Check out this Q/A at Wired with Frankie Trull of the National Association for Biomedical Research:
I’ve read that the A.E.T.A. poses a threat to civil liberties. On one website I read that “Anyone engaging in non-violent civil disobedience causing at least $10,000 profit loss, will be considered a terrorist.”
They refuse to actually read the law. All First Amendment activities are specifically excluded from the law.
The beauty of the law, from legal standpoint, is that it was drafted and redrafted to take into consideration the sort of broad landscape of political concern about this. It was supported by major champions of First Amendment protected activities, like the chairman of Subcommittee on Crime in the House, Bobby Scott, and a number of more conservative members on the other side of the aisle. It was signed off by the ACLU. Only those who didn’t want to see the bill passed said it would infringe on First Amendment freedoms.”
A few quick points, here:
- If the law had such broad support, why was it rushed through the House with only six members of Congress in the room, as part of an obscure procedure called suspension of the rules?
- Non-violent civil disobedience isn’t protected by the First Amendment (despite her claims in this Q/A). But does that mean it should be wrapped up in “terrorism” legislation?
- Furthermore, spraypainting and breaking windows is certainly not First Amendment activity, and it is certainly illegal, but can we use the same word to describe petty vandalism that we use to describe flying planes into buildings?
Beyond all of that, though, this Q/A really misses the entire point of AETA, and the entire Green Scare, much like the other AETA misinformation campaigns. This isn’t about outlawing leafletting or protesting, and to get into a debate about that truly misses the big picture: this legislation is not about banning First Amendment activity, it is about chilling First Amendment activity, and making everyday folks afraid of using their rights.
Look at the image, above, on the flier that NABR distributed at a recent conference. Groups like NABR repeatedly go out of their way to market this fear of animal rights and environmental activists as “terrorists,” to make everyone look over their shoulders for the next “terrorist” threat. They’re thriving on this fear.