|
Dead Reckoning posted:The company is in line to eat a $100,000 fine, so it's not as though they're walking off scott free. Which isn't even pocket change for them. That's like pocket lint. Its a price they would gladly pay because of the profits at stake for the pipe. They treat it as a cost of doing business.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Well I mean Waters hypocrisy is kind of obvious when he laments the natives for working outside the system. While also decrying the Bank for working within the system. It's almost like he wants the pipeline built and doesn't give a gently caress about the Indians. Though to be fair, that is American as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
I had a discussion the other day on if Obama's inaction on the DAPL would taint his legacy at all. We came to the conclusion that it won't because no one cares about Native Americans enough to make it a big deal. It really is a terrible situation, but I think the pipeline will eventually be built.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:When an oil construction project fails to file the proper paperwork, upsetting regulators, everything's fine, someone just dropped the ball, it happens Like... if the project had plowed over the site instead of documenting the heck out of it and getting approvals for route changes to preserve the site from the appropriate regulators before proceeding then I would be a lot harder on the company. But as it actually happened, what is there to make of it other than a paperwork error?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Like... if the project had plowed over the site instead of documenting the heck out of it and getting approvals for route changes to preserve the site from the appropriate regulators before proceeding then I would be a lot harder on the company. But as it actually happened, what is there to make of it other than a paperwork error? Because oil companies are often bad, they are invariably evil even in cases where they actually weren't evil. Seriously though, I can't believe the situation has gotten so stupid the oil company of all people are shaping up to be the good guys here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 20:58
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
CommieGIR posted:Which isn't even pocket change for them. That's like pocket lint. What's your alternative? That the fine structure should be such that filing paperwork with the wrong office will put even the biggest company out of business?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If they're just assholes who decided to bulldoze a site and throw their money around like the bad guys in an after school special, why did they bother to notify the SOHP and re-route the pipeline? Why didn't they just stop construction and notify them right away instead of waiting 10 days? Serious question: Can they do no wrong?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Umm... read the article, I guess, and the linked letter. The site in question was identified, construction was routed around, the ND State Historic Preservation Office signed off on the changes... everything was done above board except that whoever was responsible for notifying the ND Public Service Comission dropped the ball (and I can only imagine how much they are hating life now) because that person was hand holding a bunch of VIPs visiting the site.  you take a letter to the commission from the companies' lawyer that makes excuses for their fuckup at face value, but the protestor must be lying. please note that the company did not notify NDPSC even after an inspector noticed the site and the reroute. the commission had to contact the company about what the hell was going on. http://www.psc.nd.gov/database/documents/14-0842/225-010.pdf the NDSPC learned about all of this from that report, not the company, which is why they're loving pissed here's part of the company's permit requirements: quote:. Company understands and agrees that if any cultural resource, paleontological site, archeological site, historical site, or grave site is discovered during construction, it must be marked, presen/ed and protected from further disturbances until a professional examination can be made and a report of such examination is filed with the Commission and the State Historical Society and clearance to proceed is given by the Commission as you can see, they massively failed their requirements, almost certainly because they did not want to halt construction and they would've had to if they followed the law and reported to the commission. also what are you on about follow up? the guardian has contacted whoever they can. they attempted to contact the company and get their side of things, but got no comment and so had to rely on their lawyer's letter. they got the NDPSC's side, which is pissed off, and they got the protestors' side, which is also pissed off. the site is on private property and the guardian can't just go in there and start investigating without the permission of the company that refused to speak to them, so exactly what follow up did you expect them to do? Condiv fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
so with hillary having lost is obama gonna do the right thing and reroute the pipeline or is he gonna sit back and let the standing rock sioux get trumped?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
Condiv posted:so with hillary having lost is obama gonna do the right thing and reroute the pipeline or is he gonna sit back and let the standing rock sioux get trumped? quote:Trump’s financial disclosure forms show the Republican nominee has between $500,000 and $1m invested in Energy Transfer Partners, with a further $500,000 to $1m holding in Phillips 66, which will have a 25% stake in the Dakota Access project once completed. The information was disclosed in Trump’s monthly filings to the Federal Election Commission, which requires candidates to disclose their campaign finance information on a regular basis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:If Obama somehow stops the pipeline's construction, Dakota Access will just chill until God Emperor Trump ascends to the throne in January and then So yeah, destroy the environment to appeal to the vain hopes of people trapped in a dying industry until the air spontaneously combusts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Condiv posted:
Every detail in that letter is verifiable by the regulators themselves and (with more work but still possible) by third parties. Lying about events that can be verified in a public and written document that is guaranteed to be scrutinized would be a really dumb thing for a company to do. So yeah, I'm willing to take that account on face value since either the SHO, the comission, or a number of other parties with no reason to obfuscate could call it out as bullshit in about two minutes if bullshit it was. Combine that with the fact that the site in question was preserved and yeah, it really seems like it was just a paperwork error. Condiv posted:also what are you on about follow up? the guardian has contacted whoever they can. they attempted to contact the company and get their side of things, but got no comment and so had to rely on their lawyer's letter. they got the NDPSC's side, which is pissed off, and they got the protestors' side, which is also pissed off. the site is on private property and the guardian can't just go in there and start investigating without the permission of the company that refused to speak to them, so exactly what follow up did you expect them to do? Dude how can you be so uncritical? Regarding following up on the dispute between NDPSC and the company: They could have for instance, at minimum, contacted the SHO to verify the claims made in the letter. Then they could have reported "company's account of events is corroberated by x y z" or alternately "company's claims were bullshit". Or they could have printed "SHO refused to talk to us" if the SHO declined to comment for whatever reason. Regarding printing the unverified claims of a rando protester: At minimum, the reporter should have gotten specific locations and followed up with the two regulators on the scene. Maybe consulted the planned pipeline route to see if they were accounted for, or had already been surveyed, or whatever. The reporter could have gone with the protester at some point, since presumably she had some way to get into position to see the artifacts she claims to have seen, and verified that there were in fact artifacts there. The reporter could have flown a drone over the site. Or asked protesters more willing to risk a mild rebuke than he was to take pictures. Or basically anything other than uncritically accept the word of a protester. If it were actually true, a story about the pipeline company intentionally destroying historical sites would be really big news. News worth verifying. The fact that none of that work is referenced in the article suggests it's just clickbait. Like....read this. Just read it. The Guardian Article posted:Cheryl Angel, a Sicangu Lakota tribe member who has been at the Standing Rock camps since April, said she has personally seen what appear to be indigenous artifacts in the line of construction and that she believes the pipeline operators have intentionally hidden discoveries of sacred sites and knowingly destroyed them. This cries out for some kind of verification. There are facts to dig up here - facts that could confirm or deny a narrative that would be a really big deal if true. But there's no attempt by the reporter to do any of that. Why doesn't that raise a giant red flag for you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
Oh hey a DAPL thread. I am up the road from this and everyone I've met seems confused about wtf is going on at the site. I talked to one of the members of a neighboring reservation and he was perplexed why a bunch of white people were protesting. Also, the consultants in the psc report "keitu engineers & consultants" are morons, or at least their boss is, so if their report looks lovely, that's why.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
Any truth to the claims that Trump is deeply invested in the DAP? Because if so the cause is probably in deep poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
Tias posted:Any truth to the claims that Trump is deeply invested in the DAP? Because if so the cause is probably in deep poo poo. Gobbeldygook posted:If Obama somehow stops the pipeline's construction, Dakota Access will just chill until God Emperor Trump ascends to the throne in January and then
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
Tias posted:Any truth to the claims that Trump is deeply invested in the DAP? Because if so the cause is probably in deep poo poo. I spoke with my mom (instructor at a Lakota tribal college) last night, she had a lot of students and other people she knows who participated in the protests and occupation and of course it's a huge topic of debate on the reservation. The occupation is basically over, done, finished by Trump being elected President. There was some hope that Obama in his lame duck term (after the election) or Clinton would intervene, but with Trump there is zero chance. According to her everyone is despondent and gloomy and have basically admitted it's now a lost cause.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:I spoke with my mom (instructor at a Lakota tribal college) last night, she had a lot of students and other people she knows who participated in the protests and occupation and of course it's a huge topic of debate on the reservation. Also some news that isn't about natives being run over and having guns pointed at the,: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/dakota-pipeline-protests/army-corps-engineers-says-pipeline-construction-can-t-continue-without-n683871
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:It's a problem if you live in society and benefit from infrastructure. =/ I see you suffer from a category mistake here. Not all infrastructure is public infrastructure. Public infrastructure is good and often necessary. This project, while industrial transport infrastructure, is not public infrastructure. It is a privately owned concern's method of easing their shipping costs and increasing throughput. It is not in any way intended serve the public good save indirectly via providing minor employment effects. Edited to avoid oncoming pedantry. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I see you suffer from a category mistake here. If the property owner agrees without recompense or disagreement, then the easement was willing and the property owners are happy to have it. When property owners and neighbors and everyone in the immediate area flips their poo poo, on the other hand... http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/10/woman-arrested-property-land-stolen-dapl/ At least one of the anti-DaPL links I came across today defines an easement as, "an agreement to pass through land to provide a public service," what service is this pipeline giving those folks? I've had all kinds of easements on my property as a kid growing up, helping my folks flip properties etc.. And one of the really, really nasty tiny details about an easement - is that if you DO NOT fight it for a long enough period (if you were aware of its existence, or harm, or annoyance factor, or not!) then you just have to knuckle under and eat poo poo and allow literally unlimited numbers of people to cross "your" (cuz it sure as gently caress isn't any longer) property in perpetuity and also now you're the lawbreaker if it gets past the point of reasonable traffic to you, as the person who bought and paid for that land which is now a public access throughfare http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/easement So basically it's your land - you still pay taxes on it! But it's no longer yours to use, and it's probably stuck in the middle of your own ACTUAL land, so you've got to figure out ways to cross it (bridges, tunnels, agreements to bury the line under the ground so it's not in your loving way 24/7, etc) and now you can be charged if you happen to get in the way of whatever stranger shows up on your property at whatever time of the day or night for any reason, to do whateverthefuck they deem "necessary". In my personal experience, the word "easement" can be a poison bullet to a property purchase - because nobody wants to buy a piece of property that some third-party assholes can cross at will and whim, and have no recourse. I've seen my own parents both refuse deals because of annoying easements with sketchy neighbors, or simply sell off as son as an easement caught them flat-footed and they got sick of dealing with it coyo7e fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:
I'm there; this isn't true. People are wintering. Win scenarios are being explored. As it's generally understood in the camp; The Army Corps of Engineers still has to give the final approval for one part of the pipeline. The Corps has issued an invitation to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe to participate in talks that intend to address the concerns of the Standing Rock People. DAPL has filed a lawsuit, asserting that they have no obligation to participate in those talks. They intend to start digging with or without the Army Corps' consent. A /lot/ more people deserve a seat at that table. Every stakeholder from here to Mississipi; every Nation. The Turret still stands; the War Camp to the north will /not/ Parler.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
DAPL has to have the pipe finished by the end of the year. It has contacts to move oil locked in at 2014 prices. If they miss the deadline they move oil at market price. Which is to say probably not at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:DAPL has to have the pipe finished by the end of the year. It has contacts to move oil locked in at 2014 prices. If they miss the deadline they move oil at market price. Which is to say probably not at all. In that case it's essential to keep blocking. They only understand what hits them on the wallet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:DAPL has to have the pipe finished by the end of the year. It has contacts to move oil locked in at 2014 prices. If they miss the deadline they move oil at market price. Which is to say probably not at all. So delay is a viable win strategy? Sweet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:So delay is a viable win strategy? Sweet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:So delay is a viable win strategy? Sweet. I'm tempted to flow with the happiness, but with Trump invested in the pipeline and having stated that he's going to move them forward, things could get really ugly. On the other hand, I get the impression that the presidency is pretty overwhelming for him, so let's hope he forgets to move in along the way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm tempted to flow with the happiness, but with Trump invested in the pipeline and having stated that he's going to move them forward, things could get really ugly. Note that the cops are apparently trying to break up crowds of protestors tonight with water cannons. In sub-freezing windy temps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
https://www.facebook.com/kevin.happychappy/videos/1806825289589975/ Went on for several hours. My understanding is that the protesters were attempting to move barricades set up by police, who then opened up on them. Police had them pinned on the bridge and were spraying them with tear gas, water, and rubber bullets for hours, as you can see in the above. I'd heard that the LRAD was also deployed, but didn't see it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Drone footage looks pretty damning, straight up super-soakering the crowd with the hose. Reminds me of civil rights era footage from school  https://twitter.com/rtyson82/status/800575599974682624
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
All cops are bastards imho
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/dakota-pipeline-protests/dakota-pipeline-protesters-authorities-clash-temperatures-drop-n686581quote:sheriff's spokesman Rob Keller told NBC News that no water cannon were deployed. He said the water was being sprayed from a fire truck to control blazes as they were being set by activists. Hmmm I wonder why they would want to shoot down the drone's recording them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
The drone was on fire, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
https://www.democracynow.org/2016/11/21/headlines/standing_rock_100_injured_after_police_attack_with_water_cannons_rubber_bullets_mace A few excerpts: quote:In North Dakota, more than 100 Native Americans and allies fighting the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline have been injured by police, who attacked them with rubber bullets, tear gas, mace canisters and water cannons in freezing temperatures Sunday night. The attack was on a bridge near the main Oceti Sakowin resistance camp. I love how the sheriff's spokesman is claiming a) the protests set the fires (not police flares) and b) they were trying to put out the fires and c) no water cannons were deployed when there's footage of them using water cannons to pretty clearly just hose down protestors while completely ignoring the nearby fires. I imagine the spokesperson lying to the media will have literally no consequences at all, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Souai posted:Drone footage looks pretty damning, straight up super-soakering the crowd with the hose. Reminds me of civil rights era footage from school Nothing more American than celebrating Native American Genocide Week by killing a few Native Americans and their sympathizers
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
god bless america
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Is there any footage which shows these supposed fires being set, or blazing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
I saw a still photo in one article.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I saw a still photo in one article. Of course if it's sub-freezing temperatures, building a bonfire not near the lines of conflict is not exactly an offensive maneuver
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
I'm still trying to find some verification for the pictures, but I'm hearing that a woman's arm was mangled by a concussive grenade. The pictures are especially gorey, and I've seen them circulated on my friends' Facebook pages back home. There's a gofundme page for the victim, but I'll wait to share it until I can get some more sources for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:Of course if it's sub-freezing temperatures, building a bonfire not near the lines of conflict is not exactly an offensive maneuver
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If you are illegally occupying someone's land and setting fires, you don't get some kind of cold weather exception. But enough about the US Government! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 06:16
|
|