ELS What do you think of these type of groups

[canexplain]

$2 million homes burn in 'act of terror,' developer says

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/03/03/...ire/index.html

so what do you think of groups like ELF and PETA ? X****

that friggin figures i spelled the title wrong and cant change it ... well then what do you think of els hehehehhe

[chairmenmeow47]

my god, i doubt all the fumes from the fire are "green"!!! i hate any extremist group that tries so hard to convert other people to their way of life. burning people's houses down is not an effective method of communication.

as for PETA... People Eat Tasty Animals

i love meat. my aunt and uncle own a cattle ranch. kill the cow in front of me and make a tasty steak, i don't care. if you want vegetables, go eat vegetables. don't try to bring me to the un-tasty side.

i remember my freshman year of high school at boarding school, my stupid environmental science teacher forced us all to work "vegetarian day" in the cafeteria. so i showed up in my "ZZ Cattle: Beef, It's What's for Dinner" shirt. my teacher took one look at me and said i could leave =P

[TomAz]

$2 million homes burn in 'act of terror,' developer says

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/03/03/...ire/index.html

so what do you think of groups like ELF and PETA ? X****

that friggin figures i spelled the title wrong and cant change it ... well then what do you think of els hehehehhe

How is burning an uninhabited home in an act in which no one is injured an "act of terror"? Doesn't someone need to actually be terrified for it to be considered "terror".

It's just arson.

hey do you PHX people remember the guy who was doing this here a few years back? I knew that guy personally.

[shakermaker113]

How is burning an uninhabited home in an act in which no one is injured an "act of terror"? Doesn't someone need to actually be terrified for it to be considered "terror".

It's just arson.

burning someone's home down is pretty terrible if you ask me.

[thomas morejunk]

Uninhabited.

[algunz]

I'm a strong advocate for freedom of speech, but when it comes at the cost, financial or worse, of others than the argument often gets lost on me. If they want to burn down an empty Wal-Mart, go for it, but people's private property - that's not cool.

[canexplain]

toms a terrorist leaning left wing facist .... morning






here is what this thread deservs now .... terrorist cats .....

[algunz]

Uninhabited.

It's someone's future home. Granted we are talking about millionaires, but still.

[shakermaker113]

oh. I didn't realize nobody owned them yet. that's less terrible.

[thomas morejunk]

It technically was MY future home as much as anyone else's. So yes, i agree, and I'm not too shaken up about it.

[Young blood]

English as a second language is pretty awesome.

[algunz]

Dyslexics Untie!!

[canexplain]

I'm a strong advocate for freedom of speech, but when it comes at the cost, financial or worse, of others than the argument often gets lost on me. If they want to burn down an empty Wal-Mart, go for it, but people's private property - that's not cool.

thats why i dropped out of the SDS way back then ... when they wanted to bomb bldgs with janitors in them at night time, it got to be uncool ... plus i had a distance friend who was being chased by the FBI and i was in the service so that would have been a big bust ... x****

[Young blood]

ELF is a bunch of douche bags. Progress is going to happen. Change peoples mind in how and where the build. Violence and terrorism is bullshit.

PETA is alright as a concept.

Extremists, no matter the group are the problem. Enlightening and educating is the way to go.

[chairmenmeow47]

Uninhabited.

it's still FIRE.

how many huge fires are started because someone dropped a cigarette or didn't properly put out a camp fire? those are both very small fires compared to what this group did. they are lucky nothing got out of control. what if there was a wind shift? what if there was an explosive substance in the area? what if some kid was in the area?

obviously the fact that it was uninhabited makes it less dangerous and stupid, but lighting giant buildings on fire to make a political point is dangerous and stupid no matter how you slice it.

[bartelby]

its stupid and completely defeats the purpose of what they are trying to do...its like causing an oil spill to protest Exxon or something

[HowToDisappear]

A year or two ago the ELF claimed responsibility for destroying a huge condo project under construction in the UTC area. Made no sense to me - UTC has been very heavily developed (unfortunately) for at least 30 years. There's certainly no stopping it (developers have absolute rule here). Not that I advocate extremism and violence - I don't - but it would have been a lot more helpful if they'd burned something down back then. Now, it's just an exercise in futility and needless destruction.

[bartelby]

they should spend their time and effort getting someone elected to stop these developments, not completely alienating any moderate support they might have had

[Mr.Nipples]

fucking PETArds...blame them...

[canexplain]

guess i am a minority then for sure .. i think if there are not people that might get hurt, and yes you could accidently start a fire or something like that, it makes point, good or bad ... not like just sitting around bitching like we all do .... ELF did something here in colorado too ... i think aspen .....x****

[Young blood]

It was Vail. Insurance paid up and they re-built so what was the point?

[thomas morejunk]

it's still FIRE.

how many huge fires are started because someone dropped a cigarette or didn't properly put out a camp fire? those are both very small fires compared to what this group did. they are lucky nothing got out of control. what if there was a wind shift? what if there was an explosive substance in the area? what if some kid was in the area?

obviously the fact that it was uninhabited makes it less dangerous and stupid, but lighting giant buildings on fire to make a political point is dangerous and stupid no matter how you slice it.

Sigh. I'm in no way condoning this. I simply restated what an above post had stated, then subsequently commented on for argument. Dangers here DID include more than just arson, yes, but being in the Northwest winter land, coupled with the fact they sadly perform these shenanigans for a living, I doubt this story will do more than cause their wiki page to be hit a few dozen more times in the coming weeks. Find another noob to attack, I'm not bored anymore.

[TomAz]

it's still FIRE.

i didn't mean to imply that it was OK for them to do this. Clearly it is wrong. It is a crime, called arson.


The point I was making was that the guy quoted in the paper was using a loaded word ("terrorism") just to make the perpetrators seem like even worse people. Sorry, arson in which no one is injured is not equivalent to lopping off the dome of some squealing engineer and broadcasting the video on the internets. I don't care what some FBI mouthpiece says, it's just deliberately manipulative phrasing. DON'T FALL FOR IT.

[bartelby]

guess i am a minority then for sure .. i think if there are not people that might get hurt, and yes you could accidently start a fire or something like that, it makes point, good or bad ... not like just sitting around bitching like we all do .... ELF did something here in colorado too ... i think aspen .....x****

my problem is that while the act makes a point (generally, one with which I agree)
it:

1) causes more GHGs to be released because of the fire and the subsequent effort to rebuild the houses
2) the ability it gives to those on the other side of the argument to dismiss all those against development as petty criminals (edit: as terrorists)
3) it only really hurts the insurance companies in the end

[algunz]

Drastic measures are often the only way to get heard. "By Any means Necessary" But, why not chain themselves inside the uninhabited homes, or camp out on the lawns like homeless people to deter potential buyers. Arson is a chicken shit means of expression, and thank goodness the fires didn't spread to surrounding open land, that would have been the ultimate of sad ironies.

[chairmenmeow47]

guess i am a minority then for sure .. i think if there are not people that might get hurt, and yes you could accidently start a fire or something like that, it makes point, good or bad ... not like just sitting around bitching like we all do .... ELF did something here in colorado too ... i think aspen .....x****

but how responsive will the developers be to change now? it's frustrating to try to "get something done" and "change things", but pissing people off only PISSES PEOPLE OFF! imagine if your neighbor came over and handed you some coupons to make your house greener as a way of saying they disapprove of your giant carbon footprint. now imagine that instead of talking to you, the neighbor decides to just burn your house down while you're gone and leave a sign saying that you're house isn't green. which method are you more likely to respond to?

the developers (or whoever) are now out a bunch of money. why on earth would they now want to spend MORE money to be green?! it's sensationalist and counter-productive. and i wonder what real impact this small development has on the ENTIRE PLANET anyways? they're chopping at the leaves instead of working to solve the greater problem.

it's always best to work WITH people and not against them. if you're trying to change the minds of "evil money grubbing businesses", then speak their language and try to create more laws and tax breaks that encourage green activity than resort to crude, aggressive scare-tactics.

and it's not even a big political statement, it's just a small development somewhere. they're going to have to think bigger if they think headlines will change anything.

[canexplain]

It was Vail. Insurance paid up and they re-built so what was the point?

what if they do it again, and again ..... i think we all have our lines in the sand ... some closer then others ... there are beaches in the world like this, so dont think it could never happen ... what if corparations sp bought up a 100 mile patch of hwy 1, the pch, put in hotels, and made it gated where we couldnt drive it , but had to go up 5 .... now that would make some more lines in the sand for people like here on the board ....x*****

[algunz]

It was Vail. Insurance paid up and they re-built so what was the point?

Same thing is gonna happen here too. Nobody will think twice.

[TomAz]

3) it only really hurts the insurance companies in the end

no, that's not 'the end'. In the end, it's the people who pay insurance premiums who are funding this.

[chairmenmeow47]

Sigh. I'm in no way condoning this. I simply restated what an above post had stated, then subsequently commented on for argument. Dangers here DID include more than just arson, yes, but being in the Northwest winter land, coupled with the fact they sadly perform these shenanigans for a living, I doubt this story will do more than cause their wiki page to be hit a few dozen more times in the coming weeks. Find another noob to attack, I'm not bored anymore.

debate does not equal attack. it's ok to discuss different viewpoints in an online forum

you're completely right though, this story isn't going to mean jack shit tomorrow. all the more reason their acts were stupid.

and yes tom, terrorism is WAY too extreme of a description.