Greenpeace Ordered to Pay $345M Over Pipeline Protests
Did Greenpeace organize a criminal campaign against the Dakota Access Pipeline protest or were Greenpeace's actions peaceful dissent being silenced by corporate lawsuits?
Above: A protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline in Washington, D.C., U.S., on March 10, 2017. Image credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images
The Spin
Climate-skeptic narrative
During the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, Greenpeace orchestrated a deplorable campaign against Energy Transfer that involved violent attacks on staff and equipment, trespassing on private property and defamatory propaganda. This disorder wasn't a peaceful protest but criminal mayhem designed to inflict maximum financial damage on a lawfully permitted project.
Climate activist narrative
Energy Transfer's meritless lawsuit is a blatant attempt to weaponize the courts into silencing environmental advocacy and dissent. In doing so, the company poses a direct threat to free speech by holding peaceful protestors responsible for the actions of others, setting a dangerous precedent that undermines the fundamental right to protest corporate harm.