Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

[Guest guest]

Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking up to. He

only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of terrosim, he

as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes in on the anger of

others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He treats all of us as

idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If you want a hero look up to

someone that has achieved without violence and someone that shows compassion to

all suffering.

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

AAPN List <aapn >

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

 

 

This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

this on his behalf.

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

Fwd: Vlasak Interview

journalistandanimal s

 

----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

-----

" Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

Vlasak Interview

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

 

This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

 

He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

justification for the use of violence for political ends,

and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

 

Dennis Brewin

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Even if he is a terrorist(and I do not think he is since he has not killed

anyone), he has a right to air his views. Incidentally Benjamin Zephaniah,

whom I have interviewed also believes that in extreme circumstances, the

lives of many animals could be saved if you take out a few vivisectors.

 

On 1/5/09, Julia Gaius <juliagaius wrote:

>

> Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking

> up to. He only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of

> terrosim, he as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes in

> on the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He

> treats all of us as idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If you

> want a hero look up to someone that has achieved without violence and

> someone that shows compassion to all suffering.

>

> ________________________________

>

<journalistandanimals<journalistandanimals%40gmail.com>

> >

> AAPN List <aapn <aapn%40>>

> Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

> Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

>

> This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

> Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

> this on his behalf.

>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

> Fwd: Vlasak Interview

> journalistandanimal s <s%40gmail.com>

>

> ----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

> -----

> " Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

> Vlasak Interview

> Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

>

> This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

> cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

> belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

>

> He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

> that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

> justification for the use of violence for political ends,

> and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

>

> Dennis Brewin

[Guest guest]

Well, I don¹t agree really with Jerry¹s tactical approach; I prefer one more

modelled after the CIA: arming and training the defenceless against

_________fill-in-the-blank aggressors. Surely an ape should be able to

handle an RPG with proper instructions.

 

I just saw the movie Defiance starring current 007, and was struck by the

dichotomy of being slaughtered or being armed and fighting. The Bielski

brothers protected the innocent and helpless against men who were bent on

their extermination, and I was struck how similar the situation that people

in the forest are placed when trying to protect the animals that live there

- although one of the brothers shot his horse to feed the hiding humans ­

which seemed a bit extreme. Another animal was shot when trying to steal

some food from a wayward maiden, which also struck me as vulgar as she

carried the dog off for food as well.

 

But the film was accurate in the scenes of human behaviour when stressed to

the maximum limit ­ do we revert to barbarism or follow a higher path? In

theory we would like to think we are a peaceful lot and non-violent protests

and activism will get us where we want to go, but for the folks in the

ghettos of Belarus and elsewhere, it just dropped them off in a mass grave.

 

If one is to liken the animals of the world today to the Jews of WWII, then

one can see where Mr. Vlasak and others are going with this ­ to instil fear

into the hearts of collaborators and persecutors, using any means necessary.

Banding about the term ³terrorist² is meaningless in this regard, just as it

is in Gaza at the moment. Who is the terrorist and who is the rightist? I

guess the whole animal situation would be easier to evaluate if only apes

and other animals could speak and carry sidearms.

 

Jigs in Nepal

 

 

 

 

On 1/6/09 12:03 AM, " Julia Gaius " <juliagaius wrote:

 

>

>

>

> Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking up to.

> He only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of

> terrosim, he as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes in on

> the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He

> treats all of us as idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If you

> want a hero look up to someone that has achieved without violence and someone

> that shows compassion to all suffering.

>

> ________________________________

> <journalistandanimals

> <journalistandanimals%40gmail.com> >

> AAPN List <aapn <aapn%40> >

> Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

> Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

>

> This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

> Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

> this on his behalf.

