Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday December 05 2016, @01:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the embrace-extend-extinguish? dept.

According to an article at Snopes.com:

The Army Corps of Engineers has denied the easement needed to complete the Dakota Access Pipeline, according Colonel Henderson, who notified Veterans for Standing Rock co-organizer Michael A. Wood Jr on 4 December 2016.

More than 3,000 veterans had converged at the Standing Rock camp to support the Sioux in their ongoing opposition to the building of a $3.7 billion pipeline that would cross through disputed land managed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Wood said upon learning of the move, "This is history."

From a report in Al Jazeera :

The US Army Corps of Engineers has turned down a permit for a controversial pipeline project running through North Dakota, in a victory for Native Americans and climate activists who have protested against the project for several months, according to a statement released.

The 1,885km Dakota Access Pipeline, owned by Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners LP, had been complete except for a segment planned to run under Lake Oahe, a reservoir formed by a dam on the Missouri River.

"The Army will not grant an easement to cross Lake Oahe at the proposed location based on the current record," a statement from the US Army said.

The Standing Rock Sioux tribe, along with climate activists, have been protesting the $3.8bn project, saying it could contaminate the water supply and damage sacred tribal lands.

[...] "Today, the US Army Corps of Engineers announced that it will not be granting the easement to cross Lake Oahe for the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline," said Standing Rock Chairman Dave Archambault II, in a statement.

"Instead, the Corps will be undertaking an environmental impact statement to look at possible alternative routes."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 05 2016, @03:00PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 05 2016, @03:00PM (#437163)

    The reading comprehension may be on your part:

    At the time of his most recent disclosure statement in May, Trump owned $100,000 to $250,000 of stock in Phillips 66, which has a 25 percent stake in the Dakota Access project.

    So he owned that stock in May, no mention if he still owns it today. Unfortunately, I can't tell you how long selling those amounts of stock etc.. usually takes. But you are assuming he still owns them, and you are also assuming he is trying to circumvent his forced selling of them. Both of which the story has no info on.
    And that's the BS grandparent is talking about, and it's what I'm seeing over here in Europe to. I'm not saying he should get a free pass, just that he'll be treated as others have in his shoes. And from what I'm seeing, that's currently not the case.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 05 2016, @03:26PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 05 2016, @03:26PM (#437174) Homepage Journal

    "he'll be treated as others have in his shoes"

    So - one of the richest men around wears hand-me-down shoes? Who'da thunk it!

    --
    There is a supply side shortage of pronouns. You will take whatever you are offered.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 05 2016, @03:28PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 05 2016, @03:28PM (#437175)

    > So he owned that stock in May,

    Yes he owned it in May.
    And he owend DAPL stock and has said he sold that.
    But has not said he sold the Phillips 66 stock
    So it is entirely reasonable to assume that he still owns the Phillips stock.

    The logical contortions of trump apologetics are ridiculous.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:56AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:56AM (#437566) Journal
      Once again, he's going to throw this conflict for how much money again? It's hard to say whether it's more insulting or humiliating to claim that Trump will corrupt major decisions for scraps.