Chicken CAN be healthy. Just buy from the right people. Don't bash on a restaurant because it buys from abusive companies, BASH THE COMPANIES INSTEAD PETA!
If Africa or parts of Asia are hungry, WHY NOT FIGHT BACK AGAINST YOUR OPRESSORS?

Posted by: halo snipe | October 16, 2007 05:43 PM

Yeah, here's the thing...sure, all that grain could feed millions, but you can't expect money-laden Americans to limit their diet. The hungry may not be jaded, but the well-fed are. People are not dropping my tongue's standards. Period.

As for chicken abuse, guess what? I've said it before and I've said it again. Chicken abuse happens, whether a slaughterhouse worker or a carnivorous animal does it. That kind of compassion is, frankly, stupid.

Posted by: Ray-O | October 16, 2007 09:01 PM

I imagine Novak's speech went something like, "Ah, if ONLY there was more grain for us to import from starving third world nations. Then and only then we could conquer the tragically low obesity rates in the majority of the western world!" (wipes a tear from his eye)

Posted by: Becci | October 17, 2007 02:24 AM

I live in Louisville...I wish I had known about this protest. YUM gives money to animal shelters locally as well and I always think it is so contradictory because they are contributing to some of the worst abuse of factory farm animals around. I despise that company.

Posted by: Animal Lover | October 17, 2007 08:59 AM

Has anybody told "halo snipe" and "Ray-O" that PeTA is an ANIMAL RIGHTS' org., and that a/r's activists are not interested in their non-sensical, uneducated advice and opinions - with their "logic" that is, frankly, stupid?
Nothing better to do than to be so obsessed by spending so much free time on an ANIMAL RIGHTS' blog site commenting uselessly - like attention-seeking losers?

Posted by: Ariel | October 17, 2007 11:12 AM

Ray-O: If you really think chickens are abused in the wild the same way they are in slaughterhouses, you have some research to do on factory farming--maybe ten seconds' worth.

Posted by: Rose | October 17, 2007 11:31 AM

No, Ray-O, even if the animal is slaughtered, there are more compassionate ways (for worker and animal) than the status quo to do it—controlled atmosphere killing, etc.

Also, an animal killed in the wild by a predator, has at least enjoyed some freedom and control over his/her life.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 17, 2007 12:10 PM

KFC what's your problem? How long does Peta have to fight you to just or at least buy your chickens from companies who use CAK!

Posted by: Carla | October 17, 2007 12:10 PM

Animal Lover:

Dogs and cats are a different case than chickens. They were domesticated for different reasons: dogs and cats are company, but chickens were tamed as a food source.

Posted by: Ray-O | October 17, 2007 12:24 PM

my last posts to cochran and mars didn't appear anymore so i presume this blog is now for the antibloggers! good luck and farewell! my greetings to ariel, michele, mike qinoa, judith the freedom fighter and all the other animal protectors - my time is over here!!!!

Posted by: animalfriend | October 17, 2007 12:44 PM

Factory farms for chickens and other victims around the world also causes global poverty:

http://www.wspa-usa.org/pages/2040_wspa_report_says_factory_farming_exacerbates_global_poverty.cfm

And global chicken farming has been cited by the WHO and others as the most likely cause of a the next enormous global plague which will do horrors for world hunger, poverty and so forth.

But KFC boils alive millions of living beings for profit, so what do they care. How convenient for us that we are not the ones being tortured.

Has the military option been taken off the table, Peta??? But that is the only thing that terrorists and Nazis understand!

Posted by: stoptorture | October 17, 2007 01:16 PM

Animalfriend, don't leave the PETA files behind! I think they are still having problems with their software, because some of my posts made it on here, and some did not, even though they were submitted on the same day, with the same computer. In other words, it's nothing personal against you. Hope to see you here again!

