Animal Justice Party Inciting Violence Against Tony Abbott?

In what could only be regarded as a vain attempt to claw back credibility, lost due to the preference fiasco at the Federal Election, it appears that the Animal Justice Party is trying to incite members and fans into an act of violence against the current government.

The following text was attached to a “Ban Live Export” image posted to the groups facebook page.

So Mr Abbottoir, the word is out there that you are trying to make a deal with the Indonesians to accept turned back boats if you change the laws of our animal welfare requirements on their abattoirs so we have no say in how Australian cows are killed for their meat. (and keep it a secret) Mr Abbottoir, please know that if you do this there WILL be a revolution. How do I know this? Because I would have NO qualms in starting one and I am certain that thousands (if not millions) more will join me. You will not get away with this latest attempt of deceiving your own people, so back up, walk away and do the right thing, now. Today! (as shared and well said from Jan B. and for those who have been critical of the AJP we will fight this ALL THE WAY )

Even more concerning is this comment by the party

with the current “veil of secrecy” we may have to have a revolution afterall or possibly get arrested for having an opinion ? no amount of emails or letters will get through and these horrors are global but so are our words and actions of protest.

As we know the next federal election is possibly another three years away, so they couldn’t mean a voting revolution. Which leaves only one other possibility, and that is that this party is trying to organise some sort of violent revolution against the Prime Minister and government. Judging by some of the comments that have been left, I don’t think that I am too far off the mark with that one either.

What is equally disturbing is that a federally registered political party is taking such liberties with the name of this country’s Prime Minister to mock him and further their own agenda.

Whilst it was embarrassing to see the haphazardly thrown together policies that the party took to the election, such as campaigning to change things that the Federal government has no authority over, and the Vice President saying that building more slaughterhouses would virtually stop live export overnight, this latest stunt has to be the final straw. Is it any wonder that the mainstream media portrays animal advocates as a bunch of loonies?

[GARD]As a further indication of how out of touch with this social justice movement the party really is, the author of that post refers to these animals as Australian cows. Yet one of the very things that a majority of animal advocates are campaigning for is to have other animals no longer referred to as property.  I also wonder, at what point during the live export process do these animals stop being ‘Australian’ cows, and become ‘Indonesian’ cows?

Also, the last time I checked, there weren’t any slaughterhouses in Australia doing  weekly or daily tours either. So much for secrecy being something that happened in Indonesia.

Thankfully, those rational animal advocates amongst us can all breathe a collective sigh of relief and be grateful that this party didn’t get any candidates elected into the Senate because I hesitate to think what their behaviour would be like then.

19 thoughts on “Animal Justice Party Inciting Violence Against Tony Abbott?”

  1. Re-read the text. It in no way states any violent intentions whatsoever. There does exist a peaceful revolution. This is what a true vegan wants. Peace through peace.

    “A nonviolent revolution is a revolution using mostly campaigns of civil resistance, including various forms of nonviolent protest, to bring about the departure of governments seen as entrenched and authoritarian. While many campaigns of civil resistance are aimed at much more limited goals than revolution, generally a nonviolent revolution is characterized by simultaneous advocacy of democracy, human rights and national independence in the country concerned. In some cases a campaign of civil resistance with a revolutionary purpose may be able to bring about the defeat of a dictatorial regime only if it obtains a degree of support from the armed forces, or at least their benevolent neutrality.

    An effective campaign of civil resistance, and even the achievement of a nonviolent revolution, may be possible in a particular case despite the controlling government taking brutal measures against protesters; the commonly held belief that most revolutions which have happened in dictatorial regimes were bloody or violent uprisings is not borne out by historical analysis. Nonviolent revolutions in the 20th century became more successful and more common, especially in the 1980s as Cold War political alliances which supported status quo governance waned.”

    • Hi Laurie,

      I have reread the comment by the Animal Justice Party a number of times, and do not believe that it was implied that a peaceful revolution be started.

