December 13, 2016

Tweet exposes anti-oilsands activist's conflict of interest

Christopher WilsonRebel Commentator
 

Tzeporah Berman is the most radical, outspoken, uncompromising, and likely most recognizable eco-activist in Canada. 

For 25 years Berman has been leading radical protest movements across our country from anti-forestry protests in Clayquot Sound, BC in the 1990’s to more recently campaigning against the Canadian oil and gas industry from pipelines to fracking.

And now today she sits on the Alberta government’s Oil Sands Advisory Group.

Where else could a radical eco-activist like Tzeporah get a job working for a government besides the Alberta NDP?

Well actually, the BC Liberals.

Watch as I show you her history in BC and how close she is to eco-radical Vancouver Mayor, Gregor Robertson.

What I saw in a tweet by Berman is certainly a conflict of interest for the Alberta government she now works for.

Rachel Notely just wrapped up a week in Vancouver holding numerous meetings trying to sell those opposed to the recently approved Kinder Morgan pipeline project on its merits.

So why on earth is someone sitting on her Oil Sands Advisory Group fundraising for the most anti-oil sands political party and TIDES Canada associated Vision Vancouver?

Our politicians need to stop falling for the idea that somehow naming destroyers like Tzeporah to advisory groups, gains favour with radical environmentalists.

They will oppose all forms of development until we are all in energy poverty and into a stage of negative growth which is ultimately, what these environmental extremists want.

Let's stop hiring foreign funded radicals like Tzeporah, and stop giving her the opportunity to do so much damage.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-12-15 02:21:58 -0500
RON VOSS commented 1 day ago
‘While Notley postures in support of the Kinder Morgan pipeline she appoints a woman to her OSAG who says keep the oil in the ground. Cognitive dissonance.’

It’s a little something that’s for sure.
commented 2016-12-14 23:22:58 -0500
The headline says “conflict of interest”….the F!#!#king carbon tax and anti-oil activism is all manner of bad things but it is NOT a conflict of interest. These people are doing what they have a lawfull electoral mandate to do.

This came about because of a consortium of influences from schools and the media….all of it WRONG WRONG WRONG ….but it is in no way a “conflict of interest” and in the interests of better journalism standards …that should be made clear.

The crop of young impressionable voters…and the protest voters fed up with the previous corruption…will now have to suffer the consequences of their vote……that’s why we redo it every four years.
commented 2016-12-14 12:08:15 -0500
@ Earl Richards . . . . "When companies leave, Vancouver’s tax base will disappear. " ? ? ?
Companies have been leaving Vancouver for years . . . but NOT because of oil tankers.
They have been leaving because of the Loonie Mayor and his insane regulations and HIGH business taxes. Drive out to Langley and Surrey to see ALL the companies that used to be in Vancouver.
commented 2016-12-14 11:37:42 -0500
@glen Craig;
Really?
Seriously?
Best interest of thier constituents?
Are one of the train cars from the little choo choo that could?
commented 2016-12-14 10:46:42 -0500
Glenn Craig….just like YOU voters in Ontario, a mantate to Wynnut? NOT!!
STFU!!
We won’t lay down here in the west., unlike the clowns in the east.
commented 2016-12-14 01:34:45 -0500
Sorry…her eco-activism is not a conflict of interest….the voters indicated they wanted this. Just like Hitler did not invent anti-semitism…and his supporters cannot download their kharma on him….the fact that Notley’s government is commandeered with econuts is a lot of bad things…but none of these people are garnering spin off money from anything that is not electorally mandated policy….and therefore they are not in “conflict of interest” …the fact that it is NOT in the best interest of their constituents notwithstanding.
commented 2016-12-14 01:13:49 -0500
HMMMM when the Chinese own Vancouver they may push for the pipeline and the enviro kooks will have no say, that would be quite comical.
commented 2016-12-14 01:12:33 -0500
Earl Richards i hope you do understand that an oil spill would be accidental while the raw sewage is pumped on purpose eh?
commented 2016-12-14 01:11:20 -0500
Earl Richards i will go stand in a a small pool filled with bitumen if you stand in one filled with raw sewage that you have no problem with.
commented 2016-12-13 23:33:07 -0500
This parasite has made a good living selling fear and BS for 25 years, she’d have made a good soviet apparatchik back in the day.
commented 2016-12-13 23:07:39 -0500
Earl maybe they should shut the gas and power off from northern B.C that way Vancouver could say they are doing there part to save the climate . Let me know what you think of that Idea .
commented 2016-12-13 22:32:12 -0500
Port of Vancouver currently sees 5000 vessels a year , all carrying bunker fuel, if pipeline goes through it would be about 6200 vessels, only 420 carrying Canadian crude
How much Alaska crude is shipped down the b c coast ?— research shows that in the year 2013 it was about 38 million cubic meters a year , enough to fill b c place stadium to the roof 15 times
It’s all working just fine you LEFTARD BASTARDS !!!!!!!
commented 2016-12-13 21:50:58 -0500
The US can do it. We can too. Keep fighting
commented 2016-12-13 21:05:24 -0500
Earl Richards commented 7 mins ago
No toxic, tar sands for Vancouver. A spill from a tanker down into Vancouver harbour will hurt Vancouver’s business base, as companies will have to close. When companies leave, Vancouver’s tax base will disappear. Vancouver will lose tourism jobs and future businesses, as tourists and companies tend to shy away from contaminated areas, and companies will not locate in Vancouver. The tar sands should not be permitted to reach Burnaby.

News flash. It already does. However, you should thought of that when you blocked gateway.
commented 2016-12-13 21:04:21 -0500
While Notley postures in support of the Kinder Morgan pipeline she appoints a woman to her OSAG who says keep the oil in the ground. Cognitive dissonance.
commented 2016-12-13 20:57:12 -0500
No toxic, tar sands for Vancouver. A spill from a tanker down into Vancouver harbour will hurt Vancouver’s business base, as companies will have to close. When companies leave, Vancouver’s tax base will disappear. Vancouver will lose tourism jobs and future businesses, as tourists and companies tend to shy away from contaminated areas, and companies will not locate in Vancouver. The tar sands should not be permitted to reach Burnaby.
commented 2016-12-13 20:09:24 -0500
Apparently, these people are making money, probably a lot of money from what I call the Climate Change Gravy Train. As I indicate in “From There to Here” at the end of ’Where is Here", Climate Change is Big Business. http://heinzegroup.com/climate2016.htm
commented 2016-12-13 19:05:24 -0500
They’re all a bunch of genocidal killers. Lock them up.
commented 2016-12-13 19:04:03 -0500
Funnier note. That constipated face on Bermann reminds me of the invisible energy minister at that age, when she was a low average teacher.
commented 2016-12-13 19:01:49 -0500
Considering Berman’s paymasters are non-Canadian business competitors of the Canadian energy industry, that would make her a traitor to the workers of Canada. So, dare I say, “Lock Her Up!”.

But then, those are the same paymasters of Baby Doc and his blond squeeze, Notley and her invisible energy minister, and Wynne. Need several cells for those who sold out the workers. Particularly for the Alberta Non- Democratic Party who shrug at 200 000 jobs lost, representing 800 000 lives assuming an average family of four. Then…the increased suicide rate…