Some how i think greenpeace are wrong

[Hagar]

It is alarmist and rather naive... and frankly, I worry more about what goes on inside nuke facilities than the possibility of a hijacked aircraft striking one.
There have been numerous mishaps, some quite devastating, and no aircraft (or terrorists) were involved in any of them. Food for thought.

I would have to agree there. The nuclear power industry seems to be its own worst enemy at times. If they would tell the truth about their activities & these mishaps intead of constantly hushing everything up there would be no need for people like Greenpeace using this type of propaganda.

After considering the alternatives I've reluctantly come to accept that nuclear power is the only practical option. This being the case the public deserves to be given the full facts including any risks before we go ahead & do it. Time to stop messing around.

[Woodlouse2002]

Aye... an F-4 is a tad different than a fully loaded 747 coming in at high speed. I'd be interested to know how the walls would stand up in best case scenario (for the terrorists), a plane scores a direct hit and doesn't have to go through anything... I'd be interested to see how the walls would hold up.

Look at it this way. If the F4 was atomised and the wall barely scratched then sure a 747 might do more damage, but not enough to breach it.

[Ijineda]

what a stupid piece of propaganda from greenpeace!

alright, terrorists could hijack a plane and crash it into some nuclear reactor, so we shouldnt build any...no skyscrapers as well, no antennas, hey maybe we should ban airplanes as terrorists could use them, ok done, hey what about car suicide bombers, alright cars are banned, hey did you think about fire? terrorists could burn something, ok no more fire.

[Flt.Lt.Andrew]

The problem is: you're all going about this incorrectly. You're saying oh evil greenpeace"GO THE MILITARY FUCK YOU GREENIES" kinda thing when they're trying to be a moderating voice. I mean sure I hate them too and they're little turds who get in the way, but if you elimate their voice what have you?

And we call ourselves democratic.



A.

[Katahu]

The problem is: you're all going about this incorrectly. You're saying oh evil greenpeace"GO THE MILITARY FUCK YOU GREENIES" kinda thing when they're trying to be a moderating voice. I mean sure I hate them too and they're little turds who get in the way, but if you elimate their voice what have you?

And we call ourselves democratic.



A.

You're right, the greenies deserve a voice. However, their voice won't be heard if they continue doing things that even people like you and me will obviously disagree on [like blowing things up and getting people killed or injured without reason].

[Tweek]

Their voice shouldn't be hard unless they can back up any sort of arguement with solid facts. Would an aircraft even be able to do any significant damage to a nuclear facility? I think not.

It's just another load of crap, making others believe that something like this is bound to happen.

edit: Just found this on their website, under 'Frightening Facts'.

"Nuclear energy won

[beefhole]

Andrew, that's not true and I hope you know it

There is legitimate reason to despise "the greenies," and when the hell did anyone mention that environmental issues aren't important or say anything about the military? This entire thread has been about how concerned everyone is with the environment! (and nothing was said about the military)

I'm really, really, really tired of the "free speech and democracy" argument being misused.  Please save it for when it's actually applicable.

[Craig.]

Andrew there is a differance between free speach and having a legitimate concern. I have all the time in the world for those who can calmly and rationally present an argument. These people are not able to do that, as evident by this commercial. They are unwilling to listen to reasonable arguments and will shout at a person trying to present a view differant to their own until they give up.
I think you are so sucked up in this anti-american trip that your unable to see this.

[eno]

Why are we all so ANTI GREEN ?
They have legitimate concerns which, although misguided at times, we should all take notice of.

Global climate change is a real posibility and should be treated as a high priority. I am of the opinion that nuclear power should be considered along with the other obvious alternatives.
Where the Greens go wrong is that they want it every way up. They want alternative sources of power but aren't willing to take the slight enviromental risk that might come from it ..... all alternative sources have some enviromental hit. Wind farms need land to be built..... usually in areas where the enviromentalists don't want them. I'm sure that they would have concerns about the placement of buoys for wave power and the list goes on.

Whilst I find the clip that started this thread alarmist and misguided, I happen to have a lot of respect for Greenpeace and some of their campaigns. I have been on the recieving end of some of their lunatic fringe and their antics. However I have also met some of their scientists and more sane activists. I've heard well reasoned arguments from them and discussed many topics.

So instead of dismissing them out of hand because of one rather silly film clip ...... keep your minds open and listen to all sides of the argument...... you might learn something new.

[Souichiro]

Couldn't have said it better ENO!

[C]

So instead of dismissing them out of hand because of one rather silly film clip ...... keep your minds open and listen to all sides of the argument...... you might learn something new.

To be fair, if that video clip is the face they want to present, then they are going to get comments as we have seen here. You'd question the position of anyone who sanctioned such a sensationalist approach at publicity, and you wonder at what mindset of person are they trying to appeal to.

[eno]

To be fair, if that video clip is the face they want to present, then they are going to get comments as we have seen here. You'd question the position of anyone who sanctioned such a sensationalist approach at publicity, and you wonder at what mindset of person are they trying to appeal to.

Whilst I find the video misguided it is chosen from the whole site ...... I wonder if the poster happened to read anything from the rest of the site, or just chose the video because it was on the front page.
If that video had been of aircraft crashing into the corporate headquarters of an oil company, pre 9/11, we would have all said it could never happen, we know better now. It could happen and the outcome is unknown because it has never happened.

Yes it's sensationalist but if it gets people interested in the site then it's doing it's job.
As I said in my post check the whole picture out rather than just the stupidly spectacular.

[Fly2e]

And I was waiting to see seals being clubbed in the background

[Craig.]

[quote]And I was waiting to see seal being clubbed in the background

[Woodlouse2002]

I've watched the video and I can see one vital flaw. No sane, self respecting family would go for a day out on the beach on the shores of the Bristol Channel.