kalibex said:Joe said:I think this pipeline protest business is part of either a deliberate campaign to get a revolution going, just one part of the campaign to whip up a certain section of the population, to create a particular climate. The anti-Trump business seems to be part of that. The more I think about it the more I think that the defining aspect of a Trump presidency is going to be some kind of revolution or social chaos in the USA, with Trump simply being used as the fall guy.
Does this statement imply that you believe that the native protestors are also being used and manipulated into taking a stand that they can't win? This no-DAPL protest is not exactly inconsistent with their general beliefs and philosophy. This protest also did not just start with the Trump presidency.
I was wondering the same thing... I have a close acquaintance who seems well informed on this issue and has visited the protest camps several (3-4?) times as a support volunteer. This is my understanding of the situation:
- In an early proposal the pipeline would have crossed the Missouri River north of Bismark, ND but it was rerouted through Standing Rock so it could cross the river south of the city. The popular understanding is that this was done because of concerns about the pipeline polluting upriver from a large city full of white people and is a case of "environmental racism" http://abcnews.go.com/US/previously-proposed-route-dakota-access-pipeline-rejected/story?id=43274356
- The popular story is that the route through standing rock is a problem for several reasons: 1. it disturbs (already destroyed in some cases) sacred sites 2. the route goes under Oahe (feeds into the Missouri River) and many fear it will leak into and poison the water 3. the route illegally crosses sovereign Dakota Sioux lands when they have expressly forbidden it and they are being forced to accept it. All of these points sound quite plausible to me.
- I found a "Pro" site that advances the company position: https://daplpipelinefacts.com/ . It might be a whitewashing/greenwashing propaganda effort but its interesting because it directly contradicts the popular notion that the pipeline crosses Sioux lands. It also compares the DAPL pipeline to an existing pipeline that follows the same route and insists that the new pipeline will be much safer because it will be buried much more deeply under the lake
ADDED:
Not sure if this is accurate or propaganda, it comes from an obviously pro pipeline site and has the feel of slick marketing so... FWIW
Getting back to Joe's point:
Joe said:I think this pipeline protest business is part of either a deliberate campaign to get a revolution going, just one part of the campaign to whip up a certain section of the population, to create a particular climate.
Is this an effort to deliberately provoke the Sioux and their supporters by routing the pipeline through their lands and forcing them to accept it? Are their legitimate concerns that are being deliberately blown out of proportion to manufacture a divisive situation?
Added: I haven't yet listened to the sott radio episode covering this issue that was mentioned a few weeks ago, so my apologies if any of this is redundant.