1on April 7th, 997, in the northeast Atlantic, members of Greenpeace destroyed the offshore equipment of an oil and gas exploration ship. A Greenpeace member who participated in the operation said: "It is dangerous to destroy exploration equipment, but oil companies have not put climate issues above commercial interests, so we will do it for them."
On March 23, 2000, Greenpeace protesters broke into the waste transfer station in Hong Kong Island West. About 30 of them boarded a container ship carrying waste and staged a sit-in to protest the burning of waste in nearby Kennedy Town. However, the incinerator they protested was closed in 1994, and in 2000, Hong Kong did not use incineration to treat municipal solid waste at all. At that time, the ship Rainbow Warrior, which transported people from Greenpeace to Hong Kong, brought about 10 tons of gutter oil and 3 cubic meters of ordinary garbage, and it was up to Hong Kong taxpayers to pay for the Hong Kong government to deal with it.
On 20 1 1 February11,demonstrators in Greenpeace destroyed the fence of a Spanish nuclear power plant and climbed the cooling tower of the nuclear power plant, forcing the nuclear power plant to stop running urgently. This kind of emergency shutdown for nuclear power plants, as long as you are not careful, disasters will follow. Regardless of the safety of the local people and employees of the power plant, Greenpeace did this specially, holding them hostage, coercing the power plant to shut down, and subsidizing other new energy projects promoted by the government.
On 20th11July14th, demonstrators from Greenpeace broke into an experimental farm in Canberra, Australia. This farm has planted half a hectare of wheat, which can reduce the blood sugar coefficient, improve the intestinal health and improve the nutritional value. Because the wheat is genetically modified experimental wheat, the demonstrators in Greenpeace ignored the principle of "no infringement of property" and climbed over the fence of the farm to destroy it.
On 2011June 10, the Amsterdam District Court of the Netherlands issued a judgment and issued an injunction to Greenpeace members, demanding that they not interfere with Kane Energy's legitimate business on the Greenland coast. Previously, Greenpeace's boat had sailed under the company's offshore drilling platform and prevented the drilling platform from working normally. All this is because Greenpeace believes that "once an oil spill occurs in the Arctic, it will be impossible to clean it up", but Kane Energy Company has not announced the oil spill emergency plan.
On 2011July 2 1 day, members of Greenpeace were suspected of illegally destroying the property of CSIRO. On the morning of 2 1, Australian police raided and blocked the Sydney headquarters in Greenpeace, but no one was arrested. Crop Life condemned Greenpeace's attacks and destruction, saying that they hindered valuable scientific research. 1995, Greenpeace learned that Shell was approved to sink the abandoned Brentsbar oil storage platform into the North Sea. In the summer of that year, Greenpeace members occupied the oil platform in the sea between Britain and Norway, with the goal of preventing Shell from sinking or moving. The German branch of Greenpeace also proposed to extend the occupation period from several weeks to several months. From May to June of that year, the movement gained considerable momentum in Europe, especially in Germany. The local Shell gas station was even set on fire by demonstrators encouraged by Greenpeace.
In June, under great pressure, Shell announced that it would abandon the platform deep-sea treatment scheme. Subsequent independent investigation found that the Brentsba oil storage platform had been thoroughly cleaned before it was abandoned, and there was no toxic and radioactive waste claimed by Greenpeace except a pile of scrap iron. Although Greenpeace admitted his mistake, he still publicly stated that he would not change his position against Shell's deep-sea burial scheme. As early as 1987, the original Rainbow Warrior, which Greenpeace could not repair, sank into the New Zealand Bay and became an artificial reef. Burying Brent Spar oil storage platform with a large amount of scrap iron was described by Greenpeace as "Shell regards the North Sea as its own garbage dump"; When the Rainbow Warrior was buried, Greenpeace boasted that it was an "artificial island reef beneficial to marine ecology".
