From: Rod Adams <atomicrod@aol.com>
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Nuclear madness
Date: 5 Jul 1996 17:37:58 GMT

"Mark A. Friesel" <mfriesel@beta.tricity.wsu.edu> wrote:

>On 3 Jul 1996, Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
>
>> Rod Adams (atomicrod@aol.com) writes:
>>
>> > Not to quibble, Jeremy, but wasn't it dolphins that were cut up on
>> > purpose in a Greenpeace video?
>>
>> That was another, much later incident.  The baby seals scandal probably
>> happened over ten years ago now.  I may be wrong, but I suspect that the
>> same reporter that dug up the dophins scandal was involved with this one too.
>
>Is this just slander?  Where can I get the videos you refer to, or can you
>give me reference to the article where you found out about this?  There
>was no response to the last request I made.

I know this is getting way off topic, but here is a copy of a post
that I put on the web last summer (July 1995)  I posted it after
attending a session at the American Nuclear Society summer meeting
in Philadelphia, PA June 25-29. I saved it because I knew it was
dynamite information that might again come up in conversation.
Judge for yourself wether or not slander is a proper word for telling
the story.

"Magnus Gudmundsson (MEGA Video and Film-Iceland) has a story about
Greenpeace that will shock many of you.  I saw his presentation early
this month; I hope that eventually a major network will pick it up.
The story is about the actual events surrounding the film that
Greenpeace released purporting to show that Venezuelan fishermen
routinely killed dolphins.  The story received a lot of play on
television news casts and resulted in calls for an embargo against
Venezuelan exports.  The real story is that Greenpeace staged the
event; even to the point of encouraging a fisherman to brutally cut
open a live dolphin for their camera.  Mr. Gudmundsson showed the
original video of the episode, not just the 30 seconds or so that
provided such dramatic "evidence" to the news media.  It was obvious
from the video that a Greenpeace camera crew hired a local fisherman
under the pretense of doing scientific research on dolphins.  They
directed the action on the boat, even telling the fisherman to turn the
boat around before actually landing a captured dolphin because the
sunlight reflecting off of the water was spoiling the picture.  When
the boat reached the shore, the event director again told the fisherman
what to do.  He told him that they needed to cut open the dolphin as
part of their experiment.  The fisherman looked very uncertain and said
he did not have a knife.  The cameraman gave the fisherman his knife.
The filming crew told the fisherman exactly how to cut the dolphin and
ordered a deeper cut when the first one did not produce enough blood.
They had the fisherman drag the still squirming dolphin to the water so
that the blood would spread for a more dramatic shot.  At the end of
the video, a third man dropped a dolphin skeleton on the beach.  He
asked the cameraman if he should poke at the skeleton with his feet as
if he had just discovered this piece of evidence.  As part of Mr.
Gudmundsson's presentation, he showed a film clip of an interview with
Greenpeace's founder, who compared himself to Dr. Frankenstein.  He
told the interviewer that he had created a monster.  I agree with his
assessment."

Rod Adams

From: cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Nuclear madness
Date: 8 Jul 1996 14:09:04 GMT

Scott Nudds (af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
> (Jeremy Whitlock) wrote:
> : The video on the dolphin scandal was produced by Magnus
> : Gudmundsson, an icelandic filmmaker working for MEGA Video and
> : Film-Iceland.  His email is mgudmice1@aol.com.
>
>   And what is his relationship with the Icelandic whaling industry if
> any?

As far as I know, no connection.

>  What do you know about him that suggests that he can be trusted?

The video evidence pretty much speaks for itself.  I don't know anything
about him that suggests he cannot be trusted.

On a related note, I mentioned several days ago that it was my belief that
this same Magnus Gudmundsson was involved in the exposure of Greenpeace's
staging the slaughter of baby seals.  I have since confirmed this by email
with Mr. Gudmundsson.  The name of the documentary on the baby seals
scandal is "Survival in the High North".

--
Jeremy Whitlock
cz725@freenet.carleton.ca
Visit "The Canadian Nuclear FAQ" at http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cz725/

From: cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Nuclear madness
Date: 10 Jul 1996 17:40:43 GMT

Scott Nudds (af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
> (Jeremy Whitlock) wrote:
> : The video evidence pretty much speaks for itself.  I don't know anything
> : about him that suggests he cannot be trusted.
>
> : On a related note, I mentioned several days ago that it was my belief that
> : this same Magnus Gudmundsson was involved in the exposure of Greenpeace's
> : staging the slaughter of baby seals.  I have since confirmed this by email
> : with Mr. Gudmundsson.
>
>   The evidence you offer is simply that some guy whom you claim produced
> the films, says he produced them and that they are accurate.

As I mention above, the video evidence speaks for itself.

>   Without further substantiation, - something supportive from a
> respected and unbiased publication for example - an admission of guilt
> by the accused, or legal proof of guilt, your "evidence" must be
> regarded as <nothing> more than hearsay.

Capturing the act on video is a little more than "hearsay" -- I think
Rodney King would agree with me here.  Mr. Gudmundsson's documentary also
showed the version of the dolphin video released to the U.S. media, and
there is no doubt about the falsification.

However, I agree that it would be nice to know what fallout came of these
videos (admission of guilt, legal proceedings, etc.), and this thread has
prompted me to track some of this stuff down.  I will report in due
course.

--
Jeremy Whitlock
cz725@freenet.carleton.ca
Visit "The Canadian Nuclear FAQ" at http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cz725/

From: cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Magnussen Videos
Date: 11 Jul 1996 12:53:57 GMT

"Mark A. Friesel" (mfriesel@beta.tricity.wsu.edu) writes:

[snip]
> In brief, Greenpeace had sued Mr. Gudmundsson for libel when his film was
> aired on Norwegian television, and the Norwegian court found in favor of
> Greenpeace.  Ascribed to Judge Pettersen:
>
>       '...the statements made in Gudmundsson's film, were so extreme
>       that reaction is necessary.'
[snip]
> Do either Jeremy Whitlock or Rod Adams have any comment?

It would be best to reserve comment until we've seen the corroborating
information that Mr. Gudmundsson promises.  Having seen Mr. Gudmundsson
present the dolphin video in person, I can attest that he is very driven
and emotional about his cause (which, if what he says is true, is
understandable), and given to making some quite extreme statements about
Greenpeace's motives and actions.  For all we know, he might have gone too
far and thus suffered the libel suit, which would imply nothing about the
veracity of the video itself.  Mr. Gudmundsson has told me that he proved
the Greenpeace fraud in court, so further investigation is definitely
required here.

For clarity, let me add the following:

From observation of the dolphin video itself, which included tapings of
the U.S. newscasts that covered the event, two things are indisputable:

1) The butchering of the dolphins by the fishermen was completely staged
for the video.

2) The edited version of the video constitutes fraud.

> On 8 Jul 1996, Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
> ....
>> The video evidence pretty much speaks for itself.  I don't know anything
>> about him that suggests he cannot be trusted.
>
> Now you do.  Has your position changed?

Based solely on a Greenpeace webpage, no.

--
Jeremy Whitlock
cz725@freenet.carleton.ca
Visit "The Canadian Nuclear FAQ" at http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cz725/

From: cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Nuclear madness
Date: 12 Jul 1996 14:23:21 GMT

"Mark A. Friesel" (mfriesel@beta.tricity.wsu.edu) writes:
> On 10 Jul 1996, Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
>
>> As I mention above, the video evidence speaks for itself.
>
> Evidently it spoke for itself in the Norwegian court as well.  I'd like to
> hear your opinion on this ruling, and how you think the issue relates to
> nuclear power and the environment, since you brought it up.

I've commented on the ruling in the "Magnussen Videos" [sic] thread;
namely that I'm reserving judgement until I know more information.  All
I've seen so far is information that Mr. Gudmundsson was sued for slander,
which could have been for comments made above and beyond the video itself.

Mr. Gudmundsson has indicated that he will provide the videos as well as
corrorborating documentation, and that he will do so as soon as he returns
from a trip he is currently on (July 18 was the return date I think).

>> Capturing the act on video is a little more than "hearsay" -- I think
>> Rodney King would agree with me here.  Mr. Gudmundsson's documentary also
>> showed the version of the dolphin video released to the U.S. media, and
>> there is no doubt about the falsification.
>
> But you evidently failed to investigate the issue, and now your making
> further unsupported claims.  The videos are one thing - your comments are
> the 'hearsay' here.

Granted, since it appears only Rod and I have seen this video, it does
constitute 'hearsay' until we see more evidence -- and it boggles me why
we're wasting bandwidth discussing this fundamental point (I've already
indicated that I'm tracking down the information).

As I also pointed out in the other thread, from my own observation of the
video, there is no doubt about the falsification.  The documentatry shows
both the unedited and the edited version of the dolphins' slaughter on
video, and the edited version is shown as directly taped from U.S. network
television.  The staging of the slaughter is not a deception, since the
images are identical (okay, more correctly, the *chances* of the video
being a deception are minute).

--
Jeremy Whitlock
cz725@freenet.carleton.ca
Visit "The Canadian Nuclear FAQ" at http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cz725/

From: cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Magnussen Videos
Date: 12 Jul 1996 14:30:57 GMT

"Mark A. Friesel" (mfriesel@beta.tricity.wsu.edu) writes:

[snip]
> 'Driven' and 'emotional' are not indications of truth - among other
> things they can be signs of anxiety.  I appreciate that
> you're trying to prove a point, but let's stick with details.  Which
> court, and when?  What was the fraud?  Did he give any of this
> information? He hasn't responded to my second email message yet.

We likely won't know until after July 18, as indicated in the other thread.

[snip]
> At the very least you should state why you think it was instigated or
> staged by Greenpeace.  And the seal slaughter incident?

My opinion?  Well, I think they staged both slaughters for a "good cause",
in their minds.  They couldn't tape the seal or dolphin slaughter directly
so they traded off a little deception for a greater "good".

>> > On 8 Jul 1996, Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
>> > ....
>> >> The video evidence pretty much speaks for itself.  I don't know anything
>> >> about him that suggests he cannot be trusted.
>> >
>> > Now you do.  Has your position changed?
>>
>> Based solely on a Greenpeace webpage, no.
>
> But you have no other evidence to offer at present except opinion, nor
> have you refuted their information.  Further, by disregarding the page
> simply because it is provided by Greenpeace is an indication of bias, much
> as if I chose to disregard the videos because they came from Gudmundsson.

Right, so let's wait for independent evidence.  I've seen Greenpeace lie
in its "Greenlink" newsletter about matters that I know quite a bit about
(ie, nuclear), so of course I would be skeptical about their webpage. It
might contain facts, but not all the facts.

--
Jeremy Whitlock
cz725@freenet.carleton.ca
Visit "The Canadian Nuclear FAQ" at http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cz725/