Kit Kat Candy Bars Threaten To Destroy Our Planet Says Greenpeace

	JENNIFER ANISTON SEX TAPE VIDEO
	WOW - JESSICA SIMPSON HAS A BOOB EXPLOSION
	JENNIFER ANISTON'S POKIES ARE SHOWING YIKES (PHOTO)
	KATY PERRY BUSTING OUT OF HER DRESSES (PHOTOS)
	KOURTNEY KARDASHIAN'S MAN SCOTT DISICK DID NOT WANT ANOTHER BABY!
	KIM KARADSHIAN'S MOST OUTRAGEOUS TWITPICS
	SELENA GOMEZ IN SOME HOT GIRL ON GIRL ACTION (PHOTO)

Kit Kat Candy Bars Threaten To Destroy Our Planet Says Greenpeace

BY Dr. Jody Overland on March 19, 2010 | 8 comments | Related : Greenpeace, Kit Kat, Nestle

In their latest assault on normal human behaviour Greenpeace has launched a campaign attacking Nestle for buying the wrong sort of palm oil. "What" you say in startled disbelief – can this be for real?

Are the morons who spend their time and our money telling us how to live and making sure we don’t mess with Mother Nature actually trying to dictate which type of palm oil is kosher? "YES" is the shocking answer. Apparently an evil company in Indonesia named Sinar Mas has planted some palm trees to be used as a source off oil on land that Greenguts has determined should be a rainforest.

Now tell me, as you are going about your busy day and trying to deal with life’s real problems and issues isn’t it good to know that a lunatic fringe who live tax free off of the charity of the stupid and ignorant are working hard to protect us from the revenge of Kit Kat and Coffee Crisp?

Have a break? from Greenpeace UK on Vimeo.

No related posts.

	Christina Hendricks shows her bare boobs off shamelessly - HOLLYWOOD HICCUPS
	Jennifer Aniston's Pokies Are Showing YIKES (Photos) - THE STIR
	Kristen Stewart Talks Her Crazy Experience With Katy Perry - FIT FAB CELEB
	Angelina Jolie & Brad Pitt’s Wedding Crisis: The Wedding is on HOLD - CELEB BABY LAUNDY
	Milley Cyrus Gives Us A Look At Her Boobs (Photos) - HOLLYWOOD HICCUPS
	Miranda Kerr Poses Naked 10 Months After Baby Born - SWANKY CELEBS
	Lady Gaga Flashes Her Genital Piercing - LICKABLE CELEBS
	Kate Moss 13 Year Old Sister's Modelling Debut (Pics) - CELEB TEEN LAUNDRY
	Kate Winslet Poses Nude In Rome (Photos) - HOLLYWOOD HICCUPS
	Kanye West Had A Wardrobe Malfunction (Photo) - FIT FAB CELEB

Laura

This is such an ignorant comment to make! It may not be a part of your “real life problems,” but it is SOMEBODY’S problem. And if nothing is done to stop such senseless deforestation for the benefit of greedy North American consumers, it will be everyone’s problem.
Jody

Dear Laura – the level of ignorance and racism in your article is contemptible but not surprising. People who have a moral compass informed by intellectual garbage like the film “Avatar” can be counted upon to think of the USA not as the world’s largest doner of charity (which it is by far) and greatest protector of the weak and defenseless (which again it is by far) but as evil and greedy. Why are American and Canadian consumers “greedy” but Chinese and European consumers not “greedy?” Why are Indian and African consumers not “greedy.” Do you think people who live in poorer nations are less “greedy?” Do you know that Nestle, the world’s largest food company is Swiss, not American? Does that disappoint you. People like you should be banished to coutries like India or Sudan where you can enjoy and experience the “non-greedy” world firsthand.

Our needs, the needs of the human race, come way before rainforests. Cut down all of the rainforests if need be – I don’t really mind. Why, because the plants in the Oceans, known as algae, produce over 70% of the world’s fresh new fresh oxygen. Rainforests are not needed for human survival on the planet.

Greenpeace and their groupthink followers are not even a step ahead of their Luddite ancestry. Greenpeace and those who support them do not even stop to consider that without modern industry and the science that is supported by the wealth this industry creates we would have average life spans of the preindustrial age – 35-40 years at best spent in poverty, ill-health, and discomfort. Let’s see, the rainforest or 80 healthy rich years -which would you choose?
Rusty

Damn straight!!! You go Jody!! Its nice to hear someone speak the truth!

http://celebdirtylaundry.com/ Robyn

Hi Rusty – Thanks for the nice comments – am surprised how few people agree with me – thanks again Jody

SarumantheWhite

Jody – I would not want to live for 80 minutes let alone 80 years in the kind of world you seem to want.
Why does ‘normal’ human behavoir have to involve destroying the natural world? Especially when alternatives are readily available.
As for over 70% of the world’s oxygen being produced from the oceans, has it escaped your notice that mankind is doing it’s best to destroy the oceans as well as the rainforests?
As for your racism comment (the most overused word in the dictionary)this is laughable. It seems that your outraged rant was provoked by what your tiny mind perceived to be a slur on the US. Try and take a larger view instead of being so misty eyed and defensive about Uncle Sam.
My idea of hell would be to live in a world crammed to capacity by human beings, especially if they had views like yours.
The fact that Nestle have since seen the light and sourced their palm oil elsewhere puts your rant into perspective.
jody

You would not live for 80 minutes if left to your own abilities and resources. My point is not to suggest that wanton destruction of the environment should be encouraged – that would be obvious to you if you had a sense of humour and any experience with the real world. Just to clarify – what I am saying is that there is no way for us to enjoy the level of economic happiness we do and play all the silly games and adhere to all the absurd standards that organizations like Greepeace promote.

People make choices – environmental health is costly – most people when given the choice prefer to buy cheaper products that do not take into account environmental well being. What stands between the orangutan’s survival and extinction is not the USA, Nestle and palm oil but mankind’s greed and the third world’s impatience to catch up with the West economically.
SarumantheWhite

Jody – not quite sure what you mean ‘I would not live for 80 minutes if left to my own abilities and resources’?
I have lived for 54 years so far and have plenty of experience of the real world (is there an unreal world lurking out there somewhere??)
As for a sense of humour I do posess a somewhat ironic one although I thought this was meant to be a serious discussion.
I agree there is no way we can continue the level of economic (sic) ‘happiness’ we have been.
The credit crunch / recession is ample evidence of that before you even get into the environment, time to pay the piper although it seems most people prefer to bury their heads in the sand as usual.
We need to start living within our means – something I have always done on a personal level.
Human beings are mammals and as such need to interreact with the natural world not pretend that we are somehow seperate from it. This includes addressing the biggest problem facing the entire planet.
Human overpopulation.
Jody

Now you have gone from environmentalist to economist – and predictably you are off base once again.

The most ridiculous statement you have made is that human overpopulation is the biggest problem facing the entire planet. Not only is there no human overpopulation but in fact the standard of living of humans has been steadily rising through the years with the increase in population – does that FACT make you at least pause before blabbing on with your overpopulation nonesense?

Predictably, environmental freaks like yourself hate people and view them as an evil standing in the way of “nature.” To you misanthropes mother nature is benevolent and the earth is a living organism with which people must interact – preferably obsequiously. I see mother nature as a hard bloodthirsty bitch, the one who authored survival of the fittest and who needs to be defeated by human ingenuity so we can gain immortality.

celebdirtylaundry