Followers of Chris Butler revealed themselves
last year (2011) when they wrote letters and emails to the Hawaii Legislature in opposition to meat processing. They probably didn’t expect their identities to be a matter of public record. Not everyone opposed to the bill is a cult member, but dozens can be easily confirmed. I’m not an expert on the Legislature, however it appears that this Bill will be carried forward to the next session due to public opposition by the cult.
For those of you assisting me in exposing members, note the addresses and email addresses in this large PDF file.
Some familiar names of cult members:
The Anthony Family, Kailua
…and, perhaps not so familar
Jai Tamayo from Maui
Radha das Gibons
Opposing points of view are summarized below. Perhaps I’m overly sensitive, but I sense a real hatred of meat eaters
and suppose that Tulsi Gabbard will work behind the scene to undermine non-Vegan food supplies that are consumed by the vast majority of Americans.Pro:
The Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation, representing farmers and ranchers throughout the islands, supports this bill because it will help assure that the Hawaii Livestock Cooperative facility remains available to address the food needs of the islands. We defer to the appropriate authorities regarding the amount of funding necessary to accomplish this goal.
• For food sustainability and food security reasons, the Oahu facility should remain open to supply locally raised meat to people in Hawaii.
• Even if mainland meat shipments are currently available to the islands, this facility will be able to support local livestock farmers/ranchers, as they expand capacity.
• The Campbell facility is in close proximity to the market since most people live on Oahu.
• Most residents and island visitors are not vegetarians; they eat meat.
• Many in the community prefer fresh meat to that coming in from the mainland.
• Our understanding is that at the present time, the facility is used mainly for pork processing but that in the future it could also be used for beef processing.
Thank you very much for your continued support of local farmers and ranchers.Con:
I am opposed to Senate Bill 249 that will use hard earned taxpayer dollars for the state to purchase a failed and unnecessary slaughterhouse for the following reasons:
1. We don’t have the money. With so many public services being cut, such as schools being closed, workers being furloughed, etc. due to budget short-falls, the last place we should be spending taxpayer dollars is on an unnecessary slaughterhouse.
2. Taxpayer money shouldn’t be used to bail out failing businesses. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to buy and run a slaughterhouse that has been so unsuccessful that nobody in the private sector wants to do it. If the State operates this slaughterhouse through enactment of SB 249 it will likely be a severe ongoing drain on the State budget.
3. It is bad for people’s health. It makes no sense for the state to use taxpayer money to promote a meat-based diet, which has been linked to increased risk of heart disease, diabetes, obesity, cancer, and many other illnesses.
4. It is bad for the environment. The slaughterhouse is located in an environmentally sensitive area and poses a serious threat to the environment because it discharges its waste into a “lagoon” located just yards from the ocean. This creates the potential for ground water contamination and pollution of the ocean—contributing to the possible creation of dead zones, coral reef suffocation, and fish depopulation. Additionally, the meat industry is bad for the environment as it is an inefficient use of resources and is the most significant contributor to global warming.
5. It is bad for the animals. Slaughtering animals for food is unnecessary because nature has provided ample vegetables, fruits, grains, legumes and dairy products for human sustenance. Slaughtering animals for food is an unnecessary “luxury” and is morally wrong.