Green Scare
-
Activists Jailed for Refusing to Testify Before Grand Jury
-
Judge Rejects Plea Deal for Animal Activist, Uses "Terror" Rhetoric
-
Green Scare Updates: SHAC 7, Knowing Your Rights, and Double Standards
Secret Prisons and the Silencing of Dissent: Video to Watch
Published June 25, 2009 @ 02:24PM PT
Check out Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! interview with animal rights activist Andrew Stepanian, who was just recently released from the secretive Communication Management Unit (CMU) prison in Marion, Illinois (where he was held along with mostly Muslim prisoners); his attorney, Paul Hetznecker; and journalist and blogger Will Potter, of Green Is the New Red, who of course has covered this issue extensively.
As always, what Will Potter has to tell us, in addition to what Stepanian himself shares, is frightening and disturbing. And among all his excellent points, Will makes the important point about how the media has completely dropped the ball when it comes to the political use (and abuse) of "terrorism" labeling.
Video here.
See also the following:
- Daniel McGowan's "Tales from Inside the U.S. Gitmo," published recently at Huffington Post
- This earlier Democracy Now program on the CMUs (for which Will Potter was also interviewed): "'Little Guantanamo'–Secretive 'CMU' Prisons Designed to Restrict Communication of Jailed Muslims and Activists with Outside World"
- The Green Scare category of posts on this blog, which includes links to a number of Will's posts
Wildlife Groups Sue for Wolves; "Terrorism" Hypocrisy Continues
Published June 02, 2009 @ 12:07PM PT
There will be an overdue "Animals in the Blogs" roundup of other interesting posts sometime tomorrow or Wednesday, but in the meantime, please check out the following press release and post. [Edit: Was no one going to tell me that when I wrote this, "tomorrow" and "Wednesday" were the same day? Everyone was content to let me go on thinking it was Monday? Sheesh.]
First, wildlife/conservation groups--including the Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and HSUS--have today filed suit in response to the removal of Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves. Read more from the press release here: "Suit Filed to Challenge Removal of Endangered Species Act Protection From Northern Rockies Wolves."
Second, all over the news and blogosphere in recent days, there has been outrage and mourning over the assassination of physician and abortion provider Dr. George Tiller. But there has also been frustration and outrage over what his murder is--or rather is not--being labeled. In "3 Reasons Why Murdering an Abortion Doctor Isn’t Being Called 'Terrorism,'" Will Potter of GreenIsTheNewRed.com lays out the facts and obvious hypocrisies. Please read Will's post. He does a great job of deconstructing what's happening here.
More on the FBI's Vegan "Terrorist"
Published April 23, 2009 @ 05:43PM PT
At the end of "On the FBI's 'Most Wanted' Vegan 'Terrorist'" yesterday, I rounded up some of the responses to the news from my fellow animal rights bloggers. At the time, Will Potter of GreenIsTheNewRed.com hadn't yet weighed in. Now he has, and given that this is his area of focus, I want to direct you to his take on the news too. Here's a part of it:
It was an overtly political move to neutralize the growing chorus of opposition to the recent DHS memo warning of right-wing extremism. When the memo came out, right wing groups sprang into action (much more so than environmental or animal groups have) and have already filed a lawsuit. Meanwhile, some environmentalists mistakenly saw it as reason to believe the Green Scare is over.
Enter Daniel Andreas San Diego. He hasn’t harmed anyone, and his crimes are nothing compared to Osama bin Laden and others on the list (and nothing compared to right wing groups who have admittedly created weapons of mass destruction). But he’s an easy way to create the false impression that this “War on Terrorism” is somehow bipartisan, that both the left and right are being targeted equally.
Chuck Norris recently showed us that’s a load of garbage. This political maneuvering my placate the right (and the DHS memo may placate some environmentalists). And then it’s back to business as usual.
Read the rest here. And see my previous post here.
Oh, and Will reports that one of his readers sent this in: "Word on the street is bin Laden really likes falafel." Funny how that hasn't made it into any news releases and bios, huh?
On the FBI's "Most Wanted" Vegan "Terrorist"
Published April 22, 2009 @ 01:37PM PT
The FBI has announced the addition of an animal rights activist to its Most Wanted Terrorists list, a vegan animal rights activist, the FBI makes a point of stressing. And grouping an activist who's never killed or tried to kill anyone with the likes of Osama bin Laden, along with the FBI's (and subsequently, news reports on the FBI's announcement) focus on his veganism, is outrageous. I'll start off giving some of my thoughts on this (thoughts similar to what others are expressing too) and then feature some other responses.
Let's be clear about something: the vast majority of vegans are among the strongest promoters of peace and nonviolence this world has. And even the vast majority of the tiny minority who engage in illegal property destruction are known for their painstaking efforts at making sure no one is physically hurt during one of their actions--and that's why no one has ever been killed in an action taken by environmental or animal rights activists. Whether that justifies the actions is something heavily debated within the animal rights community, given that many (I'd say the majority) of us fear that someone may accidentally be hurt someday and that the actions fuel opposition to animal rights and distract from the message.
