Poor old Andy Tait. In the Guardian this week, the Greenpeace “freedom fighter” writes a martyr’s note about how he was deported from Indonesia because of his supposed work promoting greater land conservation in the country. Despite his endeavors to portray himself as a man with Indonesia’s interests at heart, Tait actually spearheads a campaign that imperils the economic development of Indonesia and severely undermines job creation, and perhaps stability of the country. One need not look any further than Tait’s remarks about why he is campaigning in Indonesia.
Tait’s entire modus operandi is to promote forestry standards endorsed by Greenpeace, namely that of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). As we have highlighted on a number of occasions, the entire FSC campaign is an attempt by Greenpeace and other radical green groups to control the standardization process in forestry products. Thus, Greenpeace has bullied private business for years, smearing some of the most reputable global brands in an attempt to coerce them into embracing FSC-endorsed products. What’s more, Tait is pretty upfront about this.
In his Guardian piece, Tait notes that he is in “regular contact” with major international businesses. To say “regular contact” is somewhat misleading when one considers the lengths that Greenpeace go to in order to coerce private businesses. But what’s at stake here is much greater than Tait’s ability to visit Indonesia. As more and more businesses capitulate to Greenpeace’s radical agenda the developing world becomes poorer and poorer.
This is bad enough, but FSC and Greenpeace are actually promulgating forestry standards that are – by their very nature – severely flawed and destructive. A recent report by the Congress of Racial Equality recently reveals FSC products contain red lauan (shorea), a critically endangered tropical species.
If Tait actually cared about the future and well-being of people in Indonesia he would see to it that Greenpeace supported initiatives that supported economic growth and created job opportunities. As of now, he is more concerned with self promotion and furthering his ideological crusade.
That said, Indonesian elected officials are rightfully taking the fight back to Greenpeace. This week, lawmakers are calling on the government in Jakarta to “review the existence of Greenpeace in Indonesia,” the Jakarta Post reports. The Consumers Alliance welcomes this positive development and congratulates Indonesia for standing up for its national sovereignty.
Meanwhile, Greenpeace’s crusade against developing world forestry continues to run rampant. This week Greenpeace’s infamous warship, the Esperanza, has set sail in Papua New Guinea to stop what they allege are illegally logged wood products. Greenpeace activists have taken to defacing private property and blockading forestry companies’ ship from traversing the high seas. Greenpeace’s hostile activity in Papua New Guinea is highly misplaced given this group’s ongoing record of distorting the truth in the name of environmental extremism.
New “DarkPeace” Video Reveals Greenpeace’s Record of Extremism
The Consumers Alliance continues to expose Greenpeace’s record of extremism and illegal activity that disrupt economic activity throughout the world.
The Consumers Alliance’s new online video – The Victims of Greenpeace Exposed – reveals Greenpeace’s extremist acts that are reflective of the group’s larger agenda to preserve the environment at all costs often through illegal and unethical means. In recent years, Greenpeace has attempted to stop energy projects in South Africa, forced sports apparel company adidas to stop sourcing developing world fabric and – most recently – faced arrests outside The White House for protesting the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline in North America.
This anti-capitalist and anti-people organization will do everything in its power to shut down private business practices everywhere it goes.
Watch The Victims of Greenpeace Exposed now!
If you are a believer in spreading economic freedom and the rule of law, share the video on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and voice your concerns over Greenpeace’s radical agenda!
The Guitar Follies – After Gibson Debacle Will Congress Support a Legislative Solution?
After Gibson’s guitar-making facilities in Nashville and Memphis were raided by federal agents, the Consumer Alliance’s Andrew Langer was quick to point out on Big Government that “if you lie down with dogs be prepared to get up with fleas.” Langer was of course referring to the fact that Gibson had embraced standards endorsed by Greenpeace, FSC, and the Rainforest Alliance, but still found itself under the federal government’s microscope for allegedly using illegal timber.
Even after their facilities were raided, the silence coming from these environmental groups was quite stunning, demonstrating either an admission that their standards were not up to scratch or a reluctance to defend a reputable American business. The entire saga has demonstrated one thing: that even if you embrace the deeply flawed standards supported by radical environmentalist groups, you will not be inoculated from scrutiny and you should not expect their support when you’re under federal investigation.
FSC-Watch picked up on Langer’s piece, noting that the entire debacle had put the green movement in a bind. FSC-Watch adds that these green groups’ silence has been somewhat revealing because this entire saga threatens to undermine the credibility of their standards. In a reference to Greenpeace, FSC-Watch notes that the organization “is going to struggle to convince supporters of the effectiveness of this strategy if the FSC itself is shown to be unable to uphold forest certification standards.”
But moves are also afoot to introduce a legislative solution to help protect businesses that unknowingly source illegal timber. Representatives Jim Cooper and Marsha Blackburn – both from Tennessee – have co-sponsored a bill that would “protect people from prosecution for unknowingly possessing illegally imported wood, and would require the federal government to establish a database of forbidden wood sources.”
Recent News from the Green Movement
Like a rabid dog backed into a corner over its questionable forestry standards, Greenpeace has decided to lash out and attack more reliable competitors of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). As we have already mentioned on several occasions, Greenpeace is one of the most significant backers of the FSC, an organization that claims to “promote the responsible management of the world’s forests.” In reality, however, this is far from the truth given that reports have already found FSC’s standards to be somewhat questionable—an accusation that both FSC and Greenpeace have failed to address. But still Greenpeace feels it has the standing to critique the practices of the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), two certification systems that are far more reputable and do not work hand in glove with environmental extremists like Greenpeace. One would hope that even Greenpeace would get its own house in order before throwing stones.
For those of us unable to watch the latest comedies, the “Occupy Wall Street” movement has provided ample amounts of hilarious entertainment. And when crazies are out in their numbers, you just know that radical environmental groups can’t be too far away. One OWS enthusiast, Lloyd J. Hart, even decided to produce a list of “demands,” that is as incoherent as it is economically destructive. For example, Hart’s demands include initiating “a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.” Sounds silly? Well, someone should also tell Hart that ending the fossil fuel economy will be somewhat tricky should we implement his next demand: “One trillion dollars in infrastructure (water, sewer, rail, roads and bridges, and electrical grid) spending now.” You can’t make this stuff up.
How would Dutch taxpayers feel if they knew that their money was propping up campaigns that led to higher consumer prices? If the answer is one of “angry,” “furious,” or “irate,” the people of the Netherlands should probably start writing to their elected officials. It’s well known that Greenpeace receives funds from the Dutch lottery that they then use to undermine economic development which, in turn, leads to higher consumer costs. Well, the Dutch government has just decided to stop sourcing logs from Malaysia because they failed to comply with the FSC standards backed by Greenpeace. Someone should tell the Dutch government that they are no longer a colonial power and that developing nations have a sovereign right to develop their own land and realize their full economic potential.
While Greenpeace undertakes and condones illegal activities in the name of advancing their agenda (even going so far as to risk a nuclear disaster by digging under railways to “protest” the transportation of nuclear waste in the Netherlands), the organization has taken French electricity producer, Energie de France, to court over spying on activists. Ignoring the fact that Greenpeace claims that it is being repressed whenever such charges leveled against the organization, can anyone blame one of the world’s largest producers of nuclear energy to monitor these radical ideologues. After all, when given the choice between spying on a fringe organization or suffering a nuclear catastrophe because activists want to derail a train in protest, what would you choose?
If a country could potential extract 200 trillion cubic feet of shale gas, you would expect their elected officials to be preparing the drills, right? Not so in the United Kingdom. The British Spectator’s Fraser Nelson has a fascinating blog about the House of Commons’ Energy and Climate Change Committee, which just released a report entitled “UK Energy Supply: Security or Independence?” but only alluded to shale gas in the report’s annex. Although this is obviously a major lapse from the committee, Nelson is quick to point out that some members of Parliament are actually attempting to initiative a national conversation about the economic potential of shale gas drilling. When one considers how heated the debate has become in the UK over soaring energy costs, it might be the time for the government to start taking shale gas seriously.
Be sure to look out for our next newsletter as we uncover the dirty tricks and stealth campaigning of some of the world’s most notorious environmental activists.