Greenprice

Indian Government Advised: Outlaw Greenpeace Funding By Foreign Interests

In a fresh report submitted to the Prime Minister’s Office and the national security advisor, IB has called for foreign donations to Greenpeace to be put on “prior category” list so that permission is taken before any money flows in for funding its activities, news agencies said on Wednesday.
The IB report also listed 12 foreign nationals who have been associated with some NGOs in their campaign against coal mines, power projects and nuclear power plants.

greenpeace_forsale.jpg

13 Replies to “Greenprice”

  1. So basically “Greenprice” has been designated as a terrorist organization…okay that’s logical…
    Now if Canada did that as well but including Tides, Forest whatever….and seized their assets.

  2. If Canada sued the USA State of California that headquarter these groups, using NAFTA; They may just win! Start with a caricature of “Crazy Horse Thomas Mulcair” in a Brown Shirt sitting on US green Backs, waving a Tomahawk & Hammer.

  3. We should have done that years ago. We also BTW should have ended diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia. Many SDA readers overrate the present federal government.

  4. An interesting thought Slap Shot. Can a foreign government (Canada) push for RICO charges in the US? I’m thinking that we should look for willfull misrepresentation by eco-luddite groups in court appeals like the animal rights groups did that led to them being successfully sued by the circus.

  5. I agree. It will not happen here. Our Conservative government has become too infected with the progressive side and would rather cave to these terrorists.

  6. Only white people are allowed to have power plants and the wealth that goes with them. Ask Greenpeace.

  7. The Harper government is well informed on the external funds coming into Canada to influence economic development and in Canadian politics itself. The environmental movement is simply a conduit for funds used to fight logging, oil & gas exploration, urban development and yes native land claims. Northern Gateway gets a lot of press but it is the tip of the iceberg.
    Are these funds being used with a environmental thrust as its core rationale? Or are these funds being used to determine who runs Canada and who sets the political direction of the country? I argue and suggest that foreign money is coming into Canada to establish the latter. It is well known that foreign money was used by the Democrats in the first Obama election. Lessons learned?
    Canadians as a rule do not step outside the box easily. The Harper government has done more to set a independent foreign policy than any government in generations. Admittedly much of this effort was forced by a indifferent or even hostile Obama government. Perhaps it is a natural evolution of a country that is long overdue. In any event such a development threatens the status quo. OPEC, Russia and the USA are threatened by Canada’s growing independence. The obvious problem with increasing Canadian oil production is the financial threat to OPEC and Russia. Canadian production might reduce their sales and reduce the price they might command. The USA is threatened by a richer Canada. It enables Canada to set a more independent foreign policy and allows Canada to diversify markets for Canadian exports. Resources within Canada might not be available to the USA or at prices the USA wants to pay.
    The threat of foreign money influencing the 2015 Federal election has to become an election issue. Those in Canada who receive these funds have to be exposed. If the Harper government does not jump on this issue then I suspect foreign money will be used to drive the media agenda during the campaign. The campaign will be dominated by a message not of the CPC’s choosing and will probably cost them the election.

  8. Good on Indian government.
    Perhaps some western politicians, purportedly representing the working stiffs. Should take a note, have a meeting get experts from the proletariat that has to balance what’s left over after taxes.
    Should at the least follow the Indian government in this case.

  9. “I suspect foreign money will be used to drive the media agenda during the campaign.”
    The media agenda is going to be determined by the fact that the media is chock-a-block full of Leftists, money sources notwithstanding.
    The CBC is a good example, who funds them again?

  10. Greenpeace is no longer an environmental organization. With their forays into the insurance business in China and other Asian Countries,they ARE the establishment as much as Swiss Re and British Petroleum.
    The suckers who support them will continue to give them their nickels and dimes,secure in the knowledge they are helping to save the planet,while at GP headquarters, management will continue to rake in the dough and take huge salaries and expense accounts.
    Is Greenpeace officially a part of Maurice Strong’s brave new world or am I being too cynical?

  11. Actually the civil plaintive would be the Pipeline Business office in Canada . They could claim Rico (NAFTA) in the same way Pickens did in suing Ontario over the Wind-Mill contracts.
    Or if Enbridge is sued they may follow the successful “Chevron” path in that they will counter-sue all the cockroaches.

  12. Green Peace is no different than a group like World Vision. They pretend to have a mission with a few Publicity stunts or cheap documentaries of others suffering. Others on phoney extinctions like polar bears. In reality they are just conglomerations that exist to take money for nothing to feed a bureaucracy of money hungry people who are self righteous. In different ways of course. The thing is these groups just care about their own pay checks in house. They are far from being charities or even political organizations. They do little & produce nothing. The head of World Vision last I heard was making 7 million a year with a private jet. What the heads of Greenpeace make is anyone’s guess.

  13. “Climate change” is a theory for which there is “no scientific proof at all” says the co-founder of Greenpeace. And the green movement has become a “combination of extreme political ideology and religious fundamentalism rolled into one.”
    Patrick Moore, a Canadian environmentalist who helped found Greenpeace in the Seventies but subsequently left in protest at its increasingly extreme, anti-scientific, anti-capitalist stance, argues that the green position on climate change fails the most basic principles of the scientific method.
    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/19/CO2-is-good-for-us-climate-change-is-bunk-greens-are-raging-extremists-says-Greenpeace-co-founder

Navigation