Greenpeace loses lawsuit. Liable for $700M. (Page 1/1) Raydar MAR 23, 11:34 AM What many leftist activists describe as “free speech” ends up looking more like a license for engaging in criminal disruption and property damage. Remember the 2020 riotous Summer of Love™ with the infamous “mostly peaceful protests”? And of course today we have the wanton destruction of Teslas. Greenpeace defended its actions as “free speech” after Energy Transfer Partners, the developer building the Dakota Access Pipeline, sued the ecoterrorist group. In 2017, the pipeline project was effectively shut down as a bunch of climate activist protesters waged a campaign of disinformation, arson, and sabotage in their efforts to derail the completion of the pipeline project. This was in North Dakota near the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s reservation. The activists, who created a makeshift camp, harassed workers, set fires, vandalized equipment, blocked roads, and killed livestock. When they were finally removed with the aid of the National Guard, they left over 21 million tons of trash that cost more than $1.1 million to clean up. So much for protecting the environment… Despite the setbacks, ETP finally completed the pipeline, which transported crude oil from North Dakota’s Bakken region underground to an oil terminal in Illinois. The oil was then transported to refineries on the Gulf Coast. Yet those setbacks cost ETP some $340 million and damaged the company’s reputation. Well, after years of litigation and a trial, a North Dakota jury ruled in ETP’s favor, granting the company a ruling of nearly $700 million in damages. Complete article at the Link jdv MAR 23, 01:27 PM I am sure the more they look into the corruption they will find a common link. Some one is paying these thugs. cliffw MAR 23, 01:43 PM Greenpeace. Founded in Canada in 1971. What is the logic behind the name ? The New Green Deal ??? What is up with the word green ? Most will remember the activism of Greenpeace small boats blocking ships. They should have been sued a long time ago, and many times since. Doug85GT MAR 23, 02:36 PM Good. I hope it bankrupts them. All terrorists, including eco terrorists, should be dealt with severely. 82-T/A [At Work] MAR 25, 08:17 AM I'm not sad... While their initial founding might have had some good intentions, many of these organizations have become political action arms of the Democrat party, rather than focusing (in a non-partisan way) on their true mission and goals. When these organizations get corrupted (by the offer of free money from certain sources), they become obligated to certain things that don't always align with their stated goals... and it will cause them to fail. This will / would bankrupt them. Jake_Dragon MAR 25, 05:42 PM quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm not sad... When they start using terrorism to try and prove a point. That is my line. Those little ****ers that shut down the 110 and get knocked over by the truck. Well guess what, you should not have been there. Destruction of property, stopping emergency responders from doing a job. Stopping health care people from going to work. All of it. They really need to start living in the real world, none of that helps anything. I remember Greenpeace and the whaling boats. I was ok at first, we shouldn't be hunting them to extinction but there should be a line these conservationists should not be crossing. olejoedad MAR 25, 06:25 PM One of the original founders of the group left it years ago because they were getting too radical, as I recall, the board of directors let him go because he was too reasonable.