>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

> Fwd: Vlasak Interview

> journalistandanimal s <s%40gmail.com>

>

> ----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

> -----

> " Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

> Vlasak Interview

> Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

>

> This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

> cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

> belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

>

> He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

> that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

> justification for the use of violence for political ends,

> and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

>

> Dennis Brewin

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Well said Jigme. 'Terrorism' is only what they do and we don't. We fight

righteous wars, they indulge in 'terror'. We only defend ourselves, they are

the aggressors. We safeguard human and animal rights, whereas they abuse

them. We protect and they kill. They use brutal booby traps and fire bombs,

we only use peaceful fighter jets and cruise missiles (and two very peaceful

nuclear bombs that are still spreading their ill effects). We have a right

to speak, they don't. We have a right to protest and block traffic, they

don't. We spout ethics, morning, noon and night to beg for money, when they

do it, it is brushed off as empty verbiage. Therefore someone calling for

armed revolution is branded a 'terrorist' whereas a well dressed head of

state killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people is hailed as a

diplomatic elected leader. I have differences with Jerry Vlasak, but I will

go to any extent to defend his right to speak, it is a fundamental human

right he shares with all of use, like animals or not. By the way, Jerry

Vlasak has also made it clear that he is speaking of a HYPOTHETICAL

situation where the lives of many millions of animals could be saved if you

killed a few abusers. I think the same logic applies to armed guards to

prevent poaching, you save the lives of many animals by killing a limited

number of poachers. Now, I hasten to add that I am neither for killing

vivisectors nor for killing poachers (I am totally opposed to the death penalty

and the University of Westminster where I studied, is Europe's leading voice

against capital punishment). Nonetheless, I will support the

right of a killer to speak. If he says he wants a platform to explain his point

of view, I will gladly give it to him and have done so several times in public.

It is risky, but it is an integral part of my work ethics. And I am prepared to

court arrest for this.

 

On 1/6/09, Herojig <herojig wrote:

>

> Well, I don¹t agree really with Jerry¹s tactical approach; I prefer one

> more

> modelled after the CIA: arming and training the defenceless against

> _________fill-in-the-blank aggressors. Surely an ape should be able to

> handle an RPG with proper instructions.

>

> I just saw the movie Defiance starring current 007, and was struck by the

> dichotomy of being slaughtered or being armed and fighting. The Bielski

> brothers protected the innocent and helpless against men who were bent on

> their extermination, and I was struck how similar the situation that people

> in the forest are placed when trying to protect the animals that live there

> - although one of the brothers shot his horse to feed the hiding humans ­

> which seemed a bit extreme. Another animal was shot when trying to steal

> some food from a wayward maiden, which also struck me as vulgar as she

> carried the dog off for food as well.

>

> But the film was accurate in the scenes of human behaviour when stressed to

> the maximum limit ­ do we revert to barbarism or follow a higher path? In

> theory we would like to think we are a peaceful lot and non-violent

> protests

> and activism will get us where we want to go, but for the folks in the

> ghettos of Belarus and elsewhere, it just dropped them off in a mass grave.

>

> If one is to liken the animals of the world today to the Jews of WWII, then

> one can see where Mr. Vlasak and others are going with this ­ to instil

> fear

> into the hearts of collaborators and persecutors, using any means

> necessary.

> Banding about the term ³terrorist² is meaningless in this regard, just as

> it

> is in Gaza at the moment. Who is the terrorist and who is the rightist? I

> guess the whole animal situation would be easier to evaluate if only apes

> and other animals could speak and carry sidearms.

>

> Jigs in Nepal

>

> On 1/6/09 12:03 AM, " Julia Gaius "

<juliagaius<juliagaius%40>>

> wrote:

>

> >

> >

> >

> > Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking up

> to.

> > He only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of

> > terrosim, he as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes

> in on

> > the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He

> > treats all of us as idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If

> you

> > want a hero look up to someone that has achieved without violence and

> someone

> > that shows compassion to all suffering.

> >

> > ________________________________

> >

<journalistandanimals<journalistandanimals%40gmail.com>

> >

<journalistandanimals%40gmail.com<journalistandanimals%2540gmail.com>>

> >

> > AAPN List <aapn <aapn%40> <

> aapn%40 <aapn%2540>> >

> > Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

> > Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

> >

> > This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

> > Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

> > this on his behalf.

> >

> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> > Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> > Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

> > Fwd: Vlasak Interview

> > journalistandanimal s <s%40gmail.com> <

> s%40gmail.com <s%2540gmail.com>>

> >

> > ----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

> > -----

> > " Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> > aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

> > Vlasak Interview

> > Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

> >

> > This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

> > cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

> > belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

> >

> > He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

> > that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

> > justification for the use of violence for political ends,

> > and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

> >

> > Dennis Brewin

[Guest guest]

Of course he is allowed to air his views. I am not arguing about him airing his

views. No one is arguing with that. But just as he is expressing his views, I am

expressing mine. No he has not killed anyone. I read somewhere he said he

couldn't because he took the hippocratic oath. So he puts the ammo in the gun,

aims and gets someone else to pull the trigger. My views. He is inciting hatred.

It leads to problems. He is dangerous and does the movement no good. I saw him

on TV and he just went out of his way to get people in the room, on both sides

of the debate stirred up. Never good for anyone.. And of course people that like

to label us as terroists just love him. Have you read Capers in the Churchyard?

It demonstrates acts like this lead nowhere.

 

My view is he is an idiot and a dangerous man. Get him to pull the trigger for

once. I bet you he won't do it. I guarantee he won't do it..

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Julia Gaius <juliagaius

Cc: aapn

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 4:06:11 PM

Re: Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

 

Even if he is a terrorist(and I do not think he is since he has not killed

anyone), he has a right to air his views. Incidentally Benjamin Zephaniah, whom

I have interviewed also believes that in extreme circumstances, the lives of

many animals could be saved if you take out a few vivisectors.

 

 

On 1/5/09, Julia Gaius <juliagaius wrote:

Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking up to. He

only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of terrosim, he

as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes in on the anger of

others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He treats all of us as

idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If you want a hero look up to

someone that has achieved without violence and someone that shows compassion to

all suffering.

 

________________________________

 

AAPN List <aapn >

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

 

This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

this on his behalf.

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

Fwd: Vlasak Interview

journalistandanimal s

 

----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

-----

" Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

Vlasak Interview

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

 

This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

 

He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

justification for the use of violence for political ends,

and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

 

Dennis Brewin

[Guest guest]

Obviously there is some kind of mix up because I am not arguing about his right

to express his views. If he has that right so do I so no one should take offence

to me expressing my views. I am however arguing about his views not his right to

express them.

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Herojig <herojig

Cc: Julia Gaius <juliagaius; aapn

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 5:45:09 PM

Re: Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

 

Well said Jigme.. 'Terrorism' is only what they do and we don't.  We fight

righteous wars, they indulge in 'terror'. We only defend ourselves, they are the

aggressors. We safeguard human and animal rights, whereas they abuse them. We

protect and they kill. They use brutal booby traps and fire bombs, we only use

peaceful fighter jets and cruise missiles(and two very peaceful nuclear bombs

that are still spreading their ill effects). We have a right to speak, they

don't. We have a right to protest and block traffic, they don't. We spout

ethics, morning, noon and night to beg for money, when they do it, it is brushed

off as empty verbiage. Therefore someone calling for armed revolution is branded

a 'terrorist' whereas a well dressed head of state killing hundreds and

thousands of innocent people is hailed as a diplomatic elected leader. I have

differences with Jerry Vlasak, but I will go to any extent to defend his right

to speak, it is a fundamental

human right he shares with all of use, like animals or not. By the way, Jerry

Vlasak has also made it clear that he is speaking of a HYPOTHETICAL situation

where the lives of many millions of animals could be saved if you killed a few

abusers. I think the same logic applies to armed guards to prevent poaching, you

save the lives of many animals by killing a limited number of poachers. Now, I

hasten to add that I am neither for killing vivisectors nor for killing

poachers(I am totally opposed to the death penalty and the University of

Westminster where I studied, is Europe's leading voice against capital

punishment). Nonetheless, I will support the right of a killer to speak. If he

says he wants a platform to explain his point of view, I will gladly give it to

him and have done so several times in public. It is risky, but it is an integral

part of my work ethics. And I am prepared to court arrest for this.

