Skip to Main Content

More Bad News for Burberry

Written by PETA | January 17, 2007

One of the drawbacks of being an international business without any sort of ethical sensibilities is that once your questionable practices get out in the open, the entire world learns about them. Which is a lot of people. This past week, Burberry’s callous disregard for animal welfare was exposed in …

Paris (by means of French people in coffins) …

paris protest.jpg

… Hong Kong (with real cavepeople!) …

burberry hong kong.JPG

(I don’t know exactly what the sign on the left says, but I have a strong suspicion that there’s a message in there about Burberry and their animal-killing ways)

…and Los Angeles (where a little bit of nudity goes a long way)

Rather Go Naked Burberry Demo Los Angeles, CA 1-16-07 004.jpg

And there’s plenty more where that came from. So there you have it, Burberry. The whole world agrees that you should stop making clothes out of fur that doesn’t belong to you.

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • you're an idiot( petasucks poster) says:

    Animals are not “here” for us. They are creatures just like we are and they deserve our compassion and respect. We’re smaller than cougars tigers lions bears sharks etc. Are we here for them? If one of them eats a human is it okay because we’re “smaller” and “here” for them? You also might want to look up information on nutrition. There are many other substantial ways to get proteinsoy nuts legumes etc that are sufficient for sustaining a healthy human diet.

  • petasucks says:

    their her for us so shut up and eat a steakwhere else are you going to get protein dip shit

  • herwin says:

    thats a very “interesting” remark about the “individual choice”about wearing fur. clearly “fur” is not at all an individual choiche since the poor abused animals dont have a choiche at all. “forcing moral beliefs” is not quiet the issue. it is merely stopping animal cruelty. the problem is ALL FUR not only from fur farms in china is cruel and something that should be in the pastjust like rascism and other ugly things for a better and more human world. Great demo’s!!!!!!!!

  • pcb says:

    In response to SB… I agree… I think all outlets that say this sort of thing is Sht. But as I say I wrote to HARROD’S just before their Autumn sale last year about their furtrimmed clothing for a new fashion line.I also told them that’s it’s very hypocritical to close down a fur salon in the early 90′s yet still continue to use fur on their fashion range. All they just saidnot quoting however. They believe a individual shouldn’t be pressureddictated by telling a person what to wear or not wear. They also believe a individual should have a choice as consumer on what to purchase. What upsets me the most is that upto 30 million animals on furfarms and ranches are innocently killed every year for the furtrade and yet the practices the use haven’t been stopped or they haven’t even considered using more effectivewestern methods. Also whether this is much interestthere is a petition on the net I think it’s called the petitionsite.com or type Ban Fur farms in China to run a search to tell Du Qinglin Minister of Agriculture in People’s Republic of China to stop the sadsitic abuse on animals and to ban fur farms in China. They need a 1000000only have 325 so far

  • SB says:

    I would like to see inside these wellmanaged international sources.

  • pcb says:

    I’m pleased as to the level of dedication and commitment of these protesters. However from a email I recently received from Harrod’s I believe shops will continue to sell fur for two main reasons 1Use of fur is down to individual choice. Outlets don’t agree with forcing moral beliefs on another. 2Most Stores that use fur are under the impression that their fur comes from wellmanaged international sourcesin keeping with laws and standards. Problem is only 50 of fur comes China and that gets divided between Europe and U.S and since there is no way to track fur once it leaves Middleeast or FarEast there is no proof to say that certain stores like Burberry are supporting furfarms in China.

  • laura convery says:

    i cannot understand how anybody can think wearing dead animals is ‘fashionable’. I have no doubt in my mind that Burberry are aware of the pain inflicted on and torture suffered by the animals on fur farms. This is the epitome of vanity and they are supporting mindless cruelty on innocent creatures. How anyone can wear the skin of something that is not theirs is beyond me.

  • Amanda says:

    You went from Stodgy Stale to Cruel Fail. You can’t be cool hip or fashionable if you’re still trying to sell fur. Use faux fur like all the classy style houses.

Connect With PETA

Subscribe