Revolutionary Cells – Animal Liberation Brigade
The Revolutionary Cells – Animal Liberation Brigade, known simply as Animal Liberation Brigade, is a name used by animal liberationists who advocate the use of a diversity of tactics within the animal liberation movement, whether non-violent or not. As part of a praxis, the intention is to destroy oppressive institutions, describing an endgame for animal abusers. The Revolutionary Cells is not a group but an example of a leaderless resistance, as a banner for autonomous, covert cells who carry out direct action similar to the Animal Rights Militia.
Founded in the United States, after bombing Chiron and Shaklee's corporate offices in 2003, activists have since used the banner to firebomb vehicles and threaten to send letter bombs to individuals in the California area. Targets have included corporate customers of animal testing laboratory Huntingdon Life Sciences and animal researchers at UCLA and the California National Primate Research Center. The FBI issued an arrest warrant for Daniel Andreas San Diego for his alleged association with the cell responsible for the 2003 bombings.
Philosophy
Guidelines
The Revolutionary Cells guidelines was posted on the Bite Back website after the second bombing:Who are RCALB?
The Bite Back communique also explained who the Revolutionary Cells were and why they exist:Structure and aims
The group formed the same leaderless-resistance model as the Animal Liberation Front, which consists of small, autonomous, covert terror cells acting independently. A cell may consist of just one person.According to the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, the Front describes itself as "an international coalition fighting injustice". The Institute's knowledge Base describes it as an "unusually violent animal-rights terrorist movement with a penchant for hyperbole and casting about pretensions of power and importance." Oren Segal, co-director of Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism, believes the group consists of the same few "lone wolves" that carry out actions in the name of the ALF and Earth Liberation Front, "the names are interchangeable they're going to rename themselves depending on what actions they're doing."
The existence of activists calling themselves the Revolutionary Cells or Animal Rights Militia, another name used to inflict violence, reflects a struggle within the Animal Liberation Front and the animal rights movement in general, between those who believe violence and terror tactics are justified, and those who insist the movement should reject it in favor of non-violent resistance.
Extensional self-defense
Steven Best has coined the term "extensional self-defense" to describe actions carried out in defense of animals by human beings acting as "proxy agents." He argues that, in carrying out acts of extensional self-defense, activists have the moral right to engage in acts of sabotage or even violence. Extensional self-defense is justified, he writes, because animals are "so vulnerable and oppressed they cannot fight back to attack or kill their oppressors." Best argues that the principle of extensional self-defense mirrors the penal code statues known as the "necessity defense," which can be invoked when a defendant believes that the illegal act was necessary to avoid imminent and great harm. He also argues that is not just a theory, but policy in some African countries where governments hire armed soldiers to protect endangered wildlife from poachers who wish to sell their body parts in international markets:In testimony to the Senate in 2005, Jerry Vlasak stated that he regarded violence against Huntingdon Life Sciences as an example of extensional self-defense.