terrorizing people to save animals who save people...

[galaxee]

an editorial article in the new issue of science magazine addresses exactly the point that disturbs me most:

These are criminal acts, being investigated as an attempted homicide by local, state, and federal authorities. It is of serious concern that these acts of terrorism and their associated incendiary statements were not immediately condemned by our political leaders. There have been no high-profile or unified statements about the incidents, and days afterward, California's governor had still declined to comment.

Science 321(5891):891
Dying for Science? -- Greenwood et al. 321 (5891): 891 -- Science
(subscription required, i posted a link to the article summary, which amounts to the first paragraph.)

isn't it just the slightest bit strange that our leaders are so incredibly quick to condemn any instance of "the terrorists" but this has flown under EVERYONE's radar? i thought ALL terrorists qualified for this universal hatred and condemnation, but apparently i'm wrong.

the fact that this incident has been so quickly forgotten/ignored concerns me. when people's homes and cars are bombed because they are computer programmers, photographers, stay at home moms... are we going to be upset then? about terrorizing people for their choice in career? that's exactly what this instance was.

the fact that a controversial topic is involved is unrelated. terrorists are terrorists, no matter what issue they stand for/against.

[Godiva]

Well, you know how our current government feels about scientists. Everything would be a lot simpler if they would just.......go away.

Perhaps Homeland Security should investigate PETA as a home grown terrorist organization.

[Sufferin' Prius Envy]

Originally Posted by galaxee

the fact that this incident has been so quickly forgotten/ignored concerns me. when people's homes and cars are bombed because they are computer programmers, photographers, stay at home moms... are we going to be upset then? about terrorizing people for their choice in career? that's exactly what this instance was.

the fact that a controversial topic is involved is unrelated. terrorists are terrorists, no matter what issue they stand for/against.

This definitely isn't an isolated incident, and the attacks have been increasing the past few years. The apparent lack of concern also concerns me - BUT . . . in the Santa Cruz firebombing and assaults, you also need to factor in the if-not-outright-support of such actions by many in the Santa Cruz community . . . an underlying counter-culture of sympathizing with the philosophy and ultimate goals of these eco-terrorists.

A good example is this line out of an article in the Santa Cruz Sentinel:

"Young said he's seen "animal abusers" falsely allege incidents of violence in an attempt to cast their critics in a bad light and suggested UC Santa Cruz researchers could have easily done the same."
Animal rights extremists have long evaded police - Santa Cruz Sentinel

I suppose Mr. Young also thinks these same "animal abusers" also assault their own family members to make a point.
Two UC-Santa Cruz Researchers Victims of Firebombing - The Paper Trail (usnews.com)

I wouldn't doubt it if in a few months the Santa Cruz City Council doesn't come out with a resolution declaring Santa Cruz an animal research free zone.

One person's eco-terrorist is another's animal freedom fighter.
And to many of them, MILK IS (also) MURDER.
http://www.animalliberationfront.com...lkIsMurder.htm

[qbee42]

Galaxee, I worked in R&D for The Upjohn Company - those fine people who brought the world synthetic cortisone, ibuprofen, Xanax, Halcion, and many others. I did a lot of the design and development work on one of their big cortisone projects, but that's another story.

In my years at The Upjohn Comapany, I was exposed to a fair amount of animal testing. The researchers I worked with were fine, upstanding people who cared deeply about their animals. They avoided needless suffering, and would only use live animals for testing when absolutely necessary. I found them to be a very professional bunch.

This isn't to say that all animal testing is necessary, and all researchers saints, but the scientific world gets an undeserved black eye in this area. What it all comes down to is that there are a lot of nut cases running around; people who need a cause to champion so they can feel good about their lives. It's too bad they can't put all this time and effort into something useful.

Tom

[galaxee]

ha... science has been an annoyance to some neocon principles forever.

i don't think PETA is directly involved... though i read they do fund some of these types of things.

i'm aware of the past instances of attacks on scientists, i'm just confounded as to why this makes headlines in the news for one day and then fades away. these terrorists and terrorist sympathizers have votes, but who wants them? oh, that's right. nobody cares where the votes come from, so long as they have more than the other guy. ugh.

tom, i absolutely agree with you.

[hill]

Originally Posted by Godiva

I've always considered the life of a person more valuable than the life of an animal. I love my dog.
. . . snip

I love dogs too ... taste just like chicken!
just kidding ... fred's my best bud:

He's even my screensaver!
Lots of strange standards out there ... eat a fish, but not a cow, etc. There's still a lot of people who supplement their family's diet with fish, dear, elk, etc. and I'm not just talking Eskimos (which translatets, "eaters of raw meant" btw ... not tofu ... but I eat both).

[Dave_PH]

You sound like anoher of those damn moderates. You're probably against using high sulfur fuels but aren't willing to spike trees to save owls with spots.

[hill]

Originally Posted by Dave_PH

You sound like anoher of those damn moderates. You're probably against using high sulfur fuels but aren't willing to spike trees to save owls with spots.

Why spike the tree when you can just run up and slit the saw-operater's throat? Or maybe I'm missing the difference? You're probably against calling murder a murder, as long as the victim has adequately offended you? Moderates are the problem, eh? Soooo ... that must make al Qaeda pretty cool in your book, as they certainly aren't moderates.

[Dave_PH]

That was sarcasm. I'm a radical moderate. Spiking trees to save owls that happen to have spots isn't such a good move.