Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For the posted article: "Peru says the activists damaged an area around the hummingbird by grinding rocksinto the sandy soil. Access to the area around the lines is strictly prohibited."
"We welcome any independent review of the consequences of our activity. We will cooperate fully with any investigation. We take personal responsibility for actions, and are committed to nonviolence. Greenpeace is accountable for its activities and willing to face fair and reasonable consequences."
It is a misdemeanor. Dumb. But no real damage. Be the same on the Delicate Arch Trail. There are often rules on trails and even places where you are instructed not to use a trail section.
Violations are likely illegal... a law violation. They are unlikely to be a felony unless long lasting damage is done.
Ok, maybe this was not a good example, since some people don't care about our National parks and really care less about Peruvian locations.
So, let's compare it to destroying Indian archaeological sites or painting over Newspaper Rock in Utah? Those I can guarantee are FELONIES and will land your butt in jail or one heck of a fine that will make you go back to the cheap incandescent light bulbs. (Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 and/or Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 take our pick.)
What I'm trying to get at is that some cannot appear to fathom is that regardless if it is a felony or a misdemeanor it is still one of the most ludicrous ways to get your idea across to the people. Destroying or damaging a national monument is an idiotic way to get your point across. It only makes people believe the organization is a band of radicals. But Greenpeace is use to that since they have acted that way before.
And let's get one thing out of the way. Regardless of US laws....this disgraceful act was done in Peru. But I guess that does not matter...does it?
And yes it has something to do with the environment since acts like this make it harder to get a point across with a legitimate statement vs. a statement made in one of the most asinine ways I have ever seen.
Ok, maybe this was not a good example, since some people don't care about our National parks and really care less about Peruvian locations.
So, let's compare it to destroying Indian archaeological sites or painting over Newspaper Rock in Utah? Those I can guarantee are FELONIES and will land your butt in jail or one heck of a fine that will make you go back to the cheap incandescent light bulbs. (Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 and/or Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 take our pick.)
What I'm trying to get at is that some cannot appear to fathom is that regardless if it is a felony or a misdemeanor it is still one of the most ludicrous ways to get your idea across to the people. Destroying or damaging a national monument is an idiotic way to get your point across. It only makes people believe the organization is a band of radicals. But Greenpeace is use to that since they have acted that way before.
And let's get one thing out of the way. Regardless of US laws....this disgraceful act was done in Peru. But I guess that does not matter...does it?
And yes it has something to do with the environment since acts like this make it harder to get a point across with a legitimate statement vs. a statement made in one of the most asinine ways I have ever seen.
The lettering is an overlay of plastic. It does not stay or do anything bad to the underlying structure. Are you missing that?
They get a picture and then pick it up.
The argument in Peru is that they walked on the desert near the hummingbird. That drove rocks into the desert mantle disturbing the smoothness and leaving foot prints behind. The issue is whether or not you can just brush that out and wait a few years and all is as it was.
I have no problem with a little bit of politically motivated disturbance...particularly if clever. Destruction is totally unacceptable. So there is the issue. What actually happened here?
The Peruvian government said it was walked on. That place has been walked on for 1500 years.
It is a put on. It is well known that the desert surface can be broken by walking on it but it also seals back up reasonably quickly if smoothed and left alone. That surface is used in places like the Mojave desert to avoid blowing dust.
Again I don't want to defend a stupid stunt. But that is what it is. Not permanent damage or anything that had not gone on there before.
What is your background in and have you personally gone to the site to determine the extent of the damage?
I never considered greenpeace all that green or peaceful.
That much is true. IMHO they are closer to eco-criminals than anything else. They have no problem using violence or disregarding the safety of others to achieve their goals.
Since they do claim to have a higher calling and demand others be held accountable to higher standards, they should be held to a higher standard too. If I take a pine cone from a National Forest, it is a crime. Reasonably, I might be able to claim I didn't know and intended no harm. Greenpeace knows better and even their intentions might not have included damaging anything, they had to have now it would.
Luckily though, I am sure the Peruvian Government won't be allowing them access anymore. I doubt that if caught in Peru in the future, apologies wouldn't be considered.
In this thread I have seen comments to the effect that it isn't a felony. That wasn't the meaning. If someone walked on the graves at Arlington and trampled a message there, I doubt an apology would suffice. What we often forget is that people elsewhere have their own hallowed grounds so to speak, they are no less important than our own, respect for such places should be universal. When we diminish the scared sites of other cultures, we diminish our own.
Notice that Greenpeace didn't use water color paints to put a message on the Vietnam Memorial. Though it would cause no permanent damage, who would say it isn't a big deal? I'm willing to bet that if tried in the presence of any number of visitors, they'd be lucky to leave walking
That much is true. IMHO they are closer to eco-criminals than anything else. They have no problem using violence or disregarding the safety of others to achieve their goals.
Since they do claim to have a higher calling and demand others be held accountable to higher standards, they should be held to a higher standard too. If I take a pine cone from a National Forest, it is a crime. Reasonably, I might be able to claim I didn't know and intended no harm. Greenpeace knows better and even their intentions might not have included damaging anything, they had to have now it would.
Luckily though, I am sure the Peruvian Government won't be allowing them access anymore. I doubt that if caught in Peru in the future, apologies wouldn't be considered.
In this thread I have seen comments to the effect that it isn't a felony. That wasn't the meaning. If someone walked on the graves at Arlington and trampled a message there, I doubt an apology would suffice. What we often forget is that people elsewhere have their own hallowed grounds so to speak, they are no less important than our own, respect for such places should be universal. When we diminish the scared sites of other cultures, we diminish our own.
Notice that Greenpeace didn't use water color paints to put a message on the Vietnam Memorial. Though it would cause no permanent damage, who would say it isn't a big deal? I'm willing to bet that if tried in the presence of any number of visitors, they'd be lucky to leave walking
Greenpeace would burn the forest down to prevent someone from taking a pine cone.
I agree the classification of the crime isn't important. The action is. How the message is sent is. I refer to them as eco terrorists... So even though at times I agree with what they are trying to accomplish I don't agree with the means that they accomplish it.
Greenpeace would burn the forest down to prevent someone from taking a pine cone.
I agree the classification of the crime isn't important. The action is. How the message is sent is. I refer to them as eco terrorists... So even though at times I agree with what they are trying to accomplish I don't agree with the means that they accomplish it.
Here are a few Greenpeace stunts. Which ones do you find evil?
Greenpeace climbs the Shard in London
Big Ben scaled
Whale freighter interrupted
scaled the London Treasury building
An aerostatic Greenpeace balloon was seen next to the Mayan ruins of Chichen Itza
scaled the City Hall building in Mexico City
placed a large banner on a rail bridge at the entrance to Jerusalem
free bio-diesel to motorists in Edinburgh in 2001
Here are a few Greenpeace stunts. Which ones do you find evil?
Greenpeace climbs the Shard in London
Big Ben scaled
Whale freighter interrupted
scaled the London Treasury building
An aerostatic Greenpeace balloon was seen next to the Mayan ruins of Chichen Itza
scaled the City Hall building in Mexico City
placed a large banner on a rail bridge at the entrance to Jerusalem
free bio-diesel to motorists in Edinburgh in 2001
Just for starters:
Destroying Golden Rice. (they had no right, it wasn't theirs to destroy)
Destroying coral reefs and claiming to help save them
Destroying GM wheat
the list goes on, searching for it is quite easy.
And BTW, the Peruvian government is pursuing ...wait of it...FELONY charges against Greenpeace because ...wait ...the damage they caused will remain for a very long time.
Perhaps learning a bit about the fragile environment they tromped on might provide a different perspective other than they simply walked on some place walked on long ago.
Oh the hypocrisy of the environmental group that seems to care only for it's agenda than the environments it uses for its own purposes.
Do tell, if Greenpeace decided to use the landscaping of your neighbors, maybe tromping footprints all over say, some newly planted whatever, just what do you think the neighbor might do if they caught them in the act? Another use for a always handy 2x4 which being both natural and renewable, would serve the environment just as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
