Ross,

You WOULD have to ask for corroboration. Actually, I'm glad you asked that
since it's an important part of the dynamics of environmentalism as we know
it. I first heard about it in a radio interview with journalist Alexander
Cockburn about 5 years ago. I will have to dig to get you some written
corroboration and it will take me a while but I will keep at it.

My understanding is that Rockefeller money (Standard Oil, Esso, Exxon,
etc.), which was a traditional arch-rival to the Pew family (Sunoco), was
funding environmental organizations early on when the environmental
movement began to take off in the late 60s. If I remember correctly,
Greenpeace has been relatively free of petroleum money.

I certainly don't want to leave the impression that the top enviro groups
don't do any good work. However, they tend to be highly centralized
organizations focused on lobbying in Washington (with all that entails with
currying favor in order to get a luncheon date with Congressman
such-and-such) and spend much money on slick fundraising items. What they
won't do is organize to build local activist groups with bottom-up input
(like the rest of US politicking, they're allergic to participatory
democracy), they often won't name names regarding corporate polluters, and
above all, given their funding sources, they won't bite the hands that feed
them.

By the way, I didn't mean to imply that such information on oil $ funding
is common knowledge at all. On the contrary, it's one of many areas that
mainstream media would prefer to bury in an avalanche of OJ Simpson
trivialities or in-depth Monica lipstick color reports.

Good, uncompromising and uncompromised information is very hard to come by.
It's always best to be skeptical and ask questions of all sources...as you
did, Ross. On the environment and related concerns, I enjoy the free e-mail
newsletter Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly, which provides a good
digest of scientific information and a trenchant analysis. "To start your
own free subscription, send E-mail to [log in to unmask] with the words
SUBSCRIBE RACHEL-WEEKLY YOUR NAME in the message."

Thanks for questioning my assertion,
David in Durham


>The  statement ".....the fact >that almost all of the top ten
>environmental organizations in the US are >funded to a large extent by
>Big Oil money (Pew Charitable Trust, for >example). But there are
>certainly some serious environmentalists who are >knowledgeable and
>working very hard to combat the true sources of threat to >our natural
>world." has been casually thrown out, as if it were a matter that all
>"well informed" folks know about: Common Knowlege, as it were.  While
>the message that contained it contained an UNcommon amount of good
>old-fashioned Horse-Sense, this little "fact" i think would come as news
>to many.  Would someone be so kind as to point the list towards some
>documentation or substantial evidence which supports this interesting
>"fact" - not meaning to seem beligerant, but this is not the sort of
>accusation which should be thrown into an otherwise sensible
>communication (and Real Rants go on far longer - trust me on this one
>;-} ), without at least a small morsel of corroborating evidence.  So,
>let's hear it.
>
>Curmudgeon in Canada,
>Ross.