http://www.statenews.com After more than eight years of investigation, police and MSU officials announced Tuesday the arrests of four suspects in connection with the 1999 arson of Agriculture Hall. Detroit residents Frank Brian Ambrose, 33, Aren Bernard Burthwick, 27, and Stephanie Lynne Fultz, 27, and Cincinnati resident Marie Jeanette Mason, 46, each face four counts of conspiracy to commit arson, aggravated arson and arson in connection with the Agriculture Hall incident and a Jan. 1, 2000, arson of commercial logging equipment near Mesick, Mich. en-us Foundry4 Sun, 07 Sep 2008 20:33:52 -0400 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:20:50 -0400 webmaster@statenews.com http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12005/view Are these the same nutjobs writing into the SNs everyday about how circuses are bad? This makes them a little less credible. Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:39:02 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12005/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12011/view Now what I find ironic is they destroyed years of work for Karen Chou. It was her research to try and find alternatives to animal testing that they completely destroyed. While I don’t find it hilarious Karen Chou lost a lot of her work. I find it HILARIOUS that the ALF helped destroy the work of someone basically on their side. Ooooh irony. :-) Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:50:50 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12011/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12022/view Exactly the same people. They are probably not responding to this because they are too busy preparing a legal defense for their “freedom fighters.” I think I am going to eat a big steak tonight in their honor. And I am surprised there are not MORE charged. There is federal statutory authority to charge these people with “Animal Enterprise Terrorism.” I did a research report on this law, which has existed for years, back when I was in law school. The law is 18 USC 43 and it has existed since 1992 and was updated with bi-partisan legislation in late 2006. Surprisingly, very few people have ever been prosecuted under the act. Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:36:59 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12022/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12042/view If anyone wants to read my commentary on why I think that there should be additional charges (specifically, terrorism charges) in this case, feel free to read my commentary here or here Both are the same commentary. The second link is my personal blog, and I welcome all comments, including opposing views, so long as they are civil and on-topic. Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:44:46 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12042/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12068/view This is good news. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:22:33 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12068/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12075/view I agree with all of these comments. If you don’t like the system, change it. Don’t go fire-bombing buildings and expect to get sympathy….or more importantly, results. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:08:50 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12075/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12077/view I think its a bit ironic Jason Van Dyke is asking for stiffer charges for the indicted. His claim to legitimacy as a man of the law is smashed to pieces by the fact he was banned from MSU after MSU cops found a gun in his rooms along with a copy of the Turner Diaries (which glorifies race war and hanging of blacks from L.A. lamp posts). Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:39:31 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12077/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12082/view I remember this crime since we had an oddball neighbor who was questioned about it by the FBI. She had about 10 cats and was an “animal rights” extremist. Actually it was not only Karen Chou who lost her work. There was another professor (whose name I have forgotten) who was close to retirement and whose life’s work was this project, destroyed by the fire. At the time it was a huge event on campus. If some students or others (staff, etc.) had been in the building they might have perished: it was sheer good fortune that nobody died. The destruction of the research is a tragedy. The elderly professor decided to retire since his 20+ year project was utterly destroyed. The perpetrators should be charged as well with attempted murder, and there should be no sympathy (“that was so long ago, they were young and foolish”) for their terrorist actions. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:16:21 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12082/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12100/view I’ve noticed that there’s a tendency, when people speak critically about the use of “terrorism” legislation and rhetoric to chill dissent, to act as if this is something that rose from the ashes of 9/11. As if the political opportunism we’re seeing now can only be explained as some kind of outgrowth of that tragedy. That’s true, in some ways, in that 9/11 has been exploited by politicians and corporations to push their political agenda. But that political opportunism was taking place long before 2001. Yesterdays news about the arrests for a 1999 arson at the University of Michigan is a good example of that. The FBI and law enforcement held a press conference yesterday trumpeting that “domestic terrorists” have been indicted. But that rhetoric, that PR tactic, was in use back in 2000, right after the arson. CBS News ran a two-part series in early 2000 called “Green Terror.” The opening of the CBS piece called the MSU arson “sabotage,” then the tone shifts to labeling it “terrorism”: A terrorist group claimed it set the fire specifically to stop the work of those who study genetically modified food. “I lost basically my entire professional life,” says Ives. “I lost every paper I ever wrote that analyzed the benefits and risks of this technology.” CBS went on to report: Now, federal investigators say the violent, radical green movement has a new mission. “It seems to me as if anybody who’s engaged in genetic research is potentially a target” says Stephen Peifer. Peifer, a federal prosecutor in Oregon, is presenting evidence against the ELF to a federal grand jury. He believes that “Sooner or later there will be human injury, or perhaps loss of life if this continues.” This was 8 years ago. And in that time, the Earth Liberation Front, even the most extreme and potentially dangerous acts of sabotage committed by that group, has not lived up to that expectation. Not one person has been harmed. I think that’s important to remember as we see the words “terrorism” and “violence” batted around in soundbites. As an aside, this is the same Stephen Peifer who was the Assistant US Attorney in the “Operation Backfire case,” a string of ELF actions in the Northwest. During a “terrorism enhancement hearing” for those cases, you might remember, Peifer told the court, “This is not a political prosecution.” Really? It’s been 8 years. And in that time, terrorists have flown planes into buildings. Murdered innocent people. Sent anthrax in the mail. Created “dirty bomb” plots. Distributed video communiques vowing more attacks on innocent people. And still, the government has escalated sabotage in the name of the environment to the level of “number one domestic terrorism threat.” Perhaps the researchers destroying the enviroment and torturing animals should be investigated and brought to justice in place of these individuals? Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:24:52 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12100/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12107/view Justice, I think that confusing MSU with U of M should be considered an act of terrorism. I can’t imagine anything worse than that. Congrats and good luck getting anyone to take your comments seriously with that kind of screw up on this site. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:12:49 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12107/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12116/view LOL There were a number of “environmental” related arsons throughout the Traverse City region in 1999. I know this since my parents moved to a backwater town up there named Suttons Bay while this was going on. Because we were new in town, the yokels accused me of being responsible. Everytime I visited, the local police would want to question me. I even had my own wanted poster up at the local station for awhile. I offered to buy it, but they weren’t amused. I am still amazed by the ammount of stupid gossip that goes on in that town. I’ve hardly talked to anyone there yet so many rumors have been started. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:02:00 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12116/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12123/view Justice – I used the proper name of the legislation and the proper legal definition of a terrorist in my post. I don’t see why there is a problem with calling people terrorists when, under the law, they very clearly are. The federal crime that was created by the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992 was defined as “Animal Enterprise Terrorism.” Those are not my words – they are the words of the statute. The revision of the statute (inapplicable here for ex post facto clause reasons) did not change the name or substantive nature of the crime, although it did increase the penalties substantially in what was bi-partisan legislation. I posted links to the text of both laws on my blog and you are certainly free to read for yourself what the law says. The fact of the matter is that there is a credible legal argument to be made for the fact that those charged committed an act of terrorism, and therefore, are terrorists. Perhaps someone on the left can explain to me exactly why we should ignore the laws that are on the books and refrain not only from prosecuting these individuals as terrorists, but even from referring to them as terrorists. As for Neato’s comments about me, perhaps he would look less like a coward if he posted using his real name. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:24:41 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12123/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12124/view stop trying to plug your blog douche, no one cares. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:48:36 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12124/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12135/view Someone on the left? Someone on the right can also see that the animal enterprise terrorism act is unconstitutional. Whether you agree with the people involved in the fire or think they are nutjobs, the animal enterprise terrorism act is still unconstitutional. Right or left, that’s the way it is. Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:34:16 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12135/view http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12156/view ELF, using loyalties and trust gained on the inside, you snuck in in the middle of the night to start a fire in a university building because professors were conducting research you thought you probably wouldn’t approve of. You have put me in the disgusting position of wholeheartedly agreeing with the likes of Jason Van Dyke and Lou Anna K. Simon. Bravo. But as to the four people who have been charged here, has anyone else noticed that it took the government nine years to bring charges? What kind of evidence do you think they really have here? Let’s all try and keep in mind that these four are and should be presumed innocent unless and until the government proves otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt. No doubt they wanted heads to roll for this and it’s entirely possible that they were getting desperate. We shall see. Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:20:50 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/12156/view