• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Dakota Access Pipeline

ImTheCaptain said:
i think it's a little strange that the tribes stick with the whole sovereignty thing.
Click to expand...

not sure if trolling, but this is :eek: and I'd be fired on the spot if I said this in presence of a client.

If not trolling, care to elaborate?
 
https://www.facebook.com/notes/scot...es-dakota-pipeline-protest-/10154529600627457

The claims there are historic, cultural and burial sites being bulldozed in direct disregard to the tribes claims are simply false. Much of the route is withing existing “Southwest Pipeline” and “Northern Border” pipeline right of way - on land that was excavated long ago. The Dakota pipeline follows existing right of way in many places for an older pipeline built in same place, ans specifically exactly follows the Northern Border pipeline right of way - built in 1982 - in the section leading up to, and the crossing of, the Missouri river.

And even IF historic or cultural sites or artifacts were to be suspected - the approval includes a process, as outlined above - that works. A review board that investigates claims - that includes the State Historical Preservation Office, The Tribal Burial Commission, the Sheriff AND members of the Standing Rock and Sisseton Wahpeton tribes.

Then there is the issue at the very HEART of the tribes claims ... the water intake at Fort Yates, just downstream from the pipeline’s crossing of the river (where the pipeline will be buried some 90+ feet below the river). The tribe’s KEY claim is the pipeline threatens what they say is the sole source of water for the reservation - the Fort Yates water intake, which is a few miles downstream from the DAPL river crossing near Cannonball, ND - the site of the protest.

It is very hard though for the water intake at the heart of the tribes claims to be threatened if it does not exist.

Which is a fact - and the tribe full well knows it. The water intake at Fort Yates - the one the tribes says is the primary source of the water for the reservation - is to be shut down in the coming MONTHS.
 
MHBDemon said:
not sure if trolling, but this is :eek: and I'd be fired on the spot if I said this in presence of a client.

If not trolling, care to elaborate?
Click to expand...

not trolling and I don't want to be insensitive I just don't see what the benefits are for maintaining sovereignty over tribal lands/reservations. Pride? History? meh
 
EatLeadCommie said:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/scot...es-dakota-pipeline-protest-/10154529600627457

The claims there are historic, cultural and burial sites being bulldozed in direct disregard to the tribes claims are simply false. Much of the route is withing existing “Southwest Pipeline” and “Northern Border” pipeline right of way - on land that was excavated long ago. The Dakota pipeline follows existing right of way in many places for an older pipeline built in same place, ans specifically exactly follows the Northern Border pipeline right of way - built in 1982 - in the section leading up to, and the crossing of, the Missouri river.

The use of "right of way" here is interesting. It's basically the crux of the argument, because eminent domain was called and the land is in territorial dispute, at least from the POV of the Sioux. The fact that much of the land was excavated long ago I haven't seen sourced, but even if so, doesn't account for newly discovered artifacts on the land in question.

And even IF historic or cultural sites or artifacts were to be suspected - the approval includes a process, as outlined above - that works. A review board that investigates claims - that includes the State Historical Preservation Office, The Tribal Burial Commission, the Sheriff AND members of the Standing Rock and Sisseton Wahpeton tribes.

That very process failed. It clearly doesn't and didn't work in this very case.

Then there is the issue at the very HEART of the tribes claims ... the water intake at Fort Yates, just downstream from the pipeline’s crossing of the river (where the pipeline will be buried some 90+ feet below the river). The tribe’s KEY claim is the pipeline threatens what they say is the sole source of water for the reservation - the Fort Yates water intake, which is a few miles downstream from the DAPL river crossing near Cannonball, ND - the site of the protest.

The site of the protest is immaterial. If you've noticed there are fucking tanks blocking the way of the protesters from getting closer to the intake site.

It is very hard though for the water intake at the heart of the tribes claims to be threatened if it does not exist.

Which is a fact - and the tribe full well knows it. The water intake at Fort Yates - the one the tribes says is the primary source of the water for the reservation - is to be shut down in the coming MONTHS.

That particular intake is scheduled to shut down, but the goddamned river itself is still the sole source of water for the tribe, and would pose massive economic hardship if anything happened to it.
Click to expand...

good facebook hot takes, great counterargument ELC

the guy got his source data from the company website

granted, he put together a comprehensive list here, but it's filtered trash
 
TownieDeac said:
good facebook hot takes, great counterargument ELC

the guy got his source data from the company website

granted, he put together a comprehensive list here, but it's filtered trash
Click to expand...

Simply offering a counterpoint to the hottakes from the injun environmentalists.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
not trolling and I don't want to be insensitive I just don't see what the benefits are for maintaining sovereignty over tribal lands/reservations. Pride? History? meh
Click to expand...

If you don't want to be insensitive, unlike ELC, it is important to understand that sovereignty is an inherent right to self-governance and self-determination. It is not just a "thing" that tribes "stick to."

But as for benefits, how about:
-Maintain treaty relationships with US government.
-Regulate and tax own businesses.
-Establish own courts.
-Gaming rights.
-Tax advantages.
-Establish Section 17 corporations.
 
MHBDemon said:
If you don't want to be insensitive, unlike ELC, it is important to understand that sovereignty is an inherent right to self-governance and self-determination. It is not just a "thing" that tribes "stick to."

But as for benefits, how about:
-Maintain treaty relationships with US government.
-Regulate and tax own businesses.
-Establish own courts.
-Gaming rights.
-Tax advantages.
-Establish Section 17 corporations.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with the need or purpose or desire to "self-governance"
 
ImTheCaptain said:
I'm not sure I agree with the need or purpose or desire to "self-governance"
Click to expand...

It probably has to do with not wanting to be governed by the people who committed genocide against you.
 
TownieDeac said:
It probably has to do with not wanting to be governed by the people who committed genocide against you.
Click to expand...

lots of people don't want to be governed by the US federal government. there are other ethnic groups who can claim to deserve their own separate dominion due to their treatment by the government.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
lots of people don't want to be governed by the US federal government. there are other ethnic groups who can claim to deserve their own separate dominion due to their treatment by the government.
Click to expand...

Which other groups were indigenous to the continent?
 
incredulous.gif
 
Right, so it's about pride/sense of self. Who can argue that sovereignty has had a net positive effect on the generational well-being of the people of these tribes?
 
This is an awfully paternalistic/imperialist argument, dude. We're like a step away from noble savage talk.
 
how so? I'm not talking about compelling anyone to do anything. I'm just wondering if integration with the rest of the US would have resulted in more positive outcomes for these communities. Or if it would going forward.
 
They still have to follow federal laws. What assimilation/integration are you even specifically talking about? You're really following circular logic if you're saying hey, see how shitty you've been treated for being outsiders? Well...ever considered not being outsiders? That's some paternalistic, 1st grade melting pot bullshit. These folks speak English, pay taxes, go to schools and work, etc. What exactly is missing? Giving up their land for a pithy payout and a pipeline, compromising values that go way farther back than Eurocentric Christian values?
 
TownieDeac said:
They still have to follow federal laws. What assimilation/integration are you even specifically talking about? You're really following circular logic if you're saying hey, see how shitty you've been treated for being outsiders? Well...ever considered not being outsiders? That's some paternalistic, 1st grade melting pot bullshit. These folks speak English, pay taxes, go to schools and work, etc. What exactly is missing? Giving up their land for a pithy payout and a pipeline, compromising values that go way farther back than Eurocentric Christian values?
Click to expand...

Plenty of ethinc enclaves exist int he US, have their own subcultures and continue to exist. I never said sell the soul and try to be a WASP. That seems to be the knee-jerk reaction to my questions here.

What are they gaining by maintaining the reservation system, other than nominal self determination?
 
TownieDeac said:
This is an awfully paternalistic/imperialist argument, dude. We're like a step away from noble savage talk.
Click to expand...

Gimme a break. The state of many indian reservations is somewhere between cesspool and shitburger. It isn't condescending to ask if maybe the reservation model isn't working out for many.

That said, several of the reservations are thriving and there is a pretty good correlation between the state of a reservation and whether or not it has a casino which puts money back into the community and employs its members. Not sure that would help many of these in Sioux country, though, as the Dakotas aren't exactly a thriving population center.
 
I feel like all we need is knight and his Andrew Jackson avatar to come through and sort this out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top