Jerry Vlasak interview

[Guest guest]

http://www.abolitionist-online.com/interview-issue03_radical.reform_jerry.vlasak\

..shtml

*RADICAL REFORMATION: The Dr. Jerry Vlasak Interview*

 

***by Claudette Vaughan *

 

*Controversial and compelling, Dr Jerry Vlasak speaks to the

Abolitionist-Online on his views on animal liberation, consumerism and being

prevented from attending the 2004 AR Conference in Britain.*

 

**

 

*Abolitionist: How did the recent 60Minutes interview with you and Rod

Coronado go? *

 

*Jerry Vlasak: The interview itself went well; although Ed Bradley did not

appear terribly sympathetic, he was fair in his treatment. The producers

were very well versed, and knew an amazing amount about the movement. Rod

pretty much stayed with the ALF credo, but I went further, justifying the

use of violence to stop animal abuse when other means were not effective.

Though I made the comparisons between the struggle for animal liberation and

many other movements for justice, the only one he mentioned was slavery here

in the US, which I thought was excellent. *

 

*Abolitionist: What does your new position as ALF Press Officer entail and

how's it going?*

 

**

 

*Jerry Vlasak: Our job is to educate the mainstream press and anyone else

interested in the underground movement for animal liberation. We provide the

other side of the story when the press reports on animal liberations or

economic sabotage on behalf of exploited non-human animals. We have done

hundreds of interviews in print, on radio and on television, explaining that

there is a real struggle going on for the rights of animals to be left alone

by humans. *

 

*Abolitionist: Can you talk about America's escalating consumerism and the

associative problems for animals and vegans?*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: Ultimately, human overpopulation is the root cause of animal

suffering. This planet was not meant to sustain the 6 billion humans who

occupy it, much less 20 billion by the end of this century. Thousands of

species are going extinct every year because of human destruction of

habitat, and billions of animals are suffering as humans destroy their

homes, exploit them for food and their own selfish ends. *

 

*To make matters worse, Americans are leading the way in consumption and

destruction of the planets resources. Although we make up only 5% of the

worlds population, we consume 25% of the resources. Then we attempt to get

the rest of the world to live our way, so we can sell them more stuff and

increase profits. Our culture is spinning out of control, and unfortunately

taking a lot of innocent, non-human bystanders with it. *

 

*It cannot go on much longer; sometime in the next few decades, and maybe

much sooner, we will see a drastic die off of humans, whether through

disease, natural disasters, or some catastrophic event. When human numbers

are markedly decreased, things will improve for the rest of the natural

world.*

 

*Abolitionist: In your press release you are quoted as saying " We have seen

an attempt by the Pharmaceutical companies and govt ­ able assisted by their

friends in the media ­ to discredit the animal rights movement and

campaigning groups at the forefront of challenging the vivisection industry

in the UK " . Tell us about that.*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: The industry has stated their profits are being threatened,

and in May 2004 met with Tony Blair, stating that they would cease all

investment in the UK unless the government neutralized the animal rights

movement. Then all of a sudden new laws are handed down targeting peaceful,

legal protests, I am banned from entering the country, and additional

lawsuits are filed against legal animal rights groups. But all these

ludicrous new laws will not stop activists fighting for animal liberation.

All it is going to do is to continue driving the movement underground. There

has been a huge increase in the number of acts of sabotage in the UK this

year, and activists are more determined than ever to succeed. It just proves

how effective the AR movement is being in the UK, because as Dr. Lindsey

says " You only feel the chains, when you begin to move! " *

 

*Abolitionist: You and Pamelyn Ferdin, your wife, were prevented from

entering the UK and the 2004 AR Conference in the UK on what grounds?*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: The Home Office banned us, saying we were " not conducive to

the public good " . In reality, they are bowing to the economic pressures of

the pharmaceutical industry, serving the special purposes of a select few

rich and powerful white men who want to become even richer and more

powerful.

When Pamelyn and I visited the UK in April of this year, we went around to

several pharmaceutical companies and hospitals that contract with Huntington

Life Sciences (HLS), the largest animal testing company in Europe. HLS kills

500 animals EVERY DAY, testing everything from agrochemicals to

human-intended drugs. The company has been infiltrated five times by

activists, who retrieved evidence and video footage of the horrific,

gratuitous abuse, suffering and torturing of animals. They have even been

sanctioned by a company-friendly UK government.*

 

*In any case, none of the companies we visited that employ HLS would even

let us in their front doors. Dressed professionally and in polite speech, we

asked only to speak with someone from the company who could discuss the

rationale for testing on animals at HLS and also why they chose a company

that had been exposed repeatedly for their lack of expertise and their

blatant disregard for protocol. It became clear that HLS was chosen in order

for the companies to get the results they wanted, results that would

increase sales and profits. *

 

*It only follows that when, a few months later, we are invited back to the

country to speak at a gathering of like-minded people, that these same

companies called in their favors in government to keep us out. It's a clear

case of the state guaranteeing profits for the corporation, at the expense

of the well being of its citizens. They can't stand the spot light being put

on them especially by a physician like my self and former vivisector. That

hits too close to home and they know that they can't dupe me the way they

think they can with an unknowing public. *

 

*Abolitionist: What kind of reaction have you received so far from within

the international animal rights movement. Has there been any move to vilify

you in any way? *

 

*Jerry Vlasak: I have received nothing but support from the animal rights

movement. It is amazing how many people feel the way I do, but are simply

unwilling to speak publicly for fear of governmental and societal

repression. Including other physicians and scientists who also agree with

me. They are so afraid of losing their jobs and being unable to pay the

lease on their Mercedes, that they are unwilling to come out publicly

against vivisection. *

 

*The press are the ones that have a really hard time dealing with the issue.

They seem flabbergasted that a surgeon who daily saves the lives of humans

would speak out on behalf of animals, and on behalf of patients who suffer

as billions of dollars are wasted on fraudulent animal experiments. They

routinely ignore the immense suffering of both humans and non-humans, and

focus on the inconveniences of a few animal abusers whose livelihood is

being threatened by a campaign to stop animal suffering and exploitation. In

the USA, we have no more " free press " and it's getting to be that way in the

UK and other " Westernised " countries. The press is bought and paid for by

the giant corporations, and the corporations dictate the stance they must

take. *

 

*Abolitionist: Do you think the aboveground groups around today, being so

tame and accommodating to the vivisection community, will have to be

accountable for what, some say, will be an eventuality – the death of a

vivisector?*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: Vivisection has been battled for well over a century in the

UK, and the government released figures just last week that there are more

animal experiments being done every year. Obviously, the past and current

tactics utilized by the above ground groups of merely asking corrupt

companies to do the right thing, or writing letters and threatening to

boycott them is not working.

To quote Nelson Mandela, " Nonviolence is not a moral principle, but a

strategy, and there is no moral goodness in using an ineffective weapon. "

Mainstream anti-vivisection groups exist mainly to collect large amounts of

money and pay themselves hefty salaries.*

 

*In the future, people will look back to the present time and wonder why we

were so complacent and meek. We need to begin using the tactics that have

been shown effective in other liberation struggles. I see it in my own

evolution as an activist; I started by asking people nicely to be nice to

animals. Then I started demanding it. It's time that we stop taking NO for

an answer. Animals are being tortured to death every day, and every day we

should be planning a strategy that will stop the exploitation and murder.

Not a hundred years from now, but today. *

 

*Environmental and animal rights activists have been hospitalised, and more

than half a dozen killed by the abusers in the struggle thus far; why is it

only they can use violence, not only against the animals but against us as

well? We have to defend ourselves, and our brothers and sisters who cannot

defend themselves. By whatever means we have that is effective. *

 

*I am a pragmatist; we as a movement need to look at what works and then use

those techniques. It seems silly to look back at the decades of the same

tired old tactics, watching the environment destroyed, more animals dying

every year, more activists being injured and killed as the abusers annually

increase their profits and lie to an apathetic public. *

 

*Abolitionist: In a widely publicised statement at the American 2004 AR

Conference in Washington, you said " I don't think you'd have to kill too

many {researchers}. I think for 5 lives, 10 lives, 15 human lives, we could

save a million, 2 million, 10 million non-human lives. If we maintain we are

non-speciesists we'd have to ask ourselves equally: Wouldn't taking down one

major drug dealer also save hundreds of thousands of lives of addicts in the

making? *

 

* *

 

*Jerry Vlasak: Drug addicts are humans with the ability to make decisions

and live with the consequences. Animals in laboratories are not there by

choice; they are victims of an oppressive regime that does not recognize

their right to life. Whenever there is oppression, those oppressed have the

right to rise up and throw off the chains of their oppressors. Killing an

animal abuser, who is not an innocent bystander, is morally defensible, and

if they had the power to do so, animals would do it. *

 

*A more accurate comparison would be the killing of Nazi concentration camp

guards and officers to free the prisoners being taken to the gas chambers.

This most likely would have made the next crop of soldiers less likely to

volunteer for duty.*

 

*Most animal experimenters would be happy to look for alternative methods if

they thought they really had to. I know when I went into the lab as a young

surgeon, I didn't care if I was using animals or not. I did it because those

around me in that particular lab were doing it and I was brainwashed into

thinking that it was a " necessary evil. " *

 

*If I thought my life would be in danger by experimenting on them, I would

find another way. And believe me, using methods that don't rely on animal

data would be far more likely to successfully find a cure for my human

patients. *

 

*So yes, I think the threat of violence would save lives, innocent lives.

I'm sorry to say its true.*

 

*All animal abusers should be politely asked to stop killing animals in

their work and explain to them the scientific fraud in animal

experimentation, as I was. If they refuse, they should be told to stop

immediately, or suffer the consequences. If they still refuse, then they

should be stopped by whatever means necessary. I would hope they would stop

the torture and killing when asked, but I suspect some would not.*

 

*I think it's important to understand that I abhor violence. I see violence

every day in the patients I care for that are shot, stabbed, and involved in

automobile accidents. But I also abhor the violence in laboratories and on

factory farms as well, and there is a lot more violence there than what any

human ever endures. I also abhor suffering, and I know that the patients who

are suffering with diseases are not going to be cured by wasting resources

on the suffering of animals in animal experimentation. To dismiss this

horrendous violence and suffering of non-human animals is to trivialize

their lives. *

 

*Abolitionist: Many debates are centred around the force of aggressive

direct action as an impediment to progress. Is this too convenient or too

condemning in your view?*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: No one seems to mind the " force " and violence used by

governments and corporations to wreck THEIR devastation and destruction.

Thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed by American troops in

the last year; millions of animals are murdered horribly every day for food

and in laboratories. But it seems as soon as someone mentions fighting back

for survival and to defend themselves with force, that it's some sort of

extreme tactic or immoral stance. The predominating absurdity in American

mainstream animal activism is the notion that if one intervenes to halt an

injustice, a murder or a rape in progress, if you actually use physical

force as necessary to prevent that act, somehow or other you've become

morally the same as the perpetrator.

One of my favorite quotes is by Malcolm X, who said, " I am not against

violence in self-defense. I don't even call it violence when it's

self-defense. I call it intelligence. " *

 

*As long as our movement continues to move along state-sanctioned lines,

such as lobbying efforts, letter writing, and peaceful protest, no

significant change will occur. Every year more animals are suffering and

dying. As an example, the UK Home Office just released a study showing more

non-human primates, and more total animals underwent torture in laboratories

last year than the year before. The state understands that we are having

little or no effect on their business as usual, so therefore they leave

activists alone. Only when we start using effective tactics do we feel the

wrath of the governments and their constituent corporations.*

 

*SHAC is a classic example; these activists have shuttered animal companies,

have put animal abusers out of business, and are threatening to do so again.

Therefore, they are feeling the pain of federal indictments, lawsuits, and

other forms of harassment and intimidation by the state. THE MORE EFFECT WE

ARE, THE MORE WE WILL FEEL THE WRATH OF THOSE WHO PROFIT FROM THE SUFFERING

OF ANIMALS. And this is okay, this is how we will know we are making a

difference. *

 

*Abolitionist: What is your definition of evil?*

 

*Jerry Vlasak: Evil to me, are the vivisectors who strap defenseless animals

into torture devices and insert needles into their brain while they scream.

Evil are those who slit the throats of animals in slaughterhouses while they

writhe in pain. Evil is the individual who slaps a trusting companion animal

onto a hard, cold, steel table and injects poison their veins, and evil is

the former " owner " who cares more about keeping their new carpet clean or

the furniture new than their living, loving companion's life. Evil are the

corporations who are responsible for the 20,000 children who die each week

for lack of clean water, because these evil corporations and governments

spend billions on useless animal experiments concocted to impress their

wealthy investors. There is evil everywhere in this world, but glimmers of

hope as well. It's what keeps us all getting out of bed every morning,

right?*