When I was in Portland, Oregon, I sat down with the nice folks at Because We Must to film a video interview about my work, and some of the lessons learned from the corporate-led war on dissent as “terrorism.”

We filmed it in this beautiful park, and our discussion of a pretty dark topic was interrupted at one point by bald eagles cutting lines through the sky. The three of us all looked at each other after being hit with the same reminder: this is all worth fighting for.

I think this video turned out really well (and I love the Godspeed in the background — that album was on repeat many late nights writing the book). It’s really an honor to me that folks spend their time and energy producing things like this. I don’t think I say this nearly enough, but thank you all for listening to what I have to say.

Interview with Will Potter from Because We Must on Vimeo:

We are are excited to post our interview with our good friend Will Potter. Will runs the very informative blog Green is The New Red and is also the author of the recent book ‘Green Is the New Red: An Insiders Account Of A Social Movement Under Siege’. Will focuses on how the animal rights, and earth liberation movements have been targeted by the Government and labeled as ‘eco-terrorists’ and how dangerous this is for all social justice movements, present and future. After watching the interview, we would love it if you shared it with comrades, friends and family!

This recent investigation of a McDonald's egg supplier is an example of the type of activism the FBI calls terrorism.

The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force has kept files on activists who expose animal welfare abuses on factory farms and recommended prosecuting them as terrorists, according to a new document uncovered through the Freedom of Information Act.

This new information comes as the Center for Constitutional Rights has filed a lawsuit challenging the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) as unconstitutional because its vague wording has had a chilling effect on political activism. This document adds to the evidence demonstrating that the AETA goes far beyond property destruction, as its supporters claim.

The 2003 FBI file details the work of several animal rights activists who used undercover investigation to document repeated animal welfare violations. The FBI special agent who authored the report said they “illegally entered buildings owned by [redacted] Farm… and videotaped conditions of animals.”

The animal activists caused “economic loss” to businesses, the FBI says. And they also openly rescued several animals from the abusive conditions. This was not done covertly in the style of underground groups like the Animal Liberation Front — it was an act of non-violent civil disobedience and, as the FBI agent notes, the activists distributed press releases and conducted media interviews taking responsibility for their actions.

Based on these acts — trespassing in order to photograph and videotape abuses on factory farms — the agent concludes there “is a reasonable indication” that the activists “have violated the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, 18 USC Section 43 (a).”

Click here to view the FBI document.

The file was uncovered through a FOIA request by Ryan Shapiro, who is one of the activists mentioned. The file is available for download here. [Please note that this document has additional redactions in order to protect the identities of the other activists, at their request.] Shapiro is now a doctoral candidate at MIT.

“It is deeply sobering to see one’s name in an FBI file proposing terrorism charges,” he said in an email. “It is even more sobering to realize the supposedly terroristic activities in question are merely exposing the horrific cruelty of factory farms, educating the public about what goes on behind those closed doors, and openly rescuing a few animals from one of those farms as an act of civil disobedience.”

When I testified before Congress against the AETA in 2006, one of the primary concerns I raised is that the law could be used to wrap up a wide range of activity that threatens corporate profits. Supporters of the AETA have repeatedly denied this, and said the law will only be used against people who do things like burn buildings.

So how do we explain that such a sweeping prosecution was being considered in 2003, under the law’s somewhat-narrower precursor?

One possibility is that FBI agents lack training, education, and oversight. They are spying on political activists without understanding or respecting the law.

Another explanation is that this document is no mistake, nor is it an isolated case. It is a reflection of a coordinated campaign to target animal rights activists who, as the FBI agent notes, cause “economic loss” to corporations.

Learn the full story of how corporations are targeting activists as "terrorists."

At the state, federal, and international levels, corporations have orchestrated an attempt to silence political activists, and a key target has been undercover investigators. For example:

• An “Ag Gag” bill has been introduced in Florida to criminalize investigations. Its lead sponsor calls these investigations “terrorism.” Four similar attempts failed in other states this year.
• These state bills are similar to model “eco-terrorism” legislation drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a corporate front group.
• A recent EUROPOL report on international terrorism includes a section on undercover investigations by animal rights and environmental activists.
• 12 Spanish activists have been charged with terrorism for their investigations.
• Two activists in Finland faced similar charges.

The FBI makes clear that the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is not about protecting public safety; it is about protecting corporate profits. Corporations and the politicians who represent them have repeatedly lied to the American public about the scope of this legislation, and claimed that the law only targets underground groups like the Animal Liberation Front. The truth is that this terrorism law has been slowly, methodically expanded to include the tactics of national organizations like the Humane Society of the United States.

This document illustrates how the backlash against effective activism has progressed within the animal rights movement. However, if this type of legislation is not overturned, it will set a precedent for corporations to use this model against Occupy Wall Street and anyone else who threaten business as usual.

‎About 100 protesters in France occupied a bullring to non-violently stop the barbaric bullfight.

In response, bullfight supporters punched, kicked and beat them as they were locked-down and immobilized.

Which ones are the “violent extremists”?

Source: Animal Equality

The history of the animal rights and environmental movements has been poorly documented by the mainstream press. The stories of these movements have overwhelmingly been ignored, and when they’ve been reported by newspapers or television networks, it has been through the lens of corporate and government officials. The best, and sometimes only, documentation of these movements has come from activists themselves.

Zines, leaflets and newspapers are fragile by nature, though, and activist turnover (combined with FBI raids) has made them increasingly rare. Josh Harper and the crew of ConflictGypsy.com have set out to create an online archive of these publications, preserving the history of protest movements for animal rights and environmentalism.

I was thrilled to be asked to write a guest blog post about a classic publication, Ecotage. It was published in 1971, when many of the tactics now considered “eco-terrorism” were merely considered pranks or “ecotage.” In this post I discuss how corporations orchestrated a change in government policy by wielding the power of language. However:

Ecotage should serve as a reminder that there is nothing inevitable about this. The FBI labels “eco-terrorism” the “number one domestic terrorism threat,” but public support is not, and has never been, with the corporations destroying the environment; it’s with those trying to stop them.

Head over to ConflictGypsy and read the full post, then check out the rest of the archives. As a warning, though, the massive amount of cool stuff on that site will suck you in before you know it.

One month ago, environmental activist Tim DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison for non-violent disobedience. The sentence was harsher than those handed down to people who burned churches and threatened black leaders. It was a sentence intended — like so many disproportionate sentences against activists — to send a message. But what message?

Environmental activists could have responded to this case in the way that corporations and politicians (who called DeChristopher an “eco-terrorist”) had intended. They could have scaled back their organizing to only milquetoast tactics that are 100% “safe”; they could have responded with fear.

Instead, we’re seeing something quite different as attention has shifted to the creation of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would draw oil from that tar sands of Canada to East Texas (this NPR story has a good overview). Already, more than 800 people been arrested for non-violent civil disobedience in Washington, D.C. Some of the arrests that have made headlines have included a top NASA climate scientist, Jim Hansen.

What has been even more inspirational is the response of young people who have been radicalized by both the sentencing of Tim DeChristopher and the Obama administration’s deference to corporate interests. A letter from student groups and youth leaders at the Tar Sands Action said in part:

Big corporations are using their financial influence to corrupt our democracy and deepen their pockets at the expense of Americans. And it’s not just related to energy and the environment; they are threatening the very foundations of our democracy, working to disenfranchise voters, attack workers’ rights and the middle class…The Keystone XL decision is a significant test of President Obama’s commitment to our generation, but it’s not the only one.

The letter astutely taps into what is so significant about the mass civil disobedience taking place in Washington right now. It has drawn national attention to a dangerous, misguided plan that President Obama should shut down. More broadly, though, I think these 800+ arrests  represent something bigger than this particular campaign. As Tim DeChristopher recently wrote from prison: “By its very nature, civil disobedience is an act whose message is that the government and its laws are not the sole voice of moral authority. It is a statement that we the citizens recognize a higher moral code to which the law is no longer aligned, and we invite our fellow citizens to recognize the difference.”

I would go even further: the government is not the sole voice of moral authority, and it is not any voice of moral authority. I don’t think most Americans would even consider that a radical statement at this point. Do you? We’ve watched bankers get bailouts while the environmental crisis worsens and unemployment increases. I think we need to remind ourselves that this is a sentiment that environmentalists in D.C. understand just as viscerally as pissed off Texans.

For more information and to get involved, visit Tar Sands Action and  Rising Tide North America.

Grist.org is featuring a discussion I had with Robert Jensen, who is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin and author of Citizens of the Empire (among many books). I think the interview turned out really well, and is particularly relevant in the wake of Tim DeChristopher’s sentencing. I hope you’ll check it out. You can read the full interview on Grist, and here’s an excerpt:

Q. Whatever one thinks of the specific analyses or tactics of groups such as the Earth Liberation Front, the accelerating pace of ecological collapse suggests their call to consciousness about the larger living world is more important than ever. After your investigation into the Green Scare, what is your assessment of the likelihood the culture will listen?

A. As the scale of the ecological crisis we are facing becomes more apparent, and as the backlash against social movements that are challenging our self-destructive culture intensifies, it is difficult to not feel dark, to feel helpless. I certainly feel that way quite often — not just because of the content of my own work, but from the near-blackout in the mainstream press. Unfortunately, I do not see any of this changing anytime soon. As the ecological crisis accelerates, the accompanying crackdown by corporations and people in power will intensify as well. The people who have the most to lose will cling desperately to that culture as it is threatened, and this includes not just CEOs but much of the overwhelmingly privileged United States and so-called First World.

After all of that, this will probably sound quite odd, but in the face of this I would argue that there are reasons to be inspired. Through my work, and in particular through book and media tours, I have been fortunate to meet people all over the country from diverse backgrounds. What has been striking to me is that, even if people are unfamiliar with the Green Scare or the targeting of political activists, they are rarely surprised. People may not know the specifics, but they know that corporations have more power than people. They know the scope of ecological destruction is increasing. They know we have no choice but to change but that people in power will not change willingly. I’m not convinced that the question at hand is whether or not the culture will listen, because I think that so many people already feel this. I think the question is: Will we find the courage to be heard?

Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher has received a longer prison sentence for non-violent civil disobedience than people who have burned churches, threatened African-American leaders, and plotted to kill people.

DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison today for disrupting an illegal oil and gas lease auction. Meanwhile:

• Yesterday (and also in Utah), a man who set fire to two Mormon churches was sentenced to probation.
• A Massachusetts man who mailed letters threatening to burn black churches and NAACP headquarters was sentenced to 15 months. In his letters he said: “I do not like African-American or minorities in charge as supervisors of my security department at Novartis, nor I like them as President of the United States… For that I am going to burn down your offices just let you know how I feel. What right does some black person [have] to be in charge of me.”
• A Salt Lake City woman who defrauded clients of about $300,000 (comparable to the loss of profits that DeChristopher caused oil and gas corporations) was sentenced to 15 months.
• A former FBI agent was sentenced to two years in prison for planning to assassinate an FBI official.

These examples aren’t isolated instances. They can be mixed and matched with countless others. The point, as we have seen consistently, is that people who break the law in order to stop an injustice, who break the law in order to make the world even the slightest bit better, are met with disproportionate penalties compared to those who break the law for greed, hatred and revenge.

And of course, the disparity becomes even more extreme if we also consider the criminal activities of corporations– including the corporations DeChristopher protested, and the corporations which lobbied for him to receive a harsh sentence.

As Jamie Henn of 350.org tweeted recently: “Wall Street wrecked the economy & got billions in bail. Tim stood up for his beliefs and gets 2 years in jail.”

Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher was sentenced to two years in prison for using non-violent civil disobedience to disrupt a sham oil and gas auction. He had been found guilty on two felony counts for making fake bids in the auction, costing corporations hundreds of thousands of dollars, and faced up to ten years.

He increased the bids on 22,000 acres of land in Utah national parks. A federal judge later ruled the auction was illegal.

DeChristopher’s case has attracted international attention, and he has become a spokesperson for the environmental movement. This case is much bigger than DeChristopher, though (as he has often said himself). We all need to be thinking: what’s next? How do we move forward?

Even if you do not consider yourself an environmentalist, or don’t agree with DeChristopher’s tactics, this case should raise serious questions about the misplaced priorities of our government and our entire culture. DeChristopher’s two-year sentence is comparable to what members of underground groups have received for property destruction. The court has sent the message that public, aboveground activists, who use non-violent civil disobedience, will be treated on par with underground activists who use economic sabotage.

More importantly, though, the government has sent the message that the people who step forward to stop ecological destruction will be met with harsh punishments, while those who responsible for this destruction, such as the oil and gas corporations bidding for public lands, will go about business as usual.

As the judge said during sentencing: “Civil disobedience can’t be the order of the day,” or it will lead to “chaos.”

But chaos for who? For the people? For the planet? Or for corporations?

This case, and the larger crackdown on the environmental movement, makes strikingly clear that the government is more concerned about the latter. As defense attorney Ron Yengich said: “We never impose the rule of law on people who steal from poor people, destroy the banking systems or destroy the earth.”

Moving forward, we need to remember one thing above all else: this is happening because DeChristopher was effective.

DeChristopher’s actions exposed what goes on inside sham corporate auctions, it cost corporations hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it galvanized the movement.

At sentencing, U.S. District Judge Dee Benson said that DeChristopher’s leadership in the environmental movement, his “continuing trail of statements” for civil disobedience, and his speech outside the courthouse were the reasons he faced prison time.

The judge went so far as to take the unusual step of having DeChristopher taken into custody of the U.S. Marshalls until his prison sentence begins. In many other cases I have covered, including those of convicted arsonists, the prisoners were allowed to self-surrender. People are generally only taken directly into custody if they are a violent threat or a flight risk. Why was this different?

Because DeChristopher is inspirational, and he would clearly use his time before prison to organize.

“You have authority over my life, but not my principles. Those are mine,” DeChristopher said to the judge. “I’ll continue to confront the system that threatens our future.”

Others have vowed to do the same. Thousands will be in Washington, D.C. in August to protest the Keystone XL pipeline to the Tar Sands. They are planning mass non-violent civil disobedience.

Tim DeChristopher gave a moving speech after he was found guilty today. In a few months, he will be sentenced. He faces up to 10 years in prison.

“Everything that went on inside that building tried to convince me that I was alone, and that I was weak. They tried to convince me that I was like a little finger, out there on my own, that can easily be broken. And all of you out here were the reminder, for all of us, that I was… connected to a hand, with many fingers, that could unite as one fist. And that fist could not be broken by the power in there… All those authorities in there wanted me think like a finger. But our children are calling to us, to think like a fist.”

Thanks to Rising Tide North America for the link.

Tim DeChristopher has been found guilty on two felony counts for making a fake bid in an oil and gas auction. An auction that was later ruled by a federal judge to be illegal.

Meanwhile, a bus driver who gave his students an impromptu detour so they could see the mass protests outside the courthouse was fired.

And the people who were involved in this sham auction? And the corporations who were profiting from it? They still have their job, they’ll still have their freedom.

I think Bill McKibben summed this up pretty well:

Tim has shown the power of civil disobedience to shine a light — the government should be giving him a medal, not a sentence, and in time this will be recalled as a key early battle in the century’s long fight for a livable climate.

Just in case the federal government thinks that it’s intimidating people into silence with this kind of prosecution, think again. In fact, this is precisely the sort of event that reminds us just why we need a real, mass mobilization to stop the climate crisis.

Tim DeChristopher’s “crimes” were a peaceful response to a global crisis.

Twenty years from now we will marvel at such restraint.