Skip navigation

Indymedia UK is a network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues

Teaching Compassion in Coventry - Cruelty Free Fair & Talks

Coventry Veggies & Vegans | 24.08.2006 21:16 | Animal Liberation | Education | Birmingham

This will be a fantastic day with many attractions including cruelty-free merchandise stalls from a variety of animal protection organisations, speakers, films, vegan cafe, cookery demonstration, FREE veggie food samples and recipes and lots more. This will be an exciting and unique event in Coventry, raising awareness of how everyone can live compassionate, healthy, ethical lifestyles and help to create a more caring society. FREE entry.



STALLS
A chance to stock up on animal-friendly books, chocolates, cosmetics, toiletries and clothes and meet lots of other caring people. For the really well organised, it's an opportunity to get your compassionate Christmas cards and presents well in advance.

Stalls already booked include the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research, Animal Aid, Viva!, the Captive Animals` Protection Society and Farm Animal Rescue Sanctuaries. For a full list of stallholders, details of their organisations and what they`ll be selling on the day, go to  http://www.coventryveggies.makessense.co.uk/articles/404.html

TALKS
A full day of talks on the theme of Teaching Compassion, including vegetarianism, factory farming, vivisection and animals in sport and entertainment. We are very pleased to have two experienced school speakers from Animal Aid - Diane Smith, who is the Midlands Regional Education Officer and Kate Fowler, who will be speaking on the links between cruelty to animals and violence towards people. There will also be a talk on the work of the Dr Hadwen Trust to replace animals in the medical research and a speaker from the Captive Animal Protection Trust.

The talks will include videos and question and answer sessions. They will be suitable for all adults and teenagers interested in animal protection issues but will be particularly useful for teachers and schoolchildren covering these subjects in their studies (Food Technology, Citizenship, English, Religious Studies, Philosophy and Science). More & more schools are now requesting school talks from groups such as Animal Aid and this will be a great opportunity to gather plenty of information for school projects etc as there will be masses of free literature and lots of experts to talk to. The talks will also be very useful for Youth Workers or anyone wanting to know more about humane education. You are welcome to come for just one talk or stop for the whole day. For a full timetable/programme of talks, go to  http://www.coventryveggies.makessense.co.uk/articles/405.html and info on each of the speakers, go to  http://www.coventryveggies.makessense.co.uk/articles/406.html

ADMISSION FREE - all welcome

We are delighted that the event has the backing of several well known celebrities, who have supplied us with quotes and photographs to go on our website. These celebs include the poet Benjamin Zephaniah, John Feldmann of punk rock band Goldfinger and the top barrister Michael Mansfield. To see the quotes, go to  http://www.coventryveggies.makessense.co.uk/articles/416.html
We would like to thank Shari, editor of Black Velvet Magazine (UK Independent Rock Zine) for her help in obtaining this celebrity support.  http://www.blackvelvetmagazine.com/

CAN YOU HELP???
This event is not a big vegan festival, we are not encouraging vast numbers of dedicated vegans/campaigners to come and scoff all the food and enjoy the many attractions!! The idea is primarily to encourage people that have yet to switch to a compassionate way of living(particularly local students, teachers, youth workers etc), those that need a little educating about how we can live in harmony with all life forms on this planet, and we intend to attract many hundreds of them!!!

An event of this scale requires an awful lot of volunteers to make it a success! We already have the support of many people who have pledged to help in a wide variety of ways, but we still need more! We would like to hear from you if you could offer any time during the day. Perhaps you could help set up tables, hand out leaflets in the city centre, wear an animal costume, hand out vegan food samples outside the venue, help in the kitchen, take photos/video footage of the event, help on the stalls or clear away afterwards etc etc. If you can help in any way, even if only for half an hour, please contact us on  cov.veggies@hotmail.com

"COMPASSION FOR HUMANS AND ANIMALS IS INDIVISIBLE, ALL LIFE IS ONE"

Coventry Veggies & Vegans
- e-mail: cov.veggies@hotmail.com
- Homepage: http://www.coventryveggies.makessense.co.uk/


Comments

Hide the following 16 comments

Dr Hadwen Trust

25.08.2006 09:06

Did you know that "Dr Hadwen" never believed in "alternatives"?He only believed in "abolition" of vivisection immediately.

