Live Feed: Riot Police And Humvees Move In To Remove Last Remaining Standing Rock Protesters

Tyler Durden's picture

Yesterday we noted that, after nearly a year of continuous protests, eviction day had finally come for the last remaining members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota. 

That said, and quite unsurprisingly we might add, a number of Standing Rock protesters apparently decided that the North Dakota Governor's eviction notice, which went in effect yesterday at 2pm, was merely a suggestion and overstayed their welcome on federal lands.  As such, riot police and Humvees have now been called in to facilitate their immediate departure.

Of course, as most are acutely aware at this point, the standoff in North Dakota revolves around Native American opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), a project the Standing Rock tribe said crosses over land that belongs to them pursuant to the Treaty of Fort Laramie from 1868.

According to RT, roughly 100 protesters remained in camp this morning as riot police moved in to clear the grounds.

Live-streams from across the Cannon Ball River showed police, including state troopers from Wisconsin, and what looked like National Guard troops entering the mostly abandoned encampment on Thursday morning, accompanied with armored vehicles and construction equipment.

 

About 100 protesters remained in the camp on Wednesday, defying the deadline for evacuation ordered by North Dakota's governor.

Here is a live feed of today's festivities:

 

* * *

For those who missed it, here are scenes from yesterday as the Governor's eviction notice took effect.

After nearly a year of conflict, today may mark the last stand at Standing Rock as authorities’ begin their final eviction of protesters, also known as water protectors, from their camps.

The standoff in North Dakota revolves around Native American opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), a controversial initiative the Standing Rock tribe says crosses over land that belongs to them pursuant to the Treaty of Fort Laramie from 1868.

The #NoDAPL movement gained widespread attention in 2016 after videos and reports emerged showing law enforcement’s brutal militaristic crackdown on protests. Hundreds of water protectors have been arrested and injured — some critically.

The eviction, expected imminently today, stems from an executive order signed by Governor Burgum.

 

Below is a collection of live video from the ground at Standing Rock that we will update throughout the day:

 

Keep up with the latest developments on Twitter:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Ghost of PartysOver's picture

Why stop there.  Go to the Town Hall Meeting.  Then on to all other Progressive Loser Marches.  

Protesting Gov't is one thing.  But when it crosses the line to property destruction then lock em up.

general ambivalent's picture

Can't wait for them to round up all the Trumptards as they shout, 'I can't take all this WINNING!'

BullyBearish's picture

Can't tell if it's a really bad winter in Gaza or North Dakota...

Ignatius's picture

"...Forcing Unarmed Indigenous People Off Treaty Lands."

Anyone else spot the irony here?

xythras's picture
xythras (not verified) Ignatius Feb 23, 2017 2:20 PM

Protest on your OWNED space. If not go to jail's safe space. 

This off-duty cop taught some manners to spiks.

VIDEO: Off-duty Officer’s Fight with Unruly Teens sets off Protests

http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-02-23/off-duty-officers-fight-with-u...

And Trump should change laws and make them (hard) work in prison not live off our taxes. Like in Russia & China. Then they'll feel the burn and behave.

SILVERGEDDON's picture

Fun fact - the camp was on treaty land which was part of the reservation handed over in the 1892 treaty by the US government to the Sioux in ecchange for a peace settlement, and the surrender of traditional Sioux territory to the government. It was shit land no one else wanted at the time. 

Of course, decades later, when oil, gas, and minerals were discovered, government and big business seized the lions share of the reserve back from the Sioux, because, hey, that's what government does - lie, cheat, divide and conquer.

The Sioux tribes never surrendered sovereignty to the USA - they negotiated a peace treaty that has been broken repeatedly, endlessly, ever since it was signed.

What they did get - was smallpox, starvation, lies, reservation schools, molestation, abuse, and resultant alcohohol and drug abuse.

They could be us - we could be them. Our future with government and big business is looking more and more like the history of lies and betrayal they have experienced for the last 2-300 years. 

