Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

RateMyTerrorist: the ELF pole

Do you rate the ELF?

  • Yes, go for it. All in all, a fair response to the situation.

    Votes: 17 50.0%
  • No.

    Votes: 9 26.5%
  • I think their tactics are valid, but i don't support the cause/actions.

    Votes: 3 8.8%
  • I think their cause is valid but i don't support their actions.

    Votes: 5 14.7%

  • Total voters
    34
Can anyone explain to me why anyone would set fire to something and then claim that by doing so they are helping the environment? :confused:
If they were nicking SUV's and turning them into bicycles I might have some respect...
 
sihhi said:
If socialists or anarchists were to act on "this issue" ideally it'd be a case of aiming for free public transport-- see earlier threads between me and Isambard and the congestion charge.

Yeah, I can see that's a better option than simply boycotting SUVs. But how do you get free public transport through direct action?

As for silentnate's question -- the emissions delivered by an SUV through it's lifetime of use is far more than one petrol blaze.
 
Pilgrim said:
You need to refine your criticism to those who deserve it.


Yeah, I always get this. Your dad, Madzones' old man, just couldn't live without one, so I guess there has to be exceptions to my desire for a blanket ban on all of them.

I'm kind of favour (in the short term) of special licences, stingently tested, for people like your dad so they may conintue to function, but really deep down I think the whole 4x4 thing is a bit of a red herring, because it's all cars, and the way society is structured around them, that needs to change.

And to answer SilentNate, if I was thinking of buying a car, I would be most reluctant to choose one that might provoke such public anger that resulted in it being potentially torched.
4x4's need to become as socially unacceptable as the wearing of fur. I really think it's possible.
 
In Bloom said:
How is a converted van any better (in terms of pollution and danger to pedestrians) than a 4x4?
Its got more soace. Its uses less the to mile. doesn't have massive bars on the front like SUV's.

Random said:
Yeah, I can see that's a better option than simply boycotting SUVs. But how do you get free public transport through direct action?
- Sabotaging the barriers
- Setting up a train bunkers union to pay fines of members
- Becoming a member of a transport union and agitating for free transport


- Burning SUVs ;)
 
Taxamo Welf said:
Its got more soace. Its uses less the to mile. doesn't have massive bars on the front like SUV's.
Try driving a white van off road. The fact of the matter is that some people do need a 4x4. Free public transport, more renewable and carbon neutral feuals would be good long term fixes, but burning 4x4s is no solution.
 
Random said:
So you're against all urban SUVs, then?
Depends on what you mean by that, if you mean, am I against people who have no need for a 4x4 driving them round the city, consuming silly amounts of petrol and putting people's lives at risk, then yes. If you mean, am I against anybody who lives in an urban area owning a 4x4, then no.
 
In Bloom said:
The link worked before, it was about a cafe ran by an ELF major player sacking workers for unionising. For some reason it redirects to the libcom main news page now :confused:

Oh yeah what a wanker - that's some vegan twat in portland I believe (can't access the article). Arsehole obviously knows his priorities. I cringe at the thought that he might consider himself an anarchist. :o :mad:
 
Random said:
Yeah, I can see that's a better option than simply boycotting SUVs. But how do you get free public transport through direct action?

As for silentnate's question -- the emissions delivered by an SUV through it's lifetime of use is far more than one petrol blaze.
Didn't Freedom have an article a bit ago about people in Sweden(?) simply getting on buses and refusing to pay?
 
sihhi said:
:confused:
You don't think people are in favour of higher wages for nurses or bus drivers?
if the govt. told them it meant higher taxes, no.
Otherwise yes.

and their seem to be a sizeable mnority of c*nts out there who would not either.
 
I didn't laugh. There was a fare dodgers' group in London as well, c1995-1998.

BTW, more than 50% think the ELF is mint :cool: :D
 
Not that I don't think its a brilliant idea in theory, but wouldn't a fare dodgers' union fall foul of incitement laws?
 
heal the earth mother fucker!
210px-Legolas.jpg
 
In Bloom said:
Not that I don't think its a brilliant idea in theory, but wouldn't a fare dodgers' union fall foul of incitement laws?

so? i know you're not being daft or anything but who cares? lets just do it, who are they going to prosecute? :confused:
 
rednblack said:
so? i know you're not being daft or anything but who cares? lets just do it, who are they going to prosecute? :confused:
A good point, though for something like this to work properly (instead of just being an exercise in point scoring against the man), it'd take a fair level of organisation, which might be difficult to do without being caught. Still, I'm sure most people on here know a great deal more about this sort of stuff than I do :)
 
In Bloom said:
Not that I don't think its a brilliant idea in theory, but wouldn't a fare dodgers' union fall foul of incitement laws?
surely so would agitating or the forceful taking of power?

I dunno. Its a good thing to be nicked for though: 'Anarchist kingpins rednblack(45) and Trixonimo Welp(12) were today charged with being the brains behind the the Fare Bunkers Union, estimated to have lost Richard Branson alone almost millions of pounds. Rednblack told the jury they were a 'bunch of cunts' after dismissing his barrister for having a public school education and silly voice. Tixilicks Wolfe has already been acquitted on a technicality pointed out by the QC his daddy (Lord Barecash of Channel Islands Banking Group) bought him.'

:D
 
Taxamo Welf said:
surely so would agitating or the forceful taking of power?
Nah, its only incitement if its likely to happen.

I dunno. Its a good thing to be nicked for though: 'Anarchist kingpins rednblack(45) and Trixonimo Welp(12) were today charged with being the brains behind the the Fare Bunkers Union, estimated to have lost Richard Branson alone almost millions of pounds. Rednblack told the jury they were a 'bunch of cunts' after dismissing his barrister for having a public school education and silly voice. Tixilicks Wolfe has already been acquitted on a technicality pointed out by the QC his daddy (Lord Barecash of Channel Islands Banking Group) bought him.'
:D :D :D
 
the 48th operation of the FBU took place last night on a midlands train. Issues regarding a fighting fund for air freshener for all members to use in the toilets will be raised at the next meeting.

Frats.
 
aurora green said:
well this has been gone over quite a few times on here recently (at great length) but my views are still the same, that yes, anyyone who chooses to drive the most polluting car on the planet can can be pretty much lumped together. It's not as if there is no other option. 4x4 drivers couldn't give a fuck about the environment, therefore the feeling is recipricated, by me anyway.

Some arn't as bad...wished I had one the other weekend when I was kayaking and the get out point had about 2 foot of mum...luckily had lots of mates to push my car. When my mate put his car in a ditch in the peak on winter he was very glad the passing MR team had on which they used to pull him out. However people who own really big ones and drive them round Lincoln piss me of as they turn streets big enough for 2 cars into a single lane
 
Back
Top Bottom