Obama Is Pathetic on Human Rights in North Dakota
ANGLO AMERICA, 7 Nov 2016
William Boardman - Reader Supported News
We’re monitoring this closely. And, you know, I think, as a general rule, my view is that there is a way for us to accommodate sacred lands of Native Americans. And I think that right now the Army Corps is examining whether there are ways to reroute this pipeline in a way…. So—so, we’re going to let it play out for several more weeks and determine whether or not this can be resolved in a way that I think is properly attentive to the traditions of the first Americans….
– President Obama on the Now This News website, November 1, 2016
Police use pepper spray against protesters trying to cross a stream near an oil pipeline construction site near Standing Rock Indian Reservation, north of Cannon Ball, North Dakota, November 2, 2016. (photo: Jason Patinkin/Reuters)
4 Nov 2016 – Isn’t that sweet? The President gave lip service to “the traditions of the first Americans.” He didn’t mention treaties between sovereign nations, of course, because he’s not about to break with the traditions of the second Americans: that such treaties are only a means to a genocidal end and aren’t to be taken seriously by the United States of exceptional, manifestly destined Americans whenever such treaties interfere with what the US wants.
That’s what “properly attentive” means historically. Freely translated, “properly attentive” means “make a show of peace talk, and then roll over them with whatever force necessary after it’s too late to affect the election.” The legal mind is nothing if not properly attentive to elegant turns of phrase in its unyielding hypocrisy.
If the President had any intention of honoring anything relating to the sacred lands of Native Americans, he would not be planning to “let it play out for several more weeks.” Sacred lands have already been destroyed. Sacred lands are being destroyed no, not only by the pipeline construction but also by the massive militarized police response to nonviolent protest. Letting it play out for several more weeks only opens the door to the destruction of more – even all – of the sacred lands in the path of this lethal-to-the-planet pipeline.
What is happening, what has been happening for months in North Dakota, is a travesty – of justice, of common human decency, of the rule of law and standards of international law. And our president is on the wrong side of all of it, just barely responding in his docile, passive, articulate evasiveness.
“We’re monitoring this closely,” says the President
If the President is monitoring this closely and remains willing to let it play out for several more weeks, that’s a pretty clear signal that he has no serious problem with the creation of police state conditions in North Dakota. Besides an unknown number of private security forces working for Energy Transfer Partners (the pipeline sponsor), there are law enforcement officers from at least seven states that have cost about $10 million so far. That seems a ridiculously high price to pay to contain peaceful protest. And it’s an even more ridiculous price for taxpayers to shell out to protect private profits.
If the President is monitoring this closely without responding, that is a tacit admission that he has no serious problem with any of the egregious behavior so far by official and quasi-official paramilitaries and their wide-ranging mistreatment (apparently including criminal assault) of American citizens. In particular, he has allowed and continues to allow himself to be seen as approving:
- Unlicensed, apparently untrained private security forces using dogs to bloody peaceful protesters (who call themselves water protectors).
- State officials arresting and over-charging journalists for committing journalism.
- A local sheriff inflaming the public with false reports of “pipe bombs,” when what he had actually heard was talk of “peace pipes.”
- Law officers shooting nonviolent water protectors in the back and front with rubber bullets.
- State officials housing arrestees in dog cages and conditions that violate international law against torturing prisoners.
- Law officers on the riverbank using mace and pepper spray against nonviolent water protectors standing in the water.
- Official surveillance helicopters flying low to panic horses.
- Official surveillance helicopters mysteriously going off duty just before “persons unknown” start a prairie fire (with such ineptitude that the wind blows it away from the Standing Rock Sioux gathering ground).
- Apparent contempt of court by Energy Transfer Partners, who sent its bulldozers to destroy a burial ground that, once destroyed, could no longer be a reason for a federal court to rule against the pipeline. Desecration is not a criminal act, apparently, when you have a government permit for it, even when that permit is under litigation.
That’s a lot of official abuse to tolerate, even for a president, and that’s just a sampling of the police state techniques being tested in Middle America these days.
“And I think that right now the Army Corps is examining whether there are ways to reroute this pipeline in a way …”
The President paused there, leaving the thought unfinished. The pipeline has already been re-routed, away from the state capital city of Bismarck after residents there expressed fear that the pipeline threatened their water supply. Now the pipeline threatens the water supply of the Standing Rock Sioux (and thousands of others), but that is more acceptable to the American power structure. The President has expressed no dismay at the idea that a pipeline rupture along the Missouri River would devastate huge numbers of “the first Americans,” who have no other source of water. As one water protector put it: “If it were to be contaminated,… it would be a death sentence.”
Why does the President think rerouting a climate-hostile pipeline is any kind of an answer to anything other than protecting the speculative bets of Energy Transfer Partners? If he were to consider this pipeline (any new pipeline) in terms of its impact on global climate values, this would be a no-brainer: no more pipelines. This is the Army Corps of Engineers we’re talking about – the Army – and the President is the commander in chief who has no difficulty blowing up wedding parties and funerals with drones in some imaginary defense of national security. Why does he have such reluctance to protect planetary security? Why does he not just order the Army Corp of Engineers to go back to square one and re-do this process which was fast-tracked in the first place, for reasons that remain murky, and with the exclusion of interested parties with legal standing. But President Obama, on full salary as he campaigns for Hillary Clinton, shows no inclination to do any of this well or right. He’s apparently much more confortable with false equivalencies and blaming the victims (also on Now This News):
Yeah, I mean, it’s a challenging situation. I think that my general rule when I talk to governors and state and local officials, whenever they’re dealing with protests, including, for example, during the Black Lives Matters protests, is there is an obligation for protesters to be peaceful, and there’s an obligation for authorities to show restraint. And, you know, I want to make sure that as everybody is exercising their constitutional rights to be heard, that both sides are refraining from situations that might result in people being hurt.
For someone supposedly monitoring this closely, the President might be expected to know that people have already been hurt and most if not all of those hurt were nonviolent, peaceful protestors set upon by dogs and assaulted by rubber bullets, sound cannons, and chemical weapons. What fundamental, callous irrationality prompts this president to bring in Black Lives Matter? That is strange beyond comprehension. But perhaps it shines a light on that dark place in his soul that allowed him to react with almost no help or pity for the people of Flint, poisoned by their own governments, including the one President Obama is supposed to lead.
___________________________________
William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
Go to Original – readersupportednews.org
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.