If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front

If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front

source: If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front

What do you do if you feel something terrible is happening, and the cause of that terrible thing is systematic? - that is, the systems for governing our world offer no possibility of change, because they themselves are part of the problem. Either you accept the system, or you fight it - and if your methods include violence, you thereby become a terrorist, and (in a sense) an enemy of those who chose to work within the system instead. The Earth Liberation Front were a group of ecological activists who took to arson; and whose members eventually wound up in gaol. This film allows them to present their case, and interestingly, they come over as intelligent and thoughtful and not in the least wild or woolly in their thinking. To its credit, the film also interviews some of their targets and those responsible for their prosecution, who are not demonised and who also come over as human. The only thing I struggled with was the insistence of front members that they weren't terrorists. I rather think they were - but this thought-provoking documentary raises the question of whether being a terrorist is always wrong, and doesn't offer easy answers in either direction.

"If A Tree Falls," is a documentary about the ELF (earth liberation front) and the fires they set in protest of the parks services, forest service, and logging. It's an interesting movie, and somewhat educational. On purely technical aspects alone I give it an 8. It did a good job of laying out everyone and everything involved, all sides, including prosecutors, law enforcement, environmental activists, and a few of the ELF extremists. Now for the spoiler alert. This documentary ends up trying to get the viewer to weigh in on not the actual events, but on whether or not these people are terrorists and deserve to go to a prison designed specifically for terrorists. My answer is yes. They try to justify their unlawful actions by saying they took great care in planning so no one would be injured or killed. The fact is they planned and carried out a Federal crime and burnt down other people, and our government's property to incite a reaction. They paint the main character of this film as a really nice guy, who got caught up in something dumb. Well he should have thought about the consequences when he did it. Besides, I am sure there are a lot of terrorists, murders, arsonists, etc. around the world, that if you asked their families, would say that their child was "such a good boy." He ended up being sentenced to 7 years in the Supermax prison for terrorists. I guess he will have plenty of time to think about it now. Arson is a serious crime that COULD have caused injury and death, and I after the first fire the ELF members should be called terrorists, because if you were in that area and owned a business I am sure you would be afraid someone might burn your business down at anytime. Once the government gets done with these people I sure hope they go after that adolescent Paul Watson from "Whale Wars" for piracy. The police were cast in a bad light in this movie as well. Environmentalists, as they always do, tried to paint law enforcement as some nazi jackboot thugs. They show people at a Pacific Northwest location involved in a protest "sit-in," and Police wiping and spraying pepper spray in their eyes. The whole time these protesters are saying things like,"Please don't hurt me," or," Please don't spray me. Well, you were asked, then told to leave. If you don't leave the police have an obligation to remove you. Stop getting your panties in a bunch and leave if you don't want to be sprayed. Anyways, for technical reasons this movie is a pretty good one.

I've seen this trend in documentary films, particularly in American ones: the story of a social movement or something wrong going on is told from the point of view of an affected individual, more often than not delivering not only information but a sentimental message, trying to make you emphatize with that particular individual. For me, that's a mistake. When a cause is wrapped up around a single person and becomes a personal issue rather than an universal fight, the whole thing sinks down under just "a" story. Thus my summary comment: "the" story would have been better, without the whole sentimental filling. Now, I ordered the DVD expecting to get more information about the ELF and related issues. I certainly did, although I had to cope with a lot of those sentimental fillers. Don't get my wrong, I do think that seeing what happens to someone involved with the ELF is educational, although there's no need to go that deep into Daniel's own life. You get involved knowing the repercussions, I'm sure people supporting the ELF emphatize with Daniel McGowan, and detractors will say "that's what he deserves". Then, again, why going so much into Daniel's private life details, not directly involving the ELF or environmental issues but rather trying to show his defects? For those wanting to get involved in the environmental movement, that may only scare them away. OK, some (if not all) of the stuff will simply anger these people, which in return will create, perhaps, an action. From my European point of view (and environmental activist, as well), I don't see the sentimental lines fitting anywhere. Alright, I'll stop repeating myself now. As I was saying, you will find useful information here (I discovered, among other things, the rare film "PiackAxe"). I didn't watch the extras yet, but I hope I will find even more nice information here -without fillers-. I believe the film also try to portrait ELF people like "humans too" by showing their mistakes and weakness'. Hm, about that, let's just say that activists should take it as a what-not-to-do list rather than a pointing finger. I still don't see any so-called mistakes there, even though I do see how messed up is to betray your comrades for money or other selfish reasons (being able to walk free hand by hand with your child is more valuable than fighting against the total destruction of our natural world, right? If your child doesn't have air to breathe in the future but the one sold by the same corporations that destroyed the planet, you will be long gone by then, so who cares...). Summarizing, worth watching, even with its flaws. If just for the informative value. If you can focus on what really is important, you will find the destruction mankind bring for greed. And, hopefully, will do something about it.

