An animated whiteboard systematically debunking Greenpeace’s extreme rhetoric.

Open Invitation Clock
Loading Clock
Total time that Greenpeace
has ignored open invitation
from International Seafood
Sustainability Foundation
(ISSF) to participate in the
ongoing dialogue about Tuna
fisheries & sustainability.
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

For years, the National Fisheries Institute (NFI) has been calling out Greenpeace’s deceptive campaigns and unilateral sustainability claims that lack scientific data and support and our concerns go unaddressed. But expose the massive fundraising machine and PR tools behind the organization, including a brand new $33 million dollar yacht disguised as a boat tour, and you get an op-ed from Greenpeace’s top U.S. oceans campaigner in the Tampa Tribune a mere 3 days later.

Greenpeace describes its fundraising flotilla as one “designed so teams of scientists can work on board alongside Greenpeace staff, as well as the media,” but where are the research projects, the science-based studies or the peer reviewed research? Since its prized Rainbow Warrior set sail, it’s been hosting publicity events, throwing parties for donors, and leading tours meant only to find new donors. The decks have been full of chafing dishes and bartenders not Petri dishes and microbiologists, and that revelation makes Greenpeace very uncomfortable. Even its own fan base on Facebook has flooded its posts promoting the Rainbow Warrior tours with comments like “I’ m really disappointed about the wasted time for the Rainbow Warrior III – she is built to be a Warrior not a cruise ship!!!,” and “I would love the ship, I donated for, doing the job for the oceans…”

And even when Greenpeace hauls in its big guns to defend (read hide) its fundraising mission, Greenpeace regurgitates the same half truths and scientific distortions they know will fill their deep coffers. In its weak Tampa Tribune defense, the group claims its donations don’t come from the government or corporations but “wholly from individual supporters,” when it knows full well, nearly half of its contributions come from giant foundation grants. Perhaps it’s the fact that its charitable status has already been revoked three times in two countries that has put the fundraising giant in such a tizzy. Or perhaps it’s just worried it will have to answer some real questions at the next port of call.

Posted by TFT-Staff

 
Greenpeace Cycle of
Abuse: Case History



Greenpeace Hypocrisy:
Case in Point