Activists say Cliften Supports McDonalds and Proctor and Gamble

ALF-Types Think Merritt Clifton Hurts Animal Rights Progress

Merritt Clifton: Obstructionist Extraordinaire

Merritt Clifton is a perfect example of an obstructionist. He vehemently denounces being an animal rights activist (which is true), even though he has no problem giving activists "pointers" and explaining to them their "mistakes". Instead of an activist, he claims to be an unbiased "journalist" who believes in the humane ethic.

Clifton's paper Animal People has spread his obstructionist ideas to all corners of North America's animal movement. In it, he defends businesses like Proctor & Gamble, McDonalds, and Sea World; rants about the "psychotic" A.L.F. activists; and pleads for activists to work with abusers to bring about change for the animals.

Clifton, with the help of his paper, has helped lull the movement into a complacent slumber -- our outrage was pacified, ineffective campaigns were looked upon as the animals' salvation, and direct action was dismissed as extremist and ineffective.

Clifton, although willing to bend over back-wards to speak well of the abusers, apparently has no problem trying to destroy good direct action activists. As any educated activist knows, you do not spread rumors that other activists are infiltrators without hard evidence, or rumors linking people with illegal activities.

As someone who claims to have been involved with environmental, peace, and animal issues for over two decades, Clifton should know better. I think he does know better. And it is precisely because he knows how harmful these rumors can be that he uses them. Direct action threatens his perceived "empire" that he has created with Animal People and he wants radical actions stopped.

Since he doesn't recognize the fact that direct action stems from committed people who demand change now, he is attacks the messenger that reports on direct action, No Compromise, by attacking those people involved in its production.

Clifton is also weak on the issues. For starters, he admits to not being vegan while traveling. Equally egregious, he defends Sea World, Proctor & Gamble, and McDonalds. He argues that Sea World has the world's largest tanks, rescues dolphins, promotes environmental education, and has not captured animals from the wild for over a decade. I guess we should just ignore the fact that the animals are still imprisoned and that any tank, no matter how large, is still a toilet when compared to the ocean.

When defending the vivisectors, Proctor & Gamble, Clifton argues that P&G have donated $45 million to developing alternatives to animal tests, reduced animal use by 56%, and in 1984 made a corporate commitment to phase out all animal tests as quickly as possible. But if P&G is so good why is it that more than a decade after their "corporate commitment", they continue to slice, dice, and sacrifice animals for profit?

And how could Clifton possibly defend McDonalds? Because the golden arches signed an agreement to only purchase brutalized carcasses from factory farmers that meet the humane standards set up by some meat promoting organization. Well, hooray for the largest animal killer in the world! Hey Merritt, sign me up for the Humane Auschwitz Now campaign!

With friends like Clifton, the animals don't need enemies. There are many obstacles in our way towards animal liberation -- the abusers, the authorities, infiltrators, and agents. But we must also remember that even those who claim to be friends of the animals can also be obstacles.


Anonymous said...

Did you ever notice that you, Zsuzsa, Pam, the murdering Mad Doc, Cindy Bemis, Ivan Callais, Marge Weems are all 100% totally out of your minds?

When are you going to defend poor Ivan?

Ed Muzika said...

I don't doubt it.

I don't know all the players or Ivan.

Tell me more. I am interested.

Anonymous said...

Ivan has a long, sad history of collecting animals and keeping sick animals lingering until they die. A hundred dogs escaped from his house in Woodland Hills a few years ago, all running loose on his street, it was a funny news story on TV; animal lovers hundred dogs all get loose. City Animal Regulations tried to look the other way, so they wouldn't look like they were picking on an animal lover.

This time it looks like he's in serious trouble

Anonymous said...

According to one Supervisor's office I talked to, Ivan was doing more to some of those animals than simply "collecting" them.

Yes, I mean what it sounds like I mean. He's also responsible for the dog whose picture was on Ryan Olshan's blog a few months back, with half her face torn off. So "sad" is not the word I'd use to decribe Ivan Callais - more like sick and twisted.

But Ivan Callais is actually a failure of Marcia Mayeda, rather than Boks. Her people knew all about Callais and did essentially nothing. Then, when it finally hit the fan, it was Gentle Barn, rather than LACDACC, that went in and saved those poor animals.

How they managed to pass THAT buck I'll never know, although there's no doubt the animals were safer in Gentle Barn's hands than Mayeda's.

And yeah, Cindy Bemis is a hoarder, but she's a hoarder who's been allowed to fester under Mayeda's near seven-year term. Seems only fitting that those two monsters go up against each other.

Reminds me of the wise words someone said when Latrell Sprewell choked P.J. Carlesimo: "It's a case of one asshole meeting a bigger asshole."