Thoughts on the North Dakota pipeline
- Thread starter nodle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- north dakota pipeline
I am with you. Yes it may bring more jobs in to a hurting area but at what cost? Besides haven't we taken enough land away from these people already?
I wonder if Standing Rock is next?
Obama administration cancels oil & gas lease on native land in Montana
Obama administration cancels oil & gas lease on native land in Montana
Looks like things heated up last night. Still surprised this hasn't got more coverage in the media. I wouldn't be surprised if someone ends up shooting at those guys, then it will become big media.
Police, protesters face off at Dakota Access pipeline
Police, protesters face off at Dakota Access pipeline
Sounds like they lied about using the water cannon:
https://twitter.com/rtyson82/status/800575599974682624
But there is drone footage out there:
https://twitter.com/rtyson82/status/800575599974682624
Last edited by a moderator:
OK. I need to weigh in here. I can't believe this is the topic that is getting me back on Flux.
The amount of misinformation out there is simply staggering. The reason your friends in oil company seem to have a different opinion than everyone else isn't because of jobs. It's because this is where we live and a lot of us know the law enforcement working these protests.
Quick Note on My Support: I support the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Living in southwestern North Dakota and coming from an agricultural background I have heard on numerous occasion in the last several years that agricultural commodities are becoming increasingly more expensive to get to market because so much oil is on the trains. In addition, there are a ton of trucks on the road shipping the oil as well. Not as many as there were a couple of years ago, but still many more than there were ten years ago. The pipeline would help solve this problem. It would get oil off the roads and it would also get it off of the trains. There have been a number of nasty derailments the last couple of years. I'd rather those happen with grain in the cars than combustible and dangerous oil. That's the main reason I support the pipeline, not jobs. The number of jobs it would bring long term is pretty negligible. Now, there is an argument that it would bring down the per barrel production price and therefore we might see more drilling as a result, but that'll happen when the price eventual comes up as well.
Some fact that need to be known before discussing this
This is not a case of oppression.
In my opinion this is a situation where the tribe wanted more money than DAPL was willing to pay, they called the tribe's bluff and now the tribe is angry and attempting to make them pay for it.
These protesters are not "peaceful." I have a friend who is a member of the North Dakota Highway Patrol. He is supposed to be stationed in Watford City, which is about three hours from the protests. For the last four-five months the majority of his time has been spent sleeping in the guard barracks in Bismarck, waking up at 4:30 a.m. and working until 9:30 at night. What has he been doing? Protecting the houses of Sheriffs and their deputies who have consistently had their lives and the lives of their families threatened over this stuff. In fact, a month ago he was on the front line of the protests, when shots were fired. One of the "protesters", a woman, was about 15 feet from him and fired a handgun. Did law enforcement react in an inappropriate manner and open fire on these "poor" "innocent" "water protectors"? No, they remained professional and kept their heads.
Last night is just another example of a coordinated attempt to make law enforcement look bad. Can you imagine if you lived in a farm or a ranch near where this was taking place? How would you feel safe at night?
This is not oppression by DAPL or by law enforcement. This is oppression of a different sort. Environmental groups are taking advantage of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in an effort to make a point, and I for one do not think they will be happy until the agitate to the point that someone is killed. They have done everything they can up to this point to instigate altercations with law enforcement and to law enforcement's credit they continue to be incredibly professional.
Will be interested to hear everyone's response.
The amount of misinformation out there is simply staggering. The reason your friends in oil company seem to have a different opinion than everyone else isn't because of jobs. It's because this is where we live and a lot of us know the law enforcement working these protests.
Quick Note on My Support: I support the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Living in southwestern North Dakota and coming from an agricultural background I have heard on numerous occasion in the last several years that agricultural commodities are becoming increasingly more expensive to get to market because so much oil is on the trains. In addition, there are a ton of trucks on the road shipping the oil as well. Not as many as there were a couple of years ago, but still many more than there were ten years ago. The pipeline would help solve this problem. It would get oil off the roads and it would also get it off of the trains. There have been a number of nasty derailments the last couple of years. I'd rather those happen with grain in the cars than combustible and dangerous oil. That's the main reason I support the pipeline, not jobs. The number of jobs it would bring long term is pretty negligible. Now, there is an argument that it would bring down the per barrel production price and therefore we might see more drilling as a result, but that'll happen when the price eventual comes up as well.
Some fact that need to be known before discussing this
- There are already a number of pipelines that traverse the Missouri River at different places up and down the river. This pipeline will actual follow the exact route of another pipeline, at least on this leg of it.
- This pipeline will be constructed the following way - A pipe which the oil will flow through, surrounded by a redundant second pipe that would prevent any leakage.
- As with other pipelines of this type, sensors, which record any change in flow due to a leak in the first pipe, are sent through the system daily.
- The pipe will not be going "through" the river. but is actually run below the river bed.
- There is no "gravesite" or "holy site" that the planned road travels over.
- There were 389 public meetings held regarding the cultural survey for DAPL.
- 7 meetings were proposed directly to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. None were accepted.
- The proposed route is not on "Tribal Land"
This is not a case of oppression.
In my opinion this is a situation where the tribe wanted more money than DAPL was willing to pay, they called the tribe's bluff and now the tribe is angry and attempting to make them pay for it.
These protesters are not "peaceful." I have a friend who is a member of the North Dakota Highway Patrol. He is supposed to be stationed in Watford City, which is about three hours from the protests. For the last four-five months the majority of his time has been spent sleeping in the guard barracks in Bismarck, waking up at 4:30 a.m. and working until 9:30 at night. What has he been doing? Protecting the houses of Sheriffs and their deputies who have consistently had their lives and the lives of their families threatened over this stuff. In fact, a month ago he was on the front line of the protests, when shots were fired. One of the "protesters", a woman, was about 15 feet from him and fired a handgun. Did law enforcement react in an inappropriate manner and open fire on these "poor" "innocent" "water protectors"? No, they remained professional and kept their heads.
Last night is just another example of a coordinated attempt to make law enforcement look bad. Can you imagine if you lived in a farm or a ranch near where this was taking place? How would you feel safe at night?
This is not oppression by DAPL or by law enforcement. This is oppression of a different sort. Environmental groups are taking advantage of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in an effort to make a point, and I for one do not think they will be happy until the agitate to the point that someone is killed. They have done everything they can up to this point to instigate altercations with law enforcement and to law enforcement's credit they continue to be incredibly professional.
Will be interested to hear everyone's response.
That is a lie, they found artifacts:
Source 1
Source 2
They were already dishonest from the start.
North Dakota Economy is in bad shape
The only people wanting this is North Dakota. You guys overspent and blew your budgets, you thought that oil would be there forever (it is but we are oversupplied). Everyone thinks that once this pipe rolls across then it will be back to the way it was.
I will agree with you that anyone would rather have a grain spill than an oil spill. I think a lot of people are using this as an excuse though. It's not really about the safety but more about crossing their lands. If they would come out and say "Ok guys we are going to re-route the pipeline" then everyone including the Tribes would be happy. But they aren't budging because there is money involved. Big money.
Did you actually read these stories? The State Historical Preservation Office was contacted and the sites were found to not be significant. It's regrettable that the PSC wasn't also contacted.
It's really too bad that you can't get past your belief that this is all about the state's budget. I've said that isn't the case for me and I haven't heard any of my friends who I've talked to about this use it as a justification either.
One last thing, THE PIPELINE DOES NOT CROSS TRIBAL LAND! That is the great lie of all of this.
https://m.facebook.com/notes/scott-gates/on-the-standing-rock-tribes-dakota-pipeline-protest-/10154529600627457/
Read this and get back to me. I'm fairly certain it points out the inlet's use will be discontinued in the near future if it hasn't been already. But even if it isn't discontinued the safety measures they have in place, which I outlined in my post above should be enough. Like I said, this isn't the first pipeline to traverse a river. If these guys didn't know what they were doing we'd be hearing about pipeline leaks left and right.
Read this and get back to me. I'm fairly certain it points out the inlet's use will be discontinued in the near future if it hasn't been already. But even if it isn't discontinued the safety measures they have in place, which I outlined in my post above should be enough. Like I said, this isn't the first pipeline to traverse a river. If these guys didn't know what they were doing we'd be hearing about pipeline leaks left and right.