Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2945745 - 07/30/04 04:53 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Careful, I think were dealing with some sort of lunar related cycles here.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'
Female User Gallery

Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #2945816 - 07/30/04 05:13 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

I would like to point out that property destruction is non violent, and that the "animal rights extremists" you are probably talking about like the Animal Liberation Front are explicitly non-violent. The term terrorist is thrown around in the most ludicrous of ways. Essentially, the way it is used, it means that anyone who actually directly takes thier ethics into thier own hands and steps outside of the status quo in order to protect something that is sacred to them is a terrorist.

The state and the media are calling people like these terrorists because they are a direct and real threat to the powers that continue to reap rewards for brutalizing and tormenting any number of other living beings (be they human or otherwise.)


Someone mentioned the tactic of tree spiking. For me, that is a pretty serious tactic that has to be thoroughly considered, and yes there are occasions and methods of doing it which will hrut the logger but most responsible eco-saboteurs will use methods that are intended to damage the saw-mill machinery as opposed to hurting the logger. Also something like treespiking is usually a tactic that is done when other tactics have failed. It's generally not a first step. Sabotage is not violent, since as far as I'm concerned my definition of violence is harming a living thing. Unless you consider a piece of machinery more valuable than real lives, you've gotta understand that point.

I really urge people to actually do thier research and try to understand where these so called "terrorists" are coming from before writing them off as crazy motherfuckers. A lot of radicals have tried and given up on indirect approaches because they fail so many damn times. If anyone wants to be hooked up with some real information on this subject please feel free to ask me for some links. I don't expect people to suddenly become anarchists or radicals because my logic is sound, but it would be nice if people were more willing to actually look into and attempt to understand how us radicals got to the conclusions we got to and not jump to the terrorist card because you're afraid of being associated with a reviled group.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2945832 - 07/30/04 05:18 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Property destruction is most certainly violent. "Safe in our homes and persons." Do not fuck with me or mine. Trust me you will be much the worse for it.

You're right, "terrorist" is most certainly tossed around a bit too lightly. Mostly, they are common criminals.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAncalagon
AgnosticLibertarian

Registered: 07/30/02
Posts: 1,364
Last seen: 15 years, 3 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: zappaisgod]
    #2945837 - 07/30/04 05:20 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Agreed. You seriously don't consider me turning your house into an inferno 'violent'?


--------------------
?When Alexander the Great visted the philosopher Diogenes and asked whether he could do anything for him, Diogenes is said to have replied: 'Yes, stand a little less between me and the sun.' It is what every citizen is entitled to ask of his government.?
-Henry Hazlitt in 'Economics in One Lesson'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2945881 - 07/30/04 05:31 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

A friend of mine was riding his motorcycle through a desert wash with his father-in-law and a friend of his father-in-law. The friend was in the lead, my friend was in the back. Some asshole(s) strung a metal wire across the wash about neck high. The front rider was decapitated, the second rider tried to lay his bike down and had his shoulder sliced open by the wire, fortunately my friend had time to avoid the wire totally. Fuck the environmental extremists, if they dislike humanity so much they should all off themselves. I'll provide the ammo.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'
Female User Gallery

Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: Evolving]
    #2946013 - 07/30/04 06:16 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Evolving, what makes you think it was eco-radicals that but a wire across the road? I can't think of too many reasons anyone would do that.

Also, if eco-sabotage is "violent" what about the police state we live in, what about vivsection, what about strip mining and clearcutting? What about the National Guard who were ready to snipe anyone who jumped the fence into the "hard zone" at the democratic national convention, Terror is being surrounded by city, state, federal, riot cops, military personnel, the national guard, horse cops, motorcycle cops and helicopters when you are having a bazzar in a park at which there are musicians playing, people fixing bikes and people trading stuff like zines and patches, for the afternoon, as an expression of the fact that we don't have to spend life in the death sentence of capitalism. This just happed in Boston. This is happening everywhere. It isn't being changed by petitions and chants, it isn't being changed by legal challenges to the constitution or anything of that nature.

What will change it? I'm more inclined to believe that actively dismantling things that are extremely disgraceful, violent and terrifying is more likely to have an effect than asking, then pleading, then giving up when those tactics prove themselves to be innefectual. (While at the same time building the kind of communities we really feel drawn towards based on egalitarian relationships, mutual aid, love and consideration for all other lives.)

Ancalagon, what would be the aim of burning my house to the ground, as opposed to blockading a clearcut site and deflagging it, as opposed to breaking into Huntingdon Life Sciences and liberating animals who are having thier vocal cords slit so they can't scream as they are tortured? Sabotage isn't something anyone takes lightly. It has a very specific and very direct purpose. It is rarely ever intended to be a risk to the personal safety of any life, although it is often intended to cause economic damage to the monsters who use that money to fund genocide.

That isn't to say that all saboteurs plan things out flawlessly. Sometimes people make mistakes, but I can say for a fact that neither the ALF nor the ELF has ever hurt a human being. Ever. They have however inflicted economic damage on companies that commit atrocities every single day. People that chose this form of action are not stupid, or impulsive. They are generally intelligent and extremely well informed. They are generally compassionate, loving and passionate human beings that are simply incapable of ignoring reality and medicating the world away. They are people that can't sit down anymore and feel an ethical imperative to act in the most effective way despite the personal risk.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2946042 - 07/30/04 06:29 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

NiamhNyx said:
Evolving, what makes you think it was eco-radicals that but a wire across the road? I can't think of too many reasons anyone would do that.



It wasn't a road, it was a desert wash. There is only one reason anyone would do that, to harm people riding mortorcycles in the wash. The forest service told them the only plausible explanation was enviro-nuts who don't want people riding their motorcycles in the desert. The same asshole mentality that consumes people who drive spikes into trees to harm people using chain saws.

Quote:

Also, if eco-sabotage is "violent" what about the police state we live in...



Ah, the old two wrongs make a right rationalization. Sorry, that's bullshit.

I also like how these dummies vandalized a mink farm, freeing a bunch of minks. Then the minks went and devasted the local waterfowl population. Brilliant!

Or how about the moronic actions in San Diego, torching a bunch of autos at a dealership? The heat from the flames melted windows on nearby homes, the pollution generated was more than the autos would have created in their lifetimes of driving. Another brilliant move...


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'
Female User Gallery

Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: Evolving]
    #2946343 - 07/30/04 08:35 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

I'm not talking about two wrongs making a right. I'm talking about am individual or group of individuals figuring out what is going on in the world and directly responding to it in a manner that they feel will have some direct results and actually make some amount of difference in the world. Perhaps not every action is as fully successful as is intended... but how about the many times sabotaging logging machinery deflagging a future logging site, and setting up a road block has threatened the operation sufficiently enough that the block of land is abandoned, and left to the wilds?

What about the difference liberating a bunch of caged factory farmed chickens and bringing them to a country side location - in which they are free to roam and eat bugs and weeds and basically be chickens- makes on the lives of those creatures.

Chosing to do any sort of action defintly should require a whole lot of consideration of what the methods and goals are, and what the possible outcomes could be, and I'm not saying that every single action is going to be a sweeping success, but to say that the tactic is wrong, that only crazy terrorists or raging idiots would chose such methods is absolutely ludicrous.

I just noticed the quote you have as your signature, Evolving, and totally agree with it. The radicals we're discussing generally realize the same damn thing and are therefore stepping outside of the same old tactics of the mainstream political game and actually accomplish some real differences in some very real lives. The radical community is definitly up for some criticism, and there is definitly a lot of self-criticism happening. Figuring out how to fight this monster of a system and it's many symptoms of pathology is daunting, and there are many directions which may be taken, but to immediately write off an entire tactical option in such a complete way is really fucking ridiculous as far as I'm concerned.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2946849 - 07/30/04 11:35 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

NiamhNyx said:
... how about the many times sabotaging logging machinery



The actions of assholes, destroying jobs and property.

Quote:

What about the difference liberating a bunch of caged factory farmed chickens and bringing them to a country side location...



The actions of assholes stealing property and destroying jobs.

Quote:

... but to say that the tactic is wrong, that only crazy terrorists or raging idiots would chose such methods is absolutely ludicrous.



Only ludicrous to people who are moral relativists, who have lost all perspective and have no consideration for their fellow humans.

Quote:

... to immediately write off an entire tactical option in such a complete way is really fucking ridiculous as far as I'm concerned.



Sorry if it disturbs you that some people have a sense of right and wrong and put the well being of those of their own species above that of other animals - but guess what, that is the way of nature. Maybe in your perverted fantasy world, destroying people's livelihoods is the answer to the ills of society, but you are wrong - dead wrong. People like those that you champion should be locked up in cages with the Unabomber and others of their psychotic ilk. If a victim or a cop shoots one of those sons of a bitches in their acts of criminality, I will rejoice in the justice of the act.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #2947583 - 07/31/04 06:11 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

"The great kidney transplant pioneer Dr. Thomas E. Starzl was once asked why he used dogs in his work. He explained that, in his first series of operations, he had transplanted kidneys into a number of subjects, and that the majority of them died. After figuring out what had enabled a few to survive, he revised his techniques and operated on a similar group of subjects; a majority of them survived. In his third group of subjects, only one or two died, and in his fourth group, all survived. The important point, said Starzl, was that the first three groups of subjects were dogs; the fourth group consisted of human babies. Had Starzl begun his series of experimental operations on people, he would have killed at least 15 people. Yet there are activists who believe, in the name of animal rights, that that is what Starzl should have done."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #2947599 - 07/31/04 06:34 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

But would the right-wingers support animal experimentation if they knew it was being used to save people on welfare and single moms?  :grin:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleretread
-=HasH=-
Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 851
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #2947991 - 07/31/04 09:47 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

rogue_pixie said:
The fact is animal research is pointless and cruel. Animals are completely different, with different psychology and physiology. There have been many cases where products tested on animals that have been regarded as safe have gone on to cause devastating affects on human babies, causing all kinds of horrific mutations. It is not a reliable method of research and it is holding science back whilst causing mass unnecessary suffering.




People who don't know what they are talking about always seem to have the most extreme views, and the loudest voices. If you'd like, I could compile a list of medical procedures that were tested on animals first and have now gone on to save thousands of human lives, or new medicines, vaccines, etc.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblerogue_pixie
faerydae
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/28/04
Posts: 3,977
Loc: UK
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: Xlea321]
    #2948004 - 07/31/04 09:53 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

LMAO :thumbup:


--------------------
"Whatever you do, you need to keep moving.  Because when you stop moving you die (physically and emotionally).

Good luck and blessings of happiness and fortune." ~ RandalFlagg RIP


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleretread
-=HasH=-
Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 851
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2948005 - 07/31/04 09:54 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

I'm proud of NiamhNyx for her response. She is the only one that is actually addressing the issue of the term terrorist being applied to these demonstrators. I think that the more intellectual of us realize that rogue_pixie is just operating on a "But I wuv de cute wittle fuzzy bunnie" level, rather than a level of educated, mature discussion, so I'd say that we all just ignore him/her until they can mature enough to be a part of the discussion.

If these people are using threats of violence or actual violence to further their political goals, they are terrorists.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblerogue_pixie
faerydae
Female User Gallery

Registered: 07/28/04
Posts: 3,977
Loc: UK
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: retread]
    #2948045 - 07/31/04 10:17 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

I refuse to address someone who has already disregarded me as an idiot "who doesn't know what she's talking about". You are clearly, far more intellectual than I, considering you can look on the internet to find cases where testing on animals has proved effective. Honestly.


