Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 13

     
     1        image which hides the reality behind it.  That, of course,
              is the front of the leaflet that is the subject of this
     2        action showing the profiteering behind the Ronald
              McDonald's mask.
     3
              McDonald's started in 1955.  Speaking personally, I was
     4        born in 1954.  I was born before they started.  I intend
              to outlive them.  In this case on one side we have
     5        McDonald's Corporation with an annual turnover of 24
              billion dollars every year.  On the other side we have two
     6        unwaged individuals, members of public.  Not only on the
              other side is us, but also the people that they exploit;
     7        they exploit consumers, they exploit staff workers, they
              exploit children with their advertising, they exploit
     8        animals and they exploit the environment.  Their only
              interest is maximising their profits from exploitation.
     9
              In this case, there is no jury.  We are asking you, the
    10        judge, obviously, and the public as a whole to be our
              jury.  We believe we have a right to be tried by our peers
         and the peers are members of public of which we are a
              part.  McDonald's have denounced the entire London
    12        Greenpeace fact sheet and similar leaflets as all lies.
 
    13        This means as all these points in the fact sheet are
              criticisms made by hundreds of organisations and groups,
    14        hundreds of thousand of people, they are calling all their
              critics liars.  They have set themselves up on a pedestal
    15        with their over one billion dollars advertising revenue
              each year and their aggressive corporate image and
    16        expansion and the practices which they pioneer throughout
              the world; then they are surprised to be the focus of
    17        criticism and alternative points of view.
 
    18        "McDonaldisation" has entered the language as an example
              of uniformity and mass consumption and militarisation of
    19        work.  That is something we are standing up to.
 
    20        Why did McDonald's bring this case?  Just to run through
              some of the issues regarding this case, we believe
         McDonald's have brought this case as a form of censorship
              and intimidation.  We believe it is an abuse of the laws
    22        of this country.  We believe they are continuing this case
              because they want to turn it into a show trial and
    23        propaganda platform against two unresourced, unwaged
              individuals and then use that throughout the world as an
    24        example of how they have been exonerated -- if they win.
 
    25        We think this case is about freedom of speech.  We have
              been overwhelmed by the public support that we have had. 
    26        Our personal circumstances I will go into a bit later on, 
              but we are motivated by a genuine concern for the 
    27        conditions in which people live and work in our society,
              the conditions of animals and the state of the
    28        environment.
 
    29        Despite our exhaustion after three years of pretrial
              hearings, it is our determination to stand up for our
    30        principles that has carried us thus far and, hopefully,
              will carry us throughout the long and further exhausting