Skip to comments.What the Dakota Access Pipeline Is Really About
Posted on 12/07/2016 2:25:44 PM PST by KeyLargo
What the Dakota Access Pipeline Is Really About
The standoff isnt about tribal rights or water, but a White House that ignores the rule of law.
A little more than two weeks ago, during a confrontation between protesters and law enforcement, an improvised explosive device was detonated on a public bridge in southern North Dakota. That was simply the latest manifestation of the prayerful and peaceful protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Escalating tensions were temporarily defused Sunday when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, at the direction of the Obama administration, announced it would refuse to grant the final permit needed to complete the $3.8 billion project. The pipeline, which runs nearly 1,200 miles from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota to Illinois, is nearly complete except for a small section where it needs to pass under the Missouri River. Denying the permit for that construction only punts the issue to next monthto a new president who wont thumb his nose at the rule of law.
Like many North Dakotans, Ive had to endure preaching about the pipeline from the press, environmental activists, musicians and politicians in other states. More often than not, these sermons are informed by little more than a Facebook post. At the risk of spoiling the protesters narrative, Id like to bring us back to ground truth.
This isnt about tribal rights or protecting cultural resources. The pipeline does not cross any land owned by the Standing Rock Sioux. The land under discussion belongs to private owners and the federal government. To suggest that the Standing Rock tribe has the legal ability to block the pipeline is to turn Americas property rights upside down.
Two federal courts have rejected claims that the tribe wasnt consulted....
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Google the headline to read.
"So what is the pipeline dispute really about? Political expediency in a White House that does not see itself as being bound by the rule of law. The Obama administration has decided to build a political legacy rather than lead the country. It is facilitating an illegal occupation that has grown wildly out of control. That the economy depends on a consistent and predictable permitting regime seems never to have crossed the presidents mind."
But let a bunch of Militia types try something similar in Oregon and in comes the FBI tactical units.
Imagine if the rancher would have used an ied.
You know how they were spun even without this.
These people are spun as saints.
It is brutally sickening.
Exactly the point I have been making.
No rule of law for Obama. He does not, and never has cared about such things.
His whole life has been about disrupting and defeating the rule of law.
Just an FYI, Native Americans DO NOT live in tepees. They’re not that hardy nor that stupid.
Uhm, wrong tribe Joe.....
I don’t know what is worst, the communist left or just ignorant. This pipeline is needed and poses no problem to the Indians or the rotten core of communists Democrat ignorant.
Don’t we still have those Hotchkiss guns in storage somewhere?
It’s about....if you give us money, we won’t object so much..Indians have done this since the beginning...
I used to be able to Google search my way into WSJ articles, but it hasn’t worked the last couple of times. Is there something I’m missing?
He’ll let President Trump do the dirty and hard work to enforce the rule of law and then he’ll stand on the sidelines and harp at Trump if things get nasty. Lawless freak.
Yes, we know...
These protestors have been bussed in by Buffet and Soros. They are not locals....and are paid $15.00 an hour to protest. The underground pipeline will be far safer than rail or road transport, and Buffet has the contract for rail transport.
Great article here:
Native American reservations: Americas failed Socialist experiment
Posted by ReaganGirl in Economy, Native Americans, Socialism
September 19, 2016
Native American Reservations: Socialist Archipelago
Mises Institute Daily
Imagine a country that has a corrupt authoritarian government. In that country no one knows about checks and balances or an independent court system. Private property is not recognized in that country either. Neither can one buy or sell land. And businesses are reluctant to bring investments into this country. Those who have jobs usually work for the public sector. Those who dont have jobs subsist on entitlements that provide basic food. At the same time, this country sports a free health care system and free access to education. Can you guess what country it is? It could be the former Soviet Union, Cuba, or any other socialist country of the past.
Yet, I want to assure you that such a country exists right here in the United States. And its name is Indian Country. Indian Country is a generic metaphor that writers and scholars use to refer to the archipelago of 310 Native American reservations, which occupy 2 percent of the U.S. soil. Scattered all over the United States, these sheltered land enclaves are held in trust by the federal government. So legally, many of these land enclaves are a federal property. So there you cannot freely buy and sell land or use it as collateral. On top of this, since the Indian tribes are wards of the federal government, one cannot sue them for breach of contract. Indian reservations are communally used by Indian groups and subsidized by the BIA (the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior) with a current annual budget of about $3 billion dollars. Besides being a major financial resource that sustains the reservation system, BIAs goal is also to safeguard indigenous communities, or, in other words, to make sure that they would never fail when dealing with the outside society. People in the government and many Native American leaders naÏvely believe that it is good for the well-being of the Indians to be segregated and sheltered from the rest of American society.
This peculiar trust status of Indian Country, where private property rights are insecure, scares away businesses and investors.1 They consider these forbidden grounds high risk areas. So, in Indian Country, we have an extreme case of what Robert Higgs famously labeled regime uncertainty that retards economic development.2 In fact, this regime uncertainty borders on socialism. James Watt, Secretary of the Interior in the first Reagan administration, was the first to publicly state this. In 1983, he said (and then dearly paid for this), If you want an example of the failure of socialism, dont go to Russia, come to America and go to the Indian reservations.3...
You’re so right. Can you imagine why they would be in a building made of skin/cloth, and have to sit on the FROZEN ground; Lunacy .. and they’re not stupid.
But there are a number of American Indians who do know how to put up a lodge and looking at the way those lodges are put together is just painful. The skin is slack, which means they didn’t ‘diamond’ cut the poles to keep them from turning once planted in the ground (or didn’t put the bows out in the first place), the smoke flaps aren’t oriented right for conditions, there’s disrepair which should have long ago been fixed...
There are some American Indians who do live year round in lodges - they do so for a number of reasons (most often, because they make money from doing it.)
But ghads, all I see in that picture are a bunch of college ‘Native American Activist’ teepees which have zero clue how to deal with their tents. Hell, call them what they are, death traps.
Wish they would come to Phoenix and protest the expansion of the 202 freeway!
I won’t be long before a Trump-led DoJ and FBI puts an end to this shenanigan and gets the pipeline built.
They ignored the part about it being about money (the Indians are mad they can’t fleece the white man because it goes around the reservation).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.