Foie Gras Protest at the Pearl Brasserie in Dublin

by boycott Pearl Brasserie Mon Jun 30, 2008 14:47

The gardai should investigate the restaurant. Foie Gras production is banned in Ireland on cruelty grounds. If an Irish farmer wanted to torture animals the way Foie Gras geese are treated he would be prosecuted. But the owners of the Pearl Brasserie insist on importing it.

Why do the guards try to intimidate protesters when they should be stopping animal cruelty?

Why does the government not stop foie gras imports?

by Annoyed Mon Jun 30, 2008 16:04

The restaurant is not breaking any laws - what a stupid comment,
"why dont the guards investigate the restaurant."

Investigate what - the good food and ridiculously expensive prices

The production is banned in ireland but not importation so no illegal activity there pal.

God people on this website are worse than BB, you will moan about anything.

by annoyed? Mon Jun 30, 2008 16:28

The Protesters were not doing anything wrong.

Yet the police tried to intimidate them.

Why don't the police act this way towards the restaurant owner? You know why...

by Private Mon Jun 30, 2008 17:59

Why did you give the Gardaí your details?

by Random Tue Jul 01, 2008 03:05

Why do the cops want protester's details in the first place? Does that protest constitute an illegal gathering? I wouldn't have thought so, it's just creepy to me that the cops would want to take a citizen's details in that manner, I'm not sure about it. Where are we going, should we expect to get fingerprinted for holding up a placard in a public place? I don't understand. Someone bring me wide on this please.

by annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:28

As stated you are obliged to provide your name and address to a garda upon request. This applies to everyone in the state. The law is the rule of law which most citizens live by except the few who feel they are above this.

Just as a garda is obliged to give their name and id number if requested to do so we are obliged to give our details. This is the basis on how the country works otherwise it would be anarchy.

Imagine the scenario - its 3am I am stopped at a garda checkpoint on a country road, am asked my name and destination and refuse to give it - what will end up happening most likelt an arrest on charges of failing to obey a garda instruction.

Give this crap a break, the gardai are there to protect honest hardworking citizens not the minority of scroungers who feel that the world is out to get them. Most people in ireland today cannot afford to think like that cos they dont have mommy or daddy to back them or the dole to support thier lazy lifestyle

by Private Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:59

Apart from the circumstance you describe where the Road Traffic Acts provide the authority for Gardaí to request Driver I.D. & Licence etc -

Show us the law, and the circumstances, which says 'you are obliged to provide your name and address to a Garda upon request'.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:32

The Public Order Act - gives the gardai the power to request information from members of the public when they determine that there may be a public order issue.

And before you start- it is wide ranging and subject to garda discretion and reading of the situation

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:35

In the case of most of the offences under this Act, if a Garda suspects you of being involved, you are obliged to give your name and address if asked. In fact, it is an offence if you fail to do so. You may be arrested without warrant if you fail to give your name and address.

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:42

You are obliged to give your details to a Garda under the road traffic act of you are the driver of a vehicle and stopped at a checkpoint or whatever. Presumably so they can check you have a valid licence which is particularly relevant from today onwards. Passengers in the car are under no obligation to do so.

Other than that, the only time you have to give your details is if you are being arrested for something! Yes folks, it is still a relatively free country and you are perfectly entitled to go about your law abiding business without any sort of police harassment. As the protestors here were not under arrest, the did not have to give their details an presumably chose to do so as they had nothing to hide whatsoever.

As for:

"Give this crap a break, the gardai are there to protect honest hardworking citizens not the minority of scroungers who feel that the world is out to get them. Most people in ireland today cannot afford to think like that cos they dont have mommy or daddy to back them or the dole to support thier lazy lifestyle"

It is my understanding that the gardai are employed to protect all citizens, whether "scrounger" or not! And what do "scroungers" have to do with this discussion anyway? Or how much money a person has, or whether they are on the dole, have a mammy or daddy, or a re lazy or keep fit fanatics??? Sticking to the topic of discussion would be appreciated.

I agree, incidentally, that the restaurant should be investigated, as they/their staff have made threats and been physically abusive on previous occasions, towards honest hardworking citizens going about their business in a law abiding manner.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:48

is wrong

As stated under the public order act you are obligied to give your detaisl to the gardai

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:51

states the following

"I agree, incidentally, that the restaurant should be investigated, as they/their staff have made threats and been physically abusive on previous occasions, towards honest hardworking citizens going about their business in a law abiding manner."

Like a lot of waffling on this website there is a lot of words and no proof or evidence. Make the complaint to the gardai, show the evidence and then we will see who is telling the truth

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:54

We can do this all day so here is a link for anyone who wants to check it out:

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/justice/cr...eland

You are obliged to give your details if you are up to no good. The protestors here clearly were not as they were not prevented from holding the protest. They were not being threatening, abusive, violent, causing a riot, menacing passers-by for money, or any of that sort of nasty stuff. They were just having a totally legal, peaceful protest and had nothng to hide.

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:58

It is my understanding that a complaint was made to the gardai on the occassion I mention. I was not there myself so cannot provide proof (quite how one would do so here I am not sure in any case)

Perhaps someone who was there could give more details if they read this???

Annoyed, you still don't explain what you were on about with all the dole/mammy/daddy stuff.... if that's not waffle I don't know what is!

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:00

(1) In YOUR opinion they were not doing anything as mentioned in the terms of the public order act. However it is the gardai's opinion that counts. The question asked was under what law are people required to give details. Just because you dont agree with the law or its interpretation does not mean that it was illegal to ask for details from protestors.

(2) Please respond to my post regarding the proof you have of the intimidation by restaurant staff? No answers, indeed even if prooof is there it is the individual that should be investigated not the restaurant.

If you don't like the food dont eat it, in a free and fair society that people like you proport to agree to, we have the right to choose to eat foie gras if we want to, you have no right to stop me eating it if I please, I have made the decision that I dont care how it's produced cos it just tastes so damn good

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:07

"It is my understanding that a complaint was made to the gardai on the occassion I mention. I was not there myself so cannot provide proof (quite how one would do so here I am not sure in any case)"

You were not there yet you know it happened, yet you cannot explain how proof can be given. Well you did say that intimitation and threatening behaviour was made. If you werent there and cant understand how to proove it and indeed are not even sure that a complaint was made then why bring it up

As for my comments re dole etc it is borne from sheer frustation of being faced constantly with protest re this and that from seeminlg y the same people who when i question them about how they can afford to be professional protestors I usually get a fuck off if I am lucky. I apologise if it offended anyones feelings but like a lot of this website, the majority dosnt care because the majoirty live in the real world of high prices, high mortgages, rising unemployment and yet we constantly see projects like the M3 held up be people who seemingly live off air and when people want to go and enjoy a rare night out they are now hassled over that also.

I will respect your views when you respect my right to eat what I want so long as I am not breaking the law

by Arthur Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:21

Since you talk of intimidation; no doubt the people who work at the restaurant feel their livelihoods are on the line simply because they offer on the menu some [LEGAL] food, the production of which other people disagree with.

They have a right to be intimidated. The aim of this protest, as stated by the protesters, is to bully the restaurant into taking the offending item off the menu. The explicit threat is that the protest will continue until the restaurant is forced to closed and everyone loses their job.

Can you blame them for calling the Gardai? Sure, most right-thinking people might think, this has to be against the law, to harrass our staff and customers? To threaten our very livelihood? I'm sure they were surprised when they found out it wasn't. And I'm sure the motivation fo the Gardai in attempting to move on the protestors were that they saw how grossly unfair and ugly this tactic is.

And for what? For selling something that's perfectly legal. Why should the restaurant give in to your demands or close down, just because you disagree on an opinion of the morality of the production of a foodsource?

This is no better than Youth Defence intimidating staff and clients at clinics which offer abortion information.

There are plenty of options open to you to get the sale of foie gras banned in Ireland. Lobby your elected representatives, raise awareness with stalls etc. Get restaurant owners who are sympathetic to your cause to highlight their opposition.

This ugly, hateful, nasty campaign is not designed to get foie gras banned here. It's a vindictive, cowardly act perpetrated on the easiest of targets to satisfy nothing more than the bloodlust of the religious-like animal welfare zealots.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:26

Arthur,

Once again I see that when real ordinary people give their views that the serial protestors go to ground.

I agree with everything you have just said

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:26

(1) As they were not so much as asked to stop th protest, nor told not to do it again, I think it is safe to assume that they were not guilty of any wrong-doing. I ever said it was illegal to ask for personal details incidentally. I can ask anyone in say, a pub, for their name and phone number if I want to and it's not illegal to do so. Neither is it illegal for them to refuse though!

And what's this about me not agreeing with the Public Order offences act??? Or its interpretation??? Where did you drag that idea up from??? I welcome a good argument as much as anyone else, but don't appreciate words being put in my mouth, so to speak.

(2) My response is above. Hopefully someone who was there will read and reply. You are right however - it is the individual/individuals who should be investigated - I could have phrased that better I suppose, but thought it was fairly clear what I meant as you can't really accuse an inanimate building of being abusive or threatening. If indeed you did, and the aforementioned building were to refuse to give its details, I suppose the buildingwould be commiting an offence. Sorry to have confused you Annoyed.

As for : "If you don't like the food dont eat it, in a free and fair society that people like you proport to agree to, we have the right to choose to eat foie gras if we want to, you have no right to stop me eating it if I please, I have made the decision that I dont care how it's produced cos it just tastes so damn good"

I would first like to know what exactly you mean by "people like me".

Secondly, yes I do indeed agree to a free and fair society. You apparently do to. You do currenlty have the right to eat foie gras. Have you ever been prevented from doing so? Did one of the protestors rush in and grab your mouthful of diseased liver from your fork? I think not. The protestors have just as much right to picket this place peacefully as you do to eat the stuff they are objecting to. Get over it. They are doing you no harm.

Yes it is legal to sell and eat foie gras here, although not to produce it. And it is illegal to sell in many places, although not here (yet). It is also perfectly legal to do many other things which are ethically questionable, in many places. Just because something is legal does not make it morally right, and vice versa. The fact that you don't care about the suffering involved does not mean that others don't.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:38

"As they were not so much as asked to stop th protest, nor told not to do it again, I think it is safe to assume that they were not guilty of any wrong-doing. I ever said it was illegal to ask for personal details incidentally. I can ask anyone in say, a pub, for their name and phone number if I want to and it's not illegal to do so. Neither is it illegal for them to refuse though"

Catlady,

It is not safe to assume anything. The original question asked was what law obligied citizens to give details to the gardai and I answered and another poster said this wasnt the case. Your example of nightclub asking is childish, you are not a law officer requesting details the simple fact is that it is an offence to refuse to give your details to a garda when requested because the garda has formed the opinion that you are doing something that warrants being asked for your details.

I met a garda last evening when I was out walking and and said hello and walked by. Why wasnt I asked for my details because I wasnt doing anything wrong.

It is your opinion that foie gras is produced cruelly, you are wrong to state that production is illegal. It may be banned here but if its on sale in a top class establishment it obviosuly isnt illegale to sell it here.

Let people make their minds up by the means Arthur outlined. Do you not think it is intimidating to have a bunch of epople shouting and ranting at you as your enter a restaurant for a night out?

Again Catlady, dont assume anything, garda powers are estenvise and are not used lightly they are there to protect society and citizens and people should applaud gardai for the dnagers they face everyday in protecting us rather than engage in this sort of idiotic ranting about things. It isnt going to save one little goose

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 13:40

It is also perfectly legal to do many other things which are ethically questionable, in many places. Just because something is legal does not make it morally right, and vice versa. The fact that you don't care about the suffering involved does not mean that others don't.

Right back at you

Just because this protest is legal does not make it morally right to ruin someones night out, threaten jobs etc

The fact that you and a few others care about how foie gras is produced does not mean that others do. If they did the streets would be full and the restaurants empty and production would cease wouldnt it

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 14:17

Eh?? What do you mean? Who has gone to ground?

There seems to be some confusion as to what protestors do when they are not out protesting. It depends on the individual. Protests (by this group) are generally on on Saturdays as it is obviously difficult for people to get out mid-week due to work commitments. I assure you that all of the ones I know lead busy lives - from school goers to college students to teachers or researchers like myself. Some are retired and some are "stay-at-home-mothers". And all live in the same Ireland with rising mortgage costs, prices and so on.

I'm not surprised you are met with a hostile attitude if you go around asking disparaging questions such as how an individual can "afford to be a professional protestor" to be honest. With all due respect, my finances are my own business and so is what I choose to do on a Saturday! How would you react if I were to stop you on your way into a restaurant and ask how you could afford to be a professional restaurant-goer??? I'm sure you would tell me to F off too!

It seems to me that you are jumping to ill informed conclusions about people. I have been on various protests with this group, and all we do to people entering an establishment is to politely offer them a leaflet. If they refuse, we say ok. We do not ask them anything personal and we welcome any discussion of the issue if they wish to engage in it. Were we abusive or threatening we would be stopped by the Gardai and possibly arrested. Not once has either of these two things happened.

Arthur.... please tell me where this "explicit threat" you speak of is??? And what is this talk of closing the restaurant down??? You have either missed the entire point of the protest, or are wilfully misrepresenting NARA. The point is to get them to stop selling fatty diseased liver, not to close the restaurant down or put anyone who works there out of a job!

Also, the Gardai did not attempt to move them on. Had they attempted to do so, they would easily have succeeded! Peaceful protest is entirely legal in this country! Are you against all protests as a matter of principle or just this one??? If you saw a group protesting about, for example, Pennys using child labour, or Woody's selling Israeli goods, would you also declare it as harassment of the staff of these establishments??? Perhaps you feel that peaceful protest should be banned. Perhaps you should lobby your elected representative to have it banned. My advice is not to waste your time, as if it actually worked, nobody would need to hold a protest in the first place!

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 14:27

Another long rant that never answers the key points.

And I also see another cherry for this website - you managed to mention Israel - maybe the foie gras is another vast world jewish conspiracy.

On this thread, you have made points that when questionedou step back and say "Well i wasnt actuallty there " (i am paraphrasing)

Then you "assume" things , think a complaint has been made etc etc etc

As for politely asking restaraunt goes to take a leaflet come on dont tell bare faced lies.How can a group of people holding extreme pictures on placards and shouting be deemed polite?

You agree then with serial protesterselling people to f off when questioned. I said my post was born from frustration from the serial protestors. And I feel I have a right to ask questions of people who seem to have no known source of income or job yet can "protest" 24/7 blocking developments. It was a post that was general and not specific to this protest but take from it what you will as I dont really care.

Again as I said, if people cared about this the resaurants empty and the streets full but the aint so - what does that tell you

by Catlady Tue Jul 01, 2008 14:30

... as work beckons...

to get back to the original offence for not giving details question. Yes you do have to give them if a garda thinks you are up to no good. They can and do however ask for them on occassions such as this even if you are not up to no good.

As I said I have been on many protests, the gardai are often present either at our request (if we have been threatened with violence) or at the request of the people we are protesting. Sometimes they ask for details, sometimes they don't. I have never ever been threatened with arrest, warned, moved on or "told-off" for protesting. Why? because I was not doing anything wrong and causing no trouble.

I have great respect for the vast majority of the gardai. Rarely have I come across one who was not sympathetic to the cause I was highlighting, or one with whom I could not have a laugh as the protest continued. Once again, people here are jumping to the conclusion that I have a problem with authority or do not respect the laws of the land simply because I go on protest about issues I feel strongly about.

Why on earth would i have any problem with the Gardai anyway??? They are the only ones who can ensure I don't get beaten up every time I go on a protest for goodness sakes!

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 14:33

your convoluted points are so full of hypocracy I keep missing points

"With all due respect, my finances are my own business and so is what I choose to do on a Saturday"

Where someone chooses to go and do and eat and is perfectly within the law should be theie business not yours.

Why not go and protest outside when the restaurant is closed. the message is the same but you wont ruin anyones night out and you will still get your message to the public.

