Greenpeace Vandalizes HP Corporate HQ

Kaitian

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
4,870
I forget to mention that I'm fine with euthanizing animals but people have to make an effort to put them up for adoption. There are protocols especially with the Humane Society which they do euthanize animals who have not been taken in after a certain period of time. It's sad and unfortunate but they don't have the budget to keep them around so they do their best to help all animals get away from actual cruelty and into a better environment. PETA on the other hand views domesticated ownership as cruelty. Even their forum which is non-existent now reflected those insane people's ideology.

PETA should fuck off and be rid of their exempt status.
 

Azhar

Fixing stupid since 1972
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
18,876
Explain the logic you used to come to the conclusion that I support terrorists. My post didn't even indicate that I support PETA or Greenpeace (which I don't) but you somehow came to that conclusion. Probably because you're an idiot.

nilepez is absolutely right on the methods. You're all bitching about vandalism, but none of you would be up in arms if it happened to the RIAA. You've got an issue with the group, not the method.

Yeah that's why everyone was against Jamie for being stupid in court when the RIAA went after her. :rolleyes:

We're capable of thinking, believe it or not.
 

Ockie

*** Self Proclaimed Storage King ***
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
17,992
Explain the logic you used to come to the conclusion that I support terrorists. My post didn't even indicate that I support PETA or Greenpeace (which I don't) but you somehow came to that conclusion. Probably because you're an idiot.

nilepez is absolutely right on the methods. You're all bitching about vandalism, but none of you would be up in arms if it happened to the RIAA. You've got an issue with the group, not the method.

Bullshit.

You are bitching because someone accused you of something blindly... now you accuse all of us blindly under some gross assumption. Kettle, say hi to pot.

A crime is a crime, vandalizing or terrorizing is not a way to get attention.
 

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
19,251
HP should publish the amount of toxic chemicals used to clean this up, along with the "carbon footprint" the cleanup created, and give Greenpeace the credit for all the additional pollution....

this idea rules!
 

Dzero

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
246
Greenpeace is nothing more than a disgusting organization full of criminals.
 

OmegaAvenger

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
3,240
greenpeace begged me for money when i was broke and out of a job at school (grandma loaned me the money), even after I told them I was broke, showed them my empty wallet, they wanted my CC number. I told them to fuck off. Fuck greenpeace.
 

Jaerb4

Gawd
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
914
Bullshit.

You are bitching because someone accused you of something blindly... now you accuse all of us blindly under some gross assumption. Kettle, say hi to pot.

A crime is a crime, vandalizing or terrorizing is not a way to get attention.
Sorry, I overgeneralized. Many of you wouldn't, though.

Yeah that's why everyone was against Jamie for being stupid in court when the RIAA went after her. :rolleyes:

We're capable of thinking, believe it or not.
Even in the Jamie threads there's people jumping on the RIAA, and she surpassed the stupidity of this GP stunt by miles. It's actually pretty impressive that they did the 's's so well.
 

TechieSooner

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
7,601
Fact: They committed a crime

/end_of_story

I hope everyone involved gets jailtime, personally. Or at least hefty fines. Greenpeace is ridiculous, all they do is break laws. Hurting their cause more than helping it.
 

moetop

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
1,471
Well, PETA is one thing which I'm opposed to their lunacy which they try to enforce on our lives. Such as they believe in exterminating all domesticated animals (which includes your dogs, cats, etc). Fuck them and I will not give up my best friends (my sweet dog & cat) to satisfy their ego. I take care of my own animals way better than had them been subjected to any kind of cruel nature out there.
.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/06/23/EDG11DC9BK1.DTL
You're wrong on that. They've killed thousands of animals on their own by claiming that they were taking them in and giving them up for adoption when they do jack shit. It's bullshit PR by them. All of the animals they've killed would have been placed with good people but they don't give a shit about that. They rake in the money and do fuck all. The money is better off going to the Humane Society, ASPCA, etc. Those fucking people are nuts through and through.

I forget to mention that I'm fine with euthanizing animals but people have to make an effort to put them up for adoption. There are protocols especially with the Humane Society which they do euthanize animals who have not been taken in after a certain period of time. It's sad and unfortunate but they don't have the budget to keep them around so they do their best to help all animals get away from actual cruelty and into a better environment. PETA on the other hand views domesticated ownership as cruelty. Even their forum which is non-existent now reflected those insane people's ideology.

