The brush is too wide for the occasion, I agree.
It's a bit puzzling, though, to hide behind the slogan. Why don't they
want their faces to be connected to the case they're fighting for?
Concerning the conspicuously damaging effect on the animal welfare (I
dislike "rights" here) movement, I'm not at all sure if this is staged
by opponents to the movement. Unless they're pulling the strings
somewhere in the shadows. The foot-soldiers are just naïve young
adults with reduced ability to see the consequences of their actions.
In other words, prime candidates for darwininan selection...:-)
Jostein
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 11:32 PM
Subject: RE: No fur, No photos
Rather a broad brush you're painting with there, Jostein. It doesn't
follow
that someone who hides their face condones extreme action of that
type. The
extremists in the animal rights movement have had a very damaging
effect on
the mainstream. Suspiciously so, wouldn't you say?
--
Cheers,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Jostein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 December 2005 22:02
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: No fur, No photos
That may be because today's animal activists are more prone
to use illegal and stupid forms of action. Like releasing
North-American minks from fur farms in Europe. Apparently,
wild European ferrets are not worthy of concern.
I'd vote to have animal activists replacing rats in the lab, too.
Jostein
