Eco-terrorists claim climate change justifies their actions to destroy the oil infrastructure

Fervent belief in global warming and man-made climate change is motivating some to protest oil pipeline construction across the United States. Some of these activists are so driven by the political agenda called climate change, that they are seeking to shut down the U.S. oil infrastructure and its vast network of pipelines. A new wave of eco-terrorism has emerged to sabotage and tear down existing structures. Lessening our dependence on fossil fuels is a noble cause, but any transition to cleaner energy must be accomplished through practical and constructive means. By tearing out the oil infrastructure, eco-terrorists would make energy, heating, and transportation unaffordable for millions of people.

In an editorial for The Guardian, activist Emily Johnston wrote that the world must be saved from fossil fuels, and she argues that this is the reason why activists took a pair of pipelines offline in Minnesota earlier in 2017. Likewise, an eco-terrorist sabotaged an oil pipeline in North Dakota because he thought it was necessary to stop “the ticking time bomb of man-made global warming.”

Convinced that oil consumption is causing hurricanes and other extreme weather, activists such as Johnston are willing to do whatever it takes to tear down the U.S. oil infrastructure. In reference to a barrage of hurricanes that hit the U.S. in the summer of 2017, Johnston wrote, “As recent months have made clear, climate change is not only an imminent threat; it is an existing catastrophe. It’s going to get worse, and tar sands oil—the dirtiest oil on Earth—is one of the reasons.”

“I have little doubt that the awful weather events of the last couple of months played some role in this—it’s not just scientists seeing the truth anymore: the building is indeed burning, and all the world’s babies are in it,” Johnston wrote in her op-ed.

This is a perfect example of how the fervent climate change insanity is driving people to extremes. Leftist-leaning authorities are giving in to the insanity, too. Clearwater County District Judge Robert Tiffany gave Johnston and activist group Climate Direct Action the option to use the fear of cataclysmic climate change as justification for their actions. They claimed their unruly actions to shut down the Enbridge pipeline were a “necessity defense” to protect the planet from global warming.

So-called climate change experts can now be brought to court in their defense to testify on how oil consumption is causing hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts across the world. This concocted defense allows the eco-terrorists to claim their action of shutting down the pipeline was necessary in order to save other people from immediate harm.

Michael Foster, the eco-terrorist who shut the valve down on the Keystone Pipeline, is also enraged by the belief that climate change is an immediate threat to the world. Convicted in October, and facing up to 21 years in prison, Foster told reporters, “It’s been a year, and pollution is worse today than the day I turned the Keystone valve shut. Based on that alone, I wonder how effective it was. If people don’t respond quickly (to climate change), it won’t matter.” Foster attempted to use “climate change” as his defense but has no right to an appeal, allowing the judge and jury’s verdict to stand.

However, the current case against Johnston and the Climate Direct Action could become the first to put fossil fuels on trial, allowing future eco-terrorists a legal justification to shut down oil pipelines. If climatologists enter the courtroom and convince the jury that the eco-terrorists are justified “in accordance with higher laws” then eco-terrorism will be celebrated and the U.S. oil infrastructure as we know it will be put in grave danger.

“Climate change” may be used as a legal reason for activists to begin tearing down the U.S. oil infrastructure. This is how bizarre the world has become. (For more, visit

Sources include:

comments powered by Disqus