If they really believed in what they're doing, they'd be honest about it. But they dress it up in weasel words like "direct action". Consider this.
Lauren Gazzola was, according to her supporters, "alleged to have operated a website that reported on and expressed ideological support for protest activity against Huntingdon and its business affiliates. For this they are charged with "terrorism" and face an aggregate of 23 years in Federal Prison."
Wow, that sucks. I mean, operate a website and go to jail? Pretty fucked up. We're living in a fascist nation. Time to join the revolu--oh, wait. Apparently they posted home addresses and phone numbers, and exhorted their members to engage in exciting activities such as:
demonstrations at one's home using a loudspeaker; abusive graffiti, posters and stickers on one's car and house; invading offices and, damaging property and stealing documents; chaining gates shut, and blocking gates; physical assault including spraying cleaning fluid into one's eyes; smashing the windows of one's house while the individual's family was at home; flooding one's home while the individual was away; vandalizing one's car; firebombing one's car; bomb hoaxes; threatening telephone calls and letters including threats to kill or injure one's partner or children; e-mail bombs in an attempt to crash computers; sending continuous black faxes causing fax machines to burn out; telephone blockades by repeated dialing to prevent the use of the telephone; and arranging for an undertaker to call to collect one's body.
Yeah, they're just like Gandi.
50. On or about August 10, 2002, members of the conspiracy, including defendant LAUREN GAZZOLA, assembled outside the home of RH, an employee of M. Corp. and, using a megaphone, threatened RH, his wife and family with burning down their home.
Who could have ever foreseen that such acts could have legal consequences?
I was part of an experiment to determine the effect of caffeine on heat tolerance. Every morning for two weeks I got some pills which may or may not have contained caffeine. I wrote down everything I ate and drank. I had blood drawn every other day. I consumed no chocolate, coffee, tea or broccoli. (Apparently broccoli affects your body's metabolism of caffeine.) I saved my urine. All of my urine. (They wanted their caffeine back, I guess.) At the end of it, I did a heat tolerance test, where I got on a treadmill in a hundred-degree room at hundred-percent humidity and walked for four miles an hour for a little over an hour, until my core body temperature went up too high for me to safely continue.
It was inspiring to do my part for science, and I'd do it again in a heartbeat. As a side benefit, it no longer bothers me to have blood drawn. (I guess I got used to it.)
You think macaque monkeys are people, with all the rights attached thereto. I do not think that macaque monkeys are people. Because of this, we are incapable of communicating meaningfully.
Unfortunately, the Bush admin can not persue them because of people like you that are constantly accusing Bush of personally doing illegal wiretaps and spending crazy stupid sums of money on shiny new technology and then having the ACLU sue over it, preventing any administration from ever being able to any type of survelence...ever, even if it means stopping a terrorist attack like this one or one from overseas.
You're willfully ignorant, or stupid, or lying.
The issue was never with "any surveillance... ever". The issue was never with secret surveillance. The issue was with breaking the law.
Here's how it is. The administration wants to wiretap people. There's a method called FISA for doing this. FISA allows for immediate taps in your smoking-nuke situation, as long as paperwork is submitted to a notoriously rubber-stampy court, which operates in secrecy, within three days. There is nothing that the administration needs to do other than file some paperwork. They have refused to do this. FISA clearly states that for wiretapping to occur, it must be used.
The administration is claiming that it has the authority to wiretap people secretly, whenever it wants, with no judicial oversight, ever. Despite that the law clearly says it can't. I'm going to put this in italics, so you pay attention. The President is not a King. He is subject to the law. If he doesn't like the law, he can act to change it. He cannot just ignore it.
The only possible reasons for doing this are (1) the President wants to wiretap his political opponents, (2) he wants to flex his Presidential balls. We can't know which, and neither will anyone else, because this all goes on in secret, with no accountability, not even to a secret court.
Now, if you make the claim that the ACLU and company are against any and all wiretapping again, I'm going to bap you in the nose with a rolled-up newspaper. You have no excuse.
