Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

ALF issues in Asia

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Ha! ...I must have missed a few emails as I did not know I was in

debate with Merritt, but your post really points out the different styles of

Journalism found in the West vs. Asia. On one hand you have the meek

defending the powerful, and on the other, the weak fighting the powerful.

I am really glad that you posted the Amnesty International statement as it

highlights how we are in danger as these laws propagate around the globe

like rabbits in a cage. For example, if some kook throws a bottle of monkey

dung through the Nepali Embassy window in Austria, in protest of the

exploitation of Nepal¹s Rhesus Monkey there, then I would expect the police

to come knocking at my door. Why wouldn¹t they, if they have the legal

right to do so? Terrorists and mobsters are chased all over the globe for

their deeds, and hundreds of innocents are integrated and suspected in every

case. I wont even get started about Gitmo. But it¹s not unreasonable to

think that anyone in Asia that is working with an NGO that is saving

animals, won¹t become a suspect if something really bad goes down involving

a fringe group in Europe. And under the laws regarding terrorism,

investigators have the right to search under rocks in Afghanistan if they

want to. Who¹s to stop them from breaking into our office and having a root

around? But paranoia and conspiracy theories aside, this is just not right.

Our brothers and sisters who are helping animals around the globe deserve

our support, regardless of the intent of this forum. As was posted here

today, animals don¹t know anything about maps and political boundaries. We

should look to them for guidance in this regard. Cheers,

Jigme

 

 

 

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:02:41 +0530

AAPN List <aapn >

ALF issues in Asia

 

Dear colleagues,

I know I am late but I feel compelled to make

some observations regarding the AAPN debate between Jigme Gaton and Merritt

Clifton on the imprisonment of ten Austrian animal rights activists. I will

try to address my concerns one by one :

1) The Austrian issue should be a matter of concern for all of us. What is

happening in Austria may happen in Asia or India. I am attaching a message

from Ms Nandita Shah of SHARAN(Sanctuary for Health and Reconnection to

Animals and Nature) that explains why the Austrian detentions are relevant

in the Asian and Indian context.

 

2) The Austrian case is one that concerns basic human rights everywhere. I

am attaching the statement of Amnesty International on the issue.

 

3) Since I have distributed Animal Liberation Front literature and video in

India, I am intrigued by Mr Merritt Clifton's stance on the incident. He

comments: " there should be a lesson in this case, regardless of outcome:

don't go around advocating and defending anything you would not want to be

suspected of doing, whether the alleged offense is associated with activism,

illegal drugs, fornication, or flying paper airplanes in the back of the

classroom. " Since Mr Clifton is a journalist and editor, I am a bit

perplexed by what he intends to state. What exactly does Mr Clifton mean by

" don't go around advocating and defending anything you would not want to be

suspected of doing " ? There are many examples from many walks of life that

contradict this position but since Mr Clifton is a journalist, I am

providing the two most spectacular examples of journalism concerning this

and would be interested to know his opinion on whether they constitute

advocating and defending anything you would not want to be suspected of

doing.

 

i) An interview of a suicide bomber by Time Magazine journalist Aparisim

Ghosh(Link here:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1077288,00.html ) Surely a

suicide bomber is much more deadly than an animal rights extremist? Does Mr

Clifton think that the journalist concerned in this case committed a wrong

by giving voice to a potential killer?

 

ii) Journalist Phil Rees's book, 'Dining With the Terrorists' in which he

outlines his experiences meeting militants in different parts of the world.(

Link here :

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1509307,00.html ) What is Mr

Clifton's view on this journalist giving a platform to 'terrorists' to

speak?

 

4) Barry Horne : Mr Merritt Clifton describes Barry Horne as a " serial

arsonist. " This is a selective description for Barry Horne was an extremely

committed animal rights activist who died whilst fasting for animal rights.

Whilst it is true that he did commit illegal acts including reported cases

of arson, it is also equally true that he laid down his life for the cause

of betterment of animals. One of his notable efforts to rescue animals from

captivity was in 1988 when he tried to retrieve a dolphin named Rocky from

captivity in Marineland in Morecambe, Lancashire. His effort failed but

Rocky was eventually released in the wild in a lagoon reserve in the Turks

and Caicos islands.

A journalist should provide all sides of a story, right? Please read a

letter by Barry Horne on animal rights here :

http://www.barryhorne.org/letter.html and an appraisal of his life here :

http://web.archive.org/web/20030212174035/http://arkangelweb.org/barry/barry

..shtml

Barry Horne's sacrifice for animals has been dealt with elaborately by Keith

Mann in his history of the Animal Liberation Front, 'From Dusk til Dawn.' I

invite all of you to read the book and make up your own mind on Barry

Horne's activities.

Regardless of whatever one thinks of arson as a tactic in advancing a

cause, I cannot but admire the honesty of individuals who voluntarily break

the law to help animals. One such man is Rod Coronado who heads 'Operation

Bite Back' that targets animal abusing institutions. Mr Coronado has gone on

record to say, " My decision to indulge in serious criminal activity was a

conscious one that I made as an individual fully knowing that the

consequences were acceptable. " I take my hats off to such uprightness. It is

important to give voice to the perspective of law breakers to understand

what led them to break the law in the first place. Such an approach could

also be of help in understanding cases like the detention of the Austrian

activists.

 

Lastly, I want to say this. I am in regular touch with the Animal

LIberation Front and have tried to make people in India aware of their

activities. By distributing ALF material I am offering people a perspective

they might miss in the mainstream press. By reading and knowing about the

Animal Liberation Front, people will be better placed to put them in

the context of the animal rights movement, nationally and internationally. I

wonder if in Mr Merritt Clifton's opinion I am a terrorist or abetting

terrorism since I am ' advocating and defending anything you would not want

to be suspected of doing.' Would be interested to know his views on this.

I hope the detained Austrian animal rights activists get proper justice.

Best wishes and warm regards,

 

Dear Friends,

 

Perhaps you know about the violent arrests and detention of 10 Austrian

Animal Rights activists since May 21st. without reasonable grounds.

 

In recent years, milestone reforms in animal law have been achieved in

Austria including bans on fur farms, battery cages for hens and the use of

wild animals in circuses.

 

A group of International animal rights organisations are working together in

order to press for a release for these activists, and they need your

support.

 

You are invited to read more about this incident at* www.vgt.at

<http://www.vgt.at> <http://www.vgt.at/> *and to add your name as well as

that of your organisation to the attached press release to express your

concern about a serious infringement of the right of legally registered NGOs

to function freely.

 

Why is it important to endorse this press release? Because the infringement

of civil liberties taking place in Austria at the moment could spread to our

own doorsteps if we are not vigilant.

 

Please do read this urgently and if you agree to endorse it, please send a

mail to that effect to Herma Caelen <herma.caelen by *June 24

*

Should you wish to sign, she will require the following information:

 

The name of your organisation (if you are representing an organisation) or

your own name and email address

Your country

Your website address

 

(These details will be published. Please do not send information you do not

want to be distributed.)

 

Even though this alarming event is a European one, non-Europeans are urged

to support the press release.

 

 

The staff of the European Vegetarian and Animal News Agency (EVANA) will

publish the full list of endorsees on its website (http://www.evana.org) on

the afternoon of Wednesday, June 25 at the same time as the press statement

is released to the media.

Thank you for your concern and solidarity.

 

Nandita

SHARAN

 

Please pass this on to anyone that you know may be interested

 

 

 

http://www.vgt.at/presse/news/2008/news20080605_1_en.php

 

 

Vienna 5th June 2008

Statement from Amnesty International The Human Rights Organisation,

AmnestyInternational stands up for the Ten imprisoned Animal

Protectionists

 

In a two page statement the organisation describes a string of offences

against Austrian criminal law.

 

Amnesty International emphasises, once again, that political and social

activism as a freedom of expression is a protected human right.

