Nuxfanabroad Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 Appears a potential catastrophe of apocalyptic-apostrophes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Actually they have been that way for a while and the Americans love it. Canada is so resource rich and yet the americans have cost Alberta and the rest of Canada so much. For example: If I am not mistaken, Chrissy Brett was also the leader of the Victoria tent cities, despite not actually being homeless. It's like she's some sort of professional protester or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 5 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: I’m curious how the numbers look in each country with respect to aboriginal populations. Disgraceful numbers in any event. I’ve refrained from saying too much on this thread mainly because I’m woefully ignorant on the subject. Well first of all so many are uneducated on this matter and rightfully so as it's very complex. This "we give them enough money" is utter nonsense and shows how little some are educated on the matter. "The numbers " is irrelevant as Canada should insure all it's citizens are free and given the same opportunity. I know you don't mean anything rude by it and you're just curious. Make no mistake the treatment of indigenous people is disgraceful and inhumane, a country as rich as Canada can supply all, ALL it's citizens with safe drinking water. Also make no mistake the treatment and racism shown to First Nations people took place because of our governments feeling they were inferior. One of the few good things Harper ever did was his apology to First Nations for residential schools and he pointed out how they were viewed as less equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 this is becoming a joke, arrest these people, punch them in the face, cut off gas to the reveres. if that was me someone would have met my fist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 canlt believe Canada economy is held up because some natives are not making money. if the band supports it why are these idiots protesting, probably paid by Trudeau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 21 minutes ago, goalie13 said: For example: If I am not mistaken, Chrissy Brett was also the leader of the Victoria tent cities, despite not actually being homeless. It's like she's some sort of professional protester or something. paid by the government of canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: Are you in Canada finding it odd the your media is basically ignoring the majority of Wet'suwet'un members who have agreed to the pipeline and stated they don't know who most of the protesters are? nah that canadian media for u. supporting unemployed people who do not want to work that want live on welfare. CBC is probably paying them a good amount Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 15 minutes ago, Squamfan said: canlt believe Canada economy is held up because some natives are not making money. if the band supports it why are these idiots protesting, probably paid by Trudeau the lower mainland and Quebec have drastically hurt the Canadian economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 42 minutes ago, goalie13 said: For example: If I am not mistaken, Chrissy Brett was also the leader of the Victoria tent cities, despite not actually being homeless. It's like she's some sort of professional protester or something. so this is wrong, you can't be barred from entering your workplace. The RCMP needs to clear the path for Popham there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 34 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: "The numbers " is irrelevant as Canada should insure all it's citizens are free and given the same opportunity. I know you don't mean anything rude by it and you're just curious. Yeah among the more insidious practices was the compulsory sterilization during some periods/areas....no word other than evil to describe that policy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: Are you in Canada finding it odd the your media is basically ignoring the majority of Wet'suwet'un members who have agreed to the pipeline and stated they don't know who most of the protesters are? Both sides are being covered, just the protests are flasher media fodder so people want to see them covered. Seems to me more people want the pipeline to go through though, if you're paying attention. That said, I don't see much talk of who the protesters are other than here on CDC. I don't understand the rights of First Nations enough, I would like to know more as I don't like feeling ignorant. I guess at the end of the day, First Nations are a part of Canada, not a part from Canada. They don't really have their own territory or nations when it comes to the wishes of the rest of the country. If that's the case, then that is too bad and I understand the gripe that some of the bands are having. If they were told, here you can have this part of your land back....but with conditions , then it is not really their land. I thought they could self govern but I read that land and criminal law involves the federal gov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: Both sides are being covered, just the protests are flasher media fodder so people want to see them covered. Seems to me more people want the pipeline to go through though, if you're paying attention. That said, I don't see much talk of who the protesters are other than here on CDC. I don't understand the rights of First Nations enough, I would like to know more as I don't like feeling ignorant. I guess at the end of the day, First Nations are a part of Canada, not a part from Canada. They don't really have their own territory or nations when it comes to the wishes of the rest of the country. If that's the case, then that is too bad and I understand the gripe that some of the bands are having. If they were told, here you can have this part of your land back....but with conditions , then it is not really their land. I thought they could self govern but I read that land and criminal law involves the federal gov. so think of it like this: any land holder in Canada can have the government move in and do things if its deemed in the public interest. Lots of people have had their homes sold out from under them for national projects (or municipal for that matter). Its the same thing with so-called "crown" or unceded land, as long as there was a legitimate consultation, the impact is minimal (on the whole) and there is fair compensation the feds can do what they want. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 27 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: so think of it like this: any land holder in Canada can have the government move in and do things if its deemed in the public interest. Lots of people have had their homes sold out from under them for national projects (or municipal for that matter). Its the same thing with so-called "crown" or unceded land, as long as there was a legitimate consultation, the impact is minimal (on the whole) and there is fair compensation the feds can do what they want. My best pal took his realtor ticket ( just for fun, he's one of those types). I remember him pointing out, you don't really own the home you have bought.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 5 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: great. thats one thing. Whats next? natural resource development is an incredible opportunity for first nations people. You seem to want to kill it for what I see as a very selfish motivation on your part, some kind of misguided feel good moment. Thats weird... I was thinking you were the selfish one that wants to capitalize financially in the short term by damaging our planet longterm. with irrepairable severe climate change............ Wow, i guess we see things differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said: so think of it like this: any land holder in Canada can have the government move in and do things if its deemed in the public interest. Lots of people have had their homes sold out from under them for national projects (or municipal for that matter). Its the same thing with so-called "crown" or unceded land, as long as there was a legitimate consultation, the impact is minimal (on the whole) and there is fair compensation the feds can do what they want. Wow you are 200 % wrong... Unceded means that First Nations people never ceded or legally signed away their lands to the Crown or to Canada To be more precise: the Maritimes, nearly all of British Columbia and a large swath of eastern Ontario and Quebec, which includes Ottawa, sit on territories that were never signed away by the Indigenous people who inhabited them before Europeans settled in North America. In other words, this land was stolen Under Wet'suwet'en law, authority over the nation's 22,000 square kilometres of unceded territory lies with hereditary chiefs from five clans, who oppose the pipeline. ... A 1997 Supreme Court of Canada decision affirmed that the provincial government can't extinguish Wet'suwet'en rights to their land.Jan 24, 2020 https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/01/24/analysis/what-we-mean-when-we-say-indigenous-land-unceded Edited February 11, 2020 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 23 hours ago, canuktravella said: but u drive a car right so whos the hipocrite https://walkingeaglenews.com/2020/02/11/scores-of-canadians-feared-inconvenienced/?fbclid=IwAR1MHvRbTztiYdVj2kIiwug2c9P_cPA7A3sh4a4dw2Q__IuPbWcKlW_AjJY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 15 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Wow you are 200 % wrong... Unceded means that First Nations people never ceded or legally signed away their lands to the Crown or to Canada To be more precise: the Maritimes, nearly all of British Columbia and a large swath of eastern Ontario and Quebec, which includes Ottawa, sit on territories that were never signed away by the Indigenous people who inhabited them before Europeans settled in North America. In other words, this land was stolen Under Wet'suwet'en law, authority over the nation's 22,000 square kilometres of unceded territory lies with hereditary chiefs from five clans, who oppose the pipeline. ... A 1997 Supreme Court of Canada decision affirmed that the provincial government can't extinguish Wet'suwet'en rights to their land.Jan 24, 2020 https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/01/24/analysis/what-we-mean-when-we-say-indigenous-land-unceded spare me the oversimplified op ed's please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 16 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: A 1997 Supreme Court of Canada decision affirmed that the provincial government can't extinguish Wet'suwet'en rights to their land Too funny, a guy arguing about the law, with a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 19 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Thats weird... I was thinking you were the selfish one that wants to capitalize financially in the short term by damaging our planet longterm. with irrepairable severe climate change............ Wow, i guess we see things differently. I won't be benefitting. I want the 20 bands to benefit. You on the other hand seem to want a warm fuzzy feeling cuz saying no feels good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 11, 2020 Share Posted February 11, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I won't be benefitting. I want the 20 bands to benefit. yah right... a lawyer that claims he isn't personally benefitting... I am visualizing you sitting at a desk with your feet crossed as you typed it..... Edited February 11, 2020 by kingofsurrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now