TTY: Glastonbury Festival is not animal friendly

Re: True to You: Glastonbury

http://true-to-you.net/morrissey_news_150409_01

9 April 2015

Glastonbury Festival is not animal friendly

barbarism begins at home

Last year the artist Banksy burst into the Glastonbury Festival with his very clever moving art-piece called Sirens of the Lambs, which shows the screaming faces of lambs crying out from a truck bound for slaughter of the most unimaginably corrupt and vicious savagery.
Michael Eavis, the gentlemanly God of Glastonbury, was not impressed.
"Is it some kind of animal rights thing?" he asked, pretending not to understand what the rest of us saw so clearly. No, Michael, it was a preview of the UK entry for the 2015 Eurovision Song Contest…

"Our cows are actually very happy," Michael Eavis, now suddenly Dr. Dolittle, assured reporters, "they have the highest milk yield in the county."
What Michael Eavis meant by this statement was: WE are economically very happy because our cows have the highest milk yield in the county. No Glastonbury cow was available for comment, and no cows were heard laughing. Dr. Eavis equates milk yield as a sign of happiness, we note.

In order to 'have the highest milk yield in the county', a cow must be persistently 'raped' against its will (a logical assumption), or it must be artificially inseminated from the age of 13 months onwards, or injected with bovine growth hormone. The latter is banned (that is, frowned upon) in the UK, but since farmers pay no heed to the law when it comes to gassing badgers, shooting foxes or hunting, then we're safe to assume that the bovine growth hormone practice continues. In the UK, the farmers' financial gluttony is unassailably up there with the holy scriptures.
Dairy cows are not allowed to not be in lactation because then their milk production decreases and they do not produce enough milk to justify the cost of their board and lodgings. Therefore, cows are repeatedly raped and raped and raped … which Michael Eavis presumably thinks is a great way to make sentient beings happy. Dairy cows are only allowed to live for as long as they are useful to the farmer, which is about 4 years. If left alone, the cow could live for 20 years.
I assume that the dairy cows at Glastonbury who no longer yield milk are brought into the home of Michael Eavis and allowed to sit down and watch Emmerdale until they gently pass away in their later years, because, after all, Michael insists that Glastonbury cows are "very happy."
In truth, of course, as soon as a cow is a substandard producer of milk, she and her friends are sent off to have their throats slit.
We can easily imagine Michael Eavis waving the cattle truck off, and we can see his cows being "very happy" about that, and waving back to Michael.
A male calf produced by a dairy cow is immediately shot, or raised to be murdered for beef, or allowed no daylight during its entire short lifespan where it is trapped in a crate, unable to move, and thus the creation of veal. After calving, newborns are hit on the head with a hammer or pulled away from their mothers after just one day together, which causes explosive stress to both mother and baby. Does Michael Eavis approve of this? It appears so. Milk is worse than "meat" because on dairy farms the cows are tortured for YEARS before they are killed. Calves are pulled away from their mothers by dragging the calf with one leg, both mother and calf in a state of chaotic distress.
Does Michael Eavis at his Glastonbury Farm accommodate any cows at all that do not yield money his way? I doubt it. Off with their heads!
Does Michael Eavis care about the insane environmental damage caused by dairy farming? I doubt it. To hell with the environment! People who do not care about animal rights usually do not care about human rights. It naturally follows.
Should you actually agree to play at the Glastonbury Festival you might find visual arts expert Michael Eavis meddling with your presentations. In 2011 I played Glastonbury and attempted to sing the song Meat is murder. Behind me, a screen that usually shows the many evils of factory farming remained blank. I was told that Michael Eavis had stopped the screening of the film because it wasn't indicative of how his dairy farm operated. He didn't quite understand that the poor souls in the actual film did not want to be there in the first place. Michael Eavis also went on to justify banning the film by saying it would "upset" younger people. What Michael Eavis was saying, in effect, was:

it's OK for our belly, but not for our eyes … and at all costs don't educate anyone on animal cruelty because it might damage the financial profits of our happy Glastonbury Farm.

If he had thought the film gave an incorrect view of dairy farming, he wouldn't have cared if the film had been shown, but he banned the film because he knew the film was truth.

Like most animal haters, Michael appears to be one of those people who love dead animals, yet hate live ones. How is this sane, or logical, or possible?
If dogs and cats aren't 'food', then why are cows and sheep? The BBC recently made a terrible fuss when some unfortunate dogs were allegedly poisoned at Crufts - which, yes, was abysmal. But the BBC had no concern or report on the 40,000 piglets whose throats were slit in the UK in that very same week.
Why is the latter not a BBC story? Why is a poisoned dog at Crufts a story for national lamentation, yet the slaughter of 40,000 screaming piglets is not mentioned anywhere on any known news program?
If a dog is not food, then why is a pig?
Well, you might argue that 'oooh I love bacon', but if you love the pig dead, why do you not love the pig while it is alive, and why do you not protect it from slaughter … if you "love" "bacon" so much? Surely if you eat animals it's because you hate rather than love them?
Is a cat 'food'? No. So why is a lamb?
We have been trained and brainwashed to believe that some animals deserve to be killed and some don't, and much advertising effort is put into the hope that we do not ever decide for ourselves. No celebrity vegetarian chefs on the BBC! There is also heavy reliance on the hope that humans never quite become intelligent enough to understand that both humans and animals have natural rights. After all, as Gary Yourofsky brilliantly observed: if you remove bees or ants from the planet the entire cycle of life is damaged, but if you remove human beings from the planet then the entire planet will prosper and be saved.
Should we care that factory farming (which isn't farming at all - it's an industry very much like any other) is irrefutably linked to cancer in humans? Are you aware that the "country smell" so powerful in idyllic areas is actually the smell of mass slaughter of animals? Does anyone actually believe that the badger kill (not 'cull') is a move to protect cows, or to protect godly farmers' income? Are you aware that the virus of factory farming causes more greenhouse gas emissions than all combined forms of motorized transport? Of course you're not, for if you knew how much the "meat" industry is destroying the planet, well, you might grow wise to the biggest threat to your own life.

Like many animal haters, Michael Eavis was awarded a CBE by Elizabeth Battenberg (you have been ordered to address her as The Queen) in 2007. In 2005 he expressed how it was "outrageous to ban hunting". For such as Michael Eavis, there just cannot be enough bloodshed. More! More! More! Kill! Kill! Kill! Would he object if the hunters were also hunted?

Animal rights is now the leading social justice issue on the planet. Your decision is whether you support either the butcher or the butchered. It cannot be both.

Morrissey
8 April 2015
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

Looks like Benny's milk posts have got to him.

P.

he probably gave up dairy a while ago when he ordered the soy drink everyone refers to. i also think it unlikely that he reads any of this posted here but lets fill our egos anyway
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

he probably gave up dairy a while ago when he ordered the soy drink everyone refers to. i also think it unlikely that he reads any of this posted here but lets fill our egos anyway

Whatever. I'm off.
 
Well, see, there's a link between that new video and this TTY post. MAMMARY GLANDS!
It's really really clever. He's so clever, our Morrissey.

Okay now can Damon's male boobs? :)

Didn't watch the video included in your post btw, I think I've seen enough shitty videos for this week.

Glastonbury, not good for the environment? Well I remembered someone posting a video of the rubbish tip aka campsite there a few years ago. Didn't stop you from going though, did it? And suddenly now it's bad for moomoos and so it's bad? Well, you don't say.

Wow Morrissey, in one week you have revealed both Flesh and Truth! Hallelujah!!!!

Morrissey maketh us lie down in green pastures with the moomoos...He leadeth us besides still waters...and suddenly, quite unexplicably, slips and drowns.
 
He sounds Butthurt because his new music vid was so shit

a.gif
 
An anonymous person writes:

Looks like someone has given up dairy!

Glastonbury Festival is not animal friendly - true-to-you.net
9 April 2015

barbarism begins at home

Last year the artist Banksy burst into the Glastonbury Festival with his very clever moving art-piece called Sirens of the Lambs, which shows the screaming faces of lambs crying out from a truck bound for slaughter of the most unimaginably corrupt and vicious savagery.

Michael Eavis, the gentlemanly God of Glastonbury, was not impressed.

"Is it some kind of animal rights thing?" he asked, pretending not to understand what the rest of us saw so clearly. No, Michael, it was a preview of the UK entry for the 2015 Eurovision Song Contest…



Media coverage:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yeah im sure its that his high high expectations for music videos and the care he takes over them, along all the super great detailed ones in the past, are what hes concerned with and now hurt by. his concern was super evident as he hired famous filmmakers gave it a great budget and took a long time planning out the concept expecting it to take off with all of the promotion he gave to it. never mind his thirty years in the music business (more than any here) im sure he doesnt know whats up or what the video would have accomplished. you guys sound hurt, especially when you say your off and then come back to make another comment about the video and artist you dont like. you guys sound really upset and bitter about him not doing what you wanted or expected
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

he probably gave up dairy a while ago when he ordered the soy drink everyone refers to. i also think it unlikely that he reads any of this posted here but lets fill our egos anyway

I am actually slightly convinced that he might read and respond to this site. I've wondered that on several occasions. Which horrifies me to no end.
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

I am actually slightly convinced that he might read and respond to this site. I've wondered that on several occasions. Which horrifies me to no end.

If that's true then Damon is never allowed out in public again.
 
A small thing which matters, the Queen's offical name is still that of Elizabeth Windsor and not Elizabeth Battenberg. Cheeky Moz.

"The adoption of the Mountbatten-Windsor surname applies only to members of the Royal Family who are descended from the Queen, and not, for example, to her cousins, or descendants of her sister, Princess Margaret, who retain the surname Windsor." from the website The British Monarchy. n.d. Retrieved 5 May 2011.
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

I am actually slightly convinced that he might read and respond to this site. I've wondered that on several occasions. Which horrifies me to no end.

what makes you think so bhops. also just a how ya doin
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

http://true-to-you.net/morrissey_news_150409_01

9 April 2015

Glastonbury Festival is not animal friendly

barbarism begins at home

Last year the artist Banksy burst into the Glastonbury Festival with his very clever moving art-piece called Sirens of the Lambs, which shows the screaming faces of lambs crying out from a truck bound for slaughter of the most unimaginably corrupt and vicious savagery.
Michael Eavis, the gentlemanly God of Glastonbury, was not impressed.
"Is it some kind of animal rights thing?" he asked, pretending not to understand what the rest of us saw so clearly. No, Michael, it was a preview of the UK entry for the 2015 Eurovision Song Contest…

"Our cows are actually very happy," Michael Eavis, now suddenly Dr. Dolittle, assured reporters, "they have the highest milk yield in the county."
What Michael Eavis meant by this statement was: WE are economically very happy because our cows have the highest milk yield in the county. No Glastonbury cow was available for comment, and no cows were heard laughing. Dr. Eavis equates milk yield as a sign of happiness, we note.

In order to 'have the highest milk yield in the county', a cow must be persistently 'raped' against its will (a logical assumption), or it must be artificially inseminated from the age of 13 months onwards, or injected with bovine growth hormone. The latter is banned (that is, frowned upon) in the UK, but since farmers pay no heed to the law when it comes to gassing badgers, shooting foxes or hunting, then we're safe to assume that the bovine growth hormone practice continues. In the UK, the farmers' financial gluttony is unassailably up there with the holy scriptures.
Dairy cows are not allowed to not be in lactation because then their milk production decreases and they do not produce enough milk to justify the cost of their board and lodgings. Therefore, cows are repeatedly raped and raped and raped … which Michael Eavis presumably thinks is a great way to make sentient beings happy. Dairy cows are only allowed to live for as long as they are useful to the farmer, which is about 4 years. If left alone, the cow could live for 20 years.
I assume that the dairy cows at Glastonbury who no longer yield milk are brought into the home of Michael Eavis and allowed to sit down and watch Emmerdale until they gently pass away in their later years, because, after all, Michael insists that Glastonbury cows are "very happy."
In truth, of course, as soon as a cow is a substandard producer of milk, she and her friends are sent off to have their throats slit.
We can easily imagine Michael Eavis waving the cattle truck off, and we can see his cows being "very happy" about that, and waving back to Michael.
A male calf produced by a dairy cow is immediately shot, or raised to be murdered for beef, or allowed no daylight during its entire short lifespan where it is trapped in a crate, unable to move, and thus the creation of veal. After calving, newborns are hit on the head with a hammer or pulled away from their mothers after just one day together, which causes explosive stress to both mother and baby. Does Michael Eavis approve of this? It appears so. Milk is worse than "meat" because on dairy farms the cows are tortured for YEARS before they are killed. Calves are pulled away from their mothers by dragging the calf with one leg, both mother and calf in a state of chaotic distress.
Does Michael Eavis at his Glastonbury Farm accommodate any cows at all that do not yield money his way? I doubt it. Off with their heads!
Does Michael Eavis care about the insane environmental damage caused by dairy farming? I doubt it. To hell with the environment! People who do not care about animal rights usually do not care about human rights. It naturally follows.
Should you actually agree to play at the Glastonbury Festival you might find visual arts expert Michael Eavis meddling with your presentations. In 2011 I played Glastonbury and attempted to sing the song Meat is murder. Behind me, a screen that usually shows the many evils of factory farming remained blank. I was told that Michael Eavis had stopped the screening of the film because it wasn't indicative of how his dairy farm operated. He didn't quite understand that the poor souls in the actual film did not want to be there in the first place. Michael Eavis also went on to justify banning the film by saying it would "upset" younger people. What Michael Eavis was saying, in effect, was:

it's OK for our belly, but not for our eyes … and at all costs don't educate anyone on animal cruelty because it might damage the financial profits of our happy Glastonbury Farm.

If he had thought the film gave an incorrect view of dairy farming, he wouldn't have cared if the film had been shown, but he banned the film because he knew the film was truth.

Like most animal haters, Michael appears to be one of those people who love dead animals, yet hate live ones. How is this sane, or logical, or possible?
If dogs and cats aren't 'food', then why are cows and sheep? The BBC recently made a terrible fuss when some unfortunate dogs were allegedly poisoned at Crufts - which, yes, was abysmal. But the BBC had no concern or report on the 40,000 piglets whose throats were slit in the UK in that very same week.
Why is the latter not a BBC story? Why is a poisoned dog at Crufts a story for national lamentation, yet the slaughter of 40,000 screaming piglets is not mentioned anywhere on any known news program?
If a dog is not food, then why is a pig?
Well, you might argue that 'oooh I love bacon', but if you love the pig dead, why do you not love the pig while it is alive, and why do you not protect it from slaughter … if you "love" "bacon" so much? Surely if you eat animals it's because you hate rather than love them?
Is a cat 'food'? No. So why is a lamb?
We have been trained and brainwashed to believe that some animals deserve to be killed and some don't, and much advertising effort is put into the hope that we do not ever decide for ourselves. No celebrity vegetarian chefs on the BBC! There is also heavy reliance on the hope that humans never quite become intelligent enough to understand that both humans and animals have natural rights. After all, as Gary Yourofsky brilliantly observed: if you remove bees or ants from the planet the entire cycle of life is damaged, but if you remove human beings from the planet then the entire planet will prosper and be saved.
Should we care that factory farming (which isn't farming at all - it's an industry very much like any other) is irrefutably linked to cancer in humans? Are you aware that the "country smell" so powerful in idyllic areas is actually the smell of mass slaughter of animals? Does anyone actually believe that the badger kill (not 'cull') is a move to protect cows, or to protect godly farmers' income? Are you aware that the virus of factory farming causes more greenhouse gas emissions than all combined forms of motorized transport? Of course you're not, for if you knew how much the "meat" industry is destroying the planet, well, you might grow wise to the biggest threat to your own life.

Like many animal haters, Michael Eavis was awarded a CBE by Elizabeth Battenberg (you have been ordered to address her as The Queen) in 2007. In 2005 he expressed how it was "outrageous to ban hunting". For such as Michael Eavis, there just cannot be enough bloodshed. More! More! More! Kill! Kill! Kill! Would he object if the hunters were also hunted?

Animal rights is now the leading social justice issue on the planet. Your decision is whether you support either the butcher or the butchered. It cannot be both.

Morrissey
8 April 2015

I don't think it will be very long before Morrissey gives up on music altogether and dedicates himself to full-time animal rights warfare.

I do wonder what sparked this sudden character assassination of Michael Eavis, though. The man is nearly 80 years old, surely there are more worthy targets?

Also - meat-eaters consume animals because we hate them? No. Stupid statement.
 
Re: True to You: Glastonbury

I don't think it will be very long before Morrissey gives up on music altogether and dedicates himself to full-time animal rights warfare.

I do wonder what sparked this sudden character assassination of Michael Eavis, though. The man is nearly 80 years old, surely there are more worthy targets?

Also - meat-eaters consume animals because we hate them? No. Stupid statement.

Michael Eavis is simply an example. Moz can't name everyone. And, actually, you do the same. You single out Morrissey for his believes but he isn't the only one. His views aren't as unique as everyone makes them out to be. Furthermore when you say "stupid statement" ... well, give a better one. I think we should change the roles a bit. Everyone around here picks a topic, makes a statement and then let others comment on it and rip it apart. To comment on people's statements is, for some, easier and more comfortable than make a statement by themselves.
 
At one point, Morrissey almost went into the whole 'I don't eat pork' conversation in Pulp Fiction between Vincent and Jules.
 
Great, another KFC, McDonalds, Burger King eating New York Yankees cap wearing fat Brit infatuated with meat and killing animals. Just what the world needs.

Morrissey still drinks milk and he could never give up Parmesan cheese or any cheese for that matter. He just is stating that dairy cows should not be treated bad.

One thing the Morrissey stalkers should get from this, is that he spends a lot of time on youtube now. Maybe you can send him secret messages, like where the best Italian restaurants are when he is touring.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone hear about that horrible fire over at morrissey-solo? Nobody was harmed, thank God, but sadly, quite a few of Brummie Boy's straw men went up in flames. :lbf:
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom