As strategic violence is accepted as vaild by the Animal rights brigade, surely it is time that a few local activists were treated to a similar campaign for tacit support of terrorism.

A few anonymous daubings here, some exhumations there and parcels of razor blades sent to children there.

Perhaps then they will then get the message that violence and intimidation are not acceptable in civilised society and tacit approval of it likewise.

Yet again covert, illegal action to make a point, no dialogue, legal protest or anything, just wanton valdalism as usual. Until they can protest within the law they should be hounded out and locked up.

The Swastikas are sure to come.

Lets get the eggs out,or even better the bricks,I'll risk the fine.Mindless idiots

the things they do are ridiculous and they should be stopped. the plumbing company only have a distant relationship with oxford university as well. soon they will be attacking pupils of oxford uni.

anon wrote:
As strategic violence is accepted as vaild by the Animal rights brigade, surely it is time that a few local activists were treated to a similar campaign for tacit support of terrorism. A few anonymous daubings here, some exhumations there and parcels of razor blades sent to children there. Perhaps then they will then get the message that violence and intimidation are not acceptable in civilised society and tacit approval of it likewise.

You inciting others to violence then anon? It's noteworthy that as strategic violence towards animals is accepted as valid by the pro-vivisection animal abuse brigade, the ALF apparently confine their retribution to minor acts of vandalism.

By contrast anon advocates acts of extreme violence towards those who engage in minor vandalism in defence of animals.

It's an interesting, although perhaps not altogether surprising, aspect of the comments on these forums that acts of violence are predominantly advocated by the pro-viv loons rather than by animal rights advocates.

Dr Mengele wrote:
The Swastikas are sure to come.

Yes. Minor damage is akin to fascism. You are right.

Alan wrote:
Yet again covert, illegal action to make a point, no dialogue, legal protest or anything, just wanton valdalism as usual. Until they can protest within the law they should be hounded out and locked up.

By protesting within the law, I assume you mean things like peacefully marching through Oxford on demos organised with the police. That's ok is it?

Clare wrote:
the things they do are ridiculous and they should be stopped. the plumbing company only have a distant relationship with oxford university as well. soon they will be attacking pupils of oxford uni.

Yes of course. Damage to property naturally leads on to random attacks on pupils.I never thought of it that way. You are right.

As for the animal researchers, whatever will they do next? Today mutilation and killing of animals, tomorrow - err, more mutilation and killing of animals.

badger wrote:

anon wrote: As strategic violence is accepted as vaild by the Animal rights brigade, surely it is time that a few local activists were treated to a similar campaign for tacit support of terrorism. A few anonymous daubings here, some exhumations there and parcels of razor blades sent to children there. Perhaps then they will then get the message that violence and intimidation are not acceptable in civilised society and tacit approval of it likewise.

You inciting others to violence then anon? It's noteworthy that as strategic violence towards animals is accepted as valid by the pro-vivisection animal abuse brigade, the ALF apparently confine their retribution to minor acts of vandalism. By contrast anon advocates acts of extreme violence towards those who engage in minor vandalism in defence of animals. It's an interesting, although perhaps not altogether surprising, aspect of the comments on these forums that acts of violence are predominantly advocated by the pro-viv loons rather than by animal rights advocates.

"Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword".

Not advocating anything that the terroists haven't themselves done.

I'm sure a few martyrs for the cause can only strengthen it.

Not running scared are you?

Oh yeah, because saving lives, markers and spray paint is OBVIOUSLY terrorism and crime.

Alan wrote:
Yet again covert, illegal action to make a point, no dialogue, legal protest or anything, just wanton valdalism as usual. Until they can protest within the law they should be hounded out and locked up.

I think you'll find that many animal rights groups operate completely within the law and change is possible through these means. However-the fact that a small group of people are willing to take action in this fashion and be supported generally and widely by animal lovers (like myself)should serve to illustrate the depth of ethical realisation that a good deal of the world population have come to about this issue. animal maltreatment is tantamount to slavery.

Andrew wrote:

Alan wrote: Yet again covert, illegal action to make a point, no dialogue, legal protest or anything, just wanton valdalism as usual. Until they can protest within the law they should be hounded out and locked up.

I think you'll find that many animal rights groups operate completely within the law and change is possible through these means. However-the fact that a small group of people are willing to take action in this fashion and be supported generally and widely by animal lovers (like myself)should serve to illustrate the depth of ethical realisation that a good deal of the world population have come to about this issue. animal maltreatment is tantamount to slavery.

It serves to show how ethically and morally bankrupt the arguments are.

Presumably if you think terrorism is justified for the sake of lab rats then you also accept that it is even more justified when used by groups like the PLO IRA etc etc.

