Author Topic: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest  (Read 4295 times)

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« on: October 28, 2016, 12:15:07 AM »
Anyone else been following this? It really feels like a massive civil rights' movement.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/27/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protests/index.html

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dakota-access-pipeline-authorities-start-arresting-protesters-new-camp-n674066

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/live-updates-from-the-dakota-access-pipeline-protests-oct-27/

TL;DR - A massive number (thousands?) of Native Americans have been camping out on Federal land for the past few months to stop the construction on a massive oil pipeline that runs from the Bakken oil fields of North Dakota to Illinois. Rev. Jesse Jackson, Mark Ruffalo and Shaliane Woodley and Green Party Presidental Candidate Jill Stein have all traveled to march with the "largest gathering of Native American people" of the century.


One of my friends raises some rare breed of horses in the area, so I've been perusing their Facebook posts for the past few months, but it seems like the national news has finally started to cover this. Things came to a head yesterday, complete with protestors shooting at law enforcement and hurling Molotov cocktails as others chained themselves to equipment.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #1 on: October 28, 2016, 10:42:30 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protests/index.html

More updates. Protestors fired weapons at law enforcement. This is crazy!
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2016, 01:10:15 PM »
I have been following this for quite a while. The behavior of the SD local and state government has been pretty appalling. Many racist overtones with references to the way it is treated, and also a good window into the pervasive militarization of our local police departments. Why the hell does a small town need that kind of hardware?

In addition to the recent arrests, it is worth noting the intimidation and blocking actions against journalists attempting to cover events. The highest profile is probably the warrant and arrest of Amy Goodman of Democracy Now. A judge threw it out, luckily.
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/17/breaking_riot_charges_against_amy_goodman

It is particularly galling that the mass arrests at DAPL were occurring the same day that the Bundy's and their crew were acquitted on a large number of the charges against them.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2016, 01:47:06 PM »
I have been following this for quite a while. The behavior of the SD local and state government has been pretty appalling. Many racist overtones with references to the way it is treated, and also a good window into the pervasive militarization of our local police departments. Why the hell does a small town need that kind of hardware?

Apparently they're pulling law enforcement from five states, so it may not be the locals bringing that much hardware.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2016, 01:53:03 PM »
I have been following this for quite a while. The behavior of the SD local and state government has been pretty appalling. Many racist overtones with references to the way it is treated, and also a good window into the pervasive militarization of our local police departments. Why the hell does a small town need that kind of hardware?

Apparently they're pulling law enforcement from five states, so it may not be the locals bringing that much hardware.

Thanks for that. I'd much rather believe that it is a compilation of hardware, though I'm still not sure why they would need even one Humvee.

Rubyvroom

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2016, 02:17:15 PM »
I would suggest getting all sides of the story by also watching Unicorn Riot live feeds to supplement what you are being fed by mainstream news. I hadn't heard of Unicorn Riot before this year, but their live streams often offer much needed details that are left out of the snippets in the news. 

For example, where were these major news outlets last month when the protesters were deliberately attacked by security dogs? There is plenty of video of unmarked security guards lunging into into crowds of protesters with attack dogs coming out of the crowd with their mouths bloody. Major news outlets didn't seem to have much to say about that.

I can't confirm of course (I'm not there) but I saw a video today where people were suggesting that authorities are now deliberately arresting medics that are clearly marked via their clothing and markings on their vehicles that they are there only to serve as medics, not protesters. The ethical ramifications of much of what I'm seeing on these live streams, including the intimidation tactics against journalists makes me very uneasy.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2016, 02:50:01 PM »
High Country News has had some decent coverage. This article in particular is worth a read because it places the current events in historical context, and highlights the relationship between state, federal and tribal law. Because of the role of treaties, there are some very important jurisdictional issues that are often unappreciated.

http://www.hcn.org/articles/Reckoning-at-Standing-Rock

Silverado

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 132
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2016, 07:18:09 PM »
"A people should know when they are conquered "

It's been covered pretty well here in the midwest. I wonder if the groups really expect to change something or not. There are lots of examples of it going both ways i guess. With the effort they are putting in, I'd think there would be some areas where they could really make some change that might even offset the risk of the pipeline.

Vertical Mode

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 408
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Boston, MA
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2016, 08:39:08 PM »
I have been following this for quite a while. The behavior of the SD local and state government has been pretty appalling. Many racist overtones with references to the way it is treated, and also a good window into the pervasive militarization of our local police departments. Why the hell does a small town need that kind of hardware?

Apparently they're pulling law enforcement from five states, so it may not be the locals bringing that much hardware.

Thanks for that. I'd much rather believe that it is a compilation of hardware, though I'm still not sure why they would need even one Humvee.

I thought the same thing in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing. Never in my life did I imagine seeing armored personnel carriers rolling through my hometown, but there it was right there on the TV. They brought out the full cavalry to catch those bastards. Now I'm even more convinced that the Boston police department has more "hardware" than some countries' armies do. Their argument seems to be that the nature of the enemy has changed, and that to keep current they need MRAP's.

All of the reporting I've seen on the DAPL protests makes it look like the SD gov't is mobilizing for war against the protestors, it's sickening. At least in our case everyone agreed on who the enemy was.
"That is why you will never be a good detective, Cato. It's so obvious, it cannot POSSIBLY be a trap..."

Link to my Journal: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/trending-vertical-vertical-modes-journal/

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2016, 10:22:15 PM »
I would suggest getting all sides of the story by also watching Unicorn Riot live feeds to supplement what you are being fed by mainstream news. I hadn't heard of Unicorn Riot before this year, but their live streams often offer much needed details that are left out of the snippets in the news. 

For example, where were these major news outlets last month when the protesters were deliberately attacked by security dogs? There is plenty of video of unmarked security guards lunging into into crowds of protesters with attack dogs coming out of the crowd with their mouths bloody. Major news outlets didn't seem to have much to say about that.

Interesting. The raw video feeds I've seen show protestors tearing down a fence to cross onto private property and into an active construction site. The bulldozers that were working immediately shut down, and the security staff step in to keep the protestors away from the operators. Protestors strike at the dogs and guards with flag poles.  This could be where the dogs got blood on their face.

Rather aggressive actions from both sides, it seems.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Rubyvroom

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2016, 07:35:46 AM »
I would suggest getting all sides of the story by also watching Unicorn Riot live feeds to supplement what you are being fed by mainstream news. I hadn't heard of Unicorn Riot before this year, but their live streams often offer much needed details that are left out of the snippets in the news. 

For example, where were these major news outlets last month when the protesters were deliberately attacked by security dogs? There is plenty of video of unmarked security guards lunging into into crowds of protesters with attack dogs coming out of the crowd with their mouths bloody. Major news outlets didn't seem to have much to say about that.

Interesting. The raw video feeds I've seen show protestors tearing down a fence to cross onto private property and into an active construction site. The bulldozers that were working immediately shut down, and the security staff step in to keep the protestors away from the operators. Protestors strike at the dogs and guards with flag poles.  This could be where the dogs got blood on their face.

Rather aggressive actions from both sides, it seems.

I am most definitely biased towards the side of the protesters, so it's hard for me to make a post that doesn't sound defensive. I would simply argue that if they were breaking the law by trespassing, they should have been arrested, not deliberately attacked by dogs. Many people went to the hospital with dog bites that day. It was rather convenient that protesters are met with immense police presence EVERYWHERE they go, yet there were no police anywhere to be seen on the site that day.

There are protesters that are acting aggressively. What I've seen is rocks being thrown after they've been pepper sprayed, rubber bulleted, etc., and there are also protesters yelling at the angry protesters to stop throwing things and putting them all in danger. I've seen rocks get hurled at cops and I've seen protesters form a line between cops and their own people to defend the cops. I see cops trying to handle people delicately and I see cops kicking people while they're down. I see good and bad happening on all sides.

There is also evidence that a DAPL employee sped towards their camp with guns in his vehicle this past week. He was ran off the road by camp security (ie, protesters) and later arrested, and they found the insurance for the vehicle he was driving registered to DAPL. So there are also agitators being thrown into the mix.

I really hate to see things escalating to such a dangerous level, for all sides, but I am definitely more concerned that protester and journalist rights are being violated.

The protests have spread to my city as well. We found out that a number of our police officers were dispatched to North Dakota to assist. Queue angry citizens lined up at our government center in opposition.

But at any rate, I am glad that folks are willing to watch the feeds. It's easier to form your own conclusions that way. You will not see most of that on CNN. It does give you a good perspective on what is going on without a major news corporation's filter.

Rubyvroom

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #11 on: October 29, 2016, 07:43:24 AM »
Also, just for discussion, after months of silence on the issue here is HRC's statement on the DAPL protests.

"We received a letter today from representatives of the tribes protesting the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. From the beginning of this campaign, Secretary Clinton has been clear that she thinks all voices should be heard and all views considered in federal infrastructure projects. Now, all of the parties involved—including the federal government, the pipeline company and contractors, the state of North Dakota, and the tribes—need to find a path forward that serves the broadest public interest. As that happens, it's important that on the ground in North Dakota, everyone respects demonstrators' rights to protest peacefully, and workers' rights to do their jobs safely."

All I can say is, wow, there are so many words there.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #12 on: October 29, 2016, 09:20:40 AM »
I thought the same thing in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing. Never in my life did I imagine seeing armored personnel carriers rolling through my hometown, but there it was right there on the TV. They brought out the full cavalry to catch those bastards. Now I'm even more convinced that the Boston police department has more "hardware" than some countries' armies do. Their argument seems to be that the nature of the enemy has changed, and that to keep current they need MRAP's.

All of the reporting I've seen on the DAPL protests makes it look like the SD gov't is mobilizing for war against the protestors, it's sickening. At least in our case everyone agreed on who the enemy was.

Some of that is on the DoD. They've been selling surplus vehicles (specifically, MRAPs) to local PDs for the cost of shipping them back from Iraq, which IIRC is less than $10k.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2016, 11:02:22 AM »
I am most definitely biased towards the side of the protesters, so it's hard for me to make a post that doesn't sound defensive. I would simply argue that if they were breaking the law by trespassing, they should have been arrested, not deliberately attacked by dogs. Many people went to the hospital with dog bites that day. It was rather convenient that protesters are met with immense police presence EVERYWHERE they go, yet there were no police anywhere to be seen on the site that day.

I agree the incident was unfortunate. The pipeline company was trying to protect its workers and equipment (and keep the protestors out of a dangerous construction site), and injuries resulted. It would have been better if one side or the other had completely backed off - no doubt.  However, this was (I believe) the incident that began the 'immense police presence' and both sides have been safer since.

Quote
There are protesters that are acting aggressively. What I've seen is rocks being thrown after they've been pepper sprayed, rubber bulleted, etc., and there are also protesters yelling at the angry protesters to stop throwing things and putting them all in danger. I've seen rocks get hurled at cops and I've seen protesters form a line between cops and their own people to defend the cops. I see cops trying to handle people delicately and I see cops kicking people while they're down. I see good and bad happening on all sides.

There is so much misinformation out there. It's very difficult for me to put together a true line of events - seems every side has its slant.  I can commend law enforcement for their restraint in some instances- Thursday a protestor drew a pistol and fired at the police. They did not return fire.

Quote
There is also evidence that a DAPL employee sped towards their camp with guns in his vehicle this past week. He was ran off the road by camp security (ie, protesters) and later arrested, and they found the insurance for the vehicle he was driving registered to DAPL. So there are also agitators being thrown into the mix.

Yes, this is an interesting incident.  Doesn't do anyone any good to be inciting violence. It was amazing no one was killed in this instance - I saw pictures of the event; it looked pretty tense. (Getting run off the road and chased into a river, all with guns involved.)

Quote
I really hate to see things escalating to such a dangerous level, for all sides, but I am definitely more concerned that protester and journalist rights are being violated.

The protests have spread to my city as well. We found out that a number of our police officers were dispatched to North Dakota to assist. Queue angry citizens lined up at our government center in opposition.

But at any rate, I am glad that folks are willing to watch the feeds. It's easier to form your own conclusions that way. You will not see most of that on CNN. It does give you a good perspective on what is going on without a major news corporation's filter.

I guess I don't feel protestor rights are being violated (in a systemic way).  The main camp has been on federal land for months; no movement has been made to evict them.  Protestors have burned millions of dollars of equipment (In Iowa) and broken into valve sites to shut down pipelines (or try to kill themselves, which could have easily been the result). As far as I've read, the peaceful marches have not been hampered - the only incidents that have been forcefully acted upon are when protestors invade private property and create highway roadblocks that endanger the public.

Not to say that no law enforcement has acted inappropriately; it's a tough line to follow for either side, for sure, and with slanted coverage it's very difficult to get both sides of every incident.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Northwestie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2016, 03:41:54 PM »
..............meanwhile, the clowns who occupied the Klamath Wildlife Refuge for a month with rifles, intimidated federal employees, pulled down fences, disturbed a cultural resources site with a backhoe, rifled through work files, and generally made a mess of things for a month -- were acquitted.

Now imagine if this federal refuge was taken over by Native Americans or the Black Lives Matter group - how long do you think they would have been allowed to occupy the place?

Roboturner

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Colo-RAD-o
  • No Snacks, Just Math
"I win again, just like always!"





ariapluscat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 481
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #17 on: November 04, 2016, 10:54:07 AM »
isn't the land covered by treaties w the sioux ppl? this was brought up to the un recently.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #18 on: November 04, 2016, 08:12:43 PM »
isn't the land covered by treaties w the sioux ppl? this was brought up to the un recently.

No. Where the pipeline crosses the river was originally part of the reservation in an 1851 treaty; in 1868, that treaty was replaced with a new one, shrinking the borders of the reservation.  Of course, all treaties have contained language ensuring that public construction works would be allowed to cross reservation land unhindered.

http://standingrock.org/fort-laramie-treaty/


..............meanwhile, the clowns who occupied the Klamath Wildlife Refuge for a month with rifles, intimidated federal employees, pulled down fences, disturbed a cultural resources site with a backhoe, rifled through work files, and generally made a mess of things for a month -- were acquitted.

Now imagine if this federal refuge was taken over by Native Americans or the Black Lives Matter group - how long do you think they would have been allowed to occupy the place?

The main protest camp is on federal land. They've been camped there for months.  And no protestors have been killed by law enforcement - looks like this protest is indeed being handled differently than the Oregon one, and the protestors have been allowed to camp on Army Corps. land for a different amount of time than other similar protests - longer, in fact.  But yeah, riffling through work files is much worse than blocking state highways with flaming cars, shooting at law enforcement officers and lighting National Guard vehicles on fire...
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 08:23:21 PM by Metric Mouse »
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

beel

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #19 on: November 04, 2016, 08:40:01 PM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

ariapluscat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 481
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2016, 07:42:35 AM »
isn't the land covered by treaties w the sioux ppl? this was brought up to the un recently.

No. Where the pipeline crosses the river was originally part of the reservation in an 1851 treaty; in 1868, that treaty was replaced with a new one, shrinking the borders of the reservation.  Of course, all treaties have contained language ensuring that public construction works would be allowed to cross reservation land unhindered.

http://standingrock.org/fort-laramie-treaty/



my understanding was that just bc it wasn't part of the reservation doesn't mean it's us territory, much less private property of the company.

yes, there were also disputes over whether the sioux were given enough input on the federal approval process. there was a burial ground and also cultural artifacts that were not properly charted and may be covered under indigenous rights not to be disturbed, even if on federal land.

it's such a complicated issue. i'm glad i don't live super close by bc i find it really hard to track all of this, esp since there seem to be so many conflicting interests: the wider native protesters, the liberal no-oil politics, the liberal pro-oil and conservative pro-oil, the residents of the reservation, the residents near the original routing, the federal agencies like the corp of engineers, the dapl private company, the dapl private police, the local police, the police brought in, the federal forces, and then probably some plethora of local politics.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2016, 07:47:43 AM »
isn't the land covered by treaties w the sioux ppl? this was brought up to the un recently.

No. Where the pipeline crosses the river was originally part of the reservation in an 1851 treaty; in 1868, that treaty was replaced with a new one, shrinking the borders of the reservation.  Of course, all treaties have contained language ensuring that public construction works would be allowed to cross reservation land unhindered.

http://standingrock.org/fort-laramie-treaty/



my understanding was that just bc it wasn't part of the reservation doesn't mean it's us territory, much less private property of the company.

yes, there were also disputes over whether the sioux were given enough input on the federal approval process. there was a burial ground and also cultural artifacts that were not properly charted and may be covered under indigenous rights not to be disturbed, even if on federal land.

it's such a complicated issue. i'm glad i don't live super close by bc i find it really hard to track all of this, esp since there seem to be so many conflicting interests: the wider native protesters, the liberal no-oil politics, the liberal pro-oil and conservative pro-oil, the residents of the reservation, the residents near the original routing, the federal agencies like the corp of engineers, the dapl private company, the dapl private police, the local police, the police brought in, the federal forces, and then probably some plethora of local politics.

Not easy to parse through all of the misinformation.  This is probably the best documented run down I have seen - lots and lots of sources in the article. 

https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-gates/on-the-standing-rock-tribes-dakota-pipeline-protest-/10154529600627457
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Mel70

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #22 on: November 14, 2016, 03:53:18 PM »
I would suggest getting all sides of the story by also watching Unicorn Riot live feeds to supplement what you are being fed by mainstream news. I hadn't heard of Unicorn Riot before this year, but their live streams often offer much needed details that are left out of the snippets in the news. 

For example, where were these major news outlets last month when the protesters were deliberately attacked by security dogs? There is plenty of video of unmarked security guards lunging into into crowds of protesters with attack dogs coming out of the crowd with their mouths bloody. Major news outlets didn't seem to have much to say about that.

I can't confirm of course (I'm not there) but I saw a video today where people were suggesting that authorities are now deliberately arresting medics that are clearly marked via their clothing and markings on their vehicles that they are there only to serve as medics, not protesters. The ethical ramifications of much of what I'm seeing on these live streams, including the intimidation tactics against journalists makes me very uneasy.

Thank you for the information!

Mel70

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #23 on: November 14, 2016, 03:56:00 PM »
I am most definitely biased towards the side of the protesters, so it's hard for me to make a post that doesn't sound defensive. I would simply argue that if they were breaking the law by trespassing, they should have been arrested, not deliberately attacked by dogs. Many people went to the hospital with dog bites that day. It was rather convenient that protesters are met with immense police presence EVERYWHERE they go, yet there were no police anywhere to be seen on the site that day.

I agree the incident was unfortunate. The pipeline company was trying to protect its workers and equipment (and keep the protestors out of a dangerous construction site), and injuries resulted. It would have been better if one side or the other had completely backed off - no doubt.  However, this was (I believe) the incident that began the 'immense police presence' and both sides have been safer since.

Quote
There are protesters that are acting aggressively. What I've seen is rocks being thrown after they've been pepper sprayed, rubber bulleted, etc., and there are also protesters yelling at the angry protesters to stop throwing things and putting them all in danger. I've seen rocks get hurled at cops and I've seen protesters form a line between cops and their own people to defend the cops. I see cops trying to handle people delicately and I see cops kicking people while they're down. I see good and bad happening on all sides.

There is so much misinformation out there. It's very difficult for me to put together a true line of events - seems every side has its slant.  I can commend law enforcement for their restraint in some instances- Thursday a protestor drew a pistol and fired at the police. They did not return fire.

Quote
There is also evidence that a DAPL employee sped towards their camp with guns in his vehicle this past week. He was ran off the road by camp security (ie, protesters) and later arrested, and they found the insurance for the vehicle he was driving registered to DAPL. So there are also agitators being thrown into the mix.

Yes, this is an interesting incident.  Doesn't do anyone any good to be inciting violence. It was amazing no one was killed in this instance - I saw pictures of the event; it looked pretty tense. (Getting run off the road and chased into a river, all with guns involved.)

Quote
I really hate to see things escalating to such a dangerous level, for all sides, but I am definitely more concerned that protester and journalist rights are being violated.

The protests have spread to my city as well. We found out that a number of our police officers were dispatched to North Dakota to assist. Queue angry citizens lined up at our government center in opposition.

But at any rate, I am glad that folks are willing to watch the feeds. It's easier to form your own conclusions that way. You will not see most of that on CNN. It does give you a good perspective on what is going on without a major news corporation's filter.

I guess I don't feel protestor rights are being violated (in a systemic way).  The main camp has been on federal land for months; no movement has been made to evict them.  Protestors have burned millions of dollars of equipment (In Iowa) and broken into valve sites to shut down pipelines (or try to kill themselves, which could have easily been the result). As far as I've read, the peaceful marches have not been hampered - the only incidents that have been forcefully acted upon are when protestors invade private property and create highway roadblocks that endanger the public.

Not to say that no law enforcement has acted inappropriately; it's a tough line to follow for either side, for sure, and with slanted coverage it's very difficult to get both sides of every incident.

Why the reluctance to allow journalists to report the news? Someone mentioned the arrest of Amy Goodman. More dialogue should follow, not trying to repress the news.

Northwestie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #24 on: November 14, 2016, 04:01:21 PM »
Goodman's charges were thrown out of court - the judge was like WTF are you guys doing?

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #25 on: November 14, 2016, 04:11:23 PM »
Interesting. The raw video feeds I've seen show protestors tearing down a fence to cross onto private property and into an active construction site. The bulldozers that were working immediately shut down, and the security staff step in to keep the protestors away from the operators. Protestors strike at the dogs and guards with flag poles.  This could be where the dogs got blood on their face.

Rather aggressive actions from both sides, it seems.

Both sides? What you just stated shows deliberate attacks and law breaking by anarchists (real protesters don't attack people) by one side only while the other side went out of their way to defend themselves non-violently.

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #26 on: November 14, 2016, 04:14:10 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/us/dakota-access-pipeline-protests/index.html

More updates. Protestors fired weapons at law enforcement. This is crazy!

Real protesters protest, they don't fire weapons. Those firing weapons are hard left anarchists who use events like this to promote their hatred. You can see the same type of people inciting violence in the current election riots.

attackgnome

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 62
  • Location: Denver, CO
  • It was a cold spring day in Casper, Wyoming.
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #27 on: November 14, 2016, 04:58:06 PM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

Spent a couple winter's in the oilfield up there. The camp will disperse the first week the temperature doesn't get above -10.

"People splitting firewood...." http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/11/02/report-standing-rock-fierce-resilience-black-snake-approaches-river

They have no idea what they are in for.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #28 on: November 14, 2016, 05:29:00 PM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

Spent a couple winter's in the oilfield up there. The camp will disperse the first week the temperature doesn't get above -10.

"People splitting firewood...." http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/11/02/report-standing-rock-fierce-resilience-black-snake-approaches-river

They have no idea what they are in for.

... except that many of them have lived there their whole lives.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #29 on: November 15, 2016, 05:11:33 AM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

Spent a couple winter's in the oilfield up there. The camp will disperse the first week the temperature doesn't get above -10.

"People splitting firewood...." http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/11/02/report-standing-rock-fierce-resilience-black-snake-approaches-river

They have no idea what they are in for.

... except that many of them have lived there their whole lives.

Actually, according to this news report, less than 1 in 5 is from the state: http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/news/north-dakota/4139574-authorities-highlight-criminal-histories-some-pipeline-protesters

Not sure if that matters or not. I'm a bit more concerned about the protestors shooting at police officers, lighting vehicles on fire and damaging infrastructure such as bridges and highways.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #30 on: November 29, 2016, 04:47:33 AM »
Army Corps of Engineers orders DAPL Protest Camp Closed

Looks like the U.S. Gov. has decided to move the protestors out "For safety reasons".  Interesting course of action - We'll see what develops.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Rubyvroom

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #31 on: November 29, 2016, 05:10:44 AM »
Yeah, there have been quite a few developments out there. I believe that after the letter was issued, the Army Corps of Engineers released a separate statement they had "no plans for forcible removal," but in the same statement they also said specifically that "emergency, fire, medical, and law enforcement response cannot be adequately provided in these areas." On the one hand, I wonder how much of those services were being provided in the first place (so maybe that statement doesn't have as much gravity as it seems to me), but on the other hand there have already been incidents of mercenaries showing up to intimidate people, so I wonder if this will feel like an open invitation for more of that behavior. We'll see how things go. It unfortunately seems to be on a path towards escalation, whatever form that takes.

In another development, apparently 2,000 veterans plan on converging on the site in support of the protestors, from Dec 4 - 7. They've crowdfunded over a half a million dollars in 17 days, and are talking about planning a second trip a few weeks later because they've exceeded capacity.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #32 on: November 29, 2016, 10:14:03 AM »
Actually, according to this news report, less than 1 in 5 is from the state: http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/news/north-dakota/4139574-authorities-highlight-criminal-histories-some-pipeline-protesters

Not sure if that matters or not. I'm a bit more concerned about the protestors shooting at police officers, lighting vehicles on fire and damaging infrastructure such as bridges and highways.

I'm also concerned about egregious use of force against protesters.
http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/news/north-dakota/4168144-sheriff-morton-county-sued-excessive-force-protests

Many law enforcement agencies are politely declining to show up for Morton County's request for support in part because they believe that it is a misappropriation of the emergency management support, because their constituencies do not want them showing up there, etc.

I expect things to get much worse in December as ETP (company building DAPL) faces insolvency and contractual obligations. See the executive summary at (I tried to paste the text, but the formatting didn't work):
http://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/The-High-Risk-Financing-Behind-the-Dakota-Access-Pipeline_-NOV-2016.pdf

Based on past actions by ETP and local law enforcement, we can expect the insertion of agitators into the camps and use of private contractors (aka, mercenaries) against the protesters in addition to the continued use of water cannons in sub-freezing temperatures and indiscriminate use of other strongarm tactics.

Regardless of opinions on the pipeline, the actions of the local law enforcement against American citizens is deplorable.

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #33 on: November 29, 2016, 10:35:51 AM »
One media source dug for some facts...most of the others have simply provided a soapbox for the protestors.

"Protesters claim that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to consult tribal leaders as required by federal law. The record shows that the corps held 389 meetings with 55 tribes. Corps officials met many times with leaders of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which initiated the lawsuit and the protests.

Protesters claim that the Standing Rock Sioux pursued meetings with an unresponsive Army Corps of Engineers. Court records show that the roles in that story were in fact reversed. The corps alerted the tribe to the pipeline permit application in the fall of 2014 and repeatedly requested comments from and meetings with tribal leaders, only to be rebuffed over and over. Tribal leaders ignored requests for comment and canceled meetings multiple times.

In September 2014 alone, the Corps made five unsuccessful attempts to meet with Standing Rock Sioux leaders. The next month, a meeting was arranged, but "when the Corps timely arrived for the meeting, Tribal Chairman David Archambault told them that the conclave had started earlier than planned and had already ended," according to a federal judge.

At a planned meeting the next month, the tribe took the pipeline off the agenda and refused to discuss it. This stonewalling by tribal leaders continued for a year and a half."

http://www.wdaz.com/news/4159502-column-what-dakota-access-pipeline-protesters-arent-telling-you

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 629
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #34 on: December 04, 2016, 11:49:28 AM »
..............meanwhile, the clowns who occupied the Klamath Wildlife Refuge for a month with rifles, intimidated federal employees, pulled down fences, disturbed a cultural resources site with a backhoe, rifled through work files, and generally made a mess of things for a month -- were acquitted.

Now imagine if this federal refuge was taken over by Native Americans or the Black Lives Matter group - how long do you think they would have been allowed to occupy the place?

um...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Alcatraz#Collapse_and_removal

Not defending the KWR decision but Native Americans have mounted a ton of protests on federal land and while it sometimes does take force to ultimately disperse them, very few end up in prison.  At this stage of the game, particularly way out in the middle of nowhere, both sides are willing participants.  That has to temper the response from those of us viewing it from a distance.  The people on the ground there will feel like they have no choice, govt employees, protesters, and pipeline employees.  We will view their actions with the certain knowledge that they actually did, they could choose to leave.
"Whenever you are presented with the opportunity to pee...pee." - Advice from my grandfather. 

At a fundamental level, it's all gambling.  Would you rather bet your money or your time?

20 months to go!

Classical_Liberal

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
  • Age: 41
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #35 on: December 04, 2016, 01:41:59 PM »
I've been working on a travel contract since May in Bismarck, ND.  It's about 30 miles away from the protest camps and the only population center nearby.  My work has absolutely nothing to do with the pipeline or oil.  I've tried very hard to stay neutral minded about the whole situation because the locals are upset and taking sides.  This has exacerbated previously present racial tensions.

If anyone has specific questions about "on the ground" stuff locally, I'd be happy to answer to the best of my ability. I will say, my personality tends to be one that favors "the little guy", but I've tried to not let that taint my rather neutral stance, as I see both (or many) sides to this situation.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #36 on: December 04, 2016, 01:50:53 PM »
I've been working on a travel contract since May in Bismarck, ND.  It's about 30 miles away from the protest camps and the only population center nearby.  My work has absolutely nothing to do with the pipeline or oil.  I've tried very hard to stay neutral minded about the whole situation because the locals are upset and taking sides.  This has exacerbated previously present racial tensions.

If anyone has specific questions about "on the ground" stuff locally, I'd be happy to answer to the best of my ability. I will say, my personality tends to be one that favors "the little guy", but I've tried to not let that taint my rather neutral stance, as I see both (or many) sides to this situation.

What would be good local papers to read for info? (online, obviously)
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Classical_Liberal

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
  • Age: 41
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #37 on: December 04, 2016, 02:06:12 PM »
What would be good local papers to read for info? (online, obviously)

http://bismarcktribune.com/ is the only major local paper (Bismarck is only about 60-70K in population). 

It trends towards the position against the protesters, but does provide limited counterpoints.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #38 on: December 04, 2016, 03:52:58 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/04/politics/dakota-access-pipeline/index.html?adkey=bn

Big movement on this front. ACOE reverses itself, and says pipeline will be re routed.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Classical_Liberal

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
  • Age: 41
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2016, 04:09:14 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/04/politics/dakota-access-pipeline/index.html?adkey=bn

Big movement on this front. ACOE reverses itself, and says pipeline will be re routed.

Thanks for the info MM!  Work will likely be interesting tomorrow, I'm going to practice silent meditation tonight.

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 706
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #40 on: December 29, 2016, 07:12:50 AM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

Spent a couple winter's in the oilfield up there. The camp will disperse the first week the temperature doesn't get above -10.

"People splitting firewood...." http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/11/02/report-standing-rock-fierce-resilience-black-snake-approaches-river

They have no idea what they are in for.

Much has happened since this was written, but as someone who consider North Dakota "down south" I wanted to comment on this. Those protesters included both local indigenous people (who have adapted to the climate for a few thousand years), and other indigenous people travelling from the south and north to support them. Some of those, like the Sami and Inuit, are used to winters colder than -40 F/C.

I hope we will get all of our money out of this before the entire project collapses. http://planetsave.com/2016/12/04/indigenous-norwegians-force-bank-withdraw-support-dakota-access/
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #41 on: December 30, 2016, 05:29:41 AM »
https://www.wday.com/news/north-dakota/4188319-swat-team-called-dakota-access-pipeline-protests-5-arrested-trespassing


Looks like protestors are still there, despite some bad blizzards that have hit the area recently. Seems from my reading that since the ACOE decision, the tribe Chairman requested that protestors leave; many did, but the most militant ones seems to have stayed, and continue to cause issues for local law enforcement.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4288
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #42 on: December 30, 2016, 06:08:18 AM »
I grew up in North Dakota.  Wonder what these protesters plan is come mid December..... in NORTH DAKOTA

Spent a couple winter's in the oilfield up there. The camp will disperse the first week the temperature doesn't get above -10.

"People splitting firewood...." http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/11/02/report-standing-rock-fierce-resilience-black-snake-approaches-river

They have no idea what they are in for.

Much has happened since this was written, but as someone who consider North Dakota "down south" I wanted to comment on this. Those protesters included both local indigenous people (who have adapted to the climate for a few thousand years), and other indigenous people travelling from the south and north to support them. Some of those, like the Sami and Inuit, are used to winters colder than -40 F/C.

I hope we will get all of our money out of this before the entire project collapses. http://planetsave.com/2016/12/04/indigenous-norwegians-force-bank-withdraw-support-dakota-access/
That article makes no sense.  Why would you tamper with a bridge BEFORE you go over it?  Honestly, unless the "authority" in question has evidence of this tampering I don't trust their statement.  There have been so many incidences of false statements, I just can't trust them.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #43 on: December 30, 2016, 06:28:44 AM »
That article makes no sense.  Why would you tamper with a bridge BEFORE you go over it?  Honestly, unless the "authority" in question has evidence of this tampering I don't trust their statement.  There have been so many incidences of false statements, I just can't trust them.

I'm not sure which article you're referring to? But I believe that the bridge you are referring to leads to the construction site - protestors have repeatedly 'tampered' with the bridge, parking vehicles across it and lighting them on fire, as well as detonating IEDs beneath it (with tragic consequences). This is intended to block the bridge for construction traffic - protestors are repeatedly attempting to cross it to damage construction equipment staged at the work site on the other side.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4288
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #44 on: December 30, 2016, 06:35:45 AM »
That article makes no sense.  Why would you tamper with a bridge BEFORE you go over it?  Honestly, unless the "authority" in question has evidence of this tampering I don't trust their statement.  There have been so many incidences of false statements, I just can't trust them.

I'm not sure which article you're referring to? But I believe that the bridge you are referring to leads to the construction site - protestors have repeatedly 'tampered' with the bridge, parking vehicles across it and lighting them on fire, as well as detonating IEDs beneath it (with tragic consequences). This is intended to block the bridge for construction traffic - protestors are repeatedly attempting to cross it to damage construction equipment staged at the work site on the other side.
The article within the post I quoted. http://planetsave.com/2016/12/04/indigenous-norwegians-force-bank-withdraw-support-dakota-access/
And I stand by my statements, proof please.  If they actually damaged something, don't you think they would have been arrested for something more than trespassing? 

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #45 on: December 30, 2016, 06:40:21 AM »
The article within the post I quoted. http://planetsave.com/2016/12/04/indigenous-norwegians-force-bank-withdraw-support-dakota-access/
And I stand by my statements, proof please.  If they actually damaged something, don't you think they would have been arrested for something more than trespassing?

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/police-and-protesters-face-off-at-backwater-bridge/article_11111264-b9b3-5e7d-8ecc-40b17d324e7f.html

This article gives a rough coverage of both of the major protests at this site. It also clearly mentions the fires set by protestors.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4288
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #46 on: December 30, 2016, 06:53:35 AM »
The article within the post I quoted. http://planetsave.com/2016/12/04/indigenous-norwegians-force-bank-withdraw-support-dakota-access/
And I stand by my statements, proof please.  If they actually damaged something, don't you think they would have been arrested for something more than trespassing?

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/police-and-protesters-face-off-at-backwater-bridge/article_11111264-b9b3-5e7d-8ecc-40b17d324e7f.html

This article gives a rough coverage of both of the major protests at this site. It also clearly mentions the fires set by protestors.
Again with no actual evidence, though I'll give that likely someone within the protesters may have burned some vehicles.  The only evidence that it was protesters though AGAIN was a statement from police "Throughout the night, protesters started a dozen fires and tried to move north through a line of police, according to the sheriff's department, who reported that rocks and logs were thrown at officers, and one officer was struck in the head."
Which is funny because if you look at the article you posted the damage to the vehicles happen once and the protesters want access to the bridge but the police are keeping them off "Houska noted that police reinforced the roadblock of burned vehicles with barriers and wire behind the vehicles on the bridge after the October fires.
"This has been weeks and weeks of those vehicles on the road for no apparent reason, and it's a huge public safety risk. It's putting enormous pressure on the Standing Rock Sioux community and people who live and work in the area," she said."
It looks like to me, that the damage to the vehicles is benefiting the police, not protesters.  Not saying that within a large group, you might not find people who doing things that are not benefiting the whole but again, to take the words of the police with no evidence, given the evidence of them lying seems foolish. 
The protesters say they only started fires in response to the water canons being used against them "He said the fires reported by police were set in order to help people warm up who had been sprayed." The article over and over, shows that the protesters want access to bridge and the ones against it are police.  The protesters attempted to remove the vehicle, the police did not want them to.  So, it is rather convenient for the police to say that inspecting the bridge is not safe.
So again, I'll ask for actual evidence of damage caused by protesters, not statements from the police. 

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #47 on: December 31, 2016, 04:43:47 AM »
Again with no actual evidence, though I'll give that likely someone within the protesters may have burned some vehicles.  The only evidence that it was protesters though AGAIN was a statement from police "Throughout the night, protesters started a dozen fires and tried to move north through a line of police, according to the sheriff's department, who reported that rocks and logs were thrown at officers, and one officer was struck in the head."
Which is funny because if you look at the article you posted the damage to the vehicles happen once and the protesters want access to the bridge but the police are keeping them off "Houska noted that police reinforced the roadblock of burned vehicles with barriers and wire behind the vehicles on the bridge after the October fires.
"This has been weeks and weeks of those vehicles on the road for no apparent reason, and it's a huge public safety risk. It's putting enormous pressure on the Standing Rock Sioux community and people who live and work in the area," she said."
It looks like to me, that the damage to the vehicles is benefiting the police, not protesters.  Not saying that within a large group, you might not find people who doing things that are not benefiting the whole but again, to take the words of the police with no evidence, given the evidence of them lying seems foolish. 
The protesters say they only started fires in response to the water canons being used against them "He said the fires reported by police were set in order to help people warm up who had been sprayed." The article over and over, shows that the protesters want access to bridge and the ones against it are police.  The protesters attempted to remove the vehicle, the police did not want them to.  So, it is rather convenient for the police to say that inspecting the bridge is not safe.
So again, I'll ask for actual evidence of damage caused by protesters, not statements from the police.

I guess this is the post fact era..

Of course the protestors want the bridge cleared - it's the road leading to the construction site; they wish to go to protest, vandalize equipment, and harass workers as they did this summer.


It's not "likely" that some protestors burned vehicles - that is literally what happened. There is photographic evidence of the fires set by protesters.


And yes, the police would probably not try too hard to unblock the road; it protects private property and makes it easier and safer for them to do their job. The protestors lit fires on the bridge to block it, and now are mad that it's blocked? And if this level of violence is occurring, with fires being lit and people tearing down barricades and shooting at police, who are then shooting rubber bullets back - how in the world would engineers get in to assess the bridge?
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4288
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #48 on: December 31, 2016, 07:30:23 AM »
Metric Mouse, if you want to call this post-fact, you actually have to post facts.  Not, the police said so or it is likely they did or of course they did it.  Given that people have been safe within the protesters, including media, I do think engineers could check the bridge.  I also think it is possible to clear the bridge without the engineers, let the protesters do it.  They tried and the police stopped them.  That begs the question of why. 
No one is contesting the fires, they are contesting why the fires were lit and where.  You may want to reread my statement where I said it was likely that someone within the protesters did light the fires past the statement by the protesters themselves, but the proof needs to be there, not just the statement of the police because they are not trustworthy.  And a picture of a fire is not proof of who. 
If you want to talk facts, you actually need facts.  Try again.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2016, 09:00:48 AM by Gin1984 »

Classical_Liberal

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
  • Age: 41
Re: Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
« Reply #49 on: December 31, 2016, 08:37:40 AM »
how in the world would engineers get in to assess the bridge?

Plus, there is four-plus feet of snow on the ground.  Half of the roads in the state have not been properly cleared in a month and looks like another streak of -40 windchills.  No way anyones inspecting anything until spring.