Oakland Police Stop Protesters, Threaten Arrest Should They Return

Apparently tipped off ahead of time about a planned protest by Direct Action of San Francisco, Oakland police stopped a planned protest at the home of a lawyer for Valent Biosciences. Activists targeted the man because Valent does business with Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Using about six marked cards, police forced the activists to retreat to nearby Montclair Village where a Honda Civic with six of the activists was stopped by Oakland police. Oakland police warned the activist that if they went into Oakland to protest at the lawyer’s home, they would be arrested.

Direct Action of San Francisco’s Andrea Lindsay complained to the Tri-Valley Herald that, “We’ve done absolutely nothing.” She added that even if activists at such protests vandalize homes, such acts of violence cannot possibly be blamed on the organizers/sponsors of such protests. She went on to defend such vandals, saying,

It’s not just angst-ridden teens. Some are people who sincerely believe in the cause and are convinced that economic sabotage is the only way to bring about change.

This is the same Andrea Lindsay who last October defended the bombing of Chiron’s headquarters.


Protesters, police get lost in chase. Glenn Chapman, Tri-Valley Herald, August 22, 2004.

Lawyers for Indicted SHAC Activists Complain about Bail Terms, Charges

On May 28, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty activists Kevin Kjonaas, Lauren Gazzola and Jacob Conroy appeared before a federal judge who granted the three bail on their own recognizance.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil did issue a two-paragraph order preventing the two from, according to the Oakland Tribune, “disseminating any personal or private information about company employees and their families, and from threatening or inducing others to threaten anyone.”

Attorney’s for the three activists, however, said the order was not clear enough and asked Brazil for further clarification as to what the three can and cannot do. Brazil said he could not do so, but that the order was clear enough. “‘Go smash up someone’s car’ — that’s inducement,” Brazil said. “Exercising your political views is not inducement . . . you know you can’t threaten people, period.”

Andrea Lindsay made a statement outside the courtroom, however, saying that,

The indictment fails to pin one criminal act on any of these defendants . . . The indictments against these animal protection activists are nothing more than a clear attack on free speech and SHAC USA will be as s rigorous in its defense as it has been in its opposition to animal cruelty.

Lindsay also claimed that SHAC’s website simply reports on acts by other animal rights activists but does not incite them.

Michael Drewniak, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office in New Jersey, said the facts would show otherwise,

Their Web site doesn’t just report — it incites harassment, intimidation and violence against individuals associated with Huntingdon. It defies logic to say they merely report things.


Lawyers for animal rights activists criticize government case. KTVU.Com, May 28, 2004.

Animal group vows to carry on. Josh Richman, Oakland Tribune, May 29, 2004.

More Andrea Lindsay on Animal Rights Extremism

Previously I mentioned statements that Andrea Lindsay made to KGO-TV about the bombing of Chiron Corp., apparently identifying herself as a SHAC spokesperson. KRON 4 also ran a story featuring additional comments by Lindsay justifying that and other animal rights extremist activities.

KRON identifies Lindsay as being part of the Animal Rights Direct Action Coalition and quotes her as saying of the Chiron bombing,

Tentatively, I would say yes [it was justified], it caused economic damage and no people were hurt and it did cause damage to Chiron, which is fantastic.

KRON also asked Lindsay what she though of activist harassment of Laurent Manrique. Manrique’s restaurant/shop, which served foie gras, was severely vandalized in an action that also damaged surrounding shops. The most disturbing aspect of the actions against Manrique, however, were activists who stationed themselves outside his home and videotaped him and his family going about their routine and then mailed the videotape to Manrique with a letter notifying the family they were being watched. As Manrique put it, “I freaked out and my wife started to panic.”

For Lindsay, however, this is all in a day’s work for the committed activist,

The things happening to the foie gras chefs I certainly support. I think that they don’t have any right to go home and feel comfortable while they’re inflicting suffering on innumerable animals.

Ah that trademarked animal rights compassion at work again.


Is radical activism effective? KRON, August 28, 2003.

Terrorists Explode Bombs at Major California Biotech Company

In the early morning hours of August 28, two bombs placed by animal rights extremists exploded at the headquarters of Chiron Corp., a biotechnology company, in Emeryville, California. A third device consisting of a five-gallon plastic jug of gasoline was discovered unexploded and was safely detonated by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department.

The bombs were detonated just days after Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty had named Chiron its target of the week. Chiron spokespersons said the company has no current contracts with HLS, but has used the testing firm in the past and will use them again in the future.

A group calling itself the Animal Liberation Brigade took credit for the bombings, issuing a communique through the extremist web site Bite Back!,

In the early hours of August 28th volunteers from the Revolutionary Cells descended on the animal killing scum Chiron. We left them with a small surprise of 2 pipe bombs filled with an ammonium nitrate slurry with redundant timers. This action came about because Chiron has continued their murderous connection with Huntingdon Life Sciences even though they have been exposed numerous times as some of the most egregious animal killers in the industry.

Chiron, you were asked to sever your ties with HLS, you were told, and yet you continued your relations with them. Now it is time for you face the consequences of your actions. If you choose to continue your relations with HLS you will no longer be subject only to the actions of the above ground animal rights movement, you will face us. This is the endgame for the animal killers and if you choose to stand with them you will be dealt with accordingly. There will be no quarter given, no more half measures taken.

You might be able to protect your buildings, but can you protect the homes of every employee?

From palestine to euskal herria, from the jungles of colombia to northern ireland, the struggle will continue until all of the oppressive institutions are destroyed!

for animal liberation through armed struggle, the Revolutionary Cells

–animal liberation brigade

SHAC spokespersons the media that it was not involved in the explosions but that this was the sort of action that SHAC supported. SHAC’s Andrea Lindsay told KGO-TV in San Francisco of the need to constantly pressure employees of firms like Chiron,

At 5:00 p.m., those people think they get to check out and go home and forget about what their company is doing to animals and we want to remind them that those animals are sitting in cages overnight. The animals don’t get to check out at 5:00 p.m. and neither do they. Until their company stops supporting this cruelty, they’re going to be a focus of this campaign 24-7.


Was Emeryville Biotech Company Targeted?. KGO-TV, August 28, 2003.

Animal rights activists suspected in Chiron blasts. Reuters, August 29, 2003.

Animal rights group takes credit for Chiron bombs. KTVU.Com, August 29, 2003.

Anti-Fur Activist Sues Firefighter

This one had me laughing out loud. In April 2000, anti-fur protester Andrea Lindsay chained herself to a Nieman Marcus billboard that was atop a 10-story building in San Francisco. Now she’s suing the firefighter who removed her from that billboard, charging he assaulted her. She’s also suing police claiming their efforts to coax her down from the billboard “inflicted emotional distress.”

Most of Lindsay’s injuries were a direct result of her method of affixing herself to the billboard — she put a bicycle lock around her neck and attached it to part of the billboard. Then she dropped the key. Firefighters retrieved the key and unlocked Lindsay, but she claims she suffered injuries to her neck and back, as well as tearing in her ear lobes (she did all this wearing earrings).

Part of the lawsuit actually contends that she was placed at risk when, “Plaintiff then noted blood coming from her head which was not only painful but particularly distressful due to the large amount of rust and bird droppings on the billboard.” Yeah, its hard to imagine a billboard having rust and bird droppings. Aren’t those the sort of things you’re supposed to consider before chaining yourself to a billboard?

As for the emotional distress she suffered, Lindsey didn’t particularly like the no-nonsense manner in which police treated her. The lawsuit complains that police at various times told her, “Get the f– down” and “I don’t care how long you a– stay up there. For every minute you are up there, I’ll add another charge.” Apparently she was hoping for a written invitation.

San Francisco City Attorney Nathan Ballard put it better than I can in response to the lawsuit,

She admits that she chained herself to a billboard 50 feet in the air and now she wants us to feel ‘concerned for her safety’ when the Fire Department comes to rescue her. We’ll have to see what a jury thinks about that.

Maybe the firefighters who had to forcibly remove her from atop a 10 story building should counter sue Lindsay for recklessly putting their lives in danger with this little stunt.


Activist sues firefighter rescuer: Alleges assault during removal from billboard. Peter Hartlaub, San Francisco Chronicle, June 13, 2001.