Steve Pearl and Netcu we know where you work…

After some netcu related hilarity during the past few days demonstrations at Harlan, HLS Wooley and HLS Occold we took PCs Bacon and the officer we know as “Dave” in to the main Cambridgeshire Police Headquarters. And a police officer dropped a real clanger.

Please address all complaints regarding NETCU policing policy not to the PO Box but to the actual geographical address which is now confirmed as.

Steven Pearl
Constabulary HQ.
Hinchingbrooke Park.
PE29 6NP

How we know this?

We drove into the HQ, a friendly bobby said “Can I help you gentlemen”, we said “yes we have an interview with Superintendent Pearl”, “Oh” he said, “If you would like to sign in at the office over there and then speak to those officers (pointing at Bacon who is trying to get out of the car as quickly as possible to let the officer not to give up the Netcu hideout)”, “So we are in the right place then?” we ask “Oh yes, his office is over there” (points to the left of the building.)

For those needing to hear it from the horses mouth phone the main 0845 number ask for the HQ address and say, can we write to Sup Pearl there? Hehe.

Communication ends……………………….


SHAC trial ends – defendants jailed with disproportionate sentences!

SHAC trial ends with ridiculous sentences, Heather Nicholson jailed for 11 years; Gregg and Natasha Avery sentenced to nine years each; Gavin Medd-Hall an eight-year prison sentence Daniel Wadham jailed for five years Gerrah Selby and Dan Amos were both sentenced to four years in prison.

More mainstream bullshit can be viewed in the usual locations. We will be responding on our website against each lie that the media pump out of there pharma funded anuses as so keep your eyes pealed!

Hypocrisy, Terrorism and Extremism.

I have been looking at a few forums regarding the first SHAC trial and would like to respond to some of the main points.


To start with the hypocrisy charge. Animal rights activists protesting against vivisection, it is argued, still use animal tested products. This is a very fair point which needs addressing to the best of my humble abilities. My personal view is that for a start everything water, aromatherapy oils, homeopathic medicines, mobile phones, pesticides etc, etc have at some stage been tested on animals. To avoid animal tested products is well nigh impossible in our society although we should do so as far as is practicable. A similar charge could also be made against climate change activists who could be labelled “hypocrites” if any fossil fuels are used or against human rights activists who will find it very difficult to boycott Chinese products (this is also well nigh impossible).

For some reason those in favour of animal testing always argue that we should not take medication as this will have been tested on animals, they never argue about ink in printers or additives in soft drinks (chemical laden fizzy pop is an abomination which afflicts the young). Of course logically it would be more ethically viable for an animal rights activist to take paracetomol an analgesic and anti pyretic which has been around for decades than an artificial sweetener such as “splendour” which was only recently tested on animals. If we look at a drug such as ergot (from a fungus on wheat) used to stop post partum haemorrhage it was in use thousands of years ago in ancient Eygpt. All medication has been tested on animals but we argue that there are other, better ways of checking drugs are safe to use.

There is very little information concerning how a product was tested, where it was tested, on which species, when it was tested and whether or not it contains bits of dead animal. The onus should be on the drug and assorted animal testing industries to provide this information to the public so that informed choices can be made by those who do not wish to use animal tested products for ethical , scientific, medical or religious reasons. Someone then might decide that they do not wish to use a floor cleaner tested on dogs at HLS and reach for the borax instead.

Roche produce vitamin K which is given to nearly every baby in the UK to prevent the rare but potentially lethal haemolytic disease of the newborn. It contains glychocholic acid from bovine bile which is hardly vegetarian or Hindu friendly, I also suspect that as the bovine bile is probably not Halal or Kosher strict Muslims and Jews may be none too impressed with Roche followed closely by those who are rightly or wrongly concerned about CJD. Maybe we should campaign for very clear labelling after all the vivisectors have proposed that they label animal tested things as animal tested why not go one step further and tell us when and for what reason. I know that aspirin has been around for a very long time and can use it with a clear conscience but it could be labelled as animal tested recently as ongoing experiments on everything already on the market are commonplace, I would also like to know the reason why it is being repeatedly tested. Aconite, a homeopathic remedy has been around for a long time, I believe it is ethical to use, if a drug company commission animal tests on aconite does that make my choice unethical? Of course not.

Some of the most sinister comments have centred around denying animal rights people access to medical assistance. Animal rights people pay taxes and many of us have worked in the NHS for many years. In fact I might be the biggest hypocrite of all because rather than dying when I was attacked by a police officer I accepted surgery on several occasions to my smashed femur, a blood transfusion, surgery to my face (my cheek was hanging off) and antibiotics to control the MRSA and pseudomonas which wracked my body. I could have denied all treatment and died of course and there are a few of our number who would have done just that. It would have meant on a practical level that they would have put my leg in traction and hoped for the best causing more disruption for the NHS staff and indeed a murder charge rather than GBH for the PC concerned if I had died within a year. On a moral level quite simply I believe that we should use drugs and surgical techniques that already exist. It would be highly unethical for example to ban insulin just because it was once tested on animals. Drugs could have been developed in other ways with quite probably better results.

Not one of us whether vivisector or animal rights activist can possibly know everything about every drug but we want animal testing to stop, not scientific medical research. This does not involve throwing out medications which have been used often for decades just because they were tested on animals. Of course presuming that xenotransplantation ever happens it would be the height of hypocrisy for an animal rights activist to accept an organ from a pig killed to order. I find it rather despicable to be told by vivisectionists that not only is it acceptable to be attacked by the police but that I should then be denied access to what is the prerogative of everyone in the UK the NHS , followed by whining over how THEY felt “harassed” by the incident.

Furthermore chiropractors, homeopaths, aromatherapists, herbalists etc are only available to those who pay privately. Someone with mild depression might be better off seeing an aromatherapst rather than being dosed up with Prozac. Medication is often dished out as the first resort when it should be the last in many cases. I would have a health service which in addition to “conventional” medicine and surgery would also have practitioners such as highly trained chiropractors, arnica for those post surgery, an emphasis on diet and aromatherapy oils in every drug cupboard.

Animal testing is also an inexact process. No-one really knows what will happen in the human body until humans have used a product for a considerable amount of time. Rats are a different creature altogether and can survive things we cannot. To extrapolate data from experimenting on rats is dangerous enough when we regard life saving medication but to test a food colouring on rats and then feed it to young human children on the mere assumption it is safe because the rats did not die is positively evil profiteering, HLS do this every day along with all of their contract testing lab’ chums. Even more disgusting is the fact that if I want to avoid an animal tested pesticide I can’t it is in the air, the water, the earth and being absorbed by my skin, HLS(and others) test a pesticide on animals tell everyone it is safe and whether we like it or not we are forced to absorb it into our bodies passing it on to the next generation through the womb and breastmilk. I for one do not trust HLS to rubber stamp anything as safe for me to eat, drink or breathe as they have been known to falsify results and they do not bother to monitor the animals 24 hours a day perhaps missing vital clues.

The Nazis experimented on human prisoners, they came up with some useful (and some not useful) data on hypothermia after torturing their victims which has been used by others since. If they had found a cure for cancer I would utterly condemn the methodology, lament for the murdered and put steps in place to stop such an atrocity ever happening again but the cure should still be used. In fact Marion Sims experimented on the poor and on slaves in the US and he is still celebrated as a great gynaecologist, the Sims speculum is still in use today. No-one (I hope) would ever seriously suggest that it is OK to experiment on innocent humans without fully informed consent (or even not so innocent ones) and I would argue that it would be throwing out the baby with the bath water to exclude every medical and other intervention which came into being by abusing humans. Using for example techniques perfected by the Nazis to save a life on an air/sea rescue operation does not involve condoning the atrocity. Driving on a road once made by slaves does not condone slavery.

Experiments on humans without their consent have been conducted by drug companies this century notably Pfizer. What I would suggest is that those responsible are put on trial for mass murder and if found guilty incarcerated for the rest of their lives and the company’s assets seized. The victims or their families should be compensated handsomely, sod the share holders. Then if for example they have actually found out something useful such as a cure for Parkinsons that should be used for the benefit of humankind.

Some people posting have suggested that animal rights activists should be carted off to HLS and experimented on. I do not think that this was meant seriously, if it was of course if the law is even handed this would be regarded as a threat to torture and kill, so be careful out there we would hate you all to play into our hands!


Were the suffragettes “terrorists”? Or the miners? Or the feminists? Campaigns have always consisted of those who operate legally and others unlawfully. In the 70s some fire bombed porn shops in the name of feminism, in the 90s miners went to Michael Heseltine’s home and dug up his lawn, the suffragettes massed on Knightsbridge with hammers smashing in every shop window, did home demos with hundreds of people, set fire to buildings and anything and everything stopping short of seriously injuring or killing people. The animal rights movement over a long distinguished history dating back to when the Band of Mercy wrecked grouse butts back in Victorian times have not killed anyone and this is no coincidence. Animal rights is based upon the premise that humans have rights and that it is despicable to infer inferiority due to race, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, language, physical or mental impairment etc. We simply go one step further by believing that it is despicable also to infer inferiority on the basis of species.

Killing someone even in extremis defending self or those who cannot defend themselves is a very heavy undertaking which none have been able as yet to enact. Respect for human rights is part and parcel of animal rights actual terrorism by which I mean no regard for life and limb has as yet not happened. The UK SHAC 7 ran a legal campaign which continues, they are not terrorists. For the record they have been found guilty of conspiring to blackmail with persons unknown, they have not been convicted of doing the multitude of things suggested in the press, nor is it in any way proven that they knew the people who did these things, approved or encouraged. Persons unknown did stuff, other people, those who are openly stating that they are opposed to HLS will go to prison for it.

Imagine a campaign against phonemasts. Should those in the public eye go to prison for up to 14 years just because persons unknown to them have carried out arson attacks on said masts? Even though they have put disclaimers against illegal acts on their website? Even though a barrister has sanctioned every leaflet and newsletter?

The conspiracy to blackmail charge could have been used against the Suffragettes, the miners and he feminist movement as well as many modern counterparts. Methinks that we have not seen the last of this charge against protestors.


One of the things that concerns me is that the reason why SHAC campaigned against HLS is being vilified more than the tactics used by some people who remain for the most part unknown. Surely if it is wrong to send a used condom or brand someone a paedophile it is wrong for any reason whether the sender is trying to make a point about vivisection or child slave labour? Much of the debate centres on the premise that animals are nothing and that it is heretical to even suggest otherwise let alone try and protect them from greedy selfish fellow humans. The word “traitor” has even been uttered on Oxford Gossip re to the human race (now there’s a suprise) and even a suggestion to hang the defendants (made in jest I’m sure..I hope!) suggesting that it is not the so-called crime that is at issue but the motive i.e compassion for other creatures.

More nauseating are the occasional comments from animal rights activists trying to disassociate themselves from SHAC on the grounds that they do not approve of everything the media have reported the defendants did. I actually do not approve of every single thing done in the name of animal rights, first of all I don’t know of every single action but I do know that the media have blatantly lied to the public in actually reporting that the 7 defendants sent incendiary devices, yucky things in the post and hate mail themselves. Logic and common sense makes it impossible that Dan A, Dan W and Gerrah could have dug up Gladys Hammonds grave when at that time they were still at school and had probably not even heard of SHAC, HLS or the Newchurch campaign.

It is however brilliant to see that vivisection is being discussed and thought about albeit in the narrow confines of cosmetic and medical testing. Why are we not discussing pesticides, GM crops, plastics, chemicals, paint, noxious gases, artificial sweeteners, health foods, fridge coolants, chemical cleaners, aromatherapy oils, cosmetic botox, ad infinitum all of which are forced on our animal brothers and sisters before being forced on us? Come on then all those who support animal testing I can’t wait to see you justification for testing floor cleaner on a wild caught primate something I would call extreme cruelty which would induce a violent response from Joe public if anyone were to do this in any town centre.

A few words to all those who are naive enough to believe the crap they have been spoonfed by the media;

The police lie, it’s true sorry to burst the bubble. They lie all the time look at what they said about Earth First! in the Observer. They even have been known to fib in court. They arrest activists illegally and then have to compensate them financially.

The police via NETCU have said that they are in favour of animal testing. They have openly taken a political stance and if this does not bother you well….it should. The police should hardly have had links on their site to pro vivisection lobby groups such as the Research Defence Society. Imagine if the police said publicly on a website that they supported abortion or shooting pheasants very, very bad. NETCU and all their little underlings are nothing more than the lackeys of the vivisection industry who would love to play lap dog to EDO and EON as well.

