# data[].attributes.headline
Essay Article Source #1: A Positive Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.subject
Essay Article Source #1: A Positive Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.body
This is the positive article I chose to include in my essay, courtesy of The Hill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The key to America's national and energy security rests with our ability to provide for our own energy needs with our own natural resources, personnel and infrastructure.

A proposed $3.7-billion pipeline is planned for a 1,200-mile span from the Bakken oil fields of western North Dakota to Illinois. This will allow North Dakota to export half of its daily crude output to the rest of America.

The Dakota pipeline will create over 8,000 immediate jobs in the construction sector. It will be a huge boost to regional employment, especially for welders, mechanics, electricians, pipefitters, heavy equipment operators, truckers and other complimentary trades in the manufacture of the materials needed to build the pipeline.

The economic benefit to the construction of the pipeline with the state and local economies is an estimated $129 million annually to property and income taxes. The service industries will also see a benefit through additional income to hotels, restaurants, etc. Once the pipeline is operational, it is estimated that state and local governments can see an estimated $50 million annually in property taxes and $74 million in sales taxes for the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, pipelines are the safest mode of transporting crude oil. The Dakota crude oil pipeline is designed to exceed stringent federal standards and will be built and operated using the most advanced technology and monitoring systems.

An exhaustive review process begun in 2014 for the building of the pipeline and to date there have been close to 400 meetings, surveys, hearings and lawsuits. This pipeline has been fully reviewed and approved by all four states affected as well the Army Corp of engineers. The North Dakota Public Service Commission is also in support of the pipeline and has been involved in the review process from its start. This project has been green-lighted and the necessary permits have been issued for construction to begin.

So why then is the pipeline not being constructed?

It is being reported that the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, represented by the radical group EarthJustice, filed a lawsuit to halt construction. It is documented that the Sioux, despite their claims they were not given the opportunity to make their own review of the effects on "cultural sites" as well as environmental impact on their lands, did not participate in the approval process in spite of outreach to them.

A handful environmental rabble-rousers with a radical agenda seek to stop a multibillion dollar project based solely upon unsupported facts, threats and innuendo.

Presently before the federal court is the application by the opponents for an injunction enjoining the construction of the pipeline and thereby denying that which the nation and states affected wants and needs. I say the court should either deny the motion for an injunction outright or require the parties seeking an injunction to post with the court a $1 billion dollar bond in good faith of their allegation and claims.

We as a nation cannot cower or bow to environmental extortion. The administrative process played out as intended and just because a minority of activists does not like the decision cannot deny parties what they are entitled as a matter of law.

The court must put an end to frivolous lawsuits whose sole purpose is to bully, threaten, provoke and obstruct. The court should also consider sanctions and the awarding of attorneys' fees as a further message of deterrence. In addition, local authorities need to exercise police powers in making sure criminal laws are not being violated by protesters and those in opposition who are engaged in trespassing, threats, destruction of property or worse.

In America, we must work within a system that respects the rule of law and the outcome of lawful processes that have run its course.

The Dakota pipeline is needed. It will create a new and safer mode of transporting needed domestic crude to our nation. It will provide much-needed jobs and is in our national security and energy needs.
Blakeman is professor of public policy, politics and international affairs at Georgetown University's School of Continuing Studies and was a member of President George W. Bush's senior White House staff from 2001 to 2004. He is also a frequent contributor to Fox News and Fox Business Channel. The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why we must build the Dakota Access pipeline now

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The key to America's national and energy security rests with our ability to provide for our own energy needs with our own natural resources, personnel and infrastructure. A proposed $3.7-billion pipeline is planned for a 1,200-mile span from the Bakken oil fields of western North Dakota to Illinois.

# data[].attributes.headline
Essay Article Source #2: A Negative Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.subject
Essay Article Source #2: A Negative Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.body
This is the negative article I chose to include in my essay, courtesy of Huffington Post.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NEW YORK ― A frigid rain fell hard on Cheryl Angel and her fellow protesters Tuesday, but she would not be moved. The 56-year-old activist and elder of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe braved far worse weather while living for months on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota, where she fought to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline from being buried under the sacred waters of Lake Oahe.

She had joined hundreds outside the New York offices of Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) to urge them to vote against President Donald Trump 's controversial slate of nominees. But she had a hunch that the fight over the 1,172-mile pipeline wasn't over.

"Open your eyes, America, and see that water is in danger in your own backyard where pipelines are slated to be built across America," Angel told The Huffington Post on Tuesday. "The American people need to stand together and protect the water sources where they are under attack."

That attack resumed Tuesday when Trump signed a flurry of executive actions meant to jump-start stalled construction on the pipeline and invite TransCanada, the company behind the controversial Keystone XL, to reapply to build the pipeline rejected by his predecessor in 2015.

Native American leaders quickly announced plans Tuesday afternoon to fight the executive actions, particularly the one granting permission to complete construction on the Dakota Access Pipeline. The oil conduit has been , when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied a permit to lay the final stretch of the $3.8 billion project's pipe under Lake Oahe, a water source sacred to the Standing Rock Sioux. The halt, issued under former President stalled since December Barack Obama and hailed as a victory by protesters, may be undone by the new executive orders.

"Trump is portraying his true self by joining forces with the darkness of the Black Snake pipelines crossing across the culturally and environmentally rich landscape of the prairie lands of America," Tom BK Goldtooth, executive director of the grassroots-organizing nonprofit Indigenous Environmental Network, said in a statement. "These actions by President Trump are insane and extreme, and nothing short of attacks on our ancestral homelands as Indigenous peoples."

Hours after the president's announcement, hundreds of protesters swarmed Columbus Circle in New York City. Loud chants of "If all lives matter, Native lives matter!" and "Keep it in the soil, you can't drink oil!" echoed in the park.

The event was hosted by a number of grassroots organizations urging those who care about the planet to show their opposition to Trump's new order.

Rosemary Faulkner, 78, got news of the protest from a friend's email and made a sign "very quickly" for the occasion, she said.

"No one knows how Trump is going to function," Faulkner told HuffPost. "I keep hoping he won't carry through with these awful ideas, but now it's getting worse and worse."

Faulkner said the country needs to have a sharper focus on renewable energy.

"It just seems so obvious," she said. "Climate change is such a huge thing."

Jed Holtz, a 34-year-old organizer with the Freedom Socialist Party, said it's time to call for larger change in protecting clean water.

"It's going to take a much bigger galvanization of working-class people across race lines to stop these attacks [on the environment] from happening," Holtz said.

Thousands of protesters ― including 2,000 veterans who came to serve as "human shields" ― descended on Standing Rock last year as security forces battled demonstrators with attack dogs, tear gas and fire hoses sprayed in frigid temperatures. But don't expect mass demonstrations to block Trump's order. On Friday, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council voted unanimously to approve a resolution asking protesters to leave their sprawling encampment by the end of the month. Demonstrators intent on maintaining a physical presence were offered an alternative site on higher ground nearby on the Standing Rock Reservation to carry on their resistance, a tribal spokeswoman, Sue Evans, told HuffPost. The tribe plans to take its fight to the courts.

John Linstrom, a 29-year-old student at New York University, said he came to Tuesday's protest to stand up for the water protectors.

"I think we need to respect what the indigenous leaders at Standing Rock are asking of us," Linstrom said about the unanimous decision to send protestors away. Still, he said if protests do start up again, he'd be willing to "risk arrest" by going to Standing Rock.

The action on the Dakota Access Pipeline is not technically an executive order, according to lawyers for Earthjustice, the legal nonprofit representing the Standing Rock Sioux. Rather, the document is a memorandum ordering the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to complete the permitting process "to the extent allowed under law." The law already requires the Army to conduct a full environmental impact statement (EIS) and consider alternative routes, the group said.

"Nothing in the Presidential Memorandum changes that or even addresses it. If the Corps responds to this directive by issuing the easement without the EIS process, it will be violating the law and subjecting itself to additional litigation," Phillip Ellis, a senior spokesman for Earthjustice, wrote in an email to HuffPost. "The Tribe does not anticipate taking legal action against the Memorandum. If the Corps issues the easement, it will violate its own prior findings, and we will likely seek court review of that decision."

For protesters who are already dug in around the Standing Rock camp, Trump's orders served as a new call to arms. Medic + Healer Council, the group that ran clinics at the protests, recirculated its request for volunteers Tuesday after the orders were signed.

"The Trump administration 's decision to push forward with KXL and DAPL is disheartening but expected in light of the months of militarized oppression that Standing Rock and the NoDAPL movement has faced, even under a progressive president," Linda Black Elk, an ethnobotanist and leader at the Medic + Healer Council, wrote on . "We call on our relations to join us in our stand with the Water Protectors and against DAPL."

Angel sees the future of the fight on an even broader scale. She said it's critical for the U.S. to wean off fossil fuels and prevent further environmental hazards from pipelines that leak into major rivers and endanger the drinking water of communities. As if by eerie coincidence, a pipeline in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan leaked 52,834 gallons of oil on aboriginal lands Monday, less than 24 hours before Trump signed the new executive orders.

"The fossil fuel industry is a dead and dying economy," she said. "Green energy is the new great America. Trump and his Cabinet are trying to build an infrastructure for pipelines so our country will remain dependent on fossil fuels."

Trump's efforts to increase pipeline infrastructure are undoubtedly a significant setback for "water protectors" across the country, but Angel is prepared to resume the fight. She's confident the American people can halt pipeline construction once and for all.

" The people of America can do anything," she told HuffPost. "This is America. When did we become afraid of one man? We cannot allow our fears to hold us back any longer."
Michael McLaughlin and Sebastian Murdock contributed reporting. How will Trump's first 100 days impact you? Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking updates on Trump's presidency by messaging us here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Native Americans Ready To Battle Trump Over Dakota Access Pipelines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEW YORK ― A frigid rain fell hard on Cheryl Angel and her fellow protesters Tuesday, but she would not be moved. The 56-year-old activist and elder of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe braved far worse weather while living for months on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota, where she fought to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline from being buried under the sacred waters of Lake Oahe.

# data[].attributes.headline
Essay Article Source #3: A Neutral Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.subject
Essay Article Source #3: A Neutral Stance on the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.body
This is the neutral article I chose to include in my essay, courtesy of The Wall Street Journal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fight Over Dakota Access Pipeline Intensifies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A protest by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe against the Dakota Access pipeline has morphed into a broad opposition movement, prompting the Obama administration to review federal permitting and calling into question longstanding polices that limit tribal input on infrastructure projects.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dakota Pipeline: What's behind the Controversy? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Dakota Pipeline: What's behind the Controversy? 

# data[].attributes.body
This article, courtesy of BBC News, takes a neutral stance on the DAPL construction and solely provides facts on the situation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald Trump's backing of the Dakota Access Pipeline project has set the stage for a new confrontation with native Americans and environmentalists.

Within days of taking office, he signed two presidential memoranda supporting both the Dakota and the Keystone XL pipelines - telling the army to review one, and inviting a private company to re-apply for the other.

What is Dakota Access?

A $3.7bn (£2.8bn) pipeline is planned at nearly 1,200 miles (1,900km) long to transport some 470,000 barrels of crude oil a day across four states, from North Dakota to a terminal in Illinois, where it can be shipped to refineries.

The pipeline would provide a more cost-effective, efficient means of transporting crude, rather than shipping barrels by train.

The project, built by a subsidiary of Texas-based company Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), would also increase profit margins for oil companies while crude prices are low.

Most of the pipeline has already been built but the section closest to the Standing Rock Sioux reservation was still awaiting federal approval.

Why was it suspended?

The decision came after months of protests by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and their supporters, who set up a number of spiritual camps - Sacred Stone, Oceti Sakowin, Red Warrior, and Rosebud Sicangu - near the Missouri river.

They had argued that the project would contaminate drinking water and damage sacred burial sites.

The US Army Corps of Engineers suspended the project last year, but in February 2017 said it planned to grant final easement for the remaining section of the project.

Construction sites are technically just north of the tribe's reservation but the Sioux say the government took this land from them illegally in an 1868 treaty.

Native Americans also accused the government of approving pipeline construction without consulting them, a requirement under US law.

Environmental activists say the pipeline would perpetuate fossil fuel production.

What does Trump's decision mean?

Mr Trump made two different announcements: his backing of both projects in presidential memoranda, and a plan to use American steel in any and all future pipeline projects.

While Mr Trump does not have the power to approve either the Dakota Access or Keystone XL pipelines, his memos offer significant encouragement.

For Dakota, he said he believes finishing the pipeline will "serve the national interest" and ordered an "expedited" review. He also ordered the army to "consider" withdrawing its December memo, which effectively paused the project.

On the Keystone XL project, he invited the company involved, TransCanada, to resubmit its application, and instructed the secretary of state to "take all actions necessary and appropriate to facilitate its expeditious review".

But Mr Trump can only ease the way with such memos, and prompt their advancement - he cannot single-handedly approve them.

On the same day, he signed another memo, ordering the secretary of commerce to produce a plan to use steel and iron made in the United States in all pipeline construction and repair.

The new president may face questions about his personal interest in the Dakota project, as ETP chief executive Kelcy Warren donated $100,000 (£80,000) to his election campaign.

Mr Trump denies he is motivated by any financial interest.

How have opponents of the project reacted?

The Standing Rock Sioux said they would fight the decision.

"Americans know this pipeline was unfairly rerouted towards our nation and without our consent," they said.

Greenpeace director Annie Leonard said that "instead of pushing bogus claims about the potential of pipelines to create jobs, Trump should focus his efforts on the clean energy sector where America's future lives".

Who exactly are the protesters?

More than 200 Native American tribes pledged their support last year, in the largest coming together of indigenous peoples in the US in decades, perhaps centuries.

At its peak, an estimated 10,000 people joined the campsites in the region to join in the demonstrations.

Among others lending their support were :

Hundreds of US military veterans

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and Democratic presidential primary contender Bernie Sanders

Robert Kennedy Jr, environmental activist and nephew of former president John F Kennedy

Several actors including Shailene Woodley and Mark Ruffalo

Have the demonstrations been peaceful?

Protesters have been accused of starting fires and throwing petrol bombs at police.

A Colorado woman who shot at police trying to remove protesters from private property was arrested and charged with attempted murder.

Police have in turn been accused of using excessive force, including dousing crowds with pepper spray and freezing water as well as firing sound cannons, bean bag rounds and rubber bullets.

Officers have arrested hundreds of people and accused activists and journalists of criminal trespass, rioting and other felonies.

At one point, police held protesters in temporary cages made of chain-link, which activists equated to "dog kennels".

The allegations led the United Nations to speak out about the use of excessive force against protesters.
Correction: This article has been substantially updated to correct previous inaccuracies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald Trump's backing of the Dakota Access Pipeline project has set the stage for a new confrontation with native Americans and environmentalists. Within days of taking office, he signed two presidential memoranda supporting both the Dakota and the Keystone XL pipelines - telling the army to review one, and inviting a private company to re-apply for the other.

# data[].attributes.body
Ansar, T. (2016, September 4). Multiple Injuries In North Dakota as Oil Pipeline Crews Destroy “Sacred Land” Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/talalansari/violence-erupts-in-north-dakota-as-oil-pipeline-crews-destro?utm_term=.yhQYkVeKw#.ij3vrbqAX

Associated Press (2017, February 13). A timeline of the Dakota Access Oil Pipeline. Retrieved from https://www.apnews.com/c0ae0f38ae17499897ac1d06790a91f2

BBC News (2017, February 7). Dakota Pipeline: What’s behind the Controversy? Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37863955

Blakeman, B. (2016, September 6). Why we must build the Dakota Access pipeline now. Retrieved February 2, 2018, from The Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/295216-why-we-must-build-the-dakota-access-pipeline-now

Brady, H. (2017, January 25). 4 Key Impacts of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines. Retrieved from National Geographic: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/01/impact-keystone-dakota-access-pipeline-environment-global-warming-oil-health/

Dakota Access Pipeline Facts (2016). Dakota Access Pipeline Facts. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://daplpipelinefacts.com

Dalrymple, J. (2016, September 8). What you need to know about the Dakota Oil Pipeline and the Native Americans Trying to Stop it. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-dakota-oil-pipeline-and-the?utm_term=.dwjdanyvg#.yqrkewPKX

Dawson, C. (2016, October 11). Fight Over the Dakota Access Pipeline Intensifies. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/fight-over-dakota-access-pipeline-intensifies-1476234035

Kaufman, A. Miller, H. (2017, January 24). Native Americans ready to Battle Trump Over Dakota Access Pipeline. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/native-americans-trump-dakota-access-pipeline_us_5887ca3de4b098c0bba73a30

Scheltens, L. Waters, C. Posner, J. (2016, December 5). The fight over the Dakota Access Pipeline, explained. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJZ1-LAFOTo

# data[].attributes.headline
4 Key Impacts of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines

# data[].attributes.subject
4 Key Impacts of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines

# data[].attributes.body
This article, courtesy of National Geographic, outlines four major impacts the pipeline would cause. The tone of this article seems to oppose the pipeline's construction, by describing more negatives than positives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Donald Trump signed executive orders early this week that restarted the effort to complete the Keystone XL pipeline across the Great Plains ( see a map of the route) and the Dakota Access pipeline in the northern plains.

If the two pipeline projects that were halted during former President Barack Obama's time in office begin moving forward again, here's the impact they may have on the environment and people.

1. How the Pipelines May Affect Animals

Opponents have warned that the pipelines could endanger many animals and their habitats in the U.S. and Canada through the infrastructure's construction, maintenance, and possible failures that could lead to an oil spill.

The critically endangered whooping crane is at risk of flying into new power lines that would be constructed to keep oil pumping through the Keystone XL pipeline, the National Wildlife Federation has said. While the greater sage-grouse isn't officially an endangered species, it has already lost some of its habitat, and the Keystone XL pipeline route is close enough to areas where grouse mate that noise from roads, pumping stations, and construction could impact the breeding success of this shy bird.

The Keystone XL pipeline route would go through most of the remaining locations of the swift fox, a tiny canid about the size of a house cat. The U.S. State Department's Environmental Impact Report also said that some American burying beetles will be killed and their habitats also destroyed by the pipeline, though the agency added that a monitoring and habitat-restoration program would help mitigate losses and the species wouldn't be seriously threatened.

There are nine threatened, endangered, and candidate species in the areas that the Dakota Access pipeline would run through, according to an environmental assessment by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published in May 2016. The assessment concluded that the pipeline does not pose a specific threat to any of their habitats.

2. How the Pipelines May Impact Oil Production

If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, about 830,000 barrels of heavy crude oil per day will flow from Alberta, Canada, to the refineries along the U.S. Gulf Coast, which are built to handle the kind of heavy crude oil that comes out of the tar sands. Those refineries need crude oil in order to function and to support the people who work there, and places like Mexico and Venezuela, which typically export oil to the U.S., are beginning to run out of it.

The U.S. State Department said TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, has agreed to change its planned pipeline route to go around the environmentally sensitive sandhills of Nebraska, bury the pipeline deeper in the ground than they had planned, and closely monitor the pipeline's safety. These steps are intended to help minimize the harm of an oil spill if one happens.

The alternative to a pipeline also presents concern s. The State Department estimated that as of January 2014, 180,000 barrels of Canadian crude oil per day is being transported by freight trains. If no pipeline is built, that number will rise. Using trains to transport oil to refineries in the U.S. poses a safety concern because explosions can occur, killing people and damaging habitats nearby.

The Dakota Access pipeline project was meant to address the growing amount of oil being shipped out of North Dakota by freight trains. It's cheaper to move oil through pipelines and reduces the likelihood that explosions will happen, according to Energy Transfer Partners, the pipeline project's builder.

3. What the Pipelines Mean for Climate

Many climate activists have opposed the pipelines on the suspicion that they may increase our reliance on, and use, of fossil fuels, and further delay investment in more renewable technologies.

But the State Department said in a 2014 assessment that the Keystone XL pipeline would have no additional impact on greenhouse gas emissions because the oil would be extracted from tar sands in Canada at the same rate anyways, regardless of whether or not the pipeline was built.

The EPA contested that finding, saying that extracting oil from the tar sands generates more greenhouse gases than extracting oil through more conventional methods and therefore contributes to a greater amount of greenhouse gas emissions over time. If more pipelines are built, more oil could theoretically be extracted at a faster rate, meaning greenhouse gases would actually be released more quickly.

The State Department's assessment argued that the oil extracted from tar sands would find its way to market regardless of whether the Keystone XL pipeline was built or not. However, it's also true that the fate of the pipelines remains uncertain, with activists in Canada and the U.S. opposing the plans. The volatile market also does not guarantee that demand will make the high cost of extracting oil from the tar sands worthwhile.

The Natural Resources Defense Council and other major environmental groups say that, most likely, Keystone XL pipeline would accelerate the pace and expand the scale of tar sands development. Using trains slows down the process of getting the oil to refineries and ultimately to market, so it is better long-term for the environment, the groups said.

No environmental impact report has been created for the Dakota Access pipeline, though the U.S Army Corps of Engineers said they would conduct an environmental impact survey when they halted the project in December 2016.

Ultimately, Anthony Swift, staff attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told National Geographic it's a question of whether the U.S. will support development of "one of the most carbon-intensive sources of energy in the world, or whether we really are going to move in a direction to cut greenhouse gases."

4. How the Pipelines Will Impact People

Aside from the long-term impact that a warming climate could have on human life as a result of reliance on oil, the pipelines could pose an immediate threat to the drinking water of nearby communities and may damage areas considered sacred by Native American tribes, according to opponents.

The Dakota Access pipeline project has encountered fierce opposition in part because the threat of an oil spill and poisoned water sources could impact the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, whose reservation is immediately downstream of the point where the pipeline will cross the Missouri River. Many tribe members are also concerned about burial grounds being disturbed during construction of the pipeline. Bulldozers have already removed some topsoil on ground that the tribe considers sacred.

Both pipelines would create jobs during their construction. The State Department estimated that the Keystone XL pipeline would create 42,100 jobs over the one to two years of the pipeline's construction and would create 50 permanent jobs. While that isn't a lot of long-term job creation, it would keep the crude oil refineries in the Gulf Coast up and running. If the pipeline is not built, it could eventually endanger jobs at those refineries.

Energy Transfer Partners says the Dakota Access pipeline would create up to 12,000 jobs during its construction. It would create around 40 permanent jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
4 Key Impacts of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Donald Trump signed executive orders early this week that restarted the effort to complete the Keystone XL pipeline across the Great Plains ( see a map of the route) and the Dakota Access pipeline in the northern plains.

# data[].attributes.headline
A timeline of events regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.subject
A timeline of events regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.body
Courtesy of Associated Press, an news source considered primarily unbiased. This timeline focuses more on facts, rather than opinion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) - Notable events in the dispute over the Dakota Access oil pipeline.

___

December 2014 - Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners applies to the federal government to build the 1,200-mile Dakota Access pipeline to carry North Dakota oil through the Dakotas and Iowa to an existing pipeline in Illinois. The pipeline is projected to cost $3.8 billion and carry half a million barrels of oil daily. The proposed route skirts the Standing Rock Sioux tribe's reservation and crosses under Lake Oahe, a Missouri River reservoir in North Dakota that serves as the tribe's drinking water source.

March 2016 - Iowa regulators approve the pipeline, making it the fourth and final state to grant permission.

April 2016 - Opponents establish a camp at the confluence of the Cannonball and Missouri rivers in southern North Dakota for peaceful protest. Camps in the area would later swell to thousands of people.

