|
That development inspired some non-government bodies with
the idea that they could defend their interests by seeking
to criminalize anyone who dared to expose and attack their
exploitative policies. American animal rights and environmental
activists became the first targets of this modern-day witch-hunt
when the national lobbyists group US Sportsmen's Alliance
(USSA), along with the America Legislative Exchange Council
(ALEC), introduced into the Texas Legislature in February
2003 the so-called "Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act"
(H.B. 433). The ramifications of this bill, loosely modeled
after US federal laws designed to wage the "war on terrorism",
are alarming for anyone interested in being involved, even
in the most peaceful and un-terroristic way, in animal or
environmental issues.
According to the H.B. 433 bill, "two or more persons
organized for the purpose of supporting any politically
motivated activity intended to obstruct or deter any person
from participating in an activity involving animals or an
activity involving natural resources" are defined
as an "Animal Rights or Ecological Terrorist Organization".
And further, "a person commits an offense if the person
knowingly provides financial support, resources, or other
assistance to an animal rights or ecological terrorism organization
for the purpose of assisting the organization."
As a result, anyone found supporting animal or environmental
organizations, through activities such as peaceful protests,
demonstrations, signing petitions, civil disobedience, debates
or financial contributions, is liable to be prosecuted for
supporting "terrorism". In addition the offender will be
required to have his or her name, address and photographic
identity showcased on a state-run website for three years.
Definition of a terrorist?
The irony is that what may spring naturally to the mind
of any sensible person when hearing of a group of people
labeled an "animal and ecological terrorist organization"
is not those individuals working to protect animals and
the environment, but rather those organizations, companies,
multinationals and corporate bodies who engage in animal
exploitation and environmental degradation.
The irony becomes even more evident when the meaning of
the words terrorism and terrorist are analyzed. According
to the Collins English Dictionary:
"terrorism n. 1. the act of terrorizing; systematic
use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal. 2.
the state of being terrorized. 3. government or opposition
to government by means of terror."
"terrorist n. a. a person who employs terror
or terrorism, esp. as a political weapon. b.(as modifier):
terrorist tactics."
It seems logical then, in relation to animal issues, to
brand as terrorists not animal rights activists (that is,
people who care about and for animals), but rather those
involved in the meat industry, the horse racing industry,
rodeos, recreational hunting, vivisection, etc - that is,
people who terrorize animals.
The real agenda
Evidently the real reason behind the so-called "Animal
and Ecological Terrorism Act" is not the defence of society
from terror, but rather the defence of self-interest, be
it economic, lifestyle related, or otherwise. In fact, the
prime promoter of this bill - the US Sportsmen's Alliance
(USSA), formerly known (believe it or not!) as the Wildlife
Legislative Fund of America (WLFA) - is an organization
whose main aim is to provide direct lobbying and grassroots
coalition support to protect and advance the rights of hunters,
trappers, fishermen and so-called "scientific wildlife management
professionals".
According to its website, the USSA was "formed in response
to a landmark Ohio Ballot issue in 1977 that proposed a
constitutional amendment to ban all trapping in the State.
Thanks to the U. S. Sportsmen's Alliance, the U.S. Sportsmen's
Foundation and sportsmen and sportswomen across the state,
this issue was defeated. The U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance and
its Foundation have been working ever since to defend hunting,
fishing and scientific wildlife management against lawsuits,
legislation and ballot issues initiated by anti-hunters."
Unfortunately this is not the first time in human history
that people who try to right wrongs have been demonized
and persecuted. We only need to think of the way figures
such as Gandhi, Jesus and Buddha - true epitomes of non-violence
- were branded and treated, to see the lengths to which
some people, societies and nations will resort in order
to protect their own interests.
Gandhi, despite being one the most exemplary follower of
the Hindu teaching of ahimsa (non-violence), was treated
as a modern-day terrorist because his views were a threat
to British Imperialism. Likewise, Jesus, the formulator
of the "turn the other cheek" teaching, was declared a danger
to society, only because he dared to speak out against the
crimes and abuses committed by the Rabbinical establishment.
And Buddha, the embodiment of compassion, was treated with
contempt because he challenged the Brahminical control of
Hindu society by denouncing the injustice and oppression
inherent in the caste system.
In a push to extend the bill nationwide, USSA and ALEC
are promoting the legislation in other American states such
as Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Washington
and Wisconsin.
What's next?
What's next then? Will this trend spill out from US borders
and spread worldwide?
At a time of closer-than-ever cultural, military and trade
ties with the US, will Australian hunters, anglers and "scientific
wildlife management professionals" follow the American example
and have Australian animal rights activists in their sights?
Or is the "Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act" instead
destined to become a futile exercise - a last-ditch, desperate
attempt to preserve an utterly exploitative and utilitarian
culture which seems to have no future in a world which urgently
needs a more considerate and respectful approach to all
life forms with whom we share the planet. 
© Vegetarian Action February 2005
References
'Animals Today', Vol 11 / 1 / 2003, p 6.
State Environmental Resource Centre, "Terrorism
Bill Used to Attack Civic Activism", www.serconline.org,
accessed 1/8/2006. (This page contains links to relevant
Legislation.)
Rosenblith, L.J. "Civil Rights vs Fear
of Terrorism", About.com, environment.about.com,
(accessed 1/2/2005)
|
