portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

actions & protests | environment

ELF Claims Incendiaries left at MI Perrier Bottling Plant

The Earth Liberation Front Press Office has received a communique from the Earth Liberation Front claiming they left incendiaries at a pumping station supplying a water bottling plant owned by Nestlé Waters North America (formerly known as the Perrier Group of America) in Mecosta County, Michigan. According to news reports, these incendiaries failed to ignite and were removed from the station without incident.
ELF Claims Incendiaries left at MI Perrier Bottling Plant

For Immediate Release

The Earth Liberation Front Press Office has received a communique from the Earth Liberation Front claiming they left incendiaries at a pumping station supplying a water bottling plant owned by Nestlé Waters North America (formerly known as the Perrier Group of America) in Mecosta County, Michigan. According to news reports, these incendiaries failed to ignite and were removed from the station without incident.

Controversy has surrounded the Ice Mountain Plant for the past several years with local activist groups asserting the bottling plant will have a negative impact on the local environment, and that it violates stated and federal water rights. Three Native American tribes have launched a lawsuit against Nestlé on the basis that rivers and ultimately the Great Lakes will be affected by its operations.

Although the incendiaries failed to ignite, the ELF has sent a message that the commodification of water is an attack on a fundamental right of all beings and must be stopped.

The communique follows:

-begin communique-

When all legal avenues of dissent have been undertaken to no avail, only one option remains. Illegal Direct Action. The people of Michigan have stated very clearly that we do not want a Perrier Bottling Plant. We've had enough of empty political rhetoric about freedom and justice, enough of sitting back while our most basic rights are handed over to corporations. Clean water is one of the most fundamental necessities, and no one can be allowed to privatize it, commodify it, and try and sell it back to us.

We will no longer stand idly be while corporations profit at the expense of all others. To this end, we have taken action against one of the pumping stations that Perrier uses to steal water.

On the night of Sunday, the 21st of September, the ELF penetrated the perimeter fence of an area of land used for canned hunts. This particular location, a short distance from Rodney, MI, near 13 Mile Rd and M20 is home to the pumping stations that supply the Perrier Bottling Plant in Mecosta County. Access to one of the pumping stations was gained and timed incendiary devices were placed. We will not allow the commodification of life to continue. Action must, and will, be taken, for it is our only chance.

Water for life, not for profit!
Welcome to Michigan. ELF

- end communique -


The Earth Liberation Front is an international underground organization that uses direct action in the form of economic sabotage to stop the destruction of the natural environment. Since 1997, the ELF in North America has caused over $100 million in damages to entities who profit from the destruction of life and the planet.

The Earth Liberation Front Press Office is an autonomous entity that serves to publicize news and actions of the ELF, as reported through news media or by anonymous communications from the individuals involved in activities.

-30-

Contact: North American Earth Liberation Front Press Office elfpress at resist.ca  http://www.earthliberationfront.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - F R O N T L I N E - N E W S Now With 5600+ Subscribers! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Would you like to Unsubscribe or Subscribe to the Frontline-News mailing list?  https://lists.resist.ca/mailman/listinfo/frontline-news
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- For general questions, feedback and requests: frontline at rocketmail.com
- Frontline Information Service Administrator: frontline at rocketmail.com
PGP keys available at:  http://www.animalliberation.net/about/pgpkey.asc
Direct Action Frontline Information Service bringing you uncensored news from around the world since 1994.

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

homepage: homepage: http://www.earthliberationfront.com

ELF=Domestic Terrorists 26.Sep.2003 15:31

PoohNTigger

They wish to resort to terrorisim, then they need to be treated like terrorists.

They should be hunted down and made to answer for their crimes.

oh please 26.Sep.2003 15:44

another terrorist

Under current US law anyone who has engaged in an act of civili disobedience is a terrorist. Should they be "hunted down" too. Comparing property destruction with the killing makes the term terrorism meaningless (which is what the US has achieved). Face it, there is ahuge difference between people who *kill* other people and people who destroy property. And remember, all the great social movements of this country have happened through illegal direct action and property destruction or theft.

What a country...

What about the Nestle? 26.Sep.2003 15:48

esparanza

What kind of punishment do you think Nestle should receive for breaking the law and harming the environment? What kind of terrorist group are they?

My Apologies 26.Sep.2003 15:53

PoohNTigger

I should have phrased it as Terrorist tactics i.e. bombing. Or better yet, Common Criminals. You are correct, terrorist was the wrong word.

" Face it, there is ahuge difference between people who *kill* other people and people who destroy property. "

There is? if they destroyed this plant, how many people would they have put out of work? And so far ELF has been very lucky with their demolition. But that luck could run out in a second. Would you defend them then?

What if you worked at a place that ELF destroyed? would you defend them if you lost your job and means of support?

The destruction of property or people is irrelevant. They are still destroying. You can support them if you'd like. I can see no reasoning or logic behind their actions. They are common criminals

question 26.Sep.2003 16:21

revolutionary

Hey PoohTiggerPigletOwlEeyore,

Glad to see you step back from the debasement of the word terrorism. I've said it before and I'll say it again: read 1984, Orwell's nightmare is slowly becoming our own.

I'm curious how you reconcile your thoughts on vandalism/propertydestruction/etc (The destruction of property or people is irrelevant. They are still destroying. You can support them if you'd like. I can see no reasoning or logic behind their actions. They are common criminals) with the actions at the Boston Harbor in the U.S. Revolutionary War. These guys, ostensibly heroes, were destroying too. Do you oppose their actions too? If not, why not?

Whatta Shmuck! 26.Sep.2003 16:28

-----

> " Face it, there is ahuge difference between people who *kill* other people and people who destroy property. "
> There is?

Doh!

> [Whether] The destruction [is] of property or people is irrelevant.

Doh!

> I can see no reasoning or logic behind their actions.

Doh!

Why don't the cops follow your logic when they bust up organized crime. I mean, they're putting people out of work. What an unfair world...

Pooh,...I...Can…not…keep…eyes….oopppeeeennnnn 26.Sep.2003 17:00

Gertha

Your above post, and infact, nearly everything you have posted to this site, is so bereft of individuality that it's as if the voice of commercial rhetoric itself is speaking. As has been demonstrated by numerous other commenters, the slippery logic you habitually employ obviously needs little debate before evaporating into the obfuscation from whence it came. Move past Milne, pops! Your supposedly 42 years old, I believe, and yet you spend hours a day on a failed adolescent drive to impress/irritate a segment of the population who's influence you no doubt consider to be marginal at best. Why??

Please consider experiencing actual human existence before further boring the snot out of everyone, cheers!

Oh, and.. 26.Sep.2003 17:23

Gertha

Go elves! Any half-wit should be able to choose the right side of a conflict between the ELF and Nestle! Unless of course they want to argue that the same set of laws that handle Nestle with kid gloves (after that company caused the deaths of tens of thousands) should be expected to handle the situation fairly. That would make them more than just any half-wit, though.

take back the language 26.Sep.2003 17:59

Metal Pancreas

A distinct and stinky observation that has been culminating in my mind is that the people who are passing laws and passing sticky hundred dollar bills under the table are, de facto, beyond the reaches of punishment. The people of Michigan don't want this to happen? Too bad, the politicians suppress the will of the people and herald in some nastiness in the form of misery and eventual death. This calls for: you guessed it: Illegal Direct Action. The only reason it's called illegal is because THEY are writing the fucking dictionaries. It should be called self-sufficiency.

Just because they spell democracy with a capital d don't mean it exists.

What's the matter children 26.Sep.2003 20:12

PoohNTigger

"I've said it before and I'll say it again: read 1984"

I have, several times. An entertaining story.

"with the actions at the Boston Harbor in the U.S. Revolutionary War. These guys, ostensibly heroes, were destroying too. Do you oppose their actions too?"

Had I been British, probably I would have.

"you spend hours a day on a failed adolescent drive to impress/irritate a segment of the population who's influence you no doubt consider to be marginal at best. Why?? "

Why not? what's the matter child, can't you take someone not agreeing with you? Besides, I see your types on conservative sites all the time, Can't you take our posting on here?

"Please consider experiencing actual human existence before further boring the snot out of everyone,"

I've done more living in my 42 years than you ever will child. Nice try, but lacking in finesse.

You don't like the fact that I consider groups like ELF common criminals? Too bad. It's a free country, I'll say what I like.

Later kids.

Hold up 26.Sep.2003 20:19

-----

"It's a free country, I'll say what I like."

I thought it was a newsite not a country and not a personal forum for you to make a fool out of yourself. But, apparently it is the later.

"Later kids."

Wow, I am in awe of your astounding maturity and intellectual capacity. Perhaps, you should run for president. Or maybe you can get a job at a leftist magazine satiring the right. You'd play the part of blowhard buffoon perfectly.

<wink>... <spit!>

Can't resist... too much fodder... 26.Sep.2003 20:28

-----

"can't you take someone not agreeing with you?"

If you'd put some thought into your arguments, I wouldn't mind, but, you are parroting some of the most banal, pointless constructions out in the right-wing. I mean, aren't you kind of embarrassed? You're making the right look like a bunch of idiots.

"I've done more living in my 42 years than you ever will child"

Wow, that's some logic. Now that you've proved that perhaps you can go talk to Douglas Adams about the possibilities of impossibility. It's so ironic because I've met teenagers with far more cognizant and objective ideas. Someone posted a while back about planting a provocatuer at the right-wing sites. I nominate you.

</flame>

I hope you don't take this more seriously than I take your bogus arguments. ;P

No thank you 26.Sep.2003 20:29

PoohNTigger

"Or maybe you can get a job at a leftist magazine satiring the right. You'd play the part of blowhard buffoon perfectly. "

No thank you, I have a very nice career in a very stable industry and also a healthy retirement check from Uncle Sam for my service. Besides, why should I take away your future?

Ah Jeez... 26.Sep.2003 21:00

Justice Evans

And yet again, Lefties, we've lost the point. We spiral down into incessent bickering over the words of a few (on a damned liberal posting type site, no less) and waste precious space debating symantics of language. ELF will NEVER change the things they desire to change by destroying them. Pooh will never change things he desires to change by digressing into an argument over his own language. First mistake, Pooh: Defending yourself. Defend your point, perhaps, but not yourself.

"Later kids?" Yes. Wrongly put.

"Please consider experiencing actual human existence before further boring the snot out of everyone." Gertha, why? Why must you insult?

Does it help? Is the cause forwarded?

Too often I experience conversations with intelligent people who have so much anger at The Man and everything else we desire to change that change becomes secondary and Anger becomes primary.

You will never change somebody by yelling at them. Especially if they already agree with you. Look around...look at what People watch, listen to, read, etc. You have to finesse them if you want to fix it.

Take out an ad during the Super Bowl. No money? If you want it bad enough, you'll find the money.

RE: Pooh Pooh 26.Sep.2003 21:24

blah

"You will never change somebody by yelling at them."

--no one here wants or cares to "change" Portland IMC's current resident COINTELPRO Troll named "PoohNTigger" (aka Lamet Vali, aka Bush Admirer, etc. etc.)

WE JUST WANT THEM TO STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM PORTLAND INDEPENDENT MEDIA CENTER,

and keep their tongue firmly emplaced up the tailpipe of their millionaire masters.

speak for yourself, not for others 26.Sep.2003 21:32

another terrorist

I'm not a liberal and I'm not a "lefty" and while you may have lost the point that doesn't mean that others have. The question remains: can anyone name one successful progressive social movement in this country that was not furthered by illegal action? The revolutionary war, the abolition movement, the woman's suffrage movement, the labor movement, the civil rights movement were all furthered by illegal actions (although those actions were all denounced at the time). The progression is obvious, one of expanding inclusivity of rights and the removal of some (but far from all) oppressive systems. Those who broke the law knew history would forgive them as do those that break the law today.

As for semantics, since many of us think using language, the discussion of language is absolutely critical to understanding the limits that are placed on how people think. If people want to equate the value of life with that of property shouldn't we argue that those are distinct entities. People struggled and gave their lives so that we would not think of people as property and I think we do them a disgrace to not immediately question and denounce those who want to take our thinking and understanding back hundreds of years.

*another terrorist* is correct 26.Sep.2003 22:48

GRINGO STARS

PoohNTigger, by virtue of his "violent agitators are common criminals" rhetoric, plays the part of many of history's most reactionary, conservative elements. PoohNTigger would be (if he had been placed in different times/places) pro-slavery, pro-racial-segregation, against women voting, for British occupation of the American colonies, against the weekend, against 40-hour weeks, and against overtime pay. The sad thing is, that well-meaning people such as "Justice Evans" would be inneffective cheerleaders instead of active participants in these struggles. PoohNTigger *might* have said "Slavery is wrong" but he also would have said "John Brown was wrong to violently free slaves and steal from plantation owners and he SHOULD be hanged." Meanwhile Justice Evans would be saying that the although slaves are sold away from their wives, husbands, sons and daughters, they shouldn't be so darned ANGRY with th epeople selling them.

"To be angry is very good. It burns out things and leaves nutrients in the soil. You should always be ready to be angry at injustice and cruelty."
-- Maya Angelou

"The world needs anger. The world often continues to allow evil because it isn't angry enough."
-- Bede Jarrett, The House of Gold

Violence is a natural result of oppression and injustice. Abolitionist Frederick Douglass believed that when an escaped slave used force to prevent a slave-catcher from forcibly returning him to bondage, he or she was helping to lift slaves up from both their physical and mental bondage. It was the persistent lack of resistance in the face of unremitting oppression that had the most morally degrading influence on the oppressed.

"We cannot but shudder as we call to mind the horrors that have ever marked servile insurrections - we would avert them if we could; but shall the millions forever submit to robbery, to murder, to ignorance, and every unnamed evil which an irresponsible tyranny can devise, because the overthrow of that tyranny would be productive of horrors? We say not. The recoil, when it comes, will be in exact proportion to the wrongs inflicted; terrible as it will be, we accept and hope for it. The slaveholder has been tried and sentenced, his execution only waits the finish to the training of his executioners. He is training his own executioners."
-- Frederick Douglass, 1857


"Hitler also works in the sweat of his brow for peace. They are all for peace: Priests, bankers, generals. But what does the pacifism of the bourgeois governments and parties mean? Vile hypocrisy. Every robber prefers, if possible, to take away his victim's purse 'peacefully' without taking his life. Mussolini would naturally prefer to pocket Ethiopia 'peacefully,' that is, without the expenses and sacrifices of war. England and France would like to enjoy their plunder 'in peace.' But woe to whoever hinders them! That is the meaning of capitalist love for peace."
-- Leon Trotsky, late 1930s

Absolutely 26.Sep.2003 23:03

-----

I agree with "Another Terrorist", also. I can't believe the stupidity and ridiculousness of getting a "superbowl ad". Nevermind the fact that no major network would ever run it (how's that for free speech, Pooh), it would _not_ have a significant effect whatsoever. Directly hinder their activites, cost them money -- those things are far more effective than some luke warm Truth project bologna. I think the left needs to be much more aggressive if they want to be heard. Remember when the war started and the protests shut down the street? We got more publicity then than all the other protests combined! Fuck the passive stuff.

Nestle has no rights, Nestle is not a person 27.Sep.2003 00:38

PK

Not that what I am about to say is needed, for it is common knowledge to most of us anyway, but it would seem certain individuals dont get it. NESTLE is not a person, NESTLE is a legal fiction. They are not enttilted to the same rights as the rest of us (no matter what the fucking law may say) And they are certainly not entitled to endanger the lives of others for their own profit. As far as I am concerned, they forfeit any rights when they endanger the lively hood of the enviorment and/or people and should lose any right to do business or exist (which was the way it used to be) And a company that has no regard for the general well being for its surrounding enviorment, do you really think they have any respect for those they employ?

On Anger... 27.Sep.2003 13:55

Justice Evans

And I said not to defend oneself. Dammit.

Passive? No. Feeling fed up? Yes.

When your anger clouds your thoughts, it takes you out of the larger scheme of things, and that is when your anger becomes ineffective. You can sit around and bitch, or you can do something about it. You can destroy property and ideas, OR you can create new and better ones in people who didn't know or care before. You can be so goddamned mad at the masses for spooning up the media propaganda that is fed to them via 3000 cable TV stations, via the bland mass radio, the conservative talk show hosts, the bullshit the bullshit the bullshit...OR you can take advantage of their listening ear. You can get into that ear and teach them, you can show them a better way...low and goddamned behold, you can Talk to them.

A Superbowl ad? Its genius. Where else have you got the attention of most of Television's watchers? You get that first slot after the kickoff, where everybody gathers around to see what's gonna happen, and you hit them hard. You hit them with truth, ideas, thought. Which thought, which ideas, which truth? I don't know...So you figure out which ones. A chance the network won't run it? Perhaps, but as far as I know, those slots are sold to the highest bidder. Don't like that you might need a lot of money to change the world? Accept it. The world runs on the stuff. So get it. A million angry people who send ten bucks apiece can buy a superbowl ad. Believe it. OR, sit in the coffee shop, or at your computer, or at your rally with a bunch of people who already know what your getting at and keep yelling the same old tired thoughts into their faces.

Also... 27.Sep.2003 14:07

Justice Evans

The Point is this:

To change what you desire to change, you have to change the collective will of the people. Yelling at them, destroying their things (no matter how you feel about property), shutting down their path to work, creating a frenzy of anger and stirred up negative emotions...These things DO NOT WORK...not today.

Do not forget WHO the people are...they are not interested in much beyond The Game, The Barbecue, The Portfolio, American Idol, Big Brother, The Bar, The Job, The Family. They WILL NOT come to you, you have to come to them, on their turf, in their way, and and and...and make a damned difference in their lives. I am not against illegal direct action...what I oppose is violence against nameless corporations that create an effect (for them) of a dog nipping at their heels, and for the public, an alienation due to their lack in understanding WHY you are being violent. All they see is another liberal breaking stuff like little babies. Thats what THEY see. Show them something else. They will not delve into and try to figure out WHY you would do such a thing. Why do you refuse to understand that? People are the way they are...so change the way they are.

"In order to make a human stop doing something (or start), you have to make the human stop WANTING to do it." -Ender

public relations 27.Sep.2003 15:10

heimdallr

"All they see is another liberal breaking stuff like little babies."

Actually, having spoken to a lot of "normal" people about environmental issues this summer, I would disagree. A person's opinion of the tactics used to achieve a goal has a lot to do with their feelings about the goal itself. Yes, people who do not have any desire to prevent corporations from wreaking ecological havoc are not going to be very pleased to see corporate property destroyed, but they're probably not that likely to be convinced of the need for that prevention in the first place, no matter how politely and patronizingly you speak to them about it. I have never met someone who opposed old-growth logging, for example, who ceased to oppose it upon someone's torching a logging truck or spiking a tree. In fact, I've found that many people have a certain sympathy for tactics such as the ELF's (i.e. very carefully targeted destruction of corporate property that avoids causing harm to human beings or even in most cases to individuals' property) because of the blatantly evident inability of all those institutions you learned about in Civics class to effectively combat environmental destruction. Obviously, this sympathy is not something you can express on TV, because the persons who profit from this destruction love nothing more than to see their opponents spending all their time writing letters and signing petitions rather than directly intervening to stop them. In my general experience, public opinion of groups like the ELF tends to fall into one of two broad rubrics--either something along the lines of "I'm an American, damnit, I have a God-given right to drive my Hummer everywhere and you can complain about it all you want as long as you don't do anything that's actually going to stop me" or "I'm kind of glad to see someone is taking the issues that seriously", even though the latter (admittedly a less frequent response) has to be expressed quietly due to most people's fear of censure by social authorities. This mythical person who supports a group's goals but is turned off by sincere disagreement with their extremist tactics is mostly a creation of the mass media and mostly serves as a straw man that causes division among activists. If anything, the effect of direct actions that garner media attention is to make the public more aware of the severity of a given issue, whether or not they support the objectives of that action.

Well said. 28.Sep.2003 11:50

--

Thanx heimdallr.

Yep. 28.Sep.2003 13:44

Justice Evans

A dialog that is not a diatribe. Thank you for your intelligence...very, very much.