However, regardless of whether animal rights advocates support or oppose these types of property destruction in the name of animal activism, I think we all can agree that putting these activists--who act in opposition to abuse, torture, and killing and who have a policy of avoiding physical harm to both humans and nonhuman animals, in the same category as hateful people and groups who seek to harm and kill (and furthermore, simultaneously leaving hate groups and individuals who do kill and seek to kill off the list!) is outrageous and ludicrous.
Moreover, the FBI's focus on this "most wanted" activist's veganism, as if that's a part of what makes him a so-called terrorist, is shameful and enraging. Given that the FBI has a history of going after the vegan animal rights community (everyone remembers their attempts to infiltrate vegan potlucks, right?), this move perhaps shouldn't be surprising, but it's still inexcusable.
Please continue reading after the jump for a roundup of thoughtful, excellent responses--and more details on this news--from other animal rights/vegan bloggers, including Gary Francione, Erik Marcus, and others (click on the links introducing the excerpts for these bloggers' full responses):
Secret Prisons for Muslims and Animal Rights, Environmental Activists
Published April 14, 2009 @ 10:38AM PT
Will Potter just posted "Secretive U.S. Prison Units Used to House Muslim, Animal Rights and Environmental Activists" at GreenIsTheNewRed.com. Intro:
The government is using secretive prison facilities on U.S. soil, called Communication Management Units, to house inmates accused of being tied to “terrorism” groups. They overwhelmingly include Muslim inmates, along with at least two animal rights and environmental activists.
Little information is available about the secretive facilities and the prisoners housed there. However, through interviews with attorneys, family members, and a current prisoner, it is clear that these units have been created not for violent and dangerous “terrorists,” but for political cases that the government would like to keep out of the public spotlight and out of the press.
Go read it. It's astonishing.
Updates on the AETA Arrests and Green Scare Tactics
Published March 11, 2009 @ 07:55AM PT
Since I last directed you to the goings-on at GreenIsTheNewRed.com a few weeks ago regarding recent activist arrests (Activists Arrested as "Terrorists" for Exercising Free Speech), Will Potter has supplied numerous additional updates. Following, after the jump, are several that you should check out (indented paragraphs are extracts from the posts). This is highly important stuff.
Activists Arrested as "Terrorists" for Exercising Free Speech
Published February 22, 2009 @ 03:00PM PT
It's finally happened. The ridiculously broad Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) has been invoked to arrest activists as "terrorists" for crimes that appear to amount to barely more than trespassing and property damage. It's astonishing--and frightening. And although the government is specifically targeting animal rights and environmental activists, activists for all social justice causes need to being paying attention to this. This is a blatant effort to silence dissent (dissent that could, you know, cause profit loss to major industries with ties to other major industries and government both).
Will Potter of Green Is the New Red writes,
On February 19th and 20th, the Joint Terrorism Task Force of the FBI arrested four animal rights activists as “terrorists.” Details of the arrests and the charges are still coming, but based on my conversations with attorneys and local news articles, this is the most sweeping expansion of the War on Terrorism and the “Green Scare” to date. . . .
These activists–Nathan Pope, Adriana Stumpo, Joseph Buddenberg, and Maryam Khajavi– were arrested for First Amendment activity.
My calls to the FBI for a copy of the indictment have not been returned, and attorneys I’ve contacted have not viewed it either. However, the FBI’s press release notes that the activists are facing four charges, and lists four incidents. They include:
- 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.”
Chalking, leafleting and protesting are not terrorism, they are not property crimes, and they are not violent crimes. They are speech. Unlike real terrorists, these defendants are not accused of arming themselves with bombs or machine guns. Their only weapons are words.
The only allegation of possible criminal activity is the FBI’s mention of a forced entry. The details of that incident are unclear, though. For instance, at many lawful home protests in the past, activists have been attacked by the people they are protesting who, understandably, are not happy about a demonstration right outside their front door. In short, the very worst element of the entire set of allegations is nowhere near any reasonable person’s threshold for what constitutes “terrorism.”
When I testified before Congress about the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, I was attacked by supporters of the bill, including Democrats, who said the law would only be used to go after groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. I argued that the vague and overly broad wording in the law could be used by an ambitious prosecutor or federal agents to target First Amendment activity. Eerily, the hypothetical case I described is identical to the recent arrests.
Please go read the whole post at GreenIsTheNewRed.com for more details.
See also Tracy's post at Digging Through the Dirt. She notes in her remarks, "While trespassing, assault and threats may be illegal, they hardly constitute terrorism. If a gang member trespasses on property, punches someone and issues a threat, he'll likely get arrested, but he won't be labeled a terrorist."
Top image: Portland Independent Media Center
Second image: Civil Liberties Defense Center
