I have no problem with groups who handle their problems the right way. If you are for saving the Earth, I think most of us are, then dont set fire to protest pollution.
This group has claimed responsibilty for many acts that could be viewed as terrorism and are continuing.
DO you burn a forest to protect it from logging? Would you slaughter seals to keep it from being trapped?
I am sorry but this group is like every other terror group, looking for a headline to use to attack someone or thing.

Here is the story on their latest.

Utah lumberyard (http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2004/06/17/build/nation/38-elf-lumberyeardfire.inc)

yeah, the ELF is insane, too many hippies on mushrooms wishing they could save the world. but is was funny when they blew up those SUVs. it would have made an awesome peice of video art if anyone had had the sense to tape it.

Destruction is never art, but art can be destruction... Hmmmm I think I could use that again LOL
I think we need to sieze their accounts and arrest the members maybe ship them to gitmo, along with the KKK SKinHeads(Nazi Party) IRA, many of the so called militias and any others who advocate violence to express an opinion.

Frankly, I think they're just a bunch of idiots that like destroying stuff but claim to be fighting for a cause to justify it. Like the rioters that claim to be protesting something but instead really want a new pair of shoes and a VCR.

The irony is how they manage to both spew lots of pollution into the air by burning the wood/SUVs and promote the further destruction of resources caused by replacing what they just destroyed.

Originally posted by WhammyBar
but is was funny when they blew up those SUVs. it would have made an awesome peice of video art if anyone had had the sense to tape it.

You may like this website:

fuh2 (http://www.fuh2.com/)

Originally posted by Beirut_Veteran
[B
I think we need to sieze their accounts and arrest the members maybe ship them to gitmo, along with the KKK SKinHeads(Nazi Party) IRA, many of the so called militias and any others who advocate violence to express an opinion. [/B]

Do you think that violence should never be used to support an opinion ?
In some cases I believe that a certain degree of violence is acceptable. It depends from what is at stake and what level of violence. Destructing goods, if everything is done to make sure that no human being may be harmed, is sometimes legitimate.

The ELF is another example of extremism taking a cause too far.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
You may like this website:

fuh2 (http://www.fuh2.com/)

that's funny, but I still say blowing them up would be funnier. I say the ELF repeats their performance and collaborates with soime postmodern pretentious little fuck to get the whole thing on tape. I nkow I would watch it.

Originally posted by astrapol2
Do you think that violence should never be used to support an opinion ?
In some cases I believe that a certain degree of violence is acceptable. It depends from what is at stake and what level of violence. Destructing goods, if everything is done to make sure that no human being may be harmed, is sometimes legitimate.
I would say that any degree of violence against private citizens by a group not associated with a legitimate military is terror and should be stopped.
I never believe if I am mad at a company that it is ok to destroy their property.

The only man who knew the correct way to protest something was Mahatma Gandhi.

I am not one who will advocate for any violent solution, but let's have a little perspective here.

ELF focuses on property damage. I do not hold property in a higher reguard then human lives.

Things would be different if they were killing people, but they aren't. Of course in our society property is viewed as much more imporant then people, so I can see how people could get upset.

Originally posted by Pepper
ELF focuses on property damage. I do not hold property in a higher reguard then human lives.

Things would be different if they were killing people, but they aren't. Of course in our society property is viewed as much more imporant then people, so I can see how people could get upset.

They can focus on property damage all they want, eventually they're going to kill someone. A night watchman, an innocent bystander, or mostly likely themselves. It's not an acceptable risk. Especially when they're causing more pollution than they're stopping. But the irony seems lost on people.

Are these people related to PETA or GreenPeace?? LOL I mean really lets burn things down kill little critters in forests but lord we saved a tree or two by scortching it. LOL. People make me wonder sometimes.

do they realize what an ELF is? it is hard to take a terrorist group siriously when it sounds like they come from santa's workshop. and of course their methods are rediculous.

Actually Elves are the protectors of mother earth, so it fits their ideals but not there actions.
I am for working to protect the environment, but not by burning it, I dont believe that protesting the emmissions of three forklifts by burning up someones dream or lively hood is a real logical practise. I think the fire caused more pollution than the forklifts would have in a year.

Originally posted by Beirut_Veteran
I would say that any degree of violence against private citizens by a group not associated with a legitimate military is terror and should be stopped.
I never believe if I am mad at a company that it is ok to destroy their property.

Of course. The idea is not to use violence whenever one disagrees ! ELF does not have my support in this case. On the other hand, i don't agree with you about the fact that only violence linked to agovt or military is accepatble. It is sometimes, sometimes not - it all depends on the goals of this govt.

In some cases violence by opponents can be the only thing to do. Under an oppressive regime, this can be legitimate - I am thinking of the ANC fight against apartheid during the 60's. Mandela agreed to a certain degree of violence against goods, not people (bombings of power plants) and I think he was right.

Another example nearer from us is the detruction of GMO fields in France last year. When public health and environment is at stake, I agree that it can be something to do.

