TimG Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Native Chiefs overturn deal with Enbridge on Gateway PipelineI suspect they will end up creating a 'pipeline on rails'. Trying to placate all these native groups will be impossible. The stupid thing is the chances of a serious spill while shipping by rail is much higher than any pipeline. But environmental loons are not known for their grasp of logic. Edited January 19, 2012 by TimG Quote
jacee Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 I suspect they will end up creating a 'pipeline on rails'. Trying to placate all these native groups will be impossible. The stupid thing is the chances of a serious spill while shipping by rail is much higher than any pipeline. But environmental loons are not known for their grasp of logic. The pipeline(s) aren't the only issue: Native communities also oppose shipping oil from BC ports.I think the oil producers had better start looking at some local refining and manufacturing alternatives to shipping. It's too bad they didn't do the research and planning to know that they might face such obstacles, but that's their reality to deal with now. Quote
waldo Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 Native Chiefs overturn deal with Enbridge on Gateway PipelineI suspect they will end up creating a 'pipeline on rails'. Trying to placate all these native groups will be impossible. The stupid thing is the chances of a serious spill while shipping by rail is much higher than any pipeline. But environmental loons are not known for their grasp of logic. say what! Native Chiefs <=> environmental "loons"? Oh my! Quote
jacee Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 Just thinking ... wondering ... what Harper and Oliver think they accomplished by having such a hissy fit against environmentalists and First Nations. (It's really the latter who hold the legal power to hold up the pipeline and shipping.) To me ... nothing but showing their frustration with a process they can't bend to their wishes. Did Harper really think his word was 'law' because he has a majority of seats? It's still democracy, we still have the right to protest, and FN still have the right to have a say in what happens on their traditional lands. I suppose they let their supporters know they were p'd about the environmental process. Is that all they wanted to accomplish? Because I think they made themselves look pretty stupid to the rest of us. Quote
waldo Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 Did Harper really think his word was 'law' because he has a majority of seats? It's still democracy, we still have the right to protest, and FN still have the right to have a say in what happens on their traditional lands. Prime Minister Dad And now we have this pipeline business. Now I realize I should have paid more attention to this a year ago, but like a lot of Canadians it's just showing up on my radar now. And honestly, I don’t know if the pipeline is a good idea or a bad idea. But the good news is I no longer have to look at both sides. None of us do. No, because dad has made it perfectly clear, there’s only one side to this issue. And anyone who thinks otherwise is an enemy to Canada. I’ve got to say this is way better than the old days when we had the burden of being informed citizens on our shoulders. No, now we have a new job: to be seen and not heard. Welcome to Canada 2012. His house, his rules. God save the King. Quote
cybercoma Posted January 19, 2012 Report Posted January 19, 2012 Did Harper really think his word was 'law'That's exactly what he thinks. Quote
huh Posted January 20, 2012 Report Posted January 20, 2012 That's exactly what he thinks. You have a direct line into his consciousness? What a stupid thing to say. Maybe he thinks that if pipelines are good enough in other places all over the world they are good enough in BC, maybe if super tankers can navigate the bay of fundy they can manage the coast of bc. Or is bc just too special? Perhaps those of you who don't want these projects to happen should convince british columbians, natives included, to stop using all products derived from oil since they seemingly don't want to share in the risks involved in its production. There is probably more petroleum products spilled at gas stations and via leaky gas tanks everyday than what comes from the pipelines in this country. Quote
cybercoma Posted January 20, 2012 Report Posted January 20, 2012 Hey, at least you admit that there's a risk involved. That's a step ahead of Harper. Quote
sharkman Posted January 20, 2012 Report Posted January 20, 2012 I suspect they will end up creating a 'pipeline on rails'. Trying to placate all these native groups will be impossible. The stupid thing is the chances of a serious spill while shipping by rail is much higher than any pipeline. But environmental loons are not known for their grasp of logic. I hope it doesn't come to that, but some way, some how they will get the oil to port. I think the natives are so used to protesting anything on "their" land that this type of thing will only continue to be par for the course. Quote
waldo Posted January 20, 2012 Report Posted January 20, 2012 You have a direct line into his consciousness? I believe you've missed the emphasis... not particularly what Harper "thinks"; rather, that he presumes to stifle legitimate debate/discussion, that he presumes to supersede and/or influence the NEB process, that he/his ministers presume to cast those opposed as unpatriotic... that he presumes to cast his "thinking" as "your and my thinking". As if by divine right - God Save the King! Quote
cybercoma Posted January 20, 2012 Report Posted January 20, 2012 I hope it doesn't come to that, but some way, some how they will get the oil to port. I think the natives are so used to protesting anything on "their" land that this type of thing will only continue to be par for the course. How condescendingly white of you. They couldn't possibly have a legitimate concern. Nope. They're just being disruptive savages. Quote
TimG Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 They couldn't possibly have a legitimate concern.The are hundreds of pipelines of various sorts that criss cross the country. When a spill happen they are cleaned up and forgotten. There are no legimate concerns that justify rejecting the pipeline. The only legimate concerns are those looking into safety oversight and maintenance policies that will be used and making sure they sufficient to reduce the risk of a spill to as close to zero as possible. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.