Skip to main content

View Diary: The Nuclear Shill Apologizes. (157 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  off greenpeace (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    G2geek

    Saying this as someone who would probably rather see wind expansion than nuclear (but whatever stops fossil fuels), it was very eye opening for me to encounter Greenpeace, an organization I had appreciated and taken seriously for a long time, and to then see them engage in regrettable anti-nuclear arguments that were hard to take seriously ("no nuclear plant is safe", etc.)

    I still think greenpeace does a lot of good, but unlike "protecting our environment" or "promoting conservation", incompetence is not something you can choose to agree or disagree with. It is a quality, not an issue position.

    •  I get it. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      abben

      But the Democratic party by and large endorsed this war, not to mention NAFTA CAFTA SHAFTA  Don't Ask Don't Tell, on and on. When you find that perfect pure group that also actually does something, be sure and call me.

      •  If I ended my comment with (0+ / 0-)

        "... and that's why I will never support, believe, or trust Greenpeace on any issue whatever."

        you would have a point. But it is not their imperfection that I criticize.

        •  You chose to emphasize comptetence. (0+ / 0-)

          GP has succeeded IMO in shifting the argument in some crucial areas: the destruction of Amozonia for paper pulp and soy, for instance. And their pressure on the high seas.

          Frankly they are more competent, in my view, than the Dem party.

          Where is a person to go?

          •  it always bothred me (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Plan9, bryfry, woolie

            seeing that one branch of GP campaigns to stop deforestation in Amazonia and another branch campaigns to burn doen rain forest to produce more biofuels.

            Maybe in evenings both branches unite and celebrate how much funds they raised by doing so.

            •  Greenpeace protested nonproliferation activists (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LIsoundview

              When Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency, shared the Nobel Prize for Peace with the IAEA, Greenpeace held a protest.  

              No other organization in the world has done more to monitor and crack down on efforts to build nuclear weapons in North Korea and other dicey countries.

              You would think that an environmental organization would celebrate anyone who made serious efforts to prevent more atomic weapons from being built, tested, and, God forbid, even used on human beings.  

              But, since part of IAEA's mandate is to encourage the peaceful expansion of nuclear power, Greenpeace condemns IAEA.

              Thanks to the propagandizing efforts of Greenpeace and other "Green" activists, Germany is replacing nuclear energy, which provides 30% of German electricity, with 26 new dirty coal-fired plants by 2020.

              While claiming to protect people from hypothetical, projected deaths from low-dose radiation that has not been proven to cause health effects, Greenpeace shares the responsibility for contributing to global warming and to the premature deaths of thousands of people right now and as well to the termination of thousands of plant and animal species.  As an environmentalist, I find that this blots out the positive work Greenpeace has done.

              Greenpeace also encourages a hysteric, emotional, ad-hominem attack on anyone in disagreement with its program.  It commissions scientific reports that must verify pre-ordained conclusions. It chooses ideology over facts every time.

              The IPCC predicts average global temperatures to rise enough by 2050 to put 20-30% of all species at risk for extinction.

              by Plan9 on Mon Jun 11, 2007 at 09:04:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Correction: "scientific" reports (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LIsoundview, bryfry, t7

                Greenpeace reports should not be dignified as scientific.

                The IPCC predicts average global temperatures to rise enough by 2050 to put 20-30% of all species at risk for extinction.

                by Plan9 on Mon Jun 11, 2007 at 09:22:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Well, of course ... (4+ / 1-)
                Recommended by:
                LIsoundview, Plan9, t7, woolie
                Hidden by:
                melvin

                Greenpeace is going to protest anyone who makes a real and significant contribution to nonproliferation. It cuts into their donation revenue.

                Less fear = less interest in "green" and "peace" = less donations

                That's Greenpeace science.

                If they don't get donations, how will they pay their protesters?

                •  Troll rated for sheer idiocy. (0+ / 0-)
                  •  Wow! Way to contribute ... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    woolie

                    to the discussion! You must be proud of your keen insight and intelligent comments.

                    So are you saying that Greenpeace has never compensated their protesters? Never given them money or paid for their travel or paid to put them up somewhere when they are staging a protest at some important site or event?

                    Damn! And usually I have to really insult someone to get troll-rated.

                  •  fortunately your TR will have zero effect here. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Plan9

                    "The answer to fear cannot always lie in the dissipation of the causes of fear; sometimes it lies in courage."

                    by woolie on Tue Jun 12, 2007 at 04:51:39 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  I am surprised at you, Melvin (0+ / 0-)

                    See here for appropriate use of troll-ratings.

                    You've been around for a while on DailyKos, so I am surprised that you are unaware that it is highly inappropriate and unKossaklike to troll-rate someone simply because you disagree with his or her point of view.

                    Feel free to rant about a poster's idiocy and to argue with the posts, but troll-rating only undermines your standing and  you risk having it unfairly used against you.

                    The IPCC predicts average global temperatures to rise enough by 2050 to put 20-30% of all species at risk for extinction.

                    by Plan9 on Tue Jun 12, 2007 at 10:25:48 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site