Theo
Active Member
When you're dealing with lunatics who advocate fascist-style terrorist violence on those they disagree with, including attacks on cancer researchers and their families (rather than trying to win a debate in the marketplace of ideas as civilized people do in democracies) it's no surprise that truth is meaningless to them.
Nevertheless, it's worth looking at what liars they are as they get increasingly belligerent in their hate and self-righteousness.
For example, from June of this year:
I'm sure that the nutters who support the tactics of these extemist groups couldn't care less that their style is to make up fake quotes by scientists. To the sane of us, any group that must back up their scientific claims with invented, fake quotes from scientists is nothing more than a pack of liars trying to decieve the public.
More:
Ah, I've seen those scientific claims all over Morrissey web sites, and the claims about the underlying motives of scientists is a talking point Morrissey routinely spews in his increasingly tedious interviews.
I don't know how one reads into the hearts of people doing, say, cancer research, but blanket, demonizing statements that people in the field are only after money is silly on its face. I'd think many people go into that field because they want to help people. But if you acknolwedge that, you might not be able to work the cultish sheep up into a violent, terrorist frenzy of self-righteous intolerance and hate. Instead you might just do something as boring as petitioning your government to require the strictest standards of care for animals and only allow animals to be used when necessary. No, we must paint the "enemies" as evil, sub0human monsters who's rights we needn't respect, and we are thus morally free (indeed, encouraged) to send them mail bombs as violence is the only language they understand.
Here's a dossier titled Misleading the Public: 15 years of pseudoscientific untruths, distortions and unsubstantiated claims by anti-vivisection groups. It goes over numerous rulings against these groups by the independent Advertising Standards Authority. The usual response to this from a cultist will be that the web site it's presented on is biased and thus all of this information can be dismissed, while the supposed truth-telling web sites like PETAs are the gospel. The web site is indeed biased and doesn't claim to be otherwise. But reading these rulings by the ASA makes clear that the antivivsection groups have no interest in telling the public the truth. I'd ask these groups why, in trying to persuade the public, they must lie. Needless to say, the propagandist will simply attack the source and continue lying. They consider themselves right regardless of facts, because they are morally superior people and they just care more about animals than the rest of barbaric society. If they're lying, it's because they have to in order to save the animals. Or something like that.
Perhaps the reason they resort to violent, terrorist-style violence is because of their frustration that in a democracy the people can hear more information than their propaganda and outright lies (no doubt if they controlled society there'd be no free market of ideas), and thus they cannot persuade us to abandon medical progress, which we all rely on in order to have better and longer lives and don't believe we are evil for doing so. The members of these groups are free to sign pledges declaring their intention to pass up any of the benefits of medical progress if they so choose. I sure won't stop them. For the sane people, it's time to kick the extemist, lying, violent, anti-democratic groups to the curb, along with all the empty-headed celebrities that shill for them, and concentrate on raising the standards of care for animals.
Morrissey declared recently that he'd like to see violence come to those who don't oppose any and all animal research. Somebody should ask him why he wants to see violence against those who simply do not believe the lies of the groups he shills for. It's not our fault he's too stupid to be a critical thinker, and since we're far more tolerant than he is we will not advocate violence against him for the vile things he advocates.
Nevertheless, it's worth looking at what liars they are as they get increasingly belligerent in their hate and self-righteousness.
For example, from June of this year:
The Advertising Standards Authority is today upholding a complaint by Professor Sir Michael Rawlins, Chairman of NICE and highly respected scientist, against the animal rights organisation ‘SPEAK’, which is campaigning against the new research centre at Oxford University. The verdict is that SPEAK has misused a quote he gave at a conference, changing it so much that the meaning was completely altered.
***
The quote attributed to Professor Rawlins, "The animal testing regime… is utterly futile" has been blazoned on SPEAK placards and leaflets for over two years. The image with a cat’s head and the slogan is available on their website for download (see link, right).
When contacted by RDS, Professor Sir Michael Rawlins said:
"In my view, animal studies play an essential role in the discovery and development of new medicines. Without them new treatments for human disease would not be found; and the safety of patients would be very seriously compromised. The notion that animal studies are 'futile' is utterly wrong."
"As a clinical investigator, there is no way I would be prepared to investigate new active substances in either volunteers or patients without essential information from studies in animals."
***
The antivivisection group, Europeans for Medical Progress, who recently had five rulings upheld against it by the Advertising Standards Authority, has also used this misquote in one of its newsletters: "The animal testing regime is clearly not an effective safety net - indeed Professor Sir Michael Rawlins, chairman of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, has publicly stated that the animal study regime is "utterly futile".
I'm sure that the nutters who support the tactics of these extemist groups couldn't care less that their style is to make up fake quotes by scientists. To the sane of us, any group that must back up their scientific claims with invented, fake quotes from scientists is nothing more than a pack of liars trying to decieve the public.
More:
The UK-based Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has today upheld five complaints against US based animal rights organisations People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA). The ruling was made against a fundraising leaflet mailed across the UK by PeTA, which has a turnover of over $28 million in the USA and is backed by numerous Hollywood celebrities.
***
The five complaints today upheld against PeTA cover scientific aspects of the debate, as well as the underlying motivations of researchers for using animals. On the science, the ASA has ruled that "the implication that physiological differences rendered the results of animal experiments crude or inapplicable to humans was misleading."
PeTA claimed that researchers are morally bankrupt individuals riding a 'ghastly gravy train'. The ASA upheld the complaint against this, stating that it: "…unfairly denigrated researchers taking part in research using animals and misrepresented their motives for doing so."
The full ASA adjudication against the PeTA claims is available from the ASA website at www.asa.org.uk
Ah, I've seen those scientific claims all over Morrissey web sites, and the claims about the underlying motives of scientists is a talking point Morrissey routinely spews in his increasingly tedious interviews.
I don't know how one reads into the hearts of people doing, say, cancer research, but blanket, demonizing statements that people in the field are only after money is silly on its face. I'd think many people go into that field because they want to help people. But if you acknolwedge that, you might not be able to work the cultish sheep up into a violent, terrorist frenzy of self-righteous intolerance and hate. Instead you might just do something as boring as petitioning your government to require the strictest standards of care for animals and only allow animals to be used when necessary. No, we must paint the "enemies" as evil, sub0human monsters who's rights we needn't respect, and we are thus morally free (indeed, encouraged) to send them mail bombs as violence is the only language they understand.
Here's a dossier titled Misleading the Public: 15 years of pseudoscientific untruths, distortions and unsubstantiated claims by anti-vivisection groups. It goes over numerous rulings against these groups by the independent Advertising Standards Authority. The usual response to this from a cultist will be that the web site it's presented on is biased and thus all of this information can be dismissed, while the supposed truth-telling web sites like PETAs are the gospel. The web site is indeed biased and doesn't claim to be otherwise. But reading these rulings by the ASA makes clear that the antivivsection groups have no interest in telling the public the truth. I'd ask these groups why, in trying to persuade the public, they must lie. Needless to say, the propagandist will simply attack the source and continue lying. They consider themselves right regardless of facts, because they are morally superior people and they just care more about animals than the rest of barbaric society. If they're lying, it's because they have to in order to save the animals. Or something like that.
Perhaps the reason they resort to violent, terrorist-style violence is because of their frustration that in a democracy the people can hear more information than their propaganda and outright lies (no doubt if they controlled society there'd be no free market of ideas), and thus they cannot persuade us to abandon medical progress, which we all rely on in order to have better and longer lives and don't believe we are evil for doing so. The members of these groups are free to sign pledges declaring their intention to pass up any of the benefits of medical progress if they so choose. I sure won't stop them. For the sane people, it's time to kick the extemist, lying, violent, anti-democratic groups to the curb, along with all the empty-headed celebrities that shill for them, and concentrate on raising the standards of care for animals.
Morrissey declared recently that he'd like to see violence come to those who don't oppose any and all animal research. Somebody should ask him why he wants to see violence against those who simply do not believe the lies of the groups he shills for. It's not our fault he's too stupid to be a critical thinker, and since we're far more tolerant than he is we will not advocate violence against him for the vile things he advocates.