Jordan Halliday and a supporter outside the courthouse.

Utah animal rights activist Jordan Halliday has begun a 10-month prison sentence for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury about his political beliefs and political associations. It is believed to be the first time in two decades, and only the third time in U.S. history, that someone has been imprisoned for criminal contempt of court after already serving prison time for civil contempt–all because of his principled stand against what activists call a political witch hunt.

The Utah grand jury was convened in 2009 to investigate the release of mink from Utah fur farms by the Animal Liberation Front. Halliday refused to cooperate because grand juries have historically been used against social movements (as they are now being used against antiwar activists in the Midwest) in fishing expeditions.

When you walk into a grand jury, you check your rights at the door. You have to answer questions about your politics and your friends. You don’t have the right to remain silent. If you refuse to cooperate and “name names,” you can be sent to jail. That’s what happened to Halliday.

But the story of how and why he was targeted gets even more surprising.

Corporate Leads

According to a government memo, “there is evidence that the defendant [Halliday] notified news sources of the McMullin mink farm attack on the day of the attack, and even before police officers knew of the significance of the crime.” This would seem like a good reason to question him.

However, it’s a lie.

FBI file shows emails from Fur Commission.

On August 20, 2009, someone submitted an anonymous message to KUTV.com about the fur farm raid. The only details provided on the contact form were a first name of “Jordan” and an email “jo~dan@aol.com.” The message said the Animal Liberation Front released 300 mink from McMullin mink farm and that they “look a lot happier.”

KUTV forwarded the message to Lindsey McMullin, the farm owner. McMullin forwarded the email to Teresa Platt of Fur Commission USA, an industry group. Platt forwarded the email to the FBI. [Here is a section of the FBI file with the emails.]

This is the basis for the FBI’s obsession with Halliday: an anonymous email attributed to “Jordan” that they received from a corporate front group, and the fact that Jordan Halliday is the only animal rights “Jordan” they could find (the other Jordans they spoke with were not activists, prosecutors said).

Refusal to Cooperate

Halliday maintains he has no knowledge of these crimes, and points out that anyone claiming responsibility for a crime would not use their real name (plus jo~dan@aol.com is not even a valid address). Instead, he argues that he has been targeted because of his protesting and writing, and that this is a broader attack on the animal rights and environmental movements.

Halliday’s attorney said in a memorandum:

… Jordan has resisted questioning involving his membership status and/or leadership position in various organizations of political and social nature involved in advocating for animal protections. He has been questioned about whether he organized a rally in front of the federal courthouse, and if he knows who did organize such rally, or if it were an organization to which he belongs that planned the rally. He has been asked about his family members, and whether one is married to an animal rights activist…[emphasis added]

1-2-3-4-FIFTH

Halliday answered either “no comment” or invoked the Fifth Amendment to all questions asked of him during his grand jury appearances. He answered no questions. His refusal to cooperate with the grand jury resulted in him spending 104 days in jail for civil contempt of court. Before being released, he was informed that the government had indicted him again on the same case, this time on criminal contempt charges.

Upon learning that prosecutors sought a 2 year prison sentence, Halliday pleaded guilty to refusing to answer questions at a federal grand jury. He was sentenced to 10 months in prison. To put this in perspective, William James Viehl and Alex Jason Hall were convicted of two counts of “animal enterprise terrorism” under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act for the Matthews mink farm raid, and sentenced to 21 and 24 months.

Why was Halliday treated so harshly?

One reason is that his “refusal to testify over a long period and his statements about ‘resisting’ the grand jury make his conduct more serious than simply failing to appear as a material witness.”

An example of this “disdainful view of grand juries” is a March 4, 2009 text message sent by Halliday after appearing before the grand jury. According to the government’s sentencing memo, he wrote:

Well, after my dave chapelle … I plead the 5th routine today. I was making some fo [sic] the gj laugh. I was sayin’ like “1-2- 3-4-5th!”. And they asked to see and they asked to see and they asked her to grant me more time as well, because they needed more time. The prosecutor was pissed as fuck.

Prosecutors note that “Dave Chappelle is a popular comedian who performs a comic routine that Halliday claims in the text message to have been mimicking before the grand jury. (Submission Exhibit No. 6.) In context, the video clip illustrates Halliday’s intention to mock the grand jury process…”

Prosecutors also say there were protestors outside the courthouse, and that Halliday said on websites and in the press that he had no intention of cooperating with a grand jury witch hunt. His refusal to cower in fear, his refusal to acquiesce to the government’s bullying, and his willingness to mock those the government were spun by the government as evidence of the need for a higher sentence.

“Stardom”

It’s telling that prosecutors bluntly describe this lack of fear as a threat to the entire grand jury system. “In some sense, the defendant’s contempt has brought a certain stardom within the counterculture animal rights extremist movement,” the sentencing memo says. He has tweeted, blogged, and interviewed about his experiences. He has supporters who have opened Facebook and Tumblr accounts, and protested outside the courthouse.

It is imperative, prosecutors said, that the “sentence defendant receives must not only deter his future criminal conduct, but also send the appropriate message to ensure that, as an unintended consequence of a lenient sentence, the defendant’s supporters are not emboldened to follow the defendant’s contemptuous ways.”

The FBI, the fur industry, and prosecutors are openly trying to send a message.

But what message are you hearing?

A new lawsuit challenges the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act as unconstitutional because it has given activists reason to fear that they could be prosecuted as “terrorists” for non-violent civil disobedience, protests, and First Amendment activity.

The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of 5 longtime animal rights activists. The activists say the vague wording of the law, and the corporate-led campaigns against animal rights activism, have made them alter their own advocacy.

The landmark case has implications for all social justice movement, beyond the animal rights activists targeted. It sets a dangerous precedent for labeling anyone who effectively threatens corporate profits a “terrorist.” As the Occupy Wall Street Movement grows rapidly, and has begun reclaiming foreclosed homes from banks and shutting down ports, this lawsuit couldn’t come at a more pressing time. And with the impending passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, the dangers of this parallel legal system for “terrorists” has become strikingly clear.

The lawsuit seeks to strike down the law for violating the First and Fifth Amendments [read the criminal complaint in Blum v. Holder]. Specifically, it argues that the law is unconstitutional for 3 reasons:

1. It is so broad that it has had a chilling effect on free speech. The law hasn’t outlawed animal rights activism, but it has made activists think twice about using their rights. This was the primary point I raised in my Congressional testimony against the law in 2006, and since then the political climate has become even more toxic. The first use of the law was based on activists allegedly chalking slogans on the sidewalk and wearing bandanas. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is an attempt by corporations to use the power of fear in order to silence their opposition.
2. The language is so vague that people can’t decipher what is illegal. The law’s criminalization of “interfering with” the operations of an animal enterprise, or causing a “loss of profits,” leave activists wondering if they could be labeled a terrorist for a successful lawful campaign. This is compounded by the law’s emphasis on “tertiary targeting”: it not only protects animal enterprises,” but any business that does business with an animal enterprise. When politicians, the courts, lawyers, and national organizations cannot agree on the meaning of this law, it is dangerously overbroad.
3. It singles out animal rights activist because of their political beliefs and their effective advocacy. Meanwhile, violence by anti-abortion extremists is not being labeled as terrorism. For more on this: “If Sarah Palin Were an Animal Rights Activist, She’d Have Already Been Convicted of ‘Terrorism.” Singling out groups of people because of their political beliefs, and restricting their First Amendment rights, is antithetical to a healthy democracy.

Here is a detailed, step-by-step analysis of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act if you are interested. I wanted to focus a bit on the people involved in the lawsuit, though:

Sarahjane Blum has been an animal rights activist for 23 years. She co-founded GourmetCruelty.com in 2003, which exposed the cruelty of the foie gras industry and helped California to ban foie gras farming. According to the lawsuit: “While she had knowingly and openly violated the law many times through acts of non-violent civil disobedience, she was unwilling to face the possibility of prosecution and sentencing as a terrorist. She was stunned that the ethical, important work that she had devoted her life to had been turned overnight into terrorism.”

Ryan Shapiro is now a doctoral candidate at MIT studying the history of political repression against animal rights activists. With Sarahjane Blum, he co-founded GourmetCruelty.com, produced a documentary film, and spoke publicly about his work. He was also friends with the SHAC 7 — a group of activists convicted as terrorists. “Faced with the imprisonment of his friends, and with the passage of the AETA, Mr. Shapiro began to worry that the price for peaceful protest and civil disobedience was one he could not afford to pay.”

Lana Lehr has organized for the welfare of rabbits, and also protested the sale of their fur. After the passage of the AETA, she found herself altering her protest activity and censoring her words and her writing online.

Lauren Gazzola is one of the SHAC 7. She recounts a lecture she gave at a law school class where she censored herself from encouraging activists to follow her advocacy, because she feared her words would be used as evidence of conspiracy to violate the AETA.

Jay Johnson, who has confirmed that he has been placed on a terrorist watchlist, has witnessed the chilling effect on grassroots animal rights activism. After the case of the SHAC 7 and the passage of the AETA, protest attendance plummeted. For instance, he recounts a protest against a company affiliated with Huntingdon Life Sciences: “When he arrived at the site of the planned protest, he was met by over 40 police officers in riot gear, and not a single other protestor.”

In the interest of full disclosure, I have known several of these plaintiffs for well over a decade, as activists and as friends.

I point this out because I want to take the liberty of saying that this lawsuit was not an easy decision for them. There’s of course a fear of drawing a giant red target on one’s back, but the primary concern of these plaintiffs is not themselves — it’s the animals, and those advocating on their behalf. All of these activists are deeply committed to the animal rights movement, and they had to answer the uncomfortable question: “Does acknowledging fear draw even more attention to it? Could this make even more people afraid?”

But this lawsuit is more about courage than fear. It is about these plaintiffs and the CCR having the courage to acknowledge that this political climate exists, that what we are experiencing is real and it is valid, and that we can’t move forward by pretending it doesn’t affect us. It is to say, unequivocally: “Yes, we have been afraid. Yes, we have all known fear. And now it is time to fight back.”

Two animal rights activists in Finland have been found not guilty on nearly all charges related to their undercover investigations of factory farms, which revealed sick, injured, and dying pigs.

Karry Hedberg and Saila Kivelä of Oikeutta Eläimille (Justice for Animals) were charged with “aggravated defamation” because of their exposés.

According to Finnish news outlet Helsingin Sanoma.

…the court found that the aim of the defendants was to raise critical debate on the conditions in which pigs are kept in Finland. With that in mind, they had recorded material which was disadvantageous from the point of view of the owners of the piggeries.

As it had not been asserted that the recordings had been doctored in any way, the court found that selective use of camera angles could not be seen to constitute false or suggestive information.

In the view of the court, freedom of speech needs to be considered, even though the pig farms were depicted in a negative light in interviews

In other words, the videos and websites the group created were free speech, and did not qualify as “defamation” because they were accurate depictions of the cruelty of factory farms aimed to “raise critical debate.”

Hedberg was given a 20-day suspended sentence because he trespassed in order to create one of the videos.

This is major victory against “Green Scare” style court cases in Finland, and let’s hope it’s foreshadowing of what will happen in the case of the Spanish 12 and ag-gag bills in the United States.

Kellie Marshall and Victor Vandoren, both from Austin, Texas, are accused of attempting to release mink from a fur farm in Sioux City, Iowa. At a court date last week, their charges were increased to include two class D felonies in addition to two misdemeanors.

Police allege that Marshall and Vanorden used bolt cutters to cut several holes in a fence at the mink farm, and that a vehicle near the property had hiking maps and a police scanner.

As former Animal Liberation Front prisoner Peter Young noted, the same fur farm was raided by underground animal rights activists in 1997, and approximately 5,000 mink and more than 100 silver foxes were freed.

It’s not clear yet if the two will face Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act charges. However, with recent raids in Jewell, Iowa (freeing 1,500 mink), Washington State (freeing 1,000 mink) and Oregon (freeing 300 mink), industry groups like the Fur Commission have been making the media rounds calling this crimes “terrorism.”

Kellie Marshall and Victor Vandoren are facing about 10 years in prison and are being held in county jail on bond. You can write them a letter or make a donation to their legal support at http://supportkellieandvictor.blogspot.com.

As animal rights activists continue to expose the systemic cruelty of factory farming, the industries targeted are doing everything they can to keep the public in the dark. I’ve written previously about attempts to pass new legislation criminalizing undercover investigations, how EUROPOL lists undercover videos as a terrorism threat, and how Spanish activists are being prosecuted as “terrorists” for their work. Now, two activists in Finland are being prosecuted for exposing what goes on behind closed doors at 30 pig farms. Mikko Alanne wrote at the Huffington Post:

In December 2009, Finnish media outlets stunned the nation by publishing disturbing video and photographs from inside 30 pig factory farms, the result of a two-month undercover investigation by the leading Finnish animal rights group, Justice for Animals. You can see the images and videos here.

Sights of injured, dead, and dying pigs outraged a country whose factory farmers had always touted their “humane” practices. Members of Parliament and even agribusiness representatives condemned what they saw. Police investigations were promised. There were even calls for the Minister of Agriculture to resign (she didn’t).

Now, almost two years later, the events have taken a truly incredible turn.

Instead of charging a single pig factory farmer with cruelty to animals, Finnish authorities are prosecuting the two activists who made the undercover videos, Karry Hedberg and Saila Kivelä. The charges are “aggravated defamation” of the nation’s pig farmers and “disturbing the peace.”

Check out the rest of Mikko Alanne’s excellent article here.

Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher has received a longer prison sentence for non-violent civil disobedience than people who have burned churches, threatened African-American leaders, and plotted to kill people.

DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison today for disrupting an illegal oil and gas lease auction. Meanwhile:

• Yesterday (and also in Utah), a man who set fire to two Mormon churches was sentenced to probation.
• A Massachusetts man who mailed letters threatening to burn black churches and NAACP headquarters was sentenced to 15 months. In his letters he said: “I do not like African-American or minorities in charge as supervisors of my security department at Novartis, nor I like them as President of the United States… For that I am going to burn down your offices just let you know how I feel. What right does some black person [have] to be in charge of me.”
• A Salt Lake City woman who defrauded clients of about $300,000 (comparable to the loss of profits that DeChristopher caused oil and gas corporations) was sentenced to 15 months.
• A former FBI agent was sentenced to two years in prison for planning to assassinate an FBI official.

These examples aren’t isolated instances. They can be mixed and matched with countless others. The point, as we have seen consistently, is that people who break the law in order to stop an injustice, who break the law in order to make the world even the slightest bit better, are met with disproportionate penalties compared to those who break the law for greed, hatred and revenge.

And of course, the disparity becomes even more extreme if we also consider the criminal activities of corporations– including the corporations DeChristopher protested, and the corporations which lobbied for him to receive a harsh sentence.

As Jamie Henn of 350.org tweeted recently: “Wall Street wrecked the economy & got billions in bail. Tim stood up for his beliefs and gets 2 years in jail.”

Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison for using non-violent civil disobedience to disrupt a sham oil and gas auction. He had been found guilty on two felony counts for making fake bids in the auction, costing corporations hundreds of thousands of dollars, and faced up to ten years.

He increased the bids on 22,000 acres of land in Utah national parks. A federal judge later ruled the auction was illegal.

DeChristopher’s case has attracted international attention, and he has become a spokesperson for the environmental movement. This case is much bigger than DeChristopher, though (as he has often said himself). We all need to be thinking: what’s next? How do we move forward?

Even if you do not consider yourself an environmentalist, or don’t agree with DeChristopher’s tactics, this case should raise serious questions about the misplaced priorities of our government and our entire culture. DeChristopher’s two-year sentence is comparable to what members of underground groups have received for property destruction. The court has sent the message that public, aboveground activists, who use non-violent civil disobedience, will be treated on par with underground activists who use economic sabotage.

More importantly, though, the government has sent the message that the people who step forward to stop ecological destruction will be met with harsh punishments, while those who responsible for this destruction, such as the oil and gas corporations bidding for public lands, will go about business as usual.

As the judge said during sentencing: “Civil disobedience can’t be the order of the day,” or it will lead to “chaos.”

But chaos for who? For the people? For the planet? Or for corporations?

This case, and the larger crackdown on the environmental movement, makes strikingly clear that the government is more concerned about the latter. As defense attorney Ron Yengich said: “We never impose the rule of law on people who steal from poor people, destroy the banking systems or destroy the earth.”

Moving forward, we need to remember one thing above all else: this is happening because DeChristopher was effective.

DeChristopher’s actions exposed what goes on inside sham corporate auctions, it cost corporations hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it galvanized the movement.

At sentencing, U.S. District Judge Dee Benson said that DeChristopher’s leadership in the environmental movement, his “continuing trail of statements” for civil disobedience, and his speech outside the courthouse were the reasons he faced prison time.

The judge went so far as to take the unusual step of having DeChristopher taken into custody of the U.S. Marshalls until his prison sentence begins. In many other cases I have covered, including those of convicted arsonists, the prisoners were allowed to self-surrender. People are generally only taken directly into custody if they are a violent threat or a flight risk. Why was this different?

Because DeChristopher is inspirational, and he would clearly use his time before prison to organize.

“You have authority over my life, but not my principles. Those are mine,” DeChristopher said to the judge. “I’ll continue to confront the system that threatens our future.”

Others have vowed to do the same. Thousands will be in Washington, D.C. in August to protest the Keystone XL pipeline to the Tar Sands. They are planning mass non-violent civil disobedience.

Justin Solondz was arrested by the FBI on Wednesday after being extradited from China, where he was imprisoned on drug charges. Solondz was wanted by the FBI for his involvement in arsons claimed by the Earth Liberation Front, particularly the arson at the University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture.

Solondz is alleged to have helped created the incendiary devices used to destroy the lab. Recently, his co-defendant in the case, Briana Waters, changed her plea to guilty and agreed to cooperate with the government. If this case goes to trial, Waters will likely be forced to testify against her former friend.

The FBI was quick to issue a press release trumpeting the arrest, and attributing it to the “dogged persistence and long term patience of the FBI.” However, the real story isn’t nearly so flattering.

• The entire “Operation Backfire” investigation of the Earth Liberation Front was made possible by chance, when the FBI pressured Jacob Ferguson in another case, and the heroin addict confessed to a string of arsons. Ferguson, the informant in the largest domestic terrorism investigation by the FBI, was recently sentenced to 5 years in prison for heroin charges and for endangering his daughter.
• Solondz was arrested in China on drug charges. If anyone could claim this arrest as a “victory,” it is Chinese police, not the FBI.
• The primary strategy of the FBI against all of the ELF defendants was to instill fear. The defendants, who did not harm a human being but were accused of serious property destruction, were threatened with multiple life sentences. Many received the “terrorism enhancement.”

I point all of this out because it helps put into context the FBI’s relentless clamoring for recognition and validation in this “terrorism” case. Agents and prosecutors are looking to make career advancements by cracking down on “eco-terrorists,” and it should make everyone pause, regardless of how you feel about these individuals and tactics.

To raise this question another way: When the FBI proudly says it is tracking environmentalists “across eastern Europe, Russia, Mongolia, and China,” what other threats are not being so doggedly pursued?

Click here to learn more about the broader crackdown on the environmental movement.

Jacob Ferguson was the lead arsonist in the Earth Liberation Front cases dubbed “Operation Backfire,” but the heroin addict avoided any prison time by wearing a wire and recording conversations with his former friends that could be used against them in court. By being an informant, Ferguson got a free pass on all of his crimes, and avoided decades in prison.

Ferguson was unable to stay away from heroin, though, and in April he was arrested on drug charges. Now he has been sentenced to five years in prison. He pleaded guilty to manufacturing and selling heroin (he was caught with two grams at his home), possessing cocaine, and neglecting and endangering his 4-year-old daughter.

That 5-year sentence is just for the drug charges, though. Another consequence of his guilty plea is that it means he has violated the conditions of his probation in the ELF cases. In other words, a federal prison sentence will likely be on the horizon. Ferguson– one of the most notorious government informants in recent FBI history– is going to have a difficult time in prison as a well-known “snitch.”

More broadly, Ferguson’s heroin charges should also raise some questions about the type of people the FBI is willing to rely upon in their desperation to convict “eco-terrorists.”

It should also raise some questions about sentencing disparities in the criminal justice system. Ferguson, a drug addict who neglected and endangered his child, was sentenced to 5 years  in prison. Daniel McGowan — one of the people Ferguson informed on, who destroyed property in the name of defending the environment — was sentenced to 7.

