Trevor Loudon's New Zeal blog has moved to

redirecting you there now

Friday, January 05, 2007

ALF- Arseholes who Love Fires?

From Indymedia

The Animal Liberation Front, an underground animal rights organisation, are overjoyed with the early morning blaze at Tegel's processing plant on Carmen Road, Hornby, Christchurch.

Daryll Cartwright, spokesperson for the Animal Liberation Front, says "while we do not wish any harm to animals or humans we would like to see the same destruction at Tegel's two North Island plants. We are delighted that no more chickens will meet their deaths at the Hornby plant in the immediate future".

The Animal Liberation Front hope that the economic damage to Tegel is substantial and that the public will think about the conditions and treatment of the 44,000 chickens Tegel slaughter every year.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tegel's growing and production methods are incredibly cruel. Birds are bred to grow so quickly that their legs often collapse under their artificially enhanced weight, crippling them. Many die of starvation and dehydration because their broken legs will not carry them to food and water. They are crammed by the tens of thousands into sheds thick with ammonia fumes and forced to spend their entire lives living in their own waste. The birds routinely suffer broken bones from being grabbed by their legs and violently stuffed or thrown into crates for transport and from being slammed into shackles upside-down at slaughterhouses. Many chickens are still conscious as their throats are slit and when they are dumped into tanks of scalding hot water to remove their feathers.

6:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not 44,000 birds a year. The report over TVNZ said 50,000 a day!

8:34 AM  
Blogger Blair said...

Waaaaaaah! Poor chickens!

Now git in mah belly! :oP

11:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Daryll Cartwright sounds like a right wanker who the hell is he? Does he turn up in any socialist publications? Does he have any links to animal rights in New Zealand?

5:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The terms "Animal Liberation Front" and "Animal Rights" are oxymorons. Only humans have the requisite moral nature for ascribing to them basic rights. Human beings alone possess the capacity for free choice and the responsibility to act ethically.

The advocates of animal rights do not want to acknowledge the implications of an inescapable fact about all the lower animals: that they live in a WILD kingdom, which is to say they have no compunction about "abusing" -- such as slaughtering and consuming -- one another chronically and at will and as a matter of unimpeachable instinct.

In the Tegal case there may be a claim for improving conditions for the chickens [the suffering of animals is of concern to all conscientious human beings], but not to the point of sacrificing human benefits to spare animals the degree of suffering needed to secure these benefits.

The ALF are impossibly arrogant to suggest that they can interfere in an obviously successful free market enterprise by taking up the "rights" of birds who themselves have no concept of such rights.

9:05 PM  
Blogger S. Baldrick said...

spiwit, the left loves maladaptive individuals, despite their claim to materialistic evolution (really just an excuse to reject traditional morality)..... Just look at Helen Klark, or Steve Maharey, or that other transsexual MP. They happen to embrace every social manifestation of lower selective breeding you can name. As fowl, leftists would barely even make it to chickens. Leftists also love to kill humans before birth, such is the self-hatred of leftist women as potential mothers. Some "breeders"!

In evolutionary terms the leftist is basically a kind of lower breeding malapert, desperately trying to justify itself through high-minded social engineering bullshit.

5:30 AM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

Daryll Cartwright is a scam name, as you probably know anon.

11:51 AM  
Blogger Richard said...

barry, you say

Only humans have the requisite moral nature for ascribing to them basic rights.

You are claiming that something cannot have basic rights unless it has "the requisite moral nature", which apparently means having the capacity for free choice, the responsibility to act ethically and the concept of such rights.

Now, do you have ANY evidence whatsoever for this claim, or are you just another crazed Ayn Rand devotee?

3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richard, consider this:

If animals in fact did have rights as you and I understand the concept of rights - rights that entail and mandate a hands-off policy toward other rights possessors - most of the creatures now lurking in lawns and jungles, at the very least all the carnivores, would have to be brought up on murder charges.

Rights have nothing to do with the lives of wolves and turtles because of what animal rights champions themselves admit, namely, the amoral nature of at least the bulk of the animal world. Your friends do at least admit the vast gulf between animals and humans and that humans alone are equipped to deal with moral issues. Further, they imply, first and foremost, that people indeed are the only living beings capable of understanding a moral appeal. Only human beings can be implored to do right rather than wrong.

Enough evidence?

8:08 PM  
Blogger Richard said...

Yes, only humans understand moral concepts. In that respect there is a gulf between humans and other animals. In particular, humans are the only top-end predators capable of considering the (supposed) rights of potential prey. This ability, unique to humans, is part of the "requisite moral nature" you refer to.

But your claim is that having such a moral nature is necessary for the possession of rights. You have not yet presented ANY evidence for this claim.

