pipeline_mike

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/14/dakota-access-water-protectors-endanger-rivers-lea/

Hello there. I just finished reading your article. I was a Project Manager on the DAPL last year, and I must say that your article is very well researched and well written. There are some areas that could be greatly expanded upon. First and foremost is the violent behavior of some of the so-called "protestors." This behavior ranged from criminal mischief and animal abuse at its best, to intimidation, felony arson, attempted murder and terrorism at its worst. Also, the Standing Rock Sioux/"Water Protector" bloc is treated as a unified entity in your article. This is FAR from the case. Chairman David Archibald enjoys a majority of tribal support, but there is a significant pluarility of the tribe members who are strongly against his leadership in general, and were specifically against his decisions over the past couple years with regards to the DAPL. One should not ignore that the entire controversy served to enrich Archibald personally---ammong his other ventures, he owns the only gas station in town, and he was the primary beneficiary of the 100+-fold increase in local traffic as well as the accompanying demand spike in fuel and propane that resulted from the DAPL "protests." To say that there was internal resistance to the official tribal policy(and who it benefitted), is an understatement. Futhermore, there existed an even greater resentment between the Standing Rock Sioux and those who had traveled from other parts of the countryto take part in the "protests." Many of the SRS viewed these travelers as unwelcomed invaders who had only come to participate in a kind of Woodstock or Burning Man festival--a mockery. The tourist "protestors" left more than a bad taste in the mouths of many SRS. Currently, the developing issue at Cannonball is the environmental disaster that these fair-weather activists left in their wake. As Spring is upon us, the Cannonball Ranch is transitioning to its seasonal floodplain stage--threatening to wash literal tons of trash and human waste into the selfsame watershed that all of these jill Stein-led out-of-towners were ostensibly trying to protect from pollution. (Oh the irony....) The cleanup efforts are under way, as I type. Anyway, those are my intial critiques. All in all, you wrote an extremely great article, and my critiques are somewhat tangential, as they serve to dispute neither the spirit nor of the letter of your writing.

This appalling article came across my FB feed. The tin foil hat side of me thinks "trial balloon." Any way you cut it though, god damn.... Welcome back Plato. Please read and share your thoughts: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/new-family-values/6437058

Warning: this video is intense. Also, captivating.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-15/canada-releases-atrocious-jobs-data-then-revises-it-above-highest-estimate-following “These are numbers we don’t see outside recessions. I just don’t believe we’re in a recession, so therefore I would expect the full-time employment numbers to be [higher].”

@j-william. One is about a lottery winner who kidnaps a girl and keeps her in his basement. Its told from both characters' perspectives. The other is like the movie "Eyes wide shut", but actually pretty good. Come to think of it, I did not like "Eyes wide shut", but loved a similar Cruise flick: "Vanilla Sky." They produce the same kind of disorientation, but I ended up feeling very different emotions as a result. I wonder why. Maybe because the former leads the protagonist away from reality and towards madness, while the latter story is about the protagonist gradually 'waking up' from delusion.

They leave you feeling disoriented. Like, fish prefer to be near the bottom of the water body or near some sort of structure. It gives them a frame of reference with their environment. In Fowles' books, it seems like he goes out of his way to make the reader doubt any concrete reference points or narrative anchors. You never know which way is up, not even at the end. Instead of having 1 big twist/shift like in Fight Club or Ender's Game, Its one small twist after another.

I read it. and The Collector too. Both because girls suggested them to me. Beautifully written, sure. But there is something I find frustrating about John Fowles, that I can't put my finger on.

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2bmtvr/what_memory_from_your_childhood_makes_you_think/

http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2014/06/philosophy-is-a-bunch-of-empty-ideas-interview-with-peter-unger.html Anyone else notice the winds of anti-philosophy sentiment lately? (I mean above and beyond the general environment of non-thought...)

http://triviumeducation.net/

http://outlookzen.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/why-philosophy-gets-no-respect-in-society/

Here is a link of his most recent video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huZECEZzh9g He talks pretty ghetto, but at times he is amazingly well spoken and communicates with remarkable clarity. After Stef and Karen Straughan, Askchazellis is probably my favorite personality to watch on Youtube. He usually talks about relationships and gender issues, and I really enjoy his perspective on life.

@ the Matrixhasme. These guys were both pretty deep. One has been around since the very early days. @ Brentb, Thank you. @ NateC. hey Nate. Seems top be a lot of agreement with your reaction. What its like encountering a new FDR milestone(sometimes):

Brought to my attention by kind FDR meet up'er: I vehemently denied ever harboring any suicidal thoughts while simultaneously freely admitting to having indulged in alcoholism for half a decade. So, somehow I fogged the fact that I actually was practicing suicide, and happily ignored the fact. Same for smoking. Ugh. Maybe this didn't go so badly after all. Perhaps someday, they will feel the same way.

I just attended my first meet up today. It did not go well. Through a variety of means, I actively(in hindsight) did everything possible to emotionally derail the entire conversation. My actions left the other FDR members visibly ill. They more or less 86ed me, and even in the moment I could not blame them for doing so. It was like watching a car crash in slow motion. They were smart, empathetic, and all around really nice and welcoming to me. I was closed, numb and failed to empathize with either them or myself. I feel really bad right now--rejected and discouraged, alone. I know that it's my fault. I feel that I need to get professional therapy before I attempt to engage with other listeners again. It's not fair to expose them to my own emotional toxicity. Has anyone else overcome and grown from a bad experience like this? What helped?

I used to be one of those people. Try not to hate women, I can't see it being productive, and besides, you attract more flies with honey than with vinegar. This is probably why Stef is so happy all the time. He is selling happiness. (aside/ I know this is a shallow argument, open to the rebuttal: "you can attract more flies with raw shit than with fresh honey." /end aside.) Maybe there are no NAWALTs out there. I don't know. I sure as hell don't want to spend the requisite lifetime trying to figure it out for myself, when we have some evidence for their existence here in the FDR community. Anyway, like Stef says: there is no sense in arguing about the morality of the actions of Jews in the concentration camps. And that's what we are, men and women, all of us captives, living out our own value propositions. Our real enemy is the state and those who profit by maintain it---turning our basic gender traits into to weapons with which to divide us. If people like us stop breeding, then what kind of world does that leave for the outliers born into the future? Its time to change the value proposition arithmetic. Condemn. Get angry. Certainly. But, hate is a lonely waste of time. Just my take on it.

Where does this argument run off the track? (thanks to Stef, alarms started going off when he conceded the entire argument,) LINK: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-23/daniel-hannan-explains-why-socialism-does-not-work

anyone else see this on Reddit? http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/mariakonnikova/2014/05/why-do-people-persist-in-believing-things-that-just-arent-true.html?utm_source=www&utm_medium=tw&utm_campaign=20140519 and by does't, I mean doesn't.

http://www.mgtow.com/video/wendy-williams-teaches-women-to-trap-men-into-fatherhood/ What a paragon of society. Wish we had more talk show hosts like Wendy Williams.

http://outofthegdwaye.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/biblecontradictions-reasonproject.png found on /r/dataisbeautiful

If and when he actually does a YouTube video(he has discussed this topic a multitude of times in the podcasts) on this topic, he will really be throwing down the gauntlet. Who cares though? Most boomers are so far washed, there is no stitch or thread of color left to find. Lost causes, by and large, they are. Better to toss a little Molyneux at them and see what sticks.

Why bother with the fiction of legality or the violence that enforces it? Let the risks of any action accrue to the actor and let reputation be the incentive that enforces agreements between actors. Let the free society begin in our minds and how we think about things. What is the use of hanging up on the minutia of a corrupt society? You might say, "well, we are talking about an injustice that is, not what ought to be." To which I would ask, "How can we reasonably expect to achieve any real justice without first adopting the new paradigm in our own minds?"

caveat emptor