SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
Indybay About Contact Newsletter Calendar Publish Community

Santa Cruz Indymedia | Animal Liberation | Education & Student Activism | Police State and Prisons

Home, Auto of UC-Santa Cruz Vivisectors Set Ablaze
by Animal Liberation Press Office
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 2:59 PM
For Immediate Release
August 3, 2008
Home, Auto of UC-Santa Cruz Vivisectors Set Ablaze
No Sanctuary for Animal Abusers

Santa Cruz: The home of one UC Santa Cruz vivisector and the automobile of another were burned early Saturday, in what local authorities are calling attacks by animal liberationists. No communiques claiming the actions have yet been received by the North American Animal Liberation Press Office as of Sunday afternoon. According to a San Jose Mercury News reporter, the automobile of a vivisector whom police refused to name was completely destroyed, while the damage to the home of animal abuser David Feldheim was limited to a door frame and smoke damage. Feldheim is fond of terrorizing and killing mice in his research, which according to his website, involves the "viral introduction of genes into living mouse brains."

The attacks occurred four days after a customer at Caffe Pergolesi, a downtown Santa Cruz coffeehouse, found fliers listing the names, home addresses, home phone numbers and photos of thirteen UC-Santa Cruz vivisectors. Police believe unidentified animal rights activists created the fliers, which were made to appear as "wanted posters." The fliers warned: "Animal abusers everywhere beware; we know where you live; we know where you work; we will never back down until you end your abuse."

The Santa Cruz incidents occurred one day after a mass e-mailing by Stop Animal Exploitation Now!, or SAEN, highlighting what the group called "mounting violations of the animal welfare act" at private labs in Santa Cruz and Berkeley. Police would not say whether there is a connection between the group and Saturday's violence. Santa Cruz police Captain Steve Clark would only say authorities are looking at several animal liberation groups, including SAEN, but have no suspects in Saturday's bombings.

"The pattern and string of attacks has been escalating against the research and science community here as well as at other University of California campuses," Clark said. Vivisectors at the University of California-Berkeley and University of California-Los Angeles also have been targeted, including firebombings in Los Angeles.

Animal Liberation Press Officer Jerry Vlasak, MD states: “UC Santa Cruz may consider themselves an institution of higher education, but they are also an institution of animal torture and killing. Their research is a colossal waste of taxpayer money, and is considered unethical and fraudulent by most physicians interested in research that might help their patients. These animals are terrified and abused beyond belief in these experiments, and this continued depravity by cruel wanna-be scientists simply cannot be justified any longer in a civilized society. This is historically what happens whenever revolutionaries begin to take the oppression and suffering of their fellow beings seriously, whether human or non human. It's regrettable that certain scientists are willing to put their families at risk by choosing to do wasteful animal experiments in this day and age."

"Only force can help where force prevails"- Bertolt Brecht
-30-



Contact: Press Officer Jerry Vlasak, MD
Animal Liberation Press Office
6320 Canoga Avenue #1500
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818.227-5022

http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org
press [at] animalliberationpressoffice.org

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by 874
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 3:15 PM
Wait... could the original poster clarify whether Jerry Vlasek or the 'animal liberation press office' actually wrote this above? I can't find it listed either as a media release or a communique on the linked site. The way it is written both implies authorship by Vlasek, and quotes him as a third person who may not be making a statement about this event. Also, most of the announcement refers to information taken from the newspaper about the flyers found in the cafe and so forth. The nature of the writing makes it sound like someone who didn't necessarily know the intentions of the participant wrote it, with mental solidarity with what they felt the goals were.
Additionally, was the car that was burned owned by a researcher, or their neighbor?

by just sayin
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 3:56 PM
just thought I'd point it out
by UCSC Grad
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 5:09 PM
These acts of violence are completely unacceptable. The people who committed these acts should be hunted down and persecuted with the same zealousness and vigor as this city would use against the KKK or any other extremist hate group.
by I Have No Idea
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 5:23 PM
"Wait... could the original poster clarify whether Jerry Vlasek or the 'animal liberation press office' actually wrote this above? I can't find it listed either as a media release or a communique on the linked site."

http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

PRESS RELEASES
http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/pr_home.htm

http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/press_releases/pr_08_08_04_ucscarsons.htm
by Concerned
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 5:28 PM
What mounting violations? I work in one of those labs and know nothing of these 'violations'. How about instead of spreading their typical lies, SAEN actually cites exactly what violations are taking place? If they are speaking of animal abuse by SCBT that's one thing, but the university is entirely removed from that. The worst part about these kinds of statements is that they have little merit and will sadly be gobbled up followers.
by ntuit
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 5:28 PM
The more I read and learn about UC - the uglier it looks. The UC graduate posting on here must be very proud. I guess animal torture and other abuses are to be expected of an institution that helped develop that in one instance destroyed the lives of 100s of thousand of people and tortured them for years. The administrators live on bloated salaries that they justify by comparing themselves to CEOs and other minions of the corporate world. They are no longer educators - they are corporate excutives with all of the perks. Still they try to keep the lowest wage earners down. All the money and ridiculous stuff they've done at Memorial Stadium and the tree grove has made them ridiculous and laughable. Their million dollar deal for the UC Berkeley Chief of Police was criminal and a disgusting waste of taxpayer money. On top of all of this - they do appear to condone unnecessary torture of animals. Possibly John Yoo of the UC Berkely law schools has also written a paper on animal torture like he has for human torture. This university systme needs a clean up from the top down.
Are you being serious when you say, "If they are speaking of animal abuse by SCBT that's one thing, but the university is entirely removed from that." Do you really believe that or are you naive regarding UCSC and SCBT? Do the research unless you really need someone else to post it here for you. Here's a hint for the skeptics, where do you think many SCBT employees are also students? Now dig further and give an update.

