Alison takes the MSM to task for being insufferably lazy with regards to Greenpeace "co-founder" Patrick Moore, suggesting that they ...
... mention that Moore's speaking engagement at that Chamber of Commerce luncheon was hosted by two Canadian uranium mining companies, that Moore's current cross-Canada tour is sponsored by TEAM CANDU, and that Moore is being paid to support nuclear power by the US Nuclear Energy Institute.
There's also the itty bitty issue about how Moore really isn't technically a "founder" or "co-founder" of Greenpeace:
Moore has claimed for years to be a founder of Greenpeace, an exaggeration of his actual role. Moore sailed on the first Greenpeace campaign, but he did not actually found the organization. According to Dorothy Stowe, an American Quaker, who immigrated to Canada in 1966 and founded Greenpeace with her husband Irving Stowe and other Canadian pacifists and ecologists, "Technically, Patrick Moore cannot be described as a founder of Greenpeace. He was there in early stages with a lot of others. But what he is doing now is unconscionable."
Hey, I know ... let's see who else is unspeakably sloppy and/or lazy with their research, shall we?
- Blogging Tories and "Patrick Moore"
- Blogging Tories and "Patrick Moore" founder Greenpeace
- Blogging Tories and "Patrick Moore" "Nuclear Energy Institute"
You must have seen that coming.
1 comment:
"Technically, Patrick Moore cannot be described as a founder of Greenpeace. He was there in early stages with a lot of others. But what he is doing now is unconscionable."
So he was an active member when greenpeace was first created and because they do not agree with what he is doing now, they do not count him as a co-founder? Isn't that like using the logic that Thomas Jefferson signed the Declaration of Independence but because I don't agree with him owning slaves, he wasn't a co-founder of America. Please find a better argument that makes sense.
Post a Comment