Dakota Accees Pipeline Protests: woman's arm blown off by grenade

[UWDude]

Police using water cannons on protesters in sub zero freezing conditions at night in North Dakota.
meanwhile, media busy covering Fuck trump protesters, no water cannons, no tear gas.

http://www.alternet.org/human-rights/woman-may-lose-arm-after-police-injure-hundreds-standing-rock-protesters


There is lots of footage on youtube of the water cannons at night.


One 21-year-old woman was reportedly struck with a concussion grenade that destroyed much of her left arm. She is now undergoing multiple emergency surgeries in an attempt to save the limb.



the wounded include “an elder who lost consciousness and was revived on scene,” a “young man with a grand mal seizure” and “a young man with internal bleeding who was vomiting blood after a rubber bullet injury to his abdomen.” The council reports that “at least 26 seriously injured people had to be evacuated by ambulance to 3 area hospitals.”


Both her radial and ulnar artery were completely destroyed. Her radius was shattered and a large piece of it is missing. Her medial nerve is missing a large section as well. All of the muscle and soft tissue between her elbow and wrist were blown away.”

[phill4paul]

This shit has gotten out of hand.

[jonhowe]

Scary headline. My closest female friend is there, and has been for weeks. She's 25 though, so I'm assuming this isn't her, though she is hard to contact there.

[phill4paul]

Scary headline. My closest female friend is there, and has been for weeks. She's 25 though, so I'm assuming this isn't her, though she is hard to contact there.


a 21 year old woman from New York City, Sophia Wilansky, was severely injured when a concussion grenade thrown by police hit her left arm and exploded. Sophia was heading to bring water to the unarmed people who were being attacked for several hours by Morton County Sheriff forces. The Morton County Sheriff’s Department has stated that she was injured by a purported propane explosion that the Sheriff’s Department claimed the unarmed people created. These statements are refuted by Sophia’s testimony, by several eye-witnesses who watched police intentionally throw concussion grenades at unarmed people, by the lack of charring of flesh at the wound site and by the grenade pieces that have been removed from her arm in surgery and will be saved for legal proceedings.


Below is her statement as conveyed by her father, lawyer Wayne Wilansky.


“At around 4:30am after the police hit the bridge with water cannons and rubber bullets and pepper spray they lobbed a number of concussion grenades which are not supposed to be thrown at people directly at protesters or protectors as they want to be called. A grenade exploded right as it hit Sophia in the left forearm taking most of the undersurface of her left arm with it. Both her radial and ulnar artery were completely destroyed. Her radius was shattered and a large piece of it is missing. Her medial nerve is missing a large section as well. All of the muscle and soft tissue between her elbow and wrist were blown away. The police did not do this by accident - it was an intentional act of throwing it directly at her. Additionally police were shooting people in face and groin intending to do the most possible damage. Sophia will have surgery again tomorrow as bit by bit they try to rebuild a somewhat functioning arm and hand. The first surgery took a vein from her leg which they have implanted in her arm to take the place of the missing arteries. She will need multiple surgeries to try to gain some functional use of the arm and hand. She will be, every day for the foreseeable future, fearful of losing her arm and hand. There are no words to describe the pain of watching my daughter cry and say she was sorry for the pain she caused me and my wife. I died a thousand deaths today and will continue to do so for quite some time. I am left without the right words to describe the anguish of watching her look at her now alien arm and hand.”


A fund set up by friends and verified to help with Sophia’s recovery is set up here:
https://www.gofundme.com/30aezxs

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sU15VLnlJlEdVB4H6SmLaQ2gQ25mtSjpFpVu4daGVTE/preview

[jonhowe]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sU15VLnlJlEdVB4H6SmLaQ2gQ25mtSjpFpVu4daGVTE/preview

Yes, it's not her, I saw. I just meant the headline I saw here in New York, "NYC woman may lose arm after hit with grenade at Dakota Access pipeline protest site". It made me nearly shit my pants and click pretty quick.

My friend Samantha "only" got pepper sprayed a few times.

[Anti Federalist]

This shit has gotten out of hand.

Has been, for years now, and only likely to get worse, now.

[specsaregood]

This shit has gotten out of hand.

So what exactly are these people protesting?

[angelatc]

So what exactly are these people protesting?

And why are people from New York there?

[Dr.3D]

So what exactly are these people protesting?

From what I understand, they are Native Americans, protesting the pipeline going through their land.

[dannno]

This reminds me of Ernest Goes to Camp but with a police state.

[specsaregood]

From what I understand, they are Native Americans, protesting the pipeline going through their land.

I could get behind that. Is the pipeline for public or private/commercial purposes?

[Dr.3D]

I could get behind that. Is the pipeline for public or private/commercial purposes?
I understand it's a private/commercial pipeline cutting through land that the Native Americans have a treaty with the U.S. government that says they won't trespass on that land. This has been going on for some time now. Last I heard, those protesters are being sprayed with water in freezing weather.

[phill4paul]

So what exactly are these people protesting?


So what exactly are these people protesting?


Taking a Stand at Standing Rock
By DAVID ARCHAMBAULT IIAUG. 24, 2016

Near Cannon Ball, N.D. — It is a spectacular sight: thousands of Indians camped on the banks of the Cannonball River, on the edge of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota. Our elders of the Seven Council Fires, as the Oceti Sakowin, or Great Sioux Nation, is known, sit in deliberation and prayer, awaiting a federal court decision on whether construction of a $3.7 billion oil pipeline from the Bakken region to Southern Illinois will be halted.

The Sioux tribes have come together to oppose this project, which was approved by the State of North Dakota and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The nearly 1,200-mile pipeline, owned by a Texas oil company named Energy Transfer Partners, would snake across our treaty lands and through our ancestral burial grounds. Just a half-mile from our reservation boundary, the proposed route crosses the Missouri River, which provides drinking water for millions of Americans and irrigation water for thousands of acres of farming and ranching lands.

Our tribe has opposed the Dakota Access pipeline since we first learned about it in 2014. Although federal law requires the Corps of Engineers to consult with the tribe about its sovereign interests, permits for the project were approved and construction began without meaningful consultation. The Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation supported more protection of the tribe’s cultural heritage, but the Corps of Engineers and Energy Transfer Partners turned a blind eye to our rights. The first draft of the company’s assessment of the planned route through our treaty and ancestral lands did not even mention our tribe.

The Dakota Access pipeline was fast-tracked from Day 1 using the Nationwide Permit No. 12 process, which grants exemption from environmental reviews required by the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act by treating the pipeline as a series of small construction sites. And unlike the better-known Keystone XL project, which was finally canceled by the Obama administration last year, the Dakota Access project does not cross an international border — the condition that mandated the more rigorous federal assessment of the Keystone pipeline’s economic justification and environmental impacts.

The Dakota Access route is only a few miles shorter than what was proposed for the Keystone project, yet the government’s environmental assessment addressed only the portion of the pipeline route that traverses federal land. Domestic projects of this magnitude should clearly be evaluated in their totality — but without closer scrutiny, the proposal breezed through the four state processes.

Perhaps only in North Dakota, where oil tycoons wine and dine elected officials, and where the governor, Jack Dalrymple, serves as an adviser to the Trump campaign, would state and county governments act as the armed enforcement for corporate interests. In recent weeks, the state has militarized my reservation, with road blocks and license-plate checks, low-flying aircraft and racial profiling of Indians. The local sheriff and the pipeline company have both called our protest “unlawful,” and Gov. Dalrymple has declared a state of emergency.

It’s a familiar story in Indian Country. This is the third time that the Sioux Nation’s lands and resources have been taken without regard for tribal interests. The Sioux peoples signed treaties in 1851 and 1868. The government broke them before the ink was dry.

When the Army Corps of Engineers dammed the Missouri River in 1958, it took our riverfront forests, fruit orchards and most fertile farmland to create Lake Oahe. Now the Corps is taking our clean water and sacred places by approving this river crossing. Whether it’s gold from the Black Hills or hydropower from the Missouri or oil pipelines that threaten our ancestral inheritance, the tribes have always paid the price for America’s prosperity.

Protecting water and our sacred places has always been at the center of our cause. The Indian encampment on the Cannonball grows daily, with nearly 90 tribes now represented. Many of us have been here before, facing the destruction of homelands and waters, as time and time again tribes were ignored when we opposed projects like the Dakota Access pipeline.

Our hand continues to be open to cooperation, and our cause is just. This fight is not just for the interests of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, but also for those of our neighbors on the Missouri River: The ranchers and farmers and small towns who depend on the river have shown overwhelming support for our protest.

As American citizens, we all have a responsibility to speak for a vision of the future that is safe and productive for our grandchildren. We are a peaceful people and our tribal council is committed to nonviolence; it is our constitutional right to express our views and take this stand at the Cannonball camp. Yet the lieutenant governor of North Dakota, Drew Wrigley, has threatened to use his power to end this historic, peaceful gathering.

We are also a resilient people who have survived unspeakable hardships in the past, so we know what is at stake now. As our songs and prayers echo across the prairie, we need the public to see that in standing up for our rights, we do so on behalf of the millions of Americans who will be affected by this pipeline.

As one of our greatest leaders, Chief Sitting Bull of the Hunkpapa Lakota, once said: “Let us put our minds together and see what life we can make for our children.” That appeal is as relevant today as it was more than a century ago.

David Archambault II is the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/opinion/taking-a-stand-at-standing-rock.html?_r=0

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png/1024px-Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png

[phill4paul]

And why are people from New York there?

Persons have been coming from all over America and the world to show support. Indigenous leaders from as far away as Hawaii and New Zealand have come to stand with the Sioux. I think over 300 tribes have representatives there.

[phill4paul]

I could get behind that. Is the pipeline for public or private/commercial purposes?

Energy Transfer Partners is a U.S. Fortune 500 natural gas and propane company, founded in 1995. Rick Perry sits on the board of directors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Transfer_Partners

[Carlybee]

So what exactly are these people protesting?

Pipeline contaminating the water on tribal lands.

[Origanalist]

This shit has gotten out of hand.

Yes. It's been ugly and it getting uglier all the time. It's unreal they hemmed them in on that bridge and started shooting water cannon on them in that kind of weather. I don't see how somebody hasn't been killed yet.

[specsaregood]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/opinion/taking-a-stand-at-standing-rock.html?_r=0

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png/1024px-Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png

these guys could use some guns...

[Carlybee]

I understand it's a private/commercial pipeline cutting through land that the Native Americans have a treaty with the U.S. government that says they won't trespass on that land. This has been going on for some time now. Last I heard, those protesters are being sprayed with water in freezing weather.

They're being pelted with rubber bullets too.

[Origanalist]

these guys could use some guns...

That's just what the people attacking them would love to see. It would give them an excuse to slaughter them.

[Carlybee]

What's so annoying though is that most of the Native Americans resisting this also continue to support the Democrats who have never done a darn thing for them. They also continue to believe that peaceful resistance will stop this which obviously it won't. Not that I am saying they should resort to violence but the naivety is pretty staggering. And the fact that organizations like Occupy Wall Street are now involved means that probably George Soros is now involved and a bunch of other people who really are just attention whores. That being said I'm not going up there so maybe I don't really have a right to say anything about those who have.

[phill4paul]

Unconfirmed but reports are she has lost her arm.

https://www.sott.net/image/s17/358862/large/sophia_2.jpg

https://www.sott.net/article/334478-DAPL-protester-loses-arm-after-being-shot-with-police-concussion-grenade

[specsaregood]

That's just what the people attacking them would love to see. It would give them an excuse to slaughter them.

and yet, the two last successful protests in the past couple years both had armed protestors....

[phill4paul]

That's just what the people attacking them would love to see. It would give them an excuse to slaughter them.

Exactly. The cops are claiming thaat she was injured because the protesters were making propane cylinder bombs. That bullshit doesn't wash because the protesters aren't even armed. Why would they build bombs if they are unwilling to defend themselves with small arms?

[jonhowe]

And why are people from New York there?

My friend is there protesting the abuse of native americans via reneged treaties and crony capitalist deals which harm them and their communities. I'm not even in complete agreement with the basic premise the 1st protesters there were protesting, but now that it has turned into a military style crackdown on dissent, I'm all for 'em. That's really the issue now; how SHOULD police handle such things (if at all). Certainly not how they have.

I also give my friend the benefit of the doubt on this issue. She knows all too well that the spirit of her people has been broken: she grew up in an Inuit village in Alaska where people just lay around, drink, and collect their government checks. She, alone in her family and village, left and made something of herself (we met waiting tables and serving drinks in NYC as we both paid our way through grad school).

[Origanalist]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cx9RgTXXEAAoUEI.jpg

[angelatc]

these guys could use some guns...


I think that treaty is no longer in effect, though. The map I saw showed the pipeline was not crossing the reservation.

Any time I hear people yammering about "corporate greed" and "potential environmental concerns" I automatically default to opposing them. Give me cheap oil. None of the other pipelines in that area are contaminating the water. Pipes are the cleanest most efficient way to transport oil.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/09/20/this-is-why-environmentalists-are-targeting-energy-pipelines-like-the-north-dakota-project/


That’s why environmental activists are targeting pipelines

Now, activists are trying something new — disrupting how the fossil fuel industry transports its products. Their objective is to prevent the fossil fuel industry from accessing the pipelines and railroad networks they need to move their products. The logic is simple; if products cannot be moved, they cannot be sold and will not contribute to global warming.

This “pipeline politics” does not ask governments to enact new regulations. Instead, it leverages the existing regulatory framework. Environmentalists have built coalitions with actors that are more interested in local issues than in global climate change. These actors fear that transportation of fossil fuels might contaminate their water resources, infringe on their fishing rights, or desecrate their sacred lands. Native American nations are an especially attractive ally, because they often have treaty rights over land and water use that the U.S. government is obliged to take account of.

This isn't some spontaneous outcry. It's being orchestrated by the forces in the UN that want us to live in caves. We, most of us. Some animals are more equal than others.

[angelatc]

My friend is there protesting the abuse of native americans via reneged treaties and crony capitalist deals which harm them and their communities. I'm not even in complete agreement with the basic premise the 1st protesters there were protesting, but now that it has turned into a military style crackdown on dissent, I'm all for 'em. That's really the issue now; how SHOULD police handle such things (if at all). Certainly not how they have..

The tragedy of the commons.

[Root]

Thanks Obama!

[Dr.3D]

I think that treaty is no longer in effect, though. The map I saw showed the pipeline was not crossing the reservation.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png/1024px-Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png
Looks like the dashed line is where they were going to put it, but the solid line is a revision. Seems to go right through their territory. Looks like the white folks didn't want it in their area, so it got moved through the Sioux territory.

[phill4paul]

I think that treaty is no longer in effect, though. The map I saw showed the pipeline was not crossing the reservation.

Any time I hear people yammering about "corporate greed" and "potential environmental concerns" I automatically default to opposing them. Give me cheap oil. None of the other pipelines in that area are contaminating the water. Pipes are the cleanest most efficient way to transport oil.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/09/20/this-is-why-environmentalists-are-targeting-energy-pipelines-like-the-north-dakota-project/



This isn't some spontaneous outcry. It's being orchestrated by the forces in the UN that want us to live in caves. We, most of us. Some animals are more equal than others.

Riddle me this bat-man: Why did the original pipeline, which crossed the river north of Bismark, get scrapped and moved south to just a hair above reservation lands? Because the people of Bismark were concerned about possible contamination to their water supply?

Pipes might be the most efficient way but certainly not the cleanest. A tanker truck can only carry so many gallons that may spill. A railway tanker may only carry so many gallons that may spill. When a pipeline breaks it can spill 10's of thousands of barrels worth. And if that spill is in a river way?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_the_United_States_in _the_21st_century.

Funny how the contractors received exemption from the Clean Waters Act when you or I could be jailed for capturing a rain barrels worth of water. So which animals is it that are more equals? In this case it would be the petroleum industry.

I don't believe this is as cut and dry as "The U.N. is against it, so I is for it."

[angelatc]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png/1024px-Black_Snake_in_Sioux_Country.png
Looks like the dashed line is where they were going to put it, but the solid line is a revision. Seems to go right through their territory. Looks like the white folks didn't want it in their area, so it got moved through the Sioux territory.

Of course it's about race. How "privileged" of me not to see it.

Seriously, like I said, the other map shows different lines. It was my understanding that the treaty of 1851 had been superseded bu more current treaties, due at least in part to Indian on Indian aggression. Wikipedia would seem to confirm this.

[Jamesiv1]

US Government breaking a treaty with Native Americans. Imagine that.

[angelatc]

Riddle me this bat-man: Why did the original pipeline, which crossed the river north of Bismark, get scrapped and moved south to just a hair above reservation lands?"

The engineers cited geological concerns. I'm not equipped to argue against that. But there are other pipelines already in place. So I think it's just drama whipped up by the paid environmentalists.

Now that the GOP in in charge, the pushback against cheap and efficient energy will be even stronger. As usual, I side with the capitalists.

[phill4paul]

The engineers cited geological concerns. I'm not equipped to argue against that. But there are other pipelines already in place. So I think it's just drama whipped up by the paid environmentalists.

Now that the GOP in in charge, the pushback against cheap and efficient energy will be even stronger. As usual, I side with the capitalists.

Fair enough. I'll take the opposing view and side with the environmentalists on this particular instance. Given our penchant to dig in our heels I doubt that either of us will change our views. Considering that some of the property on this pipeline was taken through eminent domain I'm going to have to say that I don't support capitalism in the form of government force. And there's no race privilege in this mix. Most of those opposing in Iowa are white farmers...


The Dakota Access pipeline is also facing legal resistance in Iowa, one of four states through which it passes. We go to Des Moines to speak with Bill Hanigan, an attorney representing 15 Iowa landowners who are contesting the project’s use of eminent domain under the guise that it would provide a public service, even as it threatens to pollute the state’s farmland and water supplies.


Well, the legal arguments are different, but the purpose and the power behind Dakota Access is the same. In North Dakota, they’re arguing about Native American artifacts. In Iowa, we’re arguing about the application of the Constitution. And what’s common between those two things is, first of all, we’d like Dakota Access to stop what they’re doing until everybody gets their day in court, so we can make our arguments before it’s too late, before it’s a moot point. Now, the commonality among it, in addition to seeking this stay, the commonality is the issue of the great economic disparity. So, you’ve got, again, these multibillion-dollar companies who have combined this joint effort to build this pipeline across Iowa and across North Dakota and Illinois and South Dakota. And the commonality is that great economic force behind those billions of dollars pushing this through, both with law firms and both with the power of politics and the money of politics, to get this thing on a fast track in all of these places, before Iowans and South Dakotans and North Dakotans and Native Americans have an opportunity to even get to the court to get the court to review this and say it’s not fair.

https://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/7/iowa_landowners_sue_to_stop_dakota

[angelatc]

Here's a map put out by "Inside Climate News," an organization that opposes the pipeline:

https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/icn_full_wrap_wide/public/RoutesDakotaAccessPipeline529px.png?itok=NMMq0k4I

According to the same article, the pipelines was moved for several reasons:


a number of factors, including more road and wetland crossings, a longer pipeline, and higher costs. Also listed as a concern was the close proximity to wellheads providing Bismarck's drinking water supply.

I am not a proponent of disallowing things because something bad might happen. If something bad does happen, then the injured parties have a right to sue. If I was in the oil pipeline business, I'd make sure that something bad did not happen. But I'd also make sure that my plan minimized my exposure if something tragic did indeed happen.

It isn't about race. It's about costs. Profit is the best measure of value that we have.

[Ender]

The engineers cited geological concerns. I'm not equipped to argue against that. But there are other pipelines already in place. So I think it's just drama whipped up by the paid environmentalists.

Now that the GOP in in charge, the pushback against cheap and efficient energy will be even stronger. As usual, I side with the capitalists.

Crony Capitalism is NOT capitalists. If they were true capitalists, they would have swung a deal with the Indians, not the government. The gov & their buddies have NO business on Indian grounds or any private property.

The US has a long history of "giving" land to the Indians and then taking it back, when resources appear. They did this a few years ago over coal.

http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/parker.html

[phill4paul]

Here's a map put out by "Inside Climate News," an organization that opposes the pipeline:

https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/icn_full_wrap_wide/public/RoutesDakotaAccessPipeline529px.png?itok=NMMq0k4I

According to the same article, the pipelines was moved for several reasons:



I am not a proponent of disallowing things because something bad might happen. If something bad does happen, then the injured parties have a right to sue. If I was in the oil pipeline business, I'd make sure that something bad did not happen. But I'd also make sure that my plan minimized my exposure if something tragic did indeed happen.

It isn't about race. It's about costs. Profit is the best measure of value that we have.

And I'm going to say that the main reason it was moved was because those that are richer on an economic and political scale took a "not in my back yard" stance. Given that the native Americans do not have this economic and political power then it does become about race. Whether you want it to be or not.

[phill4paul]

Crony Capitalism is NOT capitalists. If they were true capitalists, they would have swung a deal with the Indians, not the government. The gov & their buddies have NO business on Indian grounds or any private property.

The US has a long history of "giving" land to the Indians and then taking it back, when resources appear. They did this a few years ago over coal.

http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/parker.html

Exactly. This is about CRONY-capitalism.

[presence]

You might also enjoy: Banana Land: Blood, Bullets, and Poison (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503559-Banana-Land-Blood-Bullets-and-Poison&highlight=banana+land)

[angelatc]

And I'm going to say that the main reason it was moved was because those that are richer on an economic and political scale took a "not in my back yard" stance. Given that the native Americans do not have this economic and political power then it does become about race. Whether you want it to be or not.

Well, that's an opinion. But the people moving the pipeline put out what seem to be facts. We can clearly see that the revised route is indeed shorter. I think it is an accepted talking point that the well heads servicing Bismarck are now upstream of the pipeline as well. A quick peek at Google maps shows a lot more roads up north. I'm not able to quickly locate any information about wetlands. BUt that's 3 out of 4.

Again, there are already other pipelines in this region. I have not yet seen any argument that explains why this particular pipeline will fail and poison the reservation's water when all the others do not.

IN the meantime, the whole "community property" thing is communism. It never works in the long term. The sooner al property becomes private, the better off we are.

[Ender]

Well, that's an opinion. But the people moving the pipeline put out what seem to be facts. We can clearly see that the revised route is indeed shorter. I think it is an accepted talking point that the well heads servicing Bismarck are now upstream of the pipeline as well. A quick peek at Google maps shows a lot more roads up north. I'm not able to quickly locate any information about wetlands. BUt that's 3 out of 4.

Again, there are already other pipelines in this region. I have not yet seen any argument that explains why this particular pipeline will fail and poison the reservation's water when all the others do not.

IN the meantime, the whole "community property" thing is communism. It never works in the long term. The sooner al property becomes private, the better off we are.

Is this land private land?

Yes.

And that's the only answer that is relevant.

[Anti Federalist]

That's just what the people attacking them would love to see. It would give them an excuse to slaughter them.

Disagree.

That is the only time the fuckers tend to hang back and think first, when faced with a well armed and resolute group.

[Occam's Banana]

these guys could use some guns...

IIRC, the Oath Keepers offered to join them, but the offer was declined because they didn't want people with guns around ...

ETA: From thread http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503012-Where-Are-The-Oath-Keepers-Now


With everything that's going on with the suppression of the pipeline protesters, I cannot help but wonder where the Oath Keepers are.

via fedbook


Oath Keepers (https://www.facebook.com/OKNational/?rc=p) The Tribe has requested that we do not get involved as an org,
and they have a strict policy of no weapons.
We respect their wishes, their sovereignty, and their right to fight their fight their way.
Should their position change and they invite us out there, we would respond.

10/28/2016

[jonhowe]

Of course it's about race. How "privileged" of me not to see it.

Seriously, like I said, the other map shows different lines. It was my understanding that the treaty of 1851 had been superseded bu more current treaties, due at least in part to Indian on Indian aggression. Wikipedia would seem to confirm this.

This is one of the most naive things I've seen on this forum. The treaty is "superseded", I spit out some coffee I laughed so hard.

These weren't revisions made willingly by the natives. These aren't agreements made by equal partners. These "agreements" are dictates by the Federal Government against the actual possessors of the land. Yes, 150 years ago, but that doesn't really make much of a difference.

The very idea of "indian aggression"... I dont even know what to say. White settlers nearly wiped out the actual inhabitants of the entire continent, both through deliberate action and through unintentional germ warfare. White settlers made and reneged on treaties with the natives, slowly but surely cheating them out of their land and onto tiny, barren reservations. Settlers took their lands, forced them into reservations, and never paid what they owed, and then blamed it on "indian aggression" when the natives resorted to violence in their fight for freedom. It's shocking to see this kind of revisionist statist history being spread on this forum.


Edit: Since you suggested wikipedia would support your claim...

"The United States and Dakota leaders negotiated the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux[5] on July 23, 1851, and Treaty of Mendota on August 5, 1851, by which the Dakota ceded large tracts of land in Minnesota Territory to the U.S. In exchange for promises of money and goods. From that time on, the Dakota were to live on a 20-mile (32 km) wide Indian reservation centered on a 150 mile (240 km) stretch of the upper Minnesota River.
However, the United States Senate deleted Article 3 of each treaty, which set out reservations, during the ratification process. Much of the promised compensation never arrived, was lost, or was effectively stolen due to corruption in the Bureau of Indian Affairs (then called the Office of Indian Affairs). Also, annuity payments guaranteed to the Dakota often were provided directly to traders instead (to pay off debts which the Dakota incurred with the traders)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_War_of_1862

[phill4paul]

IIRC, the Oath Keepers offered to join them, but the offer was declined because they didn't want people with guns around ...

ETA: From thread http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503012-Where-Are-The-Oath-Keepers-Now

Personally I think they should have accepted that offer. The protesters could have continued practicing peaceful disobedience under the protection of the OK. Unfortunately, a young woman had to lose her arm. I have a feeling that reporting on this will now pick up steam because of it. I think the protesters WANTED the authorities to act in this manner to raise awareness much like the peaceful civil rights era protests. The state will ALWAYS overplay it's hand when confronted by peaceful protest.

[jmdrake]

From what I understand, they are Native Americans, protesting the pipeline going through their land.

Oh. I remember seeing people organizing for that protest online prior to the election.

[jonhowe]

Oh. I remember seeing people organizing for that protest online prior to the election.

Yes. This has been going on for months.

[Dr.3D]

Personally I think they should have accepted that offer. The protesters could have continued practicing peaceful disobedience under the protection of the OK. Unfortunately, a young woman had to lose her arm. I have a feeling that reporting on this will now pick up steam because of it. I think the protesters WANTED the authorities to act in this manner to raise awareness much like the peaceful civil rights era protests. The state will ALWAYS overplay it's hand when confronted by peaceful protest.
Sure wouldn't hurt anything if a few thousand peaceful Oath Keepers were there to keep the peace.

[jonhowe]

Sure wouldn't hurt anything if a few thousand peaceful Oath Keepers were there to keep the peace.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-23/hundreds-veterans-heading-standing-rock-defend-dapl-protesters-police


Hundreds Of Veterans Heading To Standing Rock To Defend DAPL Protesters From Police

...


“Come to Standing Rock Indian Reservation and hold the line with Wes Clark jr, Michael Wood Jr, Tulsi Gabbard and hundreds of other veterans in support of the Sioux nation against the DAPL pipeline. Bring Body armor, gas masks, earplugs AND shooting mufflers (we may be facing a sound cannon) but no drugs, alcohol or weapons.”

[presence]

IN the meantime, the whole "community property" thing is communism. It never works in the long term. The sooner al property becomes private, the better off we are.

thats really impossible.
property rights that extend beyond use:
10,000 feet deep; the top of the highest mountains; antarctica; the furthest stars and the center of the sun, etc.
will always be common; and there will always exist a frontier between what is common and what is privately held

what needs to go is PUBLIC property




Taking things a step further, I tend to lean market anarchist on private property; the State should not be in the title business; this should be a free market function... but that's a subject for another thread.

[devil21]

The federal corporation, United States (Inc.) lays claim to land solely to secure it as collateral for the banker's private debt issuance. Ron Paul was right, pretty much all that ails stems from the bankers.

This Standing Rock situation has the potential to escalate beyond a stand-off. One person on either side decides to squeeze off some hot ones and watch the hell out.

[phill4paul]

The federal corporation, United States (Inc.) lays claim to land solely to secure it as collateral for the banker's private debt issuance. Ron Paul was right, pretty much all that ails stems from the bankers.

This Standing Rock situation has the potential to escalate beyond a stand-off. One person on either side decides to squeeze off some hot ones and watch the hell out.

I think that is why the tribal leaders have called for a peaceful protest. One side has already "squeezed off some hot ones." A 21 yr. old lost her arm because of it. This should be all over the M$M. Just more fodder to continue to prove that M$M is all about the $$$.

[jonhowe]

I think that is why the tribal leaders have called for a peaceful protest. One side has already "squeezed off some hot ones." A 21 yr. old lost her arm because of it. This should be all over the M$M. Just more fodder to continue to prove that M$M is all about the $$$.

Exactly. They've done everything BUT shoot them. Spraying cold water on a freezing night is pretty damn brutal. The moment a protester pulls a gun...


That said, if they'd STARTED with guns, this shit wouldnt be going on.

[devil21]

I think that is why the tribal leaders have called for a peaceful protest. One side has already "squeezed off some hot ones." A 21 yr. old lost her arm because of it. This should be all over the M$M. Just more fodder to continue to prove that M$M is all about the $$$.

Yeah there's already been extreme provocations and it looks to be escalating. I doubt all the vets that show up will follow the advice to not bring any weapons however. I think the msm doesn't want to cover it at all because it's the feds being the asshats. Of course if any shots are fired they'll be all over it and blaming the protestors for starting it, while ignoring everything that has happened up until then.

[otherone]

That said, if they'd STARTED with guns, this $#@! wouldnt be going on.
yup.
http://www.americasfreedomfighters.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/download-5.jpg

[Occam's Banana]

Personally I think they should have accepted that offer.

So do I.


This should be all over the M$M. Just more fodder to continue to prove that M$M is all about the $$$.

I suspect another reason it isn't getting more coverage is that too many people might see the parallels between this and the Bundy Ranch standoff.

The US Dept. of Propaganda (aka, the MSM) can't risk the unwashed mundanes on the "left" and "right" realizing they have a much bigger enemy in common ...

[phill4paul]

I suspect another reason it isn't getting more coverage is that too many people might see the parallels between this and the Bundy Ranch standoff.

The US Dept. of Propaganda (aka, the MSM) can't risk the unwashed mundanes on the "left" and "right" realizing they have a much bigger enemy in common ...

They've already got the memes on social media out there. "If they were white and armed this wouldn't be happening." "This is what happens when you're not white."

It's a bunch of fucked up shit. The Bundy's asked the local tribe to come and secure their artifacts once the ran across them in ill storage. The tribe chose not to and instead sided with the BLM.

It's a shit show. Honestly, there is no better way to put it. The government(s), through misinformation and possible infiltration of every sect known in creation has created a situation that...is unprecedented in the history of mankind on a global scale.

[spudea]

I understand it's a private/commercial pipeline cutting through land that the Native Americans have a treaty with the U.S. government that says they won't trespass on that land.

That treaty came before statehood. So a question I have is was that treaty overridden during the state admission to the United States? The Enabling Act of 1889 appears to indicate the following:

"all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, and said Indian lands shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the Congress of the United States"

http://leg.wa.gov/History/State/Pages/enabling.aspx

This section is also acknowledged in the North Dakota state constitution.

[otherone]

They've already got the memes on social media out there. "If they were white and armed this wouldn't be happening." "This is what happens when you're not white."


There's lots of white folk protesting there. We know because the MSM ain't covering it.

[phill4paul]

There's lots of white folk protesting there. We know because the MSM ain't covering it.

Yes, there are. Many folks from differing nationalities, cultures, socio-economic divides. The meme shit the elites try to push aren't cutting it. I've engaged several social media contacts on this regard. They re-posted a meme talking about the shit that is going down at #nodapl and saying that the Bundy's got away with everything because they had guns. I pointed out that the Bundy's didn't get away with it. That the Bundy group never fired a single shot. And yet one of their members died. THAT has not happened at #nodapl. Yet.

[Dr.3D]

That treaty came before statehood. So a question I have is was that treaty overridden during the state admission to the United States? The Enabling Act of 1889 appears to indicate the following:

"all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, and said Indian lands shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the Congress of the United States"

http://leg.wa.gov/History/State/Pages/enabling.aspx

This section is also acknowledged in the North Dakota state constitution.
So everything was null and void just because the Native Americans didn't know about Statehood?
Do you suppose the Native Americans knew that would happen when they signed the treaty?
Sounds like a sneaky way of stealing land. Just a bit of legal juggling.

Now those Native Americans will know to get an attorney whenever they sign something.

[angelatc]

http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/11/23/really-injured-sophia-wilansky/

Apparently she may have been building a bomb using a propane tank.

[devil21]

But of course she was. There's no use for small propane tanks other than to make bombs. Can't hook them up to lanterns, portable cookstoves, heaters and other things needed for living in the middle of a friggin' field during a long term protest. Must be bombs, for real.

[angelatc]

But of course she was. There's no use for small propane tanks other than to make bombs. Can't hook them up to lanterns, portable cookstoves, heaters and other things needed for living in the middle of a friggin' field during a long term protest. Must be bombs, for real.

The article doesn't talk about an explosion in the area where the protesters retreat to during their off hours.

[phill4paul]

http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/11/23/really-injured-sophia-wilansky/

Apparently she may have been building a bomb using a propane tank.

Forensic evidence should prove things out. None of those propane containers have exploded in a manner to send shrapnel. They just look like fire damaged propane cylinders. If they were being used as IEDs there would have been other components. And why would a protesters be using IEDs when the leaders won't even allow them to arm themselves? Why build a bomb in the middle of a protest instead of building it before hand in a safe location? This explanation doesn't add up for me. But, I suppose, it is possible.

[angelatc]

Forensic evidence should prove things out. None of those propane containers have exploded in a manner to send shrapnel. They just look like fire damaged propane cylinders. If they were being used as IEDs there would have been other components. And why would a protesters be using IEDs when the leaders won't even allow them to arm themselves? Why build a bomb in the middle of a protest instead of building it before hand in a safe location? This explanation doesn't add up for me. But, I suppose, it is possible.

Maybe they were trying to detonate it, not build it?

There's a follow up here, which I found notable only for the fact that it mentions that no major media outlet questioned the narrative of the protestors. #FakeNews

[phill4paul]

Again, there are already other pipelines in this region. I have not yet seen any argument that explains why this particular pipeline will fail and poison the reservation's water when all the others do not.



From 2013...


Massive oil pipeline break under N.D. farmer's wheat field

North Dakota farmer who discovered an oil spill the size of seven football fields while out harvesting wheat says that when he found it, crude was bubbling up out of the ground.

Farmer Steve Jensen says he smelled the crude for days before the tires on his combines were coated in it. At the apparent break in the Tesoro Corp.'s underground pipeline, the oil was "spewing and bubbling six inches high," he said in a telephone interview Thursday.

What Jensen had found on Sept. 29 turned out it was one of the largest spills recorded in the state. At 20,600 barrels it was four times the size of a pipeline rupture in late March that forced the evacuation of more than 20 homes in Arkansas.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/massive-oil-pipeline-break-under-nd-farmers-wheat-field/

[phill4paul]

Maybe they were trying to detonate it, not build it?

There's a follow up here, which I found notable only for the fact that it mentions that no major media outlet questioned the narrative of the protestors. #FakeNews


Again, it's possible. I just don't see it as likely. The elders are adamant about there being no firearms so it would seem that they would be adamant about bombs. Not saying that certain elements there wouldn't use them. Or that planted elements might use them to discredit the protesters. I suppose that if some forensics are done we will see, depending on who does the forensics.

[angelatc]

Again, it's possible. I just don't see it as likely. The elders are adamant about there being no firearms so it would seem that they would be adamant about bombs. Not saying that certain elements there wouldn't use them. Or that planted elements might use them to discredit the protesters. I suppose that if some forensics are done we will see, depending on who does the forensics.

With a name like Sophia Wilansky, I am guessing she isn't a blonde-haired, blue-eyed Indian. She is either an imported professional protestor or an agent provocateur.

[angelatc]

From 2013...


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/massive-oil-pipeline-break-under-nd-farmers-wheat-field/Which caused much less damage than if it was say, in the Bismarck water supply. Nobody ever said that oil spills do not happen. Moving oil underground is the safest, most efficient, least expensive solution.

You can't go through life as a libertarian insisting that nothing bad should ever happen to anyone. That's not how libertarianism works.

[angelatc]

The company reached a settlement with the landowners, and had people working literally around the clock to fix the damage....a process which took YEARS.

http://www.inforum.com/news/3848193-two-years-after-north-dakota-oil-spill-dirty-pile-still-dwarfs-clean-pile


(Mrs. Steve) Jensen keeps close tabs on the cleanup site, where the motto is "As long as Miss Patty's happy, everyone's happy." She brings the workers homemade pie and they keep the office Keurig coffee maker stocked for her.

"The relationship between Tesoro and their consultants and subcontractors and the landowners is one of the best I've ever dealt with," Suess said. "That goes a long way to make this a smooth-running project."

The company declined to comment on a potential end date for the cleanup, which has become part of the Jensens' lives since Steve discovered the spill while harvesting on Sept. 29, 2013. Both the Jensens and health officials say Tesoro Logistics has been dedicated to restoring the land.

This is libertarian utopia, right here. There's pie!

[otherone]

Again, there are already other pipelines in this region. I have not yet seen any argument that explains why this particular pipeline will fail and poison the reservation's water when all the others do not.



I'm surprised the good people of Bismarck don't welcome the pipeline. Seems like the only logical solution. White folk don't mind it.

[angelatc]

I'm surprised the good people of Bismarck don't welcome the pipeline. Seems like the only logical solution.

So you don't actually have an answer to the question, which I will restate in what is undoubtedly a futile effort to advance the conversation.

There are already 10 other pipelines underground here. Why will this one in particular fail and poison the reservation's water while the other 10 do not?

[otherone]

So you don't actually have an answer to the question, which I will restate in what is undoubtedly a futile effort to advance the conversation.

There are already 10 other pipelines underground here. Why will this one in particular fail and poison the reservation's water while the other 10 do not?

Wasn't attempting to answer your question. Just asking why the original plan was nixed.

[Danke]

The Facts About the Dakota Access Pipeline That Protesters Don’t Want You to Know

http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/17/the-facts-about-the-dakota-access-pipeline-that-protesters-dont-want-you-to-know/

[angelatc]

Wasn't attempting to answer your question. Just asking why the original plan was nixed.

Ah. That was answered already. The new route is shorter, it crosses a lot less roads and wetlands, and is farther away from the Bismarck wellheads. So it's more efficient.

Also, the oil company is moving the reservation's wellheads, so they will also be upstream of the pipeline. Even though 10 other pipelines are currently in place, "endangering" the reservation's water supply.

[otherone]

Ah. That was answered already. The new route is shorter, it crosses a lot less roads and wetlands, and is farther away from the Bismarck wellheads. So it's more efficient.

Also, the oil company is moving the reservation's wellheads, so they will also be upstream of the pipeline. Even though 10 other pipelines are currently in place, "endangering" the reservation's water supply.

My comment was in response to the map. Can't see how a pipeline viewed as a threat in one area isn't a threat in another. I also pay attention to what the MSM and left websites choose not to cover. Salon.com, for instance, has one article on their main page IRT the pipeline...predictable, how Trump is involved. Unlike Occupy and #Nevertrump, this is not receiving traction. I do not know why.

[otherone]

The Facts About the Dakota Access Pipeline That Protesters Don’t Want You to Know

http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/17/the-facts-about-the-dakota-access-pipeline-that-protesters-dont-want-you-to-know/

from the article:
The original pipeline was always planned for south of Bismarck, despite false claims that it was originally planned for north of Bismarck and later moved, thus creating a greater environmental danger to the Standing Rock Sioux.

The real reasons for not pursuing the northern route were that the pipeline would have affected an additional 165 acres of land, 48 extra miles of previously undisturbed field areas, and an additional 33 waterbodies.

It would also have crossed zones marked by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration as “high consequence” areas, and would have been 11 miles longer than the preferred and current route.

these comments are conflicting.

[angelatc]

My comment was in response to the map. Can't see how a pipeline viewed as a threat in one area isn't a threat in another.



Well that's sort of a strawman. There's risk in everything. Minimizing risk while lowering cost is the whole game. If you think that it's possible to transport fuel with zero risk, then I don't know how to begin to address your concerns.

[angelatc]

from the article:
[B]The original pipeline was always planned for south of Bismarck, .

.

The original northern route was still south of Bismarck. Nope - I was wrong. You're right, that does not make sense.

[dannno]

The Facts About the Dakota Access Pipeline That Protesters Don’t Want You to Know

http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/17/the-facts-about-the-dakota-access-pipeline-that-protesters-dont-want-you-to-know/

That seems like a pretty good article, if it's all factually correct, except for the title and the last sentence.

The title insinuates that the protesters all know these facts, and they just want to protest to hurt oil companies and don't really believe that they are protecting the environment and water supplies for this tribe. Pretty sure they are almost all completely ignorant of these alleged facts. Even if they read that article, they would likely not believe it and think the oil company is just lying for PR reasons.

The last sentence just sounds icky.


The rule of law matters. We cannot allow lawless mobs to obstruct projects that have met all legal requirements to proceed

[otherone]

Well that's sort of a strawman. There's risk in everything. Minimizing risk while lowering cost is the whole game. If you think that it's possible to transport fuel with zero risk, then I don't know how to begin to address your concerns.

Isn't that what the protestors are doing? "Minimizing risk"?
I see the same issues in my neck of the woods. The Penneast pipeline is crossing 1/4 mile from my house, and people in the surrounding area are up in arms with the "not MY backyard" nonsense. I got into a debate last year with the dem mayor of a small town when she bleated that the big bad gas company can't push her county around because it was a wealthy area...they had means to fight it. My response was why would she be ok that the pipeline went through an impoverished area without the means to defy it? Her reply was that it was her intention that the pipeline be stopped entirely. :rolleyes:

[dannno]

from the article:
The original pipeline was always planned for south of Bismarck, despite false claims that it was originally planned for north of Bismarck and later moved, thus creating a greater environmental danger to the Standing Rock Sioux.

The real reasons for not pursuing the northern route were that the pipeline would have affected an additional 165 acres of land, 48 extra miles of previously undisturbed field areas, and an additional 33 waterbodies.

It would also have crossed zones marked by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration as “high consequence” areas, and would have been 11 miles longer than the preferred and current route.

these comments are conflicting.

It makes sense if there is more than one planning stage. Clearly they considered the northern route at one stage if they have all that data, but when the project was finalized they had likely already picked the southern route.

So they probably did this when they were considering several routes, and had no specific plan in place to go the northern route - the northern route likely never took precedence over any other route during the planning.

[angelatc]

Isn't that what the protestors are doing? "Minimizing risk"?

The issue falls back to property ownership. The land isn't on the reservation, and as I understand it the treaty they're citing has been replaced with new treaties.

[Pericles]

and yet, the two last successful protests in the past couple years both had armed protestors....

Nobody arrests an infantry battalion.

[Dr.3D]

The issue falls back to property ownership. The land isn't on the reservation, and as I understand it the treaty they're citing has been replaced with new treaties.
How do they replace a treaty if those they signed it with do not consent? Sounds like a contract violation to me.

[otherone]

How do they replace a treaty if those they signed it with do not consent? Sounds like a contract violation to me.

There is precedent:

http://www.statesymbolsusa.org/sites/statesymbolsusa.org/files/primary-images/USconstitutionWeThePeople.jpg

[angelatc]

How do they replace a treaty if those they signed it with do not consent? Sounds like a contract violation to me.

Those they signed it with were probably dead. The new treaties were negotiated to end wars between the Sioux and the Dakota.

[libertyjam]

How do they replace a treaty if those they signed it with do not consent? Sounds like a contract violation to me.

I always like to call it the US gov't playing the ol' Takes-Backsies switcheroo game.

[Dr.3D]

Those they signed it with were probably dead. The new treaties were negotiated to end wars between the Sioux and the Dakota.
Dead or not, a contract is still a contract. I'm sure the contract mentioned something about how long it is supposed to last.

[Dr.3D]

I always like to call it the US gov't playing the ol' Takes-Backsies switcheroo game.
Would be interesting to see the exact wording of the treaty.

[phill4paul]

Which caused much less damage than if it was say, in the Bismarck water supply. Nobody ever said that oil spills do not happen. Moving oil underground is the safest, most efficient, least expensive solution.

You can't go through life as a libertarian insisting that nothing bad should ever happen to anyone. That's not how libertarianism works.

You can claim that it is the most efficient, least expensive solution, but you refuse to understand that it is not the safest. What the hell are you talking about? Oil destroyed 7 football fields worth of farmland. It proves you wrong and that these breaks/spills happen. If it had happened in any water supply then it would have been worse. What was your point?

And do NOT lecture me on libertarianism. Oh, no girl, just do not. Eminent domain is not a part of libertarianism. Government regulation and specialization, Corp of Engineers, the fact that the Government owns the property the camp is set up on in the first place, none of this is libertarian.

[Natural Citizen]

You can claim that it is the most efficient, least expensive solution, but you refuse to understand that it is not the safest. What the hell are you talking about? Oil destroyed 7 football fields worth of farmland. It proves you wrong and that these breaks/spills happen. If it had happened in any water supply then it would have been worse. What was your point?

And do NOT lecture me on libertarianism. Oh, no girl, just do not. Eminent domain is not a part of libertarianism. Government regulation and specialization, Corp of Engineers, the fact that the Government owns the property the camp is set up on in the first place, none of this is libertarian.

As an aside kind of thing, the 2nd largest aquifer in the world and the largest in the United States of America is in the area which, of course, supplies drinking water to the surrounding states. That's a big deal.

In fact, the pipeline runs right on top of it. That's just brilliant. Einsteinian even. Heh.

[phill4paul]

As an aside kind of thing, the 2nd largest aquifer in the world and the largest in the United States of America is in the area which, of course, supplies drinking water to the surrounding states. In fact, the pipeline runs right on top of it.

I didn't know that. Thanks, that's a bit more than an aside. I don't know a whole amount regarding this. I'm really, just now, digging into it though I originally brought it up 2-3 months ago.

I'm not an eco-warrior. I don't have a problem shooting and eating a deer. There are property/treaty rights involved and there is a company that uses the power of government to achieve it's goal, from legislation (eminent domain) to law enforcement (fucking stormtroopers).

[Natural Citizen]

I didn't know that. Thanks, that's a bit more than an aside. I don't know a whole amount regarding this. I'm really, just now, digging into it though I originally brought it up 2-3 months ago.

I'm not an eco-warrior. I don't have a problem shooting and eating a deer. There are property/treaty rights involved and there is a company that uses the power of government to achieve it's goal, from legislation (eminent domain) to law enforcement ($#@!ing stormtroopers).



“Most of all, people don’t understand the Ogallala Aquifer is the second biggest water aquifer in the world,” Scott said. “It supplies five or six states with water in the United States, and its level in some places is only six feet underground.”


Ben Swann discusses....also Eminent Domain defined...http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?467727-Senate-approves-Keystone-XL-pipeline&p=5768032&viewfull=1#post5768032

[Natural Citizen]

While I'm thinking of it, mercantilism is the opposite of capitalism.

[Danke]

“Most of all, people don’t understand the Ogallala Aquifer is the second biggest water aquifer in the world,” Scott said. “It supplies five or six states with water in the United States, and its level in some places is only six feet underground.”


Ben Swann discusses....also Eminent Domain defined...http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?467727-Senate-approves-Keystone-XL-pipeline&p=5768032&viewfull=1#post5768032

How about more specifics. Where does it run within 6'?

Is that anywhere near the pipeline?

Also, with the numerous valves and safety measures, how much could escape in any particular leak? How far down can that go before any clean up effort, etc?

[phill4paul]

How about more specifics. Where does it run within 6'?

Is that anywhere near the pipeline?

Also, with the numerous valves and safety measures, how much could escape in any particular leak? How far down can that go before any clean up effort, etc?

Excellent point. I think all this needs to be settled BEFORE operations begin. The last big leak was 4 yrs. ago and it was around 23k barrels. It destroyed 7 football fields of farm land. Who's gonna decide? Government agencies?

[Danke]

Excellent point. I think all this needs to be settled BEFORE operations begin. The last big leak was 4 yrs. ago and it was around 23k barrels. It destroyed 7 football fields of farm land. Who's gonna decide? Government agencies?

7 football fields in ND is nothing, and the land is being restored, farmer compensated. My farmer cousin owns over 4000 acres of farm land.

[phill4paul]

7 football fields in ND is nothing, and the land is being restored, farmer compensated. My farmer cousin owns over 4000 acres of farm land.

So the goal of interaction with each other is do what the fuck you want, just compensate the other fella for it if you fuck up?

[Danke]

So the goal of interaction with each other is do what the fuck you want, just compensate the other fella for it if you fuck up?

I'm pretty sure the farmers had contracts to place pipelines on and/or underneath their land, with many clauses.

[angelatc]

You can claim that it is the most efficient, least expensive solution, but you refuse to understand that it is not the safest. What the hell are you talking about? Oil destroyed 7 football fields worth of farmland. It proves you wrong and that these breaks/spills happen. If it had happened in any water supply then it would have been worse. What was your point?

And do NOT lecture me on libertarianism. Oh, no girl, just do not. Eminent domain is not a part of libertarianism. Government regulation and specialization, Corp of Engineers, the fact that the Government owns the property the camp is set up on in the first place, none of this is libertarian.

I already told you I agree with you on the eminent domain. I think that all libertarians do. But I will stick to my contention that pipeline is the safest method of transporting it.

I never said spill and breaks never happen, so....

The farmland is being cleaned up, the property owner is being made whole, and there's pie. That's so libertarian awesome I can barely stand it.

[angelatc]

I'm pretty sure the farmers had contracts to place pipelines on and/or underneath their land, with many clauses.

This. They usually only resort to imminent domain when the land owner refuses their offers. Generally, it's called a pipeline easement lease and it generates income to the property owner.

[phill4paul]

I'm pretty sure the farmers had contracts to place pipelines on and/or underneath their land, with many clauses.

I'm sure they did. In ND. Gold rush, baby. The contracts in Iowa farmlands come down to fuck you or leave. What don't you understand about eminent domain? This ain't just about down river/aquifer injuns. Where is it you live again?

[angelatc]

This ain't just about down river/aquifer injuns.

According to the title of the thread, it's about the Dakota pipeline where the woman's arm was blown off, not the eminent domain issues in Iowa. That's kind of a moving goalpost, I think.

[phill4paul]

I already told you I agree with you on the eminent domain. I think that all libertarians do. But I will stick to my contention that pipeline is the safest method of transporting it.

I never said spill and breaks never happen, so....

The farmland is being cleaned up, the property owner is being made whole, and there's pie. That's so libertarian awesome I can barely stand it.

Well, I suppose that's something. Honestly, in this case, the farmer granted rights. When he said he looked over and say Jed Clampets "bubbling cude" he knew he struck pay dirt.

What I'm trying to convey is that an oil spill causes economic/social harm if it gets into the water supply. It's not relegated to a land spill. Can you understand this? If pipelines were rigged up with sensors that automatically throttled the flow if a leak was detected then that would be one thing. But the pipelines don't. It's not like it would be hard. It just costs money.

[phill4paul]

According to the title of the thread, it's about the Dakota pipeline where the woman's arm was blown off, not the eminent domain issues in Iowa. That's kind of a moving goalpost, I think.

There was some posts between the OP and your latest. Reading them to catch up might enlighten you a bit.

[angelatc]

Well, I suppose that's something. Honestly, in this case, the farmer granted rights. When he said he looked over and say Jed Clampets "bubbling cude" he knew he struck pay dirt.

What I'm trying to convey is that an oil spill causes economic/social harm if it gets into the water supply. It's not relegated to a land spill. Can you understand this? If pipelines were rigged up with sensors that automatically throttled the flow if a leak was detected then that would be one thing. But the pipelines don't. It's not like it would be hard. It just costs money.

There are already 10 pipes there that are not damaging the water. The federal guidelines call for extra diligence (for lack of the better word) when the water table is in play. Double walled pipes or something. The oil company claims they are also installing the most technologically advanced monitoring systems available. The oil company is moving the reservation's wellheads in an attempt to placate them.

At this point I believe that this isn't about anything other than professional anti-oil people having another tantrum, and there it literally no way any deal can be reached.

Libertarianism isn't stopping people from doing stuff because something bad might happen. It's ensuring that victims are compensated when property is damaged.

[oyarde]

7 football fields in ND is nothing, and the land is being restored, farmer compensated. My farmer cousin owns over 4000 acres of farm land.

See if he would like to play poker with me .

[Weston White]

When injustice aligns with cruelty, and heavy weaponry is involved, the results can be shameful and bloody.

Can't argue with that logic.


They drenched protesters with water cannons on a frigid night, with temperatures in the 20s. According to protesters and news accounts, the officers also fired rubber bullets, pepper spray, percussion grenades and tear gas. More than 160 people were reportedly injured, with one protester’s arm damaged so badly she might lose it.

This is describing what can only be considered acts of torture. And mere trespassing does not warrant the use of military/SWAT tactics. These willfully participating LEO agencies need to have their damned asses sued off--and FedGov needs to very seriously look at filing civil rights violations being committed against majority Indians by these agencies and local governments. This is a completely inappropriate response.


“We’re just not going to let people or protesters in large groups come in and threaten officers, that’s not happening,” said the Morton County sheriff, Kyle Kirchmeier.

Question: WHY IN THE HELL ARE YOU EVEN THERE DUMB ASS? YOU ARE NOT EVEN ENFORCING A COURT ORDER.


The Army Corps of Engineers has called for more study and input from the tribe before it decides on whether to grant a permit. The pipeline company has asked a federal judge to give it the right to proceed with its plan to lay pipe under the river. There is no firm timeline for either decision.

Yup, this about sums it up for me. Utterly dumbfounded!


Barring that, resolute protesters, a heavily militarized police force unwilling to budge, a company that refuses to consider an alternate route and an onrushing Great Plains winter — how can this possibly end well?

And circle gets the square!


SRC: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/opinion/power-imbalance-at-the-pipeline-protest.html?mabReward=A5&recp=1&moduleDetail=recommendations-1&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&region=Footer&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&src=recg&pgtype=article

[dannno]

Can't argue with that logic.



This is describing what can only be considered acts of torture. And mere trespassing does not warrant the use of military/SWAT tactics. These willfully participating LEO agencies need to have their damned asses sued off--and FedGov needs to very seriously look at filing civil rights violations being committed against majority Indians by these agencies and local governments. This is a completely inappropriate response.



Question: WHY IN THE HELL ARE YOU EVEN THERE DUMB ASS? YOU ARE NOT EVEN ENFORCING A COURT ORDER.



Yup, this about sums it up for me. Utterly dumbfounded!



And circle gets the square!


SRC: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/opinion/power-imbalance-at-the-pipeline-protest.html?mabReward=A5&recp=1&moduleDetail=recommendations-1&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&region=Footer&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&src=recg&pgtype=article

lol...nyt..

[phill4paul]

There are already 10 pipes there that are not damaging the water. The federal guidelines call for extra diligence (for lack of the better word) when the water table is in play. Double walled pipes or something. The oil company claims they are also installing the most technologically advanced monitoring systems available. The oil company is moving the reservation's wellheads in an attempt to placate them.

At this point I believe that this isn't about anything other than professional anti-oil people having another tantrum, and there it literally no way any deal can be reached.

Libertarianism isn't stopping people from doing stuff because something bad might happen. It's ensuring that victims are compensated when property is damaged.

Federal guidelines....

Oil company claims...

Are you still arguing liberarianism with me?

[PRB]

And why are people from New York there?

why not? if you believe in something, you'll drive or fly across the country to join people you support.

[Weston White]

So what exactly are these people protesting?

It seems the Sioux had largely been left out of the process for planning and building this structure, as well wavers were conveniently granted to the pipeline company so that federal regulations may be easily bypassed--with their underlying motivation being the potential contamination of their lands, source drinking water, destruction of their remaining sacred lands, denial of their basic civil rights and violation of agreed upon federal compacts.

[dannno]

why not? if you believe in something, you'll drive or fly across the country to join people you support.

Whoa, dude, you're bleeding pretty bad there.. need some medical attention??

[dannno]

It seems the Sioux had largely been left out of the process for planning and building this structure, as well wavers were conveniently granted to the pipeline company so that federal regulations may be easily bypassed--with their underlying motivation being the potential contamination of their lands, source drinking water, destruction of their remaining sacred lands, denial of their basic civil rights and violation of agreed upon federal compacts.

That's one side of the argument.. Angelatc posted a pretty good article outlining the other side of the argument.

[phill4paul]

That's one side of the argument.. Angelatc posted a pretty good article outlining the other side of the argument.

What side is that?

[Weston White]

Now that the GOP in in charge, the pushback against cheap and efficient energy will be even stronger. As usual, I side with the capitalists.

If you are using government officials and law enforcement to achieve your ends, to provide you with special exemptions, you are not a capitalist, you are nothing more than a plutocrat or robber baron. And when you continue to enforce your will upon a citizenry that openly contests your agenda you are among the wretched of the Earth.

[dannno]

What side is that?

The side where they weren't left out but chose to not attend the meetings where they would have had the opportunity to air their grievances. Reports of vandalism and theft of private property and gunfire from the protesters. The grenade that blew the girl's arm off turning out to be an device being built by the protesters. About how it isn't going through any of their land, and won't be risking contamination of watersheds, etc..

Of course I have no idea which side is correct, or if there are portions of both sides that are correct, I have no way of knowing that. I do know there are certainly profit motivations by the corporation building the pipeline, but there are also leftist motivations to oppose the oil industry at every turn, and virtue signalling... ahhh virtue signalling.

[Weston White]

That's one side of the argument.. Angelatc posted a pretty good article outlining the other side of the argument.

Fortunately, it is the wrong side of the argument. That side of the argument sunders reality into a hellish fiction of federalism and capitalism that should be straight out dropped kicked into someplace dark, dank, distant, foreign and forgotten.

[Weston White]

...Is there any valid reason why it begins heading out westard from Little Knife, rather than just following eastward around Garrison and Washburn?

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/23/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protest-map.html?ribbon-ad-idx=3&src=recg&mabReward=A5&recp=0&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Recommended&pgtype=article

[phill4paul]

The side where they weren't left out but chose to not attend the meetings where they would have had the opportunity to air their grievances. Reports of vandalism and theft of private property and gunfire from the protesters. The grenade that blew the girl's arm off turning out to be an device being built by the protesters. About how it isn't going through any of their land, and won't be risking contamination of watersheds, etc..

Of course I have no idea which side is correct, or if there are portions of both sides that are correct, I have no way of knowing that. I do know there are certainly profit motivations by the corporation building the pipeline, but there are also leftist motivations to oppose the oil industry at every turn, and virtue signalling... ahhh virtue signalling.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XARJFdyyfac

[angelatc]

If you are using government officials and law enforcement to achieve your ends, to provide you with special exemptions, you are not a capitalist, you are nothing more than a plutocrat or robber baron. And when you continue to enforce your will upon a citizenry that openly contests your agenda you are among the wretched of the Earth.

How is your anti-property rights "will of the people" not a Marxist position?

One of the few legitimate functions of government is to enforce contracts. Assuming that the contested land is not Indian property, then the people building the pipeline have the right to use the land in the manner in which they've contracted with the rightful and willing property owners.

[angelatc]

...Is there any valid reason why it begins heading out westard from Little Knife, rather than just following eastward around Garrison and Washburn?

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/23/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protest-map.html?ribbon-ad-idx=3&src=recg&mabReward=A5&recp=0&module=Ribbon&version=origin®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Recommended&pgtype=article

That's a good article, which pretty much answers your questions as well as confirms the things that I've read elsewhere. Thanks for pointing out out.

[phill4paul]

OK, so as we can see in this video the police aren't putting out fires. And that is not exactly a standard fire hose.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-Kbxfvno4w&feature=youtu.be

I have no idea what the taping of a cs grenade would cause it to do. Anyone familiar? Doesn't make sense to me.

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15241296_383434501997091_8497566793031668555_n.jpg ?oh=c8386d8ed4d2a2612361b1b89e33a6dc&oe=58CAFEB6

[Weston White]

How is your anti-property rights "will of the people" not a Marxist position?

One of the few legitimate functions of government is to enforce contracts. Assuming that the contested land is not Indian property, then the people building the pipeline have the right to use the land in the manner in which they've contracted with the rightful and willing property owners.

It is not only the Indians protesting this, there have been many other protests as well, many involving farmers/ranchers. It is not just about property rights, there are other considerations as well, noise, pollution, loss of access/right way, easements, property lost through eminent domain, etc.



That's a good article, which pretty much answers your questions as well as confirms the things that I've read elsewhere. Thanks for pointing out out.

How so does it answer my question? And seems to me heading south-eastward would be much more of a straight line and through more level terrain as well.

[libertyjam]

The side where they weren't left out but chose to not attend the meetings where they would have had the opportunity to air their grievances. Reports of vandalism and theft of private property and gunfire from the protesters. The grenade that blew the girl's arm off turning out to be an device being built by the protesters. About how it isn't going through any of their land, and won't be risking contamination of watersheds, etc..

Of course I have no idea which side is correct, or if there are portions of both sides that are correct, I have no way of knowing that. I do know there are certainly profit motivations by the corporation building the pipeline, but there are also leftist motivations to oppose the oil industry at every turn, and virtue signalling... ahhh virtue signalling.

Some of that may be propaganda and lies, how much ?:shrug:?

Here is what NV Assemblywoman Shelly Shelton has posted and her thoughts:

Linda Stapula Kreft Bullard posted the results of her internet research on the DAPL protests. I'd like to address those results here one by one so that Linda does not think my remarks are directed at her. They are directed at every patriot.
Linda Stapula Kreft Bullard - I'd like to answer your honestly obtained assessment two ways. First addressing the conclusions, then comparing them to the honestly obtained assessment of Cliven Bundy by his detractors.

Hopefully everyone will see the hypocrisy that Satan puts within our hearts to divide us and will throw off those chains and work towards unity.
We all learn by reading the opinions and comments of others. If there was anything I've learned in politics, it is to throw aside opinions and dig into facts first, then try to meet the parties involved and read their faces, hear their voices, and investigate their motives and hearts.
What we would hear in committee meetings all day was unfailingly one sided pleas that were usually pre-written by lobbyists who's job was to sway our opinion. The same thing happens on the internet. We have to separate the wheat from the chaff.

So here we go:
You said:
1) "the land where the pipeline is going is not owned by the NA and there are no burial grounds where the pipeline is going; their claims are completely false"
Bunkerville opponents said this:
"The land where Cliven Bundy is grazing is not owned by Cliven Bundy. He has no right to the land because he didn't pay his fees. His claims are completely false.
Both of these statements can easily be proven as true through internet blogs and opinion pieces depending on your beliefs about land and promises by the government. If you believe the government has a duty to keep its promises Both of these statements are false.
The 1934 Taylor Grazing act set up grazing management. It was intended to help stop the range wars and mediate between ranchers and "manage" the use of the land BETWEEN them, not eliminate grazing altogether.
The Grazing act was supported by the ranchers because it was a promise to MANAGE a renewable resource. It has turned into a means to mis-manage the resource and has resulted in the removal of all grazing in Clark County and elsewhere.
The government stopped managing and Cliven stopped paying them because of it. Cliven is more than happy to pay fees when the government does its job.
If you believe the government has a duty to keep their promises you will support Cliven Bundy.

The Sioux:
The 1851 Laramie Treaty was a promise to leave the Sioux alone within the boundaries of a territory that included much of western North and South Dakota. That territory was laid out in the treaty.
When gold was discovered (illegally by the government trespassing on that land) in the Black Hills, the government broke that treaty and even sent in troops to kill innocent Sioux who stood in their way.
They wanted that gold. (Just like they want the minerals under Cliven's and the Hammond's ranches.)
They did the same thing they did to Cliven. They made the Sioux boundaries smaller and smaller effectively "putting them out of business" on any productive land, just like they made Cliven's allotments smaller and smaller reducing his allotment of over 800 cattle down to less than 200, then to none.
The Sioux have an even better case than Cliven. They have at least won in court.
In 1980 the court decided the Government was wrong in taking that land. They awarded the Sioux a cash award to supposedly "make up for it". The Sioux to this day have REFUSED to take that payment with the argument that they don't want money, they just want their land back.
If you believe in property rights (the Sioux's land and Cliven's forage), you must support BOTH or face being double minded and hypocritical.
Regarding the burial grounds.
Today a line of Law Enforcement stands along the top of Turtle hill. They are there right now. Yesterday they put up a line of razor wire to keep the Natives off the hill.
It is undisputed that there is likely at least a few children still buried on that hill. Many adult bodies have already been relocated from that hill in the past. Those are the facts. The natives consider that hill sacred and go there to pray.
That is what they were doing in the video where they were all in the river being sprayed down by pepper spray. It was in that very water that my nephew experienced pepper spray for the first time.
They have always had access to that hill, even when it was owned by a private owner. Now the USFWS has bought that hill in the past few weeks from the private owner and the Gestapo stands guarding it like Fort Knox.
Are we going to believe a government that stands on a hill considered sacred and guards it with razor wire when they tell us they have not disturbed any burial sites?
I guess it will only finally hit home when the government padlocks your church and takes pastors captive like they have already done down south for violating the regulations against ministers addressing political topics.
When it does hit home it will likely be too late.
We wonder why do do not have unity, then refuse to unite ourselves.

Your next point:
"2) the pipeline is not as unsafe as the NA are trying to claim and in fact is safer than rail and other transport methods"
Opponents to Cliven Bundy said:
"Cliven's cattle is more detrimental to the environment than leaving the land unproductive is."
Cliven claims grazing is good for the environment, makes Desert Tortoises thrive, and reduces wildfires.
His opponents say their method is "safer" for the environment because cattle trample Desert Tortoises and eat all their food.
If you believe in the value of historical observation you will realize that both views are right and wrong. We tend to choose facts that agree with our opinion.
If Cliven is not grazing the Tortoises might have a field day for a while with no competition. The grasses may thrive for a while with no humans to walk on it. But when those wildfires start no wildlife is safe.
Pipeline transport is relatively safe. But when a huge spill occurs simple math takes over. A semi truck running off the road with 200 barrels of oil is going to result in less damage than a pipeline leak of 200,000 barrels.
Both views are right in some ways and wrong in some ways. It all depends on what your views are.
If you believe that the role of government is to stay out of our business and let business and people thrive you will support the right of Cliven to graze and the right of business to build a pipeline.
You will also support the right of the Sioux to keep the pipeline off of their property and for the right of DAPL to find another route to build the pipeline. You will also support the right of Cliven to use the forage that belongs to him and keep the BLM away from his cattle.

3) the NA refused or did not attend over 140 meetings where they could have brought up their concerns prior to the pipeline being approved
The Pipeline representative put forth this narrative in an interview with the NYT. It was claimed they tried to set up numerous meetings for input during the month of September 2014 and all were rejected.
He claimed it the Sioux had just let them know they were opposed earlier things may have been different. He called it "regrettable".
The Leader of the Sioux responded yesterday by posting publicly the minutes and a recording of an hour long meeting in September (The very time it was claimed they refused to meet) where they vigorously opposed the pipeline going through the disputed land.
The BLM claimed the Cliven "refused" to pay his fees and that he owed over a million dollars of those "fees". Simple math proves that, at the set AUM rate even if Cliven had paid his fees he could not possibly owe more than $350k for that time period.
If you believe that people will lie to get sympathy for their cause you must give the Sioux the benefit of the doubt as they have now proven the DAPL leadership to have lied.
And you will give Cliven the benefit of the doubt when he says he TRIED to pay his fees to the county and it was rejected.
When faced with making a decision it is my propensity to look with suspicion on the party that has been proven to lie. You will have to choose who you believe.
If you believe people who have already lied to your face early on, you will support the BLM and DAPL.
If you believe liars should be punished for putting false narratives out to the press just to get sympathy you will punish them by opposing the BLM and DAPL.

4) the NA refused offers of support by patriot groups
If you believe in property rights you must support their decision.
They are not saying you cannot exercise your second amendment rights. They are saying that IF you want to join them in this particular protest, they do not want participants who will bring firearms that will interfere with their chosen method of protest.
They are assuming that most patriots will come armed. And I'm sure everyone will agree that they are right in that assumption.
This is no different than Ammon banning the open carrying of long rifles at Malheur. It was his protest, his choice.

5) the NA protests are funded and orchestrated by change.org and other bad guy affiliations...
Perhaps my nephew should make some phone calls and get his check.
The fact is most there have little to nothing. They hitch rides back home when they rotate because many came without a dime or without enough gas money to get home.
We just sent money to him to ensure he had enough money to get home. Am I a part of the "bad guy affiliations" now?
There is a lot more to the story about those who are up there and the splits among them that I will report on later.
I would like to remind you that hundreds of stories have been written stating the Koch brothers funded and orchestrated Bunkerville, Malheur and even COWS (Coalition of Western States)
Any of you who are members, or have participated in these protests know for a fact there is no truth to these claims in spite of the thousands of "internet blogs" claiming to prove it.
After considering the source of the similar claims regarding the DAPL protest, and getting first hand reports on the conditions there, I believe the claims of where they are getting support are just as false as the Koch brothers claims.
Regardless of where support comes from this is America and we have the right to support any cause we wish. I just believe the charges are completely false.
In Bunkerville and Malheur many businesses with the same interests donated everything from food, to money, to travel expenses. How is that any different from businesses and individuals pledging support to the DAPL protesters?

In the end it comes down to one thing. If you are a patriot you believe in the right of protest and civil disobedience. On these rights lie the BACKBONE of our history.
We have every right to disagree with causes. But no patriot should be able to sleep nights as long as there is one FREE SPEECH ZONE within our borders.
It takes a lot of soul searching to leave pre-conceived ideas and prejudices behind and stand together.
But that is what we are going to have to do if we ever want to break the chains of oppression that our Government tries to bind us with daily.

https://www.facebook.com/nvleg/posts/702500103232467:0

https://www.reddit.com/r/NoDAPL/comments/5exdwu/the_standing_rock_sioux_have_released_an_audio/

Some good discussion in the comments on her page too.

[angelatc]

It is not only the Indians protesting this, there have been many other protests as well, many involving farmers/ranchers. It is not just about property rights, there are other considerations as well, noise, pollution, loss of access/right way, easements, property lost through eminent domain, etc.


.

I already stated I am not a proponent of eminent domain. I am only talking about this particular protest, in which a non-property owner is trying to prevent a property from installing a pipeline.

The libertarian solution to pollution is to sue for damages when it occurs. The Marxist solution is to deprive the property owner of rights for the perceived benefit of society.

[PierzStyx]

How is your anti-property rights "will of the people" not a Marxist position?

One of the few legitimate functions of government is to enforce contracts. Assuming that the contested land is not Indian property, then the people building the pipeline have the right to use the land in the manner in which they've contracted with the rightful and willing property owners.

Yet here you are supporting the government violating property rights it had secured by treaty to a people, using eminent domain to seize tribal property and selling it to corporate interests, and then using the local militarized police to attack those people when they assert their property rights.

You're on the wrong side of this argument if you truly believe in personal property rights. You are in fact arguing that the government can violate contracts, which a treaty is a type of, at will.

Your Marxist/libertarian comparison is wrong too. Insisting that the state has a right to steal and sell private property at will is a Marxist argument, defending it is defending Marxism. well, actually you're defending Fascism. People protesting against and refusing to submit to big government seizing their lands and justifying itself through laws it manipulates for its own good is the epitome of libertarian.

[otherone]

Give me cheap oil.// This isn't some spontaneous outcry. It's being orchestrated by the forces in the UN that want us to live in caves.


The Marxist solution is to deprive the property owner of rights for the perceived benefit of society.

Like cheap oil, so that we mightn't live in caves?

[Weston White]

I already stated I am not a proponent of eminent domain. I am only talking about this particular protest, in which a non-property owner is trying to prevent a property from installing a pipeline.

The libertarian solution to pollution is to sue for damages when it occurs. The Marxist solution is to deprive the property owner of rights for the perceived benefit of society.

So if your neighbor decides to operate of pig or diary ranch along the property line boarding your home, you would be happy as a pig in mud for them? If so, would you have any issues if Disneyplace bought several of your neighbors properties to open a new family theme park circumferencing your property?

This issue is not merely a case of a single property owner wanting to built a mill or structure on their land or mine for minerals, but about a property owner that is intent on directly impacting many other contesting property owners.

[libertyjam]

Would be interesting to see the exact wording of the treaty.

It has been found.

TREATY OF FORT LARAMIE WITH SIOUX, ETC., 1851.

http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/Vol2/treaties/sio0594.htm#mn5

[The Northbreather]

It seem logical to do a cost benefit analysis on the use of the tractor trailer/train model or the pipelines crossing under rivers model in the event of a severe earthquake.

It runs near a large fault I believe?