You can sue someone if something actually happens, sure. Again, you cant tell someone they can't buy the house next to you because they might steal your BBQ pit one day.
We not good at keeping these companies accountable They will simply file bankruptcy and open under a new name or some other shenanigans Rocket River
They weren't worried about that when they thought they were about to get paid to run the pipeline legitimately through their land though.....
Agreed, it's not a perfect comparison, a stolen BBQ pit is a LOT more likely, but the point is that you can't tell someone that they can't buy the house next to you any more than you can tell someone they can't lease someone else's land next to you. Well, actually they got away with it now due to the US having a really bad president that encourages violence, hopefully the next really bad president fixes the situation and doesn't reward violence.
As I understand it, the claim is that the US government unilaterally broke a treaty with the tribe and stole the land away from them. And now, they want to build a pipeline there that could put the tribe's water at risk. You and other conservatives in the same position would stand for that? I think your analogy would be more accurate if the neighboring house used to belong to me, but was taken away without my consent. The risk of a stolen BBQ pit is also off. http://www.kare11.com/news/dapl-treaty-law-vs-federal-law/362249021 Protestors getting in violent tussles with law enforcement is a distraction to the underlying issues and should not in my view factor one bit in the federal government's decision to delay the construction and seek out an alternative solution that can work for all parties.
^^^^^THIS There is no logic whatsoever to this protest other than a money grab. Our current President is a complete moron.
Is the tribe demanding that the oil be transported by tanker instead of by pipeline? If not, how does the comparison show the protests are illogical on the basis of environment?
That's the method that is currently used and will continue to be used if the pipeline doesn't go through. They are effectively protesting for a more dangerous method of oil transportation through their territory.....but they aren't really environmentalists, they are just greedy douchebags.
Well what do you know? Pipeline spills 176,000 gallons of crude into creek about 150 miles from Dakota Access protest camp http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/12/pipe...50-miles-from-dakota-access-protest-camp.html
This a false flag if I've ever seen one. Damn liberals are getting sneaky. Obama probably got his super secret Muslim covert operatives to sabotage the pipeline.
for clarification, it's the other way around: sweet Lou was stalked by a member here. He needed a restraining order & Speaking of greed , pipelines is cheaper option than tanker-truck transportation but doesn't generate many jobs or benefit local community
Well clearly he's picked up the practice of internet stalking since then. Also, sure, pipelines are cheaper than tanker truck transportation but they are also MUCH safer. The ONLY reason the reservation is throwing a fit is because after they tried to gouge the oil company on the land lease deal, the oil company cut them out entirely. As such, they don't want the pipeline to go through since they can't profit off of it.
I agree to some degree but can't fault them for playing monopoly or looking for some marginal profits
