Post by Swamp Gas on Jun 3, 2004 16:21:44 GMT -5
In the past week we have had 23 activists arrested for
activities related to the campaign to Stop Huntingdon
Animal Cruelty.
Please read the following and cross post to other
lists.
Animal Rights Arrests
by Will Potter; May 27, 2004
The Bush administration sent a calculated message to
grassroots political activists this week: The War on
Terrorism has come home.
FBI agents rounded up seven American political
activists from across the country Wednesday morning,
and the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey held a
press conference trumpeting that "terrorists" have
been indicted.
That's right: "Terrorists." The activists have been
charged with violating the Animal Enterprise Terrorism
Act of 1992, which at the time garnered little public
attention except from the corporations who lobbied for
it. Their crime, according to the indictment, is
"conspiring" to shut down Huntingdon Life Sciences, a
company that tests products on animals and has been
exposed multiple times for violating animal welfare
laws.
The terrorism charges could mean a maximum of three
years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The activists
also face additional charges of interstate stalking
and three counts of conspiracy to engage in interstate
stalking: Each count could mean up to five years in
prison and a $250,000 fine.
Since September 11, the T-word has been tossed around
by law enforcement and politicians with more and more
ease. Grassroots environmental and animal activists,
and even national organizations like Greenpeace, have
been called "eco-terrorists" by the corporations and
politicians they oppose. The arrests on Wednesday,
though, mark the official opening of a new domestic
front in the War on Terrorism.
Bush's War on Terrorism is no longer limited to Al
Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden. It's not limited to
Afghanistan or Iraq (or Syria, or Iran, or whichever
country is next). And it's not limited to the animal
rights movement, or even the campaign against
Huntingdon Life Sciences. The rounding up of activists
on Wednesday should set off alarms heard by every
social movement in the United States: This "war" is
about protecting corporate and political interests
under the guise of fighting terrorism.
To use a non-animal rights analogy, these activists
are the canaries in the mine. They are part of a
relatively new, isolated social movement, and
therefore more vulnerable to attacks on civil
liberties. But what happens to them now will happen to
other movements soon enough.
The activists arrested are part of a group called Stop
Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, an international
organization aimed solely at closing the controversial
lab. The group uses home demonstrations, phone and
email blockades, and plenty of smart-ass, aggressive
rhetoric to pressure companies to cut ties with the
lab. It has worked. The lab has been brought near
bankruptcy, after international corporations like
Marsh Inc. have pulled out their investments.
To most, this is effective-- albeit controversial--
organizing. According to the indictment, though, it's
"terrorism" because the activists aim to cause
"physical disruption to the functioning of HLS, an
animal enterprise, and intentionally damage and cause
the loss of property used by HLS."
That's like saying the Montgomery bus boycott, a
catalyst of the civil rights movement, was terrorism
because it aimed to "intentionally damage and cause
the loss of property" of the bus company.
It seems the biggest act of "terrorism" by the group
is a website. Members of the group are outspoken
supporters of illegal direct action like civil
disobedience, rescuing animals from labs, and
vandalism. Whenever actions-legal or not-take place
against the lab, the group puts it on the website. The
activists are not accused of taking part in any of
these crimes.
Such news postings are so threatening, apparently,
that the indictment doesn't even name the corporations
that have been targeted. They are only identified by
single letters, like "S. Inc." or "M. Corp."
"Because of the nature of the campaign against these
companies, we didn't want to subject them further to
the tactics of SHAC," said Michael Drewniak,
spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office in New
jersey, in an interview.
Some of the wealthiest corporations on the planet, and
the U.S. Attorney's Office must protect them from a
bunch of protesters. This is what the War on Terrorism
has become: The Bush administration can't find real
terrorists abroad, yet it spends law enforcement time
and resources protecting corporations from political
activists.
The lawsuit is so outlandish that some activists, who
asked that they not be identified, said they don't
think it is intended to win. Instead, they see it as
an important political move in the War on Terror. In a
hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
just last week, a U.S. Attorney said the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act needed to go further to
successfully be used against Stop Huntingdon Animal
Cruelty. If this lawsuit fails, the Justice Department
can say, "We told you so."
So, these activists face a double-edged sword. If they
lose, they go to prison, and are labeled "terrorists"
for the rest of their lives. If they win, it could be
fodder for an even harsher political crackdown.
Their only chance is for activists of all social
movements-- regardless of their political views-- to
support them, and oppose the assault on basic civil
liberties. Otherwise, in Bush's America, we could all
be terrorists.
Will Potter is a freelance reporter in Washington,
D.C. He has written for the Chicago Tribune, Dallas
Morning News, and Chronicle of Higher Education, and
closely follows how the War on Terrorism affects civil
liberties.
www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=5610§ionID=40
www.counterpunch.org/potter05292004.html
activities related to the campaign to Stop Huntingdon
Animal Cruelty.
Please read the following and cross post to other
lists.
Animal Rights Arrests
by Will Potter; May 27, 2004
The Bush administration sent a calculated message to
grassroots political activists this week: The War on
Terrorism has come home.
FBI agents rounded up seven American political
activists from across the country Wednesday morning,
and the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey held a
press conference trumpeting that "terrorists" have
been indicted.
That's right: "Terrorists." The activists have been
charged with violating the Animal Enterprise Terrorism
Act of 1992, which at the time garnered little public
attention except from the corporations who lobbied for
it. Their crime, according to the indictment, is
"conspiring" to shut down Huntingdon Life Sciences, a
company that tests products on animals and has been
exposed multiple times for violating animal welfare
laws.
The terrorism charges could mean a maximum of three
years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The activists
also face additional charges of interstate stalking
and three counts of conspiracy to engage in interstate
stalking: Each count could mean up to five years in
prison and a $250,000 fine.
Since September 11, the T-word has been tossed around
by law enforcement and politicians with more and more
ease. Grassroots environmental and animal activists,
and even national organizations like Greenpeace, have
been called "eco-terrorists" by the corporations and
politicians they oppose. The arrests on Wednesday,
though, mark the official opening of a new domestic
front in the War on Terrorism.
Bush's War on Terrorism is no longer limited to Al
Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden. It's not limited to
Afghanistan or Iraq (or Syria, or Iran, or whichever
country is next). And it's not limited to the animal
rights movement, or even the campaign against
Huntingdon Life Sciences. The rounding up of activists
on Wednesday should set off alarms heard by every
social movement in the United States: This "war" is
about protecting corporate and political interests
under the guise of fighting terrorism.
To use a non-animal rights analogy, these activists
are the canaries in the mine. They are part of a
relatively new, isolated social movement, and
therefore more vulnerable to attacks on civil
liberties. But what happens to them now will happen to
other movements soon enough.
The activists arrested are part of a group called Stop
Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, an international
organization aimed solely at closing the controversial
lab. The group uses home demonstrations, phone and
email blockades, and plenty of smart-ass, aggressive
rhetoric to pressure companies to cut ties with the
lab. It has worked. The lab has been brought near
bankruptcy, after international corporations like
Marsh Inc. have pulled out their investments.
To most, this is effective-- albeit controversial--
organizing. According to the indictment, though, it's
"terrorism" because the activists aim to cause
"physical disruption to the functioning of HLS, an
animal enterprise, and intentionally damage and cause
the loss of property used by HLS."
That's like saying the Montgomery bus boycott, a
catalyst of the civil rights movement, was terrorism
because it aimed to "intentionally damage and cause
the loss of property" of the bus company.
It seems the biggest act of "terrorism" by the group
is a website. Members of the group are outspoken
supporters of illegal direct action like civil
disobedience, rescuing animals from labs, and
vandalism. Whenever actions-legal or not-take place
against the lab, the group puts it on the website. The
activists are not accused of taking part in any of
these crimes.
Such news postings are so threatening, apparently,
that the indictment doesn't even name the corporations
that have been targeted. They are only identified by
single letters, like "S. Inc." or "M. Corp."
"Because of the nature of the campaign against these
companies, we didn't want to subject them further to
the tactics of SHAC," said Michael Drewniak,
spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office in New
jersey, in an interview.
Some of the wealthiest corporations on the planet, and
the U.S. Attorney's Office must protect them from a
bunch of protesters. This is what the War on Terrorism
has become: The Bush administration can't find real
terrorists abroad, yet it spends law enforcement time
and resources protecting corporations from political
activists.
The lawsuit is so outlandish that some activists, who
asked that they not be identified, said they don't
think it is intended to win. Instead, they see it as
an important political move in the War on Terror. In a
hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
just last week, a U.S. Attorney said the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act needed to go further to
successfully be used against Stop Huntingdon Animal
Cruelty. If this lawsuit fails, the Justice Department
can say, "We told you so."
So, these activists face a double-edged sword. If they
lose, they go to prison, and are labeled "terrorists"
for the rest of their lives. If they win, it could be
fodder for an even harsher political crackdown.
Their only chance is for activists of all social
movements-- regardless of their political views-- to
support them, and oppose the assault on basic civil
liberties. Otherwise, in Bush's America, we could all
be terrorists.
Will Potter is a freelance reporter in Washington,
D.C. He has written for the Chicago Tribune, Dallas
Morning News, and Chronicle of Higher Education, and
closely follows how the War on Terrorism affects civil
liberties.
www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=5610§ionID=40
www.counterpunch.org/potter05292004.html