On Jul 6, 1:55=A0am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Rupert, slavishly adoring of a third-rate philosophy prof who spent his
> career at an academic backwater, uncritically quoted the third-rate prof
> and blabbered:
>
It would be widely agreed in the academic community that the author of
"The Case for Animal Rights" is not a "third-rate prof", but
nevertheless I do not slavishly adore him, I just thought the
quotation would be of some interest.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > [Regan, the third-rate prof:] =A0Consider this possible scenario. Why
n=
ot hire someone to infiltrate
> > the animal rights movement, as an agent provocateur, with one main
> > purpose: to find a malleable person in the movement who could be
> > "encouraged" (shall we say) to try to do something that would really
> > discredit ARAs. Like, maybe this person could be "encouraged" to try
> > to murder someone. And not just anyone. No, the "someone" should be a
> > pillar of the community, someone who (what an odd coincidence) just
> > happened to be a leader in a major animal user industry, someone who
> > just happened to have been famously outspoken in his criticisms of
> > ARAs. An attempt on his life would be perfect. It would show the
> > public that ARAs really are extremists who will stop at nothing to
> > further their ends. It is not hard to visualize the headline: "Animal
> > Rights Terrorist Attempts to Murder Pillar of Community".
>
> > A few problems would have to be solved. It takes time to find the
> > right person for the job. It takes money to pay all the players. Who
> > is going to come up with the necessary cash? Well, suppose the pillar
> > himself could pay for the attempt on his life. Suppose the pillar
> > himself (such is his influence) could arrange to have the local police
> > on hand to arrest the would-be murderer. "Nah", you might say, "This
> > is too fanciful, too conspiratorial. I don't think anyone in a major
> > animal user industry would ever do anything like this." Think again.
>
> > Leon Hirsch, past president of the Norwalk, Connecticut-based U. S.
> > Surgical Cor****ation, played the role of the pillar of the community.
> > Hirsch's former company manufactures staples used in place of ordinary
> > sutures in many operations. During Hirsch's tenure, physicians
> > received training by practicing on live dogs, who were vivisected,
> > then killed. ARAs (led by Friends of Animals, also locate in Norwalk)
> > mounted an in-your-face campaign against Hirsch and his company back
> > in the late 1980s. His ingenious way of getting even was to put up the
> > necessary money to arrange for an ARA to try to murder him.
>
> > On November 11, 1989, a man on the payroll of a firm Hirsch had hired
> > drove a young woman named Fran Trutt, a self-professed ARA, along with
> > her two recently purchased pipe bombs, from New York City to Norwalk.
> > When she placed the bombs adjacent to Hirsch's parking space, Hirsch's
> > friends in the Norwalk police department just happened to be on hand
> > to arrest her.
>
> > The resulting story (not the bombs, which never exploded) was the real
> > bombshell. There it was: "Animal Rights Terrorist Attempts to Murder
> > Pillar of Community". As John C. Stauber and Sheldom Rampton observe,
> > "Normally, of course, company presidents do not arrange their own
> > murder, but Hirsch was neither crazy nor suicidal. He was trying to
> > engineer an embarrassing scandal that would discredit the animal
> > rights movement."
>
> > Hirsch would have succeeded, too, except for one thing: the ensuing
> > trial brought ot light extensive tape transcripts that implicated
> > everyone, from Hirsch on down, who had hatched the plot to discredit
> > ARAs. Friends of Animals sued Hirsch, who sold U. S. Surgical in 1998,
> > but their suit was unsuccessful, and he never faced any criminal
> > charges. Perhaps not surprisingly, Fran Trutt was the only person to
> > serve time (a year in prison, followed by a year on probation). She
> > seems to have left the movement.
>
> False. =A0There was no entrapment, and the firm did not set Trutt up.
>
Well, that's interesting, I wonder why Hirsch doesn't sue Regan for
defamation.
"No entrapment", eh? Strong words, Ball.
I can't read your link because my anti-censor****p software has stopped
working, I'll have to look at it later.
|
