Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Killing People to "Save" the Environment
CFP ^ | April 22, 2005 | Alan Caruba

Posted on 04/22/2005 7:33:27 AM PDT by MikeEdwards

I confess it took me a long time to realize that much of what passes for the environmental movement or environmentalism involves imposing restrictions that (1) destroy economic growth and (2) often destroys lives.

A perfect example of both these Green objectives is the utterly vile efforts of the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) that have been directed of late against major financial investment companies such as Citicorp and Bank of America. Both ceded their lending decisions to RAN in 2004.

Their latest target has been J.P. Morgan whose CEO, William Harrison, has been under siege in his home in Greenwich, CT. As Steve Milloy of JunkScience.com has noted, "RAN wants to dictate J.P. Morgan Chase’s lending policies for the developing world, especially with regard to energy projects and logging. As an extremist group railing against oil, wood, and meat consumption, RAN wants to block lending to projects it claims may contribute to global warming or involve logging in ‘sensitive’ areas."

One of my personal heroes, Niger Innis, the national spokesman for CORE, has said "RAN does not deserve a seat at the table of any bank, and certainly should never been given veto power." He criticized the World Bank, Citigroup, and Bank of America for having "shamefully compromised" their lending policies as the result of RAN’s threats. An Ugandan, Diana Koymuhendo, asks, "What right do they have to tell poor people they must settle for whatever crumbs Rainforest Action tosses to them?"

Without an investment in the provision of energy in Third World nations, they are going to remain mired in poverty. . . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: actionnetwork; economic; economy; environment; environmentalists; envirowhackos; green; greens; growth; rainforest; world

1 posted on 04/22/2005 7:33:44 AM PDT by MikeEdwards
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MikeEdwards

Alas, squeaky wheels get fixed. There really hasn't been much of a concerted, prolonged anti-environmentalist campaign run by much of anyone over the years -- not that I can ever remember. There have been people and some small groups, but they usually wind up only screaming into the wind. The press doesn't help, but they're just a bunch of tools anyway. (I know. I used to be an managing editor.) Give them tons of press releases, make lots of noise, make other people tell them they notice... the newspapers will love you.

Remember, they treated environmentalists like total whack-jobs when they showed up back in the 70s, but by the 80s they made them legit. There's a lesson there. It's patience and dedication.


2 posted on 04/22/2005 7:46:04 AM PDT by HowardDeanScream08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HowardDeanScream08

"Remember, they treated environmentalists like total whack-jobs when they showed up back in the 70s, but by the 80s they made them legit. There's a lesson there. It's patience and dedication."

This rule certainly doesn't apply to christians. The press will always make them look like a bunch of whackos......


3 posted on 04/22/2005 7:57:49 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite (How soon will the U.S.A. be U.S.S.A.?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HowardDeanScream08

And again, you demonstrate how those who oppose the environmentalists aims have lost the war of words.

An anti-environmentalist campaign is the last thing folks would want to sign up for. Who would possibly want to be "against" those who wish to protect our environment?

What conservatives need to do (IMHO) is to devise an pro-environment plank. It may, in fact, be the same one you are thinking of as an "anti-environmentalist" campaign you envision, but it's name no longer contains the word "anti".

I was having this discussion with my son the other day. The democrats right now are not "for" anything, it seems. They are against everything. We Americans are positive, can-do people. We want to be "for" something, not anti.

Words matter. Just a thought.


4 posted on 04/22/2005 8:00:28 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dmz

Incorrect.

I am not at a loss for words, nor am I "against" the environment. I simply pointed out that no one has actually really put the forth the effort to debunk and discredit all the environmentalist crazies on a grand scale, which is actually quite easy. Most responsible scientists know the score, but either they don't want the spotlight or don't want to get involved, only do research.

There doesn't *need* to be a PRO-environment plank, just a RESPONSIBLE one. There is a tremendous difference.

Yes. Words matter. All three of my sons know that, too.


5 posted on 04/24/2005 3:51:17 PM PDT by HowardDeanScream08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson