| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| Tree group to splinter? |
| 2004-02-01 |
| EFL Tech Central Station The Sierra Club is one of America’s wealthiest tax-exempt organizations. In fiscal 2002, the Club reported $23,619,830 in revenues, and disclosed $107,733,974 worth of assets to the IRS. Ironically, some of the groups cash flow is generated from oil wells on club property. It claims a national membership of 700,000 people. As Sierra’s website proclaims, "the Club is America’s oldest, largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization." An old Chinese curse goes, "may you live in interesting times." I thought the acient Chinese secret was actually a detergent. Well, these happen to be interesting times for the Sierra Club. A small chunk of its membership is worried about what it calls "impact of mass immigration on the environment and quality of life for future generations" of Americans. These dissidents want the Club to promote public policy that will restrict America’s future population growth. In particular, they would like the Club to endorse a reduction in the number of immigrants the U.S. accepts each year. These dissidents have formed their own pressure group. They call it Sierrans for US Population Stabilization (SUSPS). These members watched Logan’s Run too many times after ingesting herbals. SUSPS may look small, but it is becoming a force to be reckoned with within the Club. It now controls 20% of the 15 seats on Sierra’s board of directors. It hopes to expand that control after this spring’s board elections. To get a feel for the tension raging inside the Club, it may help to read an email purportedly sent by Paul Watson, a pro-SUSPS Sierra Club board member, to Carl Pope, the Sierra Club’s executive director, last March. The email documents SUSPS’ central arguments about why the Sierra Club’s position on immigration (currently neutral) must change. Wouldn’t these naturalists be more comfotatble living moving to Mexico? The immigration trend there is suitable. Some people on the political left don’t like SUSPS’s position on immigration. As the Nation magazine once put it, these activists don’t want to see the Sierra Club "hijacked to fight immigrants rather than loggers and polluters." Betsy Hartmann, an academic, believes SUSPS is the thin edge of an effort by "the right wing" to "penetrate the mainstream environmental movement." She calls it "the greening of hate." For Dr. Hartmann, implying that immigrants are responsible for environmental degradation represents a kind of "racism." They should have never let Pat Buchanen join their club. -snip- opinion on how this resolves. |
| Posted by:Super Hose |
| #9 "impact of mass immigration on the environment and quality of life for future generations" of Americans. These dissidents want the Club to promote public policy that will restrict America’s future population growth. -no shit, I've been saying this for 5 years. Put a moratorium on all immigration into this country. The only pop growth should be from those of us already here. There's enough people already in the country, and yes, it has potential to hurt the environment. (how many more strip malls and parking lots do we need). I've seen Seoul, I can tell you how over population can fuck up an area. This is one of the smartest things SClub could support. As far as abortion goes, that's a hot button too long to fight here. I'm pro-choice, but that's my deal. I don't condone abortion for my personal life due to my personal beliefs, but I'm not about to try and stop or harrass someone from having a legal abortion. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-2-1 11:38:24 PM |
| #8 #7. It is and I agree about Chuck Asay. He's nationally syndicated. So Rantburghers can pick up some of his work. Here's an example or go to: http://www.comics.com/editoons/asay/index.html Asay is mostly conservative, but he'll take a shot at GW when warranted. BTW you mentioned once that you live near Tesla drive. That puts us about 1 1/2 miles apart. |
| Posted by: Gasse Katze 2004-2-1 5:56:00 PM |
| #7 GK, that sounds like the local Gazette! |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2004-2-1 3:27:27 PM |
| #6 badanov, Sierra Club policy has for years supported legal abortion for exactly that reason: lessening population. (I corresponded with them about it--objecting to such a policy.) By that logic, they ought to back war, too. And genocide. If the end justifies the means, finally anything goes. They are evil. Fr. Tony Thurston |
| Posted by: Fr. Tony 2004-2-1 2:12:37 PM |
| #5 It's always a shame when the tree-huggers go at eachother with hatchets. |
| Posted by: 4thInfVet 2004-2-1 1:58:14 PM |
| #4 LOL, SH. If I didn't know better, I'd think you were the guy who writes headlines for our local dead tree scroll. e.g. Shoe Warehouse Steps into(Town) |
| Posted by: Gasse Katze 2004-2-1 1:41:41 PM |
| #3 Isn't this kinda redundant, to have a group concerned with controlling population growth? I mean liberalism professes the benefits of abortion. All we have to do is to keep them in business and they will control populations for us. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-2-1 1:33:21 PM |
| #2 Tree Group To Splinterr Okay SH how long you been looking for that one? LOL |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-1 1:21:23 PM |
| #1 This has been brewing for a long time. The Sierra club hates new development whether it is suburban tracts or Walmart. It doesn't take a genius to realize that most of the population growth in the US is because of immigration. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-2-1 1:16:24 PM |