Gloucestershire police riot

They have cried poverty all season, said that they cannot deal with hunts illegally hunting, threatening, hitting, riding at, driving at and beating the living snot out of anyone who is trying to monitor or sab hunts. Gloucestershire police have no resources EXCEPT for when the hunt want them to crush dissent. On Saturday out came at least 12 vehicles packed with cops, tazers, a helicoptor, all followed by a press release. 6 sabs were arrested for highly suspect reasons such as allegedly carrying “offensive weapons” i.e whips (sticks with rope attached to stop hounds hunting by cracking them) and citronella (essential oil diluted in water) to mask the fox’s scent.
Anyone could be forgiven for thinking that Gloucestershire police are nothing more than hunt lackeys.
2 of us visited the Cotswold Vale Farmers, the pack at the centre of all this police bias, yesturday and we had 8 police officers with us and we were grateful they were there as the day ended;they helped save hounds lives as the huntsman and his whipper in left 5 hounds to fend for themselves on a busy road the Forest of Dean, B4234, English Bicknor, Little Collins Grove. We used whips to help save the hounds from fast traffic by using them as leads so much for them being offensive weapons. One hound was treated for a deep laceration which should have been noticed by someone in the hunt, 2 hounds had gone off somewhere else we managed to catch only 3. Now we know that the police have vast resources at their beck and call we will expect them to actually enforce the Hunting Act next season. If they or we had not been there yesturday a hound could have been hurt/killed, or people hurt/killed in an RTC. It is clear that the Cotswold Vale are unable to control their pack so sabs on Saturday were performing a public service for which they should be applauded and not comdemned as they have been by the police and most disgracefully by a certain established anti hunt lobby group.
Tim Bonner now of the MFHA (Maters of Foxhounds Association) sprouted some nonsense about the Cotswold Vale being picked on because they are a “small rural pack” well no Tim they were sabbed because first of all they are illegally hunting (this lot have blocked badger setts before now near Tewkesbury something the police refused to investigate), secondly a few weeks ago they instigated an unprovoked, vicious assault on sabs 2 of whom were badly injured, the police have yet to arrest the clearly identified perpetrators of the assaults.
To intimate that sabs are “anti social” and violent in a police press release is utterly outrageous and should be condemned by every fairminded person.

303 gsi gateway and police disruption

At last! Schnews has written a brilliant article on how NETCU et al have been trolling on the internet. This has been going on for years and is most notable on certain anti animal rights websites which target and smear activists as well as Indymedia. The police have put up posts and comments which:
are disruptive
pretend to be from named activists in an attempt to discredit
are fictional
threatening (we have highlighted at least one of these on a previous post)
give out names, addresses, private emails and phone numbers of activists
are vindictive and hateful
The fact that the individual police officers concerned are paid to disrupt campaigning in this way is an absolute disgrace. The sheer vitriol that comes out of many of these snide attempts to demoralise is proof that the political police units are not there to “protect” anything other than corporate profits and their own very lucrative little positions. They hate activists but at the same time depend on us for their swanky vehicles and luxury accomodation (according to Mark Kennedy in the Mail on Sunday this weekend). They do their best to exaggerate the danger and rake in the cash from the taxpayer whilst facing no real risks.
Must be nice having to do nothing more than make up crap for Indymedia, blogs and of course facebook we presume AND get an enhanced salary.
Right now as the Earth burns and billions of animals die in agony all the police in NDET, NPIOU, FIT, NETCU, Rumble, Achilles and other anti activist operations want to do is keep the torture, the murder, the violation, the sacrilege going and they are prepared to wreck the lives of anyone who stands up against their freinds in the multinationals, the hunts and the labs. They are nothing more than the lackeys of those who rip animals apart, who destroy the forests and who make a profit over crucifying any man woman or child who interferes with making hard cash. This is nothing to do with the law every single officer and civilian worker involved with these police units could have chosen to have done something else, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE LOWLIFE is the enemy of every decent person and has decided to do what they can to induce a police state. Recognise them as the enemy and above all FIGHT BACK. More to follow….much more..

Media feeding frenzy over “UCs”

We have not commented thus far because anything we have to say has already been covered on Indymedia and Fitwatch, we have no comment other than sending the utmost love and respect to those caught up in this and who first outed PC Kennedy.
However as George Monbiot has commented in the Guardian today that the animal rights movement has planned “plenty of violence” this cannot go unchallenged. To our knowledge actual violence from animal rights activists is limited to the Brian Cass incident in January 2001 and perhaps another couple of unclear and isolated examples. We are uncertain of all the facts and decline to comment because of this. However to state that the animal rights movement is “violent” is utter nonsense. The normal fare of the animal rights activist are peaceful if vocal demonstrations, leafleting etc until recently lock ons, occupations, liberations etc all done without violence were dealt with as minor offences, now they are “conspiracy to blackmail” but does that make such actions violent? Why is it considered perfectly acceptable to occupy a power station (and we at NW fully support such actions) but “violent” and imprisonable under 145/146 SOCPA for 5 years to do the same action at a laboratory?
George Monbiot swallows hook, line and sinker the State’s line that it is acceptable that the animal rights movement should be spied on and oppressed but not any other movement. Maybe, just maybe if there had been a bit more analysis and questioning of the draconian and extreme policing of the AR movement, other movements would not be facing the exact same threat. Is this civil liberties for all George or are we going to have a special clause (as in SOCPA) that everyone has the right to protest unless they care about the liberation of sentient beings and the cessation of violence against them?
Furthermore why no condemnation of violence against animal rights activists? We are punched, kicked, threatened with monotonous regularity. In some cases activists have been lucky to escape with their lives after being hospitalised, four people have been killed. Why is that OK George? Are we somehow of less worth when we are protesting against a lab’ than when we are protesting against climate change?

Police support the vile fur trade

Met’ show that they are pro abuse…..again. Anatomy of a court case.

Four activists were in court for 3 days in October 2010 for an action against a company selling fur. They were found guilty of Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986.

Background information.
The protest took place on 5th November 2009 at the Kensington Olympia Exhibition Centre at The Spirit of Christmas Fayre. The London Fur Company had a stall at the fair, they make all their money out of fur and have no retail outlet-they sell most of their products at events such as this one. Five activists made their way to the fayre and up to the London Fur Company stall (which trades as Wild Divine). Two of them glued their hands together around a shelving unit (but had a debonder for quick release whilst another chained herself to a clothing rail. A fourth activist then attached herself to this person. The fifth was there simply as a legal observer and was standing back, filming what was happening. The protest consisted of holding posters and attempting to hand out leaflets, informing passers-by about the fur trade in general and chanting.

The whole protest lasted around 15 minutes before the activists were manhandled out of the building. Police arrived and (an hour and a half later) the police received a phone call from New Scotland Yard telling them to arrest the activists as , “we can’t have people like that disrupting any events like this. They were then arrested under section 4a of the Public Order Act 1986 (intentional harassment alarm or distress-intentional because they had intended to attend the event).

A year on, four of the activists were taken to court (the fifth has disappeared-the four includes the activist who was filming). They had been charged with Aggravated Trespass (trespass on land with the intention of interfering with a lawful activity) and section 5 of the Public Order Act -harassment, alarm and distress using threatening , abusive, insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour.

The trial;
One witness (staff at the London Fur Company) gave her statement to police on the day that the trial began (12th October 2010). There were three witnesses who worked for the company and one witness who was security at the fayre.

Several police witnesses were called despite only being there during the arrest and not the incident. The defendants themselves submitted footage of what had happened (the prosecution had no footage themselves) as they believed it showed their innocence. A guest appearance was made by DC Ken Norman from New Scotland Yard who was in charge of the case, despite not being involved in the arrest-he likes “personally taking on cases” of animal rights people and had “personally taken on a case” of one of the defendants . After two days the judge dropped the Aggravated Trespass charge. The defendants gave evidence about the alleged section 5 offence. At the end of the third day the judge decided that they were guilty of the offence.

Note; section 5 is the least serious offence in the Public Order Act. Most people get small fines or absolute/conditional discharges for this (if it’s their first offence).

Only one of the four defendants has previous convictions (AR related but not anti-fur related) and the others had no convictions. The judge decided it appropriate to make them pay £500 court costs each and £300 fines (£400 for the person with previous convictions) plus the usual £15 victim surcharge (for victims of crime). This is £815 each, £915 for the person with previous. A little harsh??

On top of this all four defendants received a two year (the judge initially wanted it to be three years) Restraining Order (the new ASBO??) prohibiting the defendants from:

a) “entering any premises where fur is being sold or displayed or exhibited for sale including retail shops, wholesale premises and trade and retail fairs. Except in multiple department stores where you are prohibited from entering the fur department”.

b) “attending any event in the open air where fur is being sold or displayed nor exhibited for sale “, this is to protect London Fur Company and fur traders generally“.

If the activists do anything that’s prohibited they will be guilty of an offence punishable by imprisonment of six months or a fine up to £5000 (or both). In a Magistrates Court or by imprisonment up to five years or an unlimited fine (or both) in Crown Court.

Considering that it was the first offence for three of the activists and they were in court over one single offence (not a number of offences that mounted to harassment , for example) this is a bit extreme.

On the first two days of the trial two representatives from the British Fur Trade Association were taking notes in the public gallery (including one activists name, DOB and address) and on the third , no-one from the BFTA but between eight and ten trainee security guards from Harrods who stayed for the first hour.

NETCU’s latest

NETCU have announced on their own site today that the new NCDE is Detective Chief Superintendant Adrian Tudway of the Met’. He has been deputy to ACC Anton Setchell since January. As he is not an Assistant chief Constable he probably costs less and no doubt they are all having a bit of a sort out in the National Extremist police units.

Steve and Anton get the boot hahahaha

In todays Torygraph it is revealed that ACC Anton Setchell has been retired and Superintendent Steve Pearl has been booted out of his leadership as head of NETCU though we are sure that there are many lucrative opportunities for them in the private sector making money on information about activists. It would seem that both are a little miffed about this and are throwing a hissy fit about how the government will regret it. However the Telegraph is THE Tory rag, betchya they’ll sex up the political police units whilst unashamedly slashing the child protection units. Paedophiles don’t threaten the state, we apparently do, we will have to wait and see.


THe Daily Mail made some interesting comments about yesturdays student demonstration in London and the subsequent trashing of the Tory Party HQ.
First they say that NETCU was disbanded in October 2010. The website is still up the last post being on the 25th when the second SHAC case concluded.
Then they say that NPIOU (who have files on 1822 of us at the last count) has had it’s budget cut by 20%.
The political police who reside on the 7th floor of Scotland Yard it would seem needed a boost and how could the government possibly justify cutting police child protection teams to the bone whilst allowing the bloated budget of NETCU, NDET, NPIOU to continue? Well a nice little riot is one way, let it happen and then terrify people about the consequences of allowing Class War and “animal rights extremists” (both seemingly blamed by a senior police officer in the DM) to be at liberty.
THe DM appears to say that FIT teams and the NPIOU should be given a big budget and licence to deal with the nasty anarchists.
Even more telling is police Inspector Gadget’s blog with one cop commenting at 08.08 this morning, “I would suggest NPIOU is a bit safer in regards its budget today”. Yes it would appear so, no doubt Nick Herbert’s speech later today will shed some light, I just hope that he remembers that when he was a student in Cambridge that his youthful high jinks did not count against him.
Regardless some people need to take security measures, no doubt the tablois will be posting up pictures of those wanted for arrest.

Canadian Activist Corners Security “Expert”

Little gem of an article with excellent footage of some UK security expert telling a Canadian activist about his “work” when he was overheard discussing stuff in a cafe In Canada
Some of the lies he tells are;
that SHAC are proscribed under the Terrorism Act, he does not say which one.
that SHAC dug up a grandmother
that Smash EDO attacked 2 children aged 3 and 6
that there are May Day riots every year in London.