PETA should fuck off and be rid of their exempt status.

I am not wrong in what I said. You said that "Such as they believe in exterminating all domesticated animals (which includes your dogs, cats, etc)." and "PETA on the other hand views domesticated ownership as cruelty. " . You link says nothing to support your statements, and PETA's official statement on their web site which I quoted, supports the idea that Domestic ownership is a good thing "for people to adopt animals (preferably two so that they can keep each other company when their human companions aren't home) from pounds or shelters". They want you to adopt more than one!

I don't like PETA, and them killing animals that they took in is not good. They did not kill all the animals. They did have some of them adopted (%14 per your article) They would have killed them all per your statement "believe in exterminating all domesticated animals ". Not knowing what you are doing concerning sheltering and adoption, and having different priorities with your money is not a good thing. If they took the money they have and put it to proper shelter and adoption the animals would be a lot better off, but there official stance as a organization is not the extermination of all domesticated animals. I have no doubt that you can find an Individual that is a PETA member that believes that, but as an organization that is not there official stance, nor do I believe that the majority of members believe that killing an animal is better than having them adopted, they just aren’t doing it right, nor will they will probably ever. Once again I ask to show something that shows support for your following statements.

Such as they believe in exterminating all domesticated animals (which includes your dogs, cats, etc).

PETA on the other hand views domesticated ownership as cruelty

If these statements were true there adoption rate would be 0 and they would not advertize that adopting more than one animal was preferable.
 

TechieSooner

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
7,601
Here's a thought. Why doesn't PETA kill the animals like lions that kill other animals like Zebras?
 

collegeboy69us

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
5,256
A real measure on the test of their values is if someone did the exact same thing to their headquarters how would they react? 100 dollars says they would be howling for justice, and how their rights were trampled, and all that hippy non sense.

PETA is just a cult of small minded people that have nothing better to do, kinda like those over zealous preachers who are always asking for donations.

PETA, religious people, whoever can belive in anything they want to believe I won't try to stop you. However if you feel the need to commit a crime just to make a point, isnt' that point automatically negated?

Much like everyone else here -- if I was ever accosted by peta/greenpeace freaks, I would make it a mission to go and eat MORE animals, or just cruise around town in my 7.0L LS7, gunning the engine at stoplights.
 

Azhar

Fixing stupid since 1972
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
18,876
Sorry, I overgeneralized. Many of you wouldn't, though.


Even in the Jamie threads there's people jumping on the RIAA, and she surpassed the stupidity of this GP stunt by miles. It's actually pretty impressive that they did the 's's so well.

As they say, a polished turd is still a turd. RIAA were still being greedy, but Jamie didn't help anything by lying to the judge.

Two wrongs don't make a right.
 

snowden

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
188
Ahahahhaha!!! That's hillarious!

If I were the judge in charge of this case I'd rule that HP gets to take some contingent of it's employees over to Greenpeace's HQ and paint whatever they want on top!

And why are some people getting their panties in a bunch over what looks like a drunken frat prank (and probably is...)? Like this prank is actually going to make any of us stop and go "oh, HP does use hazardous materials!" Really Greenpeace? They use hazardous stuff in PCBs? Shock.
 

Kristofff

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,303
ITT: We ignore the fact that this instance of vandalism is hilarious and awesome and instead we circle-jerk together like idiotic rednecks, screaming about "tree huggers" and "hippies", happy that we have our own little Jews to ignorantly demonize.
 

dr.stevil

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
9,157
ITT: We ignore the fact that this instance of vandalism is hilarious and awesome and instead we circle-jerk together like idiotic rednecks, screaming about "tree huggers" and "hippies", happy that we have our own little Jews to ignorantly demonize.

pot, meet kettle ;)
 

Lith1um

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
2,906
All of them should follow the lead of Eva Braun and Hitler. They should all meet in the park for a big group hug, then all bite the capsule simultaneously.
 

Kaitian

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
4,870
I am not wrong in what I said. You said that "Such as they believe in exterminating all domesticated animals (which includes your dogs, cats, etc)." and "PETA on the other hand views domesticated ownership as cruelty. " . You link says nothing to support your statements, and PETA's official statement on their web site which I quoted, supports the idea that Domestic ownership is a good thing "for people to adopt animals (preferably two so that they can keep each other company when their human companions aren't home) from pounds or shelters". They want you to adopt more than one!

I don't like PETA, and them killing animals that they took in is not good. They did not kill all the animals. They did have some of them adopted (%14 per your article) They would have killed them all per your statement "believe in exterminating all domesticated animals ". Not knowing what you are doing concerning sheltering and adoption, and having different priorities with your money is not a good thing. If they took the money they have and put it to proper shelter and adoption the animals would be a lot better off, but there official stance as a organization is not the extermination of all domesticated animals. I have no doubt that you can find an Individual that is a PETA member that believes that, but as an organization that is not there official stance, nor do I believe that the majority of members believe that killing an animal is better than having them adopted, they just aren’t doing it right, nor will they will probably ever. Once again I ask to show something that shows support for your following statements.

If these statements were true there adoption rate would be 0 and they would not advertize that adopting more than one animal was preferable.
However there is a dedicated site to talking about PETA which is PETAkillsanimals and they have this PDF filed by PETA themselves. In that document they only managed to only adopt 12 animals and killed off the rest.
www.petakillsanimals.com/downloads/PetaKillsAnimals.pdf

While you're going ahead and talking about their site which is again PR Bullshit but they do not practice what they preach or encourage to do publicly especially with that PDF I linked. They do that crap to milk money from people, nothing more. Also the article I linked is an old one but the PDF is filed this year and is a huge jump in killing animals. So they went from 14% adoption to only 12 animals given out for adoption. They do believe in exterminating domesticated animals. They even ran a campaign called "Are Animals the New Slaves?" It's pretty damn obvious what they meant by that. Newkirk is still the president of PETA and whatever her views are, PETA reflects. The article I linked you exactly shows you that.

I consider myself to be quite knowledgeable about animals and their conditions but PETA's rationale in the past has been to kill these animals because they were too far "broken" to be adopted when that's bullshit. Most animals that have been rescued from horrible conditions are suited just fine for a domesticated environment. The rest however are not and have to be put down by law.

You know that polar bear, Knut, that was rejected by his mother? Well the german zoo which took care of him and raised him up. Guess the geniuses that called for his death? PETA through their spokesman, Frank Albrecht.

Here's a bunch of bullshit quotes by Newkirk.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ingrid_Newkirk

I'm not interested in any defense of PETA. They actively seek the end of all domesticated ownership. You're citing right from their site and like I said, it's just PR bullshit to milk more money from politicians.
 

moetop

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
1,471
What do you mean by "exterminating" in your original statement? We may be on the same page.

Such as they believe in exterminating all domesticated animals (which includes your dogs, cats, etc).

If you mean, if they could collect all of the domesticated animals in north America and kill them, then you haven’t shown me anything that proves that.
 

Ockie

*** Self Proclaimed Storage King ***
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
17,992
What do you mean by "exterminating" in your original statement? We may be on the same page.



If you mean, if they could collect all of the domesticated animals in north America and kill them, then you haven’t shown me anything that proves that.

Systematically. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out on their views. A simple reading on their agenda quickly makes this clear.
 

fatrat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 31, 2000
Messages
6,838
Funny? Awesome? How about vandalism, tresspassing, breaking and entering, dangerous, and childish. How fun and aswsome do you suppose it is to the people who will have to clean it up? Would if be fun and awesome if someone who disagreed with you did something similar to your house or your car?

Not condoning what they did, but childs paint washes off with water. 20 minutes with a hose should be enough to wash off the whole top of the building IMHO.

They wasted more time creating the stunt than HP will spend getting rid of it.
 

fatrat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 31, 2000
Messages
6,838
I disagree with their methods in this particular case, but I would caution anyone from cavalierly labeling groups like Greenpeace as "terrorists?" Beyond the connotation associated with that designation, the US government has passed laws like the Animal Enterprise Protection Act that make certain, seemingly benign actions by activist groups felonies and allow the government to prosecute them as domestic terrorists. If you want a particularly egregious example, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHAC_7#SHAC_7. In that case vegan activists who were protesting an animal testing facility each recieved multiple year jail sentences for running a website about their protest and suggesting therein that fellow minded activists send Hunington Labs "black faxes" (ie take a few sheets of black paper, tape them end to end, then send an endless fax to your target wearing out their toner and tieing up their fax line).

You mean these guys? :mad:
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
its still illegal. even tho id be happy if someone did hte same thing to the RIAA/MPAA, its illegal so they would still deserve to be prosecuted.

That's not what Steve said. What he said was that it was actions like these that make make people dislike GP.

I never said that the action is legal. Nor did I say that the people who trespassed and painted the roof shouldn't be prosecuted.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
Honestly it is long past time to arrest most of the members of these organized crime syndicates and terrorist supporting organizations and disband them permanently. Activism is what we had in the 60's and 70's, these people aren't activist, they are criminals and terrorists and should be treated as such.

Terrorists? Really? Have we really lowered the bar so far that painting a roof is terrorism?

And FYI, activism in the 60's and 70's would have far surpassed your below sea level bar for terrorist by a few miles, never mind those tea dumping terrorists that founded the U.S.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
You send people to jail as pedophiles for sending naked pictures of themselves yet you allow these terrorist scum to walk among free people?
Your country is fucked up.

If this was terrorism, then kids that send naked pictures of themselves are too. GP terrorized HP and the kids are terrorizing parents and others opposed to nakedness.

It's official terrorist = "someone that doesn't something, which may be illegal, that I don't agree with"

In short, the kid who shoplifts a twinkie is terrorizing Safeway. The car that ran a red light is terrorizing everyone that had a green light. They're all terrorists and should be treated as such. :rolleyes:
 

Dekoth

Gawd
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
891
Terrorists? Really? Have we really lowered the bar so far that painting a roof is terrorism?

And FYI, activism in the 60's and 70's would have far surpassed your below sea level bar for terrorist by a few miles, never mind those tea dumping terrorists that founded the U.S.

No, this is just organized crime on this singular incident. However do any real reading on these organizations and it doesn't take a genius to see the true face of these groups.

What was done at the boston tea party has utterly nothing to do with the tactics these groups use. You cannot even compare acts intended to protest tyranny against a group of citizens to acts committed in the name of the environment. That is so far of a stretch I question the sanity of anyone who would even try to make that argument.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
No, this is just organized crime on this singular incident. However do any real reading on these organizations and it doesn't take a genius to see the true face of these groups.

What was done at the boston tea party has utterly nothing to do with the tactics these groups use. You cannot even compare acts intended to protest tyranny against a group of citizens to acts committed in the name of the environment. That is so far of a stretch I question the sanity of anyone who would even try to make that argument.

The act was illegal. Based on the posts on this thread, it's clear that many seem to think an illegal act by a group they don't agree with is a terrorist group.

If you jaywalk in protest of crosswalk lights that are too short, you're a terrorist....that's how low the bar is in this thread.
 

Azhar

Fixing stupid since 1972
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
18,876
The act was illegal. Based on the posts on this thread, it's clear that many seem to think an illegal act by a group they don't agree with is a terrorist group.

If you jaywalk in protest of crosswalk lights that are too short, you're a terrorist....that's how low the bar is in this thread.

It was the government and other environmental groups that labeled as Greenpeace borderline eco-terrorists.

Even the former Canadian Greenpeace ecologist left them because he found them becoming too political, radical and extremist with no scientific backings (source)
 

Kristofff

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,303
Yes, but people shouldn't be screaming about terrorism and offing heads in relation to a vandalism without explaining their ranting.

Actually, I'd prefer it if no one used the term "terrorism" because it has become a fucking meme of our day and no longer means anything.
 

TechieSooner

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
7,601
It was the government and other environmental groups that labeled as Greenpeace borderline eco-terrorists.

Even the former Canadian Greenpeace ecologist left them because he found them becoming too political, radical and extremist with no scientific backings (source)

I'd agree... I'd support the term eco-terrorist.