They would also argue that they were fighting a worthy cause.

Karen wrote:
Oh yeah, because saving lives, markers and spray paint is OBVIOUSLY terrorism and crime.

Well it certainly isnt legal to spray paint other peoples property.

Get em ALF. There's a lot of people behind you. All of you deserve medals.

quote

Think Torture-Think New Labour.

anon wrote:

badger wrote:

anon wrote: As strategic violence is accepted as vaild by the Animal rights brigade, surely it is time that a few local activists were treated to a similar campaign for tacit support of terrorism. A few anonymous daubings here, some exhumations there and parcels of razor blades sent to children there. Perhaps then they will then get the message that violence and intimidation are not acceptable in civilised society and tacit approval of it likewise.

You inciting others to violence then anon? It's noteworthy that as strategic violence towards animals is accepted as valid by the pro-vivisection animal abuse brigade, the ALF apparently confine their retribution to minor acts of vandalism. By contrast anon advocates acts of extreme violence towards those who engage in minor vandalism in defence of animals. It's an interesting, although perhaps not altogether surprising, aspect of the comments on these forums that acts of violence are predominantly advocated by the pro-viv loons rather than by animal rights advocates.

"Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword". Not advocating anything that the terroists haven't themselves done. I'm sure a few martyrs for the cause can only strengthen it. Not running scared are you?

Could you just clarify a couple of points anon. In support of your pro-vivisection cause, you are encouraging others to use violence not only against members of the ALF in retaliation for some minor damage to property, but also against those who offer "tacit support" to such individuals. What exactly do you mean by tacit support, and which individuals - if any - have you identified as offering such support?
Also what is your position in relation to animal researchers who terrorise and abuse animals every day in their laboratories?

alan page wrote:

Karen wrote: Oh yeah, because saving lives, markers and spray paint is OBVIOUSLY terrorism and crime.

Well it certainly isnt legal to spray paint other peoples property.

OK then Alan, would you ever be prepared to break the law? Say for example they lowered the sexual age of consent to 13 (as it currently is in Spain) and you found out that your neighbour was having sex with 13 year old girls.
Would you still consider it wrong to break the law and intervene in order to prevent an act that most people would regard as rape? Would you condemn those who did intervene in the same strident tones as you now condemn those individuals who break the law in support of animal rights?

Or would you be in favour of breaking the law in these circumstances? If so, then it's surely fair to say that it is the cause of animal rights to which you object, and not the breaking of the law per se.

Also, are there any circumstances in which you think violence against humans would be justifiable? Take for example the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which involved, and continue to involve the use of extreme violence against and mass slaughter of human beings. Do you think this can sometimes be justifiable or are you always against the use of such violence all of the time? (I am not talking about violence towards animals, which is something you obviously agree with)

Those vivisectionists shall henceforth be known as 'Geezers of blood'.

alan page wrote:

Andrew wrote:

Alan wrote: Yet again covert, illegal action to make a point, no dialogue, legal protest or anything, just wanton valdalism as usual. Until they can protest within the law they should be hounded out and locked up.

I think you'll find that many animal rights groups operate completely within the law and change is possible through these means. However-the fact that a small group of people are willing to take action in this fashion and be supported generally and widely by animal lovers (like myself)should serve to illustrate the depth of ethical realisation that a good deal of the world population have come to about this issue. animal maltreatment is tantamount to slavery.

It serves to show how ethically and morally bankrupt the arguments are. Presumably if you think terrorism is justified for the sake of lab rats then you also accept that it is even more justified when used by groups like the PLO IRA etc etc. They would also argue that they were fighting a worthy cause.

The current legislation governing experimemnts on laboratory animals allows for the infliction of both "moderate" and "substantial" pain on animals so long as the researchers can justify it in their application for the project license. This means that researchers are allowed to inflict considerable pain on animals so long as they get the wording correct on the license application.
(If you're in any doubt about this, look at the researchers' own logs of their research on internet websites such as medline or pubmed, or read the result of the judicial review application by the BUAV in which the High Court found that the Home Office had underplayed the likely suffering of animals in determining project license applications.

So with this in mind Alan, do you only support the use of violence against "labrats" as your post implies, or are you in favour of such violence against a whole range of species (eg primates, dogs, rabbits) as currently takes place at Oxford Uni?

Paint is not a terrorists tool. Vandalism is not terrorism. Lets get things into perspective, this is non violent protest. What IS violent is the way substances like paint and paint stripper are tested on animals. Shoved down the throats of rats, dropped into the eyes of rabbits and rubbed into the shave skin of guinea pigs. Now THAT, is extreme.