Small point that needs further clarification Thurlow;
how does the interests of Greenpeace differ from any other "self appointed" lobbygroup? If their claims were proved to be without substance then why are they still relevant?
And if it is to be the enthusiatic deployment of the "fear tactic" that is to be condemned, I can still remember - seems like only yesterday - a slightly younger (and maybe less wiser) George Bush being liberal with plenty of inferred statements of perceived threats.
Maybe instead of a "War on Nations of Terror" we should have a "War on Terrible Notions"
