Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Journalist Charged in North Dakota with Rioting; Case is Dismissed

posted by martyb on Wednesday October 19 2016, @01:09PM   Printer-friendly
from the freedom-of-the-press dept.

butthurt writes:

Amy Goodman, host of the New York City-based leftist news programme Democracy Now! was charged with criminal trespass by the North Dakota state's attorney (prosecutor). The charge was changed to riot, then was dismissed due to lack of evidence when Goodman appeared in court on Monday. The charges stemmed from her presence at a protest in September against construction of the Dakota Access (Bakken) oil pipeline, after the protest was reported on her show.

Coverage:

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Journalist Charged in North Dakota with Rioting; Case is Dismissed | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 92 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19 2016, @07:46PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19 2016, @07:46PM (#416308)

    > So are you claiming instead that 40 pipeline jobs is more important than moving that huge amount of oil around? I just don't see the point of your argument here.

    There are a million unexamined assumptions behind your claim.
    For example, that the money spent on the pipeline couldn't be put to more productive use elsewhere.
    That the externalities of all the people using the oil shipped by the pipeline don't drown out the benefits.
    That the pipeline is really the most efficient method to get oil to the market rather than some other source more local or cheaper.

    You are the king of assuming the worst for positions you disagree with and the best for positions you agree with.
    In reality all you do is construct elaborate strawmen to rationalize your bias. Complexity, nuance, scope, differing interpretations, etc all of that is for ignorant dummies as far as you are concerned which is ironic as fuck.

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday October 19 2016, @08:10PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 19 2016, @08:10PM (#416319) Journal

    For example, that the money spent on the pipeline couldn't be put to more productive use elsewhere.

    I don't see you in a position to make that evaluation nor anyone else for that matter. In a distributed system, we don't need to be. There are key information from the economy, such as a good estimate of risk free rate of return and the price of crude in various markets, present and past that adequately informs a pipeline builder of the relative productivity of their would-be investment. They can then decide whether that's good enough or not.

    That the externalities of all the people using the oil shipped by the pipeline don't drown out the benefits.

    That's a pretty flimsy concern since cheap energy has considerable positive externality.

    That the pipeline is really the most efficient method to get oil to the market rather than some other source more local or cheaper.

    That actually a pretty easy one to figure out. It's already pretty local and pipelines are well known for being extremely cheap for the volume compared to other transportation methods.

    You are the king of assuming the worst for positions you disagree with and the best for positions you agree with.

    Compared to what you just wrote? There is an awful lot of projection on the internet.

    In reality all you do is construct elaborate strawmen to rationalize your bias. Complexity, nuance, scope, differing interpretations, etc all of that is for ignorant dummies as far as you are concerned which is ironic as fuck.

    Show it's relevant. Don't just complain.