Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ALF/ELF - the terror threat nobody dares talk about

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:06 AM
Original message
ALF/ELF - the terror threat nobody dares talk about
http://www.thetimesharebeat.com/wash/crossings63.htm

"The FBI estimates that ALF/ELF has committed more than 600 criminal acts in the United States since 1996, resulting in more than $43 million in damages," Jarboe testified. "The tragedy of September 11th has not slowed these groups," he continued. In order to regain prominence in the public mind, they have "turned increasingly towards vandalism and terrorist activities in attempts to further their cause." For example, a family-owned auto dealership in Eugene, Oregon suffered a one million dollar loss when 35 SUVs were set on fire last March. ELF described the fire in its press release as a warning that "gas-guzzling SUVs are at the forefront of this vile imperialist caravan towards self-destruction."

Defenders of ALF/ELF cite a record of over two decades of "direct action" (self-defined as fire, vandalism and property damage). They claim never to have killed or seriously injured any individuals. The groups describe themselves as waging a "nonviolent campaign taking all precautions not to harm any animal - human or otherwise." They prefer to be called A-L-F and E-L-F, not "alf" or "elf." They seem to disregard a scientist and the wood industry association executive both of whom had their fingers blown off by a letter bomb a few years back.

That safety record more good fortune, than good intentions, their critics say, noting that the groups take no responsibility for first responders such as fire fighters who might be injured or copycats who might not be as cautious. (ALF/ELF fires are usually set in the middle of the night, each cell operating independently without advanced communiqués.)


http://slate.msn.com/id/2090581/

The radical Earth Liberation Front has claimed responsibility for an Oct. 24 attack on a Wal-Mart construction site in Martinsville, Ind. The saboteurs vandalized over a dozen vehicles, resulting in $25,000 worth of damages—a tiny blip compared to the $100 million in damages the group says it has inflicted since the mid-1990s. What are the ELF's goals, exactly?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001756001_ecoterror02.html

ELF first took aim at urban sprawl in 2000, when it burned luxury homes and condos under construction on New York's Long Island. But Phil Celestini, the agent in charge of the FBI's domestic terrorism operations unit in Washington, noted that the San Diego fires "are taking place in more densely populated areas than in the past."

On Aug. 1, a fire destroyed a five-story, 206-unit apartment complex under construction in San Diego's University City neighborhood. The damage estimate of $50 million made it "the single largest act of property destruction ever committed by one of these groups in the history of the country," Celestini said.

"It's sheer dumb luck and providence that someone has not been killed," he said. "You set a fire that big, there's no way of predicting what the ultimate consequences will be."


http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1126/p02s01-usju.html

Initially, acts of "monkey wrenching" amounted to little more than vandalism aimed at such targets as logging equipment and mink farms. In the 1990s, that escalated to major arson and bombings. Meanwhile, the range of targets in recent months has expanded to include biotechnology firms, SUV dealers, housing developments, Wal-Mart stores, and a bottled water plant.

According to the FBI, there have been some 600 acts of ecoterrorism in the United States with property losses totaling nearly $50 million. Speaking of recent attacks on biotech firms, Phil Celestini, head of the FBI's domestic terrorism unit in Washington, told the Associated Press, "We've seen a drastic escalation in the use of violent tactics in the past year."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. Screw both of them, destruction of property is a crime
I don't care what your casue is or how right you might be there is always other ways to achieve goals without destroying someone else's property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Dude!
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 09:16 AM by DarkPhenyx
Where's your underpants? *covering eyes* At least put on a towel or something, sheesh! Running around with your bananna hanging out like that. There are women and children...and at least one Chimpy....here!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Just representin'
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. I talk about it.
These people are morons and zelots. They are no better than al'Queda, only having a different, more user friendly, driving force to make them stand out.

The bottom line is that they do more harm than good for the causes they support. Kinda like PETA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. No better than Al Qaeda... Do they kill people? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Neither did al'Queda in the begining.
You will notice a certain "ramping up" of the violence level? It really is only a matter of time. Additionally their efforts are actually hurtng the environment, not helping it. Burn down a house? More trees cut to replace it. Also everyones insurance rates go up...again. Burn a bunch of cars? Wow, smog and cancer inducing chemicals released into the air.

As I said...they are idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. I have a link for you
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

In related news, anti-Bush protesters to be charged as terrorists because, well, they're getting noticeably ANGRIER than before! If we don't rein them in, they'll unleash Republican Genocide sooner than you think!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Oh, I have no doubt the "terrorist" label...
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 09:47 AM by DarkPhenyx
...is being used against anyone who opposes the administration. In this case, however, it is a pretty appropriate use of the label.