You also stated that foie gras is fatty diseased liver - well if it is why do the relevant authorities allow the sale of dieseased food? Answer- it isnt diseased , . Stop telling lies about the foodstuff, it isnt diseased.

by boycott pearl brasserie Tue Jul 01, 2008 15:53

Foie Gras, as served at the Pearl Brasserie, is made from the forcibly enlarged livers of ducks and geese.

The Pearl Brasserie's delicacy is made by a process called Gavage, whereby a long metal pipe is rammed down the throats of these ducks and geese, two or three times per day, to force feed them large amounts of grain. This soon results in their livers swelling to up to ten times their normal size – a symptom of a serious disease called hepatic lipidosis.

That's HEPATIC LIPIDOSIS just in case you missed it.

"Force feeding quickly results in birds that are obese and in a pathological state, called hepatic lipidosis, or fatty liver disease. There is no doubt that in this pathological state the birds will feel very ill."
Dr. Ian Duncan, Professor of Applied Ethology, University of Guelph, Canada.

During an investigation into this process, a New York state wildlife pathologist who examined foie gras animals said, "If this kind of thing was happening to dogs, it would be stopped immediately."

He expressed horror at their "greatly enlarged livers, the product of overfeeding by force (livers are easily torn by even minor trauma)," and at one duck's "laceration of the liver with hemorrhage into the body cavity. This type of treatment and farming of waterfowl is outside the acceptable norms of agriculture and sane treatment of animals."

Many New York veterinarians signed a statement that foie gras production should be outlawed because foie gras is nothing but the serious liver disease hepatic lipidosis: "Animals in this condition would feel extremely ill .... Foie gras production, by definition, constitutes clear-cut animal cruelty."

http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/foiegras-peta.html

So that's what you are eating at the Pearl Brasserie, and supporting the import of.

Don't say you weren't told.

The photo above shows the comparison between a healthy liver and the liver used to make foie gras.

by boycott Pearl Brasserie Tue Jul 01, 2008 15:58

The production and import of Foie Gras is covered in European Council Directive 98/58

"No animal shall be provided with food or liquid in a manner (...) which may cause unnecessary suffering or injury."
Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998.

In the ten years since the directive, many countries have banned production of Foie Gras. These countries include Ireland.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:12

As I said the food isnt diseased, its enlarged but surely if it was diseased and a danger to public health it would be banned

it isnt so to quote catlady

"It is safe to assume" that it isnt diseased.

by boycott pearl brasserie Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:48

Your prejudices are blinding you and making unable to read- Foie Gras is DISEASED LIVER.

The Pearl Brasserie is serving it, importing torture so rich people can eat diseased food, and you are defending it.

It is sick.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:55

If it were diseased and a health risk to humans then it would be banned but it aint

Your radical beleifs blind you.

Animals and birds and fish were created by God to provide food for humans- survival of the fittest.

It's my money and my life and I can and will spend it on any food that is legal

by boycott Pearl Brasserie Tue Jul 01, 2008 17:10

It is banned in many places and production of it is banned here, that's why the sickos at the Pearl Brasserie have to import it.

Things get banned because people protest. All sorts of things used to be legal - presumably idiots used to go around saying that it was okay to keep slaves and beat their wives and have children working in factories because these practices were not (then) banned by law.

The import of this diseased torture food will be banned, as it breaks EU laws, and it's only the power of the French farming lobby that it is keeping it going (with some support from idiots and sickos in places like Ireland).

As for God providing animals for your use, I'll leave that with you. I guess God tells you His will on an individual, one-to-one basis, so I don't want to intrude.

by WTF Tue Jul 01, 2008 17:49

That charming youtube video on the NARAwebsite.Of a bunch of noisey hecklers screaming outside the Pearl B and then ending with footage of the owner.What is this video implying??Here is the mark get him and do him in any chance you can?????Not of course that NARA would do anything like that...In the same way Shin Fein never comitted any PIRA bombings.Animal rights groups have their own terrorist groups like ALF,ARM and Justice Dept to do their dirty work for them.
Anyways,I will go off and have some of this fine French cusine one day.Anyone try stop me had better have their Health insurance up to date.

by shame Tue Jul 01, 2008 20:13

I think you'll find the owner of the Pearl Brasserie was videoing the protest. Ever think to ask him why?

Doesn't matter anyway- this gruesome "delicacy" derived from torture and disease is disgusting, and anyone who advocates importing it is supporting cruelty and should be ashamed.

by Annoyed Tue Jul 01, 2008 20:45

my arse

I am not ashamed of anything. I like it , I pay good money (a lots) for it so no I am not ashamed at all thank you very much

by WTF Tue Jul 01, 2008 21:11

If I was him I would be videoing that lot as well.Might want a record of suspects if anything happens to his staff or busisness.There are a lot of fanatics and violent people around these days y'know.
But I think you will find it is a NARA video on Youtube.That is if you could be botherd to check your facts.Only reason this bunch of disaffected teens are hanging round this resturant is they got a response from the owner.Maybe he should get a mosquito teen repeller to clear the area?

Ashamed of what??Eating somthing tasty??Dont think so.

by boycott pearl brasserie Tue Jul 01, 2008 21:49

Annoyed

"I pay good money (a lots)" I'm sure you do. And God tells you it's alright to pay a lots of money for this disgusting stuff. The torture and disease involved in its production don't bother you? Well, some of us have higher standards.

WTF
RE. Making videos - why is it disturbing for NARA to video their own protest, but fine if the owner of the Pearl Brasserie makes a video? Prejudice about protesters? Do you think you might be suffering from double standards? Or maybe no standards, since you also think it's fine to eat diseased and enlarged livers of tortured animals.

I think there is another protest coming up at the PEARL BRASSERIE soon, maybe you should go along yourself and make a whining noise to see if that would scare the protesters away? The exercise might do you good.

by Random Tue Jul 01, 2008 22:01

To Catlady - thanks very much for the citizensinformation.ie link. That sheds a bit of light on the question, hats off.

To Annoyed - it's a shame your reply to comment #4 was removed.

Getting back to the bigger picture, I wouldn't like to eat a tortured animal's internal organs myself which means I wouldn't like to see the product of that process on sale. If anyone actually enjoys eating it then that's their own choice. If it was me I think I'd probably throw up.

by Mr Man Tue Jul 01, 2008 23:22

Hepatic Lipidosis is just a name. It is called a disease because it is an abnormal condition. It has no ramifications to health. And all the name means is fatty liver (hepatic=liver, lipidosis =fatty). I am sure battery chickens have a wasting disease in their legs, as well as a variety of farmed animals have a wide range of diseases, but there is no concern as there is no effect on human health. You are just over emphasising that it is a disease. So what. A very tasty disease is what it is.

by sarkozy Wed Jul 02, 2008 00:19

Well, originally we are told it is not diseased, now we have to hear that it IS a disease but it is just a name...

it's a disgusting practice which is banned in Ireland.

by Laura Broxson - National Animal Rights Association Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:27

I'm not going to respond to all the nonsense that has been posted here, but I will make a few points.

(1) We are not trying to close down the restaurant, we're only trying to get them to stop serving 1 item on their menu - foie gras.

(2) Even though there were a number of heartless comments made by foie gras enthusiasts, I'm sure that most people (whether they are vegetarian/vegan or not) will agree that the production of foie gras is barbarically cruel. And that it is hypocritical for it to be on sale in Ireland, when the production of it is banned here.

(3) Customers going into the restaurant feel comfortable with stopping and talking with us, and many even take leaflets - so either Pearl Brasserie clients are unusually fearless, or perhaps we're not as scary as some people are trying to say we are. I'm guessing that the people who commented with their sympathy for the Pearl Brasserie, and those that feel we are ''bullies'', were equally as outraged when there were protests outside Weir's on Grafton street, regarding the sale of African diamonds.

(4) The police asked for our details, so we gave them, as we have absolutely nothing to hide. We also assumed that you have to disclose your personal details when asked to by the Gardai.

