100% Pure Cow Shit
Forget Pure NZ, now it's just you
From today, the entire nation is being branded as part of an $85 million a year marketing campaign - now, it's all about "you". The country isn't pure - "you" are. And according to Tourism New Zealand, "you" are one of 80 million international tourists actively considering visiting New Zealand.
So our ever optimistic Tourism Minister has decided to avoid the 100% Pure brand that NZ has spent 12 years and hundred of millions in building to degrade our brand down to 100% You.
Why have we destroyed our brand right when NZ has a clean and green brand that has become much more attractive globally at a time pollution is destroying (and will increasingly destroy) much of the planet?
We have done it to hide the fact that NZ is increasingly becoming less green and much more polluting, so rather than demand stricter pollution control from our Agricultural Industry (who have the power to get us to go to war in Iraq and have the power to censor entire chapters critical of their pollution impacts) we are just down grading our brand to accommodate for our economic hypocrisy.
If Labour rolled over and took it for the dairy industry, you know National are choosing to sleep in the wet spot. the political party of Farmers and Bankers will not damage their voting rump by demanding restrictions on Farmers using and polluting our water.
When our environmental laws are so weak...
Enforcing rules proves costly for ECan
Environment Canterbury (ECan) is out of pocket by nearly $150,000 after prosecuting the region's most serious polluters.
The regional council spent $237,943 on investigation and legal costs last year, but recovered only about $89,000 through Environment Court judgments.
In its most expensive case, ECan spent $156,016 prosecuting Christchurch waste company BJ Dakin & Co for allowing chemicals, including 160 kilograms of arsenic, to be discharged at its Bromley premises.
The company was last month fined $36,500 after admitting disposing of waste material underground, inappropriate handling and storage of hazardous waste, and discharging contaminated stormwater.
The fines and costs were payable to ECan, but left the council with a large shortfall.
The council lost money in 10 of the 11 prosecutions it took to court last year, despite winning the cases.
...when the international criticism is so loud against our green myth lie...
New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it's no friend of the earth
But my prize for the most shameless two fingers to the global community goes to New Zealand, a country that sells itself round the world as "clean and green". New Zealand secured a generous Kyoto target, which simply required it not to increase its emissions between 1990 and 2010. But the latest UN statistics show its emissions of greenhouse gases up by 22%, or a whopping 39% if you look at emissions from fuel burning alone.
...and when our own Federated Farmers President Charlie Pederson describes the environmental movement as a “war against humanity”, why don't we just be honest about our Tourism brand and call it 100% Pure Cow Shit?
posted by Bomber @ 10:26 am
20 comments
20 Comments:
Even if New Zealand had the most environmentally friendly Agricultural sector on the Planet, (which would be difficult considering free range animals fed on grass are generally far more environmentally damaging than factory reared animals), how are these millions of Tourists meant to get to New Zealand in a manner which in itself isn't also environmentally harmful?
We can't start by lowering our own emissions as far as we possibly can? That seems very short sighted. Only those who believe global warming is a hoax would be that short sighted surely.
If you were truly interested in lowering emmissions as far as we can you would be a supporter of large scale factory farming of animals rather than pasture farming and discouraging mass market tourism to New Zealand.
Seeing as you have always pretended that global warming is not occuring from man made pollution, I'm not sure why you are showing any interest in the issue, it's like talking condom use with the Pope.
No intensive factory farming is not the solution and would make things worse better research into the different types of feed and grass types can be used to reduce methane release and much better shit removal technology.
We can use agriculture, but this Government slashed the R&D tax credits Labour put in place in favour of tax cuts for rich bank workers like you Gosman.
I see you are persisting with this complete fabrication of yours that I have denied the reality of AGW when you don't have a shred of evidence to support this viewpoint. I must say I admire your ability to suspend reality for the sake of an argument point.
Intensive factory farming has a multitude of benefits over pasture farming not least the fact that methane production per animal is far lower for most livestock, (the animals don't need to expend as much energy per calorie consumed for a start). On top of that the waste products are much easier to collect and dispose in an environmentally friendly way rather than discharging into the waterways, which I gather you find so objectionable.
The question therefore becomes one of animal welfare versus protecting the planet. Are you stating you place animal welfare above the long term environmental survivalability of our species?
Gosman, you are such a filthy little liar! You've been on this bloody site attempting to denounce global warming, Christ remember your comment that you were over at Hot topic 'kicking arse' - all your denial shows now is that you've woken up to the fact that man made pollution is warming the planet and are now embarrassed by your previous right wing bullshit, it's great to see you back down though and admit you were wrong and that man made pollution is warming the planet.
As for your desire to hurt animals from intensive farming practices while pretending to care about the environment, you seem very slow on the facts
http://www.helium.com/items/1200371-factory-farms-effects-on-the-environment
I've asked you this before and you failed to respond then so I don't hold up much faith for a different response this time. Please provide a single shred of evidence of where I have denied the current scientific consensus regarding AGW.
