this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
156 points (99.4% liked)
Green - An environmentalist community
5310 readers
3 users here now
This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!
RULES:
1- Remember the human
2- Link posts should come from a reputable source
3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith
Related communities:
- /c/collapse
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/eco_socialism@lemmygrad.ml
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- /c/environment@beehaw.org
- SLRPNK
Unofficial Chat rooms:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Look, that's presumably a high security home. They just walked on in set up ladders and climbing gear. Took a bunch of photos along the way, drooped what in-my-opinion is nondestructive black fabric over the house, took more photos and ~~left~~ waited around until they got arrested.
The article keeps emphasizing "oil black fabric" but oil is wet, and that fabric looks dry. Are there aftermath photos?
I'm suggesting this was coordinates by greenpeace and the person they "attacked"
So, you're suggesting that this was co-ordinated by Greenpeace and ...the Prime Minister? To keep up whose appearances exactly?
What would both parties stand to gain from this?
What would be the consequences for both when the co-ordination was leaked/revealed?
Greenpeace is a marketing company. They product they're pushing is green technologies. Broadly speaking, and obviously without direct knowledge, its possible to buy access to a property for a photo or movie shoot to achieve whatever message they're pushing. Everything is for sale for the right number. It's not unfathomable that greenpeace bought a permit and/or permission for this stunt, even if using legal loopholes suggesting they were just shooting a film.
So greenpeace gets their marketing piece, and PM estate gets paid.
Just saying it's not an implausible scenario. 🤷🏼♂️
You haven't addressed the critical point:
Both would stand to lose vastly more in credibility than ever they might gain.
Whilst that might not matter to Sunak - a lost cause politically anyway, and clearly someone who values money highly - Greenpeace thrives on commitment to the cause.
It certainly seems to me a highly implausible scenario.
That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. Certainly there's an element of risk, but I imagine that both parties operate under pseudonyms for exactly that reason.
A point of order here, while you're welcome to criticize my opinion, you also haven't addressed my reasons for doubt.
A) When did you ask me to?
B) By pointing out the cost/benefit to both sides, I would have said that I did anyway.
However, if you would like me to go into more detail: this is a property that was not occupied by the PM or his family - Greenpeace have stated that they were aware of this. The 'high security' was evidently provided by the police - who would also have been aware of this. Even at the best of times, given a little advance planning, avoiding a routine police cordon - routine being the key word - is not exactly difficult.
I struggle to see why Greenpeace would take the route that you are suggesting (a literal conspiracy theory) and decide to take the risk of losing credibility instead of doing as they have frequently, attestably, through court records, done and evade the existing security.
The consequences of a leak are zero. Greenpeace exists for rich folks who hang out in the same circles as Sunak to bilk the same folks that the rich folks that are in parliment bilk with campaign donations or equivalent in the UK.
"True believers" don't join green peace unless they are marks.
Looks like plastic based fabric too. Not very eco friendly if you ask me.
I agree with this take. Imagine if Greenpeace did this to the US Whitehouse. There is no way it would work unless they coordinated with the President/Secret Service etc. But if I saw a picture of that and it was presented in a way that it was a guerrilla attack, then it's obviously bullshit. And if you are greenpeace and coordinating with the targets of your attack then what are you actually doing?
Also greenpeace is still anti-nuclear, so they should be dismissed with prejudice anyway. It's basically a club of rich fucks profiting off of climate destruction so that they can boat around the world on their boats and pretend they are activists.
My thoughts are to consider greenpeace a media production company. Coordinate a b-roll shoot under a pseudonym to access the property, stage your shots and leave. There's no footage of the activists getting arrested on the story this post links to, and the fabric clearly isn't oil drenched, it's just "oil-black" (I. E. The name of the color, not the state of the fabric)
Greenpeace gets their marketing materials and the estate gets some cash.