Climate protesters arrested outside State Department 6

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Delay And Deny Posted 4:52 pm
   27 Sep 2007

   APhttp://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5inVcIYkhKsco2W8La6d6g1 ...
   How about printing the mainstream version:
   
   
   The demonstrators walked up to one of the State Department's entrances, but were blocked from going into the building. They stood and sat outside chanting and occasionally clashing with officers on the scene if they came too close to the building.
   ...
   About two hours into the demonstration, officers with the Federal Protective Service arrested 49 protesters after giving them multiple warnings to leave, according to Greenpeace's official count.
   
   
   
   John Bailo
   
   
   Sutext:

   Permalink

2. 

   Billhook Posted 6:10 pm
   27 Sep 2007

   Self-promotion stuntsIn the Greenpeace press blurb I liked the line about how they "were out in full force" to protest etc.
   
   All 50 of them. Except it was only 49 on AP. But who gives a damn for accuracy ?
   When did Greenpeace ever call its membership out in full force ?
   I'm wondering what this organization is actually for ?

   Permalink

3. 

   caniscandida Posted 6:52 pm
   27 Sep 2007

   "full force"Yes, Billhook, it seems an odd expression.  At least those fifty themselves were "out in full force" -- as though they could have been present, but "not all there" in some sense, in which case I guess they would have been "out in defective force," maybe, or "fragmentary force," or "intermittent force," or some such.
   Actually, fifty sounds like a corps of elite Special Ops guys, not a popular demonstration of citizens.  There were around a hundred of us, last week, at a rally in favor of a pro-horse ban on horse-drawn carriages in NYC, and we looked pretty puny.
   Anyway, I do not usually associate Greenpeace with demonstrations like this one, standard activist fare.  They are more famous for activism of other, less imitable kinds.
   
   Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.

   Permalink

4. 

   randino Posted 11:28 pm
   27 Sep 2007

   In defense of protest.My how commentators to this story, look down their noses at anyone protesting the old fashioned way. How superior we are, we actvists who never leave a computer terminal, and who make the powerful of the world tremble with our e-mails, blogs, and list serves. Yup, those monks in Burma should have known better and confined their protests to their blackberries. That would have caused the generals to soil themselves in fear!
   Let me speak in defense of old school activism. Activism that involves real face to face interaction with other human beings. Activism that involves something other than tapping your way on a keyboard. Activism that - horror of horrors - might involve some risk, some courage.
   People wonder why the war continues, in spite of popular disapproval. People wonder why we continue set ourselves up for environmental suicide. Perhaps we see the limits of internet activism. Maybe we should take another look at what smashed Jim Crow, brought down apartheid, derailed the WTO, caused one president to bow out of an election, and a superpower to back down from a war.  
   So, let us quit being so superior. You stay at your terminal. Me, I am with the monks.
   Randy Cunningham
   
   Randy Cunningham

   Permalink

5. 

   Billhook Posted 2:47 am
   28 Sep 2007

   What is Greenpeace for ?Randy - you mistake my message. Metaphorically, like you, I'm with the monks.
   As spokesman/liason officer for FLAG (Fawley B Local Action Group) in the UK in '86 I campaigned (succesfully) against the building of the largest Coal-fired power station in Europe.
   I wasn't actually arrested for continued campaigning against GW till the early '90s, in Berlin, (when the UNFCCC mandate was agreed).
   My criticism above is of the Greenpeace routine of high profile stunts by rather small numbers of staffers,
   
   with the convenient effect of encouraging members' continued subscriptions,
   
   but without ever calling that huge membership out onto the streets
   
   to demonstrate their abhorrence of the climate genocide that the US now leads.
   Which is why I ask just what is that organisation for ?
   Regards,
   Bill

   Permalink

6. 

   shelly123 Posted 3:58 am
   28 Sep 2007

   Bash Bush not GreenpeaceI'd like to commend Greenpeace for their protest and calling attention to President Bush's lack of action on global warming. Instead of involving the United States in the Kyoto Protocol, he set up a meeting to discuss options of "voluntary" cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
   I think the more groups and individuals that speak up -- the better! 50 is not too shabby. Looks like this may be a good way to build momentum for more global warming protests and activities.

   Permalink