censor_statue_of_libertyThe recent FBI arrests of animal rights activists as “terrorists” for chalking sidewalks, protesting and making fliers marks a drastic turning point in the Green Scare, and in the history of this country. The government and corporations are clearly hoping to set a legal precedent for the sweeping power of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. But these arrests are much more than a test case, or an isolated incident of ambitious prosecution.

These arrests are part of a 5-step process the FBI and other government agencies are using to overtly label First Amendment activity as “terrorism.”

The process has worked something like this:

  1. Label. The first step was to label illegal direct action by groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front as “terrorism.” The FBI, corporations, industry groups and politicians began doing this in the 1980s, through media campaigns, think tank reports and legislation like the Animal Enterprise Protection Act.
  2. Guilt by association. Next, these groups expanded their smear campaign to anyone who ideological supports direct action and economic sabotage. They began labeling the above-ground supporters of those movements as “terrorists.” A turning point was the conviction of the SHAC 7 for running a controversial website that vocally supported a wide range of tactics.
  3. More guilty by association. This is now. The guilt by association is spreading from those who vocally support direct action (and, like the SHAC 7, perhaps even publish anonymous communiqués) to those who are merely lawfully protesting as part of the same campaign. In the SHAC 7 case, the government argued that the defendants were “conspiring” to promote illegal activity by running a website. In these recent arrests, the government is arguing that the First Amendment activity itself is “terrorism” because it’s part of a campaign that involves illegal tactics.
  4. Expand the net. With the latest arrests, the government is still trying to play up the fact that illegal actions have happened recently in California, including bombings that have been recklessly attributed to animal rights activists. The next step is to completely drop that pretext. In other words, the next step is to go after people who are using their First Amendment rights and are not engaging in home protests, chalking sidewalks or wearing masks. This is the same expansion of the net that happened during the Red Scare: targeting writers, speakers, journalists, and public figures. I feel strange writing this but, in many ways, the next step is to go after people like me.
  5. Repeat. This process will be repeated for different organizations and different types of people (activists, non-profit leaders, writers) and it will be repeated for other social movements. The government is not establishing these legal and legislative precedents simply to abandon them once the animal rights “radicals” are imprisoned. The legal latticework will be used against the next social movement, and the next, and the next. This has happened in every era of government repression throughout history: once those in power discover tools for silencing one opposition group, they never stop there.

In analyzing a process like this, it should be very clear that I don’t mean to imply, in any way, that this process is inevitable. The FBI is formulaic in how it cracks down on protest movements—we can see the patterns throughout U.S. history. The responses of activists and everyday people, though, need not follow any formula. The future is fluid. We have the power to intervene in this process—through education, community building, media outreach, lobbying, and the courts—and we must do so immediately, swiftly, and forcefully.

Related posts:

  • Derp
    Animals don't have rights. Anyone who intimidates researchers should be fisted by the long arm of the law.
  • why havent you published my comment -- too close to accurate?
  • @Greenconsciousness:

    I've been very sick. It is published.
  • STOP EQUATING THE ANIMAL LIBERATION FRONT WITH THE PIG ROAST FUNDRAISERS OF THE EARTH LIBERATION MOVEMENT The two groups were/are very different. Elf is for the most part FBI provocateurs who destroyed the burgeoning ALF. I despise them for the stupidity and recklessness of their actions which are mostly cop planned and designed to destroy any threat that things will change. They wiped out the ALF and that is exactly what they wanted to do.
  • Stephen
    Pub,

    Why not? I have the right to freedom of associaton. Those 'criminals' are good company, and I am worthy of such flattery. If it makes you uncomfortable you can stand alone.
  • pub
    Oh, Stephen, you really flatter yourself. Don't.
  • pub
    Respect other people and work to change things through legislation, not intimidating protest, and maybe people will consider you decent. Your heros, the drugged-out hippies of the 60's, were just that, drugged out hippies that made public intimidation of anyone a bunch young trendy punks don't like fair game. And then they went into our universities to teach the next generations how to hate almost everything about their country that the people who came before them worked very hard to give them. Act like decent people and others will reciprocate.
  • just because something is legal doesn't make it morally right, and vice versa
  • Joe
    Will, the legal activities I was talking about were the researchers,ranchers,fur stores,ect. that are the victims of animal rights terrorist.
  • Joe
    Mahatma Gandhi and his followers.
    World War II resistance fighters.
    The Polish Solidarity Movement.
    Vietnam War draft card burners.
    What do they all have in common?.....HUMAN RIGHTS

    How dare you equate yourself to them. You are a small minded, small group of people who terrorize researchers, and others engaged in LEGAL activities. As for me being the evil empire all I can say to that is I am the only person here who as ever done anything to actually help the environment.
  • So Joe, are you saying you have no problem with the tactics employed by any of those groups as long as it is for human rights?

    And "LEGAL" activities? Gandhi? Resistance fighters? Draft card burners? Um, try again. All of them were very much breaking the law.
  • Stephen
    I know. I know. But.....wellll; I'm bored, I might as well practise my rhetoric.
    The upside is that Joe is responsible for re-igniting my activist spirit. I'd grown apathetic, but now I'm back in the fight.
  • Carcass
    I've been reading this blog for a while and I love everything about it except for Joe and people responding to Joe. Wake up and smell the troll, folks. All he's trying to do is get a rise out of you. Anyone who doubts this is encouraged to look through the archives of this blog. See if you can find a single exchange involving Joe that didn't degenerate into ad hominem shit-slinging. You can't because he's not here to discuss, he's here to annoy. I entreat the sensible readers of this blog to not let Joe make it anymore about himself than he already has. Deny a troll attention and he will starve!

    Will, I'm sorry I missed you when you were speaking in Philly recently, but hopefully you'll get a chance to come back before you get charged with facilitating encouragement to incite conspiracy or what-the-fuck-ever.
  • Stephen
    You really don't get it do you. I'm a terrorist just like:
    The Tiananmen Square demonstrators.
    The Boston Tea Party participants.
    Mahatma Gandhi and his followers.
    World War II resistance fighters.
    The Polish Solidarity Movement.
    Vietnam War draft card burners.
    You are an agent of the evil empire, when you and your kind have twisted and warped the definition of terrorism into uselessness, you will be consigned to the dustbin of history.
  • Joe
    go for it! see you and the rest of the terrorist ilk in court! I of course will be on the right and just side of the issue.
  • BB
    "This is the same expansion of the net that happened during the Red Scare: targeting writers, speakers, journalists, and public figures. I feel strange writing this but, in many ways, the next step is to go after people like me."

    Yes, Will, it's time be afraid--and those in this country who 'get it' are VERY afraid. What's just as strange and frightening, are the people posting comments on this site that are so irretrievably, historically illiterate, blind or perhaps overwhelmingly stupid, who continue to spar with you over the definition of terrorism, as freedom takes a glorious slide down the shitter. I image they will be among the first herded into those nice detention, er, FEMA camps the gov't already has ready and waiting...or perhaps you have a few FBI agents among those commenting here, just trying to stir the pot?
  • Stephen
    I never denied it was, but thanks to you I have come to the realization it is time to stop pussyfooting about, get into the trenches, man the barricades, and fight the good fight and realize that when your enemy calls you a terrorist you are actually a freedom fighter.
  • Joe
    Are you so dense that you can't see threatening and harassing researchers because you don't like what they do is by definition terrorism?
  • Bethany
    Yes... Lynching, murder, and rape against humans are just that... Lynching, murder, and rape... But if we are following the FBI's 'terrorism' doctrine here, and these lynchings, murders, and rapes are done for the political purposes of re-enslaving/dominating over other races, shouldn't that be considered terrorism?
    But it never is, and never will be (excuse my pessimism), because it's easier for our government to live with racism than it is to live with the corporations that line their pockets being challenged for any reason at all.

    If anyone is guilty of “the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes," I would say it is the FBI.
  • Stephen
    I use the OED myself. Are you really so dense that you don't see that a person can be a racist terrorist, most people are complex beings and can be several things at once. Or is "little Joey one note" your idea of the pinnacle of humanity.
  • Joe
    Lynching,murder and rape are just that lynching, murder and rape! When one does any of those because they hate a persons race, religion or color they are a racist.

    When one uses violence or threats there of to stop a legal enterprise or force poltical change, they are a terrorist.

    Is that clear enough little stephen asshole or do you need me to send you a copy of Webster?
  • Stephen
    Little Joey's comedy cavalcade has reached new heights/depths, a total lack of logic and an inability to carry a thought from one paragraph to the next. Please tell me again how lynching, murder and rape are not "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce,". Honestly if all our enemies were like you we'd die laughing, or is that your sinister plan.
  • John
    From what I remember reading, the FBI said that the arrested activists were wearing masks during some of the activities. I'm curious how the government received the information that they were even present at these events or made flyers, etc.
  • Hi John, I have details from the FBI on exactly that, check back on this site tomorrow morning...
  • Joe
    I don't recognize the KKK as terrorist by definition, the KKK are racist and are guilty of racism. Racism is defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race." and clearly animal rights terrorist are not guilty of this.

    Terrorism is defined as "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes." this is what animal rights activist who cross the line are guilty of....terrorism.
  • goodamerican
    Doesnt that smack of exactly the way to stiffle political dissent?....how has that EVER been good for this country?
  • @Joe:
    You've completely avoided my point. Again, if you believe these activities of animal rights activists are "terrorism," then a logical person would infer that infinitely more extreme tactics for political purposes (lynching, murder, raping, all of which the klan have done) would have to be terrorism as well. To parse one out is to admit the blatant political game of this War on Terrorism: it's not about tactics, it's about beliefs.
  • Joe
    No, the KKK is not often called terrorist but when a member of the KKK commits a crime its labeled a hate crime and has sentencing enhancements just like AETA.

    To do away with the AETA would mean we should also do away with all hate crime laws.
  • goodamerican
    and do away with them we should...dont be fooled, "hate crime laws" are totally unconstitutional in that they give special privilage to one group over an other...and are meant to get U.S. all fearful of speaking our minds about ONE CERTAIN GROUP ESPECIALLY....MAN, a crime is a crime, one caused by hate is no diffent than any other mindless act of that sort....but special prvilage has NEVER BEEN and should not be a part of our social structure, wouldnt you agree with that?
  • The fact that you recognize the KKK is not being labeled terrorist, and don't seem to have a problem with that, speaks volumes.

    If this activity is terrorism, then, logically, klan activity certainly is. And if murdering and lynching people is NOT terrorism then, logically, neither is this. Either way, it's hypocritical and offensive to be more concerned about non-violent animal rights activists than you are about racists who have murdered people.
  • Bethany
    Meh... Sounds like they knocked to me.
    Not that it wouldn't be terrifying if five to six individuals knocked on my door and were angry at me... but I wouldn't call it terrorism.

    No one ever called the KKK terrorism... and their tactics were a lot more direct and more often violent than these movements.
  • Joe
    The FBI says "On February 24, 2008, five to six individuals including Mr. Pope, Ms. Stumpo, and Ms. Khajavi, attempted to forcibly enter the private home of a University of California researcher in Santa Cruz. When her husband opened the door, a struggle ensued and he was hit by an object. As the individuals fled, one yelled, “We’re gonna get you.” The professor and her husband both told the FBI they were terrified by the incident.'
    You are right it does not say who yelled but it does say that 3 of the 4 arrested did try to forcibly enter the home while people were there, who knows what they had in mind if they got in.
  • Joe
    Will, you forgot to mention that they were also arrested in connection with a attempted forced entry and assault.
  • @Joe:
    The incident in the FBI press release has not been attributed to these activists. The FBI release lists an alleged incident at a protest, and says these activists were among others at that protest, and that a "struggle ensued" (the FBI doesn' t say if the defendants were in that struggle) and then someone yelled "We're gonna get you" (the FBI doesn't say the defendants yelled that). The entire purpose of the FBI throwing around vague allegations like this, without evidence, is to make people jump to conclusions. Don't fall into that trap. If that information comes out in court, fine. But again, I'm not going to keep repeating the unsubstantiated claims of the FBI. There are too many other people doing that.
blog comments powered by Disqus