Reply to Re: Stop the guinea pig torture in Newchurch
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Ok, I take back everything I said about the psychological problems. I'm sorry, I shouldn't do that. I'm a dilettant psychologist, but I try to help people. Though, this really wasn't the time nor place. On closer inspection, you guys are pretty normal though (you too Chrispy 
And you're right Allikitten (opinion or not!) about me saying I was right, I take that back too, so..
ANIMAL STUFF
I would like to say that, after reading lots of stuff, it is my opinion that animal testing is unnecessary and obviously cruel. So what did I read?
These PETA Fact Sheets may be biased, but facts are facts and they raise some intresting points. (Read the "Alternatives: Testing Without Torture" part and the "Health Charities: Helping or Hurting" parts.
This U. S. Food and Drug Administration page strongly urges cosmetic manufacturers to conduct whatever tests are appropriate to establish that their cosmetics are safe, allowing animals tests.
The Americans for Medical Progress
are pretty biased themselves. They make a point, but probably don't even know about other ways of testing medicines.
This site is kinda hippy but still states that "However, more and more professionals believe that animal testing may delay the development instead because it may provide inaccurate and mistaken information. Already in foreign countries, many doctors and scientists have formed associations acting against animal testing", which is still correct.
World Chiropractic Alliance reports a story about a Nobel Prize winner who developed a technology he says he says could eliminate the need for animal testing.
Anyway, there's too many links for me to post here. So, on the cosmetics side: I think the PETA list of companies that don't do at's (shorter) proves that they are not necesarry and that other companies are probably money-hungry (dang Unilever and Proctor & Gamble!)
As a marketeer, I'd oppose to animals tests in companies I work for (PETA says non-animal tests are cheaper, we'll see..) But letter-writing campagnes or picketing won't do much, Alli
On the medical site: Lots of progress has been made thanks to animal testing, but these days, I can imagine doing without (considering the many alternatives.
NON ANIMAL STUFF
Anyway, Rey, about the so called impact of the Arab world. Would you have said that the arab world had an impact on you before 9/11? I think it's safe to say no (correct me if I'm wrong) because the US govermnent hadn't started their mass-marketing yet then.
I saw this (unbiased) documentary yesterday on belgian tv detailing how the US goverment fooled the majority of the American population into thinking a war on Iraq Arab was necessary. (I know it's over, Allikitten, you said somewhere we should let go and focus on the future, but they really lied to you guys and you shouldn't just take that)
Your goverment pulled everything out of the closet:
"Secret" documents detailling Iraq's nuclear plans (one based on a student's paper, some even forged), the CIA even knew that some documents were forged, but they didn't act.
A tape they hadn't been able to translate yet was presented as crucial evidence as proof of Osama's ties with Iraq.
A very disturbing fact was that immedeatly after the 9/11 bombing, the Pentagon received word to investigate all possible ties between Iraq and Osama, it was the perfect gift for the Bush-administration
And there was this fake debate in the Senator where senator Kenndy seemed to critise(but only vere barely) the idea of war but buckled down, knowing he couldn't openly express his anti-war stance (like he did 3 months before that)
My point is (and maybe someday you guys will know it too) that that war was totally unprovoked, Saddam wasn't planning squat, no matter what they made you believe.
I see the BBC and the British government are even fighting about how the "evidence" was presented, interesting.
Couple that with the goverment completely controlling the media. There are no programs that critise the government, are there? Oh wait, I forget, some people like Micheal Moore dare, but get cancelled soon after that. Anyway, they turned the war into a bizarre reality show, spouting nothing but good news. And CNN even fired that one reporter because expressed some criticism towards the US goverment, how's that for censorship?
So... The war is over, no WMD's have been found (fat chance) and after 9/11, there haven't been any new terrorist strikes aimed the the USA. There never was an Arab threat, it was just (and still is) a cover-up for a war on Iraq (which we all know was about oil).
So, Rey (if you're still there) could you please explain the Arab threat and it's impact on your life to me?
Btw, genocide, world hunger and poverty, however awful, DO have NO effect on your life, you live on the wealthy side, remember?
Anyway, Rey, you'll find this interesting, you do know about the Genocide-law belgium used to have (a week ago)? It allowed for all kinds of war victims to prosecute their agressors in Belgium (we formed this (never before seen) law in response to Africa's genocides). But then someone filed a lawsuit against Powell, Rummfeld and Bush! Then the nasty Americans made us change our law so only belgian victims could file a lawsuit and they could go free. Now the law is pretty useless. Go USA!
Anyway, GP-torture should both be adressed simultaneously
Also, I never said things like Genocide shouldn't be on TV, I was just explaining why they are not on TV, thinking as a TV producer. And when I say not on TV, I mean not on TV in the USA, cause they do still televise injustice like that over here. I also think it should be on tv I even watch that crap (like documentary about the USA and such
Sorry if I offended someone, it's been some hours since I started writing this and I don't remember what I wrote.. there'll probably be some spelling mistakes too
Peace out!
And you're right Allikitten (opinion or not!) about me saying I was right, I take that back too, so..
ANIMAL STUFF
I would like to say that, after reading lots of stuff, it is my opinion that animal testing is unnecessary and obviously cruel. So what did I read?
These PETA Fact Sheets may be biased, but facts are facts and they raise some intresting points. (Read the "Alternatives: Testing Without Torture" part and the "Health Charities: Helping or Hurting" parts.
This U. S. Food and Drug Administration page strongly urges cosmetic manufacturers to conduct whatever tests are appropriate to establish that their cosmetics are safe, allowing animals tests.
The Americans for Medical Progress
are pretty biased themselves. They make a point, but probably don't even know about other ways of testing medicines.
This site is kinda hippy but still states that "However, more and more professionals believe that animal testing may delay the development instead because it may provide inaccurate and mistaken information. Already in foreign countries, many doctors and scientists have formed associations acting against animal testing", which is still correct.
World Chiropractic Alliance reports a story about a Nobel Prize winner who developed a technology he says he says could eliminate the need for animal testing.
Anyway, there's too many links for me to post here. So, on the cosmetics side: I think the PETA list of companies that don't do at's (shorter) proves that they are not necesarry and that other companies are probably money-hungry (dang Unilever and Proctor & Gamble!)
As a marketeer, I'd oppose to animals tests in companies I work for (PETA says non-animal tests are cheaper, we'll see..) But letter-writing campagnes or picketing won't do much, Alli
On the medical site: Lots of progress has been made thanks to animal testing, but these days, I can imagine doing without (considering the many alternatives.
NON ANIMAL STUFF
Anyway, Rey, about the so called impact of the Arab world. Would you have said that the arab world had an impact on you before 9/11? I think it's safe to say no (correct me if I'm wrong) because the US govermnent hadn't started their mass-marketing yet then.
I saw this (unbiased) documentary yesterday on belgian tv detailing how the US goverment fooled the majority of the American population into thinking a war on Iraq Arab was necessary. (I know it's over, Allikitten, you said somewhere we should let go and focus on the future, but they really lied to you guys and you shouldn't just take that)
Your goverment pulled everything out of the closet:
"Secret" documents detailling Iraq's nuclear plans (one based on a student's paper, some even forged), the CIA even knew that some documents were forged, but they didn't act.
A tape they hadn't been able to translate yet was presented as crucial evidence as proof of Osama's ties with Iraq.
A very disturbing fact was that immedeatly after the 9/11 bombing, the Pentagon received word to investigate all possible ties between Iraq and Osama, it was the perfect gift for the Bush-administration
And there was this fake debate in the Senator where senator Kenndy seemed to critise(but only vere barely) the idea of war but buckled down, knowing he couldn't openly express his anti-war stance (like he did 3 months before that)
My point is (and maybe someday you guys will know it too) that that war was totally unprovoked, Saddam wasn't planning squat, no matter what they made you believe.
I see the BBC and the British government are even fighting about how the "evidence" was presented, interesting.
Couple that with the goverment completely controlling the media. There are no programs that critise the government, are there? Oh wait, I forget, some people like Micheal Moore dare, but get cancelled soon after that. Anyway, they turned the war into a bizarre reality show, spouting nothing but good news. And CNN even fired that one reporter because expressed some criticism towards the US goverment, how's that for censorship?
So... The war is over, no WMD's have been found (fat chance) and after 9/11, there haven't been any new terrorist strikes aimed the the USA. There never was an Arab threat, it was just (and still is) a cover-up for a war on Iraq (which we all know was about oil).
So, Rey (if you're still there) could you please explain the Arab threat and it's impact on your life to me?
Btw, genocide, world hunger and poverty, however awful, DO have NO effect on your life, you live on the wealthy side, remember?
Anyway, Rey, you'll find this interesting, you do know about the Genocide-law belgium used to have (a week ago)? It allowed for all kinds of war victims to prosecute their agressors in Belgium (we formed this (never before seen) law in response to Africa's genocides). But then someone filed a lawsuit against Powell, Rummfeld and Bush! Then the nasty Americans made us change our law so only belgian victims could file a lawsuit and they could go free. Now the law is pretty useless. Go USA!
Anyway, GP-torture should both be adressed simultaneously
Also, I never said things like Genocide shouldn't be on TV, I was just explaining why they are not on TV, thinking as a TV producer. And when I say not on TV, I mean not on TV in the USA, cause they do still televise injustice like that over here. I also think it should be on tv I even watch that crap (like documentary about the USA and such
Sorry if I offended someone, it's been some hours since I started writing this and I don't remember what I wrote.. there'll probably be some spelling mistakes too
Peace out!
