Oilsands and misinformation?

[Topaz]

While in Toronto, Harper says he going to correct the misinformation about the environment and the oilsands. This should be good. There are corporations now that they will boycott(lack of a better word) any other businesses that used fuel from the oilsands or dirty oil. If things do happen like it says in the article, then Canada trade could come to a standstill on some products. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/harper-defends-oilsands-misinformation-calls-them-overwhelming-204619610.html

[olp1fan]

Harper probably didn't see the irony in complaining about people spreading misinformation ..his party are experts at it afterall

[TimG]

This should be good. There are corporations now that they will boycott(lack of a better word) any other businesses that used fuel from the oilsands or dirty oil.

But they will happily use blood soaked oil from despotic regimes. It is crap like this that shows how morally bankrupt environmentalism is as a creed. Humans are a disease - the "nature" must be preserved in its "pristine state" for no reason other than it makes these big city intellectuals who don't have to work for a living feel better. It is disgusting. Edited December 17, 2011 by TimG

[olp1fan]

But they will happily use blood soaked oil from despotic regimes. It is crap like this that shows how morally bankrupt environmentalism is as

Western friendly despotic regimes who were put there by us

[TimG]

Western friendly despotic regimes who were put there by us

Why is that is relevant? The issue here is the anti-human phoney moralism of the enviromentalist creed.

[jacee]

Clean up the IMAGE of the tar sands?

Now where have I heard that before?

Oh ya ... that fraudster Bruce Carson ...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/12/11/weston-carson-lobbying.html

Once among Harper's most trusted aides, Carson has a long history of money problems dating back to 1980 when he was jailed and subsequently disbarred as a lawyer for stealing money from his clients. He was convicted of fraud again almost a decade later. Despite his background, Carson managed to work as a senior policy adviser in the PM's office until August 2008.

Headed think-tank funded by $15M government grant

That's when he left to head up a newly created Alberta-based think-tank, the Canada School of Energy and Environment, supposedly to help develop new sources of green energy. Located at the University of Calgary, the school was funded with a special $15-million grant from the Harper government. Carson was its first head.

Only weeks after his appointment was announced, Carson was seconded back into Harper's service as a senior adviser during the 2008 federal election campaign, and for several months after that, he was back working in the PM's office.

During that time, he appeared to have lobbied high-ranking bureaucrats to help him obtain a $25-million federal grant to establish another new research institute — Carbon Management Canada — which he would also go on to head.

That prompted Harper's then chief of staff, Guy Giorno, to write two letters to the federal ethics commissioner in an apparent attempt to contain any damage from Carson's actions.

Carson returned to his post as head of the Canada School of Energy in February 2009, changing the mandate of the organization from green energy research to public relations strategies aimed at cleaning up the image of the oil sands.

Ya right! ... Harper wants to clean up the IMAGE of the tar sands, not the operations themselves. He's already given a known fraud artist $40m in federal funds that was supposed to be for developing clean energy but instead was (fraudulently?) used for PR to improve the IMAGE of the tar sands.

Think Carson got the $40m and then just "changed the mandate" all by himself? I doubt it. I smell a dirty deal from the PMO.

Now Harper is going to dump more of our money into cleaning up the IMAGE of the tar sands ...

HEY HARPER! Why not spend some money on cleaning up the tar sands instead of just their IMAGE?

The IMAGE of the tar sands is bad because the tar sands are bad news. However, I think it was the offensive campaign against the Saudi people that really turned the world against them. Bad call, stupid arrogant ignorant campaign, made themselves look like redneck a$$holes, which appparently they are cos they don't seem to understand why it was a stupid thing to do.

So now we taxpayers are supposed to pick up the tab for damage control for their stupidity?

Clean up their IMAGE?

Not MY tax dollars!

The oil barons can go suck tailpipes.

They're so out of tune with reality and the rest of the world it's pathetic ... embarassing.

Edited December 17, 2011 by jacee

[Topaz]

Any of the MP's not for a better environment, especially, with the oil sand, must have money in oil stocks.

[TimG]

Any of the MP's not for a better environment, especially, with the oil sand, must have money in oil stocks.

Ah yes. In your delusional world people cannot support the oil sands because it is the morally correct thing to do. It must be because they hope to make a few bucks in their RRSPs.

This is one more example of moral bankruptcy of the environmental movement: the inability to understand that people who disagree with their prescriptions are standing up for a higher principle rather than personal gain .

Edited December 18, 2011 by TimG

[cybercoma]

How is it a moral stance to support the tar sands?

[TimG]

How is it a moral stance to support the [oil] sands?

The world needs oil. Whether you like or not. Canada needs to generate exportable products to maintain our lifesytle and social programs. It is quote immoral to say that the oil sands much be left in the ground which increases the price of oil, enriches despots and impoverishes Canadians.

[cybercoma]

The world needs oil. Whether you like or not. Canada needs to generate exportable products to maintain our lifesytle and social programs. It is quote immoral to say that the oil sands much be left in the ground which increases the price of oil, enriches despots and impoverishes Canadians.

Who said the oil sands have to remain in the ground? People are against destroying the environment. Theh oil sand companies can extract as much oil as they want, but they ought to be finding a way to do it that doesn't destroy the planet that sustains us.

[sharkman]

They are making improvements in the process, but environazis aren't interested in anything besides shutting down the whole oil industry. Cooler heads need to lead.

[olp1fan]

They are making improvements in the process, but environazis aren't interested in anything besides shutting down the whole oil industry. Cooler heads need to lead.

which is why the NDP and Greens will never be the government

[cybercoma]

They are making improvements in the process, but environazis aren't interested in anything besides shutting down the whole oil industry. Cooler heads need to lead.

If no one held their feet to the fire, they wouldn't do a damn thing and you know it.

[cybercoma]

which is why the NDP and Greens will never be the government

So it's ok to call the NDP and greens "Nazis", eh?

[olp1fan]

So it's ok to call the NDP and greens "Nazis", eh?

nah i wouldnt call them nazis the highlightinh had notta to do with that

i call them enviroterrorists

[Jack Weber]

So it's ok to call the NDP and greens "Nazis", eh?

Methinks he's got his idealogies mixed up...

[TimG]

Who said the oil sands have to remain in the ground? People are against destroying the environment. Theh oil sand companies can extract as much oil as they want, but they ought to be finding a way to do it that doesn't destroy the planet that sustains us.

And they are doing that. Suncor has developed a process that will eliminate 95% of the tailing ponds and allow land to be reclaimed after extraction. Many of the new projects are in situ which means the land is not disturbed and operators are working to reduce the consumption of fresh water.

But that stuff is irrelevant to most enviromentalists because they obsess about the phoney CO2 issue. I say phoney because the differential between CO2 emissions emitted from the oil sands vs. other sources is less than 15% when you look at the total amount of CO2 emitted by burning gas. It makes no sense to look at only the emissions during extraction and use that to black list certain sources. Much bigger reductions could be found by improving efficiency of engines.

[sharkman]

So it's ok to call the NDP and greens "Nazis", eh?

I'm not labeling them based on their politics, but based on their actions. People that are willing to put long spikes in trees waiting to be harvested so that mill workers get hit with an exploding saw blade or chain themselves to equipment so they'd get run over if it moved forward, those are the types that I refer to as environazis. It's just a term I picked up over the years and it fits the extremist well. I think these types are on both sides of the political spectrum, though mostly on the left.

The right has its whackos too. Those that shoot abortion docs or bomb clinics are way worse than environazis.

Edited December 18, 2011 by sharkman

[cybercoma]

Methinks he's got his idealogies mixed up...

I'm just poking fun at him because he got mad when another poster suggested that his arguments were similar to those used by the Third Reich.

[cybercoma]

I'm not labeling them based on their politics, but based on their actions. People that are willing to put long spikes in trees waiting to be harvested so that mill workers get hit with an exploding saw blade...

...are morons that should be charged with a crime.

[sharkman]

I'm just poking fun at him because he got mad when another poster suggested that his arguments were similar to those used by the Third Reich.

I think your memory is a little off, please remind me when another suggested that my arguments were similar to the Third Reich, and I became mad.

[cybercoma]

I think your memory is a little off, please remind me when another suggested that my arguments were similar to the Third Reich, and I became mad.

lol. I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about olp1fan being totally cool with your Nazi comment, when he lost it at another Nazi comment. Frankly, I don't really care who you call a Nazi. It's not the most accurate term, but that crap about the nails in the trees is definitely ecoterrorism.

[sharkman]

Oh, okay, I assumed again, and you know what that does!(make an ASS out of U and ME). Anyway, I don't use the term loosely as it is associated with some pretty sick people.

[waldo]

They are making improvements in the process, but environazis aren't interested in anything besides shutting down the whole oil industry. Cooler heads need to lead.

I'm not labeling them based on their politics, but based on their actions. People that are willing to put long spikes in trees waiting to be harvested so that mill workers get hit with an exploding saw blade or chain themselves to equipment so they'd get run over if it moved forward, those are the types that I refer to as environazis. It's just a term I picked up over the years and it fits the extremist well. I think these types are on both sides of the political spectrum, though mostly on the left.

you attempt to clarify your 'environazis' labeling by providing a lumber industry tree spiking reference... and yet you used the label in regards to the 'whole oil industry'.