The master manipulators at Greenpeace have been unfurling banners and vandalizing property for years in the name of raising their profile in the media and raising funds from their supporters.
We've written a number of times about how Greenpeace uses selective reporting of the facts in pursuit of its radical agenda. One of the most glaring transgressions that Greenpeace and others us is to promote research findings that have either been debunked or even disavowed by the folks who initially published them.
It would appear Greenpeace thinks its potential donors have been living under a rock or haven't read a newspaper since July. Just yesterday the once-proud activist group stooped to sullying its name, again (read ahhhh-gain), in order to scare supporters into coughing up their hard earned cash.
This time it let supporters know that, "In a paper published in the leading scientific journal Science, marine biologists projected that most commercial fisheries would collapse by 2048 if current trends continue."
While biologists work on their assessment of the Alaska pollock stocks it is important to keep in mind a few facts. Since 1977 the U.S. has overseen Alaska pollock and made it a model of fisheries management for the world.
Despite ebbs and flows in the available biomass this fishery has remained the picture of responsibility. Here's another picture to keep in mind when people suggest otherwise:
Alaska Pollock 1990-2009
Last week Greenpeace's outgoing Executive Director admitted that the once-revered eco outfit lies as a matter of strategy, this week it... lied some more. According to reports, here it is along side the Environment and Animal Society of Taiwan suggesting tuna could be, "wiped out by 2048."
The Big Hollywood Blog has a Greenpeace feature today that is a must read. It includes a video clip from a BBC program in which the cornered Executive Director of Greenpeace squirms quite a bit before he admits that Greenpeace exaggerates and misreports as a matter of strategy.
If you've ever poked around the internet in search of Sushi sites you may have come across http://www.sustainablesushi.net/ . Sounds innocuous enough-a sushi lover helping other sushi lovers chose their favorites wisely, right?
Wrong.
Greenpeace is out ranking grocery stores again but the fact is these contrived rankings have become background noise during an important seafood sustainability discussion that has seen responsible ENGO's move forward with initiatives that show real promise and progress. Despite insistence that "several stores have already begun to develop sustainable seafood procurement policies" it presents no evidence those efforts are as a direct result of Greenpeace's continued attempts at public relations blackmail.
It's not hard to become enamored with Greenpeace if you don't look below the surface. Save the whales, protect the forest, defend the earth-great goals. But what about distort the facts, destroy the property and misappropriate the science-not great tactics.
So, today Greenpeace is firing up its well oiled PR machine and releasing yet another set of seafood sustainability retailer rankings, this time in Canada. Surely it will tell a recycled tale of woe and then-- thank goodness-- Greenpeace will be there to save the day, all the while honing its public relations extortion tactics.