(5) Regarding the incident that happened the first time we protested the Pearl Brasserie, feel free to check with Pearse Street and Harcourt Terrace Garda Stations about what happened. I made an official complaint, and then had to give a statement. After the Gardai who attended on that night were questioned, I was told that we had the option of charging the restaurant owner, Sebastien Masi, with assault. We chose to have him cautioned, and to have the incident put on record.

by Annoyed Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:37

"I'm sure that most people (whether they are vegetarian/vegan or not) will agree that the production of foie gras is barbarically cruel. And that it is hypocritical for it to be on sale in Ireland, when the production of it is banned here."

Don't be sure of anything Laura, if this were the case you wouldnt need to protest cos it wouldnt be on sale and people wouldnt be going to the place to eat it

People don't care

by WTF Wed Jul 02, 2008 13:25

So why haven't you got any videos on youtube of these"customers going into the resturant feel comfortable with stopping and talking with us-maybe even taking a leaflet"???Surely if that was the case you would have a great piece of footage there??Maybe because it has never happened???

2] It is not up to you wether YOU press charges against a person in Ireland..It is a decision taken by the Garda attending the complaint or incident,as to wether it is a justifiable matter to concern the forces of law.The Gardai can caution somone or apprehend,or arrest and caution. You can arrest somone under the catch all offences against the State Act,detain them,and then release them without charging them with anything.If you arrest somone they must be charged with a crime,in your case it would be common assault,or using words likely to lead to a breach of the peace.They ask you wether you want to press charges which means are YOU personally willing to get into court ,into the witness box,swear under oath that all the above did happen and be cross examined.Without no witness,no prosecution case....Or the Gardai decided quite sensibly to avoid loads of paperwork,orally caution Msr Masi,and leave it at that.
So tell us Laura...WHY ever not???What more great media attention could you have got??Innocent animal libbers attacked by anasty Frenchman?the chance of sending an animal abuser down?? Or you are Really NOT telling us the whole story here are you???

3] Boycott Pearl bras. Double stds??No,not really,seeing that Msuer Masi hasnt gone and put his video on You tube to identify all of you has he??Remove the railway sleeper from thine own eye...
My standards are none of your busisness anyway,seeing I cant say much for yours either,which seems to be of Im morally superior to all and sundry. Yeah,I actuall might show up at this resturant,and make more than a whining noise if I am harrassed or botherd by the likes of you.
.Nothing like working up an appetite before a good dinner.

by Laura Broxson - National Animal Rights Association Wed Jul 02, 2008 13:57

You're obviously not going to believe anything I say, so I'm not going to waste my time any further by responding to your repetitive questions.

You also clearly have a lot of free time on your hands, maybe you should think of spending it in a positive and productive way? I wonder do you have issues with animal rights campaigners, or activists in general? Either way, maybe you should just take a moment to calm down.

Please do stop by at our next protest - but before you do, why not tell us your real name, instead of hiding behind ''WTF''. Are you afraid we might look you up and hunt you down or something? Don't worry, your comments stir up feelings of pity, not rage.

This will be the last comment I post, so feel free to respond to this with more accusations, questions and personal attacks. Then you and your buddies can celebrate by deluding yourselves into thinking that you've ''won''. Enjoy yourselves!

by p t Wed Jul 02, 2008 14:06

"People don't care "

you obviously care enough to spend hours on the computer trying to justify this barbaric practice

by suzy - N.A.R.A Wed Jul 02, 2008 19:32

Annoyed - i don't know why you're such an annoyed, angry and defensive person and i don't care. It sounds to me like your just looking for a fight as you repeatedly mention how people on this website are 'stupid'.

first of all, peaceful protesters are'nt obliged to give their details, they never are. they're entitled to go ahead with their perfectly legal demonstrators as it is peaceful, not obstructing pathways etc.

just because it is law does not make it right.

second of all, foie gras is diseased even if it is not harmful to humans (if you dont count the cholesterol highering, artery blocking fat that it's loaded with) doesn't mean it's not a vile, vomit-smelling dish of crap and he production of it is both barbaric and brutal and should be stopped. it just shows what kind of people ''annoyed and ''wtf'' etc. are when they still eat or defend a dish like this even when they know about it's disgusting produce.

wtf - you were'nt there, so you can't just assume everyone there were teenagers, on the dole etc. so you can stop making assumptions like that just to try and win your argument, it's weak and you're not getting anywhere what age these people are or what money they have is nothing to do with the issue.

the people who were there protesting the vile restaurant >look up how they treated the protesters at the first demonstration< were speaking out for animals who don't have a voice and were trying to right a wrong in this world.

also, the protesters were not violent in anyway so you can drop that altogether...
feel free to reply

by suzy - N.A.R.A Wed Jul 02, 2008 19:40

comparing the protesters to terrorists how childish, ''wtf''.

N.A.R.A organised a demonstration, stood outside the pearl brasserie peacefully holding placards and shouting chants and handing out leaflets to people who were interested is exactly what happened that day in a nutshell - argue all you want that was it plain and simple.

yet you are comparing this to bombing train stations and flying planes into buldings, people who actually kill are terrorists, better check you're dictionary

by Mr Man Thu Jul 03, 2008 00:04

It seems to me that your time would be better spent protesting somewhere where it would make a difference. Surely you should be trying to get the sale of this delicious item banned, rather then going after a seller and annoying the general public who mostly couldn't care and wouldnt buy this delicious item anyway because there are so few places to buy this delicious item. So rather than try to get one restaurant to stop the sale of this delicious item, lobby to ban it's import.

But I rather suspect that there wouldn't be sufficient public support for your cause. Perhaps that is why you are reduced to bully tactics to get your own way.

by to mr Thu Jul 03, 2008 00:10

Delicious item? Diseased fatty liver of tortured animal actually. Stop lying to yourself, and don't tell other people how to protest. If you think the is a lot of public support for this disgusting practice then you should organise a support demonstration and see who shows up. See how real life matches your forecasts...

by Mr Man Thu Jul 03, 2008 00:30

Well, either you haven't tried it or have bad taste because it truly is a delicious item. I encourage everyone to try it.

I never said there was a lot of support for the practice, rather I said that there wasn't alot of support for the ban. To assume that the inverse is automatically my opinion is a logical fallacy. In my opinion there is just a general apathy and if there is sufficient demand for it that an overpriced restaurant will serve it, then perhaps there is more support for it rather than the (what looks like from the photos) 5 people protesting.

As for a counter protest, well, I'm sorry but I will have to decline. Not only do I have a job but I try not to make a fool of myself in public by campaigning for something trivial when there are rather more pressing issues at large in the world today.

And again, it really is delicious. If diseased fatty liver of tortured animal tastes this good then maybe we should be seeing what other parts we can artificially engorge.

by concerned reader Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:59

How do you know there is not a lot of support for the ban on importing torture foods? As far as I know, a lot of people are simply unaware that this sort of stuff goes on. This article has certainly opened my eyes, and I will be writing to the Minister in charge of food issues (A green party member I believe) to alert me to the fact that a process which is illegal in Ireland is being outsourced to countries where it is still allowed.

I will also write to the Pearl Brasserie. Unfortunately I am not in Dublin, but if I was I would seriously consider joining the protests, despite the Garda intimidation tactics.

So this protest has had at least one positive result.

How would you raise awareness of the issues?

by Arthur Thu Jul 03, 2008 13:52

People are quite entitled to protest on any issue they feel strongly about. Use of the word "terrorism" is simply hysterical.

On the remark made by the lady regarding the notion that they don't want to close the restaurant down. Well, that's simply naive. Of course the aim of this protest is to dissuade customers from going there. Not because they'll suddenly have a change of heart about going there becuase they've learned foie gras is on the memory, but because the protest outside intimidate them or succeeds in interrupting their dining experience.

Your response no doubt would be, "well, we don't want them to close down, simply to stop serving foie gras". So, despite not breaking any laws, nor having any bearing whatsoever on the legality of the importation of this produce, you would bully this business into bending to your will.

That's simply wrong. Whatever moral authority your protest carries - and I do understand your point of view, although not fully agreeing with it - it loses its potency with this juvenile, nasty piece of street theatre designed, as I've said, not to change anything but to give an outlet for an angry, self-righteous mob to vent its anger on an easy target.

by reader Thu Jul 03, 2008 14:00

There is a long history of protest at retail outlets. Recently, a government unveiled a plaque outside the Dunnes Stores in Henry St. dedicated to one such campaign.

The protest at the Pearl Brasserie is nothing special. Hysterical calls for it to stop are nothing new either.

How would you raise awareness of the issue?

by suzy - N.A.R.A Thu Jul 03, 2008 20:55

you don't seem to know much about the issue, no offense, there is support from the general public including several customers to take a leaflet or talk to us as they head on in to the pearl brasserie and many chose to eat somewhere else afterwards, i'm sure if the rest probably did'nt have reservations the majority of them would do the same. people are starting to open their eyes to the truth.

you're saying we should target the producer, not the restaurant, i can tell you that in France there are many campaigners that picket foie gras production farms. there would'nt be much point in us writing to the french government, the best approach is to stop irish restaurants selling it.
you also said we should target other restaurants as the pearl brasserie don't give much interest. i can assure you the pearl brasserie are one of the last 4-5 reataurants in Dublin selling the vile dish and most of them are getting the same attention. we don't care if the pearl brasserie don't show interest and we don't give up easily.

there were far more restaurants selling foie gras but after they knew about it's disgusting produce they contacted us to inform us they had backed out of the sale of it. the fact that the pearl brasserie are still selling it after they know about the produce just shows what kind of people run the restaurant, money hungry, compassionless people who don't care if they have blood on their hands as long as their still making money, but we knew that anyway by the way they treated the protesters first demo round.
you, mr man, also know about the sick 'delicacy' and you're still eating and promoting it well, enjoy your heart attack

by ciara Thu Jul 03, 2008 21:09

people keep refering the protesters to bullying people out of attending the restaurant, or intimidating to get their own way,
the demonstraters offered leaflets out to anyone interested, never forced anything on anyone, the only reason customers of pearl brasserie, took leaflets is probably out of curiosity or the oictures on the placards, the people who keep refering to the protesters as being noisy and manipulating out of frustration to get the dish out of ireland were'nt there that day and can't make assumptions like that.
another thing... the right thing to do is demonstrate outside the restaurants not the dail or any other similar place, writing to tds and ministers helps but getting restaurants to put a stop to the sales is far more efficient

by Mr Man Fri Jul 04, 2008 04:52

So I (.ie) googled NARA; according to them the only NARA in Ireland is the National Anglers Representative Organisation. Which leads me to two conclusions; 1)The National Anglers Representative Organisation is much more popular than the National Animal Rights Association (not something to be proud of) 2) Nobody is linking to your site (unsurprising as it is a tad hard on the eye), in fact, indymedia articles referring to you get more prominence. That's a firm support base you've got yourself there. I had to get to your site via an article in Indymedia.

I had a poke around your site and was quite surprised when these animal lovers turned out to be trying to support and channel money to convicted and admittadly guilty blackmailers, arsonists, theives and terrorists. So you support peaceful protest yet at the same time support acts of vandalism and other criminal acts when protests don't work?

http://www.naracampaigns.org/arprisoners.html

by rogy Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:43

If you write "NARA Ireland", then you will get this group on the first results page.

by Catlady Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:59

"support acts of vandalism and other criminal acts when protests don't work?", you seem to be trying to make out that NARA is illegally funding crime.

Writing letters to someone in prison and sending them the odd tenner (via the Governor of the prison) to buy a bar of soap or a toothbrush hardly amounts to anything non peaceful. Sure even prisoners on death row for murder get people writing to them. In fact when I was at school the religion teacher was encouraging us to do so.

I'd love to know why some people get so carried away with themselves when trying to defend animal abuse.... They seem to want everyone to believe that being a compassionate consumer and trying to speak up for the voiceless is some kind of crimelord....

Question (already alluded to by Laura above): Do you all think the same about people protesting about human rights abuses??? The Dunne's employee's campaign against the Apartheid regime was mentioned, interesting as there is an article on here today about Mandela just having been removed from the US Terrorist list.

I wrote to Mumia Abu Jamal a while ago, although I didn't have any spare cash to send him this time. So obviously if I go on an anti-racism demo I am funding criminal activity??? Is that really your position???

by Cat gentleman Fri Jul 04, 2008 13:22

As somone pointed out here are you not demonstrating outside the other resturants?Suzy claimed they are reciving the peaceful attention as well.Yet there is no evidence of this on the website.Apart from a long length of resturants still selling this good food.??Is it still the only reason you are outside the PB is because you recived resistance there,so therefore you concentrate all your efforts there?

by c Fri Jul 04, 2008 14:15

Protest is about the sale of Foie Gras Torture Food

Pearl Brasserie sells Torture Food

Why should protest not be at Pearl Brasserie?

Why are some posters eager to see protest anywhere but the Pearl Brasserie?

by Damien Fri Jul 04, 2008 20:47

In replying to this thread, and the absurd Bothar thread all we are doing is raising the profile of this tiny group...that really seems to be one person. They seem to be a small sub group of Alliance for animal rights, as they share a PO Box and have no other presence.

Given that AFAR don't even mention the Fois Gras "campaign" on their website, and that AFAR in Ireland keep a very low profile anyway its safe to say that this is a fringe element of what is already a fringe group. I can't find any pictures of "demos" on the AFAR site that show more than 5 participants ... so essentially we are worrying about nothing. At most two people support this "campaign" - if there was a majority of the 5 active AFAR members then one assumes the "campaign" would at least make it to the AFAR website.

by Mr Man Fri Jul 04, 2008 22:03

Catlady;

"you seem to be trying to make out that NARA is illegally funding crime." No, not at all. Just that NARA makes some questionable choices in its people to support.

"Sure even prisoners on death row for murder get people writing to them" They're not exactly on death row now are they?

"I'd love to know why some people get so carried away with themselves when trying to defend animal abuse...." They don't. People get "carried away" when the protesters are using their time ineffectually, causing annoyance and flogging a dead horse.

"Do you all think the same about people protesting about human rights abuses???" Some of them, yes. If someone was protesting Israeli human rights abuses with a jew=nazi placard or protesting Chinese human rights abuses with a "chinky go home" poster I would. It's not what you do, it's how you do it.

"So obviously if I go on an anti-racism demo I am funding criminal activity?" Where did that come from? All I said was that NARA was trying to support and channel money to convicted and admittedly guilty blackmailers, arsonists, thieves and terrorists. You aren't funding criminal activity, you are just trying to fund criminals.

by Catlady Fri Jul 04, 2008 22:18

NARA are rather unlikely to spread bull shite as they are opposed to animal exploitation.... just a detail.

Lordie lord.... if NARA had a "grudge" against every abuser who oposed them (as opposed to every abuser) then their campaigns would not work. Incidentally I am not involved with them, simply because I live too far away. I get to the odd demo to show support when I can though.

I speak therefore for myself aone when I say that I have an enormous grudge against this Brasserie's owner. Same enormous grudge I have against anyone who profits from the exploitation of those who cannot defend themselves. Not a personal grudge mind - I dont fraternise with the devil or his companions myself, so to speak - but a moral "grudge", if that is the word you choose to use. Same grudge I have against all abuses, those of the elderly, children, citizens of developing countries etc.....

Mr. Man, try telling the victims of torture that it is nothing more than a "buzz word". Your references to other threads on indymedia lead me to think that you are pretty much against anyone who tries to improve society.... (correct me if I am wrong and show your support fopr something at least...)

Why? Why are you against the highlighting of torture???? Is it easier for you to accept so long as it is swept under the carpet???? (That would explain a lot IMHO. "He doth protest too much" and all that.....)

Sure tis nice to buy cheap clothes made from the sweat if Chinese or Indian children.... we don't see them. 'Tis grand to stuff our faces with diseased liver, especially as it was only the animal who suffered from the non-contagious disease. Wonderful this Isle where we can download images of sexually abused kids, since we don't have to worry about the horrors they have to go through to just feel "normal!.

Now before you all jump up in your seats and knock yourselves unconscious (chance would be a fine thing) screaming that "eating diseased liver doesn't make me a child abuser!"... of course it doesn't. I wish simply to highlight the fact that any abuse can be committed by the ignorant ( I ate diseased liver myself when I lived in France). However, once you are made aware of the facts, to continue doing so makes you a supporter of the said abuse, whatever it may be. To stop consuming said product once you know the pain and stress that has gone into it's production makes you empathetic, compassionate.

It displays an EXTREME LACK OF COMPASSION to suggest that torture is little more than a buzz word.

by Catlady Fri Jul 04, 2008 22:42

1. I am not NARA.

"NARA makes some questionable choices in its people to support."

The AR movement in general welcomes questions. Hell as an AR activist and an academic I question myself all the time. Questioning is exactly what the world needs! Address NARA specific questions to NARA though as I do not represent them in any way. Personally I don't know all of the prisoners mentioned on their site so I cannot comment on each individual case. What I do know, however, is that none were convicted of hurting (never mind killing) anyone. On that basis, I support them morally, and fair play to NARA for putting their addresses on the site so people can send them a Christmas card if they want to!!!!!!!!!!

Mt poinit about death row meant that if a DR prisoner should be allowed the meager solace of receiving a tenner for soap and al cheerful letter, the what the hell is wrong with doing the same for (for example) a woman who took a half dead dog from her neighbours garden and was convicted of theft???? Get real. Tell me now what is wrong with sending someone in prison a letter/a tenner if you have it????

"the protesters are using their time ineffectually, causing annoyance and flogging a dead horse."
Suggestions for new campaign tactic welcome.....
But don't forget that similar protests have resulted in the likes of BT stopping selling fur. However my ears are open to more "effectual" methods, and I will certainly pass them on to NARA.

""Do you all think the same about people protesting about human rights abuses???" Some of them, yes. If someone was protesting Israeli human rights abuses with a jew=nazi placard or protesting Chinese human rights abuses with a "chinky go home" poster I would. It's not what you do, it's how you do it"
Was there a "french=animal abuser" placard???? I doubt it..... How would "Jew=Nazi" work, incidentally?

How come. and this is a general question to all, do people come out so strongly to defend Foie gras?
I am genuinely curious. Not like you are foie gras farmers (since it is illegal here).

Why does any AR thread bother you all so much? (Genuine question)

by Catlady Fri Jul 04, 2008 22:54

In answering I forgot to ask....

How come you folks have so much time to spare posting here???? Spewing negativity??????

I have an excuse as obviously I am a waster with no job or prospects........ (according to you lot)

I got accused of the above first and then when I had to go work and couldn't reply, I was apparently running and hiding....

Oh well... I'll just have to live with the fact that supporters of abuse don't like me.... boo hoo!

by Mr Man Fri Jul 04, 2008 23:32

Well, in response to "What I do know, however, is that none were convicted of hurting (never mind killing) anyone"
-Well, there are some blackmailers in there and i'm not sure how whether hurting someone or not makes it less morally grey.

Death row prisoners are going to die, that is the difference.

"Tell me now what is wrong with sending someone in prison a letter/a tenner if you have it?" Because it send out a message that breaking the law is OK and may encourage others to commit arson/blackmail/burglary.

"Suggestions for new campaign tactic welcome.....
But don't forget that similar protests have resulted in the likes of BT stopping selling fur."
Lobby to get import of fois gras banned. And I don't agree with the stopping of selling fur, rather the stopping of using fur of questionable origin.

"Was there a "french=animal abuser" placard?" I'm sure not. But my point was it's not what you do its how you do it.

"How would "Jew=Nazi" work, incidentally" I don't know. But I have seen it.

"How come. and this is a general question to all, do people come out so strongly to defend Foie gras?"
I can't speak for anyone else, but I find it extremely delicious and welcome any chance to eat this fine fine food and dislike my purchase options being curtailed. Plus the antics of animal 'liberation' groups have put a dirty smear on animal rights protesters. Your support of the criminals further confirms my bias.

"Why does any AR thread bother you all so much?"
I don't think AR bothers people. More the AR activists bother people. As to why they bother people is a quetion they should be asking themselves really.

"How come you folks have so much time to spare posting here????"
Writing a few comments shouldn't take the average person that long. I reccomend Mavis Beacon if you're having difficulties.

by Jacqueline Fallon Sat Jul 05, 2008 00:36

I wish to congratulate the activists on their protest against the availability for consumption of foie gras in Ireland. I am not an animal rights' activist myself as I am in the habit of eating certain Irish farmyard animals from time to time, but I am totally against foie gras because of the unnecessary cruelty involved in its production.

Best of luck with this campaign against foie gras and many thanks for highlighting it, I did not know it existed until you highlighted it, as I do not frequent these expensive restaurants which are only suitable for pretentious people with more money than sense.

by Pedro Sat Jul 05, 2008 16:41

This is not a small, isolated campaign. And it is having an effect. See-

'Foie Gras Removed From Two Restaurants In One Day'
https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/402712.html

Keep up the good work folks.

by 1 of many Sun Jul 06, 2008 02:33

Most of the contributors to this thread seem to be in favour of a ban on Foie Gras. The small isolated group seem to be the ones who are in favour of this disgusting practice...

by Damien Sun Jul 06, 2008 21:27

"The small isolated group seem to be the ones who are in favour

Your kidding right? Its simply a lie to suggest that more people support the AFAR\NARA\CAFT stance on angling\fois gras\ horse racing. Lets look at it this way : membership of NARA\AFAR\CAFT = less that 10. Population of Ireland( 32 counties) over 6,000,000.

Thats around 1 in 600,000 if my sums are correct.....Fairly clear which is the majority.

by suzi - N.A.R.A Sun Jul 06, 2008 23:44

you seem to have a vendetta against animal rights

first of all, i could'nt care less if that organisation is the first to come up when you google NARA. you might actually get better results if you type N.A.R.A which is the actual title of the group.

second of all, N.A.R.A is newly formed and barely a year and the website is even less than that, naturaly it will take a while until it is first to come up when you google it. plus it is only quite recently that animal rights is getting recognised in Ireland, people joining organisations, writing to ministers, acknowledging animal abuse.

third of all, N.A.R.A is the number one website to come up when you google animal rights in Ireland.

i feel embarassed for you that you are putting so much of your time and effort into this issue.

by sasha Mon Jul 07, 2008 00:09

i don't understand when you say N.A.R.A are asking you to send funds to terrorists, blackmailers or whatever. i went onto the website and i did not find information referring to this. all i saw was if you chose to, you could send funds and your support to animal rights activists who ilegally rescued animals from places of abuse, or wrote letters to animal abusers or organised campaigns, demonstrations, protests, marches etc. against places/people of abuse or acted in any way to save animals

i fail to see how these people are terrorists and i fail to see how you can call them terrorists maybe you don't know the meaning of the word

back in the days were black people were seen as slaves or women seen as property people who acted in these ways or fought for others lives or liberation were seen as freedom fighters

by Steve Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:46

I think this "Annoyed" person is just trying to wind ye up, lads. No one could genuinely be that much of a gobshite, especially not on a public forum such as this. As it says here, don't feed the trolls!

As for supporting prisoners, YES! DO IT! AS MUCH AS YOU CAN! Someone said that sending letters and money to prisoners sends out the message that illegal activity is OK. Depending on your own views, well then, sometimes it is! There's not a single animal rights activist I know of who doesn't agree with ALF actions (against property anyway, not this Justice Department/ARM thug shite). I write to prisoners myself who are inside for various reasons and they all say how great it is to hear from people on the outside. Breaks up the grinding boredom and monotony to some extent, and helps build community too! For some info and addresses:

www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk
www.vpsg.org
www.anarchistblackcross.org

There are a lot more too, have a browse!

by Mr Man Tue Jul 08, 2008 20:08

Suzy

"you might actually get better results if you type N.A.R.A which is the actual title of the group"
Well, unfortunately putting full stops after things doesn't change anything because N.A.R.A. is the actual title of the National Anglers Representative Organisation. And N.A.R.A. isn't the actual title of the group, it's the acronym.

"N.A.R.A is newly formed and barely a year and the website is even less than that, naturaly it will take a while until it is first to come up when you google it"
Unfortunately, that is not how google works. Once the site is indexed, it is assigned a 'rank' depending on the importance of the site, which is decided by many variables, none of which are time the site has existed.