Posted by: Michele | October 17, 2007 05:13 PM

It is so important that animal lovers keep on creating awareness about animal cruelty and doing public protests like this. Corporations like YUM will change their ways when a significant amount of the mainstream population is aware of the atrocities committed against our feathered friends. YUM will have no choice as profits depend on the public's good will toward them. Keep up the fantastic work PETA! It's only a matter of time and continued public communication. Shame on YUM for not choosing to be a leader by adopting more humane policies.

Posted by: Holly | October 17, 2007 05:28 PM

animalfriend not all posts are put up, don't take it personally. I don't because I see others like yourself have the same problem.

Posted by: rojo | October 17, 2007 07:06 PM

I think some of you misunderstood Ray-O's comment (or was it me?)

Stay Ray-O! halo snipe is the sniper here ... why he's wasting his time airing his shallow views on an AR blog is really quite bizzare.

I think some of us get confused with names appearing BEFORE the posts rather than at the end where you expect to be (like a signature).

Great protest PETA ... as usual. Thanks to the protesters who get out and do this stuff. I love you!

Posted by: Mandy | October 18, 2007 04:45 AM

The chicken doesnt look so giant next to Matt....

Posted by: Sarah | October 18, 2007 11:25 AM

Ariel

I agree!!!

Posted by: Ana | October 18, 2007 12:49 PM

Mandy,
Ray-o is an anti-a/r's activist. Had you been reading his comments in the recent past, you would know how obnoxious he is AND can be deceitful. For example, it seems like he is coming across as having some kind of compassion about the chickens, but then he writes: "People are not dropping my tongue's standards. Period."
If you go back to read his obnoxious comments, you'll see for yourself how much more blatant he is and says the same thing.

Posted by: Ariel | October 18, 2007 01:07 PM

Animalfriend,

Some of my posts have gotten sucked into the black hole, too. As Michele stated, most likely a software issue. Stick around—I like your posts.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 18, 2007 01:46 PM

Mandy, the poster's name IS at the end of the comment, so the people directing their comments to Ray-O were not targeting the wrong person (though halo snipe is not a PETA supporter either).

Posted by: Michele | October 18, 2007 01:54 PM

Are you people that insane to believe animal feed can be used as people feed?

Posted by: Mars | October 18, 2007 02:39 PM

For the record, I am an animal lover. I realize that the chicken feel pain, but that's just the way the food chain goes. I am an animal. I am a predator. I eat real chickens, not some unappetizing fake. However, some forms of exploiting animals are just stupid.

Take fur farming. Food is essential for life, but we don't really need to wear fox skins when there's excellent substitutes, and when animals that are already going to be eaten can provide us with stuff to wear. But, unfortunately, there is no "excellent" substitute for beef. Tofu is tofu and meat is meat.

But even as I play with my pet dog, I realize he is a carnivore. Whenever I look at the big cats on the Discovery Channel, I realize that all those so-called cruel atrocities are happening in the wild right now. I realize that animals themselves eat meat, and that to be a vegetarian because humans were not meant to eat meat, is being happy to suffer because of the imperfections of the human body. I already despise humanity, so eating meat is a way to distance myself from a species I am embarassed to belong to.

At least this chicken are killed to be eaten, not because of their ideology.

Posted by: Ray-O | October 18, 2007 06:35 PM

Animalfriend,

DO NOT GO ANYWHERE....
We need you right here where you belong.
Some of my posts don't show up, but maybe it's better they don't. LOL LOL LOL
Judith

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 18, 2007 06:47 PM

okay. to the person 2 comments below me, yea, chicken abuse happens, but its better by a "carnivorous animal" than by a slaughterhouse,because thats how the animal food chain goes. animals are supposed to eat other animals to survive, because animals cannot live of of vegetables, however, people can, thereofore your statement is wrong. as oppose to a slaughter houses where animals have no deefense and are trapped in cages. so, this kind of compassion, in fact, is NOT stupid. chickens are just as important a any other animal.

