: Excuse me, but it wasn't Ray Kroc that mass-murdered millions of people of
: the Jewish Race in the gas chambers!! And it wasn't Ronald that attempted to
: take over Kuwait!!!To use the example you quote later, neither was Jeffrey Dahmer. Does that make Jeffrey Dahmer a force for good? The original poster was saying that McD's were _like_ them, not that they _were_ them.
: And what has making burgers got to do with a bastard thug who murders your best
: friend, relative, or spouse?!! Stop comparing apples and oranges!!!
Isn't everyone someone's friend, relative or spouse? There is ultimately no difference in causing someone's death by indoctrinating them into an unhealthy diet or causing someone's death by indoctrinating people to shoot other people. It may be a much more "newsworthy" event to nerve gas a town, killing 4-5000 people instantly, but it's equally deadly to kill 4-5000 people by teaching them not to eat properly.
McDonald's are doing their best to foster and promulgate a culture that overconsumes meat on a massive and endemic scale. Deaths arising from ill health due to the imbalanced diet engendered _are_ McDonald's responsibility, as a company that large wields considerable social power.
(as to the Gulf War references, which country was responsible for the deaths of most a)Britons and b)Kuwaitis?
The West tends to be a little indiscriminate when their precious oil supply is threatened. They doesn't turn a hair at the nerve gassing and will happily sell Saddam the equipment to do it again, but threaten their petrol supply and they suddenly get all gung-ho and moral...
(Yes, Europe and the Brits _are_ equally culpable in this, so I'm not just "getting at America" again))
: About the only things McD's is guilty of is not policing its stores and franchises adeguately, and taking taxpayers' money to advertise in Asia.
It obviously doesn't feel the least bit of guilt about:
1) Misleading the public.
2) Fostering an unhealthy and wasteful diet on the world.
3) Exploiting the less-well-off by using strong-arm tactics to suppress competition (even though it claims to believe in the "free market" (witness the McMunchies case))
4) Using non-renewable resources when renewable ones are available, and not actually recycling the renewable ones it does use.
5) Allowing their food to be prepared without due concern for the conditions or healthiness of the food animals (which can lead to an increased health risk for those eating it).
6) Targeting adverts at those who a) don't know enough to see through the mask and b) exert tremendous influence over their parents (that's children, in case you didn't know).
7) Contributing to global destruction due to extreme wastefulness in production and inefficiency in processes.
: Furthermore, McD's doesn't own any farmland or plants that pre-produce its
: products or toys. And where's the proof that they get any of their beef supply
: from the rainforest?
Try this link. Look up the "environment" section.
: But again, comparing Ronald to Hitler, Saddam, Dahmer, or Bundy?!!! Give me a break!!!
Certainly. Which limb would you prefer?
(on a serious note, you are saying that Ronald isn't an "evil" person the way that Hitler et. al. are. Does this mean that you would accept a person as "evil" only if they filled the cackling maniac stereotype?
Look at what they do, as well as who they are. Ronald is the figurehead of a multimillion dollar ad campaign that contributes to an unhealthy diet for millions. How many of them will suffer ill health due to the high levels of fat and sugar (ask the W.H.O.)? As such, Ronald is _culpable and implicated_ in the deaths. What more do you want as a definition of "evil"?
After all, Charles Manson hasn't killed as many people as Ronald McDonald has...
Gideon.