<on edit>

If the Brit protestors start blowing up American intersts in the Isle's to further their cause then they will be terrorists BTW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
umkhonto Donating Member (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. The Traitor Label
is being used to describe them, can the terrorist label be far behind?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Depends on what further actions they take.
This is a bit off thread though. Dosen't really have anything to do with ALF/ELF.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. Threadjack
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veganwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. i do not think they have ever killed anyone
they stay with direct action and property damage.

of course i could be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlashHarry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
93. Spiking trees can kill or maim people... N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rogerashton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. While I would not condone their actions,
I do think it is important to distinguish between terrorism and property destruction, even when the property destruction may or does result in loss of life. Terrorism is the deliberate destruction of civilian human lives to create fear and thereby advance a political agenda. Intentions count. Calling this terrorism is on the same level as saying that *Bush is the same as Hitler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Terrorism...
...is using violent means to promote your agenda. Death really has nothing to do with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rogerashton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #8
74. You are mistaken.
Or you are failing to recognize that the word "violent" has many shades and degrees.

What I am saying is that terrorism is too important to lump it together with actions that do not intend the taking of (specifically civilian) lives and creating fear for political purposes. Now, you and I might define terrorism differently, but there is a real phenomenon out there that needs to be the first priority to oppose -- and broadening the word diffuses the effort. That's the problem with the Iraq war. Mr. Bush would have us believe that Saddam's bluffing is the same as Al Qaeda's terrorism, and it just isn't. More than that, the Pubs have come close to saying that telling the truth about Mr. Bush in the strong language it deserves is violence and is terrorism? Do we not have to draw a line somewhere? Several lines, actually.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #74
83. Terrorism does not require you to kill anyone.
Ask blacks who used to live with burning crosses on their lawns. Aslo, if you look in the dictionary, you will find that my definition is correct. Now, how other people wish to define it is a different issue, however if we wish to start allowing everyone to define words however they wish then we will devolve into a situation where noone can hold a meaningful conversation at all. We are close enough to that as it is I would really like to step back from that state, thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
96. i dont see how property destruction is violent against people yes
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 08:21 PM by corporatewhore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amazona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
23. atarting fires in San Diego County certainly kills
Quite a few people were killed in San Diego County last year as a result of these fires, most started by human agency. The University City area is quite heavily populated. If no one was killed in that particular fire, as the article claims, it was not for lack of trying. In addition to people being burned alive and being killed by smoke inhalation, as a direct result of fires in San Diego County, I wonder how many die later of heart disease, etc. I had a friend who was in a fire and who almost died 3 months later of a heart attack caused by lingering effects of smoke inhalation. These injuries and deaths are not counted in the statistics to my knowledge, yet they are caused by fire.

If these people are setting fires and then only claiming the fires where no one was directly killed, then it doesn't make them non-violent, it just makes them cagey as well as evil.

Fires in San Diego County kill. Fire bugs no matter what justification they give for setting these fires need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. link?
what fires specifically are you talking about?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #25
42. Try reading the articles at the front of the thread
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #23
44. huhhhhhhh?!? the fires in san diego were caused by a lost hunter..
trying to attract the attention of search and rescue, not by "ELF" or "ALF" or "SANTA".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Not those fires, the condo fires
Fer chrissakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. nobody died in the fire in university city
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. Only a matter of time before somebody gets killed
Plus they've moved into the suburbs and cities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
15. would somebody please think about those poor SUVs!
gimme a break
you can't equate vandalism with terrorism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Torching a five-story, 206-unit construction project
Yep, just vandalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. I'm crying over those poor little 2x4's

boo hoo

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. How about the trees they came from to begin with.
And the ones the were cut to replace them. Not to mention all the mining for the concrete, et. al.

Would ELF/ALF have prefered that instead of building a large structure where lots of people could live that we build tract homes instead using a lot more land and resources?

Like I said. They are idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Trust fund kiddies, malcontents, common criminals
Lunatic fringe, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. isn't that all terrorist groups?
from the Weathermen to al Quaeda? To the US revolutionaries? To the Cuban Revolutionaries? The Reds in 1917 Russia? Trust Fund Kiddies, Malcontents and Common Criminals. I like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. I guess the Zapatistas are trust fund kiddies too!
LOL!

I don't really care about the ALF or whatever
but equating vandalism with mass murder is weak and disingenous at best.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. STFU? hmmmm.... very sad
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 11:36 AM by el_gato
I guess you don't want to hear anything that does
not conform to your beliefs.

