ALF plants fake bomb at medical school

The Animal Liberation Front ( ALF ) has claimed responsibility for a bomb threat at the medical school at the University of California San Diego ( UCSD ). A fake bomb was planted at the campus of the UCSD medical school Wednesday, causing the buildings to be evacuated. According to one report the device was "covered with bullets". The FBI and the Joint Terrorism Task Force are investigating. Let's see. Here we have ALF planting a phony bomb on a college campus, causing research buildings to be evacuated. Sounds like it certainly qualifies as an act of terrorism to me. I would challenge any ALF apologist to make a coherent, convincing argument that this doesn't qualify as an act of terrorism. I'm not holding my breath. I'm also not holding my breath that you will here any of this condemned on any pro-AR blog or website.

AR idiocy in the news......

The Animal Liberation Front ( ALF ) , a domestic terrorist organization, has claimed responsibility for an attack on the home of Dr. Edythe London, a professor and researcher at UCLA's David Geffen School of Medicine. The vandals flooded Prof. London's home with a garden hose, doing $20,000-$40,000 worth of damage. In a rather courageous act, Prof. London wrote a response to the attack that has run in today's Los Angeles Times. In this response, Professor London outlines the work she is doing and why animal use is important to it. Professor London's calm, well-reasoned response to the ALF terrorists is, IMHO, nothing short of awesome. Prof. London has done a tremendous service to the research community here, because her response shows scientists to be the reasoned, rational people they are, while making the ALF thugs look like exactly what they are: cracked lunatics who think they have a right to terrorize others and commit criminal acts in the name of their ideology. Big time kudos to Professor London for putting out this courageous response to the ALF dirtbags.


In another story, a New Jersey appellate court has dismissed a lawsuit against Huntington Life Sciences ( HLS ), a pharmaceutical testing firm, by the New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ( NJSPCA ) . NJSPCA sued Huntington for allegedly causing unnecessary pain and suffering to animals, and had sought restitution from the company. The court rightly dismissed the case, because HLS has no legal obligations to NJSPCA, and thus there is no grounds for a claim of restitution. Seems to me like a frivolous lawsuit in which an animal advocacy group was trying to use the legal system as way to steal money from a legitimate business that it happens to dislike. I'm certainly no law expert, but I can't help but wonder, and hope, that perhaps this case will set a precedent in cutting off AR groups and their lawyers that hope use litigation "on behalf of animals" in the future as part of their strategy.

Tensions over AR extremism heating up in L.A., Oregon

Animal rights thugs have stepped up their sick little jihad against scientists in both Los Angeles and Oregon recently. I have commented before about the ALF's attempted firebombing of UCLA researcher and pediatric ophthalmologist ( That's right, they're harassing someone who helps kids see better. How freakin' sick is that? ) Dr. Arthur Rosenbaum's car. Here is an excellent article that appeared last week in L.A. Weekly last week that details ALF's terrorizing of Dr. Rosenbaum. The article does of fine job of exposing the role of the inflammatory rhetoric of AR whackjob-in-chief and Hippocratic oath ignorer, trauma surgeon Dr. Jerry Vlasak, in the increasingly tense climate of fear, violence, and intimidation. The last sentence of the article is nothing short of chilling: "A possibly messy and tragic showdown is brewing.". Let us hope not. Let us hope that the terrorists are found, arrested, tried, convicted, and severely punished before that happens. If this unfortunately does end in tragedy, one thing is for sure: Dr. Vlasak, like the coward that he is, certainly will not accept responsibility for the role of his vile rhetoric in it. He will simply let his sycophantic "useful idiots" take the fall.

In a similar story, another researcher in Oregon is being terrorized by AR criminals. The garage door of researcher Dr. Eliot Spindel was spray painted by ALF and a caustic chemical thrown on his daughter's car. A release on the North American ALF website then further threatened Dr. Spindel with more vandalism and violence including broken windows and firebombs. Jim Newman, communications coordinator for Oregon Science & Health University, where Dr. Spindel works, has a great quote here. According to Mr. Newman: “Americans have the right to protest against things they feel strongly about,” Newman said. “But the harassment and frightening small children at researchers’ home and property damage goes clearly beyond the boundaries of what free speech is all about.” Exactly. But ALF terrorists, like their Islamo-fascist brethren, recognize no such boundaries. Like all terrorists, they have no respect for the rule of law or the rights of others, and they have a smug sense of "moral rightness" about their own beliefs that they think somehow gives them license to terrorize those with whom they disagree in order to advance their own agenda.

Update to ALF attack on non-fur selling "fur" store

Last week, I posted about an ALF vandalism on a store in Pennsylvania that has the word "fur" in its name, but doesn't actually sell fur. Well, the story has been updated to now include comments by self-anointed ALF "press officer" Dr. Jerry Vlasak. Yes, this is the same Dr. Vlasak that advocates murdering scientists to stop animal testing. In the story, Dr. Vlasak dishonestly attempts to shift the blame for the attacks from the perpetrators and onto the victims. Why? Simply because they use the word "fur" in their name. Dr. Vlasak is using the exact same kind of logic here that some people use to blame a rape victim, rather than the rapist, for the rape: since a woman was dressed provocatively, it is her own fault, not the fault of the perp, that she got raped. After all, by dressing provocatively, she was "just asking for it". Dr. Vlasak is using the same horrid logic: since the business uses the word "fur", well, it's their own fault they got hit. As per usual for Dr. Vlasak, he is utterly intellectually and morally bankrupt.

Doh! ALF idiots attack "fur" store that doesn't sell fur

According to this story, the Animal Liberation Front ( ALF ) is taking responsibility for vandalism at Linda's Fashions and Fur Salon in Geistown, Pennsylvania. Apparently none of the ALF criminals bothered to check up on their chosen target before indulging themselves in their need to vandalize: the business in question doesn't sell fur, and hasn't for the past 20 years. Intelligent people, these ALF types, aren't they?

Death toll from apparent "animal liberation": 400 mink and 2 family dogs

This is a rather disturbing story coming out of Pennsylvania. Four hundred mink will killed when they were released form a mink farm, and two dogs were also stabbed or shot. As the article states, no one has taken responsibility for this act, but it sure seems like it has the Animal Liberation Front ( ALF ) or other similar radical "animal liberation" group written all over it. I would guess that the dogs were killed because they were apparently trained to round up the minks, and the perpetrators couldn't allow that to happen. This incident pretty much sums up what is so wrong about "animal liberation" terrorists. To release animals into the wild like this is nothing short of criminally irresponsible. First off, it often ends up killing the very animals that these miscreants claim they want to protect because they often die from exposure, being run over, predators, etc.. Furthermore, such a release has the potential to also devastate the local ecosystems by the influx of these often non-native animals. And these are the same people that claim to care about animals and the environment. Why would those who favor AR release animals to die and kill dogs one might ask? I think the answer is that because to the AR/animal liberation mindset, self-serving ideology and agenda trumps all. If some animals must be sacrificed to achieve their goal of "total animal liberation", in the words of Ingrid Newkirk, then that is an acceptable loss in their minds. In short, the ends justify the means. We saw a similar thing in the U.K. recently in which some animals were killed in an ALF arson at a dairy farm that damaged farm machinery and a hay barn. Again, the fact that some animals were killed is inconsequential to the perpetrators. You will not here either of these actions condemned by PeTA or any other outlet of the animal rights mafia. Why? Because there seems to be an unwritten rule amongst many ARAs that you never, ever criticize a "direct action" or the ultra-radical lunatic fringe that conducts them. To do so is to harm "the cause". The hypocrisy here is mind-boggling as well. To the AR mind, it is apparently OK for them to kill animals if it somehow advances the "higher goal", but God forbid using animals for life saving medical research or shooting a deer to put food on your table.