It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If you are in PETA you could soon be considered a terrorist

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   
This article is for all of those who have slammed me for being "paranoid" about abuse of power by our government.

Before we get to the article let me connect you.

The military tribunals act has passed and is law, this thread is not about that act, but it is pertinent. Under that act, the PRESIDENT and the Sec Def have the ability to name ANYONE an enemy combatant. And if you are a terrorist you are DEF an enemy combatant.

Well here is the first way they are going to get some of us liberal hippy protestors.

War on Terror Comes home

BTW the senate bill passed already and just yesterday the house bill passed we are just waiting on someone to request a suspension of the rules to actually pass the bill in the house. then its on to the pres's desk which you know hes gonna sign it.


House bill
Senate bill

11/4/2005--Introduced.
Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act - Rewrites federal criminal code provisions regarding animal enterprise terrorism to prohibit anyone from traveling in, or using the mail or any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of damaging or disrupting an animal enterprise and, in connection with such purpose: (1) intentionally damaging, disrupting, or causing the loss of property used by or owned in connection with such enterprise; (2) intentionally placing a person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury to that person or a family member through threats, vandalism, property damage, trespass, harassment, or intimidation; or (3) conspiring or attempting to do so. Prescribes escalating penalties.
Authorizes restitution for: (1) the reasonable cost of repeating any experimentation that was interrupted or invalidated as a result of such offense; (2) the loss of food production or farm income reasonably attributable to such offense; and (3) any other economic damage, including any losses or costs caused by economic disruption, resulting from such offense.


Mk.... so... do you see it? If your a "terrorist" you can be deemed an enemy combatant... if you are an enemy combatant you have NO RIGHTs, NO FREEDOMS, NOTHING. This is just another way for them to claim one of us activists is a terrorist, thus silencing our msg.

I am not actually a member of PETA, and I actually think that they go a lil too far sometimes, I am however a FIRM believer in atleast a sembelance of humane treatment for the animals that we eat, kill, and test on a daily basis.

This law is just another example of how before too long its going to be entirely TOO easy to detain indefintally someone who disagrees with the GOV or thier corporate masters.

[edit on 14-11-2006 by Elsenorpompom]




posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   
El Senor, I agree with you 100% and I've been afraid of this, too. The other one they're out to get are the so-called "eco-terrorists", of which there aren't any but hey, as you said, it IS another way to get the liberal hippie protesters. The laws just keep getting worse and worse.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Elsenorpompom. Yes it is directed at PETA as they are animal terrorists just like their cohorts from ALF. The revision is directed at just those individuals. In order to understand it fully you have to read the definitions of the terms used.



`(d) Definitions- As used in this section--

`(1) the term `animal enterprise' means--

`(A) a commercial or academic enterprise that uses or sells animals or animal products for profit, food or fiber production, agriculture, education, research, or testing;

`(B) a zoo, aquarium, animal shelter, pet store, breeder, furrier, circus, or rodeo, or other lawful competitive animal event; or

`(C) any fair or similar event intended to advance agricultural arts and sciences;


Text of bill with defs



Then under e it allows for peaceful actions



`(e) Rules of Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed--

`(1) to prohibit any expressive conduct (including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstration) protected from legal prohibition by the First Amendment to the Constitution;

`(2) to create new remedies for interference with activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of the First Amendment to the Constitution, regardless of the point of view expressed, or to limit any existing legal remedies for such interference; or.....

Text of bill with defs


In other words you do the crime; you do the time when interfering with commercial animal enterprises, which is something PETA and ALF love to do so why not? I mean any fool knows the average person would not do those things, therefore they need not fear.




[edit on 11/14/2006 by shots]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
So if you go about destroying a lab or someones property "for the animals" shouldn't you be punished for such an action? I'm sorry but when you hurt others in the pursuit of your political or social goals in America I think it is fair that you should pay the consequences of your actions.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
Mk.... so... do you see it? If your a "terrorist" you can be deemed an enemy combatant... if you are an enemy combatant you have NO RIGHTs, NO FREEDOMS, NOTHING. This is just another way for them to claim one of us activists is a terrorist, thus silencing our msg.


That's quite a leap from defining what animal enterprise terrorism is to going to calling them enemy combantants, with no rights or freedoms. How do you get that from this proposed legislation. Is it right that animal activists can theaten and damage others and their propertiy just because of their beliefs on a matter.

Would you feel the same if the legislation was against anti-abortion groups?



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I support the peaceful protests of say animal testing labs, people should have that right but I do not support these animal extremists one bit. Like the extremist who dug up the grave of the grandmother of a farm with supplied animals for testing and removed the body. that is just sick and the people who terrorise people working in animal testing or just supplying things like water etc should be treated as they are....terrorists

I support the testing on animals myself for medical purposes but not for any other purpose. Every single drug from something as simple as aspirin to cancer drugs have been tested on animals. Without animal testing I would most probably be dead so you understand I have strong personal reasons for supporting it. I also fully support other peoples right to protest against it as long as it is not with violence, intimidation or committing a crime.

Send Peta to gitmo, they are more of a threat to us all than the Islamic extremists .



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 06:51 PM
link   
The problem is that they started with Al-Qaeda. Then with any arab. Then with illegals in the US. Then with PETA. What's next? The average US citizen.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I am a member of PETA

People Eating Tasty Animals.

Mmmmm... pork chops..

Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 14-11-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Yeah the point is if an animal liber damages a testing lab they should be charged with criminal damage, just like anyone else would be. They should not be treated as terrorists/enemy combatants and have all their rights taken away.

Where is the law making anti-abortionists terrorists? Or taggers, or anyone else that causes criminal damage to property?

Next thing we'll see is it will be a crime to even talk about such things as animal liberation, and I thought that only happened in dictatorships?


This law is obviously to protect those who make a profit from suffering. Who is the real criminal when animals are tested unnecessarily? And yes that happens every single day.

[edit on 14/11/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
As a member of the Canadian chapter of PETA I guess I'll not be traveling south of my border anytime soon. Not that I wanted to anyway since America became a fascist state. We've all seen this coming for a long time and its going to get worse.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Thinker, if a organization (no matter what it is) results in an attack (domestic terrorism) which is what it has been called since before 9/11 .. how is that not terrorism? .. No one is saying all people in PETA is a terrorist, just that PETA engages in terrorist activities. Which they do. Attacking animal testing centers, as noble as it may be, is still a terrorist act.

Much like the green peace fellas who burn homes and HUMMER sales lots. Terrorism. No other word for it?



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Yeah the point is if an animal liber damages a testing lab they should be charged with criminal damage, just like anyone else would be. They should not be treated as terrorists/enemy combatants and have all their rights taken away.


Read the proposed law before you go off the deep end will you? No where does it state that they are enemy combatants and have "all their rights" take away. You make it sound as if they are going to round up all PETA members and send them to the veal farms instead of GITMO.

For example if you threaten someone with reasonable threat of death or bodily harm you can be fined or imprisoned up no more than 5 years or both of those. If you actually carry out the threat you can get up to 10 years, kill someone in such an act and you can get up to life. In fact the law defines how long/much you can be punished for your actions depending on the severity.


Where is the law making anti-abortionists terrorists? Or taggers, or anyone else that causes criminal damage to property?


You are right, yes there should be legislation against any group that threatens or does physical damage to a person or their property. Perhaps you should write your congressman and ask them to sponsor such a bill if you are so inclined. Obviously enough people have been ticked off by some of PETA's actions to try and get a law passed.

Name one thing in the actual proposed law that makes you uneasy. If you peacefully protest, this law does not even apply to you. If you engage or help in any threats or actions to destroy property or harm people then yes, this proposed law would apply to you.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   


Read the proposed law before you go off the deep end will you? No where does it state that they are enemy combatants and have "all their rights" take away. You make it sound as if they are going to round up all PETA members and send them to the veal farms instead of GITMO.


He related three laws together. This one, the patriot act, and the military comission act. If PETA members are terrorists, they don't have any rights, they can be held indefintly without trial or accusation.

Make the links, it will be much easier.

So if I say Hitler was against testing on animals (he was) anyone who is against testing on animals is like Hitler?

[edit on 14-11-2006 by Vitchilo]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thinker_1
As a member of the Canadian chapter of PETA I guess I'll not be traveling south of my border anytime soon. Not that I wanted to anyway since America became a fascist state. We've all seen this coming for a long time and its going to get worse.


Hey as long as you are a peaceful, law abiding member of PETA you will have no problems, welcome. If you have engaged in actions or threats against someone or their property then I guess you should avoid our "fascist" state. Imagine that; we want to actually prosecute those that harm others or their property.




...the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else ... Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathisers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.


George Orwell: What is Fascism?



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
He related three laws together. This one, the patriot act, and the military comission act. If PETA members are terrorists, they don't have any rights, they can be held indefintly without trial or accusation.

Make the links, it will be much easier.


Tell you what, since you are the one trying to prove the link, show me the correlation between the three laws. The burden of proof is on you to prove your case, not on me to do it for you. So far, all I have heard is vagueness.

The proposed law in question in fact does limit the sentence of someone committing an act of "animal enterprise terror". They can not be held indefinetely as you so claim. They cannot be held without trial or accusation as well.



Prove otherwise.

House Bill


They cannot be declared "enemy combants" under the military comission act of 2006 as they would not be:


i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or

ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006[/url]


Unless PETA attacks the US or one of it's allies outright, this law will not apply.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I am a member of PETA

People Eating Tasty Animals.

Mmmmm... pork chops..

Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 14-11-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]


I'm glad I eat meat!!!
At least they won't come looking for me for that-not yet.Will the PETA people be on the red list or on the blue list?? Maybe the green list???

Mod Note: One Line and Short Posts – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 16-11-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   
You're right about that the military comission act doesn't apply, unless an illegal immigrant would be a member of PETA.

First, let's see the bill.

Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act - Rewrites federal criminal code provisions regarding animal enterprise terrorism to prohibit anyone from traveling in, or using the mail or any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of damaging or disrupting an animal enterprise and, in connection with such purpose: (1) intentionally damaging, disrupting, or causing the loss of property used by or owned in connection with such enterprise;


Disrupting... so no damage at all, nothing, just disrupting.. blocking the entrance of a facility where the workers use things against animals would be labelled as terrorism, surely they would just have a fee on the first offense and worst later. IMO blocking, slowing or damaging things that ``tortures`` animals may not be legal but it's moral.


(2) intentionally placing a person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury to that person or a family member through threats, vandalism, property damage, trespass, harassment, or intimidation;

Yeah... reasonable.. they always say this, and people end up in jail when it's not the case on 90% of the cases.

Trespass? A terrorist act? What are they thinking?


(3) conspiring or attempting to do so. Prescribes escalating penalties.

Yeah, attempting to do so. This is freaking large to interpretation. They could round up NOW every member of PETA because they attempting to conspire to save animals from barbarics treatments.

Also, let's not forget that any money given to PETA is support to terrorism. IMO, those people should only be charged as before, as criminals, not terrorists.

For the patriot act 1 and 1.5, I don't have the time now, but I'll search for it tomorrow evening.



posted on Nov, 14 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   
The stupid 'I eat meat' posts do nothing but waste bandwidth, it was funny once and that once was a looooong time ago. Grow up, if you have nothing constructive to add blah blah blah.... Could you do anything more predictable?



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 05:10 AM
link   
So called 'animal rights' terrorists in the UK have decimated large parts of the countryside by releasing mink into the wild. It's taking years for wildlife to recover - with many species still close to extinction. Such people have no regard for animal welfare nor the environment. They also go around digging up graves and exhuming bodies. Apparently for fun. They have no regard for law, due proceedure, society, the environment, nor the rights of anyone or anything but themselves. They represent the very worst in humanity. I'd happily see them all shipped off to Guatanamo Bay.

Edit: In the UK, Animal Rights protestors disagree with the law of the land and the actions of our Govt. So they instead of trying to change the law by due and proper means, they terrorise those whose actions they disagree with. Islamic terrorists disagree with the law of the land and the actions of our Govt. So they instead of trying to change the law by due and proper means, they terrorise those whose actions they disagree with.

[edit on 15-11-2006 by Essan]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 05:19 AM
link   
ah yes, they are gonna milk the terrorist label on an organization that is against one of the biggest source of economy on the planet. of course the government will want us to think they are terrorists...

If you ask me the terrorists are the ones who breed animals for the purpose of slaughtering them for money.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join