I hope you know this already,but i doubt you don't,has vivisection been lessened any bit by this "Trust"--no!

I hope this fraudulently trust along with "FRAME" and "Gill Langley" financially liquidate out of existence.

Tim


Another Reusch-ite Conspiracist

25.08.2006 17:32

Yeah, that's right, these are all pro-vivisection front organisations run by paid infiltrators. Hans Reusch says so, so it MUST be true. Yawn :0(

For thiose who don't know, Reusch is a paranoid (Swiss?) anti-vivisection writer, author
of "Slaughter of the Innocent" and a number of other (in fairness, quite readable) books criticising
animal experiments on scientific grounds. His opinions have fallen on fertile soil in some sections of the animal rights movement, eg groups like British Anti-Vivisection Agency (not to be confused with BUAV) are strongly influenced by him.

Unfortunately, he ludicrously simplifies complex arguments - in effect, "no animal experiment, ever conducted, anywhere, at any time, by any experimenter, has ever provided any use whatsoever to human beings"

This is an opinion to which he is entitled. However, in Reusche's view, anyone who disagrees with him in the slightest is denounced as a "traitor" or more likely, as a "paid infiltrator". He has made something of a career of back-stabbing such high-profile and sincere activists as Jean Pink (founder of Animal Aid, who did much to promote Reusch's books in the 1970s when he was unknown in Britain) and Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation, the book credited by many as starting the modern philosophy of "animal rights".

In my opinion, Reusch's ego trip has caused immeasurable harm to, and infighting within, the animal rights / AV movement - if the vivisection industry DID want to pay someone to infiltrate and cause damage, they couldn't have chosen a better candidate.

Gregor Samsa


Peter Singer

25.08.2006 18:12

Hans Ruesch's books,particularly "Slaughter Of The Innocent",is not just about condemning vivisection on scientific grounds but also on moral grounds,for which a whole chapter is dedicated to it.His works,which "converted" many medical Doctors and Scientists like Professor Croce,were not only verbally attacked or dismissed by the "BUAV" and Swiss Ceiba Geigy employee(turned "anti vivisectionist") Gill Langley but also ignored by supposed "anti vivisection" organisations like NAVS.

Peter Singer's "Animal Liberation" endorses the "necessity" of vivisection saying "only a few contribute to medical research." Which one's could they be and how many is a "few"? Is he talking "percentages"?

Peter Singer's "animal rights" lecture tour was partly sponsored by the "Rockefeller Foundation" who own drug,chemical and oil companies and are big financial proponents of vivisection.Like Ruesch has previously said,Singer keeps the door permanently open to vivisection,only ever raising objection on "ethical" grounds",but implicitly sustaining vivisection as "scientific."

And how did Hans Ruesch stab Jean Pink in the back? Wasn't she the one who retired,and firmly supported, Ceiba Geigy employee, Gill Langley?

There are plenty of Scientists,Doctors,Surgeons and Researchers in his books that state that there never has been or ever will be,a "benefit" from vivisection.

1000 Doctors(and many more) Against Vivisection
Slaughter Of The Innocent
Naked Empress Or The Great Medical Fraud

Based on these works,and with the help of Professor Croce and other individual Italian Scientists,the Italian Parliament in the 1980s voted unamiously for a 3yr suspension of all animal experimentation;this was never enforced because of a change of Government who bowed to commerical interests.

From what i hear,no mainstream "anti vivisection" organisation like the "BUAV" reported this to their members.

Tim


Hans Ruesch

26.08.2006 18:05

Regarding the comments by Gregor Samsa: I presume the author means RUESCH, rather than Reusch, which is misspelt no less than five times. I also presume he means the British Anti-Vivisection ASSOCIATION, rather Agency, which I am co-founder of. Despite these mistakes it is reassuring to see that we are not to be confused with the BUAV!

One day my dearest wish is for someone to explain in simple terms why it is so hard for so many people to believe in the concept of infiltration. Surely even the most naive must realise that where huge industrial concerns are at risk infiltration of any perceived threat is employed in order to defend the huge profits at stake? And they do not come any bigger than those of the pharmaceutical industry.

It is my honest belief that had Ruesch's books been widely promoted and the contents acted upon in the late seventies by those whose job it is to do everything possible to try to end vivisection, the practice might well be a distant memory by now. However, the enemy has been given time and are now further entrenched more than ever.

As for Langley, her history - and that of the pathetic past actions of the big national 'anti-vivisection' societies - is well documented. Most of the all-important Ruesch material on these subjects - the 2 Bulletins and subsequent Foundation Reports - are available to read free of charge, starting at  http://www.bava.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/CIVISReports.html

See also The Enemy Within:  http://www.bava.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/enemy.html with some classic quotes from supposed 'anti-vivisectionsts'. Eg: "It's nonsense to say that animal experiments have never contributed to any medical advance . . . and if vivisection had never made a contribution to medicine . . ." - Gill Langley. So much for her fighting vivisection.

Needless to say it is ALL essential reading for those wondering just why vivisection has not been abolished.

Sincerely, Chris





Chris Pedler
- Homepage: http://www.bava.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/


sia ko jo

28.08.2006 12:44

Animal rights philosophy and ideology is based on falsehood and bad arguments, tedious moralisms and leads nowhere.
1) humans and animals are different categories. we have language and thought, animals dont.
2) there can be no equality between a human and a spider or a rat or a cat.
3) ideas of equality exist and are created by humanity, and they are then applied to the non human. so, the idea of animal rights comes out of a long history of legal works about rights of farmers, citizens, tenants etc, till now we can apply it to animals.
4) animals have no rights other than those recognised or give by a section of society, the state etc
5) if you say that humans are also animals, then this is true. but our species is distinguished by language and thought. furthermore,it is a characteristic of our species to eat other animals, and use nature and animals to our ends. human civilistation is built on farming, domestication animals etc.
5) there is no need to have uneccessary cruelty to animals, but at the same time, animal rights are not a serious political issue.
6) nature is there for our use, but we should make use of our power over nature wisely.
7) animal rights does not know itself and is not sure of whether it is left wing or right. it is apolitical in this case.
8) do serious politics, and forget this nonsense, Join a marxist group and try and stop the war on iran.
9) the workers need to be strong to defeat capitalism, they need meat!

animal rights not serious left wing politics


sai ko jo correct

28.08.2006 15:37

yes, the above comment by sai ko jo is correct. i have been involved with animal rights before and it really is a waste of time. it did not occur to me what a waste of time it was until i began thinking seriously about politics, and just being in touch with reality.... vegetarianism is impossible, even i a serious vegan for six years began to long for the taste of meat at christmas dinner. animal rights ideology is like an ascetic vegetarian sect, full of moralistic nonsense with which to judge everyone else, rich boys who can afford to eat organic food and buy soya milk... this is the truth of animal rights. the serious issue is the war on the islamic world, campaigning for animal rights is good, but get a grip!!!

jo the ex veggie


The Self worshipping humanists club

29.08.2006 11:41

Why are you on an "Animal Liberation" forum,if this is not "a serious issue" for you? Why are you wasting your "precious" time,when you could be saving your fellow humans who have "thought and language"?

Have you read any "animal rights" books? And i'm not talking about, Rockefeller employed, Peter Singer's books or ,vivisection propagadising,Tom Regans books, either.

Have you read "Introduction to animal rights:Your Child Or The Dog" by Law Professor, Gary Francione or "Animal Equality:Language and Liberation" by Psychologist, Joan Dunayer?

Have you heard of the silver back gorilla called "Koko" who communicates in American sign language to his human guardian?

