Earthlings

[_Z_Ryuken]

The problem with making a video like that is, if you want to be completely honest about it, you'd have maybe 10 minutes of horrific footage, and 2 hours of cattle sitting around and mooing. As Mecha has said, it's taking only the most horrendous stuff, and splicing it together to shock people into supporting a cause. It is indeed propaganda :/

That doesn't change anything.
People in prison are just sitting there or sleeping 22 hours of the day. Doesn't mean the ones that shouldn't be there aren't suffering needlessly.

 

[Raziaar]

The problem with making a video like that is, if you want to be completely honest about it, you'd have maybe 10 minutes of horrific footage, and 2 hours of cattle sitting around and mooing. As Mecha has said, it's taking only the most horrendous stuff, and splicing it together to shock people into supporting a cause. It is indeed propaganda :/

That's like saying war is fine, just because people are only being bombed a couple years out of their entire lifetime. <chuckles> Crazy analogy, I know... but still.

The fact is, I bet those clips aren't just rare things that took them 10-20 years to find ONE incident of... they probably happen frequently, because it seems so systematic.

 

[hot564231]

This is the real world, Jimmy. And the reality is that humans are omnivorous, and always have been up until about the time jesus flew out a vagina.

*a long and pointless point i do not want to read*

i was talking about you insulted me, not animal testing... christ, i just posted a video, i just don't want a talk in the thread i made, i hate doing that (talking in Politic topics that is) i will still eat meat, but it's the fact the living things get treated like that turn's a few heads with me

 

[Yuri]

That doesn't change anything.
People in prison are just sitting there or sleeping 22 hours of the day. Doesn't mean the ones that shouldn't be there aren't suffering needlessly.

...wait, prisoners suffer needlessly? What is your golden alternative to prison? :upstare:

The fact that they probably aren't being killed for most of their lives is a pretty stupid one

But the fact that that movie showed mostly cases of illegal horrible animal abuse ruined its credibility as an informative film. I found its attack on animal shelters the most ridiculous, because if animal shelters could not euthanize their animals, they probably wouldn't be able to keep any animals. I would rather have animals euthanized than have no animal shelters. I hate assholes who complain about things without a solution. If you have a better idea, speak up. If you don't, then shut the hell up.

If you watch the part about the slaughtering, they say that the steel bolt gun is meant to basically kill the cow by shooting a steel bolt into its brain. Then they show a live cow being slaughtered, and only say "Sometimes they don't die, its not infrequent." Hmm. I wonder how "infrequent" that is, and if it was just a big mistake made by the workers. I'm sure it isn't profitable to slaughter live cows, in fact its probably bit of a problem. It is horrible to kill a living thing, but humans are omnivores, and animals that we would generally eat would be shot with a gun or arrow and then killed in a very similar, if not a more horrible and painful manner. Just because a factory mass-produces meat, and has more efficient (and probably more humane) ways of killing its meat, does not make it any more horrible than someone who kills their own food. And it has a horrible death-machine look with blood everywhere because that is its goddamn purpose.

I love the line in it, as well, that said "If humans were all required to get their own meat, all of them would be vegetarians." What kind of f*cking moron would ever say that? There are people ALL OVER THE WORLD that kill animals for food. If I had to do it, I would not hesitate to kill an animal for its meat.

The condescending attitute of that film made me lose a lot of respect for Phoenix. I hate propagandous self-righteous assholes who have no alternatives.

i was talking about you insulted me, not animal testing... christ, i just posted a video, i just don't want a talk in the thread i made, i hate doing that (talking in Politic topics that is) i will still eat meat, but it's the fact the living things get treated like that turn's a few heads with me

You called him an asshole, dude, for making fun of you for posting a propagandous bullshit movie. Get over yourself, you were the one who posted it, so he's going to single out you when talking about how stupid this movie is.

 

[Raziaar]

But the fact that that movie showed mostly cases of illegal horrible animal abuse ruined its credibility as an informative film. I found its attack on animal shelters the most ridiculous, because if animal shelters could not euthanize their animals, they probably wouldn't be able to keep any animals. I would rather have animals euthanized than have no animal shelters. I hate assholes who complain about things without a solution. If you have a better idea, speak up. If you don't, then shut the hell up.

I don't think it was trying to depict the euthanasia(sp?) as the bad part... it was when people chose the CHEAPER alernatives... such as mass gassing of the animals, where it was terrible and cruel... But that stuff is so light in comparison to the rest of what is depicted as systematic 'standards' that are apparently practiced.

 

[Yuri]

I don't think it was trying to depict the euthanasia(sp?) as the bad part... it was when people chose the CHEAPER alernatives... such as mass gassing of the animals, where it was terrible and cruel...

I don't know anything about the prices of animal euthenasia, but is it not possible that mass euthenasia is the only alternative for animal shelters?

I mean, that is horribly cruel, but you have to think about the sheer amount of animals that go to those things per day, and the lack of funding they really have. I hate that idea of those horrible chamber things, that's awful, but do they have a choice? Can they realistically give each one of them a lethal injection or whatever the alternative is? Do they have the laborers and funds available? And how common are these gas chambers? They made very little (actually, none) citation and reference to fact.

They also made it seem like the workers just love to kill kittens. I'm sure anyone who has to do that tries their best to not think about it but it still leaves quite a scar...

 

[Raziaar]

I don't know anything about the prices of animal euthenasia, but is it not possible that mass euthenasia is the only alternative for animal shelters?

I mean, that is horribly cruel, but you have to think about the sheer amount of animals that go to those things per day, and the lack of funding they really have. I hate that idea of those horrible chamber things, that's awful, but do they have a choice? Can they realistically give each one of them a lethal injection or whatever the alternative is? Do they have the laborers and funds available? And how common are these gas chambers? They made very little (actually, none) citation and reference to fact.

They also made it seem like the workers just love to kill kittens. I'm sure anyone who has to do that tries their best to not think about it but it still leaves quite a scar...

As I said... that's only at the BEGINNING of the movie, and PALES in comparison to the other shit that goes on. Watch the whole thing, you'll see.

 

[Yuri]

I skimmed through every section. I got the jist of it and it was ridiculous propagandous bullshit.

I don't have an opinion on animal testing, as awful as it is... and that was the only section that jarred a reaction other than "Oh god this is really horrible to watch."

Every other section was just so ridiculously one-sided and crappy sensationalist journalism that it was not worth the time.

 

[Raziaar]

I skimmed through every section. I got the jist of it and it was ridiculous propagandous bullshit.

I don't have an opinion on animal testing, as awful as it is... and that was the only section that jarred a reaction other than "Oh god this is really horrible to watch."

Every other section was just so ridiculously one-sided and crappy sensationalist journalism that it was not worth the time.

You found the animal testing stuff worse than the foxes being used for furs, who were still alive when they were being skinned, as they looked around at the camera, obviously in great pain without any flesh or fur? You could see all their muscles, and they were still alive... and this wasn't the only one. As there are apparently no regulations for how the animals have to be killed. Then the dead animals are ground up and fed to the other animals.

I mean... look at this! This animal is alive and moving, and looking around after the fact.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/1759/skinnedalive3kn.jpg

 

[Mr-Fusion]

The slaughter practices in this video are beyond inhumane.

This is a problem that needs to be resolved.

It exists. It needs to not exist.

Basically! That's all there is to it. No need to yell and become the cliche of the second line "Violent opposition!"

It's just a simple fact of creating laws to prevent these things. Pets must be de-sexed, sticter pet ownership methods must be introduced so people can't just dump a dog they got sick of after a week. The vegan issue is a can of worms, i think eventually live animals won't be used for meat, but rather meat grown in labs as mentioned previously.

Above all it's a morality issue. Over time humans will hopefully come to respect the lives of animals more. We're still a very primitive species if you think about the potential of where we could be.

 

[99.vikram]

If you have an alternative, suggest it by all means.

My 2 cents is that fur in all forms should be banned. We have synthetic stuff nowadays that can keep us as warm.

As for animal testing and slaughter for food, I can't see any alternatives.

 

[Raziaar]

If you have an alternative, suggest it by all means.

My 2 cents is that fur in all forms should be banned. We have synthetic stuff nowadays that can keep us as warm.

As for animal testing and slaughter for food, I can't see any alternatives.

These big industries have tons of money... for the animal slaughter, they could at least spend money to devise ways to 100% guarantee kill the animal instantly, so as to eliminate suffering. That bolt method simply does not work, and the still alive throat slitting... that's horrible.

 

[Dan]

What's so bad about animal suffering? Did you ever watch wolves take down a Buffalo on the Discovery chanel? The think spends about 90 minutes getting eaten while it's still alive.

 

[Raziaar]

What's so bad about animal suffering? Did you ever watch wolves take down a Buffalo on the Discovery chanel? The think spends about 90 minutes getting eaten while it's still alive.

Yes, that's true... but though with big predators the animals die quicker than that, since the big cats and wolves and stuff usually gouge out the neck to strangle/choke the animal to death so it can't escape.

