Kleenex

  •  (1) |
  • 1 (11) |
  • 2 (413) |
  • 4 (1) |
  • 5 (2) |
  • 9 (15) |
  • A (1527) |
  • B (1091) |
  • C (1831) |
  • D (973) |
  • E (1213) |
  • F (775) |
  • G (701) |
  • H (980) |
  • I (999) |
  • J (471) |
  • K (107) |
  • L (612) |
  • M (1144) |
  • N (592) |
  • O (243) |
  • P (1960) |
  • Q (51) |
  • R (1245) |
  • S (1154) |
  • T (743) |
  • U (241) |
  • V (369) |
  • W (569) |
  • x (3) |
  • Y (39) |
  • Z (14) |

Greenpeace punks Kleenex over old growth forests




Hat tip to Noel for the link to Intervention on Kleenex

Kimberly-Clark, the company that owns the Kleenex brand (along with Huggies, Cottonelle, Kotex, Scott, Depends, etc), thinks it's cool to use old-growth trees in the United States and Canada to manufacture their paper tissues. Yup. They think it's Ok to kill 100+ year old trees for the sake of your incontinence, menstrual flow and buggers.

This from Greenpeace's Kleercut.net website :

Kleenex, one of the most popular brands of tissue products in the world, contributes to the destruction of ancient forests. Its manufacturer, the Kimberly-Clark corporation, has been unwilling to improve its practices, continuing to rely on paper and pulp made from clearcut ancient forest including North America's Boreal forest. Kimberly-Clark clears these ancient forests, essential in fighting climate change and providing home to wildlife like caribou, wolves, eagles and bears,into products that are flushed down the toilet or thrown away.


***
liza's picture

| | | | | | |

Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Visit our sponsors

Who's online

There are currently 3 users and 15074 guests online.

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Words to live by

I of all people should know better. The civil rights movement in the U.S. told women to stop talking about gender issues because first the fight against racism had to be won. The feminist movement frowned at women of colour raising their issues, insisting that first the fight against the patriarchy had to be won. The nationalist movements in Africa insisted that feminism was a corrupt and decadent western import, and that first we had to capture our earthly kingdoms, and achieve our panAfricanist Nirvana, before we started looking at "side issues". And those of us who are interested in our contemporary political dynamics have fallen into the same pit of not tackling the prickly, the uncomfortable questions now: we are waiting to win the larger battle before we clean our house. There is always another battle or another issue, and the matters that matter to the foot soldiers are postponed for yet another day. Yet, these issues ARE the battle. We fight for freedom --and do not imagine we are doing anything less--because it is the freedom to live our lives the way we want, from the jobs we choose to the people we fall in love with. If we cannot tackle them, then we are not equipped to tackle anything. What are the lines of difference we draw? For what do we engage, argue, participate and in some heroes' cases, take awful risks? For what?


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify