Morrissey endorses new animal rights book

Everyone here seems to be a bit misinformed. In the US, the ALF has never supported/used violence in their campaign. There is a long history in this country of governmental organizations villainizing radical groups. The Black Panthers, USDS, Greenpeace, and various anti-war groups have all been under attack like this, stretching back to Vietnam. The Right in America is labelling the ALF terrorists to distract the mainstream public from true problems both here and abroad.

The main thing the government is worried about from the ALF is destruction of property and loss of possible commercial gain. Pretty much, whenever the United States government is against something, its something that will negatively impact their OWN gain. I think we need to take a look at how much value we place on personal/private property. So a bunch of activists break into a lab and attempt to free animals, destroying property. Does that make them terrorists? In that sense, is graffitti a form of terrorism? Even arson, done in the middle of the night, which doesn't even injure one single human or animal isn't terrorism. Its just arson. My definition of terrorism is killing innocents in an attempt to coerce or force an opposing nation or group to follow your orders. ALF? Nah.

Bingo.....You hit it right on the nose there...Great point!!!
 
If you openly support a group that goes out and hurts somebody, the police are not going to say, "pfft! Old Ted couldn't have done this" and leave it at that.

I support ending the war in Iraq, but i'm not going to write a check to the Taliban.

= the classical knee-jerk "guilt by association" fallacy.
 
i think people generally miss the point about animal rights, they concentrate on how inconvenient or harmful it would be to humans if the "lunatic fringe" had its way and animals weren't tortured and exploited, but that's kind of like saying slavery should never have ended because it was so helpful econimically! it's not a perfect analogy and i don't mean to be disrespectful to anyone, but my point is no matter how difficult it is to completely overthrow and reorganize industries like food and medicine it just has to be done because it is morally intolerable to base our lifestyles on cruelty. on a good day i really believe that people are always moving (slowly) towards a more compassionate way of life. morrissey is ahead of his time :D
 
= the classical knee-jerk "guilt by association" fallacy.


i think members of the mafia say the same thing...

you don't think it should matter that of all of the animal rights groups out there that your friend chooses to ally themselves with that particular message?

Bob Barker has been a long-standing advocate of animal rights and I'll bet he's never been harassed by the FBI. It's not simply because he is a beloved TV show host, but the fact that he doesn't end his shows with "..and remember to send a pipe bomb to the vivisectionists. Bye bye!"
 
Freeing animals that are needed to create insulin hurts human beings. My mother would be dead if ALF had there way.Burning down valuable information on cancer research hurts human beings. The list goes on. Nuff said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4HmoThntg8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BQ55eDm6eI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da1S7uvZ0xs

Watch and learn.

Good Luck

If you know anything about "research", it hardly is. It is a widely known fact, or atleast it should be, that our bodies react to medication DIFFERENTLY than animals. Fill in the blanks. It's a big "DUH".
My mother has had diabetes since age 12. All this "research" hasn't helped her life in any way.
 
If you know anything about "research", it hardly is. It is a widely known fact, or atleast it should be, that our bodies react to medication DIFFERENTLY than animals. Fill in the blanks. It's a big "DUH".
My mother has had diabetes since age 12. All this "research" hasn't helped her life in any way.

Yes, you are quite correct...The mass majority of animal-torcher-bassed-so-called-research cannot be extended to humans. So we do have things for diabetes, etc from stuff that was done in the past. From this day on..there is no reason to use animals and screw with them for "research" or so they call it.

Has no one ever had an animal that they have loved. It's those animals being torchered, murdered, mutilated.

Sure there are animals we may not have as companions being used for so-called research but they still cry out, feel pain and go absolutely insane under the conditions in which they are FORCED to live. I say, if you want to eat meat then have the guts to go out with nothing but a knife and try and bag yourself a kill. It is quite cowardice to pay someone to slaughter and torcher an animal so you can buy it in discreet little packages that look happy and pain-free. How many times do you hear people say about hot dogs or somethng...."Don't tell me what's in it it will gross me out" and then continue to eat it. Anyway..back to the topic....

The struggle for animals and their lives is closely related to all other struggles in one way or another.

Moz said that those people only understood violence and that is why he agreed with what ARM did. Speak in their language. I can tell you that I worked in a psych facility and you become numb to pain and suffering as and I can relate that to these people that work in these labs as well as these horrific folks working in the slaughterhouses...they just lose their compassion and all sense. But I never would have tortured any living being in the name of something research based (so-called) even if a doctor told me..."Beat and cut this person with schizophrenia to see how he reacts so we can help other people with schizophrenia."

Also....there was someone who posted a story about a man with the brain-disease schizophrenia and his ARM actions. Having schizophrenia does not mean that you are cruel and crazy and are more likely to join revolutionary groups or as some people see, crazy groups.

there are people who have taken out abortion clinics and doctors but the ALF has NEVER hurt anyone. Hitting someones wallet is a small tactic compared to drilling holes in kittens head with 6-inch screws, tying monkeys down with metal plates on their heads held in with screws while given purposeful head injuries and noting how they happen to move after each time they are hit only to be taken out. It is so grotesque that most people do not want to even look at what goes on. EVen behind factory farms....it is repulsive..There is fesces that tests positive in meat inspections but there is an acceptable amount of fesces the FDA will allow for human consumption. They don't care about us and we vote them to do so.....Who is there to take care of our animal companion/friends?

Again, to all equating Moz with a terrorist..get over it! If you support the US govt. you support terrorism (or any govt. for that matter).