However, the BIG difference, is that those animals who die there, live a nice and free life, whereas the ones we use for our food, live caged up. If we're going to cage them up so they have unbelievably drab lives, we could at least make the end of it be painless. We have the means to do so, and the intelligence to know. Just because the animals do it in this situation is irrelevant, since they are operating off instinct and have no other means to take their prey down... we are not bound by that.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

...wait, prisoners suffer needlessly? What is your golden alternative to prison? :upstare:

It was a metaphor.

But the fact that that movie showed mostly cases of illegal horrible animal abuse ruined its credibility as an informative film. ...I hate assholes who complain about things without a solution. If you have a better idea, speak up. If you don't, then shut the hell up.

Who says it needs to be so informative as to include every aspect of animal treatment that ever existed? The point is to inform about animal cruelty. Showing how super-great some places treat animals would be pointless and draw attention away fro a serious matter.
I don't need a better idea to speak my opinion or my feelings on the matter. The solution is law enforcement. I shouldn't have to tell you that.
You constantly bitch uneccessarily.

If you watch the part about the slaughtering, they say that the steel bolt gun is meant to basically kill the cow by shooting a steel bolt into its brain.

You are mistaken. If you watch that part it says it is merely meant to immobilize and desensitize the animal. It does not kill it.

...It is horrible to kill a living thing, but humans are omnivores,

Killing is necessary. Nobody here contests that. Your argument for this point is needless.

and animals that we would generally eat would be shot with a gun or arrow and then killed in a very similar, if not a more horrible and painful manner. Just because a factory mass-produces meat, and has more efficient (and probably more humane) ways of killing its meat, does not make it any more horrible than someone who kills their own food. And it has a horrible death-machine look with blood everywhere because that is its goddamn purpose.

You are overlooking some points. It is true there are humane butcheries. It is also true there are inhumane slaugherhouses run by wicked people with no respect for the animals well-being. The atrocities committed here are far worse than any hunters arrow or bullet.
Hunters do not slit the animals' throat so that it bleeds to death as it hangs upside down, suffocating. Hunter's do not bind the animal in a locked cage before killing it. Hunters do not force their prey to wallow in their own decay before killing them.
A hunter's prey does not suffer.

I love the line in it, as well, that said "If humans were all required to get their own meat, all of them would be vegetarians." What kind of f*cking moron would ever say that? There are people ALL OVER THE WORLD that kill animals for food. If I had to do it, I would not hesitate to kill an animal for its meat.

That line was an exaggeration, but I would bet a majority of people today cannot kill their own food.
I could, but only if the animals death was painless.

The condescending attitute of that film made me lose a lot of respect for Phoenix. I hate propagandous self-righteous assholes who have no alternatives.

You are a bitter, bitter person. Do you want a hug?

 

[Dan]

But my point is why do we care how animals feel? I mean they're not going to return kind deeds like a human might (unless you believe Aesop's Fables as fact). A dead cow is a dead cow, and if it weren't for McDonalds most cows wouldn't have a reason to be alive in the first place.

 

[Raziaar]

But my point is why do we care how animals feel? I mean they're not going to return kind deeds like a human might (unless you believe Aesop's Fables as fact). A dead cow is a dead cow, and if it weren't for McDonalds most cows wouldn't have a reason to be alive in the first place.

I'm sorry, I don't have the ability to instill humanity into you. That's something you are raised with.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

and if it weren't for McDonalds most cows wouldn't have a reason to be alive in the first place.

That's ****ed up.
Cows don't exist solely to serve man.

 

[99.vikram]

Cows on farms are. They are bred for human use. (Artificial insemnation isn't very natural).

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

Cows on farms are. They are bred for human use. (Artificial insemnation isn't very natural).

That is an existence that has been chosen for them. My point was we didn't create them like robots to bolster the profits of a stupid french fry clown.

 

[Yuri]

You found the animal testing stuff worse than the foxes being used for furs, who were still alive when they were being skinned, as they looked around at the camera, obviously in great pain without any flesh or fur? You could see all their muscles, and they were still alive... and this wasn't the only one. As there are apparently no regulations for how the animals have to be killed. Then the dead animals are ground up and fed to the other animals.

I mean... look at this! This animal is alive and moving, and looking around after the fact.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/1759/skinnedalive3kn.jpg

I must have skimmed over that part.

Of course that's awful, unnecessary, and should be stopped :/



Your metaphor sucked by the way, Z Rhuken. I suggest you try harder

I fail to see how it "informed" me on animal cruelty by flashing horrible images of mangled and tortured animals. I'm not a f*cking moron, I know that some people are f*cked up and do awful things to animals. That's like making a documentary "informing" the public of how murders sometimes take place, and then showing footage of people commiting murders for two hours while they repeat that humanity sucks because of it.