Posted by: Amanda | October 18, 2007 09:13 PM

okay. to the person Ray-O,yea, chicken abuse happens, but its better by a "carnivorous animal" than by a slaughterhouse,because thats how the animal food chain goes. animals are supposed to eat other animals to survive, because animals cannot live of of vegetables, however, people can, thereofore your statement is wrong. as oppose to a slaughter houses where animals have no deefense and are trapped in cages. so, this kind of compassion, in fact, is NOT stupid. chickens are just as important a any other animal.

Posted by: Amanda | October 18, 2007 09:15 PM

okay. to the person Ray-O,yea, chicken abuse happens, but its better by a "carnivorous animal" than by a slaughterhouse,because thats how the animal food chain goes. animals are supposed to eat other animals to survive, because animals cannot live of of vegetables, however, people can, thereofore your statement is wrong. as oppose to a slaughter houses where animals have no deefense and are trapped in cages. so, this kind of compassion, in fact, is NOT stupid. chickens are just as important a any other animal.

Posted by: Amanda | October 18, 2007 09:15 PM

this is kinda strange foe me- im a vegetarian who doresnt wear or buy fur or leather. i also work at a canadian KFC, i know the owner of the company i buy my chickens from, hes a nice guy who doesnt de-beak birds or boil them while they alive, in fact, none of the things you are saying happen at his company(i have toured his plant myself) is this an american thing or what? see here in canada, we have anti- cruelty legislation, but apparently the peta protesters that stand in front of my work in chicken costumes dont know that, they lump us all together, in fact out of my 35 staff- 26 are vegetarian. go figure , what a world, i know i will get a tonne of posts telling me how awful i am, but i sleep well at night, thanks

Posted by: margaret | October 18, 2007 11:16 PM

oh yeah , my point, during world hunger week we raised enough money to feed 4000 orphaned children, that went directly there, no middlemen, thats the bottom line, thanks

Posted by: margaret | October 18, 2007 11:20 PM

animalfriend,
I was waiting for a response from the moderator before I wrote anything, but since there wasn't any, I'm glad that Michele, Mike, and Judith spoke up.
Yes, please do return. Some of my posts had not gone through either.
*******************

Addressing another comment on here: "For the record, I am an animal lover."
People say they are animal lovers, but actually some have a restricted "love." I know people(breeders) who say they "love" their dogs, yet think nothing of taking the pups to the vet to have their ears and tails cropped -causing pain -so that type of breed would be sell-able. And the same people (breeders) think nothing of getting rid of their "loved" dogs when they are not of any "value" ($$$$) to them anymore. Some people say they "love" their cats, but think nothing of having them declawed, which is not only excructiatingly painful, it can cause the cats to be traumatized for the rest of their lives. And then we have the people who say they "love" their (caged or wing-clipped) birds. Personally, I find no love there for those birds, who were meant to fly freely in their own natural habitats.
I learned a long time ago from the founder of an a/r's org. that animal rights is not particularly about loving animals. It is about justice - justice for all animals. The founder went further to say that one doesn't even have to like certain animals, and that we certainly don't know ALL the animals personally.
Anyway, for anyone to say they "love" animals, that is a generalized, restricted statement when they do not follow through with their "love" by having respect for the justice of ALL animals.

Posted by: Ariel | October 19, 2007 09:35 AM

ok my friends, i'm back and sorry for my furious reaction, but sometimes my strong feelings for the animals make me loose my nerves - in future i try to behave better and let's hope that this one doesn't be eaten by the anti spam filter! peace to everybody!

Posted by: animalfriend | October 19, 2007 09:51 AM

Interesting post, Margaret. Does your supplier use controlled atmosphere killing at the slaughterhouse?

Our Canadian animal-cruelty laws date back to 1892 and are not always adequately enforced. A loophole-filled revision, S-213, may soon replace the ancient laws. Ajax-Pickering MP Mark Holland's much better alternative, Bill C-373, may unfortunately not see the light of day.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 19, 2007 10:12 AM

Caged chickens do not need to be debeaked but birds allowed to roam will peck each other to death so debeaking is needed.Debeaking FYI, is the painless clipping of the tip of the top bill which is the part used for pecking.It's about as painful as clipping your toe nails which are made of the same material.It does not hinder the normal habits of the bird one bit other then pecking and is usualy performed once on the bird.

Posted by: Mars | October 19, 2007 10:53 AM

Hello Ariel:

Your 9:35 am comment is PERFECT; it says it all. Not even the poor cats and dogs closest to us get treated with respect, love and justice. To say "I love animals" is more than just petting them; it is actively seeking justice for all of them.
:)

Posted by: Ana | October 19, 2007 01:34 PM

Good call, animalfriend!

Gee Mars, unless you were a debeaked chicken in a former life, I don't think you can judge if the procedure is painful or not. A bird's beak does contain a nerve. If flocks were kept under 100 chickens (in a factory farm setting—yeah right), a pecking order could be established and it wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 19, 2007 02:13 PM

Canadian laws exist regarding the transport of animals for slaughter, and not regarding how the animals are actually treated while they are "living", nor when they are being slaughtered. It is a complete farce.

So if debeaking is just like getting one's nails trimmed, I wonder if being scalded alive feels like sunbathing. When the chickens are hung upside down and having their throats slit, I wonder if that's just like getting a paper cut.

Even prisoners in maximum security get to be outside of their cells an hour per day.

I just heard that Prizm (the Canadian subsidiary of YUM foods) will be closing 25 unprofitable stores over the next 2 years - I would think that most of those would be KFCs - I did a KFC demo in 2006 and many, many people who went by didn't take a leaflet because they said KFC was disgusting and they would never eat there anyway. My group handed out about 500 leaflets though, and the store I was targeting DID close a few months later... YES!!!

Posted by: Michele | October 19, 2007 03:04 PM

Newsflash, Ariel. Even in the wild, there is no such thing as justice for all animals. Herbivores eat plants; carnivores eat herbivores. The food chain.

Posted by: Ray-O | October 19, 2007 05:45 PM

animalfriend,
SO glad you're back! : ) I never thought for a moment that if you should not return, that wouldn't mean you would ever stop speaking for the animals. And believe me, I think I can speak for a LOT of us who truly understand how you felt. That feeling can only come out of someone who has deep compassion and convictions.

Hi, Ana! : )
I've been catching your posts to me, but was not able to address all of them. I REALLY appreciate ALL of your posts because I love to keep learning, and I am learning more from you and from other (REAL) a/r's activists as well.
Since I practically have no tolerance for the ad nauseum ignoramuses on here (the anti's), I think it is more positive and healthy-minded to read and to make general comments that are more widely educational concerning the rights that the animals deserve, rather than "entertaining" attention-seeking losers who just want to go on ego trips or express their hate. So I like to point that out ABOUT them on occasion so that they do not take the real focus away, which belongs to the animals.
Nevertheless, I also think that anyone who addresses them one-on-one is also VERY educational AND tolerant.
I ALWAYS look forward to your posts! And after all, you are an excellent teacher in the teaching profession! : )

Posted by: Ariel | October 19, 2007 06:38 PM

Ray-O,

The food chain isn't quite that simple. Carnivores also eat other carnivores. A polar bear will eat a seal that will eat a squid that will eat a fish, et cetera.

Believe it or not, there was even a lacto-ovo vegetarian lioness named Little Tyke who totally refused to eat meat.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 19, 2007 09:07 PM

BULLSHIT Margaret, In vancouver we protest at KFC every Tues and 10 minutes from there is a large slaughterhouse where we can go watch through open doors and windows where birds are being dismembered while fully conscious. And I DO NOT believe that 26 people at your work are veg, check the definition. AND thats also BULLSHIT about your boss breeding his own chickens for KFC because ALL KFC chicken comes from KFC destributers where the birds are mass produced and all pumped full of the same shit so it all has that signature 'taste'.