I just started posting on these forums and am shocked to see how many folks like to take a daily bash at Moz. I love Moz and his music and regarldess of what he says about anything...if you don't believe in what he says...you have to think that he has different experiences than most (as does everybody) and you should never agree with everything someone says....Though I must admit I have yet to find one thing Moz has said that i have disagreed with. Then again...I have not read all of his interviews............

Peas...People :)
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised how many people here don't agree with Morrissey's animal rights views, or are even hostile about them, not because you should agree with everything he says but because it is so fundamental in his perspective and therefore in his music.
 
If you know anything about "research", it hardly is. It is a widely known fact, or atleast it should be, that our bodies react to medication DIFFERENTLY than animals. Fill in the blanks. It's a big "DUH".
My mother has had diabetes since age 12. All this "research" hasn't helped her life in any way.

yes, exactly, and that's why animal testing has even prevented potentially effective drugs for humans from ever seeing the light of day. if a drug doesn't work in an animal experiment it is immediatley discarded, even though it may have worked for humans. ultimately - all drugs are tested on humans before they hit the market anyway. I think that big story last year about this medical testing on a few men who reacted in the most horrible way with deformed heads, excruciating pain and seizures seconds after taking the meds that passed the animal tests should wake us up to the fact that animal testing is not the most reliable way of establishing safety for humans (that story dissapeared from the news suddenly - I always wondered what happened to those poor guys!)

morally speaking: in bygone centuries scientists did vivisection on prisoners. the critics who said this to be cruel were laughed at. I read the following utilitarian statement by a doctor: "those who say that vivisection on prisoners is cruel are sentimental and wrong. it is not cruel because it serves mankind".

so - it's all a matter of perspective, isn't it? I believe that today - in this century - anyone would be shocked by the above viewpoint.

anyway, I hope that research on cells is the future anyway. Let's hope medicine will evolve to a true high tech standard and stop foolish experiments like feeding cancer-rats nothing but coffee for 4 weeks to see if coffee can cure cancer (this medieval sounding experiment DID happen here in austria, believe it or not)
 
Last edited:
yes, exactly, and that's why animal testing has even prevented potentially effective drugs for humans from ever seeing the light of day. if a drug doesn't work in an animal experiment it is immediatley discarded, even though it may have worked for humans. ultimately - all drugs are tested on humans before they hit the market anyway. I think that big story last year about this medical testing on a few men who reacted in the most horrible way with deformed heads, excruciating pain and seizures seconds after taking the meds that passed the animal tests should wake us up to the fact that animal testing is not the most reliable way of establishing safety for humans (that story dissapeared from the news suddenly - I always wondered what happened to those poor guys!)

morally speaking: in bygone centuries scientists did vivisection on prisoners. the critics who said this to be cruel were laughed at. I read the following utilitarian statement by a doctor: "those who say that vivisection on prisoners is cruel are sentimental and wrong. it is not cruel because it serves mankind".

so - it's all a matter of perspective, isn't it? I believe that today - in this century - anyone would be shocked by the above viewpoint.

anyway, I hope that research on cells is the future anyway. Let's hope medicine will evolve to a true high tech standard and stop foolish experiments like feeding cancer-rats nothing but coffee for 4 weeks to see if coffee can cure cancer (this medieval sounding experiment DID happen here in austria, believe it or not)


The botched drug testing story hit the news in April 2006.
Few months ago Channel 4 broadcasted the programme about the most severly affected man who lost part of his fingers and toes.
This accident is a human error and could've prevented if they carefully controlled the dose of the drug given to the testers.
You can find out about the programme from Channel 4 website.
 
i think members of the mafia say the same thing...

you don't think it should matter that of all of the animal rights groups out there that your friend chooses to ally themselves with that particular message?

Bob Barker has been a long-standing advocate of animal rights and I'll bet he's never been harassed by the FBI. It's not simply because he is a beloved TV show host, but the fact that he doesn't end his shows with "..and remember to send a pipe bomb to the vivisectionists. Bye bye!"

The mob members go to church. So does your president. Conclude using your own logic and make no less than 5 mistakes. (easy task).

Bob Barker .... Great example. Shame he didn't neuter himself.

FYI: my friends haven't harmed anyone. Bob Barker has.
 
Yeah there is a kind of hostility toward his animal rights view. Very strange. Meat is murder led me to instant vegeterianism and now veganism.

People can do what they like but Moz is not a terrorist as some have said. He is correct in his use of using their own language to communicate with these folks. I don't have what it takes to do that but I do my best by eating a vegan diet and living a vegan lifestyle. No leather, wool, silk, honey...everything down to cleaners,soaps, toothpastes..you name it and serious thought goes into it when I buy. Even where the products come from..sweatshop labor is a no, wal-mart is a no. Companies I buy from is important because people like proctor and gamble among a ton of others just keep usin useless tests on these poor, innocent animals. It sounds insane and like it is a lot of work but it is second nature after a while.
 
got my copy of the book today.
here is Morrissey's endorsement:

As an animal protectionist, even I feel humbled and useless when I read of Keith Mann's life and risks, No matter who says what, it is
such as Keith who are the real heroes of modern society. There can be nothing brave about going to Iraq to kill civilians - stay here.
in England, and face the slaughterhouses of the Death Industry, and their factory farms and their torture laboratories of dread. The Daily
Mail terms pro-vivisectionists as 'boffins' and denounces anti-torture activists as 'extremists' - thankfully some of us aren't so dim.

How vicious life would be without visionaries such as Keith, and the bravery und unified vision of the ALF. One way or another books such
as Keith's make us more aware of ourselves because they tell us what we are - or aren't - doing to help other beings. That so many corporations
and power-maniacs openly and eagerly despise animal rights activists is evidence of the guilt of those corporations. What else could it be?

MORRISSEY
 
Back
Top Bottom