"What mounting violations? I work in one of those labs and know nothing of these 'violations'. How about instead of spreading their typical lies, SAEN actually cites exactly what violations are taking place? If they are speaking of animal abuse by SCBT that's one thing, but the university is entirely removed from that."

Sentinel coverage:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_10084756

San Jose Mercury News:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10080239

It appears the corporate media decided to 'clean up' their spin and focus their efforts at demonization. Although part of the original story online story, as re-posted on indybay.org (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/08/02/18522193.php), information about U.S. Department of Agriculture federal compliance reports on labs across the U.S have been removed from the articles by the San Jose Mercury News (/ Santa Cruz Sentinel clusterfuck).

The San Jose Mercury News removed this infromation from their article:


"Stop Animal Exploration NOW!, or SAEN, an Ohio-based group that collects and publishes federal compliance reports on labs across the U.S., said this week that Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc., a firm that produces antibodies for medical use, received 27 violations by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The violations, made during visits in 2006 and 2007, ranged from findings of poor care of animals, including goats and rabbits, to the hiring of unqualified employees.

The company's ranking placed it behind only one other lab in California, TB Holdings of Berkeley, which had 35 violations during the same years, according to SAEN.

Jessica D. Milteer, a USDA spokeswoman, said she could not immediately verify whether the specific reports posted on SAEN's Web site were accurate replicas of official reports. But Milteer confirmed her agency routinely provides such reports to the advocacy organization under Freedom of Information Act requests, and said she had no reason to suspect the group's postings were fraudulent.

Matt Mullin, a spokesman for Santa Cruz Biotechnology declined to comment Friday, saying only the company's top two executives were authorized to discuss the violations. Neither was available, he said.

Michael A. Budkie, who founded SAEN 12 years ago, said the Delaware Avenue lab purposely keeps animals in poor health, according to the eight inspection reports he has published on his site dating back to 2001.

"We're talking about situations where the animals in question are receiving very little in the way of veterinary care," Budkie said. "You can't have an animal producing antibodies without having it in a terribly deteriorating condition."
by the anti-abortion movement has taken.
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 6:12 PM
Ideological justification aside, how far have the tactics gotten them?
by AFC
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 7:22 PM
mouse-vivisection.jpg
mouse-vivisection.jpg

Thoughts About Animal Experimentation
Golden Drops of Bare Truths

"Vivisection is probably the best and longest established form of organised, officially acknowledged animal cruelty. Vivisection is symbolic of the way we treat animals. It has the support of the world's most profitable industries. I believe that when vivisection is banned other forms of animal cruelty will quickly disappear too. Vivisection is the most immoral, academically and intelectually dishonest form of animal abuse. Now that slavery and apartheid have been abolished I firmly believe that vivisection is the most evil and barbaric, unjust and unjustifiable practice on earth." (from the book Fighting for Animals)

http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=72
by Jimmy Harrison
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 7:35 PM
I'm just blown away that anyone could become so carried away by one issue that they think they're justified terrorizing these people's private life and family. With ongoing warfare in the Middle East, and outright genocide in Darfur (to name only the most obviously violent crises facing the globe currently), you're going to bomb a PROFESSOR'S HOUSE? You really think you're making a positive contribution to the world?

The reason that the world is currently so miserable is because of people who believe their own imaginary causes, whether it be religious, ideological, or whatever, are more important than what anybody else believes. It takes a real special kind of arrogance to put your ideology before the life of another human being. How shortsighted and cowardly.
by Bob Dobbs
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 7:39 PM
...would that have been acceptable to those who did it?

I liked this quote from the press release: "It's regrettable that certain scientists are willing to put their families at risk by choosing to do wasteful animal experiments in this day and age."

So...if somebody kills their children, it's their own fault. And the person who actually arranged the killing is, well, justified?

Just curious.

by dyp
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 8:44 PM
This is sort of interesting to read. The ALF or animal liberation front is in disagreement with that Vlasak guy at the animal liberation press office over the issue of violence to people. One of the only rules of ALF, apparently, is that no one may be harmed. But Vlasak has many several public statements counter to this (such as advocating selected assassinations), earning sharp criticism from the ALF movement and others. All the ALF people are anonymous, of course, but they are more numerous than the Press office group in Los Angeles. A group fighting japanese whaling doesn't like Vlasak any more.
http://www.animalliberationfront.com/ALFront/Interviews/ALFandBradley.htm
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/05/local/me-alf5

by ab
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 10:24 PM
Going after people in their homes is indefensible. Injuring them is reprehensible. Protest all you want (it's you right!), but escalation to violence will lead to more violence. Will Jerry's self-serving justifications sound the same when the guy in black with the molotov cocktail in hand has just had his chest blown out by a shotgun-wielding scientist protecting his children?
by Loligo35
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 10:33 PM
I am glad the animal rights folks know how to veil there threats against the scientists familys, wouldnt want anything like the law to get in the way of doing right (sarcasm)
by ever
Sunday Aug 3rd, 2008 11:49 PM
This is not the way to further your cause.
I have nothing more to say.
by archipelago
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 1:07 AM
To call this a "news article" is quite a stretch. It is infused with ideology. But the problem with ideology is that it blinds people. And leads in all sorts of ethically dubious directions.

Here we have a true case of ideological blindness leading people to believe whatever fantasy they wish to believe. Leaving aside the huge problem of the use of terrorist tactics, just the posting here alone is unbelievable. The researchers are discussed in inflammatory language, but do we even know what we are talking about here?

How about some relief from the ideology for a moment?

Wake up, people. The wrong house was bombed. One of the researchers is simply a chemist. He doesn't even work on animals of any shape or form. Yet somehow in this version of the "news" it is about murderers, torturers, vivisectors, and monsters. Explain to me how a chemist working with chemicals and occasionally fungus is a guilty of murder, torture, vivisection? And then explain how it is noble and justified to bomb his residence in the dark with a rather dangerous explosive while he and his wife and child are asleep. Oh I forgot, it is his fault and he is the one putting his child in danger. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

When people get so carried away with their ideological convictions that they become blind, well, of course they are going to bomb the wrong house. But hey, it's okay, because it was close enough and at least it was in the neighborhood.
by mike morford
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 3:50 AM
I call you that pepetrated this attack or are sympathetic with it, COWARDS ! You cannot come face to face in a civilized manner to confront this issue. Is it because you have no chance of winning your argument? You must resort to do things when no one is looking, giving into primal urges and animal instincts. To take action like this in the cover of darkness (or dusk) speaks volumes. Sneaking around and lurking in bushes shows the state of mind that you have. You are desparate.
by dyp
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 6:23 AM
Regarding the comment above, I wouldn't be that certain that the aggressor is a student. Indeed, old newspaper articles about vocal animal rights activity in this region largely cite folks who are residents of the city, but not attending the school.
Indeed, if you go through online forums and blogs relating to Santa Cruz, it is clear that a good 25% of the city or more just loathes having the university there. And you know what... not all of these people who feel like that are conservatives or cranky old people who hate having students live in apartments next to them making noise. Some of them do not like the work done at the school.

Back to the main point of the media release above, which is that nobody has taken credit for this either through Vlasak's Animal Liberation Press Office, or the more 'conservative' ALF (because they have more ethical principles regarding the types of actions allowed). It is becoming increasingly clear that this is not a mainstream ALF or animal liberation strike, and instead sounds like an independent or disconnected group that did it.
by your dreads are leeching your intelligence
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 10:10 AM
Did you not read what the article said? 'SAEN highlighting what the group called "mounting violations of the animal welfare act" at private labs in Santa Cruz and Berkeley'. Considering UCSC is a public institution, it's labs are not be private! For the record, many people who work at SCBT who are also employed at UCSC are undergraduates who work as dish washers and lab help. Please tell me one faculty member at UCSC who also works at SCBT and I will rest my case.
by ex-resident
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 10:37 AM
Hope you guys like the feds and cops, because they're going to be crawling all over Santa Cruz for weeks to come. Smashing the windows of banks and businesses, attacking professors, instigating police standoffs on Riverside Avenue- you're doing a better job of lobbying for increased police budgets and truly heavy-handed repression than the people you think you're fighting against.

The sad part is- your masturbatory vandalism will probably get some legitimate activists thrown in jail right alongside you. It's assholes like you that caused the Green Scare to happen, and have tarred and feathered what would be otherwise laudable causes.

In defending the lives of animals, are you willing to kill other animals- humans? And if so, do you realize how fucking hypocritical you are?

by suki
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 10:58 AM
It's interesting to read this and reflect on the shared ideology of the pro-life movement, which (i propose) now be a term used to describe anyone willing to kill or maim in order to "protect life"
by cope
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 11:32 AM
Anyone devoting any time to researching the subject would realize that UCSC is not a medical research facility, and it has far below average biological research involving lab animals than similar colleges like Stanford. That is why they could only find a handful of people using mice in their research. Indeed, the McDonald's and the KFC at the base of the hill probably use more birds every day than the cell biologists use mice up there.
by Becky Johnson
( becky_johnson222 [at] hotmail.com ) Monday Aug 4th, 2008 11:44 AM
I want to echo comments made by others here. I think the action at the UCSC professor's house was profoundly ill-advised. Terrorism, and that's what it is, can never be condoned, no matter how just the cause. You have deeply offended the vast majority of people who live here, and raised ZERO sympathy for your cause.

I too am opposed to cruelty to animals. But this is NOT the way to raise your issue. ONLY after you have completely exhausted all legal means to affect change, is civil disobedience called for. And even then, it can never be done in a way that endangers or hurts anyone or you will lose support for your cause.

For the record, HUFF in 19 years of its history has NEVER staged an action at any opponents home.
We KNOW where most City Council members live, but, despite our differences, they have the right to sleep safely in their own homes without fear of attack from those with whom they disagree. This is the beauty of democracy. You CAN express disagreement with your government. Use public forums. Circulate petitions. Stage pickets. Send letters. Issue press releases. Write articles. Take pictures. Interview experts. Use the courts. But DON"T become a thug.

And, BTW, gee thanks for the swarm of Federal cops you have brought down on all of us.
by WGS
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 11:45 AM
It's not just the arson-terror tactics of these Animal Rightists that are fascist in origin.

Upon coming to power, Hitler banned animal research, which he called a "conspiratorially Jewish" science, and introduced the Tierschutzgesetz, the first "animal rights" legislation.

Mengele's subsequent experiments on handicapped children and Jews in in Auschwitz must be understood in this context, as should the pronouncements of the animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who advocates euthanizing severely handicapped children.

I hope it is merely a coincidence that both of the victims happened to be Jewish, but this looks much more like an anti-Semitic hate crime than a progressive act of protest.


by rats over people!
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 11:53 AM
good to see you still chiming into AR posts as multiple characters

don't think we don't notice.

yes, AR activists are nazis. yes, we want you to die so a rat can live

by trust no one
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 11:55 AM
You can't believe what you read in the papers.

