Grand juries target eco-activists

From Earth First!, March 29:

Environmental Activists Jailed as Grand Jury Indictments Increase

San Francisco, CA—As attorneys argue in federal court in San Francisco on March 30 to quash a grand jury investigating a protest in San Francisco, activists point to current trends that use secret grand juries to carry out broad, politically-motivated sweeps of environmental and other activists around the country.

In January, 11 people were indicted by a grand jury in Oregon investigating acts of sabotage linked to the underground Earth Liberation Front (ELF). Charges relate to alleged arsons at such targets as a ski resort expansion into endangered lynx habitat and a facility for rounding up wild horses for dog food. There were no injuries, but the FBI claims millions of dollars in damage to property and calls the actions terrorism. Two Washington state activists were added to the indictment in February, and one person was indicted in a related grand jury in San Diego for a public speech. A grand jury in Colorado investigating crimes by environmental activists just began issuing subpoenas. A status hearing regarding the 13 indictments from the Oregon grand jury will take place on April 3 in Eugene. More indictments and subpoenas are expected, say attorneys in the case.

“Apparently, according to the FBI, the threat is greater than that posed by neo-Nazis, systemically brutal and racist police forces, or Al-Qaida,” said Ben Rosenfeld, a civil rights attorney from San Francisco. “The government’s vendetta is a campaign in a broader witch hunt against radical environmentalists and self-identified ‘green anarchists’ — those who merge ecology, animal rights, and anarchism in a vision of freedom and sustainability for all living beings.”

The FBI announced last year that ELF was their #1 priority for domestic terrorism and held a press conference in Washington DC with U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to announce the indictments, where they dodged questions about Osama bin Laden but called the environmentalists “eco-terrorists.” The FBI has help from groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative corporate lobby group. A.L.E.C. has written model legislation stepping up the ante for acts of property destruction committed against corporations. Legislation has been introduced in 9 states seeking to categorize property destruction, trespass or arson as acts of domestic terrorism.

Activists point to the fact that these politically motivated acts of property destruction harmed no life, yet are being called terrorism even as violent attacks by right-wing zealots go unprosecuted. According to the FBI’s own 2003 statistics, 7400 hate crimes motivated by race, ethnic, religious or sexual orientation occurred that year. Information on these ‘eco cases,’ as they are called, can be found on the Civil Liberties Defense Center website.

See our last post on ELF and the domestic anarchist scare.

See also WW4 REPORT #s 33 & 22

  1. Further details…
    From Truthout, March 7:

    The Green Scare

    By Karen Pickett

    On January 20th, eleven people were indicted in Oregon by a grand jury investigating acts of sabotage linked to the underground Earth Liberation Front (ELF). The actions, going back nearly a decade, include a number of arsons – with such targets as a ski resort expansion into endangered lynx habitat and a facility for rounding up wild horses for dog food. There were no injuries in any of the actions, but the FBI claims over $25 million in damage to property.

    Some of those indicted had been arrested in December, including one person who died in custody in Arizona. Shock waves have been reverberating through the environmental activist community, and the situation is still unfolding. Two more people were arrested in Olympia, Washington, on February 23, and the day before, outspoken Native American and animal rights activist Rod Coronado was arrested in Tucson, Arizona, on charges sent down by a grand jury in San Diego. In addition, there is a grand jury investigating Animal Liberation Front (ALF) activities in San Francisco.

    But those being rounded up are not only being charged with crimes associated with the acts the FBI and grand juries allege – they are also being labeled as terrorists. Moreover, Coronado’s charges stem solely from a public address he gave in San Diego in 2003. During this speech, in response to a question from the audience, he explained how he went about setting a fire at an animal testing lab in Michigan in the early 1990s – an arson crime for which he had previously served a four-year term in federal prison. For answering that question, Coronado has been accused under a little-used federal statute making it a felony to “teach or demonstrate the making or use of an explosive or destructive device.”

    The FBI announced last year that ELF was their #1 priority for domestic terrorism. Now they have help from groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative public policy lobbying group funded by over 300 corporations. ALEC, in collaboration with the US Sportman’s Alliance, has written model legislation stepping up the ante for acts of property destruction committed against corporations in the business of development, logging, mining and vivisection.

    Legislation has been introduced in nine states seeking to categorize property destruction, trespass or arson as acts of domestic terrorism IF committed by animal rights activists. Of course, arson, trespass and vandalism are already illegal, but ALEC wants to see additional layers added so that those who support those activities – financially or otherwise – could also be prosecuted. The terrorist label, and the addition of conspiracy changes, as in the current cases, are meant to marginalize and vilify people already facing criminal charges and to enhance sentencing options. In the current culture of fear that exists in the US, the vilification in effect denies the accused their right to a presumption of innocence until a trial.

    The branding of acts of property destruction as terrorism rather than sabotage increases the sensationalism surrounding this politically charged situation, and is designed to send potential support running in the opposite direction. The authorities even call those arrested “the family,” in an undisguised attempt to evoke images of the notorious Manson family. But the Manson family were cold-blooded murderers. The indicted environmental activists are people never known to carry weapons. There have been no injuries or deaths in connection with the actions alleged. Yet they are being called terrorists, even as violent attacks by the right-wing have gone un-prosecuted – 7400 hate crimes motivated by race, ethnic, religious or sexual orientation, according to the FBI’s own 2003 statistics.

    The agenda is criminalization of dissent, long within the purview of the FBI, but the less recognized agenda is also protection of wealth and private property. It seems ALEC would put damage to property on par with threat or actual harm to life. Nowhere, in the FBI’s pronouncements of how heinous these acts they call terrorism are, is a body count or even a litany of injuries. The “injury” is defined in millions of dollars to corporations who are in the business of building multi-million dollar developments on endangered species habitat.

    If property destruction is put on par with threat to life, the question must be asked whether the next step will be increased prosecution for the revered tradition of non-violent civil disobedience or vilification of the successful market campaigns carried out by the likes of Rainforest Action Network, because after all, those activities, as well as boycotts and strikes, put a dent in the bottom line of profit margin. In fact, attacks disguised as IRS investigations and other back door strategies are already on the rise against organizations that carry out civil disobedience and market campaigns.

    “Eco-terrorism,” a term trumpeted in the media, was invented in the early 1990s by public relations firm Hill and Knowlton, in the employ of corporations in the extractive industries. It was then put into popular use by right-wing ideologues like Ron Arnold, long known as a vehement anti-environmentalist whose self-professed goal is to destroy the environmental movement.

    Property destruction is sabotage, not terrorism. Call it what it is, and then debate appropriate prosecution and penalties.

    Karen Pickett is the director of the Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters Forest. She has been an Earth First! activist since the early 1980s.

    1. By any means necessary
      The subtext here is that BAMN is a fair strategy for the activists, but when the moneyed interests take the same approach, well then it’s time to quibble over semantics.