July 2016 - The Army Corps of Engineers grants pipeline permits at more than 200 water crossings. The Standing Rock Sioux sues. The Cheyenne River Sioux later join the lawsuit as plaintiffs.

Aug. 10 - North Dakota authorities make the first arrests of protesters. The total has since surpassed 600, including actress Shailene Woodley and Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

Sept. 9 - U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg denies an attempt by the Standing Rock Sioux to halt pipeline construction. The same day, the Army, the Department of Justice and the Interior Department declare that construction bordering or under Lake Oahe won't go forward pending further review.

Nov. 20, 21 - Authorities use tear gas, rubber bullets and water sprays on protesters who they say assaulted officers with rocks and burning logs at a blockaded bridge, in one of the most violent clashes of the protest. At least 17 protesters are taken to hospitals. One officer was injured when struck in the head with a rock.

Dec. 4 - Assistant Army Secretary for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy declines to allow the pipeline to be built under Lake Oahe in part because she says alternate routes need to be considered. Energy Transfer Partners calls the decision politically motivated and accuses President Barack Obama's administration of delaying the matter until he leaves office.

Jan. 18, 2017 - The Army Corps launches a full environmental study of the pipeline's disputed Lake Oahe crossing that could take up to two years to complete. Boasberg, the federal judge, rejects an ETP request to stop the study.

Jan. 24 - President Donald Trump signs executive actions to advance the construction of the Dakota Access and Keystone XL oil pipelines.

Feb. 8 - The Army forgoes further study and grants an easement necessary to complete the pipeline and the company immediately begins drilling under Lake Oahe. The two tribes challenge the move in court two days later.

Feb. 13 - A federal judge in Washington denies the tribes' request for an emergency order halting construction of the pipeline, saying he'll consider it more fully at a Feb. 27 hearing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A timeline of the Dakota Access oil pipeline

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) - Notable events in the dispute over the Dakota Access oil pipeline. ___ December 2014 - Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners applies to the federal government to build the 1,200-mile Dakota Access pipeline to carry North Dakota oil through the Dakotas and Iowa to an existing pipeline in Illinois.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Fight Over the Dakota Access Pipeline, Explained.

# data[].attributes.subject
The Fight Over the Dakota Access Pipeline, Explained.

# data[].attributes.body
Here is a video explaining the details of the Dakota Access Pipeline controversy courtesy of Vox, an American news and opinion newssource.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The fight over the Dakota Access Pipeline, explained

# data[].attributes.headline
Photos of Protestors and their Injuries 

# data[].attributes.subject
Photos of Protestors and their Injuries 

# data[].attributes.body
This article contains photos of protesters of the pipeline, and specifically the injuries they obtained. Buzzed, a predominately left-leaning publication and often times criticized for being unreliable, took a negative stance on the pipeline, as demonstrated by these photos and the tone of the article.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The dramatic scenes unfolded after the federal government angered local tribes in August by approving construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, a 1,172-mile-long structure that runs through four states and will transfer crude oil.

Protesters say the pipeline would cross over sacred lands, including burial grounds.

Opposition groups also contend an oil pipeline near the Mississippi, Missouri, and Big Sioux rivers runs the risk of a spill into water supplies - similar to previous North Dakota oil spills that occurred in 2014 and as recently as May 2016.

Video and photos uploaded to social media Saturday show dogs attacking protesters on foot and on horses, while security guards can be seen spraying people with pepper spray.

Video also shows people marching up to bulldozers as security personnel and dogs fend off the protesters.

The protesters crossed onto private property, according to a statement by Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier, who added that "any suggestion that today's event was a peaceful protest is false."

In a statement, Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II said that sacred places, including "ancient burial sites, places of prayer, and other

significant cultural artifacts" were destroyed.

"This demolition is devastating," Archambault said. "These grounds are the resting places of our ancestors. The ancient cairns and stone prayer rings there cannot be replaced.

"In one day, our sacred land has been turned into hollow ground," he said.