You are your subsequentual,"ex veggie",say "we have thought"--...really! Then why is there global environmental castrophies,caused by man-made pollutions and "development",not being stopped to safe guard all planetary inhabitants? Are the "animals" destroying the planet,poisoning the rivers and soil,for which every being depends? Who has the real thought?.....oh its the self destructive,planetary terrorists.....homosapiens.
All of you self worshipping,christian heritaged,humanists could be gone tomorrow and the planet would be able to breathe again without your smog dispersing imperialist reign.


Tim


An added note

29.08.2006 11:54

"Animals" do not have to furfil a "humanness" criteria,in order to be respected.

The humaness criteria,for supposedly being equal and superior,is similar to the preceding past when black people were regarding as "property" by the legal system(who represented the economic interests of the state) who would only regard black people as "persons" and as having "rights" if they furfilled a criteria of "whiteness."

Tim


reply to tim

29.08.2006 15:06

Tim,

on the label humanist: yes, i am proud to be a humanist. i am not a christian or any kind or religious believer.
2) have i read anything apart from singer? yes, tho not all that you have mentioned. i will try and read them, but to be honest, at least singer is a philosopher and he has arguments. the others are totally lacking in arguments, and seem simply moralistic cliches about the suffering of animals. singer is your best guy, i wouldn't attack him.
3) why am i bothering to attack animal rights if i think it is worthless? precisely because it is worthless, and i think people like you are wasting you time on this while there is serious political work to be done, ie stopping the war on iran, racism etc
4) of course animals are not messing up the planet, we humans are.... we need a political solution to this, not some moralistic feely nonsense that will achieve nothing.
5) it is totally incorrect to compare racism and animal rights? why? because all humans are human, that is they share language, thought, and can breed with one another. furthermore, it is clear that there is really nothing called race, but only different human phenotypes or characteristics. we cannot breed with animals,nor do we share language or thought.how do you say to a cat " you and i are equal" in a way that it would understand. you cannot.
6) you also are 'humanist' as you cannot get outside to a non human view of the world. such a view is a pretend view.

7) eat meat!! it is good for you.

sai ko jo


anti human animal rights

29.08.2006 15:16

Tim and friends,
i seem to gather from you posts, correct me if i am wrong, to hold something similar to the deep ecology of earth first!, the kind of belief that says it is of small consequence if millions of humans die from starvation and war, as it is a way for the planet to regulate itself from the plague of humanity.... you guys are malthusians and not marxists. you have an ascetic anti human pseudo religious moral creed, with next to no argumentation, and a wierd distorted world view in which you try and speak from the viewpoint of nature itself. your own posts are totally confused and you have nothing apart fom moral outrage that people mistreat animals. animal rights is not serious politics and is a waste of time.

sai ko jo


Pub philosophers go home

29.08.2006 20:55


“A tiny group of activists succeeding where Karl Marx, the Baader-Meinhof gang and the Red Brigades failed.”
— Characterization of SHAC (Animal Rights group) by the UK’s Financial Times

Animal Rights groups obviously p*ss the Marxists right off cos all the Marxists do is poorly argued pub philosophy (see previous posts) rather than actually get out there and change anything for the better.

As "left wingers", the previous posters might like to think about the workers being encouraged by the animal abusers of the world to consume crap food that's gonna knock years off their lives, then selling them the pills to pop for the rest of their lives to make them "better" (apart from the unpredicted side effects, obviously). Animal abusers always end up abusing people too. You choose whose side you want to be on.

WeAreAllAnimals


Do I prove my love of humanity by hating animals then?

29.08.2006 22:40

Sai ko Jo, following your (absolutely absurd) train of thought, if people who dislike animal cruelty are natural misanthropists and dislike humanity, do I then prove a love of humanity by hating animals?

Or perhaps if I love animals and care for them, then this means ipso facto that I dislike my own children, or care less for their welfare.

The points made by sai ko jo, about animal lovers hating humanity is part of an old (and stupid) argument brought up in the House of Lords some years ago, and is wholly redundant.

I am not affilated with any animal rights group, nor have I been on any protest, but I love animals and I send a lot of my money to children in the Third World. You probably do not.

