Environmental, General News

He Who Has Control Of The Skies, Has Control Of ………..

China ‘modified’ the weather to create clear skies for political celebration – study

Researchers say Beijing used cloud-seeding to create artificial rain and lower pollution in July, in latest example of ‘blueskying’ efforts

Chinese weather authorities successfully controlled the weather ahead of a major political celebration earlier this year, according to a Beijing university study.

On 1 July the Chinese Communist party marked its centenary with major celebrations including tens of thousands of people at a ceremony in Tiananmen Square, and a research paper from Tsinghua University has said an extensive cloud-seeding operation in the hours prior ensured clear skies and low air pollution.

The Chinese government has been an enthusiastic proponent of cloud-seeding technology, spending billions of dollars on efforts to manipulate the weather to protect agricultural regions or improve significant events including the 2008 Olympics.

Make it rain: US states embrace ‘cloud seeding’ to try to conquer drought

Read more

Cloud-seeding is a weather modification technique, which sees the adding of chemicals like small particles of silver iodide, to clouds, causing water droplets to cluster around them and increasing the chance of precipitation.

The Tsinghua study’s reported findings add to a small but growing body of scientific evidence around the success of the technology. Other countries have also invested in cloud seeding technology, but China has invested billions despite questions over the degree of its effectiveness, and debate about whether manipulating the weather in one area could disrupt weather systems elsewhere.

On Monday the South China Morning Post reported a recent research paper which found definitive signs that a cloud-seeding operation on the eve of the centenary had produced a marked drop in air pollution.

The centenary celebration faced what the paper reportedly termed unprecedented challenges, including an unexpected increase in air pollutants and an overcast sky during one of the wettest summers on record. Factories and other polluting activities had been halted in the days ahead of the event but low airflow meant the pollution hadn’t dissipated, it said.

The paper, published in the peer-reviewed Environmental Science journal and led by environmental science professor, Wang Can, said a two-hour cloud-seeding operation was launched on the eve of the ceremony, and residents in nearby mountain regions reported seeing rockets shot into the sky on 30 June. The paper said the rockets were carrying silver iodine into the sky to stimulate rainfall.

The researchers said the resulting artificial rain reduced the level of PM2.5 air pollutants by more than two-thirds, and shifted the air quality index reading, based on World Health Organization standards, from “moderate” to “good”.

The team said the artificial rain “was the only disruptive event in this period”, so it was unlikely the drop in pollution had a natural cause.

Last year Beijing announced plans to expand its experimental weather modification program to an area 1.5 times the size of India – 5.5 million square kilometres – covered by artificial rain or snow. The State Council has said it aims to have a developed weather modification system by 2025, including another half a million square kilometres hosting hail suppression technologies.

In the five years to 2017 state media claimed China had spent more than US$1.3bn on the technology and induced about 233.5bn cubic meters of additional rain. In 2019 officials said weather modification practices, usually the firing of iodine-packed shells to disrupt unfavourable weather fronts, had helped to reduce 70% of hail damage annually in agricultural regions of Xinjiang.

However it has also been used for political and other significant events, including the 2008 Olympics, the 2014 APEC summit, as well as National Day parades and annual Two Sessions meetings.

Cloud spraying and hurricane slaying: how ocean geoengineering became the frontier of the climate crisis

The weather manipulation activities, also known as “blueskying”, are usually implemented in conjunction with social changes in the lead up to events, including the shutdown of factories, construction and other polluting industries, and encouraging people to stay off the streets or leave the region, said Dr Shiuh-Shen Chien, of National Taiwan University’s department of geography, in a 2019 essay for Society+Space.

Dr Chien said China’s weather authorities had “institutionalised” climate controls for decades, with technological attempts dating back to the 1980s, but was unique in using it not just for commercial or agricultural reasons but also for “propaganda purposes”.

China ‘modified’ the weather to create clear skies for political celebration – study | China | The Guardian

Regards Mark

Hunting

EU Commission: where failure is everyday political life

The European Commission wanted to equate hunting and fishing with mining and ban them on 10 percent of the land area.
DJV (German Hunting Association) and other organizations successfully protested against it.

DJV calls on the federal government to implement the biodiversity strategy with a sense of proportion.
The European Commission has given up its controversial goal (!!) of enforcing a hunting ban on ten percent of the land area of ​​the European Union. This is evident from the Commission’s statements on the application of its directives.

User associations, among others, have shown strong resistance to the plans in advance.

The German Hunting Association (DJV) had urged the federal government to delete the problematic formulation and exerted influence through the umbrella organization of European hunters, FACE.

The DJV welcomes the relenting of the European Commission and calls on the new federal government to implement the goals of the EU biodiversity strategy with a sense of proportion.

“Protecting through use is an internationally recognized principle for successful species protection”, said DJV board member Professor Jürgen Ellenberger.

In May 2020, the European Commission presented its guidelines for implementing a biodiversity strategy.
It stipulated that strict protected areas should comprise 10 percent of the land area of ​​the European Union (EU).

The plan was to prohibit any “extractive” activity there.
In addition to mining, this should also include hunting and fishing.

The DJV has now successfully protested against this approach together with FACE, the action alliance Forum Natur and many other organizations. The European Parliament and a large part of the EU member states also expressed strong criticism of the excessive approach of the Commission.

https://www.jagdverband.de/eu-jagdverbot-schutzgebieten-vom-tisch

And I mean…This withdrawal has the potential to massively destroy the few remaining wildlife rights, and it has already happened.
The report is the proof that the EU Commission business model is a completely failed institution made up of lazy, irresponsible, corrupt politicians.

As soon as the hunters protested (not sued, just protested) the EU Commission had to give up its target.

This 10% protection would be the least that the EU should do against the massive murder of wild animals, especially wild birds in the EU area. According to reports of the Committee against Bird Murder, the sum of all determined numbers of shooting wild and migrating birds amounts to a total of around 53 million LEGAL deaths per year!

In the case of migratory birds, further losses in the millions are to be expected.

Also not included are losses through illegal hunting and bird trapping, including snares, which are among the most cruel animal traps of all.
As if this were not cruel enough, the commission obeys its allies, the hunter gang, and cancels its decision even to declare the populous 10% of the land area as protected areas.

FACE President, Torbjörn Larsson stated: “We are very pleased that common sense has prevailed and that there is no blanket hunting ban in this new category of strictly protected areas.

FACE has been actively opposed to unjustifiably banning hunting, highlighting that hunters play a key role in protected area management in Europe”. While thanking FACE Members for actively discussing this file at national level, Torbjörn Larsson added: “This shows how important it is for Europe’s 7 million hunters to work together”.

It is understandable that the FACE President gives such shit in public. But the fact that no one from the EU Commission is ashamed of being manipulated and led by FACE is a sign that this authority has no right to exist.

https://www.face.eu/2021/12/move-to-ban-hunting-in-10-of-the-eu-considered-unjustified-by-member-states/

My best regards to all, Venus

Farm Animals, General News

There is no such thing like “humane meat”

When you receive a call about your vehicle’s extended warranty, you likely hang up without paying a dime—you know it’s a trick.
However, shoppers often don’t apply the same kind of thought when at the grocery store.
Unfortunately, much like a suspicious call offering a deal that’s too good to be true, “humane” and “sustainable” labels on animal-derived foods are deceptive.

Instead of selling delicious vegan foods that are truly humane, many companies simply slap misleading labels touting compassion on the same types of cruelly sourced products that they’ve sold for decades.
This is known as “humane-washing,” and it’s a marketing ploy that makes consumers believe that they’re making kind choices when they’re actually not.

Here, we’ll break down what these deceptive labels really mean.

‘Grass-Fed’ Cows

The U.S. Department of Agriculture doesn’t verify the accuracy of producers’ claims, so it’s nearly impossible to know what the cows really ate.
“Grass-fed” cows are still subjected to mutilations without painkillers—hot irons are pressed into their skin, and their sensitive horns are burned off.
Farmers and ranchers may clear vast acres of land filled with natural plant life in order to graze cows, which kills wildlife and causes erosion.

’Cage-Free’ Chickens and Eggs

-Hens used in the egg industry live in dark, severely crowded warehouses.
-The tips of chicks’ beaks are commonly burned off.
-Up to 86% of hens used in cage-free egg production have broken bones.
-All male chicks are killed—often ground up or thrown into the trash to suffocate—because they’re considered useless by the egg industry.

What if Animals Raised With ‘No Antibiotics’ Get Sick?

Producers can use this label as long as they provide “sufficient evidence” that the animals were raised without antibiotics.
More animals can suffer and die because farmers don’t treat them when they get infections, in order to keep the deceptive label.

Which Animals on Farms Are Raised With ‘No Hormones’?

This label applies only to the flesh and milk of cows. It’s illegal to give hormones to chickens, pigs, and turkeys, so any company advertising hormone-free products from these animals isn’t doing any extra work.

If you look closely, you should find a stamp reading, “Federal regulations prohibit the use of hormones.”

Essentially, this is the equivalent of marketing zero-calorie water but with cruelty to animals thrown into the mix.

Continue reading “There is no such thing like “humane meat”” →

Environmental, Farm Animals, General News

Brazil’s Amazon beef plan will ‘legalise deforestation’ say critics.

A family-run cattle ranch in Acre, Brazil
A family-run cattle ranch in Acre, within the proposed Amacro sustainable development area. Critics of the plan claim that intensifying agriculture will lead to increased deforestation. Photograph: Luisa Dörr/Fern

Brazil’s Amazon beef plan will ‘legalise deforestation’ say critics

The beef industry hopes a planned deforestation-free farming zone will tempt buyers back but many fear it will drive up illegal tree felling

Brazil’s Amazon beef plan will ‘legalise deforestation’ say critics | Deforestation | The Guardian

For many, the overriding image of agriculture in the Amazon is one of environmental destruction. About 80% of deforestation in the region has been attributed to cattle ranching, tainting beef exports.

Brazil’s beef industry hopes to tempt buyers back to the Amazon region, which covers about 40% of the country’s total area, with a new deforestation-free pledge. But critics are concerned it could effectively legalise deforestation in the region.

In May, government officials began fleshing out the details of the so-called Amacro sustainable development zone, which it is hoped will lead to a massive intensification of agriculture in the Amazon. The Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro, is expected to greenlight the project later this year.

The Amacro zone – an acronym taken from the states it covers: Amazonas, Acre and Rondônia – is a vast 465,800 sq km (180,000 sq mile) region in north-west Brazil. It encompasses the Mapinguari national park, Brazil’s fifth largest protected area, and the Kaxarari indigenous territory, where the tribe has struggled to defend its land against loggers. Greenpeace has identified the northern portion of the zone as an emerging deforestation hotspot.

Previous agricultural development projects have led to the loss of vast tracts of native vegetation in other parts of Brazil, but Amacro’s proponents promise it is being designed to prevent illegal deforestation. Edivan Maciel, the former agriculture secretary in the state of Acre, says the aim is to produce more beef on land that has already been cleared. It is about “optimising what we already have without having to advance over the forest”, says Maciel, a Bolsonaro-allied appointee.

But Humberto de Aguiar, a federal prosecutor in Acre who handles environmental crimes, told the Guardian that the effect of the plan is such as “to legalise the deforestation already being done”.

It’s very difficult to stay legal. If I had another means of survival, I would leave

Gabriel Santos*, small-time rancher

Amacro is the brainchild of Assuero Doca Veronez, a powerful figure in Amazonian agribusiness, who told a Brazilian news site last year that “deforestation for us is synonymous with progress”. Veronez, a ranch owner and president of Acre’s Federation of Agriculture and Livestock, was fined for illegal deforestation in 2006. He denied any wrongdoing and said he sold the property in 2002.

Veronez says more intensive cattle ranching will enable more beef to be produced on less land and protect against deforestation. He claims to produce about 2.5 times the state average for beef. “Amacro can contribute to the preservation of these areas,” he says.

The idea that a shift to intensive ranching could cut deforestation in the Amazon is disputed by some researchers. It may be a flawed approach, concluded a University of California report in 2017, which noted, “the opposite could be true”.

Judson Valentim, a researcher at Brazil’s agriculture research agency, says intensification is unlikely to change the system responsible for the breakneck pace of deforestation. Veronez, like most large ranchers, relies on a network of smaller producers, most of whom, according to Valentim, lack the technical and financial resources to invest in more efficient grazing practices.

While ranchers like Veronez may avoid deforestation, their suppliers may not have the luxury to do so, says Valentim.

Growing demand for Amazonian beef has tempted more local people to raise cattle as a viable livelihood for feeding their families, leading to a sharp increase in illegal deforestation.

Gabriel Santos*, a small-time rancher from the Amacro zone, has been fined more than $130,000 (£96,000) for illegally clearing land in the reserve for grazing. But he says converting the forest to pasture is his only viable economic option.

Revealed: UK supermarket and fast-food chicken linked to deforestation in Brazil

Read more

Because Santos’ farm has been blacklisted by regulators, he cannot sell cattle directly to slaughterhouses. So he sells to a middleman, who sells on to the big ranchers.

If big ranchers become more productive, even if they do so without cutting the forest, it pressures the forest-razing cattle producers beneath them to grow their operations as well, says Valentim.

Veronez says he has nothing to do with other people’s environmental issues: “I’m absolutely against this kind of control.”

Although Brazilian law restricts most Amazonian landowners from clearing more than 20% of their property, lack of regulatory oversight helps to explain why 94% of deforestation may be undertaken illegally.

“It is very difficult to stay legal,” says Santos, who has racked up half a dozen eviction orders because of unpaid fines. He says with an annual income of $10,000, he cannot pay. He hides when government agents come to his property and fears he will eventually be hauled to jail. He attributes a recent heart attack to the stress.

“How am I going to support my family?” he pleads. “If I had another means of survival, I would leave. I only stay here because I have nowhere to go.”

Regards Mark

Environmental, Farm Animals, General News

UK: Christmas Shopping? Why ‘The Worst Toy In The World’ Could Be The Most Ethical Gift You Buy.

https://www.euronews.com/green/2021/11/13/christmas-shopping-why-the-worst-toy-in-the-world-could-be-the-most-ethical-gift-you-buy?utm_term=61adf5577a65115b704c760ba4877dfb&utm_campaign=AnimalsFarmed&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=animalsfarmed_email

“From an early age we are presented with an idealised view of what farms are like and how animals live on them.”

World Animal Protection hopes to change that with their Factory Farm Playset. Or ‘the worst toy in the world’, as they have labelled it.

Unlike ordinary farmyard toys, the playset has been designed to show the unnatural living conditions forced upon cows, pigs and chickens on intensive farms. It even has a warning on the packaging highlighting the methane and CO2 emissions from farming that contribute to climate change.

“While 5 or 6-year-olds may not have a grasp on politics, diplomacy and global issues, they have a clear sense of right and wrong and the need to make changes,” says Lindsay Duncan, UK Campaigns Manager for Farming at World Animal Protection.

The charity hopes the 1/32 scale model will allow children “to reimagine the traditional farmyard narrative we are taught while we are young.”

What is factory farming?

It is estimated that at least 50 billion animals are reared on factory farms every year. This means they are deprived of natural light, outdoor space and sustainable feed.

Designed to maximise production and minimise costs, agribusinesses keep livestock like cattle, poultry and fish at high stocking densities on large-scale production plants.

These cramped conditions cause serious health problems for many animals.

Over 80 per cent of factory-farmed pigs in the U.S. have pneumonia upon slaughter, while battery-farmed chickens spend their entire lives in a cage smaller than an iPad.

Weight-gain drugs administered through feed cause chickens to reach slaughter weight after only 35 days. This process would take over 90 days under natural conditions.

How does intensive farming impact the environment?

The Factory Farm Playset not only highlights the ethical dilemmas of intensive farming, it also underlines its correlation with climate change.

“Animal agriculture is responsible for producing the equivalent of 7.1 giga-tonnes of CO2 per year – that’s 14.5 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions,” continues Duncan.

If left unchecked, agriculture is projected to produce 52 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions in the coming decades – 70 per cent of which will come from meat and dairy alone.

“We have to have a reduction in meat eating and an end to factory farming to help avoid further damage to the climate. Eating less meat and growing crops for human beings instead of animals uses significantly less land and resources, drastically reducing emissions and taking the pressure off wild animals and their habits.”

And while the Factory Farm Playset is designed for children, World Animal Protection hopes adults will come to the same conclusion.

“We can all learn something from it to help protect the planet for future generations. We, the ‘grown-ups’, have to change our ways, and quickly.”

World Animal Protection’s ‘Say Yes to Less’ campaign is encouraging people in the UK to do their bit to put an end to factory farming by taking meat off their plates – for a day, a week, or a whole month.

Watch the video above to find out more.

Regards Mark

Environmental, Farm Animals, General News

EU: Animal Welfare in Trade Policy after the Covid-19 pandemic: Another set of learnings.

In July 2021, in a special issue of the Global Trade and Customs Journal on sustainable trade, Eurogroup for Animals reacted to the publication of the EU Trade Policy Review, and to the omission of animal welfare in the text, arguing that countries need to better address the impact of trade policies on animal welfare in order to promote resilient and sustainable economies.

The COVID-19 crisis has painfully put the spotlight on the detrimental impact of economic and trade policies that prioritise profits above all. Shortly after the publication of its new strategies on food policy and on biodiversity in the midst of the pandemic, the EU also launched a review of its trade policy.

The new trade strategy published in February 2021 has been described by EU authorities as the greenest ever. The text underlines that EU trade policy will have to “unequivocally support the Green Deal in all its dimensions”. Yet, the document does not offer new proposals on making trade policy more sustainable. It also omits to address animal welfare, and how the impact of trade policy on animals has fuelled several of the challenges the planet is facing, such as the surge in antimicrobial resistance, the spread of zoonoses or the biodiversity and climate crises. 

The Opinion Piece describes the state of play for animal welfare in EU trade policy  and considers tools to improve the situation. To better address animal welfare in trade policy, the EU could pursue two strategies. Firstly, it could increasingly rely on market access tools, either applying more standards at the border or using conditional liberalisation in its trade agreements. Secondly, at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) it should promote the need to be allowed to differentiate, and thus discriminate, products based on methods of production that are invisible in final products, such as animal welfare standards. You can read more here. 

If the EU wants to address the root causes of the costly crises the planet is facing, it will have to consider how to ensure that its trade policy does not stimulate unsustainable production systems. Achieving such a goal will require the adoption of measures bolder than the ones listed in the new EU trade strategy. The review of EU animal welfare standards will be a test case for all who wish to see more standards applied to imports, and, hopefully, these discussions could steer needed debates at the WTO on methods of production. It is high time to transform trade policy into a real enabler of sustainability. 

Regards Mark

Farm Animals, General News, Uncategorized

England: Takeaway The Meat.

Dear Mark,

Takeaway the Meat is Viva!’s ground-breaking new vegan TV ad campaign and we are crowdfunding to reach 16 million people in the UK.

We want to show people the correlation between animal cruelty and what is on their plate.

Over 450 people have donated to the campaign so far helping us smash our first target of £10K – and the list is growing fast!

We need your help to reach our next target of £15K.

A very generous donor has offered to match all donations up to the total value of £40k, and we have also secured a grant from Channel 4 which will double the total again.

https://viva.org.uk/tv-ad/?campaign=TVCF2021-email-1&mc_cid=2739f17e08&mc_eid=f1cc978ae5

Please give a donation if you can to get this ad onto UK national tv.

Regards Mark

Fur and Fur Farming

Fashion magazine “ELLE” has removed fur from all of its editorial and promotional content

LONDON, 2 DECEMBER 2021 – Today ELLE Magazine announced that it has committed to ending the promotion of animal fur in its pages and online.

The announcement was made today at Business of Fashion’s 2021 VOICES event in London and follows dialogue between ELLE brand owner, Lagardère Group, the Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society International and Creatives4Change.

ELLE created a charter to disallow editorial content that promotes animal fur on its pages, websites and social media. This includes no animal fur in editorials, press images, runway and street style images.

The charter, which is in alignment with the Fur Free Alliance’s definition of fur, also no longer allows the depiction of animal fur in any advertisements on its pages and online.

All ELLE editions around the world signed it, which includes publications in Arabia (English and French editions), Argentina, Australia, Belgium (Flemish and French editions), Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada (English and French editions), China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, UK, Ukraine, USA and Vietnam.

For 13 of those editions, the charter is already effective, for 20, it will be effective as of Jan. 1, 2022, and for the remaining editions, it will be effective as of Jan. 1, 2023.

The ELLE network that will be impacted by this announcement includes:
45 editions worldwide
21 million readers per month
6.6 million copies sold per month
175 million total reach
46 websites, 100 million unique visitors, 400 million pages viewed and multiple mobile/tablet apps

According to Constance Benqué, CEO Lagardère News and CEO ELLE International:

“Societal engagement has always been one of the key pillars of the ELLE brand. The world has changed and the end of the use of fur is aligned with the course of history. We hope that, with this commitment, ELLE will open the path for other media to disallow fur promotion, all around the globe, and promote a fur-free future.”

According to Valéria Bessolo LLopiz, SVP and international director of ELLE:

“For many years, ELLE has been engaged towards environment, sustainability and ecology through regular features or special green issues. The presence of animal fur in our pages and on our digital media is no longer in line with our values, nor our readers.

It is time for ELLE to make a statement on this matter, a statement that reflects our attention to the critical issues of protecting and caring for the environment and animals, rejecting animal cruelty. It is also an opportunity for ELLE to increase awareness for animal welfare, bolster the demand for sustainable and innovative alternatives, and foster a more humane fashion industry.”

Alexi Lubomirski, fashion photographer and founder of Creatives for Change, says:

“Since its inception, ELLE magazine has always been a leading light in fashion, synonymous with a freshness, unencumbered by the weight of tradition and formality. Because of this strength, ELLE was said to ‘not so much reflect fashion as decree it.’

It is this creative power to inspire, that allows ELLE to make broad steps in shaping the hearts and minds of its readers for a more evolved and aware future for all.”

PJ Smith, director of fashion policy for the HSUS and HSI, adds:

“We celebrate ELLE for taking a stand against the cruel fur trade and look forward to other fashion magazines following their lead. This announcement will ignite positive change throughout the entire fashion industry and has the potential to save countless animals from a life of suffering and a cruel death.

ELLE’s leadership will also drive innovation for more sustainable and humane alternatives.”

https://www.furfreealliance.com/elle-international-pledges-fur-free/

And I mean… More than 100 million animals worldwide are killed for their fur every year, including mink, fox, raccoon dog, chinchilla, rabbit and coyote – that’s the equivalent of three animals dying every second just for their fur.

Every designer who puts fur on the catwalk, every retailer who puts fur on the shelves, and every consumer who hangs fur in their closet helps keep the shameful misery on the fur farms going.

This spiral must stop and fur sales and fur farming must be banned in the EU and worldwide.

In this respect, we welcome the decision of ELLE magazine to no longer support this bloody business with advertising. Fashion designers have always used these luxury magazines as advertising media for their fur articles.

Now one puts an end to that, and we think that’s great.

My best regards to all, Venus

Environmental, Farm Animals, General News

London, England: Mc Libel – The Biggest Corporate PR Disaster In History. A David vs Goliath Fight.

Dear all;

In the post I showed yesterday from Stacey called ‘Sweet Earth’, I mentioned that the McDonalds issue has been a very big one with animal activists in the UK for decades.  Here is the sweet earth ink:

Sweet Earth – An Article Provided By Stacey at ‘Our Compass’. – World Animals Voice

Whilst we still have issues with McD; it is at least positive to see that they have finally moved part of their food to plant based; for which the murder of animals is obviously not necessary.

So, as said, I am posting here now a film which shows how McD attempted to silence and get apologies from 2 activists in London; named Helen and Dave; over a range of issues associated with it. They both said ‘NO’; and so it went a long way for many years.

I will leave it until the end of the film for you to see the result.

In passing, the legal ‘helper’, one Keir Starmer, was a young man at the time who gave his support to the two of them.  Now, Keir is the leader of the ‘Labour Party’; the main opposition organisation to the current UK government led by Boris Johnson (we share a surname, nothing else !).

I like this video; as it has positive outcomes and shows that as with Helen and Dave; if you believe in what you are campaigning for; there is never a need to be sorry for your views and statements.

Enjoy the video – simply click on the ‘Watch on YouTube’ link below to see the film

YOU MAY NOT GET IT FROM THE VERY START; JUST GO BACK AND SEE IT ALL..

McLibel

Regards Mark

————————————————————–

From Spanner films who made the video:

Hello. This is the official, full-length (81 min) version of our 2005 documentary, McLibel. This film was made completely independently (no studio/broadcaster backing) over four long years. We’re a tiny independent film company always struggling to make ends meet, so if you watch for free here, please make a donation – http://spannerfilms.net/donate – and also sign up to our email list: http://www.spannerfilms.net/mailing_list . Thanks v much and enjoy the film, Franny & Lizzie from Spanner Films – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

The first documentary from renowned director Franny Armstrong (The Age of Stupid, Drowned Out), McLibel tells the true story of two ordinary people who battle McDonald’s in what became known as “the biggest corporate PR disaster in history” (Channel 4 News). The Seattle Times called the film an “irresistible David and Goliath tale… you can’t help but cheer along” and the Sydney Morning Herald described it as “an often-hilarious exposé of big business arrogance… and an extraordinary example of independent filmmaking”.

McDonald’s often used the English libel laws to suppress criticism. Major media organisations like the BBC, Channel 4 and The Sun had backed down in the face of their legal threats. But then they sue single father Dave Morris (41) and gardener Helen Steel (34). In what became England’s longest-ever trial, the “McLibel Two” represent themselves for three and a half years in court against McDonald’s £10 million legal team.

Every aspect of the corporation’s business is cross-examined, from junk food and McJobs, to animal cruelty, environmental damage and advertising to children. McDonald’s try every trick in the book against the pair, including legal manoeuvres, secret settlement negotiations, a visit from Ronald McDonald and even spies.

Seven years later, in February 2005, the marathon legal battle finally concludes at the European Court of Human Rights – will the result take everyone by surprise?

Filmed over ten years, with courtroom reconstructions directed by Ken Loach, McLibel features the first interview with a McDonald’s spy, as well as in-depth contributions from Eric Schlosser (Fast Food Nation) and Keir Starmer (then Helen and Dave’s pro bono lawyer, now the Leader of the Labour Party).

The McLibel trial became a cause-celebre in the UK, resulting in changes both to UK law and to McDonald’s itself. It is often cited as influencing works which followed, including Fast Food Nation, Jamie’s School Dinners and Super Size Me.

The producers estimate that more than 26 million people have seen McLibel on TV, cinema, DVD and at local screenings worldwide.

Farm Animals

Mothers protect their babies

https://fb.watch/9KTf79uOtD/

How primitive and underdeveloped we humans are still in the 21st century!
In order to understand that we are dealing with an intrinsic animal cruelty in meat “production” and that the NOT documented suffering of “useful” animals is much, much worse, one should actually only be able to add one and one together.

But apparently a moral change in animal-eaters’ consciousness is not subject to an evolutionary autopilot.
In other words: what we did not understand centuries ago, we cannot understand today either, namely that animals are not our slaves, not our food, not our objects of torture.

The recognition of human superiority over other animals in our everyday life is nothing other than the fascist right to rule over them, to decide about their life and death, to destroy them as it suits us.

Eating animals and their products does not only mean supporting the enormous animal suffering.

Primarily means cooperation with this fascist system of exploitation, the destruction of other living beings and last but not least our planet.

There is in fact no human being who is more valuable than the living non-human animals in his environment, because without them he would not even exist.

 Eating meat is environmental crime.

My best regards to all, Venus