Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday July 27 2015, @10:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the when-does-activism-become-terrorism dept.

I was saddened to hear that two individuals who released fur animals and vandalized fur farms across America were busted: http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/fbi-arrests-activists-accused-of-releasing-mink/article_6c169b5d-dbbc-5dd1-adb0-534ee46af88b.html

But the arrest is sort of beside the point and there are two interesting tidbits in there. First and less interesting, is the ridiculous charge of terrorism under the "Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act" -- seriously, what they did is just plain old crime. Before you know it, going 10 over on the freeway will be considered an act of terrorism.

More intriguing, despite a lack of details on how they got busted, is this tidbit:

The indictment states that they covered their tracks by avoiding phones or logging into known online accounts and email. Instead, they used public Internet computers and encrypted email and cash for purchases while traveling. They would allegedly withdraw hundreds of dollars while back home in the San Francisco Bay Area before another trip.

The FBI states that they drafted communiques and posted them online to publicize their actions on websites associated with "animal rights extremists."

I'm going to guess automatic license plate readers were involved. Pure guess.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Monday July 27 2015, @12:56PM

    by wantkitteh (3362) on Monday July 27 2015, @12:56PM (#214281) Homepage Journal

    Dude, you really need to live under a terrorist threat some time, it's obvious you have no understanding at all. But hey, considering how diluted the definition of the word terrorism has become in the last 15-20 years, I can't say I'm surprised this is the sort of thing people are saying.

    The terrorist campaign run by the Irish Republican Army against the English "occupation" of Northern Ireland had all the hallmarks of terrorism. The bombings and shootings themselves generally followed one of two patterns. If they were done in Northern Ireland itself, the target would be a person or building with any connection to England or anyone who co-operated with them, however tenuous. If they were done on mainland England itself, any target was valid as long as credit could be claimed as soon as the attack took place - or more likely before, in the case of a timed bomb. However, the targets themselves when considered in isolation would never have furthered any Republican cause in any way what-so-ever - blowing up churches and schools at peak occupation isn't exactly a political move after all. Instead, the message was far simpler - "We'll keep up the attacks on any targets we see fit until we get what we want!!" THAT is the essence of terrorism.

    This fur activism doesn't even vaguely fit the profile of terrorism. The attacks were directly targeted on the perceived-unethical business installation and the spoils of the profit from that business. If anything, "eco-terrorism" should probably be renamed "eco-industrial espionage".

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Redundant) by khallow on Tuesday July 28 2015, @02:03AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 28 2015, @02:03AM (#214650) Journal

    This fur activism doesn't even vaguely fit the profile of terrorism.

    Do you have a reason you think that? It looks awful similar to that paragraph you just wrote about the IRA such as fitting the first pattern of attacking civilian targets with a common connection and delivering the message "We'll keep up the attacks on any targets we see fit until we get what we want!!", the "essence" of terrorism as you admit.

    • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Tuesday July 28 2015, @01:05PM

      by FakeBeldin (3360) on Tuesday July 28 2015, @01:05PM (#214823) Journal

      Sorry, I tried to mod you and then scrolled. Apparently in the mod box. No clue how to undo it.

    • (Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Tuesday July 28 2015, @10:36PM

      by wantkitteh (3362) on Tuesday July 28 2015, @10:36PM (#215089) Homepage Journal

      Terrorists generally resort to terrorism because they can't take any significant action directly against their foes, instead attacking random targets with only the barest hint of a connection necessary to get the point over that they will continue to hurt third parties until their foes stop/start doing whatever it is. In this case, fur activists directly attacked the farm they opposed and those they consider responsible for it's operation. That's not a terrorist attack - it's just an attack. "Terrorist" is an overused word being overused here just like it is in 90% of cases these days.

      • (Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Tuesday July 28 2015, @11:26PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 28 2015, @11:26PM (#215112) Journal

        Terrorists generally resort to terrorism because they can't take any significant action directly against their foes

        And we see that here such as vandalism of homes.

        Terrorists generally resort to terrorism because they can't take any significant action directly against their foes

        Check. Note that the whole story is about hitting easy targets.

        to get the point over that they will continue to hurt third parties

        Check. Such as targeting homes.

        In this case, fur activists directly attacked the farm they opposed and those they consider responsible for it's operation. That's not a terrorist attack - it's just an attack.

        But those are random attacks on the parties in question which is terrorism by your bizarre definition. Why strain so hard to fail to apply your very own meaning?