But a regular terrorist, they're not... Just major PITA that pull stunts and piss everyone off.
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
567
Folks who think this is terrorism or some other kinda of bologna of that sort....what about your Boston Tea Party?

I know it'd be illegal and all these days(under your Patriot Act)...but is that not a big part of your history? Rebelling against the imperialist oppressor?

I'm going to assume that everyone ignored this because of how ridiculous it sounded, but...really? Boston Tea Party = vandalizing a company's HQ?
 

Kristofff

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,303
I'm going to assume that everyone ignored this because of how ridiculous it sounded, but...really? Boston Tea Party = vandalizing a company's HQ?

Are you that guy who throws a fit when anyone compares modern injustices and abuse of the laws to the historical movements of the past?
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
It was the government and other environmental groups that labeled as Greenpeace borderline eco-terrorists.

Even the former Canadian Greenpeace ecologist left them because he found them becoming too political, radical and extremist with no scientific backings (source)

Nevertheless, this was not an act of terrorism and those that painted the roof cannot possibly be considered terrorists based on this or similar acts.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,806
I'm going to assume that everyone ignored this because of how ridiculous it sounded, but...really? Boston Tea Party = vandalizing a company's HQ?

Of course you're correct. The Boston residents boarded a private ship and destroyed it's cargo (Tea), while the GP vandals applied water soluble paint to the roof of a privately owned building.

Just because you agree with the reasoning behind one act doesn't mean the law was not broken. Just because you disagree with the reasoning behind the other doesn't make the perpetrators terrorists.
 

greenman

Gawd
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
586
What is this.. the 70's?
Peace love and hug a tree?

If HP really is making "hazardous products", then, I didn't think I'd ever say this but, HP is awesome!! :D

(this post contains toxic products)
 

Dekoth

Gawd
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
891
The act was illegal. Based on the posts on this thread, it's clear that many seem to think an illegal act by a group they don't agree with is a terrorist group.

If you jaywalk in protest of crosswalk lights that are too short, you're a terrorist....that's how low the bar is in this thread.

Some have, however I have not. I was very clear that this particular incident is not an act of terrorism, merely the act of organized crime.

Nevertheless, this was not an act of terrorism and those that painted the roof cannot possibly be considered terrorists based on this or similar acts.

Correct, however they are still affiliated as a group and said group condones, supports and perpetuates acts of terrorism in the name of their cause. That is why my stance is, the groups as a whole should be disbanded forcefully and many members arrested and prosecuted as such.

Another example of these groups is the mentioned Whale War's playing on Animal planet. I literally had bile in my throat when I saw this being glorified on television by animal planet. While I do not in any way condone the acts of the Japanese whalers, the solution is not to commit acts of blatant piracy against them. The fact that it is put in animal planet as anything other then what it is, is utterly revolting. Every single member of that crew should be arrested in the spot when they come into port and tried as pirates under international law since their acts are committed in international waters.
 

Kristofff

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,303
Another example of these groups is the mentioned Whale War's playing on Animal planet. I literally had bile in my throat when I saw this being glorified on television by animal planet. While I do not in any way condone the acts of the Japanese whalers, the solution is not to commit acts of blatant piracy against them. The fact that it is put in animal planet as anything other then what it is, is utterly revolting. Every single member of that crew should be arrested in the spot when they come into port and tried as pirates under international law since their acts are committed in international waters.

They are on open waters and, as such, not subject to local laws, no? I really don't care if those two groups of filth battle it out out on the sea.
 

TechieSooner

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
7,601
Another example of these groups is the mentioned Whale War's playing on Animal planet. I literally had bile in my throat when I saw this being glorified on television by animal planet. While I do not in any way condone the acts of the Japanese whalers, the solution is not to commit acts of blatant piracy against them. The fact that it is put in animal planet as anything other then what it is, is utterly revolting. Every single member of that crew should be arrested in the spot when they come into port and tried as pirates under international law since their acts are committed in international waters.
I've seen it.

I have much the same feelings, but I'm not sure (since it's in international waters) you can do much about it.

I'm quite frankly, after watching that, more pissed at the people trying to pester the whalers than the whalers themselves...
They bug the holy living crap out of these whalers then wonder why, when they board their ship, they get taken hostage :rolleyes:
 
Top