You say that rights "entail and mandate a hands-off policy toward other rights possessors". Well, no. You're confusing rights with responsibilities. You can have rights without responsibilities (e.g., a new-born child) and you can probably have responsibilities without rights (e.g., Saddam Hussein).

If you were to claim that recent human activity has caused global warming, I would be entitled to ask for evidence of your claim, and there are all sorts of things you might bring forward as evidence, such as the fact that burning fossil fuels releases CO2 into the atmosphere and that over past millennia there has been a high degree of correlation between global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels. Then we can discuss how good your evidence is.

I'm just as entitled to ask for evidence when you claim that a thing cannot have rights unless it has a "requisite moral nature". But you haven't presented any evidence, indeed, you haven't even indicated what sorts of things might count as evidence for your claim.

From a scientific standpoint, your view that only rights-understanders can be rights-possessors is as baseless as any article of religious faith.

4:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"In the Tegal case there may be a claim for improving conditions for the chickens [the suffering of animals is of concern to all conscientious human beings], but not to the point of sacrificing human benefits to spare animals the degree of suffering needed to secure these benefits."

That is one of the most vile things I have ever read. I am at a loss for words.


12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

its easy for tegel to comply with the rules, the poultry industry gets to write the rules themselves.

and trev, you got it wrong, ALF stands for "Avoid Leaving Fingerprints" and I love them

A Chicken

4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These ALF people are exercising their individual right to do their own thing in their own time. Trevor should be right in there applauding them on if he was consistent with his so called lidertarian priciples. Sadly, he is not. When it comes to the test of practice the right to do your own thing only extends to capitalists. And don't come back with that wissy "with responsibility" get out clause. That pathetic abstraction just underlines your 4th form debating credentials.

5:42 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

The ALF types can save all the chickens they want as far as I'm concerned.

Just as long as they're their own chickens and not someone else's

What'sinconsistent about that?

9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I beleive that sometimes Trevor it is necessary to stomp on property rights in order to prevent animals from suffering. You will never agree with this as you seem to worship at the alter of property rights, and I will never believe that a property right is more important than an animal's life. Living things (like chickens) have more moral value than inatimate objects (like sheds).

10:11 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

It is quite legitimate to invade someone's property to help an animal or human in distress, in an emergency situation.

It is not legitimate for a private individual to carry out burglaries to "liberate" someone elses property because you believe their animal husbandty practices are faulty.

The answer there is to notify the appropriate authorities and let them deal with it.

If you don't like our current legal animal welfare standards, work to get them strenthened.

3:26 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

Isn't it quite harmful for the environment if the idiots over at the Animal Liberation Front or their counterparts in the Earth Liberation Front burn SUVs which give off more pollution into the atmosphere or perhaps whenever they release animals from their pens and head out into the streets to get run over?

I thought these people "cared" about the environment or animals so much. Looks like animals and the environment are victims of hardcore socialism too just as much as people.

8:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And there we have it - "quite legitimate to invade someones property to help an animal in distress" The anarchists photographic evidence is overwhelming - the birds are, in myriad ways, distressed to the point of death. So the anarchists are very precisley putting your words into action. So Trevor, get on your bike over to the chicken farm and start invading as soon as you like.

10:36 AM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

A simple phone call to the animal welfare authorities would have served just as well.

Criminal activity was completely uncalled for.

11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nope the animal welfare authoritys have shown many times that they are unwilling to act in defense of animals even where their are clear breaches of the law.

As you are probably quite well aware the animal abusing industrys carry significant sway in parliament and hold more power than the large majority of the public that opposes factory farming. As such and as the democratic process cannot be relied on to help these animals which are clearly in distres then stomping on property rights is justified.

If you can outline another strategy for helping these animals in distress that will bring about change quickly and that does not damage the property of a company such as tegel then please share it - im sure im not the only one that would love to hear it.

As long as the government supports shocking animal abuse and environmental destruction then property rights are overuled by a moral duty to act on the part of those aware of the abuse.

1:45 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

How do you justify theb vandalising of butcher shops anon?

6:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone who feels that animal welfare is seriously lacking in this country needs to get involved with the Green Party and help them campaign in 2008. Help to get them into a coalition with the Labour party, and get a Ministry of Animal Welfare established. Those are realistic goals. The animal welfare act states that animals must be allowed to demonstrate natural patterns of behaviour, but the egg and pork industries get a free pass somehow - it is tough to display natural patterns of behaviour when you are stuck in a cage the size of an A4 piece of paper with two or three other hens. The act is a sham.

9:08 PM  
Blogger mah29001 said...


How far are you going to allow the idiots in the Animal Liberation Front and their counterparts in the Earth Liberation Front to get a free pass even if it means putting the lives of human beings at risk?

And how the hell is burning down a factory or freeing animals into the street that enables them to become road kill is helping them? Animals are just simply victims of hardcore socialism as are humans.

5:40 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home