Chris DeRose on Animal Rights Terrorism

The Animal Liberation NSW site has an interesting interview with Last Chance for Animals president Chris DeRose. DeRose has long been a supporter and advocate of Animal Liberation Front-style terrorism, and in his interview reveals that he also thinks it is just great if the animal rights movement’s cause is advanced through violent physical attacks on individuals,

Claudette: A perceived downside to direct action is “Does the movement want to engage in a battle of opposition with governments who have unlimited ability to suppress us?” When you say “engage against the opposition” do you mean physically? Like bodily harm or property damage?

Chris: You know I always try to say that certain activities like bombings or arson — I always stay away from those things only because they are uncontrollable. There are things that I am against personally but I’ve seen them done and they have worked. For example the Managing Director of HLS in England was beaten and that put the fear of whatever into those people. It did start to shake up what was going on over there. I think the man that did it got 3 to 5 years but something like that, I think, had an effect. Now am I endorsing that? Not publicly.

If it happens and it works, then that’s great.

Ah, that famous animal rights brand of compassion on display once again. Oddly enough, later in his interview DeRose laments,

Other countries are following suit. We have created here in the States, two generations of monsters. We have done it because of what we teach them in schools. We teach them how to take living things and vivisect. We teach them to become desensitized rather than being compassionate.

Yeah, because they would never get the idea from the animal rights movement that it’s okay to firebomb buildings and violently attack people, now would they?

Much of the interview is filled with DeRose talking about how he plans and participates in illegal activities. For example, DeRose says,

If everybody follows doing their specific job that they wanted to do that will determine what makes a great direct action. I think it is also important when you look at individuals to take into consideration what that individual can do — what they are best suited to. I seldom ever just let anybody do exactly what they want to do, especially if they are not really appropriate for that specific job. I try to, if that’s what they want to do, but if it doesn’t work then I have to move them to another place. If that person is really in it for the animals they won’t mind. I mean we do group discussions and brainstorming sessions. The person in charge is aware of what each person can do and takes in everything of what they are saying. That’s what makes a good operation.

Say, if we are going to do a break-in at a chickery and we start talking to each other and somebody else has an opinion — “I think if we went down Old Man So and So’s farm on the back road it would be faster…” then, you know, the person who is putting this altogether is listening and taking it all in. At the end there will be a specific clear plan of what needs to be done.

Last Chance for Animals is a tax-exempt nonprofit. Doesn’t sound like its engaged in legitimate charitable activities.


Derose On Direct Action. Animal Liberation NSW, 2002.

Leave a Reply