It's easy to have twelve-pound brass balls behind a keyboard. This guy wasn't just being threatened himself. He was receiving threats to his family, to uninvolved neighbors. Would you feel comfortable not giving in to intimidation if people around you, people who hadn't made that decision, would pay the price for your "pair"?
I wasn't talking about the proper action if the scientist in question had, while armed, come across one of these scumbags in the act of bombing a house. I was talking about the proper action now, after the fact. Delicious libertarian fantasies of shooting the damned hippies mid-firebomb don't apply.
I suppose that's a biased an inaccurate video of some guy punching a dog in the face. Also, I'd link to the university's refutation of the ALF's claims if the university made said refutation. Their silence is understandable in some ways (I doubt anything they said would convince these people), but it's not helpful to people like me trying to wrap our brains around the thing.
firebombing someone's house, threatening their neighbors and their family
then I suggest you return to grade school and play one of these things is not like the fucking others until you're ready to join us at the grown-ups' table.
You're missing the point. Whether or not you agree with primate research, either you're against the use of violence to achieve your political ends, or you're enabling these terrorists.
Were the slave revolts through out history wrong? Should the former slaves not taken any kind of violent action towards their masters?
What a fascinating analogy. When macaque monkeys start firebombing houses, please notify me.
The fire crippled many research and public service programs supported by mainstream environmental groups. For example, approximately one-fourth of the world's supply of an endangered plant species, the showy stickseed, went up in flames. [...] Slides and research material on the recovery of Mount St. Helens after its 1980 eruption were destroyed in the fire. Public outreach programs sponsored by WSU Extension-King County, including coordinating master gardeners and pea-patch gardens for the working poor, were also harmed.
I thought that must have been a typo. But nope, these assholes burned down a $4.1 million research facility that was breeding trees because one of the researches was working with genetically engineered samples in the lab. Not releasing them into the environment. Just looking at them in the lab. Unbelievable. They're lucky no one was hurt, or worse.
Far-right and far-left zealots have a lot more in common than they like to admit. Their shared radicalism leads to a desire to tear down our institutions and force society into a mold more to their liking. This means violence and force, lots of force.
What kind of animal research? What sort of ethical issues did you run into, and how did the system handle it? We hear that animal researchers are bloodthirsty scoundrels, cruelly vivisecting for the fun of it. Did you go through an IRB process, and what did that entail? What restrictions were placed on what you did?
Anyone else remember the right-wing bloggers posting maps to the home of the journalist who did a fluff piece on Rumsfeld's vacation home? And the barely-veiled exhortations to their followers to go out and wreak havoc? Which were not rescinded, even when it was revealed that the whole thing was cool with Rummy?
Or pro-lifers who don't condone the Army of God or clinic bombers... but they don't condemn them, either. Same plausible-deniability nonsense.
What the crap are you talking about? Have you been reading too much LGF about how liberal Slashdot is? You'll notice that the majority of the comments are calling the "animal-rights activists" terrorists. Were you expecting something else?
Well, according to the terrorists and their enablers, "Each monkey is first paralyzed, then has coils glued to her eyes during a single session that lasts up to 120 hours, and finally killed." It says nothing about why he did this or what the purpose was, which, I suppose, would make a difference.
Also, according to them, people at "Huntingdon Life Sciences" "punch baby beagles repeatedly in the face". I'm not sure what to make of this. Do researchers punch puppies? That seems kind of... odd. What's the point of that?
We complain when people who hold strong views don't censure their extremists. I would be a hypocrite if I didn't say this.
Violence isn't the answer. These people are destructive. These people are assholes. However, the answer is not to shoot them. They should be arrested, tried and, if found guilty, fined and/or imprisoned for their crimes.
Fantasies of "first against the wall, motherfuckers!" are briefly satisfying, but ultimately degrading to the person having the fantasy.
Fucking terrorists. They're the same as abortion clinic bombers, using violence to induce fear to achieve their political goals.
And I want to say that he should have stood up to them, that if you give in like this, the terrorists win... but the guy's put up with years of harassment, and now violence against his coworkers, with a very real threat to his family and to people unlucky enough to live near him. So it's understandable why he's packing it in; under the same circumstances, I would have given up years earlier. But it still fucking sucks.
The most grating part of it is that I'll bet the assholes from UCLA Primate Freedom who posted his picture and contact info think they can wash their hands of the inevitable results of their propagandizing.
This is great news if it pans out, but still, I'm going to have to do a lot of gritting-of-teeth to ignore the crowing from the pro-life crowd who are so, so happy about Sam Brownback's Amazing Dancin' Embryos being, um, kept alive until they get incinerated along with the rest of the medical waste.
I'm all for whatever it takes to get nifty medical research going on, but that part's going to give me a goddamned headache.
So... you mean that if I pick a stock from one of these scam emails, and see if there's been a recent rise in price, I can net a few percent off it if I pick it up and hold it for a period of time?
Slashdot Mirror
Kind of like this pledge for opponents of embryonic stem-cell research?
Lauren Gazzola was, according to her supporters, "alleged to have operated a website that reported on and expressed ideological support for protest activity against Huntingdon and its business affiliates. For this they are charged with "terrorism" and face an aggregate of 23 years in Federal Prison."
Wow, that sucks. I mean, operate a website and go to jail? Pretty fucked up. We're living in a fascist nation. Time to join the revolu--oh, wait. Apparently they posted home addresses and phone numbers, and exhorted their members to engage in exciting activities such as:
Yeah, they're just like Gandi.
Who could have ever foreseen that such acts could have legal consequences?
I was part of an experiment to determine the effect of caffeine on heat tolerance. Every morning for two weeks I got some pills which may or may not have contained caffeine. I wrote down everything I ate and drank. I had blood drawn every other day. I consumed no chocolate, coffee, tea or broccoli. (Apparently broccoli affects your body's metabolism of caffeine.) I saved my urine. All of my urine. (They wanted their caffeine back, I guess.) At the end of it, I did a heat tolerance test, where I got on a treadmill in a hundred-degree room at hundred-percent humidity and walked for four miles an hour for a little over an hour, until my core body temperature went up too high for me to safely continue.
It was inspiring to do my part for science, and I'd do it again in a heartbeat. As a side benefit, it no longer bothers me to have blood drawn. (I guess I got used to it.)
You think macaque monkeys are people, with all the rights attached thereto. I do not think that macaque monkeys are people. Because of this, we are incapable of communicating meaningfully.
Ah, well.
You're willfully ignorant, or stupid, or lying.
The issue was never with "any surveillance... ever". The issue was never with secret surveillance. The issue was with breaking the law.
Here's how it is. The administration wants to wiretap people. There's a method called FISA for doing this. FISA allows for immediate taps in your smoking-nuke situation, as long as paperwork is submitted to a notoriously rubber-stampy court, which operates in secrecy, within three days. There is nothing that the administration needs to do other than file some paperwork. They have refused to do this. FISA clearly states that for wiretapping to occur, it must be used.
The administration is claiming that it has the authority to wiretap people secretly, whenever it wants, with no judicial oversight, ever. Despite that the law clearly says it can't. I'm going to put this in italics, so you pay attention. The President is not a King. He is subject to the law. If he doesn't like the law, he can act to change it. He cannot just ignore it.
The only possible reasons for doing this are (1) the President wants to wiretap his political opponents, (2) he wants to flex his Presidential balls. We can't know which, and neither will anyone else, because this all goes on in secret, with no accountability, not even to a secret court.
Now, if you make the claim that the ACLU and company are against any and all wiretapping again, I'm going to bap you in the nose with a rolled-up newspaper. You have no excuse.
It's easy to have twelve-pound brass balls behind a keyboard. This guy wasn't just being threatened himself. He was receiving threats to his family, to uninvolved neighbors. Would you feel comfortable not giving in to intimidation if people around you, people who hadn't made that decision, would pay the price for your "pair"?
Given that you can't tell the difference between monkeys and people, your little hypocrisy test applies to you, and you alone.
I wasn't talking about the proper action if the scientist in question had, while armed, come across one of these scumbags in the act of bombing a house. I was talking about the proper action now, after the fact. Delicious libertarian fantasies of shooting the damned hippies mid-firebomb don't apply.
I suppose that's a biased an inaccurate video of some guy punching a dog in the face. Also, I'd link to the university's refutation of the ALF's claims if the university made said refutation. Their silence is understandable in some ways (I doubt anything they said would convince these people), but it's not helpful to people like me trying to wrap our brains around the thing.
If you can't tell the difference between:
- holding protests
- waging action through the courts
- firebombing someone's house, threatening their neighbors and their family
then I suggest you return to grade school and play one of these things is not like the fucking others until you're ready to join us at the grown-ups' table.What a fascinating analogy. When macaque monkeys start firebombing houses, please notify me.
Ooh, and here's an example:
Way to go, retards...
I thought that must have been a typo. But nope, these assholes burned down a $4.1 million research facility that was breeding trees because one of the researches was working with genetically engineered samples in the lab. Not releasing them into the environment. Just looking at them in the lab. Unbelievable. They're lucky no one was hurt, or worse.
Far-right and far-left zealots have a lot more in common than they like to admit. Their shared radicalism leads to a desire to tear down our institutions and force society into a mold more to their liking. This means violence and force, lots of force.
What kind of animal research? What sort of ethical issues did you run into, and how did the system handle it? We hear that animal researchers are bloodthirsty scoundrels, cruelly vivisecting for the fun of it. Did you go through an IRB process, and what did that entail? What restrictions were placed on what you did?
Anyone else remember the right-wing bloggers posting maps to the home of the journalist who did a fluff piece on Rumsfeld's vacation home? And the barely-veiled exhortations to their followers to go out and wreak havoc? Which were not rescinded, even when it was revealed that the whole thing was cool with Rummy?
Or pro-lifers who don't condone the Army of God or clinic bombers... but they don't condemn them, either. Same plausible-deniability nonsense.
What the crap are you talking about? Have you been reading too much LGF about how liberal Slashdot is? You'll notice that the majority of the comments are calling the "animal-rights activists" terrorists. Were you expecting something else?
Well, according to the terrorists and their enablers, "Each monkey is first paralyzed, then has coils glued to her eyes during a single session that lasts up to 120 hours, and finally killed." It says nothing about why he did this or what the purpose was, which, I suppose, would make a difference.
Also, according to them, people at "Huntingdon Life Sciences" "punch baby beagles repeatedly in the face". I'm not sure what to make of this. Do researchers punch puppies? That seems kind of... odd. What's the point of that?
We complain when people who hold strong views don't censure their extremists. I would be a hypocrite if I didn't say this.
Violence isn't the answer. These people are destructive. These people are assholes. However, the answer is not to shoot them. They should be arrested, tried and, if found guilty, fined and/or imprisoned for their crimes.
Fantasies of "first against the wall, motherfuckers!" are briefly satisfying, but ultimately degrading to the person having the fantasy.
And into the character of his family members, and of his neighbors too, I suppose?
Fucking terrorists. They're the same as abortion clinic bombers, using violence to induce fear to achieve their political goals.
And I want to say that he should have stood up to them, that if you give in like this, the terrorists win... but the guy's put up with years of harassment, and now violence against his coworkers, with a very real threat to his family and to people unlucky enough to live near him. So it's understandable why he's packing it in; under the same circumstances, I would have given up years earlier. But it still fucking sucks.
The most grating part of it is that I'll bet the assholes from UCLA Primate Freedom who posted his picture and contact info think they can wash their hands of the inevitable results of their propagandizing.
This is great news if it pans out, but still, I'm going to have to do a lot of gritting-of-teeth to ignore the crowing from the pro-life crowd who are so, so happy about Sam Brownback's Amazing Dancin' Embryos being, um, kept alive until they get incinerated along with the rest of the medical waste.
I'm all for whatever it takes to get nifty medical research going on, but that part's going to give me a goddamned headache.
So... you mean that if I pick a stock from one of these scam emails, and see if there's been a recent rise in price, I can net a few percent off it if I pick it up and hold it for a period of time?
Eh, if I felt like gambling I'd go to the casino.
Leo Strauss called; he wants his elitism back.
They claimed that Linux has a severe malware problem? I must have missed that part.
*cough* Blue Pill *cough*