"it is only quite recently that animal rights is getting recognised in Ireland"
I disagree.

"N.A.R.A is the number one website to come up when you google animal rights in Ireland"
Unfortunately, it isn't. It isn't even on the first page of results, even with an Ireland-specific search. I believe you are mistaken because you don't know how google works. Google tracks your clicks on webpages and tailors your future results according to your choices. So whereas your google results bring up the site, for everyone else it may as well not exist.

"i feel embarassed for you that you are putting so much of your time and effort into this issue."
The feeling is mutual

Sasha;
Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. So blackmail and arson aren't intended to create fear for an ideological goal? And I'm pretty sure arson disregards the safety of non-combatants (unless security is getting REALLY tight)

by suzi - N.A.R.A Tue Jul 08, 2008 23:28

nittpicking at every little detail in order to win your argument??
fortunately i don't pay so much attention into the workings of google, i have a life, and don't really care.
so what if the anglers trade or whatever it is, is first when you search N.A.R.A on google. people can find the webpage if they wish and thats all thats imporant.

N.A.R.A and animal rights in general IS growing popular everyday.
by saying animal rights is only recently getting acknowledged in Ireland recently, i meant it is only recently that the general public in Ireland would know what vivisection is, or that the fur trade is still going compared to the U.K for example where animal rights is very well known and active. but the nittpickers had to make sure that , that statement is corrected too

by Damien Wed Jul 09, 2008 00:57

The "cause" of the animal rights activists is hampered by the activists refusal to cooperate. In what can only really be a juvenile ego boost, campaigners seem to invent their own organisations rather than strengthen an existing one.

For example off the top of my head there are AFAR , ARAN , CAFT , Vegaplanet , NARA PETA and ALF active in Ireland, and I'm sure many more. Many of these only have two or three active members, so they simply exist to dilute the lobbys power. There also seems to be quite a bit of empire building - some of the organisations seem to share addresses etc. yet "trade" under different names. One assumes this is because someone decides they would like to be king of their own castle, at the expense of the actual campaign

For a group that has many laudible campaigns, which would be well received by the public, they seem intent on self destruction. Many people agree with much of their philosophy, but instead of pushing to have their more reasonable beliefs brought to fruition , their time seems to be constantly spent arguing with people about their most controversial beliefs.

by sasha Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:13

you can define terrorism all you want.
terrorists instil terror in other beings. real terrorists kill, such as the animal technician in research labs that tests it's drugs on animals, or the slaughterhouse worker, the fur farmer etc, etc, etc. if i was to spot the terrorist between these people and a person who broke into a laboratory and rescued a beagle pup from a life of torture and misery, i'd have to go with the obvious as any ethical person would. just because these businesses and industries who make their money from the exploitation of animals, do so legallly, doesn't mean what they do is right.
through the years that the animal liberation movement has been in existance no one has ever been killed, and that is not a coincidence. the only people whose lives have ever been in danger where the animal rights activists themselves.
i personally define terrorism as the use of violence, fear and intimidation in order to achieve one's goals such as the people who work in the lab or the foie gras production farm or a similar animal abusing business.
so go on, get annoyed that your not winning your argument, search through google, come up with another definition, make random assumptions again and defend the real terrorists all you want
this is it plain and simple

by Mr Man Thu Jul 10, 2008 22:42

Suzi;
I admit I am a habitual nit-picker. I guess i'm just a sucker for logic and truth.

Sasha;
Rather than get into an argument on the definition of a terrorist, I won't as its meaning is relative to the semantics of the user. You see them as 'freedom fighters' and I as terrorists. This duality of a conflict of opinion is not unique.

However, not only does the US Justice Department deem the ALF terrorists, letter bombs have been sent by them to various people. To liken researchers in labs to terrorists is a bit far. Without animal testing, advances in most of medicine would be impossible. I personally have carried out and helped carry out numerous experiments involving animals, some of which have aready contributed to relieving people of fatal conditions. Does this make me a terrorist? Oh I was chuckling all the way to the bank with my profit from use of violence, fear and intimidation, happy that I was furthering my goals towards combatting congenital brain disorders. I better hope I'm not on the US terror list as I'm going there this month.

Monaghan, Rachael. "Terrorism in the Name of Animal Rights," in Taylor, Maxwell and Horgan, John. The Future of Terrorism. Routledge 2000, pp. 160-161.

by Mr Man Fri Jul 11, 2008 02:07

Oh and here's some more...

ALF activist Barry Horne planted incendiary devices in stores selling animal products.

ALF activist David Blenkinsop and two others assaulted Huntingdon Life Sciences director Brian Cass with pick-axe handles

ALF activist Donald Currie was jailed for 12 years and placed on probation for life, for planting homemade bombs on the doorsteps of businessmen with links to Huntingdon Life Sciences

The ALF claimed responsibility for a firebomb attack on UCLA researcher, however the device had been placed on the doorstep of a house occupied by the scientist's 70 year-old neighbor

After the homes of Van Der Looy employees are targeted, because of their involvement in the building of the life-science industrial park in the Netherlands, the company pull out of the building project because of the "unacceptable intimidating attitude" by the ALF

Nice bunch

by dieter Fri Jul 11, 2008 13:29

What any of this nonsense about letter bombs etc has to with a peaceful protest against the selling of torture food in a Dublin restaurant is beyond me.

"Gavage', or the force feeding of ducks and geese to make their livers swell up, is illegal in Ireland because the disgusting practice is so cruel.

Yet the Pearl Brasserie is importing the diseased livers and selling them because of a loophole in the law.

There is a peaceful protest at the restaurant tomorrow evening (Saturday 12th) at half past six.

Come along if you think the sale of torture food is wrong.

Write to Trevor Sargent if you can't make it, and tell him to stop this practice (he's in charge of food policy).

by Damien Fri Jul 11, 2008 19:46

"What any of this nonsense about letter bombs etc has to with a peaceful protest against the selling of torture food in a Dublin restaurant is beyond me."

As discussed above, the Animal Liberation front, is a group responsible for numerous acts of vandalism, destruction and intimidation, and have frequently been labelled terrorists. Well there seems to be rather close links between NARA and ALF..... Laura Broxson from NARA has declared that NARA "fully support the ALF"[1]... Laura has also spoken of her "direct communication" with ALF.

Also interesting to note the name Ciaran Long. Ciaran has in the past spoken of his memberships of Association Of Hunt Saboteurs, ALF, ARAN and NARA....Indeed Ciarans email address is pagan_animal_liberation_front@hotmail dot com so its pretty clear he is a member of the ALF, as well as a member of NARA

Given the small size of the animal rights movement in Ireland, Ciarans clear ALF membership, and Lauras support for ALF, it would seem highly likely that this group has at least two members which are also part of ALF Ireland.

If NARA are simply the public face of ALF, in a Sinn Fein \ IRA type strategy, then talk of ALF letter bombs and bombings[3] has alot to do with any event which NARA organise.

[1] http://www.naracampaigns.org/news.html
[2] http://www.indymedia.ie/article/84574
[3]http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/dec/08/animalrig...knews

by Ciaran Long - AOHS Tue Jul 15, 2008 15:02

"Also interesting to note the name Ciaran Long. Ciaran has in the past spoken of his memberships of Association Of Hunt Saboteurs, ALF, ARAN and NARA....Indeed Ciarans email address is pagan_animal_liberation_front@hotmail dot com so its pretty clear he is a member of the ALF, as well as a member of NARA

Given the small size of the animal rights movement in Ireland, Ciarans clear ALF membership, and Lauras support for ALF, it would seem highly likely that this group has at least two members which are also part of ALF Ireland."

Sorry Damien, but I'm not a member of NARA but I do consider Laura to be a good friend and an amazing activist and would help out with any of her campaigns. And I'm CERTAINLY not a member of ARAN. I've never mentioned that I'm a member of ALF. But I am a member of the Hunt Sabs.

