So long as you look at those who came out to protest as nothing more than useful morons then I could see it that way. They basically got used as pawns by the tribe and there was all sorts of equipment vandalized, locals terrorized, and a young woman got her arm nearly blown off all because the tribe was upset about losing money as a result of their own greed. It's not a good look.
Not surprised you would act like a dramatic victim over nothing. I'm sure you will next accuse me of the death of all your ancestors.
Oh, it's no big deal, I get that you'd want to find out as much about me as possible. I understand. Now me on the other hand, I know nothing at all about you because you are completely irrelevant to me. It's just how it works. Lesser people are always fascinated about their betters while we don't even care that you exist at all. Hell, you're just lucky I still bother responding to you at all. Probably a key highlight in your life.
LOL, you have shamed and abused Lou so bad he has resorted to stalking your personal life. That is really pathetic when you think about it.
You keep repeating that over and over again like its established fact, but I've yet to see a verified source for it in this thread, unless I missed it somewhere. What were the terms being negotiated? What were the views brought forth by both sides during those talks? I'd like to know more. You speak of equipment being vandalized and locals "terrorized". Well, there are stories from the other side of people peacefully protesting and being physically attacked. That's not a good look either. Also, one can perhaps debate the merits of the protest on environmental grounds, if the realistic alternative to the pipeline is not a reduction in crude oil transportation but just a more inefficient method of doing it. But to look at that in a vacuum without also considering that the tribe believes the pipeline is being constructed, without their permission, through territory they have a rightful claim to, is just missing the larger context. As soon as we accept the notion that these tribes have rights and are justified in their claims over territory that has been historically ripped away from them we get to a very uncomfortable and uneasy place, so I understand the impulse to go in the other direction. Things become much simpler if we just leave the past in the past and pretend it didn't happen, and also pretend that what works best for the economy (at least in the short term) is also perfectly safe for the environment.
Bottom line the town didn't want the pipeline going near them, so they made a fuss and the company moved it to be through an indian reservation. Is that fair? Building pipelines through waterways that could threaten major cities is just ridiculous. Kalamazoo is still recovering from the spill three years ago which ruined the river and sickens the residents and destroyed the town's tourism. These are huge risks being taken for an energy source that needs to be replaced.
I know a little about Yellowknife which seems like they share common struggle with many Native reservations.I think they need alot of help on all aspects including the environmetal issue. A tiny place with population of less than 16k , they've enough cancer patients to flood all Canadian major hospitals where they are air lifted in masses together for their appointments.
"True Cos. operates at least three pipeline companies with a combined 1,648 miles of line in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming, according to information the companies submitted to federal regulators. Since 2006, the companies have reported 36 spills totaling 320,000 gallons of petroleum products, most of which was never recovered. Federal pipeline safety regulators initiated 19 enforcement activities against the three True pipeline companies since 2004. Those resulted in $537,500 in proposed penalties, of which the company paid $397,200, according to Department of Transportation records." http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pipeline-spills-176000-gallons-oil-north-dakota-creek-44143592
That would be because it is. They have rights when it comes to their land, not rights over land that isn't theirs. There is simply not intelligent argument that the tribe has rights to land that is not theirs and the notion that they can claim a right to land "wherever the buffalo once roamed" is flat out r****ded.
Just saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. I'll ask again -- is there a source for that I can review? The claim is that the land was confiscated from them without their permission. The Supreme Court agreed. Background: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/north_america-july-dec11-blackhills_08-23/
And the court set aside compensation....you can't just decide something is yours simply because you want it. If the government decides to use eminent domain and seize part of your land, you have no say over the mater. You either accept compensation for it and move on, or you whine about it and no one cares. However, if you choose to whine about it, that doesn't mean the land becomes yours again. Clearly they need better education standards on the res.
I'm not a lawyer, but I find it very questionable that the US government has a right to seize land belonging not to US citizens but another sovereign entity on the basis of eminent domain. "Or you whine about it and no one cares." Well, that's not happening in this case, now is it? Millions care. It is an injustice.
No matter what it was part of America for over 100 years, so they decided to throw them a bone and pay them more than what all of North Dakoka combined is worth. If they don't want to accept it, fine. They can go to war like their ancestors did.....I doubt they are any better fighters today so it probably won't end well.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/13/us/pipeline-spill-north-dakota/ Pipeline 150 miles from Dakota Access protests leaks 176,000 gallons (CNN)Activists who have demonstrated for months against the Dakota Access Pipeline may have some fuel to justify their protests. A spill has occurred 150 miles from Cannon Ball, North Dakota, where protesters have fought construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Officials estimate 4,200 barrels of crude oil have leaked. State officials estimate 4,200 barrels of crude oil, or 176,000 gallons, have leaked from the Belle Fourche Pipeline in Billings County. Of that amount, 130,000 gallons of oil has flowed into Ash Coulee Creek, while the rest leaked onto a hillside, said Bill Suess, spill investigation program manager at the North Dakota Department of Health. Built in the 1980s, the pipeline is 6 inches in diameter and transports about 1,000 barrels of oil daily, he said. The leak happened December 5. "Any time it gets into water, we respond differently and we take it more seriously," Suess said. He said more than 100 people are working to clean up the spill. Investigators are still trying to determine the cause, he said. The incident happened less than a three-hour drive from Cannon Ball, where protests led by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe have simmered for months over the 1,172-mile Dakota Access Pipeline. The $3.7 billion project would connect oil-rich areas of North Dakota to Illinois, where the crude oil could then be transported to refineries on the Gulf Coast or the East Coast. The demonstrations have turned violent at times. Military veterans march in support of protesters at the Standing Rock Sioux reservation on December 5. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe sued the US Army Corps of Engineers after the pipeline was granted final permits in July. The tribe said the project will not only threaten its environmental and economic well-being, but will also cut through sacred land. It said construction would destroy burial sites, prayer sites and culturally significant artifacts. In early December, the US Army Corps of Engineers announced it would look for an alternate route for the pipeline, although the pipeline is nearly complete. Companies behind the project have pushed back. Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics Partners said they expect to complete the construction without additional rerouting. They have taken legal action, asking a federal court to allow them to complete the pipeline. The Dakota Access Pipeline would transport 470,000 barrels of oil a day across four states, Energy Access Partners said. It will pass through an oil-rich area in North Dakota with an estimated 7.4 billion barrels of undiscovered oil. This oil would be shipped to markets and refineries in the Midwest, East Coast and Gulf Coast regions. hhhhhmmmmm Rocket River
Those 50 permanent employees hired will certainly benefit from Keystone... the temp hiring will be helpful I guess.
How is this pipeline even economically viable at this point? We need to stop all this drilling its going to kill Houston.
