The University of California has been selected as the poster child of animal abuse at laboratories. It's been shown that the tactics are more effective if you just hit one person over and over and get them to quit what they're doing.

There are two main goals behind ALF actions. The first is obviously to remove as many animals as possible from fur farms, vivisection labs, and other areas of abuse. The second is to cause as much economic damage to these industries and persons as possible.

If killing [animal research scientists] is the only way to stop them, then I said killing them would certainly be justified.

The inconvenience and the suffering of any children or any family members pales in comparison to the suffering and oppression that goes on in these animal laboratories.

If animal abusers aren't going to stop perpetrating these types of atrocities, they ought to be stopped using whatever means necessary. What we're starting to see is the implementation of that type of strategy.

Things are picking up...It's not going to make this thing go away... don't think you're going to find anybody deterred...There's a lot of people willing to die for the cause.

If that means going onto their farms, releasing their animals and burning the place to the ground, that's morally justifiable, in our opinion...There were always innocent people who got hurt somewhere along the way but it was important that those who oppressed one group of people be stopped, and we don't see the animal liberation struggle being substantially different from these other struggles.... A sustained campaign against a particular industry or a particular organization has the potential to be quite effective.