Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Wicked Witch Descends on the Animal Rights Conference 2009

Our movement is represented by welfarists like Karen Dawn who are ruining the movement. Listening to their welfare bullshit during talks caused abolitionists within earshot to feel ill.

“Welfare is hurting the movement” Dr Will Tuttle, Animal Rights Conference 2009 Opening Plenary

Bob Linden gave a great talk at the Saturday session Engaging Media (news releases, letters to the editor, talk shows, feeding and care, dramatizing events) - Kuipers, Smith, Linden, Dawn

Linden wisely used a portion of his allotted 10-12 minutes and bashed the Humane Society of the United States’ Wayne Pacelle for his plans to sustain the corpse-munching status quo in his recent interview with Drovers rag---a pro-animal agriculture nightmare---with consequences so horrific and bizarre, not even a science fiction writer could dream this shit up.

Bob Linden is correct in that any rational vegan would admit, Wayne Pacelle’s comment, “We’re not telling people to become vegetarians  — we’re urging them to exhibit greater decency” reflects a disturbing philosophy to promote when ice caps are melting and a silent holocaust is going on three times a day.

Excerpts from Pacelle’s latest damage with Drovers:
Pacelle: We at the Humane Society of the United States don’t talk about animal rights, but human responsibility. That places us more with the comments that you represent from the agriculture community. I don’t think anyone can reasonably claim that our work is moving in the direction of eliminating animal agriculture as some of the folks in the industry keep repeating.

Adams: So your intent is not to shut down the livestock industry? Is that what you are saying?

Pacelle: Yes, that is correct. I don’t think in any kind of practical way one can say we are trying to eliminate animal agriculture. We support certified humane programs, we support other farmers, we work with farmers, we think farming is a noble profession

Full interview here:

During Linden’s talk, Karen Dawn (who was sitting next to Linden and about to speak next) was heard grunting, groaning and gasping in disgust as Linden used his time to bash Pacelle and the HSUS message/media engagement. Have no fear Dawn fans, she got the last word following Linden, instructing the audience that Linden’s remarks painted a bogus picture and to see her after the talk if they would like the real scoop. Yes, Karen Dawn invited people to speak with her later about the Pacelle comments and further explained the Engaging Media session was better suited to brag about her scrawny ass photographed in some New York rag inferring Bob Linden is misguided in his use/place/voice. I guess that is how we engage the media when we have no brains …we use our asses to peddle popular animal confinement, torture, and murder preservationist views.

Not one to talk behind people’s backs, I approached the moldy blood and pus munching Karen Dawn (Dawn was seen eating cheese at an upscale LA restaurant and explained, “I didn’t want to waste it”) later at her invite to discuss the Drovers interview. Dawn told me Bob Linden is a liar and that Wayne Pacelle didn’t say those things. As she spoke I could smell the wretched stench of happy meat permeating her words and had to inform her that I am an abolitionist and that I feel she is hurting the movement with her campaign for Prop 2 and refusal to use the word vegan. Dawn then claimed to be an abolitionist and a welfarist. I told her you can’t be both. This bitch is really confused about the state of things when she thinks the two can coexist in harmony. I’m not buying it.

I then asked Dawn if she lived during slavery and then were to describe her legacy to her great grand-children, would she want to tell them that she fought for better living conditions for the slaves or that she fought for their freedom? This question struck a nerve with Dawn who responded, “This isn’t about me, me, me!” raising her arms in a flapping motion with each “Me!” like some prehistoric giant lizard. Two more “Me’s!” would have sent the wicked witch of the west air-born like a cage-free chicken flailing for freedom. The exhibit hall grew quiet as everyone listened. Karen Dawn then cried out in a loud screech, “I might be wrong, you might be wrong” and stormed off effectively escaping any responsibility.

It would be nice if we could talk about/examine our beliefs without fear they might fall apart. Maybe in a better world we would all know what we are preaching to others about … the welfare of animals. I guess these things don’t deserve further examination when, Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn is at the helm. There is nothing well or fare about evil sorts munching on animals, so let’s call it what it is, “animal confinement, torture, and murder preservation.” And promoting the acceptability of these practices as an ideal is truly an evil pursuit. Are the animal agriculture industries funding Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn?

Anyways, feeling bad that I upset the bitch so much, I approached her at the bar later that night to apologize and show her a print-out of the Pacelle interview so she would realize that Bob Linden was telling the truth. Dawn wasn’t interested in my apology or the knowledge that she is the one who is full of happy meat. Dawn informed me in no uncertain terms that she knows the interview very well and that she doesn’t need the transcripts. I then asked her if she agreed with Pacelle’s views in the Drovers interview and she said, “Yes.” Shocked I backed up---careful as to not breathe her evil reptilian exhales and asked her again … to make sure I wasn’t caught in some sort of twisted time warp, “Do you agree with Wayne’s words?” Dawn responded, “Yes, I agree with everything Wayne said.”

Poseurs like Karen Dawn and Wayne Pacelle are hurting the movement when they are to busy fighting for cages that are 2 inches bigger as a path to guilt-free menstrual slurping---pleasing the bad man to no end---instead of fighting for veganism. And somehow Alex Hershaft believes moldy blood munching posers like Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn deserve prime speaking time at his annual conference.

“Welfare is hurting the movement” Dr Will Tuttle, Animal Rights Conference 2009 Opening Plenary

Simultaneously posted at Thomas Paine's Corner

Bookmark and Share Add to Technorati Favorites


  1. I was really surprised at how much welfarism worked its way into the discussions. I didn't expect it. And it is a major problem. How can someone like Karen Dawn advocate welfare an rights at the same time? Her presentation was more like satire than serious.

    if she would've flapped her arms a couple of more times, she'd have been "air-born like a cage-free chicken"... lmao!

  2. This is very interesting that you make this comments. I have nevet thought that I would see the day that animal lovers would be so uncompassionate. As a african american for welfare I don't feel that what Dawn spoke about was wrong in anyway. When Karen spoke she spoke for voiceless and I also feel she speaks for people like me who feel they have no place in this movement. Open your eyes and understand we are all for the well being of animals.

    I don't believe in the all or nothing position. If I did I probably would not be here right now and being apart of such a white movement. I want you to know that this movement goes beyond animals and we should be compassionate to each other.

  3. This is really unprofessional, rude and completely out of line. Thank you self proclaimed "abolitionists" for dividing the movement even further. Good job on making things worse. A true leader can bring people together and the writer of this piece is doing the opposite. You short sighted, self proclaimed "abolitionists" choose to waste time bickering and slinging mud at people on the same side as you while the animals suffer. This is a waste of time. Just do your thing and let others do theirs. Stop wasting time that could be used for helping animals.

  4. To both of the anonymous posters: Imagine you're both confined in a cage with no room to move, languishing in your own waste, bruises and fractured bones from the confinement; and, i would imagine, miserable, at best, if not wishing for death to release you.

    Now, I am the only advocate you have. Do you want me to say:

    1- well, nothing is going to change so let's just give them enough room to stretch their arms; or

    2- this is insane! get them the fuck out of there.

    the concept of welfare is oxymoronic in and of itself when you're trying to create feel-good laws that refine torture and confinement.

    insofar as dividing the movement, perhaps you should get off the fence and join the movement rather than whining about nonsense. if you care about the nonhuman individuals, you would not support their continued torture.

  5. The poll on VRG from 2006 showed that *approximately* 1.4% of the US population is vegan.

    Take those numbers, use your head, and realize that total "abolition" won't happen in our lifetimes no matter how hard we try, and in the meantime we can only try and make things somewhat more tolerable, one step at a time. Why can't you see that we need both sides working together on this?

  6. current u.s. population: 304,059,724 (7/08)

    .014(304,060,000) = 4,256,820 vegans

    .95 (304,060,000) = 288,857,000 apathetic complacent malleable stupid americans

    it takes one person to tell the insipid masses what to think and then lead them in that direction. but an abolitionist message will not be heard when there are "advocates" catering to those who perpetuate atrocity.

    this cannot be done as long as we have traitors advocating refined methods of torture for holocaust victims. welfare reform does NOTHING but pander to agribusiness and the slovenly masses who continue to shove mutilated body parts in their mouths under the auspices of happy meat.

    there is no middle ground when the welfarists are patting themselves on the back for maintaining a holocaust rather than joining the abolitionists and calling for revolution.

  7. While of course this whole post shocks and saddens me (which was obviously part of its intent as it is headed "Wicked Witch" and Dave sent me a copy) I won't comment on most of it -- that wouldn' seem useful. But for those unfamiliar with me and my work I will just note that the comment about my eating cheese at a Los Angeles restaurant "so it wouldn't go to waste" is an untruth apparently included to discredit my work for the animals by giving the impression that I am not vegan. It is important that activists don't believe everything they hear or read.
    As for the rest, I hope people who know nothing about my work will check out and compare the tone of it with the tone of the piece above including some of the language used to describe me, and will ask themselves who was more likely to have been behaving in an assaultive manner during the conference interactions.
    I will not engage any further on this blog as I feel the tone and energy of the piece about me does not call for engagement, but please feel free to email me if you have questions or want clarification.
    With the hope for peace and camaraderie in our movement and in the world,
    Karen Dawn

  8. I agree with you, Karen. that activists should not believe everything they read or hear. But I did believe what I heard you say. Do you remember when you were at the bar and Dave took you up on your offer to discuss the HSUS? I know you had already had quite a few at that point, so don't worry if you can't quite remember. I'll fill you in...

    You said that ... oh never mind... there was too much... the convoluted logic and outright disrespect for nonhuman life... flapping your wings was pretty funny though... i think it requires a blog of it's own... maybe i'll include the 12 steps...

  9. Now, I am the only advocate you have. Do you want me to say:

    1- well, nothing is going to change so let's just give them enough room to stretch their arms; or

    2- this is insane! get them the fuck out of there.

    The problem with this statement is:

    1- you can not get them the fuck out of there without first giving them enough room.

    2 - Its clearly misconstrued.

    If a pig had to choose between more space or no space that pig would choose more space. Its arrogant, selfish and narcissistic to think that taking progress away from a movement because it doesn't "fit" what "you" believe is enough progress. Its not up to you to decide, you get what you can for now and you accept it and the animal suffers less for it, rather than suffering the same while you tear apart the few people you actually have who feel the same way about the issue. Sure I agree there are some people who are in it for themselves only, maybe Wayne maybe Karen, but maybe not, maybe they care and besides do you want to be one of those people?
    Movement is about progress and steps take those away and you will be left with nothing.

  10. Okay, Anonymous (I wouldn't sign my name to that drivel either)...

    Let's talk about humans, because you're clearly a speciesist impediment to progress.

    Do you think that if you were a prisoner put in solitary -- stripped naked on a cement floor in the dark for an unspecified amount of time -- it would make any difference if you were confined in a two by five cell or a three by six? You're being tortured and driven to madness either way. By your convoluted logic, you would thank the well-meaning deluded inactivists fighting to refine your torture. And you would tell those who wanted to abolish cruel and unusual punishment there's no hurry... baby steps.

    The movement "should" be about progress. But negotiating terms of confinement IS NOT progress -- it's what we fight against. What don't you understand?

    African American slavery -- I suppose as long as the slaves were beaten no more than five times a week, you would have been okay with welfare.

    I suppose that raping women is okay as long as the assailant kisses the injuries afterward.

    I suppose it's okay to rape children and long as they're 80 pounds or four feet tall.

    I suppose it's okay to confine hundreds of chickens in a dark filthy shed as long as there are no cages with bars.

  11. AR2009 was my first Animal Rights Conference and I have to say I was not impressed. I found the majority, especially the self-proclaimed abolitionists, to be irrational, arrogant, judgmental and unwelcoming and made me realize why there were not very many people in attendance. The plenary sessions appeared to be nothing but a lot unproductive, “preaching to the choir” type talks with no discussion whatsoever on how to attract new people to the “movement”.

    I attended the “Engaging Media” panel and found Bob Linden to be a loud-mouthed, ignorant, lunatic using the panel to raise money for his own personal endeavors. That and when he spoke about earlier in the day going across the street to McDonalds to scream at people through his bullhorn all I could think was “Well there is a crowd of people who will probably never want anything to do with animal rights.” I learned absolutely nothing about engaging the media from him and found his talk pointless and mean spirited (a lot like this blog).

    On the other hand I found Karen Dawn to be inspiring. Her talks were rational and engaging, her arguments were well thought out and intelligent and instead of presenting “pipe-dreams” she gave valid examples on how anyone can help make a difference in the lives of suffering animals without making it seem overwhelming or impossible. She was one of the very few people that I actually learned anything from during the conference.

    Animal Rights is such an important cause and it is a shame that instead of actually fighting for the animals you are putting time in energy into slandering somebody solely because they had a different opinion than you.

  12. Karen Dawn is a fucking idiot.

  13. Karen dawn is a fucking whore.

  14. You could have written the same piece informing us that Karen Dawn agrees with Wayne Pacelle and is a welfarist without calling her a "bitch". White, arrogant men dominate this movement. I am glad I skipped the conference because this is exactly what it is, name-calling, holier-than-thou grandstanding and dividing an already fractured movement. If you want to make a difference in the lives of animals, save your money, buy some bolt cutters and get to liberating.

  15. As an abolitionist, I think it is critical that we present our argument in a passionate way, yet be careful of being overly inflamatory simply because it distracts from our argument, which is solid. We are already a marginalized group, and while it is difficult to manage the anger one can feel about that at times, I feel it is our responsibility to make sure the face we present is always in service of our message. I am deeply disappointed in how some leaders associated with our movement choose to "respresent" - but the fact is that we do have two separate movements, and I feel it's tactically smarter to keep making air tight arguments for ours, deconstruct welfare arguments, and avoid the temptation to publicly rail on another person. People tend to react as much if not more to the way a message is delivered that to the actual message - which is something Karen Dawn does exceedingly well (two ready examples are her response on this forum and as the panel member opposite me at AR2009).

  16. Reality check: They are not getting out of confinement any time soon. Eating meat is ingrained in our culture as well as in others and if you think about it logically we can not abolish the slaughter of animals over night here. I wish we could but it will not happen in our life time.

    We can advocate veganism AND help alleviate animal suffering at the same time by getting laws passed. No one at the conference was talking down on direct action but there are strong arguments against that as well.

    I can not bellieve you people are not helping get laws passed to protect animals! Are you insane? It is the strongest tool we have to help animals.

    I do not have a problem with direct action. But we can not save all of them RIGHT NOW. There are just too many of them. So we owe it to them to use every tool possible and to also stop bashing others who are working hard to protect them. You guys are being counterproductive.

  17. Great job crunching those numbers, Camille. 4 million people vegan, 288 million, 98.6% of the population not and hey - They're going to change overnight, right? Let's blow up some cars, but on some Crass t-shirts, and be unstable anarchists who change causes by the day. Grow up already, please. You either are insane, retarded, or lying to yourself.

    And yes, I called you a retard.

    Oh by the way, if you *really* want to win converts, continue comparing African American slavery to the meat industry.

    Also, compare rape to the meat industry. If you're trying to make people hate the AR movement even *more* than they already do, and LOSE people on our side, you're doing a stand up job.

  18. I find the tone and the name-calling here to be way out of line (not only in the post, but also in the comments disagreeing with the post--if we want people in other movements to take this one seriously as a compassionate, nonviolent, considerate movement, use of "bitch" and "retard" isn't the way to do it--they're both inappropriate and offensive).

    I do think it's important to be honest about what high-profile people in the movement are actually saying, promoting, and sometimes misstating. Those who disagree with what Karen Dawn says and promotes would do better to disagree with her in a more professional, less personal, less hostile way. When she or someone else sets up a straw man argument or says or implies something untrue (or calls for people to be respectful but then spends time on stage visibly rolling her eyes and sighing at speakers she disagrees with), by all means, point that out.

    But like Dallas said, whether you agree or vehemently disagree with Karen Dawn, she is an engaging speaker, and when someone outside the movement and new to all this hears or reads her words and tone on one hand and an approach such as this on the other, they're going to go with Karen Dawn. When this kind of approach is taken with someone we disagree with--whatever the situation and whoever the person, whether it's an internal movement argument such as this or a debate with someone opposed to animal rights altogether--we run the risk of pushing people *in* that person's direction (and to her defense) rather than encouraging them to critically think about what the person is saying and doing.

  19. Lots of anonymous's afraid to put their names to their opinions..Spineless weaklings.

    I wasnt there, but I loved the piece above. Why? Because it rattles cages. Half assed animal lovers will advocate their welfarist opinions because when everyones happy the cages will be slightly bigger, and the animals will have found inner peace.. Surely?
    Then the war will be over and we can happily give up our principals and be happy, right?

    Just like its wonderful to have mature debates with vivisectionists, instead of ...well entertain yourself.

    We need vision and voice. We need to carve out a future. At least the word Vegan fucking exists, we've got that far. Anyone who gets offended deserves to be. If you want to be all namby pamby, go for it just dont be a public speaker for animal rights, when really you represent industrialised welfarism.

    Someone has to lead the way. If we all settled for welfarism it would just be fucking lame.

  20. It seems we're not playing nice enough. The complicit are offended! Let's negotiate with the oppressors and the traitors and hope to enlighten some apathetic slobs along the way.

    WTF? We're talking about animal "advocates" who are complicit in perpetuating the holocaust and contributing to the misery of countless victims. Simply because some stupid bitch waves a happy-meat banner with a lame-ass smile doesn't make it a legitimate position. It's counterproductive and reckless and yet, once again, the pacifists are offended by WORDS!

    And as for "Anonymous 10:12 p.m." -- why don't you grow a pair and step out into the light of day with your panzy-ass comments. When a cock-sucking ignorant deluded welfarist speciesist clown calls me a retard, I get all warm & fuzzy. Thanks.

  21. Obviously, attitudes here aren't going to change. I hope all this inflammatory rhetoric makes the people spewing it feel good--because that's the *only* effect it has. If your goal is to change people's minds and habits, doing it this way dooms you to failure--and, again, just drives people to the defense of those you're trying to discredit, even if and when your actual points, buried deep beneath the rhetoric, have validity.

    It's hard to blame anyone who dismisses calls for compassion from people whose rhetoric is full of sexism, homophobia, and ableism. Why should they feel compassion for all beings when the people demanding it are themselves offensive and dismissive of other minority groups? It's remarkably hypocritical to demand that people be consistent in their values, personally and in terms of what they promote, and not be consistent in yours too. Dismissing what effect words and actions have on one minority or group of oppressed while defending another oppressed group--and calling on people to change while refusing to consider that perhaps how you're calling on them to do it might actually be counterproductive--is all rather ironic.

    And labeling anyone who disagrees with you as "complicit" is a lazy response and a weak argument. There are fellow abolitionists in this thread, people who often disagree with Karen Dawn as much as anyone else, saying that this shit doesn't help. You don't have to agree with this kind of approach to be equally opposed to welfare-style advocacy.

  22. Dear Friends:

    There is nothing new in what is going on with respect to Karen Dawn or Wayne Pacelle. I have been writing and speaking on this topic since the early 1990s, when it became clear to me that the rights movement was being hijacked by welfarists who claimed to endorse rights and argued (with no support) that reform would lead to abolition. In the mid-1990s, I wrote "Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement," in which I discussed and critiqued what I called "new welfarism." What is being discussed in this essay is merely the most recent manifestation of new welfarism.

    I am, however, concerned with some of the rhetoric and language here. I disagree strongly--very strongly--with people like Karen Dawn and Wayne Pacelle, but I find a number of the terms here to be sexist, homophobic, and downright disrespectful.

    I would urge all of you to consider the importance of expressing disagreement in a non-violent way. Yes, I am aware that welfarists are often abusive in the way that they respond to criticisms of their orthodoxy. Yes, I am aware that the ostensible hypocrisy of some of these people is breathtaking. But that does not justify some of the things that are written here.

    Thank you for your consideration of my comments.

    Gary L. Francione
    Professor, Rutgers University

  23. Oh come on Gary, I don't mind being downright disrespectful, nor do I mind expressing disagreements in a non-violent way (last time I checked, I haven't bitch-slapped anyone yet), nor do I mind using language and rhetoric that you find sexist and homophobic, nor do I mind writing essays about things you wrote about years ago.

    "The thing worse than rebellion is the thing that causes rebellion" Frederick Douglass

    What I do mind is welfarists rolling their eyes at abolitionists and then bashing them publically on stage. What I do mind is Karen Dawn holding hands with the corpse-munching world effectively undermining/delaying/denying any real change. I do mind that "animal rights activists" are activily ruining the movement.

    And lastly, I really don't mind people telling me how to behave, you are not my mommy. She's dead. She died from a life-time of munching on corpses.

  24. We need to get the majority on our side. Currently they are not, so we need to use every tool possible right now. Both sides are needed to help in every which way.


    Dont we want to enlighten those "slobs" along the way and convert them to veganism? Why would you not? Are we not trying to get as many people as possible to boycott the industry? We need to educate the public to win public opinion. This is part of how change is made.

    The language in this blog is way out of line. The more vulgar language used the less credible you become. And you wonder why Karen Dawns book was on a best seller list last year? If you look at her writing she comes across as much more educated and appealing. She has been an effective voice for animals converting many people to veganism whether you like this fact or not. Given that this is going out to activists I would hope you would appreciate this fact. She is not delaying change at all. Numerous people now support animal rights and have gone vegan because of her work. This is great news in my opinion. The more people who go vegan the better!

    We need to stop arguing. We are on the same side here people. Bottom line, there are pro's and con's to both approaches and both are also effective at ending animal suffering. There is no time to waste fighting people on the same side. It's ridiculous and does not help animals at all.


  25. Kristy said: "Don't we want to enlighten those apathetic 'slobs' along the way and convert them to veganism?"

    No. We want to relegate those apathetic slobs to the cob-webbed corners of society so they can munch on mutilated cadaver parts in the dark like the parsitic life forms they are. I do not see the efficacy of the convention wisdom that dictates we should all educate the complicit into submission... and do it nicely. Perhaps "outreach" is your mantra... mine is "revolution".

    Kristy said: "And you wonder why Karen Dawns book was on the best seller list last year?"

    No, Kristy... it's no wonder at all. This movement is dictated by pacifists and welfarists who've marginalized any progress that the liberation wing has made. We say empty the cages, you say makes them bigger. Understand that simply because you have an army of welfarist drones marching in sycophantic step with your pacifist welfarist leaders, I'm very unimpressed.

    Kristy said: "It's ridiculous and does not help animals at all." Agreed. Taking the time to take exception to my vulgar language has done absolutely nothing.

    Don't be swayed by the pacifist majority rule, Kristy. This is a war and until we approach the nonhuman holocaust with the same passion we would if the subjects were human babies, then there is nothing to discuss.

    And the fact that certain people's language is the most offensive thing the speciests can isolate in this blog is most telling.

  26. Camille wrote, "And the fact that certain people's language is the most offensive thing the speciests can isolate in this blog is most telling"

    This is one of the reasons I use the language I do. Shows where our priorities and hearts are at. Most telling and most embarrassing. Most never catch on.

  27. It is important to alleviate animal suffering... cruel and industrialized animal suffering at the hands of the uncompassionate, the typical greedy, dullminded, indifferent speciesist assclowns, witless lackeys that are only in it for the money, or are too brain-damaged, selfish, childish, arrogant and dwonright rude to truly realize the difference between right and wrong, and to recognize suffering. And do somehting about it.

    Some self-proclaimed abolitionist folk spew alot of rhetoric, this is not good in that the end result is that it is only needlessly fracturing the movement.

    too me this is morally reprehensible.

    To do nothing is not an option, that is, if one has an ounce of courage, possesses basic commonsense and has the barest amount of compassion and dignity within their all too human body.

    peace begins on the dinner plate.

  28. Well given that you want to raise an army here then we would want to convert people to our side. Using vulgar language pushes people away that you could otherwise win over. Just a fact. If the war is so important to you then how do you think you will win with less than 1% of the population? A lot of vegan people are not even interested in being an activist and some do it just for religious or health purposes so that puts the # of animal advocates even lower than 1%. So please explain to me how you will win a war against millions? I realize you are all very passionate about the issues which is great but passion and home made explosives alone will not win animal rights.

    The meat eaters and abusers of animals are not in cob webbed corners, they are at Wendy's and Applebee's eating dead animals in the light of day and will be for a loooong time my friends. I would like to see them in dark corners too but thats not what is happening.

    We are in the minority. You can't win the public over with your approach. You are pushing them away just like you are pushing away opportunities to protect animals. If you do not support laws to protect animals then how can law enforcement do their job to arrest and get animal abusers prosecuted?

    Simply because one has a potty mouth does not mean they are more passionate about animals than another. I curse like a sailor in person around the people who know me, but on a blog where others will read it I realize that would not come across the right way. Whatever message you are trying to convey gets lost when such language is added and I am not trying to add fuel to the fire here as that would not help animals.


  29. And actually a lot of points have been "isolated" not just your language.

  30. Kristy,

    Your words may be reasoned and rational but they belie an apathy and learned helplessness that is at the core of this movement's stagnation.

    The problems are overwhelming... We don't have the numbers... GET A GRIP! This is the precise attitude that seduces advocates into inactivity, tolerance & complicity. Yes, I am a minority as a vegan and I'm a further minority within the community of vegans. So, are you suggesting that I abandon my passion and integrity to become one of the complicit tolerant vegans; those who adopt behaviors that align themselves with the oppressors to appease the perpetrators are a disgrace.

    I'm somewhat amused by your commentary on my language. In case you hadn't noticed, my responses to you have been very measured. My "potty" mouth. lmao.