--------------------
"Whatever you do, you need to keep moving.  Because when you stop moving you die (physically and emotionally).

Good luck and blessings of happiness and fortune." ~ RandalFlagg RIP


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #2948114 - 07/31/04 10:43 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

PM me and I shall link you to many papers proving that animals research is POINTLESS and potentially DANGEROUS.



From what I've seen, providing a link is something you are either unwilling or incapable of doing.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleretread
-=HasH=-
Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 851
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2948232 - 07/31/04 11:22 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

NiamhNyx said:
Evolving, what makes you think it was eco-radicals that but a wire across the road? I can't think of too many reasons anyone would do that.




I have heard of "eco-radicals" doing this to prevent off-roading before. However, without evidence that this was the case, I can't totally believe that they did this either.
Quote:


Also, if eco-sabotage is "violent" what about the police state we live in, what about vivsection, what about strip mining and clearcutting?




As bad as I believe strip mining and clearcutting to be, they certainly aren't violent actions against living humans. Do you think that someone who kills 100 pot plants in their set up by harvesting them are commiting acts of violence against nature that is the equivalent of murder?
Quote:


What about the National Guard who were ready to snipe anyone who jumped the fence into the "hard zone" at the democratic national convention,




The Catch 22 of fighting terrorism is that they terrorists, in a way, win no matter what you do. The real purpose of terrorism is to cause the government to become more oppressive to their people to prevent attacks thus causing the people to dislike the government. If their had been an attack at the DNC, which was quite unlikely, these guards would have been the first line of defense. If they were not posted and an attack had gone down, the people would be asking why their wasn't enough security. Either way, the Administration looks "bad" to some people.

I snipped a great deal here that dealt with percieved slights that the government was perpetrating among you that somehow seemed to justify the actions of the eco-terrorists. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleretread
-=HasH=-
Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 851
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: rogue_pixie]
    #2948233 - 07/31/04 11:23 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

rogue_pixie said:
I refuse to address someone who has already disregarded me as an idiot "who doesn't know what she's talking about". You are clearly, far more intellectual than I, considering you can look on the internet to find cases where testing on animals has proved effective. Honestly.




What?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleretread
-=HasH=-
Registered: 07/14/04
Posts: 851
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: NiamhNyx]
    #2948259 - 07/31/04 11:31 AM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

NiamhNyx said:
What about the difference liberating a bunch of caged factory farmed chickens and bringing them to a country side location - in which they are free to roam and eat bugs and weeds and basically be chickens- makes on the lives of those creatures.




What about the impact it has on the owner of the poultry farm and his children? What is more important, chickens or people?
Quote:


Chosing to do any sort of action defintly should require a whole lot of consideration of what the methods and goals are, and what the possible outcomes could be, and I'm not saying that every single action is going to be a sweeping success, but to say that the tactic is wrong, that only crazy terrorists or raging idiots would chose such methods is absolutely ludicrous.




Sabotaging machinery isn't "terrorism"?
Quote:


Figuring out how to fight this monster of a system and it's many symptoms of pathology is daunting, and there are many directions which may be taken, but to immediately write off an entire tactical option in such a complete way is really fucking ridiculous as far as I'm concerned.



Do you think that the way to fight the system is to use the process of informing people and planning a change through legislature and elections, or go against the will of the majority of the people and simply attack what you know to be bad? Thats where my main problem with this whole thing comes in. You can't FORCE the majority of the population to live in a way that you "know" to be good if it is against their will.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'
Female User Gallery

Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
Re: New Laws Against Animal Rights Activists [Re: retread]
    #2948394 - 07/31/04 12:13 PM (19 years, 9 months ago)

Clearcutting, strip mining, factory farming.... and any other of these brutal practices we could come up with are violent against HUMANS as well as against animals, plants, ecosystems. You seem to forget that we aren't separate, that when a significant portion of land is decimated it has hazardous effects on the health and function of the entire planet. Take the example of the clearcut in Oregon that caused an entire mountain to slide into a little rural community, destroying houses and killing the parents of several young children.

Strip mining has caused, in countless occassions, water supplies to be totally contaminated. Factory farmed meat is full of horomones that are very bad for our bodies.

I have no desire to negatively impact the livelihood of the working class, far from it. The working class and us damn radicals are not enemies. Take the example of Judi Bari who was both doing environmental direct action AND organizing loggers to fight for better labour conditions, so that when environmentalists blocked them from going to work they'd still get paid. The FBI set off a bomb in her car.


The original union organizers, the ones who attained the 8 hour day, were anarchists and 8 of them were killed after police attacked a dispersing meeting in haymarket square, beating people and then framed the 8 anarchists for throwing a bomb. This is the history of May day. This is the history of the working class. Labour movements arose from workers refusing to submit to the bosses and demanding what they wanted. They did not do this passively, if they had attempted to be pacifists they would have failed utterly. Of course at this point in history most unions have been coopted by the bourgeois union buerocrats who consistantly sell out struggles in order to protect thier own privlege.

We don't need the vast majority of the shit we produce with the resources we rape from the earth. The entire system of labour we've constructed is based upon an abstraction. Most "jobs" are usurious and useless but they exist because hey, jobs are jobs and we have to do something to earn money right? So I guess that also means we have to convince people to desire shit they don't need and probably wouldn't want unless they were conditioned to desire triviality and the temporary distraction from the meaninglessness of the existance we've been conditioned to lead.

This system is a monstrosity of epic proportions. It only survives by taking the labour of the working class and applying it to useless and usurious tasks. This process exploits humans beings, it destroys ecosystems and it's foundation is pathology.

Opposing this in whatever way is most effective, with utter respect, consideration and love for what is truly of value (all living beings, human or otherwise) is immensely important. A bulldozer is a real threat to places that are sacred, to many millions of lives. It is one object responsible for the propgation of continuation of utter insanity. Monkey wrenching it to cause economic damage to a mega corporation and waste the time of a logging operation is hardly fucking terrorism.

I have never attempted to say that two wrongs make a right because monkeywrenching and sabotage are NOT WRONG when they are a useful means of defending life against the machinery of abstraction and exploitation.

As far as I'm concerned terrorism is threatening to injure innocent living beings for political ideology. Threatening the very machinery that is oppressing YOU and all you hold sacred is SELF DEFENCE.

Tactics like sabotage are necessary because not everyone will be swayed by words and those that continue to oppress and murder for power have to be stopped. Is it wrong for a woman who's being raped to punch the rapist in the face?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Activists find tracking systems on their cars
( 1 2 3 all )
LearyfanS 3,742 43 02/23/08 01:08 PM
by Luddite
* Terrorists Eating Farm Animals
( 1 2 3 4 all )
wingnutx 5,399 75 09/08/03 12:33 PM
by Clover
* Animal-rights vandals hit chef's home wingnutx 584 4 08/19/03 07:03 PM
by FileSoup
* freedom, rights, and other species
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 2,148 46 07/04/03 03:24 PM
by hongomon
* House Bans Coloning of Human Cells
( 1 2 all )
PotSmokinHippie 4,085 21 08/04/01 09:36 AM
by Phred
* GOP takes the house!!!
( 1 2 3 all )
ehud 2,384 50 11/07/02 07:01 PM
by ehud
* "torture-lite" and human rights after 9/11 Edame 821 4 06/28/03 08:08 AM
by Cornholio
* Canadian supreme court to hear pot laws challenge
( 1 2 all )
carbonhoots 1,910 23 04/08/03 02:29 PM
by friartuck

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
7,385 topic views. 1 members, 8 guests and 14 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 15 queries.