The Most Dangerous Domestic Terror Law You've Never Heard Of

[ensho]

http://www.alternet.org/rights/141328/the_animal_enterprise_terrorism_act:_the_most_dangerous_domestic_terror_law_you%27ve_never_heard_of/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet


The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act: The Most Dangerous Domestic Terror Law You've Never Heard Of


***
Under the AETA, if you and a friend go on the web to research a company whose practices you plan to protest, you may have just become a terrorist.
***


You may not have heard of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, because the very first prosecution under the 2006 law is currently underway in San Jose, California. In the case, USA v. Buddenberg, four animal rights activists are accused of chanting, making leaflets and writing with chalk on the sidewalk in front of a senior bio-researcher's house, as well as using the internet to research the company whose actions they planned to protest. Under the AETA, they are charged with acts of animal enterprise terrorism.

The AETA classifies a person who "intentionally damages or causes the loss of any real or personal property" or "intentionally places a person in reasonable fear of" death or serious bodily injury as terrorists when they act for the "purpose of damaging or interfering with an animal enterprise." It imposes penalties accordingly. At first blush, this may not sound so bad. But a closer look exposes serious problems: the AETA can be read to reach so many different types of protests and people, and it is written in language so vague, it is impossible for someone to know whether their actions might be covered under the AETA, and thus great swaths of protected speech are in danger of being silenced by the law.

-snip-

Under the law, an animal enterprise includes any business that deals in animal research or uses or sells animal products. This could be read as anything from a lab conducting medical research on monkeys to a gas station that sells beef jerky.

Terrorism under this law might be defined as anything from physical harm to a person, the threat of physical harm to a person, physical harm to property, or, most tellingly, a loss of profit -- or any attempt or conspire to interfere or damage an animal enterprise in any way, even if no economic damage actually occurs. To be charged under this federal law, like most federal laws, you have to have crossed state lines, used interstate mail, or used the internet in the commission of the crime. If you and a friend go on the web to research a company whose practices you plan to protest, you may have just become a terrorist.

So, what is an Act? An act is a law passed by Congress and signed by the president, in this case an unconstitutional one. Attorneys from the Center for Constitutional Rights, the Civil Liberties Defense Center, and co-counsel are mounting a facial challenge in the case-challenging the law itself and demanding it be struck down.

-snip-

To learn more about actions you can take to abolish the AETA, click here
---------------------


good grief!

[meow2u3]

1. It's a specious law aimed at animal welfare activists

Repukes in Congress rammed this law through after the 9/11/01 attacks, using 9/11 as a pretext to make terrorists out of animal lovers.

Save a cat or a dog from vivisection, you're a terrorist. Burn a cross on the lawn of a racial or ethnic minority or parade around in the streets dressed in white sheets and hoods provoking a race riot, you're exercising freedom of speech. What the hell?

:wtf:

[superduperfarleft]

2. Will Potter has been a great source of information on the AETA for years.

His site: http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/

I know it's cool on DU to hate vegans, but this is a very important civil liberties issue, regardless.

[Buzz Clik]

3. I will never understand the insanity of some protestors and those who defend them

Privacy is the cornerstone of some of the most critical rights we cherish. But, when someone is even vaguely suspected of something we don't like, we have no problem getting right in their face, in their homes, and involving their families.

Sorry, but it pisses me off, and I see it as being a less violent form of terrorism.

[starroute]

4. This is not about the in-your-face protesters -- it's about everyone else

For example, take this item from a few weeks ago:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/pets/detail?blogid=48&entry_id=40828

The Carson & Barnes Circus, which regularly uses elephants in its acts, is scheduled to perform at the Cow Palace this weekend (May 29-June 2), followed by the Wells Fargo Center in Santa Rosa (June 8-9) and Sonoma-Marin Fair in Petaluma (June 10-11).

But while laws and regulations offer some protection for animals who perform in circuses, the sad truth is that they are minimal and rarely enforced.

Bay Area and national animal welfare agencies, including the Marin Humane Society, Humane Society & SPCA of Sonoma County, Citizens for Cruelty Free Entertainment, Forgotten Felines of Sonoma County, Pets Lifeline and the San Francisco SPCA, have publicly called for a boycott of the Carson & Barnes Circus, citing the company's routine abuse of animals. These organizations are all strongly against the use of animals in circuses and the inhumane training methods that are often employed, such as whips, tight collars, muzzles, electric prods and bullhooks that can puncture and tear an elephant's skin. When not performing, animals are often transported and confined in small, cramped cages.

According to a statement from PETA, the Carson & Barnes Circus has "failed to meet minimal federal standards for the care of animals used in exhibition as established in the Animal Welfare Act (AWA)."

Now, you may or may not approve of PETA, but this call for a boycott also includes the Humane Society and the SPCA. And if I understand the act correctly, all those organizations are now liable for prosectuion as terrorist groups.

For all I know, the San Francisco Chronicle may also be part of the conspiracy for posting that blog -- and Democratic Underground may be as well, now that I've quoted from it. The law is just that broad and just that pernicious.

[slampoet]

5. Could you get charged with a Federal Crime for COW TIPPING? Sounds like it.

Also this sounds like it is there to prevent people from organizing farm workers into unions too.