You can pick apart my posts all you want, I have no idea why you are starting an argument with me. I think that animal cruelty laws should be much more strictly enforced, but I didn't need this demeaning sensational movie to tell me how uninformed I am about everything, yet provide no actual proof other than a whole lot of awful footage of extreme cases.

I love your bit on the hunter who must kill the animal painlessly. How would you go about doing that, Dr. Good-death? You realize you have to immobilize prey before being able to kill it most of the time, which is pretty goddamn painful. And killing it isn't as easy as you'd think-- slitting its throat takes a pretty long time, stabbing it takes even longer, and I don't know too many other ways to kill something other than perhaps snapping its neck (which may not even kill it, and is probably quite difficult to do properly). Teach us your humane ways of killing things, oh good sir. :upstare: You certainly have a bizarre opinion on what a hunter actually does and needs to do.

You also realize that farmers raise their cows and such in captivity and have done so for centuries. You realize that they aren't treated all that great because all the farmer wants is its food, right? And you realize that farmers were not graced with a steel bolt gun until somewhat recently, right? And that killing a cow is not as easy (or painless) as you may think.

Hunters and gatherers, man. Either way, the animals you eat are going to be hurting quite a bit.

Why not make a documentary on how the public can help reduce animal cruelty? Why not state actual facts instead of adding every bit where some animal has to be killed and condemning it? Why all the unneeded animal cruelty garbage throw in for a huge portion of the movie?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

My point was we didn't create them like robots to bolster the profits of a stupid french fry clown.

Actually, that's exactly what farms are: large numbers of cows created soley to feed people.

Any proper documentary would provide more than just random footage. It would provide evidence of exactly how much abuse goes on, statistically, and then propose rational solutions to end the abuse while keeping the meat sources society needs.

This video presents no facts of any sort. All it says is "ABUSE HAPPENS SO DO AS I SAY".

And, naturally, he says JOIN PETA.

Targeting of vulnerable groups

PETA has also been accused of targeting "vulnerable or emotionally sensitive" groups, particularly teenage girls. PETA was ordered by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority to discontinue claims it made about milk consumption in a campaign targeted at school children, concluding that the compaign "played on children's anxieties and were likely to cause some children undue fear and distress." The ad featured trading cards with statements such as "Sue's milk-drinking led to her battle with zits." Other cards claimed that dairy products cause obesity, belching and flatulence, and excessive nasal mucus build up. In response to the ruling, PETA modified the cards to address the Standards Authority's regulations.

Additionally, PETA has been severely criticized for distributing graphic pamphlets to children attending school plays. According to PETA's website the pamplets are geared toward making parents aware of how their actions affect their children. Pamplets are never given to children under the age of 13, only to their parents. One pamplet, addressing the wearing of fur, was titled "Your Mommy Kills Animals" and featured an illustration of a mother-figure slicing a knife into a rabbit's stomach. Another pamphlet was titled "Your Daddy Kills Animals!" and showed an image of a father-figure gutting a fish. The latter pamphlet declared that "Since your daddy is teaching you the wrong lessons about right and wrong, you should teach him fishing is killing. Until your daddy learns it's not fun to kill, keep your doggies and kitties away from him. He's so hooked on killing defenseless animals, they could be next."

I like the emphasis on "defenseless."
So if the animals had, say, beaks, teeth, claws, hooves and horns - eating meat would be okay?

Clearly the answer is yes.

 

[Yuri]

Only the only thing it says for you to do is that "HUMANITY SUCKS AND ARE ALL SPECIESISTS YOU SUCK!"

Good job Joan Fenix.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I have no idea why you are starting an argument with me.

I thought you liked it like that.

I didn't need this demeaning sensational movie to tell me how uninformed I am about everything, yet provide no actual proof other than a whole lot of awful footage of extreme cases.

Some people don't know about this stuff. What do you reckon would be better proof? Is slaughter anything but extreme?

I love your bit on the hunter who must kill the animal painlessly.
Didn't say painlessly, just quickly and cleanly.
How would you go about doing that, Dr. Good-death? You realize you have to immobilize prey before being able to kill it most of the time, which is pretty goddamn painful.
You don't have to immobilize it if you're a hunter. I realize a meat factory would. The first slaughter I saw was a guillotine. That seems sufficient. Quick. Maybe painful for a split second. Fairly clean. Cheap.
And killing it isn't as easy as you'd think-- slitting its throat takes a pretty long time, stabbing it takes even longer, and I don't know too many other ways to kill something other than perhaps snapping its neck (which may not even kill it, and is probably quite difficult to do properly).
Teach us your humane ways of killing things, oh good sir. :upstare: You certainly have a bizarre opinion on what a hunter actually does and needs to do.
There's a difference between a subsistence hunter who lives off the land and respects it, and a trophy hunting gamesman.
...
Hunters and gatherers, man. Either way, the animals you eat are going to be hurting quite a bit.
We have free range animals up here. Lots of space, low population, you see.

