Greenpeace Nazca Lines stunt slammed by Peruvian government

Subscribe here:
Greenpeace have humbly apologised after a climate change publicity stunt at the ancient Nazca Lines in Peru angered the government. Report by Ashley Fudge.

Current affairs, amazing footage and incredible stories. Welcome to ODN – On Demand News. Formerly the ITN YouTube channel, ODN is your home for the

top visual stories happening across the globe.

Like us on Facebook:
Follow us on Twitter:
Add us on Google+:

More stories from ODN:

Cuba and the US: Why Obama’s move is so important:
US Navy unveils new robotic fish for underwater surveillance:
Sony hack: Reasons why it was probably NOT North Korea:
“We are sickened”: Military shows interior of Pakistan school:
Tony Abbott: “obvious questions” raised after Sydney siege:
Is there life on Mars? NASA Curiosity finds signs of life:
An ancient pharaoh towers again, after centuries under water:
Peruvians fight to settle disputes before New Year:
Long-lost Disney film found and restored in Norway:
Pakistan school attack: More than 100 children dead:
Sydney siege: Australian PM pays tribute to siege victims:
Crane smashes through home after marriage proposal goes wrong:
California homes buried by mudslides:
Sydney siege: Suspected terrorist takes hostages in cafe:
Greenpeace Nazca Lines stunt slammed by Peruvian government:

See 2013’s Most Watched Videos:

Watch our videos with more a million views:


Written by

The author didnt add any Information to his profile yet

19 thoughts on “Greenpeace Nazca Lines stunt slammed by Peruvian government

  1. This is no silly act like 'ooops' This is a msg to someone up there, because the war against them we won, and we are waiting for them. JAIL FOR GREEN PEACE AND PUBLIC STATEMENT OF STUPIDITY. This is irreversible damage against a sacred place in its image. I hope someone takes all their money away, and dont call them animals for we are insulting animals.

  2. Greenpeace's work is admirable but they have to understand that their protest have to be consistent. You can not compromise a cultural heritage because you think your interest is more important. Acting in this way is behave like politicians and industries that do nothing to improve our Planet and save an irreversible climate change!

  3. Greenpeace has done damage to an archeological site and needs to understand that there are limitations to what they want to do. They could have made their point in a less harmful way.

  4. to all of you armchair twats who masturbate your particular psychological deformities and ideological-predilections you got from your mummies and daddies in trashing Greenpeace for a tactical error in judgement… and criticize/dismiss its very existence…

    ask yourselves whether YOUR personal contributions to the protection/preservation of land, water, air, habitat, species, are significant, or even existant
    and whether your criticism comes from a place of integrity, or gratuitous reactionism

    ask yourselves also whether perhaps some of your anger might be better directed at those career-professionals/sociopathic-twats/etc who have serious responsibilities and who are failing to take decisive actions through denial, interference, incompetence, indecision, apathy, inertia, politics, corporatism….

  5. “A slap in the face at everything Peruvians consider sacred.”
    Is that a true statement made by someone of honour and integrity
    representing the consensus-view of an entire nation?
    or simply fatuous inflammatory opportunistic rhetoric by some otherwise-unemployable
    suit munching on the public trough for personal/political/commercial purposes?
    I don't know – perhaps others do…

    I agree that tactically this particular Greenpeace stunt was stupid and ill-advised
    based on its disrespecting a sensitive and precious world heritage site.
    Locating the banner a few hundred metres, even a couple of kilometres away
    would have been just as effective – given that the Nasca-site  and surrounding area would be observed from the air by hundreds of professional chairwarmers and decision-avoiders, and corporate panderers flying in for just another expense-account junket…
    Oh, and probably a few people who are genuinely committed to addressing the serious problems and have to endure the burdens of the dead-weight and actively harmful lot – like Steve-baby Harmer and Tony (Bud) Abbott

    The very premise that the focus, attention , and concentration of the delegates who are bound by oaths, duty-of-care obligations, and contracts to do their best to work on ever-more critical problems could be diverted and diffused by some peripheral external event, and then blame assigned to those event-perpetrators is truly pathetic and depressing.

    To anyone who remotely supports or aligns with such a premise: "I fart in your general direction, you non-creative garbage, sitting on your loathesome spotty behinds not caring a tinkers cuss for the Earth, while spewing your philistine pig-ignorance"!
    (acknowledgements to M.P. Britain's highest cultural achievement, and a partial compensation for the general malignancy that was the "empire on which the sun never sets" on which the sun is ever more setting)

  6. I find it hard to believe they could have caused any significant damage by not wearing "special shoes" at the site.  Sounds to me like the Peruvian government trying to come up with some excuse to bitch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *