Discussion on:

7
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Greenpeace Arctic
Should have just used fire hoses to wash them into the sea. What right of trespass do these illegals think they have?
Posted by pauc1
6th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Sad, but true.
If they had used fire hoses and someone got hurt they would sue and get millions from a sympathetic judge.
Posted by Hates Idiots
7th Jun 2011
0 Votes
+ -
Agreed... Yes... Firedrill!
The cold water would bring them to their senses.
Posted by GuntherGump
6th Jun 2011
+2 Votes
+ -
Hypocrites
Call me when they sail, not motor, hand hewn sailboats, with organic sails to their raids. Without oil, their little speed boats and the mother ship would not have got to the rig. It reminds me of a similar protest years ago against wood- cutting by local environmental activists. In the picture where all their evil gas powered 4 wheel drive vehicles they used to get to the protest. As usual, it's do as I say, not as I do with the watermelon crowd.
I do agree that BP needs to be watched, as they have one of the worst safety records, but GreenPeace's theatrics are over the top.
Posted by philwhite42@...
6th Jun 2011
-3 Votes
+ -
What are you guys even doing here?
Trolling Smartplanet spreading FUD on every article. These are the type of actions that get things changed. Kudos to Greenpeace for having the balls to make a difference!
Posted by shaunehunter
6th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Clowns.
With the intelligence found in UBL's house indicating oil rigs as a future targets these clowns are lucky they did not get shot.

I agree with phil. When they attack a rig from solar powered kayaks I'll be impressed. As long as they use oil products to fight big oil they are hypocrites.
Posted by Hates Idiots
7th Jun 2011
-1 Votes
+ -
They are playing you greenpeace
If I were running the rig security considering the vast loss of income & expenses greepeace would never have got near the rig let alone on board. This could easily be accomplished without hurting anybody using latest equipment which I have seen in operation, for less than hundred thousand pounds which is peanuts to them and can repel armed pirates from tankers. This begs the question WHY NOT? There are many people in the know employed by these companies who know much more than I do with unlimited funds. They want greenpeace to do these things otherwise they could not. the company is playing you, greenpeace should be very careful or its organisation will suddenly find it self the " baddies" with world option against them & loss of all funding, which would be a very bad thing for the planet.
Posted by ronangel
6th Jun 2011
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!