It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dakota Access Protesters Leave Abandoned, Frost-Bitten Dogs

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Of they were shot at, arrested and hospitalized and unable to retrieve their dogs. That's probably a lot closer to the truth.

And secondly....if one man burns a tent or one man leaves a couple of dogs do you then condemn all protesters?



They knew the possibilities but yet they still put their pets and children in danger.

Shame on them.




posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I guess being a self righteous asshole has its flaws.



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
Kind of quiet in here, any other time a an animal story comes up people call for death but since it was about the pipeline zip.


Some of the SJW's took their kids along with them. I can't condone that.

www.sayanythingblog.com...



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

I have no idea what they thought. But since they were on treatied land, and forced out by militarized police, because of corporate interests. Well, you do the math.

Native Americans (and the guy with the knife looks Native American) have been killing deer for 100s, if not a thousand years. Certainly doesn't look like they did it "just for fun." *eye roll*

What else ya got?



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence




I have no idea what they thought. But since they were on treatied land, and forced out by militarized police, because of corporate interests. Well, you do the math.


You are not aware that the Standing Rock Tribe asked them to leave ?
You are ill informed about this whole situation, like most SJW's are.
Did you know Standing Rocks sister had served within the Obama administration?
Did you know there is existing pipeline crossing where they are at?
Did you know the pipeline follows an existing pipeline corridor?




FORT YATES, ND – In a unanimous vote, Standing Rock Sioux tribal council members voted to close the network of encampments behind the Dakota Access Pipeline protests within 30 days, including the main Oceti Sakowin, Rosebud, and Sacred Stone camps. Council members also voted against providing any temporary camps or shelters to individuals who should remain at the camps after the February 19 deadline. The decision was made in an emergency meeting held on Friday, January 20 at the tribe’s headquarters in Fort Yates, North Dakota.

edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
First off nobody in their right mind would bring children or pets to an outdoor protest in sub-freezing temperatures- especially camping out in tents in such harsh weather conditions. Secondly since we know that people actually DID bring children and pets with them in such conditions then obviously they were not in their right minds so it doesn't shock me that some may have abandoned their pets there.

And for those who would say that maybe they were injured or arrested or forced out so that's why they didn't take their pets: Why didn't any of the others grab the animals as they were being forced out? No matter whose animals they were for a group of people who claim to be so righteous in their intentions of protecting the environment you would think at least a few of them would be concerned for the welfare of the animals and rescue them hoping to reconnect with the owners soon after.

While I wouldn't consider myself any sort of "animal rights activist" or anything I could never leave an animal to freeze or starve to death!



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence




I have no idea what they thought. But since they were on treatied land, and forced out by militarized police, because of corporate interests. Well, you do the math.


You are not aware that the Standing Rock Tribe asked them to leave ?
You are ill informed about this whole situation, like most SJW's are.
Did you know Standing Rocks sister had served within the Obama administration?
Did you know there is existing pipeline crossing where they are at?
Did you know the pipeline follows an existing pipeline corridor?




FORT YATES, ND – In a unanimous vote, Standing Rock Sioux tribal council members voted to close the network of encampments behind the Dakota Access Pipeline protests within 30 days, including the main Oceti Sakowin, Rosebud, and Sacred Stone camps. Council members also voted against providing any temporary camps or shelters to individuals who should remain at the camps after the February 19 deadline. The decision was made in an emergency meeting held on Friday, January 20 at the tribe’s headquarters in Fort Yates, North Dakota.


I'm well aware of what's happening.

What does SJW have to do with this? Just another BS way to poke partisanship in this?
What does Obama have to do with this?


“We want to stress that we are cleaning the camps, not clearing them,” the tribe posted on Facebook on Saturday. “We do not support or endorse any ‘raids.’ We have not asked for law enforcement to assist in clearing camps and in fact have repeatedly told them there will be no forcible removal.”


Yeah

I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.

What the hell does Obama have to do with this?

edit on 27-2-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.


You just proved how little you know, the pipeline does not go thru reservation land.

Here's a pick of Obama standing with the Chief and his sister in this link. Don't forget how much Warren Buffet gainedmade while he was shipping all that crude by rail.indiancou ntrymedianetwork.com


edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)

edit on Mon Feb 27 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: attempt to fix BB code



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence


I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.


You just proved how little you know, the pipeline does not go thru reservation land.


It goes through treatied land.

And the tip (disputed) of the reservation.
edit on 27-2-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
Any other evidence, pics for example, of the "Frost-Bitten Dogs"? Than some lonely words from a questionable source?
So we just have to believe?

Ah, if it hits the evil leftists(if they even were left, a leftist seems to be everybody that doesn´t fit the rghtwingers nuts agenda), no evidence is needed, alternative facts have to be enough.

Running gag former USA hits it again...
Sane people worldwide even don´t laugh anymore about the former USA and it´s new "King", his followers, they just ignore that idiocracy happening in the OST m,eanwhile, shaking tired their heads and go on with important things.
The former USA isn´t importaqnt anymore, it became nothing more than a running gag.


Yes but now that we have an actual government in charge they will quit laughing post haste.



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence


I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.


You just proved how little you know, the pipeline does not go thru reservation land.


It goes through treatied land.

No, it doesn't. You are wrong. Standing Rock itself did not even argue that mistaken belief in their court case what makes you think you are right and they are wrong?
edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)





And the tip (disputed) of the reservation.
edit on 27-2-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



Even with your edit, it is still a false claim. The DAPL does not go thru tribal land. Don't you think Standing Rock would have brought this up in their court case? The DAPL follows an existing pipeline corridor and crosse Lake Oahe at the same spot as an existing pipeline.
edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: zosimov
As usual, people seem to be more concerned about the animals that were left behind than the people who left them there.

Sad.


Excuse me, but those very same people left the dogs and the trash. Am I supposed to be "concerned" about them given their behavior? They claim to be "environmentalists" yet they left 25 garbage trucks full of trash behind. I'm sad all right, sad that thy didn't get some significant jail time.



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence


I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.


You just proved how little you know, the pipeline does not go thru reservation land.


It goes through treatied land.

No, it doesn't. You are wrong. Standing Rock itself did not even argue that mistaken belief in their court case what makes you think you are right and they are wrong?


No, I'm not.

Look at the damned map, and the proposed pipeline route.



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence


I know the previous proposed pipeline route and the current. The previous was above the land, the current is through the tip of the reservation.


You just proved how little you know, the pipeline does not go thru reservation land.


It goes through treatied land.

No, it doesn't. You are wrong. Standing Rock itself did not even argue that mistaken belief in their court case what makes you think you are right and they are wrong?


No, I'm not.

Look at the damned map, and the proposed pipeline route.


Proposed pipeline route? I hope you know the pipeline is about 95 percent completed? You realize it will be only a matter of a month or two till it is flowing oil?
You are wrong, the DAPL does not go through treatied land.

Notice what treaty the Standing Rock tribe has on their own webpage?

FORT LARAMIE TREATY


APRIL 29, 1868


I hope you understand that the treaties themselves made provisions for infrastructure improvements.
It's a moot point to argue if it does or does not go through treaty land.

They withdraw all pretence of opposition to the construction of the railroad now being built along the Platte River and westward to the Pacific Ocean, and they will not in future object to the construction of railroads, wagon-roads, mail-stations, or other works of utility or necessity, which may be ordered or permitted by the laws of the United States.

edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Quit being dense. You'll just look silly.

Or worse, stupid.


edit on 27-2-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Yea, you might want to check out what treaty is in effect.
The 1851 treaty is not the correct answer.
Try this one, its the one Standing Rock falls under.
FORT LARAMIE TREATY
APRIL 29, 1868


I'm not the one that is misinformed here.
edit on 27-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence

Yea, you might want to check out what treaty is in effect.
The 1851 treaty is not the correct answer.
Try this one, its the one Standing Rock falls under.
FORT LARAMIE TREATY
APRIL 29, 1868


I'm not the one that is misinformed here.


The 1868 treaty doesn't change much, either. And those treaties still hold effect.

Try again.



posted on Feb, 27 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Liquesence

Yea, you might want to check out what treaty is in effect.
The 1851 treaty is not the correct answer.
Try this one, its the one Standing Rock falls under.
FORT LARAMIE TREATY
APRIL 29, 1868


I'm not the one that is misinformed here.


The 1868 treaty doesn't change much, either. And those treaties still hold effect.

Try again.

It didn't change much? hahahaa, go look at a map, you found the first one, I'm sure you won't post the second one, it will defeat your agenda, and you will be showing a map that does indeed show the DAPL is not on tribal land. Again, if it was on tribal land, do you not think Standing Rock would have presented that in their court case?



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join