Not saying this was NOT done by animal activists but the truth is that ALMOST NO ONE KNOWS for sure. Yet all kinds of people here act like they know what the true story is. I'm sure it's even worse on the corporate newspaper sites.

Governments, including our own, have been known to use false flag operations to discredit and justify attacking enemies, perceived and real: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

It's quite typical of authorities drive a wedge between other leftwing groups and so-called fringe groups with heated rhetoric (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2005/05/19/17383601.php), as well as false flag operations. With a relatively simple operation like this, they can muster public support to pass laws like the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/11/12/18329237.php). When more mainstream-ish groups buy into the fearmongering, they are actually allowing the government to slowly but surely repress their own rights to express dissent. How many "peace" groups have been spied on in the name of fighting terrorism? We may never know the full answer to that.

Going back a few years, the whole official Chiron "bombing" in Emerville story never really washed with me for several reasons that I won't go into here. Something funny is up with that, including that perhaps Daniel Andreas was a goverment operative rather than the perpetrator as authorities still claim. Could he have been another "Anna" (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/01/20/17969021.php) as in the Auburn "ELF" case (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/01/18/40662.php) and when he couldn't prod anyone into committing a crime, he disappeared and the "crime" somehow happened anyway? The pretext of looking for him certainly allowed the gov't to raid and intimidate a lot of local AR folks (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2005/04/24/31542.php).

I'm sure other long-time readers here can provide countless examples of themselves. And I won't even go into what our government was able to get away with after 9/11 -- raising the question of who benefited from that most profitable of crimes. I will link to the historically documented Operation Northwoods for folks who think our own government would never even consider perpetrating such a crime: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods.

In short, don't jump to conclusions and think you know the whole story.

- trust no one
by Incisor
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:02 PM
Savage. There is a prison cell waiting for these criminals. They will be found and they wil prosecuted.
by WGS
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:07 PM
If, as you suggest, the FBI (or similar agency) provoked or perpetrated these attacks (in analogy with what they did, for example, with the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement), they somehow forgot to implicate a particular group (no one has taken credit). If you look at the COINTELPRO documents obtained via the FOIA, you will see that these operations are always accompanied by propaganda campaigns designed to smear specific individuals or groups. Yet we have none of that here.

Occam's razor: the simplest explanation is probably the right one; more complex claims require compelling evidence. In its absence, this becomes mindless conspiracy theory.

The sad reality is this action was probably perpetrated out of abject ignorance and stupidity, in the absence of any sense of critical progressive analysis.
by observer
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:08 PM
Let's not buy into the propaganda.
by Incisor
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:10 PM
DYP says "It is becoming increasingly clear that this is not a mainstream ALF or animal liberation strike, and instead sounds like an independent or disconnected group that did it."

Bull! ALF operates in exactly this mode. Independent, loosely connected and antonymous cells are perfect descriptions of ALF.

It is far from clear. ALF is high on the list of suspects. But be sure, they will find you, whoever you are.
by It was not ALF
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:15 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Liberation_Front

"Any direct action that contradicts these aims — and in particular the provision not to harm human or non-human life — may not be claimed as an ALF act"
by your tired meme
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:38 PM
The AR movement is not "pro life" necessarily, even pulling those two words from their normal connotation and association with human-fetus lovers.

The AR movement is anti-animal-oppression, in other words it's against human on non-human animal violence or exploitation. It's not a call for every animal to live forever.

You may disagree, but to call AR "pro-life" is a lie. Pro-life people care not a whit about quality of life issues, whereas that's THE primary concern for AR activists.

Euthanizing sick animals or those who cannot find loving homes is better than prolonged animal suffering, as virtually all AR activists agree. Oftentimes, "liberated" animals are too sick or disfigured to be kept alive and only a portion are healthy enough to be placed in loving environments. That's not a pro-life position, a pro-life position that would keep Terri Schiavo alive into her 90s or longer regardless of her quality of life.

You've made that anti-abortion point on indybay threads for years, but it's not catching on because it's not true. (The nazi crap is weak too, but I guess that's what you do when you can't argue on the merits, or lack thereof as you may think, of modern AR. Why not toss out whack charges of anti-semitism when you got nuthin' else, huh?)
by smells like Stasi
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:48 PM
The radical right bombs abortion clinics, and the radical left bombs animal researchers. Not too much difference between the two, is there? What did the KKK and the SDS have in common, again? Both were heavily infiltrated by the FBI. What did the undercover agents always do once they infilitrated a group? Incite to violence! George Demmerle and the Chicago Seven in 1968, for example - he was a "radical fight-the-pigs-with-violence guy" - and an undercover FBI agent, out to discredit the anti-war movement by infilitrating it and initiating violent acts.

As a result of this "action" by unknown "animal rights activists", the FBI now gets to increase its presence and activities in Santa Cruz, perhaps infiltrating Students Against War (oh, yes, they have more than one undercover cop inside SAW) and other peaceful groups and attempting to incite them to violence. Anyone promoting or applauding this "action" is either an idiot or an undercover police/university spy.

Too bad they couldn't have put as much effort into finding those responsible for the anthrax attacks, huh? By the way, the claim that "Bruce Ivins did it" is just bullshit. Christ, the FBI - Federal Bureau of Infiltration, Incompetence, and Intimidation - America's domestic political police. Ever see The Insider? Same story, different day.
by okay then
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 12:55 PM
well, if you are saying it's "mindless conspiracy theory" until there's proof, then I guess AIM and the Panthers were actually suffering at the hands of the government and it was just "mindless" of them to suspect the feds and others until proof emerged a decade or more later. how many people called Abbie Hoffman paranoid at the time? COINTELPRO was not known as such at the time it was perpetrated. by your logic, every other government crime against activist groups can be similarly poo-poo'ed or dismissed on the same grounds, as rarely, if ever, are such things "proven"

as for naming a specific group, it's only been a couple days. in addition, ALF doesn't really go around publicly naming chairpeople or regional directors of illegal activity. and the papers are reporting that SAEN is being looked at by authorities. that's one specific group named right there. besides, they don't have to name a target if their goal is to discredit/attack/marginalize an entire movement (in this case AR).

besides, you can't limit what you think might be possible in today's false flag ops by what the government may or may not have done 40 years ago. jeebus. they keep learning, those sneaky bastards, and it would be "mindless" of us to assume they haven't

bringing up occam's razor to justify your own personal theories is just a mindless distraction in this comment thread

the point of the above comment about false flags was that NO ONE KNOWS, and that includes YOU, you presumptuous twit

by someone
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 1:56 PM
i agree with the above post
by Suki
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 3:06 PM
I haven't posted on Indybay before when it comes to this issue.
I appreciate the points you make that differentiate between anti-abortion "pro-life" sentiments and the AR perspective and agree that they are substantiative. I disagree with you that you can draw a bright line between the two concerns by stating that the anti choice movement doesn't incorporate "a quality of life" into their political program/organizing ideation.
They absolutely do believe that their program is all about the quality of life. I totally disagree with them; however that is a claim they make.

For instance, they mimic/pick up on reproductive inequity/quality of life concerns when they use the slogan "Abortion hurts women" as an organizing slogan. it's a silly approach to spark thought on the issue of reproductive inequity, nonetheless when they use this argument, they are feeding into a repro justice perspective. It's just that they think prohibiting abortion will somehow answer the real issue of shitty or non-existent health care.

Yo know, clearly what sparks the line of argument that the pro-life/AR communities have more in common than the AR community might be comfortable with is the dist. of private information which makes it possible to physically threaten researchers at home. And you have to ask; if these two groups (anti-abortion vs AR) seem to be using the same tactics and are perceived to be in some way ideologically linked, is that seeming likeness something the AR community wants to dispute/dispel? I'm curious (in other that's a real question not a rhetorical one) Please don't yell at me when and if you answer this posting!
by John
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 5:31 PM
your tired meme wrote:
"The AR movement is not "pro life" necessarily, even pulling those two words from their normal connotation and association with human-fetus lovers."

Nor is the antiabortion movement truly "pro-life." They just use abortion as a tool to rant against what they really oppose, premarital sex.

"The AR movement is anti-animal-oppression, in other words it's against human on non-human animal violence or exploitation."

If that's the case, why does virtually everyone in the AR movement resort to the tired (and false) meme of "non-animal alternatives," which in fact are neither? The reality is that they are complementary methods that almost all exploit animals in less-apparent (but usually cause more animal suffering) ways, such as the harvesting of bovine serum by cardiac puncture without anesthesia for use in cell culture media.

Why is there not a single AR proponent who opposes clinical HIV tests (for antibody in serum of humans), despite the fact that every test increases net demand for vivisection, in the form of animal antibodies that detect the human antibodies?

Note that in both of these cases, as long as the animal is not the actual subject, your movement simply doesn't give a shit about the animals that are vivisected, and in fact lies to conceal the vivisection.

"It's not a call for every animal to live forever."

Correct, just as the "pro-life" antiabortionists generally don't give a shit about live children, for example all those children in Iraq that we have killed and maimed.

"You may disagree, but to call AR "pro-life" is a lie. Pro-life people care not a whit about quality of life issues, whereas that's THE primary concern for AR activists."

Not really. Did you speak out against the dumping of the "liberated" animals in Minneapolis into a field, where they were easily picked off as prey or died of exposure? The hypocrisy of the movements is very parallel. Both are about demonizing people. The animals and the fetuses are just tools.

"Euthanizing sick animals or those who cannot find loving homes is better than prolonged animal suffering, as virtually all AR activists agree."

So why weren't the Minnesota animals euthanized instead of being cruelly and casually dumped in a field to die long deaths?

"Oftentimes, "liberated" animals are too sick or disfigured to be kept alive and only a portion are healthy enough to be placed in loving environments."

The animals dumped in Minnesota were neither. They were, however, completely unready for life outside the lab. That was cruel, and not a single alleged animal advocate spoke out against it.

Oh, and AFC, speaking of truth, your photo is of a rat, not a mouse. Your credibility is gone.
by WSQT Guerrilla Radio 88.1 FM in DC
( wsqtradio [at] hushmail.com ) Monday Aug 4th, 2008 6:07 PM
Listen now:
Embed code:
Download audio:
Download audio
ca_fires.mp3 3.1MB

There has been a national campaign to criminalize ALL pro-animal and pro-Earth protest for the past few years. HEY FBI-if you treat protesters as terrorists, only "terrorists" will be able to protest!

Here is a summary of harassment of peaceful protesters just in the DC area that WSQT covers. Word is that this is a national problem as Federal police and Homeland Security agencies fill up with Iraq veterans keen to treat protesters as "insurgents!"

*In VA there have been people doing MONTHS in jail for nothing more than wearing a mask to a circus protest, courtesy of FBI agent Vincent Antignano. This came after George Mason University(sponsor of the offending Ringling Brothers appearance) retaliated against students seen at earlier protests with campus "disciplinary" proceedings.

*In DC a senior police official was overheard saying the departments goal was to arrest ALL animal rights protesters! There have been arrests at later protests for falsely alleged incidents at earlier protests, and a LOT of spying and harassment

*Two Indymedias have been harassed by the FBI for covering FBI agent Vincent Antignano, and covering the UCLA vivisection campaign.

In light of similar incidents nationwide, is it any suprise that someone decided that two can "turn up the heat?"

by WGS
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 6:10 PM
John is my hero.
by Diana
Monday Aug 4th, 2008 6:10 PM
The rat is being injected with a hypodermic needle and not being cut into with a knife which is what vivisection is.
by what about the actual tactics?
Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 2:01 AM
Leaving aside the ideological frameworks of AR/antiabortion, whether they're similar or not... The fundies have been doing this kind of thing for decades. Has it got them anywhere? Also, insofar as it has done anything for their 'cause,' how much of that is because the Feds are distinctly UNINTERESTED in arrests and prosecutions for anticlinic violence?

If you adopt a losing tactic and then go down in a 'blaze of glory,' who or what have you helped, in the end? Besides the ever-growing police state, that is?

For cross-reference, consider the effects of the Berkman-Goldman attempt to assassinate Frick-- it lost the steelworkers their strike, because it swung massive public sympathy behind the otherwise-hated company. Here's a refresher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Clay_Frick#Assassination_attempt

Just in case you don't feel like a click-through, here's the punchline:

"Frick was back at work in a week; Berkman was charged and found guilty of attempted murder. Berkman's actions in planning the assassination clearly indicated a premeditated intent to kill, and he was sentenced to 22 years in prison. He eventually served a total of fourteen years, and under pressure from supporters in the labor movement, including the forming of The Berkman Defense Association, was pardoned in 1906.

"Negative publicity from the attempted assassination resulted in the collapse of the strike. Two thousand five hundred men lost their jobs, and most of the workers who stayed had their wages halved."

That's 14 years of of the labor movement focused on dealing with the guy in prison, instead of focused on winning strikes and radicalizing workers in the process. All and all, why wouldn't anti-labor governments and private thugs want to infiltrate unions and incite violence? They'd defeat the unions every time, that way...

But, hey, history doesn't repeat itself. It needs your help.
by John
Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 9:25 AM
Diana wrote:
"The rat is being injected with a hypodermic needle and not being cut into with a knife which is what vivisection is."

Even if we use their definition, their hypocrisy is staggering.

Cell culture, their favorite "nonanimal alternative" mantra, involves direct cardiac puncture and desanguination of unanesthetized calves. "Fetal" bovine serum comes from calves that are no longer fetuses by any ethical definition, because they have been removed from their slaughtered mothers before cardiac puncture. It's complementary, not alternative, too. Note that the people claiming that cell culture is a panacea are not people who do cell culture (like me).

And clinical tests (ON human blood) for HIV and other viruses are manufactured using the products of vivisection (animal antibodies that recognize human antibodies). One can point this out again and again, but not a single member of the AR movement will ever picket an AIDS clinic.

It's all about targeting people. The animals are just tools to them.
by run out of town
Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 10:25 AM
Someone mentioned if it had been the KKK the City would kick them out. Sorry to tell you we have the KKK in town. They also flier, some live in Boulder Creek. They are not invisible and it's well known they are in town. Who exactly should the city " run out of town?" I am not in agreement 100% with the act mentioned in the article, but "The City" is a very broad term, who, what , when?
by Jack Straw
Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 10:38 AM
KKK? Are those the people in Santa Cruz who wear hoods and set fire to houses in the middle of the night in order to intimidate the occupants into submitting to their nazi-like world-view? Or are those the highly progressive Animal Rights "activists"? Hold on a minute, while I check the labels under their hoods.
who wants to start a lynch mob and get 'em? I got my pitchfork ready

we could string a few of 'em from the trees and then set out to systematically wipe the rest of them from the face of the planet

nuthin' better than targeting small minorities for hateful attacks. it's easy too, to place all our rage on them and ignore what's really screwing up our lives

I personally feel very threatened by vegans and am eager to begin the slaughter

grrrrr!
by John Thielking
( pagesincolor [at] riseup.net ) Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 7:54 PM
Thankfully there was another peacefull protest this week, where some bicyclists attacked abandoned buildings with seeds. That's more like it.

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/08/04/18522794.php

I really can't say if this violent AR incident was COINTELPRO or not. One way to tell anonymous fakery from real anonymous terrorism or intimidation by the unsophisticated people who are made to look like they are guilty is the apparent level of sophistication required to pull off the act in question.

Looking at the situation from this perspective, I question the need for the relatively high tech molotov cocktails used in the firebombings. The news said that the firebombs were molotov cocktails on steroids. Only on the Sci fi channel does Al-Queda possess the sophistication to reprogram alien dna or some other high tech nonsense. The US government has access to Anthrax spores. The US government is capable of making it seem that it was possible for people to make cell phone calls from airplanes in mid flight on 9/11 (disproven to be possible by a researcher flying in a Cesna at 10,000 ft). And of course the US government has the ability to create the most effective chemical combination for a fire bomb. It's not provable from only this information of course that this was the US government, but it would not suprise me if it were.

Regardless of who was responsible, these cowardly acts do not bode well for the AR movement. These acts will only help to solidfy the criminalization of peacefull protests by the nonviolent portion of the AR movement. Currently it is technically illegal to commit any violent or nonviolent act that deprives a meat producer/animal slaughterer of profits, thanks to this trend being recently enacted into federal law.
by WTF?
Tuesday Aug 5th, 2008 9:49 PM
What a self-congratulatory PR. The UC may be an institution of corruption, but what good is it to put the lives of others in danger?

It's disappointing because it is alienating those willing to stand for animal rights...

It's a disgrace to the activist community that some would stoop to the level of thugs and vandals to make their statement.

Learn your theories, organize...and figure out a more mature and effective way to change the system...

by Confused
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 6:24 AM
The researcher whose car was destroyed did not use any animals in his research so I am confused as to why he was targeted. This was a poorly thought out action especially considering the extremely high fire hazard we have ion the state right now. BTW this is exactly why the police went nuts over the earlier incident where the protestors were just rattling doors.
by more
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 6:53 AM
when those protestors rattled doors (or as the family later stated, crossed onto private property or something) there were no cars on fire.

i don't understand the correlation there.
The whole story sounds fishy. What is this "mass emailing" by Stop Animal Exploitation Now? What about the mysterious flyers left at Cafe Pergolisi - and nowhere else? Who "found them" and brought them to the police?

Then we have the firebombing on the upper West Side - unusual in the extreme. Targeting a couple of researchers at UCSC - Christ, the folks at McDonalds and Safeway are responsible for more animal cruelty than the entire U.S. academic research program put together - and people respond, not with firebombing, but with anti-factory farming campaigns - and one researcher didn't even have anything to do with animals at all.

That's why I say this looks like a COINTELPRO program whose aim is to allow the FBI to expand their presence in Santa Cruz. There are too many cute coincidences and uncertainties.

Note that in the 1960s, the FBI set up numerous fake organizations and fake newsletters that typically promoted idiotic and violent behavior, all under the guise of COINTELPRO. Given the FBI's focus on "eco-terrorism", it would not be too surprising to find that most of the violence-promoting animal rights groups are just front organizations for undercover FBI agents. (UCSC has a full time undercover FBI agent on campus, for example - ask them to deny it).

What does an undercover FBI agent look like? Well, check this link to see the Canadian version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow

There, the police sent undercover agents into the protestors with rocks in a deliberate effort to incite violence. Next time you see some protestor wearing a mask, rip it off and take a photo - ten to one it'll be an undercover cop. Stasi monkeys.

Consider also the FBI's handling of the anthrax attacks: harrassment of innocent individuals, and protection of corporate criminals. That's all the FBI is about these days: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
by Confused
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 8:12 AM
What I meant was is that the police reacted so vigourously against the attempted home invasion (or just door rattling deoending on your point of view) to try and shut these people down before it got to the firebombing stage. This is tha same pattern of violence that was seen in southern California.
by annie
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 9:16 AM
solidarity from the midwest. it's about time we start upping tactics, even if we personally may disagree with some of the details. vivisectors have been upping their tactics for years.

obviously most of the people on here are trolls, but it breaks my heart to see people who write and talk and talk and write about a diversity of tactics going out of their way to condemn this. what unites us is more than squabbles over tactics, and that goes both ways.

but my broken heart is mended and then some by knowing that some people are putting their words into concrete action, which speaks much more effectively for those who are daily tortured and killed by the purveyors of actual violence - the vivisectors. thank you. you're heroes.
by archipelago
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 11:52 AM
Have your "views" if you are so attached to them and think they are so "valid." No one can stop you from holding views, whatever they are.

But when you post those views in public, well, that's a different matter.

Explain to me or any of us on any side of any issue here how it is that you can torture, vivisect, and murder yeast?

When you accomplish that, maybe we can try to see if what you say is worth considering.
by vincent
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 2:34 PM
i want to thank whomever set up the bomb for ruining my fun and encroaching on my freedom. as a graduate student, i enjoy walking the halls stoned to the bejesus, drinking beers and doing research. now, with the increased police/security presence, there is absolutely no way that i'm going to be able to do that. everyone talks about a police state, but i remember working in peace before the tree sitters came, before the animal rights activists. now i need a key and an ID to get into the place i work. thanks a million. every time i come to these boards, i realize the ignorance and hatred that fuels anti-science sentiment in santa cruz and i repeatedly ask the question, "why are you so scared of science?" if we all stopped pretending to know more than we really know and learn to read and think critically i wouldn't have fucking cops outside my door and maybe people would be making a difference instead of propagating hatred. i'm past the point of caring, i'm getting done and, to quote r. kelly, getting the fuck out of dodge. thanks again for ruining it, way to go. killer.
by Danny
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 4:47 PM
Please, I encourage you (or any of you trolls - and make no mistake you are trolls) to write me directly. People who firebomb homes are criminals, not protesters. And these tactics are out of step with the Santa Cruz community. Any community to be honest.

In solidarity? If one of Feldheim's children would've been hurt or worse, in solidarity?! Girl, you're a sociopath. And if you can rationalize throwing firebombs at people's property or homes - you are indeed sick.

Oh, and while I'm on a tear, get those God-damn tree sitters out of the trees NOW! None of this madness started till they started the protect to save a f(*king parking lot.
by huh
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 6:13 PM
Too bad you don't get half as upset about the ongoing occupation and slaughter in Iraq. Iraqis and US soldiers are blown up almost every day there. Too bad you don't get as upset about our crumbling schools and bridges while companies like Blackwater, Bechtel, and KBR make off like bandits with our tax money.

My friend, your outrage is greatly misplaced, especially since almost no one even knows who burned up that car and front door. I don't and you don't either.

There are far bigger madnesses going on every day -- the tree sitters aren't actually even hurting anyone. Where is your outrage with those? What are you doing to help stop them?

by Hi, Annie!
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 7:10 PM
Any relation to "Anna"? You know, the FBI career-track, former-volunteer entrapper/snitch from Florida? Last seen giving state's evidence in Sacramento? Hmm?
by ..
Wednesday Aug 6th, 2008 10:07 PM
Premise Four: Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted yet often unarticulated hierarchy. Violence done by those higher on the hierarchy to those lower is nearly always invisible, that is, unnoticed. When it is noticed, it is fully rationalized. Violence done by those lower on the hierarchy to those higher is unthinkable, and when it does occur is regarded with shock, horror, and the fetishization of the victims.

Premise Five: The property of those higher on the hierarchy is more valuable than the lives of those below. It is acceptable for those above to increase the amount of property they control—in everyday language, to make money—by destroying or taking the lives of those below. This is called production. If those below damage the property of those above, those above may kill or otherwise destroy the lives of those below. This is called justice.

Premise Ten: The culture as a whole and most of its members are insane. The culture is driven by a death urge, an urge to destroy life.

Premise Fifteen: Love does not imply pacifism.

- Stolen from endgame vol. 1
by Danny
Thursday Aug 7th, 2008 5:20 AM
Man, you don't know me at all. I've protested the Iraq war from both sides, as an objector to an unjust war and as the brother of a soldier who is serving there. And you've done what exactly, Hector Projector?

I protest in real life against the war in the Bay Area and NYC. Indeed, there are far bigger madnesses going on daily. But it's not often that a firebomb goes off down the street from my house, hence my anger.

And my point was that the level of vitriol began with the tree sit (actually earlier but if can be traced to that point) and has increased to where it is today (one burned house, one burned car). If it keeps going along the same trajectory someone will end up getting hurt.

by hello
Thursday Aug 7th, 2008 10:40 AM
there have been "radical" actions in the SC and Bay areas for longer than the recent tree sitters have been there. you pinpointing them as the beginining of the end is just silly and historically inaccurate

besides, it's really hard to buy your supposed strong anti-war stance when you keep remarking how upset those dirty hippies in the trees make you. it belies a different set of priorities than you feign in your anti-war claims here. you clearly seem to value "order" (even in things that don't effect you in the least like folks camping in trees) over stopping the real injustices in our world, especially those committed in our name

while it might seem alien to you, some people think justice comes before peace
by endgame
Thursday Aug 7th, 2008 8:22 PM
"I remember the predator-prey bargain: If you consume the flesh of another, you take responsibility for the continuation of its community. "

"I do not so much mind killing, if there is a purpose; if, for example, I'm going to eat what I kill"

"For nearly as long as I can remember, I've had the habit of asking people if they like their jobs. Over the years, about 90 percent - with the exception of my bosses at the NOAA - have said no."
by Susan Olsen
Thursday Aug 7th, 2008 10:42 PM
Comments on Jerry Vlasek of Animal Liberation Movement

Jerry Vlasek clearly supports violence, murder and endangering children just because he disagrees with some people.

Please publish his home address and phone number because he clearly believes it is okay to harrass and attack people you disagree with, and therefore we want to harrass and attack him.


-Susan Olsen from "People are Animals Too, Duh!"

by James
Friday Aug 8th, 2008 8:16 PM
Susan, Jerry Vlasek also saves human lives, children and otherwise, every day. He's a trauma surgeon. Do you save lives, ever?
by James
Friday Aug 8th, 2008 8:17 PM
Susan, if you think Vlasek supports those things just because of a simple innocent little disagreement, you're very blind and need to delve a little deeper.
by John Thielking
Sunday Aug 10th, 2008 9:08 PM
After reading the discussion here,

http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/2008/08/06/hsus-green-scare-donation/

new information comes to light. The person who had his car firebombed was testing RNA reactions using yeast, while the other researcher was using mouse embryos.

It is always possible that if AR activists did do these attacks, they may have simply followed the researchers from their workplace to their homes without knowing what kind of work they were actually doing inside the labs. However, if the perpetrators of the attacks can read and surf the web at or above the third grade reading level, they should have been able to find the UCSC Biomedical research web site (which coincidentally is down for the month of August). Looking at the next closely related site, the UCSC Environmental Toxicology web site, it is easy to find a long list of technical papers published by each faculty member. If one were to bother to do a search of such material at the UCSC Science library one could easily determine if the researcher was engaged in destructive animal research.

Because the apparent disconnect between stated AR values and the actual research that the victims were conducting is so gross, I suspect that it was not actual AR activists who perpetrated these attacks. Other CIONTELPRO type dirty tricks that are too high tech for the average joe to pull off also suffer from this type of basic disconnect at the level of motive. It is as if the dirty tricks people know their tech stuff (how to build bombs, crack e-mail accounts and tap phones, etc) but don't have a clue what to do with the information they obtain using such methods, other than make bumbling attempts at making patsies look guilty.
by Craig
Monday Aug 11th, 2008 3:57 AM
Or, perhaps, John, the people who did this THINK that they are AR activists because they heard a speech when Peter Young was in town, read some pamphlets, learned how to make a bomb of sorts, and decided to "stick it to the man" without any real understanding of the facts. You somehow assume that these folks would take the time to actually understand (ie: read) the research of the people they were attacking. My hypothesis is that these folks wanted to get into the black-masked "cool kids club" so badly that it didn't matter to them.

I mean, for anyone who has seen SC activists vocalize their opinions (on Pacific Ave, here, at city council meetings), my hypothesis is much closer to reality than yours.

Just putting it out there...
by Matthew
Wednesday Sep 10th, 2008 10:44 AM
I would not put it past the pigs to do something like this, or just a crazy mf'er with a mission. After spending time with Judi Bari and Ramona Africa, I've come to the conclusion that cops will do anything to stifle dissent. What better way to divide and conquer? Get all you mad at each other, accusing each other, ect. It's wrong to hurt anyone or any animal but there's a lot better ways to smash the state than with a molotov that does little damage. Start by dismantling/smashing any surveillance cameras you can...