In response to today’s vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to authorize the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the Rosebud Sioux Tribal President announced that the Rosebud Sioux Tribe (Sicangu Lakota Oyate) recognizes the authorization of this pipeline as an act of war.
The Tribe has done its part to remain peaceful in its dealings with the United States in this matter, in spite of the fact that the Rosebud Sioux Tribe has yet to be properly consulted on the project, which would cross through Tribal land, and the concerns brought to the Department of Interior and to the Department of State have yet to be addressed.
“The House has now signed our death warrants and the death warrants of our children and grandchildren. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe will not allow this pipeline through our lands,” said President Scott of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. “We are outraged at the lack of intergovernmental cooperation. We are a sovereign nation and we are not being treated as such. We will close our reservation borders to Keystone XL. Authorizing Keystone XL is an act of war against our people.”
In February of this year, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and other members of the Great Sioux Nation adopted Tribal resolutions opposing the Keystone XL project.
“The Lakota people have always been stewards of this land,” added President Scott. “We feel it is imperative that we provide safe and responsible alternative energy resources not only to Tribal members but to non-Tribal members as well. We need to stop focusing and investing in risky fossil fuel projects like TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline. We need to start remembering that the earth is our mother and stop polluting her and start taking steps to preserve the land, water, and our grandchildren’s future.”
The Rosebud Sioux Tribe, along with several other South Dakota Tribes, stand together in opposition to risky and dangerous fossil fuel projects like TransCanada’s Keystone XL. The proposed route of TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline crosses directly through Great Sioux Nation (Oceti Sakowin) Treaty lands as defined by both the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaties and within the current exterior boundaries of the Rosebud Sioux Reservation and Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation.
Well that could not be any more disturbing to read.
And the Lakota tribe is completely in the right on this issue. Something that usually I would expect the Democrats to recognize.
Look I understand why Mary Landrieu sponsored the bill to authorize the Keystone XL pipeline, and I understand why some Democrats feel they must support it.
But ultimately it will not help Landrieu hang onto her Senate seat, and it WILL anger not only the native American people but also the environmentalist who have usually been a reliable demographic for Democrats.
Personally I would rather lose a Senate seat, than to lose the support of voters that we are desperately going to need in the next two years.
Um, the oil is already being transported from Alberta to oklahoma by train, that is way riskier than a pipeline, trains go through every town and city along the way, if there is a derailment or an explosion it will be near people instead of the middle of nowhere , where the pipeline would go
ReplyDeleteUm, ok. How about they run it through your yard?
DeleteAsk the people of Lac Megantic in Quebec how they felt about oil being transported from the U.S. by rail through their little town? Nearly 50 people dead and buildings destroyed.
DeleteI hate the tar sands, and I feel the rights of the First Nations (that's what we call them in Canada, cuz they were certainly here first) must be listened to and obeyed. But until all the folks protesting oil pipelines start supporting every initiative involving renewable energy, and voting AGAINST the Kochs and their ilk, I doubt that expressing your anger about Keystone will, in the end, carry much weight. Capitalism is great, until it isn't.....
Translation, by "war" they mean "we want more money." And then magically they will be supporting the project and the resources provided by mother earth.
Deleteinstead of the middle of nowhere , where the pipeline would go
Delete-------------
Number one- there is no middle of nowhere left in the USA. You are delusional. Don't forget your food is being grown/raised in "this middle of no where"
Number two-let the Canadians ship it by rail to their ports.
Number three-the USA is not making any money from this pipeline, we will be left with the clean up after the spills since Trans Canada has a track record of not maintaining there pipelines.
Good for the Native Americans, if this is what it takes to shut this pipeline down, I say go for it.
As for the democrats that want to save a senate seat, you are a bunch of idiots. Selling our environment/health that will be impact for years to come isn't worth it.
I am glad I finally saw President Obama take a clear stand on this issue-it made it very clear he will veto the bill.
Anonymous7:37 AM
DeleteTranslation, by "war" they mean "we want more money." And then magically they will be supporting the project and the resources provided by mother earth.
***
We want more $? BULLSHIT!
7:46, if only the Tribes were truly as idealistic as you naively want them to be. This is all about $$ and they want a piece of the action. Sorry if that doesn't fit into your agenda and perception of modern Native American tribes, who have long since recognized that cash is king.
DeleteActually train transport is NOT more dangerous than a pipeline. Or is your complaint that it is more dangerous going through towns with white people?
Delete7:37am
DeleteApparently you are an uneducated white person. Sister tribes in Canada have successfully stopped Keystone from crossing our lands. As for money , LMAO!!!!! Like Native Tribes have ever gotten money when our lands have been stolen from us.
Native American Tribes have never received money from the US Govt 9:01?! Good one.... LMAO as I pick my uneducated white ass up off the floor.
DeleteO T
ReplyDeleteLiberaland and Americans Against the Teaparty have articles about Bristol ranting at Obama about a speech he recently made. In her comments she mentions going to work in Anchorage every day. Wonder what kind of job she has.
Pat Padrnos
Hi Pat.
DeleteWe all know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Pistol has no job at all. In her paperwork for the child support hearing, she declared "0" earned income. Meaning she is living off of money already in the bank. They all lie with every breath they take.
JJ
Yes - it is amazing how they do lie. Without skipping a beat they try to turn everything to their advantage. I say amazing because I can not think of the right word.
DeletePat Padrnos
Yes - it is amazing how they do lie. Without skipping a beat they try to turn everything to their advantage. I say amazing because I can not think of the right word.
DeletePat Padrnos
She volunteers at a soup kitchen?
DeleteThe American people don't want this pipeline! John Boehner and Co have stock in this POS pipeline and the funny thing is...the First peoples in Canada are not letting Trans Canada drill on their land, so they are wanting to build a pipeline before its even been cleared in Canada? Why? Also the price of oil/LNG is so low right now that it would cost more $$ to extract this dirty oil from dirty Tar sands. And the Treaty! Call your Congress Today and tell them NO! I thought this was already SAID, NO, but GREEDY Congress keeps bringing it back like a dirty penny.... We have said no, POTUS has said NO, and now they want to violate a treaty which is WAR to Native Americans...!?
ReplyDeleteJust tell them NO,NO, NEVER on KXL!!!
O/T So many feels. This absolutely slayed me, but I thought of you immediately nonetheless: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/11/14/teacher-to-parents-about-that-kid-the-one-who-hits-disrupts-and-influences-your-kid/?tid=pm_local_pop Enjoy.
ReplyDeleteI imagine there isn't anyone in Canada who is willing to let this pipeline go through their land. I think Vancouver would be a nice terminal actually. (Truly, Canadians, I don't want you to be stuck with it either.)
ReplyDeleteBold Nebraska facebook page has much to say about the pipeline. They stand with the Rosebuds. It is very interesting. Lots of people are fighting this pipeline. I hope successfully!
ReplyDeleteI'm on the side of the Lakota tribe on this topic. The US has already taken over all their land except for the reservations. The Keystone XL pipeline will only create about 35 permanent jobs in the US but a whole lot of profit for the big oil companies.
ReplyDelete1. The Canadians do not want pipelines going through their cities either. Burnaby BC (just outside Vancouver) has said that the pipeline cannot go through their land. The federal government (Harper, or GWB lite, bought by Kochs) is planning to plow ahead anyway. Will be interesting to see how that works out.
ReplyDelete2. I totally support the Sioux Nation and their fight to keep the pipeline out of their land/sovereign nation. This is their right.
3. The Keystone pipeline is a lose/lose situation for Americans. Few jobs, oil going out of USA once it reaches the American port city and is refined, no oil for America.
We would be much farther ahead if we would start investing more in renewable, clean energy such as wind and solar and geothermal. None of these destroy our land and water. Just because the Koch brothers and their followers/bought politicians think oil is still the best way to go, does not make it right!
1smartcancerian
"We would be much farther ahead if we would start investing more in renewable, clean energy such as wind and solar and geothermal."
DeleteYes! I just emailed my Senator and ask her to reject this KXL and told her the very same thing.
Why are the Repubs allowed to keep bring this crap up over and over again in spite of it being rejected already how many times?
So once again the United States Government decides that land ceded to the Nations that lived there before the Europeans decided to move in doesn't really really belong to that Nation.
ReplyDeleteGood to know our treaties are printed on Charmin.
Connie
Or Angel Soft, owned by the Koch brothers.
DeleteOf the relatively small numbers of European and Japanese students I've worked with, a HIGH percentage of them have been fascinated with Native Americans--they write papers and take trips and even volunteer on reservations. Based on that admittedly anecdotal evidence, as well as the environmental impact, I think the international community will side emphatically with the Rosebud Sioux. I hope the international media makes them aware of the problem.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, the international community did not side with us when we invaded Iraq, and that just fueled our jingoistic fires.
What are the Sioux tribes' rights? Can they close their lands to drilling, or is there some sort of eminent domain caveat?
A comment on politicususa yesterday from "LookingForward" said it better than I ever could:
ReplyDelete"Keystone is not a job creator, it takes away the rights of land owners and native Americas, it puts our largest ground water mass, the Ogallala aquifer at risk from a oil spill that will happen. This aquifer covers 8 states, supplies 2.3 million people with drinking water, is responsible for watering crops such as corn, soybeans, and livestock. This water is the life source that feeds the US food market and we’re going to put that at risk just so the politicians can pay back the oil men that gave them money for their reelection or election campaign? NO!"
NOLA will still process the same tar sands oil but from other countries, so jobs will not be lost, no one builds new refineries now.
ReplyDeleteAnd Nebraska is not sure it wants the pipeline yet either.
Screw lying Mary Landrieu. "Tar sands is the cleanest oil on earth!" It is actually the dirtiest. Self centered bitch calls for an immediate vote just to keep her senate seat. Well screw her.
ReplyDeleteHoka-Hey, it s a good day to die.
This is all Koch brothers.
DeleteFollow the trail.
Each gallon of tar sands oil takes more energy to extract than it contains. Think about that. There is no reason to do it in the first place while there are other options. They've destroyed a large portion of the Athabasca river, waste water dams are leaching into miles of the river and have ruined the habitat for untold numbers of creatures and killed the ecosystem. Mary Landrieu is a liar.
DeleteThis is the new improved way to transport fuel and natural gas and unfortunately the big oil barons and interests will always have their way. Presently, railway lines transport dangerous hazardous chemicals, including refined oil and propane gas; in fact, we have one rail line a mile from my neighborhood which makes 1 trip a day delivering this stuff to the railway hubs, like the Great Lakes, for export. It passes through towns and neighborhoods for hundreds of miles along the way I cringe everytime I hear it.
ReplyDeleteIf we had an accident, our neighborhoods would be evacuated for heavens knows how long. It would be an environmental hazard above ground, possibly easier to clean up, which takes months, and the little people's lives are stressed and ruined. It's the little people versus the conglomerate. And Democrats see there's no point in fighting a losing battle.
No answers to this complex question, because where one group win, another loses. Pipeline, railway or shipping, an accident is prone to happen and damage one man's back yard.
We all knew that the House would pass it. I hope it doesn't pass the Senate now as well. It is a huge mistake. Much as I like Canada and have enjoyed many trips there over the years, if Canada wants a pipeline, it should cross Canada. Why should the middle of the US be dangerously marred by carrying another country's oil for that country's profit? There is no reason why the Canadians cannot build a pipeline across Canada to the west coast. If the Canadians want to foist their pollution risk onto the US, I think we have to say "no, thanks." There are major fault lines along the route and major water aquifers that will be at risk as well. Not a good idea for the US. Sorry, Charles and David, just go away.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
Canadians have been fighting against a pipeline that would cross their country. And, thus, the Keystone XL route through the U.S. was born.
DeleteCanadians were also fighting Palin's AKn Transcanada pipeline which would go through Canada to get to refineries in the lower 48.
The Transcanada pipeline never materialized. The problem is that the Keystone pipeline may well come to be. It is a HUGE mistake. We abuse the environment at our peril. Unfortunately those of us who know better will suffer along with everyone who thinks it'a a great idea.
DeleteBeaglemom
If you guessed that the Koch brothers own the tar sands destination refinery in Texas, you would be right.
ReplyDeleteIn other oil spill news, the state of AK filed a lawsuit against the Flint Hills refinery over a long history of spills in North Pole AK. I was surprised AK wouldn't try to help cover this up.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newsminer.com/news/local_news/state-s-lawsuit-claims-north-pole-refinery-has-long-history/article_1c131696-a6a2-11e3-a438-001a4bcf6878.html
I would like to point out that First Nation tribes in Canada, including my sister tribe, have successfully stopped Keystone from going across their lands.
ReplyDeleteBut once again, the USA is continually going against tribal agreements.
There are many viable energy alternatives to oil that will be a win/win for the environment and the economy. There are no alternatives for the clean water we need to support all life on earth. Clean water is the next resource everyone on earth will be fighting to get or to keep. Anything we do now to endanger our water supply will make this situation worse. Are we really willing to poison our water for the short-term gain of a few people in the fossil fuel industries? We need to take all the government subsidies and tax breaks now given to fossil fuel profiteers and give them to the fledgling solar, wind, and geothermal industries. We will easily be able to switch over to alternatives once we make that commitment.
ReplyDeleteMary Landrieu and the other Dems that support this are rolling over like subservient dogs, showing their bellies to the GOP, thinking it will gain them respect, when in fact is does nothing more than confirm their weakness.
ReplyDeleteI am so supportive of the tribes in this matter. We have treated them horribly in America and it makes me sick to my stomach!
ReplyDeleteThe oil is not going to be beneficial to America - it will to other parts of the world. It's a Canadian pipeline going across our land and that of the tribes with the distinct possibility of doing mother earth harm.
I don't trust our government (U.S. Congress) as far as I could throw them and sincerely hope President Obama vetoes this too! God bless him and our first people!
I don't know the Lakota Tribe's motives for opposing the pipeline, but I'm pretty sure it's not money. The Lakota newsletter is pretty clear that they are worried about the safety of the project and potential harm to our/their land. The big problem is that the US has repeatedly snatched land from citizens citing Eminent Domain (with little or no compensation, although that doesn't help at all). I had not heard that the President said he would veto a bill if it gets through the Senate. If that's true, it's very good news.
ReplyDelete