By WILL POTTER

FBI agents rounded up seven American political activists from across
the country Wednesday morning, and the U.S. Attorney's Office in New
Jersey held a press conference trumpeting that "terrorists" have been
indicted.

That's right: "Terrorists." The activists have been charged with
violating the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act of 1992, which at the
time garnered little public attention except from the corporations
who lobbied for it. Their crime, according to the indictment,
is "conspiring" to shut down Huntingdon Life Sciences, a company that
tests products on animals and has been exposed multiple times for
violating animal welfare laws.

The terrorism charges could mean a maximum of three years in prison
and a $250,000 fine. The activists also face additional charges of
interstate stalking and three counts of conspiracy to engage in
interstate stalking: Each count could mean up to five years in prison
and a $250,000 fine.

Since September 11, the T-word has been tossed around by law
enforcement and politicians with more and more ease. Grassroots
environmental and animal activists, and even national organizations
like Greenpeace, have been called "eco-terrorists" by the
corporations and politicians they oppose. The arrests on Wednesday,
though, mark the official opening of a new domestic front in the War
on Terrorism.

Bush's War on Terrorism is no longer limited to Al Qaeda or Osama Bin
Laden. It's not limited to Afghanistan or Iraq (or Syria, or Iran, or
whichever country is next). And it's not limited to the animal rights
movement, or even the campaign against Huntington Life Sciences. The
rounding up of activists on Wednesday should set off alarms heard by
every social movement in the United States: This "war" is about
protecting corporate and political interests under the guise of
fighting terrorism.

The activists arrested are part of a group called Stop Huntingdon
Animal Cruelty, an international organization aimed solely at closing
the controversial lab. The group uses home demonstrations, phone and
email blockades, and plenty of smart-ass, aggressive rhetoric to
pressure companies to cut ties with the lab. It has worked. The lab
has been brought near bankruptcy, after international corporations
like Marsh Inc. have pulled out their investments.

To most, this is effective-- albeit controversial-- organizing.
According to the indictment, though, it's "terrorism" because the
activists aim to cause "physical disruption to the functioning of
HLS, an animal enterprise, and intentionally damage and cause the
loss of property used by HLS."

That's like saying the Montgomery bus boycott, a catalyst of the
civil rights movement, was terrorism because it aimed
to "intentionally damage and cause the loss of property" of the bus
company.

It seems the biggest act of "terrorism" by the group is a website.
Members of the group are outspoken supporters of illegal direct
action like civil disobedience, rescuing animals from labs, and
vandalism. Whenever actions-legal or not-take place against the lab,
the group puts it on the website. The activists are not accused of
taking part in any of these crimes.

Such news postings are so threatening, apparently, that the
indictment doesn't even name the corporations that have been
targeted. They are only identified by single letters, like "S. Inc."
or "M. Corp."

"Because of the nature of the campaign against these companies, we
didn't want to subject them further to the tactics of SHAC," said
Michael Drewniak, spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office in New
jersey, in an interview.

Some of the wealthiest corporations on the planet, and the U.S.
Attorney's Office must protect them from a bunch of protesters. This
is what the War on Terrorism has become: The Bush administration
can't find real terrorists abroad, yet it spends law enforcement time
and resources protecting corporations from political activists.

The lawsuit is so outlandish that some activists, who asked that they
not be identified, said they don't think it is intended to win.
Instead, they see it as an important political move in the War on
Terror. In a hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee just
last week, a U.S. Attorney said the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act
needed to go further to successfully be used against Stop Huntingdon
Animal Cruelty. If this lawsuit fails, the Justice Department can
say, "We told you so."

So, these activists face a double-edged sword. If they lose, they go
to prison, and are labeled "terrorists" for the rest of their lives.
If they win, it could be fodder for an even harsher political
crackdown.

Their only chance is for activists of all social movements--
regardless of their political views-- to support them, and oppose the
assault on basic civil liberties. Otherwise, in Bush's America, we
could all be terrorists.

Will Potter is a freelance reporter in Washington, D.C. He has
written for the Chicago Tribune, Dallas Morning News, and Chronicle
of Higher Education, and close followed the emergence of "domestic
terrorism."

More info go to:  http://www.shacamerica.net