Although Greenpeace is not a terrorist organization, the ideological resources of eco-terrorist organizations are only 50 steps and 100 steps away from Greenpeace's extreme ideological trend of "human beings are dispensable on earth". Peter Liszt's research book Radical Environmentalism: Philosophy and Strategy mentioned that Greenpeace's films softened "the public's moral attitude towards extreme environmental behavior and increased their acceptance of' unconventional' environmental strategies." Believers in Greenpeace who accept this concept are more likely to believe in the creed of eco-terrorist organizations, that is, "it is nothing to set fire to and throw bombs at the highest wildlife and vegetation". In the book Eco-terrorism: Extreme Environmental Protection and Animal Liberation Movement published by Preeg Publishing House in 2006, it is mentioned that those eco-terrorists who are keen on arson, vandalism and violence are "often recruited from people with the same ideas as Greenpeace". Greenpeace not only violently destroys other people's private property, but also is often exposed as a liar. Greenpeace has always claimed that in the first 50 to 75 years of 2 1 century, more than half of the species on the earth will become extinct. However, Bjorn Lomborg, a scientist who has devoted himself to environmental protection for many years, mentioned in his book "Suspicious Environmentalist" that he has repeatedly publicly pointed out the mistake of this conclusion to Greenpeace: the most pessimistic estimate that can hold water scientifically is that only 0.7% of the species on the earth will disappear within 50 years, which is far from half. The head of Greenpeace Denmark has to admit that Bjorn Lomborg's work is being accepted within the organization, but the official biodiversity report of Greenpeace headquarters still insists on the original wrong argument. After the Norwegian media publicly questioned the Norwegian branch of Greenpeace, the head of the Norwegian branch of Greenpeace had to hold a press conference to accept the accusation and declare "the data before reassessment", but at the same time said: "If most people don't believe that the world will face ecological disasters at any time, then they will not take environmental organizations seriously." In other words, Greenpeace lied about the fate of the earth, so don't be too picky about how credible their views are.
In 2007, a study funded by Greenpeace and completed by Serraglini, a Frenchman, claimed that Monsanto's transgenic rice MON863 would have adverse effects on some physiological indexes of experimental mice. Two years later, the same research team tried to prove that MON8 10, another genetically modified rice from Monsanto, would also damage the health of laboratory mice. After the publication of these two studies, an expert group composed of six scientists from different fields published a paper in Food and Chemical Toxicology, pointing out that Seraglini himself did not do any experiments, but selectively quoted some experimental data published by Monsanto with prejudice, and adopted the wrong statistical method and reached the wrong conclusion. Since then, the European Food Safety Agency and the Australian Food Standards Agency have also rejected Serraglini's paper. At 9 o'clock in the evening of April 1 1 April, 2065438, Yun Lai, senior project director of Greenpeace China, and other three people sneaked into the experimental field of rice base of Huazhong Agricultural University in Lingshui, Hainan, and stole rice materials, which were captured by the teachers and students of the base. Greenpeace, as an internationally renowned non-governmental organization, has made such a bottomless theft of experimental materials. No matter for what purpose, this blatant violation of national laws should be severely condemned and punished by law.
At about 9: 40 pm that day, Master Lai, the doorman of the base, found someone stealing materials in the experimental field. At this time, the researchers rushed out of the base and caught a man and a woman in the afternoon. "There are two people coming from our ridge, and there is another person in the distance. It is very obvious that the woman hid the stolen materials in her clothes. " Jasmine Zhang Road said. The staff of the base found three self-sealing pockets the size of B5 paper, which contained seeds and leaves. Yan Jianbing said that at first, the three unidentified people refused to disclose their units. However, under the repeated questioning of the staff, the other party said: "We are green and peaceful, how did we come!"
After Yan Jianbing published his blog post, the client Yunlai and his Greenpeace successively responded in Weibo. Among them, Greenpeace claimed that the organization did send people to the rice base to take action, but only if there were problems in the rice breeding base itself. In Weibo, the organization called the act of obtaining rice leaves and ears an "unannounced visit". It is worth noting that Yan Jianbing pointed out in his blog post that Greenpeace and his party "came from our ridge", while Greenpeace said that "they didn't enter the fence". Finally, after being questioned by netizens several times, I admitted that my staff did "sample" at the breeding base and said that this was "the need for investigation".
On May 5, 20 14, the Ministry of Agriculture issued the Notice of the General Office of the Ministry of Agriculture on Preventing the Loss of Genetically Modified Experimental Materials to all genetically modified R&D units across the country, demanding that "the loss and malicious spread of genetically modified materials should be strictly prevented, and the core scientific research secrets and germplasm resources in China should be prevented from being stolen, causing irreparable losses to the country". Yan Jianbing believes that the notice document of the Ministry of Agriculture is of great positive significance to the promotion of the whole incident. According to him, the National Security Bureau has been involved in this matter to conduct a comprehensive investigation, and the progress and results of the investigation still need to wait. But there is no doubt that once the experimental materials in this incident are classified as national scientific research secrets, the people involved will be seriously dealt with by the relevant departments for stealing state secrets and bear legal responsibility. Zhu Zhen, a researcher at the Institute of Genetics and Development of China Academy of Sciences, interpreted the document issued by the Ministry of Agriculture. He mentioned that Greenpeace is an overseas organization, and the nature of stolen rice materials has been clearly defined in the documents of the Ministry of Agriculture. In addition to the problem of theft itself, it also conflicts with the laws of some countries. Similar incidents have occurred abroad, and the authorities have filed a case for investigation. At the same time, strict measures have been taken against the parties, such as restricting exit and monitoring behavior. Compared with the reaction of relevant departments in China, Zhu Zhen believes that our relevant departments will spend a long time to investigate, but in the end, we will take decisive measures and deal with it seriously. Greenpeace has been criticized by the government, industry and even other environmental organizations. It was bombed by French special forces and was arrested for minor crimes such as trespassing. The organization's management mechanism and its non-violent direct actions (some social unrest considered illegal, such as demonstrators chained their own and Nestle's trucks and blocked their factories) are the main sources of controversy. On the other hand, some people think that Greenpeace is too mainstream. Paul watson, the leader of sea shepherd conservation society, once called her "Miss Avon of the environmental movement". They went door-to-door to raise money, and one of them relied on the deliberate exposure of the media. The media always put Greenpeace's name on the front page to increase the exposure.
Sometimes, Greenpeace exaggerates to achieve his goal. 1in the autumn of 975, Greenpeace took a reporter group to shoot the "cruel shot" of Eskimos hunting seals. Robert Hunt, then chairman of Green Action, once pointed out, "If hunting is not prohibited, Greenland seals will be extinct within five years." With the hype of news media and the support of European and American movie stars and politicians, 1983, the European Parliament was forced to announce the ban on the sale of baby leopard skins in Europe, which led to the collapse of the whole seal fur market. But the chairman of the Canadian Wildlife Fund said: "We are not worried about the extinction of Greenland seals." Humanitarian agencies commissioned to investigate also found that the method of hunting seals was not inhuman. Hunters in Canada's Arctic Circle committed suicide in 1 1 because they lost their livelihood.
Greenpeace's two critics are Icelandic filmmakers Magnus Gudmundsson and Patrick Moore. Gwyz Monzon is the director of Living in the Arctic, a documentary supporting whaling. He is concerned about the social impact of anti-whaling and seal hunting. Moore is the former president of the International Greenpeace, dedicated to protecting British Columbia's forests. Greenpeace's supporters say that Gwitz Munderson and Moore, like many critics, have made considerable returns from related industries. Sometimes, the scientific or factual basis of a movement will be criticized, especially the Brentsba oil platform incident. In this incident, Greenpeace waged a successful struggle. They occupied Brent Spar and achieved a boycott, forcing Royal Dutch Shell, the owner of the platform, to dismantle the platform instead of drilling holes in it. Later, it was generally believed that from the perspective of environmental protection, Shell also had the right to drill holes there. Greenpeace is unilaterally concerned about the quantity of oil and the unconfirmed pollution that may be left in buildings.
In September 2003, Public Interest Watch (PIW) complained to the Ministry of Internal Revenue that Greenpeace's tax revenue was inaccurate and illegal. PIW said that Greenpeace replaced charitable and educational purposes with non-profit donations. PIW wants the IRS to investigate this complaint. Greenpeace denied the accusation and asked PIW to disclose its foundation members. Mike Hardiman, executive director of PIW, rejected this request. Greenpeace's status as a Canadian charity organization was revoked from 1989. In March 2006, Fang wrote an article for Beijing Science and Technology News on the occasion of 3 15 Consumer Rights Protection Day, questioning that the organization's research against genetically modified foods was in the name of environmental protection and hindered the scientific reality.
Patrick Moore, former chairman of Greenpeace, mentioned in many articles and speeches that his former colleagues now "completely reject the mainstream political ideology and the trend of sustainable development, preferring to continue confrontation and increase radicalism rather than dialogue. They brought the environmental movement into an era dominated by zero tolerance and extreme left-wing thinking. "
Greenpeace members caught in environmental activism regard human beings as the cancer of the earth, and they admire Herb Hammer's words: "Of all the components of the ecosystem, only human beings are completely dispensable." These people are also anti-technology. All big machines are considered inherently harmful, and technology can only endorse things that are completely useless. Greenpeace is also anti-trade, not just free trade, but all trade. All enterprises, big or small, are the embodiment of greed, evil and corruption. The Natural Forest Network, an organization with good relations with Greenpeace, publicly declared that "it is necessary for the world to adopt the strategy of gradual and complete elimination to eliminate the consumption-based capitalist system". In a word, Greenpeace's aim now is to oppose all the achievements of human civilization and hope to establish a green utopia in the form of Eden. In their eyes, from chemistry to food, all industries are "devil elements" and should be eliminated; From Apple computers to canned tuna and mineral water bottles, they are all useless things that are toxic and harmful for thousands of years.