Humane Society Defends Donation to Eco-Terrorism Witch Hunt

After the recent bombings in California–which the press, industry groups and FBI recklessly rushed to attribute to animal rights activists—I reported that the Humane Society of the United States donated money to the “eco-terrorist” witch hunt. That didn’t sit well with many people, even those who oppose direct action. Now, HSUS’ Wayne Pacelle has come out to not only defend the donation, but endorse California’s version of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

Much of Pacelle’s blog post is standard rhetoric condemning illegal activity. But what truly surprised me is that Pacelle acknowledges that nobody even knows if animal rights activists were involved in the attack.

So, if the perpetrators of the Santa Cruz attacks turn out to be agents hostile to animal protection, it would not surprise me, because this is a tactic that malicious forces have used in the past to discredit many good causes. I’d feel especially good if our reward money helped to catch an infiltrator and exposed this person to the harsh glare of public opinion.

Huh? So let’s get this straight: HSUS gave money to this Green Scare witch hunt and condemned “extremists,” without even knowing if animal activists were involved. But if they were involved, this donation would help oust infiltrators?

Fat chance. HSUS’ actions will never help reveal an infiltrator, in part because the FBI are the ones doing the infiltrating (remember Eric McDavid’s case?). And besides, the damage has been done. The FBI, corporations and even animal groups have blamed this on animal activists, and those parties won’t be coming out and saying, “Oops, we were wrong.” Why? Because, at best, they don’t care that they’re wrong, and, at worst, they know it and are recklessly smearing animal activists anyway.

Pacelle writes as if the actions of HSUS exist in a political vacuum, and completely ignores the larger political climate. It’s bad enough that some groups are remaining silent about all of this “eco-terrorism” rhetoric, but for the largest animal protection organization in the country to come out and support it… that’s another story entirely. It lets law enforcement know that their actions can proceed unchecked and unquestioned by the few groups in the country who are actually paying attention.

The government and corporations have responded to this endorsement accordingly:

  • “Eco-terrorism” legislation. Surprise surprise, corporations used the bombings to rush through “eco-terrorism” legislation called the California Animal Enterprise Protection Act (here’s a critical look at the CA AEPA). And, disturbingly, here’s Pacelle applauding the legislation (in its original, even-more-absurd form, no less).
  • Police raids. FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces have raided a college activist house and an anarchist bookstore. The bookstore, the Longhaul Infoshop, is also a community space, with public computers (14 were seized by the police).
  • Frivolous arrest. One activist, Nathan Pope, who lives in the raided house, was arrested for felony perjury. He is being held in lieu of $100,000 bail. What was Nathan Pope’s crime? Investigators said Knoerl [Pope] checked the ‘no’ box in response to the questions ‘have you applied for a driver’s license or identification card in California or another state/country using a different name within the past 10 years?’” The police acknowledge the arrest was “”unconnected with what we were searching for,” and had nothing to do with the crimes. They still have no suspects in the bombing cases.

It’s clear that HSUS needs to distance itself as much as possible from the firebombing because of the pending factory farming ballot initiative in November. It’s already going to be a dirty fight: the egg industry admits Proposition 2 would be a “major blow”. But guess what: the loyalty oaths and condemnations haven’t protected HSUS from “extremist” and “terrorist” smear campaigns.

The Center for Consumer Freedom is waging a media campaign to wrap up mainstream, national organizations with underground saboteurs. The CCF’s David Martosko writes: “If law-enforcement agencies are serious about attacking the growing problem of animal rights violence, they should start looking for clues inside some of the better known animal-protection charities.” It looks like they should also start investigating the Wu-Tang Clan.

[On a bittersweet note, as this Green Scare continues in California, the California Senate is finally trying to gut Red Scare legislation: under this bill, membership in the communist party would no longer be a fireable offense. Geez. It's 2008. Kudos to lawmakers for their speedy, principled stand against the Red Scare.]

Wayne Pacelle’s blog doesn’t allow public comments. But he posted a few messagesthat he received, and whaddayouknow, every single one is supportive of HSUS’ donation to the witch hunt.

So I’ll open it up to you all for a more honest discussion: Is HSUS justified in donating money to the “eco-terrorist” witch hunt and supporting legislation against so-called “animal rights extremists,” in hopes of passing this ballot initiative? If not, what should HSUS have done?

  • Debbie
    After carefully reading everyones response to this AETA, it's amazing how misinformed so many of you are. The best one was the one about PETA and the HSUS killing homeless animals. Not one of you know the real details yet you are so quick to judge. Maybe instead of reading what you want to hear, doing a little investigating as to what these organizations really do. I have been a member of HSUS,PETA,Farm Sanctuary and others for many years. WE have visited their facilities and have been on many of events with them.
    They have done a hell of alot more then any of you so called concerned compassionate citizens!! Animals have become nothing more then a commodity to many organizations, including the meat and dairy industry which is killing us with their chemicals to make a better profit. Also animal testing is 90% inaccurate and England is already using other methods which are available to us. The animals that are put to death by any of these organizations are either very sick or very old. PETA and the HSUS try to keep the young healthy ones alive to be adopted, which is why they try to promote no-kill shelters. No-kill meaning to let those animals who can live healthy normal lives. The ones who will only suffer will not be able to live in a no-kill facility!!! because it is inhumane!!! Those of you who take everything out of context, have another agenda and it is not in the best enterest of the animals and Wayne Pacelle, PETA and the other reputable organizations DO NOT condone terrorist acts!! And the article which mentioned that letter writting is inaffective, well guess what, it is December 4th 2008 and California has passed Proposition 2 on November 4th.........compassion will prevail, as it has been proven!!! Thank god for those who do the research and know the truth!!!!!
  • Forager
    I should have included the link to what the North American Animal LIberation Front Press Office said but didn't think about it, I don't know if this has already been posted on or anything but anyways, the link for those interested is
    http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/News...
    also in looking again for the article I found another comment on HSUS' actions to support the State's oppression of these groups from clear back in '05 but still is related to today:
    http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/News...
  • Forager
    "If not, what should HSUS have done?"
    HSUS should support any activities which are effective in the liberation of animals if they truly believe in what they say they do. Of course, they are for animal rights as opposed to animal liberation so perhaps that justifies it all in their mind.
    I like the post that the North American Animal Liberation Press Office put out on his statement. These mainstream groups show their true hypocrisies on a day to day basis with their actions, they claim to care about the animals and yet those at the top of HSUS take home more money then your average middle class worker does. And it's the same with PETA who supports gassing of feral animals, and killing off of homeless animals while at the same time criticizing no-kill shelters, and calling for the freedom for all animals, as a next move, perhaps they would like to start hauling in wild animals and domesticating them to show where their motivations truly lie.
    Personally, I feel that all of those mainstream organizations are useless. Whether an individual agrees with the tactics of the ALF and ELF or not, they are effective, and if you believe in animal liberation, that is what should matter to you. If those who want to get involved with organizations like HSUS, Green Peace, Sierra Club, and the others, and give them money and sign their petitions and write the letters they ask you to (which in their minds might be effective but c'mon, lets be realistic here, what Corporate representative or politician-if we can distinguish a difference between the two-is going to shudder at a bunch of letters coming in that he's not going to read anyways) want to do that, fine, let them, let them imagine that by getting involved in these "feel good" organizations (as Paul Watson accurately put it) that they are making a difference, but don't criticize others for choosing to take up tactics which are more effective.
    I realize that it also comes from a pacifist vs violent perspective in which we get caught up in petty moralist arguments blinded by ethics dictated to us instead of seeing the larger amount of violence which is being caused by ignoring these atrocities. I think once we start calling them violent actions though is when we get caught up in the stupid mindset that property is more important than life. The actions of all of these so-called extreme groups, are actions which as Will has mentioned, haven't hurt anyone, and yet they are violent? Yeah, and this is coming from people who probably don't view driving a car as a violent action despite the significant amount of lives that car culture takes every year.
  • Attempted to comment on this site; no indication that my comments
    will be posted, even though Mr. Pacelle‘s page says he invites
    comments both pro and con.

    Here‘s what I TRIED to post:

    The so-called Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is an attempt to muzzle
    ALL animal rights activism; the HSUS endorsement of these police
    state tactics is an endorsement of the repression of legitimate
    protest in matters of animal rights and, by extension, in general. To
    the best of my knowledge NO animal rights activists in the US have
    injured or killed any human beings; attaching the world
    “terrorist”
    to even acts of civil disobedience such as freeing animals destined
    for unspeakable torture - not simply as a strategy but to spare a few
    animals pain - is to diminish the evil of the word and is an insult
    to those who have suffered at the hands of real terrorists.

    Your action is reminiscent of those during the McCarthy era who
    turned against their fellows to save their own skins or to gain
    advantage. Ultimately, such cowardice will not protect HSUS from
    those corporations who profit from animal cruelty and who advance
    their agenda by belittling and attacking all efforts to protect animals.

    I have appreciated many of the HSUS activities, in particular your
    opposition to breed specific laws. As a new graduate I am only now in
    a position to donate to worthy causes. Yours was high on my list, but
    I must now reconsider.
  • Frivolous arrest. One activist, Nathan Pope, who lives in the raided house, was arrested for felony perjury. He is being held in lieu of $100,000 bail.

    Last week, a woman called in to the local radio show here in Kansas City; her husband had beaten her the night before - slammed her into a doorway while she was holding their two-year-old son - and she wanted advice on whether she should leave him. At the time of the call, he was in jail, waiting for someone to bail his sorry ass out. I forget what the total bail amount was, but the lucky party need only hand over $60 to the bail bondsman. ($600, maybe?)

    So, to recap...terrorism against women, eh. Terrorism against paperwork? Will. Not. Be. Tolerated.

    Oh, and f*ck the HSUS. If anyone's thinking about donating money towards animal rescue efforts during natural disasters, look for small, local groups; HSUS & Co. will sweep in for a photo op and then offer to kill all the strays for you.
  • Keep it posi
    While I understand that the California and U.S. governments have used these actions to commit some pretty serious oppression, I don't really like the continuing implication that these actions were carried out by government agents. That takes power away from the animal liberation movement. Whether or not it's true, I want that "Scientist" to KNOW that somebody tried to burn his house down. Government plots to harass activists don't coerce people into abandoning careers as murderers and torturers of innocent, helpless beings. Imagine if you were just getting out of college and deciding on a career and it's been long known that one possible concern of going into animal testing is that somebody may come in to your office one night and destroy 20 years worth of research, that's something to think about. Now what if choosing that career also meant you'd have to sleep with one eye open because your work endangered you and your family? I'm not even sure this whole hostage situation thing is 100% bad, the silver lining on that is, med-students (or bio-students or whatever lines of "Science" produces these monsters), as part of the public, are also under the impression that they could be taken hostage if they engage in these sort of atrocities.
    On a side note, the Wu-Tang Clan has in fact been investigated by the FBI and ATF for gun running on tour in the mid to late 90s (for more info check their wikipedia).
  • They should just stay out of it. I mean, if they truly want to maintain the image that their brand of animal advocacy isn't involved in "terrorism" then they should just stay away from the entire issue.

    Moreover, the HSUS is smarter than that. They shouldn't let the CCF frame the debate, define the terms, and dictate their actions. They should attack the CCF, not a few radical activists.
  • Wendy
    I've been annoyed with HSUS' rather lax policies for a while (it's "okay" to buy animals [dogs,cats] as long as they're from a "reuptable breeder" [I'm not convinced there is such a thing]; "humane meat"). Like the above poster, I know - well, knew - someone who works for the HSUS whom I have great respect for. Obviously, it's not Wayne Pacelle.

    The blindness of this man is galling. Has he not read that famous Niemoller quote? Whether he agrees with direct action or not, he has no business contributing donations to this so-called terrorism scare. Is the movement not already divided enough for him? What, is working FOR the FBI and the CIA?

    There are animals suffering greatly every day, particularly in the wake of these last two hurricanes; the money set aside for these "criminals" could have been used for the actual benefit of animals, perhaps like taking them from one of the parishes in LA where many were euthanized as a result of the hurricane and moving them to other shelters across the country. Oh, right, but that's a kind of direct action, too.
    My mistake.
  • I am one of those people who has significant doubts about the usefulness of "direct action".

    If I donate money to an organization to do something for an animal, I don't expect that money to be used to put out a bounty on political activists. Wayne Pacelle's endorsement of this earlier action of his has finished off my image of him as human being I can trust to do the right thing. As far as I am concerned I am done with the HSUS.

    I know a number of people who work for the HSUS. I respect them all. I like many of them. I respect the work that they personally do. That hasn't changed.


  • Pacelle writes as if the actions of HSUS exist in a political vacuum, and completely ignores the larger political climate.



    On a related note, the HSUS puts out a voter's guide. It is completely single issue ( animals ) in its endorsements. Be warned you should use it as point of departure only. Check out your candidates voting history and complete platform.
blog comments powered by Disqus