"A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts."I will not get into analysis of the Greenpeace text this morning, but suffice it to say it's just jibberish jotted down to perpetuate a negative tone onto Russian authorities and the whole "Arctic 30" situation. While Greenpeace prefers to keep the negative pressure up in characterizing Russian actions, one obvious explanation for these prisoners being transferred 1300 kilometers South to St. Petersburg is to resolve the situation by setting them free. As to the overall effectiveness of Greenpeace over the years, and especially in the present, Notgoodenough.com author Katherine Peterson summarizes:
"While this is admirable both for ensuing an international movement, and not out of character for the protest atmosphere of the 70’s era, I would have hoped that the organization had modernized with the time. Unfortunately, this does not appear to have happened."Even if the so-called Arctic 30 are detained longer, St. Petersburg is far more accessible for the prisoners' families than Murmansk, which is inside the Arctic Circle. In November temperatures in Murmansk can reach in excess of cold below -30 Degrees. Lastly, Greenpeace SPAMMING of media outlets in the West has apparently worked, at least where SEO is concerned. Any search performed for the term Arctic 30 currently returns either a Greenpeace bit on Russian fault in the case, pitiful activist propaganda, or some western leader ready and willing to take credit for the demonstrators' release. The latest on the latter is Britain's David Cameron who has reportedly asked Vladimir Putin to release the group. Perhaps a fair way of assessing this whole case by the public would be personalize the act traveling to Russia, boarding zodiacs in the Arctic and trying to board via rappelling ropes and grappling hooks a Gaszprom oil plaform. What would any reasonable human being expect the reaction to be? Why can't Greenpeace simply admit the methods of the Arctic 30 may have been excessive and respectfully request the group's release? We all know that answer, but the point is; "Do Greenpeace's actions help or hurt the protest against Arctic oil drilling?"
