I had this slither over the transom at Facebook tonight:
Re: My image on your blog
Between You and Jenny Moores
Jenny Moores October 24 at 6:09pm Report
Terry: I am writing to politely ask you to take my photo off your blog. While I appreciate that you have opinions about one rate power, I don't appreciate you using my image to prove your point. Surely you can find a more suitable photo that actually relates to your position.
If I'm correct, you and I used to have the same job at NNSL - we were both photo editors. With that background, I would expect you have an awareness of photo usage rights.
Please and thank you,
And my reply:
Terry Halifax October 24 at 7:44pm
Hi Jenny
As per your request, I’ve removed your image and replaced it with an artist’s rendition.
I can appreciate that you wouldn’t want your visage associated with the comments you made or the company you keep.
Get used to it. It’s time someone put a face to some of the numbskulls running these shadowy organizations that want to put the world on hold, while you wallow in personal luxuries.
You and your ilk have postponed legacy and hope for thousands of indigenous people along the Mackenzie Valley.
Take notice, Jenny, people are fed up with this mindless bullshit you granola-munching tourists are spouting and you need to be exposed.
Many people are working hard to build a sustainable, realistic future for the North and it includes a real future for people in remote communities.
It also includes wind, solar, gasification, cogeneration, biomass and fuel cells. And yes, Jenny, our future also includes a pipeline.
I doubt you recognize that you and your counterparts are committing economic genocide with your policies. You probably think you’re actually helping.
Get this straight, Jenny, you are NOT helping!
Warm regards,
Terry
Not sure where she got the idea I was ever a photo editor, but I guess I better polish up my writing a bit.
Posts
I thought it might be a good point to make Terry, that Jennifer works for INAC and might actually be a believer in the pipeline.
ReplyDeleteAlso, if you pay attention to what's going on within the GNWT, you'll noticed a lot of money, $60-million over the next three years, to find better ways to provide energy to our communities, including the potential for a biomass industry that could help bring relief to the high cost of power.
I don't think it's fair to say they, as in Ecology North, are committing economic genocide. That's just a foolish and ill-informed comment. They are providing a point of view needed in this debate. Some people fear the pipeline, and rightfully so. We've seen the effect of large projects like this elsewhere and it isn't pretty. If you aren't willing to respect the fact they are concerned about the environmental and social impacts on the NWT, well, that's just pathetic.
It's obvious you support a pipeline, but I'd like to know if communities in the Delta are ready for what a large scale project like the pipeline will bring. Sure, it'll bring jobs and economic growth to the area, but with that, comes a lot of new people, temporary workers, who will come north. With that, as we've seen in Albert communities like Fort McMurray and Grand Prairie, comes drugs, prostitution and a plethora of social issues that, to be honest, Inuvik, other small communities and the GNWT aren't prepared for whatsoever.
Also, I don't think it's fair to say people who haven't lived here for however long you've lived here, are 'tourists' and don't know what they are talking about. There are people who are here, maybe two or three years, who are passionate about the north and believe in what they do because it's what they think is best. You really think people with the environment in mind are ruining the lives of indigenous people across the valley? Give me a break. The pipeline will bring nothing but continued and expanded hardships for the people in the region, and if you can't see that you're ignorant.
Great to have your high and might attitude back on the blog. Look forward to more attacks and uninformed opinions. Cheers.
A 'tourist'
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteYes, I’m sure Jennifer is a huge advocate for the pipeline, now that she knows what it is. According to her bio: “(before joining the board, I didn't even know what the pipeline was!)”
Do tell me oh wise one, what IS Ecology North’s plan for the remote communities? They have no one on their board outside of Yellowknife, aboriginal, or even a long-term resident of Capital City. Why wouldn’t I call them tourists?
You and your pinhead eco groups offer no alternatives to an economy, you just take. You sit in your cozy government jobs and wave your picket signs every three years. You demand more and more and more and give nothing back.
No diamond mines, no pipeline no exploration. You think eco-tourism is going to feed us? You think wood pellets are going to power the North? You’re a sick joke.
Did you read about the woman in Fort Good Hope who can’t afford the electricity for her oxygen pump? What do you eco-thugs say to her? Choke in the dark? Why wouldn’t I call that economic genocide?
Take a look in your own back yard someday, anon. The Third World is right here and people are dying everyday from misery you can’t even imagine. You spend your time lobbying for plastic bag bans and infants are drinking pop from baby bottles because their mothers can’t afford milk. Where are your priorities?
Not only are we prepared for a pipeline, we have made a enormous investment in that preparation. The Inuvik taxpayers are on the hook for millions in that preparation.
We all know you’re only against the pipeline because the gas will feed the oil sands. That is such a ridiculous argument that my eyes roll when ever I hear it. Do you really think the oil sands won’t survive without arctic gas? Put down the bong, dude.
Next time have the guts to sign your name, or I’ll just throw you in the trash.
(sent via email)
ReplyDeletein fact, do support the pipeline Terry. I think it could bring prosperity to the North. It would be better if we had devolution to reap more benefits from the natural resources we have, but hey, in due time I hope. Making sure the people of the North are protected from the potential negative impacts of a pipeline is a fair stance to have and I would hope you'd have the same belief.
I think it's a bit short sighted and ignorant to think that people who question the pipeline are against it.
Ecology North supports the pipeline, they just have concerns about the social and environmental impacts it will have, which are likely to be larger and will contribute to the already long list of social problems the North deals with.
A plan for remote communities? Make sure they aren't destroyed by the pipeline. Plain and simple. Groups like Ecology North want to make sure big business and temporary workers don't come up here and rape the North for all it's worth, leaving us to clean up the mess. It's a legit concern and if you aren't willing to accept that, well, that's too bad.
I think you need to get off your high horse. I've been to the communities you speak of as being 'third world'. I've seen the tragic circumstances a lot of the people in our communities live in. It's wrong. And I did read about the woman in COLVILLE LAKE. A terrible situation that anyone should have a power bill that high, let alone someone who needs oxygen to live a semi-normal life. But how much do you think the cost of energy in Colville Lake is going to drop if a pipeline brings another source of energy there? To build the infrastructure needed to bring natural gas to that community, it will be costly and likely energy rates will remain high. Maybe not as high as it is now, but it will still be high regardless.
You make it seem like no one is paying attention to the problems in our communities. The high cost of food, rather healthy food, is a travesty. No one should have to pay the price of milk that people do in our remote communities. People realise there is a problem there and our government isn't doing enough to deal with it. My priorities are in a place where the high cost of living needs to be reduced so people aren't scrapping to get by.
You talk about being 'prepared' for the pipeline in Inuvik, yet I've yet to hear you give any response to refute my last comment. What problems does Inuvik have in place to deal with an influx of people and social problems? What is the town doing to prepare people for what will come with a project like this? And, I don't think I once made the argument that the pipeline will 'feed the tarsands'. I don't know where you got that from, but that's hardly what I think.
And throw this in the trash. As long as you read it, I'm happy.
An informed, pipeline supporting tourist.
Tourist,
ReplyDeleteYou're starting to sound like our Member of Parliament. After Bevington told the Joint Review Pane to take their time, he made a long list of demands:
"I'll support the pipeline with a new resource revenue sharing agreement, devolution, wood pellet-burning public transportation, blah blah blah..."
He should be screaming to get this project built, but no, he's so far up the ass of these Yk environmental groups that he can't. Any MP in Canada would be slathering at the mouth to have a $16 billion project in their riding but not the Groucho Marxist. He has NEVER said he supports the pipeline.
As for the negative social impacts of the pipeline, you must have missed the numerous announcements of a $500 million social impacts fund that Fred Carmichael and Nellie Cournoyea negotiated from the federal government. That buys a lot of treatment for problems that exist here with or without a pipeline.
Make no mistake, tourist, the people here have been waiting almost 40 years for this pipeline and they have dealt with this project inside and out. Nothing has been overlooked.