The courts are not fair. Do not think ever that you have heard the whole story in court. Behind the scene evidence is omitted, threats made and all sorts of shenanegans. The courts are infinitely better than stringing people up from the nearest lamp post but favour the powerful and the wealthy. Senior executives from certain corporations could if the police put their mind to it be tried for conspiracy to blackmail, pollute, murder and perjure but it is a bit unlikely. It is however interesting to fantasise about how much worse a company like Shell would look like if put under the same scrutiny as SHAC using the same state resources. I think that the individuals cherry picked for the occasion would look positively demonic.

Some of the “victims” we all hear about are not very nice people. They have also sent yucky things in the post including a dead mouse and loads of weird racist stuff. In fact during the Newchurch campaign pro vivisection yobs cracked a few skulls beating protestors whilst the police turned their backs on the assaults. My apologies again for ruining the image of the benign, besieged, brainbox who would have cured cancer by now if it wasn’t for those wretched villains in the animal rights movement.

Vivisectors are flesh and blood not deities. Somehow the police, the government and media have deified them the end result of which is greater protection in law than those who actually do save lives such as Doctors, Nurses, Firemen all of whom often run the gauntlet of abuse and assaults at work. Punch the GP because he “dissed” you and you might get community service if you are very unlucky, demonstrate peacefully outside a place that makes cages for laboratory animals you could be sent to prison for 4.5 years and have your liberty curtailed for a further 5 years with a CRASBO. This is also a prime example of human supremist extremism.

Hope that this might be of assistance to someone.

Lynn Sawyer



Lately there have been many negative comments across Indymedia concerning mostly WARN but also SHAC and other campaigns. None of us has an issue about criticism as long as it is constructive or even outright dislike, we cannot expect to all get on. Debate is healthy of course we are all individuals. We will do the best we can whilst we remain at liberty and strongly suggest that others who do not like our methods show us all up by creating something much better.
What we do have an issue with are not opinions or personal insults but lies especially fabrications about Sean’s case and about SHAC, especially when some of those being lied about are in prison and unable to defend themselves. There have been many posts concerning informers and/or infiltrators in SHAC and WARN. It appears that every post now is accompanied with comments insisting that both groups are either run by the police or that the police have infiltrated. Not one scrap of evidence has ever backed up these claims just vague nonsense about how grasses are under current investigation by these unknown people. Any activist actually investigating someone they suspect of being a grass would hardly warn that person by posting publicly that they were doing so and so we can safely assume that this is unsubstantiated nonsense unless of course actual evidence emerges one fine day. By the way, we all know full well that lots of people have been approached to be informers, that there may well be infiltrators and that some activists have become grasses in the past, but at present no one of us have any suspicions about our fellows and despite many statements to the contrary no-one has actually shown us any evidence of any wrong-doing, in fact despite asking many different groups and individuals no inkling of any evidence has come to light.

These comments are made maybe by some who are genuine but disgruntled but in the main to cause rifts in the animal rights movement, to alienate the movement from other movements, to put off new people, to create a climate of fear, to isolate individuals, to give our enemies in the media and the state ammunition, to stop people posting actions or to stop actions as people might be fearful of such vicious criticism, to imply that Sean partook of illegal acts and to get information from outraged activists who feel that they have to respond to this nonsense giving facts. The fact that Indymedia has been used as a tool with which to spread this poison is something we should all learn from.
What has really made us suspect that it is the police or vivisectors behind some of these allegations are the recent outright fibs which make Jackanory look like a serious documentary! The whoppers under “Solidarity for Political prisoner Sean Kirtley” are real gems and most certainly NOT made by anyone genuine. They have now been hidden.

They say

2 grasses sold his details for £900 and copied his pc details while he was on the London action in return for a shorter sentence for herself.

We say

Sean never went to London, we have no idea what £900 was given to 2 activists and no-one has enlightened us. NO female was imprisoned. Someone else goes on to say that Lauren Gazzola grassed up Sean, hardly likely as they never met, she is a great activist who would never sell out, she is in prison in the USA and was not even in the UK when all of these heinous banner waving acts were taking place. Pure lies

They say

Someone in the SSAT organisation copied Sean’s hard drive and these people are now isolated from membership details and operations

We say

WHAT organisation? SSAT was a website updated by Sean which even Judge Ross said was legal, there have never been any membership details and as for “operations” well we are not aware of any. Seans hard drive was taken by the police when they smashed his door in in May2006 they possibly copied it themselves, not that there was anything incriminating on his hard drive anyway other than that he knew other vegans in Worcestershire. Again claims are made about the hard drive being copied by a grass but no evidence whatsoever.