Posted by: Marley | October 19, 2007 10:25 PM

Oh my gosh! I think I have just been "enlightened" for the first time in my life, by an anti-rights' activist yet! - the food chain in the wild!
For our next campaign, we are going to have to protest against Mother Nature for animal justice in the wild! LOL
************

Addressing an intelligent post:
Michele,
GREAT post and a high-five about the results of the demo! Yes!

Posted by: Ariel | October 20, 2007 08:21 AM

They say that careless talk costs lives....
If there were animal rights, then what?(I am not giving up my seat for a chicken). You misguided a/r "zealots" are wasting your lives with all this crap. Rights should be given only to those that think through logic rather than instinct. A human will strafe out of the way of a train, but a deer will run in a straight line, tire, and become "railkill". Who should get the rights? The logical answer would be the human.
P.S: A/R people blogging is a waste too!

Posted by: halo snipe | October 21, 2007 11:18 PM

Someone - please - tell me that anti post, 10-21-07,11:18pm, was only meant to be humorous! LOL
I couldn't stop laughing particularly when I got to the part: "(I am not giving my seat up for a chicken)."
"Logic" "humans" ----- can't stop laughing! LOL LOL LOL LOL

Posted by: Ariel | October 22, 2007 03:07 PM

Hmmm, if rights should be given only to those who "think through logic rather than instinct", then at minimum, infants, small children, and developmentally delayed individuals would not be entitled to any rights either. Sounds like halo snipe is not logical, so according to his own comments, he should also not be entitled to any rights.

Halo, you seriously need to read "Animal Liberation" by Peter Singer. Then get back to us with your comments.

Posted by: Michele | October 22, 2007 04:43 PM

mike Q, she wasn't lacto-ova-vegetarian, she loved milk and eggs were part of her diet.
certainly food for thought for all those cat owners buying meat for their cat because they "need it". Just make sure the cats get some taurine.

Posted by: rojo | October 22, 2007 06:59 PM

A lacto-ovo vegetarian is someone who does not eat meat but who DOES eat eggs and dairy products.

Posted by: Michele | October 24, 2007 12:01 PM

Peter Singer is DEFINITELY among "the" top-knotch BEST of the best!

Posted by: Ariel | October 24, 2007 06:41 PM

thanks michele, i didn't realise that was the way lacto-ovo was meant. I thought vegetarian took into account all non-meat foods and then you further differentiated yourself from there.
apologies to mike.

Posted by: rojo | October 24, 2007 07:17 PM

Michele
STFU. Children, babies, and the disabled dont have much of any rights ANYWAY (They cant do the things we adults can. Voting, a voice in the world, firearms, etc)! I meant in a more general view! When I hear the words "TOTAL animal liberation", not only do I think of releasing lab animals, but no pets allowed, since it is total (Newkirk said this). No logic you say? When it comes to tactics, I am a Lincoln, Patton, FDR, Eisenhower, Washington and Master Chief. So I think I mean what I say.

Posted by: Mr. Chief | October 24, 2007 11:09 PM

Ariel

Technically you are a homo sapien too. You laugh when you see the words "human" and "logic". So according to you, NOBODY has any logic!

I'm still not giving up my seat for a chicken! (I'll give it a booster seat!)

Posted by: Mr. Chief | October 24, 2007 11:15 PM

repost, in case lost.

thanks michele, got that way wrong. apologies to mike Q.

Posted by: rojo | October 26, 2007 02:54 AM

I'm a vegeterian: and everyone is talking about the 'food chain' and 'carnivores'. Let me say something. The way these animals are slaughtered for OUR pleasure is unnatural. Inhumane. Completely against nature. So don't expect ME to follow nature when THOSE sadists aren't.

Posted by: Lotus | April 26, 2008 09:58 AM