Under pressure from radicals like the Rainforest Action Network, Levi Strauss & Company announced that they would become the latest company to surrender to the greens’ onslaught against private business and low consumer costs. In a statement the company revealed that they would “not knowingly purchase wood and paper products from endangered forests and other highly controversial sources such as high-risk regions for illegal logging.” In previous newsletters we documented how Greenpeace was caught playing fast and loose with the truth by repeatedly alleging that tests conducted by Integrated Paper Services show that Asian paper manufacturers were somehow using illegal timber fibers. The facts proved otherwise and IPS denied such claims. IPS has even stated, “we are unable to comment on the credibility of the statements Greenpeace has made regarding country of origin” of IPS’ paper samples.
Not only did this saga demonstrate how low radical greens would stoop in order to undermine economic growth in the developing world, but it also revealed how these groups use false smears to deceive businesses. In particular, Levi’s now claims it will only source paper products from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). The flaws associated with FSC’s standards have been well documented in these newsletters. In particular, a recent report revealed that while Greenpeace and their green lackeys go on the offensive, their very own FSC contains species listed as endangered by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), most notably the red lauan.
Illegal Activity Earns Greenpeace a Hearing
As energy prices across the world remain volatile, it’s become more important to explore new sources of oil and gas to help alleviate the stress on consumers and businesses. Unless, of course, you’re Greenpeace. Fresh from their successful campaign to halt the Keystone XL Pipeline in the U.S., Greenpeace is now taking action in the United Kingdom to encourage government ministers to drop their support for companies such as Cairn Energy who would like to pursue more oil drilling in the Arctic. Speaking before a parliamentary committee regarding Cairn Energy’s activities is clearly a major change for Greenpeace, given that they have previously resorted to criminal activities in Greenland.
Just last year four Greenpeace activists “climbed aboard Cairn Energy’s Stena Don platform off the island’s coast and rigged up hanging tents.” The government of Greenland criticized Greenpeace for its “very grave and illegal attack,” before highlighting its sovereign right to explore “opportunities to secure the economic foundation for its people’s condition of life.” As we have documented in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, Greenpeace has no respect for state sovereignty. The statement from Greenland’s government could be any country describing their ongoing travails against Greenpeace. British parliamentarians providing yet more publicity to an organization that thrives on criminal activity is an insult to those across the world who have fought Greenpeace for their rights to pursue economic opportunity.
Recent News from the Green Movement
Want to save the world? In addition to eating less meat, green campaigners now have yet another suggestion: use a smaller font size for typing on your computer. The Minus One Project encourages computer users to reduce their font size by one, thus taking a small step to save paper and thus the rainforest. As if we didn’t have enough nannying from the green movement. They want to influence what we drive, eat and now the size of font we type? The reason we use a preferred font size isn’t to save the planet, but so we can read with ease. One can only laugh at the amount of paper that will be wasted when people print off hundreds of pages only to find that the font is indecipherable. Vishal Sagar, the “brains” behind the idea, stated that he hopes “this project will inspire people to come up with more such ideas that have co-existence and sustainability at their core.” For the sake of amusement, we couldn’t agree more.
The Obama administration’s energy policy – or lack thereof – has become something of a national joke. Energy prices are soaring, yet rather than embracing market solutions and encouraging more exploration, the administration is obsessed with handing out wads of cash to green energy companies. Many of these companies also happen to be owned by donors to the president. If people thought this crony capitalism was bad, it’s only getting worse. A recent report by CBS revealed “that 80 percent of the Department of Energy’s $20.5 billion in green energy loans went to President Barack Obama’s fundraisers and donors.” What’s more, the administration has also funneled billions to 11 green energy companies that have “since gone bankrupt or are facing serious financial difficulty.” The American people not only can’t afford this. They simply deserve better.
Most ideas emanating from the green movement belong in the toilet, but not literally. The Center for Rural Empowerment and the Environment (CREE) has developed a new ‘eco-toilet,’ especially designed to help “benefit hippos and other wetland species.” Not only do these ‘eco-toilets’ help produce waste that “can be safely used as a fertilizer for crops,” but they also help “to alleviate human-hippo conflict, which occurs when hippos raid villagers’ crops for food.” Alleviate conflict? Does CREE have the capability to make an ‘eco-toilet’ for Greenpeace activists that will stop them from raiding private property?
Analysis from DailyClimate.org revealed that climate change news coverage in 2011 plummeted by some 20 percent from 2010. The decline in coverage comes from the fact that “fewer reporters covered the issue in 2011 than in 2010, 20 percent fewer outlets published stories, and the most prolific reporters on the climate change beat published 20 percent fewer stories.” Sunny Hundal in the left-wing Guardian lamented the fact that the climate message “is no longer being heard.” Although the left might like to think that this is some kind of conspiracy, this likely stems from the fact that during times of deep economic malaise, people are no longer concerned with tertiary issues such as climate change. They are, however, deeply worried about the country’s sluggish economic growth.