The ALF is a militant group dedicated to freeing animals from labs, destroying labs that do conduct research on animals, and harassing the Scientists but rarely harm them

Your thoughts on the group, and I do support, for animal liberation

Where the animals go when they are free?

They take care of them

Sure
I mean are you sure?

Some just save them and think they will survive in their new naturial freedom, but there is rarly someone who does....
But if they take care of them...well thats good!

Or a free roaming farm so to speak

There are lots of fur farmers where I come from and many different "animal free groups" and what I read from ALF's site some groups act in their name. But usually the "liberators" don't take care of the animals afterwards. They leave the minks/foxes in the wild where they die because they have lived their whole life in captivity and can't hunt. And usually the animals are so damaged mentally and physically that they have to be put down. I don't know what methods the "liberators" use but I don't believe that it is done by a vet.

So, I am against these kinds of actions. There are more effective and legal ways too.

I would take care of them

The ALF has no clue what it is doing half the time and most of the members are terribly misguided and ill informed. Like PETA.

They are also labeled as a terrorist organization by the US govt. but nowadays even the US govt. would label Washington or the American Militia as a terrorist group

So you know how to properly care for a group of rats injected with formula XYZ?

Or are capable of caring for a creature that has survived vivisection?

And imagine that the creatures you freed, the formula being tested or disease being studies could cause health problems i YOU once you have them?

Or that in freeing/stealing them, you just condemn your friend's aunt to death because the study wasn't completed in time and she gets a disease they were testing treatments for.


It's never black and white. It's ugly shades of gray and NOT to be meddled with lightly or with the Idealist's rose colored glasses stuck in place.

haha no, thats where you come in, and others

Ha ha, no. I have my own animals with issues. I can barely deal with the personal distress that gives me without handling the decisions of others made whimsically as well.

Regardless, it is up to ANYONE who takes up a banner to research not only the goals of their particular banner, but the 'enemy' as well. Put aside your prejudice and hatred in the scrutiny of your enemy, and you'll find that you'll loose a lot of enemies.
But possibly get really depressed. Black and whites are so much easier to deal with.

You stand with them if you want, but know, learn, understand from as many sources as possible (not just ALF friendly ones) what you're aligning yourself with or you will recognize your massive failure to educate yourself later on.

Rather read something like their Manifesto, like the IRA Handbook

Violence NEVER solves violence, even if said violence is done in the name of "liberation." The solution to the issue of animal exploitation is to raise our collective consciousness to include this new "other." To achieve this goal, compassion is our only tool. Harassment and property damage create alienation and fear - it will not change most people's outlooks.

For an very well written discourse on the terror tactics used by some animal rights groups, I suggest reading Capers In The Churchyard: Animal Rights Advocacy in the Age of Terror by Lee Hall.

For anyone who truly cares about the plight of our nonhuman family, one positive direct action that anyone can take it to look at their own life in order to make changes to reduce the amount of suffering we are personally contributing to this planet. Change yourself, and you change the world.

Make peace with yourself, and the world will find peace. So simple, yet so hard. Enjoy

Shannon

I understand, but violence and direct action always has its purpose especially when it is just

If they expect "rescued" animals from labs and fur farms to readapt to the forest they are obviously poorly educated or otherwise uniformed. What one could argue is whether it is preferable to die of starvation/the cold/predators or to get your skin ripped off your body, alternatively to be subjected to tests too brutal (and/or unjustified) to perform on humans until you drop dead or are disposed of. Really?

There are other ways to experiment not involving animals and if animal testing was prohibited today, I'm sure these would be more or less perfected within a few years. I'm weary of the 'dying relative argument', as if that puts an end to all discussion. I refuse to believe there could be no other way, if there was a will to make these changes and the funds to back it up.

No, I don't think smashing labs is particularly productive or effective, my guess is this is desperate people wanting to make their message heard. It's headlines. The fact that people react more to the activist's nuttiness than their cause is unfortunate. Remember how people looked upon "tree-huggers" just a few years ago?

You just cant make a once non-enemy to your cause a enemy to your cause, so you gotta make sure your actions do not affect the your non-enemies

Good reading... but it's only a start. Only, barely, just a start.



Please give examples, or I just can not believe your claim. SO NOT convinced by one small statement that has a lot of words with too many connotations.



Clarify, please?
Is English your primary language, or is it a secondary?

Afraid of Homeland Security

Except that deciding you don't want to eat turkey and shrimp anymore doesn't actually do shit to change the outside world. Don't confuse symbolic action for direct action, it is little more than talk. You don't have to change yourself or eating habits in order to get laws passed that prevent animals from being mistreated in testing labs or abattoirs, all you have to do is get those ideas out there and convince people they are good ideas. Too many people rely on ultra-introspection because they seem more concerned with attaining the moral high ground and it doesn't do a bit of good towards any cause.


Cuban Revolution.


It would probably be a good idea not to post anything from that, even if you are a CIRA supporter. PIRA has abandoned armed struggle and the future of Ireland belongs to Sinn Fein using the diplomatic process. The vision of the future for Ireland no longer lies with the Army Council, and Gerry Adams knows what he is doing, irrespective of my thoughts on returning to violence. Regardless, that passage only states something that is the opposite of every ALF action. All it says is if a Volunteer accidentally or otherwise damages someone's property in the course of service, that person should be given restitution by supporters of the movement in order to build community. All the ALF does is burn down labs, set animals free, and then jack themselves off like "JOB WELL DONE LADS!" Meanwhile, people are still dying of diseases that those animals were being tested to cure because the animals were more than likely found with the same disease, what a concept. Either that or they were injected with antibodies or some shit, but usually in those cases they were bred in those labs, not the taken from the wild, for that very reason. There was a case back when I was in high school too, of the ALF attacking some testing facility with monkeys and one of the ALF members wound up in the hospital a couple of days later because one of the monkeys had a contagious illness, and oops, he must have gotten to close to it.

The AFL doesn't do more harm than good, they only do harm. They've not done one good thing that animals and/or humanity could have benefited from in their entire existence, it's no wonder PETA is allied so closely with them. I remember when Timothy McVeigh (swell guy, actually) was about to be executed and Ingrid wrote some letter about how his becoming a vegetarian made him a visionary along the likes of Albert Einstein and it was the funniest thing I had ever read at that point, because I know if the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building had been an animal shelter instead of a government workspace, she would have condemned him to hell even if he had become a vegan afterwards. People need to pull their heads out of their asses.

Yea PIRA honors the cease fire, while CIRA, or the RIRA does not, but they are smaller factions then the PIRA, that broke off from them

Every armed group always has problems when it comes to killing or destroying something, even like the US military, but to them destroying labs is just, like how the IRA destroyed police stations or shops that supported the Ulsters or Britain itself, which to them is just, and you cant please everyone, you know

Don't compare to the two. The ALF denounces "unfair treatment" and "horrible conditions" yet will brutalize and even kill human beings without warning to save precious animals, while bombings by PIRA were done for justice and usually authorities were notified in advance to prevent unnecessary casualties. One is hypocrisy in violence, the other is just violent action. It's not like people are swiping animals off the street just to test shit out on them for fun and amusement, it's hardly the same case. Ulster doesn't have a right to exist in the first place, I can't say attacking RUC outposts (before the RUC became the PSNI) was misguided or hypocritical, since the Council was always upfront about what it would do and how.

Yea I know that the PIRA gave warnings before their bombings, but from what I have read the ALF doesnt kill but maybe just rough up the scientists

And yea fuck the Ulster, attacking military or police targets is justifiable, but out right directly killing civilians is not

Now now, I wouldn't go that far. When people stand complacent in the face of injustice against their fellow man, they get what's coming to them and shit happens. Sounds justifiable to me.

Well indirectly killing civilians is sometimes unavoidable, that is war

But I hear what youre saying

I agree with Iota in that change BEGINS in the individual, but I also agree that it needs to be taken to the next level in the event that your personal changes are making no external impact.

I have to check out the link she left, still.

Cuban revolution. Don't answer FOR him, dude. Let speak for himself.

So not touching the discussion of the IRA/RUC stuff any more than I dare to touch the Gaza stuff. I try not to touch too much political/religious issues.

By deciding that you are not going to eat a turkey or shrimp, you are not contributing to the death of these sentient creatures. What you call symbolic action is direct action in my eyes - I am not confused. Through changing how you perceive the world, and therefore how you act in it, you are engaged in positive direct action. It's called your life. Only you can decide what is right for you and what isn't but make no mistake about it, every cause has an effect.

As for your believe that the law can be used to change things for the better, I would agree. But in order for the law to be used as a tool of liberation, and not oppression, people's beliefs must change. There is an ongoing academic legal debate over whether the law is reflective or aspirational. It appears you are of the camp that believes the law can be used to change people's minds - I am not. Once people have looked at their lives and decided that certain things are no longer permissible (ie. legal), then the law can be used as an effective tool to reflect this attitudinal change. But the law being used to change people is another form of violence - people must change of their own accord otherwise the change is not authentic. And in order to make authentic changes, introspection is required. it is not about taking any moral high ground - there is no such thing. It is about looking without yourself and discovering your truth and then living it. That is walking the path, and the only person who can know what path you should be on is you - so look inside.

Violence is never a solution - ever. By using oppression to win the battle, you become the oppressor. Think about it - when has violence really solved anything?

American Revolution, Fall of the Roman Empire, WW2, Fall of the Ottoman Empire, Ireland winning Independence

All were through armed struggle and violence

And you see this cycle of violence as a positive characteristic of our species? I guess we just see things differently. I look at your examples as failings of our ability to communicate - they are not solutions, but examples of the problem.

War never stops war - EVER.

How would you stop war?

There will always be war no matter what, Plato said, Only the dead have seen the end of war. So when do you think war will ever stop

I am against directly killing civilians, and going to war for the wrong reasons, if the war is just then ok

How will war come to an end? War will end when each of us can come to peace with ourselves, because in doing so, you come to peace with each other. With compassion, you see that each of us has a story, each of us has experienced suffering, each of us has lived with joy, each of us has a family, and each of us is trying to find our way in the world. We are all trying to do our best on this planet, and while it is easy to get on a path that leads us astray, NONE of us is purely evil. Ying and Yang - war will end when we personally each find balance.

When you are at war with yourself, you are at war with others. Make peace with yourself, and you make peace with the world around you. If everyone could stop and face themselves, there would be no war, because in discovering who you really are, you realize, we are all one.

War will end when we are ready for it to end. Are you ready?

After a few scores have been settle of course, first justice, then peace

Peace and freedom is always the aim sought for

Forever_You, it appears that we might be on the same page. I think enough scores have been settled and it's time to start working on peace. Wouldn't you agree? Peace is the aim in the end, and in my eyes, the end is now.

Thanks for the discussion.

Justice first then peace, peace cant happen without justice

Justice happens with forgiveness, and the first person you have to forgive, is yourself. Forgive yourself, and you find peace.

Good luck

What do I have to forgive myself for

Only you can answer that, but trust me, there has never existed a person who didn't have something to forgive. Even saints have their shortcomings, right?

I have nothing to forgive

Then you must be enlightened, which makes me wonder why all these questions about war?

About your sig you must be the revolutionary in heart and mind, to start a revolution whether violent or not

Violent revolution? hahahaha No. Violence is not an option - evolution is.

Find your truth and live it. If everyone did that, the world would be at peace.

Take it easy forever_you. Over and out.

Shannon

Whatever you say

You aren't contributing, but you aren't doing anything to stop it just by refusing to it. How about spreading the word about animal mistreatment? Instead of just saying "I don't eat meat because it's bad for the environment and animals get treated like shit and I want to save the world" or some shit like that? Introspection only leads further in, instead of changing yourself, change the world. You don't need to change your heart or any bullshit like that if you've already fucking changed, and no, it's about constantly requiring change and love and forgiving and peace, when you have met the change you were seeking, that's it, you have changed, now you can start with the outside world.

Nobody should have to wait for freedom. Why in the hell should one group of people be told "You can't do this because the majority say it's wrong even though it has no effect on them whatsoever even though we let that majority do the same thing?" I'd rather put a law in that grants equality while waiting and waiting while people like you still allow injustice to carry on because you're on your quest to examine yourself to make the world better. Violence may not be a solution, but it answers many questions most are unwilling to face. If you've got a bigot politician in office enacting a bunch of laws to oppress and suppress a minority, assassination would be ideal instead of sitting by until he leaves or just taking it up the ass. Eventually, when all you do is focus on changing yourself, you aren't going to get shit done, or the various movements you wanted to change yourself for will have moved on and accomplished what they set out to do, and you'll have to change yourself for another movement to "make people see." You're going to lag behind.

I think that we have misinterpreted each other at some point Not Jer. I never stated that all you do is change yourself and that is it. Once you look inside and find out what you believe, then you are able to translate that knowledge into action. Leading by example is the most positive and effective manner for changing the way other people view a situation that is available. I agree with you that sitting around silent when injustice is occurring is consenting to the violence. If there is a politician in power who is manifesting hate, it is everyone's duty to displace that individual, but not through assassination. Call an election and run for office, don't try to kill the individual.

We are fortunate to have systems in place that can allow our society to evolve without violence. The challenge we face is to take those institutions and use them to their fullest extent. This is a huge challenge as we are dealing with a citizenry that is unaware of the basic requirements of democracy, but through education, anything is possible.

This isn't about lagging behind - it's about seeing the big picture and knowing where your foundation is so that this feat is something that can be attained. If you act without really knowing the reasons why, then you act in ignorance. To bring us back to the discussion about the ALF, their actions so more to alien the message of animal rights from the public than to bring support and sympathy. Their actions are one's of desperation, battling one oppression with the same violence and disregard as their enemies do to the animals they are trying to save. To bring real change to this planet, one needs to have compassion for the "enemy" because in doing so, you understand that just as the animals in the medical laboratories have no real choice in their fate, either do most of the scientists or laboratory workers. We are all victims of our circumstances, and the sooner we start pointing fingers at each other and instead begin to examine the systems that allow oppression to exist, the better off we will be. It is not our fault that this world continues to allow unneeded suffering to occur - it's the systems we have inherited, and it is time to change them. We need to create a world where our institutions bring out the best qualities in humanity, not the worst. We need to foster an environment of understanding that difference is a mark of abundance, not something to fear.

The Animal Liberation Front will never achieve it's goals, because at the end of the day, it's main goal is to hurt those that it perceives as causing suffering to our nonhuman family. Hurt creates more hurt, and the only thing that will ever quell it is love. To understand that truth, you must look inside, because it is all too easy to get caught up in the hate game. Isn't it?

You realize that by refusing to compromise, and embracing violence when the need arises, you are guilty of the same thing the opposition is, that being the refusal to compromise? This is what I mean by the moral high ground, you may have convinced yourself there is no such thing in order to make yourself feel like your conscious is clear of elitism, but you and people like you still act like you are that much highly evolved that you've done away with common methods and have risen above to inner peace. Doesn't work like that. You become what the enemy is by refusing to operate at their level, insisting you are in the right, rather than admitting you will have misgivings and make mistakes, it's no different than Stalin's totalitarianism, only this time lying within the self. There's nothing to understand when people are only listening to one language, so as much as you can say violence has never solved anything, neither has pacifism, unless you consider letting someone randomly kick the shit out of you on the street a solution. People need to accept that nonviolence only gets as much done as violence. Remember when you talk about MLK as an excuse, he didn't live to see the fruits of his work, that is not a solution either, people should not have to die or wait around while change comes, if it has to be forced, then so be it, I don't see how that is any different than bombing campaigns until change comes.

The ALF fails not because they are violent, but because they misdirect their violence. It's not like they're taking about people who habitually abuse the fuck out of animals in their care, they just bomb and raze laboratories where animals are housed because that's the only intel they wish the act on. They've got the brush but no canvas. So yeah, peace, love and understanding; I hope you walking up to a warlord in Sudan telling him about all that stops a genocide.

I never stated a refusal to compromise. What I said is that violence is never a compromise I would take. Nothing justifies violent action because it doesn't solve the problem. Compromise is needed, and through communication it can be reached. If you are able to communicate the issues, then violence is not necessary.



You are projecting your beliefs onto me Not Jer. There is no moral high ground to take, just challenges we face in life and how we decide to respond to them, learning from the results of our actions to ensure that any mistakes made are not repeated. Mistakes are always made - that is how we learn. We are all human and because of this, we error. The challenge is to admit our humanity, admit we fuck up, put our egos aside and rather than acting from a place of self-interest, to reach out to the world for the good of all. I understand the sort of individual who you are talking about - the people who do not engage with the world at the level of reality because they are caught up in their spiritual pursuits at the expense of everything else. That is not what I am about. There needs to be balance.

What I am saying is that in order to address the issues we are facing, a certain about of introspection and inner discovery is required, otherwise we do what we know to solve problems, which comes back to violence. History has shown us that violence leads us no where since we are still facing the same problems today that we have historically. Oppression of the many for the benefit of the few - that is the enemy and each of us is implicit in this struggle. I am merely suggesting that before one takes up arms against the oppressor that one takes some time to look inside in order to discover that we have more in common with than enemy than we might think. It's not about getting paralyzed by inaction while getting stuck in some new age spiritual plane - it's about having a greater awareness of what the best action to take is. My argument is merely that violence isn't the long term solution we need.




We can agree to disagree on the effectiveness of violence to solve problems. I think what is a better use of this conversation is to focus on the fact that we both see the problems we are facing. Rather than focusing on the differences we hold, how about seeing that there are many similarities?

As for your stance on pacifism, I think that what MLK did in his life he did see the rewards. He spent his life living his truth, and that is the reward in itself. Change takes time, and he succeeded. Didn't he? Our preoccupation with personal self interest is why you would think that he didn't accomplish his goal, but he did. It's all about living one's truth, and MLK, among others, have done that.




You have a very pessimistic view of the world Not Jer. I am an optimist, so we can just leave it at that. Even the most evil person who has ever lived is not purely evil - we all have good and evil in us. What we need is to allow our world to evolve to encourage those positive traits, rather than the negative. The war lord in Sudan is there because of the experiences he has been given in this life. When there is scarcity, there is fear, and where there is fear, there is war. But this is changing - this is the state of evolution that our species is engaged in. We have the ability to remove much of the scarcity on this planet, if we so choose. In doing that, everything would change.

I enjoy chatting with you Not Jer - you remind me of myself when I was an angry young person. Anger got me no where except stuck in a cycle of violence that never accomplished what I had hoped it would. You can hate the world you've inherited and want to smash it, or you can see the beauty that is life and embrace it. Anger infects you - stop and feel it. That's a feeling I don't miss.

Compromise through communicating all you want, eventually it will take someone of action, be it violent or otherwise, to get the job done. If violence isn't necessary, neither is nonstop preaching.


I'm not projecting anything onto you, you just seem to be advocating a stance that insists through enough introspection, you will stop fucking up. Trying to become enlightened in one thing, believing yourself capable of godliness is quite another. Yes, self discovery is required but only to a point, when you have discovered what you need. It's not a constant journey to learn everything about yourself all in one go, moderation and baby steps, like everything else.


Sure, it's still healthy to acknowledge those differences and recognize that we disagree on certain things.

On MLK, you can that he saw the rewards because of how he lived, but the truth is he died before he could see what he was fighting for gained. A little bit of self interest is completely healthy, by the way. Don't you pay your bills to keep living in your house? Altruism is great, but I highly doubt you use all your money to buy homeless people townhouses or to finance causes you want attention brought to. I would never sacrifice and martyr myself needlessly and I would never ask anyone to do that, either. Would you ask people to stay cool and die, because in the future their children would reap the benefits of what they laid their lives down for? I love life and I enjoy living, I'd prefer not to give all that up just because it would be "in the name of truth." You may not say so, but dying in the service of what you believe in is completely different, and that should never be intentional (i.e. - the Easter Rising, they didn't set out with the rebellion because they believed they were going to be executed and inspire generations), lest it appear vain and self-righteous, so I would imagine most people would like to see the benefits of their work.


I am only as pessimistic as I am optimistic, it is a balance. Some people are beyond the reaches of the goodness within them and forever lost to the hold of evil, and they should be stopped in anyway possible. The difference between us is that you had let your anger get the best of you, there's nothing wrong with hating parts of the world and wanting to smash some of it, and seeing the beauty in parts of life and wanting to embrace some of that. It's all compromise. Now you've gone into the extremes of black and white, I like the middle ground between rose tinted glasses and nihilistic urges.

Iota I do not like your ideas but trying to re do a election if the president is awful or hateful, and passed unjust laws, reform takes way to long to be put into effect, and highly doubt anyone will impeach the president or kick him out

Look at President Bush and all he has done but hes never gonna get impeached, but look like Bill Clinton got impeached for a damn blowjob big fucking deal, so he lied, its his damn personal not ours, Bush lied about going to war with Iraq which led to over 4,000 American soldiers dying, and millions of Iraqi civilians

Violent overthrow of a corrupt govt. is the quickest way to freedom, you just have to make sure you dont replace one authoritarian govt. for another, the IRA for example was seeking to kick out the British, and replace there govt. with a democratic socialist republic, its always good to have a solid exit strategy, or when peace comes

Good Morning, forgive me as I am new here and was reading this message board because it piqued my curiosity. I work for an Animal Welfare agency, not to be confused with Animal Rights. Every day I see horrific things inflicted upon animals by people...and yes, we sometimes do see the poor animals that have been released from labs and other research facilities. It breaks my heart on a daily basis and so many times I think 'Why in the Hell am I doing this?' Simple, if I didn't who would? I have several pets of my own and the majority of them have come home from work with me to stay.

But, back to the Animal Rights...the difference between where I work and Animal Rights, we try to do things with the Law; if you want to call it the Law, even if we know the Law is wrong, we still have to abide by it. That's not to say that you can't change the Law. Petitions taken to the right person sometimes start a chain reaction in the higher levels of government and the Law gets changed or a brand new Law takes the place of the old one. I forget who said it, but sometimes - just sometimes, the Pen is mightier than the Sword.

Trust me, there are days at work where we'd all like to go above the Law and tell people exactly what we think of them and their mistreatment of their animals, but instead our first and foremost priority is the animals.

You are gonna need a lot of people to petition or a lot of money, and a crazy enough democrat to listen