Just another nerd.
Back in January, British animal rights activist Kerry Whitburn served one month of a two-month sentence for breaking into a pet store. Apparently the first time around left Whitburn itching for more, and the activist was sentenced in May to four months in jail for actions taken against the Newchurch Guinea Pig Farm.
Source:
Earth Liberation Prisoners Bulletin, May 7, 2004.
On March 24, Tamara Matheson was sentenced to 60 days in jail after pleading guilty to disrupting a holiday party at Forest Pharmaceuticals in 2003. Forest Pharmaceuticals has been a target of activists because it contracts some of its animal testing to Huntingdon Life Sciences.
Ohio officials, however, released her only 15 days into her sentence in order to alleviate overcrowding at the facility she was being housed in.
I was extremely angry today after reading Patrick Leahy’s comments about eco- and animal rights terrorism. The Senate Judiciary committee held a hearing on the topic today and Sen. Leahy decided to turn his remarks into a partisan matter about Abu Ghraib rather than focus on the very real issue of eco and animal rights terrorism,
Today’s hearing was originally noticed under the title, “The Threat of Animal and Eco-Terrorism.” I can understand why that title was abandoned. When most Americans think of threats that currently face this country, we do not mean “animal and eco-terrorism.” Indeed, most Americans would not consider the harassment of animal testing facilities to be “terrorism,” any more than they would consider anti-globalization protestors or anti-war protestors or women’s health activists to be terrorists.
So if you set off a bomb at a research laboratory — as animal rights extremists have done at a number of facilities in the United States — that’s not really terrorism at all. Apparently Leahy would prefer to just sit around waiting for someone to die in one of these bombings before taking stronger action.
In fact, Leahy doesn’t think the Senate should even be holding hearings about the topic,
But I think most Americans would be surprised that we are devoting a hearing today to this issue. I think that most Americans would rather that we address more urgent concerns that really do pose a threat to this country and to the world.
Leahy seems to think that because he and other Senators passed the Animal Enterprise Protection Act a few years ago, that the job is finished. But the reality is that that act is almost never enforced, as Leahy derisively notes, but for a very simple reason — its penalties aren’t nearly strong enough for federal prosecutors to bother with.
And Leahy is dead wrong to believe that animal and eco terrorism do not pose a serious threat. In Great Britain, animal rights terrorism has reached a point where medical research is simply exiting that country for the United States and Asia. Animal rights activists were able to block construction of a Cambridge research facility because the cost of keeping the facility secure against animal rights extremists was simply too high.
How did the UK arrive at that position? Because of the actions of a lot of politicians like Sen. Leahy who dismissed the effects and extent of animal rights terrorism, which lead to such acts of extremism to spiral out of control.
Leahy assumes that since animal rights terrorism is nowhere near as violent or deadly as Al Qaeda that it is not truly terrorism. That makes about as much sense as saying that since the torture and human rights violations carried out by American military personnel at Abu Ghraib are nowhere near as violent or deadly as those carried out by Saddam Hussein, that what happened there is not really torture and that it would be pointless to hold hearings about it.
Eco and animal rights terrorists have different goals, but use similar methods as more traditional terrorists — they use fear and threats of random violence and destruction in an effort to convince researchers to abandon their work in favor of safer venues of inquiry. This sort of terrorism simply cannot be tolerated in a free society.
Source:
Statement of Patrick Leahy on “Animal Rights: Activism vs. Criminality”. May 18, 2004.
May 18, 2004
Contact: Margarita Tapia, 202/224-5225
Statement of Chairman Orrin G. Hatch
Before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Hearing on
“Animal Rights: Activism v. Criminality”
Good morning. I want to thank everyone for joining us today to examine the issue of when legitimate animal rights activism crosses over into illegal criminal acts. We have some very distinguished panelists with us today and we look forward to hearing from them.
As everyone in this room is well aware, the right to demonstrate, to protest, and to make your voice heard is as deeply imbedded in the American political fabric as is any other right that we collectively hold dear. We cannot and we will not violate that right.
However, where political activism breaches peaceful protest and dives headfirst into criminal conduct, we can, should, and will use every mechanism available to prosecute the individuals responsible. One area where it is abundantly clear that fringe activists have resorted to criminal conduct is where academic and commercial enterprises are conducting legitimate animal testing.
In recent years, some radical activist groups have gone well beyond what any reasonably minded person would consider protest. Their tactics include: vandalizing and pipe bombing research facilities; credit card fraud; threatening employees of businesses and research companies; terrorizing children of employees; and posting death threats against employees as well as employeesÂ’ names, addresses, and phone numbers on the internet.
These extremists target researchers, farmers, circuses and other lawful, productive, and beneficial organizations. There have been numerous bombings and vandalisms against farmers in my state of Utah. A mink breeders’ co-op in Murray, UT, has been attacked and fire-bombed. The farmers’ names, addresses, and phone numbers have been posted on the internet, together with complete instructions on how to build bombs, and cover up any trace of the crime. For instance, the instructions on how to make milk jug firebombs came with this caution: “Arson is a big time felony, so wear gloves and old clothes you can throw away throughout the entire process, and be very careful not to leave a single shred of evidence.” It is shocking, to say the least.
Additionally, as most of you know, I have long been devoted to health related issues. These actors target what could be life saving research. When research laboratories and university researchers are targeted and attacked, the ones who lose most are those who are living with a disease or who are watching a loved one struggling with a devastating illness. Those who target and attack peaceful organizations and individuals do not legitimately advance their cause, and promise no breakthroughs to society. Instead, they only promote a grave threat to the well being and advancement of mankind.
What is particularly disturbing about these egregious tactics is that they are not isolated instances carried out by a few persons acting alone; instead, they are part of a broad and carefully coordinated effort to threaten, terrorize and ultimately shut down lawful enterprises by systematically targeting their employees, and other persons or entities that do business with those lawful enterprises.
Our task here today is to help identify and show the line that distinguishes lawful expression and protest from criminal behavior.
Again, I appreciate everyone taking the time to be here today. We will hear from two panels of witnesses. On our first will be Mr. McGregor Scott, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California, and the Deputy Assistant Director for Domestic Terrorism from the FBI, Mr. John Lewis. We look forward to hearing from both of you.
On our second panel includes Mr. William Green, the General Counsel from Chiron Corporation, Mr. Jonathan Blum from Yum! Industries – the parent company of Kentucky Fried Chicken, and Dr. Stuart Zola from Emory University. We look forward to hearing from the three of you as well.
# # #