They say

SHAC is infiltrated and that they have known about it for 4 years.

We say

Making such an allegation has VERY serious implications for the animal rights movement especially Greg, Natasha, Heather and Dan who are in prison and for all of the other defendants. Anyone genuine would have made sure that they had decent evidence before confronting the suspect then publicising details so that people could defend themselves by isolating the informer/infiltrator. Stating that SHAC is full of grasses with no evidence is shit stirring pure and simple. It is no good to claim as these jokers do that they are continuing to investigate because if they were doing so they effectively warned their target and we suspect that it is not because they are grossly incompetent but because they are in fact police officers who want everyone suspecting everyone else.

They say

Well they start using our names and using them to make comments we would not make. Notably Lynn Sawyer saying that a post from her was not hers. Using Chris Potter’s name on the Fit watch site to criticise Fit watch. Posting something that could have been incriminating signed “VPSG” (known as Vegan Prisoners Support Group, who NEVER post on anything but their own website).

We say

Do not assume that a post/ article/whatever is necessarily from who it says it is from especially if it is really nasty/ inflammatory. Check with the campaign/individual concerned. For the record we are opposed to fascism, sexism, racism, homophobia and destruction of the environment we would never attack any activists who are striving for human liberation even though we do not actively support every campaign this is due to time constraints not because we do not care. Running a women’s group, fighting against climate change, stopping asylum seekers being sent back to torture and death, fighting fascists? We salute you all and if you see a comment which is really derogatory (as opposed to disagreeing about something) signed off by an animal rights person or group be absolutely sure that it is an attempt to divide and conquer and please contact us here at Netcu Watch for clarification.

They say

They received an email from Lynn Sawyer when her email was down

We say

The old email address had expired 2 weeks before as Lynn had not paid orange any money after changing her account, unbeknown to her orange cancelled the email address.

They say

That the WARN “grouping” have knowingly had a problem with police infiltration which is a “major problem”, Apparently Chris spoke to someone called Sara about this.

We say

We have no reason to suspect that there are any grasses/infiltrators and no-one has given us any information that would make us have any suspicions. We do not know anyone called Sara or Mark in this area! “Mark” refused to say who copied Sean’s hard drive,(despite being asked) probably because no activist actually did so!

They say

Sean was grassed up, so were others.

We say

Who, when, what, where and why? Despite these people or person (using many different names) mentioning “clear evidence” none at all has been shown to anyone. We think that if there was evidence first of all it would have been shown to those involved or their lawyers. There is no evidence that anyone we know has heard of let alone seen. As for stifling debate defending ourselves against outrageous stories is hardly that, neither is demanding hard evidence. Allegations without evidence are the worst of both worlds, paranoia and panic without the information that people need to protect themselves.

They say

Something about Sean’s kitchen getting damaged.

We say.

Pure Jackanory, Sean’s kitchen was not damaged and we have discussed this with his partner who we think as she lives with him might have noticed!

They use

The Veggies email address

We say

Well it adds a tiny bit of credibility to their account shame that we can all compare notes with one another eh? No-one from Veggies posted anything about Sean’s kitchen we have checked!

They say

“ALF” activists arrested and posted this on 2 occasions.

We say.

This could be used by police theoretically against those arrested. The police do watch Indymedia and did reportedly mention it to at least one person arrested. They have also been known to post on Indymedia.

They say

Because people have been arrested that the movement is rife with informers

We say

There is no evidence of that at present although people should be aware of the fact that informers/infiltrators are a hazard to be aware of and take precautions against without paranoia. The police can arrest people with very little evidence if they so wish, they are also more than capable of putting tracers on vehicles, watching CCTV, bugging houses and places like pubs, following people on foot and all manner of surveillance. It is not unknown for the police to “frame” suspects and at the moment animal rights activists are flavour of the decade. Informers/infiltrators may be important to them but they have plenty of other weapons in the arsenal.

They say

We are hiding our head in the sand.

We say

Questioning some vague accusation that there are informers/infiltrators is hardly ignoring the problem! Bear in mind that no information other than SHAC and WARN are supposedly infiltrated has been given which is of no use whatsoever. It is hardly likely that anyone genuine would post this nonsense but giving them the benefit of the doubt a few questions …What exactly do you expect people to do with the information “SHAC and WARN are infiltrated”? Do you not think that this accusation requires some explanation? Do you really expect us to suspect people we have known well for years (in some cases decades) on the say so of someone putting up an unsubstantiated and anonymous post? Activists across the movement meet one another often and not one person has voiced any suspicions to anyone else face to face or at ANY meeting despite the fact that we can be a pretty argumentative bunch.

They say

Ha ha look at the low numbers

We say

So What? Sean was sent to prison for 4 and a half years for peacefully protesting against vivisection and activists are still outside labs and leafleting despite the threat of having their lives turned upside down. Nationals still attract hundreds of people and that is without the subsidised coaches of yesteryear. Those marching against vivisection attract greater numbers than those marching for it despite the fact that vivisection employs a few thousand directly, all in all they can’t even be arsed to defend their “vocation” whereas we potentially risk our liberty when we demonstrate. One person can demonstrate and be very effective.

We also say.

Informers and infiltrators are a real danger the sample of comments above do not in any way assist any activist in basic security. Vague accusations cause untold harm only solid proof, and nothing less, should enter the public arena. Another reason behind these wild rumours is that in future those who have evidence of grasses/infiltrators and wish to expose them may find it more difficult to do so because the police have already used it as a tactic to divide and rule.

Needless to say this attempt to split us has failed miserably.

One thing of which we are fairly certain is that the police are scheming against us. Maybe not the nice Ledbury bobby who attends the demos but the membership of Operation Achilles and Tornardo (more like Operation damp drizzle) and of course NETCU are up to something. It is possible that once they have worked out a formula that doesn’t involve waste millions of pounds with activists being acquitted by juries as they have done no more than peaceful protest that they will move in for the kill. Rushing through a new law or ensuring that there is no jury might be ways around this, or maybe the staging of some heinous act which is attributed to animal rights people, after all there are still lots of queries surrounding Gladys Hammond and Mel Broughton certainly did not commit arson. We will make it very clear to any police officer reading this that we will fight for freedom to protest every step of the way as did the Sequani 6, no deals! We are very much on our guard and ask that in the event we are carted off one morning that other activists question everything the press say and carry on campaigning in whatever way seems right.

It is possible that a real media circus is brewing with the SHAC trial we should support one another, keep our cool even in the face of gross oppression and never ever give up. The fact that hundreds still march at HLS, at Sequani, at Wickham and that more robust activities are increasing is hardly a failure, certainly not in the current climate. We may be fighting overwhelming odds but we always have done. To keep on fighting is what counts, to know that we have done our best and to maintain hope that one day we will live in a world where all living creatures, including humans, are treated with compassion and respect.

The State shows its true colours.

The State shows its true colours.

The Independent front page makes astounding reading. The old D’ notices with which the police, MI5,etc could ask the media not to publish sensitive stuff is to be replaced by a new piece of legislation which gags all journalists if those in Whitehall have their wicked way.

On page 7 reads the headline “Unit that rescued victims of child labour and sex trade is closed down”. The largest dedicated human trafficking police unit because of spending cuts. The overall budget for the protection of 4000 innocent people forced into a living hell was a pathetic 4 million pounds, it is now 1.7 million! So those in charge of policing are quite happy to squander 4 million pounds plus on prosecuting the Sequani 6 alone. The message is clear forcing a young girl into a life of torture and repeated rape is nothing compared to feeling slightly annoyed at a banner being held according to the Home Office. But then of course women and children whose lives are at risk and may well be deported do not have lobbyists, they do not give huge donations to the Labour Party, they do not have senior police officers at their beck and call unlike Big Pharma.

A serious question to all police officers ;

Did you become a police officer to stop atrocities such as serial rape or to sit behind a desk trying to prove that a peaceful protestor somehow “harassed” someone who spends all day hurting innocent animals? Honestly now where would YOU prefer the national budget to be spent NETCU or the Met’s People Trafficking Team not that any of you have a choice?

The growing threat of NETCUs quest for funding and hysterical attempts to get even more new laws to oppress us all with!

Have Steve and his gremlins had the donuts with the pink sprinkles on again? Maybe too much MSG in the takeaways? Maybe they have just got bored with animal rights people or maybe they have finally cottoned on to the fact that many animal rights people are also active against environmental desecration? Maybe they have decided that Earth First! is very effective.

Whatever it is the article in the Observer today (9th November 2008) is an appalling attempt to create a climate of hysteria against environmental activists. The best bit is when NETCU allegedly says (let us give them the benefit of the doubt journalists can tell big fibs);

“Officers are concerned a “lone maverick” eco-extremist may attempt a terrorist attack aimed at killing large numbers of Britons”.

Now why might NETCU’s hypothetical crazed environmentalist do such a thing? Well it appears that because some environmentalists are of the opinion that there are too many humans around it might help things, cull the herd so to speak in NETCUs warped imagination. Of course this is madness to cut the population by 80% the “lone maverick” would have quite a job on his or her hands having to murder 5 billion people in a short space of time. It is very unlikely unless of course in a darkened room at Hinchingbrooke the poor dears have allowed their imaginations run riot watching 28 days later where activists inadvertently release a plague which turns more or less the entire population into the flesh eating living dead. Maybe they think there is some James Bond type villain somewhere plotting the same sort of thing. Maybe they are having a great time all together in NETCU and want the funding to go on and on and on as well as telling tall stories to anyone who will listen about how heroic they all are even though they face nothing like the risks a police officer on a Saturday night in any town centre will face. Yes we know paper clips can be dangerous but not as much as a pissed bloke(s) wielding a broken bottle.

What concerns us is the way in which they attempt to criminalise a very valid opinion. The word “heretic” is not mentioned (how long before it is?) but NETCU are reported as saying that because arguments in favour of population decrease have been expressed that those individuals are prepared to kill. This is utter nonsense. For a start the human population is increasing rapidly, people are starving, land, air and water are defiled by our activities, entire species are being wiped out at unprecedented levels. To suggest that as a species we cut down our consumption of resources and limit our FUTURE numbers are valid points. How can those who do not exist suffer? No-one has EVER to our knowledge suggested genocide it is everything we are opposed to and if anything maybe NETCU should look to companies such as Nestle, or Shell, or Union Carbide who think nothing of mass murder or extremism in pursuit of profit! We at NW are utterly opposed to gross human rights violations such as those inflicted on babies in China in their attempt to curb population growth.

We believe that if the atrocities of starvation, preventable infant mortality, war, forced pregnancies, patriarchy and environmental devastation were solved that women especially would actively seek to limit their brood or even not have children at all (how many women really want loads of children?). The world population would drop dramatically over a generation or two, it has already happened in the West. Some of us activists have a few children, some have none, it is down to personal choice and seems to indicate a steady decrease in overall numbers.

To suggest that Earth First! is planning extreme violence would be laughable if it were not so sinister. Clearly NETCU wish to do something to justify their pitiful existence. We suspect that they are softening the public up for raids, serious charges and ever new ever more oppressive legislation. We also would like to warn the journalists involved in this disgraceful pro industry propaganda (Mark Townsend and Nick Denning) that they are undermining their own profession by promoting NETCUs not so hidden agenda. If one of them writes an article, even if that article is never published, which questions the wisdom of unlimited population expansion will they too be suspected of terrorism? Is it really up to NETCU to decide what we should all believe?

More thoughts on the Counter Terrorism Bill

Imagine that you are a jury member. The accused is a middle aged man charged with ABH and assaulting a police officer. The video evidence shows quite clearly him punching a police officer. Of course he would be found guilty as charged despite the fact that he said he was protecting his 8 year old daughter who was being pushed over and sworn at, and threatened by this police officer. Of course no other footage exists which would show the full story just the heavily edited police version and that of the corporation being protested against. CCTV footage can after all be seized pretty quickly by the police.

We live in a society where everything is taped and filmed and used in evidence. It could be that in the future that the state and big business have a monopoly on using recording devices or even writing contemporaneous notes. It is often heard outside the gates of Sequani that holding a video camera is “harassing” workers as is writing down police officers numbers (workers might think we were writing something down about them). If people are successfully convicted under this proposed law simply for recording incidents or even attempting to record an incident activists will have nothing other than their own/others testimony with which to defend themselves which may contradict actual video evidence. We need to be thinking about how we can deal with this amongst ourselves maybe just in affinity groups and in our wider movement.