For supporters of Greenpeace ...

[dajop]

Greenpeace are media tarts who mug unsuspecting people walking down the street. They may have had good intentions once, but the greed has taken over.

Here here! Couldn't have said it better myself. There are many effective environmental groups out there who work constructively with governments, industry and other organisations to improve environmental outcomes. Greenpeace does not.

As for (alleged) global warming, it will be interesting to see the affect the economic crisis has on emissions. It may well be far more effective than any deliberate attempts to cut emissions (yesterday I read that oil stocks at a record 48 days or something like that - so must be having some effect)

 

[trooper]

Dunno if I'd use the word "tarts"... but would otherwise agree....

After I let my membership lapse... YES, I joined up back in their sensible days... Greenpeace rang me to ask why I hadn't renewed... I gave them a list of the actions/statements made by them that I found over the top (or even ridiculous) and said... "That's why"

Got hung up on......

Platy... That Koala incident is just another (small) example of technically incorrect (and sometimes simply false) claims that obscure the real good such organisations try to do, and irritate folks who might well be sympathetic - if not treated like fools........ They MUST realise it???? Surely??

I spoke to some young protestors outside Garden Island Dockyard once on my way home (in mufti) because I couldn't think of any reason for them to be there... turns out they were protesting against the arrival of a USN vessel... OK.. so far so good. That is their right. Thing is the ship in question was a Charles F Adams class DDG.... and there were three RAN ships of that very class tied up (two of them clearly in view) nearby. (HMA ships Perth, Hobart and Brisbane)

I asked WHY they were against its visit.. and was told "Because it's Nuclear powered"

"Ummmm" says I.. "No it's not"

I pointed out the Aussie ships of the same class... and mentioned that THEY were conventional Steam Turbine vessels... mentioned that ship classes do NOT have some with that and some with Nuclear.... and that any ship with two conventional funnels.. like ours, and the visiting US ship... was , again, certainly not nuclear powered......

Where do they get this stuff from?

 

[dot]

IF you actually read the counter "arguments" in the posts above "against" Greenpeace they have little substance for the case in hand.

Choice!

IF you read my posts, I have not expressed any opinion on the validity of Greenpeace or it's actions. My only comments have been regarding your view of the General Belgrano sinking.

Perhaps it is time to step into the Greenpeace discussion. IMO, Greenpeace as an organisation do have a history of stepping over the line no matter how noble their cause. What they have done with buying the land near LHR is legitimate, although as Evan points out, will most likely only delay things and not stop the construction of a new runway at LHR.

I am left wondering when they bought the land given the third runway has been proposed for quite a few years now (and has been delayed by a lack of resolve in the British government) - I am surprised that the land had not already been bought by BAA (or whoever the appropriate authority is).

Then again, when you look at the land bought by Greenpeace on the map (See http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=U...,-0.461565&spn=0.014804,0.049846&source=embed) I can't imagine this ploy slowing things down at all. If the BAA (?) buy all the land specified for the new boundaries in the Greenpease map, there will be lots of options for the positioning of T6 and the new airport boundaries. It's not like the Greenpeace plot is in the middle of the proposed runway -there would be plenty of scope to move the boundary to the west of the Greenpeace plot (west of Simpson) and still have LOTS of space for taxi and roadways from the current LHR to the new parts.

 

[Platy]

Dunno if I'd use the word "tarts"... but would otherwise agree....

After I let my membership lapse... YES, I joined up back in their sensible days... Greenpeace rang me to ask why I hadn't renewed... I gave them a list of the actions/statements made by them that I found over the top (or even ridiculous) and said... "That's why"

Got hung up on......

Platy... That Koala incident is just another (small) example of technically incorrect (and sometimes simply false) claims that obscure the real good such organisations try to do, and irritate folks who might well be sympathetic - if not treated like fools........ They MUST realise it???? Surely??

I spoke to some young protestors outside Garden Island Dockyard once on my way home (in mufti) because I couldn't think of any reason for them to be there... turns out they were protesting against the arrival of a USN vessel... OK.. so far so good. That is their right. Thing is the ship in question was a Charles F Adams class DDG.... and there were three RAN ships of that very class tied up (two of them clearly in view) nearby. (HMA ships Perth, Hobart and Brisbane)

I asked WHY they were against its visit.. and was told "Because it's Nuclear powered"

"Ummmm" says I.. "No it's not"

I pointed out the Aussie ships of the same class... and mentioned that THEY were conventional Steam Turbine vessels... mentioned that ship classes do NOT have some with that and some with Nuclear.... and that any ship with two conventional funnels.. like ours, and the visiting US ship... was , again, certainly not nuclear powered......

Where do they get this stuff from?

Yes, Trooper. We have similar experiences and opinions to a large extent. I also cancelled my Greenpeace membership because of similar concerns.

IMHO it would be a stronger story if basic facts (endangered koalas, nuclear powered warships, etc) were secure. I worked in conservation biology for many years, but personally elected to put my efforts into the mainstream - research to inform policy/strategy, identify and unify stakeholders (corporate, gov, community, etc), fund raise for research from corporate sector with gov imprimateur, etc. That way to access decision makers and influence them in a non confrontational manner.

It also disappoints me that young folk with a passion are being misled and thus their energy being misdirected. I have no problem publicising the fate of koalas, collecting money on street corners or whatever, but take the opportunity to tell folk the current state of play/knowledge and debate realistic solutions...folk being passionate about something of potential community value is a good thing and deserves respect from both the advocate organisations and would encourage a better attitude from the naysayers who bellow terrorist, muggers, etc at the least provocation.

Now I've just received an invitation to lunch with Minister Penny Wong for Tuesday next week and must decide whether to go adnsee what she has to say on the topic of climate change...

 

[Platy]

IF you read my posts, I have not expressed any opinion on the validity of Greenpeace or it's actions. My only comments have been regarding your view of the General Belgrano sinking.

Yes, indeed, Dot, you are entirely right and it wasn't my intention to imply otherwise - in the second part of my quote I was simply trying to move debate back onto Greenpeace.

Your queries about the logic and implications of the land purchase mirror my own!

 

[Moody]

I once (unwisely) had a girlfriend from the wrong side of the bridge. One weekend whilst visiting her parents house at Lindfield there was a knock at the door and a clean but slightly scruffy Greenpeace collector started their spiel to the GF's father in complete ignorance that they had entered the lion's den.

I'm a bit squeamish so I grabbed a beer and retreated to the back deck to enjoy the serenity. When her dad eventually came out he was not holding the tree-hugger's balls in his hands as I expected, but a donation receipt.

He must have seen the look of disbelief on my face as he said "Yeah - I know they're ratbags, but someone's got to keep the rest of us honest!"

I subscribe to the same principle and history has found them to be right more often then they're wrong, so I will continue to fund their efforts.

 

[trooper]

Being right more often than wrong doesn't seem to have helped the USA and folks opinions thereof!!:mrgreen:

You are quite right of course.... and one SHOULD look at the big picture... but for me the balance tilted far enough (not helped by them making silly statements about things I had personal knowledge of that contradicted their position) to make it..

Nope!

YMMV as is entirely proper.......

 

[Keith009]

and deserves respect from both the advocate organisations and would encourage a better attitude from the naysayers who bellow terrorist, muggers, etc at the least provocation.

OTOH folks that engage in violent direct action do not deserve any respect, as such actions not only do not achieve anything - they are reprehensible. 2 wrongs do make a right here i say. Shoot-on-sight recommended for members of that criminal organisation.

Not challenging the legality of the land purchase here mind you, just making a reference to their past conduct. After all, couldn't the land purchase be usurped by Crown perogatives?

Now I've just received an invitation to lunch with Minister Penny Wong for Tuesday next week and must decide whether to go adnsee what she has to say on the topic of climate change...

The ALP is a broad church and members', sometimes deeply held, views on climate change are wide and varied, in principle. In practise, pragmatism unites us all of course.

 

[Platy]

OTOH folks that engage in violent direct action do not deserve any respect, as such actions not only do not achieve anything - they are reprehensible. 2 wrongs do make a right here i say. Shoot-on-sight recommended for members of that criminal organisation.

Actually, they have achieved! Much publicity, promotion of their views, etc!!! This has worked for them for many years...even if they have disenchanted a proportion of folk in the process.

Maybe you could lobby your extensive contacts in the ALP to have Greenpeace listed as a terrorist organisation? Then they would come under the special statutes for dealing with such! Then the possibilities are endless...

 

[turtlemichael]

The ALP is a broad church and members', sometimes deeply held, views on climate change are wide and varied, in principle. In practise, pragmatism unites us all of course.

"Pragmatism is an interesting word. Sometimes it can mean : "doing anything to be elected" or even "agreeing with me" but I like "the purpose of thought is to guide action" Applying that to the ALP, or any political party, may or course be stretching credulity.

On the earlier point that BAA, or whoever, may have the ability to move the runway and thus avoid the Greenpeace land, I think the purchase is more to do with creating legal standing for Greenpeace so that they, with the no doubt thousands of other objectors, can stand up and say "we have an interest and should be heard in court".

 

[Keith009]

Maybe you could lobby your extensive contacts in the ALP to have Greenpeace listed as a terrorist organisation? Then they would come under the special statutes for dealing with such! Then the possibilities are endless...

Good call.... let's see where i'd begin.

At least I came close with the Sea Shepherds.

 

[Keith009]

"Pragmatism is an interesting word. Sometimes it can mean : "doing anything to be elected" or even "agreeing with me" but I like "the purpose of thought is to guide action" Applying that to the ALP, or any political party, may or course be stretching credulity.

I was personally referring more to the political capital that can be derived from having certain policies.