Azara Blog: Greenpeace takes the piss on global warming

Blog home page | Blog archive

Google   Bookmark and Share

Date published: 2005/10/08

The Financial Times says (subscription service):

Greenpeace will attempt to turn a prosecution of four of its environmental campaigners to its advantage next month by using the trial to justify attacks on gas-guzzling 4x4 vehicles.

Lawyers for four Greenpeace protesters arrested for handcuffing themselves to Land Rover sports utility vehicles in London will present expert evidence on global warming and argue the action was aimed at preventing an environmental catastrophe, and they should go free.

The four, who face possible jail sentences if found guilty of aggravated trespass, are using a defence known as "necessity", arguing that actions which might otherwise be criminal were to prevent the greater evil caused by global warming.

The case marks an escalation in the battle between the environmental movement and maker of sports utility vehicles, demonised by many green activists for their poor fuel economy. Yesterday an editorial in the British Medical Journal recommended SUVs should carry health warnings about the dangers they posed to pedestrians.

Mike Schwarz, partner at solicitors Bindman Partners acting for the four, said: "There is a very strong scientific argument and a very strong moral argument and a great urgency. For the sake of all of us, this sort of argument has to work legally too." The largest SUVs were being "mis-sold", with vehicles appropriate for off-road or country use being marketed in cities.

More pathetic grandstanding by Greenpeace, and their fellow travellers in the British Medical Journal (perhaps all doctors "should carry health warnings about the dangers they posed" to everybody, not just pedestrians). And Mr Schwarz is taking the piss. SUVs are not "mis-sold", most of them are completely inappropriate for off-road and country use, as he knows full well. And the busy bodies (including the so-called environmentalists) have been making the roads in urban areas impassable with "speed calming" measures, and so SUVs are if anything more appropriate for urban areas than most other cars.

And let's take this ridiculous argument about "necessity" to its logical conclusion. By this argument we should have the right to go into the offices of Greenpeace and smash their computers. After all, computers use electricity, and electricity generation is one of the biggest contributors to global warming. And animal rights nutters should have the right to terrorise anybody and everybody who does anything horrid to animals (e.g. eating them). And anti-abortion nutters should have the right to go around shooting anybody and everybody who has anything to do with abortions. Let's just give all fundamentalist nutters (including the so-called environmentalists) the right to go around and do whatever they want, all "for the sake of all of us". Funnily enough, these people never seek election, so in fact speak for nobody except for their own minor organisations.

All material not included from other sources is copyright For further information or questions email: info [at] cambridge2000 [dot] com (replace "[at]" with "@" and "[dot]" with ".").