To save the environment you must destroy it.

classical_hero

In whom I trust
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
33,262
Location
Perth,Western Australia
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/10/peru-press-charges-greenpeace-nazca-lines-stunt
Greenpeace has apologised to the people of Peru after the government accused the environmentalists of damaging ancient earth markings in the country’s coastal desert by leaving footprints in the ground during a publicity stunt meant to send a message to the UN climate talks delegates in Lima.

A spokesman for Greenpeace said: “Without reservation Greenpeace apologises to the people of Peru for the offence caused by our recent activity laying a message of hope at the site of the historic Nazca lines. We are deeply sorry for this.

“Rather than relay an urgent message of hope and possibility to the leaders gathering at the Lima UN climate talks, we came across as careless and crass.”

Earlier Peru’s vice-minister for culture Luis Jaime Castillo had accused Greenpeace of “extreme environmentalism” and ignoring what the Peruvian people “consider to be sacred” after the protest at the world renowned Nazca lines, a Unesco world heritage site.

He said the government was seeking to prevent those responsible from leaving the country while it asked prosecutors to file charges of attacking archaeological monuments, a crime punishable by up to six years in prison.

The activists had entered a strictly prohibited area beside the figure of a hummingbird among the lines, the culture ministry said, and they had laid down big yellow cloth letters reading “Time for Change! The Future is Renewable” as the UN climate talks began in Peru’s capital.

“This has been done without any respect for our laws. It was done in the middle of the night. They went ahead and stepped on our hummingbird, and looking at the pictures we can see there’s very severe damage,” Castillo said. “Nobody can go on these lines without permission – not even the president of Peru!”
The idiocy of the stunt is just staggering, I just wonder who thought this would be a good idea.
 
Not exactly "destroying the environment" so much as "disturbing a historic landmark".
 
It is on par with the Taliban blowing up Buddha statues. Yet another terrorist act by ecoterrorists.
 
The message is the important thing. They're telling us that we need to act before its too late.

And this message is telling me that I want to rent a nice fuel-chugging boat and shoot a whale in the face. And also that I should check for new "locked up abroad" episodes in the next few years.
 
Well that was pretty dumb of the ecoterrorists.
 
It is on par with the Taliban blowing up Buddha statues. Yet another terrorist act by ecoterrorists.

They didn't destroy the thing, they just damaged... nearby? It's not clear to me via my skimming. And they apologized. Is apologizing after not destroying something the same as proudly and defiantly destroying something?
 
They didn't destroy the thing, they just damaged... nearby? It's not clear to me via my skimming. And they apologized. Is apologizing after not destroying something the same as proudly and defiantly destroying something?

I'm still trying to match the 'destroying the environment' from the thread title with the damaging of a historical landmark. :confused:
 
So I take it I am never going to get those things to match up...that makes sense.
 
I assume this will be blamed on the previous Labor government.

Seriously, Greenpeace is a grassroots activist group that often does stupid things to get its message across. But compared to nutters like PETA, they're relatively harmless, and also have the unfortunate ammunition of being right most of the time. This was a very stupid stunt, but damaging an historical landmark - while despicable - is not destroying the environment. They're fairly obviously different things. Unless those statues are natural formations, or built by beavers or some crap.

I'd like to eat me some whale right now though.
 
They apologised. How often do you see corporations doing that? Did BP even really apologise for the massive oil spill?

Ecoterrorists > corporations. I know what I'd vote as the better candidate for destruction.
 
They didn't destroy the thing, they just damaged... nearby? It's not clear to me via my skimming. And they apologized. Is apologizing after not destroying something the same as proudly and defiantly destroying something?

But compared to nutters like PETA...

You know, guys, I apologize, I was mentally thinking PETA when I posted last night. No idea why I mixed them up in my head, but there you go.

That said, Greenpeace pulls ridiculous crap that's borderline ecoterrorism so I'm really not that far off the mark with them either.
 
I haven't laughed so much since Napoleon blew the nose off the Sphinx with a cannon.
 
Don't want to burst the hyperbole bubble, but the amount of damage done was a few footprints in the vicinity of the landmark - which, while somehow crass, is FAR from "destroying world heritage site".

Now you can go back to flail around and claim that people putting up a banner to raise awareness are somehow "ecoterrorists".

:rolleyes:
 
You know, guys, I apologize, I was mentally thinking PETA when I posted last night. No idea why I mixed them up in my head, but there you go.

That said, Greenpeace pulls ridiculous crap that's borderline ecoterrorism so I'm really not that far off the mark with them either.
PETA are ecoterrorists? :confused:
 
Hell, they're that if only on the basis of providing direct support to ALF and ELF.
 
The US government (and I think the UK as well) officially labels them terrorist groups.
 
Back
Top Bottom