Screenshot of the FBI homepage, with "eco-terrorists" as the top story above Osama bin Laden.Come December 7, it will have been three years since the “Operation Backfire” arrests of Earth Liberation Front members, for a string of arsons and property crimes in the Northwest that caused upwards of $48 million in damages. Those defendants were hit with “terrorism enhancement” penalties for their crimes, which never harmed anyone, and are now in federal prisons as “terrorists.”

Four of the suspects are nowhere to be found, though. And a few days ago the FBI held a press conference and told the press and public, “We need your help.” They’re offering a reward of up to $50,000.

This was the top story on the FBI web page. Take a look at this screen shot (and my stellar photoshopping skills), and check out poor, neglected Osama bin Laden in the bottom right corner. I just wrote a few paragraphs of smart-ass commentary about the FBI’s priorities, but had to delete it. I think the image just speaks for itself. The government has made hunting down “eco-terrorists” the “number one domestic terrorism threat,” while those responsible for the single greatest act of terrorism against the United States have become footnotes of history.

To put this in perspective, the Operation Backfire crimes were 10 years ago, destroyed corporate and government property, and didn’t harm a single human being. The September 11th attacks were 9 years ago, targeted civilian and government offices, and murdered thousands of people. Oh, and Al Qaeda, unlike “The Family” of ELF defendants, is alive and kicking… and put out a new video this month.

Even if you believe that economic sabotage in the name of the environment is “terrorism,” rewards like this simply aren’t effective. The reason–the ONLY reason–the FBI was able to secure the convictions of the Operation Backfire defendants was because the lead arsonist, Jacob Ferguson, agreed to wear a wire and entrap his friends. Ferguson has a history of drug abuse and plenty of personal problems… and as part of the deal he was not only paid by the FBI, but he received probation. That’s right, the #1 domestic terrorist threat… on probation.

If FBI agents are looking to catch more “eco-terrorists,” a better strategy would clearly be to put out a call for drug addict firebugs who’ll do anything to save their own skins.

It has been nearly three years since these ELF arrests and you’d think that the FBI would be easing up, moving on. So why the obsessive focus on a handful of saboteurs? If you believe the rhetoric of the FBI, it’s simple: “These individuals are terrorists,” said Michael B. Ward, deputy Assistant Director of our Counterterrorism Division. “Regardless of their political or social message, their actions were criminal and violated federal laws.”

That’s a boldface lie. The political and social message does matter.

Consider this: Obama’s election has “unleashed a wave of hate crimes” that aren’t the subject of FBI media blitzes. From the Times UK:

Cross burnings, black figures hung from nooses, and schoolchildren chanting “Assassinate Obama” are just some of the incidents that have been documented by police from California to Maine…

Mr Obama has received more threats than any other president-elect, authorities say.

Remember those meth-addict white supremacists who had high-powered rifles and made threats of assassination? Well, that wasn’t a “true threat,” according to the FBI.

And remember the other group of nutjobs who had a plot to decapitate people if Obama won? If this isn’t “political,” as the FBI says, how do we explain, in sharp contrast to the Operation Backfire PR campaign, that the news release about a plot to assassinate the president-elect didn’t even use the word “terrorism”?

Related posts:

  • People enacting a self-interested exertion of force over powerless individuals (of any pain-sensing species) uphold the heights of ignorance and malice.

    People are hypocritically praying for mercy from those with power over them; deities, conjugal partners, governments, ideologies, while refusing to extend mercy to others who are helpless to our (in)discretion.

    Will, my opinion has been formed about who blew up the towers and it is well summarized in a song lyric "Bin Laden didn't blow up the projects, it was you *ninja*, Bush knocked down the towers." ::: brought to us by Immortal Technique.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BE-GkSEicI
  • Jay
    But just by omiting animal products from your diet your not saving animals or making a difference. You may feel better, but that cow up for slaughter will still be eaten. It is time for the environmental warriors to become just that and take direct action to protect and save that which cant save itself. Eco-terrorists take up arms!
  • Kathy
    Joe--I don't believe that saving the environment/animals for later destruction is truly saving them. The primary thing I have done to benefit the environment is to become vegan. I don't want anything in return--don't want to save the animals now so I can kill them later. I just do it because I want to save the animals and environment for their own sakes, not for human benefit.
  • Joe
    Kathy, yes humans can go fishing there. What is wrong with fishing? The fact still remains that without my efforts and the agency that I work for there would be a development and sewage treatment plant instead of a trout stream and woods.

    So, what have you done to help save the environment?.....nothing, thought so.
  • Kathy
    Joe: Including humans?? Is it a place where humans fish?? I suspect it is. I stand by my comment.
  • Joe
    Kathy, I did it so ALL could still enjoy this area, it is also still there for mink,otter and other animals to catch and kill fish. If you would rather see a sewage treatment plant I can send you to one, I'm sure you will feel at hame there.
  • Kathy
    Joe: But WHY did you do it?? I bet it was so that the fish would be there for humans to catch and kill, right?? If you are only protecting the environment/animals from one group of humans so they remain available to be destroyed by another, have you really protected anything?? Not as I define protection, you haven't.
  • Laura Borst
    The Bin Laden family has connections to the Bush family. You can read about this in Craig Unger's book, "House of Bush, House of Saud". Many people think that the 9/11 attacks were planned with the collusion of the government. The neocon Project for a New American Century stated that they "needed" a "new Pearl Harbor" to get Americans to support their goals of world domination, which included dominance in space and cyberspace. Please check out www.911truth.org for information on these issues. The federal government might have created or perhaps allowed 9/11 so it could have an excuse to repress dissent.
  • Joe
    GW....I may be predictable sometimes, boring or stupid, never! One thing that I am is I am most likely the only one here who actually does something to protect the environment. When was the last time you stopped a development from ruining a native brook trout stream?.....The last time I did it......lets see.....oh yeah it was last Thursday.
  • GW
    Can we please agree to ignore Joe? He is to stupid, predicatable, boring, etc that he isn't worth responding to. Maybe if we ignore him he will just go away. *sigh*
  • ...I'd add to that that I think it's not limited to the Department of Defense. A big pot of money, and power, opened up after 9/11, and a variety of federal agencies have been clamoring for it. Using the T-word helps them get to it. Also, it helps individuals in their own career paths---"busting an eco-terrorist cell" sounds so much better on a resume than "arresting vandals."
  • I've been throwing around the idea lately that a lot of the "domestic terrorism" stuff is coming from a vacuum in the DoD. As the US pulls out of East Asia (SK and Japan) and reconcentrates some troops to the Middle East (Afghanistan and Pakistan) there is bound to be gaps. And after the Patriot Act and the streamlining of so many government agencies, yet they are all vying for federal funding, I'm sure they are looking to keep themselves busy at all costs. "Look what we did!!! Umm, can we have more money now?" Especially now that the DoD had 7 years of a bloated budget from invading two countries, they are not going to want to tighten up the belt after such a good meal.

    And apparently the feds (even the "conservatives") have no problem throwing billions at anything that moves.
  • Joe: "We have one message for the incoming Obama Administration: act to protect the environment or the ELF will.”

    Maybe that means exactly what it says, your paranoia is getting the better of you.
  • Ansel: Ha! You're right. Thanks...
  • Joe, I wonder how those that died in the 9/11 attacks would feel about you tossing around the word "terrorism" so lightly... along with supporting that property damage is a worse threat than death.
  • Larry, I truly hope you are right that "radical environmentalists ARE a threat to capitalism". :-)
  • (I think you mean Osama, not Obama, in your first comment up there, Will.)
  • Joe:

    That headline was tough talk, to be sure, and certainly implied that future property destruction and vandalism could take place, but don't miscontrue it to imply any kind of threat to anyone's life, including Obama's.
  • Larry:

    Wow. I mean, wow.

    First: O<del datetime="2008-11-25T23:07:50+00:00">b</del>sama didn't attack once. The U.S.S. Cole attack, for example, killed at least 17 U.S. troops.

    Second: Frequency of "attacks" is really apples and oranges here. ELF actions are much more frequent, yet typically involve things like breaking windows, pulling up survey stakes, etching glass, spray painting, vandalizing SUVs, and, at the very, very worst, arson. NONE of these actions have killed anyone.

    Sorry, but I think most reasonable people are much more concerned about threats to human life than they are about what you call threats to capitalism.
  • Joe
    As far as I know Osama has not threatened Obama yet, but in your last post Will there is a threat from the ELF “We have one message for the incoming Obama Administration: act to protect the environment or the ELF will.” What could they mean by that other than more terrorist activity.
  • Larry Lester
    Well, as far as Osama goes, yes, "eco-terrorists" are more of a threat.
    Osama attacked once.
    The E.L.F./A.L.F. have attacked numerous times, and numerous places.
    Most hate crimes go unreported though.
    But, I would like to think that radical environmentalists ARE a threat to capitalism and industrial civilization...
blog comments powered by Disqus