UPDATE (My reply to Greenpeace comments, below.)
UPDATE 2 Greenpeace have responded to the outrage by removing the original page.
Watch out people. Greenpeace resorts to threats.
The moderator on-site is fighting a wall of disparaging, dismissive, and “dare you to” comments, but insists it’s all “non-violent”–really.
Judge for yourself:
“We need to hit them where it hurts most, by any means necessary: through the power of our votes, our taxes, our wallets, and more.”
“‘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.’
“The proper channels have failed. It’s time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.
“If you’re one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let’s talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.
“If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:
“We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.
“And we be many, but you be few.”
So the guys in green are turning up to my place, eh? I do hope they’ll come to chat about the empirical evidence for water-vapor feedback, but if this is supposed to be what non-violence looks like, I’m missing something. I can’t spot the line where it says, “We’re coming to your place to reason with you.” I just see stuff about breaking laws, “any means necessary,” and “we know where you live”.
It’s hard to believe, but I was a Friend of the Rainbow Warrior once. I donated (we donated) money every month for years. But hey, we all grow up sometime, and then we move on. Some of the people in Greenpeace are good people, but they don’t have any idea what forces are pushing the agenda behind the world-wide “greening”. Many in Greenpeace are just bullies who want an authorized disguise to pour scorn on other people and pretend to be heroic. Greenpeace has become a magnet for thrill-seekers looking for an excuse to pump adrenalin; the sinkhole for those with an undirected tribal yearning; the “football club” for people who want to pretend that their team sport is not a game, but life-and-death, and, of course, morally superior.
Wake up, you’re all being played for fools by big bureaucrats and global banksters.
I enjoyed the comments thread.
Jack:
“Juliette, this is a very threatening post. You will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and litigated into the stone age. I have copied this blog and forwarded it to the appropriate officials.”
Steven Miller:
Is this now the way that Greenpeace now wins an argument? By ending an article with thinly cloaked threats of violence? This is the tactic of those who know they have lost. And how did Greenpeace lose? Greenpeace has lost by taking the easy out… by supporting those who have manipulated data and exaggerated their claims.
“Hide the decline”, “Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035”, “Polar Bears going extinct”, omitting weather reporting stations in the wilderness of Canada, China, and Siberia and dozens of other shocking manipulation of data and outlandish lies. These are not the actions of people interested in scientific truth. And now threats. Greenpeace, how low can you go? It is no wonder your organization is losing credibility with the public.
JM Dennis:
Congratulations. You just crossed the line into being a terrorist organization.
Willis Eschenbach
Hey, I’m one of those who spent my life undermining the “consensus”. We don’t see eye-to-eye on matters scientific. I wrote the first FOI to CRU requesting Phil Jones’ DATA, and guess what?
After lying to me repeatedly and illegally fobbing off my requests, he finally had to admit he’d lost the data … and you call that “science”? The only reason the police didn’t indict him is the statute of limitations had run out.
For Greenpeace publicly to threaten me and my family (“we know where you live”) because I don’t agree with your beliefs is despicable. You guys have lost the plot entirely when you take to threatening people with whom you disagree.
You do see the “peace” up in your name there? How about living up to it? Call off your dogs, they will only bite you in the end.
Aaron:
Come and get me, GreenVIOLENCE. Even your name is a lie, just like your global warming propaganda has been.
Feel free to come to Wyoming and find me, Gene from India. Bring friends. Make it a party. You won’t last three seconds. Show me that the “peace” in Greenpeace is as false as the rest of the organization has proven to be.
Silly Face:
I agree completely. We should hunt them down and bombard them with malodorous pineapples. That will teach them to be sceptical. ‘Cause scepticism is evil. They’re all evil capitalist bastards. I AHTE THEM! KILL THEM ALL! THE BASTARDS!!1 BLARAHEGRHAEGRERERWER!!11
UPDATE: Some anonymous friend of GreenPeas dropped in to comment with the usual greenwash, and I replied and thought it was worth posting here.
Andrew:
Hi all,
Hope you don’t mind my passing through. It’s a busy day over on the Greenpeace weblog. Oh, but I guess you know that already. 😉
To be clear – Gene is just calling for the same peaceful civil disobedience that liberated his own country (India) from imperialism. And he is specific about what he thinks people should do (protest, boycott, that kind of thing).
Some people are taking this the wrong way, so I’ve added my own note to the blog post. There’s also a video of Gene, in case anyone wants to see what the guy who’s caused all this fuss looks like.
I’d love to stay and chat, but little busy. I’ve just brewed up a big pot of (organic) tea, and will be doing my best to talk to folks over on the Greenpeace blog. Feel free to stop by and post a comment or question.
– Andrew
Andrew,
thanks for popping by to repeat the moderation “official” Greenpeace line, but it doesn’t wash on the Greenpeace site, and it doesn’t wash here. When someone says it’s ok to break laws, and “we know where you live” there is no other interpretation. What the hell else would you use someone’s home address for–to drop in Greenpeace leaflets? To stand outside and sing whale songs? If you want to write me a letter distilling your wisdom and with the missing empirical evidence feel free, you might convince me with reason, but why snail-mail it? Just pop it up here, or on the Greenpeace site.
As long as you call us deniers we know you have no respect, not much knowledge, and are crippled with arrogance. Can I suggest you try treating us as people instead, or even, dare I suggest, scientists–which many of us are? Loading the article up with baseless lies about how much we are paid (we’re not) and suggesting we do this for the money is a deliberate attempt just to ignite the hate button among the greenpuce tribe.
Breaking laws is dangerous ground, and Greenpeace are fools for thinking they can suggest it, especially without being exactly explicitly descriptive about which laws, and in which manner.
There are nut-cases out there, and this kind of post from Greenpeace has two aims — one, hoping to intimidate skeptics into silence, and two, hoping to ignite a nutcase to DO something, then pretend that Greenpeace can hide behind it’s corporate mission statement, and deny all responsibility.
Greenpeace can’t get away with inciting terrorism. You can’t pretend that there were any lines in that article designed to reign in the eco-loonies, there were no conciliatory statements about skeptics being scientists who have a different opinion. GreenViolence is just as evil, noxious and nasty as fascist-violence. –JN