Posts Tagged laws

Eco-terrorism Part Four: Are You an Eco-terrorist?

March 2, 2009 at 7:00 PM · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , ,

Do you have an FBI file?

Do you have an FBI file?

So by now, you’re likely paranoid (like me), that you already have an FBI file just for attending events that promote veganism or environmentalism, signing petitions, leafleting, writing letters, or protesting (things that are in no way a crime but are an integral part of activism). I cannot say for sure, but I can tell you this: if you are from the state of Pennsylvania, like me, things are looking ok (so far).

The state of Pennsylvania has a website dedicated soley to terrorism awareness and protection. (If you’re not from PA, I would check to see if your state has a similar website.) In the introduction of the website, it is clarified that:

“it is important to remember that it is not illegal for an individual to belong to any group…

…even if other members of that group have committed terroristic acts…

…so long as the individual is not committing, conspiring to commit, or aiding others in committing criminal acts.

It is not what you say or think…
It is what you DO that defines one as a terrorist.”

Simply put, you are doing nothing wrong in sharing the beliefs of an organization that is labeled as “extremist” or “terrorist.” (Has anyone told the FBI that?) It’s not until you commit a crime in the name of that organization or ideal that you become a terrorist. (This is a point that is emphasized in bold on the website.) It is important to remember this, because the best thing you can do to battle the green scare is to know your rights.

The point of terrorism is to instill fear or intimidation in the hearts of the opposition. Most petitions and protests do not accomplish this.

Does this image scare you? It scares me, but not in the sense were talking about here.

Does this image scare you? It scares me, but not in the sense we're talking about here.

However, some things that are done by animal rights or environmentalist extremist groups (like ALF or ELF) do such as vandalism, break-ins, or arson, are illegal crimes. Will over at Green is the New Red seems to almost be forgetting this, claiming that because these “victims” didn’t hurt anybody, that they shouldn’t have been accused of terrorism. I beg to differ- just like the PA Aware site states, if you commit a crime in the name of a cause, that’s terrorism. But, if you’re staying within boundaries of the first amendment, such as letter writing, petition signing, website maintaining, and peaceful gatherings and protests, you are not breaking the law and therefore are not a terrorist.

Leave a Comment

Eco-terrorism Part Two: Domestic Terror

March 1, 2009 at 8:38 PM · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ever since 2005, the FBI has cited eco-terrorism as the number one domestic terrorist threat. (Never mind the fact that there are probably more important and more threatening security issues for them to be worrying about.)

The FBI has gone so far as to send undercover spies to events as innocent as vegan potlucks. This scares me, because I’m not one to risk attending protests and things that might reasonably get me in trouble with the police or FBI, but a vegan potluck is something that I’m likely to attend. In fact, whenever two activists connect, the FBI has their antenna out.

In January of 2006, the 109th Congress signed the Animal Enterpreise Terrorism Act, and a couple of weeks ago, according to Green is the New Red, four California activists were convicted under it, with charges of (as quoted from GITNR):

  • Protesting outside the home of a University of California Berkeley professor. Some activists, “wearing bandanas to hide their faces, trespassed on his front yard, chanted slogans, and accused him of being a murderer because of his use of animals in research.”
  • At another protest, activists “marched, chanted, and chalked defamatory comments on the public sidewalks in front of the residences.”
  • At one protest, a group of five or six activists allegedly “attempted to forcibly enter the private home of a University of California researcher in Santa Cruz.”
  • Fliers titled “Murderers and torturers alive & well in Santa Cruz July 2008 edition” were found at a local coffee shop. They listed the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of several researchers. The fliers said “animal abusers everywhere beware we know where you live we know where you work we will never back down until you end your abuse.” The FBI says three of the defendants are tied to the “production and distribution of the fliers.”

Now, only the third charge is actually illegal, and even the “threat” in the flyers is too vague to prove anything. Now, I don’t disagree with the act in itself- the provisions seem to be reasonable, being based around things that are indeed illegal. I guess what strikes me as weird is that they felt like they had to create it at all. We already have laws in place against arson and theft. So I guess my biggest complaint about it is that it paints the picture of activists as being “bad guys” and encourages others to think the same.

What do you think?

Leave a Comment