The infamous pipeline is going to be rerouted.
The Army will not approve an easement that would allow the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline to cross under Lake Oahe in North Dakota, the Army’s assistant secretary for civil works announced Sunday.
It must be a good decision, because it’s really pissing off the right people.
North Dakota’s sole member in the House of Representatives, Rep. Kevin Cramer, a Republican, expressed his disapproval in a scathing statement released Sunday that slammed President Barack Obama as well as the protestors.
“I hoped even a lawless president wouldn’t continue to ignore the rule of law. However, it was becoming increasingly clear he was punting this issue down the road,” Cramer wrote. “Today’s unfortunate decision sends a very chilling signal to others who want to build infrastructure in this country. Roads, bridges, transmission lines, pipelines, wind farms and water lines will be very difficult, if not impossible, to build when criminal behavior is rewarded this way.”
Building infrastructure is great. Building great dangerous leaky pipelines to pump poison over water supplies, and to torment and abuse the people most affected by them, is not. Suppressing the people’s right to protest is also not great.
Yay!
What took him so long to stop ignoring the rule of law, anyways? The pipeline was ignoring all the environmental laws and the treaties; the state government was violating human rights. And it took *months* before Obama did anything.
This is good news!!!
I’m sure it’s not over, yet. But every victory is good!
Sounds to me like the Army Corps of Engineers finally got off their duffs and looked at what they were supposed to do in the first place. The conclusion that the pipe “as is” is a danger to drinking water for many people including the local indigenous population is obvious.
Anything less than double-walled construction where a spill would endanger the water supply for even one person is caving in to the industry with a bad reputation. Make them truly respect the concept that failure is not an option.
So does that mean the enforcers will go back to their nests, their noxious mist of pepper spray and freezing water dispersing as they do? Or are they going to stick around for as long as a single water protector remains,
if only for the opportunity to avenge their mastersto keep the peace?Somehow I get the impression that ‘magnaminous in defeat’ just doesn’t suit people like that delightful sheriff and governor in charge of the ‘peace-keeping’ effort.
Lawless president? I think there’s a president-elect that’s got a high risk of being extremely lawless.
Will the horrible new president (gag!) be able to reverse this decision?
Addendum to my #4
I would also include not only the companies, but the politicians and regulators who didn’t required sufficient safety precautions in any damages caused by spills. No bankruptcy will stop the liens on their personal liability for their decisions.
*I know it is pie-in-the-sky thinking, ergo it won’t happen, but I do relish the thought.*
To be reversed Jan. 20 with impunity.
Winter is coming.
Doesn’t mean the decisions with be for the best interest of the people, only those whose probably scammed wealth is measured in billions, the few and the parasites.
You got it. it’s now impossible to build highways through Indian territory without their permission, nor wind farms, etc.
Yes, criminal behavior must be rewarded by, discontinuing.
Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
@Nerd
Thanks for making my subtext explicit.
Congratulations to all those people defending the land at Standing Rock.
Mike Smith, you do realize that all executive decisions must follow the USC, or they will be overturned by the courts? Regulations, like the FDA cGMP, are the equivalent of Federal Laws, and can only be overturned if they follow the protocol in the USC. Which requires, per USC, public hearings, time for responses, etc. Takes months, if not years to greatly change it.
Nope, The Trump can’t just say “let it be built”, and that is the law. And he can’t fire the underlings following the law if they aren’t appointed. He is impotent….
Nerd:
Here (again) is some discussion about double-walled pipes, and whether they are the best /most cost-effective way of preventing leaks from pipes (as opposed to tanks). What is
Science, it works.
https://www.aboutpipelines.com/en/blog/would-double-walled-pipelines-help-prevent-spills/
The original planned route for the pipeline was through Bismarck, a mostly white city, but it was deemed too dangerous so they decided to run it through Indian Country instead. They should go back to the original plan and see how those good, upstanding Republican voters think about that. I’d love to see them freeze their asses off while they were protesting in the teeth of a high plains winter. Oh, and lets not forget the dogs, the truncheons, the rubber bullets, the gas. But then, white blood is always more valuable than red, black or brown, isn’t it? I can already hear the outrage on Fox News.
I love how he just crams pipelines into that list. Sure, things like wind farms aren’t without problems, but they’re not frigging petroleum pipelines.
And water? Maybe build some new ones for Flint and countless other cities that need them. There’s some infrastructure work for you.
Silver Fox @16:
Well, how much money does Bismarck pay into the Government via taxes of all kinds versus the few people who live near the new (now blocked) route?
A Government, dealing with a huge project such as this, sometimes has to choose between a rock and a hard place (no pun intended) when making decisions. Piss off a few people who don’t pay that much into the tax coffers, or a load of people who pay a load of taxes. Real life sucks sometimes, deal with it. I am not deliberately being a dick, just pointing out reality. We are still an oil-based country in the US, so horrible choices will need to be made. Unless you don’t use cars/air travel, deal with it.
miles wrote @18:
yes you are.
Congratulations and thank you to all of the protesters.
I wonder if the veterans arriving didn’t push this over the edge. If so, their participation will make it that much harder or the Army Corps to reverse it.
miles links: if the problem is that the US is still dependent on oil, how about spending billions of dollars on fixing that problem — rather than spending billions on making it worse.
Paul Ryan: “This is big-government decision-making at its worst. I look forward to putting this anti-energy presidency behind us.” The responses so far are beautiful.
Ryan is so forward-looking.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/affinity/2016/12/02/standing-rock-the-veterans-are-coming-in/
Included in the above post, before the idiots whining about how us Indians didn’t make the planning meeting, please shut the fuck up, and stop spreading that lie:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/affinity/2016/12/03/kirchmeier-i-wanna-be-a-star-gimme-money/
In this ^ post, you’ll note the complete lack of coverage about Kirchmeier having the nerve to put up a wish list, expecting the people in nDakota to pick their own pockets even more, after being handed $17 million, and how it was the people at the Oceti Sakowin camp who showed up at the cop’s door with things on their wish list, saying that they could share, and that generosity is one of the most important principles for the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota oyate (people).
I’m also sick and tired of all the assholes who try to claim the pipeline would be safe. No, it wouldn’t. A big ass section of it went into land six miles from my house. It’s cheapshit all the way.
absolutely agree with that. The problem is that is not what we they were attempting to do here. What they were doing here was finding the cheapest way to do it like always,
cost the least and make the most money. Very few were involved in this for the greater good of society they were in for the sole motive of making the most money they could by delivering a valuable commodity to customers who will pay top dollar for it. They can get off the pedestal now and take the flag off their shoulders. Cheap is not the be all and end all if they can not build and operator a pipe lines that meets proper safety standards and make a profit that is tough. if they can not make money from the oil business without what is increasingly clear are unacceptable pollution levels and compliance is impossible that also is tough. you are advocating sacrifice only on one side in this
follow the money
uncle frogy
SC @ 20:
Water Protectors, please. As Simon Moya-Smith put it:
Native Americans: We’re water protectors. Not protestors.
Media: Nah, you’re protestors.
Neo Nazis: We prefer ‘alt-right.’
Media: ?
Apologies.
In October, Mark Trahant pointed out that here in nDakota, making the switch to clean energy right now would boost the economy and bring permanent jobs to the state.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/10/07/paris-standing-rock-its-climate-choices-ahead-166018
miles links wrote:
What you linked was not science. It was an industry pipeline lobbying group’s article on why pipelines are the bestest thing evar. There’s another article on how great and easily the pipeline operators can detect leaks, which doesn’t bother to mention that despite all these technological marvels, pipelines are still leaky as fuck, nor do they mention that pipeline operators are often extremely lax in leak detection (as per regulatory bodies).
Wanna talk science: Here’s the Alberta Energy Regulator report on the pipelines within Alberta from 1990 to 2012. Some highlights:
Fun stuff, and that’s just one Canadian province, in a country where regulations tend to be a little tighter than in the United States. The report brags that pipeline failures are down to a new low of 1.5 incidents per 1000km of pipeline, but the vast majority of the gains were from more reliable water pipelines which pose limited environmental risk when they leak or rupture. Natural gas and oil pipelines failure rates haven’t improved in years despite the continual advances in technology.
#18 Miles Links, aka Dick and “post truth” occupant:
Last spring the USA became a net energy exporter for the first time since about 1955. Go look it up and educate yourself. As of that date we became a net EXPORTER of petroleum products.
At no time has any sane policy ever formally depended on tax base status. The actual taxpaying residents within Yellowstone or Grand Tetons or wherever are NEVER part of the decision process.
Stop being a dick. And stop living in this weird f*cked up post truth world where FACTS aren’t believed.
This pipeline is a profit generation device that should never have been considered on merit. ESPECIALLY when it was relocated away from Bismarck.
