Federal Judge Says Public Can Legally Be Kept in the Dark on Dakota Pipeline Spill Risks

The Dakota pipeline’s parent company, Energy Transfer Partners, has argued in court that the public must be kept in the dark about the Dakota pipeline’s spill risks because it might be “useful to vandals and terrorists” or others “with malicious intent to damage the pipeline”…

…Surely not because a company that’s invested $3.8 billion in the pipeline wants to hide its liability of knowledge before the fact if that pipeline does indeed poison the drinking water of 17 million people as members of Standing Rock Sioux and Cheyenne River Sioux indigenous American tribes claim it could.

But last Friday, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the public has no right to know about those potential risks, stating, “the asserted interest in limiting intentionally inflicted harm outweighs the tribes’ generalized interests in public disclosure and scrutiny.”

As Mint Press News reported, the ruling comes “despite that fact that pipeline safety experts have repeatedly found the environmental review of the Dakota Access pipeline to have been “seriously deficient.”

Not only that, but North Dakota apparently manages an average of not one or two, but four oil spills every year and has since the mid-90s.

Surely someone will do something to stop this insane potential poisoning of the people and their environment, right? Surely that’s more important that corporate interests, isn’t it? With the drinking water of millions at stake?

“Yeah right, good luck on that” said Flint, Michigan.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Piper McGowin of The Daily Sheeple.

Piper writes for The Daily Sheeple. There’s a lot of B.S. out there. Someone has to write about it.