Why intensive factory farming can be less environmentally harmful than traditional farming practices.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727691.200-veggieworld-why-eating-greens-wont-save-the-planet.html
(Of course you will have to subscribe to read the full article)
I thank God (which is quite a feat for an Atheist) that there is only one of you Gosman!
You don't think we could aspire to sound Animal Welfare and Environmental practice? I appreciate that doesn't gel well with Monsanto's world view, but thanks to Wikileaks we know we can't put any faith in them.
And your corporate driven MARKET is doing so well at self regulating the economy and the environment at the moment isn't it Gosman?
Gosman you lie so much, perhaps you forget? let's get this straight - you are now SAYING that global warming is caused by man made pollution? Just a yes or no Gosman, not your whining and your lies - yes or no - (Gareth over at hot topic must laugh a lot when he sees you claim you were not a denier)
As for your bullshit link, and as the link I posted pointed out 'normal' farming can be much better than intensive factory farming.
Oh and a simple yes or no on global warming caused by man made pollution thanks Gosman,
You keep stating that I have lied yet have produced not a single shred of evidence that I have EVER posted a comment that has claimed that AGW is not backed up by the weight of scientific evidence. You are more than welcome to request Gareth at Hot Topic to furnish you with this detail if you like.
Until you do so I would suggest that the lack of evidence for your position means it is you that is the liar not myself.
Did you or did you not claim you were kicking butt over at Hot Topic? And you have yet to actually say that global warming is caused by man made pollution Gosman, through all your winging and bitching not a word yet - just answer the question - is man made pollution causing the planet to warm - yes or no Gosman?
I never claimed I was kicking butt over at Hot Topic. We have had this discussion before and you eventually got around to accepting this. Maybe in your advancing years your memory is fading.
As for my position on AGW I think you will find the answer to the question you keep banging on about at the same time you attempt to locate evidence for my AGW denial comments. I have stated them on numerous occasions on different blogs. You must have some difficulty with comprehension.
Oh Gosman, that's the best you've got? Name calling? How sad of you. You did claim you were kicking butt, and i love how you can't actually answer the question, which is what is most amusing - why can't you just tell us all whether or not man made pollution is causing global warming?
I see no reason to respond to an accusation that is without any basis. If you provide evidence that backs up your claims then I'll respond.
Your failure to do so suggests you are just making stuff up. This is incredibly shoddy behaviour, especially from someone who purports to value journalistic integrity so highly.
LMAO - Gosman you were a climate denying troll who claimed he was kicking butt over at Hot Topic - that's why I don't normally bother with you - but let's put my contempt for you to one side and just tell people following this nasty little spat (and tell me) once and for all - is man made pollution warming the planet?
It's really, really, really simple yet you can't seem to do that and prefer to fall back on attacking me, why can't you just tell us if man made pollution is causing the planet to warm?
It's just so simple, yet you can't seem to do it?
No more bitching about me, no more stomping and pouting, just answer the question, is man made pollution warming the planet?
Again you keep making up stuff about me without A SINGLE SHRED OF EVIDENCE.
It would be like if I accused you of supporting Chairman Mao's Great Leap forward and demanded to know if you had changed your mind yet.
I doubt very much you would even allow that sort of baseless allegation to be made on this site yet you have no problem with throwing out baseless allegations of your own.
Just to reiterate for you - I HAVE NEVER DENIED THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SUPPORTING AGW.
Has that finally sunk in through to your leftist grey matter that mascarades occassionally as a rational thinking tool?
Oh Gosman, i'm so proud of you, you've walked away from climate denial and have accepted that man made pollution is causing the planet to warm. Congrats, it's a hard U turn to make, but it is the right thing to do with all the recent science proving that it is happening. Well done Gosman.
And congratulations to you for moving away from supporting Communist dictators like Chairman Mao and Pol Pot. It must have been hard to move away from supporting self declared hero's of the working classes and admitting to yourself they were bloody butchers but the facts must have been to much to ignore after a while.
YAWN
Oh Gosy, now you are just getting bitter and silly aren't you love? You've been called on being a climate denier who was boasting about 'kicking arse' over at Hot Topic and you respond with all these yucky personal attacks? What have your lies about Pol Pot and radical Islamists got to do with this post about NZ moving away from 100% pure because we our green credentials are a lie?
Come on champ, this is the reason i just delete your posts Gosy because you are a right wing troll, I'm putting up with it today because I'm in a great mood and I thought it was important for you to admit that man made pollution is causing climate change.
Now I'd love to banter with you and your right wing hate, but I SERIOUSLY have a lot of work to do today.
Post a Comment
<< Home