VeggieBoards banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Action Alert:<br><br><br><br><div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is being "fast-tracked" with the help of the white house and at the urging of the lobbying groups that represent all of the animal exploitation industries (pharmaceutical, biomedical, agribusiness, furriers, hospitality, tourism and entertainment). The list of groups and companies promoting this legislation include all of the most notorious targets of the animal rights movement including Huntingdon Life Sciences, Covance, Charles River Labs, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche and Wyeth.<br><br><br><br>
If you have never made a call to your legislator, now is the time to get on the phone.<br><br><br><br>
Also, if you donate to one of the large animal advocacy groups that have been silent on this issue, please contact then now and urge them to make a strong statement against this bill. Calls are especially needed to those groups that specialize in legislative action.<br><br><br><br>
This bill has the potential to send effective activists to jail....labeled as terrorists....for many years.<br><br><br><br>
ACT NOW: FEDERAL LEGISLATION<br><br>
LABELS ACTIVISM AS TERRORISM<br><br><br><br>
The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act 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.<br><br><br><br>
Please act now to make sure that the War on Terrorism, and the tragedy of 9/11, isnt used to push a political agenda and silence dissent.<br><br><br><br>
The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act expands the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992. 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.<br><br><br><br>
* 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.<br><br><br><br>
* AETA risks the prosecution of undercover investigators, whistle-blowers and other activists as terrorists. It defines economic damage as including the loss of profits. The extremely vague and overly broad language in the bill puts all activists at risk. Causing the loss of profits isnt terrorism. Its effective activism. And even activists that arent prosecuted under the law will feel the chilling effect of its terrorist rhetoric.<br><br><br><br>
* AETA isnt needed. Existing laws are already overly broad: the Animal Enterprise Protection Act was used to successfully convict the SHAC 7 this year on terrorism charges for running a website. And AETAs penalties for violence arent needed, because the animal protection movement has never killed a human being.<br><br><br><br>
All Americans should be concerned, regardless of how they feel about animal issues. The word terrorism should not be batted around against the enemy of the hour, to push a partisan political agenda. Who will be next?<br><br><br><br>
What you can do:<br><br><br><br>
Contact U.S. representatives and urge them to oppose HR 4239.<br><br>
Contact U.S. Senators and urge them to oppose S 3880 (previously S 1926).<br><br>
Contact animal advocacy and environmental organizations, which have overwhelmingly remained silent on this legislation, and demand that they help defeat it.</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
Legal protests and boycotts indeed cause businesses to lose profits. That's the point. This bill threatens to turn effective, legal, peaceful activism into a "terrorist" activity.
 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
Top