Like Vilepagan, I have a lot of admiration for Gandhi and his non-violent fight. But in some cases, only a certain amount of destruction will make people react.

Of course I would not advocate violence against people other than soldiers or policemen, and only in the case of a fight against an oppressive regime.

The trouble with a protest is that it is entirely up to the protester(S) as to what is important. Usually there is a leader and followers. Mob temperment can get it out of hand. Slanted views come into play. Passions can become extreme. Usually there are other recourses with out extremism.

The ELF organization has never injured a human being. That's where they get their large number of support. ELF is not only one of the most misunderstood terrorist groups, they are the most effective and dangerous. The FBI may say it's difficult to track them down, but they don't want you to know it's impossible.

Originally posted by Blibblob
The ELF organization has never injured a human being. That's where they get their large number of support. ELF is not only one of the most misunderstood terrorist groups, they are the most effective and dangerous. The FBI may say it's difficult to track them down, but they don't want you to know it's impossible.
Maybe not physically, but taking someones livelyhood because you disagree with their practises is injuring a human being.
I may not agree with the way some people do business or I may think they are polluting. But to destroy a business is wrong.
Astra, I agree with you that if you are rebelling against an oppresive leader that a use of violence is required. But that is viloence against military not private citizens.
Blib back to your point, I would assume that if I protested your way of disposing of your trash and decided to set fire to your house you might be pissed. As long as I didnt physically injure you or your family it would be ok according to your views.

Maybe not physically, but taking someones livelyhood because you disagree with their practises is injuring a human being.
I worded it the way I did because I'm aware of that. I used the term injure because it has a connotation of phisical harm. I am well aware that these practices do harm.

Blib back to your point, I would assume that if I protested your way of disposing of your trash and decided to set fire to your house you might be pissed. As long as I didnt physically injure you or your family it would be ok according to your views.
I do not condone what they do. However their practices are in no way as terrible as other terrorist groups. Indirectly harming something that can be regained in return for stopping something that necessarily can't be regained. It's all for attention, if people actually paid attention to less violent means, then these would never be used. Blowing up SUVs(that was funny) certainly catches your attention more than petitioning the government. If people gave a shit... but since they don't, even these means wont work.

People dont pay attention to those who yell, use extreme measures becuase most are viewed as lunatics. These tactics were used by groups in the 60's and it didnt work then either so they graduated from burning buildings to killing in the name of their causes. It wont belong before ELF kills someone and then people will be yelling that we should have stopped them when we had the chance.
With all the attornies in this country it would be easier to use the legal system or a PAC to achieve those goals, but asking even those people to give up their SUV's or conviences is not going to work.
I drive once in a while, I walk most everywhere I go. I believe we need to protect the earth but burning it is not protecting it. And destroying someones business is not away to further your cause.
These are terrorists tactics maybe not on the same lines of Al Qaeda but by saying do what we say or we will destroy your business is a terror tactic and should not be tolerated.
I bet if the owner of that lumber yard burned the home or offices of ELF then there would be arrests made.

It wont belong before ELF kills someone and then people will be yelling that we should have stopped them when we had the chance.
Yes it will. It's rather easy to make a pacifist destroy an inanimate object, but very difficult to make them destroy a living animal. And the idea of mass murdering nature lovers is far to illogical to work.

I bet if the owner of that lumber yard burned the home or offices of ELF then there would be arrests made.
Well, duh. They should be arrested, the hard part will be finding them. They should not be held to the same level as other terrorists. Even though their practices are just as illogical.

Blib I was refering to a death happening while they burned another lumber yard. It is not far fetched to see the death of a fire fighter or even someone sleeping in their office to protect the yard, even worse an owner with a weapon and then we could have many die.
This type of protest has never worked and has always ended with loss of life.

Blib I was refering to a death happening while they burned another lumber yard. It is not far fetched to see the death of a fire fighter or even someone sleeping in their office to protect the yard, even worse an owner with a weapon and then we could have many die.
The funniest thing about ELF is that if that happened, it wouldn't be an ELF act. I've read the information they put out, and if there's a death or injury of some sort, then the main office wont acknowledge it. It turns from them, to another small group. They expect the most carefully planned opperations this side of the universe. They wont acknowledge anything done like the pentagon would do it.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Blib I was refering to a death happening while they burned another lumber yard. It is not far fetched to see the death of a fire fighter or even someone sleeping in their office to protect the yard, even worse an owner with a weapon and then we could have many die.
The funniest thing about ELF is that if that happened, it wouldn't be an ELF act. I've read the information they put out, and if there's a death or injury of some sort, then the main office wont acknowledge it. It turns from them, to another small group. They expect the most carefully planned opperations this side of the universe. They wont acknowledge anything done like the pentagon would do it.
Does it matter if they dont admit their fault? The person is still dead and they are responsible. This is a very good reason to shut them down now.

This is a very good reason to shut them down now.
How would you propose to shut them down?