Quantcast

ELF and ALF Terrorists fixing to get hammered

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Nice!!!
:thumb:

11 People Indicted in Ecoterrorism Plot
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

Eleven people were indicted in a series of arsons, claimed by the radical groups Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front, in five Western states, the Justice Department said Friday.

The 65-count indictment said the suspects are responsible for 17 incidents in California, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Wyoming, including sabotaging a high-tension power line, in a conspiracy that dates back to 1996. The indictment was returned Thursday by a federal grand jury in Eugene, Ore., and unsealed Friday.

"The indictment tells a story of four-and-a-half years of arson, vandalism, violence and destruction claimed to have been executed on behalf of the Animal Liberation Front or Earth Liberation Front, extremist movements known to support acts of domestic terrorism," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said at a news conference Friday.

Appearing with Gonzales, FBI Director Robert Mueller declared, "Terrorism is terrorism, no matter what the motive."

"There is a clear difference between constitutionally protected advocacy ... and violent criminal activity," Mueller added.

"It is one thing to write concerned letters or to hold peaceful demonstrations," Mueller said. "It is another thing entirely to construct and use improvised explosives to harass and intimidate victims by destroying property and to cause millions of dollars in losses by acts or threats of violence."

Eight defendants have been arrested. Three people remain at large, and are believed to be outside the United States, according to a statement from the Justice Department.

In Eugene, two defendants, Jonathan Christopher Mark Paul, 39, and Suzanne Nicole "India" Savoie, 28, were both ordered held without bail, pending further hearings.

A criminal complaint filed in federal court in Eugene accused Paul, a firefighter, of setting firebombs that burned down a horse slaughterhouse in 1997. The ALF claimed responsibility for that fire, which caused an estimated $1 million in damage.

Savoie, who works in a group home for the developmentally disabled, is accused of serving as a lookout for a fire in 2001 that destroyed offices of a lumber mill. The ELF claimed responsibility for that fire.

The other defendants are Joseph Dibee, Chelsea Dawn Gerlach, Sarah Kendall Harvey, Daniel McGowan, Stanislas Meyerhoff, Josephine Overaker, Rebecca Rubin, Darren Todd Thurston and Kevin Tubbs.

Dibee, Overaker and Rubin have not been arrested. The other six were arrested in December.

Using improvised incendiary devices made from milk jugs, petroleum products and homemade timers, they carried out attacks between 1996 and 2001, the indictment alleged. Targets included U.S. Forest Service ranger stations, U.S. Bureau of Land Management wild horse facilities, lumber companies, meat processing companies, a ski area and the power line, the indictment said.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
BuddhaRoadkill said:
Since when did vandalism and arson become "Terrorism"?
ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
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.
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,976
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
BuddhaRoadkill said:
Since when did vandalism and arson become "Terrorism"?

When they can potentially kill someone. So using Arson for political means is probably going to be considered terrorsim. Events like the Phoenix Mountain Preserve fires where millions of dollars of homes were burned, would probably quailfy, as would Spiking trees, burning lumber mills. I'm not saying I disagree with the message, but the techniques have crossed the line.
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,976
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
Transcend said:
Terrorism is the catch word of the year under this administration. OMG fear the terrorists!

Only too true. This administration attaches the word terrorist to almost everything.

But still ELF is a organization doing property damage and endangering human life for the goal of changing public policy, making them at least technically a terrorist organization, even if many people wouldn't agree.
 

BuddhaRoadkill

I suck at Tool
Feb 15, 2004
988
0
Chintimini Bog
Transcend said:
Terrorism is the catch word of the year under this administration. OMG fear the terrorists!
That was my point. I guess going strictly by Webster, one could consider their actions "terrorism". Don't ya think it's kinda pathetic to try and lump some dirty hippies torching empty buildings in with nightclub bombings where hundreds of people are injured/killed? I guess when I think of Terror, I think of fearing for my life - not my property.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
You guys are just retarded. If some hippies go out and blow up a consruction office somewhere to make a political statement, how is that different than arabs blowing up coffee shops?
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
BurlyShirley said:
You guys are just retarded. If some hippies go out and blow up a consruction office somewhere to make a political statement, how is that different than arabs blowing up coffee shops?
I tend to agree with you Shirley. The problem though with labelling it all terrorism is you are giving them the attention and cachet they are seeking. "Terrorists" is automatically going to garner more headlines than "arsonists" or "vandals" which is obviously what they want.
Like Reactor while I'm sympathetic to their aims their methods leave a lot to be desired.
A question Shirley, do you regard PETA as terrorists?
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
valve bouncer said:
A question Shirley, do you regard PETA as terrorists?
If PETA blows **** up for political reasons, then yeah. If they just chain themselves to sheep, no. The simple act of violence in the name of politics (save the iraq schpeel) is the deciding factor.
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
BurlyShirley said:
If PETA blows **** up for political reasons, then yeah. If they just chain themselves to sheep, no. The simple act of violence in the name of politics (save the iraq schpeel) is the deciding factor.
Yep, fair enough, agreed again. How about those guys that try to disrupt G8 mettings and so on? I guess what I'm getting at is that the line of where activism becomes terrorism is pretty blurred. Also, all terrorists aren't created equal. Are Al Quaida and the ELF no different in your book?
If we're too quick to whip out the terrorist card we might then start using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
valve bouncer said:
Yep, fair enough, agreed again. How about those guys that try to disrupt G8 mettings and so on? I guess what I'm getting at is that the line of where activism becomes terrorism is pretty blurred. Also, all terrorists aren't created equal. Are Al Quaida and the ELF no different in your book?
If we're too quick to whip out the terrorist card we might then start using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Well sure, there's a matter of scale to everything, but in the name of convicting such nutjobs to longer/harder sentences, I believe a "terrorist" gets more time than a "vandal" ya know?
I mean really, we could call anybody a terrorist, but its pretty reasonable in this case, imo.
As for the guys you asked about. I dunno. I guess it comes down to what they've specifically done. If they're popping tear gas bombs to clear out buildings, yeah, if they're just blocking doorways, probably not.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
Here's the thing...until it turns into violence that harms people, or (something the dictionary definition misses) it is systematic, I don't think you can call it terrorism. It also really devalues the term. Much like the recent habit of throwing the word "treason" around in cases where it most certainly doesn't apply. This isn't quite like the IRA. Ask ten retards on the street if they've heard of the ELF, and you'll get 9 or 10 blank stares. They aren't the IRA, y'know?

Is it wrong? Yep. Is it terrorism? Probably not. If we're not going to call Eric Rudolph a terrorist, (he was a bomber or a fugitive most of the time, if I recall correctly) then it's hard to call these guys terrorists. Hell, you might as well call a guy who gets into bar fights a terrorist. Drunk drivers certainly qualify as well.

Now, since the government is calling them terrorists, I have a question for Gonzales: When can we start torturing them to give up info? Enquiring minds want to know...
 

BuddhaRoadkill

I suck at Tool
Feb 15, 2004
988
0
Chintimini Bog
BurlyShirley said:
You guys are just retarded. If some hippies go out and blow up a consruction office somewhere to make a political statement, how is that different than arabs blowing up coffee shops?
Um ... there are people in the coffee shops?

The crusties target a construction office, intentionally without people.
The arabs target people, that happen to be in a coffe shop.

You don't see a difference there? Kinda like black/white, night/day, N8/Changleen, .....
 

BuddhaRoadkill

I suck at Tool
Feb 15, 2004
988
0
Chintimini Bog
BurlyShirley said:
Well sure, there's a matter of scale to everything, but in the name of convicting such nutjobs to longer/harder sentences, I believe a "terrorist" gets more time than a "vandal" ya know?
Now this I agree with, sorta. Throw out a racial slur during a casual saturday night brawl and boom, ya gots yourself a hate crime. There should be some kind of extended punishment for politically motivated criminal activity, but come up with a more fitting term. Lumping property damage in with childrens body parts flying through the air is absurd. One is cause for concern, the other is ... well ... terror.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,673
2
Feeling the lag
Silver said:
Here's the thing...until it turns into violence that harms people, or (something the dictionary definition misses) it is systematic, I don't think you can call it terrorism. It also really devalues the term. Much like the recent habit of throwing the word "treason" around in cases where it most certainly doesn't apply. This isn't quite like the IRA. Ask ten retards on the street if they've heard of the ELF, and you'll get 9 or 10 blank stares. They aren't the IRA, y'know?

Is it wrong? Yep. Is it terrorism? Probably not. If we're not going to call Eric Rudolph a terrorist, (he was a bomber or a fugitive most of the time, if I recall correctly) then it's hard to call these guys terrorists. Hell, you might as well call a guy who gets into bar fights a terrorist. Drunk drivers certainly qualify as well.

Now, since the government is calling them terrorists, I have a question for Gonzales: When can we start torturing them to give up info? Enquiring minds want to know...
Unusually I agree with Shirley on this one. If these people are using bombs and arson to attempt to coerce government organisations then the only difference between them and other groups acknowledged as terrorist is the ultimate aim. Surely the acts should govern the definition rather than the motive?
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,976
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
Silver said:
Is it wrong? Yep. Is it terrorism? Probably not. If we're not going to call Eric Rudolph a terrorist, (he was a bomber or a fugitive most of the time, if I recall correctly) then it's hard to call these guys terrorists. Hell, you might as well call a guy who gets into bar fights a terrorist. Drunk drivers certainly qualify as well.
QUOTE]

Eric Rudolph is a terrorist.

As far a drunk drivers....WTF does it take to for people to get the hint??? Should Drunk drivers have one knee cap blown off each time they are caught, and the third time....aim about 16" north.
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,976
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
BuddhaRoadkill said:
Um ... there are people in the coffee shops?

The crusties target a construction office, intentionally without people.
The arabs target people, that happen to be in a coffe shop.

You don't see a difference there? Kinda like black/white, night/day, N8/Changleen, .....

Anytime you set an arson, you could kill people. And in a way it's worse because the people hurt aren't usually directly involved in whatever. Usually it's a janitor, or firefighter, or the guy next door.

There is a degree of difference, ELF et. al., usually are trying to minimized the chance of loss of human life, but it's still there. What most people consider terrorists deliberately try to inflict casualties. But the crime of terrorism is defined in the United States Code as:

(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Monkey-wrenching a bulldozer is vandalism, expensive vandalism.

An organized conspiracy to burn buildings to stop development is defined by the USC as terrorism.

I am sympathetic to their goals, In a lot of cases we are simply raping the planet, and it's wrong. But in their frustration they've stepped over the line, and what they are doing is hurting their cause more than helping it.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,737
1,820
chez moi
'Terrorist' or not, the magnitude of this stuff is very minor...so minor as to overshadow the significance of the debate.

To talk about this like it's somehow part of 'winning the war on terror' is just a laugh. It's like catching a kid in high school dealing pot and calling it a 'drug bust.' Sure, there was problem and some cops did some good police work figuring it out and bringing it before a court...but is it important enough to give a second look?

In the not-so-wise words of Walter Sobechzeck, "F*ckin' amateurs, dude. F*ckin' amateurs."


MD
 

narlus

Eastcoast Softcore
Staff member
Nov 7, 2001
24,658
65
behind the viewfinder
Transcend said:
Terrorism is the catch word of the year under this administration. OMG fear the terrorists!
anyone remember that edited version of the republican convention a couple years ago? they took snippets of all the speakers and spliced together their references to either "terror/ism/ist" or "9/11". it was staggering how often they flogged that horse.
 

Reactor

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2005
3,976
1
Chandler, AZ, USA
MikeD said:
'Terrorist' or not, the magnitude of this stuff is very minor...so minor as to overshadow the significance of the debate.

To talk about this like it's somehow part of 'winning the war on terror' is just a laugh. It's like catching a kid in high school dealing pot and calling it a 'drug bust.' Sure, there was problem and some cops did some good police work figuring it out and bringing it before a court...but is it important enough to give a second look?

In the not-so-wise words of Walter Sobechzeck, "F*ckin' amateurs, dude. F*ckin' amateurs."


MD
Oh, I agree. There is an order (or more) of magnitude between "real" terrorists that set bombs to intentionally kill people, and the "eco-terrorists" which are more intent on property damage, with the possibility of someone accidentally getting injured. But like it or not, they technically fall under the same provisions of the US code. I even agree with many of ELFs points, just not their methods of getting their message across.