Comments on: Activism Labeled “Blackmail,” UK Animal Activists Sentenced to 4-11 Years in Prison

By: Kathy

Kathy — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:48:29 +0000

I think people need to be more active–more protesting, more effort against animal abusers. The worst thing is to cave in to what the government is doing. Of course, people have to be careful because we don't need more people in jail, but we can't simply give up our rights. We need to fight for them now, more than ever.

I am really optimistic that things will begin to change now that we have a new President in office….

By: whatever

whatever — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:12:51 +0000

Tom, sorry to ruin your prison rape fantasies but doing time in the UK is different from doing time in the US. There are vegan support groups for prisoners, vegan meals, etc. While being locked up in the UK sucks, it’s not like being in jail in the US where Nazi like you get off on raping, terrorizing, etc.

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 01:48:52 +0000

This is great news! I’m exhilerated that a bunch of loon left terrorists are sitting in prison dropping bars of soap for the other inmates. This is so awesome! Jail time for the eco-terrorists…

By: easyVegan.info » Blog Archive » easyVegan Link Sanctuary, 2009-01-28

easyVegan.info » Blog Archive » easyVegan Link Sanctuary, 2009-01-28 — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:19:51 +0000

[...] Green is the New Red: Activism Labeled “Blackmail,” UK Animal Activists Sentenced to 4-11 Years … [...]

By: bill

bill — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:44:46 +0000

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/26/078235

“On 22 January 2009, Kent Police seized an Indymedia server hosted by Manchester-based colocation facility UK Grid and run by the alternative news platform Indymedia UK. The server was taken in relation to comments on an article regarding the convictions in the recent Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) trial. Seven activists were sentenced to a total of 50 years in prison.”

By: Stephen

Stephen — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:45:04 +0000

I said what I said it was clear. While i abhor violence and do not support it and wish it was not necessary. In all cases of activism, ( civil rights, anti-war, etc.) their have been acts of violence, while I deplore such acts, they are activism. One mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist. History will judge us.

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 03:26:40 +0000

Will, I did read the whole post and I realize that these members of shac were sentenced for crimes similar to the shac members here in the US. My response to Stephen was to argue his belief that all tactics used by AR groups are activism, including acts of violence.

By: Will Potter

Will Potter — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:31:57 +0000

Joe, did you read this article? The entire post is about how SHAC is not accused of doing any of those things.

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:18:30 +0000

Stephen, the central point is that shac does not like HLS which is a LEGAL enterprise. So this small group of people (SHAC) uses death threats,bombs,arson and violence to further its agenda, isn’t that terrorism?

By: Stephen

Stephen — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 05:46:53 +0000

Joe, you use the typical strategy of a man fighting a losing argument. You ignore the central point, which is that selective application of the law is used to advance a specific agenda. You try to define the argument in terms that favour your views, the difference between a terrorist and an activist is more a case of which side someone is on than the methods employed. And when that fails you change tack yet again. You fiddle around the edges like this because the central argument is unassailable.