Animal Liberation Front - Research Paper Example

Animal Liberation Front TCT 390: Terrorism & Counterterrorism Studies Matthew Luther Mr. Klumb 8 March 214 Several critiques have argued that Animal Liberation Front can be compared as other terrorist groups due to the violation of the activities. However, it is true that the activists of the Animal Liberation Front followed ethical value and morale in their activities. They were fighting against those individuals who used to torture animals. This report has discussed about the structure, motivation, origin and goals of ALF to justify the ideology and motive of the Animal Liberation front. In addition to this, the report has discussed about the threat of ALF and policies to reduce the threat that is posed by ALF. Finally, the report has stated that how the activities of ALF cannot be compared with the activities of other extremist terrorist groups in this world. Animal Liberation Front Introduction: The Animal Liberation Front is also recognized as ALF. ALF can be acknowledged as the terrorist groups that contains domestic terrorists. ALF is an international, leaderless and underground resistance that used to involve in different types of illegal direct actions in the pursuit of the animal liberation. This terrorist group believes in direct action. In addition to this, this terrorist organization has activity in more than 40 countries. ALF can be considered under the radar of the Animal Enterprise Protection Act (AETA 2005 and AEPA 2002). The activists of Animal Liberation Front try to remove the animals from the farms and laboratories. Major motives of this group are to arrange safe housing, organize veterinary care, and destroying facilities, ensuring healthy and sustainable living of the animals. However, several critiques have compared the activists of this group to the terrorists due to their direct illegal and devastating actions. This research paper is going to determine how the AEPA 2002 and AETA 2005 have been attached or linked to the ALF. The common problem of both AEPA 2002 and AETA 2005 is to label the groups as terrorist as the individuals within these terrorist groups with a lawful message that cannot engage the terrorist aspect. Therefore, it is quite important for the researcher that whether the label of terrorism can be applied to the Animal Liberation Front. However, based on the above mentioned facts and aspects, the research question of this paper can be articulated as: “Is the tag of terrorism proportionately applied to the Animal Liberation Front as a whole or do these tags originate from act of extremist sections of the pressure group?” Discussion: This part of the research paper will discuss about the Animal Liberation Front. Origin: The origins of the Animal Liberation Front trace back to the English Activists’ group in the late 1960s, when a British Journalist formed HSA to stop the killing and torturing of the animals. Ronnie Lee was the founder of this Animal Liberation Front. Animal Liberation Front was established in the year 1976. In addition to this, his follower Cliff Goodman helped him to develop this group in order to save the animals from the attack of the hunters or other individuals. They decided that it is important to develop and implement several plans and activities in order to maintain the ecological balance and bring sustainability in the life of the animals as it is the basic right of the animals to live in the environment. However, Goodman and Lee were arrested by Police in the year 1974 during a raid on the Animal Colonies in Oxford Library situated in Bicester. These two activists were sentenced for three years in prison, for their movements and activities. Brand of Mercy was developed in the year 1972 to reduce the number of torturing activities on the animals. After 12 months of their sentence, they were paroled. However, Lee understood that a big movement is required to create awareness of this issue and the group among the people in this world. Lee recruited several new individuals along with the activists and members of the Brand of Mercy in order to develop a new group. Like this way, Lee ensured a positive revolutionary movement. Ronnie Lee tried to consider a name of this group that can haunt those individuals who utilized animals according to Molland. Like this way, finally the Animal Liberation Front was developed in the year 1976 (Best, 2007). Structure: It is true that each terrorist organization used to follow an organizational structure to enhance decision making processes and ensure intended activities work effectively. The Animal Liberation Front followed decentralization in the group with no hierarchy to enhance effective team co-ordination and significant collaborative performance. The movement of the Animal Liberation Front has both above ground and underground components. Decentralized decision making process ensured firebreak when it came to legal responsibility. In addition to this; volunteers were expected to stick to the developed goals and aims of the Animal Liberation Front. These two structural options helped the group to change the strategies according to the demand of the situation in the external environment. The organization brought the concept of above-ground group structure in order to support the important and valuable covert volunteers. However, the supporters of the Animal Liberation Front adopt the activists in the jails and prison system as the conscience’s prisoners. The management of this American Liberation Front Group succeeded to motivate several young individuals to join the group by paying a small monthly fee. In addition to this, the group succeeded to manage three publications in order to publish their motivation, goals, intention and ideologies. It is true that the organization succeeded bringing about a huge revolution in the UK as well as other countries due to their ideologies and activities. Last but not the least, these particular above ground and underground structures helped the Animal Liberation Front to remove 17, 262 animals from several facilities (Hill, 2011). Motivation: Motivation of an individual or an organization or a group generally depends upon the philosophy, perception, thinking and ideology of that individual, group or organization. However, it is extremely important that each and every human and non-human animal has the right to live peacefully within the community and environment. This philosophy motivated the activists of the Animal Liberation Front to enhance the movements and activities in order to secure the basic rights of the animal within the society (Bjelopera, 2013). However, the activists of the Animal Liberation Front strongly argued that each and every animal should be taken care of and should not be viewed as the private or public property. However, the philosophy of direct action and animal welfare motivated the activists of the Animal Liberation Front to consider extremism in their activities (Atkins, 2004)1. It is true that laboratories of several universities used to keep different animals for the samples to test or investigate or examine some particular aspects. These activities influenced the activists of the Animal Liberation Front to consider the extremism activities. Destruction of facilities or bombing in the laboratories can be considered as the extremist activities of the Animal Liberation Front in order to reduce the number of activities. There are mix reviews of several critiques regarding the activities of the Animal Liberation Front. According to some critiques, the Animal Liberation Front can be considered as an extremist terrorist group based on their characteristics and activities. On the other hand, some individuals and freelancers stated that, the activities of the Animal Liberation Front cannot be termed as the terrorism as the activists of the group always follows morale or a welfare ideology or motivation in order to maintain the basic rights of the animals. However, it can be stated that the tag of terrorism on the Animal Liberation Front is vogue as they have clear intention to maintain communal welfare. Goals: It is clear from the above mentioned facts and aspects that the Animal Liberation Front has a clear intention to maintain the fundamental rights of the animals and save them to ensure social, communal, or environmental welfare. Value of ethics and humanism motivated and influenced the activists of the Animal Liberation Front to adopt and practice direct-action oriented strategies and activities. Like other organizations, Animal Liberation Front also had some goals and aims to accomplish or achieve. These aspects are outlined below. It is true that several individuals within the society make profit through the animals’ exploitation. Therefore, major goal of the Animal Liberation Front is to damage economic stability of the individuals who used to make profit from the exploitation and misery of the animals (Lee, 2004). It has been mentioned earlier that they were fighting against some individuals or communities in order to maintain animal welfare in the environment. Therefore they developed goals to take all the required actions and precautions against harming any human or non-human animal. Violation and non-violation depends upon the characteristics of a terrorist group. Some critiques have considered the activities of the Animal Liberation Front as the terrorist activities based on the extremism in the activities. However, the third goal of the Animal Liberation Front is to reveal the atrocities and horror committed by some individuals against the animals by performing several types of non-violent liberations or direct actions (Mann, 2007). Their major goal is to liberate each and every animal from the places of abuse. These places of abuse include factory farms, laboratories and fur farms. In addition to this, the activists of the Animal Liberation Front tried to place the animals in healthy and good homes where the animals can live without danger, suffering and torture. The major goals of the animal Liberation Front was to ensure the natural lives of the suffered animals. The last goal was quite unique and uncommon to consider. It is said to be true that several people in this world are vegetarian. According to the principles and ideologies of the Animal Liberation Front, people who are vegetarian can be termed as the member or people of the Animal Liberation Front as the activists of this Animal Liberation Front did not want to take the lives of animal at any cost. Threat that ALF Poses: It has been mentioned earlier that some critiques have badly criticized the activities and principles of the Animal Liberation Front due to too much extremism in the activities. However, it is highly important for each and every social or communal welfare group to maintain non-violence in their movements. However, the activists of the Animal Liberation Front stated that they do not believe in violence in their activities. But, slowly and gradually the Animal Welfare Group failed to justify their ideology and principle. Most importantly, the activists failed to maintain the principle and ideology of non-violence in the activities. Day-by-day, the reach of Animal Liberation Front in global areas increased at a rapid pace (White, 2012). The United Kingdom and the United States of America mostly suffered from the activities of the Animal Liberation Front. Most importantly, the provision against the violence in the code of the Animal Liberation Front has seriously triggered the divisions within the allegations and movements of hypocrisy from the critiques of the Animal Liberation Front. According to Paul Wilkinson (who is considered a terrorism expert); in 1998 stated that the Animal Liberation Front can be considered as one of the most dangerous domestic terrorist groups in the United Kingdom. In 1994, the Animal Liberation Front was considered as one of the extremist terrorist groups by the spokesman of the United States of America (Webb, 2004). In the late 1990s, the management and leading activists of the Animal Liberation Front started to attack the animal enterprises in order to ensure animal welfare within the environment. According to reports, Congress, and the area of international and domestic terrorism, the activities of the Animal Liberation Front became a serious threat for the government of the United Kingdom and the federal government of the United States of America. Throughout the years, the Animal Liberation Front failed to get the attraction of the governments of the countries due to the extremism activities. In 2005, the FBI in the United States of America stated that violent animal rights, eco-terrorists and extremists pose serious threats to the entire nation (Liddick, 2006)2. However, the governments of several operating countries, especially the government of the United Kingdom and the federal government of the United States of America developed several policies and regulations in order to overcome the issues and threats that are posed by the Animal Liberation Front. Effectiveness of Policies to Combat Threat: It is true that the government of the United Kingdom and United States of America found it difficult to stop the movements and activities of the Animal Liberation Front. In addition to this, several critiques stated that the percentage and rate of violence were increasing quite seriously in the activities of the Animal Liberation Front. Therefore, the governments were greatly concerned about the issues. It forced them to develop several policies to stop these activities. In addition to this, the federal government of the United States of America along with the justice department announced “Operation Backfire” in order to reduce the threats that are posed by the Animal Liberation Front. Several activists were arrested. However, the strength of the activities and movements started to increase in Canada and America. The federal government of the United States of America succeeded to capture several Canadian and American activists who were directly involved in these activities (Newkirk, 2000)3. Most importantly, several animal and environmental activists referred to some legal actions based on the movements and activities. However, these developed policies and strategies helped the government of the country to reduce the threat factors that were posed by the Animal Liberation Front. In terms of comparison, it can be stated that the Animal Liberation Front cannot be compared with other terrorist groups as they had a clear motive of animal welfare within the environment and community. Several critiques have compared the activities of the Animal Liberation Front with the activities of the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and several Jihadists groups. But, the ethical value and motive of this group can prove that this group cannot be labeled as a terrorist group. Conclusion: It is clear from the above discussion that the Animal Liberation Front can be considered as one of the extremist animal welfare groups, which operates in more than forty countries based on their ideology, and principle. However, it is true that several organizations in the international and domestic terrorism field believe in violation and extremism. In addition to this, several extremist terrorist groups believe in violence in order to meet their demand and needs. However, it is clear from the mentioned facts that the Animal Liberation Front maintained a strong philosophy and ideology in their values and activities in order to save the animals from the suffering and tortures. Yet, the leaders and activists of the Animal Liberation Front failed to maintain their developed goals, ideologies and principles in their activities and movements. They slowly and gradually proved that their movements and activities started to expand in several countries. These movements and activities posed real threats for the governments of the United Kingdom and United States of America. However, the United States Congress has stated in its report that the activities of the Animal Liberation Front is becoming a serious threat for the nation. Throughout the operating years, the Animal Liberation Front failed to get the attraction of the governments of the countries they operated in, due to the violation and extremism activities they committed. The operation of the Animal Liberation Front was spread in more than forty countries, but the United States of America and the United Kingdom mostly suffered from their activities. As the ALF ideologies and principles vary from other terrorist organizations, therefore it can be stated that the general qualities of the sense of the term “terrorism” cannot be labeled on the Animal Liberation Front. References: Atkins, S. (2004). Encyclopedia of Modern Worldwide Extremists and Extremist Groups. New York: Greenwood Publishing. Best, S (2007). Dispatches from a Police State: Animal Rights in the Crosshairs of State Repression. The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, 3(1), 1. Retrieved from: http://www.inclusivedemocracy.org/journal/vol3/vol3_no1_Best_animal_rights.htm. Bjelopera, J.P. (2013). The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service, 1(1), 1. Hill, M (2011). United States v Fullmer and the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act: True Threats to Advocacy. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 61(1), 3. Lee, R. (2004). Peace News, 1974, and for the rest see Lee and Gary Treadwell in Freedom, 1979, both cited in Stallwood, Kim. "A Personal Overview of Direct Action" in Best and Nocella. (Eds.) Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? Lantern Books, 1(1), 83. Liddick, D. (2006). Eco-terrorism. New York: Greenwood Publishing. Mann, Keith. (2007). From Dusk til Dawn: An insiders view of the growth of the Animal Liberation Movement, Puppy Pincher Press, 12(1), 167. Newkirk, I. (2000). Free the Animals. New York: Lantern Books. Webb, R. (2004). "Animal Liberation — By Whatever Means Necessary," in Best and Nocella. (Eds.) Terrorists or Freedom Fighters, Lantern Books, 9(1), 77. White, K. (2012). Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act and the Suppression of Free Speech: The Jurist.Retrievedfrom:http://jurist.org/dateline/2012/03/kimberly-white-animal-terrorism.php. Read More