From The Seattle Times:

The woman convicted in an ecoterror attack at the University of Washington has been sentenced to six years in prison.

TACOMA, Wash. -The woman convicted in an ecoterror attack at the University of Washington has been sentenced to six years in prison.

KIRO-TV reports that Briana Waters asked for mercy because she has a 3-year-old daughter.

Prosecutors had recommended a 10-year sentence. Her lawyer asked for no more than a year-and-a-half.

Waters was taken into custody after Thursday’s sentencing in federal court in Tacoma. She had been convicted March 6 of arson, and her lawyer is working on an appeal.

The 32-year-old from Berkeley, Calif., was an Evergreen State College student who acted as a lookout in 2001 when others set fire to the Center for Urban Horticulture in Seattle. The Earth Liberation Front claimed responsibility because it believed, mistakenly, a researcher was genetically modifying poplar trees.

Background on Briana Waters is here.

More later…

Related posts:

1. ELF Fugitive Sentenced for Drug Charges in China

I was out in Washington for part of the Briana Waters trial, just before she was found guilty on two counts of arson for an Earth Liberation Front arson at the University of Washington. What struck me most about the experience was that not only must she deal with former friends becoming government informants, and not only must she deal with the press and courts and prisons labeling her a “terrorist,” but Waters also has a young child.

From www.supportbriana.org:

In the spirit of Mother’s Day, an anonymous donor has pledged to match donations from Briana’s supporters for up to a total of $10,000. If successful, we will have raised at least $20,000(!), which will be used specifically to offset the cost of an expert attorney who has been hired for Briana’s appeal.

We will be accepting donations until May 18, 2008 for the Mother’s Day Challenge. If you are donating for this purpose, please indicate “Mother’s Day Challenge” on the memo line of your check or in the note section of the online donation system to the right. If you have any questions, please email donate@supportbriana.org. Thank you for your support!!!

Related posts:

1. Green Scare Benefit CD Featuring Peregrine and Auryn

It’s Not Over: An Update to the “Green Scare”

April 29, 2008

By Will Potter

As the trial of Briana Waters wound down in March, as jurors deliberated her innocence or guilt, and as the press largely ignored her “eco-terrorism” case in lieu of Obama-Clinton-Anybody-But-Bush mania, it seemed, just for a moment, like one chapter of the “War on Terrorism” might near a close.

Waters, a mother and violin teacher from Oakland, Calif., stood accused of aiding a 2001 arson at the University of Washington’s Center for Urban Horticulture. She faced up to 20 years in prison. Waters and 10 others had been rounded up and labeled “eco-terrorists” as part of the government’s massive, multi-agency “Operation Backfire.” Most defendants agreed to cooperate with the government soon after their arrest in exchange for reduced sentences. A few held out for non-cooperating plea agreements. Only Waters chose to take her case to trial.

Waters, activists hoped, might be the end of the line in this “Green Scare,” this string of legal, legislative and public relations attacks labeling environmentalists “eco-terrorists.”(For more information, see sidebar below).

Perhaps the political climate would cool. After all, a grand jury had convened in Minneapolis months earlier — and it fizzled after two activists refused to cooperate. Rod Coronado, a former Earth Liberation Front (ELF) activist, had faced 20 years in prison for answering a question at a public lecture about how he committed his crimes — and jurors deadlocked. Just weeks earlier, Jeff Luers, who had been sentenced to 22 years for burning three SUVs in 2000, stepped back into court — and the judge reduced his sentence to 10 years.

On top of that, Darius Fulmer, one of the SHAC 7 who participated in a website urging Huntingdon Life Sciences to stop animal testing, had been released from prison. And the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a sweeping law that wraps up non-violent civil disobedience as terrorism, had been sitting on the shelf since its passage.

Not quite victories. But things certainly could be worse.

Then, on March 3, multi-million dollar suburban mansions near Seattle — each about 4,200 to 4,750-square-feet, going for about $2 million a pop, touted as “green” — were burned, resulting in approximately $7 million in damage on the “Street of Dreams.” Nobody injured, nobody home. But before the smoke had even settled, before the ashes had even cooled, before the Feds had even sorted through the debris, a chant of “Terrorists! Terrorists! Terrorists!” had started rising from politicians, corporations and the press.

The evidence of “eco-terrorism”: a bed sheet left at the scene, hanging on a fence. In spray-painted block letters: “Built green? Nope Black!” The rush to label the crime “eco-terrorism” without so much as a communiqué smacked of a nearly identical incident in 2004; luxury homes in Maryland burned down, everyone shouted “eco-terrorism,” and then oops it turns out to be a group of guys with personal vendettas. Because in a sinking housing market, in a slumping economy, as these top-dollar homes sat unsold, do environmentalists have a monopoly on motive?

A lack of evidence didn’t stop the FBI from not only attributing the fires to “eco-terrorists,” but determining what understanding what anonymous, underground activists were thinking. One agent told The Washington Post that an incendiary device would have carried a mandatory 30-year sentence. The lack of such a device, he said, reflected that “whoever committed this crime may have been cognizant of that.”

Three days after the arson, a jury found Waters guilty on two counts of arson. Jurors deadlocked on the remaining charges. Defense attorneys argued for a mistrial, and the judge refused.

“One thing that is certain to those close to the case is that the arson … has only damaged Briana’s chances of getting a fair verdict,” said a statement from Olympia Civil Liberties. “The corporate media have consistently pointed out how curious the timing of the arson is, with the ‘UW Ecoterror Trial’ still going on, further linking Briana with a shadowy ELF underground in the minds of the public.”

Then five days later, on March 11, the FBI announced that four people had been charged in a 1999 arson at Michigan State University that had targeted genetic engineering projects. The government held a press conference labeling them “domestic terrorists,” much like former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez labeled the Operation Backfire defendants “eco-terrorists” before the fingerprint ink had even dried. And, just like the Operation Backfire arrests, one of the defendants, Frank Ambrose, soon pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors as they build their case against Marie Mason, Aren Burthwick, Stephanie Fultz and a fifth, unnamed person.

The war on “eco-terrorism” is far from finished, the FBI promises. But the radical environmental movement hasn’t quit, either. “Every time a fire breaks out and somebody takes a spray can and writes ‘ELF’ or ‘ALF’ on there, then everybody gets all excited that ‘Oh this movement has started back up,’” said Bob Holland, a retired arson investigator, in an interview with FOX News.

“The movement,” he said, “never really left.”

Will Potter is an award-winning independent journalist who focuses on how lawmakers and corporations have labeled animal rights and environmental activists as “eco-terrorists.” He is the creator of GreenIsTheNewRed.com, where he blogs about the Green Scare and history repeating itself.

—

WHAT IS THE GREEN SCARE?

“The No. 1 domestic terrorism threat,” says John Lewis, a top FBI official, “is the eco-terrorism, animal-rights movement.”

Those movements have not flown planes into buildings. Or sent Anthrax through the mail. Or taken hostages. Yet the U.S. Department of Homeland Security lists them on its roster of national security threats, while ignoring right-wing extremists who have bombed the Oklahoma City federal building, murdered doctors, and admittedly created weapons of mass destruction.

The disproportionate, heavy-handed government crackdown on the environmental and animal rights movements, and the reckless use of the word “terrorism,” has been dubbed the Green Scare. Much like the Red Scare of the 1940s and 1950s, the relentless use of the T-word is meant to sway public opinion, instill fear, and chill dissent.

Corporations and the politicians that represent them have used these scare-mongering tactics since the early 1990s, but post-9/11 terrorism hysteria offered a new opportunity. The Green Scare has included anonymous, full-page ads in The New York Times; “terrorism enhancement” penalties for property crimes; and legislation branding the tactics of Martin Luther King, Jr. “terrorism.” Even a children’s movie, Hoot, has been labeled “soft-core eco-terrorism for kids.”

Much like the Red Scare, the true motivation this time around is not to catch Communist spies, or “eco-terrorists.” The goal is to chill dissent by making normal, everyday people — who might leaflet, protest or speak out in support of these issues or in defense of these activists — afraid that they, too, could be branded a “terrorist.”

No related posts.

Briana Waters has been found guilty of two counts of arson for the 2001 arson at the University of Washington, claimed by the Earth Liberation Front.

The jury hasn’t been able to reach a verdict on the other three counts. Among those, the most important, using a destructive device during a crime of violence. That charge carries a mandatory minimum of 30 years in prison.

From KIRO:

After the verdict was read, 32 years old Waters touched foreheads with her boyfriend with her eyes closed in a prolonged embrace. Waters’ mother sobbed quietly in the courtroom.

Sentencing has already been set for May, but still in question is whether or not Waters will be taken into custody immediately. The U.S. Attorney wants that, but, of course, the defense is arguing against it.

The verdict comes on the heels of the high-profile arsons nearby, which the media has already labeled “eco-terrorism.”

Here’s what Olympia Civil Liberties had to say:

One thing that is certain to those close to the case is that the arson Monday has only damaged Briana’s chances of getting a fair verdict. The corporate media have consistently pointed out how curious the timing of the arson is, with the “UW Ecoterror Trial” still going on, further linking Briana with a shadowy ELF underground in the minds of the public. Anyone should have been able to predict the negative impact of an action like this on Briana’s trial, and that just makes this whole event even more frustrating.

There are many reasons to view this fire and it’s motivations as suspicious, and there is not yet any evidence that it was actually based on environmental motivations. The vast majority of arsons in this country are caused for run-of-the-mill reasons, and fraud or financial reasons are some of the biggest. The media seem all too happy to jump to conclusions about the people who started those fires based on the most preliminary investigations. Also there have often actions by agent provocateurs during political trials throughout history.

From The Seattle Times:

Burgess called jurors into the courtroom Monday morning to ask if any of them had read or heard news of an event that might cause them to be unable to continue deliberations, a reference to the arsons. No one withdrew.

Defense attorneys made an unsuccessful motion for a mistrial.

Related posts:

1. B.J. Viehl Pleads Guilty to ALF Fur Farm Raid
2. Environmentalist Arrested for Attempted ELF Arson in California

UPDATE: This blog post was also published by Counterpunch, on March 07, 2008.

Multi-million dollar mansions in a Seattle suburb–each about 4,200-4,750 square feet, going for about $2 million a pop, touted as “green”– were burned Monday. About $7 million in damage on the “Street of Dreams.” Nobody injured, nobody home. But before the smoke had even settled, before the ashes had even cooled, before the Feds had even sorted through the debris, a chant of “Terrorists! Terrorists! Terrorists!” had started rising from politicians, corporations and, most disturbingly, the press.

Most reporters couldn’t even hold off on using the T-word until the second paragraph. The New York Times headline? “Ecoterrorism Suspected in House Fires in Seattle Suburb.” The Telegraph: “Arson attack on green homes by eco terrorists.” The Los Angeles Times photo caption: “An act of terrorism?”

Vested corporate and political interests are revving up the “War on Terrorism” PR-mobile, sexifying and terrorfying a property crime story, and they’re doing it brilliantly. But reporters would do well to remember, regardless of how you feel about the moral or political implications of arson as a tactic, regardless of how you feel about classifying property crimes as “terrorism,” regardless of how you feel about global warming or suburban sprawl or any environmental issue, we still don’t even know the facts. It’s truly shocking–and, after writing about these issues for years, it’s getting harder and harder for this stuff to elicit any surprise–that the press has so boldly proclaimed these suspected crimes as “terrorism” based on off-the-cuff speculation of law enforcement.

Raising Doubts

So far the only evidence of “eco-terrorism” has been a bed sheet left at the scene, hanging on a fence. In spray-painted block letters: “Built green? Nope Black!” and “McMansions + R.C.D.’s r not green.” ["R.C.D.'s" are "rural cluster developments."] The sheet also had the letters “E.L.F.” presumably the call sign of the Earth Liberation Front. The Times noted that banners have been left at other ELF arsons, too. But that doesn’t mean squat. Remember the pet shop owner who burned down his own store, animals included, and spray painted that it was done by the ALF? Or the bomb scare at an animal testing lab, where the feds shouted “Terrorism!” and got the wrong guy?

Or, better yet, have reporters forgotten a nearly identical incident in 2004, when luxury homes in Maryland burned down, everyone shouted “eco-terrorism,” and then OOPS it turns out to be a group of guys with personal vendettas or out for kicks. Among them, a security guard for the subdivision, a member of the volunteer fire department, and some pals, all car-racing aficionados. Not an “eco-terrorist” in the bunch.

It’s simply irresponsible to begin tossing around these terms, and attribute the crime, authoritatively and definitely, without concrete evidence. It’s a dangerous path for journalists to swallow the sound bites of the FBI so willingly, so gleefully.

Eli Sanders of The Stranger raised a very interesting point along these lines, from his “architect friend.”

There’s a part of me that suspects that it was actually just an insurance job. Here’s why: The ‘Street of Dreams’ was in June. And not a single house has sold yet. Each one is about $2M. And the market is only getting worse. If I were a developer… a $7M insurance payout would help a lot.

Federal Speculation
Cops, fire chiefs and the Feds don’t have their stories straight yet. The Associated Press reported, “Crews removed incendiary devices found in the homes, Snohomish County District 7 Fire Chief Rick Eastman said. Later, however, Kelvin Crenshaw, special agent in charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in Seattle, said there was no evidence such devices had been used.”

A lack of evidence hasn’t stopped FBI agent Dave Gomez from not only attributing the fires to “eco-terrorists,” but determining what the Elves were thinking. The Washington Post ran a story from Elizabeth M. Gillespie that said:

FBI agent Dave Gomez theorized that those responsible might have chosen not to use any incendiary devices to avoid long sentences if they ever stood trial. Using a destructive device during a federal offense carries a mandatory 30-year sentence, Gomez said, “so whoever committed this crime may have been cognizant of that.”

Again contradicting previous “official statements,” the fires were started with “available combustibles” (perhaps paper or wood) and not incendiary devices. Gillespie also notes that investigators had yet to enter the two damaged homes.

Meanwhile Rick Eastman, the fire chief, told The LA Times: “It was clear the fires were deliberately set.” Eastman let the blazes burn and did not send in firefighters because, the LA Times reports, “he feared the homes might be booby-trapped.”

It’s not clear what, exactly, gave him this impression, because to date not one ELF action–even the most extreme, and potentially dangerous crimes like arsons–has harmed a human being. And to my knowledge, having spoken with former ELF and ALF press officers, there’s never been a “booby-trapped” arson to harm firefighters.

What use are facts, though, with such a sexy story?

Stacking the Deck
The government is trying to stack the deck here. They’re labeling crimes like this as terrorism before they have started investigating and before they’ve even talked to a suspect, because it immediately skews the odds in their favor. If someone is arrested for this crime–whether an environmentalist or another insurance scammer–how could they ever get a fair trial?

What’s worse, as we can see from the comments of FBI Agent Gomez, the government is already setting the foundation for another story: “These eco-terrorists are cunning, they’re getting around existing laws and trying to get reduced sentences. We need more terrorism laws! We need more surveillance powers! We need more more more!”

Terrible Timing
The “eco-terrorism” buzz comes as a jury in Tacoma deliberates the case of Briana Waters. A mother, a violin teacher, Waters is accused of serving as a lookout during a 2001 arson at the University of Washington. The Earth Liberation Front targeted the horticulture center for what they thought was genetic engineering of poplar trees.

Robert Bloom, her lawyer, requested that the judge declare a mistrial, because the “eco-terrorism” buzz of the trials would surely influence the jury against his client. For instance, in 2001, environmentalists set fire to the Romania Truck Center in Eugene, OR as lawyers prepared for the trial of Jeffrey “Free” Luers. Luers was charged with arson at the same truck center, in 2000. That probably wasn’t the best idea: the judge hit back with a 22-year sentence for Luers. There has been no communiqué connecting this week’s arsons to Briana Waters, rhetorically or otherwise, but that doesn’t mean the crimes will not have an impact, as she faces 35 years in prison. The judge has rejected her attorney’s request.

Waters has a lot on the line right now, as the only remaining “Operation Backfire” defendant fighting the charges and maintaining her innocence. In Oregon, other individuals wrapped up in the same government sweep of environmental activists were hit with “terrorism enhancement” penalties for their crimes. Many turned state’s evidence, or cooperators, or snitches, whichever you prefer, and a few held out for non-cooperating plea agreements. Waters’ case is built upon the testimony of two women who agreed to name her name in exchange for a drastic reduction in their own sentences, from more than 30 years down to as low as two. The Seattle arsons aren’t going to help her case.

In light of this, in light of the fact that Waters has been held up as a hero for refusing to cooperate in any way with the government, reporters should be questioning whether environmentalists would choose to commit these crimes and jeopardize her case. I don’t doubt that there are people dumb enough to sabotage someone else’s freedom for their own purposes, but this just doesn’t add up.

Green Scaring and Green Washing

This Green Scare, this crackdown on activists by the FBI, corporations, and the politicians that represent them in the name of fighting “terrorism,” has been escalating at the same time that public awareness of environmental issues has been escalating. Everyone, it seems, is an environmentalist. I’ve seen Hummers with environmental bumper stickers. I’ve seen $200 t-shirts marketed as “organic” and “sustainable.” Everyone is seeing green, green, green, including corporations seeing green potential in this consumer trend.

The Washington Post had a wonderful article by Monica Hesse, “Greed in the Name of Green: To Worshipers of Consumption: Spending Won’t Save the Earth.” Hesse writes:

Congregation of the Church of the Holy Organic, let us buy.

Let us buy Anna Sova Luxury Organics Turkish towels, 900 grams per square meter, $58 apiece. Let us buy the eco-friendly 600-thread-count bed sheets, milled in Switzerland with U.S. cotton, $570 for queen-size.

Let us purge our closets of those sinful synthetics, purify ourselves in the flame of the soy candle at the altar of the immaculate Earth Weave rug, and let us buy, buy, buy until we are whipped into a beatific froth of free-range fulfillment.

And let us never consider the other organic option — not buying — because the new green consumer wants to consume…

When many environmentalists I spoke to first heard about these crimes, destroying luxury homes that were luxurious but also built “green,” they said they cringed. Not only will this be labeled terrorism, they thought, but any shred of information about the environment will get lost in the frenzy. People just won’t get it. Surprisingly, some have had to eat their words.

From the New York Times:

“Stick it to the man!” Mr. Olsen said when told who claimed responsibility for the fires. “I’m not supportive of those tactics but there’s been far too much development.” He added, speaking of the development, “Nobody wanted it.”

From the LA Times:

…Loren, seemed concerned about the rapid pace of development in the area, known for its stables and boutique wineries.

“I don’t feel sorry for the developer,” he said, beginning a long gripe about over-development and “cheap pressboard materials.”

People are fed up. And I’m not just talking about “eco-terrorists” taking drastic action in the name of the environment. I’m talking about everyday people who are fed up with the green washing, fed up with the spinning of environmental passions for corporate profit. And, perhaps most importantly, fed up with the reckless push to label people as “terrorists,” fed up with the domestic spying and terrorism enhancements and grand juries and arrests, fed up with the greening of the never-ending War on Terrorism.

No related posts.

Two big court dates for so-called “eco-terrorism” cases are coming up in February, both on February 11th.

• The trial of Briana Waters is set to begin in Washington state. Waters was arrested as part of the government’s “Operation Backfire” roundup of environmental activists. Others were already hit with “terrorism enhancement” penalties for property crimes, and are currently in prison as convicted “terrorists.” It will be interesting to see how much the government pushes the T-word in this case. (I’ll have much more detailed information on this in a few days. I also hope to head out there in February, if I can swing it… if anyone can help at all with travel costs there’s Paypal in the sidebar).
• Oral arguments are scheduled in the appeal of Rod Coronado and Matt Crozier’s mountain lion case, before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
  Coronado and Crozier entered the Sabino Canyon National Recreation Area in March 2004 to disrupt the government’s killing of mountain lions. He allegedly busted snare traps, pulled up sensors, and spread mountain lion urine to confuse tracking dogs. Interfering with a hunt would typically merit a ticket or a fine, but they were sentenced to eight months in prison and three years supervised probation.

  More to come in the next few weeks…

Related posts:

1. Appellate Court: Encouraging Civil Disobedience is Not Protected Speech

A Washington grand jury has indicted three alleged arsonists for the 2001 attack on the University of Washington horticulture center, tacking on more charges to individuals already charged in other “eco-terrorism” roundups.

The fire cost the university about $7 million, and was allegedly set in protest of genetic research at the facility.

The three individuals indicted are: “Briana Waters, 30, of Berkeley, Calif.; Justin Solondz, 26, of Jefferson County, Wash.; and William Rodgers, who killed himself in an Arizona jail after his arrest in December,” according to The Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Waters had previously been charged in the case, and Solondz is on the run.

The indictment also adds Josephine Overaker, 31, and Kevin Tubbs, 37, as co-conspirators.

Solondz is also alleged to have destroyed five acres of genetically engineered canola in Eastern Washington, 800 hybrid poplar trees at Oregon State University sites, and a wild horse and burro corral in California.
Tubbs and Overaker already have “eco-terror” charges in Oregon as well.

In cases like this it’s hard to know all the details, and what evidence, if any, the state has to bring these charges. Consider this, though: the indictments come just 10 days before the five-year statue of limitations runs out in the case.

That timing should give everyone pause. Remember that law enforcement is under a lot of pressure from industry to serve up some saboteurs. And these individuals were also named in other “eco-terrorism” roundups.

If the government had waited any longer to bring indictments, the case would be closed and forever listed as another failure by law enforcement to catch “eco-terrorists.”

In a case like this, with a mandatory minimum term of 35 years, we should be sure to give the defendants the benefit of the doubt, not the government.

UPDATE 5/18/06
Speaking of benefit of the doubt, someone pointed out that saying Solondz or anyone is “on the run” unfairly tilts the scales in the government’s favor. I completely agree. We don’t know that he is evading law enforcement, and saying so implies that he is guilty and has something to hide. Thanks for the email, and I’ll be sure to stay clear of language like that.

Related posts:

1. ELF Fugitive Sentenced for Drug Charges in China
2. Minneapolis Activist Indicted for Conspiracy to Violate Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act