Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 15
1
Secondly, we will demonstrate that they are hypocritical
2 and dishonest, preferring propaganda and abusing the
language.
3 (11.30 am)
Thirdly, that they are an exploitative organisation; again
4 using the resources and people and animals on this planet
to the best of their ability to increase their profits.
5
Fourthly, that they are unethical and unprincipled. They
6 used dirty tricks, for example, by sending spies to
infiltrate an environmental organisation such as
7 Greenpeace; that they have lied in legal letters to get
the apologies.
8
Fifthly, they are destructive because what really is the
9 effect on society of this kind of worldwide mass
organisation, what effect does it have on people, on their
10 culture, on their diet, on their psychology? As someone
with a young child, I am aware of influences from
11 advertising from organisations that want to get into the
psychology of young people so they fit in with the
12 American dream, as dictated by an organisation like
McDonald's.
13
Sixthly, they are obsessive, that they are -- it is hard
14 to explain really -- the whole language they use, the way
they organise and plan, the whole promotion of themselves
15 internally and externally, is fanatical to the point of
obsession; that they are oppressive.
16
Lastly, they are oppressive, they are greedy. So these
17 are strong words but we feel that they are justified
criticisms and fair comment.
18
Why are they bringing and continuing this case? As Helen
19 has said, for six years between 1984 and 1990 they did
nothing to stop the distribution of this fact sheet.
20 I will show later on that virtually an identical fact
sheet based upon the London Greenpeace fact sheet is still
21 circulated in ten's of thousands, having had legal
correspondence with McDonald's and McDonald's not taking
22 any further action against them.
23 A number of years ago one of the members of this group,
which is Veggies in Nottingham, who produce McDonald's
24 campaigning literature in large amounts as a service to
the public in much greater numbers than London Greenpeace,
25 will be giving evidence in this case. I will look at that
a bit later on.
26
Want of prosecution is an abuse of the law. We believe
27 there was a want of prosecution for six years. I have
mentioned censorship. A climate of intimidation that
28 increasingly people were contacting London Greenpeace
frightened to criticise the McDonald's Corporation;
29 oppressed; when approached would say: "We cannot touch
McDonald's with a barge pole; we have all been sued". A
30 climate of intimidation has been created. We do not
believe this should be the purpose of libel laws.
