Federal Legislation Labels Activism As "Terrorism"

[Jcrowley]

Federal Legislation Labels Activism As "Terrorism"

The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) is currently pending in Congress, and industry groups are doing their best to push it through quickly and with little public scrutiny, Patriot Act style, before Fall recess. Please act now to make sure that the War on Terrorism, and the tragedy of 9/11, isn't used to push a political agenda and silence dissent.

The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act expands the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992 http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/aepa. Supporters say it is meant to stem illegal actions taken against controversial animal enterprises, or any company that does business with an animal enterprise. But the sweeping language in the bill goes much, much further:

AETA labels the tactics of Martin Luther King and Gandhi as "terrorism." It spells out penalties for "an offense involving exclusively a nonviolent physical obstruction of an animal enterprise or a business having a connection to, or relationship with, an animal enterprise, that may result in loss of profits but does not result in bodily injury..." In other words, a terrorism law includes nonviolent civil disobedience.

AETA risks the prosecution of undercover investigators, whistleblowers and other activists as "terrorists." It defines "economic damage" as including "the loss of profits." The extremely vague, overly broad language in the bill puts all activists at risk. Causing loss of profits isn't terrorism. It's effective activism. And even activists that aren't prosecuted under the law will feel the chilling effect of its "terrorist" rhetoric.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=16747

AETA is a perfect cover for characterizing non-violent civil disobedience as terrorism. “Lawful and peaceful protests that, for example, urge a consumer boycott of a company that does not use humane procedures, could be the target of this provision if the activity resulted in economic damage to the company,” explains K9 Magazine. “The bill would also make it illegal to expose cruel conditions at facilities such as puppy mills and research labs, if exposure of such conditions even if done lawfully would result in economic damage to the animal enterprise. There is no exemption in the bill to exclude economic damage that results from the disclosure of information about a company’s treatment of animals, which is disclosed through public information.”

[babylonsister]

1. How long will it be before this applies to activism against

this admin, or war? I know, it's going on, but I imagine that will be considered terrorism soon.
Enter detention centers.

[GeorgeGist]

2. Protecting profits...

is now more important than protecting the 1st ammendment. Surprise, surprise.

[Allyoop]

3. Terrorism = Protests

HMMMMMMMMMM???? I wonder if they'll arrest the anti-abortion groups and charge them with domestic terrorism? Of course, the abortion clinics probably don't make a profit, so if the object is to protect profit then I guess they'll (protesters) be safe!