Is dissent and civil disobedience akin to terrorism? The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) seem to think so.

A series of documents from 2005-2009 show that Canada's security agencies have equated environmental and animal-rights groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and Greenpeace with terrorist threats. A quote from an assessment prepared in 2008 by CSIS states:

"Multi-issue extremists and aboriginal extremists may pursue common causes, and both groups have demonstrated the intent and the capability to carry out attacks against critical infrastructure in Canada."

Whatever you think about Greenpeace, PETA, or any other organizations that campaign vehemently for a polarizing cause, it's clearly troubling to see Canada's security and intelligence services blurring the lines between activism and extremism. Targeting dissenters as terrorists gives the government an excuse to take action against legitimate activism and political dissent; such action against anyone that opposes the current regime is akin to a police state, and nobody wants our country to head into that direction.

From my understanding, Greenpeace, PETA, and other such groups encourage non-violent civil disobedience. They do not aim threaten to harm individuals and property, and mostly purse their political agendas through lobbying, advertising, and promotion. Equating them to actual terrorist and extremist groups that seek to hurt the people and property of Canada is disingenuous at best, and even possibly nefarious.

The role of our country's security services like CSIS and the RCMP is to keep our nation safe from harm from the people who aim to destroy it. Their role is not to shut down political and civic discourse and action, especially when that discourse or action is opposed to agenda of the current governing regime.

Advocacy and activism are at the core of democracy. A true democratic state encourages a multitude of voices and allows people to advocate for their cause, no matter how loud the cacophony. Shutting down terrorism is essential to a country's safety. On the other hand, shutting down dissent is shutting down the core of a democratic nation.

We need to encourage activists like PETA and Greenpeace to pursue their agendas through appropriate methods — as they do, mostly, right now — instead of bundling them with terrorists. Activists want to make change for the better of our country; terrorists want to make change for the worse of our country. Acting if they are one and the same is harmful politicking, pure and simple.