Veteran's support group raises over $200,000 to support Standing Rock pipeline demonstrators

Veteran's Stand, a military veteran's organization has collected $213,500 to send supplies to the Standing Rock Native American reservation in North Dakota as part of a renewed campaign against the Dakota Access oil pipeline.

The pipeline will cost $3.7 billion and run through four states. Critics claim it threatens the water supply of millions of people. The group wrote on Facebook: "We have continued to stay in contact with indigenous and camp leadership and have identified several areas where the Veterans Stand network can continue to serve the needs of the camp and local community."

Michael Woods, founder of the group said to CNN that it was unlikely the group will send a large group of protesters as they have done in the past. He said the group did not want to do anything aggressive in response but wanted to give people a platform. The secretary of communications of the group, Anthony Diggs, spent a week at the Standing Rock Reservation meeting with camp leaders arranging to send supplies and organize volunteers. Last year veterans raised more than $1.5 million to support protests.

The protesters thought they had won the battle when in December then-president Obama ordered the US Army Corps of Engineers to look at ways to reroute the pipeline. Within 4 days of taking office new president Donald Trump signed an executive order to "get the pipeline built" and also restarted the process on the Keystone XL pipeline. Energy Transfer Partners (ETP) the company building the pipeline said that work was beginning immediately and was expected to be completed in about 83 days.

A number of veterans are already returning to Standing Rock and have said they are ready to shield indigenous activists from attacks by an increasingly militarized police force. A number of veterans have already arrived at Cannon Ball North Dakota or are en route after hearing the news that Trump had allowed ETP to drill under the MIssouri river.

The presence of many veterans may make it more difficult for police to remove hundreds of activists who remain camped near the construction site and some hope that their presence will limit the use of excessive force by police. Elizabeth Williams, a 34-year-old Air Force veteran who arrived at Standing Rock late Friday said: “We are prepared to put our bodies between Native elders and a privatized military force. We’ve stood in the face of fire before. We feel a responsibility to use the skills we have.” There are wide differences as to how many veterans will show up. Some organizers estimate a few dozen are on their way but other activists are pledging that hundreds will appear in the coming weeks. In December it was estimated almost 1,000 had taken part in protests before Obama announced the government was denying a key permit. Some critics claimed the veterans were not well organized and not prepared to camp during the harsh winter conditions. Others complained that they did not follow directions of the aboriginals leading the movement.

Matthew Crane, a navy veteran who is helping coordinate a return group said that his group has vowed to be self-sufficient, and help the activists, who call themselves the "water protectors". He said the group intend to provide cleanup efforts, kitchen duties, medical support and even protection from the police if needed. Crane said: “This is a humanitarian issue. We’re not going to stand by and let anybody get hurt.” Jake Pogue, a 32-year-old marine veteran said as he helped organize a vets camp area: “We’re not coming as fighters, but as protectors. Our role in that situation would be to simply form a barrier between water protectors and the police force and try to take some of that abuse for them.”

Dan Luker, 66 year old Vietnam vet from Boston, who visited Standing Rock in December was returning. He said that for many vets, helping the water protectors was "healing". Luker said: “This is the right war, right side. Finally, it’s the US military coming on to Sioux land to help, for the first time in history, instead of coming on to Sioux land to kill natives.” LaDonna Brave Bull Allard, founder of the Sacred Stone camp where Luker and others were setting up their own camp said that she welcomed the return of the vets. Allard said: “The veterans are going to make sure everything is safe and sound. The people on the ground have no protection.”

The protests have seen many arrested. Since last fall police have made roughly 700 arrests. Company private guards and police have been accused of using violent tactics. They have deployed water cannons in freezing weather, mace, rubber bullets, teargas, pepper spray and other less than lethal weapons.

Police arrest 141 as they clear Dakota Access protest

(October 28) Police garbed in riot gear, along with armored vehicles used pepper spray and batons to disperse over 300 protesters and clear out a camp. The protesters, many from the Standing Sioux tribe, were trying to stop construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

 

Police ended up arresting 141 protesters mostly aboriginal. North Dakota Governor, Jack Dalrymple, claimed police were successful in clearing the camp. He also said that private property was no place to carry out a peaceful protest. The Standing Rock Tribe claim that they own the property under the terms of an 1851 treaty with the U.S. government.

The proposed $3.8 billion pipeline is claimed by environmentalists and the Standing Rock Sioux to be a threat to the water supply and also sacred tribal sites However, as noted in a recent Digital Journal article several government agencies have also been critical of the project including the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The protesters tried to fend off the security forces by throwing rocks, bottles and even Moltov cocktails. They chained themselves to vehicles and and started fires according to police. The 1,172 mile pipeline is being built by Energy Transfer Partners would deliver oil from the Bakken shale oil in North Dakota to US Gulf Coast refineries. Supporters claim it would be safer than transport by rail or road. There are many financial institutions involved in financing the project. 17 different financial institutions from several different countries have loans out for the construction to the amount of $2.5 billion. However, if you consider lines of credit as well, 38 banks are involved to the tune of $10.25 billion.

Standing Rock tribal chief Dave Archembault II said: "I knew North Dakota state was planning something. They set up a pre-hospital tent near the camp. … That was sending me signals this was going to get out of hand." Archembault had asked the Department of Justice to tell the state not to proceed with the raid. He wants an investigation into the use of force by police. The police not only had military armoured vehicles MRAPS but also LRAD a long range acoustical device that makes piercing sounds that make people ill. The chief said that the company only needed to reroute the pipeline for the protest to stop. Archembault claimed that Obama could deny the easement.

Archembault chided Hillary Clinton for not taking a position on the issue instead of sitting on the fence. Archembault concluded:

"..let the union workers reroute this pipeline away from water, and we’ll protect them so they have safe jobs and everybody’s happy. All the politicians, all the people who get oil industry contributions for their campaigns, the economy, the national security, the energy independence will all be there. Just reroute this, deny the easement, and let’s put an end to this, once and for all. "

Court in North Dakota rules use of drones in arrest was not improper

A North Dakota district court has just made the first ruling on an arrest made using drone surveillance. The presiding judge ruled that the use of the drones was not improper and had no bearing on the charges.

Rodney Brossart has a 3,000 acre farm near the small town of Lakota in North Dakota. When six cows wandered onto his property Brossart believed he could keep the cows. When police came Brossart and two family members chased them off the land threatening them with high-powered rifles. The result was a 16 hour long standoff with a SWAT team from the nearest city Grand Forks.
The police had a search warrant. They also had an agreement with Homeland Security that enabled them to call in a surveillance drone. The drone pinpointed Brossart's location on the farm. The SWAT team was able to then arrest Brossart. He was charged with terrorizing a sheriff, theft, and other charges.
Douglas Manbeck, who represents the state in the case, claims the drones were used only after warrants had already been issued for Brossart's arrest:

"The alleged crimes were already committed long before a drone was even thought of being used. IIt was only used to help assure there weren't weapons and to make [the arrest] safer for both the Brossarts and law enforcement.""I know it's a touchy subject for anyone to feel that drones are in the air watching them, but I don't think there was any misuse in this case,"
John Vilasenor of the Brookings Institution an expert on drone use claims that using a drone is really no different than using a police helicopter:"It may have been the first time a drone was used to make an arrest, but it's certainly not going to be the last...I would be very surprised if someone were able to successfully launch a legal challenge [in Brossart's case]."
The FAA has already issued about 300 temporary licences for both research institutions and law enforcement agencies to use surveillance drones.
Bruce Quick Brossart's lawyer complained that the police used "guerrilla-like police tactics" in the arrest. Quick also described the use of the drone as "outrageous government conduct" and that it was "dispatched without approval or a warrant". Apparently there was a warrant and also approval for use of the drone. Quick also notes that laws regarding wandering livestock in North Dakota are not clear. He claims that the police abused their power by attempting to force Brossart to return the cows.
With more law enforcement agencies receiving licenses to use drones there will no doubt be more legal challenges to their use. While there may be little difference between use of drones or helicopters and perhaps security cameras their use increases government invasion of privacy. Perhaps the U.S. is not yet a police state but it is certainly already a surveillance state.