SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Authorities used rubber-coated steel bullets, concussion grenades, tear gas, and water cannons against unarmed protesters near the Dakota Access oil pipeline in 26°F (-3°C) temperatures over the weekend.
Indian Country Today reports
"We have seen four gunshot wounds, three of them to the face and head", said Leland Brenholt, a volunteer medic.
[...]400 protesters, or "water protectors", attempted to dismantle a police-enforced barricade on State Highway 1806.
[...]"Water protectors are done with the military-style barricades. We are done with the floodlights and the armored military trucks. We are are done with it!" declared organizer, Dallas Goldtooth in a mid-evening Facebook post.
Their action was met with the same militarized response that the Morton County Sheriff's Department has demonstrated on protesters for weeks: the use of armored trucks, less-than-lethal ammunition, tear-gas, mace, and on this below-freezing night, water cannons.
[...]Reports from a coalition of advocacy groups near Standing Rock report hundreds of water protectors were receiving treatment for contamination by tear gas, hypothermia, and blunt traumas as a result of rubber bullets. One person, an elder, was reportedly revived after suffering cardiac arrest, organizers said.
"As medical professionals, we are concerned for the real risk of loss of life due to severe hypothermia under these conditions," read a statement from the Standing Rock Medic and Healer Council.
A more measured take is available from the AP.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday November 23 2016, @04:17PM
If you ever wanted a cause to fight Big Government, here it is. The government wants to steal your land to run an oil pipeline under it. The government wants to run this pipeline under and through your water sources and supplies. The government will back this up with military force. And the worst part? It isn't even the government who's going to benefit. It's a bunch of oil tycoons. Yes, let's steal land, break up people's farms, leave industrial garbage on our land, pollute our water sources, wreck the water table, all to line the pockets of those lucky few who have control of our government.
This is the government: rich people with lawyers who never had to get elected to anything. And they're coming for you.
Where's Cliven and Ammon Bundy when you need them? Oh yeah, sitting in federal prison because of a stupid pointless occupation of a park nobody cared about.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @04:44PM
"The government wants to steal your land"... It's not technically your land, It's the governments land and they can do anything they want with it. Your deed states the facts somewhere in the fine print. You also don't have ownership under the ground or the airspace above. The only way to truly own property is to buy an island from a country and start your own country, easier said than done though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:28PM
Yeah and it's not their polluted water that they aren't going to be able to drink safely.
The Gov is answerable to the people. Of course these bunch are a minority but if enough people kick up a fuss then the Gov should listen whether from "airy fairy niceness" or from the harsh reality that the more people a politician keeps pissing off the higher the chance that someone would kill him/her. This is even true for dictatorships. That's why dictators who know how to stay in power don't like it when their crazy kids do over-the-top bad stuff (those kids can actually get in trouble as a result). The lion knows that the herd can actually kill him.
Whether this standing rock stuff is important enough, that's up to you. I'd say the US people don't need that pipeline that much, but hey I don't even live in the USA.
(Score: 2) by jcross on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:30PM
I'm not that informed on the issue but I thought the area in dispute was on a Native American reservation, which is supposed to be sovereign territory. Not that they haven't been screwed on just about every treaty ever, but aren't we supposed to be a little more enlightened now?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:00PM
I thought the area in dispute was on a Native American reservation, which is supposed to be sovereign territory. Not that they haven't been screwed on just about every treaty ever, but aren't we supposed to be a little more enlightened now?
Did you climb under a rock during the last election season? Seriously, I wouldn't blame you if you had. It was absolutely toxic, and one of the ugly and persisting ramifications (besides having a monster in the white house) is that bigotry, racism, sexism, and generalized hate have become completely normalized. What was that about being "a little more enlightened now?" We've just proven to the world that a large chunk of our population is overtly racist, sexist beyond belief, does not believe in democracy, embraces foreign meddling in our affairs if it serves their short-sighted goals, and have absolutely no compunction about intimidating, assaulting, and even killing those they disagree with.
We aren't more enlightened now. We're less enlightened, and becoming ever more so every day that goes by. The Republic is gone, now we are nothing more than a two-bit imperialistic banana republic AT BEST (and that is a generous reading of recent events). These people are fighting the good fight, but if even the Obama administration allows this sort of thing against them, I shudder at what they can expect once the racists moves into the west wing this January.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @07:03PM
The Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 was signed by USA.gov and defines what can be done with the land.
It has not been superseded by a subsequent treaty.
This attempted usage violates the treaty.
Bulldozers on their burial grounds would need to be approved by the Lakota.
That approval has NOT been given.
Doing something that has the potential to poison their water supply has DEFINITELY not been given.
These resident of the territory of USA are within their 1st Amendment rights to peacefully protest without being assaulted with weapons of war.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:39PM
I would love to know exactly who owns the land as it is just some regular private citizen or is it part of the reservation. I have seen stories stating that the pipeline is not on the reservation and others that say it is. If it is on the reservation I say let the tribe set fire to machinery that crosses the boundary as it is trespassing and they are considered a sovereign nation and enjoy a lot of freedoms on their property not available to others [brainerddispatch.com]. If not they are going to have to go piss up a rope even if this does seem like a dick move. Considering that a river is involved there are likely additional considerations as water access and use is also negotiated in these treaties.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Thursday November 24 2016, @12:22AM
Wonder no more! See the map and read the history [ndstudies.gov] of the treaty the the U.S. signed.
Of course, said treaty was promptly ignored by the U.S. government who allowed white people to exploit mines in the Black Hills and setttle ranchers in the area, resulting in a decision in 1980, which found the U.S. guilty and sentenced it to pay compensation to the indian tribes, money which was refused, as the tribes did not wish to sell their land.
So technically, the land is indeed sovereign indian land.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Monday November 28 2016, @02:56PM
Well it looks like it might be time to set fire to some construction equipment.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @08:01AM
I'm really confused. Are you trying to describe Trump supporters or Hillary supporters? Your complaints apply to both. The sad thing is each side only see the faults in the other and never looks closely at who they're supporting. Trump is at least starting to act more responsible. I don't think Hillary would have changed.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:34PM
This situation is different, because this is a Native nation's land, so they have substantial rights that an ordinary private citizen or organization wouldn't have. Of course, what often happened when Natives were given rights to land is that the US government takes it away whenever it's convenient. Which is precisely what happened here.
And, I have to say, as much as I agree with the protesters in this case, they're absolutely screwed: All the public officials who could stop the pipeline have made it abundantly clear that they won't. And yes, that includes officials in both parties: Obama is noticeably silent about what's going on (ongoing and continuous use of force by police and private thugs^Wsecurity guards against people who aren't committing crimes, among other things), and Trump has made it clear he wants more pipelines and drilling.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:44PM
If it is true that the pipeline is going across the reservation then the tribe has every right to seize all equipment in use on the land if they haven't gotten permission. I'm not sure that is the case having seen stories stating that it is and isn't. to further muddy things there is the river and often in treaties access and usage of nearby water is also negotiated.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:36PM
And anywhere you can buy one has strict restrictions on what you can build there, taxes, and usually at most allow a 99 year lease.
The only real way to have sovereign land is to have enough manpower willing to die, or pay someone else to die to hold onto it. Pretty sure nobody here has either the social or financial pull fo that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:54PM
> This is the government: rich people with lawyers who never had to get elected to anything. And they're coming for you.
And the alternative is what?
Rich people with private militaries stealing your land.
And if you think you can out gun them, think again. This response, that's them being restrained by the law, not emboldened.
The whole reason this protest is happening is because of government. These people don't have to die to have a chance of winning. That doesn't mean there won't be violence. Just that these people won't be massacred because they decided to stand against the rich.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:27PM
Call me crazy, but the alternative I had in mind was not letting people get rich and powerful enough to control the government or hire private militaries.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @11:28PM
> not letting people get rich and powerful
And how do you propose to do that without a big government?
Or have you forgotten the thousands of years of small government?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @12:16AM
Don't buy their products.
Look for goods produced by and sold by operations that are 100 percent worker-owned.
Additionally, don't contribute your labor to the companies of the 1 Percent and don't knuckle-under to their rules which allow **them** to skim off all the profit while *you* do all the work .
Start your own company.
Find like-minded people and form a worker-owned cooperative.
Don't give away your profits to people who do not part of the production process.
without a big government?
It's pathetic that you can't break out of the top-down Authoritarian mindset and move on to the People Power paradigm.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @02:37AM
When in the history of mankind has that ever worked?
You are arguing for what is essentially organized action in resisting the economics of efficiency of scale.
That kind of organization is a hop, skip and a jump away from a "top-down authoritarian mindset."
You want to fight organized power with organized power and not have that power organized into anything else.
That's just wishful thinking.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @05:25AM
People start new companies all the time.
Clearly, not you.
In Emilia-Romagna, at last count, there were 8100 (Socialist) worker-owned operations, started via the Maracora law. [google.com]
USA has over 11,000 companies that are 100 percent worker-owned.
Over 400 of those are (Socialist) cooperatives.
Go ahead and continue to work for "The Man".
Go ahead and continue to buy from "The Man".
Apparently, -some- people enjoy their chains.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @06:19AM
> People start new companies all the time.
Wait, if people are starting companies all the time, then what's the problem?
> USA has over 11,000 companies that are 100 percent worker-owned.
And how many owners are there? 22,000?
You seem to have faith that tiny-sized co-ops can scale up without becoming organized power structures.
That's never happened. Not even once. Because people.
Its just the same old libertarian fantasy that in the absence of organized power structures people won't form organized power structures.
You can have an argument about how rigid those structures will be, but to deny that they won't spontaneously form is to assume that people are robots who all think like you think you do.
(Score: 1) by SandRider on Friday November 25 2016, @06:30AM
The Mondragon Corporation employed 74,335 people in 2015. It is worker owned, though it also has non-owner workers so it is not the perfect example. But still it is a large successful cooperative business which has been around for 60 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @06:26AM
> Go ahead and continue to work for "The Man".
I missed that the first time I read your post.
I've been self-employed for over 15 years.
Essentially retired now because I can afford it.
But keep on projecting, that cognitive dissonance can't be very pleasant.
(Score: 2) by tisI on Thursday November 24 2016, @11:58PM
You're not even on point.
These assholes are using, I'm assuming from TFA, local police as their own private security force.
The same police force that is employed to protect and serve the public is being used to assault and fire on unarmed civilians that have a right to protect their property and land.
And you, I, and the victims are paying these cocksuckers to assault them.
This country is on the verge of civil war. Cops are shooting unarmed civilians. Armed civilians are now beginning to shoot cops, and killing them in kind.
Blue lives don't matter when they're armed thugs harassing, killing and extorting money from a destitute people.
I have zero sympathy for cops now that they're turning their guns on the very people they are to protect. This is fucked up. Kill the bastard and those that own him.
Doesn't help when some half-cocked fanatic comes along and spews inflammatory hate to get himself elected president and the public decides this is now the condoned behavior of public interaction.
Guns are the answer. We need more guns .. and make them easier to get.
"Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself."