By Winona LaDuke
It’s eight years since Highway 1804 and the Missouri River were cleared of Water Protectors, yet the story continues. It’s an ongoing story of the future of the water and the land, and lawyers and trials. In the past few months, we’ve seen renewed media on Standing Rock, outright fake newspapers and messaging that seems intended to create a new narrative prior to the jury trial in Mandan of Energy Transfer Partners v. Greenpeace.
This is apparently how it works: if you want to spin a story in North Dakota, just create a new media outlets and then a web site, where you “set the story straight”. Sort of like lying repeatedly till folks believe you.
I beg to differ with the story. I am an eyewitness to Standing Rock as a Water Protector. The Energy Transfer Partner’s claims are false. To further boost its story, in early January, Energy Transfer Partners (now called Energy Transfer) set up a website called “Take Back the Truth”, with a cute little oil drop on the logo. These website claims are an oily rewrite of history, and the implications for North Dakotans and the rest of us are big.
Claim One: “The Dakota Access Pipeline does not encroach on any Tribal Lands.” That depends if you are an oil company or a Lakota. A Lakota person will tell you that the pipeline traverses Unci Maka, and that the Missouri River is the lifeblood of the people – Mni Wiconi. The Dakota Access pipeline is within the l868 and the l851 treaty territories, lands legally retained by the Lakota as confirmed by the US Supreme Court. The pipeline was rerouted and moved to just north of Standing Rock, so that the city of Bismarck would not bear the risk of a big oil pipeline contaminating its water supply. The residents of Bismarck have political and voting power. Now, the pipeline impacts the land, water and Lakota people.
Claim Two: “Greenpeace falsely claimed that Energy Transfer desecrated sacred and culturally important sites.” This is true! There was that big incident where the Tribal Historic Preservation Office identified sacred and cultural sites in the path of the pipeline on the former Cannonball Ranch. This occurred on the Friday of Labor Day weekend. The next day, Energy Transfer bulldozed this area. I was there in the camp that day. It bulldozed sacred sites.
Claim Three: “Neither Energy Transfer nor DAPL used extreme violence against protestors.” $38 million is a lot of money to spend shutting down Water Protectors. North Dakota spent that to protect the interests of a private corporation, Energy Transfer Partners. Police forces used some “less than lethal” weapons, paid for by the state. Tigerswan, under contract with Energy Transfer Partners, also bought “less than lethal” weapons, releasing attack dogs on Water Protectors and injuring them.
Claim Four: “Energy Transfer Partners’ lawsuit is not about free speech.” It is! When they sue people for so-called defamation, oil and pipeline companies like Energy Transfer send a clear message: If you stand up, you will be punished in a lawsuit. “To me, this is a freedom of speech case and freedom of association case,” attorney Sarah Vogel, former ND assistant Attorney General and Agriculture Commissioner told the Monitor. “As residents of a small state without a whole lot of power, we’d better be able to speak up. Who knows? I mean, this time, it’s Greenpeace, but who will it be next time?”
Claim Five: “Greenpeace orchestrated the Standing Rock protests back in 2016.” That’s not true, most of us didn’t even know they were there. They just have more money than the little guys and are easy to pick on.
Then there’s this past fall when the North Dakota Monitor reported some brand-new newspapers mysteriously appearing. Central North Dakota News “was postmarked from Chicago,… and distributed to residents predominantly residing in Morton County…” The paper told some pretty scary stories from eight years ago, ie: 2016: “Area schools locked down as authorities respond to pipeline protests.” It also puffed up a $ 5 million Energy Transfer donation to the University of St. Mary back in 2016. The byline for the story tracked to a media front for a “dark money group” supported by fossil-fuel interests.
Some folks noticed. Tavi Leier, from Mandan, for instance, told the Monitor, she was concerned about a newspaper that looks legitimate but is “kind of swindling the rural people a little bit” and “putting something out there that’s not real.” Cecile Wehrman, Executive Director of the North Dakota Newspaper Association, said the publication does not meet the definition of an official newspaper in North Dakota.
Last thought: Let’s not let some Texas Oil folks make up a new story while they threaten our water and civil liberties.
