The Green Scare continues

I’ve written about the ongoing persecution and jailing of environmental activists in the US – called the ‘Green Scare’ in allusion to the Red Scare of the McCarthy era – in German a while ago, today I’ve seen a good English article on the topic on Indymedia Portland. A big part of the continuing crackdown is taking place in the Portland area: some of the last pieces of rainforest in the US are located there.

Court cases of three environmental activists have recently reignited discussion regarding definitions of the word „terrorism.“ All three cases involve acts of arson. While arson is a crime punishable by law, one still must question the heavy handedness of prison sentences handed down as well as proposed sentences in the following cases. The lengthy sentence originally handed down to forest activist Jeff „Free“ Luers was recently reduced by nearly 13 years. Briana Waters faces a possible 20 year sentence with Tre Arrow possibly facing life sentences if found guilty. A single act of arson in the state of Oregon is punishable by up to seven years. In this post 9/11 environment, radical environmentalists have been labeled terrorists by the federal government. Does this label fit the crime in these cases? Does destruction of private property equal terrorism? Is destruction of private property equal to acts of violence?

Jeffrey Luers is probably the best-known victim of the Green Scare so far but the other cases are remarkable in their own right: Neither against Brianna Waters nor against Tre Arrow are there any pieces of evidence, yet both face decades in jail if found guilty. Both maintain their innocence while Jeffrey Luers pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 23 years in prison at first (now down to 10 years, as the article states – still, 10 years for arson in which no living being was hurt. You can probably kill your spouse twice for that.)

The SHAC7, on the other other hand, were sentenced for thoughtcrime, i.e. running a website on Huntington Life Sciences’ animal testing lab and calling for action against them. They were not convicted of any actual actions taken against the lab – running the website was enough. They „were convicted on March 2, 2006, under the controversial Federal Animal Enterprise Protection Act. The Act punishes anyone who „physically disrupts“ an animal enterprise. The charges stem from these activists’ alleged participation in an international campaign to close the notorious product testing lab Huntingdon Life Sciences.“

The article linked above covers some recent developments as well as some of the background of the Green Scare.