Greens’ Failure to Define Sustainability.

The Greens who support the idea of Oomans 'Living in Harmony with Wildlife’ i.e. using Wildlife as a Local Resource.

Given the colossal scale of the slaughter which oomans are currently inflicting on billions of Animals around the world greens who promote the idea of oomans living in harmony with Wildlife ought to be diagnozed as clinically inane. The greenless greens support the idea of large numbers of oomans moving back into the countryside but if this happens they will exterminate all Wildlife which pose a threat to the safety of their children, livestock, or livelihoods.

(uk) Earth First!

Some of the so-called greens who espouse the belief in oomans living in harmony with Wildlife organize meetings which ... ban Dogs. The following are a couple of examples of this hypocrisy, “Mass trespass in commemmoration of the diggers. Meeting saturday, 12 midday for mass trespass to mystery site (no Dogs).”[22] Could you trust people who vehemently support the fantasy of living in harmony with nature when they can’t act harmoniously with Dogs? If they can’t even ensure that oomans and Dogs live in harmony then how are they going to ensure oomans and all other forms of Wildlife are going to live in harmony?[23] In 1998 london greenpeace embarked on a publicity campaign for its oomano-imperialist creed - ‘Oomans must be able to live and travel where they wish and when they wish’. These are the same people who put up ‘No Dogs allowed’ signs at their meetings. It seems to be alright for oomans to wander where and when they want but not Animals.

Charles Windsor, fred pearce, the Goldsmiths, (uk) Earth First!, Robin Page, ‘the Ecologist’

These so called greens support the principle of oomans ‘living in harmony with Wildlife’. What this means is that they support the idea of local people/tribalists traeting Wildlife as a resource. The phrase 'Relying on local resources' implies support for Animal exploitation.

Bellamy, David.

"Bellamy has made numerous public statements of his belief in game keeping as beneficial for conservation, he is patron of the 'Moorland Gamekeepers Association' and is involved in a number of other similar organizations that put this idea across."[24]

Nicky Chambers, Craig Simmons & Mathis Wackernagel?

Quite unusually for greens, these authors stress the need for land to be put aside for Wildlife. However, they want to confine Wildlife to a mere 12% of the Earth's land surface even though it was Wildlife which created the Earth’s habitability. Quite what the authors mean by ‘putting land aside for Wildlife’ is not discussed. Presumably it means 12% of the land in each country around the world? It is not known whether their plan would mean that oomano-terrorists would be prevented from trespassing on this land.

Unfortunately, doubts about the authors’ seemingly impressive commitment to Wildlife begin to surface when they condemn the situation where oomans are prevented from exploiting Wildlife in so-called Wilderness areas .. “such as in the case of some wildlife conservation projects where the development needs of local people are ignored.”[25] Do the authors believe that in these Wilderness areas, Wildlife ought to ‘pay their way’ by offering themselves up to be shot by rich hunters to enable local people to earn enough money to trigger off a local population explosion? People who are attracted by the slogan of local politics ought to appreciate that when greens use this phrase what they actually envisage is that oomans have the right to exploit all the Animals which live around them.

All publications are copyrighted mundi club © You are welcome to quote from these publications as long as you acknowledge the source - and we'd be grateful if you sent us a copy.	We welcome additional information, comments, or criticisms. Email: carbonomics@yahoo.co.uk The Mundi Club Website: http://www.geocities.com/carbonomics/
To respond to points made on this website visit our blog at http://mundiclub.blogspot.com/