Dallas Company Sues Greenpeace Over “Eco-Terrorism” at Dakota Access Pipeline

Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners has gone to court against Greenpeace and other environmental groups, accusing them of being “eco terrorists” in their fight against the company’s Dakota Access Pipeline.

The company filed a racketeering lawsuit in federal court in North Dakota on Tuesday claiming the groups caused “billions of dollars in damage” through “criminal activity and campaigns of misinformation.”

The lawsuit, 1:17-cv-00173 in U.S. District Court for the District North Dakota was also filed against BankTrack, Earth First!, Greenpeace Fund, Inc. and others. It claims the groups spread misinformation for the purpose of “fraudulently inducing donations” and damaging Energy transfer’s business and financial relationships.

“The Complaint also alleges that the Enterprise incited, funded and facilitated crimes and acts of terrorism to further these objectives,” said Energy Transfer in announcing the lawsuit.

The suit described them as “rogue environmental groups and militant individuals.” It claimed the misinformation campaign was predicated on false, alarmist and sensational claims that the company had encroached on tribal treaty lands, desecrated sacred sites of Native American tribes and constructed the pipeline without consulting the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

“The Enterprise supported these false claims with manufactured evidence, including phony GPS coordinates purporting to show the existence of cultural and religious artifacts along DAPL’s corridor, and sham affidavits submitted in court,” stated the press release.”In addition to its misinformation campaign, the Enterprise directly and indirectly funded eco-terrorists on the ground in North Dakota.  These groups formed their own outlaw camp among peaceful protestors gathered near Lake Oahe, and exploited the peaceful activities of these groups to further the Enterprise’s corrupt agenda by inducing and directing violent and destructive attacks against law enforcement as well as Plaintiffs’ property and personnel.”

 

 

%d bloggers like this: