Josh Connole and 'eco-terrorism'

Nailing Connole because of his politics was the whole point 3

So how about this stuff with Josh Connole?

For those who haven't been following: In 2003, about 125 SUVs at SoCal car dealerships were burned and vandalized. Slogans like "Fat Lazy Americans" and "ELF" were left behind.

Of course, as we all know this is not mere property destruction, not mere crime, but "eco-terrorism."

So the FBI was brought in and they starting looking for likely suspects. They found a vegan, commune-living, Iraq-war protesting, electric-car driving, fossil-fuel hating activist, and arrested him. Except, oops:

"So they immediately started following him around and then when they arrested him they said, 'You've got some red paint on your pants and we think it matches (the paint used in the attacks)," [Connole attorney John] Burton said. "So they took his pants and flew them back to FBI headquarters for analysis, where it turned out to be catsup."

In the meantime, Burton said, Connole spent four days in jail, often chained to the floor and repeatedly urged by FBI agents to confess.

Meanwhile, the guy who really did it wrote a letter to the L.A. Times, mocking the feds for getting the wrong guy.

Now, from the tone of the coverage, I think the idea is that we're all supposed to be upset that the feds are surveilling people based on their political activity -- and in fact, that Connole was arrested based purely on his politics.

But that slightly misses the point.

"Terrorism," if it means anything, must include the deliberate targeting of civilians for injury or death. But no radical animal-rights or environmental group is doing that. They hurt property, not people. Calling that "terrorism" has nothing to do with the severity or nature of the crime -- it has to do with the nature of the criminals. It is an overt attempt to demonize a certain political position.

You have two things going on here:

One is an attempt to loosen all restraints on the executive branch when it comes to terrorism -- to cast terrorism as so bad that it justifies the suspension of basic legal protections.

The other is an attempt to take what has become an incredibly loaded word -- terrorism -- and apply it to domestic political enemies.

Like I've said, I'm not the conspiracy-theory type, but this is Authoritarianism 101.

The arrest of Josh Connole blew up in their faces this time, but he was not some sort of aberration or overreach. The surveillance and intimidation of the Josh Connoles of the world is the very purpose of the fight against "eco-terror."

Mark my words: For every Connole we hear about, another 100 we won't.

David Roberts is staff writer for Grist. You can follow his Twitter feed at twitter.com/drgrist.

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. jdhlax Posted 6:57 am
    16 Nov 2005

    There's A Reason ...that they're called "pigs."

    Permalink

  2. Japhet Posted 5:26 am
    17 Nov 2005

    Ecoterrorism?i hope we're all not falling for the eco-terrorism trap.  Terrorism has to include an human component--like suicide bombing, al-Quaeda flying planes into buildings, tossing molotov cocktails at riot police.  These actions by the ELF don't exactly compare...if you understand how they were carried out.  From what I understand all actions like these are carefully choreographed to the point of paranoia around safety and danger.  If at any time someone's safety or life is threatened, for even a moment, the whole action is called off.  Thats not terrorism.  Terrorism isn't discriminating. It's blind violence.  This is targeted, planned and specific to make a point and if any life is at any moment threatened its called off.  
    However, it is breaking the law and is serious property damage. The odd thing about all this is because of the "eco-terrorism" label the FBI can get more funding from the government (the word "terrorism" in any FBI report obviously attracts LOTS of money and attention) to persecute "eco-terrorists" often giving them much more serious sentences than say, a rapist or sex offender who are outrightly harming people in our communities.
    I can't believe enviros are going along with the FBI-created label "eco-terrorist" without seeing the bigger picture: that these actions often bring about great change in society.
    If there are any eco-terrorists in this country they aren't the ones wearing Birkenstocks and hemp necklaces; they're wearing corporate nametags like Dow chemical, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and GE.  

    Jay Els

    Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. http://www.ran.org

    Permalink

  3. jdhlax Posted 11:39 am
    17 Nov 2005

    Don't Forget ...to include things like bombing countries and killing unarmed civilians in the definition of "terrorism."  Personally, I don't like the word.  Because of the way it's been used, it has no more meaning than calling someone an asshole.  Remember, one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.  A much better approach would be to articulate complaints about people or groups instead of name calling.

    Jeff Hoffman

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement