BMEWS
 

Walmart sucks up to the sky is falling crowd and launches its own green revolution.

 
 


Posted by peiper    United Kingdom   on 09/19/2009 at 09:56 AM   
 
  1. > Everything it sells would be labelled with a number or a symbol, showing the
    > product’s ecological impact, from the extraction of raw materials to its
    > disposal as waste.

    What a horrible waste of time and money.

    I’ve been choosing products and services that don’t try to ram this concept of green down my throat.  If you’re trying to sell me a concept along with the product, I figure your product sucks ass, and you’re trying to distract me from that fact.

    Posted by Argentium G. Tiger    Canada   09/19/2009  at  05:04 PM  

  2. A couple days back I said that Der ObamanFuhrer wanted as many of our frontline troops overseas so they could be used up or killed.

    It’s begun.

    http://www.military.com/news/article/ambushed-marines-aid-call-rejected.html?col=1186032325324&ESRC=dod.nl

    How long do you think our guys will last when they know that when surrounded by Taliban and out numbered 10 or 50 or 100 to one - NO ONE IS GOING TO COME TO HELP THEM SO AS TO LIMIT POSSIBLE CASUALTIES...to just our soldiers.

    NATO-led forces are investigating the death of four Marines in eastern Afghanistan after their commanders reportedly rejected requests for artillery fire in a battle with insurgents, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.

    Tuesday’s incident was “under investigation” and details remained unclear, press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference.

    A McClatchy newspapers’ journalist who witnessed the battle reported that a team of Marine trainers made repeated appeals for air and artillery support after being pinned down by insurgents in the village of Ganjgal in eastern Kunar province.

    The U.S. troops had to wait more than an hour for attack helicopters to come to their aid and their appeal for artillery fire was rejected, with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.

    Posted by babylonandon    United States   09/19/2009  at  07:51 PM  

  3. Its 100,000-plus suppliers would have to reveal their ecological impact or have their products taken off the shelves.

    So WalMart is going to require its 100,000 Chinese suppliers to do that? Can you imagine the reaction of Chink suppliers? [yawn… crickets chirping… ‘Oh yes, must make up ecological impact for WalMart’… yawn… crickets…]

    I’m with you Argent. While I don’t go out of my way to avoid ‘green’ crap, if it’s marketed to me as if I’m a doctrinaire Gormon, aka: idiot, I run away with my hand on my wallet.

    Posted by Christopher    United States   09/20/2009  at  04:10 AM  

  4. No wonder we all hang out together - there are specific companies (GE) and products that I too walk away from. But on the whole - if I like it, if I need it.

    I’m sick of it - yes a recycling bin(s) are good. Been doing it for years - would like it if more of US stuff went back to bottles. We only buy a few (and I mean very few) shelf items in cans - no more canned soda at all. And now - even our recycling has gone down (well there is just 3 of us, that helps too). And I’ve cut the amount of ‘new’ and ‘improved’ ‘cleaning’ stuff down to almost zero.

    We grow some of our own - but to look at every label, to buy only certain places/products simply because they are bowing down to a hypocritical moron from TN - nope that is too far toward stupid for me.

    And the arrogance to think that either God’s creation or the Big Bang would be sent into the great goodnight by one little ole created being - I’m not better than God and I don’t think what little ole me is going to do will undo the what millions of years of primordial ooze.

    Arrogant and stupid - what a combination.

    Posted by wardmama4    United States   09/20/2009  at  06:45 AM  

  5. Babylonandon:  Dear God.  I’m not going to come out and flat out condemn the commanders who made the decision, as I don’t have all the data, but they’d better have a damned good reason for what they chose to do.

    Peiper?  Drew?  Christopher?  I think Babylon’s link rates a separate post, whatcha think?

    Posted by Argentium G. Tiger    Canada   09/20/2009  at  07:52 AM  

  6. NATO-led forces…

    I don’t know Argent. I think the culprit is in the first five syllables of the article. Not much different from reading “UN-led forces…”

    Why, oh why are we still with NATO? NATO’s purpose was to oppose the Warsaw Pact, which has been defunct for almost 20 years.

    I remember back when I re-upped in ‘84. I actually had them insert into my contract that I would never, ever, be assigned under a foreign command, or wear anything but US uniforms. No blue helmets allowed.

    It never came up, but I wonder if I would have prevailed in court if I’d ever been ordered to serve under foreign command?

    Posted by Christopher    United States   09/20/2009  at  08:56 AM  

  7. Wal Mart commits envirocide.  Giant retailer goes broke in one week!  Millions of sane customers flee to competition outlets!  Eat shit and die Wally World.  Film at 11.

    Posted by grayjohn    United States   09/20/2009  at  11:00 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Christian hoteliers charged with insulting Muslim guest, and it's a criminal offence.

Previous entry: SCOOTER KILLER CLEARED BY LOOPHOLE ....

<< BMEWS Main Page >>