Native American Tribe Says Building of Keystone Pipeline will be Considered an Act of War

November 18, 2014   |   Cassius Methyl

Cassius Methyl
November 18, 2014

(TheAntiMedia) A few days ago, the House of Representatives approved a bill allowing for construction of the Keystone Pipeline, sponsored by Bill Cassidy of Louisiana.

Now, only the senate and president have to approve the bill for this massive corporation to have full permission to steal land from Native American tribes, farmers, ranchers and countless other Americans to build the pipeline. This theft will take place under eminent domain laws, which is why the government is so heavily involved in this process. A judge has already rebuked Nebraska governor John Heineman’s attempt to fast track the pipeline’s route through private and Native American lands. Natives are firstly concerned because their land will literally be stolen from them by the government and handed over to a Big Oil corporation, and secondly because it could easily malfunction and end up polluting large amounts of land and  water.

The politicians in power over the corporation’s permission to build this are putting words in the mouths of the American people.

To be exact, John Boehner said it was “time for Obama to listen to the American people” and not stand in the way of the pipeline’s construction. Among the many things absolutely wrong about this statement, Barack Obama probably does not care about opposing this, and the American people did not vote to approve this pipeline. However, many Americans and Native Americans vehemently opposed this project while the people in power have ignored them.

Bill Cassidy, the face for the bill to approve the pipeline, also put words in the mouths of the American people; disrespectfully and inaccurately saying “This will make it easier for the Senate to do right by the American people and finally vote on building the pipeline.”

Among the opposition for the pipeline, the Rosebud Sioux Tribal President of South Carolina declared that his tribe considers the continued efforts to approve the Keystone pipeline for the TransCanada Corporation as an act of war. The intense effort by politicians to make sure the corporation has it’s way is an intense effort to allow TransCanada to steal land from tribes like this one.

The Department of Interior and the Department of State were presented with concerns from the Rosebud Sioux Tribe about their land being taken, and they were completely ignored.

The tribe’s president said,

“The House has now signed our death warrants and the death warrants of our children and grandchildren. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe will not allow this pipeline through our lands,”

He continued,

“We are outraged at the lack of intergovernmental cooperation. We are a sovereign nation and we are not being treated as such. We will close our reservation borders to Keystone XL. Authorizing Keystone XL is an act of war against our people.”

In February, the tribe and other Sioux Nation members adopted tribal resolutions to oppose the pipeline and stand up for the only land they have left.

“The Lakota people have always been stewards of this land,” the tribal president continued. “We feel it is imperative that we provide safe and responsible alternative energy resources not only to Tribal members but to non-Tribal members as well. We need to stop focusing and investing in risky fossil fuel projects like TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline. We need to start remembering that the earth is our mother and stop polluting her and start taking steps to preserve the land, water, and our grandchildren’s future.”

An article from The Lakota Voice says “The proposed route of TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline crosses directly through Great Sioux Nation (Oceti Sakowin) Treaty lands as defined by both the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaties and within the current exterior boundaries of the Rosebud Sioux Reservation and Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation.”

This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons License with attribution to Cassius Methyl and Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to receive our latest articles. Image credit:

Author: Cassius Methyl

Cassius Methyl joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in March of 2014. His topics of interest include thinking, creating a future, deep spirituality, and astrology. He resides in Sacramento, California.

Share This Post On


  1. Of South Carolina?? C'mon…

    Post a Reply
  2. So let's just keep buying our oil from Middle East countries who really hate us. There's your act of war. Real war. Not made up bullshit.

    Post a Reply
  3. If you have any semblance of a brain……how about you use it to explain why this story is "BS"…….but I'm sure all you can come up with is the moronic BS line…….I bet you ass would think differently if it were your land or you were forced to leave your house in order to make way for "progress"…..

    Post a Reply
  4. Idiot……..we need to stop relying on petroleum all together…….slowly phase it out…..its almost all gone anyways, what then…why not start ending dependency on it as soon as possible…..and besides that we are always declaring war on some Middle Eastern nation……we are doing it as we speak…….you think this pipeline will end war…..this is not our oil, it is Canadas, and it is only being piped to a port where it will be sold on the open market…..are you that dumb that you think that the oil will becoming here for us to use….you are a typical moronic misinformed fool….but don't take my word for all I have said…..instead of listening to what media tells you, how about you go do some research and find the real facts for yourself…..but yet your brain is not capable of that, and never will be… brain is so washed I can barely see from the reflection of the moronic comment you made!

    Post a Reply
  5. David L Hayes, none of this oil will benefit the US. Canada will ship the oil over US soil (at us risk) directly to the Gulf and the World market. Now for the million dollar question, who is benefiting?

    Post a Reply
  6. South Dakota buddy, not South Carolina.

    Post a Reply
  7. These natural minerals are meant to stay where they are! What do humans think about the consequences to life when they are all gone??? With them condensed in the atmosphere, it is no wonder people have no sense of respect, no love of life without the chase and fetish of a dollar, they can't be replaced or regrown. This depletion, deprives the value of existence.
    Blessings to The Rosebud Sioux Tribe x

    Post a Reply
  8. Sure, we do not need the pipeline. We don't need more jobs. We can let all the people live in poverty. We can send all our money off to other countries with no benefit to the US. Yes, it is Canadian oil that would go down the pipeline, but the jobs to build it and maintain it would be American. But we don't want any more Americans to have jobs.

    Post a Reply
  9. You're like a dog begging for a treat and thinking of yourself before thinking of any consequences any Oil men who cross that land I hope they kill.

    Post a Reply
  10. Brian …. You are a liberal all right. Wishing death on those that disagree with you.

    Post a Reply
  11. @Miles Coleman: usage of quoatations and ellipsis don't lend creedance to your viewpoints as much as you might think. Distracting at best, "moronic" at worst.

    Post a Reply
  12. No im not at all but it is their land whats left of it and they have a right to fight for it you must be a facist since you think you can just grab and take what you want

    Post a Reply
  13. Sioux aren't located in South Carolina, nor is the pipeline going through that state. I believe they meant South Dakota.

    Post a Reply
  14. I am not a fascist. I don't support Obama. The "land grab" will be when they pay for the mostly underground use of the property in the same manner as the power company or the telephone company running lines under the surface. Not all of the pipeline will be underground, but the vast majority will be. A year after it is placed 12 feet under you will have a hard time finding it. There will be less damage then when they widen a road.

    Post a Reply
  15. So you don't drive a car or live in a wooden or brick house or buy food from a store or wear clothes or have an indoor toilet? ALL of that takes oil as well as other "natural minerals".

    Post a Reply
  16. I can drive a car but choose not too.
    You seem to miss the point that I was making,
    I am not against providing for human needs only stating the facts. Pollution is a problem.
    In this commercial society, there is little choice but to buy my food from a store but yet those whom live sustainably from what is provided by nature seem to be condemned for following natural allowances.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>