 

 

On 1/6/09, Herojig <herojig wrote:

Well, I don¹t agree really with Jerry¹s tactical approach; I prefer one more

modelled after the CIA: arming and training the defenceless against

_________fill-in-the-blank aggressors. Surely an ape should be able to

handle an RPG with proper instructions.

 

I just saw the movie Defiance starring current 007, and was struck by the

dichotomy of being slaughtered or being armed and fighting. The Bielski

brothers protected the innocent and helpless against men who were bent on

their extermination, and I was struck how similar the situation that people

in the forest are placed when trying to protect the animals that live there

- although one of the brothers shot his horse to feed the hiding humans ­

which seemed a bit extreme. Another animal was shot when trying to steal

some food from a wayward maiden, which also struck me as vulgar as she

carried the dog off for food as well.

 

But the film was accurate in the scenes of human behaviour when stressed to

the maximum limit ­ do we revert to barbarism or follow a higher path? In

theory we would like to think we are a peaceful lot and non-violent protests

and activism will get us where we want to go, but for the folks in the

ghettos of Belarus and elsewhere, it just dropped them off in a mass grave.

 

If one is to liken the animals of the world today to the Jews of WWII, then

one can see where Mr. Vlasak and others are going with this ­ to instil fear

into the hearts of collaborators and persecutors, using any means necessary.

Banding about the term ³terrorist² is meaningless in this regard, just as it

is in Gaza at the moment. Who is the terrorist and who is the rightist? I

guess the whole animal situation would be easier to evaluate if only apes

and other animals could speak and carry sidearms.

 

Jigs in Nepal

 

On 1/6/09 12:03 AM, " Julia Gaius " <juliagaius wrote:

 

>

>

>

> Jerry Vlaseak is a terrorist and no one that any one should be looking up to.

> He only does the movement more damage. And whilst he preaches acts of

> terrosim, he as far as I know, never carries them out himself. He cashes in on

> the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out the terrorist act. He

> treats all of us as idiots without the minds to think for ourselves. If you

> want a hero look up to someone that has achieved without violence and someone

> that shows compassion to all suffering.

>

> ________________________________

> <journalistandanimals

> <journalistandanimals%40gmail.com> >

> AAPN List <aapn <aapn%40> >

> Monday, January 5, 2009 10:28:37 PM

> Colonel Dennis Brewin on Jerry Vlasak Interview

>

> This message was sent by Colonel Dennis Brewin in response to my post on

> Jerry Vlasak. He has some problems posting stuff on AAPN, so I am posting

> this on his behalf.

>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> Col. D. Brewin <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> Jan 5, 2009 4:45 PM

> Fwd: Vlasak Interview

> journalistandanimal s <s%40gmail.com>

>

> ----- Message Forwarded on Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:15:40 GMT

> -----

> " Col. D. Brewin " <dbrewin (AT) army (DOT) mod.uk.net>

> aapn (AT) vahoogroups (DOT) com

> Vlasak Interview

> Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:02:19 GMT

>

> This man is a terrorist, pure and simple. He should be in a

> cell where he cannot contaminate people who are lead to the

> belief that they have a duty to spread his beliefs.

>

> He spouts evil with every breath, and, regardless of claims

> that all views should be heard, I believe there can be no

> justification for the use of violence for political ends,

> and it is wrong to promote incitement to this end.

>

> Dennis Brewin

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>Even if he is a terrorist(and I do not think he is since he has not

>killed anyone), he has a right to air his views. Incidentally

>Benjamin Zephaniah, whom I have interviewed also believes that in

>extreme circumstances, the lives of many animals could be saved if

>you take out a few vivisectors.

 

 

Having a right to air one's views means having the

opportunity to do it on one's own nickel. It does not mean that

responsible journalists have any obligation to amplify the views of

terrorists, or raving sociopaths, or anyone who as Julia Gaius put

it, " cashes in on the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out

the terrorist act. "

 

I have reported about Jerry Vlasak's activities from time to

time, mostly in connection with the outcomes of court cases. What

he does and what the results are is sometimes news, and when it is,

it belongs on the record.

 

Inasmuch as news is " who, what, where, when, why, &

how, " a summary of Vlasak's claims about his motivation is also at

times appropriate -- with the critical perspectives of others,

including animal advocates taking less bellicose approaches, the

targets of his remarks, mainstream media, lawmakers, and law

enforcement. All of this is part of putting Vlasak's history into

context.

 

This is a very long way from uncritically giving public voice

to a person who advocates murder.

 

The tendency in journalism is for the practitioners with the

least experience and fewest readers to try to attract bigger

audiences by being more sensational than anyone else.

 

Thus when some of the founders of Best Friends tried to start

a magazine more than 35 years ago, before starting their animal

sanctuary, they made the mistake of interviewing Charles Manson for

their debut edition.

 

This lastingly complicated their lives, because the exposure

they gave to a homicidal psychopath, when they were still quite

young, has for 35 years given people who don't like their pro-animal

work a pretext for calling Best Friends a cult inspired by Manson,

etc.

 

Anyone who knows them knows that this is not true, and never

was, but they did commit a mistake, in pursuit of audience, that

haunts them still.

 

 

 

--

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.]

[Guest guest]

I have to make it clear that I am not taking offence to anyone speaking out

against Jerry Vlasak and neither am I trying to suppress any information or

view that is critical of violence in the animal rights movement(or any

movement for that matter). Merritt Clifton says, " It does not mean that

responsible journalists have any obligation to amplify the views of

terrorists, or raving sociopaths, or anyone who as Julia Gaius put

it, " cashes in on the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out

the terrorist act. " He also adds, " The tendency in journalism is for the

practitioners with the

least experience and fewest readers to try to attract bigger

audiences by being more sensational than anyone else. "

 

I disagree. Keith Mann has advocated violence for animal rights. A

mainstream media house like BBC gave him air time, link here :

http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=0uHTJFNbceI Channel 4 recently broadcast

Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's speech as an alternative Christmas message in England

amidst much criticism, although the tone of his message was

conciliatory.(Full text of his speech here : *

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5394734.ece*<http://www.timesonl\

ine.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5394734.ece>)

I totally support Channel 4 for their brave and fair decision, many

Britishers appreciated it as well.(Many thought that Ahmedinejad as a

Holocaust denier should have been denied air space in England).

I don't think that BBC and Channel 4 fit the description of 'practitioners

with the

least experience and fewest readers to try to attract bigger

audiences by being more sensational than anyone else. " Both BBC and Channel

4 have adhered to the true principles of democracy and human rights by

giving these individuals a voice. And what about Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya?

They always give air time to militants and insurgents, and very rightly so.

Even Osama bin Laden has been given a voice on Al Jazeera, again I feel

rightly so, he is entitled to speak on why he wreaks carnage and kills

people. Robert Fisk gives voice to 'terrorists' and he is an accomplished

journalist. Phil Rees does and he is very accomplished as well, and he never

uses the term 'terrorist'. Those who are against giving voice to Jerry

Vlasak and other people advocating violence would do well to think if people

like Bush and Blair should be given a voice, for they advocate murder as

well. If they are given a voice, then their opposition should also be given

a voice. If Ehud Barak can go on television, so can Nasrallah, and I am glad

he does. If Colin Blakemore is given a voice, Ronnie Lee and Mel Broughton

should also be given a voice. This is not sensationalism, this is fair

treatment of your subject. For a journalist, a criminal's opinion is as

important as that of a saint, he makes no judgements, he is only a

messenger. By posting Jerry Vlasak's message, I have acted only as a

messenger.

 

 

 

 

On 1/6/09, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>

> >Even if he is a terrorist(and I do not think he is since he has not

> >killed anyone), he has a right to air his views. Incidentally

> >Benjamin Zephaniah, whom I have interviewed also believes that in

> >extreme circumstances, the lives of many animals could be saved if

> >you take out a few vivisectors.

>

> Having a right to air one's views means having the

> opportunity to do it on one's own nickel. It does not mean that

> responsible journalists have any obligation to amplify the views of

> terrorists, or raving sociopaths, or anyone who as Julia Gaius put

> it, " cashes in on the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out

> the terrorist act. "

>

> I have reported about Jerry Vlasak's activities from time to

> time, mostly in connection with the outcomes of court cases. What

> he does and what the results are is sometimes news, and when it is,

> it belongs on the record.

>

> Inasmuch as news is " who, what, where, when, why, &

> how, " a summary of Vlasak's claims about his motivation is also at

> times appropriate -- with the critical perspectives of others,

> including animal advocates taking less bellicose approaches, the

> targets of his remarks, mainstream media, lawmakers, and law

> enforcement. All of this is part of putting Vlasak's history into

> context.

>

> This is a very long way from uncritically giving public voice

> to a person who advocates murder.

>

> The tendency in journalism is for the practitioners with the

> least experience and fewest readers to try to attract bigger

> audiences by being more sensational than anyone else.

>

> Thus when some of the founders of Best Friends tried to start

> a magazine more than 35 years ago, before starting their animal

> sanctuary, they made the mistake of interviewing Charles Manson for

> their debut edition.

>

> This lastingly complicated their lives, because the exposure

> they gave to a homicidal psychopath, when they were still quite

> young, has for 35 years given people who don't like their pro-animal

> work a pretext for calling Best Friends a cult inspired by Manson,

> etc.

>

> Anyone who knows them knows that this is not true, and never

> was, but they did commit a mistake, in pursuit of audience, that

> haunts them still.

>

> --

> 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.]

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Well, if u believe that even bad press can be good press (in some cases, I

do) then the whole Jerry debacle might be an awareness raising for some.

Many people on the street think something along these lines:

 

³What kinda whackjob would consider killing vivisectors to save some monkeys

in a lab? What are monkey¹s doing in labs anyway?? ­ if he¹s a nutcase Dr.

who says they don¹t need them, do they really? The nutcase Drs. are usually

right. Seems like more and more of my friends and family are dying of

cancer each year, and I wonder if the monkey¹s are really helping...and

animal rights terrorists?!? Come on, u mean those people that used to chain

themselves to old growth trees? How much harm can they do...probably blow

themselves up if they gotta hold of real bomb. Something is fishy here...I

don¹t trust the mainstream media, they are a pack of liars...I wonder what¹s

really going on?

 

And so forth. So go for it Jerry...it might work, this inverse awareness

raising. In general, the other approaches seem to be taking an awful long

time to solve the problem for good.

Jigs in Nepal

 

 

On 1/6/09 12:52 PM, " Merritt Clifton " <anmlpepl wrote:

 

>

>

>

>> >Even if he is a terrorist(and I do not think he is since he has not

>> >killed anyone), he has a right to air his views. Incidentally

>> >Benjamin Zephaniah, whom I have interviewed also believes that in

>> >extreme circumstances, the lives of many animals could be saved if

>> >you take out a few vivisectors.

>

> Having a right to air one's views means having the

> opportunity to do it on one's own nickel. It does not mean that

> responsible journalists have any obligation to amplify the views of

> terrorists, or raving sociopaths, or anyone who as Julia Gaius put

> it, " cashes in on the anger of others and stirs them up to carry out

> the terrorist act. "

>

> I have reported about Jerry Vlasak's activities from time to

> time, mostly in connection with the outcomes of court cases. What

> he does and what the results are is sometimes news, and when it is,

> it belongs on the record.

>

> Inasmuch as news is " who, what, where, when, why, &

> how, " a summary of Vlasak's claims about his motivation is also at

> times appropriate -- with the critical perspectives of others,

> including animal advocates taking less bellicose approaches, the

> targets of his remarks, mainstream media, lawmakers, and law

> enforcement. All of this is part of putting Vlasak's history into

> context.

>

> This is a very long way from uncritically giving public voice

> to a person who advocates murder.

>

> The tendency in journalism is for the practitioners with the

> least experience and fewest readers to try to attract bigger

> audiences by being more sensational than anyone else.

>

> Thus when some of the founders of Best Friends tried to start

> a magazine more than 35 years ago, before starting their animal

> sanctuary, they made the mistake of interviewing Charles Manson for

> their debut edition.

>

> This lastingly complicated their lives, because the exposure

> they gave to a homicidal psychopath, when they were still quite

> young, has for 35 years given people who don't like their pro-animal

> work a pretext for calling Best Friends a cult inspired by Manson,

> etc.

>

> Anyone who knows them knows that this is not true, and never

> was, but they did commit a mistake, in pursuit of audience, that

> haunts them still.

 

-- Paul Reitman, CEO

Phoenix Studios Nepal

Mobile: 9841589797

 

www.phoenixstudios.com.np/corporate

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>And so forth. So go for it Jerry...it might work, this inverse

>awareness raising. In general, the other approaches seem to be

>taking an awful long time to solve the problem for good.

 

 

People have been trying to coerce the behavior of others with

mayhem and threats of mayhem since before we could be distinguished

from chimpanzees. That approach has not only not solved any problem

for good, but has become the most deeply rooted problem of all, the

notion that might can make right, whether by subjecting a lab rat to

painful tests or threatening to kill a vivisector.

 

 

 

 

--

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.]

 

 

[Guest guest]

>By posting Jerry Vlasak's message, I have acted only as a

>messenger.

 

 

This is precisely the point. A copy boy acts only as a messenger.

 

By the time a copy boy graduates to reporting, he is

expected to be exercising perspective and critical judgement.

 

 

--

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.]

[Guest guest]

[Note from Moderator:

We are getting well off the track of Asian-specific issues. I'll allow Shubho

this riposte and then we must close the thread!

John.]

 

If as a copy boy, I have the likes of Stephen Sackur, Robert Fisk, Phil

Rees, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Martin Bell, Aparisim Ghosh and Anita Pratap(all

of them have given voice to 'terrorists' at one time or another and acted as

messengers)as examples to follow, then I am in very distinguished company.

And without boasting, I think I have been, when I was INVITED(did not

approach mind you, was invited) to be part of an international media

delegation writing to the New York Times protesting the death of Russian

journalist Anna Politkovskaya. Transcript here :

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/opinion/l19russia.html?pagewanted=print

Was the killing of Politkovskaya an act of terrorism? You bet it was and

that is why I protested it alongwith all these luminaries. But would I give

her killers the chance to defend themselves in print and on television? Yes,

I would and and the three most distinguished lights in international

journalism[Charles Lewis, Seymour M. Hersh and Aidan White. Respectively,

founder of the Center for Public Integrity; national security correspondent

for The New Yorker; and general secretary of the International Federation of

Journalists are likely to agree with me.] And among the 81 others who signed

that historic letter excluding me, I know many would share my stance on

giving voice to 'terrorists' and 'people inciting murder' like Jerry Vlasak.

 

 

 

On 1/6/09, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>

> By posting Jerry Vlasak's message, I have acted only as a

>> messenger.

>>

>

>

> This is precisely the point. A copy boy acts only as a messenger.

>

> By the time a copy boy graduates to reporting, he is expected to be

> exercising perspective and critical judgement.

>

>

> --

> 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.]

>