Was Martin Luther King Jr. a Terrorist?
The U.S. House will soon vote on a bill that would define acts of peaceful protest as terrorism. Already passed by the Senate, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, S. 1926 and H.R. 4239 (AETA) categorizes activists as terrorists if they engage in First Amendment-protected activities like demonstrations, leafleting, undercover investigations and boycotts targeted at any business or institution that uses or sells animals or animal products. Have we lost our right to protest?
If AETA was in place during the 1950s and ‘60s, civil rights activists who engaged in lunch counter sit-ins at restaurants that serve animal products might have faced 10-year prison terms. It also would include any kind of whistleblower looking to flag illegal or questionable practices of the company.
According to the ACLU:
“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 because they ‘disrupt’ the company’s business. This overbroad provision might also apply to a whistleblower whose intentions are to stop harmful or illegal activities by the animal enterprise. The bill will effectively chill and deter Americans from exercising their First Amendment rights to advocate for reforms in the treatment of animals.”
The House is expected to vote on this bill soon after returning from recess possibly this week. The electorate’s call for sweeping change in Congress last week gives us new cause to encourage Members to vote down this bill that is a direct hit to our First Amendment rights. Please contact your Representative and the House Judiciary Committee today and ask them to oppose the AETA.
While this bill speaks primarily to animal rights activists and their abilities to challenge animal rights abuses in the corporate sector, it also represents a new tactic in how corporate America chooses to deal with active opposition to their policies, or lack there of. AETA can be applied to a breadth of situations and activities that could well limit the ability of any activist in America to challenge or call to question a corporation’s actions around animal rights, human rights and the environment. Along with us, there are about 160 groups who oppose this bill.
14 Responses to “Was Martin Luther King Jr. a Terrorist?”
Leave a Reply
All comments offered in the spirit of civil conversation are welcome! Commercial spam, obscenity and other rude behavior are not, and will be removed. Valid email addresses are required. (RAN respects your privacy; we will not use, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.)
November 14th, 2006 at 8:40 am
Unfortunately, the House passed the AETA by voice vote on Monday, 11/13. When the bill came up for consideration, only a handful of House members were even back in town, and very few were on the floor of the House when discussion ensued. We hope and expect that this bill will be challenged in court and found to unconstitutionally violate activists’ first amendment rights.
November 14th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
MY RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE AND TO PROTEST MY GOVERNMENT IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION. THOMAS JEFFERSON SAID IT IS MY DUTY.
November 14th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
It is a very frightening time to be an animal activist and for that matter…an American.
I hope this will be challanged! We need to all thank Dennis Kucinich , a vegan, who voted against it!
November 14th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
i do not understand! As far as i have learned in school in Germany at the start of the 60tis, america is a democratic state, and it is the duty of every american to protest against undemocratic actions, it doesn`t matter if it is a president, a judge, a billionar or what ever, i grew up with that knowledge, that somewhere on this earth, there is a goverment that`s fair to it`s people. what happened to america???? how come that a president who made himself a president by cheating the electins in the first place( it was on the news all around the world) can change the constitution and all these people in theparlament say yes, even if this parlament was just and especially was invented because of mr. nixon and his paranoia. now you have mr. bush, who seems to be just a paranoid as mr. nixon, or worse, just watch how many people got killed because of him ( i do not believe in al kaida, i don`t think that group ever existed, i think it`s just another lie of mr. bush, like so many others and nobody can deny that he lied a lot, too much for my opinion) and now 100, 000s of people die in afghanistan, in iraq, and soon in iran or elsewhere i suppose, you let him make everybody who has his own opinion to a terrorist??? what do you want to do, put the whole world into that torture jail in cuba, or what??? don`t you think it`s about time you see, that the only terrorist the world has to fear is mr. bush and his playmates??? i think now, that the democrates came back to power ( and i prayed for it), they will all those stupid unamerican laws, that mr. bush invented, undo. i believe in democracy and that critic is always there so you can learn and to mend mistakes to grow more democratic. kick that petty tyrant out of the goverment and insist that all his political records in the time, he was president, get open for the publik, not in 50 years, but now!!!. i am sure, than you will perfectly see the real terrorist, and i am sure the hunt for people who love and defend mother earth and all of her children will stop and america will be a democraticy again for the whole world.
November 14th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
i watched a movie that had a very interesting and in this case, a very appropriate tag line. it went like this: “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.” i learned in school that the government is supposed to be FOR the people AND BY the people, right? how come if we want to peaceably protest something, we are now considered terrorists? what does this say about our government? coersion and censorship. i find this whole thing to be sxceedingly STUPID.
November 14th, 2006 at 6:18 pm
This is unbelievable… WIthout the right to protest, we would still have segregation,women couldnt vote, there would still be child labor, and the environment would be destroyed. So many of the things we take for granted today, would not be so if it werent for activists that stood up to the government
November 14th, 2006 at 8:53 pm
I think the U.S. government goes too far as to determine who’s a terrorist and who’s not; in short, we have a demented, power-hungry presidential administration who will do anything to intimidate those who dare to oppose them.
Isn’t it time we took back our government?
November 14th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
People who have compassion for animals have every right to protests about animal cruelties. They have the right to let the public become aware of the cruelty and brutality involved in slaughtering animals for their animal parts or their furs. Animal activists don’t engage in any form of violence to protest about animal cruelties. We should not allowed the bill Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act to pass. If it doesn’t pass animal activists would have the freedom of opportunity to protest in non-violent ways to make the public aware of animal issues and cruelty and abuse involved with animals. Our right to peacefully protest is included in the U.S. Constitution and passing of this bill would violate our constitutional right to protest. People protest, not only animal issues, about other issues that needs public attention and awareness. So, why try to pass this bill to prohibit animal activists from peacefully protesting? Prohibiting animal acitivists from peacefully protesting and other people to protest about other non-animal issues isn’t fair and it is not justified.
November 15th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
“According to the ACLU: “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 because they ‘disrupt’ the company’s business.”"
That’s the thing-! Under the fine print, there is no longer any such THING as a lawful protest if it’s against an animal enterprise. Even if we’re merely asking a company to ‘change its ways,’ it could inadvertently affect their profits, even if it wasn’t our goal and then we’d be in trouble. This is ABSOLUTELY a violation of the Constitution.
November 16th, 2006 at 11:15 am
I’m a little confused I read the bill and I think I’m missing something. I can understand the comment above:
“According to the ACLU: “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 because they ‘disrupt’ the company’s business”
But in the bill section 6 part B says:
“Does not include any lawful economic disruption that results from lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to discloser of information about an animal enterprise;”
I do not see were it changes any laws about protesting. I’m not trying to defend this law, I’m just trying to see what I’m misssing.
November 17th, 2006 at 11:32 am
This is very troubling. If you protest peaceably, and you happen to disrupt the business of say, a fast food restaurant that may be on the street you are protesting, you can be immediately arrested and put in jail as terrorist. With the repeal of Habeus Corpus, you may never be heard from again. Our government will be able to put you in jail for handing out leaflets in the vicinity of any business that sells, say shoes or handbags, and send you to Guantanamo. You now have no civil right to even question your arrest or imprisonment due to the repeal of Habeus Corpus. Why are we all not in the streets protesting?
November 20th, 2006 at 5:34 am
well, with all due erspect, you guys let it happen. you seem to have leta guy with lots of powerful mates rig an election and then lead you round by the nose these past yrs on pretext of the ‘terrorist threat’ etc. Just kick the dick head out and show America’s great side (and that’s from someone who actually loves the individuals I’ve met from Amercia but hate the US as a nation or I suppose ultimately the ‘people’ (if this is indeed the people!). I guess I just never really beleived you actually had so many rednecks, rich corrupt power bases and pure idiots as your TV would have us beleive…whatever happened to the sensible grounded, rational middle America I wonder. Still every empire eventually crubles I guess
November 22nd, 2006 at 4:01 pm
The only reasonable response is to start protesting more. I hope the next Congress can reinstate habeas corpus. It is a founding principle of the rule of law. Also, I hope McCain’s role in punching a hole in habeas corpus haunts him through the 2008 election. I call him “habeas Mccainus” now, and I urge you to also. We can’t let him forget this. He is as moderate as Feinstein and Lieberman, and I mean that as an insult.
November 24th, 2006 at 11:22 am
Here’s the latest communication from the Equal Justice Alliance about next steps to stop the AETA. RAN is a member of EJA, a group of animal rights and social justice activist organizations working to protect our first amendment right to protest:
We have resolved that Equal Justice Alliance must continue its mission along three tracks:
* To protect equal justice and freedom of speech for animal and other social justice advocates by working to repeal AETA and to prevent future repressive legislation;
* To provide an alternative Congressional watchdog function;
* To promote an atmosphere of respect for animal advocacy within Congress and Justice Department.
We plan to pursue three ways of neutralizing AETA:
* By convincing federal district attorneys not to prosecute under AETA because the law is too broad and vague to make it through the courts;
* By convincing federal courts to dismiss a test case because the law is too broad and vague;
* By convincing Congress that the law is unworkable, unconstitutional, and should be repealed.
These are our projected tasks:
* Establish friendly relations with key legislators, Justice personnel, and defenders of civil liberties.
* Work with bar associations to obtain their support.
* Place favorable stories in the media.
* Develop talking points for contacting your senators and representative to begin the repeal process.
* Plan a major national conference next summer in Los Angeles to promote repeal.
* Compile guidelines for operating in the face of AETA.
* Compile a record of discriminatory enforcement of AETA.
* Ask animal rights and other social justice advocacy groups and individuals to join our effort.
Here is a quick summary of the key flaws of AETA, with more details on our website:
* It was passed by a voice vote of only five Representatives as a non-controversial bill.
* It is excessively broad and vague.
* It imposes disproportionately harsh penalties.
* It effectively brands animal advocates as ‘terrorists’ and denies them equal protection.
* It effectively brands civil disobedience as ‘terrorism’ and imposes severe penalties.
* It has a chilling effect on all forms of protest by endangering free speech and assembly.
* It interferes with investigation of animal enterprises that violate federal laws.
* It detracts from prosecution of real terrorism against the American people.
What you can do
Clearly, we can not take on this ambitious challenge without your active and continuing support. We need your help in three specific areas:
* Keep the issue alive among Members of Congress by contacting your two senators and representative periodically, using the arguments on our website, which expand on the talking points listed above.
* Report to us any cases of prosecution of social justice groups. This will help us to demonstrate that AETA enforcement discriminates against animal activists.