Quote :

"So is this thread going to dwindle into semantics about what "terrorism" is or will there be legitimate discussion on how these guys could have gone about demonstrating their interests through more constructive means?"

it's the fucking E.L.F.

there's no point in discussing what constructive avenues they could've taken

their whole M.O. is to avoid constructive avenues like the plague

Quote :

"i dont care what ideals they think they're "fighting" for... burning down untenanted buildings is arson. yeah, its a crime, and if theres an interstate aspect to it it might even be a federal crime... but the crime is still arson. you start calling this stupid shit "terrorism" then you might as well call every other crime "terrorism" i mean, goddamn it. I say DUI is terrorism. The real fear of drunk driving bastards plowing down innocent bystanders terrorizes the shit out of me. For that matter, anyone who climbs up on my ass with "road rage" at 50+ MPH in rush hour traffic is a fucking terrorist. "

oh, i agree-it's arson. it's also terrorism. i don't see why it should be treated any differently because of that--simply treating it like arson is just fine, in terms of legal prosecution.

kinda like hate-crime laws...murder, battery, etc are the same in my book regardless of why you didn't like the guy (unless he really had it coming...like he stole your money, boned your wife, and took a shit on the hood of your new Ferrari.)

...and the DUI hyperbole is silly and irrelevent.

3/5/2008 12:26:51 AM

Quote :

"the first indicator of a truly stupid argument is quoting the fucking dictionary"

Scuba Steve

Not if you live in the real world--some of you clearly want to twist definitions as you go along to fit the needs of the moment. In any event, what's really stupid is posting audio about getting butt-fucked and so on--you know, like you did, Scuba Steve.

Quote :

"Well now that Webster (^^^) has properly defined how he thinks this is terrorism and given us an FBI's [sic] opinion[emphasis added] we can hopefully advance this discussion above his drivel."

HockeyRoman

Well, that's the thing, junior, who's better suited to determine what is terrorism? The FBI or some asshole like you on the Internet? The answer is self-evident.

It's good to see so many of you showing your true colors by defending the far-left terrorists of ELF, though. It's very revealing. GG.

BTW, many of you don't seem to know the difference between tactics and strategy. Concerning the attacks by ELF, arson is the tactic; terror is the strategy. FYI.

[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 1:15 AM. Reason : .]

3/5/2008 1:14:36 AM

Quote :

"t's the fucking E.L.F. there's no point in discussing what constructive avenues they could've taken their whole M.O. is to avoid constructive avenues like the plague"

The point was to make it more than just about E.L.F. or arson or what people think terrorism is but rather about the wider picture of environmentalism or the need for greater environmental concern so that arson isn't the only way to get peoples' attention.

Quote :

"Well, that's the thing, junior, who's better suited to determine what is terrorism? The FBI or some asshole like you on the Internet? The answer is self-evident."

But is still just his opinion as he gave no proof, no numbers to support his claim that "eco-terrorism" is such a plight on our society at this time. As such his opinion carries as much weight as mine, yours (however misguided and senile), shmoe's or anyone else who wishes to contribute to the discussion. And how convenient of you to overlook the rest of what I wrote.

Quote :

"It's good to see so many of you showing your true colors by defending the far-left terrorists of ELF, though. It's very revealing. GG."

It isn't so much that I am defending this group nor their actions. In fact, I agree that burning homes is counter-productive to their cause. But those points have already been covered. My concern is for the greater picture of the pro-environmental movement.

Quote :

"BTW, many of you don't seem to know the difference between tactics and strategy. Concerning the attacks by ELF, arson is the tactic; terror is the strategy. FYI."

Thanks for the info?

3/5/2008 1:41:33 AM

^ Well, shit! Are you actually going to try to be reasonable now? In that case, I'm not sure I have a response--I'll check my trick bag and get back to you.

3/5/2008 4:18:54 AM

i love getting my legitimate statements trolled by a wannabe-mod retard who forgets his password

3/5/2008 3:41:22 PM

hey, i'm not a retard.

:grr:

3/5/2008 4:33:05 PM

you wouldnt know it from your posts

3/5/2008 4:37:47 PM

Letters after Times Square bombing claim: 'We did it'

Quote :

"The blast is similar to two other incidents in New York, one in October and one in May 2005."

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/03/06/times.square/?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail

Domestic terrorism is not a problem, right?

3/7/2008 12:01:15 AM

No one is arguing that it isn't.

Perhaps you'd like to illustrate how this relates to the topic of anti-sprawl activists other than you feel they are the same since you see them as terrorists. If you want to discuss what happened in Time Square then by all means do in another thread. I'd like to think that this thread can evolve beyond simply spitting out definitions of terror and how or if this fits but instead discuss implications for the pro-environment movement as a whole.

3/7/2008 12:28:55 AM

Quote :

"I don't agree with methods of the arsonists in WA but I do sympathize with their intentions."

HockeyRoman

3/7/2008 12:32:15 AM

And?

Oh wait, I found it. I forgot a "the" in there. My forgetfulness of articles got Webster all hot & bothered. Well, at least I know who I am going to for paper proof reading when I resume English classes.

[Edited on March 7, 2008 at 12:40 AM. Reason : "the"]

3/7/2008 12:34:54 AM

^ I was referring to the sentiment of your post, not the syntax. Had I been checking for errors, I would have included the "[sic]" explanatory element.

By the way, it's proofreading, not "proof reading" (sic), as you have it, junior.

[Edited on March 7, 2008 at 1:06 AM. Reason : .]

3/7/2008 1:03:51 AM

while googling some misspelled signs i came across these pics of a coffeeshop in seattle where the signs dont seem to be unintentionally "misspelled"

5/12/2008 6:14:50 PM

^ Isn't this just good niche marketing?

5/12/2008 7:04:41 PM

I find this more humorous than anything else.

5/12/2008 8:36:53 PM

ELF reprezant






can i expect authorities at my door in 24 hours?

5/12/2008 11:44:54 PM

Poor insured wealthy people.

I'm so worried about them.

5/13/2008 12:07:21 AM

the funny thing about that coffee shop is its supposed to be a communist place according to the signs, seattle personalities, etc...but its a for-profit coffee-shop (capitalist) thats fooling a bunch of dumb hippies as if its communist

5/13/2008 12:35:19 AM

I just find it humorous. Especially the 2nd sign. "Try the Americano."

If they can pull in enough customers without getting firebombed, good for them. Capitalism at its finest.

5/13/2008 12:37:23 AM

good for anybody who can run a business in america and make money

but also, LOL at the retarded customers (not all of them of course) but the ones who are like YEAH COMMUNISM RULES FUCK CAPITALISM! but they're at a regular old capitalist food/drink establishment

5/13/2008 1:05:02 AM

Yeah, the irony is good there. Maybe if the money went to some cause other than the owner's pocket it wouldn't be like this but this is definitely capitalism. Although, in Seattle, I imagine anyone who doesn't get coffee from Starbucks thinks they're sticking it to the man.

5/13/2008 1:09:33 AM

i'm sure plenty of them do, and i'm sure whoever owns/runs the Kommunist koffee shop is a resourceful entrepeneur

I wonder if our local Seattle expert joe_schmoe / JoeSchmoe is familiar with that spot

5/13/2008 1:13:12 AM

A communist entrepreneur (if such a thing could exist) would simply redistribute the profits to his customers regularly. Of course, they'd have to take down each customer's information, fill out forms in triplicate to determine each individual's need, and then issue checks a month late and 40% short due to a price war with the Starbucks across the street that necessitated a $4 million marketing blitz, but hey. War is hell, right?

5/13/2008 1:18:14 AM

lol

5/13/2008 1:22:22 AM

It just goes to show you that commies will sell out for a cup of coffee:

Quote :

"Certainly there are moments when [Bill] Ayers has the sound of the sixties down pat, like when he tells me, 'Imperialism or globalization—I don't have to care what it's called to hate it.' And then there are moments when he sounds light-years away from his radical sensibilities, more like an old grump lamenting today's uninformed youth: He tells me a story about going into Starbucks and having the young woman behind the counter mistake his photo pin of John Brown for Walt Whitman. 'And when I told her, no, it's John Brown, she said, "Who is John Brown?"' But I am struck by another part of that story. What are you doing in a Starbucks? I ask the man who professes to hate globalization. 'Oh,' he says. 'I have an addiction to caffeine.'"

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/

5/13/2008 4:44:53 AM

Dude

Did you really

and I mean REALLY

Try to present a bourgeois coffee shop in an argument against communism?

5/13/2008 12:51:27 PM

lets not forget about the trees they've just condemned. Now they have to be cut down to rebuild these homes.

[Edited on May 13, 2008 at 3:31 PM. Reason : asdf]

5/13/2008 3:31:21 PM

Quote :

"'Imperialism or globalization—I don't have to care what it's called to hate it.'"

While this guy is obviously a toolbag, I have to agree that globalization is probably one of the largest threats to American soverienty and has led to quite a few of America's and the world's problems

5/13/2008 5:21:51 PM

idiots at it again
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080808-us-animal-rights-extremists-firebomb-scientists-home-car.html
(not the ELF. The ALF this time, or something similar)

8/8/2008 6:45:38 AM

^ I'd take that article with a grain of salt. There's a growing argument against animal testing on the grounds of effectiveness. For example:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/may/05/highereducation.uk

8/8/2008 11:50:24 AM

and that has what to do with firebombing scientist's cars and houses?

8/8/2008 12:22:40 PM

Who cares if it is effective, it is their right. If your goal is to take that right away then you should be setting fire to the property of congressmen, not scientists.

8/8/2008 12:23:05 PM

^^ Did you read the article you linked? It asserted the necessity of animal testing as a indisputable fact. It wasn't a simple new report.

8/8/2008 12:56:59 PM

well the, i'll take quotes like this with a grain of salt too

Quote :

"All of our current drugs and treatments were discovered through astute observation of patients, pioneering self-experimentation, ingenuity and advances in technology. Aspirin, the world's most common medicine, owes nothing to animals: nor do antibiotics, anaesthetics, Aids drugs, antidepressants - the list goes on."

8/8/2008 1:05:11 PM

i guess i'm kinda late with this reply but

Quote :

"Dude Did you really and I mean REALLY Try to present a bourgeois coffee shop in an argument against communism?"

no, i used a capitalist coffee shop under the guise of a communist coffee shop as an argument against the retards who spend money there

8/8/2008 1:10:57 PM

And the salt lobby cheers.

(For the record, I agree with the nutty environmentalists. ELF's property destruction ain't terrorism. They make a point of avoiding harm to humans.)

8/8/2008 1:12:44 PM

It's wrong as hell

but yeah, it's not "terrorism" using most definitions.

unless you want to use the "anything that's bad" definition used by the media and administration.

8/8/2008 1:18:32 PM

Anyone who denies that the acts in question are terrorism--and are intended to be terrorism--is a fucking idiot.

Quote :

"Wrong--again. terrorism: 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism

Quote :

"The EFL realizes that all life on Earth is threatened by entities concerned with nothing more than pursuing economic gain at any cost. Therefore, the ELF uses clandestine guerrilla tactics in efforts to take the profit motive out of killing the Earth [3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.]."

Quote :

"The ELF recognizes that the popular environmental movement has failed miserably to bring about the protection needed to stop the killing of life on this planet. State sanctioned means of social change on their own rarely have and will have any real effect in obtaining the desired results. This is due to the obvious fact that the legal means of protest do little more than reinforce the same system which is a root of the problem. The state system is not going to allow any real change within it unless the state structure (government), big business, and finally the mainstream consumer society feels that change is really necessary. Matters must be taken into the hands of the people, who need more and more to step outside of this societal law to enforce natural law [1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.]."

Quote :

"Capitalism as a target is not easily identifiable due to it being an ideology rather than a physical object. But forms and symbols of capitalism can be targeted successfully to greatly influence the impact the capitalist state has on life. Whatever the target may be, the ELF ideology promotes efficiency and effectiveness: choosing the most effective target possible and using strategies and tactics to cause the most amount of economic damage as possible. In addition, the idea of momentum is pushed to create a movement that continues to grow to successfully stop the destruction of life. More and more actions need to be taken in order for this success to become a reality [2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.]."

Edited excerpt from The Earth Liberation Front: 1997-2002 by Leslie James Pickering (Arissa Publications) and the ELF website http://www.EarthLiberationFront.com. Reprinted with permission.

http://www.satyamag.com/mar04/elf.html

Eco-, animal-rights terrorism called threat
Thursday, May 19, 2005

Quote :

"WASHINGTON -- Environmental and animal-rights activists who have turned to arson and explosives are the nation's top domestic terrorism threat, an FBI official told a Senate committee yesterday [emphasis added]. Groups such as the Animal Liberation Front, the Earth Liberation Front [emphasis added] and Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty are 'way out in front' in terms of damage and number of crimes, said John Lewis, the FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism. 'There is nothing else going on in this country over the last several years that is racking up the high number of violent crimes and terrorist actions,' Lewis said[emphasis added]."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/224826_ecoterrorist19.html

[Edited on August 8, 2008 at 2:52 PM. Reason : .]

