Greenpeace shuts down fish quota talks

HERE

Stupid Mackintosh computer. It's here


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/dec/17/fishing.conservation1

I don't always agree with organisations like that but that's quite funny.

Not the state of the oceans, that's not funny.

How did they get enough time to build a wall without being hoofed off the premises?

class. pure class.

for once i agree with them when ALL the fish are GONE i hopethe trawlermenbe crying in their pints when they are out of a job as i wont be feeling sorry for them

I think sympathy for Greenpeace is misplaced. Sure, the history of European efforts to conserve fish stocks is unimpressive to say the least, and the UK's record of permitting its fisheries to be decimated by e.g. the grasping, unscrupulous Spanish fleet is contemptibly feeble. But Greenpeace is an extremist organisation: its members are zealots with agendas, very often, not wildly different from those of the Animal Liberation Front and similarly unrepresentative loonies. Reading that piece in The Guardian, one finds this:

"They are calling not only for a halt to unsustainable cod fishing, but also for large areas of the oceans to become protected as "marine reserves". .."

Do you imagine such reserves, if instituted in the way Greenpeace wants, might allow for angling? Suchlike fieldsports are far from being priorities in the eyes of Greenpeace: in general, they view anglers in much the same way they think of Canadian seal hunters, Japanese whale hunters, or English fox hunters, which is to say, they think we're Neanderthal animal-torturers whose primitive practices should be abolished. I've talked to these people on my doorstep, and when they're manning stalls in the marketplace...

I too am surprised they got away with it: the Belgian riot-police, if let loose, would have kicked the cr*p out of them. I dislike Belgian riot-police a bit less than I dislike and distrust Greenpeace.

To think of Greenpeace as being the same type of organisation as the Animal liberation front is a gross error. Greenpeace will only protest through non violent means and will have a scientific basis andan alternative solution to the environmental issues they tackle. You may well get the odd extremist on your doorstep or in the market place. But the organisation has clear principles which it adheres whatever some individuals might say.

The link below will show you the core values of greenpeace.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/our-core-values

If you look further around their website you will see that they can in no way be compared to left wing loonies or indeed belgian riot police /forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

<blockquote class=quoteheader>H.P. Sauce wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

I think sympathy for Greenpeace is misplaced. Sure, the history of European efforts to conserve fish stocks is unimpressive to say the least, and the UK's record of permitting its fisheries to be decimated by e.g. the grasping, unscrupulous Spanish fleet is contemptibly feeble. But Greenpeace is an extremist organisation: its members are zealots with agendas, very often, not wildly different from those of the Animal Liberation Front and similarly unrepresentative loonies. Reading that piece in The Guardian, one finds this:

"They are calling not only for a halt to unsustainable cod fishing, but also for large areas of the oceans to become protected as "marine reserves". .."

Do you imagine such reserves, if instituted in the way Greenpeace wants, might allow for angling? Suchlike fieldsports are far from being priorities in the eyes of Greenpeace: in general, they view anglers in much the same way they think of Canadian seal hunters, Japanese whale hunters, or English fox hunters, which is to say, they think we're Neanderthal animal-torturers whose primitive practices should be abolished. I've talked to these people on my doorstep, and when they're manning stalls in the marketplace...

I too am surprised they got away with it: the Belgian riot-police, if let loose, would have kicked the cr*p out of them. I dislike Belgian riot-police a bit less than I dislike and distrust Greenpeace.</blockquote>What? Are you barking? It doesn't really matter whether Greenpeace is anti-angling or not, because without something being done there will be nothing to catch. I'd rather live with getting some lip off the tree-huggers (and very few Greenpeace supporters are like that) than feel smug about not supporting them while the fish all get wiped out.

MARKS LINK

"Shut down until fish stocks recover" HPS, I don't see what you're getting at? If Grenpeace wanted to be like the other factions, wouldn't they simply sabotage the trawler, or do something worse. They are a peaceful organisation, one which doesn't resort to extremist action.

my dealings with Greenpeace put me in the mind of complete hypocrite's! i work on an oil rig which is self propelled, and we are very enviromentally aware these days with a zero discharge legislation aboard our rig, yet they chase us with there Rainbow warrior! (has anbody seen this ship?) it belches out god knows how much pollution and i would hate to think how much oil and diesel is burnt in there campaign for no more drilling!

also boarding rigs and blocking off harbours, is in my view very much a left wing loonie aproach, losing millions in lost revenue and who do you think has to pay in the end????

US the consumers!

that said, i do believe Whole Heartedly that GOVERNMENT need to address our fish stocks immediatly, and stop the spanish and other foreign fleets from scraping all life out of existance on our sea beds, and reviewing net sizes in our own fleets!

but it is the buisness of goverment and us to vtell goverment not some Hypocritical hippy army, who have nothing better to do in there lives and are scared of getting a real job and contributing to the economy like the rest of us!

Just my humble opinion, may be not politicaly correct, or correct at all, but mine none the less!

tight lines guys!

Laney/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif