The side of environmentalism they don't make a fuss about on national news.

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
That's the part I don't understand. They know who these people were, right? Throw them in a chain gang until the mess is fixed.
Well they have arrested about 700 if not more over the course of protest so given that they would have at least that many names tied directly to it.

Send each of thema $1500 fine and call it a start on paying for cleaning up their own environmental mess they made!
Or add in the other ~ $20 - $25 million spent dealing with them and round the fines up to about $35 - $40,000 apiece and call it good!

As far as I am concerned they did not protest in a clean organized passive manner so they can pay the bill for their actions. :mad:
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,210
What if I told you all that was occupied until hundreds of storm troopers in battle gear swarmed the camp with assault rifles and military vehicles, and the wouldn't let anybody take their food or trash can in the paddy wagons?
 

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
What if I told you all that was occupied until hundreds of storm troopers in battle gear swarmed the camp with assault rifles and military vehicles, and the wouldn't let anybody take their food or trash can in the paddy wagons?
I'd call BS since my state is part of reality and not part not part of the galactic republic from star wars. :rolleyes:

Mostly if they were real true concerned environmentalists they would not have made such a mess to being with.
Hell even basic camping and wilderness living etiquette non environmentalists follow (or at least the ones I was taught as a kid) even if you're only in the local park for the fun of it dictates you don't make a mess where you stay let alone walk away from it leaving it for someone else to clean up if you're asked to leave.

And above all you certainly don't burn the damn place down on your way out even if you were kicked out. (You did look a the pictures in the links and read about the given timeline, ~ 3 weeks, they had to pick up their mess and clear out in right? ) o_O

http://www.npr.org/2017/02/22/516487940/dakota-access-pipeline-protesters-clean-up-as-deadline-looms

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2017/02/21/hardly-news-hundreds-protesters-remain-dapl-site-not-involved
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,210
The protesters didn't want to be forced out at gunpoint any more than the pipeline workers did. I'll bet if you ran the pipeline workers off with SWAT teams, they would leave behind all sorts of heavy machinery, pick-up trucks, and lunch boxes.:D

I guess my point is: Forced over-running of any encampment leaves a mess.
And don't worry about the ashes. A spring flood is coming and they will all be washed away in a much healthier way that washing the trash into the river.
 

Kermit2

Joined Feb 5, 2010
4,162
A true environmental steward would not have created that level of filth, nor let it accumulate to such huge proportions without working to keep it check.
Rich trust fund babies with no jobs. Who else has months to camp out and "protest"? I have a job, but, if I had been there I would pack out every human thing I packed in. THAT is what being a good environmental steward is all about.
We may not be able to fix everything but we can keep from making it worse by not polluting our own camp site.

They were warned endlessly that the police eviction was coming, and would rather pose like martyrs and be dragged away than pick up the filth and leave the mother of nature pristine, the way they found it. That choice was theirs. Don't hand me that excuse about arrest. They knew the score and chose to leave trash and human filth so they could look victimized on camera.
Hypocritical little punks. Crying about the environment and trashing it to prove how "woke" they have become.
 

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
The protesters didn't want to be forced out at gunpoint any more than the pipeline workers did. I'll bet if you ran the pipeline workers off with SWAT teams, they would leave behind all sorts of heavy machinery, pick-up trucks, and lunch boxes.:D
Seriously? I'm getting the impression you have not read one link yet. :(

The thing is, They weren't forced out until their deadline that was made clear weeks earlier was reached so it's not like they were just jumped without warning and marched out of camp at gunpoint one Wednesday afternoon. :rolleyes:

They stayed the knowingly and willingly (and adding to the mess the whole time) until forced out and even then they didn't go without causing as much damage and further mess as they could. :mad:
 

djsfantasi

Joined Apr 11, 2010
6,412
A true environmental steward would not have created that level of filth, nor let it accumulate to such huge proportions without working to keep it check.
Rich trust fund babies with no jobs. Who else has months to camp out and "protest"? I have a job, but, if I had been there I would pack out every human thing I packed in. THAT is what being a good environmental steward is all about.
We may not be able to fix everything but we can keep from making it worse by not polluting our own camp site.

They were warned endlessly that the police eviction was coming, and would rather pose like martyrs and be dragged away than pick up the filth and leave the mother of nature pristine, the way they found it. That choice was theirs. Don't hand me that excuse about arrest. They knew the score and chose to leave trash and human filth so they could look victimized on camera.
Hypocritical little punks. Crying about the environment and trashing it to prove how "woke" they have become.
If left alone, a true environmentalist steward would be ALLOWED to clean up that mess. When you have Imperial Storm Troopers forcing an evacuation, they assume the Cleanup responsibility. Not the protesters whose constitutional rights are being trampled.

Have you ever been in a large protest? Or do you pretend to understand the dynamics?
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,210
Seriously? I'm getting the impression you have not read one link yet.
I've been watching this for months and it all comes back to the beginning: "Hey, you didn't ask us if you could build a pipeline on our land."

I know you have an axe to grind because this is your kind of work and your neighborhood, so consider this: If I installed a fracking site on your land and gave you three weeks to get out or be killed, would I be whining that you didn't clean up properly before you ran for your life?
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,210
As far as I am concerned they did not protest in a clean organized passive manner so they can pay the bill for their actions. :mad:
As far as I'm concerned, there was no need to spend millions of dollars on heavily armed attackers against unarmed people. The only ones who brought guns were the government and they could have avoided all of this by honoring the treaty they have with the local Indians. The whole thing was initiated and escalated by the people with guns. If I come to your house and hold a gun to you head, will you pay me?
 

killivolt

Joined Jan 10, 2010
778
Whats interesting about Global Warming was my perspective, I got sucked in a few years back and now I'm not, it happened when they pulled all the R12 off the shelfs and made me eat the cost of repair, suddenly my Customers were few. But, all these long boring "Threads" going on forever have opened my eye's to how we get scammed by Gov.

Maybe we should let the Libs spend some of their Carbon Credits on the Cleanup, I think the DNC has a few Million in their Coffers as well, they use for campaign funding.

kv
 

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
"Hey, you didn't ask us if you could build a pipeline on our land."
But it was never on their land. ~1/2 a mile away ( so close they could taste the money) but technically no. Not on their land. Private land that its owners agreed they could cross except for the 1094 foot corridor owned by the federal government who also said they could cross it as well. :rolleyes:

http://www.voanews.com/a/dakota-access-pipeline/3563592.html

best they could do was claim it as sacred ground and make a fuss and hope the liberal media picked it up and ran with it. :(

http://www.voanews.com/a/dakota-access-pipeline/3563592.html

Also there is already a pipeline (two actually and they are 42" lines not a single 30") crossing even closer to the tribal land than this one that no one seems to want to talk about.

http://standingrockfactchecker.org/fact-check-missouri-river-crossing/

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

I know you have an axe to grind because this is your kind of work and your neighborhood, so consider this: If I installed a fracking site on your land and gave you three weeks to get out or be killed, would I be whining that you didn't clean up properly before you ran for your life?
Contrary to you and a few others assumptions I have no axe to grind with anyone other than those who can't be bothered to get their facts about the real stories behind what did go on and why right.
So yes, unlike most everyone else, I do in fact live close enough to this fiasco to have a fair understanding of what is really being played out and why Vs what the well known less to be honest media and other liberal idiots with an axe to grind say went on. :(

The fact is the crossing was never on reservation land nor was any sacred ground violations done (that hadn't already happened or dealt with when the first two pipelines went through there in the 1980's even closer to the tribal land than this one is.) :rolleyes:

There already is an active pair of larger pipelines already crossing the river in that same location but even closer to the tribal land and suposed sacred sites than this one, (nobody wants to acknowledge or talk about.)

Many of the protesters were anything but passive in their actions and did break many laws hence the need for the higher level security, law enforcement and eventual national guard participation and actions done in response. :oops:

The pipeline companies and all related agencies did make active and repeated efforts to fully comply and even go above and beyond minimal requirements to cater to the protestors and tribal wants but that has been largely ignored as well.

The real engineering and technical info on the crossing. https://daplpipelinefacts.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
Whats interesting about Global Warming was my perspective, I got sucked in a few years back and now I'm not, it happened when they pulled all the R12 off the shelfs and made me eat the cost of repair, suddenly my Customers were few. But, all these long boring "Threads" going on forever have opened my eye's to how we get scammed by Gov.
Same boat here. I was on the on the other side for a while too but being I like to debate and win I tended to do more research than most to back myself up with credible factual data.

Problem was, the more I dug for facts to show what the concerns were likely real the less and less real legitimate data, but more misrepresentative/exaggerated/outrightly made up information, I found being used to support the cause or claimed science behind it. :mad:

A post I made another forum about this problem that pretty much sums up my present stand on things.

"
"Are we in the U.S. just stupid? Stubborn? Don't care about the environment? There are certainly folks here in the U.S. that are stupid, stubborn, or don't care about the environment (and many that are all three), but I don't really think that's the reason why."

I don't see not caring about the environment having much of any real legitimate validity in how our country approaches its operation and overall actions any more. To be honest we pretty much had all the justifiable and gainful environmental protection and cleanup of past issues pretty well done going on 20 years or more now.

Collectively since the 1960's we as a nation stepped up on the cleanup and proper management of our overall environment to a level that has shown itself to be more than justifiable sufficient.

The problem is since that point in time corruption, greed, special interests and blatant bureaucratic bloat with the sole intent to grab as much control over as much as possible in order to squeeze as much money out of everything as possible got into the system and started taking things too far and the average uneducated public not only fell for it but bought into it for everything they had.

Now we are at the point that too much of our national policy and general operations on or regarding supposed environmental issues or what can be weakly associated with or claimed to be relevant to it, goes completely counter to proper environmental good stewardship.

Too much has become run by corrupt entities backed by doe eyed bleeding heart idiots who have near zero formal or accurate scientific or technical knowledge and understandings of the actual causes they hold so dear to to the point that largely the actual environment has very little to absolutely nothing to do with environmental regulation and actions. Pure money and power grabbing special interest and bureaucratic greed is what's running the show now.
Pretty sad when so much of environmentalism has become and is driven now by the very things they hated and were against and the 'anti environmentalists' like me are more realistic advocates of true environmental responsibility and proper rational good stewardship of the land than they are. :(
 
Last edited:

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,210
But it was never on their land.
According to CNN, "38 miles of the Dakota Access Pipeline cuts through territory that still belongs to Native Americans, based on a 1851 treaty signed at Fort Laramie in Wyoming."

More "Fake News" from CNN?
https://www.romper.com/p/what-everyones-forgetting-about-standing-rock-the-dapl-protests-21948

Then there is only this to worry about:
“Since 2010, “over 3,300 incidents of crude oil and liquefied natural gas leaks or ruptures have occurred on U.S. pipelines."

http://www.blacklistednews.com/185,000_U.S._Oil_Pipelines_Leak_EVERY_SINGLE_DAY/54467/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Hmmm...one dirty campsite vs 3,300 oil leaks.
I guess the oil companies have the high ground on the environmental argument.:rolleyes:
 

killivolt

Joined Jan 10, 2010
778
Same boat here. I was on the on the other side for a while too but being I like to debate and win I tended to do more research than most to back myself up with credible factual data.

Problem was, the more I dug for facts to show what the concerns were likely real the less and less real legitimate data, but more misrepresentative/exaggerated/outrightly made up information, I found being used to support the cause or claimed science behind it. :mad:

A post I made another forum about this problem that pretty much sums up my present stand on things.

"

Pretty sad when so much of environmentalism has become and is driven now by the very things they hated and were against and the 'anti environmentalists' like me are more realistic advocates of true environmental responsibility and proper rational good stewardship of the land than they are. :(
It was reported in the news today 63˚F in Antartica, but that exact location of the recording happens to be closer to Africa.

kv
 

Thread Starter

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
According to CNN, "38 miles of the Dakota Access Pipeline cuts through territory that still belongs to Native Americans, based on a 1851 treaty signed at Fort Laramie in Wyoming."

More "Fake News" from CNN?
https://www.romper.com/p/what-everyones-forgetting-about-standing-rock-the-dapl-protests-21948
Show me an actual map and proof it is land owned by them plus that they didn't sign right of way agreements to it if it is. Until then it's just unfounded or misrepresented hearsay.

In fact,here you go. Point out exactly where the point of land ownership contention is with that pipeline is on this map.
Dakota-Access-Pipele-Private-Land-Map-2.png
https://daplpipelinefacts.com/dt_articles/the-dakota-access-pipeline-does-not-cross-land-belonging-to-the-standing-rock-sioux/

And a bigger interactive map to help you out too incase you are having dificulty finding and figuring out exactly where the disputed tertory that ~38 mile of pipeleine is in. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/23/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protest-map.html :eek:

Now regarding treaties like the 1851 one,

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/treaty-resonates-in-dapl-discussion/article_e9bd6a47-e14e-507e-bb0a-8ee29eb30c9e.html

The actual treaty.
(Short version) http://www.uwyo.edu/robertshistory/fort_laramie_treaty_of_1851.htm

(long version)
http://standingrock.org/fort-laramie-treaty/

I don't see anything that relates to oil pipelines in it but then it was written in 1851 some 166 years ago but I do see some plausible issues that may go against the tribes.

http://www.insidesources.com/what-the-dakota-access-pipeline-protesters-arent-telling-you/

http://inter-american-law-review.law.miami.edu/land-anyway-dakota-access-pipeline-protests-arent-oil/

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/23/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protest-map.html

Plus there's that damn inconvenient problem with other treaties plus the Indian Appropriations Acts that came after that one like in 1876 after there was that whole Great Sioux war, Battle of little Bighorn and several others, that pretty much changed the validity and honoring of the Treaty of 1851 or at least what land and rights to it they have anyway.

Especially regarding what land was from that point forward legally acknowledged as being tribal land as property of the US government and its citizens. You know, that ~38 mile stretch? Not really there's any more and hasn't been seen as such by the US government since ~1876 and later since we did agree to pay them ~$106 million back in the 1980's for the land we took in the 1889 amendments to the Indian Appropriations Acts. )(still disputed by them but technically a very weak standing point given they want ~$11 Billion for it now. $10 billion of specifically ear tagged payment for the removal of nonrenewable resources at at that which pretty much says in writing they will would and did happily sell out any and every bit of their environment and what's in it if and when they get offered enough money. ) :oops:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Sioux_War_of_1876

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

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

Also technically the tribes appear to have in fact voted for not against giving land access for the pipeline based on what their own minutes of their own council meeting regarding the actual pipeline on December 2nd of 2015 anyway.



From,
http://web.archive.org/web/20160208172848/http://mhanation.com/main2/elected_officials/elected_officials_tbc_resolutions_2015.html


Hmmm...one dirty campsite vs 3,300 oil leaks.
I guess the oil companies have the high ground on the environmental argument.:rolleyes:
Strawman defence and you damn well know it, but.....

Yes pipeline leak just like your vehicles (and you're doing what and spending how much of you time and resources yourself to counter the leakage of things you own?). o_O

However unlike you and the protestors the pipeline owners do their best to prevent leaks and do in fact step up and take the necessary responsibility and put forth and active effort to fix and clean up after them as they happen.

I don't mind a rational counter argument but at least show the courtesy to validly prove your accusations plus include the full story behind them as well. If I can do it you can too. :oops:
 
Last edited:
Top