nittro Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 This pic is from early morning last Friday as the Greenpeace vessel enterred Lake Ontario from the canal. I'm not aware what mission they may have been on "upstream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Nittro ....they just trolling for salmon , want to make sure they ok for us consumers to eat ! BTW , nice shot of the ship ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 They are on a protest tour along the great lakes. One key item of focus is global warming and the power plants; nuke and coal. They're leaving the fisherfolk alone this time. They are no different from Al qaida, just a different form of terrorism, and they do violate whatever laws they consider good for the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Froda Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 They are on a protest tour along the great lakes. One key item of focus is global warming and the power plants; nuke and coal. They're leaving the fisherfolk alone this time. They are no different from Al qaida, just a different form of terrorism, and they do violate whatever laws they consider good for the cause. My sentiments, too. bigugli.........maybe they were there observing the Port Poss e....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest canadadude Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 My sentiments, too. bigugli.........maybe they were there observing the Port Poss e....... There looking at our glow spoons to see if they contain Lead: : .......don't worry the port posse is ready for any tree huggers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Andrews Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Bruce I don't condone their tactics in fact they give the environmental movement a radical lable but comparing them to Al Quada is criminal. They don't mass murder people and strap bombs to children and send them into churches and resorts. Please rephrase your comment. Maybe comparable to PETA and yes they are in the terrorist catagory. But Al Quada I think is a little far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Terrorism is terrorism. Back in the 90's there was a group with affiliations to both PETA and Greanpeace that was responsible for bombing animal testing labs and a couple of Kfc's. Disruption of livelihoods, economic terrorism also is harmful, just not as blatant. Ask any of the Byes from the Rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Froda Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 Greenpeace is what is known as eco terrorists. They may not use RPG's and bombs but they do have the same mindset as the likes of Al Qeda and other militant groups. Look at PETA along with animal rights groups in the UK who use terror like tactics to get their point of view across. To me, they both use terror in different ways to get their points across. IMHO, it ain't so far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packrat Posted September 7, 2007 Report Share Posted September 7, 2007 They were at Nanticoke last week blockading a freighter from delivering its shipment. From what was posted on another board some of the antics these people performed were more dangerous to themselves. If you go to Stomps Long Point page and scroll thru the threads you can read all about it there. http://www.longpoint.on.ca/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7563 That should help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 See what you started Nittro (Glycerin) !!!! I wonder if that ship is running on veggie oil ?? Like packrat said , they put themselves and potential rescuers in very dangerous positions , which will one day cost their lives........I have to wonder why these groups of people who start out with some good intentions , end up screwing it all up by going off the deep end and becoming finactics . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Andrews Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 The difference is greenpeace is trying to better the earth for all man kind by raising awareness. Yes animal and echo terrorists need to be jailed and what they did put rescuers in danger. I agree they were wrong but we're comparing school yard bullies to the nazi's. We can hardly claim that Al Quada is trying to raise awareness. That's all I'm saying. I don't think the victims of Al Quada would appreciate the comparison either. In reality if greenpeace doesn't want to raise awareness peacefully without placeing innocent people in danger, they should sink their ship and jail anyone who survives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
live2fish Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 They complain about pollution and this and that but how come they can stroll around in there big boat what it doesnt burn gas to and by the looks of it, it burns lots of gas. They spray painted on teh side of a freighter but are the spray bottles not bad for the enviornment when they use them??? They can complain but when all of their convieninces are taken away they would just have something else to female dog about. We will never ever be able to make people in Peta or Greenpeace happy. I just dont agree with some of them complaining about things they dont like and then they go home and use the exact things they were complaning about. my 2 cents Bowen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest canadadude Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 I may not agree completly with all of Greenpeace's tactics but they do carry alot of weight in the world and have succesfully stoped the exploitation of many species!!!! I think they played a bigger part then anyone in stopping the comercial exploitation of worlds whale populations!!! Unlike Peta and other tree hugger organizations they are more concerned with the commecial depletion of the worlds resources and the destruction of our world on a whole!!! There not out there harrassing the average fisher and hunter from enjoying there sport!! Unlike alquada greenpeace does not promote violence to get there message across, they will however use themselves as human shields to protect and protest the distruction of world species!!They do not condone ecoterrorism hence the name greenPEACE, at times I will agree they may cross the fine line but I would never put Greenpeace in the catagory as a terrorist organization!! just my 2 cents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest canadadude Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 Its funny how back in 70's greenpeace were known around the world as ecological heros trying to the save the planet!!!!! ....and now post 9/11 we refer to them as terrorists ...... times have changed dudes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Froda Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 I still don't believe that Greenpeace is any different from all of the rest of the extremist organizations. They just have better press agents to make them look like eco-warriors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted September 8, 2007 Report Share Posted September 8, 2007 Dragging a net into a ship's prop sure don't sound too peaceable to me. Rendering a vessel powerless at sea is called "piracy". That was a fave tactic used against some of the sealers. No one was apprehended so the press conveniently failed to report such incidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest UglyFish Posted September 10, 2007 Report Share Posted September 10, 2007 they are aout the dumbest group of ppl on the planet. bowen had it rite with reguards to the doo-doo, and i know first hand 3 of them were arrested for tryin to stop a coal ship from unloading at nanticoke. 1 even tried chaininghimself to or near the rutter or whatever. that ship only had about 35000 tons of coal.... wouldn;t have made a difference to the other 65000000 tons they already had on site stockpiled. oh, and the captain of another ship on his way in, stated had they got on his ship, he would ahve headed back out to american waters, and thrown them overboard and called the coastguard, as that is legal for him to do, because the activists are considered pirates once they illegally get on another vessel. in addition to that, ontario power generation, had to pay to have added security on site at nanticoke. they had 175 OPP officers and another group in the hundreds doin security on site. all food, and accomidations were paid for by OPG. Food for 1 day was almost $8000 for the 175 OPP officers plus cost of boats and other patrol vehicles, maintenence and fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokin Joe Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Personally I think the governments should hit them where it hurts. They should hold them accountable for their actions and they should have to pay the costs incurred. Same as when some idiot goes over the falls. They are responsible to pay for the costs are they not? After a few times of paying for time and damages they may rethink their strategy. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest UglyFish Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 Personally I think the governments should hit them where it hurts. They should hold them accountable for their actions and they should have to pay the costs incurred. Same as when some idiot goes over the falls. They are responsible to pay for the costs are they not? After a few times of paying for time and damages they may rethink their strategy.Just my two cents. they don;t need the government to. courts have done it. on 2 seperate occasions, the company that had issues with them, sent greenpeace a bill for costs to the company for increased security, and and production lost, and were then takin to court after greenpeace laughed about it, and were ordered by court to pay the bill. nanticoke is prolly gonna do the same thing. my father works in the coal yard there. i have first hand knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest canadadude Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 I guess I see you points of view..... The nerve of some orgaizations to acctually care and fight for the health of the planet, I mean what are they thinking; save the rainforest bah, stop global warming bah, stop using the Greatlakes as sewer bah save endangered species bah!!!! Come on Greenpeace get with the program if you can make a buck destroy what ever is in your way thats the way you should think, if you wipe out the planet doing it oh well !!!!! Ecology and saving the Planet what a nusence those ideas are!!!! Lets be serious we don't want to inconvience anybody with this saving the planet crap!! Governments should wipe them off the planet for there radical ideas of saving whats left of this planet!!! Who on this site wants to breath fresh air when we can enjoy the lovely brown smog we get durring the summer!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
live2fish Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 that a little radical John. Its not that they dont mean well, its just the way they do things in teh illegal and dangerous ways that they do. Bowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Andrews Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 John you and I are on the same page but what was green peaces agenda here. It was to raise awareness and discussion. Uglystick doesn't understand that. It doesn't matter if all they had on board was a bucket of coal. The mission had nothing to do with stopping coal to the plant. Their mission was a successful one by all accounts.... BUT!.... the way they carried their message to the public was destructive and dangerous and yes a little hypocritical. You simply can't argue about crime by participating in criminal activity. The problem here though that I think most don't understand (and it's highly publicized so I don't get that either) is that these folks believe that the situation is so desperate that they don't feel a less productive but legal alternative would be enough. "Save the world NOW because tomorrow it will be too late if it's not already" The sky is falling is an old analogy but is it so far fetched? Over 2,000,000 square miles has shrunk off the Northern polar cap in 2 years!!! Yes John if you look at what they did it was reckless, criminal and put innocent lives in danger. But for the rest of you if you look at what ignoring the message they sent, their crime wasn't a fraction of a drop in the bucket to what is likely going to happen in our life time. More than likely our Grandkids are already screwed. So these folks are willing to go to jail if it makes you change your ways. Stop driving to the corner store and idling your cars at the drive through. By local product and conserve. Don't let this little fiasco go to waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest canadadude Posted September 14, 2007 Report Share Posted September 14, 2007 Dan as we all know sometimes it takes the Radical, unlawfull ways of this organization to get things done!!!!!! We all know how hard it is to legally fight corprate and government policies and if Greenpeacers want to put themselves in dangerous situations to try and save our Planet then I'm all for it!!! I understand everyone has different out looks on this organization and I will respect there thoughts but I don't think it's a crime to try and save the planet no matter what means may be needed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted September 14, 2007 Report Share Posted September 14, 2007 One way that would help for sure is to raise the price of gas dramatically . The lineups at Timmies "might" get shorter . Buy our own products .....could eliminate thousands of trucks from tearing up the roads and huge ships that travel half the globe and guzzel thousands of tons of fuel daily. But , we wan't "cheap" ,so nothing will change on the large scale of things until gas reaches 2 or 3 bucks a litre which will make trade very expensive . I saw a boat for sale at Port today ...a nice little cruiser for only $179,000 ...do you think these people worry about the cost of gas ?......or hydro ? As always they ask the "regular" folks to tighten their belts . I'm with Greenpeace but they must learn to explain to the public the reasons they take the radical path they do. Better PR is a must these days....the press can be very unkind and we know who owns the press !.........Cleaning up our country will be an act of futility as long as the other side of the world pollutes unchecked . World trade plays a huge part in this & we are no match , including our impotent government , for the huge multinatioal corporations who really don't have any concern for the planet . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
live2fish Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 that little 40 foot yacht with the big deisel engines.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.