Activists Arrested as "Terrorists" for Exercising Free Speech

by Stephanie Ernst

categories: Activism and Actions, Green Scare

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