      I am not alone in this assesment, as a number of people have contacted me privately, and commented elsewhere that they believe it to be the case too.

      If they were intending a peaceful revolution, do you not think that the comments would have stated that?

      • Is there a way to find out for sure? It would be so terrible if it really does mean violence. Nothing could be more contrary to veganism or damage the image of the movement more. That’s why I was hoping it was just written frm that place of hurt and desperation and overwhelming emotion we all experience from time to time. A vegan’s suffering is tremendous. I hope we can all be brothers and sisters united, there to help eachother back up whenever we suffer a ‘down’ moment. None if us are perfect. We all make mistakes or are misunderstood at times. I hope that is the case here. Help a brother find his way back to the best path. And if he will not be helped then my worst fears are realized. Peace to you my dear friend.

        • There is no mention of it being a peaceful revolution also, as there are a number of hate filled comments directed towards this government, what other conclusion are we supposed to come to?

          I know we all do say things from time to time, though these are comments made by the Animal Justice Party, and by people who should know better.

  2. You can believe what you like Cameron.
    I am an AJP member I am also an active Vegan and an animal rights activist. NO I am not happy with Tony Abbot reaching into current government because 1/2 Labor MP’s wanted to see Live Export banned.

    Regardless of this fact you obviously do not understand what Vegan means.

    I do not break the law even though sometimes i feel like doing so.
    The AJP have a right to be in power or to have some seats in the senate no different to the Greens.
    It is not just about animal rights or welfare of animals its also about Education the health system and the environment.
    I know the Perth candidates personally and sometimes we say things because we are passionate or upset that animals do not even get regarded or really any thought.

    Regardless of this they do not break the law and neither does anyone in the party. If they were to they would get thrown out.

    • Hi Alex,
      Thank you for this comment, and you have raised some good points that do need addressing.

      You have said that over 1/2 of the former ALP MPs wanted live export banned, what do you base this on? If I were you, I would base it on how they voted in parliament, not some survey done during election time. If my memory serves me correctly, I cannot recall on sitting ALP MP that voted in support of ANY proposed bill to end live export, can you?

      Could you please explain to me what it does mean to be vegan, so both myself, and readers are able to understand what it entails?

      If you read the second comment that is linked to and referenced in this article, you will see that the AJP does in fact state that they want to get arrested. So the AJP is telling us to break the law.

      It is interesting that you have mentioned education, health and the environment, as these are three areas that the AJP went into the election with no policies on. And there are still no policies on these areas on the AJP website either.

      I do not believe that any political party, let alone the AJP or The Greens has any right to be represented in politics. Whilst you may know the Perth candidate personally, I have only made comments about the party. This is excluding Mark Pearson as based on previous comments he has made, I do not believe he is the best person to be representing a political party that is seeking justice for other animals.

      I only wish more people would look at the ‘animal’ groups objectively, and without emotion. Just because the group claims to be ‘for the animals’, it doesn’t actually mean it is.

  3. If this bizarrely biased author expects to have any credibility, one would expect that he would know what vegan means, not have to ask. If he had any knowledge of the animal rights movement, he would know that one of its primary tenets is non-viokence. He makes reference to ‘cows’ – and refers to the term ‘property’. How would you prefer us to describe cattle, Cameron? As ‘animals of the bovine family’? Do get a grip (admittedly, the majority of animals exported to Indonesia are steers, but that is not relevant for the context of this article). Cameron, one can only assume from your truly fatuous assertions that you are comfortable with the horrific abuse we have seen perpetrated on our animals in Indonesia (and elsewhere), that you approve of Abbott’s grovelling to the Indonesians using our cattle as bargaining chips, to get his boats policies over the line, that you subscribe to the specious notion that they become ‘Indonesian’ (cattle)
    onve they are sold and thus there is no responsibility in Australiia to take meaures to protect them from egregious abuse, and perhaps you even believe Abbott’s truly ridiculous assertion that Indonesian slaughterhouses are at the level of Australian standards (jin Australia, apart from minimal exceptions, it is the law that all animals are stunned prior to slaughter, and if animals in Australia were being stabbed in the eyes, had their leg tendons slashed, were kicked and beaten and had their tails broken, there would certainly ne a level of protest). You also apparently endorse Abbott’s agenda of secrecy. I am not a member of the AJP, and I deplore the preference deals it made, but you do yourself absolutely no credit (not to put to fine a point on it, you make yourself look like a ‘shock jock’ desperate for a headline) writing such absolute rubbish.

    • Cameron, are you not vegan? And also for any other vegan reading, speak to eachother through kindness. For kindness is ‘being the change’.for if it does not start with you, change will not happen. Kindness needs to be your guide and not any negative emotion. Kindness requires strength because it is not our instinct to be kind when something has upset us. Thank you friends and peace to you.

      • Laurie,
        Yes I am vegan and have been for quite a few years.

        I am hoping that as you read through previous articles and comments that I have made you will see that I do reply kindly and respectfully to those who comment, despite the threats that are made against my friends, family and myself.

        • Yes! I actually meant (and here is an example of how someone can write something and it can be taken the wrong way so I am glad you are asking for clarification) that other people were being rude to you. I would like for people to be kind to you – to everyone. Without kindness we have nothing. Only fighting, arguing, finger pointing – none of which have any value. Kindness is not easy – it is the more difficult choice. But it is the right one. #ActiveKindness Blessings to you and may anyone who treats you unkindly never be allowed by you to steal your kindness from you. Keep it, use it. There is no greater (Anti)weapon against anger or rudeness. Carry on my friend!

    • Hi Nicky,

      If you read the previous comment made by Alex, they state “Regardless of this fact you obviously do not understand what Vegan means.” This is why I have asked them to tell me what they believe being vegan means.

      I should also add that not all vegans subscribe to the tenets of non-violence. Have you heard of the ALF?

      I honestly do hope that you know what happens when you assume things? Because exactly that has happened now.

      If you have read anything that I have written or made comment on in the past, you will see that I am against ANY animal being used for food, entertainment, clothing, etc. regardless of what country claims ownership.

      The reference to them being property is exactly what they are classed as at the present point in time, and the campaigns by the ‘concerned’ animal advocacy groups reinforce that belief. The campaigns regarding the issue of live export and foreign slaughter, beginning with the Animals Australia one, all make reference to Australian animals, with very little if any regard being given to animals from other countries.

      Yes, the law may prohibit certain acts from being done to those animals about to be slaughtered for food, though that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen out here. Wally’s Piggery ring any bells for you?

      Also, I do believe that there are 15 slaughterhouses in Australia that have an exemption from the pre-stunning requirement.

      • I would say that a vegan who is not non-violent is not vegan. Or else they are shooting themselves in the foot. This is why I no longer say I am vegan first. I say I am a kindness activist. As a result I eat a vegan diet. How sad that I can’t say I’m vegan and let that stand on its own. The movement is stunted by any acts or statements not inline with peace and kindness. 🙁

  4. Cameron, I have not read anything you have written previously, but this article raised any number of alarm bells. And you would know as well as I do that the ALF is in a significant minority; the rest of us do our campaigning lawfully and peacefully )although I have pushed the boundaries on that on occasion).
    Having observed the AJP committee in action, I can confidently assure you that they couldn’t organise themselves to run a campaign of violence, much like they coudn’t organise themselves to run an ethical, strategic and professional election campaign.
    I see you say that you are a vegan. There has been much discussion about what this means, so this is what it means for me. I do not claim to be vegan for the following reasons: I am vegetarian. I have dogs who eat meat. I do not buy leather, wool, down pillows and the like, to the best of my knowledge nothing in the household products/cosmetic range that is tested on animals or contains animal derivatives. That said, I have products made in countries with truly atrocious animal abuse records (China, South Korea) – such as electronic devices. On that basis, I feel that I cannot claim to be vegan. But others tell me they see it differently, through the prism of only what they eat – I see it as broader than that. Thee is little you can buy, for example, electronics, that aren’t made entirely or in part in China or South Korea.
    I have hens who were rescued from a battery farm who lay eggs.
    Your statements about the animals being ‘property’ is all too unfortunately the case and se see that reflected every day especially in court cases and other exposes of animal abuse, especially those to do with animals used in farming.
    As far as Animals Australia’s campaign not encompassing animals in overseas markets who are not Australian, I can only assume – and reluctantly agree – that we can only control what we can control, and that is to campaign against OUR animals being sent to these places, and that in and of itself would send a significant message to these countries that their treatment of animals will not be tolertaed by Australia. Sadly, that situation is what it is and there are limits to the reach of any campaign.
    If I made assumptions, I apologise, but your article suggesting violence from the AJP was so far off the mark it was almost laughable.

    • I don’t think that it was too far of a stretch to think that the comments were meant to incite violence, especially when they never clarified that it was a peaceful one that they were talking about.
      Also, when you take into account that the Vice President, and Senate candidate in NSW, Mark Pearson, has publicly stated that the way to end live export was to build more slaughterhouses. Something that I never thought I would hear another vegan or one as high profile as him, would say.

  5. Cameron, Mark is not a vegan, And the fallback poisition for most of us in respect of live exports is that it will have to be a phaseout. And anything is better than putting those animals on rotten old third world ships and sending them to be buchered by savages.

    • Nicky,
      If Mr Pearson isn’t vegan, that is extremely unfortunate for the animals, and very concerning, especially considering he is so revered within the animal advocacy movement. Whilst I do not know anyone that knows Mr Pearson personally, I certainly hope that does adopt the vegan lifestyle sooner rather than later for the animals sake.

      From what I understand of the live export trade, the oldest ship used by Wellard is the MV Ocean Drover, commissioned in 2002. I’d hardly call that a third world ship.

      Instead of wanting live export banned or new slaughterhouses opened up, wouldn’t it make more sense to show the farmers how to use their land for something else other than animal agriculture? After all, wouldn’t this be a win/win for all involved, including the animals?

      Continually saying that there is no other option other than a ban or building slaughterhouses out here shows that there is a huge poverty of ambition amongst advocates who are not able to think past the accepted mantra.

  6. Mark Pearson of the AJP is a man who thinks that a native animal is “any animal that was born here”(!), and who defends the AJP’s refusal to advocate the adoption by government of educational policies promoting the health, environmental and economic benefits of vegetarianism on the grounds that it would make the AJP “look silly” (as opposed to piling into rail carriages dressed in chicken suits or putting the Greens last on their voting tickets). He considers vegetarianism to be an issue for “three hundred years from now”. He has no problem with the annihilation of BILLIONS of animals annually to feed our perverse appetites but wants to ensure that animals are treated nicely on their way to the charnel houses. When I suggested to him the curious moral incongruity of this position, asking whether Hitler might be judged less harshly if he had shipped folks to the gas ovens in first-class, air-conditioned compartments on the Orient Express instead of in filthy, overcrowded cattle-cars, he seemed genuinely not to understand the question. The AJP could have been a party for the minority of the electorate that is actually capable of thinking rationally and seriously about our relationship to the natural world. Instead it chose to follow the path of least resistance by aiming to secure a share of the STUPID vote. (eg. the vote of the average McDonald’s bogan who is outraged by the fact that “AUSSIE” grey kangaroos could be killed at the behest of ecologists trying to defend some stupid lizard). How appropriate that the AJP secured the donkey vote for the ACT Senate and used it to defeat their own stated purpose of ending the live export trade. What a tragedy that their failure to have a candidate elected deprives us of the pleasure of seeing a “Feral Cat Protection Bill” debated in the parliament. Up the Revolution!……….


What are your thoughts?