Stop being a dick and start learning stuff. Stop being part of dozens of millions of dicks who think crap that is false.
ck@28:
Sorry. Title sounded good.
Pretty sure you want a comma after “considered?”
Glad we cleared that up…
Hey troll, did you do the minimal look at the contents as allowed by copyright/subscription services? I did, you didn’t….
You did bad. Acknowledge your wrong, and learn from it.
That’s what people with honesty and integrity do.
And Miles, try this about pipelines versus other modes of transport. Fortune Magazine, hardly a bastion of green politics, talks about the potential problems.
This spill is meaningful to me, since it occurred upstream from where I grew up in Battle Creek, MI, where it flows through the city from east to west. The Kalamazoo River flows west from Battle Creek, past Kalamazoo, and through south west Michigan, which has a lot of fruit orchards and grape vineyards. A large scale problem not just localized to a small area.
The Wall Street Journal shows certain advantages to rail.
Some of the cons can be worked around by not sending shipments through cities.
I’m for smaller spills, as they are easier to clean up, and less likely to have long term impacts on the local water quality, both above and below ground.
ck, thank you so much for pointing that out! As I recall from an oil and gas law symposium I attended, it is standard practice to have double-walled pipes reinforced with concrete. The problem is that once you start running corrosive material through the pipe, it can’t last forever. (Here I’d just like to point out, apropos of nothing, that one of the problems geologists are seeing with carbon capture and storage in, say, underground caves, is that carbon dioxide is acidic and will eat away of whatever it is stored in.)
Caine, over the last couple of weeks I’ve made numerous calls to the ACOE and the North Dakota sheriff’s office. When I tried to leave messages at the North Dakota messaging service, the line was busy nine times out of 10. I hope the community up there will stay the course and not leave the camp quite yet. I don’t trust that this won’t go right ahead as previously planned.
It’s rich that this is getting pinned on Obama. The ACOE isn’t, like, a federal agency or anything, and doesn’t ever make decisions that might be swayed by extreme anger in the country or anything like that. The federal government is SUPPOSED to be responsive to that sort of thing!
Silver Fox @16:
Nerd @ 34:
Silver Fox, this is what I said to you in my #18. Avoid cities and head through sparsely populated areas. Sorry if that upsets the ghosts of a few religious lunatics.
@PZ, et al, pipelines by nature are not leaky things. Ill maintained and supervised pipelines are, lousily designed pipelines add to the potential for disaster on an ill maintained, ill supervised pipeline.
We had more pipelines than I can count in the area I grew up in, with leaks few and far between.
That said, we have a major, major problem if there is a leak, where contamination is allowed to rest, rather than be remediated and I’m prick enough to require a pipeline company to dig up an aquifer and replace every square millimeter of contaminated media and I know quite well how insane such a task would be (read: we’ve never dug *that* far, adding mitigation of miles deep and miles wide of land hasn’t been done, that doesn’t mean that I’d not, if emperor for a day, not require it. Leaks *are* preventable).
A suggestion above for double walled pipelines was a beginning, I’d go for triple walled, with the central pipe being product, the next pipe that’s outside, totally evacuated, under hard vacuum and with petroleum recovery pumps running 24/7/365 and the outer layer, under lower than atmospheric pressure.
Our problem isn’t that pipes leak, they don’t if well and consciously maintained.
Our problem is a “shit happens” attitude when massive environmental damage occurs, when flammable water flows from kitchen faucets,
As, I’m prick enough to have given BP the *entire* Gulf of Mexico bill, plus require cleaning every millimeter of ocean bottom that was contaminated. Bankruptcy, forbidden.
We do need to get a major fuel used for everything from lubricating machinery through fueling the literal engines of commerce, we do need to find superior alternatives as well.
But, we don’t need to screw up the migrations of wildlife, poison wildlife and human alike or otherwise urinate and defecate onto our own kitchen table.
It’d also be nice, for a change, to actually fucking follow the ratified treaties that we penned to those who occupied this land long before colonies called themselves a nation by mere caveat, over a a tax that was laughably under 1%.
@Caine, keep the faith, as you’ve always done since I’ve became aware of you.
I’m seriously hoping for the best for all, but I’m in no condition to help, otherwise I really would do so.
I’ve more than enough vacation time, I’ve managed to hopefully clear up my wife’s many fainting spells, resulting in serious falls (it appears that she’s ill suited for Lisinopril and bradys down fairly hard and her BP plummets to levels that frighten all beholders. A few other issues get resolved, I’ll pick up some excellent gloves from the base clothing sales store (I’d need them, Reynaud’s syndrome isn’t something one toys about with, but with current technology, is something I can deal with.
But then, I suspect that pacifism is your path and that isn’t quite mine. I prefer peace, but not at all costs, I long ago ran out of cheeks.
Which only adds to my respect for you.
I’m more of a respond in kind person. Oddly, I’ve had little violence in my “real” life, (as opposed to the military variety, which had things I couldn’t easily control). I’m usually rather good at talking someone out of a mutually destructive engagement.*
*I just had an event, early this evening, when a young man came to my door and asked, “Do you have a gun? Shoot me in the face”.
I managed to not retch, but did get him off of the property and summon both EMS and law enforcement, who sent him to a good mental health care facility.
My penance for wearing a buddy’s gift, a veteran’s tee shirt.
Why can’t adults be as easily diverted as a small child?
Child heads toward hazard/unwanted to be interacted with by a child, place a hand in front of the child’s eyes in that direction.
Frankly, I find that a superior method, the child’s mother simply slaps a hand instead.
Sorry, had to vent a little over that last bit, one that’s against my views and nature.
Headed to bed now. Work comes early, I’ve been feeling like poop warmed over, due to a massive cold front (expecting a hard freeze here on Thursday) and the morning does tend to come far to early in the day to properly prepare for. ;)
miles links
Who are you and what do you want?
miles wants to prove *exactly* how horrible a person he is.
Miles,Dude, those “religious fanatics” are the original inhabitants of that land. Why should they be asked to make another sacrifice so some share holders somewhere can make a bigger profit from that pipeline route over a longer and more expensive route around their land and away from their water?
What do they get out of it?
the attitude that seems to be applied in these questions is it is about survival to build this pipe line. This ain’t 1942 this ain’t for the war effort it is business, it is the oil business not human survival it is not even about the survival of the United States. It is about the oil business it is the one that is fighting for survival they can see the righting on the wall it is going to change and the longer we struggle to keep oil cheap at all costs the longer it will take to the alternative to take over. It does nothing for us the citizens it just puts money in the pockets of the already rich oil business.
These decisions are not long term decisions made with the success and prosperity of the country in mind they are short term decisions made at the behest and in favor to the oil business which will reap the profits. When oil finally goes away as our primary energy source because it is absofuckinglutely a finite source we can buy the new stuff from other countries who do not fancy putting all their eggs in one basket and are not controlled by the oil business.
uncle frogy
unclefrogy@40:
The “Native” Americans may or may not have been the first humans to colonize what is now the USA. Let’s say they were. So how do you feel about the various tribes attacking each other and grabbing land from the loser? Is that different to what the white man did, and if so why? To which tribes should which land be returned? Would appreciate Caine’s input on this question as a tribal member.
numerobis 39:
?
Miles. Please stop showing us your asshole. It’s just unattractive and accomplishing nothing. Also, your appeal to the ‘civilizing nature of white culture’ is not as subtle as you think.
miles links
Who are you and what do you want?
I think a route well away from the river valley (and the water source for many ND people and others downstream) is far preferable to the stupidity of running it under the Missouri. The risk of destroying an entire watershed is unacceptable. Not building it at all is acceptable. Railroads could use some business if they would like to contribute to some domestic job growth.
so by snide reference you seem to be advocating the policy of might makes right over the rule of law and any kind of civil rights or civil liberties
the colonizers won the struggle so it does not matter what they* want because reasons. ??
* who while they may not have been the original inhabitants had been living on the land in question for many generations before any europeans ever even knew the land existed
none of that has anything at all to do with why we should favor the oil business in this particular case in fact about the only thing it says is that the European settlers and the native population are in some way equal in barbarity and none stand on any moral high ground. Then we are left with the treaty obligations and the rights and privileges recognized by The United States Constitution to all people.
uncle frogy
Troll tries to bait Caine…
(golf clap)
What criminal behavior is Cramer talking about, exactly?
The news sounds great, and I’d like to congratulate the people at Standing Rock but I am too afraid that there is a snag in it. Please tell me I’m wrong.
Ah, yes, the “impeccable” economic logic behind “dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country”…
@ 34 Nerd of Redhead
Re your link “try this about pipelines versus other modes of transport.”
Read more: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/12/04/a-nodapl-victory/#ixzz4Rxxotwk7
Canada’s generally pro-fossil fuel Fraser Institute found that moving fuel by pipeline was 4.5 times safer than doing so by rail.
