Pandaganda

Okay my mighty Kittens, let’s get right to it today shall we? Today rather than spending the day in my favorite pub quietly contemplating life, I am here aboard the slave ship Lollypop bringing you the daily Keep Your Coins, I Want Change topic du jour.

Since I am shackled to the lap top by a merciless and unforgiving task master today I figured we should keep it light so all of us can maintain a good mood and wait until it is time to go to the pub.

With that in mind my Kittens today we are going to talk about why all panda bears should be killed by poor people and their yummy marbled panda meat fed to the highest bidders to be eaten with a delightful side dish of asparagus and red potatos and washed down with a bold yet playful Italian red wine.

Photobucket

(Yup, starting with this one. The cutest and probably tastiest of the bunch)

So why are we killing and eating pandas today my Kittens? Do we really have something against pandas? Do we have something against the doe eyed fools who flock to see them…ummm…..sleep, eat and shit (the only tree things pandas actually do) and adorn their muffin topped bodies with t-shirts that have pictures of pandas on them? Well, in fairness no except for the last bit. Those people who adore and fawn over pandas and stay glued to their computers so that they can watch pandas on web cams should be fed to another endangered species, the Komodo Dragon.

The reason Kittens that we want to kill and eat pandas (as well as the people who love them) is not because pandas are dicks, although they kind of are.

It is because they are lazy, useless and to bored to even bother to screw each other and reproduce. They are also the most expensive animal on earth to keep alive so that people can go and gawk at not unlike a few celebrities I could mention.

Photobucket

(I think he already ate a panda…all at once)

Photobucket

(Will sing for pie)

Let pandas die out, says noted naturalist

Money better spent protecting species with better chance, he argues

LONDON – Conservationists should “pull the plug” on giant pandas and let them die out, according to BBC presenter and naturalist Chris Packham.

“Here’s a species that, of its own accord, has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac,” Packham told Radio Times magazine.

Packham believes that money spent on conserving the panda would be better invested in other animals as the species is not strong enough to survive alone.

“It’s not a strong species. Unfortunately it’s big and cute and it’s a symbol of the WWF (Worldwide Fund for Nature) — and we pour millions of pounds into panda conservation,” he added.

“I reckon we should pull the plug. Let them go, with a degree of dignity …”

Giant pandas are confined to forest areas high in the mountains of southwestern China and have to consume large quantities of bamboo to survive.

They number around 1,600 and are threatened by agriculture, logging and China’s increasing human population.

But Packham’s views are not widely shared.

“It is a daft thing for Chris to say, and an irresponsible one,” Mark Wright, a WWF conservation science advisor, told British media.

“Pandas have adapted to where they live. They live in the mountains where there is plenty of the bamboo they want to eat.

“It’s like saying the blue whale is in an evolutional cul-de-sac because it lives in the ocean,” Wright added.Photobucket

(If only pandas were actually this entertaining)

It’s probably no great shocker that Mark, the guy from the WWF wants to keep pandas around so that people can go and spend money looking at them in zoos, and donating to the WWF because they love pandas so much they even have a picture of them as their logo. You also don’t have to be one of the WWF’s arch enemies, one of those pesky “sciencey types” to figure out that much like the panda that they use as a logo they too should be thrown back into the wilds of a forest and left to become extinct with Darwinian glee.

Photobucket

(If only this were true, and it was a Greenpeace boat)

I’m not sure if you realize this Kittens, but pandas are big business for China. The biggest business actually. They are the most expensive animal to keep in captivity and once they are taken hostage by the zoo keepers, they become uninterested in sex and stop reproducing. If you doubt this just ask any suburban married couple. They are just as tubby and lazy as the pandas although far less adorable.

From the trusty, reliable and you’d assume panda loving New York Times;

Eats Shoots, Leaves and Much of Zoos’ Budgets

By BRENDA GOODMAN

Lun Lun and Yang Yang have needs. They require an expensive all-vegetarian diet — 84 pounds a day, each. They are attended by a four-person entourage, and both crave privacy. Would-be divas could take notes.

But the real sticker shock comes from the annual fees that Zoo Atlanta must pay the Chinese government, $2 million a year, essentially to rent a pair of giant pandas. Giant pandas are also on loan to zoos in Washington, San Diego and Memphis.

The financial headache caused by the costly loan obligations to China has driven Dennis W. Kelly, chief executive of Zoo Atlanta, to join with the directors of the three other zoos to negotiate some budgetary breathing room. If no agreement with China can be made, Mr. Kelly said, the zoos may have to return their star attractions.

“If we can’t renegotiate, they absolutely will go back,” Mr. Kelly said. “Unless there are significant renegotiations, you’ll see far fewer pandas in the United States at the end of this current agreement.”

The San Diego Zoo’s contract with China is the first to expire, in 2008. The last contract, at the Memphis Zoo, ends in 2013

“People will get up in the middle of the night to see the pandas,” said Don Lindburg, head of the office of giant pandas at the San Diego Zoo. “I don’t think there is a comparable animal. There isn’t the enormity of response that you find with pandas.”

But after the first year, crowds dwindle, while the expenses remain high. In fact, a panda’s upkeep costs five times more than that of the next most expensive animal, an elephant.

A curator, three full-time keepers and one backup keeper care for Lun Lun and Yang Yang at Zoo Atlanta. A crew of six travels around Georgia six days a week, harvesting bamboo from 400 volunteers who grow it in their backyards. (Zoo Atlanta tried growing its own on a farm, as the Memphis Zoo does, but Lun Lun and Yang Yang turned up their noses.)

“It’s crazy,” Mr. Kelly said. “These bears, year-round, are some of the most pampered animals on the planet. We measure everything that goes in. We measure everything that goes out.”

Then there are the contracts, most lasting 10 years. Because China retains ownership of the pandas, zoos lease each pair for $1 million a year. If cubs are born, the annual fee increases by an average of $600,000. In addition, each zoo has agreed to pay another million or so each year to finance research and conservation projects in the United States and in China. Taken together, Mr. Kelly says, the contracts are worth more than $80 million to the Chinese government.
Photobucket

(What is more disturbing…. is that there was a stripper in the cake and the panda ate her too)

Chris Packham has called for the money that goes to support the preservation of pandas to be put towards more deserving animals. The African wild dog comes to mind. You have probably never heard of them for a couple of reasons. There used to be half a million of them and now there is only 3000. They also aren’t any environmental organizations letterhead or screen printed on any t-shirts because they ugly as hell.

Photobucket

(Yes this is what they really look like)

Can you imagine trying to raise money for your charity using this ugly fucking thing? You wouldn’t receive enough donations to afford a free lunch. People don’t donate money to preserve ugly un-cuddlable animals and besides unlike a panda the African wild dog would try to rip your bollocks off if you tried to hug it.

African wild dogs don’t sell tickets at the zoo, they don’t bring in any donation money and they also don’t cost two million dollars per year to keep lying around eating Fabrige’ egg omelette’s. They would however survive and flourish once again if somebody just left some scraps of meat lying around for them to eat and they weren’t hunted for sport by some people who enjoy killing things for fun and not survival.

Photobucket

(One fat lazy panda would feed a lot of African wild dogs)

Pandas exist to make people money. That is it. There is no other reason at all. The make China money and this is a country who has a history of making sure that their very own people become extinct when they disagree with them. They sure don’t care about a few lazy bears that can’t even be bothered to roger each other.

Photobucket

(Don’t get excited….one of them is asleep)

They certainly also exist to feed and nourish the biggest laziest panda that truly needs to be thrown into a pack of African wild dogs….the WWF.

The WWF has been criticised for being sponsored by a number of industrial companies that are actively involved in deforestation and other environmental abuses. In December 2002, WWF appointed Linda Coady, a former Weyerhaeuser Co executive to the position of vice-president of its Pacific regional office.

The panda cash machine isn’t the group’s only source of money. The World Wildlife Fund also rakes in millions from corporations, including Alcoa, Citigroup, the Bank of America, Kodak, J.P. Morgan, the Bank of Tokyo, Philip Morris, Waste Management and DuPont. They even offer an annual conservation award funded by and named after the late oil baron J. Paul Getty. It hawks its own credit card and showcases its own online boutique. As a result, WWF’s budget has swelled to over $100 million a year and its not looking back.

A recent investigation by The Unsuitablog found that WWF were unwilling to commit that they would pull out of a rainforest funding agreement with the global bank HSBC if it transpired that HSBC had renaged on their own environmental policies. The value of the agreement is estimated to be around £1 million per year.

Photobucket

(Not Dick Cheney)

Aren’t we done with pandas yet? Sure some people may think they are cute, but is cute worth saving if it is lazy? What about if cute and lazy is worth saving but how about if it can’t save itself without our help? The world needs our financial resources more than ever and we are fucking it away on motherfucking pandas.

$200 000 000 is a shitload of panda food. I can think of few other mammals that are just as cute and needy besides some lazy bears that would be long gone by now if some people didn’t want to gawk at them who could really use the resources.

Photobucket

(Not on lease from China)

Photobucket

Not on lease, but at least for sale and with a greater future than a fucking bear.


Bookmark and Share



Digg!

submit to reddit

Bookmark this on Delicious

Advertisements

~ by jeff on September 29, 2009.

2 Responses to “Pandaganda”

  1. […] awesome when people are killed by animals they cage and exploit. It really is. The wilder the animal and more gruesome the death the better. When a bear who is […]

  2. […] awesome when people are killed by animals they cage and exploit. It really is. The wilder the animal and more gruesome the death the better. When a bear who is […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: