Protesters’ Peaceful Battle for Clean Water, Sacred Lands Met with Brute Force

American Free Press

November 06, 2016   chris   No comments

Demonstrators from across the country have joined with American Indians in North Dakota to protest a private oil firm that plans to run an oil pipeline underneath the Missouri river, the only source of clean drinking water for thousands of people in the area. The pipeline is planned to transport about 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day.

By Ronald Ray

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of the Dakota and Lakota Nations of American Indians has been seeking peacefully to block further construction of the 1,172-mile-long Dakota Access oil pipeline, which threatens the tribe’s water supply and sacred spaces. The tribe, recognized by the U.S. as a sovereign nation by treaty, thus has earned the wrath of Big Oil plutocrats and, consequently, law enforcement authorities.

In a separate article in this issue we recount the jury acquittal of seven defenders of private property rights, who earlier this year occupied the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, including sons of rancher Cliven Bundy. But unlike that peaceful protest, as well as the famous defense of the Bundy ranch in Nevada two years ago, the Indians have chosen to remain unarmed, despite sometimes facing vicious brutality by police and private security firms, which has included siccing biting attack dogs on protestors, arrests of reporters, and strip searches of arrestees.

The effort to protect the Missouri River—the Standing Rock Sioux’s primary water source—and sacred burial grounds now includes the participation of more than 300 native tribes and thousands of “water protectors” occupying federal land near the pipeline’s route south of Bismarck, N.D.

READ FULL AFP ARTICLE HERE

Mark Dankof to Jim Tucker of American Free Press: Mark Glenn is Your “Valued” but “Jew-Baiting” Correspondent?

 

 

 

I wish to inform my readers at Mark Dankof’s America,  Al Bawaba, and The Proud Political Junkie’s Gazette, of my on-the-record response to an official communication of American Free Press (AFP) editor, Jim Tucker, characterizing AFP correspondent Mark Glenn as one guilty of “Jew-baiting hysteria.”

Why not call Mr. Tucker on his nickel at 1-888-699-NEWS and tell him what you think as well?

My letter, and the blathering communication of Mr. Tucker that prompted it, appear as follows:

Jim Tucker, Editor
American Free Press
Washington, D. C.
 
Dear Mr. Tucker:
 
Your open letter raises more questions than it answers.  On the one hand, you refer to “our valued correspondent, Mark Glenn.” On the other hand, you have accused Mr. Glenn of “Jew-baiting hysteria.”  This is Orwellian doublespeak, par excellence.
 
I have regularly read Mr. Glenn’s AFP columns in recent years, even as their frequency in publication clearly diminished after Christopher Petherick left AFP and you assumed the role of Editor.  Let me say for the record that his columns are insightful, accurate, and articulate, while hitting the nail on the head in regard to the Israeli Lobby, Israel’s actions in Palestine and Gaza, and the Zionist State’s role in utilizing the military of the United States as a surrogate military force in both Iraq and Afghanistan. 
 
The utilization of the phrase “Jew-baiting hysteria” is not “subject to wide misunderstanding.” It clearly conveys the notion that Mr. Glenn is an irresponsible reporter operating from racial bias, bigotry, and malice.  It is a most serious charge, and one that is patently false.
 
Rather than suggest that your characterization of Mark Glenn’s writings for AFP was misunderstood, why not simply admit that your clearly intended description of him and his work for your newspaper was a serious error and one worthy of a public apology?
 
After all, since in your own words, AFP is the only newspaper you know of that “promises–and does–correct every error,” why not begin with setting the record straight on a moral, journalistic, and political error on your part so egregious that it begs confession and expiation before the credibility of AFP–and its subscriber list–end up with a one-way ticket to Sheol?
 
And what does your libelous description of Mr. Glenn imply about two of your other correspondents, Victor Thorn and Michael Collins Piper, and their collaboration with Glenn on a new book on the USS Liberty being promoted by your newspaper?  Are they too, flirting with “Jew-baiting hysteria?”
 
Mark Dankof
Mark Dankof’s America
San Antonio, Texas