Neil Young rocks the tar sands

[jacee]

I'm not saying the guy is out buying shares in Suncor but the fact is that at the start of his tour he's paints the pictures of the oil sands by comparing them to Hiroshima and absolutely slamming their exsistence AND now he says and I quote:

IF he were dead set against the tar sands and IF he felt they were as big of an evil as he made them out to be, then there would be no IF before the tar sands expansion. Under no circumstance should the oil sands be developed IF you actually believe that strongly against them. He also went on to admit that he does use a private jet for some shows. What? This admission after the whole whoop da la about his 'green car'? Sure....he might not like the oil sands but he apparently is ok enough with their development as long as the First Natons treaties are honored.

I love Neil Young ( Daryl Hanna? Please say it isn't so!) and what he's trying to do - bring attention to the effects of oilsands/pipelines etc on the environment and the lives and livlihoods of Indigenous Peoples in the path of resource developments.

However, and I said this earlier too, I think he was a bit naive and uninformed when he began this tour, and I believe it's been a learning experience for him too. I think his view of Canada was sentimental memories of the heady 70's, now better informed of the fact that Canada hasn't stood still while he was away. And I think his idylic view of Indigenous Peoples living blissfully off the land and being harassed and disturbed by resource developments has been updated to a more realistic view too.

And I think he accomplished his goal of creating conversations like this one. Without diverse views coming together - albeit sometimes explosively at first - there is no real progress. If we are to develop resources in a sustainable way (Is that just empty rhetoric from the oil industry?), all viewpoints have to be part of the solutions and have to be respected as such.

I have challenged you, AccNow, on respect.

I believe you do hold prejudice toward Indigenous Peoples that taints your contributions to conversations and progress and I will always challenge your broadbrush negative generalizations as such. Racism is ugly and counterproductive, small minded and mean and will NEVER contribute to anything that is good in life. Snarky offerings like "vast majority" instead of "all" are not improvements but entrenchment of your purpose of slamming Indigenous people. I believe that, more than any interest in the oil sands, is your purpose in these conversations, and it isn't helpful, it isn't right and it lacks human decency.

You have skirted the issue of whether Indigenous Peoples "deserve" to share in the wealth generated by resource and other developments on their traditional lands, and have influence on how those developments occur.

I challenge you now to open this conversation directly by starting a new thread, since it goes far beyond the oil sands.

And I challenge you to participate in that discussion of Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada without making broadbrush negative generalizations about Indigenous Peoples.

Are you up to that?

.

Edited January 27, 2014 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

clearly, you read only what you want to read... only what your agenda calls for you to read (and parrot).

is stopping rapid expansion any different from, alternatively, encouraging more responsible expansion?

Clearly you just can't read....period. Rapid expansion and responsibile expansion....are both expansion. Neil Young and his entourage came in wanting it shut down. Remember...we don't need oil. But what's that Neil...you do fly private jets to your shows. But that's ok....I'll get other people to stop using it to offset my sins! Lol.

[waldo]

Clearly you just can't read....period. Rapid expansion and responsibile expansion....are both expansion. Neil Young and his entourage came in wanting it shut down. Remember...we don't need oil. But what's that Neil...you do fly private jets to your shows.

wanting it shut down? How did I miss that? Anything I've read has Mr. Young speaking in terms of emissions reductions and managed growth... only in your bizarro reality does that equate to "stopping". Your latest 'smoking gun' article is simply you continuing to fabricate your ongoing nonsense. Clearly, to you, there's only one kind of expansion... full-bore, flat-out, unfettered and unqualified expansion dictated by industry!

.

But that's ok....I'll get other people to stop using it to offset my sins! Lol.

does your LOL extend to the Alberta Government and how it leverages credits in emissions calculations? Keep digging that hole of yours, hey!

.

[jacee]

Clearly you just can't read....period. Rapid expansion and responsibile expansion....are both expansion. Neil Young and his entourage came in wanting it shut down. Remember...we don't need oil. But what's that Neil...you do fly private jets to your shows. But that's ok....I'll get other people to stop using it to offset my sins! Lol.

So is this just about slamming Neil Young or slamming Indigenous people or slamming somebody or other to you AN?

Or do you have the guts to take on real issues to try to make a real contribution to progress toward real solutions?

.

[Accountability Now]

I have challenged you, AccNow, on respect.

I believe you do hold prejudice toward Indigenous Peoples that taints your contributions to conversations and progress and I will always challenge your broadbrush negative generalizations as such. Racism is ugly and counterproductive, small minded and mean and will NEVER contribute to anything that is good in life. Snarky offerings like "vast majority" instead of "all" are not improvements but entrenchment of your purpose of slamming Indigenous people. I believe that, more than any interest in the oil sands, is your purpose in these conversations, and it isn't helpful, it isn't right and it lacks human decency.

Yes...I have seen your challenges. It has been pointed out by two other MLW members how quickly you pull out the race card if you don't like what you are hearing. As for challenges, you seem to respond to posts you want but then totally avoid the ones you don't. You never did respond to Bogues or myself regarding the so called rascist allegation over taking money versus the environment. You never did respond to my Globe and Mail article regarding Neil Young's backpedal on oil sands development if the treaties are honored. And I posted it twice....the second one specifically at your request. You ask people to discuss issues respectfully yet you have no idea on how to do it yourself. I made a statement about native groups saying that they claim to push the environmental issues but once the money comes in, then these issues don't rank as high as money. And low and behold, on the very Neil Young thread we are discussing this on....it turns out this is the very case with the Athabasca Chipewyan group. In addition to that group you have many other native people in Alberta that are benefiting immensely from these 'dangerous' oil sands. I am all for responsibly developing the oilsands waldo is suggesting but you can't sit and bash the oil sands when you're not getting the money and then say well...its ok to develop (rapidly or responsibly) as long as we get our share.

You have skirted the issue of whether Indigenous Peoples "deserve" to share in the wealth generated by resource and other developments on their traditional lands, and have influence on how those developments occur.

I challenge you now to open this conversation directly by starting a new thread, since it goes far beyond the oil sands.

And I challenge you to participate in that discussion of Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada without making broadbrush negative generalizations about Indigenous Peoples.

Are you up to that?

.

Skirted? Not even close....I outright told you that my issue here has NOTHING to do with whether they deserve it or not. Why would we talk about it if it has NOTHING to do with it. Unlike you I actually respond to the posts.

As for starting a new thread....go ahead if you want. I'll participate. Having said that, I have already been through this with you on the First Nation Patience Waning Thread and other native threads. If you have something new to bring up then go for it. I trust others will be happy to participate too.

[waldo]

I love Neil Young ( Daryl Hanna? Please say it isn't so!) and what he's trying to do - bring attention to the effects of oilsands/pipelines etc on the environment and the lives and livlihoods of Indigenous Peoples in the path of resource developments.

for what any leveraged celebrity can bring forward, Ms. Hannah is not some 'Darryl come lately'... she has a long standing presence through years of climate change related protests.

[Accountability Now]

wanting it shut down? How did I miss that? Anything I've read has Mr. Young speaking in terms of emissions reductions and managed growth... only in your bizarro reality does that equate to "stopping". Your latest 'smoking gun' article is simply you continuing to fabricate your ongoing nonsense. Clearly, to you, there's only one kind of expansion... full-bore, flat-out, unfettered and unqualified expansion dictated by industry!

I guess the title of the article is too much for you so here is a Neil Young quote

“We will thank the First Nation for stopping this, if they’re able to stop it, because in 20 years from now or 30 years from now, we’ll be able to look at all of the areas we saved and they’ll still be here,” Young said Thursday.

Of course, you don't have to believe me....you can go right to the Honor the Treaties website and see this one:

Please stand with Neil, stand with the ACFN to draw a line in the sand against tar sands expansion. The time is now to stop the expansion and force government accountability.

does your LOL extend to the Alberta Government and how it leverages credits in emissions calculations? Keep digging that hole of yours, hey!

Nope...my LOL was directed right at Neil for being a hypocrite and for you defending him.

[Accountability Now]

So is this just about slamming Neil Young or slamming Indigenous people or slamming somebody or other to you AN?

Or do you have the guts to take on real issues to try to make a real contribution to progress toward real solutions?

.

This is about slamming hypocrites. I have no problem with people who are trying to protect the environment. The TRUE people...not these phonies. The true people stand behind what they believe in.

Watch the videos that Neil Young or David Suzuki or the First Nations when they discuss the oil sands. All they talk about are death and stealing from the land. BUT WAIT....now they get in on the financial action? All those very serious things don't matter as much as money. That's called hypocrisy Jacee. Plain and simple.

[Accountability Now]

for what any leveraged celebrity can bring forward, Ms. Hannah is not some 'Darryl come lately'... she has a long standing presence through years of climate change related protests.

Wow...you didn't even comment on the part where EVEN Jacee admits that Neil Young came into this naive and uninformed. I thought for sure you were going to bash her with your normal waldoisms with my personal favorite being bluster.

[waldo]

...its ok to develop (rapidly or responsibly) as long as we get our share.

setting aside the direct calls for emissions reductions and responsible/managed expansion, whether it's Mr. Young... or a First Nations Chief, speaking to honouring treaties within a tarsands development context, none of that qualifies what "honouring treaties" means/implies. How do you (most selectively) know that "honouring", from a Mr. Young/First Nations Chief perspective, doesn't mean/imply...... responsible, managed development? Answer: you don't know! You simply, per norm, fabricate the understanding that fits your bias, fits your agenda.

[Accountability Now]

setting aside the direct calls for emissions reductions and responsible/managed expansion, whether it's Mr. Young... or a First Nations Chief, speaking to honouring treaties within a tarsands development context, none of that qualifies what "honouring treaties" means/implies. How do you (most selectively) know that "honouring", from a Mr. Young/First Nations Chief perspective, doesn't mean/imply...... responsible, managed development? Answer: you don't know! You simply, per norm, fabricate the understanding that fits your bias, fits your agenda.

I have posted the word STOP development from multiple sources. What else do you need?

EDIT: If they truly wanted to have responsible development instead of stopping altogether than why have they not said that? Why did they not meet with industry execs? They would have all the audience they need....but no.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Accountability Now

[waldo]

I have posted the word STOP development from multiple sources. What else do you need?

and again, you read what you want into an article, or the title an author chooses to apply... you fabricate what you want into an article. It's what you do; it's what you're all about. Clearly, calling for a stop to rapid expansion does not contradict a like call encouraging more responsible expansion... no matter how much you fabricate and continue to ply your BS.

clearly, you read only what you want to read... only what your agenda calls for you to read (and parrot).

is stopping rapid expansion any different from, alternatively, encouraging more responsible expansion?

oh look, from your own referenced article... Mr. Young has the nerve, the unmitigated gall to actually qualify expansion!

On Sunday, Young accused the government of “trading integrity for money” when it came to Alberta’s oil sands and said the rapid expansion of mines was “killing” First Nations people.

.

[Accountability Now]

and again, you read what you want into an article, or the title an author chooses to apply... you fabricate what you want into an article. It's what you do; it's what you're all about. Clearly, calling for a stop to rapid expansion does not contradict a like call encouraging more responsible expansion... no matter how much you fabricate and continue to ply your BS.

oh look, from your own referenced article... Mr. Young has the nerve, the unmitigated gall to actually qualify expansion!

.

Show me where he says he supports expansion in any shape or form.

[waldo]

Show me where he says he supports expansion in any shape or form.

duh! When Mr. Young raised concerns over the need to reduce emissions..... was that reduced emissions for something... stopped? Oh my... like i said, keep digging your hole... deeper!

[waldo]

But that's ok....I'll get other people to stop using it to offset my sins! Lol.

does your LOL extend to the Alberta Government and how it leverages credits in emissions calculations? Keep digging that hole of yours, hey!

apparently, this was selectively bypassed. Are you trying to peel away from showcasing you haven't a clue as to how the Alberta Government is calculating tarsands emissions?

.

[Accountability Now]

duh! When Mr. Young raised concerns over the need to reduce emissions..... was that reduced emissions for something... stopped? Oh my... like i said, keep digging your hole... deeper!

Redcuing emissions would come from STOPPING the development. You have shown nothing here....as usual.

[Accountability Now]

apparently, this was selectively bypassed. Are you trying to peel away from showcasing you haven't a clue as to how the Alberta Government is calculating tarsands emissions?

.

Hmmm....don't know...or don't care?

[waldo]

Redcuing emissions would come from STOPPING the development. You have shown nothing here....as usual.

and reducing emissions would come from cutting back on the degree of rapid expansion... or managing that expansion with emissions in mind. You have shown nothing (new) here. You have simply shown, once again, that you can and you will read whatever you want into any statement. How desperate are you?

[waldo]

Hmmm....don't know...or don't care?

of course not! It's fine for you to selectively criticize Mr. Young, to LOL at Mr. Young, over your inferred "credit offsets" reference. However, it's clearly a most inconvenient truth to point out to you one of the mechanisms, a like mechanism, used by the Alberta Government in calculating tarsands emissions. Yes, a most selective "don't know, don't care" on your part!

[Accountability Now]

and reducing emissions would come from cutting back on the degree of rapid expansion... or managing that expansion with emissions in mind. You have shown nothing (new) here. You have simply shown, once again, that you can and you will read whatever you want into any statement. How desperate are you?

I have shown quotes including a DIRECT quote from the Honor the Treaties website saying they want to STOP development. I have also shown that STOPPING development will reduce the green house gases.

Show me your quote on them supporting reasonable expansion of oil sands. Or as they call it...the tar sands...aka Hiroshima....aka the cause of cancer in that area. Yes...waldingo....they really have gotten behind the responsible expansion train.

Again...as I see you side stepped it....WHY did they avoid the opportunity to meet with the oil industry execs if they wanted support a slower expansion rather than rapid? Why would you NOT take that opportunity?

[Accountability Now]

of course not! It's fine for you to selectively criticize Mr. Young, to LOL at Mr. Young, over your inferred "credit offsets" reference. However, it's clearly a most inconvenient truth to point out to you one of the mechanisms, a like mechanism, used by the Alberta Government in calculating tarsands emissions. Yes, a most selective "don't know, don't care" on your part!

Um no....I criticized Neil because he's a hypocrite.

[waldo]

I have shown quotes including a DIRECT quote from the Honor the Treaties website saying they want to STOP development.

yes, you provided a quote... an unsubstantiated quote you didn't attribute. And again, you haven't a clue as to what "honouring the treaties" means to First Nation peoples in regards tarsands development. You have no clue, so you fabricate. But you really need to make up your mind here; you obviously want it both ways... it clearly suits all manner of BS you can lay down! But really, which of these are you going with:

- is it, stopping development, outright?... or

- is it, full speed ahead with any/all development, so long as treaties are honoured?

make up your mind!

.

I have also shown that STOPPING development will reduce the green house gases.

ya, ya... I can repeat myself to! Here, have another.

.

and reducing emissions would come from cutting back on the degree of rapid expansion... or managing that expansion with emissions in mind. You have shown nothing (new) here. You have simply shown, once again, that you can and you will read whatever you want into any statement. How desperate are you?

.

Again...as I see you side stepped it....WHY did they avoid the opportunity to meet with the oil industry execs if they wanted support a slower expansion rather than rapid? Why would you NOT take that opportunity?

really? I would of thought someone with your self-proclaimed multi-national business experience would have known something about negotiations!

[waldo]

Um no....I criticized Neil because he's a hypocrite.

Breaking, breaking: A self-serving, parroting fabricator calls someone else a hypocrite. News at 11:00!

[Accountability Now]

But you really need to make up your mind here; you obviously want it both ways... it clearly suits all manner of BS you Neil Young can lay down! But really, which of these are you Neil Young going with:

- is it, stopping development, outright?... or

- is it, full speed ahead with any/all development, so long as treaties are honoured?

make up your mind Neil!

I think you are actually close to understanding the hypocrisy involved here however as always...you are a few steps behind. I took the liberty (for the sake of this thread) to correct a few errors in your statement above and replace them with the proper words.

Is this Hiroshima, where there is no land to develop because its all poisoned....or is it now ok as long as we do it slowly. WOW!!!

really? I would of thought someone with your self-proclaimed multi-national business experience would have known something about negotiations!

It is my multi-national business experience that taught me to never pass up the opportunity for a meeting. I guess they don't teach you any of that stuff down at Overwaitea.

[Accountability Now]

for what any leveraged celebrity can bring forward, Ms. Hannah is not some 'Darryl come lately'... she has a long standing presence through years of climate change related protests.

Wow...you didn't even comment on the part where EVEN Jacee admits that Neil Young came into this naive and uninformed. I thought for sure you were going to bash her with your normal waldoisms with my personal favorite being bluster.

I thought I would bump this forward since you want to avoid it.

Even Jacee realizes how naive and uninformed Neil Young is. Yikes....looks like you are all alone on this one waldo.