|
Here's a crazy idea: why not just cancel the pipeline?
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
RBC posted:it is, that's not up for debate Liquid Communism posted:It's okay. Pretending the Treaty of Fort Laramie didn't happen is traditional at this point. Okay, but the crossing point on the Missouri river is about 26 minutes north of the 46th parallel, the northernmost border of the territory addressed by the Treaty of Ft Laramie, so I'm wondering which treaty specifically you're referring to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Okay, but
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Okay, but the crossing point on the Missouri river is about 26 minutes north of the 46th parallel, the northernmost border of the territory addressed by the Treaty of Ft Laramie, so I'm wondering which treaty specifically you're referring to. You should check your treaty borders. Per the 1851 treaty, the Sioux claim goes north to the confluence of the Heart and Missouri rivers at Mandan, just across the river to the west of Bismarck. Of course, that got moved back a bit once the US decided to violate that treaty wholesale due to gold having been discovered in the Black Hills. Does the name George Armstrong Custer ring a bell?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:I linked a video of protesters lobbing an incendiary at the police line this afternoon. There is tons of documentation of protester violence and I don't understand the kind of willfull ignorance required to just ignore it. A single incindiary, done before or after the police used water cannons and flashbangs on them? If before, arrest that guy, and the other protesters should give them up. Everything else you've posted is here say. The US is a country where cops literally shoot people in the back on the reg. They get no benefit of the doubt or trust dealing with minorities. Please come up with more than a single Molotov to justify use of flashbangs and similar gear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:A single incindiary, done before or after the police used water cannons and flashbangs on them? If before, arrest that guy, and the other protesters should give them up. Everything else you've posted is here say. The US is a country where cops literally shoot people in the back on the reg. They get no benefit of the doubt or trust dealing with minorities. Please come up with more than a single Molotov to justify use of flashbangs and similar gear. "Hey it was only the one guy who tried to burn you to death, maybe show some restraint guys?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
Volcott posted:"Hey it was only the one guy who tried to burn you to death, maybe show some restraint guys?" As police? loving YES. HOW IS THAT AN UNREASONABLE POSITION?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:As police? loving YES. HOW IS THAT AN UNREASONABLE POSITION? Cops, like most people, subscribe to the "I'm going to extra careful around people who have tried to murder me in the recent past" school of thought.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
Can we not be jerks to posters with reasonable but different opinions in the Debate & Discussion forum. Avenging_Mikon posted:A single incindiary, done before or after the police used water cannons and flashbangs on them? If before, arrest that guy, and the other protesters should give them up. Everything else you've posted is here say. The US is a country where cops literally shoot people in the back on the reg. They get no benefit of the doubt or trust dealing with minorities. Please come up with more than a single Molotov to justify use of flashbangs and similar gear. I am with you, but a molotov should not be viewed this lightly considering the damage they can do to people. Not that flashbangs and water canons are much safer, but I think it's better for the protesters to be on the side of non-violence even when violence may be used against them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Cops, like most people, subscribe to the "I'm going to extra careful around people who have tried to murder me in the recent past" school of thought. Yet they scream bloody murder and start making up charges when people do the same where police are concerned. Aren't double standards fun? Clearly it's just a few bad apples among the protestors, and they should be allowed to conduct an internal investigation to determine if those people need to be reprimanded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Can't believe these god damned red skins won't respect this one particular treaty they were forced to sign while staring down the barrel of total annihilation of their people are they going to want manhattan back next??
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
double post, sry
Tias fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Just wanted to weigh in that I know two people who have gotten permanent damage to their lung function from CS gas - It must be said that they were fixed in place by police who tore their masks off and forced them to inhale the gas for longer than you normally would in a similar situation, but, well, cops will do that to you.Kubrick posted:Can we not be jerks to posters with reasonable but different opinions in the Debate & Discussion forum. By this logic, police should always be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to kill people who throw rocks and firebombs at them. This may make sense to people with no peacekeeping experience, but would lead to societal collapse, IMO. Tias fucked around with this message at 13:55 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:A single incindiary, done before or after the police used water cannons and flashbangs on them? If before, arrest that guy, and the other protesters should give them up. Everything else you've posted is here say. The US is a country where cops literally shoot people in the back on the reg. They get no benefit of the doubt or trust dealing with minorities. Please come up with more than a single Molotov to justify use of flashbangs and similar gear. And if there was such awesome military-grade night-vis drone footage available publicly, why hasn't anybody else picked up on it? We already had drone coverage footage, where did this one fall out of the sky from? If you continue to engage with him he will continue to suck in people who don't know what his "proof" is
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Perhaps Uglycat could give you his honest evaluation, since he's there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
You could also apply similar skepticism to evidence you uncritically accept. Like, ask yourself, where is the drone footage of the beginning of the clash that prompted the water hose to come out?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
I've been there twice, am going back for a couple weeks in a few days, and I haven't seen anything that could have even been used to make a Molotov. Alcohol is strictly prohibited in camp, vehicles are subject to search by the security team to make sure nobody brings booze in, there isn't a liquor store for like an hour-plus in any direction, and the nearest gas station is ten miles away and doesn't sell any beverages in glass bottles. Plastic bottles don't really work. Gas is also really hard to come by (again, nearest station is ten miles away). Trust me, if the cops actually had footage of a protector throwing an incendiary, it'd be front page news on every major network site in the US and the Morton County Sheriffs would be sharing it to every goddamn page on Facebook. They'd be standing on top of mountains and shouting that poo poo to the heavens. It would also be one of the first times that's happened at a protest in the US in decades, incidentally; they're super super uncommon in the States. What they have actually been sharing is a single photograph of a spent propane tank of the kind you'd use for a camp heater or small stove, i.e. campsite garbage, and completely unsubstantiated claims that people have been 'manufacturing explosives' with them. It reminds me a lot of the 14th Precinct occupation last year, when St. Paul police claimed they had found a stash of 'bombmaking supplies' and accompanied it with a photo of empty Gatorade bottles, Burger King wrappers, and an old sock. Or the NATO 3 trial, when the police confiscated a dude's home beer brewing kit as 'bombmaking supplies'. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:You should check your treaty borders. Per the 1851 treaty, the Sioux claim goes north to the confluence of the Heart and Missouri rivers at Mandan, just across the river to the west of Bismarck. Of course, that got moved back a bit once the US decided to violate that treaty wholesale due to gold having been discovered in the Black Hills. Does the name George Armstrong Custer ring a bell? It appears that claim was superseded by the 1868 treaty, which was prior to the 1877 Black Hills war and the seizure of the Black Hills. Interesting to note, it appears that during the prelude to the signing of both treaties, the Sioux/Lakota used the US Army as a lever to displace other tribes and claim their land, so if you are going with the argument that all land ceded under duress is invalid, the situation is a little more complicated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:It appears that claim was superseded by the 1868 treaty, which was prior to the 1877 Black Hills war and the seizure of the Black Hills. Interesting to note, it appears that during the prelude to the signing of both treaties, the Sioux/Lakota used the US Army as a lever to displace other tribes and claim their land, so if you are going with the argument that all land ceded under duress is invalid, the situation is a little more complicated. More complicated, but mostly due to the 1860's being full of wars between the Sioux and other tribes across the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado and the US. Mostly over further intrusion by white settlers due to the Bozeman gold rush, Pike's Peak gold rush, and Oregon trail, none of which the US bothered enforcing their treaty obligations to keep out of Indian Territory, and moved in with armed force to protect when they were met with a hostile response.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Treaties signed before 1900 don't count. Ask Europe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Does anyone know where this issue is in courts, at the moment?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
I think the stuff where the tribe wasn't vigorously involved in the planning process from day 1 is an example of why it's so important to be involved in local politics. From the sounds of it, the tribes up in that area are pretty disorganized. I hope that people who can't get involved with the protest get involved in their own community to see what kinds of hosed up poo poo is going on in your own back yard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Treaty stuff! http://www.ndstudies.org/resources/IndianStudies/standingrock/1851treaty.html The gist I understand it is a treaty was made, but not everyone agreed to it, and toss a coin to decide who broke it first because for everyone it was supposed to cover not everyone knew the details of the treaty, knew there was even a treaty, and may not have even cared if they knew. Be careful when trying to group anyone all under one convenient label, everyone, american indians included, run the gambit from reasonable to batshit. Don't condemn any group based on the actions of a few, but don't brush the actions of those few away, either. The protest is a cluster of way too many emotionally charged issues trying to be solved on a cold and wet patch of grass, and with the first major snowstorm looking like it's going to hit on Monday, things are only going to get worse unless the feds/obama makes a call on this (likelyhood: 0%)
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
Silento Boborachi posted:Treaty stuff! http://www.ndstudies.org/resources/IndianStudies/standingrock/1851treaty.html Treaty or no treaty when the same pipeline was planned to go through a white neighborhood they didn't need to do any of this stuff or have any treaties at all to get it moved.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
what white neighborhood edit: I am being facetious but still want you to clarify it before I respond
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Silento Boborachi posted:what white neighborhood He means the white neighbourhood it was going to go near until they bitched about potential water source pollution, and it was re-routed no-questions-asked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
Okay, I'll bite first. Do you mean the whole "bismarck residents wanted the pipeline moved because of the risk to groundwater" bit? Because I hope you have proof of it, I've been trying to find it for days and all I got are a lot of things to the contrary on that one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Looks like the CoE decided to take a side. Chicago Tribune is reporting that they're closing access to everything north of the Cannonball River as of 5 Dec. https://www.google.com/amp/www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-pipeline-protest-boycott-bismarck-businesses-20161125-story,amp.html As far as why the line was moved,supposedly the more northerly route apparently didn't pass CoE environmental assessment due to being too close to the wells Bismarck draws part of its water supply from. http://bismarcktribune.com/news/sta...8d386c933c.html Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Nov 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
Ya, the point I was going to make was that it wasn't "white bismarck residents" (even though they probably would do something that dumb) it was the USACE looking at the bismarck route and determining that based on their criteria the southern route was overall less impact/less risk. Disagree with the corps all you want, they do stupid poo poo all the time, but turning their decision into a race issue is well, willfully dense. But please if you have a source I would love it, because I would like to slap a bismarck resident with a giant poster of the Tesoro refinery that sits just upriver from Bismarck's water intakes. Just go to google maps and go to Mandan, and head north along the river, once you see all the big ol white tanks, there she sits. There's a power plant and its coal stockpile by it too. So either bismarck residents can't look to the west and see a giant refinery and powerplant sitting right upstream or someone's trying to make this a race/ native vs non-native issue, which are probably both plausible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Oh and speaking of Mandan, we're used to contaminated water, so it doesn't bother us. http://www.kfyrtv.com/home/headlines/KFYR-Underground-BNSF-Diesel-Leak-Cleanup-Continues-for-Years-in-Mandan-364677921.html Irony: It was discovered when they were building a new law enforcement center. So there IS some connection between the cops and oil!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
TFR issued over standing rock (gently caress off faa) http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_6_1887.html moron izzard fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Nov 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
A Yolo Wizard posted:TFR issued over standing rock (gently caress off faa) Gotta clear that airspace of drones and any chance of news helicopters before the cops move in to knock over the camps. After all, it wouldn't do to have realtime video of their actions broadcast before devices they were being recorded with were seized and accidentally erased.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
Silento Boborachi posted:Ya, the point I was going to make was that it wasn't "white bismarck residents" (even though they probably would do something that dumb) it was the USACE looking at the bismarck route and determining that based on their criteria the southern route was overall less impact/less risk. Disagree with the corps all you want, they do stupid poo poo all the time, but turning their decision into a race issue is well, willfully dense. Does that not seem like a double standard to anyone else besides me?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:On the other hand according to your own sources - the ACE pretty much immediately turned down the choice to move it near the water of white residents out of hand, and then we're now requiring the native population to be responsible for due diligence? how many people live in each of the two places
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 15:22
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:how many people live in each of the two places Do people get to use population arguments like that when an area has a low population density due to the people there being rich instead of a low population because the area is poor?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Do people get to use population arguments like that when an area has a low population density due to the people there being rich instead of a low population because the area is poor? I dunno, everyone wanting to abolish the electoral college this month doesnt seem to care about this. "If you dont live in a city gently caress you" they say.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Ya, once you dig down to it, with the mind of who each of these populations primarily are, I think the corps could of done a much better job describing it. We have a native population in both mandan and bismarck, bismarck itself is home to the united tribes technical college and home to their yearly powwow (http://www.unitedtribespowwow.com/). Likewise, there are "white" people living at standing rock. But when you do these big assessments and basically go, there's more people here, and less people there, so move the pipeline to where there are less people, you should really make a clarifying statement when that smaller population is also a historically abused and underrepresented population. But I can understand the process the corps went through, they permit a lot of pipelines, hell, the other end of the dakota access pipeline is upstream of Williston's water intakes, (so technically a "white" city did get a crude oil pipeline right above its intakes, but williston also already has either a crude or natural gas pipeline going exactly through the same spot as their water intakes anyway), likewise with a natural gas pipeline and an electrical transmission line already in dakota access's path, I assume they didn't think this would "blow up" in this fashion. Hindsight and all that. I am trying to find some record somewhere, because I heard a discussion where it was mentioned that the standing rock/cannonball's water intakes are being shut off anyway next year to switch to underground aquifers instead, because the river intakes keep plugging up with silt, when I found this: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-108shrg97093/html/CHRG-108shrg97093.htm It's a long congressional hearing, but from what I've read so far, basically when the area was in a drought between 2000-2006, the Missouri ran very low, low enough that standing rock's intakes ran out of water they could pull in November/December 2003, there was still water in the river but according to one of the testimonies you could cross the river on foot. Add insult to injury, apparently one of the times they ran out of water was on thanksgiving. No water for food, no water for hospitals, apparently they had to transport anyone who needed treatment 60 miles north to Bismarck. I hadn't heard about this at all, and it might be an important piece to help understand why standing rock is a little antsy when it comes to their water source.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
blowfish posted:how many people live in each of the two places "this decision to gently caress over natives isn't due to racism, it's because there's so few of them. because we genocided the rest. so now it can never be racism to gently caress over natives" - Albert Einstein
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
OTOH, I think it is possible for a decision that has negative consequences for natives or other minorities to be made for reasons other than sneering racism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:OTOH, I think it is possible for a decision that has negative consequences for natives or other minorities to be made for reasons other than sneering racism. Sure, but it helps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 19:11
|
|