In reply to 'Anonymous' who was asking about the views of Shacwatch on animal rights.
I can't speak for the author of Shacwatch but I can tell you my story. Animal Rights has been a passion of mine for over fifteen years, I have been involved in a number of campaigns, I have stood and collected money, I have written letters, I have spoken at meetings, I have marched on demos. I am convinced that SHAC, the tactics it adopted and the people who ran it have done more to set back the cause of Animal Rights in Britain that just about anything else, that's why I read and very occasionaly contribute to Shacwatch.
I believe SHAC to be corrupt, to have used money intended for AR work to support the lives of an inner elite, to have crossed the lines into terrorism on occasion and worst of all, very worst of all to have allowed the arguments around this so very important issue to be lost.
SHAC achieved nothing, it alienated people who supported the cause, it wasted money, it lied about infiltration of its organising team and compromised the details of thousands of supporters, it allowed the government to portray AR people as criminals and nutcases just at the time when support for the cause was growing and it gave an excuse to the state to prop up groups like HLS which would have probably folded by now as a result of commercial pressure.
AR work in Britain is now twice as hard as it once was because of SHAC, people who I know no longer sent money to AR causes or are prepared to come on demos because they do not want to be associated with the SHAC label.The sooner SHAC is finaly compltely gone the better.
FOR THE ANIMALS
Thanks for your heartfelt comments
3 comments:
It's difficult to know what has driven shac to the point of failure it currently has but I agree the many unanswered questions about where all the money went are important to a lot of people. It is interesting to compare shac with pressure groups that do succeed and the tactics used.
Intimidation and violence has a history of failure, in fact when threatened the resolve of individuals tends on average to harden which begs the question why did shac use these tactics ?
The thrill of direct action is of course enticing for the younger and less mature element in shac and it is these individuals who have been the sacrificial lambs for many actions, with their lives used and discarded when shac no longer had a use for them.
There are many who remain convinced that shac was a money making cult from the start, I don't share that view prefering to believe that it was started with good intentions but once the cash started rolling in then temptation got the better of them and there was then a need to protect the income and the lifestyles it provided for a select few.
Whatever the history we can all agree that shac is now over, the core leaders behind bars, the foot soldiers not sure what to do and the middle ranking wannabees trying to set up new groups to keep the cash flowing without success.
Perhaps the cause of animal rights will in the future be reborn but we can be sure those who ruined shac will never be allowed to be a part of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtI2LrsJT2U
potty potter and fascist luke back at thier old game of being nobs and wasteing our tax money
grow up potter
grow up luke
Thank you for your post.
I was also involved with animal rights but like yourself, I have stopped my involvement too. I agree that SHAC has done more harm than good but what are the options? I feel that the movement has tarnished the view of all animal rights activists and can't really see a way to bring a more positive image of those who wish to help in cases of animal welfare. I don't wish to give up my beliefs but I also do not want to be seen as a terrorist!
Anyhow, thank you again.
Post a Comment