Nick Pope
Contributor
One of the original founders of Greenpeace told the Daily Caller News Foundation that he hopes to see Greenpeace USA lose a lawsuit that threatens the group’s existence.
Patrick Moore, who was listed on Greenpeace’s website as one of the original founders as recently as 2007 before the organization attempted to distance itself from him, would like Greenpeace USA to lose the massive lawsuit filed against the group by a company called Energy Transfer, he told the DCNF. The company is seeking $300 million in damages from Greenpeace USA in a North Dakota lawsuit that alleges the group or its entities incited major protests against Energy Transfer’s Dakota Access Pipeline, funded various attacks meant to damage the project and orchestrated a smear campaign against the company and its development.
“They’ve got to embrace what is really true science…. They ignore massively important facts, and then make lies up to replace them. So yes, I hope they are going to learn a lesson from this,” Moore told the DCNF regarding his old group and the lawsuit it faces. “Science is about truth, and then you decide your policy. These guys, they personally decide the policy, and then they lie about the underlying scientific aspects. It just completely bastardized science in much of the world, especially in the Western world … they have become sort of spoiled brats, I would say, and they don’t have good science.” (RELATED: Eco-Activist Who Vandalized Stonehenge Recounts Being Bullied By American Bros Chanting ‘Oil’)
Greenpeace USA “would certainly deserve” to lose the lawsuit, Moore told the DCNF. “They are basically attempting to destroy the means of transportation and so many other things. There’s no doubt about it that pipelines are the safest way to move liquids, especially flammable ones. There’s simply no question.”
Moore went on to play “a significant role” in Greenpeace’s Canadian arm, according to Greenpeace, but he left the organization in 1986 because he felt it had become too radical. Despite listing him as an original founder as recently as 2007, Greenpeace now has an entire website dedicated to explaining that Moore does not represent the organization and that he is not an original founder.
Energy Transfer’s billionaire executive chairman Kelcy Warren is behind the company’s lawsuit, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday. Warren, who once said that green activists ought to be “removed from the gene pool,” views climate activists as a significant threat to the energy industry and has stated that he is unafraid to go after them for the problems they caused for the company and the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Meanwhile, some of Greenpeace USA’s top leaders have fought internally about what kind of settlement may be acceptable to reach with the company, according to the WSJ. However, even if Energy Transfer wins the lawsuit, it may be difficult to enforce penalties against Greenpeace’s central coordinating body in the Netherlands because that entity does not hold assets in the U.S.
Representatives for Greenpeace USA did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“as recently as 2007”
It’s 2024
So Greenpeace was happy to call him a founder for some 20 years after he left. I’m not sure what your point is.
I forget exactly what triggered that level of animosity between them. He left when Greenpeace was looking for new things to oppose and chlorine was high on a list. Trying to ban chlorine was just dumb. It was years later when Moore actively opposed Greenpeace’s recent activities that they wrote him out of their history.
Dr. Moore explains a lot about his relationship with Greenpeace, especially his early involvement, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GH8v5aCbZBs&t=110s
Obviously, Greenpeace are Moore deniers.
Possibly, they are also ex-Pat(rick)s
Please remember that many of us were graduated scientists before Greenpeace was originally formed. To us 2007 is indeed quite recent.
Right- I often see people on TV or in person who mention something about the ’80s as if it was ancient history. I’m 75- so when I was a kid I knew people who were born in the 1880s, like my grandparents- and I knew men who fought in WW1. To me, WW1 was ancient history. The idea of my grandparents born in the 1880s was so far away it was beyond my imagination.
Well to be clear, Patrick Moore joined Greenpeace in 1971, and was instrumental in stopping both US and French above ground nuclear testing, stopping factory whaling and bringing worldwide attention to the barbaric practice of clubbing baby seals for their fur. And the green nuts now at the helm of GreenPeace cannot disprove the photographic and documented evidence he was an initial or founding member.
Here is some of the evidence he was indeed a founding member, starting at time 5:00 –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxGJBRAwxr8&t=2228s (2015 Annual GWPF Lecture – Patrick Moore – Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide)
GoonPeace’s .pdf file on Moore’s history with the outfit is no longer available, it seems – message displayed about not being archived yet.
I repeat my point that the organization had a few different names beginning with Sierra Club (which objected to using its name as umbrella), a name tied to fears of tsunami from nuclear test under Amchitka, morphing into Greenpeace at some point (beginning with using that name of the first protest ship, which Moore was on). He was instrumental in organizing Greenpeace legally to protect the name.
your point? so, history was rewritten in 2007, and we must live with it?
Exaggeration, lies, and rewriting history are the tools of the activists. The only time science enters the equation is when they falsely claim that it is on their side. I hope this court action achieves its’ goal.
Don’t forget when Greenpeace hiked into Peru and damaged the Nazca lines by putting their message on the historic and sensitive archeological site.
Wonderful people. That’s why the French sank their boat, the Rainbow Warrior.
Indeed, Greenpeace executives have publicly stated it is publicity that matters, not truth.
(One very early Greenpeace activist was too violent even for Greenpeace, so Paul Watson formed his own Sea Shepherd Conservation Society operations – Wikipedia. He promotes ‘Direct Action’, while Greenpeace claims it is not violent – though in fact it initiates force thus I say is violent. For some reason even the Sea Shepard bunch turned against him. )
I have no good idea of whether EU or Netherlands courts would enforce an judgement.
Couldn’t the onus to comply at least be held against the US operations?
The dutch courts have been rather friendly towards NGOs under the umbrella ‘human rights’. Apparently they just apply arbitrary rules whenever it suits. Human Rights as a concepts have been abused and downgraded to a form of virtue signalling w a lot of perception of intent even if they clearly break written down rules which a judge is supposed to adhere..
As the Resolute Timbers suits showed Greenpeace has powerful friends with deep pockets. Beating them through the courts is difficult.
Hold climate change activists accountable for Maui wildfire missteps
One “government misstep” that warrants scrutiny is the decision to ban an age-old fire mitigation practice, prescribed burns. These tightly controlled and highly regulated burns intentionally remove spent agricultural or forest growth so that even if there is a fire, it won’t have fuel to grow out of control.
Hawaii’s burn ban came about as a result of lawsuits and lobbying campaigns waged by activists and organizations, including Earthjustice and the Sierra Club. The effort succeeded in ending prescribed agricultural burns, which contributed to the demise of a historic 36,000-acre sugar plantation in 2016.
Indeed, forcing out the responsible steward of the land, all in the name of clean air, without balancing that consideration against unintended consequences, led to this unthinkable, tragic consequence in Maui.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/beltway-confidential/2785374/hold-climate-change-activists-accountable-for-maui-wildfire-missteps/
Media say that a recent report shows government did not do enough to prepare for wildfire on Maui.
There’s more: Energy Transfer – suing Greenpeace here – bought the Sunoco oil company back in 2017, thereby essentially indirectly becoming the named defendant in the 2020 pair of “ExxonKnew” lawsuits Honolulu v Sunoco and Maui v Sunoco. Both lawsuits more or less rely on cornerstone ‘leaked memos evidence’ from a pair of former top Greenpeace USA operatives for the accusation that fossil fuel company executives employed shill skeptic scientists in disinformation campaigns. I detailed that fatal problem and others in my dissections of both lawsuits here and here. If Energy Transfer chooses to look into those problems, it might pave the way for them to get both lawsuits dismissed from having no viable evidence proving any such ‘disinformation campaigns’ ever happened.
The major contributor to the $multi-million damage to the Company and the State of North Dakota was Obama himself. He personally instructed that a second EIS be conducted AFTER the Corp of Engineers had already permitted Dakota Access construction and about half the pipeline had already been completed. His action triggered the protest that cost North Dakota $millions to contain and cleanup tons of debris after the protest camp was abandoned.
Sovereign Immunity.
The overriding factor in a civil lawsuit is damages, attorneys could care less about science.
couldn’t care less ?
Greenpeace has used the threatening statement ‘We know who you are, we know where you live—we are many, you are few’.
Well—“…most of the €202.5 million received by the organization was donated by about 2.6 million regular supporters, mainly from Europe.”
There are over 8 billion people on this planet, making Greenpeace supporters an insignificant percentage (0.03) of the population. It seems that Greenpeace is hardly entitled to the ‘we are many you are few’ claim, and they need to be careful with that lest the majority stand up, turn around, and start to focus on them.
They have certainly caught Kelcy Warren’s attention; not a good start.
lest the majority stand up, turn around, and start to focus on them.
Indeed, they are not few, and I’m pretty certain they have more ammo
“Despite listing him as an original founder as recently as 2007…”
Just to prove it- somebody should bring it up on the wayback machine. Then rub their noses in it. 🙂
I fear that some court with judges that are influenced more by politics than a clear understanding of game alarmists play and their disregard of empirical scientific observation and favoring computer projections will be the deciding factor.
Story tip.
EV’s sales disaster for August in Australia.
Aussie EV Shock! August sales results are a DISASTER | MGUY Australia (youtube.com)
I can’t imagine the amount of lost business and money that Greenpeace and groups like them have caused. It is time to hold them accountable for the real damage they have caused as compared to some made up damage that may happen sometime down the road. It is time to take them to the cleaners.
They may hold no assets in the U.S., but a judgment against them would at least mean they cannot bring any of their ships into U.S. waters. They would immediately be confiscated.
And if the US was lucky, they couldn’t raise any funds there either.
No more “hawking” on street corners.
Unfortunate as it may be to Greenpeace Mr Moore will forever be a founder member of it, no matter what cancel culture may be employed by them.
What Greenpeace may wish to do to keep us simple folk and potential donators happy is to explain the rift between them and Mr Moore to us because no organisation of decent repute and worthy of our generosity would dare attempt to cancel anyone, good, bad or indifferent.
I really appreciate Mr. Moore’s activism against eco-goons.
But FTR he was NOT one of the original founders of Greenpeace.
Mr. Moore’s big contribution was formalizing the organization to keep rights to the name Greenpeace, as unconnected groups started to use the name.
It does get confusing, aside from Greenpeace trying to rewrite history of Patrick Moore and even Paul Watson.
For example, they try to differentiate between the very fist group and people who were on the ship planning to go to the Amchitka Island site of a US nuclear test.
Names change, Wikipedia’s entry on Paul Watson says the very first protest was under the banner of the Sierra Club but it did not want to be associated, so the group organized as the Don’t Make a Wave Committee circa 1970, holding a protest at the border crossing at Blaine WA. The Greenpeace name (which was used for their first ship), was adopted in 1972. Wikipedia says that Moore was on that ship’s voyage toward Amchitka but he was not a founder of the DMaWC).
(The DMaWC name came from a concern that the nuclear test would create a tidal wave.)
A popular story is that Mr. Moore woke up one morning and realized he was living a negative life. (My words.)So he left the Greenpeace organization he had been a top executive of.
Mr. Moore grew up with family experienced in, in a location of, fishing and forestry.