Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 jasper76 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.

These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.

You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.

In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.

So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.

If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.

Thousands of people coming into your state from all ovver the country to a demonstrate against highly politicized construction project = common sense need for a police presence. Insults like "keyboard commando" also don't absolve the police of their duties.

If the Standing Rock Sioux PD had jurisdiction then yes, they should have provided LOE to keep the peace and protect workers and demonstrators.

And where are they going to get these police? You seem to have a lack of understanding about rural environments.

You're telling me the South Dakota state police and local police dept. can't muster 5-10 police officers to provide a presence?

 jasper76 wrote:
You're telling me the South Dakota state police and local police dept. can't muster 5-10 police officers to provide a presence?

Well... that would be illegal. Jurisdictional problems.

(Sorry, joke went right over my head)

 djones520 wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
You're telling me the South Dakota state police and local police dept. can't muster 5-10 police officers to provide a presence?

Well... that would be illegal. Jurisdictional problems.

depends if on reservation.
Indian territory. not sure cops have say on that land unless its serious crimes

 jhe90 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
You're telling me the South Dakota state police and local police dept. can't muster 5-10 police officers to provide a presence?

Well... that would be illegal. Jurisdictional problems.

depends if on reservation.
Indian territory. not sure cops have say on that land unless its serious crimes

This happened in North Dakota. I get that Jasper had a brain fart when he typed South, I was just being snarky.

Yeah my bad, North Dakota

 skyth wrote:
From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.

Wow. Well feth that company.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 skyth wrote:
From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.

Wow. Well feth that company.

Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

If we have any "clean" sources of electrical generation within the next fifty years, it will be nuclear fusion. But as we found out with nuclear fission, getting it off the ground is going to be costly.

Indeed, and sadly because of Brexit certain EU funding of Fusion is in the air at the moment. Luckily the scientist are still working on it, and still finding a way around that temperature issue.

Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.

 Wolfstan wrote:
Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.

Perception I see from those outside of the US looking in. Not bashing you.
If Native American remains/artifacts are located in the general vicinity of the construction area (there's a Federal Law involving this) then all work has to stop. If it is a significant find then the project has to be redrawn avoiding the area by a good margin. Since a river is involve generally arrow heads can be found on banks will not stop the project. If say a smattering of "Midden" is found then its a different story.

 Wolfstan wrote:
Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.

I put up a link earlier regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (yes I know, Canada, but the pacification and subjugation of the First Nations is a North American issue), and you will find there was a concerted and deliberate effort by the government of Canada to eradicate First Nations culture. This began basically with the first colonists, but the official program began in 1876 and didn't end until 1996.

 djones520 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 skyth wrote:
From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.

Wow. Well feth that company.

Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.

Well, that is of course, said with the assumption that it's true. If it's not than I resend it.

 djones520 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 skyth wrote:
From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.

Wow. Well feth that company.

Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.

The only "confirmation" that I've personally seen is that some of the Natives who filed those papers are saying that among the sites dug up, were some of the ones covered under the paperwork....

Personally, that this is even a fething issue tells me to give that company the middle finger.

Looks like the court is allowing work to continue.....

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/the-latest-tribe-s-request-to-stop-work-on-pipeline/article_587cc856-d479-5e95-9b7e-cce9553aa61e.html

TLDR

Boasberg wrote that after reviewing the extensive record, the corps has likely complied with the National Historic Preservation Act while the tribe has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the court could issue.

The corps argues in court records it “followed a robust tribal consultation process” and said Standing Rock withdrew from a scheduled site visit of the proposed Lake Oahe crossing, a dammed section of the Missouri River.

So one could take away that the Standing Rock Sioux had a chance to participate in the review process and didn't and that whatever claims of historic and cultural significance could not be substantiated, i.e. proof of burial sites, etc.

It sounds like the whole burial ground argument has been a smokescreen and/or delaying tactic or cynical attempt to generate sympathy and outrage towards a group that quite frankly has become all too easy to vilify among liberals and environmentalists, the big bad profiteering and pollution promoting petroleum industry.

Left unresolved seems to be the claims of disruption or potential for damage to local water supplies. However given my knowledge of pipelines and pipeline construction, I think there is less of a case there than there was with the disturbing of burial and significant cultural sites.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
Looks like the court is allowing work to continue.....

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/the-latest-tribe-s-request-to-stop-work-on-pipeline/article_587cc856-d479-5e95-9b7e-cce9553aa61e.html

TLDR

Boasberg wrote that after reviewing the extensive record, the corps has likely complied with the National Historic Preservation Act while the tribe has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the court could issue.

The corps argues in court records it “followed a robust tribal consultation process” and said Standing Rock withdrew from a scheduled site visit of the proposed Lake Oahe crossing, a dammed section of the Missouri River.

So one could take away that the Standing Rock Sioux had a chance to participate in the review process and didn't and that whatever claims of historic and cultural significance could not be substantiated, i.e. proof of burial sites, etc.

It sounds like the whole burial ground argument has been a smokescreen and/or delaying tactic or cynical attempt to generate sympathy and outrage towards a group that quite frankly has become all too easy to vilify among liberals and environmentalists, the big bad profiteering and pollution promoting petroleum industry.

Left unresolved seems to be the claims of disruption or potential for damage to local water supplies. However given my knowledge of pipelines and pipeline construction, I think there is less of a case there than there was with the disturbing of burial and significant cultural sites.

Well I mean petroleum is a major contributor to global warming and they do make obscene profits

 feeder wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?

Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.

A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.

Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.

Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?

Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife. There's a (not)good reason we've done it way up North in the Shield, where only seasonals and Natives can see the desolation.

Hydro is renewable energy, and technologically more efficient than any other secondary means of energy production, which is why I still advocate it against most other options. But it is not, at all, clean.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife.

There is a 1250MW hydro plant where I grew up that has pretty limited environmental impact (it made a pre existing loch a bit bigger). It all depends on the scale.



Solar power is clearly a dead end.....

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife.

There is a 1250MW hydro plant where I grew up that has pretty limited environmental impact (it made a pre existing loch a bit bigger). It all depends on the scale.

I could hook up a small generator at my dad's, and of course I wouldn't cause the destruction of the lake. But I wouldn't power much more than the lights and a few other fixtures.
Hydro-Quebec produces 36 643 MW as of 2014, and we still only answer 40% of the energy needs of la belle province. We also sell a lot to Ontario, New-England and New-York, but it remains for each of those clients a secondary, altough reliable source. To do so we had to condemn 10s of thousands square km to inondation, which caused mercury accumulation from the decomposition of so much biological matter and ruissellement. To the point where lots of Northern-Quebec fishes no longer meet toxicity standards, and raised concerns for local Natives health. Other events, such as the drowning of over ten thousands caribous in the reservoirs shows that there remains a constant ecological cost to their installation.

Hydro is not a realistic approach to the North American energy need, not unless we (not so)collectively decide to say a final feth you! to Mother Nature.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
Hydro is not a realistic approach to the North American energy need, not unless we (not so)collectively decide to say a final feth you! to Mother Nature.

The thing with hydro also, at least in the US, is that there aren't too many more places we can actually put them... Most of the dammable rivers have been. And most of them (such as Hoover, Bonneville, Colville, etc) were all built before we really took wildlife considerations into account. We are now having to try and go back and redesign/remodel existing dams to allow for fish populations to migrate again

I still maintain that based on what I've read, nuclear is still the best mass producer of electricity we have. It has a proven track record of safety compared to coal/gas and even hydro power.... The instances of failures, emergencies, etc. while more severe, have been much fewer.

It seems the US is taking a page out of Putin's favourite book now:

Arrest warrant for Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman over North Dakota pipeline protest
Democracy Now! journalist and producer Amy Goodman has been issued an arrest warrant for covering the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s North Dakota pipeline protests.

The Native American tribe and their supporters are protesting a proposed $3.8 billion Energy Transfer Partners pipeline, which would carry oil across four states, because of concerns that the 470,000 barrels of oil passing through their land each day could poison the water.

While reporting from the site of the protests last week, Goodman captured private security contractors using dogs and pepper spray on the demonstrators in a broadcast that went viral.

On Sunday, Goodman announced that she had received an arrest warrant for alleged criminal trespass during the protest. The misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of a $500 fine and 30 days’ imprisonment.

“This is an unacceptable violation of freedom of the press,” Goodman said in a statement on Sunday. “I was doing my job by covering pipeline guards unleashing dogs and pepper spray on Native American protesters.”

Democracy Now! is an independent news channel that has covered the Native-American-led protests in depth, capturing the clashes between private security and protesters and showing a man with bite marks and a dog with a bloody mouth.

Goodman’s arrest warrant was reportedly discovered by attorneys looking into the arrest of Red Warrior Camp protest organizer Cody Charles Hall, who was arrested for criminal trespass on Friday.

Thirty-eight people have been arrested at the protests, Native News Online reports.

Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein also received an arrest warrant, along with her running mate, Ajamu Baraka, for scrawling graffiti on equipment during the protests.

https://www.rt.com/usa/358995-amy-goodman-arrest-dakota/

Strange I have not heard anything about it in mainstream Western media. If this had happened in Russia they'd be having a field day in screaming "Oh that dastardly dictator Putin! Look how evil and repressive Russia is!".
Well, let me take their place then and say it is a damn shame that journalists can't do their job properly in the US without having to fear being fined and arrested. Land of the free? More like land of the prisons.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
It seems the US is taking a page out of Putin's favourite book now:

Arrest warrant for Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman over North Dakota pipeline protest
Democracy Now! journalist and producer Amy Goodman has been issued an arrest warrant for covering the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s North Dakota pipeline protests.

The Native American tribe and their supporters are protesting a proposed $3.8 billion Energy Transfer Partners pipeline, which would carry oil across four states, because of concerns that the 470,000 barrels of oil passing through their land each day could poison the water.

While reporting from the site of the protests last week, Goodman captured private security contractors using dogs and pepper spray on the demonstrators in a broadcast that went viral.

On Sunday, Goodman announced that she had received an arrest warrant for alleged criminal trespass during the protest. The misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of a $500 fine and 30 days’ imprisonment.

“This is an unacceptable violation of freedom of the press,” Goodman said in a statement on Sunday. “I was doing my job by covering pipeline guards unleashing dogs and pepper spray on Native American protesters.”

Democracy Now! is an independent news channel that has covered the Native-American-led protests in depth, capturing the clashes between private security and protesters and showing a man with bite marks and a dog with a bloody mouth.

Goodman’s arrest warrant was reportedly discovered by attorneys looking into the arrest of Red Warrior Camp protest organizer Cody Charles Hall, who was arrested for criminal trespass on Friday.

Thirty-eight people have been arrested at the protests, Native News Online reports.

Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein also received an arrest warrant, along with her running mate, Ajamu Baraka, for scrawling graffiti on equipment during the protests.

https://www.rt.com/usa/358995-amy-goodman-arrest-dakota/

Strange I have not heard anything about it in mainstream Western media. If this had happened in Russia they'd be having a field day in screaming "Oh that dastardly dictator Putin! Look how evil and repressive Russia is!".
Well, let me take their place then and say it is a damn shame that journalists can't do their job properly in the US without having to fear being fined and arrested. Land of the free? More like land of the prisons.

Could be worse she could be in another country only to be poisoned by radioactive material

I have seen stories of this. Stein loses any credibility with me as a candidate when she trespassed and started putting graffiti on someone's property.

Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.

Relapse wrote:
I have seen stories of this. Stein loses any credibility with me as a candidate when she trespassed and started putting graffiti on someone's property.

She had credibility with you before this?

Prestor Jon wrote:
Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.

That's not altogether true, tho. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) established that the freedom of the press warranted a different application of legal standards. Perhaps, if something as important as the Espionage Act can be set aside, then trespass laws can too.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.

That's not altogether true, tho. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) established that the freedom of the press warranted a different application of legal standards. Perhaps, if something as important as the Espionage Act can be set aside, then trespass laws can too.

Not very likely. In the NYT case the Pentagon Papers were leaked by a 3rd party to the NYT and the NYT wanted to publish the classified documents without having any of their staff arrested so they challenged the US govt in court for the right to publish without being prosecuted. The NYT reporters didn't break any laws to get the story, the story was given to them by a third party that broke the law the Times just wanted to tell the story. In this instance a reporter broke the law deliberately and doing so had no bearing on the story. The reporter could have stood by and reported the events without being an active participant in the crimes. She chose to commit crimes she can deal with the consequences.

Yep....journalists are not immune to trespassing (or any other laws) for that matter. Just because you say you are a journalist or work for the "public" press doesn't give you carte blanche to go onto private land or residences without permission. I believe that was why there were security guards w/ dogs there. I don't know about you, but if someone has effectively told me "don't trespass" or "beware of dog" on private property, its my own fault if I get hurt, bit, or prosecuted.

As for other developments, soon after (minutes in fact) the Federal court ruling it looks like the Executive branch, i.e. Obama administration made the Judicial branch's decision moot by blocking further construction on the part of the pipeline that crosses federal lands, which was described as a sliver and asked the company to voluntarily suspend work on the pipeline on 40 additional miles that are on private land that is on either side of the sections that they have blocked further construction on.

I am guessing given that the order literally came down minutes after the court ruling that this was set to go in anticipation of a negative ruling. My guess is that this is more about a cooling off period than anything portending the permanent stop to construction given that the pipeline builder and operator would have a good case for damages from the government (i.e. the costs of delays, relocation, etc.) as it was properly permitted and construction having since commenced accordingly.

My guess is that the pipeline company will be extorted....ur I mean encouraged fund "archaeological assessments and retrieval" and water and sewer facilities for the Indian reservation after the government "consults" further with the Indian tribe with the lion share of the funds being committed to Indian owned or operated businesses. I wonder if this is the "game changer" that the Indian representative was referring too in interviews.

Peaceful protest is worth squat when the company is ripping into your ancestral sacred ground.

Where was the peaceful protest when you were being taxed without representation?