A good documentary about a fascinating subject, but it opened up a lot of questions and left me wanting more. For example, a look at Wikipedia shows you that ELF did not begin randomly in Oregon in the late 90s, but in fact started in the UK and Europe. I wanted to learn more about these organizations - their views, their actions, and their leaders. The documentary shows pictures of the people involved, but we learn very little about them, and often don't even hear their names. One of them was even described as a rich, foxy internet executive, who did a little arson on weekends - but who the heck was she? Also, the trials aren't covered at all. However, the filmmakers do give us a full look at one of the group's leaders, a seemingly harmless soul named Daniel "Sorrel" McGowan, and we also get to see interviews with detectives and prosecutors who worked hard on the case, and got the ELF labelled terrorists. They were not terrorists because they did not kill random civilians - what they did was destroy property. And the fires they set are nothing compared to the fires that are burning in Oregon as I write this because of climate change.

In 2005, former Earth Liberation Front (ELF) member Daniel McGowan is arrested, along with a dozen others, in a co-ordinated operation to bring to justice those responsible for a series of arson attacks over the previous decade. McGowan is implicated for his role in a number of these attacks, and faces a double life sentence if he continues to refuse to take a plea (and, in doing so, turn on his former comrades). Under house arrest in his sister's New York apartment, McGowan invites Marshall Curry in to document the period up to his imprisonment. The ELF are not an easy organization to categorize; formed seemingly out of the believed futility of peaceful and non-violent demonstration to protect the 'raping' of the environment, they use economic warfare (in the form of property destruction) to make their points instead. McGowan, a late-comer to the organization but one who quickly uses his charm and passion for the cause to rise through the ranks, does not deny any of the charges laid before him. Rather, Curry is granted insider accounts from not merely the arrestee but also a number of his co-conspirators (even, most notably, the snitch who gave McGowan and his accomplices up in the years after the arson attacks). Curry's film is not a propaganda film for McGowan, or even the ELF; it doesn't throw statistics at you regarding the extent of logging or the dangers of genetically-modified food (two of the organization's targets for attacks). Rather, it serves to establish a landscape more complex than the simplistic 'eco-terrorist' slur used to describe McGowan et al, without necessarily demanding sympathy for their bleak position and future. The ELF's case is nevertheless made strongly: in all the EDF's actions - and they number over 1200 incidents - not a single human casualty results, and the targets are invariably large organizations and corporations. The eco-warrior McGowan is at pains to stress their actions as mere 'property destruction', and it is hard to argue otherwise - particularly with the poignant NY backdrop - yet Curry is even-handed enough to also interview the workers and families of those whose workplaces have been destroyed. To them, the destruction of property is not a means to an end (however noble), but a misunderstanding of what it is they do. An Oregonian logging executive, whose offices were targeted by the ELF in 2001, is therefore equally convincing in arguing that by definition, he is also an 'environmentalist' - for every tree his business cuts down, six have to be planted, and further, if there were no trees left, there would be no logging business either. The points raised on both sides are relevant and thought-provoking; it is patently clear no- one is out to do serious harm, either to the environment or to the workers, yet both sides remain at loggerheads over whose supposed 'crime' is worse. And while the battle goes on, everyone continues to suffer. There is clearly a middle-way between the tree-hugging environmentalism of the ELF and the business-savvy but ecologically-dependent corporations and businesses they target, but why hasn't it been found? Concluding Thought: MacGowan may well not be a 'terrorist' in the sense of a suicide bomber seeking maximum casualties, but the arson attacks are undoubtedly intended to instill a degree of fear to encourage desired political action. That is still terrorism.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter is and old tired cliché but in this film that quote seems yet again to ring true. This doc explains why a group of environmentalists started to radicalize when they felt that corporations, police and politicians no longer listen to them. Their solution? Firebombing various facilities that according to them(later they found that some of their targets really didn't support harm to the environment, but actually the opposite)was posing a threat to the environment. This solution was extreme, and got the FBIs attention who started investigating their attacks. Slowly but surely FBI was closing the net but biggest question remained, was this domestic terrorism? And should it be viewed as domestic terrorism? For a viewer, like me, who never been involved in radical political organizations this film poses a lot of interesting questions, such as how far are you willing to go for your ideals? And also how easy is it to push idealistic youngsters to commit worse crimes then just illegal demonstrations, vandalism etc? It should be seen by anyone interested in why, how, people regardless of political views easily can be persuaded to commit crimes in order to get their agenda, message, across. So if you liked docs like Neverland: The Rise and Fall of the Symbionese Liberation Army (2004), The Weather Underground (2002),One Day in September (1999)etc then you should see this one.

Great documentary showing the people who are willing to fight back against the corporations that are not only willing to destroy and pillage mother nature for profit but are happy to do so. Do I agree with their tactics? No, but am I happy there is now a new extreme fighting back against the other extreme? Yes. For too long corporations have done what they please without caring for anything but the money lining their pockets. This documentary shows the people who where willing to stand up and say enough is enough. Peaceful protests just fell on deaf ears and ended with pepper spray to the eyes and testicles. These guys had enough, they knew for a fact that their protests where not going to change anything so they had to turn it up notch. Corporations would not listen to their cries and simply didn't care so ELF decided to hit them in the only place they care about, their pockets. This documentary follows the story of one of these protesters who decided to fight back and stand up for what he thought was right. Should these people be considered terrorists? No, they should be considered arsonists. If the government defines these people as terrorists then what name should be given to the corporations who drove these people to take these actions? Again I do not condone the actions of these people but they are the lesser of two evils in this situation.

This documentary covers a lot of territory while following the compelling story of a man whose youthful conversion to activism lands him in the US torture prison grid branded a terrorist. This film has much to say about authority, youth, environmental activism, environmental destruction for profit, and finally, about a country using the war on foreign terrorists as a pretext to practice terror on its own citizens through the use of ridiculously aggressive sentencing and detention practices. We are asked to question if the cost of ELF destruction compares to the destruction of oil, gas, timber and mining companies across the USA, to say nothing of what the US war machine does abroad. The FBI is represented by a thorough but ultimately sad apologist agent who eventually admits to feeling 'circumspect' about jailing dedicated, idealistic young American citizens to isolation gulags. The automated, unthinking flip-side of authority is shown in the grinning face of a local cop from Eugene who's been on the front line of protests and is convinced of his righteousness in just doing his job. Yet another officer redeems himself saying he prefers to prosecute crimes, not terrorist acts. For a documentary, many characters take form. We see the faces of authority in various forms of dedication, moral contortion and ignorance. We see the fragile morality of youth, with us knowing its collision with cynical reality is just around the corner (thanks to an excellent job of revealing events in the editing). We also see the glory of people battling a system of exploitation on its own terms, and finally, a corrupt justice system willing to exert more harsh terror on its highest moral watch-guards than on polluters, arms dealers and war criminals. The actions of ELF are eventually tied into the WTO protests in Seattle, and the larger movement that was taking shape before 911. The film only nominally mentions what was ELF's biggest selling tool at the time, that it always claimed to have no center, and proposed the notion that each person should be their own activist. The similarities to other activist organizations in this regard was perhaps too similar to promote. Regardless, the film is incredibly dramatic in scope for a documentary, encapsulating the 90s and 00s in the USA, and the transition US democracy has taken forwards and/or backwards in that time. The conflicts it explores, mainly freedom vs security, are as old as civilization, but the canvas is as large as ever.