It would appear that this person is one of those who have seen a nice little market niche in scaring the living snot out of various companies and then offering “security” breifings and intelligence on individuals and groups. Tellingly he says he will “provide information to whoever wants it”. It just seems like a threat, he is very open about what he is doing and seems to enjoy being filmed and questioned knowing that this would appear on the internet. This would imply that there is a good reason for him acting as he did.
What is certain is that these little breifings and even conferences are happening all over the place and people are making a profit off our backs and possibly sharing data with multinationals. They should be taken into consideration (but not too much) and challenged.
We know that Agenda run very expensive courses for the employees of vivisection establishments concerning dealing with protestors so muse as to whether or not this plonker is connected to them. We also think that the information he supplies is not free or out of the goodness of his heart. He is making money out of activists!

The Daily Fail (or is it Heil?) slanders prisoners

We have read some absolute crap over the years but Andrew Malone’s “investigation” into “A terrorist called Mumsy” has to win some sort of prize!
Andrew regurgitating a NETCU press release is not an investigation dearie and for those who read this give Andrew and DCI Andy Robbins any credibility consider the following facts;
Sarah has been in prison for years now but according to Andrew she has only been in for a week!
How exactly can a prisoner be forced to wear leather shoes? First Andrew says Sarah is forced to wear leather, then he says she is living a vegan life of Riley. Did you make this up in the pub Andrew or what?
Sarah had nothing to do with digging up Gladys Hammond.
If SHAC were a “ruthless IRA-style gang” where are all the bodies and limping people who have been knee-capped, those who have been tarred and feathered? (we at NW fully acknowledge that atrocities were committed by the UVF and British soldiers and police as well during the Troubles). Stop exaggerating Andrew, we know it makes a better headline but really show some respect to those who have suffered both in Ireland and on the UK mainland especially as we approach Rememberance Sunday.
What extensive training at “safe houses” on how to avoid police surveillance?
And it goes on and on and on 2 entire pages worth.
Solidarity with Sarah and the other activists who have been painted as her mere stooges.

Some Comments on the SHAC sentencing

NETCU try and fail to crush us.

So another 6 SHAC activists are hauled over the coals and 5 of them are sent to prison. Did this stop SHAC? Hardly, over the sentencing which took 3 days demonstrations took place simultaneously in London and at the gates of the 2 HLS sites as well as their beagle suppliers at Harlan Huntingdon and their rabbit breeders at Highgate Lincolnshire. There was even a brief foray into Cambridgeshire Police HQ looking for NETCU’s office on the day of sentencing. HLS and their backers have been left in no doubt that there are many who will continue to fight their violence and terror despite the fact that they have the full backing of the state.

So let us examine the crap that has been sprouted all over the media about both HLS and SHAC

1. Huntingdon Life Sciences is announced in hushed tones as some sort of saviour of humankind. A medical research facility no less who save babies and cure the blind, the sick and the lame. The messianic fervour with which this pile of thugs and crooks is lauded is somewhat vomit inducing so we have had another look at their website and fair play to them they tell us what they get up to behind the wire and it is not nice and no it is not “necessary” they don’t go as far as Safepharm and show us footage but hey ho.
HLS list their activities as follows:
Crop protection
Food Services
Chemicals Industry
Now there are many arguments about the validity of testing medicines on animals elsewhere, we will not get into that suffice to say that a dog is not a human and it is somewhat haphazard to extrapolate information from testing something on an entirely different species as well as it being fundamentally wrong from an animal rights perspective so we intend to look at the other decidedly non medical aspects of HLS.

The Chemicals industry is justified by HLS saying that “There are very few areas in our daily lives where we do not come into contact with one chemical or another. From our day-to-day diets, to the fuel in our cars, to medicinal products”. And so animals must suffer and die. For those of you who believe that animal rights activists should forgo all medical treatment why not take this further? HLS are of course right it is impossible to live a life free of synthetic chemicals so should we all disappear to a cave somewhere or fight for a world in which we are not ingesting, inhaling, eating and absorbing through our skin compounds which may cause us harm? Drive or take a lift in a car or a bus and you too are a hypocrite if we follow this to it’s logical conclusion. Fridge coolants are tested on animals, ditto paints, artificial scents, plastics ad infinitum. It would be a good thing if it was all labelled as animal tested. But really is this medical, life saving research getting a new air freshener on the market, is it really?

Vetinary is hardly better. HLS are not in this out of caring for much loved pets their main concern is keeping intensive farming going linking in with the meat industry in a web of abuse.
“only healthy animals produce safe and wholesome food”
“ To obtain the same food production level as today without vetinary medicines experts say it would require an increase by 25% of the poultry population and an increase of 89%of the cattle population”. In other words pump poultry and cattle full of antibiotics, cram them into tiny spaces, let them live in their own shit and go crazy as long as people can eat as many corpses as they want that is what counts. Meat, dairy and eggs are luxury items but we suppose that as the Western diet induces diseases such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, cancer that it all helps HLS’s profits to promote it. By the way Cargill are an HLS customer, they supply Mc Donalds with all of its chicken in the UK, they can cut off the hock burns from these poor creatures and coat them in breadcrumbs. A slaughterhouse in Hereford is an absolute hell on earth which kills thousands daily and abuses its workforce. Cargill also have scant regard for human rights and have a mission to destroy the Amazonian rainforest and enforce GM foods on us. What nice playmates for HLS are Cargill and Mc Donalds their very names synonymous with corporate greed, environmental desecration and the suppression of dissenting views.

HLS have “induced disease models” I.e. they make healthy individuals very sick, treat them, murder them and cut them up.
They induce mastitis in dairy cows with staph aureus and E.coli (endotoxin) for acute mastitis just so people can drink milk (and pus). 70% of humans cannot actually digest dairy past infancy so it is not necessary at all to inflict suffering in this way for a luxury product.

HLS also have “Respiratory and digestive models in swine”. Now why might that be “necessary”? No-one needs to eat the corpses of pigs, furthermore if pigs were not treated like pieces of machinery in factory farms left in their own crap and breathing methane all day they would not have breathing problems. HLS go so low as to infect piglets with E.coli at weaning which suggests that the bacterium is an issue in factory farming and a threat to an unsuspecting public. Do bear in mind that pig and poultry urine and faeces along with antibiotic residues finds its way into drinking water. “Superbugs” are partly the responsibility of the factory farms and companies like HLS who encourage the practice of treating living, sentient beings as though they were machines.

Whilst HLS accuse animal rights activists of terror campaigns they have allied themselves with notorious human rights abusers. No-one has ever cut off the arms and legs of children as Shell did in the Niger Delta, no-one has killed and maimed thousands in a chemical explosion as did Union Carbide in Bhopal. Nor have any vegans been complicit in the Holocaust like Bayer and Roche. When we see those who have actually killed and tortured humans for just a little more profit in the dock of an international court and facing prison maybe then we will breathe a sigh of relief that the tide is turning but this is fantasy land. At present these people are “law abiding”, “businessmen” , “victims of extremism” we need to expose them for what they are whilst being approachable and kind to those who are unwittingly embroiled in the horror of corporate atrocities or who wish to change aiming to win hearts and minds wherever possible. Many within HLS and allied companies have indeed helped the animals within by passing on information or leaving them long may it continue. To those within any laboratory, the police or any corporation which abuses others who have doubts or dislike what is going on you can speak out, you can leave, you can report illegal practices, think and then act in whatever way you can.

2. A quick media round up has led to the following somewhat annoying and generalised slack journalism and cliches on comments boards and in the main articles/televised bits.

The Daily Mail reprinted a NETCU press release in effect. DCI Andy Robbins clearly enjoying his 15 minutes of fame is quoted as saying that “they” posted hoax bombs and of course Prosecutor Alistair Nisbet was wheeled out of the closet again to chunter on about extremism, he who personally wrote to many of us in a failed attempt to force us to reveal pgp keys we did not even have, (some of the victims of his threats of sending us to prison were elderly and did not even own a computer or know how to use one). None of us are in a position to know whether or not any of the defendants let alone all of them posted hoax bombs but of course as this is a conspiracy trial the Crown did not have to prove anything not even to the balance of probability standard required in the civil courts. The Crown had to prove that the defendants knew one another and were part of a campaign against HLS and that some illegal activity had occurred. This could apply to many different campaigns and not knowing those carrying out illegal acts or approving, let alone having any influence over them would appear to be no defence. The defendants were not prosecuted on their own actions alone, that much is crystal clear and it is an abomination.

Readers and viewers comments were a mix of supportive for the defendants and the following mad stuff;

One idiot says that they should pay for their own prosecution and imprisonment. Well if so should this not apply to all “criminals”? Why specify animal rights activists.

There is the mind numbingly boring argument about how the defendants should be denied all health care. Well as anti vivisectionists we want experimentation on sentients to stop we do not want the entire NHS to collapse. We live in a world in which it is normal to oppress and kill the weaker members of society. We enjoy eating spring onions but we abhor the forced child labour uncovered in the Malverns this week. If we were to protest against child labour would we be hypocritical if we ate spring onions? We are opposed to man made green house gases but just by living we are part of the problem. We are opposed to the war in Iraq but pay taxes that make it possible. We are disgusted by the way in which all the oil companies behave (all of whom are HLS customers by the way) but it is impossible to completely extricate oneself from a society totally (and dangerously) dependant on oil. To campaign for change does not mean that we extricate ourselves from every single thing tested on animals for that would be very impractical. We want change for the future which does not mean starting from some animal rights year zero in medical terms. Many drugs that have been tested on animals and then used by humans are valuable and life saving we do not wish to deny them to anyone but we do question the methodology on scientific grounds, ponder the treatments thrown down the pan because they killed rats but might have helped people and are outraged at the scant regard for life that is endemic in our society. We are animal rights activists and we do not believe that a human is any more important than a mouse for example. We have through our labour, forced taxation and through VAT paid for the NHS, many of us have given years of service to that great institution, so no-one has the right to dictate to us that we alone in the entire population should be refused treatment.

Of course we then go on to “if one of your family had cancer blah, blah , blah”. Well here’s the way it is. Surprising as it may be animal rights activists do not live in some bubble which protects us from illness and disease. We have loved ones who get ill and die, we ourselves get ill and die. We have recently lost a lovely lady who fought hard for animals to bladder cancer. Getting cancer, being mashed to a pulp by police/hunters/circus freaks/ vivisectors, having sick loved ones does not change our views on vivisection. For ourselves we navigate out treatment, refusing some of it and accepting what we individually deem acceptable and for some it does mean refusing all treatment. For our loved ones that is their decision not ours unless they are very young or unable to decide in which case we have to decide with health professionals what is for the best just like anyone else. We cannot in law deny medical treatment for our dependants even if we wanted to.

Some have said that the defendants should have got 25 years. Right so being vaguely aware that someone might have painted a car, sending an email, campaigning against animal abuse warrants more punishment than mass murder? Of course at the same time someone can take a beloved family member, torture them, kill them and not receive more than six months in prison. The laws that supposedly exist to protect non-humans are hardly fearsome. In comparison really ask yourselves who is more scary a group of vegans wielding a spray can or a gang of dog fighters or badger baiters? The state has deemed that dog fighting and rolling is a minor matter despite the fact that humans are terrorised as well, so minor in fact that a charity the RSPCA is delegated to deal with the prosecution and good people pay for it twice through taxation and then through making donations they can ill afford after heart rending appeals. The priorities here are very mixed up huge rich multinationals get the platinum service from the state in protecting their interests, ordinary folk are bled dry to pay for a vague attempt at justice. No disrespect to the RSPCA who have done some good work but why are a charity prosecuting offences?

This leads onto the general idea that we live in a democratic society and therefore protest peacefully, get laws changed if you want to help those being abused an oft quoted sentiment and one endorsed by NETCU in their press release. We are all brought up with this notion that we live in a democracy and that petitions and parliament work so ordinary folk may be excused for this perhaps. If would be churlish to say that no improvements have ever been made through legislation. People are no longer hung at Tyburn in front of a howling mob, children are no longer forced up chimneys, women are no longer the property of their male relatives. HOWEVER it is extremely naïve and indeed simplistic to state that there is some sort of formula to protesting in a way that will not invite prosecution. We have attended demonstrations where police have attended and been happy with what we were doing, everyone felt safely in the realms of legality, no-one was upset but those demonstrations have actually been used as evidence against activists using the charges of SOCPA, Harassment and Blackmail. If the police present at the scene of the actual crimes do not think crimes are being committed what hope do activists have in determining what is legal and what is not? Have an effective campaign against powerful interests and you will face scrutiny, they will try and prosecute you, they will try and stop you and if you are not intimidated they will try and imprison you or hurt you. This is how it works nothing to do with legality, fairness or justice. The National Public Order Intelligence Unit on the 7th floor of Scotland Yard has files on 1822 activists who they deem to be “domestic extremists” at the last count and this includes many individuals with no criminal record who have led blameless lives. It is a blacklist of people who the political police under the leadership of Assistant Chief Constable Anton Setchell deem as warranting state intrusion and files contain misinformation, inaccuracies, rumour, opinions of individual officers and judgements about individuals. This is the way things are so let us stop pretending that the police are all nice fluffy and fair. They are not, they are the agents of the state, they are politicised and some of them positively enjoy being the lackeys of the corporations. We do need to regard the police and the courts as our enemies and be very wary even if very occasionally they may work in our interests. Very very few police officers will maintain an honest and fair approach if it means going up against their colleagues, respect to those who do but it is far safer to maintain as a general rule that the canteen culture will ALWAYS win.
Therefore animal rights activists standing outside a circus handing out leaflets are “violent”, the circus freak wielding a screwdriver and threatening to stab them is not violent. They have actually managed to get the public to believe this shit by ignoring complaints from animal rights activists concerning violence, death threats, arson, dead animals dumped at people’s homes etc and hyping up every demonstration as some sort of riot. Individual police officers may try and take complaints seriously but they will be thwarted by the CPS at some stage. Of course sometimes animal abusers and police officers do get prosecuted and have complaints against them upheld, the police DO pay out for assault and unlawful arrest so it is not all bad but our argument is that there is a definite inproportionate bias against those who fight animal abuse.
If the Hunting Act and violent crimes associated with hunting were enforced with the same vigour many hunters would be facing years in prison. Changing the law is not the answer, hunting is supposed to be banned which we all know is a joke. There are laws which govern the treatment of animals in abattoirs, farms and laboratories which remain for the most part unenforced. Those who try and gather evidence of these crimes themselves face prosecution, hunt monitors have been arrested, it is a criminal offence for us when undercover to film experiments no matter how illegal or disgusting. When these offences are prosecuted the penalties are hardly worth the effort. We need change through the grassroots not through legislation, for each one of us to take responsibility for our actions. If HLS and abattoirs had glass walls not they would be smashed by an outraged public.

Violence kept getting mentioned on the news. As far as we know this was a conspiracy case and actions which were not known about by the defendants were pinned on them. They were made scapegoats for every little thing done in the fight against HLS which is totally unacceptable. Now if one of us blows up a lab’, or indeed does send needles off in the post it would be understandable if the police wished to follow up a case against us. But here we have a case wherein some people were involved in SHAC and persons unknown did some illegal stuff. Of course the state has not had to produce any evidence that each defendant did this or that apart from maybe being loud at demos and involved with SHAC thus is the nature of conspiracy charges. As far as we can assess no-one was physically harmed by any of the defendants who now face longer in prison than a rapist. Let us get away from this condemnation of violence. Vivisection is violent it kills non human animals directly and human ones indirectly. The police are violent and many activists involved in peaceful demonstrations against vivisection have been very badly hurt by both police and security guards with quite a few broken limbs and smashed heads. Prison is violent. Violence is used routinely and systematically by HLS, HLS’s corporate mates and the state why should they have a monopoly? Actually they do because we are not violent by nature and is property damage violent or not? The charge of violence is a hypocrisy . However we should think about our actions and reflect on them. Secondary or tertiary targets (of a separate nature to direct abuse e.g DHL) mean staff who do not know who HLS is and more to the point may be sympathetic, shouting at them whilst wearing a hoodie may not be the best way of winning the day. Engaging people in conversation is far more worrying to the authorities and rightly so.

The BBC website had an interesting tale of woe from a supplier whose “life was under siege……The 3 men and 3 Women responsible for turning his life and the life of his family upside down have now been sentenced”. He was targeted for 7 years so let us look at the ages of Alfie 21 and Nicole 22, the arrests took place in 2007 which takes us back to 2000/2001 when Alfie was 11 and Nicole 12. Are the BBC seriously suggesting that 2 school children collected sanitary towels and needles to send to this man? It is far more likely that they were at school and blissfully unaware of either SHAC or HLS. We are neither condemning or condoning what this happened here because we do not know the whole story but is it really the case that all 6 defendants were soley responsible for what happened to him? We suspect not and that this is an appalling misrepresentation of the facts. Of course none of us have any way of knowing if what he said is true or not. Prosecutor Alistair Nisbet added “These defendants were not legitimate animal welfare campaigners”. No Alistair they were not, animal rights is an entirely different matter to animal welfare.

Some comments put the focus on testing products on prisoners. This sort of simplistic and facist statement implies that all prisoners are scum who deserve to be tortured and killed. So some young lad who carries a knife to defend himself from the local gang, he deserves to be tortured does he? What about Ruth Wyner the director of a homeless shelter in Cambridge who the police fitted up and was sent to prison for “allowing” drug dealing, so she deserves to be dissected eh? What about the “illegal” immigrant who is escaping torture and death at home why not poison them as well and make notes as they choke on their own vomit and blood? Maybe the drug mule who desperate for money to send her mother to hospital makes a decision that lands her in prison for longer than a child rapist why not use her for batch testing botox? Thousands of people who are in prison are there because they are poor, frightened, victims, sick or for other political reasons, millions who will never even be arrested commit the most horrendous crimes. To state that it is OK to torture and kill them as an alternative to animals at HLS is quite frankly a disgrace and akin to wanting the Nazi death camps to reopen and before someone says they will only use the really bad people like child abusers well we are glad that you have such a touching faith in our criminal justice system, we do not and where exactly do you start to draw the line as to who is a “good” person and who should be exterminated? Many innocent people do go to prison, many guilty people do not this is a fact of life. Interestingly those who are opposed to all the “violence” have no problem with publicly stating that SHAC defendants should be experimented on maybe in jest but many a true word as the saying goes.

3. NETCU issued an announcement on their website on the same day as the sentencing which said:

“In 2004 a major police investigation was launched into the criminal activities linked to SHAC……Specialist support was also provided by the Serious Organised Crime Agency and the City of London Police’s Economic Crime Unit”. This covered several different forces.

We need to learn from these cases not just in the animal rights movement but across all movements. Effectively the police have successfully charged people with crimes committed by others, without the conspiracy charge it is highly unlikely that the defendants would have faced anything near as serious.

We are supposed to be reassured by “the police service remains committed to facilitating the peaceful protest of the majority”, what like they did at the G20 and Kingsnorth? Do note that at nearly every protest the police have a little copy of the NETCU handbook designed to hinder and disrupt peaceful, legal demonstrations, that the FIT teams are still lurking albeit in a less threatening way. The police have decided that protest is at best an inconvenience at worst terrorism. We need to be aware of the law as it stands and how it is misinterpreted by the police, we need to regroup, rethink, learn from experience, evolve and carry on . We also need to make it clear to those who oppose our stance against human supremacy that if we can be isolated and persecuted in this way that this will inevitably apply to other groups first the environmentalists, antifacists, anarchists and anti arms trade activists with whom we share many goals and where there is much cross over then the far right (as is happening) and maybe one day groups such as the Countryside Alliance.

Please note well that this “major police investigation” did not cease after the 2007 raids. Police infiltrator PC Mark Stone attended animal rights events as recently as September 2010 and maybe up until he was uncovered by other activists last week. It is suspected that the police are still actively trying to collect more scalps all activists should be legally aware and security conscious regardless of how legal and fluffy demos and actions may be. Do not panic but be careful, be prepared, but above all be active.