http://www.dtnprogressivefarmer.com/...logRegionCode=
"The arson at the Sheepskin Factory in Denver was done in defense and retaliation for all the innocent animals that have died cruelly at the hands of human oppressors. Be warned that making a living from the use and abuse of animals will not be tolerated. Also be warned that leather is every bit as evil as fur. As demonstrated in my recent arson against the Leather Factory in Salt Lake City. Go vegan! -- ALF Lone Wolf"
Moreover, some fringe activists have no qualms about taking human lives to save animal lives. When the homes of University of California biologists were firebombed in 2008, one activist remarked that "It's regrettable that certain scientists are willing to put their families at risk by choosing to do wasteful animal experiments."
A psychiatrist might convincingly explain why people follow their beliefs to such extremes. I can't. I wonder if it's related to the breakdown of community in an urbanized world. I have to think people who live in a village where they know everybody would be less likely to resort to terrorism.
Or maybe it's a way for a little man to feel big. It's hard for one person to alter the course of history in a slow-moving and messy political system where competing voices might win the debate. But one man with enough bombs might force change through intimidation -- and go down in history, for better or worse.
That's just armchair speculation, of course. Yet when the psychiatrists come up with better theories, I suspect they'll have something in common with mine. The psychiatrists won't analyze whether the activists' cause was right or wrong; they'll treat the activists as dangerously unbalanced people. They'll distinguish between the extremists and the many other animal-rights advocates -- a majority, even -- who feel as strongly as the ALFites about the treatment of animals but pursue their goals through political persuasion, not intimidation.
Stratfor's Stewart worries that the schism between animal-rights moderates and violent activists is widening. The result, he fears, will be that "any moderating influence on the radicals will also be removed, and the lack of this influence will result in the more radical elements becoming even more violent."
If Stewart is right, more attacks on property and maybe even people are coming. Those who work with animals must, alas, "be warned."
"The arson at the Sheepskin Factory in Denver was done in defense and retaliation for all the innocent animals that have died cruelly at the hands of human oppressors. Be warned that making a living from the use and abuse of animals will not be tolerated. Also be warned that leather is every bit as evil as fur. As demonstrated in my recent arson against the Leather Factory in Salt Lake City. Go vegan! -- ALF Lone Wolf"
Moreover, some fringe activists have no qualms about taking human lives to save animal lives. When the homes of University of California biologists were firebombed in 2008, one activist remarked that "It's regrettable that certain scientists are willing to put their families at risk by choosing to do wasteful animal experiments."
A psychiatrist might convincingly explain why people follow their beliefs to such extremes. I can't. I wonder if it's related to the breakdown of community in an urbanized world. I have to think people who live in a village where they know everybody would be less likely to resort to terrorism.
Or maybe it's a way for a little man to feel big. It's hard for one person to alter the course of history in a slow-moving and messy political system where competing voices might win the debate. But one man with enough bombs might force change through intimidation -- and go down in history, for better or worse.
That's just armchair speculation, of course. Yet when the psychiatrists come up with better theories, I suspect they'll have something in common with mine. The psychiatrists won't analyze whether the activists' cause was right or wrong; they'll treat the activists as dangerously unbalanced people. They'll distinguish between the extremists and the many other animal-rights advocates -- a majority, even -- who feel as strongly as the ALFites about the treatment of animals but pursue their goals through political persuasion, not intimidation.
Stratfor's Stewart worries that the schism between animal-rights moderates and violent activists is widening. The result, he fears, will be that "any moderating influence on the radicals will also be removed, and the lack of this influence will result in the more radical elements becoming even more violent."
If Stewart is right, more attacks on property and maybe even people are coming. Those who work with animals must, alas, "be warned."
Attached Files
Comment