HSUS Defends Reward in Firebombings

On Aug. 2 two researchers from the University of California were the victims of firebombs. One had his car firebombed. The other his house -- and he, his wife and two kids escaped from the second floor.

Law enforcement and unfortunately the mainstream media were quick to say these crimes were the work of animal-rights activists, even though no one has claimed responsibility, no one has been charged with the crimes, and no one has been convicted. Also, it's still unclear if at least one of the "victims" even conducts experiments on animals.

As pressure mounted for animal-advocacy organizations to denounce "terrorism" by animal-rights activists -- even though no one has been charged -- The Humane Society of the United States donated $2,500 to catch the person or people who committed the crimes.

I held off from blogging about this issue for two reasons. First, animal-rights activists may not have even been involved. While I don't agree with violence and don't use that as a means of helping animals, I didn't feel a need to denounce it because that would be implying that I believed animal activists were involved in the firebombings.

Second, I didn't blog about The HSUS's reward money because I don't like to criticize people or groups who work on behalf of animals. While I may disagree with some aspects of animal-advocacy organizations, I do support and am grateful for the work they do to help animals.

Now, though, after reading Wayne Pacelle's recent blog post, I've decided to comment. Pacelle, the president of The HSUS, writes this:

A few critics have expressed anger that The HSUS put $2,500 toward a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for the crime. Several assumed that The HSUS had presupposed that animal people were responsible for the attacks.

We hadn't.

He then goes on to say what some people have suggested, that perhaps the perpetrators were people who support animal research. After all, support for a California bill protecting animal abusers, including researchers, grew after the firebombings. (And the Animal Liberation Front, who law enforcement assumed was behind the incidents, never claimed responsibility, which is not characteristic of them.)

[If] the perpetrators of the Santa Cruz attacks turn out to be agents hostile to animal protection, it would not surprise me, because this is a tactic that malicious forces have used in the past to discredit many good causes.

I'd feel especially good if our reward money helped to catch an infiltrator and exposed this person to the harsh glare of public opinion. And if it does turn out that the criminals were people who claim to be animal advocates, then I will be glad that The HSUS helped to root them out ...

To some extent, Pacelle's explanation for why he offered the reward money makes sense. He wanted to catch whoever did damage to the movement, whether it was movement supporters or the opposition.

Except for one thing.

In the press release that The HSUS sent out Aug. 4 announcing the reward money, no mention was made suggesting the firebombings may have been the work of anti-animal people. It implied that the perpetrators were animal-rights activists. No doubt about it.

The Humane Society of the United States is offering a reward up to $2,500 for information leading to the identification, arrest, and conviction of the person or people responsible for setting firebombs on a porch and in a car belonging to two University of California, Santa Cruz researchers in separate incidents early Saturday.

"One cannot claim to be an animal protection advocate and threaten violence against other people, even if we disagree with what they are doing," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. "This behavior is antithetical to the core principles of the humane movement."

Now, I do support most of what The HSUS does. Its employees are hard-working, caring people.

But to release an e-mail a month after offering the reward, saying that The HSUS all along considered that the perpetrators could have been anti-animal people, is ridiculous. Because at the time these incidents were news, The HSUS instead condemned animal-rights activists, thereby hurting our movement and strengthening calls for labeling all of us terrorists.

(Image courtesy of Satya magazine.)