Previously: Lead ELF Informant Jake Ferguson Arrested on Drug Charges

Twelve animal rights and environmental activists have been arrested in Spain and are being labeled “eco-terrorists.” Little information is available about this developing story right now, but some of the activists have worked with Igualdad Animal on open rescues, walking into factory farms where animals were being abused, documenting the animal welfare violations, and then rescuing some of the animals.

Some news outlets are reporting that the activists are alleged to have ties to the Animal Liberation Front. However, Javier Moreno, a spokesperson for the above-ground group Igualdad Animal (and one of those arrested), says his group has been targeted because the government hasn’t been able to actually catch the people committing ALF crimes. He called the attack on Igualdad Animal and Equanimal open-rescue activists “an attempt to criminalize animal rights movement” and said the eco-terrorism rhetoric is part of a continued campaign against all aspects of the animal rights movement.

“As they have no one to charge for the release of Minks, they have arrested several members Equanimal and Animal Equality in an attempt to criminalize the animal rights movement, as happens in other European countries,” he said. “The lobbies of animal exploitation and the powerful multinationals want to stop the animal movement and the repression is now coming to Spain.”

The sweeping arrests, accusing people of both above-ground and underground tactics, seem quite similar to the recent attacks on Austrian animal rights activists as “terrorists.” However, it is far too early to know.

Here is a video documenting an example of the tactic that is being called “eco-terrorism” by industry groups, both in the United States and internationally.

UPDATE: No prisoner support page yet, but you can donate to their legal support here (in English)

UPDATE 2: Official statement from Animal Equality. The Spanish government is saying the arrests are related to the recent release of mink from fur farms. Above-ground activists respond:

These two organisations, which define their activism as being non-violent, dedicate their efforts to raising public awareness of animal rights, by informing society of the consequences of the consumption of animal products and the promotion of alternatives. On the other hand, even though the organisations were not involved in the mink liberations, neither condemns these types of actions, to the extent that they defend the interests of all animals regardless of species, as none of the minks exploited by the fur industry deserves to live and die on a Spanish fur farm….

The animal exploitation lobbies and powerful multinationals wish to put the brakes on the animal rights movement in Spain, and now we are seeing the arrival of repression.

UPDATE 3: International day of protest and solidarity called for FRIDAY, JUNE 24th, 2011. Here’s a list of Spanish embassies.

Update 4: Protests planned for San Francisco, Toronto, New York City, Washington DC and more. Post a link in the comments and I’ll add them. Also, a quick thing you can do is update your social media profile photos with the banner above.

UPDATE 5: Protest in Munich, Germany, Friday 6/24 from 9 am – 1 pm in front of the Spanish embassy (Oberföhriger Str. 45).

UPDATE 6: Protest in Brussels, Belgium, Friday, 6/24 at 2 pm in front of the Spanish embassy (Wetenschapsstraat 19).

UPDATE 7: Animal Equality lawyers report:

“…the treatment of those detained is currently adequate, although they are not being given a vegan diet. Some of the activists have declared themselves on hunger strike until they receive vegan food…They are calm, but strong and determined, and many people are currently working on this situation. Many thanks for all the support that has been received so far.

“You can make your support for the detained activists reach further by calling the police stations in Santiago de Compostela and A Coruña where they are currently being held and inquiring about the health of the activists..

The following is a suggested text to read:

“Hello. I am calling because I am concerned about the health of the activists who were arrested yesterday and who are currently being held in the police station. I would like to request that they be given a vegan diet.. I wish to express my concern for the health of those detained, and in particular, Sharon Nunez Gough, who has certain health problems.”

Telephone numbers:

- Comandancia de la Guardia Civil A Coruña, 0034 981 16 78 00, where the following activists are being held:

Sara, Olaia, Eneko, José Ramon, Eladio, Rafael, Jennifer y Borja

- Comandancia de la Guardia Civil Santiago de Compostela, 0034 981 581 611, where the following activists are being held:

Jose, Sharon y David.

UPDATE 8: Leaflets and posters are available for download for the solidarity events.

UPDATE 9: Protest in Vienna, Austria, Friday, 6/24 at 11 am in front of the Spanish embassy (Argentinierstraße 34, A-1040 Wien)

Protest in Berlin, Germany, Friday, 6/24, at noon in front of the Spanish embassy (Lichtensteinallee 1)

UPDATE 10: Protest in Zagreb, Croatia