PeTA Building Vandalized and other stuff from Green is the New Red

[Guest guest]

Posted: 01 May 2008 09:00 AM CDThttp://feeds. feedburner. com/~r/GreenIsTh eNewRed/~ 3/281461322/The danger of all this “terrorism” rhetoric is how politicallymalleable it is: industry groups can mold it into“eco-terrorism,” KFC can hammer it into “corporateterrorism” to smear Peta, and on and on and on. The word can bemelted and reformed into a weapon against the latest enemy of thehour.The flipside of that is that people in power can choose to NOT usethe word, choose to not smear someone as a terrorist. And,unfortunately, it’s not too surprising what type of activityisn’t labeled “terrorism.”So when someone spraypainted racist graffiti on Peta’s office, itwasn’t “terrorism,” it was “vandalism.”“We have 11 different victims, vandalisms occurred sometimebetween 11:30 p.m.

Monday and 6:00 a.m. today,” said NorfolkPolice spokesman Chris Amos…Amos says investigators dont believe the vandalism is work of“gangs.”[Don’t you love how “gangs” is in parentheses? Curious how“eco-terrorism” rarely appears that way.]So let’s get this all straight. Groups like Center for ConsumerFreedom, which protested a book signing by Peta’s Ingrid Newkirkwith black masks, religiously call vandalism “terrorism.” Yetwhen racists vandalize CCFs political opponents, the groupdistributes emails poking fun at it: “Irony: Vandal tags PETAheadquarters with spray-paint graffiti.”Clearly, they have their priorities straight.Meanwhile:In Austin, a prominent activist who had been repeatedly harassed bythe FBI is found dead, and mainstream media hasn’t had much tosay.In Idaho, fire gutted an unoccupied home. Whaddayouknow, much likethe Seattle arson:The 3,000-square- foot home

was going to be entered in the NorthIdaho Building Contractors Association Parade of Homes in August,said Todd Stam, the owner of Aspen Homes. Stam said he thought theblaze might be an act of ecoterrorism.Buried in the article was the fact that the $720,000 home wasunsold. And insured.In Kansas, police say a “vandal” used a propane torch to cutthrough power poles and police consider “eco-terrorism.”A suspicious device was found outside a research lab in Nevada, andimmediately animal rights activists are suspected.In contrast, when a man sent 17 letters to lawmaker, activists, andjournalists, with threatening statements and a substance intended tolook like anthrax, he was a “hoaxer,” not a terrorist. (A hoaxerinspired by right-wingers like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin).When the SHAC 7 post personal information about animal researchers,its animal enterprise terrorism. But when Michelle Malkin

posts thenames and addresses of students who protest military recruitment,it’s all in good fun.The message we’ve seen, time and again: it’s not “terrorism”if right-wingers do it.//////////// ///////// ///////// ///////// ////Its Not Over: An Update to the "Green Scare"Posted: 30 Apr 2008 09:21 AM CDThttp://feeds. feedburner. com/~r/GreenIsTh eNewRed/~ 3/280819671/It’s Not Over: An Update to the “Green Scare”April 29, 2008By Will PotterAs the trial of Briana Waters wound down in March, as jurorsdeliberated her innocence or guilt, and as the press largely ignoredher “eco-terrorism” case in lieu ofObama-Clinton- Anybody-But- Bush mania, it seemed, just for a moment,like one chapter of the “War on Terrorism” might near a close.Waters, a mother and

violin teacher from Oakland, Calif., stoodaccused of aiding a 2001 arson at the University of Washington’sCenter for Urban Horticulture. She faced up to 20 years in prison.Waters and 10 others had been rounded up and labeled“eco-terrorists” as part of the government’s massive,multi-agency “Operation Backfire.” Most defendants agreed tocooperate with the government soon after their arrest in exchangefor reduced sentences. A few held out for non-cooperating pleaagreements. Only Waters chose to take her case to trial.Waters, activists hoped, might be the end of the line in this“Green Scare,” this string of legal, legislative and publicrelations attacks labeling environmentalists“eco-terrorists.”(For more information, see sidebar below).Perhaps the political climate would cool. After all, a grand juryhad convened in Minneapolis months earlier — and it fizzled aftertwo activists refused to cooperate. Rod

Coronado, a former EarthLiberation Front (ELF) activist, had faced 20 years in prison foranswering a question at a public lecture about how he committed hiscrimes — and jurors deadlocked. Just weeks earlier, Jeff Luers,who had been sentenced to 22 years for burning three SUVs in 2000,stepped back into court — and the judge reduced his sentence to 10years.On top of that, Darius Fulmer, one of the SHAC 7 who participated ina website urging Huntingdon Life Sciences to stop animal testing,had been released from prison. And the Animal Enterprise TerrorismAct, a sweeping law that wraps up non-violent civil disobedience asterrorism, had been sitting on the shelf since its passage.Not quite victories. But things certainly could be worse.Then, on March 3, multi-million dollar suburban mansions nearSeattle — each about 4,200 to 4,750-square- feet, going for about$2 million a pop, touted as “green” — were burned,

resultingin approximately $7 million in damage on the “Street of Dreams.”Nobody injured, nobody home. But before the smoke had even settled,before the ashes had even cooled, before the Feds had even sortedthrough the debris, a chant of “Terrorists! Terrorists!Terrorists!” had started rising from politicians, corporations andthe press.The evidence of “eco-terrorism”: a bed sheet left at the scene,hanging on a fence. In spray-painted block letters: “Built green?Nope Black!” The rush to label the crime “eco-terrorism”without so much as a communiqué smacked of a nearly identicalincident in 2004; luxury homes in Maryland burned down, everyoneshouted “eco-terrorism,” and then oops it turns out to be agroup of guys with personal vendettas. Because in a sinking housingmarket, in a slumping economy, as these top-dollar homes sat unsold,do environmentalists have a monopoly on motive?A lack of evidence didn’t

stop the FBI from not only attributingthe fires to “eco-terrorists,” but determining whatunderstanding what anonymous, underground activists were thinking.One agent told The Washington Post that an incendiary device wouldhave carried a mandatory 30-year sentence. The lack of such adevice, he said, reflected that “whoever committed this crime mayhave been cognizant of that.”Three days after the arson, a jury found Waters guilty on two countsof arson. Jurors deadlocked on the remaining charges. Defenseattorneys argued for a mistrial, and the judge refused.“One thing that is certain to those close to the case is that thearson has only damaged Briana’s chances of getting a fairverdict,” said a statement from Olympia Civil Liberties. “Thecorporate media have consistently pointed out how curious the timingof the arson is, with the ‘UW Ecoterror Trial’ still going on,further linking Briana with a shadowy ELF

underground in the mindsof the public.”Then five days later, on March 11, the FBI announced that fourpeople had been charged in a 1999 arson at Michigan State Universitythat had targeted genetic engineering projects. The government helda press conference labeling them “domestic terrorists,” muchlike former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez labeled theOperation Backfire defendants “eco-terrorists” before thefingerprint ink had even dried. And, just like the OperationBackfire arrests, one of the defendants, Frank Ambrose, soon pleadedguilty and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors as they build theircase against Marie Mason, Aren Burthwick, Stephanie Fultz and afifth, unnamed person.The war on “eco-terrorism” is far from finished, the FBIpromises. But the radical environmental movement hasn’t quit,either. Every time a fire breaks out and somebody takes a spray canand writes ELF or ALF on there, then

everybody gets all excited thatOh this movement has started back up, said Bob Holland, a retiredarson investigator, in an interview with FOX News.“The movement,” he said, “never really left.”Will Potter is an award-winning independent journalist who focuseson how lawmakers and corporations have labeled animal rights andenvironmental activists as eco-terrorists. He is the creator ofGreenIsTheNewRed. com, where he blogs about the Green Scare andhistory repeating itself.WHAT IS THE GREEN SCARE?The No. 1 domestic terrorism threat,” says John Lewis, a top FBIofficial, “is the eco-terrorism, animal-rights movement.Those movements have not flown planes into buildings. Or sentAnthrax through the mail. Or taken hostages. Yet the U.S. Departmentof Homeland Security lists them on its roster of national securitythreats, while ignoring right-wing extremists who have bombed theOklahoma City federal

building, murdered doctors, and admittedlycreated weapons of mass destruction.The disproportionate, heavy-handed government crackdown on theenvironmental and animal rights movements, and the reckless use ofthe word “terrorism,” has been dubbed the Green Scare. Much likethe Red Scare of the 1940s and 1950s, the relentless use of theT-word is meant to sway public opinion, instill fear, and chilldissent.Corporations and the politicians that represent them have used thesescare-mongering tactics since the early 1990s, but post-9/11terrorism hysteria offered a new opportunity. The Green Scare hasincluded anonymous, full-page ads in The New York Times;“terrorism enhancement” penalties for property crimes; andlegislation branding the tactics of Martin Luther King, Jr.“terrorism.” Even a children’s movie, Hoot, has been labeled“soft-core eco-terrorism for kids.”Much like the Red Scare, the true motivation

this time around is notto catch Communist spies, or “eco-terrorists.” The goal is tochill dissent by making normal, everyday people — who mightleaflet, protest or speak out in support of these issues or indefense of these activists — afraid that they, too, could bebranded a “terrorist.” http://pets.Fortheanimals7/join http://www.myspace.com/fortheanimals7