January 19, 2006
PETA Pammie Picked a Pack of De-beaked Peckers

The Chicken War continues. Beaks break, feathers fly, and the case is piquantly curious. One always hesitates to criticize a female. "Pick on Pammie? How improprietous!" But, no. The peremptory peck was Pam's. Even the feminist sites can't say it any other way. Pamela Anderson has 'exposed' herself to the ridiculous, ridiculously.

PETA Pam has attempted to use her artificial sex appeal to denigrate one of America's great success stories of honest, hard work and entrepreneurism. She has called for the removal of the bust of Colonel Harland Sanders, creator of Kentucky Fried Chicken, from the state capitol building at Frankfurt, Kentucky. Of course the governor, Ernie Fletcher, will never remove the statue, as spokesmen Jodi Whitaker relays, as well as the PR secretary at the governor's office which BadEagle contacted. The possibility that the KFC corporation is abusing poltry is a paltry perception, considering the cirumstances.


PETA Pam, the intellectual, complete with glasses, struggling to hold
her lips straight. And now age, and the seasoned thinker.

Moving further into the surreal, we notice more irony. What about Tyson Foods? Tyson chickens seem completely flown over in Pammie's PETA chicken attack. Yet the Tyson chicken history is similar to KFC, and by 1998 the John Tyson's corporation was the top poltry producer in the world. Tyson has been protested, not because of mishandling chickens, but employees. (The $23.4 billion food industry put their chicken workers lowest on the pay scale.) Why has PETA Pam passed by Tyson?


PETA Pam, possibly "off camera"? Then definitely "on camera," as close to real
fashion as possible. Very lovely, except for the tatoo.

Is it because Tyson hires so many American Negroes? Al Sharpton thought so, until he found out that 12 Negro employees were suing over nasty and blatant racism in a Tyson workplace.

Is it because Don Tyson (CEO of Tyson) smuggled cocaine in the rectums of chickens? (See, "The Dixie Mafia," in The Secret Life of Bill Clinton [Regnery, 1997], by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard). Is it because Tyson Foods, which owns 25% of the chicken market, was a big donor to the Clinton machine? Company pilot Josepsh Hendrickson allegedly carried cash deliveries to Governor Clinton. (In 1978, Hillary had a brokerage account that went from $1,000 to $99,537.)

PETA Pam would rather hit up the ol' Southern Colonel, rather than stir the real hen's nest. But it can't be because Tyson doesn't contribute to Republican campaigns. Tyson, KFC, and Perdue chicken companies all give heavily to the Red. (Maybe Tyson modified its former position, rather than suffer further federal investigations.)

In a Dalian meltdown, the irony morphs yet further. Pam protests the pecker's beak-removal (see video) because it disallows the natural pecking order of fowl. Naturally, one apparenlty lip-enhanced person would be very conscious of 'lip' removal. But that's not the real irony. It's the fact that white women seem to think that fattening their lips makes them more sexually attractive, while black men think removing fat lips makes them attractive. Or is this an illusion?


Puffy Angela Jolie, and a couple of unusually thin, stiff upper-lip black men, Lester Holt and Anthony Williams

But a chicken without it's beak hardly involves any more cruelty than de-clawing a house cat, or neutering a male dog. Now, PETA is outraged at stem cell research with animal cells, but not on humans. And PETA is completely unconcerned about human abortion on demand. So, we're left with Pamela, with fake lips, fake breasts, and no doubt fake claws (finger nails). This it PETA Pam, who picked a pack of de-beaked peckers to pick on. That is, she's picking on the de-peckers, the pluckers, and the pushers. And she picked on ol' Colonel Sanders. That's over the line.


Posted by David Yeagley at January 19, 2006 05:05 PM
Comments

OFF-TOPIC:

Bodvar, right on about focusing on something as silly as Pam's issue, when more & more people should be focusing on what happened to the little girl in New York that was beaten to death by her mother's husband!

It's sad how the American people have become used to & therefore anesthetized to such abuse. Leastways, that's the way I see it. Just seems that less & less coverage is being focused on such matters, judging by the most recent one in New York. Also, I spoke with my mom about this the other day, and she said "that goes on everywhere, nothing new". I rest my case.

Nadine

P.S. Sad, too, how child abuse only hits the huge media spotlight about once every 20 yrs. (e.g. Lisa Steinberg in 1987).

Posted by: Nadine on January 20, 2006 07:50 PM

Let me start by completely avoiding the subject of lips, mentioned racially or otherwise. Angelina is beautiful to look at, that's undeniable, lips and all. Ove as an actress and apparently rudderless in her lifestyle (and the lifestyle her adopted children enjoy), but pretty.

By the way...think you've got enough alliteration in the first paragraph of this essay. " 'Pick on Pammie? How improprietous!' But, no. The peremptory peck was Pam's."...say that five times fast!

As to PETA, they seem nothing more serious than frat boys and s, acting out for attention. They want us all to become vegans to reinforce and validate decisions they've made for their own lives. They're well financed, and SEEM altruistic. That is, they look noble until, as Dr. Y points out, you try to nail them on ACTUAL issues of suffering and cruely such as abortion, or you try to pin them down about their selectivity in choice of targets (KFC v. Tyson). They're political pikers.

Tyson, by the way, would be a tough customer to take on. Regardless of who gets their political contributions, they are VERY well financed, and can afford both stellar lawyers and determined security personnel should PETA-persons try to do anything at their factories or distribution centers. If you don't like dodgy software, take on some garage programmer. Don't take on Microsoft, who have money and no problems using it against any enemy which may surface. You don't like war? Go try to shake down Halliburton or McDonell-Douglas. Their lawyers will have you living in a refrigerator carton in no time.

As a matter of fact, declawing cats IS cruel. It isn't a matter of removing not their claws but the entire end segment of their digit, akin to removing a person's fingertip to the first knuckle. It makes it impossible, for instance, to hunt, feed themselves, or defend themselves should they go a'wandering from home. Changing the shape of dogs ears for cosmetic reasons (e.g., those pointy ears you used to see on Great Danes and Boxers) is cruel and painful, as is docking tails. Likewise, de-beaking chickens is cruel. It's done with a hot iron like a soldering iron, and must freak out the bird no end.

That said, some folks can't have clawed cats around their furniture, etc. At that point, I'd have to point out that it's time to reconsider having a cat, if it's OK with you to have to keep your furniture and make the cat suffer for it.

That said, those pointy dog ears are (or were) show and breed standards. That's changing, thankfully.

That said, neutering isn't cruel, and is fairly necessary given they number of companion animals we see today. It's even mandatory when getting critters from modern shelters and humane societies today to have them neutered first...a practice made so by those very animal-centric "do-gooders" who populate PETA...and good on 'em!

Finally, cruelty aside, when you have 10,000 or more of the stupidest, meanest, and most opportunistic birds God created in limited spaces, as most poultry farms do, you're actually acting in the birds interests to take their primary weapon away (their beak). There are a minority of birds who're downright psychotic when it comes to pecking other birds to , as any poultry farmer can tell you. Not only did farmers lose valuable birds to this street-gang-style behavior, the birds themselves would die horribly. I've seen it.

PETA and their sympathizers have no grounding in agriculture, little grounding in democracy, and scarcely any grasp of the practical aspects of life. They pick their fights to draw attention no to their causes (veganism, avoiding dairy products, livestock "rights", etc.) but to themselves. They're clowns...and there's nothing sadder than a clown who doesn't get that he's a clown.

It's just amazing how many people in our society line up to shout abuse at someone who mistreats a puppy, but yawn expansively when, as happened recently, a little is d and her abuser gets 60 days in jail...or no jail time at all, as happened more recently. Folks wring their hands and say how unfortunate it is, but do nothing when a little is beaten to and left on the bathroom floor for the crime of eating her yoghurt of her irresponsible mother's current psychopathic squeeze. Judges huff and bluster when you even hint that you'll review restrictions on their discretion in cases involving children...while proving that that discretion is routinely used to take it easy on habitual rapists and (in some cases) , as in the cases in Florida, the Dakotas, and elsewhere.

We can get all misty over the fate of our food but not over the young of our own species. That's suicidal.

-- B

Posted by: Bodvar on January 20, 2006 02:50 PM

interesting inspector. so they dont like humans?
Its strange this peta thing. The two peta people I knew have since moved to sweden. maybe its soemthing to do with child hood stuff. saving the world? maybe due to the shrinking open spaces. It does seem these manifestations are in response to the imbalances in the world today. Ill stop there Yeagley knows more about the psycosis stuff! It can be very harsh on this planet. lots of people feel helpless in many ways. They just seem to have gotten off track.
blacks are thinning their lips?
and whites are fattening them. help.
oh yeah I grew up with goats, cows and pigs. have u ever looked at the eyes of the goat? I can understand why the goat has these black majic vibes. The eyes! and the pig! What the hell is it? and the cow well I could do without that beast. just plain nasty compared to the buffalo. and the sheep with its cries? eerie stuff these domesticated beasts! Goats ate my shirt once!

Posted by: ecology on January 20, 2006 01:00 PM

Ecology at least you are in hunter gather mode and eating meat, so at least you recognize the food chain. I saw the title of the post and there is an inside joke only Yeagley likely will comprehend.

Farm animals are a made made creation so far removed from their wild ancestors that we are not even certain what the original species was. That being said nobody favors gratuitous cruelty to animals. However the PETA people do go overboard I am trying to find the article where PETA sent a letter of protest to a terrorist group. The terrorist group put a suicide bomb on a donkey and killed Jews. They asked the group to please refrain from blowing up donkeys. I guess that blowing up Jews must be acceptable.

My title is Inspector not Prof

Posted by: Beakerkin on January 20, 2006 12:09 PM

LOL. Prof! Beaker (no pun intended. the article..). I know I have these psudo hippie tendencies but Im not a bad guy. LOL. I know some of the hippies(which I do not concur with much except to talk about the newest craze of heritage broccoli seeds. the politics stop there!) have some horrible garlic BO and breath and I do not want to smell what come out of their butts! LOL. I was at the coop (get it, coop) the other day and the hippie chick(chick get it. Hehe) casheirs breath and bo was horrifying! Use deoderant. they make excellent all natural herbal kinds that work great without the aluminum!
Hey Tofu is not bad. I make it also with shredded pork and broccoli stir fry. actually I am going to shame those hippies becuase they are contributing to the warming trend. bastards!
what irony. absolutely sureal. Hear hear for the too. They are not sexy! The bare clean healthy skin of a women is the most beutiful thing in all the world. well except a good buffalo filet mignon. Im weird i know. Hehe.

Posted by: ecology on January 20, 2006 10:30 AM

Ah, perhaps I am beguiled by the hyperbolic bosomry of the business at hand. Gee. The Freudian potiential of this matter is phenomenal.

But, then again, isn't that the issue? The question of whether or not this is really about cruelty to animals? I dare say it is not. There are social issues inherent that exceed that concern.

I speak of the subliminal, the unconscious, perhaps. It's just all exaggerated, or should I way, constellated in this vortex of issues.

Exaggeration is the issue, on all fronts.

Oh, I give up.

Posted by: David Yeagley on January 19, 2006 06:06 PM

I tred dangerously here again, for I risk being seen as an avowed supporter of PETA. I feel that the real issues are being conveniently ignored in this article David. What does Pam being white and having been cosmetically retrofitted have to do with the suppossed desires of Black men?

My point is that cruelty to anything on a grand scale is unfortunate,and it's not macho or playing "tough guy" to bemoan the chicken industry's practices, regardless of company. I do agree that attacking the statue is stupid, and that such groups as PETA could possibly broaden their appeal if they would forgo stunt manuvers.

But, the attempt to somehow inject racial stereotypes (no pun intended) into this issue is utterly bizzare. Let's not conveniently only focus on the dumb dumbs that are all too willing to be used by PETA. Rather, I would like to examine the pros and cons of it divorced from childish partisian politics, if at all possible. Right wingers and leftist morons are both seemingly woefully mirred in ideological wonderlands of irrelevancy. Let's debate animal rights from a stance that at least tries to be responsible to all ideas, not just our knee-jerk attempts at machismo.

Posted by: Ray on January 19, 2006 05:52 PM

Lol, Beakerkin, good one! Btw, the woman that *lied* about finding a finger in her chili at Wendy's (said finger came from her male friend whom lost it in an industrial accident) was sentenced to 9 yrs. in prison & her male accomplice sentenced to 12 yrs! I think they should serve longer as there are way too many SCAMS going on nowadays (i.e. insurance scams, car accident scams, et al). Let this be a lesson for anyone that is tempted to follow their example. P.S. said woman is from South America, and thought she could just come over to the USA & get rich by doing this. It's no wonder, seeing as how many scammers do get rich from such things. Time the government cracks down hard on these criminals!!!!! Sentence them to 50 yrs. in prison! After all, she & her accomplice cost hundreds of workers jobs, not to mention Wendy's *self-made* millionaire (yeah, he worked hard to get to where he's at, unlike this woman & her accomplice) lost millions in the process.

Okay, back on topic, good one, Doc! However, just needed to mention that Angelina Jolie's lips are *real*, not fake, unlike Pamela Anderson's. Just check their photos as kids & you will see the truth.

Peace, Nadine

Posted by: Nadine on January 19, 2006 05:50 PM

What about cruelty to humans ? Have you ever sat next to someone who eats a place of Tofu ? The inherent noxious odors is a near death experience and adds to green house gasses.

No doubt Ecology will post after this and tell everyone that eating Tofu does not cause Global Warming. However it is a certain way to clear a room.

Make mine extra crispy and I want a buttermilk biscut. I do not understand why that woman tried to sue Wendy's either. I never saw a scrap of meat in my chilli and this woman sues.

Posted by: Beakerkin on January 19, 2006 05:20 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?