The Fraser Inititue will say whatever they are paid to say. The quality of their analysis often does rise to a Gr. 12 student level though.
I remember that in the inquiry post-Kalamazoo, a US gov’t agency described Enbridge’s approach to dealing with the leak as a keystone cop routine.
Any safety assurance by the pipeline company to Standing Rock probably should be considered a pius hope at best and complete lie more likely.
miles links:
My god.
Yes, Indians engaged in warfare. They also practiced torture. They fought with each other over territory. On a few occasions, they committed atrocities against European settlers.
People do bad things sometimes, and they are people.
This cannot be used to justify generic slaughter and criminal maltreatment of any other people. Or do you think it would be fair to use the massacre at Sand Creek to argue that all white people do not deserve any rights and can be treated as criminals? Are we going to play some mad game of historical one-upmanship to determine who gets to live on a piece of land?
The simple fact of the matter is that the people of Standing Rock are as deserving of lawful and humane treatment as any other people in the world, yet they are victims of historical and ongoing inequities against their group as a whole that deserve correction. You don’t get to declare one people as deserving injustice because of some hypothetical wickedness committed by their hypothetical great-great-grandfathers. We don’t believe in blood guilt.
Or maybe you do. Then get the fuck out of here.
jrkrideau:
Indeed. Their report even owns up to the fact that pipelines spill a lot more than trains. But since the pipeline industry commissioned the report, they pushed hard on incident rates (which means nothing) and the fatality rate (lots more people killed directly by trains than by pipe). If the rail industry wants to commission a report, they’re ready to flip the conclusion and harp on spills and how rail is so much better.
Regardless, it rather begs the question of whether we should be shipping the oil in the first place.
Here’s my input, Miles Links. You sound exactly like on “abear” aka “freethought police” over at the ‘pit, who once attempted this white supremacist bullshit on Affinity. Whether or not you are that person, all shit smells the same, and you stink of the ‘pit.
But… but… the well-meaning logical person was just asking questions!
TEH PEACHES ARE FREEZING!
And even then, they only get such a high number for train-related injuries by starting their analysis in a year which just happened to have one unusually large incident… What an unfortunate co-incidence!
It’s also worth noting that the incident in question didn’t even involve oil – it involved chlorine, which isn’t transported by pipeline at all, so it’s highly debatable as to whether it should be included in the analysis. Stripping that one incident out changes the average number of injuries per billion ton-miles per year from 0.2594 to 0.0732, which is almost a factor of 4. It also give you a number which is a little over half that of natural gas pipelines (although still much higher than hazardous liquid pipelines). Oh, except we only have “hospitalisations” for NG pipelines, not total injuries…
RE: miles links
…..This dipshit has chutzpah, to not flounce after blatantly shitting the bed with such an ersatz contribution.
(Note to self: in future, ignore this buffoon.)
From where I am sitting, half a world away, this does not look so much like a victory for the NODAPL movement. Sorry to have to say this but it looks more like a stay of execution. The outgoing administration does not want to be seen as the one that violently forced the pipeline to be completed, so it leaves that to the next. It looks like a rather cynical move.
shit, let me butt in. Is it really fair to qualify pipelines with leaks-per-mile-of-pipeline?. How about gallons leaked per incident? Present Train Transport vs Pipeline transport, that way. Would the scales shift?
shit ignornt me JAQ’ing off. too lazy to google it myself; so fork, I’ll just flounce out. nevermind
Dunc @55: oh, I hadn’t noticed that!
Leaks per mile and gallons per incident are shitty measures. Counting incidents tells you nothing about the severity — it’s basically just a measure of your reporting requirements.
NoDAPL: It’s Not Over.
Caine, I just can’t find the words, so in short: love and success to you and your fellows. Thank you.
rietpluim:
Lila wopila, Rietpluim.
slithey tove (twas brillig (stevem)) wrote:
I wasn’t all that successful at finding out those details myself. Found plenty of lobbying groups (masquerading as grassroots “concerned citizens” groups) extolling the wonders of pipelines, but actual online facts and figures seem to be sparse at best. The best I was able to find was that Alberta regulatory body report I linked above despite the gaps in reported data, which doesn’t paint a terribly rosy picture of the industry when it comes to petroleum (and sour gas) pipelines. Even with the limits of per-incident reporting, 460 incidents of hydrocarbons (with a relatively even split between gas and liquid leaks) being released from a pipeline in one year from a single Canadian province should be concern enough.
I think we can safely assume that plenty of leaks are unreported to regulatory bodies when possible to avoid fines/censure, and that there are plenty more that are left undetected (and undetectable) because of cost cutting. Maybe pipelines can be operated safely, but not at the cost businesses tend to be willing to operate them at.
#56 Arren:
I agree. Anyone buffoon who says this should be ignored.
Caine 53:
I have had this accusation before, but sadly no, I am not a person from that place.
PZM 51:
What? Isn’t that what the NA Indians do? Honestly, aren’t you dismissing the entire NA Indian argument there? Confused.
Liar.
This word is true. The rest is simply extra foul bait, so I wrote a poem.
slime has envy, green as limes
anagrams don’t have to rhyme
smiles and slinks around this board
posting bullshit to the horde
cherries picked, the goal posts move
logic is clearly not approved
schools of herring, neatly wrapped
what’s the point of all this crap?
herring is a fish
slimy on a dish
shark is a fish too
this poem is poo
mussel is a fish
because it is aquatic
my back is sore
must see a chiropractic
Me @65 to PZM:
PZM, please don’t allow others to color your opinion of me, I am being entirely open and honest with this question. This is a very serious point, made in completely good faith. Your words, as I read them, completely dismiss the arguments of NA Indians. Was there a subtext, something I missed? Honestly, confused.
Sorry, should have added: what about when that “piece of land” is North America?
There is nothing honest in your questions, statements, or ‘confusion’. You’re being a goddamned Sea Lion and JAQing off.
miles links:
Even were that true, what you describe is a Government which cares more for short-term profit than for the welfare of its constituents and of the environment. Specifically, appeasing the wealthy for gain at the cost of the rest is called “corruption”.
(Hint: Government is not supposed to be a for-profit enterprise)
No need to argue hypothetically; they most certainly predated the European conquest.
The more you post, the pyttier you sound, regardless of your protestations.
Of what relevance is how they dealt with each other to the way the current occupiers are dealing with them?
(I note you did not appreciate Caine’s invited input, BTW)
Your attempted sophistry is weak; I refer you to PZ’s recent post Pipeline politics explained.
The objections are present and pragmatic no less than they relate to breaches of promises (though they also breach a historical treaty).
Please do; you deserve that.
—
Bah.
(Specimen, you)
Well, it depends on exactly what you’re interested in… In terms of environmental impact, the best measure would probably be spill volume per billion ton-miles transported – so taking into account the amount of spillage, and both the total volume and distance transported. On this measure, rail transport is significantly better (see, for example, U.S. Rail Transportation of Crude Oil: Background and Issues for Congress).
However, even that is glossing over a lot of complication… Different types and grades of oil present different environmental risks, not all spills (even of the same oil) are equal, and assessing environmental impact in simple, quantitative terms is difficult. For an example of some discussion of these issues, see Risk Assessment of Oil Spills to US Inland Waterways.
In short, it’s complicated.
#65:
No. Europeans killed Indians with warfare and disease, took over their land, and then promised the survivors that they could live on these scattered tracts of empty reservation land. Our ancestors committed genocide, but they stepped back from the brink of completely exterminating native residents of the land we took. The Indian argument is “Hey, you promised to let us live here in peace, and to allow us to preserve some small fragment of our culture; and now you want to go back on that every time you see something of value to you on our land?”
Indians are not threatening to evict all people of European descent from North America, and wouldn’t have the power to do so even if they did. They’re asking that you not threaten them with slow extinction by death of a thousand cuts, and to respect our own promises, contracts, and treaties. To suggest there is parity between the actions of powerless Indians and powerful white American money interests is ignorant and offensive.
You aren’t confused. You’re stupid.
not confused though the arguments are confused and not stupid or at least I am having a hard time believing he is stupid but I do not find it very hard to belief he is in fact thinking about this from a prejudicial frame of mind in fact he is showing signs of bigotry. giving the pipeline business and by extension the oil business all the benefit of the doubt and not considering any other out come than would not be a direct benefit for the energy business. He is acting and sounding to me like a shill for the pipeline business. I hope he is getting payed well.
uncle frogy
Pyrrhic X-(
http://gizmodo.com/the-exact-thing-standing-rock-protesters-didnt-want-to-1790018392
Prima facie evidence that the pipeline should not be built and run as designed.
Creek in ND polluted due to a pipeline break.