« The vampire & the vicarHomeLee Simpson's cross walk »

Satan, Amway, Proctor and Gamble

Cheap Laughs

LONDON - The Federal Court in the US has called on Procter & Gamble and rival Amway to end a bitter legal row over claims that P&G has links to devil worship.

The subject of Satanism has dogged the FMCG giant, which owns brand such as Febreze and Herbal Essence, for some time. Allegations first came about because of an old logo that featured a man in the moon, which is seen as being linked to Satanism. This was followed by another set of rumours that an unnamed president of the company had promoted Satanic worship on a talkshow. In 1996, a distributor of Amway products spread the rumours on the corporate voicemail system, prompting P&G to sue Amway and kicking off a legal battle that has so far lasted for seven years. The FMCG and cosmetics giant sued Amway for spreading the rumour and, during the course of the lawsuit, the company's solicitors hired an anti-Amway activist called Sidney Schwartz. Schwartz posted details of P&G's complaint on his website and another later on, and Amway retaliated by taking legal action against both Schwartz and P&G. Although it settled with Schwartz, its battle with P&G continued. Yesterday, the Federal Court called for an end to the battle and to stop wasting the court's money. According to the court ruling: "Although no decision from this court -- or any other, we predict -- will end the hatred these two corporate giants harbour for each other, we hope that they will consider the impact of their continuing legal battle on the scarce resources of the courts, and decide to concentrate their creative talents on the more traditional methods of gaining competitive advantage and declare a ceasefire in the judicial arena."

Claire Billings, Revolution: US Court asks P&G and Amway to drop Satan legal row

P&G has been dogged for many years by false rumors alleging links to Satanism, based on interpretations of its man-in-the-moon logo -- now no longer used publicly -- and reports that an unnamed P&G president espoused Satanism on a talk show, with the talk show changing over time in various incarnations of the rumor. Though the rumor predates the Internet, it still surfaces regularly in Internet discussion groups.

P&G originally sued Amway in 1996 after discovering a Utah distributor had used the corporate voice-mail system to spread the Satan rumor. In handling that lawsuit, ...

Jack Neff, Ad Age: P&G, AMWAY REPRIMANDED IN SATAN WORSHIP LAWSUIT RULING

Comments

I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR A TRADEMARK ON MY RIGHT HAND OR FOREHEAD;BUT NOT FROM PROCTOR AND GAMBEL ;BUT FROMOPEC INTERNATIONAL.....WILL THOU BE MADE CLEAN?PERHAPS ONLY BY THE SOAP OF WADI RITUALISM.
what does the man in the moon and thirteen stars have to do with satanism? There is no mention of either of these symbols in connection with the devil in the bible.I think Amway is trying to divert their own worship of satan by accusing Proctor and Gamble. Here's what I mean;When people accuse others of something, usually it's something they don't like about themselves. Amway simply perpetrated a sort of freudian slip, besides as bad as self described Christians are, only a true devil worshipper or complete blithering idiot would assume as their mantra :"move the product"
I can appreciate your efforts on this subject, However when does the truth come out? I'm tired of he said she said, everyone is entitled to worship who they choose but unless you are ashamed of your god you should be honest in identifying who that may be, if not they're not being honest with themselves. Besides anything that requires you to lie or feel ashamed you should probably reconsider being a part of anyway!
Long Live P&G!

How do you feel?

Feel free to share your feelings about Satan, Amway, Proctor and Gamble. Please stick to the theme of the entry. Disagreement is fine. Homophobia, racism, and kindred expressions of hatred will be deleted. This site is one of my hobbies. I genuinely enjoy hearing from people and hate moderating or killing comments. Forthright disagreement is fine as long as it is civil.
My thanks,
Richard