Day: July 30, 2021

Slaughterhouse in Germany: a place of horror

Animal exploitation sites are some of the most hideous in the world and their doors are always tightly locked, but there are facilities that are even more impenetrable than others: slaughterhouses.

The undercover agents’ cameras document insights that television cannot get and in which atrocities are the order of the day to show what is really going on behind the walls of these places.

Slaughterhouses around the world hide a cruel and painful reality: billions of animals such as pigs, cows, calves, chickens, rabbits, sheep and fish are brutally killed every day, regardless of their suffering.

The stunning methods are mostly ineffective and cause terrible agony for the animals, who first witness the killing of those in front of them and are then killed themselves fully conscious.

Inadequately equipped facilities, disregarded quality standards, violations of animal welfare laws and hygiene regulations, as well as abuse and mistreatment of animals are the rule.

Animal Equality’s international team has been documenting the cruel practices that the meat industry hides from its consumers for several years in slaughterhouses around the world: in Mexico, Brazil, Spain, the UK, and especially in Italy, where 10 out of 17 are undercover Research has been carried out worldwide.

Recently, the living conditions of animals condemned to be slaughtered are finally gaining more and more public attention, as the latest news from Mexico shows, for example: The Congress of the State of Puebla has almost unanimously passed the bill to ban illegal slaughterhouses and the slaughter of animals without stunning assumed.

The wind is turning, and that’s also thanks to our investigative work, which we carry out with full determination.

Additional information: in the last few years the scandals in slaughterhouses in Germany have increased, one scandal follows another.
The SOKO animal welfare association has delivered several undercover investigations to the authorities and to the public.
Consequences: Sometimes a slaughterhouse closes and opens the next year next door again.

SOKO Tierschutz-Mecke-Germany

The association SOKO carried out an undercover investigation in a butcher’s company Mecke in North Rhine-Westphalia from May to July 2021.

This last undercover is a fatal reminder of the scandals surrounding slaughterhouses that specialize in the illegal slaughter of sick and injured dairy cows.
In the past few months, animals have been systematically mistreated in an animal facility belonging to the Mecke company network.


Workers beat emaciated animals in the most brutal way and to the point of unconsciousness, a sick calf is kicked and dragged by the ears, electric shocks are illegally distributed, cows are dragged around with the winch while fully conscious, and animal experiments are even suspected , because the company apparently trades in the blood of the weakened animals.

The blood is drawn from the animals by the liter while they are still alive, while the animals are still tortured.


A process that counts as a reportable animal experiment.
The Mecke employees comment on this as “emptying” and know that animals are finished after this ordeal and often can no longer get up.

In addition, pictures are shown of small children who beat the cattle with poles

It is now evident that the ridiculous penalties in animal welfare processes are zero deterrent.

The cruelest perpetrators simply moved a few kilometers further, and the veterinary office once again doesn’t know anything – that’s how animal welfare works in Germany.
“A major failure of politics and the judiciary,” said SOKO spokesman Friedrich Mülln.

The video is hard, as hard as the reality in slaughterhouses made possible by criminal butchers and corrupt authorities.

For decades this has happened thousands of times and every day in Germany under political fraud, series lobbyism and a powerful meat mafia that has nothing to fear.

My best regards to all, Venus

India: July Rescue Videos From Friends At ‘Animal Aid Unlimited’.

Above – The wonderful AAU Crew.

From Erika and all our crew friends at Animal Aid Unlimited, India.

Dear Mark,

Massage, brushing, and giving cuddles can play a major role in an animals’ recovery.

There is a proven correlation between contact with animals and human health benefits and the same healing benefits are shared by animals who experience kindness and love.

The fact that human-animal companionship affects heart rate and blood pressure are impressive. But seeing the simple happiness sparkling in their eyes is enough for us.

Giving love isn’t extra here, it’s essential, and your help makes it all possible.

Bessie howled in pain and fear. But suddenly, she wagged her tail!

Hiding in pain and wailing when touched, this precious girl had been hit by a car,her hind leg was fractured and she had deep lacerations.

But as soon as she understood she was safe in the arms of her rescuer,she stopped howling and to our surprise, started to wag her tail instead. And when we eased her pain with medication, wound dressing, splint and surgery, she gave us the most beautiful reward: non-stop smiles filled with love throughout the coming weeks of her healing.

Bessie is one of the tender souls who lives life so full of love and appreciation. Thank you for helping her heal. Please donate today.

It took Shabi weeks to recover from a head injury, but his sweetness never missed a beat!

Stumbling and circling, this beautiful little one had a brain injury after he was hit by a passing car.

Shabi’s tender-hearted neighbors saw his disorientation and called us to the rescue. His breathing was distressed and rapid and we worried that he might be bleeding internally. The first job was to stabilize his breathing; we gave him oxygen and medicine to help him breathe. Regaining his balance and orientation would take weeks.

We are so grateful that his brain damage isn’t permanent but his adorable charm sure is. Meet Shabi now, one of the world’s sweetest souls.

Help young angels wag their tails for many years to come. Please donate today.

Your animals deserve treats and so do YOU!

Your purchase helps save the lives of ill and injured street animals.

Shop Now – Animal Aid Unlimited Shop

We thank you deeply for all you do, are, and inspire for animals.

Founding family Erika, Claire and Jim, and the Animal Aid Unlimited team.

The Euphemisms of Animal Exploitation.

SURGE | The euphemisms of animal exploitation (

Thanks Stacey for sending this over to us – sorry its late in publishing !

Regards Mark

  New post on Our Compass   The euphemisms of animal exploitation by Stacey


People love defining another’s suffering in manners that provides them personal comfort and not the actual victims; animal exploitation is bloody, abusive, violent, and the cause of unimaginable fear and suffering regardless of how aesthetically appealing humans disguise it. If you get angsty by grammar that legitimately describes the horrors animals experience, just remember that nobody takes their beloved cat or dog to be “humanely euthanized” in a slaughterhouse, nor are companies/animal farmers/execs happily transparent regarding this “process” by sharing footage of the gruesome, bloody, agonizing “end” of animals: in fact, the exposure of slaughterhouses is typically only from undercover exposes, former employees, or unnamed current employees. (Although there are some slaughterhouses that film the graphic, fearful, and agonizing killing of unwilling, terrified, innocent animals, the problem is, nobody watches the footage. Who wants to, though, when you can remain willfully ignorant of the violence you inflict on innocents?

And, too, why is footage even needed when the reality of slaughterhouse existences …. well …. exists? It’s a slaughterhouse, its purpose is to kill as fast, as many, as cheaply and efficiently as possible, why people believe that good things happen is one is bizarre.) Stop pretending that just because you’re afforded the privilege of associating violence and pain endured by docile, gentle animals, with pastoral, peaceful, and caring descriptions to provide you comfort means it’s comfortable for the victims: it’s NOT. YOU don’t have to physically suffer the consequences of your delusional grammatical validations, the animals DO regardless of your willful ignorance.

Source Surge Right now, all around the world, the animal farming industries are working with politicians to try and get certain terms banned from being able to be used by plant-based companies. With the EU considering a piece of legislation that could make it illegal to use phrases that “imitate or evoke dairy products, even if the composition or true nature of the product or service is indicated or accompanied by an expression such as “style”, “type”, “method”, “as produced in”, “imitation”, “flavour”, “substitute”, “like” or similar. This could make it illegal to even say ‘does not contain milk’. Yes, that’s right, we’re not even joking. We wish we were. But this got us thinking about the words the meat, dairy and egg industries use and how they themselves hide behind euphemisms to disguise the reality of their industries. So here’s our round-up of the words the EU and other politicians should be looking to ban, if that is, they do actually care about consumer confusion.

Slaughter or processing? If we said to you, what word would you use to describe hanging an animal on a kill line and pulling a knife across their throat, what would you say? Well, if you were a farmer you would call that processing. The animal exploitation industries have a real problem saying that water is wet. In fact, in 2019, at their annual conference, New South Wales farmers voted for the complete exclusion of the word slaughter and for it to be replaced with the word processing. Why? Because in their view the word slaughter is used to create emotions that discredit animal farming industries and undermine trust in animal farming.   One farmer stated: “The word slaughter is not appropriate for our industry… it’s not mass murder.” Whatever helps them sleep at night. But this is a common term used by animal farmers, with slaughterhouses often referred to as meat processing plants. Avoiding the word slaughter seeks to detach the consumer from the reality of what happens to animals by instead using words that allow us to psychologically distance ourselves from what we are paying for. After all, would you rather pay for an animal to be processed or slaughtered?

Mass slaughter or depopulation? At the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, many slaughterhouses were forced to close due to outbreaks among the workers. One of the most notable was the Smithfields slaughterhouse that supplies around five per cent of all pig flesh in the US. This caused huge problems in the supply chain. So the next question is, what do you call killing hundreds, even thousands of lives in quick succession because you can’t sell them to have their throats cut? Depopulation. But in reality, depopulation is just a friendlier way of saying mass extermination on farms, which is exactly what it is. One way in which animals are slaughtered en masse by farmers is called ventilation shutdown, where the air supply is cut off to the barns filled with animals. This in turn causes the heat to increase to intense levels causing the animals to slowly suffocate and roast to death at the same time. This method of mass killing is even endorsed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, whilst at the same time they call it unacceptable to leave dogs in cars. Why? Because the temperature will increase which will cause the dog to suffer and die. After this process was exposed by hidden camera footage, the National Pork Producers Council said in an email: “We definitely need to come up with a new name to describe this.” Yet again showing how deliberately these industries attempt to hide the things they do. Other methods of on-farm mass slaughter include pumping foam throughout the barns blocking the airways of the animals causing them to suffocate to death, or using carbon dioxide, where the farmers turn the barns into large gas chambers or create smaller gas chambers in which the animals are gassed to death. By using the word ‘livestock’ we are viewing these animals as mere products, commodities who can be traded and profited from. In essence, it seeks to deny the animals their individuality.

“Euthanasia” Next word. What do you call the act of picking up a piglet by their back legs and slamming them against a wall or the floor to kill them because they’re not growing fast enough or aren’t worth spending money on for veterinary care? Farmers call this euthanasia. But when we think of animals being euthanised, we think of our companion animals being peacefully ‘put to sleep’ because they are severely ill. Well, farmers will describe killing an animal on their farm as euthanising the animal as if it is a merciful act, but instead of it being done in the animal’s best interest, it is done in the farmer’s financial interest. The most common methods of killing birds on a farm include blunt force trauma, which involves hitting an animal over the head until they are dead, neck dislocation, carbon dioxide gassing either head only or in gas chambers, or a captive bolt. For mammals, the most common methods include captive bolts, blunt force trauma, gassing, electrocution or a bullet. But the issue of euphemisms is even more normalised than this, to the point where some of the most common words used to describe animal exploitation actually contribute to the objectification of animals. For example, the term livestock.

Sentient individuals or livestock? By referring to animals as livestock, animal farmers are attempting to create a distinction between the animals they farm and the animals that exist in the world. It essentially ‘otherises’ the animals we exploit and attempts to put them into a different classification, which further perpetuates the idea that it is acceptable to exploit and kill these animals. For example, if you ask someone, “is it acceptable to kill livestock?”, most people will say yes. But if you ask “is it acceptable to kill animals?”, people’s responses would often be very different, even though the question is the same question. However, morally there is no difference between killing a pig or killing any other animal we don’t classify as livestock. This is how ‘othering’ works.

We view the animals we kill as being different and refer to them differently so as to make what we do to them more palatable and less likely to expose our cognitive dissonance. By using the word ‘livestock’ we are viewing these animals as mere products, commodities who can be traded and profited from. In essence, it seeks to deny the animals their individuality. What about the names of animal products themselves, many of which are also named and referred to in a way that disconnects us from the reality of who we are eating? Even though the origins of many of these words can be traced back hundreds of years, referring to animal flesh as meat, pig flesh as pork, cow flesh as beef and baby cow flesh as veal, among others, further detaches us from having to think about the animals whose bodies we are purchasing. Imagine if supermarkets had flesh aisles, rather then meat aisles. Or if instead of bacon, we bought sliced pig flesh with extra fat layers. By turning animals into objects, classifying them differently and using different words to describe them when they are living and when they are dead, it allows us to avoid the discomfort caused by thinking of them in gas chambers or hung up on the kill line about to have their throats cut.

Whether we realise it or not, the animal agriculture industries have been purposefully trying to trick consumers for years, and their on-going attempts to try and censor plant-based companies further proves how worried they are about the prospect of informed consumers making their own decisions. In the end, consumers aren’t being misguided by clearly labelled plant-based alternatives, they are being lied to and deceived by industries that are desperate to keep the objective reality of what happens to animals out of sight and out of mind.

Download Your FREE Vegan PDF HERE
Order a FREE vegan kit HERE
Dairy-Free Info HERE
Take the Dairy-Free Challenge HERE
Click HERE for more Dairy-Free Fish alternatives can be found HERE
Learn about eggs HERE
Find bacon alternatives HERE and HERE Take PETA’s Cruelty-Free Shopping Guide along with you next time you head to the store! The handy guide will help you find humane products at a glance.

Order a FREE copy HERE Searching for Cruelty-Free Cosmetics, Personal-Care Products, Vegan Products, or more?
Click HERE to search.
Free PDF of Vegan & Cruelty-Free Products/Companies HERE
Click HERE to find out How to Wear Vegan! Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend:
PETA HERE Vegan Outreach HERE
Get your FREE Activist Kit from PETA, including stickers, leaflets, and guide HERE
Have questions? Click HERE    

USA: Tigers Kept in Maggot-Infested, Rancid Barn—Take Action Now!

Tigers Kept in Maggot-Infested, Rancid Barn—Take Action Now!

Since the days of holding protests outside the now-defunct Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, PETA has been letting everyone know that animals trucked around for circuses suffer from emotional and mental distress as well as physical health issues. 

In June 2021, a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) inspection report about tiger exhibitor Adam Burck echoed these facts. It stated that the tigers used for Adam Burck’s Royal Bengal Tigers act were kept in transport cages that prevented them from moving comfortably—let alone engaging in sufficient exercise—and that these conditions could have “a dramatic, negative impact on the health and well being of the animals.” For instance, Shere Khan, a 15-year-old tiger, was notably thin, with prominent hip bones and vertebrae. Despite his visibly poor condition, he hadn’t been evaluated by a veterinarian in over a year.

photo of white tiger in cage

The USDA also found that the tigers were being kept in the transport cages inside a stifling-hot barn that was poorly ventilated. It had “a very strong rancid odor,” and maggots covered the floor under and around the cages. In addition, there was no perimeter fence, so there was “a constant, ongoing potential threat” to public safety and to the animals. According to the USDA, the setup was “not at all appropriate” for dangerous animals.

These tigers are held in transport cages almost their entire lives. When they’re on the road—which can be upwards of 11 months a year—Burck has a written policy stating that they must be in transport cages “at all times” except while performing, suggesting that they’re denied any meaningful exercise for the entire tour season.

This hell has to end. Please politely ask Burck to do what’s right and move these tigers to accredited sanctuaries now. You may use the sample letter below, but remember that it’s always more effective to use your own words.

Take Action :  Tigers Kept in Maggot-Infested, Rancid Barn—Take Action Now! | PETA

Please take action re the above link – Thanks – Regards Mark