Justin Solondz was arrested by the FBI on Wednesday after being extradited from China, where he was imprisoned on drug charges. Solondz was wanted by the FBI for his involvement in arsons claimed by the Earth Liberation Front, particularly the arson at the University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture.

Solondz is alleged to have helped created the incendiary devices used to destroy the lab. Recently, his co-defendant in the case, Briana Waters, changed her plea to guilty and agreed to cooperate with the government. If this case goes to trial, Waters will likely be forced to testify against her former friend.

The FBI was quick to issue a press release trumpeting the arrest, and attributing it to the “dogged persistence and long term patience of the FBI.” However, the real story isn’t nearly so flattering.

• The entire “Operation Backfire” investigation of the Earth Liberation Front was made possible by chance, when the FBI pressured Jacob Ferguson in another case, and the heroin addict confessed to a string of arsons. Ferguson, the informant in the largest domestic terrorism investigation by the FBI, was recently sentenced to 5 years in prison for heroin charges and for endangering his daughter.
• Solondz was arrested in China on drug charges. If anyone could claim this arrest as a “victory,” it is Chinese police, not the FBI.
• The primary strategy of the FBI against all of the ELF defendants was to instill fear. The defendants, who did not harm a human being but were accused of serious property destruction, were threatened with multiple life sentences. Many received the “terrorism enhancement.”

I point all of this out because it helps put into context the FBI’s relentless clamoring for recognition and validation in this “terrorism” case. Agents and prosecutors are looking to make career advancements by cracking down on “eco-terrorists,” and it should make everyone pause, regardless of how you feel about these individuals and tactics.

To raise this question another way: When the FBI proudly says it is tracking environmentalists “across eastern Europe, Russia, Mongolia, and China,” what other threats are not being so doggedly pursued?

Click here to learn more about the broader crackdown on the environmental movement.

The government’s roundup of environmental activists in “Operation Backfire” was only possible because the lead arsonist, Jacob Ferguson, had agreed to wear a wire, travel the country, and prod his friends into talking about the crimes with the Earth Liberation Front.

The government has repeatedly called Ferguson a “hero.” U.S. Attorney Kirk Engdall has said he was “essential” to the largest investigation of the radical environmental movement in U.S. history.

In exchange for doing the government’s work for them, Ferguson, who was involved in about 18 arsons, was sentenced to no jail time and five years probation. In other words, the most prolific arsonist in the history of so-called “eco-terrorism” got a free pass.

But Ferguson was arrested on April 6, 2011, on drug charges and now faces prison time for violating these conditions. Today will be his first probation violation hearing at the Eugene federal courthouse.

I think this is worth highlighting for a few reasons. Ferguson’s drug history is not new information. In fact, the government used this against him in order to pressure him to become an informant. The FBI was well-aware of his personal history, but chose to ignore this because it was the only lead they had in arresting members of the ELF.

This is  yet another example of how far the FBI has been willing to go, and the shady deals that agents are willing to make, in order to secure a victory in the “War on Terrorism.”

Tea Party poster.

By contrast, the “number one domestic terrorism threat,” according to the FBI, is the animal rights and environmental movements.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of three recent right-wing cases which have not been labeled terrorism, and how they compare to activist cases that have.

• Militia member incites brick attacks on lawmakers’ offices. Mike Vanderboegh, former militia member from Alabama, urged readers of his blog to throw bricks through Democratic offices in response to health care legislation. “So, if you wish to send a message that Pelosi and her party [that they] cannot fail to hear, break their windows,” Vanderboegh wrote. “Break them NOW…” The call to action worked: in the week that followed at least 10 lawmakers had offices vandalized or received death threats.

  Six animal rights activists were convicted of “animal enterprise terrorism” for doing much less. They were part of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, and ran a website that posted personal information about executives tied to the controversial lab Huntingdon Life Sciences. They posted both news reports of both legal and illegal actions, and supported all of it. They also published essays about why they support non-violent direct action and sabotage. They were sentenced to between 1 and 6 years in prison. And the former militia member? He hasn’t even been arrested.

• Plotting to attack Muslims and police, and use a weapon of mass destruction. The Christian militia group called Hutaree is shown in one of their promo videos here. According to The New York Times, the defendants were “part of a group of apocalyptic Christian militants who were plotting to kill law enforcement officers in hopes of inciting an antigovernment uprising, the latest in a recent surge in right-wing militia activity.”

  The New York Times doesn’t call this racist, political violence “terrorism.” Yet a group of environmentalists who sabotaged property as part of the Earth Liberation Front, without harming or intending to harm a single person, were smeared as terrorists immediately upon arrest. The Times used the word in the headline, throughout the story, and in all subsequent coverage.

• Urging Tea Partiers to “reload.” Sarah Palin told a rally of 8,000 tea-partiers: “It’s not a time to retreat. It’s a time to reload.”

  Animal rights activists have been charged with terrorism for much less fiery speech. The AETA 4, for example, are not accused of property destruction or threats of violent. They are being charged under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act for protesting and chalking slogans on the streets using children’s sidewalk chalk.

  To be clear, I am not arguing that Palin’s comments should be labeled terrorism. But what do you think would happen if an animal rights activists or environmentalist made the same comment, but about animal researchers?

The word terrorism is inherently malleable. There is not one true meaning of the word, no universal criteria for its application. However, these dramatic disparities extend far, far beyond any natural difficulties in using the term fairly.

People are being singled out for selective prosecution because of their politics and their threat to corporate profits. Once convicted, they are then being singled out again; Daniel McGowan, one of the Earth Liberation Front defendants, is in a secretive experimental prison called a Communications Management Unit.

Meanwhile, groups that pose a much more serious threat to human life, and have a demonstrated history of violence, go untouched. If the word terrorism is rhetorically and legally applied to non-violent animal and environmental activists, it must also be applied to much more dangerous groups.

That being said, it is not enough for us to respond by saying “They’re terrorists too!” or “We’re not terrorists, they are!”

Clamoring to label others as terrorists misses the point, which is that the word, the most dangerous and powerful term in the media and in our legal system, is nothing more than a fluid brand to attack the enemy of the hour.

Jake Ferguson was the lead arsonist in the “Operation Backfire” Earth Liberation Front actions in the Northwest. He was involved in more than a dozen arsons, more crimes than any other defendant. But he is walking the streets, free, because he became a government informant. He wore a wire and entrapped his friends into make statements about the actions.

By the government’s repeated admission, this is the only reason that the FBI and Department of Justice were able to successfully prosecute the group of activists the Feds called “The Family.” Without Ferguson, none of this would have been possible. “It was essential,” said assistant U.S. Attorney Kirk Engdall.

The FBI has overwhelmingly been incompetent in going after the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front. They’ve had few successful prosecutions, which would never have been possible without snitches. It’s part of the government’s seven step process for convicting activists as terrorists.

Ferguson was recently featured in a CNN “exclusive” about the case. Even by mainstream media standards, it was a pathetic excuse for journalism. CNN repeatedly played up the “terrorist” rhetoric as much as possible, and had no questions about Ferguson’s character. (For instance, Ferguson wore a hat during the interview to cover up the tattoo of a pentagram on his forehead. And according to all of the other defendants and attorneys I have interviewed, he had a serious drug problem that made the FBI’s offer to turn snitch more palatable.)

Ferguson received 5 years probation for his crimes. His co-defendants received 3-13 years in prison, with the “terrorism enhancement.” One co-defendant, Daniel McGowan, is now in a secretive prison facility called a Communication Management Unit because of this “terrorist” status.

The reporter also did not press Kirk Engdall, the U.S. Attorney. There is one question regarding Jacob Ferguson that the government needs to held accountable for, and it is this: If the ELF is the “number one domestic terrorism threat,” if it is “violent” and “dangerous,” and if Ferguson was the lead arsonist of the most destructive ELF cell in U.S. history… how is he walking free? If these activists are truly national security threats, Ferguson, of all people, should be behind bars.

To use the government’s rhetoric, that’s kind of like arresting Osama bin Laden, and then agreeing to let him walk if he wears a wire and entraps some of the other Al Qaeda operatives. It’s a sham. The government let Ferguson walk, regardless of his crimes, because he helped them declare a victory in the War on Terrorism.

Poster by Just Seeds Collective, justseeds.org

The cops in The Wire are methodical. They can’t go straight after Avon Barksdale (the kingpin). They must pick off henchmen, build priors (to up the stakes), threaten heavier sentences in order to turn snitches, use snitches to tighten the screws on others, and keep going onward and upward to the top.

This made me think about the application of a similar methodology to the cases against alleged members of the Earth Liberation Front, Animal Liberation Front, and others labeled “eco-terrorists” for property crimes. [For this, I'm looking just at the property crimes cases, not pure First Amendment cases like the SHAC 7.] Based on my reporting of the “Green Scare” cases, the government’s seven-step process for turning non-violent activists into imprisoned terrorists goes something like this:

1. Use the T-word early. As soon as there’s a crime that might be attributable to environmentalists, the government steps in and labels it terrorism. A case study of this is the recent arsons in Seattle. There was no claim of responsibility by the ELF, but the FBI rushed to label it “eco-terrorism.” Likewise, in California there were incendiary devices left at the home of animal researchers. Again, there was no claim of responsibility, but the government, the university, and even other animal groups rushed to label it “animal rights terrorism.” In short, this step is much like that Chicagoan political mantra: Label them early and label them often.
2. Luck out. There has to be some kind of lucky break for cops to get things moving in the case. In one case, a business owner in Michigan found boxes of maps and M-80s while dumpster-diving and called the cops. In another case, a career-oriented 20-something named “Anna” infilitrated lawful protest groups. These leads aren’t enough to build a case, but they’re a start.
3. Make an informant or “snitch.” This third step is absolutely critical to the entire process. No major investigation of ELF or ALF activity has been possible without it. The government must pick a weak link. In Michigan, it was Frank Ambrose, the environmentalist who carelessly threw out boxes of personal items. In the Operation Backfire cases, it was Jacob Ferguson, a drug addict. The government searches for a weakness and begins to tighten the screws until they turn informant.
4. Breed more informants. The FBI then uses this information to harass and intimidate other activists. The government makes the activists feel like they have no option, no hope. Agents say that unless they cooperate, they’ll spend their lives in prison, and in prison they’ll be thrown in with the worst of the worst, the murderers, the terrorists. The government makes the activists feel like their only option is to turn on their friends.

   The catch here is that each successive informant must offer new information and new names. As a result, the government’s net grows and snares people that had little or no involvement in any crime. Some activists may be hauled before grand juries, where this “snitch farming” continues. Others may be hauled into court. (A perfect example of this is Briana Waters. Her friend Lacey Phillabaum turned informant and because Lacey was one of the last to do so, she had to name someone new—and Briana was implicated).

5. Push a plea. The government doesn’t want to take anything to trial. It costs money. It’s could be a media circus. It reduces the chances of scoring a victory in the War on Terrorism. Instead, the government offers reduced sentences if the defendants take a plea. Prosecutors tell them it’s their only option, that all their friends and co-defendants are against them. Prosecutors tell them there is no hope, and that this is the only way out.
6. Play the terrorism card at sentencing. That word, terrorism, is used extensively in the press throughout this process. For the most, though, it isn’t allowed into the courtroom. Once the defendants accept a plea agreement, though, prosecutors push for “terrorism enhancement” penalties. If the defendant has already accepted a plea agreement, it’s significantly harder to fight back against this label. The terrorism label has been used since day one, and now it’s official.
7. Start the PR machine back up. The government labels the conviction and the “terrorism enhancement” a victory in the so-called War on Terrorism. Federal agents use it to prove their worth and request additional resources and support. This, in turn, leads to more surveillance, more harassment, more arrests, more snitches, and more fear. [Repeat with step one.]

There’s nothing inevitable about this process, though. The government’s methodology is formulaic, but activists can break that mold. At every step of this process, there is room for resistance (for instance, Operation Backfire defendants Daniel McGowan, Jonathan Paul, Joyanna Zacher and Nathan Block pushed for non-cooperating plea agreements somewhere near step five).

But the best defense, as the cliché goes, is a good offense. The best response is stopping this process before it begins–refusing to allow the government to initiate step one.

That means resisting this scare-mongering each and every time it appears in the press. Refusing to label non-violent property destruction as “terrorism.” And building strong communities that can support defendants each and every step of the way.

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”?

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…

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.”

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.

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.