I missed this from The TimesOnline yesterday, reporting on Osama Bin Laden's latest video appearance on the anniversary of 9/11. A date which still makes me shudder, especially as I should have been in the World Trade Centre on the day of the attack; luckily (for me) my meeting was cancelled a few days beforehand.
Anyway, it would seem that the new Grecian 2000 enhanced version of the leader of Al-Qaeda is standing fair and square in the 'green lobby'.
"The life of all of mankind is in danger because of the global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations. Yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord".
I suppose that there's a first time for everything - I have to confess that I don't think I can recall ever agreeing with anything in a statement from an international terrorist before!
ADDENDUM - from Junkk Male
Guardian - Can we fight terrorism by reducing CO2 emissions?
Junkk.com promotes fun, reward-based e-practices, sharing oodles of info in objective, balanced ways. But we do have personal opinions, too! Hence this slightly ‘off of site, top of mind' blog by Junkk Male Peter. Hopefully still more ‘concerned mates’ than 'do this... or else' nannies, with critiques seen as constructive or of a more eyebrow-twitching ‘Oh, really?!' variety. Little that’s green can be viewed only in black and white.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
1 comment:
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.
Easy Tiger.
ReplyDeleteI saw this, too, and like you decided to give it a while in deference to those who suffered that day.
There has of course be a word around for a long time: 'eco-terrorist'.
And while I was never of favour of that being accorded some slack on the rather stretched notion that they were acting 'for' the planet, we should avoid giving Mr. Bin Loading any PR angle for his rather twisted notions of world order.
While the bald facts of what you quote there are reasonable, I very much doubt that was anywhere in his mind when he set on his path. Like so many, he has co-opted a worthy ideal and twisted it for some very dubious ends.
I have no doubt he would have this planet under a radioactive cloud to satisfy his nihilistic notions of a glorious afterlife, and anyone hitching to this wagon should be very careful... not that I imply for one second that is what you meant!
The fact is that a lot that is 'hurting' this planet may well be by the numbers of bods on it, and the consequences of their strivings.
A sad fact is that some terrorist activity, especially on the WMD scale, could knock the world back to a stone age that some would deem a correction.
I think most rational folk would see a more measured approach as being desirable for our kids' futures.