Standing Rock Protests and DAPL

[ASoulMan]

What are your thoughts on this subject my fellow Kiwis?

 

[Cheap Sandals]

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]

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

 

[Lackadaisy]

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

 

[Daughter of Cernunnos]

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

 

[Male Idiot]

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

 

[Lackadaisy]

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]

Slaughter them all. Leave none alive.

 

[Joan Nyan]

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."

Let's begin with the notion of "sacred land". Extensive cultural & land surveys were conducted in North Dakota before the pipeline received approval. It marked some land as "sacred." The pipeline plans were then redrafted as to avoid ALL "sacred" pieces of land. [a] This isn't just conservative-media opinion, either, it's confirmed in the U.S. District Court memorandum, stating:

"Where this surveying revealed ...historic or cultural resources that might be affected, the company mostly chose to reroute. In North Dakota, for example, the cultural surveys found 149 potentially eligible sites, 91 of which had stone features (considered sacred). The pipeline workspace and route was modified to avoid ALL 91 of these stone features and all but 9 of the other potentially eligible sites. By the time the company finally settled on a construction path, ...the pipeline route had been modified 140 times in North Dakota alone to avoid potential cultural resources. Plans had also been put in place to mitigate any effects on the other 9 sites through coordination with the North Dakota SHPO."

Those modifications convinced the U.S. District Court to rule against the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, citing the tribe's inability to show how the pipeline would damage the group’s sacred ground. From the court document itself, it states, “if a party makes no showing of irreparable injury, the court may deny the motion... It follows, then, that the Court may deny a motion for preliminary injunction, without further inquiry, upon finding that a plaintiff is unable to show either irreparable injury" "The Tribe has not met its burden to show that DAPL-related work is likely to cause damage."

In addition to providing no substantive evidence to support their case, the Standing Rock Sioux tribe was offered ample time to consult with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but refused, instead opting "to boycott the entire consulting process.” [a] This petulance was again confirmed by the court's review, which showed that, as the Army Corps of Engineers attempted more than a dozen times between 2014 and 2016 to discuss the DAPL route with the Standing Rock, "the tribe either failed to respond to requests for consultation or dragged its feet during the process.” [c] It's also noteworthy that the company building the pipeline - Energy Transfer Partners - had only originally moved the project near the Standing Rock reservation in the first place because doing so was considered "less impactful on the environment, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.” [d] So any assumption that the company hadn't gone out of its way to seek consultation and alter its plans in consideration of the environment is absolutely false.

Now that we've established that the tribe failed to substantiate its complaints, let's add this somewhat surprising revelation; THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING FUEL PIPELINE IN PLACE, UNDER THE SAME GROUND, WITH NO COMPLAINTS. This - again - was exposed in the court's review and can be confirmed for yourself via utility pipeline maps. "The area around the permitted activity has been subject to previous surveying for other utility projects. DAPL likewise will run parallel, at a distance of 22 to 300 feet, to an ALREADY-EXISTING natural-gas pipeline under the lake. Dakota Access will also use the less-invasive HDD method to run the pipeline, which will require less disturbance to the land around the drilling and bury the pipeline at a depth that is unlikely to damage cultural resources. One can see this for themselves by viewing side by side maps, one showing the existing pipelines, and the other showing the planned route for the new pipeline. They mirror each other. [f]

Lastly is the issue of land ownership and the presumption that the pipeline encroaches on North Dakotan land owned by indigenous tribes. Wrong again. The truth is, the Dakota Access Pipeline traverses a path on PRIVATE PROPERTY and does not cross into the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. Literally 100% of affected landowners in North Dakota VOLUNTARILY signed contracts allowing for construction of the pipeline on their property. [g] They were offered a good deal and they took it. The Native American reservation is merely adjacent to affected property, it is not the ACTUAL affected property.

One might ask, "but what if neighboring the reservation still puts it in danger?" Here, too, research suggests otherwise. Per a 2015 Fraser Institute Research Report entitled "Safety in the Transportation of Oil and Gas," transporting oil and gas by pipeline is actually the safest method. Matter of fact, fuel transported via rail is found to be "over 4.5 times more likely to experience an occurrence" than via pipeline. [e] Additionally, "over 70 percent of pipeline occurrences result in spills of ONLY 1 cubic meter, and only 17 percent of pipeline occurrences take place in the actual pipeline." [e] Furthermore, the vast majority of spills actually occur inside facilities [e], meaning it's VERY unlikely that anything substantial will leak from the new pipeline. And for those concerned about the pipeline's proximity to their water supply, a modern, upgraded water facility, far away, was already built and is now operational. It was constructed via an approximately $30 million grant from the U.S. government. [h] The local water facility that MAY be affected has actually been slated to be decommissioned, so it's mostly a moot point.

CONCLUSION:
Essentially, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is complaining that private owners sold the rights to place a fuel pipeline on land that the Tribe does not own, in a way that mirrors existing pipelines, as to transport fuel in the safest and cheapest manner, with designs evolving from countless consultation efforts and professional advice on how to be as environmentally friendly as possible, while specifically redesigning the route an additional 140 times as to avoid offending the tribe, all while the tribe was largely boycotting the consultation efforts and failing to substantiate its complaints in court. What's happening now, therefore, is nothing more than the political left latching onto the latest controversy as to perpetuate their endless narrative of victimhood.
---------------
Sources:
[a]
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/30/anti-frackers-keep-falsely-suggesting-dapl-desecrated-tribal-lands/


http://mwalliancenow.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Document-39.pdf

[c]
http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/17/t...to-consult-north-dakota-tribe-about-pipeline/

[d]
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pipeline-nativeamericans-reroute-idUSKCN11P09K

[e]
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sit...ion-of-oil-and-gas-pipelines-or-rail-rev2.pdf

[f]
https://www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/dakota-access-pipeline-follows-existing-gas-line-protest-area/

[g]
https://mwalliancenow.org/blog/dakota-access-easements-95-percent/

[h]
http://www.usbr.gov/arra/pdf/projects/GP-StandingRockRuralWaterSystem.pdf

 

[Mars Attacks!]

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]

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]

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."

Several of the requests, which are going viral on social media, ask that people stop breaking into song.

"Nobody wants to hear your songs with your guitar or drum around the fire," one tweet reads.

According to other protestors, some of the new additions have also asked to use donation money to buy "fluoride-free" water instead of drinking from taps. Another protestor witnessed "a dozen or so white people" encouraging other demonstrators to block police from crossing a bridge.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[Melkor]

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]

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]

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

 

[millais]

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