Yes. They have lost their minds. We have been saying so for some time now. Even a founder of Greenpeace and Ph.D. in Ecology,
Patrick Moore, calls their agenda "Anti-Human."
In order to fight pollution Greenpeace activists dumped bucket upon bucket of a chemical known as
Fluorescein into an Argentinian river. They will say its harmless and biodegradable, but so is sewage. This is coming from people who wanted to ban Chlorine. A business would never call the newspapers and dump "harmless" chemicals into a river for no reason.
 |
| Greenpeace needlessly dumps buckets of Fluorescein into river |
 |
| A sickly green image of a mushroom cloud in the water. |
|
This image of a green mushroom cloud created by Greenpeace in the river is their new face. The Greenpeace website recently published the next phase of their activity. In a section of their article subtitled "
The Revolution will not be televised," they invite members to abandon peace in favor of crime, intimidation, and violence. I will quote their more inflammatory suggestions:
"What do you do when all the protocols and cheat codes of democracy fail?"
You respect democracy, that is you agree to disagree and
accept the will of the people. What do you mean by cheat codes? I'd like to know exactly how they have tried to cheat democracy.
"We need to hit them where it hurts most, by any means necessary"
Spoken like true home grown terrorists. They go on to try and weasel out of this statement by referring to votes and taxes and wallets but then add, "and more." The last two words negate the weasel statements completely so that all you have is the above invitation to violence.
"We need to join forces with those within the climate movement that are taking direct action to disrupt the CO2 supply chain."
This quote speaks for itself. Expect industrial terrorism. The link was not added by me. It is the original link in the Greenpeace page. Try not to follow it. It leads to an organization called
Beyond Talk. They are cute. CPR for the planet to them stands for "Climate Pledge of Resistance." I'm not kidding. Go there if you have to and be sure to look at how they wanted to disrupt our Olympics.
"Emerging battle-bruised from the disaster zone of Copenhagen, but ever-hopeful, a rider on horseback brought news of darkness and light: "The politicians have failed. Now it's up to us. We must break the law to make the laws we need: laws that are supposed to protect society, and protect our future. Until our laws do that, screw being climate lobbyists. Screw being climate activists. It's not working. We need an army of climate outlaws." "
So in response to a disaster that never happened they need to build and army. Who said "war is a continuation of politics by other means." (Carl Philipp Gottlieb von Clausewitz) We have their dismissal by most people which they count as a failure of politics. They admit to cheating and it still doesn't work for them. Now they call for an army to achieve their goals by any means necessary.
"The proper channels have failed. It's time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism."
I openly deny AGW. Many do not precisely because of this sort of intimidation. I believe in Natural Climate Change. Of that there is ample and undeniable evidence. Ask a warmist what happens if we go back to the stone age and the Earth warms up any way? What then? What use is all this sacrifice if rises and drops in Global Average Temperature are as meaningless as
ripples in the surf? Millions would die if we followed Greenpeace. Yet the barely hidden myth of overpopulation requires millions to die. I am the one who should be suffocated financially? I've got news for Greenpeace. That is going to work about as well as all their other ideas. I don't make a red cent for opposing AGW scammers. I never have. The truth is you are afraid of us now. You want to shut us up. You can't argue with us anymore so its war. Except war is carried out by noble warriors. You are nothing but thugs like the brownshirts.
"We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.
And we be many, but you be few."
This is their final lines and direct message to skeptics of all kinds. Its an indirect threat to people who speak out against Greenpeace and their faith. This is a free country. I can have my opinions and make them public too. This is my duty to my fellow citizens. I do not profit from my views unlike the green lobby.
The Greenpreists have changed into Greenthugs. This document is their Mien Kempf; their green manifesto. Law enforcement needs to wake up to this threat. You can't even catch
one loose terrorist in northern Alberta, how will you stop a hundred? -A Thousand? Do we need a Pearl Harbor or a 9/11 before we stop them?
 |
| Aerial view of a useless chemical dump. |
11 comments:
The first time I listened to an interview with Patrick Moore, I was already a "global warming" skeptic, but not yet a full blown denier. It was 2007 or 2008 on the Dennis Miller Show, and when I listened to him talk about why he left Green Peace and what it has become, it really opened my eyes. The other clincher was David Whitehouse, a PhD in astrophysics who wrote the biography of the Sun. Evidently solar cycles have a major impact on world climate.
I like the new look, but the background you had with the snow covered trees was also pretty cool. It's about time blogger allowed the 3 columns.
Greenpeace has been taken over by socialists and marxists. I can say this with some authority. While I can often agree with their aims, I rarely agree with their behaviour and tactics. For example, how about doing the same stunt but dump the chemical into a pond with frogs etc., see if it affects them? Industry has had a free ride for too long but with China willing to kill its people in order to advance economically it is difficult to hold industry to heel for many of its wrong doings. Quite simpley, politics and pollution are not necessarily related but in the non-profit world they are one and the same and leftist in nature. (real conservative)
Here's a comment I left on Greenpeace's site:
______________________________________
Gene's reasoning is as follows:
1. Greenpeace is correct in its beliefs about the environment and mankind.
2. Employing democracy and the law have failed to make society accept and act on Greenpeace's beliefs.
Therefore:
3. Democracy and the law don't work, and should therefore be circumvented.
An extraordinarily dangerous piece of thinking. It may be romantic to envision Greenpeace as an outlaw organization ready to do anything for its beliefs. But it's not romantic, it's massively destructive. We shall see if Greenpeace has the strength to repudiate this advice.
Dose anyone think the skeptics and deniers are going to stand by quietly and let the "greenpeace outlaws" attack and possibly harm them.
Bring it on and get your a wake-up call greenies.
Rob C
I need to thank Kate at http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013710.html for alerting us to this post.
Thank You.
From the Wikipedia page...
"Topical, oral, and intravenous use of fluorescein can cause adverse reactions including nausea, vomiting, hives, acute hypotension, anaphylaxis and related anaphylactoid reaction,[4] cardiac arrest,[5] and sudden death."
Harmless?
@real conservative: too right. The left uses environmental issues to gain power. Social Justice, ecological Justice, economic justice. All are bent to the will of the socialist.
@rabbit. It would take some measure of strength to endorse or repudiate this advise. I'm betting they are weak. They will ignore it in the hopes some poor moron actually follows through and gets some workers or neighbors killed.
@oddsox. I wouldn't get too worked up by that. Any substance in the right concentration will be deadly. I'm just giving Greenpeace a taste of their own medicine.
What the author of the "we know where you live" comment was actually writing about was civil disobedience -- non-violent opposition to the views of their opponents.
This being said, the comment itself is inherently threatening.
Moreover, one would wonder how these folks would react if people were to begin using civil disobedience against their elaborate climate change schemes.
I'll be tthey wouldn't like that at all.
@ Patrick Ross: How can you be sure of that Patrick? I know what he will say if pressed. A threat is a threat anyway. Should I be more scared of physical violence or a threat to ruin my life and livelihood? The interpretation is also another matter. Whatever he meant by the threat, a dimwitted follower might actually take it as a que to commit violence.
I was careful in the theme of my site for example. Calling myself an assassin is almost condoning murder if I don't explicitly say that I am the assassin of false ideas.
Believe me, I've had people threaten to ruin my life and livelihood. One person who I suspect I may not need to name has actually tried (and failed).
These people can muse about it all they like. My experience has been none of them can pull it off.
Post a Comment