Greenpeace....

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I am curious if the exact same people that are annoyed at this protest by Greenpeace are equally less supportive when Greenpeace blocks a Japanese whaling ship.

I lost a lot of respect for Greenpeace over their whaling stance

John Frizell, Director of Greenpeace International. From the Greenpeace Policy Paper 1994. “As a natural scientist I cannot accept that Greenpeace is opposed to whaling. One must be allowed to harvest a renewable resource. To me, this is an important principle.”

Kalle Hesstvedt of Greenpeace Norway in a remarkable interview with the Norwegian newspaper, “Nordlys” on May 21. Hesstvedt does not rule out the possibility that Greenpeace might accept commercial whaling when catch quotas are allocated by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). He repeated the statement on Norwegian radio (NRK) on the same day.

They also focus on japanese whaling while ignoring the overwhaling that happens in the northern atlantic.

Yet they raise 10's of millions based on their save the whale campaign.



[QUOTE=SeeBass;2619004]-How about the three people who climbed up the Statue of Liberty in the 60's in support of legalizing abortion.
-Three people climbed the Golden Gate in a Free Tibet protest.
-Two people climbed the capitol building in Alabama in the 60's in protest of civil rights[quote]

While I don't respect the stances of the 1st and 3rd, their protests were about the message, not the group.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-Pro life supporters calling in bomb scares at abortion clinics

I never ever support violent protests like this

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-the FLQ in Quebec

See above, the FLQ murdered and kidnapped and planted mail bombs, they are and will remain a terrorist group.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-the bus boycotts in the South that created mass unemployment in the name of civil rights

but was this about the message or about the group being attention whores? If I remember this was a pretty spontaneous action.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-the slave revolt of Spartacus (maybe it belongs in this list)

How is this relevant to a stupid mixed message or ineffective message protest that un-neccessarily risked lives.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-the Red River Rebellion

Interesting concept, I'm sure that Riel actually hung for his actions.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

-Toronto at the G20

I had no problems with the protests until they denigrated into mindless pointless violence.

Originally Posted by SeeBass

history is full of similar protests (I dont want to derail this thread by disagreeing about the list as I'm sure it would) and I doubt we would agree on all of the above

I would think the major reason if you agree or not is because we agree with the message not the action of the protesters.

Imagine if the Flames were about to be sold to another city and three guys climbed the tower with a "save the Flames" banner. Would everybody be reacting the same way?

Except for two, there is nothing similar about these protests and the one today, and I'm not sure that the two were anywhere near equivalent.

If the Flames protestors scaled the tower to hang a banner, I would want them arrested and fined as well.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It is notable that even you think this was all about getting their name out.

The message is already lost.

We are on page 6 in a matter of hours now.

I cant remember how many pages we had regarding the anti-coalition rally last year. I would guess not this many this fast.

In my opinion:

conversation and mass attention on a protest=success

Their act may turn people off but the attention and to make people think today was the goal. I would guess they didn't expect somebody to read their banner and suddenly say "Oh my God!! I have been wrong all along!!"

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Dozens of police and firefighters were on the scene at the Calgary Tower Tuesday morning, where Greenpeace activists in full climbing gear unfurled a huge banner protesting what they say is a "cozy" relationship between big oil and the federal and provincial governments.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Eig...#ixzz0va2GwCoK

Greenpeace spokeswoman Jessica Wilson said the protest was to outline “the cosy relationship” oil companies have with the federal and provincial governments that “allows companies to self-monitor in the oil sands.”

Read more:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1660655/

Thanks. I guess their sign wasn't big enough to get the message across. I'm surprised it wasn't "Dirty Oil". At least people would know what they're talking about.

[SeeBass]

Captain Crunch
we can debate the protest list but then you are just missing the point as I stated it can only rerail the topic at hand.

If you agree with those protest it is irrelavent.

One man's terrorist is another one's hero, (see Nelson Mandela)

[MelBridgeman]

We don't have states in Canada. morans!

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

We don't have states in Canada. morans!

Did you just call somebody a moron but spelt it wrong?

[Ozy_Flame]

Also as a point of reference, this "minor stunt" that some are writing off is now on the front page of Google Canada News and covered in over 100 news sources. I'd say they're well on their way to getting the exposure they were looking for.

[Joborule]

The point of protest is to get people to support you. The idiocy and effect of what they've done, I don't think is going to help them get much support from new people. I don't even know why keeping oil and state relationship is bad?

[Kerplunk]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Did you just call somebody a moron but spelt it wrong?

It's his accent.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Captain Crunch
we can debate the protest list but then you are just missing the point as I stated it can only rerail the topic at hand.

If you agree with those protest it is irrelavent.

One man's terrorist is another one's hero, (see Nelson Mandela)

Breaking the law to protest is wrong. Bottom line, end of story. You may like some of the causes these protests have stood for and heck, I might even agree with you. But at the end of the day what greenpeace did today was wrong.

Can you imagine what would have happened if there had been a fire or police emergency that went undermaned because of this ######ed little display?

Despite what Greenpeace thinks, they are no more important or special then anyone else. We all have to obey the rules but they should get a pass because you and a few others support their cause?

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Did you just call somebody a moron but spelt it wrong?

Dammit! beaten to the moran picture!

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

Breaking the law to protest is wrong. Bottom line, end of story. You may like some of the causes these protests have stood for and heck, I might even agree with you. But at the end of the day what greenpeace did today was wrong.

