Insane Terrorism Drill: Animal Rights Activists With Hostages

Animal rights terrorism drill at UC Berkeley sponsored by Homeland Security.

Animal rights terrorism drill at UC Berkeley.

A terrorism scenario in the nation’s largest homeland security drill involved animal rights activists holding hostages, at gun point.

Seriously.

From The Daily Californian, “Urban Shield Tests Police Ability”:

The atmosphere is surprisingly relaxed, despite the fact that terrorists protesting animal research have taken a hostage in a UC Berkeley building and are threatening to shoot anyone who approaches the scene.

Suddenly, four gunshots are heard inside the building and the officers quickly ascend a four-story fire escape to confront the terrorists.

All this is standard procedure for the San Leandro Police Department tactical team, which was participating in Urban Shield, the nation’s largest homeland security drill.

It’s an interesting choice for a terrorism drill, considering animal rights activists have never taken hostages, and never harmed anyone in this country (not quite the “real world scenario” described on the project’s website, Urban Shield). You might think the government would choose right wing groups for such drills, because they’ve actually murdered people and admittedly created weapons of mass destruction (but they’re not even on DHS lists of national security threats).

Instead, organizers chose to set up this elaborate, illogical scenario of animal rights activists holding hostages. It ain’t an accident, folks. This was a choice, a carefully crafted and vetted decision by this multi-government-agency program.

Terrorism scenarios like this send a clear message that animal rights activists are to be feared. It instills that fear in law enforcement. And it instills that fear in the general public. It helps legitimize the sweeping government attacks on the animal rights and environmental movements, known as the Green Scare, by mainstreaming unreasonable fears.

Most people who see this news clip, or saw this scenario taking place, don’t know enough to differentiate between fact and scare-mongering government fiction. And that’s the point. This way, if folks hear about more grand juries or FBI raids or infiltrating vegan potlucks, they may brush aside their logical concerns and not worry about the civil liberties of those evil, hostage-taking activists.

Why do all that? Well, there’s a lot at stake. The University of California system has been the target of heated animal rights campaigning, including the FBI recklessly attributing the recent bombings in Santa Cruz to animal activists. And the UC system was the chief lobbyist behind the recent “eco-terrorism” legislation. Also, cops in Berkeley recently raided a radical bookstore and community space called the Long Haul Infoshop.

In this political climate, here’s what I think would be a better “training” drill: Militarized police forces, pressured by vested political and corporate interests, attempting to silence political activists, and activists preparing to stand by each other, call attorneys, organize press conferences, know their rights and, most importantly, keep fighting.

Related posts:

  • BadGirl43
    This is a trick question, right? ,
  • GW
    Joe, you moron. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. Ever hear of slavery? I bet if Joe were alive during the civil war he would have considered John Brown a terrorist.
  • #23:
    "If the crime was being pinned on a group that you weren’t ideologically sympathetic towards I doubt you’d be this scrupulous..."

    Actually, I would. Because scare-mongering and political witch hunts don't solve crimes. The reason I was vocal about this particular scenario, though, is that, as you might have noticed, the entire focus of this website is on how enviro/animal advocates are being labeled terrorists. That's why I made this post: because it's directly related to all other content.

    Beyond that, if you truly believe it was animal rights activists responsible for the bombing, and you truly believe they may take hostages, how does making this an "animal rights terrorist" drill help prepare for that? What skills are inherent in an "animal rights terrorist" drill that differ from any other hostage situation?
  • a
    More to the point, you ask why the government doesn't "choose right wing groups for such drills" but you know exactly why: it's because "The University of California system has been the target of heated animal rights campaigning," not heated campaigning by right wing groups. There's reason to believe that that campaigning has turned violent. Do you want UC Berkeley to wait until the Santa Cruz bombings have been DEFINITIVELY pinned on AR activists before preparing for further violence? I doubt UC Berkeley is going to see animal rights activists taking hostages but I think its even less likely they'll see right wingers doing so. Also the article says that this was one of 25 exercises done that weekend, it's not unlikely one of the others had right wing extremists as the villains. I mean there are some things that make sense in this post, but...
  • a
    Will Potter you're answering the argument you want to hear rather than the one I'm actually making. Somebody upthread said this:

    Will, why does this article assume that the bombing of a yeast researcher’s stuff was part of the “heated animal rights campaigning” ?

    The pamphlet shows that the local AR activists thought they were animal researchers and thus could have targeted them, it's irrelevant that one of them actually wasn't.

    It would be more responsible of the FBI to keep quiet until they had a suspect, but let's be real, it was probably AR activists, even if other crimes have been misattributed to them in the past. All the meager evidence there is points to them. Again, if the crime was being pinned on a group that you weren't ideologically sympathetic towards I doubt you'd be this scrupulous.
  • And if they really wanted to make this drill accurate, they could have at least put some of the hostage takers in PETA's chicken costumes and lettuce bikinis. It would have made a better photo, too.
  • Jeremy Beckham
    I want to know specifically how the drill changes at all because it's an "animal rights" takeover anyway. Why do they need to inject that into this to begin with? Do they now negotiate by enticing them with Boca burgers and seitan? Is there a different playbook for vegan hostage-takers? Why don't they just say police trained for a (generic) terrorist hostage situation?

    Clearly the UC system thought they could achieve a political objective by describing it as such.

    What if their hostage scenario read: "Police train for situation where black men take white women hostage"?
  • "A":

    A pamphlet? Really? Is finding a pamphlet in a coffee shop, with addresses of researchers, now enough to attribute a bombing to them before there's any actual proof? A pamphlet like that is also used for home protests, which may be controversial, but are also legal. I've seen similar pamphlets here in DC, and around the country. Give me a break.

    It IS reckless because we've seen in many instances now that the FBI rushes to label something as "terrorism" and then it's disproven. For instance, the home arsons out in MD, the bomb scare at the UC system, the arson of a pet store in arson, and more.

    This word is simply too powerful to toss around like that. Once it enters the media in a case, it takes on a life of its own.
  • a
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/...

    The idea that it's "reckless" to attribute the Santa Cruz bombings to animal rights activists is really wishful thinking. Even if the researchers were only working on yeast, one of them had his name and address listed on an AR pamphlet, so obviously the local AR activists thought they were animal researchers. Ecoterrorists have been known to make mistakes. If an abortion clinic that had been targeted by pro-life activists was bombed you wouldn't think it was reckless to blame it on pro-life terrorists.
  • Joe
    GW, I live in the real world...its you that must live in BIZZARO world if you feel that terrorist tactics are just against LEGAL practices.
  • GW
    Joe must live in BIZZARO world. Worried about a car being fire-bombed, but not the billions of living feeling animals terrorized, tortured and killed in labs, factory farms, etc. Typical devil human.
  • Anonymous
    maybe we should.....
  • during the RNC here in the Twin Cities, police tried to raid the I-Witness video space without a warrant under the ludicrous pretense that they'd received a report saying anarchists had taken somebody hostage in their office.

    i'd really like to hear from you your take on the RNC 8 (at least, 8 for now) case (see rnc8.org) - it really looks from here like they're trying to expand their attacks and use of terrorist rhetoric from the animal/earth libertation movement towards anarchist organizers in general. actually i may get in touch with you about this some time soon! (or feel free to contact me first if i don't.)

    -haloka from twin cities indymedia
  • Cubestar:
    That was an error on my part. I just edited that line to reflect what I have been saying on this site and in media interviews since it happened, which is that political interests (including HSUS) have been rushing to label that as an animal rights action before any evidence is in.

    Sorry for not making that more clear. That's a very, very important clarification to make, and I'm glad you pointed it out.
  • cubestar
    "The University of California system has been the target of heated animal rights campaigning, including the recent bombings in Santa Cruz. "

    Will, why does this article assume that the bombing of a yeast researcher's stuff was part of the "heated animal rights campaigning" ?
  • Kathy
    Joe: How about all the abortion clinic bombings?? Don't they warrant special training and targeted criminalization? What's the difference? Oh, wait--I see. No big corporation is making money by selling abortions, like they do by exploiting animals..... Surely, you can't fail to recognize what's going on?
  • Stephen
    Joe
    See comment no.4 above.
  • Joe
    Stephen, I have never heard of the Boy Scouts or the PTA committing violent acts of terrorism like the Santa Cruz bombings a few weeks ago. Some animal rights groups have proven themselves to being very violent, so it is not a stretch of the imagination that a hostage situation could occur.
  • Stephen
    Joe, if you really can't see the problem with this scenario, especially as it's spelled out for you, then you are indicative of what's wrong with this country. Suppose the hostage takers were characterized as the local Boy Scout troop or the local PTA, that's just as likely. It is a deliberate attempt at demonization. The logical designation would have been simply a generic "terrorist cell", but then that wouldn't have planted in the public perception "animal lover = evil" would it?
  • Let's pretend a Christian anti-abortion gun lover holds a bunch of hostages at Planned Parenthood. Oh wait, that's the new vice-president. Never mind.
  • Alex
    @joe

    Why should they train for a hostage situation with AR activists as if it were any different than any other hostage situation? Why is that necessary? Aren't police already trained for this? Why say that the training is specifically for AR activists, instead of for many situations?

    The point is that this is just another attack through the media on a movement that has made it a point to not physically harm people.
  • m
    speaking of the uc, dont forget there is a treesit and community-wide momentum against the expansion of uc santa cruz (which would involve destruction of endangered species habitat to build new biotech and animal-torture facilities) which the state would love to crush!
    stopucsc.org
  • Joe
    Will, just because it hasn't happen yet does not mean that police can't train for it. This was just a training drill I don't see what the problem is with a pretend AR group in a pretend hostage situation.
  • Brian: I'm very familiar with the history of ALF actions in this country. Could you show me an instance of animal rights activists taking hostages? Or using guns? Or even harming a human being? I'd be eager to hear about it, because, even according to the FBI and industry groups who label activists as "terrorists," those things have never happened.
  • Brian
    Maybe you should look at the actions of the ALF and then decide whether this is not a real world scenario.

    http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/comm...
  • Couldn't agree more!
  • "In this political climate, here’s what I think would be a better 'training' drill: Militarized police forces, pressured by vested political and corporate interests, attempting to silence political activists, and activists preparing to stand by each other, call attorneys, organize press conferences, know their rights and, most importantly, keep fighting."

    That's what the RNC was for. :)
blog comments powered by Disqus