# Standing Rock Protests and DAPL



## ASoulMan (Nov 28, 2016)

What are your thoughts on this subject my fellow Kiwis?


----------



## Cheap Sandals (Nov 28, 2016)

I feel like a lot of people here will say "Fuck da NDNs" but honestly I'm sympathetic to the tribe. Lake Oahe is important to them. There is no reason why the pipeline couldn't be diverted away from the sacred lake of an indigenous tribe. Maybe it would cost a few million dollars to alter the route but that's nothing in the big picture.

And the fact protestors have had dogs sicced on them while praying for peace sickens me. That is just fucked up.


----------



## Army Burger (Nov 28, 2016)

Why can't they find a route that doesn't go through the Indigenous land in question and also avoids Bismarck?


----------



## Lackadaisy (Nov 28, 2016)

I have a lot of friends amongst the protesters. I'd rather support these guys than BLM.


----------



## Daughter of Cernunnos (Nov 28, 2016)

It's cool other than exceptional white hippies coming to the camp thinking its a music festival.


----------



## Male Idiot (Nov 28, 2016)

At least they got a legal claim on the land, unlike the pampered BLM crowd.


----------



## Lackadaisy (Nov 28, 2016)

Male Idiot said:


> At least they got a legal claim on the land, unlike the pampered BLM crowd.



That, and their ancestors were actually here before the US government came along.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Nov 28, 2016)

Slaughter them all. Leave none alive.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Nov 28, 2016)

https://www.facebook.com/WeAreCapit...7541337750750/608931162611763/?type=3&theater



> THE MISLEADING CLAIM: "Native Americans are again being screwed over by the U.S., as the Dakota Access Pipeline encroaches on 'sacred land' belonging to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, absent consent."
> 
> THE REALITY: "Court documents, official land surveys, and pipeline maps, confirm this is almost entirely false."
> 
> ...


*




*


----------



## Mars Attacks! (Nov 28, 2016)

It's pretty fucked up that that one chick got her arm blown off: http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/sophi...on-grenade-police-woman-lose-arm-bomb-photos/


----------



## Sailor_Jupiter (Nov 28, 2016)

Team Lakota!  (Although I'm biased...)  
This shouldn't be about race- it's about respecting the beliefs of others.  Is the land literally sacred?  Probably not more than anywhere else.  But they can put the pipe elsewhere for what it's worth.  Native Americans are tired of always playing second fiddle to whites on our own land- we just want to get along with everyone and be left alone.  If they were planning on running it through a white cemetery or a church,  we'd be against that too.  Everyone should be treated well. 

I hate that so many exceptional individuals in both sides are reducing this to a race thing.  No,  it's just about human decency.  Black, white,  or whatever else you are,  you should be treated respectfully.  Let's not become SJWtards and calculate exactly *how much* this or that our the other based on race!  Just treat everyone decently: the Indians who aren't lolcows will be satisfied with that,  honestly.  (If they try to run a pipeline through where your grandma is buried,  we'll protest that too.)  Just respect.


----------



## AnOminous (Nov 28, 2016)

ASoulMan said:


> What are your thoughts on this subject my fellow Kiwis?



Pretty much this.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Standing-Rock-protest-white-people-Burning-Man-10640250.php

I.e. there's a legitimate cause here but you have an influx of useless white shitheads who are mainly there to party and act like a bunch of little shits.



> "White people are colonizing the camps..." protestor Alicia Smith added on Facebook. "They are coming in, taking food, clothing and occupying space without any desire to participate in camp maintenance and without respect of tribal protocols.
> 
> "These people are treating it like it is Burning Man or The Rainbow Gathering and I even witnessed several wandering in and out of camps comparing it to those festivals."
> 
> ...



You have to admit the irony is pretty delicious.  Even at their protest on their own land about the use of their own land, you have white people showing up to steal their shit and talk over them.  White people like Wesley Bailey.


----------



## Beaniebon (Nov 29, 2016)

In this situation, the police actually are taking things too far. As annoying and provocative as protesters may be, police officers should have the training and temperament to deal with these things without severely injuring the protesters. There is no excuse for that girl who's arm got blown off


----------



## Sailor_Jupiter (Nov 29, 2016)

Lackadaisy said:


> That, and their ancestors were actually here before the US government came along.


^This.  If things reeeally got bad, the AAs could go back to their homeland.  We no longer have one,  so we're all stuck with each other.  Gotta get along!


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 2, 2016)

Mars Attacks! said:


> It's pretty fucked up that that one chick got her arm blown off: http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/sophi...on-grenade-police-woman-lose-arm-bomb-photos/


This wouldn't have happened if she was sane and a productive member of society instead of squatting and shitting on federal/privately owned land against something that met all federal and state criteria.


----------



## Lackadaisy (Dec 2, 2016)

Question: Are arrests happening when the protestors cross into private property, or have the majority of the protestors remained on public land?


----------



## Melkor (Dec 6, 2016)

So I caught word that it's been denied. Or something. Can anyone confirm/deny?

My stance on it is that it's their land, and the protestors are being handled in an unprofessional manner.

Also all the autistic commies going to the camps and shitting up the place can fuck off.


----------



## Absolutego (Dec 6, 2016)

Autistic commies ruin all worthy protest movements. They ruined BLM by making police militarism a race-based issue rather than part of the continued war on the poor.

The US Army Corps did deny the permit the Dakota Access project needs to cross the river at the protest site, but looking at the article it looks more like Dakota Access will simply try to find a different crossing site, so the pipeline isn't really canceled so much as put on hold through the winter. Hosing protesters in subzero temperatures isn't exactly great PR.  This will almost certainly crop up again in the spring.


----------



## Null (Dec 6, 2016)

Tribal lands are autonomous and led by the tribal councils. Their decisions should be final.


----------



## millais (Dec 6, 2016)

Obeme won't be in office long enough to permanently halt construction, but it will take the company a few months to redo the whole environmental evaluation process for alternative routes, by which time Trump will be president. He will probably side with the company based on his commercial ties and campaign finance connections with the company's executives


----------



## Joan Nyan (Dec 6, 2016)

Null said:


> Tribal lands are autonomous and led by the tribal councils. Their decisions should be final.


Except it's being built entirely on privately owned land that was legally purchased.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 6, 2016)

U guys do know that there are already tons of pipelines that are in this area right?











These people are just a bunch of attention whores on the same level as Trump Protesters.

There was nothing wrong with the legal grounds for this and there is nothing that can be done. 


Deal with it.


----------



## millais (Dec 6, 2016)

And the only alternative to pipelines is mobile transport via crude rail tanker. You know, those train cars that keep derailing, exploding, and burning down towns across Canada and the US with their atrocious safety record.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 6, 2016)

Look at how many awful pipelines there are in North Dakota ruining the environment, there are so many compared to the rest of the USA. It's one step from being turned into an inhospitable wasteland.

*WE NEED TO STOP IT RIGHT NOW GUYS.

*
/sarcasm


----------



## Joan Nyan (Dec 9, 2016)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/what-th...x_picks&cx_tag=poptarget&cx_artPos=2#cxrecs_s

What the Dakota Access Pipeline Is Really About

The standoff isn’t about tribal rights or water, but a White House that ignores the rule of law.

A little more than two weeks ago, during a confrontation between protesters and law enforcement, an improvised explosive device was detonated on a public bridge in southern North Dakota. That was simply the latest manifestation of the “prayerful” and “peaceful” protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Escalating tensions were temporarily defused Sunday when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, at the direction of the Obama administration, announced it would refuse to grant the final permit needed to complete the $3.8 billion project. The pipeline, which runs nearly 1,200 miles from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota to Illinois, is nearly complete except for a small section where it needs to pass under the Missouri River. Denying the permit for that construction only punts the issue to next month—to a new president who won’t thumb his nose at the rule of law.

Like many North Dakotans, I’ve had to endure preaching about the pipeline from the press, environmental activists, musicians and politicians in other states. More often than not, these sermons are informed by little more than a Facebook post. At the risk of spoiling the protesters’ narrative, I’d like to bring us back to ground truth.

• This isn’t about tribal rights or protecting cultural resources. The pipeline does not cross any land owned by the Standing Rock Sioux. The land under discussion belongs to private owners and the federal government. To suggest that the Standing Rock tribe has the legal ability to block the pipeline is to turn America’s property rights upside down.

• Two federal courts have rejected claims that the tribe wasn’t consulted. The project’s developer and the Army Corps made dozens of overtures to the Standing Rock Sioux over more than two years. Often these attempts were ignored or rejected, with the message that the tribe would only accept termination of the project.

• Other tribes and parties did participate in the process. More than 50 tribes were consulted, and their concerns resulted in 140 adjustments to the pipeline’s route. The project’s developer and the Army Corps were clearly concerned about protecting tribal artifacts and cultural sites. Any claim otherwise is unsupported by the record. The pipeline’s route was also studied—and ultimately supported—by the North Dakota Public Service Commission (on which I formerly served), the State Historic Preservation Office, and multiple independent archaeologists.

• This isn’t about water protection. Years before the pipeline was announced, the tribe was working with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps to relocate its drinking-water intake. The new site sits roughly 70 miles downstream of where the pipeline is slated to cross the Missouri River. Notably, the new intake, according to the Bureau of Reclamation, will be 1.6 miles downstream of an elevated railroad bridge that carries tanker cars carrying crude oil.

Further, the pipeline will be installed about 100 feet below the riverbed. Automatic shut-off valves will be employed on either side of the river, and the pipeline will be constructed to exceed many federal safety requirements.

Other pipelines carrying oil, gas and refined products already cross the Missouri River at least a dozen times upstream of the tribe’s intake. The corridor where the Dakota Access Pipeline will run is directly adjacent to another pipeline, which carries natural gas under the riverbed, as well as an overhead electric transmission line. This site was chosen because it is largely a brownfield area that was disturbed long ago by previous infrastructure.

• This isn’t about the climate. The oil that will be shipped through the pipeline is already being produced. But right now it is transported in more carbon-intensive ways, such as by railroad or long-haul tanker truck. So trying to thwart the pipeline to reduce greenhouse gas could have the opposite effect.

So what is the pipeline dispute really about? Political expediency in a White House that does not see itself as being bound by the rule of law. The Obama administration has decided to build a political legacy rather than lead the country. It is facilitating an illegal occupation that has grown wildly out of control. That the economy depends on a consistent and predictable permitting regime seems never to have crossed the president’s mind.

There is no doubt that Native American communities have historically suffered at the hands of the federal government. But to litigate that history on the back of a legally permitted river crossing is absurd. The Obama administration should enforce the law, release the easement and conclude this dangerous standoff.

Mr. Cramer, a Republican, represents North Dakota in the U.S. House. As a member of the North Dakota Public Service Commission (2003-12) he helped site the original Keystone Pipeline completed in 2010.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

Jon-Kacho said:


> http://www.wsj.com/articles/what-th...x_picks&cx_tag=poptarget&cx_artPos=2#cxrecs_s
> 
> What the Dakota Access Pipeline Is Really About
> 
> ...


I think the main issue is that the pipeline is running close to tribal land.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2016/12/us/dapl-protests-cnnphotos/

There's a thing called a 'sovereign nation'--tribes that have tribal lands have their own government, and a sovereign nation is not under the US' jurisdiction.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 9, 2016)

Melkor said:


> I think the main issue is that the pipeline is *running close *to tribal land.



If you don't own the land you cannot do anything about it.

You said it yourself, they do not own it. Complaining about them doing the pipeline is the same as bitching about your neighbor building a pool in the yard that they own. There is 100% no legal standing in any way, shape, or form for these protests. At all.

Really all these protesters are just a bunch of attention whores who will never benefit society in any way, shape, or form their entire lives along with those Trump protesters and the Occupy Now retards.


Melkor said:


> There's a thing called a 'sovereign nation'--tribes that have tribal lands have their own government, and a sovereign nation is not under the US' jurisdiction.



Looks like we need to finish the job that our White ancestors started.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

ICametoLurk said:


> Looks like we need to finish the job that our White ancestors started.


Ow, the edge.

If the pipeline risks the safety and drinkability of their water, it's their problem. If the government came walking in and started building a pipeline close to your house and your property, and it ran the risk of tainting your water supply, you'd probably pitch a fit too.