You're right about my email address but that was set up as a joke. ALF doesn't have a membership as you put it. Just because people like myself and Laura would agree with actions against Animal Abusers doesn't make us ALF. You can get imprisoned for doing illegal stuff so we like to keep within the law.

by Mr Man Tue Jul 15, 2008 22:15

"Just because people like myself and Laura would agree with actions against Animal Abusers doesn't make us ALF"
But half the point is that you agree with and support terrorists. While NARA et. al. still support arson, blackmail, assault, bombings etc. their moral leverage is diminished.

by Damien Wed Jul 16, 2008 23:27

"Sorry Damien, but I'm not a member of NARA "

Are you involved in NARA in any way ? Ever been to one of their protests for example?

" I've never mentioned that I'm a member of ALF.....ALF doesn't have a membership "

I'm pretty sure the first part of this argument is based purely on semantics, so I'll rephrase.....I should have said that Ciaran and Laura are likely to be involved in the ALF movement in Ireland.

"You can get imprisoned for doing illegal stuff so we like to keep within the law."

More like you aren't stupid enough to admit to it on a public forum. Also a very good reason not to publicise any links between NARA or the Sabs and ALF.

by Catlady Sat Jul 19, 2008 00:27

have been away so haven't been keeping up. It is late and I have only read the first reply to my last comment by Mr. Man, so I am replying only to the following:

"I can't speak for anyone else, but I find it extremely delicious and welcome any chance to eat this fine fine food and dislike my purchase options being curtailed."

Mr. man. you may not be familiar with the work of Carol J. Adams. Google her if you like...

For anyone who bothers, read her, then Mr. Man, than take into account my ex boyfriend. Suffice to say he was pretty rough. And he liked his porn.....and was a rapist.

He too found it delicious, welcomed any chance to consume and hated his options being curtailed. But you gotta read Adam's (easily available articles on google scholar) to see where I am coming from on this one.

by Sean Sat Jul 19, 2008 18:27

Having read the above article a few days ago I was surprised to see the popular TG4 programme Bia's Bothar promoting Foie Gras on the channel this afternoon.

Like some of the other speakers I am not a vegetarian or an animal rights protester but I would not approve of animal cruelty of the type used in the creation of Foie Gras yet Eamon Ó Cathain, presenter of Bia's Bothar and a chef whose programme I would normally enjoy showed the force feeding of geese in a French foie gras plant and went on to visit the outlet and talk to the owner before using some of his foie gras as part of a recipe. I won't be watching Bia's Bothar again!

by protester Sat Jul 19, 2008 21:13

many people who are not vegetarian are opposed to torture foods like foie gras.

it may be no harm to write a note to TG4 to comment on the item, and hopefully future programmes will at least include references to the campaign to get gavage stopped.

you can leave feedback for tg4 here: http://www.tg4.ie/Bearla/feed.htm

by WTF Sun Jul 20, 2008 12:57

Using her as an example would be like asking Wanye Le Pierre is gun ownership a good idea?[Google him if u dont know who he is]

Catlady,what has your Ex boyfriend got to do with this?Are you trying to allude that all people who eat foie gras are rapists???Could you provide some scientific facts to back up that allusion??

by Mr Man Mon Jul 21, 2008 13:05

Catlady;

I did have a brief look at Carol J. Adams stuff, and although I couldn't give an in depth critique, it appears to be sexist, biased tripe.

I have no idea how your ex-boyfriend relates to this issue. He was a rapist and liked fois gras thus people who like fois gras are rapists? Well, hitler was a vegetarian, so does that make vegetarians mass murderers?

by vegetarian Mon Jul 21, 2008 16:44

Hitler was no more a vegetarian than you are. He actually persecuted German vegetarian organisations like "Vegetarier-Bund Deutschlands”, which was closed by Nazis in 1936. Members of vegetarian and animal rights groups were often arrested and interned in concentration camps.

by WTF Mon Jul 21, 2008 23:00

Seeing that this is a wikipedia quote Vegitarian,why dont you quote the whole thing????

Vegetarier Bund Deutschland only started it's activities after the Nazis lost ww2.
Traudel Junge Hitlers personal secetary who was invited almost daily to eat with Hitler stated "he always avoided meat"

Martin Bormann had a large green house built for Hitler in the berghoff to supply him with fresh fruit and vegs during the war years.In 2005 it's foundations were still standing,and pics of Bormann's children tending das Furher Treibhaus[Furhers greenhouse] still exist.
All in all Hitler seems to have become a vegan after the death of his niece Geli Raubal in 1931.

Not to mind that the spurious aruguements put forth by vegans that Hitler occasionally ate meat,he was known to launch into triades against anyone who ate at his table meat. He himself advocated vegan diets since 1911.
Even if Hitler was a so so vegan there are some real beauties still out there.
Charles Manson,religious doomsday nutter and psycho Vegan,
Pol Pot Dictator of Cambodia,mass genocide engineer Vegan
Genghis Kahn Vegan
Volkert Van der Graaf,animal rights activist [member of the Furious potatoes,a militant animals rights group in Holland] ,Vegan Murderer of Pym Forytun

by historian Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:24

I don't know what point you are trying to make, but the simple truth is that if you think Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian then you are an idiot. Vegetarians don't eat meat. Hitler ate meat all the time, and was especially fond of wild birds.

If you insist on believing that he was a vegetarian, then you are, quite obviously, a fool.

by Mark Tue Jul 22, 2008 13:01

Historian your abusive response doesn't deflect from the fact that you are wrong
http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/

by historian Tue Jul 22, 2008 13:26

Despite what you think you can prove with web pages, people who eat meat, can not be described as vegetarians.

Hitler regularly ate meat. It even says so on the web page you linked to.
Biographers of Hitler cite his favourite foods as liver dumplings, sausages, and stuffed squab ( a type of wild bird).

I'm sorry if it comes across as abusive, but insisting that something is true when it is clearly and obviously untrue, is the mark of someone who is of unsound mind. I would call someone who insisted that Hitler was vegetarian, despite the fact that he ate meat, an idiot. What would you call them?

by Brian Tue Jul 22, 2008 13:45

The point still stands.

Somebody choosing to eat meat does not make them morally inferior to those who choose not to. The very militancy of insisting otherwise and calling the person who was making that generic point[there is a popular belief that Hitler was vegetarian afterall] an idiot does nothing but prove his point.

I would call somebody who insists that meat-eaters are somehow more prone to violence and genocide not an idiot but sadly misguided..

by Mark Tue Jul 22, 2008 15:10

The point in the link is that he had a few relapses before becoming a fully fledged vegetarian. The reality is I couldn't care less but I wouldn't call somebody an idiot because they hold a widely held belief.

These kind of arguments prove nothing and tend to be a waste of time. Its like the argument that Hitler and Stalin were atheists therefore all atheists are mass murderers.

by historian Tue Jul 22, 2008 17:16

There is no such thing as a fully fledged vegetarian. You are either someone who eats meat, or you are not.

Hitler ate meat. Regularly. His favourite foods, according to his biographers, were meat-based delicacies such a liver dumpling and stuffed squab.

Whatever way you look at it, saying that someone who ate meat, regularly and often, was vegetarian, is stupid.

Here's a book on this subject: http://www.amazon.com/Hitler-Neither-Vegetarian-Animal-...r=8-1

by WTF Tue Jul 22, 2008 23:06

Historian you are,obviously one with an agendsa.Rynn Berry is a vegan revisionist,so this is like quoting the neo nazis saying the Protocols of the learned elders of Zion is actual fact.
So apart from some anecdotal evidence from a cook book,you have no brilliant other insight that Hitler was a non vegan????
You then refute ALL the evidence by Gobbels,Traudel Junge,Martin Bormann,and all the others that shared Hitlers table and had to listen to his monolouges about veganism as totally irrevelant???? Also the fact that he advocated and gave up on meat after 1931 as just another bagatalle of history???
Some historian............ROTFLAMO

by Mr Man Tue Jul 22, 2008 23:54

Ummm, deviating from the point a bit I think. Either way, the idea that ones diet choice is indicative your personality is a bit rich.

by historian Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:20

You can call the author of the book any names you like, but the fact remains, calling someone who ate meat, often and with relish, a vegetarian, is idiotic.

by WTF Wed Jul 23, 2008 15:13

Hitler was a meat eater according to Historian.....Despite ALL the historic facts to the contrary...
historic revisionism anyone????