T
The Devil's Reject
Guest
I know it gets confusing when you hear nutters talking about their favorite domestic terrorist groups. Animal Liberation Front, Justice Department, Animal Rights Militia - what do they all mean?
Fortunately, with an internet connection one can delve into these scummy groups of cultists and zealots and see what's what.
It seems none of these are really "groups" in the way we might think. Since they are domestic terrorist organizations, they have to set themselves up very carefully.
When someone decides to take action, they choose a specific label under which they took the action based on the nature of their action. This way, for example, the ALF can claim they are not trying to hurt anybody, because the more violent actions are being done by the ARM. In other words, if your action does not involve intentionally harming others, you label it an "ALF action." If the nature of your action involves violence where you either disregard the safety of others, or intentionally attack others, then you choose a label like "Animal Rights Militia" for your action.
This is from the horse's mouth, the United Kingdom's ALF press officer Robin Webb, from a web site called (appropriatey for such zealots) No Compromise.
It seems there was some confusion from someone in a previous thread. Although I had linked to a BBC article that discussed mail bombs, fire bombs, arson, death threats, and other barbarian acts, the person wanted to pretend that Morrissey was really talking actions of a more non-violent nature, even though Morrissey's own words made it clear he was talking about violence.
To the extent there was still any doubt, I'm sorry to report the truth. When Morrissey told his fan that he should emulate the Animal Rights Militia, he was specifically talking about violent actions which deregard the safety of people. That is the definition of an ARM action. According to the ALF's spokesperson, it's what distinguishes actions taken under the label "Animal Rights Militia" from actions taken under the label "Animal Liberation Front."
From the horse's mouth, the key being the very last sentence:
http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html
==========
NC: How would you deal with someone who says they want to “join” the A.L.F.?
It may be reasonably argued that one is only a member of the A.L.F. whilst actually undertaking an A.L.F. action. There is no membership list of elite compassionate commandos.
The A.L.F. has had, and retains, an unchanging triad of policies. One, to rescue individual animals from suffering or potential suffering then place them in good, permanent homes or, where appropriate, release them into their natural environment.
Two, to damage or destroy property and equipment associated with animal abuse. That has a dual effect. It takes that property out of the arena of animal abuse, so that it can no longer be used to cause harm. Also, it compounds the economic loss by increasing insurance premiums and security costs not just for the company or institution attacked, but also across that whole discipline of exploitation. The simple intention is to price them out of business.
The third policy is to take every reasonable precaution not to harm or endanger life, either human or non-human.
Anyone, so long as they follow at least a vegetarian—but preferably vegan—lifestyle, can go out and undertake an action that falls within those policies and claim it as the Animal Liberation Front. There is no hierarchy; there are no leaders. There is just a compulsion to follow your heart in pursuit of justice. That is why the A.L.F. cannot be smashed, it cannot be effectively infiltrated, it cannot be stopped. You, each and every one of you: you are the A.L.F.
And if someone wishes to act as the Animal Rights Militia or the Justice Department? Simply put, the third policy of the A.L.F. no longer applies.
==========
So, an action taken under the label "Animal Rights Militia" is one where the third policy does not apply, and the third policy is taking "reasonable precautions not to harm or endanger life, either human or non-human."
(When I read this bit about precautions not to harm NON-human life, a little light bulb went off in my head. When you commit arson, of course the fire will inevitably kill animals, such as lil birdies and lil mousies.)
Fortunately, with an internet connection one can delve into these scummy groups of cultists and zealots and see what's what.
It seems none of these are really "groups" in the way we might think. Since they are domestic terrorist organizations, they have to set themselves up very carefully.
When someone decides to take action, they choose a specific label under which they took the action based on the nature of their action. This way, for example, the ALF can claim they are not trying to hurt anybody, because the more violent actions are being done by the ARM. In other words, if your action does not involve intentionally harming others, you label it an "ALF action." If the nature of your action involves violence where you either disregard the safety of others, or intentionally attack others, then you choose a label like "Animal Rights Militia" for your action.
This is from the horse's mouth, the United Kingdom's ALF press officer Robin Webb, from a web site called (appropriatey for such zealots) No Compromise.
It seems there was some confusion from someone in a previous thread. Although I had linked to a BBC article that discussed mail bombs, fire bombs, arson, death threats, and other barbarian acts, the person wanted to pretend that Morrissey was really talking actions of a more non-violent nature, even though Morrissey's own words made it clear he was talking about violence.
To the extent there was still any doubt, I'm sorry to report the truth. When Morrissey told his fan that he should emulate the Animal Rights Militia, he was specifically talking about violent actions which deregard the safety of people. That is the definition of an ARM action. According to the ALF's spokesperson, it's what distinguishes actions taken under the label "Animal Rights Militia" from actions taken under the label "Animal Liberation Front."
From the horse's mouth, the key being the very last sentence:
http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html
==========
NC: How would you deal with someone who says they want to “join” the A.L.F.?
It may be reasonably argued that one is only a member of the A.L.F. whilst actually undertaking an A.L.F. action. There is no membership list of elite compassionate commandos.
The A.L.F. has had, and retains, an unchanging triad of policies. One, to rescue individual animals from suffering or potential suffering then place them in good, permanent homes or, where appropriate, release them into their natural environment.
Two, to damage or destroy property and equipment associated with animal abuse. That has a dual effect. It takes that property out of the arena of animal abuse, so that it can no longer be used to cause harm. Also, it compounds the economic loss by increasing insurance premiums and security costs not just for the company or institution attacked, but also across that whole discipline of exploitation. The simple intention is to price them out of business.
The third policy is to take every reasonable precaution not to harm or endanger life, either human or non-human.
Anyone, so long as they follow at least a vegetarian—but preferably vegan—lifestyle, can go out and undertake an action that falls within those policies and claim it as the Animal Liberation Front. There is no hierarchy; there are no leaders. There is just a compulsion to follow your heart in pursuit of justice. That is why the A.L.F. cannot be smashed, it cannot be effectively infiltrated, it cannot be stopped. You, each and every one of you: you are the A.L.F.
And if someone wishes to act as the Animal Rights Militia or the Justice Department? Simply put, the third policy of the A.L.F. no longer applies.
==========
So, an action taken under the label "Animal Rights Militia" is one where the third policy does not apply, and the third policy is taking "reasonable precautions not to harm or endanger life, either human or non-human."
(When I read this bit about precautions not to harm NON-human life, a little light bulb went off in my head. When you commit arson, of course the fire will inevitably kill animals, such as lil birdies and lil mousies.)
Oh sorry you weren't referring to me. Or at least I hope not.
