cybercoma Posted January 21, 2012 Author Report Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) The day the oil-sands battle went global [T]he environmental community is simply following the pattern of the international oil industry, which seeks to influence policy wherever it has operations. Edited January 21, 2012 by cybercoma Quote
ironstone Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 citation request Doesn't the Tides Foundation,based in the US,funnel money into Canada for lobbying? Quote "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell
Scotty Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 The oil industry is the driving force in our economy. Without it, we'd be an economic basket case. In a very real sense, those environmental groups trying to do away with the oil sands are trying to destroy Canada's economy. The big money coming in from the US is not a made-up fantasy and is hostile to our interests. I would be concerned if the government was NOT doing its best to ameliorate the propaganda campaign of these people. So the question I would have for you people upset at it is - why do you want Canada's economy to be destroyed? Globe and Mail Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
fellowtraveller Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 One of the best things about the 'ethical oil' is that it has given the left a new person to hate: Ezra Levant. He is the new Conrad Black, his name and very existence invoke throbbing veins in the forehead. A big problem for them with Ezra though is that he is hard to caricature and demonize without being overtly anti-Semitic. It;s a real bind. Quote The government should do something.
waldo Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 And what about the native groups in BC that have been paid big money by outside organizations to fight against the pipeline.citation requestDoesn't the Tides Foundation,based in the US,funnel money into Canada for lobbying? online annual reports and audited financial statements exist for both the U.S. and Canadian Tides... I look forward to you extending upon your implication, particularly in regards to, "native groups in BC that have been paid big money by outside organizations to fight against the (Gateway) pipeline" Quote
waldo Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 One of the best things about the 'ethical oil' is that it has given the left a new person to hate: Ezra Levant. He is the new Conrad Black, his name and very existence invoke throbbing veins in the forehead. A big problem for them with Ezra though is that he is hard to caricature and demonize without being overtly anti-Semitic. It;s a real bind. nonsense - buffoons are buffoons regardless of heritage/religious affiliation Quote
mentalfloss Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) It's kinda funny that Harper has to pump in so much money to manipulate the media, and yet there hasn't been some overwhelming change in public perception about the oilsands or pipelines. In fact, we haven't seen such successful environmental resistance to these sorts of projects.. well.. ever. I'm sure the environmentalists are paying lobbyists as well, but at least it isn't taxpayers dollars. Edited January 21, 2012 by mentalfloss Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 nonsense - buffoons are buffoons regardless of heritage/religious affiliation Pretty much.... And Ol' Ezzy certainly fits the bill... Although,I do agree with him about his stance on Human Rights Tribunals. I believe people like Ezra Levant should be able to make flaming jackasses out of themselves with impugnity!!! Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 Pretty much.... And Ol' Ezzy certainly fits the bill... Although,I do agree with him about his stance on Human Rights Tribunals. I believe people like Ezra Levant should be able to make flaming jackasses out of themselves with impugnity!!! I also agree. Yet on the other hand funding propaganda services is over the top with regard to spending issues. Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 I also agree. Yet on the other hand funding propaganda services is over the top with regard to spending issues. So is giving sweetheart tax breaks to foreign multinational oil companies and then complaining about foreign influence of "radicals" in environmental groups... It's the height of hypocrisy and was highlighted by the Enbridge funded(maybe?)EthicalOil spokestwit on P&P a few weeks ago... And this is coming from someone who would like to see the pipeline go through!!! Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 So is giving sweetheart tax breaks to foreign multinational oil companies and then complaining about foreign influence of "radicals" in environmental groups... It's the height of hypocrisy and was highlighted by the Enbridge funded(maybe?)EthicalOil spokestwit on P&P a few weeks ago... And this is coming from someone who would like to see the pipeline go through!!! Political lobby's will always attempt to influence the decision making process. Unless we want to ban them altogether then we will have to do things differently. Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) Political lobby's will always attempt to influence the decision making process. Unless we want to ban them altogether then we will have to do things differently. Absolutely... But one is not better than the other and the federal gov't should at least appear to be unbiased... This is clearly not the case here... Edited January 22, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 Absolutely... But one is not better than the other and the federal gov't should at least appear to be unbiased... This is clearly not the case here... That is true! I dream of the day where the government actually listens to the people instead of the power brokers. Quote
TimG Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 That is true! I dream of the day where the government actually listens to the people instead of the power brokers.I am curious how you decide what "the people" want unless you are simply using that as a short hand for "the government should always do what *I* want".There is nothing more annoying than political activists claiming they represent "the people" when they are really just another political lobby group representing a minority view. This goes for big oil, big green or big whatever. Quote
Scotty Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 I'm sure the environmentalists are paying lobbyists as well, but at least it isn't taxpayers dollars. Since contributions to charities are tax deductible, yes it is. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 That is true! I dream of the day where the government actually listens to the people instead of the power brokers. Harper has declared the pipeline, which will allow us to sell oil overseas, to be an economic necessity for Canada. I don't see any way to really disagree with that. Which means those 'people' you're talking about, are not going to convince anyone with more than half a brain. And the Liberals aren't in power... Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
CPCFTW Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) It's kinda funny that Harper has to pump in so much money to manipulate the media, and yet there hasn't been some overwhelming change in public perception about the oilsands or pipelines. In fact, we haven't seen such successful environmental resistance to these sorts of projects.. well.. ever. I'm sure the environmentalists are paying lobbyists as well, but at least it isn't taxpayers dollars. Don't confuse public perception with far left wing environmentalist's perceptions. As far as I know, the overwhelming majority of Canadians are supportive of these pipeline projects. Just because some radical environmentalists have hijacked these developments, does not mean the silent majority of the public is supportive of the loud radical minority environmentalists. Edited January 22, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 Harper has declared the pipeline, which will allow us to sell oil overseas, to be an economic necessity for Canada. I don't see any way to really disagree with that. Which means those 'people' you're talking about, are not going to convince anyone with more than half a brain. you had a similar nattering post a short while back... your narrow-minded, short-sighted, pigeon-holing follows the Harper narrative to a tee! Many of those opposed to the pipeline aren't opposed... to the pipeline. They're opposed to the Conservatives complete and total failure in working towards emission control requirements. They're opposed to the complete absence of required tarsands environmental monitoring, analysis, assessment and reporting. The pipeline... the tarsands, to many, are simply symbols of the Harper Conservatives lack of any semblance of action in working to meet even it's lamest of promised commitments... or the failure to even provide legitimate and required traditional tarsands environmental impact procedures. many of your described 'half a brain' opponents would be closer to accepting tarsands development... if... it was seen to be a part of a legitimate emission control strategy... if real efforts were being deployed as a part of the development - and its extended reach. Separate from emission concerns, looking at more traditional environmental impact aspects, just how do you expect "full brain" thinking Canadians to believe anything either the Alberta or Federal governments are saying in regards to the tarsands development? Until recently, there was a complete lack of any legitimate monitoring, analysis, assessment and reporting on tarsands environmental impacts... the lacking is still there; all that's been accomplished to date is a formalized recognition of the failures in monitoring/analysis/assessment/reporting... with (presumptive) plans to remedy the failures. And you expect everyone to get on board just because, as you say, "Harper has declared"? Quote
waldo Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 Don't confuse public perception with far left wing environmentalist's perceptions. yabut... it's not a left-right perception, no matter how hard you relish that narrative. Unless you're prepared to state, unequivocally, that there are no persons of a center-left, center, center-right or right-wing persuasion, opposed to the pipeline, to tarsands development. State it... solidify your narrative. Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) yabut... it's not a left-right perception, no matter how hard you relish that narrative. Unless you're prepared to state, unequivocally, that there are no persons of a center-left, center, center-right or right-wing persuasion, opposed to the pipeline, to tarsands development. State it... solidify your narrative. I just said that I believe the majority supports the pipeline. I believe that the majority who oppose the pipeline are far left wing environmentalists. There are certainly bound to be people of every political affiliation who oppose it though. But how could we ever measure the effect that the pro-ethical oil lobby has on the opinion of these marginalized individuals? You don't really make much sense. Edited January 22, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 22, 2012 Report Posted January 22, 2012 I just said that I believe the majority supports the pipeline. I believe that the majority who oppose the pipeline are far left wing environmentalists. There are certainly bound to be people of every political affiliation who oppose it though. But how could we ever measure the effect that the pro-ethical oil lobby has on the opinion of these marginalized individuals? You don't really make much sense. no - you didn't (initially) qualify your described "left-wing" opposition to be the majority... within the opposition. You've only now done so in your latest post. Next time you (and your ilk) throw out the 'half-brainers' labeling, make sure you recognize you're also labeling a significant number of Canadians, of all political persuasions. Quote
fellowtraveller Posted January 23, 2012 Report Posted January 23, 2012 nonsense - buffoons are buffoons regardless of heritage/religious affiliation Like I said..... Quote The government should do something.
CPCFTW Posted January 23, 2012 Report Posted January 23, 2012 no - you didn't (initially) qualify your described "left-wing" opposition to be the majority... within the opposition. You've only now done so in your latest post. Next time you (and your ilk) throw out the 'half-brainers' labeling, make sure you recognize you're also labeling a significant number of Canadians, of all political persuasions. It goes without saying that there will be people with different opinions on every topic throughout every political affiliation. You just like arguing for the sake of arguing. Quote
waldo Posted January 23, 2012 Report Posted January 23, 2012 It goes without saying that there will be people with different opinions on every topic throughout every political affiliation. You just like arguing for the sake of arguing. and your opinion on the majority... is just your opinion. latest Nanos Poll: Environment Trumps Prosperity for Oil Sands DevelopmentOur most recent poll revealed that, overall, Canadians believed that oil sands development had a net negative impact of 9 points on Canada’s reputation abroad. However there were striking differences from region to region. Likewise, the environment trumped economic prosperity in regards to importance. Not surprisingly, Quebecers were comparatively much more likely to believe oil sands development was hurting Canada’s international reputation (net impact of -35), while the opposite was true for Atlantic Canadians (net impact of +16). Ontarians were more equally divided on the impact on Canada’s reputation with a net impact of +1. Of note, Canadians in the West, where oil sands development occurs, were comparatively more likely to believe it hurt Canada’s reputation abroad (net impact of -7). Canadians were also asked to compare the importance of minimizing the environmental impact and maximizing economic prosperity when dealing with oil sands development. Canadians from across the country consistently placed greater importance on protecting the environment (mean of 4.24 out of 5) than they did on creating economic prosperity (mean of 3.71 out of 5). Quote
cybercoma Posted January 23, 2012 Author Report Posted January 23, 2012 the majority who oppose the pipeline are far left wingProve it.And even if it's true, and I have no clue whether it is or not, so what? If something is supported by a majority "far" right wing contingent, does that make in any less valid? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.