The International Herald-Tribune today reports that: “…two activists convicted of libel in Britain for criticizing McDonald’s animal rights practices, environmental policies and the nutritional quality of its food did not get a fair trial and should be compensated by the British government, a European human rights court said Tuesday.” Here we go again. Ok. Lets dissect this thing; 1) the action against McDonald’s by the activists and the libel case against them, and 2) the European court ruling today.

1) Former Greenpeace activists Helen Steel and David Morris distributed pamphlets titled “What’s Wrong With McDonald’s” in front of London McDonald’s restaurants. This was the reason for McDonald’s 1990 lawsuit, which brought libel charges against them for doing so. In the leaflets (designed in 1986), people found an altered McDonald’s logo depicting the phrases “McDollars, McGreedy, McCancer, McMurder” – enough to warrant a lawsuit in and of itself if you ask me. I won’t go on through the rest of what was alleged in this leaflet and McDonald’s subsequent defense in court – it is typical leftist puke relying on an intentionally skewed view of corporations, nutrition, agriculture and economics. But its fair to say that if McDonald’s engaged in this kind of rhetoric against any other company or group, it would be held to account by the libel system itself – and to say that these leaflets were libellous would be an understatement. I encourage all readers to go read one of the many summaries of the famous McLibel case to investigate for yourself just why the judge ruled as he did (that ruling was in 1997).

2) The International Herald-Tribune reports today that the case “helped fuel anti-McDonald’s sentiment across Europe”. This is pretty funny. European snobby liberals have always hated McDonald’s: a) it is an example of the success of capitalism, b) they hate capitalism, c) it is an example of the success of United States corporations, d) they hate the United States and corporations …and by asking the ranks of European leftist academia, you will hear a million other reasons – there would not be the proliferation of McDonald’s restaurants in Europe if the company was loathed equally by the average Jean-Pierre … this is purely the upper/middle class leftists, bleating louder than the rest of the flock.

The European court has ruled that Steel and Morris should have been provided with legal aid – they defended themselves in the trial because they said they could not afford to pay for it themselves – no surprise, given their relationship with capitalism; the hand that feeds. Denial of legal aid (not granted for libel cases in UK law) “…deprived them of the opportunity to present their case effectively before the court”. REALLY? A court that sat for 335 days – a record in the United Kingdom – a court that dealt with over 40,000 documents – that called over 130 witnesses…. Steel and Morris were not able to present their case effectively? You must wonder what the court DID every single day for almost a year!!

Two observations. Firstly, any European human rights court that ruled IN FAVOUR of McDonald’s would have stunned me into silence. That didn’t happen. I am not in the least surprised that they ruled that way – they are the old turds hanging on the hairs at the ass of the world’s judicial system. Secondly: this is what comes of allowing the UK government to farm out control of its sovereign law to the European Union – UK law gets second-guessed, undermined and ridiculed by people who have nothing in common with the values of the United Kingdom, people who are decidedly UNCONCERNED with human rights except those that qualify as such within the terms of their left-wing ideals, people who do not understand the value of liberty, who do not understand or appreciate or like the capitalist system.

McLibel has shown us the prejudices of people who have an uncanny ability to live up to their stereotypes. We’ll watch and see what the outcome of this ruling will eventually be. My prediction: the UK will not appeal this decision of the European court, because the UK is now controlled by a much more liberal administration who actually agree with and defend the EU on the majority of issues – and this thing will go to libel court AGAIN.

The outcome of that trial will make interesting reading.

John Wright