 

The statement criticises the use of sec 278a of the criminal code for

demonstrators noting " It seems inadequate to postulate a group involved in

organised crime from a situation where a number of demonstrators arrange to

resist state authority " .

 

Amnesty International pointed out that well known environmental

organisations such as Greenpeace, for example, that might engage in actions

such as occupying an atomic power plant could be said to have committed an

offence under this law in doing so, and that as a consequence those who

donate to their organisation could be charged with financing terrorism under

criminal law.

 

It is also pointed out that the term " organised crime " is characterised by

the intent to enrich oneself and refers to the gravest crimes, for which the

intention to maximize profits is characteristic (drug trafficking and

smuggling, weapons trafficking and smuggling, theft and trafficking of

stolen art work, procuration of prostitutes, trafficking in human beings,

illegal gaming and gaming fraud, protection rackets, money laundering and so

on).

 

The appropriateness of the house searches also came under criticism, in

particular the reports that those held in custody were refused their right

to contact a lawyer of next of kin

 

Amnesty International is concerned about, and has strongly criticised the

claim from Public Prosecutor that no allegations are aimed at organisations,

whilst searches of offices rendered many organisations unable to function

due to seized technology, equipment and data

 

View a tranlation of the complete statement

below.<http://www.vgt.at/presse/news/2008/news20080605_1_en.php#statement>

 

For the orginal document in

German<http://www.vgt.at/presse/news/2008/Bilder/20080605amnestybrief.pdf>

 

 

 

 

Translation of the statement from Amnesty International:

 

(1) Amnesty International can of course make no statement with regard to

whether the accused are guilty of the criminal acts of which they are

accused (criminal damage to property, duress, menacing threat) and would

like to remind here of the presumption of innocence anchored in the European

Convention on Human Rights (Article 6 para 2) and in the Austrian Code of

Criminal Procedure (Sec 8).

 

(2) Amnesty International states here firstly that in terms of human rights

all nations have the obligation to protect people's physical integrity

property, and that freedom of opinion has its limits where others' rights

are violated. Laws protecting people's physical integrity and property thus

are valid for active members of civil society as a matter of course,

regardless of the issue they are committed to working for.

 

As an embodiment of the freedom of expression, political and social activism

– no matter for which issue – enjoys special protections only so long as it

is non-violent and respects the human rights of others. Commitment to a

cause does not justify damaging property or threatening people. Criminal

investigations or other measures taken against members of civil society are

therefore not problematic in and of themselves from the human rights

perspective.

 

(3) Amnesty International does, however, state that the case at hand

manifests concerns that our organisation previously expressed in a position

paper on the Austrian Criminal Code Reform Act (Strafrechtsänderungsgessetz)

of 2002 with regard to the criminal offences stipulated in Sec 278 et seqq.

relating to criminal associations or organisations:

 

Whilst Amnesty International recognises the necessity of amending the

Austrian Criminal Code to harmonise with the UN Convention on Transnational

Organized Crime, in our view this amendment was effected in a

disproportionate manner that exceeds the standards of the UN Convention. In

connection with the draft version of Sec 278 of the Criminal Code,

AmnestyInternational has already previously stated that although

criminal offences

such as resistance to state authority or serious damage to property are most

certainly not socially adequate behaviours in a democratic society and must

be prohibited by criminal law in any event, it seems inadequate to postulate

a group involved in organised crime from a situation where a number of

demonstrators arrange to resist state authority.

 

In our position paper on the Criminal Code Reform Act of 2002,

AmnestyInternational warned that the new catalogue of offences

relating to

organised crime and terrorism was formulated in an exaggerated manner.

Amnesty International pointed out that well-known environmental

organisations such as Greenpeace, for example, that might engage in actions

such as occupying an atomic power plant, could be said to have committed an

offence under this law in doing so, and as a consequence those who donate to

their organisation could be charged with financing terrorism under criminal

law.

 

Amnesty International points out that the term " organised crime " is

characterised by the intent to enrich oneself and refers to the gravest

crimes, for which the intention to maximise profits is characteristic (drug

trafficking and smuggling, weapons trafficking and smuggling, theft and

trafficking of stolen artwork, procuration of prostitutes, prostitution,

trafficking in human beings, illegal gaming and gaming fraud, protection

rackets, illegal dumping of dangerous materials, illegal transfer of

technology, money laundering, and terrorism; see also Article 5 (1) of the

UN Convention on Transnational Organized Crime).

 

Amnesty International calls attention to the fact that intent to enrich

oneself does not exist in the case at hand. The information available to us

indicates that the Public Prosecutor also does not claim that there is such

an intent. Amnesty International is, therefore, irritated that the allegedly

specific evidence has not resulted in criminal proceedings on the grounds of

damage to property, duress or menacing threat, but that charges related to a

general crime of membership in a criminal organization, the vagueness of

which crime we perceive to be problematic, are apparently being pursued

instead.

 

(4) With respect to the house searches and seizures, Amnesty International

makes reference to the human rights imperative of appropriateness, which has

also found expression in the Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure. Existing

accounts of the situation raise doubts with respect to the appropriateness

of how the house searches and arrests were made by the police. Therefore,

Amnesty International urgently recommends an independent and unbiased

investigation of these measures and expressly welcomes the initiation of

appeal procedures by defence counsel. With reference to Article 4 para 7 of

the Personal Freedoms Act (Bundesverfassungsgesetz über den Schutz der

persönlichen Freiheit, PersFrG), Amnesty International believes that

particular attention must be paid to the fact that those held in custody

have reported that the authorities have refused to allow them to contact

legal counsel.

 

Amnesty International also points out that the search warrant (which is at

our disposal) does not clearly indicate which evidence was to be secured.

The expression " electronic storage media as well as relevant documents and

objects " is very general in its wording. Amnesty International has observed

the use of such pre-written text blocks as substantiation for infringements

of fundamental freedoms in other contexts, and fears that the use of such

gives rise to doubts about how carefully the human rights boundaries are

observed in individual cases.

 

(5) Amnesty International is concerned about reports which indicate that the

extent and nature of the house searches and seizures were such as to

possibly impede the legitimate work of legal civil organisations. While the

Public Prosecutor responsible for this case stresses that the allegations of

criminal offences are not directed at any associations, the reports we have

received indicate that the seizure of materials in the associations' offices

were carried out in a manner that has left them deprived of the resources

(e.g., donor databases) they would require in order to continue working.

 

In this context, Amnesty International stresses that criminal investigations

against individuals should not be mingled with any membership in

institutions or associations of civil society that they might have. Every

effort must be made by the authorities to avoid creating the impression that

they consider it at least acceptable to have impeded the work of legal

associations.

 

(6) Amnesty International is concerned about information received from the

accused's legal counsel, according to which access to the files was limited

to an extent that specific information was not available, not even regarding

what is claimed to be the 'reasonable suspicion' (dringender Tatverdacht) or

the 'probable cause' (Haftgrund) for the arrests. Thus, the information that

is necessary for the defence of those being held and for any questioning of

their custody is being withheld from their lawyers.

 

Amnesty International points out that under Article 5 para 2 of the European

Convention on Human Rights, every person under arrest must be informed

promptly of the reasons for their arrest and of the nature of the

accusations being made against them. Pursuant to Sec 51 para 2 last sentence

of the Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure, following the ordering of

investigative custody, it is not permissible to restrict access to documents

that the accused requires in order to defend himself in an appeal against

the 'reasonable suspicion' held against him and the 'probable cause' being

given for his arrest.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

>1) The Austrian issue should be a matter of concern for all of us.

 

 

Of concern is that people have been arrested and detained for

a considerable time now without charges.

 

This usually occurs when the investigation leading to the

arrests is ongoing, and there is a belief on the part of law

enforcement that detaining the suspects is necessary to completing

the investigation and preventing crimes beyond those that led to the

initial investigation.

 

In such cases, suspects are usually charged within a matter

of days. It is unusual, but hardly unprecedented, that there have

as yet been no arraignments on charges (so far as I am aware.)

 

Long delays often reflect complex cases, such as cases

involving international activity and use of computers, and such

cases are often subject to multiple layers of review before charges

are either filed or dropped.

 

Such situations warrant awareness and monitoring, but not

jumping to conclusions. The delay itself is often indicative of the

slow workings of due process, whereas in actual instances of

political repression one typically sees an immediate & escalating

propaganda effort, beginning right after the arrests, with juicy

tidbits of allegation & innuendo released to media every few days.

 

There has been none of that so far in the Austrian cases.

 

 

>3) Since I have distributed Animal Liberation Front literature and

>video in India, I am intrigued by Mr Merritt Clifton's stance on the

>incident. He comments: " there should be a lesson in this case,

>regardless of outcome: don't go around advocating and defending

>anything you would not want to be suspected of doing, whether the

>alleged offense is associated with activism, illegal drugs,

>fornication, or flying paper airplanes in the back of the

>classroom. " Since Mr Clifton is a journalist and editor, I am a bit

>perplexed by what he intends to state. What exactly does Mr Clifton

>mean by " don't go around advocating and defending anything you would

>not want to be suspected of doing " ?

 

 

I mean exactly what I said. A responsible journalist does

not go around distributing literature that advocates and defends

arsons, bombings, vandalism, and the people who commit it.

 

If at some future point is arrested on

suspicion of aiding and abetting such activity, he really has only

himself to blame.

 

Reporting about criminal activity is part of the job of

journalism. Interviewing criminals and others who have been accused

of criminality is a routine aspect of doing the job.

 

Distributing their literature, however, steps across a line

that was observed even by Daniel Defoe, who memorably defended whole

classes of unjustly accused persons in the earliest days of

investigative journalism without advocating crime.

 

 

>i) An interview of a suicide bomber

 

a) A suicide bomber does not become one until the point at

which the only possible interview would be by seance.

 

b) Interviewing a would-be suicide bomber has the potential

effect of defusing his/her grievance. Many of us who have long

worked in journalism have had the experience of preventing suicides

or crimes, just by listening to aggrieved and distraught persons,

whose basic complaint was simply that no one was listening.

 

c) Interviewing a would-be suicide bomber also has the

potential effect of alerting the public to the nature of the threat

and the opportunity to prevent it.

 

Of course this all depends on how the interviewing is done &

how the material is presented. Presenting the material in a context

that in any manner glorifies, justifies, or encourages suicide

bombing would be a grossly irresponsible misuse of journalistic

opportunity and privilege.

 

 

>4) Barry Horne : Mr Merritt Clifton describes Barry Horne as a " serial

>arsonist. " This is a selective description for Barry Horne was an

>extremely committed animal rights activist who died whilst fasting

>for animal rights.

 

That Barry Horne or anyone else attached the name of a cause

to a long series of criminal and anti-social acts in no way makes

them any less criminal and anti-social.

 

Horne, like many other criminals, started out thoroughly

alienated from society, whetting his grievance as a garbage man, &

eventually found a vent for his alienation in a cause whose followers

made him feel like somewhat less of a nobody.

 

He was, nonetheless, still a nobody, doing nothing useful

or helpful to advance the cause he allegedly espoused. His

self-induced death was an effective attention-getting device, but

accomplished nothing to actually help any animals.

 

A fair and accurate view of Horne or anyone else begins with

the facts. If such an individual had not attached his name to animal

advocacy, animal advocates would find precious little to laud in

anything he did.

 

Rod Coronado is a somewhat more complex case in that at one

time he reputedly did do some useful undercover videography exposing

fur farms--although what he videotaped was already shown in

instructional material available then from fur industry sources,

which I had seen about two years before I saw the Coronado

material--and Coronado has done some other things that helped animals

in non-criminal ways.

 

On the whole, though, Coronado has demonstrated a much

greater appetite for violence, vandalism, and venting sociopathy

than for contributing in a positive and persuasive manner to changing

public attitudes. On balance, he is a detriment to the causes he

espouses, as Paul Watson recognized more than a decade ago in

severing Coronado's associations with the Sea Shepherd Conservation

Society.

 

 

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Mr Clifton,

Thank you for your message. I think we will have

to differ in some ways on the activities of the ALF and the issue of

terrorism concerning animal rights. However since you are slating Rod

Coronado, I would like to post a message here from him stating he has

renounced violence. And since you mention Paul Watson severing connections

with him, I am providing a link where he defends the right of Coronado to

speak out his mind freely sometime in 2006.(Here :

*http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id=2 & objectid=10370129*<http://\

www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id=2 & objectid=10370129>

)

 

I also want to state for the record there is no reliable record of animal

rights 'terrorism' in India so my probable arrest might take some time yet.

But in some cases, like the elephant polo game in Jaipur, ALF style

operations could be effective.

 

Regards,

 

http://www.supportrod.org/update.php?u=20060901

Message from Rod Coronado in Prison

 

Friday, September 1st,2006

 

[ The note below is a message written by Rod in CCA Florence. He has been

able to call out now and his partner Chrysta is visiting him at least once a

week. But it is expensive for him to call and expensive for Chrysta to drive

the 67 miles each way a couple of times a week. So if you have any extra

cash, please think about making a donation via this website or by sending a

check to the PO Box. A big thanks to all those who have already done so - it

has made a big difference! ]

 

Dear Friends and Supporters,

 

Some of you know me only by my lectures, writings, actions and statements,

some as a father or personal friend. To say the least, these last couple of

years have been truly life-changing. I've been arrested twice by the FBI,

chased by a helicopter, indicted for serious charges, charged w/less serious

crimes and it seems almost constantly accused of being a terrorist though my

actions my entire life have never caused a single physical injury let alone

death. That's not to say I haven't done things I regret. I have. But this

open letter is meant instead to be a statement of facts in regard to what I

now believe. It is part response to questions raised by past supporters who

have always heard me unequivocally support illegal direction actions taken

on behalf of the Earth and animals.

 

I believe there comes a time in everyone's life when we have to honestly ask

ourselves why we are here, doing whatever it is we do on this beautiful

planet. These last two plus years have surely been such a time for me. All

my life I have endeavored to protect the earth and her non-human children we

call animals. I still do and always will believe in respecting life be it

human or non-human and this planet we all call home. A large part of my

personal and spiritual evolution has been in the last nearly five years

since I became a parent of a beautiful human child. As a warrior I used to

think that having children was an impediment to any struggle for peace and

justice. Never could I have been more wrong. I believe our creator chose me

to be a parent of my son because I was a warrior. A man who believed that

peace for the Earth and animals could only come through aggressive and

sometimes destructive actions.

 

Raising a child requires a parent to practice the very principles you seek

to teach your children. Indeed such is the case with all living beings. I

always believed I was fighting to create a better world for all future

generations, yet to preserve what I wanted to protect, I chose to engage

sometimes in the destruction of property used to destroy life. I still see

the rationale for what I've done, only no longer do I personally choose to

represent the cause of peace and compassion in that way.

 

As a parent, I have been forced to realize that violence is everywhere in

our society and as a parent I believe in not raising children to accept

violence as a necessary evil. I believe in teaching and living peace with

the hope that only through example do our children have a chance of escaping

a violent future. In my years past I have argued that economic sabotage was

an appropriate tactic for our time. Like all strategists I have also been

forced to recognize that times have changed and it is now my belief that the

movements to protect earth and animals have achieved enough with this

strategy to now consider an approach that does not compromise objectives,

but increases the likelihood of real social change. Let our opposition who

believe in violence carry the burden for its justification, but let those

who believe in peace and love practice a way of life that our society sorely

needs now more than ever.

 

A society built around violence cannot stand the test of time. But a life

built around the tenets of mutual respect, compassion, peace and harmony con

be our only way out of this nightmare. What is won through violence must be

protected with violence and I don't want to teach my children that. As long

as governments and corporations sanction physical violence any who attempt

to stop them with violence will be labeled terrorists.

 

There is little we can do to change that in light of the media's role and

influence over the public's perception. That is only I believe in their

ability to label the cause of peace and justice as such. Many people have

bravely given their lives and freedom to forward the cause of animals and

nature, now let us continue that march in ways that do not allow the

opposition to excuse us as terrorists. I believe in promoting the rights of

animals and a safe environment through the demonstration of a way of life

based on creating sustainability rather than fighting within a system that

respects only force and violence. We are fortunate to live in a society that

allows nonviolent options. Systems of war and violence shall crumble and we

should free ourselves from the rubble while there's still time.

 

There is no shortage of good works in order to build the society I believe

in, only a shortage of those willing to make a life-ling commitment towards

creating peace. We know where the dominant society has left us. With less

rights and privilege than corporate charters and profit margins. It is now

time, I believe, to fend for ourselves and create the democracy denied to

us. Time for us to become active in educating our children, in growing and

providing healthy food to all, medicine and care giving to those who need

it, not just those who can afford it. This is how I believe we create a

better world, not through any acts of violence but with great demonstrations

of love for each other and all life around us.

 

I condemn no one forced into a life of self defense through violence, I only

pray for another way forward to a lasting peace. There is still time. Time

for a government by the people for the people... and earth. But not without

the patience and perseverance to build peaceful alternatives rather than

short-term strategies that offer too little in the way of long-term change.

My position is just the voice of one man on a journey solely his own. I

speak for no greater movement thought I hope the desires of many. Struggle

for me has become a very personal battle. Not only against a legal system

intent on imprisoning me but equally important is my personal struggle to be

a better human being. To my children, my partner, my community and myself.

Because if I can't accomplish peace in my own life, how is it that I can

hope to accomplish it on any larger standard?

 

What our world needs now is a whole lot more love and a lot less violence.

Nothing in this world will change overnight. But if we live peace and teach

our children well, they might still inherit a world better than ours. Maybe

I'm just getting old, or finally thinking about the legacy I will leave

behind, but I still have much to live and give and I want to find the

commonality between people who want only a safe and happy life for their

children. Don't ask me how to burn down a building. As me how to grow

watermelons or how to explain nature to a child. that is what I want to grow

old doing. Please afford me this. I have fought my battles and continue to

fight for mine and my family's freedom. I only want to not be remembered as

a man of destruction but a human believer in peace and love for all. May the

creator bless and protect us all with the sacred gift of life that is ours

to do with as we shall.

 

Rod Coronado #03895000

CCA Central Arizona Detention Center

PO Box 6300

Florence, AZ 85232

 

 

 

On 6/30/08, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>

> >1) The Austrian issue should be a matter of concern for all of us.

>

> Of concern is that people have been arrested and detained for

> a considerable time now without charges.

>

> This usually occurs when the investigation leading to the

> arrests is ongoing, and there is a belief on the part of law

> enforcement that detaining the suspects is necessary to completing

> the investigation and preventing crimes beyond those that led to the

> initial investigation.

>

> In such cases, suspects are usually charged within a matter

> of days. It is unusual, but hardly unprecedented, that there have

> as yet been no arraignments on charges (so far as I am aware.)

>

> Long delays often reflect complex cases, such as cases

> involving international activity and use of computers, and such

> cases are often subject to multiple layers of review before charges

> are either filed or dropped.

>

> Such situations warrant awareness and monitoring, but not

> jumping to conclusions. The delay itself is often indicative of the

> slow workings of due process, whereas in actual instances of

> political repression one typically sees an immediate & escalating

> propaganda effort, beginning right after the arrests, with juicy

> tidbits of allegation & innuendo released to media every few days.

>

> There has been none of that so far in the Austrian cases.

>

> >3) Since I have distributed Animal Liberation Front literature and

> >video in India, I am intrigued by Mr Merritt Clifton's stance on the

> >incident. He comments: " there should be a lesson in this case,

> >regardless of outcome: don't go around advocating and defending

> >anything you would not want to be suspected of doing, whether the

> >alleged offense is associated with activism, illegal drugs,

> >fornication, or flying paper airplanes in the back of the

> >classroom. " Since Mr Clifton is a journalist and editor, I am a bit

> >perplexed by what he intends to state. What exactly does Mr Clifton

> >mean by " don't go around advocating and defending anything you would

> >not want to be suspected of doing " ?

>

> I mean exactly what I said. A responsible journalist does

> not go around distributing literature that advocates and defends

> arsons, bombings, vandalism, and the people who commit it.

>

> If at some future point is arrested on

> suspicion of aiding and abetting such activity, he really has only

> himself to blame.

>

> Reporting about criminal activity is part of the job of

> journalism. Interviewing criminals and others who have been accused

> of criminality is a routine aspect of doing the job.

>

> Distributing their literature, however, steps across a line

> that was observed even by Daniel Defoe, who memorably defended whole

> classes of unjustly accused persons in the earliest days of

> investigative journalism without advocating crime.

>

> >i) An interview of a suicide bomber

>

> a) A suicide bomber does not become one until the point at

> which the only possible interview would be by seance.

>

> b) Interviewing a would-be suicide bomber has the potential

> effect of defusing his/her grievance. Many of us who have long

> worked in journalism have had the experience of preventing suicides

> or crimes, just by listening to aggrieved and distraught persons,

> whose basic complaint was simply that no one was listening.

>

> c) Interviewing a would-be suicide bomber also has the

> potential effect of alerting the public to the nature of the threat

> and the opportunity to prevent it.

>

> Of course this all depends on how the interviewing is done &

> how the material is presented. Presenting the material in a context

> that in any manner glorifies, justifies, or encourages suicide

> bombing would be a grossly irresponsible misuse of journalistic

> opportunity and privilege.

>

> >4) Barry Horne : Mr Merritt Clifton describes Barry Horne as a " serial

> >arsonist. " This is a selective description for Barry Horne was an

> >extremely committed animal rights activist who died whilst fasting

> >for animal rights.

>

> That Barry Horne or anyone else attached the name of a cause

> to a long series of criminal and anti-social acts in no way makes

> them any less criminal and anti-social.

>

> Horne, like many other criminals, started out thoroughly

> alienated from society, whetting his grievance as a garbage man, &

> eventually found a vent for his alienation in a cause whose followers

> made him feel like somewhat less of a nobody.

>

> He was, nonetheless, still a nobody, doing nothing useful

> or helpful to advance the cause he allegedly espoused. His

> self-induced death was an effective attention-getting device, but

> accomplished nothing to actually help any animals.

>

> A fair and accurate view of Horne or anyone else begins with

> the facts. If such an individual had not attached his name to animal

> advocacy, animal advocates would find precious little to laud in

> anything he did.

>

> Rod Coronado is a somewhat more complex case in that at one

> time he reputedly did do some useful undercover videography exposing

> fur farms--although what he videotaped was already shown in

> instructional material available then from fur industry sources,

> which I had seen about two years before I saw the Coronado

> material--and Coronado has done some other things that helped animals

> in non-criminal ways.

>

> On the whole, though, Coronado has demonstrated a much

> greater appetite for violence, vandalism, and venting sociopathy

> than for contributing in a positive and persuasive manner to changing

> public attitudes. On balance, he is a detriment to the causes he

> espouses, as Paul Watson recognized more than a decade ago in

> severing Coronado's associations with the Sea Shepherd Conservation

> Society.

>

> --

> Merritt Clifton

> Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> P.O. Box 960

> Clinton, WA 98236

>

> Telephone: 360-579-2505

> Fax: 360-579-2575

> E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

> Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

>

> [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

> We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

> for free sample, send address.]

>

>

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

For a sinner to repent while in the penitentiary is the very

purpose of the institution.

 

Unfortunately, such repentance is notoriously often followed

by recidivism after the purported penitents are released.

 

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...