Stena Carron protest in Shetland - Greenpeace Esperanza

[crofter]

Is this simply that she was too big to tie up at the Greenhead base or at Dales Voe.

 

I wondered that too. Because if she can berth in Lerwick, why do they not slowly steam alongside and have the boys in blue waiting with the boltcroppers?

[sjeunson]

One question for whoever has the answer. Why was the Stena Carron anchored off Bressay anyway. Is this simply that she was too big to tie up at the Greenhead base or at Dales Voe. Or was it to avoid mooring fees?.

 

LPA website says max length alongside is 205m. Stena Carron is 227m. Don't know what draught she is at the moment but that could well be an issue too. Google is handy.

[Symbister]

IMHO Greenpeace activists - endangering people, property, and environment through their actions - are barely any different from terrorists, and should be treated as such.

 

(** mod edit - removed a poor taste comment - mind the T&Cs **)

 

Quoted at random, but pretty representative of some of what has been posted.

 

Jonathan Wills has said precisely what needed to be said. It is astonishing that folk in a community whose livelihood depends more than any other in the UK on a clean and unpolluted environment should lambast those who seek to hold to account those with the potential to destroy that livelihood.

 

Posts like the one above, and there have been worse, which I strongly suspect represent a minority view, really do give Shetland a bad name. If we're trying to sell high-quality, natural and sustainably-produced fish, lamb or anything else to a discriminating and intelligent customer base, not to mention attracting visitors, the sort of ignorance or blind prejudice displayed on Shetllink (and echoed, of course, in such random lunacies as shooting seals) is the route to marketplace oblivion. We may disagree on the morality of big oil but on a purely pragmatic level, we need to be a lot clearer about who our real allies are. They aren't Chevron.

[crofter-amy]

^^ the voice of reason.

[khitajrah]

IMHO Greenpeace activists - endangering people, property, and environment through their actions - are barely any different from terrorists, and should be treated as such.

 

(** mod edit - removed a poor taste comment - mind the T&Cs **)

 

Quoted at random, but pretty representative of some of what has been posted.

 

Jonathan Wills has said precisely what needed to be said. It is astonishing that folk in a community whose livelihood depends more than any other in the UK on a clean and unpolluted environment should lambast those who seek to hold to account those with the potential to destroy that livelihood.

 

Posts like the one above, and there have been worse, which I strongly suspect represent a minority view, really do give Shetland a bad name. If we're trying to sell high-quality, natural and sustainably-produced fish, lamb or anything else to a discriminating and intelligent customer base, not to mention attracting visitors, the sort of ignorance or blind prejudice displayed on Shetllink (and echoed, of course, in such random lunacies as shooting seals) is the route to marketplace oblivion. We may disagree on the morality of big oil but on a purely pragmatic level, we need to be a lot clearer about who our real allies are. They aren't Chevron.

 

Well said. Perhaps a poll could be added to this thread so we can see what the majority view is?

[Ghostrider]

....we need to be a lot clearer about who our real allies are. They aren't Chevron.

 

Quite, but they aren't Greenpeace either. Greenpeace maybe started out with a good idea and good intent, but they've become gung ho, glory hunting attention seekers who will only act when and where it suits them for self-serving ends.

 

Their present action is doing nothing to to change that perception, and if anything its helping to reinforce it. They may kid themselves that they are preventing the SC going anyplace, and they may even kid some of the people some of the time that they are preventing her going anyplace, but if she was ready to go they'd have already been removed, one way, or the other, and she'd have been gone. Money talks!

 

Clearly, by their continued presence where they are, they're inconveniencing Chevron very, very little. They can more or less ignore them, while GP uses the situation for a bit more money-milking publicity. A nice little cosy set up really.

[unlinkedstudent]

^^ Well, I have threatened to blow any Greenpeace members up nor, for that matter, any Shetlinkers holding a differing opinion to mine. It is, however, rather sad that some posters feel that they cannot contribute any further to this thread because others have opposing views.

 

I understand that Greenpeace are in favour of wind farms. I'd be very interested to learn of the current protestors' stance on the proposed Viking development, given that their current argument is the damage that drilling for oil can do to fragile coast lines, marine life, etc.

 

GR is correct - Greenpeace are no longer the same organisation they started off as many yonks ago - IMHO, this lot need a reality check.

[blue beetle]

symbister. If GP and Mr Wills had their way there would be no fishing , crofting or salmon farming. All thats left is oil and their not very keen on that either it seems. Other than to use tons of it to power their boats. What would the people of Shetland do without the above mentioned industrys.?

[glipper]

Exactly Blue Beetle i was over at a doo in the Bressay hall one night and while at the bar Jonathan Wills was at the end off the bar speaking to one off his side kicks saying if he had his way they would be no inshore fishing around Shetland ..That would have some affect on small communities like Whalsay and Burra infact all over Shetland but i dont suppose he gives a toss as his income would be ok...

[EM]

Why was the Stena Carron anchored off Bressay anyway. ... Or was it to avoid mooring fees?.

Nope. Lerwick harbour limits extend much further than the sheltered area. She is technically within the limits and charged accordingly.

 

The Esperanza, on the other hand, has decided to remain outwith the LPA's jurisdiction. She prefers to pointlessly burn diesel in order to save themselves paying LPA harbour dues. As seen in the smarmy video highlighted by Mattie, they seem to be quite keen on super packaged food too. Seems the lentils stereotype is being tackled

 

So they certainly can't make much claim to be supporting the local economy while here, even the press aren't bothering to turn up.

[Frances144]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/24/chevron-court-order-greenpeace-oil-protest

 

They now have a Court Order to remove the dangleberries.

[Northerly]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/24/chevron-court-order-greenpeace-oil-protest

 

They now have a Court Order to remove the dangleberries.

 

Bye bye Greenpeace, don't hurry back.

[EM]

Chevron is using a legal hammer to ...

And how, one wonders, is going through the correct legal channels the incorrect approach? If Chevron had decided to ignore the law, Greenpeace would have been squealing that they should be acting lawfully. Delusional messianic wannabees.

[Northerly]

This is the best bit:

 

"Chevron has told the court it needs to move its 225m vessel from its current mooring for safety reasons, because of the rough seas, Greenpeace said. The protesters said they were being hypocrites."

 

Excuse me???!!!! Who is it whos been charging around in RIB's burning petrol? Whos vessel has been trundling merrily up and down outsider harbour limits for the past few days burning diesel??!!

 

Lectures about hypocrisy from this lot? I don't think so.

[crofter-amy]

Alas not many have shown themselves in a possitive light in the whole debacle. GP is a victim of it's own success and has lost it's plot. Chevron...well there is no good light there, just greed. But worst of all has been the pittiful display of bullying and bad manners on this forum