8/8/2008 2:46:17 PM

Quote :

" I do think it is odd that this FBI agent says environmental and animal-rights activists are "the nation's top domestic terrorism threat" yet this is the first story we've heard in a long, long time and have certainly paled in comparisons to rampant college shootings. So perhaps Bush & Co.'s war and paranoia against environmentalism is greater than their concerns for college campus safety."

For "domestic terrorism" this is likely very true and reasonable.

But terrorism as made popular by the Bush admin is a very vague term, that doesn't carry the meaning it once did.

8/8/2008 2:56:43 PM

Quote :

"1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes."

Violence against inanimate objects?

You can't pull out the terrorism bogeyman every time someone does something bad to get their way.

Doing so dilutes the definition to the point that it's completely meaningless.

8/8/2008 2:56:55 PM

^ And here's one "fucking idiot"--right on cue. So, your position is that violent acts must be committed against animate objects only to qualify as terrorism?

You really are stupid, aren't you?

8/8/2008 3:04:23 PM

Quote :

"i'm sure plenty of them do, and i'm sure whoever owns/runs the [People's Republic of Koffee] Kommunist koffee shop is a resourceful entrepeneur I wonder if our local Seattle expert joe_schmoe / JoeSchmoe is familiar with that spot"

aha i missed this.

yeah, ive seen that place, it's in Capitol Hill -- the neighborhood where all the trendy scenesters, junkies, homeless, homosexual activists, musicians, vagrant teenagers, theatre groupies, etc. etc. congregate. its the most liberal neighborhood in one of america's most liberal cities, and is completely eclectic with the only common theme being a sort of post-Grunge sketchiness.

Quote :

"People's Republic of Koffee Wednesday, April 25, 2007 You have to go with this one just for the name and the setup. People's Republic of Koffee is little more than a coffee cart, a couch, a chair, and a small table. In a garage. That's also a tattoo parlor. The PRoK is run by comedian Kevin Hyder, and the austerely simple arrangement apparently hasn't stopped him from brewing excellent coffee. His java has lots of devoted fans in a city known for coffee snobbery. Plus, once the caffeine shakes wear off, you can get some ink done."

its probably also playing on the fact that theres a 16-foot tall Statue of Lenin near where i lived in the Seattle neighborhood of Fremont, not far from Capitol Hill.

which is quite an attraction, in it's own right



--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Lenin_(Seattle)





[Edited on August 8, 2008 at 3:43 PM. Reason : ]

8/8/2008 3:38:42 PM

Quote :

"Boone Violence against inanimate objects? You can't pull out the terrorism bogeyman every time someone does something bad to get their way. Doing so dilutes the definition to the point that it's completely meaningless. "

Quote :

"hooksaw So, your position is that violent acts must be committed against animate objects only to qualify as terrorism? You really are stupid, aren't you? "

no, boone is right. if you go and cry "terrorism" or "nazism" or "hate crime" or "holocaust" or whatever every single time someone does something you dont like or is even illegal, then it renders the word meaningless.

everything is terror. oh no. call Homeland Security. boo hoo.

and if you think that i's meaningful to speak of violence as being perpetrated against inanimate objects... well, then you're the stupid one here, and theres really just no reasoning with you.

8/8/2008 3:52:28 PM

^ You're an idiot. So, if, say, the Pentagon is attacked when no one is there and no one is harmed, it can't be terrorism?

STFU to you and your cackling cohort.

8/8/2008 3:55:02 PM

Posting pictures of wieners in SFW threads is terrorism.

8/8/2008 3:55:17 PM

^ Being a "Teeny tiny wee-wee" is terrorism.

8/8/2008 3:57:38 PM

Quote :

"firebombs destroyed a car parked outside the home of one, and another was forced to escape his house, along with his family, from a second-floor bedroom window after the house was also firebombed."

good thing the family escaped the burning house, making it officially inanimate...

how the fuck is firebombing someone's house NOT terrorism?

hey the trade towers were inanimate objects, I guess 9/11 wasn't a terrorist attack either

[Edited on August 8, 2008 at 3:59 PM. Reason : 9/11]

8/8/2008 3:57:39 PM

I'm arguing that it's a matter of degree.

8/8/2008 4:01:25 PM

does someone have to die? if someone goes into a marketplace in iraq and blows themselves up, but no bystanders are injured, is that not a terrorist attack according to your interpretation?

8/8/2008 4:03:02 PM

No, I don't think deaths are required.

The Pentagon scenario would certainly be an example of terrorism.

Again, it's a matter of degree.

8/8/2008 4:09:26 PM