more fun PETA madness!

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Eupterus;625686; said:
I don't consider either ELF or ALF as terrorist groups. Nether of them have a goal of injuring people. Unless you consider finanical loss to be terrorism. It's not that I see vandalism as a good thing, it isn't the right term.
What I've read/heard about ELF is they are about destroying development which is in enviromentally sensitive areas.

I know more about the ALF. I've chatted with people who are pro ALF and have read a book about them. I recomend anyone who is curious about what the ALF does to check into this book. It's called ____ . Their goal is to make animal exploitation unprofitable by vandalism/ destroying equipment used to harm animals and rescue animals.

The FBI considers ELF, "the largest and most active US-based terrorist group." If the term is good enough for the FBI, then it's good enough for me.

BTW, the American Herritage Dictionary defines terrorism as, "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." I would say that the burnings, bombings, etc that ELF/ALF committ fall well within the realm of terrorism. I don't know many more effective ways than bombing buildings to intimidate or coerce people to following my beliefs.

As far as rescuing animals being a gray area in terms of illegal activity, I could not disagree more. Laws are laws. Breaking and entering is breaking and entering. Theft is theft. Arson is arson. There is no gray area about it. Motives don't have anything to do with committing crimes or not. That would be like justifying a murder by saying the person was killed because he was an "evil guy" and that the world is better without him. We created our laws and guidelines for our behavior. There is obviously no way to consider every situation when making the laws, so we must live with the fact that not every law is perfect and abide by them anyways. There is no other way around it. If people were to start ignoring laws because of personal beliefs, even if they are being violated with the best intentions, our society would crumble. It would be total chaos. There is absolutely no excuse or justification for the terrorism that these organizations practice, no matter how hard you try.

The bottom line is, I could never support or respect and organization (PETA) whose highest ranking officers suggest, "blowing stuff up and smashing windows" as "a great way to bring about animal liberation," and, honestly, I would lose a lot of respect for anyone who did support them after knowing the way they run their organization.

I don't mean to come off rude, but I don't know any other way to put it. This is not meant as a flame, just trying to state my opinion.
 
Well said dacox.

On a side note, I would like to thank everyone for keeping this a fairly civil debate.
 
Some good points there. I guess it depends on how you define terrorism. I had considered terrorism as having the primary focus of the organized killing of many people. I'm not as knowledgable when it comes to the ELF other then I know they are not to out to kill people. Not calling it terrorism still makes it a crime.

Arson is not an animal rescue tactic. It is a tactic used to create finaical loss to discourage certain activites. Just want to define it properly, I am against such tactics.

Illegal Animal rescue may involve tresspassing and theft of injured or sick animals.
Here is a group that sometimes engages in illegal animal rescue: http://www.openrescue.org/
 
Eupterus;626289; said:
I guess it depends on how you define terrorism.


as defined by dictionary.com
ter·ror·ism (těr'ə-rĭz'əm)
n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.


terrorism

noun
the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com