- What began under George Bush continues under Barack Obama
- targeting dedicated activists with "one of today's most serious
domestic terrorism threats," according former FBI Deputy Assistant
Director of Counterterrorism John Lewis before a Senate panel in May 2005.
Called "eco-terrorism," it grew out of the 2001 USA Patriot Act
that created the federal crime of "domestic terrorism" and applied
it to US citizens as well as aliens.
-
- In his February 2002 testimony before the House Resources
Committee, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, the FBI's Domestic
Terrorism Section Chief, Counterterrorism Division, James Jarboe defined
eco-terrorism as:
-
- "the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal
nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented,
subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience
beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature."
-
- As a result, innocent people are targeted, accused, convicted
and sentenced to hard time for constitutionally protected non-violent environmental
activism or supporting animal rights. The so-called AETA 4 are four recent
ones and face prosecution under U.S.A. v. Buddenberg for conspiracy to
commit animal enterprise terrorism.
-
- On February 19 and 20, the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task
Force arrested Joseph Buddenberg, Maryam Khajavi, Nathan Pope, and Adriana
Stumpo and charged them with conduct relating to protesting, chalking the
sidewalk, chanting, and leafleting - constitutionally protected rights
under the First Amendment, but no matter.
-
- In a February 20 press release, the FBI called the four
"animal rights extremists suspected of terrorizing University of California
researchers (and said they) used force, violence, or threats to interfere
with the operation of the (U of C) in violation of the Animal Enterprise
Terrorism Act." More on that below.
-
- The FBI cited specific "threatening incidents"
beginning in October 2007:
-
- -- on October 21, 2007, demonstrating outside a U of
C professor's residence in El Cerrito, CA; wearing bandanas to hide their
faces; trespassing on his front yard; chanting slogans; and accusing him
"of being a murderer because of his use of animals in research;"
-
- -- on January 2008, demonstrating outside the private
residences of several U of C researchers; dressed in black and wearing
bandanas to hide their faces; marched, chanted, and chalked "defamatory"
comments on sidewalks outside their residences;
-
- -- on February 24, 2008, "attempted to forcibly
enter the private home of a Santa Cruz U of C researcher; when her husband
opened the door, a struggle ensued and he was hit by an object;" one
of the individuals charged then yelled, "We're gonna get you;"
and
-
- -- on July 29, 2008, "a stack of flyers titled 'Murderers
and torturers alive & well in Santa Cruz July 2008 edition' was found
at the Cafe Pergolesi in Santa Cruz;" they contained names, addresses,
and telephone numbers of several U of C researchers and 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 defendants
were charged with producing and distributing the fliers after which "two
firebomb attacks outside researchers' Santa Cruz homes (occurred), both
of which are still under investigation by the FBI."
-
- Most often, what the FBI and DOJ charge and what, in
fact, is true is highly divergent. In this case, the AETA 4 did nothing
more "criminal" than exercise their First Amendments rights,
and, in so doing, neither threatened nor terrorized anyone. Like many other
instances in a post-9/11 environment, and often earlier, the FBI and criminal
justice system targets innocent victims, portrays them as criminals, manipulates
evidence against them, prevents defense attorneys from access to any called
"classified," uses dubious paid informants, and scares juries
to convict. As a result, numerous victims of injustice languish behind
bars as political prisoners, some serving life sentences despite having
committed no crime.
-
- That was true under George Bush and a Republican Congress
and is no different under Barack Obama and a Democrat one. Enough police
state laws were enacted to convict the most saintly if authorities wish
to do so. And it's happening with greater frequency by manufacturing terror
threats. The dominant media trumpet them. Both parties use them for political
advantage and try to silence dissent. They also make false claims to convince
the public that dangerous "terrorists" are being arrested, charged,
tried and convicted.
-
- Nearly always, those affected are innocent victims of
police state injustice at a time we're all as vulnerable as the AETA 4.
-
- Indictment of AETA 4 - United States of America v. Buddenberg
et al - Filed March 12, 2009 in US District Court for the Northern District
of California (San Jose)
-
- Count One - Conspiracy
-
- From about October 2007 - July 2008, "the defendants
conspired to use and caused to be used a facility of interstate commerce
for the purpose of damaging and interfering with the operations of an animal
enterprise (and) did intentionally place a person in reasonable fear of
death of, and serious bodily injury to that person, a member of the immediate
family of that person, and a spouse and intimate partner of that person
by a course of conduct involving threats, acts of vandalism, property damage,
criminal trespass, harassment, and intimidation...."
-
- Count Two - Force, Violence, and Threats Involving Animal
Enterprises
-
- ....defendants used and caused to be used a facility
of interstate commerce, for the purpose of damaging and interfering with
the operations of an animal enterprise, and in connection with that purpose
did intentionally" commit the same acts described above.
-
- Status of the Case
-
- On May 22, 2009, the Center for Constitutional Rights
(CCR) joined with defense counsel from the Civil Liberties Defense Center
(CLDC) in a motion to dismiss the indictment and asked the Court to strike
down the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) as unconstitutional on
grounds of "overbreadth (and) vagueness." CCR stated:
-
- "These are doctrines that allow individuals to challenge
laws that chill speech and advocacy and require people to guess at a statute's
meaning and scope."
-
- CCR attorney Matthew Strugar said:
-
- "To characterize protest and speech as terrorist
activities is ludicrous. And it is not just animal rights activists who
are in danger here. The AETA is so broad and unclear it could be used to
suppress lawful protests and boycotts by any activists across the spectrum,
no matter what the issue. The law must be struck down."
-
- CCR said the AETA 4 "actions are clearly and traditionally
protected by the First Amendment (yet) The Department of Justice brazenly
calls these young activists 'terrorists....' "
-
- The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA)
-
- On November 27, 2006, AETA became law, replacing the
1992 Animal Enterprise Protection Act. Using broad and vague language,
the new law criminalized First Amendment activities advocating for animal
rights like peaceful protests, leafleting, undercover investigations, whisleblowing,
and boycotts. These legal acts are now crimes under AETA. It equates peaceful
protest-related activities with violence and terrorism.
-
- Its proponents include prominent industries that exploit
animals for profit. They argued that animal rights activism was increasing,
their facilities were being targeted, and tough laws were needed for protection.
They claimed:
-
- -- existing federal and state laws were inadequate; and
-
- -- activist "attacks" disrupted "vital
services" that millions of Americans require.
-
- AETA expands the 1992 law by imposing far harsher penalties
than for comparable offenses under other laws and defines "disruptive"
activities to include peaceful protests for consumer boycotts, advocating
harmful practice reforms, and whisleblowing that results in "losses
and increased losses" exceeding $10,000.
-
- It goes further as well. It legalizes expanded surveillance
of animal rights organizations, including criminal wiretapping. It also
lets courts find probable cause for the vague crime of economic damage
or disruption without requiring hard evidence that a person or group planned
to commit these acts.
-
- AETA exempts "lawful public, governmental or business
reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise,"
but that provision only applies to economic disruption claims, not damage,
so it makes it hard to distinguish between the two.
-
- The law also:
-
- -- covers facilities that use or sell animals or animal
products;
-
- -- includes any person, entity, or organization connected
to an animal enterprise;
-
- -- applies to any form of advocacy;
-
- -- criminalizes claimed threatening conduct and protected
speech as well as communication with others who engage in these practices;
-
- -- potentially includes any form of communication such
as emailing, telephoning, or distributing materials across state lines
in support of abusive animal activity boycotts; and
-
- -- protects corporate animal abusers with a vested interest
in silencing dissent.
-
- Overall and in deliberately vague language, it equates
legal protests and civil disobedience with terrorism even when no violence
is involved and no physical harm caused. It claims First Amendment rights
don't apply in support of animals or when advocating against abusive animal
practices. It places profits above constitutionally protected rights.
-
- The Coalition to Abolish AETA
-
- It calls itself "a national grassroots network of
activists, lawyers, independent journalists and concerned citizens. (They)
work collaboratively to more strategically coordinate grassroots education
and outreach, legislative advocacy, media, litigation and public pressure
to more effectively reverse the erosion of rights enshrined in the AETA.
(It) also works to support animal protection advocates and other progressive
activists to continue their work despite the chilling effect of the AETA
and other repressive legislation."
-
- The Coalition is a joint project of CLDC and CCR and
urges people nationwide to join with them in their effort to "undermine
(destructive) corporate interests."
-
- It calls AETA unconstitutional by criminalizing protected
activities in support of profits. It believes it's part of a larger corporate
- government conspiracy to stifle dissent, constrain social activism, and
exploit public fear of peaceful acts called "terrorism." It strives
to build grassroots activism to challenge the law and all other forms of
oppression. It supports open dialogue, mutual trust, patience, transparency,
respect, and a determination to achieve justice. It asks all those who
agree to join with them for a common purpose.
-
- CCR calls AETA a "dangerous, Sedition Act like law."
It says it will be used to criminalize lawful protests and turn petty offenses
into major ones. It believes it's critically important that the AETA 4
indictment be dropped and AETA repealed to protect our constitutional right
to dissent.
-
- On June 8, the defendants have a status hearing in US
District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose). If convicted,
they face up to 10 years in prison for exercising their First Amendment
rights.
-
- Another Criminal Injustice Witch-Hunt Prosecution
-
- On December 1, 2008, this writer wrote about the Texas-based
Holy Land Foundation Charity (HLF), the largest US Muslim one until the
Bush administration declared it a terrorist organization, froze its assets,
shut it down, and falsely claimed it was funneling millions of dollars
to Hamas.
-
- In fact, HLF provided essential relief to Palestinian
refugees in Occupied Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan as well as aid for the
needy in various other countries, including Bosnia, Albania, Chechnya,
Turkey and America. Its major activities included:
-
- -- financial aid to needy and impoverished families;
-
- -- a sponsorship program for orphaned children;
-
- -- various social services;
-
- -- educational services;
-
- -- medical and other emergency work; and
-
- -- community development, including help to rebuild Palestinian
homes - ones Israel willfully and illegally demolished.
-
- Five HLF leaders were arrested, indicted, tried, and
on November 24, 2008 convicted on 108 counts, including supporting a terrorist
organization, money laundering, and tax fraud. It was a retrial after a
jury in October remained deadlocked on 197 counts against four defendants
and acquitted the fifth on all but one charge.
-
- Sentencing was on May 27 and harsh:
-
- -- for Chairman Ghassan Elashi - 65 years
-
- -- President and CEO Shukri Abu Baker - 65 years
-
- -- volunteer Mufid Abdulqader - 20 years,
-
- -- New Jersey office director Abdulrahman Odeh - 15 years,
and
-
- -- California office director Mohammad El-Mezain - 15
years.
-
- The Court reaffirmed the jury's $12.4 million money judgment
against all the defendants, except El Mezain not convicted of money laundering.
-
- From inception, HLF and its principals were unjustly
targeted for their charity and prominence as the largest Muslim charity
in America. Nancy Hollander, representing Abu-Baker, said the defendants
will appeal on a number of issues, including an anonymous testimony of
an expert, that she said was a first.
-
- "Our clients were not even allowed to review their
own statements because they were classified - statements that they made
over the course of many years that the government (illegally) wiretapped.
They were not allowed to go back and review them. They were statements
from alleged co-conspirators that included handwritten notes. Nobody knew
who wrote them; nobody knew when they were written. There are a plethora
of issues."
-
- Clearly it's the wrong time to be Muslim in America as
well as an environmental or animal rights activist. It was true under George
Bush and no different under Barack Obama.
-
- Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Center
for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
<mailto:lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net>lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday
- Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy
listening.
|