Day: March 18, 2003

Animal Liberation Front Attacks Norwegian Feed Factories

The Associated Press reports that the Animal Liberation Front claimed responsibility for attacks on two factories in Norway that produce feed for animals on fur farms.

A police official told the Associated Press,

We received an e-mail earlier claiming to be from the Animal Liberation Front taking responsibility for the two incidents. The investigation showed that the factories had been exposed to sabotage. This was according to the e-mail.

Activists firebombed a garage and attempted to set fire to trucks, though the Associated Press account was unclear on just how much damage the activists inflicted. Bjorn Dag Gundersen, a spokesman for the Norwegian Fur Breeder Association, did tell the Associated Press that any damages to the factory would be covered by insurance.

Source:

In Norway, police cite animal activists in attack on feed producers. Associated Press, March 10, 2003.

Handicapping the 2004 Election

Henry Hanks had a short item today about liberal/leftists crowing about this Quinnipiac University poll which has the not surprising result that it if George W. Bush is put up against an unnamed Democratic candidate, that Bush loses 48 to 44. But, as Hanks notes, the Democratic Party won’t be allowed to run an unnamed candidate and it has a major problem in that its named candidates, at this point, perform very poorly again Bush.

In November 2002, Quinnipiac University asked people about three prospective races with real individuals, and here’s what people said:

Bush 53, Gore 41
Bush 55, Clinton 38
Bush 54, Lieberman 37

This is obviously very early, but clearly Bush is likely to remain a popular president unless either a) the war in Iraq goes very badly, b) there is another major terrorist attack on American soil, or c) the economy noticeably worsens.

Based on his performance during the last election, I think Lieberman will prove to be a disaster and I can’t imagine he can capture the nomination without being forced to turn even further left (and then have his contradictions turned against him).

A Hillary Clinton vs. Bush campaign would be awesome to see, but Clinton says she’s not interested in running in 2004 (probably because, given the current situation, she would likely lose). But if the war with Iraq goes bad or the economy starts to worsen, I can’t imagine she would really want to sit out 2004 given how weak the rest of the Democratic field is (does anyone really believe, for example, that Gephardt or Kerry vs. Bush wouldn’t simply be Reagan vs. Mondale all over again?)

New York Times: Ehrlich Was Wrong

The New York Times ran an op-ed today stating the obvious — Paul Ehrlich was dead wrong. According to the Times,

A generation ago, Paul Ehrlich warned in “The Population Bomb” that with demands on resources soaring, overpopulation would kill our planet. As demands on water and air soared, many thought he was right. Now it turns out that population growth rates are plummeting for good and tragic reasons. The implications are profound.

The “good” reason for the decline is declining fertility rates as people throughout the world delay the age at which they have children. The “tragic” reasons, of course, are the AIDS pandemic which will cut short the lives of all too many in Africa and Asia.

But what the Times doesn’t note is that the situation would have been far worse had the world listened to Ehrlich and followed through on his suggestions of using military might and a denial of aid to cure the overpopulation cancer that Ehrlich claimed was afflicting the planet.

Today the percentage of people suffering from hunger in the world is lower than at any time in the last century. Ehrlich’s final solution to the overpopulation “problem” would have condemned many people in the developing world to an agonizing death as he used them as a means to an end of his ideal world population.

Thank goodness that things have changed so much that even the New York Times feels comfortable in stating what has been obvious for at least 20 years — Ehrlich got things completely backwards.

Source:

Humanity’s Slowing Growth. The New York Times, March 17, 2003.

Animal Extremists Vandalize Another McDonald's in Chico, California

On March 4 Animal Liberation Front extremists tried but failed to set fire to a McDonald’s restaurant in Chico, California (see this story for more background). The extremists apparently vandalized a second McDonald’s in Chico on March 11.

Employees of the McDonald’s contacted police at 7:15 a.m. on March 11 to report that a small fire had been set in an apparent attempt to burn down the restaurant. That failed, but there was some smoke damage to the building.

The words “liberation” and “ALF” were spray painted in red on the building.

Source:

Second McDonald’s vandalized in Chico. Eleanor Cameron, Chico Enterprise-Record, March 11, 2003.

Activists Suspected in Firebombing of New Mexico McDonald's, Arby's Restaurants

Animal rights extremists are a possible suspect in the March 11 firebombing of two McDonald’s restaurants and an Arby’s restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

According to police, the perpetrators used Molotov cocktails and crude incendiary grenades to do varying amounts of damage to the restaurants. The two McDonald’s sustained minor damage, but the damage estimate for the Arby’s restaurant was $80,000.

Sources:

Molotov cocktails used in early morning restaurant fires. KOBTV.Com, March 11, 2003.

Fast-food shops hit in arson spree. Albquerque Tribune, March 11, 2003.

3 Albuquerque Restaurant Fires Believed Set by Same Arsonist. Associated Press, March 12, 2003.

Firebombs hit local eateries. Daily Lobo (University of New Mexico), March 12, 2003.