"Where you find people who are hard and cruel to animals, these people will also be cruel and show no compassion to their fellow man."
Saint Francis of Assissi.

Badger


reply to various above

30.08.2006 11:01

Tim + friends:

i do not say animals should be treated badly, only that they are not equal to humans. I am against the unecessary cruelty to animals..... this is a fact taken for granted. as for the charge of pub philosophy: i am not to comment, but i cannot support something unless i see what it is trying to do and what the aim of it is. calling names does not convince, and shows your own utter lack of logic. this is what i am asking: in what way are animals (spiders, cats, dogs, sheep etc) 'equal' to humans and so deserve the same respect as a human. please answer. I think you have no theory at all, apart from singer, and it is just based on shallow rich boy sentimentalism. as for animal rights 'direct action' as opposed to marxist talking, you have a point but this does not mean that all 'direct action' should be supported. i.e. medicines that try and cure cancer and can save the lives of human beings maybe should be tested on rats.... as for the charge of anti human, this has nothing to do with the house of lords, but with earth first! and its love of malthus, to the extent of having stickers saying "malthus was right" i.e there are too many human beings. it is from this stance that i say that 'animal rights' is a misanthropic anti human creed that from its fake 'neutral' viewpoint puts humanity on the same level as insects, while forgetting that you yourself are human. if you guys want to think more clearly, eat meat!!! (furthermore, no one has answered in animal rights is left wing or right wing, some of us remember the unfortunate green anarchist magazine). Please replyif you can......

sai ko jo


love animals, hate yer kids

30.08.2006 11:10

loving humanity does not mean hating yer kids, nor does loving animals mean hating humanity. no, but the explicit ideology of animal rights groups, ie deep ecology, is anti human. (see murray bookchin's criticism of deep ecology). liking or disliking animals is not quite the issue, the issue is what role does humanity have to play in yr ideology and why is protecting the man made 'rights' of animals so important??? let me be more clear, do you agree as with some earth firsters that famine in africa is ok, as there are too many humans on the earth??? surely, this is madness. but if you do not believe this, then please tell me what you believe??? my experience with animal rights groups is that it is not a real issue, any more than fox hunting, and that animal rights ideology is the pet hobby of some rich white boys from england who have never seen or experienced human suffering but are sensitive to the suffering of their pet cat....

sai ko jo


I still can't understand your logic I am afraid.

30.08.2006 13:20

"but the explicit ideology of animal rights groups, ie deep ecology, is anti human"

This remark is absolute gibberish.

Stalin, who murdered 22 million people through collectivised agriculture and the gulags, was a meat eater and a keen huntsman.The Bolsheviks, champions of so called humanity in thier marxist ideology, not only murdered people by the millions, they also wiped out the Caucasian buffalo, persecuted wolves like never before and almost made the Amur tiger extinct, but also polluted Russia to a horrific extent, conducting atom bomb tests in siberia, massive logging and mining schemes, the destruction of the Aral Sea and other environmental disasters that continue to plague Russia to this day.

Trueman, who authorised the bomb being dropped on Japan in 1945, was ardently pro vivisection.

Charles Darwin, an avid enthusiast and devotee of Malthus (whom you refer to above), was a vivisectionist.

Yes there are too many people on the planet,this is commented upon by people who are anti animal welfare, we need the resources of three planet earths to give the present day population of the planet the standard of livingthat we are accustomed to here in the WEst. I have yet to meet a person concerned with animal welfare though who says that the vast majority of people in the world should therefore be culled in order to attain an environmental and population stablisiation. Why do you feel that animal welfare people are by their very nature misanthropic? Please show me some real facts, not mere anecdotal evidence and personal prejudice, to back up this claim, as I still cannot understand your logic. People who hate humanity can also hate animals too. As I said, do I prove a love of humanity by hating animals or something?

Hindus have respect for all life, human and animal, as do millions of Buddhists. Where do they stand in your scheme of things?How do you account for their beliefs?

Badger


what logic?

16.09.2006 11:34

well??

Sai Ko Jo


Links