Archambault added that topsoil 150 feet wide that stretched for two miles was removed on Saturday.

Talal Ansari is a reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in New York. His secure PGP fingerprint is 4FEE 894C 8088 7E08 E170 A515 2801 7CC6 95D3 11C2

Contact Talal Ansari at talal.ansari@buzzfeed.com.

Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Multiple Injuries In North Dakota As Oil Pipeline Crews Destroy "Sacred Land"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Protesters say the pipeline would cross over sacred lands, including burial grounds. Opposition groups also contend an oil pipeline near the Mississippi, Missouri, and Big Sioux rivers runs the risk of a spill into water supplies - similar to previous North Dakota oil spills that occurred in 2014 and as recently as May 2016.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is produced by DakotaAccessPipelineFacts.com, the website associated with the pipeline's construction, and its primary goal is to explain the benefits of the pipeline, and challenge opposing views.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
he Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is the safest and most environmentally sensitive way to transport crude oil from domestic wells to American consumers. It is the result of an extensive process that involved review and approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and regulators in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois. It will be among the safest, most technologically advanced pipelines in the world.

This $3.8 billion project crosses almost entirely private land, often already in use for other utility easements. The Dakota Access Pipeline does not cross the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, even at the portion of the pipeline that is the subject of dispute at Lake Oahe. In developing the route, the United States Army Corps of Engineers had hundreds of contacts with dozens of tribes regarding the Dakota Access project. In addition, the U.S. Army Corps reached out to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe nearly a dozen times to discuss archaeological and other surveys conducted before finalizing the Dakota Access route.

Notably, the Dakota Access Pipeline uneventfully operates along the same path as (but much deeper underground) the Northern Border Pipeline, which has functioned safely beneath the lake for 35 years.

The Dakota Access Pipeline is virtually entirely underground. As you see from this map, it does not cross any land belonging to the Standing Rock Sioux.

We have great respect for the concerns of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and plan to continue to work with their leaders to address those concerns. Recently, their interests have been overtaken by politically-motivated, anti-fossil fuel protesters who are using this issue as a cover for their often violent and extremist efforts to cause disruption. Their actions deny private property rights and freedoms to the landowners who are near and adjacent to the Standing Rock Reservation and deny American citizens and businesses the energy they need to produce jobs and build a vital and healthy economy. The behavior by some of these extremist organizations is not only criminal but dangerous to themselves and others, and we join with law enforcement and others in asking them to obey the rule of law.

We will continue to defend the rights we have been granted through proper and legal venues, and the rights of Americans to reduce foreign dependence on fossil fuels to power our economy and warm our homes.

MEET ENERGY TRANSFER PARTNERS

America uses 800 million gallons of petroleum every day. At Energy Transfer Partners, we're proud of our role in developing the latest in pipeline technologies, to bring energy to American homes and businesses. We safely operate more than 70,000 miles of pipeline, with a company priority to build with American materials, American workers, and American ingenuity.

A MESSAGE FROM NORTH DAKOTA GOVERNOR DOUG BURGUM:

"This is a key step toward the completion of this important infrastructure project, which has faced months of politically driven delays and will allow for safe transport of North Dakota product to market."- Doug Burgum, Governor, North Dakota

CEO Behind Dakota Pipeline: Employment Is Robust Thanks To The Building Of Pipelines

News, Opinions & Briefings about The Dakota Access Pipeline

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
he Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is the safest and most environmentally sensitive way to transport crude oil from domestic wells to American consumers. It is the result of an extensive process that involved review and approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and regulators in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Timeline of events Opposing the Pipeline

# data[].attributes.subject
A Timeline of events Opposing the Pipeline

# data[].attributes.body
This timeline, also published by Buzzed, depicts a timeline of events regarding the pipeline. This timeline is left-skewed, and only includes information, photos, and charts that depict the pipeline in a negative way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What You Need To Know About The Dakota Oil Pipeline And The Native Americans Trying To Stop It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The pipeline would transport millions of gallons of crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois each day. But Native Americans and environmentalists have slammed the project as a threat to sacred sites and nature.