Why not make a documentary on how the public can help reduce animal cruelty?
Nobody would care.
Why not state actual facts instead of adding every bit where some animal has to be killed and condemning it? Why all the unneeded animal cruelty garbage throw in for a huge portion of the movie?

Iunno. Not my movie.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

-Ban pet ownership in cities and cramped places
-Ban fast-foods
-Limit industralized killings
-Rational consumption of food
-More wildlife preserves and better coverage of potential pouchers
-Severly limit the use of leather (only for use as protection against the elements, no luxuries)
-Ban killing sports
-Hunting limited to neccesity
-All pets, should be evidented
-Animal abuse can be punished by life in prison or death
-Ban cosmetics
-All science research should be public
-...

and million more


If Norway managed to fine you 50€ for littering, then this is also possible.

No. I'm going to eat more meat tomorrow than I would've if I hadn't read this post.

PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO. WATCH.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1913999390200944075&q=PETA+Bullshit

 

[Yuri]

Some people don't know about this stuff. What do you reckon would be better proof? Is slaughter anything but extreme?

Better proof would be a good documentary that provided facts and actual statistics, and not just horrible images flashed at the user while Joan Fenix tells us how much we suck.

Didn't say painlessly, just quickly and cleanly.

You didn't? :upstare:

A hunter's prey does not suffer. [...] I could, but only if the animals death was painless.

You don't have to immobilize it if you're a hunter. I realize a meat factory would. The first slaughter I saw was a guillotine. That seems sufficient. Quick. Maybe painful for a split second. Fairly clean. Cheap.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about when discussing hunting animals. How do you expect to catch deer unless you hit it with something sharp and fast? With your bare hands? You do realize that most of the animals hunters eat have to be taken down somehow, and that most of them are used to being prey so they have adapted to learn how to run away real quick, right? I guess not.

There's a difference between a subsistence hunter who lives off the land and respects it, and a trophy hunting gamesman.

...
...When did I mention a trophy hunting gamesman? You have to kill the animal you want to eat. You can assume that you don't have a steel bolt gun or a gullitine handy. You are going to have to slit its throat, break its neck, or stab it to death. Perhaps you could shoot it in the head but that would be tough and you would want to keep as much meat as possible.

Seriously, when did I make mention of a trophy hunter? :|

We have free range animals up here. Lots of space, low population, you see.

Where was it in this "documentary" where it showed the cows not having space? It.. didn't really show anything besides the trip to the slaughterhouse, the slaughterhouse, and the milking places.

And I hope you realize that free range animals have to be killed, correct?

It's too bad that you don't care about the movie, because that's why you are arguing with me, right? I see no other reason other than to prove to me that you don't know what you're talking about when "free range" farmers and hunters kill their own meat. I agree that animal cruelty is bad, but so is murder, and I don't need to see footage of these things to reinforce my opinion. What I would like is a documentary on how I can help stop this shit from happening, if possible.

Man, you suck at this really hard.

 

[Raeven0]

I would love to see proof that brutal mistreatment happens often enough to make it an important issue. Assumptions mean nothing.

What's a better proof than a propaganda video? Hmm, how about a well-thought-out and organised study of slaughterhouses and other animal care centres across the country and the greater planet Earth conducted by a nonbiased third party and laid out in easy-to-read texts and graphs? (In two words: "VALID EVIDENCE".)

 

[JNightshade]

Rakurai, <3 Penn and Teller

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

Better proof would be a good documentary that provided facts and actual statistics, and not just horrible images flashed at the user while Joan Fenix tells us how much we suck.
Fair enough, though I still didn't interpret the video that way.

You didn't? :upstare:
Suffering ie bodily and psychological torture. A quick death is not suffering.
I personally cannot kill an animal unless it's death is instant and painless. I made no mention of anyone else in this respect.

How do you expect to catch deer unless you hit it with something sharp and fast? With your bare hands? You do realize that most of the animals hunters eat have to be taken down somehow, and that most of them are used to being prey so they have adapted to learn how to run away real quick, right? I guess not.
Do you realize that doesn't involve strapping it into a machine so you can kill it without effort? Hunting is supposed to be man versus animal, not animal versus high technology.
A gun or a few arrows is sufficient to kill an animal by itself.
If not it will bring it down so that a quick blow can be made.
My point is this does not involve a immobilization in the sense a hunter would use a bondage machine like the industrial farm.

...When did I mention a trophy hunting gamesman? You have to kill the animal you want to eat. You can assume that you don't have a steel bolt gun or a gullitine handy. You are going to have to slit its throat, break its neck, or stab it to death. Perhaps you could shoot it in the head but that would be tough and you would want to keep as much meat as possible.
Seriously, when did I make mention of a trophy hunter? :|
You are mixing up different points. A trophy gamesman only cares about the animals head on a wall and will use whatever means necessary to obtain it (like the industrial farm). You don't have to mention something for me to bring it up.

Where was it in this "documentary" where it showed the cows not having space? It.. didn't really show anything besides the trip to the slaughterhouse, the slaughterhouse, and the milking places.
You must have missed the pasteur with about 1000 cattle on a single feild, with very little space to roam about.
But it's not just cows. Just about every caged animal including chickens and pigs and whatever else are being treated like shit, even when not ready for the kill process.

And I hope you realize that free range animals have to be killed, correct?
Duh. But your average cattle range makes the death of his cattle fairly quick and private.
I realize a good majority of cattle operations are humane, but that is not the backbone of the discussion here. It's not worth going into.

It's too bad that you don't care about the movie, because that's why you are arguing with me, right?
Why does a simple response automatically mean I want to argue? Is this question an example? Am I challenging your e-penis by asking a simple question? I thought this is how discussion works. People exchange comments back and forth, maybe to come to some sort of conclusion. Maybe just as an exchange of information. I don't see why you get so butt-hurt by what I say.

I don't need to see footage of these things to reinforce my opinion.
So don't watch it. I don't need to see it either to know it exists. It's interesting. I've never seen the actual processes and conditions.

Man, you suck at this really hard.
Suck at what, exactly?

-

I would love to see proof that brutal mistreatment happens often enough to make it an important issue. Assumptions mean nothing.

How is even once not often enough?

 

[jverne]

No. I'm going to eat more meat tomorrow than I would've if I hadn't read this post.

PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO. WATCH.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1913999390200944075&q=PETA+Bullshit

yup...i have watched it all:

1. i know PETA members are stupid hypocrates...they are the same as those who kill animals. so please don't make a connection betwen me and PETA.
2. i encourage meat eating, but farms should have better regulations
3. even tough i'm against PETA, this video can be viewed as anti-PETA propaganda, so yes they are the same as them in the end!

an answer to mecha...this probably aren't coincidences, this is mostlikely sistematic and often practiced.
a friend of mine worked in a slaughter house as a student but quit after what he saw. but i'm aware this isn't enough proof, so don't throw it in my face. i'm confident that more and more evidence is bound to leak sooner or later.

all i want is better regulations and legislation concerning slaughterhouses, i belive with some public pressure there could be done something to improve the situation.

i don't want total animal freedom, because that is just stupid nowdays. but i don't support killing sports or other activities that has only cosmetic puropses, like fur fassion.

they could use some sort of substance to sleep the animals, like ether or something else. i hear death by CO is not painful, it's said that you just fell asleep. but this data is highly doubtfull. the only rational argument to back this up, is that CO bonds quickly to blood cells and acts as a poison to nerve cells, this is relatively fast compared to water drowning or suffocation.
more powerfull guns coul be used to kill the animal with one shot. i saw in the movie that the guy put 2 bolts in the pigs head and the pig was still runing around trying to escape, those were not death reflexes.

there could be seen alot of valuable information (like the one mentioned), but some of you just refuse to acknowlodge them and lable the movie as propaganda. i have said it a million times, the movie is not about sad music ornarator comments, it's about information. it depends on you how use that information.

please try to understand what i'm trying to say.


And once and for all, please stop connecting me and PETA, animal lovers or vegetarian. that is just no good lying and manipulation

 

[Yuri]

Suffering ie bodily and psychological torture. A quick death is not suffering.
I personally cannot kill an animal unless it's death is instant and painless. I made no mention of anyone else in this respect.

Then you can't kill an animal because it will not be instant nor painless in most cases...

Do you realize that doesn't involve strapping it into a machine so you can kill it without effort? Hunting is supposed to be man versus animal, not animal versus high technology.
A gun or a few arrows is sufficient to kill an animal by itself.
If not it will bring it down so that a quick blow can be made.
My point is this does not involve a immobilization in the sense a hunter would use a bondage machine like the industrial farm.

So guns and arrows are okay, but bolt guns and whatever else they use are not okay? Who mades these rules? Guns and arrows are technology, manno.

You are mixing up different points. A trophy gamesman only cares about the animals head on a wall and will use whatever means necessary to obtain it (like the industrial farm). You don't have to mention something for me to bring it up.

I'm not mixing up ANY points. You made up a random point that I didn't make and then said I made it. If you are going to RESPOND to me, you don't say something completely out of context that has nothing to do with what I said in the slightest bit of at all. :|

You must have missed the pasteur with about 1000 cattle on a single feild, with very little space to roam about.
But it's not just cows. Just about every caged animal including chickens and pigs and whatever else are being treated like shit, even when not ready for the kill process.

I must have. This disgrace to documentary didn't mention any points about the legality of that, nor the statistics of how many farms actually do such a thing.

Duh. But your average cattle range makes the death of his cattle fairly quick and private.
I realize a good majority of cattle operations are humane, but that is not the backbone of the discussion here. It's not worth going into.

You know this "quick and private death" thing for a fact? Why are you assuming such a thing? Also, yes, a good majority of cattle operations are probably humane, or at least I've never given any proof otherwise. How is it not worth getting into when my entire point is that this shit movie only shows the most extreme horrible cases, and ignores what its like most of the time?

Why does a simple response automatically mean I want to argue? Is this question an example? Am I challenging your e-penis by asking a simple question? I thought this is how discussion works. People exchange comments back and forth, maybe to come to some sort of conclusion. Maybe just as an exchange of information. I don't see why you get so butt-hurt by what I say.

Butt hurt? You argued with me when you disagreed with what I said and also insulted me a few times by calling me bitter and saying I bitch constantly. Then you made a bunch of random points or something, I dunno, a lot of them were pretty stupid.

So don't watch it. I don't need to see it either to know it exists. It's interesting. I've never seen the actual processes and conditions.

That's why I skimmed through it. Plus, who says this is the actual processes and conditions, and not the most extreme cases they could get their hands on?

Suck at what, exactly?

Arguing, I guess. But whatever, I'm going to stop with the insults from now on because I'm a pretty mean forum member and I don't like being such a mean guy. I'd like to apologize.

 

[Yuri]

How is even once not often enough?

Hmm... you realize that murder and rape and torture happen all the time to humans, right? These are important issues, but it is known very well that they cannot be completely stopped because that would be impossible. People sometimes break the law, and people sometimes torture or kill animals just as people sometimes torture and kill humans.

 

[jverne]

i found another "interesting" short video clip (no violence, safe to watch).

it shows a cow crying before death. i'm not entirely sure what to think about, is that sweat, water or tears. because by any chanse those are realy tears then some people need to shut up for good.


the video does contain a propaganda subtitle, but don't focus on that.


tell me what you think?


edit: apparently a cow has a Lacrimal gland, like most animals. hmm...makes you wonder...

i remember once when i had a german shepard...he had endles natural areas to run (on a farm), he was always fed, had other dogs to socialize all of the people treated him well, basicaly he had an excelent life almost total freedom. but i remeber when he made a bad thing, like attack people (but not without provocation), go into the house, kill live stock, start dog fight, we normaly end up angry on him i don't remember once he was beaten. but after some years he seemd to became aware of his doings. once he attacked a chicken, and he lied on the front porch covering his face with his paws. we didn't found out about the missing chicken for a few days later. even then he didn't get one single hit. how do i know that...he was our dog.
so makes you wonder...did he have a conscience? we never beat him, but he knew when we were mad at him. the worst thing he got was getting a leash for a few days that restricted his freedom.

i'm not saying that i know exactly what happened, but his behaviour was extraordinary! maybe the taste for freedom got to him? who would know...

a few months ago i saw a "homless" dog (what's the exact word...can't remember) in the city who walked at a crossroad and actualy stoped at the red walking light, and crossed when became green. where he learned that...beats me?!



crap!!!! i forgot the link!!! shit...sorry

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8538324824618228465+



edit#2: hmm...cows eye

http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ncisla/mus...rials/section2/lesson2B/handouts/handout1.pdf

human eye...http://www.cas.vanderbilt.edu/bsci111b/eye/human-eye.jpg


and no i'm not trying to prove (yet) that animals feel like humans, just doing some basic information gathering.

 

[Raeven0]

a bunch of crap that really has no pertinence to any point made in this thread, real or imagined

"OMG IT CAN CRY!"

So?

How is even once not often enough?

With an attitude like that, I'm sure you would support making me sole dictator of the earth and giving me absolute power to place surveillance cameras every ten metres at every location on the planet so that I can be sure nothing bad ever happens to anyone or anything. Right?