    There is a holocaust of unimaginable scope and intensity and it is beyond my ability to free every single victim. If I could, I would. And I wouldn't hesitate to neutralize the murderous sadists. I wish everyone who had to opportunity to extract blood from the tormentors would do so.

    Now, Kristy, what offends you more... my affinity for obscenity and flagrant disregard for polite debate? my stated desire to see the sadists dead? or the fact that 75,000,000 nonhuman individuals will be mercilessly tortured to death today so that that their corpses can be served up to an apathetic public while the complicit vegans remain silent with their tacit approval of the holocaust?

    Please tell me, Kristy, if the disgusting humans at Wendys were chomping down on mutilated humans, would you throw your hands up and say "oh well, it's too overwhelming... guess I'll go leaflet and politely try to educate people that eating babies is not nice" or would you want a fucking revolution?

  31. Camille, I see your point. I am not offended by your profanity, personally. My point with that has been that in general the public will not listen to us if we are vulgar and in my opinion, and many others, we need to win over public opinion.

    I feel the same exact way you do in regard to how the animals are treated and have been involved in rescue work myself. So don't get me wrong I do not just "want more space" for animals. I would like them to not be eaten, used for entertainment, for research or any other human purposes, just like you.

    At the very least we need to stop bashing eachother. I have often stood up for direct action in discussions even though I do not know anyone personally involved in it. It would be nice if you guys realized we are helping animals as well via education, outreach and by getting laws passed. This change is going to take a long time and various approaches are needed in order to reach the masses. We are all in this together for the sake of the animals. It would do us some good to stop bashing each other and spend our time working on the cause we both so deeply care about.


  32. this is insane, the abolitionist folk here are laying it on too thick. there is certainly no need for all this animosity. warwak, you surprise me. you as a teacher above all should know better than to carelessly recite the popular sensationalist lies, propaganda and half-truths of the corporate mass media machine.

    or act in that fashion.

    you do this when you bad-mouth others, others whom perhaps aren't expressing any arbitrary, untried and untested ready-made optimal sure-fire solutions or saying what you want to hear.

    nothing is foolproof.

    abolitionism is an idealist construct, too naive and ignores the larger consequences. and incredibly fails to take that first step. hardly part of the real world.

    i don't buy most of the mainstream abolitionist buzzwords and coarse, meaningless rhetoric, no i would rather attempt to reduce the suffering. but i am an abolitionist at heart. all compassionate vegans are, that's just the way it is.

  33. Thanks so much for this Dave, I can finally speak out about about Ms. Dawn, who has a newsletter called, Dawnwatch, which I have received for about 3 years. Its amazing what you can learn about a person by reading letters for 3 years, so here it is in a nutshell, so to speak.
    During the election in 2009, I was reading her newsletter about how it wasn't Sarah's idea about the wolves being shot. Dawn went on to say, they have been hunting the wolves for years, true, but not from the air!I wrote back, what about shooting the baby bears and wolf cubs in their caves, never received a letter back..After reading so many newsletters you begin to learn about people. I realized Ms. Dawn was a, Repub, I could care less. What I did care about was how the animals could be affected by her. I would find that out the next week when, Turkey gate was born. As Palin was jabbering on and on, those poor Turkeys were be slaughtered, it was the worst...Three days latter I would receive, newsletter trying to calm down the uproar of Turkeygate, she very simply said, this is a very humane way to kill a bird..Make no mistake, this lady is leathal for the animals. Humane slaughter is a myth and all of us should know this. She didn't just toss but she threw the animals under the bus because of Politics. Her Politics. Thats unforgiveable...

  34. okay so Ms. Dawn is clearly an imposter, fake, a bona fide speciesist pseudo-troll. fine i can accept that. in that case i apologize mr warwak.

    "I would find that out the next week when, Turkey gate was born. As Palin was jabbering on and on, those poor Turkeys were be slaughtered, it was the worst...Three days latter I would receive, newsletter trying to calm down the uproar of Turkeygate, she very simply said, this is a very humane way to kill a bird..Make no mistake, this lady is leathal for the animals. Humane slaughter is a myth and all of us should know this. She didn't just toss but she threw the animals under the bus because of Politics. Her Politics. Thats unforgiveable..."

    that is unforgivable, she is obviously a dull-minded greedy conformist drone, selfish and greedy to the core, only interested in the status quo. compassion and commonsense is clearly beyond her reach.

