On August 11th, 2016, hundreds of tribal members from the Oceti Sakowins, or Sioux, non-violently protested the building of the $3.7 billion Dakota Access Pipeline through their land by use of eminent domain. The local police department arrested 12 for disorderly conduct or criminal trespass.
The Texas company is Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC which "signed an agreement to sell 36.75% of the Bakken Pipeline Project [Dakota Access pipeline and the Energy Transfer Crude Oil pipeline]" with Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. on August 02, 2016, for $2 billion in cash. This agreement should close in the second half of 2016 netting Energy Transfer $1.2 billion.
It would be interesting to know who owns these corporations and what ties they have to government officials.
$1.2 billion in cash... after stealing property. But I thought eminent domain was constitutionally acceptable (the Consitution is not a perfect document)? It is under the Fifth Amendment.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
This reads like a rider, "an additional provision added to a bill or other measure under the consideration by a legislature, having little connection with the subject matter of the bill. Riders are usually created as a tactic to pass a controversial provision that would not pass as its own bill. Occasionally, a controversial provision is attached to a bill not to be passed itself but to prevent the bill from being passed (in which case it is called a wrecking amendment or poison pill)."
Eminent domain should be called what it is, theft. Private property cannot be forcefully taken without violating the rights of the owner. The word government doesn't change the act. ...But they paid them for more than market value! Yes, that maybe be but if you take something that isn't for sale you are still stealing.
Can I come into your home, kick you out, and turn the land into a park? I mean it benefits the community, right? Never mind that your house was blocking my view of a mountain. "Vote Park! It is for the good of the community."
The federal government has repeatedly broken treaties that had previously been ratified. There is a museum called Broken Promise which displays one of the treaties the U.S. has broken with Native American tribe. The U.S. has broken many though.
Now the government is at it again. Attempting to steal land for the "good" of the community. This is a violation of rights and should be condemned by everyone.
Below is what most Americans will be seeing/watching while this theft is taking place.
CNN
MSNBC
