Category: radical environmentalism

Ecuadorian Politician/Activist Talks about Yasuni

Yes, I’m back. I know I’ve been neglecting this blog, unfortunately. So this is a follow up to this post.

To sum it all up (in case you don’t want to check the link), radical environmentalists have been accusing Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador, of polluting the environment. Why? There’s an area in Ecuador called Yasuni, it is famous for having quiet a biodiversity of several rare species of fauna and flora, as well as its Native American inhabitants.

It happened that there’s also oil under it, and there was the dilemma facing the Ecuadorian government: preserve nature, or extract oil to boost the country’s economy (that basically relies on oil for its income)?

Then, president Correa came up with this plan called Yasuni ITT Initiative, in which the UN funds the country by half the estimated value of the oil under the Yasuni park (around $3.6 billion), by 2020 as a deadline, and in return, Ecuador “leaves the oil in the soil”. But this initiative failed, because governments of other countries weren’t cooperative. The Yasuni ITT Initiative was thus cancelled (in 2013) and oil drilling in that national park started, and environmentalists complained.

Now this Ecuadorian politician addressed this issue in an interview with an Arab channel, responding to the environmentalist claims about pollution in the drilling process.


Her name is Ivonne Abdel Baki (and yes she’s of Lebanese origin), and here are some background info about her to make sure that she’s more credible than those who call themselves”environmental activists” to address this topic:

  • Activist/environmentalist/former ambassador of Ecuador in USA
  • Former president of the Andean Parliament
  • UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for the Dialogue of Civilizations
  • Former minister of Foreign Trade Industry, Fisheries and Competitiveness
  • Primary negotiator and presidential envoy in the Yasuni ITT Initiative in 2007, appointed by Correa himself.

So she is an environmentalist, and also a practicing politician with experience, not some random tree-hugging vegan whining on the internet. Anyone with common sense would rather believe her in this matter.

This is the interview (in English with Arabic subtitles). In case you don’t want to watch all of it, at 9:35 she talks about Yasuni as follows:

“They are taking it (oil) but they are doing it in a very conscientious way, which I’m really very pleased to hear, that they are doing it in the way it should be done, with the latest technologies, with a lot of considerations (to the environment). The Yasuni will never die, it will always be there… They are doing it in a very unique way that it’s the latest technologies that will not effect the biodiversity that is in the park… The place is going to be staying, open for visitors, for tourism, but what we’re doing, what the government is doing now, which is very good, is that biodiversity that is over the ground…”

Q: “can we say now that Yasuni is in the clutches of oil companies?”

A: “No, we are getting the right people to do it and it’s the Ecuadorian government that is taking care of it, and we’re bringing, as I said, the technologies for doing it in the right way, instead of opening different places to drill the oil out. It would be done in one place, opening only one place, this is the technology that is being done now, newly, and then they will take the oil out and they will not pass it except for outside, from the river, take it to a place, instead of creating new roads, no roads”.

She also mentions that Ecuador is the only country in the world that gives priority to preserving nature in its constitution, in the very first chapter, which stresses on living in harmony with the environment, the indigenous people, and protecting “Pachamama” (Mother Earth in indigenous beliefs). So next time, before you scream “omg stop killing my Mother!!!1111”, take into consideration what actual environmental experts have to say, find out if the damage actually exists, before issuing judgement.

So this is the last post in 2016, see you next year!


What Environmentalists Are Really After

Environmental NGOs are not an innocent bunch of hippies and environment-lovers; instead, they have purposes which have nothing to do with the environment. Here’s a simple story to clarify that.

In Ecuador, a country in Latin America, there’s a national park called Yasuni, and it is characterized by it’s indigenous Native American population and a large amount of biodiversity.


The problem is, under this area there is black gold — oil! Since Ecuador is not a rich country and needs to flourish its economy, oil needs to be extracted. And thus the Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa suggested a solution: The Yasuni-ITT Initiative; in which the UN raises donations of $3.6 billion (half of the estimated value of the oil reserves under that park) by 2020 for Ecuador, in exchange that the Ecuadorian government “leaves the oil in the soil”.


However, only $13 million were raised by 2013. This caused Correa, the president, to end the initiative, saying that “the world failed Ecuador“.

Then, directly, them environment-lovers went furious. A member of an NGO called “Amazon Watch” (based in the USA) said that drilling the oil in that national park is equivalent to “ignoring a ticking time bomb for the entire planet“.


Photo: Environmentalists protesting in the Ecuadorian capital; Quito, against oil drilling in the Yasuni National Park. Source

In other words, Correa agreed not to drill the oil, on condition that he gets international compensation, because a country like Ecuador basically relies on oil for its economy. When they didn’t compensate in a sufficient way, of course he will go back to drilling! The UN and the international community could have avoided all the possible damages of drilling which they keep complaining about, but they weren’t willing to. And now they won’t leave Correa alone.

The question is, why all of a sudden those environmentalists rallied their forces in this instance, while when some famous oil company such as ExxonMobil or Chevron is involved, no one moves a muscle or makes a fuss in the media? Because those NGOs secretly cooperate with those multi-national corporations and get funded by them (Greenpeace itself is funded by Chevron, remember?). NGOs rush to stop a third world like Ecuador from developing itself, while corporations do whatever they will, damaging the environment without being held accountable.

This is said because there is another environmental disaster in Ecuador, but no one talks about it. Why? surprise – Chevron is behind it! Chevron dumped more than 18 billion barrels of toxic wastes in the rainforest in Ecuador, causing the indigenous population there to suffer from several kinds of diseases. The most important question is : where are the environmentalists?

Here’s something for radical environmentalists to think about…

Unfortunately, those “activists” do not have the word “logic” in their dictionary. They turn the whole problem of pollution and environmental degradation into a clash of humans vs. nature which simple-minded people who have no will to think or learn are able to grasp. Depopulating the earth is suggested by environmental NGOs as a solution, directly or indirectly.

However, the natural food-chain contains humans as well as other species, and anyone who studied biology in high school knows that if one specie is depopulated then the whole chain is disrupted and the natural balance is disturbed. so depopulating humans, just like depopulating any other specie, won’t solve the problem but would make it worse.

“But people are not like any other specie, they destroy the environment and should be depopulated!!!!!!111111″ For the surprise of the environmental activists, it’s not humans who pollute the earth. Since the beginning of history, humans were in harmony with earth. The ancient tribes used to perform a certain ritual before they kill an animal or cut a tree, to take permission from Mother Nature.

So who is causing pollution?

Better to ask, what is causing pollution?

It’s capitalism and Multi-National Corporations, who only seek to endlessly expand their profit at the expense of humans, animals, and nature. They are the ones destroying not only the environment, but destroying humanity as well. Those same corporations and companies with which the “environmental” NGOs cooperate. So, how about a new equation, easier and more realistic than humans vs. nature, it is corporations vs. humans and nature.

Why extreme environmentalism serves ANYTHING but the environment:

No matter whether you believe in one god or more, you know that humans and the environment were created to compliment each other; so no one is more important than the other. Even if you don’t believe in any god, you know that humans and nature are supposed to be in harmony. However, this is not how extreme environmentalists think.

Extreme environmentalists are your typical peace-loving-tree-hugging-hippie-dippies who value the environment above humans, and they’re usually vegan. They adopt a Malthusian view in which they blame the world problems, especially the environmental problems and pollution, on the rapid increase in the world population. They consider that “Earth can’t bear anymore”.

Protecting the environment is necessary, but not at the expense of humans. However, misanthropic extreme environmentalists think it’s the only way. If you “hate humans”, hate them because they abandon their humanity. If humanity is revived, then the world problems, including those related to the environment, would be solved. But for extreme environmentalists, get rid of humans and then Earth can sustain itself. Radical feminists benefit from this view to promote their abortion agenda. The problem, however, is not the over-population. There is enough wealth for everyone on earth and even more than that; the problem is the unequal distribution. Extreme environmentalists remain blind to this fact.

Also, extreme environmentalists do mot lift a finger when it comes to pollution unless some third world country wants to develop its industry and technology; then environmental NGOs start “screaming” and defending the environment. Developing countries improving themselves to become independent from the global market is not allowed!