  35. I'm friends with many of the people that were big shots during Prop 2, I live in Calif and was active with it before I had a chance to really think about it.
    What struck my husband and I funny, if you could call it that, was after Prop 2 won, the Attorney's and spokespeople and Karen Dawn went on to buy 1 to 2 million dollar homes, in a little defense of Karen Dawn, she did write a book, but she is in a home over looking Malibu. Where did all of this money come from. One lady involved with Prop 2 bought not one but two homes, she was interviewed by The L.A. Times. We figured out the answer, animal abuse is big business and there's lots of money to go around, while the animals still continue to suffer. After the scathing letter my husband wrote, they won't be asking for anymore donations...Where did all the money come from? Think about it, millions...

  36. uh huh.

    seriously JWJ can you verify any of this, this is starting to get a little thick and a wee bit ugly.

    i'm not saying i don't believe you, well actually i don't, but warwak is certainly more credible than most, it's just that i'm a show me kind of guy. to the rotten end.

    as far as Ms. Dawn goes, i have always suspected she wasn't the real thing or a committed activist, for example there are no links on the dawnwatch page to other AR or vegan sites, nor does she ever implore anyone to become vegan or even attempts to do so. or educate one about the horrors of factory farming. very strange.

    plus i really don't think warwak would be making all of this up, it is possible gthat Ms. Dawn does not really have her heart into the AR movement and/or veganism, i do realize that i could easily be wrong and go wrong here.

    anyone who has listened to more than a handful of Bob Lindens entertaining, down to earth, and provocative AR oriented goveganradio podcasts, knows he is a committed, resourceful and intelligent activist, he often sees things that others have missed or have glossed over.

    between the two of us...

    Bob Linden is hardly the selfish money-hungry buffoon pandering for donations from others, it is most probably speciesist assclown nutjobs, that have painted him as such. even so the airwaves aren't free, he has to pay to get his show on the air, incredible as that sounds. that she felt it necessary to be rude and unprofessional to him, in public, for me raises even more questions. notice the email etiquette section of her site, given this her alleged questionable behavior makes precious little sense.

    add it all up it doesn't make any sense and leaves alot of questions unanswered. for my money.

    for example if you can find and/or post a legitimate copy of the TurkeyGate fallout "humane slaughter" explanations, it would be nice.

    let's keep a semblance of order here, let's keep things simple. let's not be so quick to jump into the slander, libel and defamation hate bag, and let's not get mired in the unsurrealistic muck and happenstance profanity of unverifiable rumors and needlessly hateful dialog.

  37. **********************
    Bob Linden is correct in that any rational vegan would admit, Wayne Pacelle’s comment, “We’re not telling people to become vegetarians  — we’re urging them to exhibit greater decency” reflects a disturbing philosophy to promote when ice caps are melting and a silent holocaust is going on three times a day.

    i agree with this totally, a hard core abolitionist stance is hardly being expressed here. but i wouldn't call it welfarist either, or demonize the guy, it was just a poor choice of words. he was talking to a speciesist media assclown after all.

    and the mass media is already going to twist his words and ideas into unrecognizable shapes and totally outlandish unobjective unrealistic "soundbite ready" forms. It's their job, that's the primary focus of the mass media outlets today. it's pointless to make their job any easier for them, at least he's doing something important in the field of AR activism.

    Excerpts from Pacelle’s latest damage with Drovers:

    Pacelle: We at the Humane Society of the United States don’t talk about animal rights, but human responsibility. That places us more with the comments that you represent from the agriculture community. I don’t think anyone can reasonably claim that our work is moving in the direction of eliminating animal agriculture as some of the folks in the industry keep repeating.

    Adams: So your intent is not to shut down the livestock industry? Is that what you are saying?

    Pacelle: Yes, that is correct. I don’t think in any kind of practical way one can say we are trying to eliminate animal agriculture. We support certified humane programs, we support other farmers, we work with farmers, we think farming is a noble profession

    Full interview here:

    no he's not mindless regurgitating an AR stance or using hardcore AR and vegan language. i don't find that disturbing at all, once again keep in mind the brain-damaged uncompassionte and sadistic speciesist assclown that he is talking to.

    and read his blog warwak here:
    sure you and others just might not agree 100% with him on the pretended language that he uses, but he is committed and he does care about animals. it is widely known that he is a vegan.

    but i wasn't at the conference, i know how different things can be on the front lines and how simple situations can take on a life of their own out in the real world.