It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conspiracy to take over the Sierra group

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2004 @ 02:15 AM
link   
blogcritics.org...

Im to lazy to write this up all proper, btu someone else might want to take a look and run with it.




posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Thanks to MyATS, I just came across this. So, here's more info:

"The Sierra Club And Immigration
A mail-in vote has started among the Sierra Club's 750,000 members to elect five new members to the board. This normally would be ho-hum news except for the fact that three of the candidates want the nation's premier environmental group to use its considerable political clout to have the United States restrict the flow of immigration.

For decades, the Sierra Club had advocated stabilizing the American population for the sake of the environment. Most new migrants to the US use up more resources and do more ecodamage than they did back home (where they most likely didn't own a car, for instance). They take on the consumption patterns of the world's biggest polluter.

But when immigration reform became a hot-button issue in the 1990s, mainly among conservatives, the Sierra Club went neutral on the issue, except to work on the root causes of global population growth. It didn't want to polarize its membership, preferring instead to work on saving the environment from humans, not the US from more humans.

Now that decision is under intense challenge, led in part by a former Colorado governor, Richard Lamm, who's running for the board. He argues that a reduction in the flow of migrants would help the US "develop a sustainable, equitable, environmentally benign nation that could serve as an example of sustainability to the world."

The US has long restricted immigration for various reasons. Saving the planet by keeping poorer would-be migrants in their own country could be added to the mix.

Mr. Lamm's rationale isn't "anti-immigrant," as some claim. Rather, it takes the high road by calling on the nation's oldest conservation group to persuade the federal government to make the US a model in controlling US population growth, and thus helping protect the environment.

After all, restricting human use of the environment naturally means influencing the number of humans using it, and especially where they do so."

www.csmonitor.com...


"The Invasion of the Elegant Trogons -Is Sierra Clubs anti-immigration insurgency for the birds?
Fri Apr 2, 1:58 PM ET
By Susan Zakin LA Weekly Writer

More than 30 years ago, three men worked together at Zero Population Growth, a Washington, D.C., environmental group founded by scientist Paul Ehrlich. In 1969, Ehrlichs best-selling Malthusian rant, The Population Bomb, had alerted the world to the dangers of overpopulation. The Stanford biology professor was enjoying his 15 minutes of celebrity, cracking wise on the Johnny Carson show. Zero Population Growth captured the spirit of the times with bumper stickers like Control Your Local Stork. Ehrlich left the running of the organization to others. "

story.news.yahoo.com.../vv/20040402/lo_laweekly/52343


"The bitter wrangle over immigration now threatening to topple the leadership of the Sierra Club (news - web sites) has exposed a rift in the nation's environmental movement itself and placed prominent conservationists, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and former U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson, a founder of Earth Day, in opposing camps.

At the dawn of the modern environmental movement four decades ago, conservationists widely embraced the goal of global population control. They still do. But as they confront the prospect of a 50% increase in the U.S. population by mid-century mostly composed of immigrants and their children they are bitterly divided over whether to call for immigration restrictions.

On one side of the debate are Nelson and former Colorado Gov. Richard Lamm, who argue that it's not enough for environmentalists to support worldwide population stabilization. They believe the United States needs to set an example by stabilizing its own population in part, by taking a strong stand against the flood of newcomers.

On the other side, movement leaders, including Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope and Kennedy, head of Waterkeeper Alliance, say taking a stand against immigration risks alienating Latino and Asian immigrants who may represent the future of conservation. "

the complete article

[Edited on 6-4-2004 by DontTreadOnMe]



new topics
 
0

log in

join