No? Oh. Then what was your point?

 

[jverne]

"OMG IT CAN CRY!"

So?

maybe cows do have feelings? maybe before it died, it was saying something like..."pain, pain, pain, stop pain, stop pain, stop pain...BBAAMM...more pain, more pain, more pain...BBAAMM#2...more more pain, more more pain...SLICE..." or whatever comes next.

i would rather see something like...*cow is put in meatl box* "what is this, what is this...BBBAAMMM...." end.

but anyway it doesn't really matter if cows have feelings and emotions, they'll end up killed anyway. at least they should be killed quick.
what is so wrong about this?


i heard they slice throats, because the meat tastes better...this realy isn't needed...you'll get the same nutrition eitherway...so this is the same as using animals to test cosmetic pruducts, totaly uneccesary for life preservation (despite what some women will tell you).


edit: on another fourm one forumite told the story of his friend who works in the meat industry, that when there was little work they used to play football (european style) with little pigs.

don't know if it's true, but it surley doesn't lighten the atmosphere.

 

[Raziaar]

Animal cruelty laws should be applied both for pets and food animals. I mean... these corporations have more money than god, do you REALLY support their cost cutting practices? That's how we got to where we are today with alot of our bad problems, companies cutting corners to make a faster, bigger buck, and most everybody hates bad big business practices, so why not this sort of thing? With all their great mountains of money, they could try to develop instant death capability.

I don't see how you guys think otherwise.

We have laws protecting beef, for christs sake. BEEF. Laws protecting people saying or doing bad things with me, and this is no lie. There is a law against defaming beef. Why can't we at least cherish the animal that provides us that protected beef, and be more respectful in the way we kill it?

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

With an attitude like that, I'm sure you would support making me sole dictator of the earth and giving me absolute power to place surveillance cameras every ten metres at every location on the planet so that I can be sure nothing bad ever happens to anyone or anything. Right?

No? Oh. Then what was your point?

That's insane and completely out of context, but I am not against covert investigation by random people, as was the case with this video.
They used hidden cameras. They aren't any kind of authority.
They do have the power to bring their evidence to proper authorities, however.

I think complete surveillance is ludicrous, but I admire the common man for infiltrating industrious organizations.
That's kinda the opposite of what you were so sure about.
I don't want enhanced, superficial "security". I want unimpeded liberty to secure my own beliefs. If I knew of a place like that shown in the video, I would do what they have done, albeit at some loss of my humanity for a greater good.
Why do you think nothing happenedn outside of making the movie?
How do you know they didn't bring about proper legal action where necessary?
I don't see it as the propaganda you guys see it as. I see it as a wake up call.

Wickedness exists in numbers small and large. Eradicate it in any way you can. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Raziaar]

I ignored the message, and instead looked at the incredible range of offenses from all over the world. There were things in there that were obviously systematic in their every day execution... such as the dolphin roundups, etc.

I mean, for christs sake, why are they even eating dolphins!? Dolphins are such intelligent creatures, and thousands of them have saved the lives of humans around the world. They obviously show compassion for us, why do we have to eat the dolphins, and do it in such a grotesque way?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_drive_hunt

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I ignored the message, and instead looked at the incredible range of offenses from all over the world. There were things in there that were obviously systematic in their every day execution... such as the dolphin roundups, etc.

I mean, for christs sake, why are they even eating dolphins!? Dolphins are such intelligent creatures, and thousands of them have saved the lives of humans around the world. They obviously show compassion for us, why do we have to eat the dolphins, and do it in such a grotesque way?

Economy. The Japanese never had enough land to support their people with domesticated animals so they raid the sea.
I was in utter disbelief watching the dolphin sqiurm in agony, bleeding to death as passers-by found it such an amusing display.
Those are the kind of people deserving of the same fate.
---
Excerpt from the link you just posted:

The next day dolphins are caught one by one and killed. This used to be done by slitting their throats which resulted in a long and painful death for the dolphin, but the Japanese government banned this method and now dolphins may only be killed by driving a metal pin into the neck of the dolphin, which causes them to die within seconds.

Exactly how many are killed in Japan this way each year isn't known, but the number is believed to be at least a few thousand.

So at least they did something...
---
Another:

They also point at the conditions factory farmed animals have to live under in the western world and saying that the dolphins they have caught in the wild have had a better life.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

an answer to mecha...this probably aren't coincidences, this is mostlikely sistematic and often practiced.

'Systematic' would imply that an actual system exists designed purely to abuse animals.

For it to be systematic, there would need to be a vast, evil international conspiracy and surely you don't believe in...

Oh.