Paranoid Crap about Cops Grasses and Infiltrators

best wishes

Loopy good point. There is a lot of money in private investigators infiltrating groups for big companies/university.

There's been quite alot of talk on Indymedia recently about a certain group being infiltrated. People seem to be just content to put their head in the sand. I have no doubt that some groups are infiltrated by either state or companies. Therefore people should be careful what info they pass to larger groups. Keep doing the actions but don't feel you have to tell some supposed Animal Rights Network what you have done.

I have known many police officers, vivisectors and hunters. They are individuals, some as people I even like and have a certain amount of respect for but it does not stop them being my foe, nor does it stop them from the systematic abuse of innocent individuals. Many vivisectors and hunters have companion animals, indeed I have heard of HLS workers liberating individual rats to save their lives and give them a good home. This is highly commendable but I still regard them as my opponents until they stop experimenting on other animals. Other workers have left HLS employ and bravely spoken out against them.
The police have set up NETCU read the website, they have declared war on anyone who protests against vivisection and aim to disrupt ANY activity including letter writing which harms(or might harm) big pharma. In case no-one has noticed several people are in prison for running legal campaigns, others have been physically attacked and harmed by police officers, most of us are under surveillance even if we only intend to hold some old banner outside a lab once in a blue moon. NETCU have also got their beady eyes on climate activists.
I agree individual police officers should not be antagonised but if ordered to do so they will smash your door in, they may be a person of the utmost integrity but really it is safer to be careful. Just bear in mind that in recent raids a young girl was forced to remain topless in a room ful of male officers, I know of 2 occassions when other naked female activists have been jumped on in bed by male officers, one male activist was handcuffed and thrown down the stairs.
At every demonstration FIT are photograhing EVERY activist to file away for later use, they were not present at any pro-test march. All in all the police are acting as private security (or storm troopers) for the vivisection industry, they are my enemy along with those they work for however much I may have compassion for them as individuals
Lynn

Would an infiltrated campaign promote illegal direct action?
Think.

Don't know the *ARN you mention, so can't speak for that (hopefully it's not infiltrated). But it's fairly obvious that a place that gets sent comminques would be a great place to infiltrate. They may be able to get activists email addreses or IP addys from when they send in their communiques.

If was a Private Invesitagtor paid by a company or the Police it's exactly what I'd do. Set up, or even better infiltrate, a site that publishes "anonymous" communiques/action reports.

I don't want anyone to be too paranoid! A little bit of paranoia is good but too much is bad.

any one who thinks they have power over other lives has no right to life. there is no right to life and all those who wield power must step down or they will be cut down it is a war after all

The Joint Committee on Human Rights Policing And Protest Inquiry welcomes submissions from anyone.before September 22nd
www.repeal-socpa.info/#submit
Amongst the things to be considered are
The proportionality of legislative measures to restrict protest or peaceful assembly.
And of course the fairness of SOCPA (Serious Organised Crime And Police Act) is up for discussion .
Personally i will be writing in particular about Section 137 (the ban on loudhailers) & of more relevance to this discussion
for the abolition of Section 145 "interference with contractual relationship so as to harm animal research organisation".
What do i find unfair about this section? It just seems so unlike UK law.Suppose we made a law saying "driving Above 40mph is illegal for Manchester United fans" not only would that discriminate against Manchester United fans but it would lead to a situation in which they would be victimised in general.Section 145 of SOCPA does the same thing.It makes a law which is not applicable to the whole population,but just to one section ,animal rights protestersSo it suggests theres something wrong about supporting animal rights that isn't wrong about other protest ,for example opposing obesity (which could impinge on Supermarket profits!)

.i am not saying i would support such a law, because i don't ,but the comprehensible UK law along these lines should read something like "interference with contractual relationship so as to harm commercial undertakings", if all are to be equal.
i think Section 145 SOCPA helps to lead to an atmosphere in general in which peaceful protest for animal rights may not be undertaken in the same atmosphere as other protest.

thanks,
simon