Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by on Wednesday November 23 2016, @03:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the as-not-seen-on-tv dept.

Authorities used rubber-coated steel bullets, concussion grenades, tear gas, and water cannons against unarmed protesters near the Dakota Access oil pipeline in 26°F (-3°C) temperatures over the weekend.

Indian Country Today reports

"We have seen four gunshot wounds, three of them to the face and head", said Leland Brenholt, a volunteer medic.

[...]400 protesters, or "water protectors", attempted to dismantle a police-enforced barricade on State Highway 1806.

[...]"Water protectors are done with the military-style barricades. We are done with the floodlights and the armored military trucks. We are are done with it!" declared organizer, Dallas Goldtooth in a mid-evening Facebook post.

Their action was met with the same militarized response that the Morton County Sheriff's Department has demonstrated on protesters for weeks: the use of armored trucks, less-than-lethal ammunition, tear-gas, mace, and on this below-freezing night, water cannons.

[...]Reports from a coalition of advocacy groups near Standing Rock report hundreds of water protectors were receiving treatment for contamination by tear gas, hypothermia, and blunt traumas as a result of rubber bullets. One person, an elder, was reportedly revived after suffering cardiac arrest, organizers said.

"As medical professionals, we are concerned for the real risk of loss of life due to severe hypothermia under these conditions," read a statement from the Standing Rock Medic and Healer Council.

A more measured take is available from the AP.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
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: 2) by iamjacksusername on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:27PM

    by iamjacksusername (1479) on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:27PM (#431990)

    The point is to increase the marginal cost of the government suppressing a protest. Right now, an unarmed protest can be put down with a fractional ratio of government personnel and resources to protestors. By protestors being armed, the ratio moves in the direction of 1:1. The government can only afford to put down a one-off Bundy occupation. But imagine 5, 10 or 20 protests like that around the country? The government would have to expend a lot of personnel and resources. Those resources have to come from somewhere and that somewhere is ultimately the people. The point is to increase the price of extraction beyond the value of what is being extracted. That is how change happens.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @07:54PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @07:54PM (#432051)

    increase the marginal cost of the government suppressing a protest

    Are you so young and ill-informed as to not be aware of Waco?
    The Feds burned down the complex with children in it then concocted a "suicide" story that Lamestream Media swallowed whole.

    ...and Ruby Ridge?
    There, a Fed fatally shot a woman in the head while she was holding an infant.
    All charges against the Feds were dismissed.

    Using weapons against the gov't is a losing strategy.
    With them getting the USA military's surplus weapons gratis, the cops have you outgunned and they have no qualms about using all of their weapons as soon as you fire a shot.

    The only chance protesters have is to get their story into the media.
    It is shameful that Lamestream Media isn't even slightly interested in this story.
    To get any kind of proper coverage, so far, you need to go to New Media.

    ...and even what made it to the S/N front page was heavily censored.
    "Coverage" (AKA an Establishment whitewash) was added by a "news" agency that wasn't even on the scene.
    Lamestream Media has been using words like "clash" and "confrontation" instead of "police assault" and "police attack".
    To get more of the story, read the Original Submission [soylentnews.org]

    ...and, as has been mentioned in the (meta)thread, all gov't officials with the power to do something are pro-dirty energy and are doing nothing to uphold the treaty that USA.gov signed.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:27PM (#432068)

      The S/N editor felt compelled to add "balance" to the story by including "coverage" by Lamestream Media (who weren't on the scene).
      Jim Naureckas of Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR.org) has this to say about that:

      "Nothing to See Here" Headlines Conceal Police Violence at Dakota Access [commondreams.org]

      One almost gets the sense that editors writing headlines like these have enlisted themselves on the sheriff's team, waving spectators away with a "nothing to see here, folks".

      The Washington Post (11/21/16) got the news into the headline, but framed it from a police perspective: "Police Defend Use of Water Cannons on Dakota Access Protesters in Freezing Weather".

      AP's story mentions 17 injuries.
      Early reports from RESPONSIBLE reporters among the people on-scene said that injuries were over 200.
      The medics tending to the wounded have upgraded that figure to over 300 injured.

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:59PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:59PM (#432104)

        And you felt the need to inflate the situation by promulgating "water cannon" for "water hose". Spraying water on people in that kind of weather is horrible. So is ratcheting up the rhetoric to gain sympathy and then blame the "lamestream media". Cripes, for a guy who railed on Trump so much, you sure learn from his shitty tactics.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:20PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:20PM (#432120)

          The term was used by numerous news outlets.
          It accuracely describes a high-pressure device used to throw large volumes of water for long distances.

          Used in freezing temperatures against people who are living rough, it is definitely a weapon with potential for health-altering consequences.
          The medics specifically mentioned hypothermia.

          I'm quite sure you wouldn't want it used against you under any circumstances (it has the potential to remove skin), especially while the temperatures are below freezing.

          -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]