Last March I wrote an article titled Environmentalist Cowards where I highlighted the fact that the Sierra Club fears being labeled "racists" far more than they care about our environment. As stories about the impact to the environment caused by increasing demands of a growing population continue to be reported (Lake Mead dry by 2021, Population Pressures Western Water, Drought Jeopardizing Endangered Wildlife, and many others) and the Sierra Club et al continue to remain silent I felt it was necessary to once again contact the Sierra Club and ask them to reconsider their cowardly, politically correct position on immigration. Here is the response I received:
"Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this issue. The Sierra Club's membership voted on April 25, 1998 to remain committed to environmental rights and protection for all within our borders, without discrimination based on immigration status. With this vote, our members have shown they understand that restricting immigration into the U.S. will not solve the planet's environmental problems. There is broad agreement within the Sierra Club to address the global environmental dilemmas exacerbated by population growth by supporting voluntary family planning programs and access to basic rights for women and girls around the world."
Sincerely,
Ann Pinkerton
Sierra Club Member Services
85 Second St, 2nd Fl
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 977-5653 (M-F, 9-5 PST)
So rather than taking obvious steps to preserve the environment in the US by opposing illegal and even legal immigration, and the concomitant environmental impact an increased population causes, they take a ridiculous and useless global position on "family planning", i.e. abortion and the pill. This smug, high minded position is nothing more than cover for their cowardice in the face of the forces of political correctness.
So as illegals litter our deserts with tons of garbage, drive the need for a physical barrier to keep them out (opposed by the environmentalists), and consume limited, precious resources the environmentalists do nothing.
And far from broad agreement this actually nearly caused a schism within the SC because some more conservative members and animal rights activists DID in fact want immigration control to be part of the SC position. They however lost to the PC wing of the organization who feared losing some of their more progressive members. So, the environment took a backseat to politics.
The environmentalists never miss an opportunity to warn us of the dangers of global warming but they remain silent on what would be one of the easiest ways to stop the increase of, or even reduce our emissions: population stability. If they truly cared about global warming then why don't they address the population connection? What is the point of pushing us to reduce our "carbon footprints" if we increase the number of footprints year after year? Our population now stands around the 300 Million mark and is projected to increase to 1 Billion by the end of this century if current immigration trends continue. To keep the same carbon footprint we'd all have to cut our energy consumption by 2/3. How would that impact your life?
I've written to several other large and powerful environmental organizations and will report on their positions when they respond. I suspect that they will have positions similar to the Sierra Club in their morally ambiguous, cowardly, and utter uselessness.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I suspect the answers you receive from most of those groups will be similar. The upper echelons of most of these are set up as empty vessels in order to import gullible people to use as shills, and to expand the collective voices and power of the left. The upper levels and the aims are leftist. The "humanitarian or enviornmental" names are only cover.
Most of these are leveraged by association with higher level leftists who direct entire groups of these NGO's, foundations, and groups. These coalitions of leftists occassionally have legitimate organizations and people in their midst, if their philosophies agree, and if it is to the advantage of the left.
You will find that there is high level management for these and that the amounts filtered through them are not insignificant. Check through this website if you want some idea of the powers who are behind these and how far up they go:
http://www.independentsector.org/
http://www.learningtogive.org/papers/index.asp?bpid=154
All who are subject to the regulatory power wielded by this "humanitarian" group are conforming to the "PC", which governs all of us. The taxation and operational boundaries are set through this mechanism, and individualism at least that expressed by democratically banded individuals, passes through it's seive of correctness.
If your interest lies in the practical aspects of leftist control, google Independent Sector and check to further connect the dots. There are many to be connected and they all lead to the top, just as the political, governmental and corporate sectors do.
These may not be "controlling" our society, but their influence is enough to be felt throughout. Compared to them, all other truly individual voices are only a patter of raindrops against a windshield.
The Sierra Club has literally been bought by an open borders supporter with big pockes. See:
http://reflight.blogspot.com/2006/04/sierra-club-needs-spine-transplant.html
Post a Comment