Violent Rhetoric: OK From Global Warming Activists, Not From Skeptics

Damian Carrington’s column in The Guardian had an excruciatingly poor piece today: Climate Nazis: Violent Rhetoric Infecting Many US Debates which attempted to link violent right wing rhetoric with climate change scepticism, as though the two things were one and the same. It’s a technique called painting your opponent into a corner.

But the really violent and threatening rhetoric comes from the socially acceptable smiley-faced global warming activists and apologists like Greenpeace whose website carried the following message from its communications director, Gene Hashimi:

Emerging battle-bruised from the disaster zone of Copenhagen, but ever-hopeful, a rider on horseback brought news of darkness and light: “The politicians have failed. Now it’s up to us. We must break the law to make the laws we need: laws that are supposed to protect society, and protect our future. Until our laws do that, screw being climate lobbyists. Screw being climate activists. It’s not working. We need an army of climate outlaws.”

The proper channels have failed. It’s time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.

If you’re one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let’s talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.

If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.

And we be many, but you be few.

The post was only taken down after widespread condemnation turned it into a PR disaster for Greenpeace. Hashimi was never disciplined, of course. Instead he took an extended vacation in Thailand (flying is okay when you’re with Greenpeace). Whilst sunning himself on the beaches of Thailand, he posted the following message on Twitter to those who had signed up to his Twitter feed:

I haven’t said anything in 7 months, so why are all 32 of you mofos following me? Just so you know, I’m carrying a knife.

Again, no action was taken by Greenpeace against their communications director. A look at his recent twitter feed shows that the violent, hate-filled rhetoric is still very much evident (I have altered the swear words so as not to offend – be warned that Greenpeace’s communications director has not done so on his twitter feed):

Oh no, Nestle… you’re f****d! Killing babies in Africa, labourers in Philippines, and now orang-utans in Indonesia. F**k you Nestlé! & have a#kitkat

faaaaaaaaaack, this is cool! Why do white people get to have all the fun, though?

The question someone should ask Greenpeace, is do they consider this sort of rhetoric from their communications director to be acceptable?

And whilst we’re on this subject, someone should ask the IPCC if they’re proud of appointing a representative of a genocidal government, implicated in numerous war crimes, to the chair of vice-president. As Nofrakking consensus pointed out, the Sudanese government has been accused by numerous NGOs of instigating rape, murder, ethnic cleansing and torture. But the reaction in the media to the IPCC’s appointing a member of this government to a very senior post? Nil. Nothing. Nada.


5 responses to “Violent Rhetoric: OK From Global Warming Activists, Not From Skeptics

  1. Well, it’s their communications director, so i guess he’s in charge of communications strategy at Greenpeace.

    Ironically he twitters:
    “#Nestle, Rule One: taking something off the internet is like taking piss out of a swimming pool. It don’t work. ”

    Yes, Gene, indeed.

    • But one must say he’s showing some restraint in his threats against us in the last few months. Some boss must have seriously kicked him.

  2. I remember ‘Green Gene’s’ little outburst very well. Those memories returned when I first watched the 10:10 No Pressure video.

    Nice people. Shame about the backlash.

  3. First, exploding climate skeptics, now with Giffords shooting – “The Far-left ‘Jumps the Shark’ over Tucson Tragedy”

    Excerpt: For those unfamiliar with “jumping the shark”, I’d strongly suggest looking up this Hollywood idiom. It appears we are witnessing this in epic fashion as the far-left shamelessly exploits violence for the second time in four months: first, the fake explosive executions of climate change doubters in last October’s video; now they agonize over the very real Giffords shooting. Both showcase the far-left’s attempts to marginalize and silence their critics, while spewing the same kind of vitriol they ironically claim should end.

  4. Greenpeace is a terrorist organization and should be treated as one. Hashimi is public proof of that, but far from the only one – just look at their ocean going terrorism against fishing fleets which is documented on TV in “Whale Wars”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s