Tim Blair plugs PETA

In view of Nicholas Gruen’s very sensible post below about extreme animal liberationists, I feel it’s my duty to draw readers’ attention to an alliance that many may find surprising perhaps even disturbing.   Uber-Right Wing Death Beast Tim Blair is promoting animal lib organisation PETA on his blog.   Just in case  Tim’s current sidebar Blogads selection gets changed before you have a chance to read it, here’s what it says:

Pink’s New PETA Video

Pink, like anyone with a heart, refuses to wear fur & often opts for pleather. Now, she’s joined PETA’s campaign to expose the horrendous cruelty in the wool industry.

In the video Pink calls for a boycott of Australian wool until the wool industries ‘sadistic’ practices are stopped.

Well, at least they put sadistic in scare quotes.   I’m expecting Tim to arrive in the Troppo comment box any moment and condemn Nicholas’s disgracefully ‘species-ist’ discrimination against non-human animals.   Alternatively, he might review whether the modest income from Blogads is worth having his site used to promote this sort of air-headed mungbean crap.   But do mungbeans defecate? And do plants scream?   I think I need a big juicy medium rare T-bone steak.

PS I refuse to wear fur too, but it has nothing to do with having a heart.   You don’t see much fur being worn in Darwin, especially  in the wet season.   If I was living in Melbourne I might well  acquire and wear  a mink waistcoat as a matter of principle.  

About Ken Parish

Ken Parish is a legal academic, with research areas in public law (constitutional and administrative law), civil procedure and teaching & learning theory and practice. He has been a legal academic for almost 20 years. Before that he ran a legal practice in Darwin for 15 years and was a Member of the NT Legislative Assembly for almost 4 years in the early 1990s.
This entry was posted in Uncategorised. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Tim Blair plugs PETA

  1. Steve Edney says:

    From memory he’s been called on this before with previous PETA muelsing adds etc. As I recall he was happy to advertise for whoever paid.

  2. Rob says:

    Tim has sent himself up for running PETA ads in the past.

  3. There’s a lot of face fur worn in Darwin from what I can see.

  4. Darlene says:

    Sending oneself up is an easy way to get around taking money for a cause that you don’t believe in. Hmmmmmm. How about an advertisement supporting the Lakemba Mosque?

    Pink rocks, but I’m a meat eater and I’d probably wear a fur if it was cold enough. Frankly, she’s entitled to her opinion and she’s far more interesting than most pop puppets. She’s got soul (or a soul), which is more than can be said for some.

  5. Yobbo says:

    It’s great that PETA advertise on Blair’s blog, because it means that they are just throwing their money away.

  6. I pass no comment on Tim Blair in this comment, and I presume the ‘air-headed mungbean crap’ remark is just Sam Kekovic style ‘satire’. However, while I don’t like Pink (or her music anyway), mulesing is much worse – extreme cruelty justifed by people saying that not doing it is worse, which would be OK if there was no alternative. (unless they are justifying it by saying people who complain about inflicting cruelty on animals are just spouting ‘air-headed mungbean crap’, which would be even worse). The fact that there is an alternative, but some in the industry refuse to use it because it costs too much money means that encouraging a consumer boycott is totally justified.

    Even if you disagree with my view, it astonishes me that I hear barely a squeak from the usual defenders of free speech about the Wool Industry paying millions of taxpayer dollars to lawyers for the last couple of years trying to gag people who want to say what I have just said (including everyday Australian activists, not just well-off foreign groups like PETA) (and even though they might have a fair bit of dough, I’d also be surprised if PETA gets anything like the public funds the Australian wool industry gets to ‘promote’ itself, which it then uses on multi-million dollar court cases trying to gag people from expressing their beliefs.)

  7. Yobbo says:

    However, while I don’t like Pink (or her music anyway), mulesing is much worse – extreme cruelty justifed by people saying that not doing it is worse, which would be OK if there was no alternative.

    You have no idea what you are talking about and are as much an air-headed mungbean as PETA are.

    We’ve already been through this hundreds of times and neither you nor PETA has been able to provide an example of a single workable alternative.

    The fact that you believe there is one (but just can’t think of it right now) but farmers won’t use it (and therefore are sadists) is just proof that you are a run-of-the-mill moonbat.

    Please leave Australian farmers alone. People that work for a living don’t have time to deal with the uninformed brayings of Urban environmentalists.

    Oh, and post details of people being “gagged”. Here’s me betting that being “gagged” means being prohibited from throwing blood on people and the like.

    Air-headed mungbean is too generous a description for people like you.

  8. Link says:

    Er . . . how about crutching? We’re about to crutch thousands, and not because we are animal liberationists here, but because we know that many wool buyers will not buy the wool from sheep who have been subjected to the barbaric practise of museling.

  9. Link says:

    You reckon farmers are the only ones who work for a living? Unlike urban environmentalists who miserably, trudge off to their office blocks for 8-10 hours incarceration or hospitality workers who really do slave in outrageous extremes of temperature often under horrendous conditions and mostly for undeserving gits.

    From my observations in the bush, farmers have a pretty good, pretty easy life, doing what they like when they like. A bit of fencing over there, a bit of a morning’s mustering over here and best knock-off when it gets too hot. (for the stock of course). This myth about the farmer (bloke) who works like a dog is just that–a myth. Nice try though at trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes and perpetuate this fallacy. Farmers have a good life and probably more autonomy than most workers anywhere. Farmers have lost their sacred cow status, stop flogging a dead horse.

  10. Patrick says:

    Hospitality’s easy enough; especially in Australia. And I speak from literally years of experience. It is hot enough; especially in some kitchens, but so what?

  11. Yobbo says:

    Andrew Bartlett doesn’t work for a living. He’s a politician.

    We crutch AND mules. You have no idea what you’re on about. Crutching is not an alternative to mulesing. Unless you are crutching your sheep every month, they are still being flowblown. Congratulations on condemning your animals to a painful, sickening death.

    From my observations in the bush, farmers have a pretty good, pretty easy life, doing what they like when they like. A bit of fencing over there, a bit of a morning’s mustering over here and best knock-off when it gets too hot. (for the stock of course). This myth about the farmer (bloke) who works like a dog is just that

  12. Yobbo says:

    Total number of sheep

    Total breed strike cases per season (animals surviving)

    Number

    Percentage


    1999-2000

    Control sheep

    58

    14

    24%

    Breech Strike Prevention method

    66

    4

    6.1%

    Surgically mulesed sheep

    65

    1

    1.5%


    2000-2001

    Control sheep

    55

    25

    46%

    Breech Strike Prevention method

    61

    8

    13.1%

    Surgically mulesed sheep

    63

    5

    7.9%

    Source: CSIRO Livestock Industries

  13. Armagnac Esq says:

    I would have cancelled Pink’s visa just as she was touching down on the runway with her millions worth of gear half way across the Pacific. Spoilt little rich patronising America-uber-alles brat.

  14. Yobbo says:

    Yes, let’s ban rich people from Australia. Sterling idea sir.

  15. tim says:

    They’re an odd bunch, my PETA friends; the more I mock and ridicule them, the more money they give me. This latest ad is the most expensive so far. Also, last year PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk took the trouble to personally send me a PETA DVD narrated by Alec Baldwin (I’ve tried using it to slice veal; alas, like Baldwin himself, it isn’t very sharp).

    Seems it’s PETA’s ambition to convert me and my readers to their cause. Hopefully this will take decades, and cost many millions of dollars.

    Regarding Ken’s notion that I’m “promoting PETA”, I’d point out – as if to a child – that PETA simply bought advertising space at my site. This doesn’t indicate the approval Ken suggests. Advertising at my site is non-ideological. So is my blogroll, where I link to several groups and individuals I disagree with.

    One of them is called Club Troppo. Those dopes even get their “promotion” for free!

  16. Ken Parish says:

    Tim

    You might like to read what I actually wrote. I didn’t say that you were promoting PETA. What I said was: “he might review whether the modest income from Blogads is worth having his site used to promote this sort of air-headed mungbean crap” i.e. allowing your site to be used by advertisers (in this case PETA) to promote themselves. I presume you wouldn’t deny that PETA IS using the advertising on your site for the purpose of promoting itself and its views?? Nor that you are allowing your site to be used for that purpose?

  17. Link says:

    We backline twice a year for flies and lice. Seems to work, flyblown sheep are rare.

  18. Yobbo says:

    Ken: blogads doesn’t pay per clicks as far as I know, its based purely on readership.

  19. Yobbo says:

    1.5% rare or 25% rare? Vetinary tests tell a different story than you, Link.

  20. tim says:

    Ken,

    You wrote: “Tim Blair is promoting animal lib organisation PETA on his blog.” Incorrect; PETA is advertising at my site. There’s a difference.

    It’s a flat fee (about $US200 in this case, I think; I’ve spent most of it on diamond-bladed penguin mincers). Payment not related to clicks. Also not related to readership. I simply set a (very low) fee and advertisers do the rest.

  21. Patrick says:

    Don’t get too upset about Tim B’s bad faith, Ken, he might have just read your heading…and third sentence…

    I am quite like a lot of your stuff, and so my cognitive biases should work in your favour, but I was pretty taken aback when I read your post by the strength of the impression that you actually thought that Tim B, personally, was promoting PETA.

  22. Armagnac Esq says:

    Each to their own Yob, I’m more interested in her abuse of wealth and power under the influence of chronic ignorance than the mere fact that she cares about animals, an agenda which, if pursued within reasonable bounds I’m not adverse to.

    Somehow I think Joe Bloggs from Arkansas criticising Australian Farmers from the back of his trailer isn’t quite as damaging.

  23. Yobbo:

    We’ve already been through this hundreds of times and neither you nor PETA has been able to provide an example of a single workable alternative.

    No, you just don’t like the alternative, so you pretend it doesn’t exist – even when it’s farmers who are saying otherwise. and then follow it up with lame abuse of anyone who thinks otherwise. Persumably you’re also happy for millions of dollars farmers’ money (as well as taxpayer’s money) to pay inner-city elites to run drawn out court cases against PETA and Australians who disagree with you as well.

    You can pretend you’re the only person that works for a living if you like, just like you pretend there are no alternatives. Next you’ll say the federal government is being honest in saying they have improved animal welfare standards for Australian live sheep exports to Egypt.

    It’s always easier to say nothing when you know it will just bring out the prejudices and cliches – particulary when it gives people an excuse to be dismissive about everything else one says – but I prefer to actually look at the facts.

    And as far as the advert on Tim Blair’s site goes – it’s probably not the most fertile audience, but I wouldn’t rule out them getting a few converts from the curious or open-minded that click on the advert. (there mightn’t be many open minded folk amongst the commenters, but I’m sure there’s some amongst the readers). PETA’s not always my cup of tea – they can also be guilty of too much hyperbole and not enough fact – but they do have a way of grabbing people’s attention. Of course, anyone who does find themselves agreeing with PETA on any issue is hardly likely to open their mouths on Tim’s site, and perhaps not on this one either.

  24. tim says:

    “Not the most fertile audience”? On the contrary; my audience breeds like PETA-protected rabbits!

  25. Yobbo says:

    No, you just don’t like the alternative

    Again Andrew, what alternative? Both the Vetinary association of Australian AND the RSPCA accept that there is no current alternative to surgical mulesing to control flystrike.

    What is their Agenda? We all know what PETA’s is.

    Persumably you’re also happy for millions of dollars farmers’ money (as well as taxpayer’s money) to pay inner-city elites to run drawn out court cases against PETA and Australians who disagree with you as wel

    Actually I would be far happier if they just ignored PETA.

    Next you’ll say the federal government is being honest in saying they have improved animal welfare standards for Australian live sheep exports to Egypt.

    To be honest I find it very difficult to get worked up about the short-term comfort of sheep who are on their way to be slaughtered. And since my family actually is involved in this industry and they would like to keep actually earning a living, I put their concerns firmly ahead of the few hairy-armpitted ferals who turn up to protest against it.

    but I prefer to actually look at the facts.

    The only relevant fact here is that you’ve never seen a market you didn’t want to intervene in.

  26. Yobbo, it would help if you responded to what people actually say and do, rather than respond to a cookie-cutter stereotype of who you think they are. Still, its preferable to trying to use the courts (and public money) to try to silence people solely because they say you things you disagree with – an approach I’m pleased to see you don’t support. Also good that you don’t just try to lie about the reality of the live export trade, as the government and industyry body are prone to do. It’s much better to argue about competing or conflicting principles than just dismiss opposing views through fibs or abuse.

  27. Yobbo says:

    US pop singer Pink has backed down from her call to boycott Australian wool over animal cruelty claims, admitting she failed to fully research the issue.

    If only our elected officials were as fair-minded and reasonable as pop singers.

    And I’m still waiting to hear your mulesing alternative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.