Pyramid Comment

This journal takes an alternative view on current affairs and other subjects. The approach is likely to be contentious and is arguably speculative. The content of any article is also a reminder of the status of those affairs at that date. All comments have been disabled. Any and all unsolicited or unauthorised links are absolutely disavowed.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Animal Rights and Terrorism

The issue of animal rights has always been a very sensitive one and I take no side. It's a complex issue, but has now been expanded and made even more complex, or simply made deliberately more complicated, by including the right to experiment on animals free of harrassment or intimidation. Animal rights? The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act has been passed (US Congress).

Terrorism

What else? That catch-all phrase:


Terrorism

The one that makes everything acceptable and attempts to not only close the door to public view, but also hide that door. Experimentation used to be simple(!) abuse of animals and cynically for 'the public good', but is more accurately to enable business to 'make money' by the exploitation of animals and minimise the probability of legal action (compensation costs) when things go wrong. The Human Right is to get paid out. This absolves the individual from taking personal responsibility for their actions. Animals don't have rights, but humans do. Then only some humans. If you conform you are rewarded with all sorts of rights and rewards. If you don't, then watch your back. That has always been the attitude pushed by business and endorsed by government. How can anyone 'make money' if we can't kill animals or any creature.

However:


There is a chance.
And it's a very good one.

Though you must:


Think for yourself.
Not what you're told to think.

Who decides who should get an 'honour'. The establishment. And who or what is that? Good question. Pathetically, human attitude is (generally) totally hypocritical. Horse meat is disallowed for human consumption in the UK. Why? The slaughter of cattle, sheep and pigs seems to be quite acceptable. This is the massacre of the animal kingdom for 'the public good'. Blind acceptance. But horse racing is 'the sport of kings', so horses are exempted from human fodder. And 'the sport of queens'. Horses end up in pet food though when the possibility for living exploitation of the beast has ended. So, make some money out of their death. Officially, dogs seem to be spared. When have you ever seen horse meat or dog meat (the animal and not consumption by the animal) on the restaurant menu. Pathetic isn't really the right word. A more poignant word is 'sickening'. A serious blow was dealt to SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty) when six members were convicted for inciting threats and harrassment against HLS (Huntingdon Life Sciences) staff and shareholders. In Britain, police have more powers that are not necessarily asked for, but given in any event by government that supports wealth creation at any price, to deal with intimidation by animal rights activists. Animal rights activists are like the flies in the ointment that spoil the easy money making schemes. Making money and conscience try to form an impossible marriage. It never happens. It will always be a dilemma when attempting to protect defenceless animals about how to do it. Desperate measures can be necessary when opposed by state endorsed violence from the 'police service'. In service to goverment to protect business (ie: money 'creation'). The illusion is one of protecting the public. Most of the police who are not politicians dressed up and masquerading as policemen are decent people, but are subject to control the same as any soldier under orders. It's the nature of control.

But control of who and by whom?

Anyone placed in this position is 'under orders' and must obey regardless of personal conscience. Of course, it gets more complicated when the pack instinct comes out and protecting your mates becomes important. Who is the enemy? Who is on which side? It gets very sinister. Imagine a similar scenario in the death camps of Nazi Germany in the second world war. That's hardly allegedly, even today. A terrorist may claim to be a patriot and that may invoke an honest conscience rather than being state indoctrination speaking. Perhaps it's the same thing? There is no right or wrong. Just the side you happen to be on. Conscientious objectors are in principle courageous and honourable people, standing up for their principles. Even prepared to die for those principles. The myth perpetrated by governments is that they are cowards and should be 'hung out to dry'. Even put them in prison for ever, but release murderers into society. They must be relatively harmless. Only some sentient animals (humans) fight on the side of non-sentient animals, but God said "help yourself". Some small group within mankind created the concept of god. That part of mankind is god. The real controller.