The key point here for many is not whether GM is itself inherently good or
bad.  It's more about the idea that if you are opposed to it, your best
course of showing your opposition is probably not to vandalise a research
facility.

And of course it started even one step further removed than that, with the
terrible news that police had raided the Greenpeace office and seized things
- the inference being that somehow this was unfair and that Greenpeace
should be exempt from having to follow the law.  If Greenpeace want to use
such tactics - and there may well be times when that might a justifiable
decision - then they need to also accept the consequences of them.  (And to
be fair, I don't think it was Greenpeace themselves crying foul over the
police action.)

One of the biggest problems Greenpeace and other activist groups are facing
these days is that they have created the perception that they will
automatically oppose anything done that is in any way linked to big
business.  This makes it harder to get people to take them seriously on the
issues that really do matter.

With regard to the Oils, I didn't always aggree with them on every issue.
But I still respected their position because I knew they would have at least
thought about it.


jeff...

-----Original Message-----
From: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au 
[mailto:powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au] On Behalf Of Tom
Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 8:55 AM
To: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au
Subject: [powderworks] Arctic World

Hey, does anyone remember the lyrics to "Arctic World"?

... "I don't want to grow anything in my heart ... I don't 
want to breathe that Smithsonian air ... There is nothing 
that grows in their Arctic world..."

Maybe that's why PG criticised biotechnology in a newspaper 
(Sydney Morning Herald?)  piece on Queensland, which later 
appeared in a collection titled "Political Blues".

PG (formerly of Midnight Oil) pointed out how the search for 
biotech foods was disingenuous, to say the least, when the 
West has mountains of subsidised food sitting around, while 
people are starving. Even more importantly, the planet's 
ecosystem only has so much it can give, so its limits and 
balances will control how much food it can churn out. Also, 
the new organisms are unpredictable, like General Electric's 
"Micus" organism, to eat oil spills, that was never released 
because it could have multiplied and ended up in the engine 
of every car in the world.

Greenpeace (which PG was a board member of, for a bit) states 
that Australia is the first country in the world to test GM 
wheat on humans.

Is that because we have had a full and frank debate about it 
in Australia?

Or maybe it's because our politicians are especially free 
from corrupting influences, such as those in the UK (Mr 
Murdoch owns 70% of Oz metro papers - only 40% in the UK), 
and so can be trusted heaps?

Or could it be because Australian politicians, overall, 
haven't really addressed this issue?

Incidentally, did anyone else ever hear the rumour that the 
Oils went all "Secret Squirrel" and privately gave $40,000 to 
the Aust. Conservation Foundation, in relation to genetic engineering?

The political stuff the Oils talked about, and did, sometimes 
at the expense of the advancement of their musical career on 
commercial radio in particular, is a big part of the reason 
why their music meant so much then, and still means so much today.



------------------------------------

Yahoo!7 Groups Links