after a summer of waterborne actions at rossport i was wondering the same thing, then i found them in dam, moored for the winter, two ships constantly surronded by tourists.

the original gpeacers would be/ are ashamed

now, its our turn

Courage to the Brave people of Erris !

WWF aren't all that green as a lobbying group - they promote carbon trading

Greenpeace use activists for lobbying. A banner drop gets media attention and then draws an issue into the public eye, hopefully achieving some lobbying effect on those in power.

They also control what people see as the main issues, such as coal and aviation. By appropoiating activists they convince them that these are the issues they should be focussing on. They ignore issues which would not be popular with their membership and funders. For example, they separate climate change and forest preservation. They ignore the huge role that oil plays in destroying the planet - could that be because the capitalist economy depends on oil more than coal?

Greenpeace are making efforts to build a movement of direct activists - we've expanded our training programme, and do quite a lot to support the grassroots when we can. On the other hand, we have to be careful not to muscle in and take over grassroots campaigns, as that's never popular, so you won't necessarily be aware of everything we're doing as we don't always publicise it. For example, despite having no office in Ireland, and not working on gas, we've given some assistance to the Rossport activists - we just haven't publicised it. I think we're getting the balance just about right, but it's an open question.

Should we give up political lobbying and focus on actions? Perhaps, but our political lobbying has been going rather well of late, so it would be a principled rather than a pragmatic move. If we were to engineer some sort of division of labour between NGOs, we'd need to effectively merge, as everything we did would have to be coordinated. Merging with WWF, whilst having certain attractions, might not be the best way of making GP more radical.

I'm a bit surprisd to hear that two of our ships are 'moored for the winter'. We're global, so it's been summer for the last six months for GP Australia, GP NZ, GP Argentina, GP SA etc.

I think you might have got that slightly wrong. Do you remember which ships they were? We do have one decomissioned ship which is used as a museum, perhaps you're thinking about that?

Regarding oil, we've done more work on oil than coal and aviation put together. Much more, both in the UK and globally. However, we're currently in a period of major decisions on aviation expansion and new coal generation, so we're focussed on that. But if you'd rather believe we're a front group for Shell, please feel free, we wouldn't want to 'appropriate' you and convince you otherwise.

On only working on issues which please our 'membership and funders', first of all, our rmembership are our funders - we don't accept any funding from any company or government. Secondly, we don't separate climate and forests, although we did until a few years ago, and thirdly, if you think we're spending most of our resources on climate change because it brings in the bucks, then you've clearly never worked in marketing.

Greenpeace direct action - what liability do you have for the actions of Greenpeace DA?

i'm not usually up for defending greenpeace but this 'article' is bullshit and should be hidden. non news. come on admins, sort it out.

1. Raising money for publicity; to raise more money, to make more money.
2. Turning campaigns against one another; for example condemning Sea Shepherd.
3. Keeping their headquarters is good multi-million conditions.
4. Making money from the exploitation and destruction of the environment.
5. Creating the illusion of grassroots direct action campaigns and activists.

Main point of greenpeace? Making money and pacifing the population to submitt to them.

They are off getting fucked by upper class cocksuckers in every dock they port in. They are off setting up similar Tory-friendly upperclass groups like Plane Stupid. They are off to Downing Street for canapes. I am not criticisng them since it that is what they do best nowadays, and nowadays who really needs them?

I've got a rich relative who funds them but hasn't heard of Sea Shepherd. My bad, I will rectify that mistake tommorow.