Think about it. Real hard.  

johngaltfla's picture

Too bad they didn't break out GE mini-guns with rubber bullets. That would clear the commie Soros fuckers faster.

jmack's picture

I thought about, the only conclusion is to have many kids and teach them all to shoot....  There is only one law, and that is the law of the jungle, the rest is what politicians tell you to manipulate you to do what they want, without resorting to the law of the jungle.

 

   Even in the bible, god did not miraculously stop wars, he only help one side to defeat the other in the course of war.  Because evil exists. and you just dont hug it out with evil.

not dead yet's picture

Just like the Muzzies the so called Native Americans wanted to live in the past. Nobody holds a gun to your head to do drugs or booze. Their camp is typical of how they don't care about the environment as they threw their garbage all over along with their excrement. They got millions donated to them which they could of used for dumpsters and porta potties. Just like some other minority, hint south side of Chicago, we gave them all kinds of stuff and they trashed it and whined for more. Were their schools shit because of the whites or their own people were too busy teaching bullshit lies and negativity. If they had gotten off their dead asses instead of going oh woe is me they would have some clout and lawyers to back it up. In the beginning it was the whites that put up and ran the casinos which have made many tribes prosperous. Even so many tribes making the big bucks aren't very quick to use their wealth to educate and improve their peoples situatiion.

jmack's picture

you mean like the bakers and pizza shop owners that get jailed or fined for not serving gays?  or maybe you mean the attempted lawsuit against the houston preachers.  Or maybe you mean O'Keefe for doing investigative reporting, or the pro life org that film PP parting out babies...

 

      I could take your warning of an overbearing state more seriously if it didnt feel so good have Obama's boot off my neck.  Which I note all these fair weather anti-fascists had no problem whatsoever with.

Takeaction2's picture
Takeaction2 (not verified) Ghost of PartysOver Feb 23, 2017 1:51 PM

Was hoping to read "Humvees and Marines Move in to Chicago to Stop Violence...Once and For ALL".

.

Donald...finish off this Chicago crap please...

chubbar's picture

OT but wanted to get this out there   http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-02-23-breaking-mike-adams-and-alex-jones-taken-down-by-google-cia-prior-to-big-event-trump-needs-to-beware.html

This article is saying that the CIA/Google are conspiring to take down Natural News and Alex Jones prior to a big event (Trump assassination) because these two guys are covering Pizzagate and the Deep State needs to stop both Trump and others covering this issue.

Please read and pass along, Pizza gate needs to get more coverage!!!!!!

Son of Patton's picture

Unfortunately, the articles basic premise is wrong. Try it yourself. I did and quit reading the article. Its just not true

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

What are these people protesting, exactly?

They seem to be upset because the pipeline does not go across their reservation, and therefore does not pay them money.

Am I wrong?

Did they make any claims to this land before the pipeline?

LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD's picture
LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD (not verified) hedgeless_horseman Feb 23, 2017 1:56 PM

The "problem" is that the pipeline might come near "sacred ground." That can NOT happen as it will anger the Redskin gods becasue, according to official Redskin god lore, a casino parking lot is supposed go on that piece of "sacred ground."

earlyberd's picture

No, the problem is that a leak in the pipeline will contaminate the drinking water that the indigenous people rely upon. And if it leaks into the Missouri river, millions of people are fucked.

Idiot.

The_Juggernaut's picture

It's amazing how many of my leftist friends who won't shut up about their atheism are so worried about sacred burial grounds.

jmack's picture

do you know how many pipelines cross creeks and rivers and lakes?   Do you know how many of them leaked and to what extent they polluted said bodies of water?

 

   I thought not.

The_Juggernaut's picture

Actually I do.  This link may help you alleviate your ignorance.  Enjoy! :)

 

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF...

shovelhead's picture

But those other pipelines are ok?

It's just this one that angers the Great Spirit?

e_goldstein's picture

If by 'Great Spirit' you mean unkie Warren Buffett, then yes.

ReZn8r's picture

fuck you asshole, you know nothing about this issue.

SILVERGEDDON's picture

Read my reply to Xythris above.

For an educated guy, you don't know very much about the real world.

And, you don't dig very deep under the crust of fake news put out to cover up government / big business malfeasance. 

Look up Wounded Knee. Look up the Treaty of 1868.

Look into the mirror - you are next for dot gov to pluck and roast.  

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

A few ad hominem attacks, and a red herring for fun.

Is that it?

SILVERGEDDON's picture

No attack, just observation based upon your babe in the woods act and narrative talking points. 

Like I said, just goole the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851, broken innumerable times by dot gov ever since signing, and Wounded Knee, the post script - Wikipedia is a fairly unbiased information source.

When you open your own eyes, what you see is all the more enlightening.  

wow017's picture

Standing Rock Siuox protested the crossing of their land.

The protesters are environmental hangeron's who care nothing for the law or the tribe.

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

Standing Rock Siuox protested the crossing of their land.

Land?  

Did they make any claims to this land before the pipeline?  

If so, when was the most recent?

Others are saying they were protesting because the pipeline will cross a river upstream and not on their reservation. 

No?

SILVERGEDDON's picture

Here are a few tid bits of background on land issues because your google fu is so weak. 

As settlers headed west in the middle of the 19th century, nations of Native Americans wanted them to keep their distance and their foreign diseases at bay. The United States wanted easements for trails and permission to build forts in Indian territories.

The result was the Treaty of Fort Laramie of 1851 — a historic agreement that has found new resonance in the disagreement over the path of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

“It really is an important thing,” said Suzan Harjo, president of the Morning Star Institute and a longtime Native American historian and advocate. “These agreements — they all started out with peace and friendship.”

Harjo curated an exhibit on treaties at the Smithsonian’s Museum of the American Indian and wrote an accompanying book, both called, “Nation to Nation: Treaties between the United States and American Indian Nations.” The exhibit is slated to be open until at least 2018. President Barack Obama in 2014 awarded Harjo the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor, for her decades of advocacy on behalf of Native Americans.

Because of the unique standing of treaties under the U.S. Constitution, many parts of the treaty remain in effect, according to Harjo, who said she believes Dakota Access Pipeline opponents are correct in citing the treaty in their efforts to stop pipeline construction on treaty lands that are privately owned and not part of the Standing Rock Reservation.

The Treaty of Fort Laramie of 1851 was an attempt to establish Native American territories and set ground rules for the westward spread of settlers, Harjo said. More than 10,000 Native Americans came to Fort Laramie for discussions with U.S. officials. Because the fort couldn’t hold them, negotiations were held at Horse Creek, leading some to call it the Treaty of Horse Creek. Others call it “the Great Smoke,” because of the smoke when tribal leaders burned sage and buffalo grass and other symbolic things up to the Creator to signify the deal was done, Harjo said.

“They made this treaty, and it was a reasonable treaty on all sides,” she said.

A map drawn by Belgian Jesuit missionary Father Pierre-Jean DeSmet with information from famous guide and fur trapper Jim Bridger helped define the approximate boundaries of the tribes, Harjo said. The pool-table sized map now is at the Library of Congress.

The treaty also laid out rules for interaction among the tribes and with the United States, gave the government permission to build small forts and provided easements no wider than a Conestoga wagon for westward trails, said Harjo, who explained that is part of the reason for the width of railroad tracks: They originally had to fit in those same easements.

Areas on the Dakota Access Pipeline route run through the 1851 territories of tribal bands that make up the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Yankton Sioux Tribe, as well as through the Great Sioux Reservation drawn up in the Treaty of Fort Laramie of 1868, Harjo said.

However, Congress in 1889 divided the Great Sioux Reservation into six separate, smaller reservations, which have remained intact. While Congress forced the tribes on to smaller parcels of land, the treaties of 1851 and 1868 didn’t go away, Harjo said.

Grant Christensen, an assistant professor at the University of North Dakota School of Law, said he hasn’t reviewed the two Fort Laramie treaties close enough to give an opinion on any legal standing related to them. But, he explained the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution makes any treaty the “supreme law of the land" and the terms of treaties remain in place unless specifically repealed by Congress.

The U.S. Supreme Court also has held that subsequent treaties do not do away with an earlier treaty unless the new treaty specifically addresses and removes the terms of the older treaty, he said.

An example is a 1999 Supreme Court case called Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, in which the Mille Lacs Band successfully argued they never lost the right to hunt and fish on lands laid out in an 1837 treaty despite an 1855 treaty that made their reservation smaller, Christensen said.

Harjo said she believes Standing Rock still has claims to the lands in the 1851 territories. The Treaty of Fort Laramie of 1851 didn’t make the tribes change who they were, she said.

“They didn’t give up their right to speak their language or exercise their religion. They didn’t give up their ancestors’ graves. They didn’t give up their worship and other sacred places. They didn’t give up their right to have a clear blue stream to jump in to conclude the Sun Dance,” Harjo said.

Harjo said she believes the 1978 American Indian Religious Freedom Act, the 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and the 1996 Executive Order on Indian Sacred Sites — all of which she played a part in molding — have built on those treaty rights and also are in play.

“The native people in this situation haven’t begun to mount the kind of legal case that they could,” she said.


hedgeless_horseman's picture

citing the treaty in their efforts to stop pipeline construction on treaty lands that are privately owned and not part of the Standing Rock Reservation.

Just who do those private property owners think they are? So un-socialist of them to not share their pipeline revenue with the poor Indians still over on the reservation.

Hungman's picture

They are protesting for whatever reason Mr. Buffett pays them to protest for. 

TheLastTrump's picture

lol shits on fire yo

Jack's Raging Bile Duct's picture

It is clear that you've been ingesting adequate electrolytes.

jus_lite_reading's picture

Was there no other way for this pipeline? I'm all for pipelines but c'mon... couldn't they move it to the west a few miles? Am I missing something here?

Ghost of PartysOver's picture

Yes you are missing something.  It is not about the location of the pipeline, it is about the pipeline.  Period. 

NumNutt's picture

Why didn't they protest other hundred (+ or -) pipelines that are currently in existance? Oh thats right...Soros didn't pay them too....paid lackies....

SILVERGEDDON's picture

You are a sad troll. Same disinformation you tried on the camp closure story yesterday. 

Google the history of the US government versus the Sioux.

It is exactly what dot gov and big business have in store for you and me.

Wake the fuck up.  

Son of Patton's picture

So it has nothing to do with the guy who owns the railroad the crude is currently transported on?

Wake the fuck up yerself

Sam Spayed's picture

Wherever the pipeline would have been would have magically been Indian land.

not dead yet's picture

Before the pipeline went ahead they had plenty of meetings with all parties, including the Indians, over a period of months and all parties were in agreement. The Indians only started protesting after the work was started.

LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD's picture
LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD (not verified) Feb 23, 2017 1:49 PM

Where the HELL will the casino parking lot go if this damn pipeline is built... on sacred grounds?

g'kar's picture

I heard they sold out for wampum, whiskey and smallpox laced blankets again.

Omega_Man's picture

send them to FEMA camps for retraining 

SILVERGEDDON's picture

What is left of the reserve the US government deeded to the Sioux in the Treaty of 1868 that has not been stolen back by dot gov makes a FEMA camp look like Club Med. 

g'kar's picture

That'll teach'em for growing into a threat to the Borg Collective.

Sam Spayed's picture

"North Dakota Executive Order Forcing Unarmed Indigenous People Off Treaty Lands"

You mean they're letting the armed indigenous people stay???? Just getting rid of the unarmed ones???

ConnectingTheDots's picture

So the billionaire oligarchs get the taxpayers to pay for the militarized police who are servicing the monetary interests of these billionaires by evicting people defending their water supply. This system is totally insane. You couldn't make this crap up.

general ambivalent's picture

Don't forget that the anarcho-capitalists cheer all of it on, not realising that they are begging for free helicopter rides themselves.