----------



## Ruin (Dec 9, 2016)

Melkor said:


> Ow, the edge.
> 
> If the pipeline risks the safety and drinkability of their water, it's their problem. If the government came walking in and started building a pipeline close to your house and your property, and it ran the risk of tainting your water supply, you'd probably pitch a fit too.



he's right though the pipeline is on federally owned land and Indian tribes are sovereign entities. They don't get to derail U.S energy policy with woo hoo spirit crap Just like I don't get to march onto a reservation and start telling them what to do.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

Ruin said:


> he's right though the pipeline is on federally owned land and Indian tribes are sovereign entities. They don't get to derail U.S energy policy with woo hoo spirit crap Just like I don't get to march onto a reservation and start telling them what to do.





> If the government came walking in and started building a pipeline close to your house and your property, and it ran the risk of tainting your water supply, you'd probably pitch a fit too.


----------



## Ruin (Dec 9, 2016)

> If the government came walking in and started building a pipeline close to your house and your property, and it ran the risk of tainting your water supply, you'd probably pitch a fit too.



Please link me to credible peer reviewed studies that clearly show a correlation between the pipeline and environmental damage. And make it an academic journal too, no rags or statements from chief Screeching Vulture or whatever.


----------



## Lackadaisy (Dec 9, 2016)

ICametoLurk said:


> Looks like we need to finish the job that our White ancestors started.



$10 says you're not even white


----------



## RI 360 (Dec 9, 2016)

Let's send them blankets.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

Ruin said:


> Please link me to credible peer reviewed studies that clearly show a correlation between the pipeline and environmental damage. And make it an academic journal too, no rags or statements from chief Screeching Vulture or whatever.


You have a point.

They do have every reason to be concerned, though.


----------



## Ruin (Dec 9, 2016)

Melkor said:


> You have a point.
> 
> They do have every reason to be concerned, though.



Of course they do however the authorities also have every right to remove them from illegally occupying federal property and threatening people. Find a legitimate way to air your grievances, don't break the law.


----------



## Male Idiot (Dec 9, 2016)

Ruin said:


> Of course they do however the authorities also have every right to remove them from illegally occupying federal property and threatening people. Find a legitimate way to air your grievances, don't break the law.



But doing it legitimatly is HARD work yall!


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

Ruin said:


> Of course they do however the authorities also have every right to remove them from illegally occupying federal property and threatening people. Find a legitimate way to air your grievances, don't break the law.


Tell that to the autistic, non-native protesters who are legitimately shitting up the place.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/28/complaints-whites-co-opting-dakota-access-protest/


----------



## Ruin (Dec 9, 2016)

Melkor said:


> Tell that to the autistic, non-native protesters who are legitimately shitting up the place.
> 
> http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/28/complaints-whites-co-opting-dakota-access-protest/



Those people need to fuck off. I would have zero complaints if the cops maced all of the college idiots treating this controversy like Burning Man.


----------



## floofyfloofy (Dec 9, 2016)

My main concern: How the FUCK do people afford to go protest for this shit? I can't just quit my goddamn job and go to goddamn North Dakota. I barely afford to do the things I enjoy doing while making car/rent/ect payments. Holdin' picket signs don't keep milk in the fridge. How the fuck are there people from like the east coast or whatever that just have time to do this shit. I feel like it just has to be your life. Like people ages 18-30 going there to protest and they say bullshit like "I care because I'm like barely any significant fraction of Cherokee/Random Tribe" How the fuck do they pay for that shit? What do they do? How are they doing it? What about their fucking lives outside of the protest? Even being half Ho-Chunk, I simply could not bring myself to just drop everything and go protest this even as sad as I think it is.


----------



## Ruin (Dec 9, 2016)

floofyfloofy said:


> My main concern: How the FUCK do people afford to go protest for this shit? I can't just quit my goddamn job and go to goddamn North Dakota. I barely afford to do the things I enjoy doing while making car/rent/ect payments. Holdin' picket signs don't keep milk in the fridge. How the fuck are there people from like the east coast or whatever that just have time to do this shit. I feel like it just has to be your life. Like people ages 18-30 going there to protest and they say bullshit like "I care because I'm like barely any significant fraction of Cherokee/Random Tribe" How the fuck do they pay for that shit? What do they do? How are they doing it? What about their fucking lives outside of the protest? Even being half Ho-Chunk, I simply could not bring myself to just drop everything and go protest this even as sad as I think it is.



That's a big part of why the natives are pissed. College assholes with trust funds are coming and going "we understand your struggle lol" while they scarf take out and shitpost on their Iphones.


----------



## floofyfloofy (Dec 9, 2016)

Does anyone know what that shit with the veterans or whatever was? Saw it on facebook or something. I guess veterans changed Prezzy Obammy's mind and apologized to the Indians.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 9, 2016)

Lackadaisy said:


> $10 says you're not even white


Considering we conned the French into crushing the Byzantine Empire via loan contracts there might be some ancient Juden flowing through my veins.

More of a race traitor though for being with an Iowan (guess where his tribe lived) twink.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 9, 2016)

floofyfloofy said:


> Does anyone know what that shit with the veterans or whatever was? Saw it on facebook or something. I guess veterans changed Prezzy Obammy's mind and apologized to the Indians.


I've heard the vets were there originally to protect both sides, standing between both the protesters and the police.

If the whole thing about the vets apologizing is true, I'm a little torn. While I'd like to say, "that's nice", I also want to say that they didn't directly contribute to whatever war crimes the US military has committed against the natives, so it's easy for them to apologize and ask for forgiveness.


floofyfloofy said:


> My main concern: How the FUCK do people afford to go protest for this shit? I can't just quit my goddamn job and go to goddamn North Dakota. I barely afford to do the things I enjoy doing while making car/rent/ect payments. Holdin' picket signs don't keep milk in the fridge. How the fuck are there people from like the east coast or whatever that just have time to do this shit. I feel like it just has to be your life. Like people ages 18-30 going there to protest and they say bullshit like "I care because I'm like barely any significant fraction of Cherokee/Random Tribe" How the fuck do they pay for that shit? What do they do? How are they doing it? What about their fucking lives outside of the protest? Even being half Ho-Chunk, I simply could not bring myself to just drop everything and go protest this even as sad as I think it is.


A lot of the non-native protesters are traveling to ND on mommy and daddy's dime, or are trust fund kids.

It'd be nice if I could make the trip up there, being part native myself, but not all of us can afford a round trip to the middle of bumfuck nowhere in North Dakota.

Also apparently BLM is there? I wonder if they're contributing to all this shit about protesters shitting up the place.


----------



## floofyfloofy (Dec 9, 2016)

Melkor said:


> A lot of the non-native protesters are traveling to ND on mommy and daddy's dime, or are trust fund kids.


I just don't get what they do during and after. I just can't imagine just throwing my job and shit away for stuff I just want to seem like I care about. My grandpa on our Native side even said it was sad but not worth the trip there, and he even still makes bead art and dances and other Native crap.

I might just go and tomahawk some protesters that are white. It wouldn't be racist cuz they're white and I'm not. They raped our lands and took our corn.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 9, 2016)

Forget the Trail of Tears, we're gonna have a River of Salty Tears this January.


----------



## AN/ALR56 (Dec 9, 2016)

Its pretty stupid to give huge swaths of lands to a minority of people and not be even able to economically use them.
There is more indian reservations in brazil than the land that is currently inhabitated, trillions of $$ of rare minerals, good farming soil and huge florests with incredible biotech potentials are left ''unexplored''(the natives just sell it on the black market or some NGO's pretending to care for them just steal our biological resources).


----------



## ICametoLurk (Dec 9, 2016)

AN/ALR56 said:


> Its pretty stupid to give huge swaths of lands to a minority of people and not be even able to economically use them.
> There is more indian reservations in brazil than the land that is currently inhabitated, trillions of $$ of rare minerals, good farming soil and huge florests with incredible biotech potentials are left ''unexplored''(the natives just sell it on the black market or some NGO's pretending to care for them just steal our biological resources).


Having people join the rest of the Human species and not spend their time making their "precious Earth" look worse than 14 Branchland Ct  is mean.


----------



## AN/ALR56 (Dec 9, 2016)

ICametoLurk said:


> Having people join the rest of the Human species and not spend their time making their "precious Earth" look worse than 14 Branchland Ct  is mean.


yeah and those ''natives'' (most are just dark skinned people ressurecting tribes that went extinct over 700 hundred years ago or just natives from other countries just squatting deliberatly on land that is gonna be used to build goverment projects so that they can claim it was sacred land and get the project either cancelled or delayed for decades in the courtroom while getting tons of cash and affirmative actions). just want shit like tv's and electricity,they dont give a fuck about old customs or any of that shit.


----------



## AnOminous (Dec 9, 2016)

Ruin said:


> That's a big part of why the natives are pissed. College assholes with trust funds are coming and going "we understand your struggle lol" while they scarf take out and shitpost on their Iphones.



Also general scumbags of the ilk of Wesley Bailey.  And they're not limiting themselves to takeout, they're stealing shit from the actual Indians.


----------



## buffaloWildWings (Dec 9, 2016)

floofyfloofy said:


> I just don't get what they do during and after. I just can't imagine just throwing my job and shit away for stuff I just want to seem like I care about. My grandpa on our Native side even said it was sad but not worth the trip there, and he even still makes bead art and dances and other Native crap.
> 
> I might just go and tomahawk some protesters that are white. It wouldn't be racist cuz they're white and I'm not. They raped our lands and took our corn.



I'll pay you in firewater and glass beads for some trustfundie scalps.


----------



## Melkor (Dec 10, 2016)

AN/ALR56 said:


> Its pretty stupid to give huge swaths of lands to a minority of people and not be even able to economically use them.
> There is more indian reservations in brazil than the land that is currently inhabitated, trillions of $$ of rare minerals, good farming soil and huge florests with incredible biotech potentials are left ''unexplored''(the natives just sell it on the black market or some NGO's pretending to care for them just steal our biological resources).


In the US, as far as I'm aware, the government gave the native tribes land that was useless to them.

Also, a lot of tribes, such as the Sioux and the Lakota in SD, are incredibly poor and suffer from issues like alcoholism and other drug abuse.


----------



## floofyfloofy (Dec 10, 2016)

buffaloWildWings said:


> I'll pay you in firewater and glass beads for some trustfundie scalps.


Throw in some frybread and its a deal.


----------



## sapir&worf (Dec 11, 2016)

The DAPL  was originally planned to go north of Bismarck before they changed it to the current attempted route, but the whole reason for the change to the route that's pissing off the tribes has been a bit over exaggerated. It wasn't because white people were putting up a fuss about it, but logistical differences such as added distance and crossing conservation easements. So in the end, both routes would have had environmental consequences should there be a pipe burst.

http://www.snopes.com/dapl-routed-through-standing-rock-after-bismarck-residents-said-no/


----------



## DZ 305 (Dec 12, 2016)

Pipeline spills 176,000 gallons of crude into creek about 150 miles from Dakota Access protest camp





At this rate, just strap an oil drum to a burro and haul it in that way


----------



## idosometimes (Dec 17, 2016)

Cheap Sandals said:


> I feel like a lot of people here will say "Fuck da NDNs" but honestly I'm sympathetic to the tribe. Lake Oahe is important to them. There is no reason why the pipeline couldn't be diverted away from the sacred lake of an indigenous tribe. Maybe it would cost a few million dollars to alter the route but that's nothing in the big picture.
> 
> And the fact protestors have had dogs sicced on them while praying for peace sickens me. That is just fucked up.


That's NIMBYism.  NIMBYism is the worst -ism around.

People don't want pipes near their "sacred" trees, but want cheap energy.  They don't want wind turbines ruining their of the landscape either.  Put that where other people have to deal with it.  The problem is that other people don't want it either.

Other groups have joined in this specific case.  Some want nothing built ever because of tress or squirrels or some bulldink like that.  Others think that pipelines prevent adoption of renewable energy sources (most of which suck from a math perspective).  Few good arguments exist.


----------



## AnOminous (Dec 17, 2016)

idosometimes said:


> That's NIMBYism.  NIMBYism is the worst -ism around.



Everyone says NIMByism sucks until it's their shit having its value destroyed without compensation for the benefit of other people they don't give a shit about.  Then they're all for it.


----------