Can you imagine what would have happened if there had been a fire or police emergency that went undermaned because of this ######ed little display?

Despite what Greenpeace thinks, they are no more important or special then anyone else. We all have to obey the rules but they should get a pass because you and a few others support their cause?

I never said I support anybody. I also never stated they get a pass. I think they should be charged too. They guys expect to be charged it is part of the protest itself.
You missed my point.

So many protests in history have been deemed illegal do you have the same opinion on all of them?

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by fotze

Guess, you've never seen this.

I thought it might have been a previous joke....thanks

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Also as a point of reference, this "minor stunt" that some are writing off is now on the front page of Google Canada News and covered in over 100 news sources. I'd say they're well on their way to getting the exposure they were looking for.

Man, you really don't get it, do you? Are you a member of Greenpeace? That is the only rational explanation for your inane stance. The old saying "there is no such thing as bad press" really does not apply here. Everyone knows who Greenpeace is and I would say 90% of those people understand that they have issues with the oil sands.

So what do you gain by doing something like this? Show the citizens of the country (and world) that you have no respect for the laws of the land and feel instead that your "causes" should supercede these laws? Show everyone that instead of actually using the name they already have to try and enact change they continue to resort to cheap publcity stunts? I mean really, at the end of the day that is ALL Greenpeace is. Hipster punks who have no problem destroying public and personal property for "the cause". God forbid these dildo's that climbed the tower actually had to debate the merits of the oilsands with educated folk..the debate would likely last 10 seconds as the vast majority of these Greenpeacers care nor educate themselves on anything but the malarky spewn by their windbag "leaders".

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Captain Crunch
we can debate the protest list but then you are just missing the point as I stated it can only rerail the topic at hand.

If you agree with those protest it is irrelavent.

One man's terrorist is another one's hero, (see Nelson Mandela)

No your point is interesting because non of them were really relevant to todays protest.

Your trying to match either violent protests, a slave uprising or terrorist threats to todays attempt at wasteful attention whoring.

I don't get the similarities.

And in terms of one man's terrorist is another mans hero. I counter with the quote by I believe Lenin where he stated that the goal of terrorism was to terrorize. I also point to Stalin who plainly pointed out that terrorists were useful idiots.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I never said I support anybody. I also never stated they get a pass. I think they should be charged too. They guys expect to be charged it is part of the protest itself.
You missed my point.

So many protests in history have been deemed illegal do you have the same opinion on all of them?

Read the post you quoted for the anwser.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

Read the post you quoted for the anwser.

well it is rather naive of you to think that all illegal protests should never have happened as you enjoy the efforts of some of these actions.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

Man, you really don't get it, do you? Are you a member of Greenpeace? That is the only rational explanation for your inane stance. The old saying "there is no such thing as bad press" really does not apply here. Everyone knows who Greenpeace is and I would say 90% of those people understand that they have issues with the oil sands.

So what do you gain by doing something like this? Show the citizens of the country (and world) that you have no respect for the laws of the land and feel instead that your "causes" should supercede these laws? Show everyone that instead of actually using the name they already have to try and enact change they continue to resort to cheap publcity stunts? I mean really, at the end of the day that is ALL Greenpeace is. Hipster punks who have no problem destroying public and personal property for "the cause". God forbid these dildo's that climbed the tower actually had to debate the merits of the oilsands with educated folk..the debate would likely last 10 seconds as the vast majority of these Greenpeacers care nor educate themselves on anything but the malarky spewn by their windbag "leaders".

Actually son, I don't think you get it. As I've stated already, Greenpeace does not care if you hate their organization; the point of this was to get a message out, knowing full well they were going to get arrested for doing this. I never said I supported their message - all I'm saying is that their objective has been reached.

Do you work for the Calgary Police Service? You seem to care more about the law breaking, which is an entirely different arguement, and one in which I can't argue against - they did break the law I'm sure; public nuisance or mischief or whatever.

Greenpeace has had activists arrested countless times. It's all worked into their plans, and so you're arguing a point that is actually a minor and accounted for issue.

[4X4]

Why do you keep calling people 'son'? Is anyone being condescending to you?

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Actually son, I don't think you get it. As I've stated already, Greenpeace does not care if you hate their organization; the point of this was to get a message out, knowing full well they were going to get arrested for doing this. I never said I supported their message - all I'm saying is that their objective has been reached.

Do you work for the Calgary Police Service? You seem to care more about the law breaking, which is an entirely different arguement, and one in which I can't argue against - they did break the law I'm sure; public nuisance or mischief or whatever.

Greenpeace has had activists arrested countless times. It's all worked into their plans, and so you're arguing a point that is actually a minor and accounted for issue.

Why do you keep calling everyone son? Trying to show you're better/older then everyone else? Jesus H - definatley a Greenpeacer.

No I dont work for the CPS, in fact, if you look at my post history it is anything but pro CPS. I am pro "jackarses not screwing with my cities resources, first responders and citizens safety". But, like I said in my last post, it is clear Greenpeace and Greenpeacer's could care less about the laws of the land. THAT is what you dont get. The vast majority of citizens in this country (planet?) respect the laws we're governed by - why should we expect any less from Greenpeace? (don't cop out on this one with your "sons" or whatever - lets hear your anwser).