I don't know why but I usually expect more from DUers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. No, but pathetic simpery grates on my nerves
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. Now your spewing insults

I guess you don't like it since I didn't come here and cheerlead for your post.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. Please come up with a better defense for your position.
Hell, state your position. That might help too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. I just think it is dangerous to be so fast and loose with the Terror label
maybe they are counter productive and the better route to
change would be focusing on educating people but I don't
care to equate ALF with Al Queda.

It's that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #29
35. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. do you have anything to offer besides insults?

Or do you just want a flame war because I don't agree with you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. more name calling how sad

Do you care to discuss the issues or just shout insults?
Notice I have not attacked you personally but you have
repeatedly attacked me personally.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. No, but you consider mocking and pestering an admirable quality
I do not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #35
50. Don't be obtuse...
he didn't say he didn't care...he said he didn't care to equate ALF with Al Queada. Big difference when you use the whole quote in context. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. It is still terrorism. Plain and simple.
It is terrormism by the very definition of terrorism. Saying anything else is waek and disingenous at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. I think people need to be very careful throwing that word around
so If some wayward kid smashes a window on an SUV are you saying they should be sent to Guantanamo?

You are treading down the dangerous slope that Ashcroft wants to go down. Next all direct action a la Greenpeace etc. will fall under the
rubric of terrorism.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #32
39. A wayward kid smashing a window is not what this is about
This is about torching lots upon lots of vehicles, releasing toxic smoke into the air, and when the fire is doused, the PCBs and dioxins then leach into the surrounding soil and are absorbed into the water table.


But hey, what's an outbreak of cancer to an ELFer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #32
41. Greenpeace, by and large, isn't blowing things up.
What would you call the actions of ALF and ELF then? It is far from a kid smashing a window, spray painting a wall, or burning down an abandoned house because they are bored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Greenpeace is fine, they don't nor will they ever resort to violence
That's why they've been around for so long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. They are usually the victim of violence.
The sinking of the Rainbow Warrior leaps to mind. Oh, wait that was vandalism, not terrorism. The man who died in the ship was unintentional so that dosen't count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. They were murdered by the French Government
an act done by a State and yes that was in my opinion terrorism
but alot of people don't consider state sponsored violence terrorism
for some reason.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. I would be one that does.
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 12:39 PM by DarkPhenyx
However, as the death was unintentional, the act of sinking the ship was not terroriem. It was simply vandalism. Using the logic applied by many in this discussion mind you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:43 PM
Original message
i'm not so sure those deaths were unintentional

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
56. There was only one, and it was.
The inquest had enough evidence proving this to be the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. Ok, this could get fascinating...
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 12:47 PM by VelmaD
so let's use some examples from earlier in this very thread.

Was setting fire to empty condos terrorism or vandalism? No one died.

Is setting fire to SUVs or pouring sugar in their gas tanks or any of the other things some people do to disable them terrorism or vandalism? No one dies.

I'm not being snarky. Swear to gawd.

I suppose I'm also curious why sinking the Rainbow Warrior wasn't terrorism. Would like to understand your thinking on this a litlte more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. "No one died"
Okay, then.



I dislike Blockbuster Video. So if I wait until the close of business and then torch the joint, everything should be peachy because nobody died.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. First off...
my question was directed to DarkPhenyx since he actually seemed to have something interesting to say on this subject.

Second, I never said it was ok to do whatever you want as long as no one dies. I brought up those examples specifically because he mentioned the death related to the destruction of the Rainbow Warrior.

You seem to have completely missed the point of my post - where do you personally draw the line between terrorism and vandalism? I'm interested in where other people draw this line in their own heads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. You have to go back to the real definition of the word.
I would call the actions of the French gov't in this case terrorism. I would have done so had there been no death at all. They were using force and violence to intimidate a group into acquiesce to demands. By definition that is terrorism.

However some here should cal it vandalism. It was only property damage after all. The death was accidental.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #61
65. I was pretty sure we would end up...
agreeing on this one. :) I totally agree that sinking the Rainbow Warrior was an act designed solely to intimidate Greenpeace and by extension other environmental and progressive organizations.

Hey...by that definition can we call the PATRIOT ACT an act of terrorism by our government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. and the use of Violence and Intimidation against FTAA protestors
Edited on Wed Feb-18-04 01:13 PM by el_gato
in Miami I think would qualify under this definition too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
21. These are criminals
and nothing better. While I may sympathise with some of their professed ideals, I can only condemm them for using violence to achieve a goal, before violence was used on them (note the exemption for revolutionary action) As far as I'm concerned, they are lower on the totem pole than even Abortion Clinic Bombers (at least those folks, however misguided, believe they are saving lives) If I knew someone who was involved, I would turn them in. So if you are involved, stop, now. just don't tell me. This is no civil disobediance, it is escalating violence. and yes, low grade terrorism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanuckAmok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
33. Misdirected energy...
I'm somewhat familiar with both orgs, and I empathise with their causes, but I totally disagree with their tactics.

Often, they cause severe environmental damage as a result of their actions (imagine the concentrated toxin release of 35 trucks, burning simultaneously!).

I prefer the non-violent and creative actions of the European arms of the A-L-F. One of their most effective tactics is to jam the locks of fast food restaurants with slices of film, so they open hours later than planned. It's clever, effective and doesn't put anyones' safety at risk.

But on the whole, I prefer legal action and publc education to extremism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
47. so i guess i'm the only one on the board to wonder aloud..
if some of these fires aren't started by folks who haven't any association with "ELF", but maybe have a personal grudge, are a NIMBYist, or are scamming their insurance policy. Nobody even knows who these people are. Their website posts incidents as they read them in the newspaper, not as reported by an agent or operative.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. that is certainly a possibility
especially some of these car lots with a plethora of SUVs they
can't seem to sell

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. If ALF and Elf didn't have a history of this sort of activity...
...which they proudly acknowledge, then it wouldn't be an issue. Those "copy-cats" wouldn't have ALF/ELF to use as cover would they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
54. What is terrorism?
It is the attempt to bring about political or social change through fear and intimidation. Engaging in some of the tactics that both of these groups do falls under that heading, no different than the Army of God or the KKK.

You don't get to redefine terms because you like this organization or the toher.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. Thank you.
Nice to hear somone else say that.

It is also worth pointing out that being a "terrorist" does not perclude someone from also being an "activist" or a "freedom fighter". The terms are not mutually exclusive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #58
62. Exactly
There is no truer statement than "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." I agree with the aims of protecting the environment and treating animals with dignity, but let's call a spade a spade here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #58
64. so let's examine this
"Terrorism is the attempt to bring about political or social change through fear and intimidation."

The FTAA and CAFTA etc. are being pushed down our throats and
make no mistake these "agreements" are social change even though
a vast amount of people are against it. But those in power want to
"bring about political or social change" and they don't hesitate to
use "fear and intimidation."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. Ummmm
Why do you think I'm some kind of government stooge simply because I don't just fall on my knees and praise your positions as perfect and holy?

I'm really getting fucking tired of this black-and-white attitude by people around anymore. It used to be you could actually DISCUSS things like this without trollers slinging bullshit around. I miss those days.

For the record, yes, that is terrorism. Are you happy now? Or do you have more asinine questions to ask? Make it quick, I have to get back to the uber-conspiracy meeting with the WTO and the other Powers That Be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. very strange response
I'm simply discussing the issue and now your getting defensive when I
haven't even disagreed with you. My whole position on this discussion
is that the word terrorism is awfully loaded and used selectively by people and their pet enemies. All I'm trying to do here is point that out. You can get all huffy if you want but don't put words in my mouth.
I never called you a government stooge nor do I think you are one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. You are posting a distractor though.
It really isn't germain to the discussion on wether or not the actions of ALF/ELF constitute terrorism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #69
71. So, then, define terrorism
What does a group need to do to be terrorists?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. and please remember to distinguish between...
...what the group actually intended and the accidental event that happen in the pursuit of their higher goals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. it's not so cut and dry

and I don't know if a clear cut line exists.
For example if the alf freed some fur animals from
a farm I don't really care to call this terrorism
I would call it a property crime but I don't really
care to call it terrorism.

Again if someone goes and spray paints some SUVs and
breaks some windows I don't really want to call that terrorism.

But here is where the line gets fuzzy.
I know it's not black and white the way some people want it
to be but terrorism is an awfully loaded and strong word.
Now you can use some of the more spectacular acts of
some of these people and paint it as terrorism and maybe
I won't have too much to disagree about but the word
is so abused at this point that I don't even like to use
it anymore.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #73
82. Again if someone goes and spray paints some SUVs and breaks some windows
This is not "some SUVs" or "some windows".


Did you even bother to read the articles the thread is based on, or are you comfortable setting up strawman after strawman?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #82
84. did you even read my post?

:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #69
75. there is a significant difference
FTAA and NAFTA, whatever their merits (which I don't choose to discuss with you today) are being proposed by governments. governments reserve the right to use for themselves, as well as the right to incarcerate and even kill. (try getting a warrant to bust down your neighbors door sometime, you can't get one, but the FBI can.) Try to get permission to go to another country and kill people, you can only do it in the name of a government. That's why a soldier cannot be tried for murder for killing a combatant in battle, it's acting on behalf of a state.

non-state actors, say, al quaeda, or ELF/ALF or Operation Rescue, that use violence to intimidate the population towards a political goal, are terrorists, in my mind. I'll give you an example.

I hate gentrification. So I will randomly use violence against symbols of gentrification, be they rebuilt townhouses, new stores, yuppies, whatever. The local crack house has been bought by a couple of yuppies who are going to rebuild it into condos. I bulldoze it at midnight. You will soon know that moving into my neighborhood carries the risk of being targeted simply for that act. That is terrorism. It is a crime.

I love gentrification, so I get the local crack house, a decrepit, rotting old town house, condemmed by the government. It is flattened by bulldozers hired by the city. That is not terrorism, even though it had the exact same effect (the building got destroyed.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #75
77. and here is where I completely disagree with you

You are exempting the state, I would never do that.
And yes I am well aware of the "state" monopoly on the
use of violence. The elite see great personal benefit
in the imposition of FTAA etc. and they will use
the tools of the state to enact it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kodi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
57. melmac is about to invade?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #57
63. GAHHHHHHHHHHH
I FUCKING HATE THAT FUCKING PUPPET.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack The Tab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #57
79. "HEY WILLIE!"
I seriously thought of the orange one when I saw this thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #57
81. Yeah, and they're going to use FRENCH OIL!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
67. But You cannot apply the definition selectively
since our government uses violence and intimidation to bring about social change all the time

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #67
76. the defninition applies to nongovernmental bodies
like the one formerly run by your avatar, for instance. States cannot commmit terrorism. They can sponsor it, I suppose, but if a state uses violence it can either be completely legitimate (arresting the guy who just raped your little sister, using military force against Japan in WWII) or illegitimate (Iraq) but it's either a civil matter or war. not terrorism, by defninition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #76
78. I disagree
the state can engage in terrorism
they do it all the time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VelmaD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #76
80. How very convenient for governments...
that they get to define themselves out of the definition of terrorism.

Who was it that decided that States cannot commit "terrorism"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redneck Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
85. Direct action is important
if for no other reason than to keep the center of the debate from creeping to far to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #85
86. You'll notice I ahven't said that direct action is necessarily bad.
However if you use it you must be willing to accept that you are moving into an area where you may find yourself being a terrorist. Or freedom fighter. There really isn't a hairs difference in most cases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redneck Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. I would finesse that answer a little bit
"You are moving into an area where you may find yourself being a terrorist."

Ashcroft and friends are pretty quick to pull the terrorist trigger and it is not to big a step for them to start using the terrorist label against political opponents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. I wouldn't finesse it at all.
It isn't Ashcroft I am talking about. It is the actions of the group. Once the group steps into the realm of active opposition then you are in the realm of terrorism. There is little or no middle ground involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redneck Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #88
89. Terrorism is such a politically charged word right now
and the current government is willing use the threat of "terrorism" to suppress political dissent. I am a lot more concerned with how the government uses the label of terrorism than I am about the actions of ELF.

Burning down a housing development is illegal. If you do it and get caught you need to be willing to suffer the legal consequence. When the government steps in and labels that act of arson "terrorism" suddenly you have changed the level of the debate dramaticly.

We have already seen what people are willing to accept to fight terrorism and the government is taking advantage of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #89
91. and it is terrorism.
that's the point. they are using violence and force to force their agenga forward. that is the very definition of terrorism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redneck Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #91
92. The government's definition of terrorism is the point.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here. Blowing other peoples stuff up, burning down someone else's property is already against the law. Do it and you will be subject to already considerable criminal penalties. But when the government labels those same actions as terrorism it changes the nature of the debate and makes government extremism more palatable.

Arrest them, try them, put them in jail if guilty. All that is fine, but let the government define that same act as terrorism and suddenly that suspect disappears never to be seen again or gets deported or ends up in Guantanamo. By allowing the government to define terrorism as whatever they don't like is a far greater threat than ELF.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #85
98. direct action is very important
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
90. Jeez,a person has to really try to get a post deleted in the lounge
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whitacre D_WI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
94. ALF IS a terrorist!
For God's sake, he wants to eat the CAT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
95. what about the boston tea party ?
they did the first property destroyin Direct Action
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-18-04 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
97. were wto protestors terrorists?
I mean they did bring down the fence
But i see that as direct action aint nuthin wrong with it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC