Temagami Scourge

River: To coin an immortal phrase uttered by Arnold in the T.V. program Different Strokes : Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Willis? I've offered examples from our own government estimates when discussing Aboriginal funding, which you promptly ignored, nor have you a clue about the Indian Act (that's what I like about you...how you argue things using baseless resources, or crystal balls), so don't try to pull this "false" crap. you go to Rev can's site and show us your proof. Boo yah

River: Ah man...you have to prove this: I don't believe this for an instant, especially according to the latest research. In the olden days post WW II, the notion of the succesful immigrant had truth behind it, but that has been far from the case in the 1980's. I'm familiar with the Ornstein report, and his study totally contradicts what you state. If you read it, you'll note that Natives are actually better off than immigrants in general, and in particular African immigrants. Here is the full report: http://www.isr.yorku.ca/download/Ornstein-...o_1971-2001.pdf Buddy, you keep digging these holes for yourself...

...which is exactly why River argues that signed agreements with Natives are meaningless. Simple greed.

NC: You know, I think he might do a cute little jig for us if we tossed copper at his feet.....at least that's the impression I get from his posts.

Native Charm; Nice to see you, and may i offer a hearty welcome to this site. I see you've met Riverend. I would like to point out one particular item that completely explains River's view of Aboriginal people: River has been unable to effectively argue any other perspective, so he often plays the "power" card that "his" people have the power, so too bad. To me, I'd hate to do business with someone who thinks so lightly of signed agreements. Maybe the pertinent question should be whether signed agreements with Aboriginal people are not equal to those made between Caucasians by his standards. Besides, his idea of "equality" between Indians and the rest of Canada is like challenging us to a 100-yard dash while he gets a 95-yard headstart. Like we're that dumb....

Enskat: Brother...those videos are excellent! I'm glad someone has captured some of the stuff I've seen at Caledonia. To me, the most disturbing aspect of the video is that every one of the young Caledonians has a bottle of liquor in his hands. As I've been criticized for saying earlier, those Caledonians are mere drunks out acting thuggish because they are responding poorly to the suspension of law as much as everyone blames the Iroquois for. However, I still feel bad for these people. Native people have all manner of ceremonies and supports to address addiction, and I think it incumbent upon native people to offer assistance to these people to help them overcome their social problems. The bottom line is that it's good to feel vindicated about what I've previously described about Caledonians. As Canadians, we should all pull together to help Caledonians overcome the scourge of alcohol.

Newbie: I thought you were pretty clear in what you were implying, so I'm at a loss for a reason why BHS missed the obvious. I think half the problem is that the Bush Administration has lied so often that even BHS needs clarification as to which lie is "the " lie. "Let's call getting Bin Laden the "main goal" of The War on Terrorism Strategy Phase I (being the neutralization of Al Qaeda's HQ and infrastructure and Taliban support in Afghanistan )." See...This is a lie. If you recall Newbie, we were told by the Bush Administration that Bin Laden would be brought to justice, not "neutralized". Neutralization is simply a euphemism for "we haven't got him." The rest of BHS' post is basic information that you can get from websites like "Jane's Book of Military Tactics" or Time magazine. The rest BHS has to offer is a prescription for spending money. From my perspective, one of the oldest military axioms is "Finish what you started". History is full of magnificent failures by people like Hitler and Napolean, whose shared penchant for creating a new front before finishing off another opponent led to both of their complete defeats. America won't be beaten in the same way Hitler and Napolean were because they could single-handedly take on the entire Arab world and win conventionally, but they will inevitably get to a point where they are nickel and dimed to death. America shouldn't have turned it's back on Afghanistan and Bin Laden. Bush promised justice, and that's not happening; The U.S. should have invested serious coin into making Afghanistan a model of what a modern, secular Muslim Nation could be in order to show off to Afhanistan's neighbours...and they would have had the support of the world to do so. I'd support U.S. incursions into Pakistan, or some form of joint U.S./Pakistan operations in the Tribal area where Bin Laden is supposedly hiding out....I'm even certain that Saddam would have done something retarded in the interim and gave a more just cause for invasion, but we received the trumped-up version to take him on. The bottom line? Young american soldiers have been and continue to be compromised by their political leadership. The amount of money the U.S. has spent on Iraq could have made every single Afghan a millionaire, had they chose to go that route.

Buddy, are you for real? Iraq is completely and totally a command failure at the top. The poor soldiers there have been put into the position they find themselves in as a result of lies and exaggerations. The real enemy is still in Afghanistan, or on the Afghan/Pakistani border. Don't come here trying to tell us there is some kind of coherency entwining planning and policy because the current political administration has shown anything but. They assumed that their men would be treated like saviours, and they went to war on the cheap, but all that has happened is that the soldiers doing to hard work are put in situations that allow this sort of crap to occur. I'm surprised that you didn't say "Mission Accomplished". If anything, now that they opened the can of worms, America should be expanding their Army, drafting people if they don't volunteer, and putting the economy on a war footing, which means rationing gas etc. America could accomplish what you say, but they'll need at least half a million boots on the ground to do it. Trying to kep this fight cheap is laying American soldiers out to dry, but they'll do their best regardless. There should be at least a full company maintained in every Iraqi town, constantly patrolling and setting up an informants network. what use are troops bunkered down in huge camps, conducting the odd foray into the countryside. clear goals my arse....

River: Recent supreme Court rulings my beige butt. All bands are under the Indian Act, which rolled the treaty terms into one piece of legislation applicable to all, whether negotiated or not. Are you trying to tell me, after all that has been posted on this site about Indian Affairs, that you didn't know this most basic legal fact? Additionally, the Crown has to make such claims because of cases like the Lubicon and Temagami, where it was determined that they never signed Treaties, but they were put under them anyway to avoid legal issues with having taken unsigned land. Buddy, these treaties are being interpreted and ruled on by your fellow Canadians (politicians) and your legal system. If they bring race into play, like you always do, then take it up with them and don't leave the blame at my door. I know why they were signed and for what....I can't help it if your government never bothered to inform you of basic legal fact. This garbage about what will happen in the future is a strawman argument. Just come clean and simply say that you don't feel the need for the Crown to honour the legal agreements they made, in particular those done with Natives. Give me a break...all you want is something for nothing, which has pretty much been the standard in Canadian/Aboriginal relations for over 500 years. All you are doing, as an old buddy of mine used to so colorfully put it, is putting a new dress on a new whore. Don't give me thie "aggrieved white man" routine that Native Canada is bending over backwards to oppress you. That is beneath your style. Why, thank you. It tells me that you are unable to overcome my arguments, so you are stuck making the same contradictory points over and over again. Geez...look who's talking about being tiresome. Why can't you just refer to us as fellow Canadians, like you say we should be. Talk to me like a human, not some mindless savage.

Anyway...back to topic. When I was cruising through Caledonia last Sunday night, I couldn't believe that the group of Caledonian thugs by the Tim Hortons and Canadian Tire were openly drinking liquor. I was stopped at the first light coming into town and all these young Caledonais were boozing it up on a Sunday night! I wish I had my digital, because I would've loved to have taken a picture to send to the Aboriginal media illustrating how poorly the Caledonians are acting. It's pointless going to the mainstream because they are too busy focussing on the activities of the Natives. The one underlying issue is that these people are threatening any native person that comes into town. Typical of the Canadian experience, they think that all Indians are from Six Nations, and all Indians live on reserve, when in fact there are quite a number of Aboriginal people living in the town. I feel badly for these people, as they and their children are still threatened and intimidated by drunken crowds of rowdy caucasian youth. My son probably put it best when he said, after we drove through town, that the young Caucasian gangs wandering around Argyle Street looked like old pictures of Nazi youth persecuting Jews that he saw on History channel. I can't help but agree.

Now this is funny: Yes....and that's why our political leaders are always handing out soap stone carvings and Aboriginal paintings to visiting popes and foreign dignitaries. I often wonder why it is that Canada always uses Native culture to promote this country around the world, and yet they turn around and maintain that natives aren't good for anytthing. Hummmm?

No river, yours is the false statement. All of Canada is covered by treaty now. Only some bands are technically not under treaty because they missed treaty signings, and FN's in central Quebec don't have a treaty agreement, but everyone else does. Secondly, Charles is correct in that the Treaties are based on the fact that the Natives were here first, and were perceived to have an interest (according to the British) in the land that needed to be extinguished. The fact that we happen to have darker skin and black hair had nothing to do with the rationale behind the signings. As I've often said, I don't believe the Crown took one look at us and thought "gee, such a handsome people, why don't we sign agreements with them promising free health, housing and education, and tax exempt status because they look so darn sweet." However, that is the point you are arguing. I, on the other hand, believe that the Crown wanted control of the land without resorting to bloodshed, and signed agreements with those who had an interest in the land. now, if we compare views, who sounds more plausible? Lastly, and this too I've already told you repeatedly, but don't try to say that we should be Canadian when you keep distinguishing myself and other Aboriginal posters as Indians or Native Canadians. For someone who says that agreements were signed based on race, it makes me wonder why you always separate us by referring to yourself as a Canadian, while I am reerred to as an Indian, or Native, or Aboriginal, or Terrorist, or Welfare bum blah, blah, blah. ...and you wonder why I question your intellect. your bud; TS

I'm on my way to Six Nation's in a few minutes. I hope none of those Caledonian racists get in my face while I'm delivering food. I saw this morning's comfromtation, and, as usual, the media isn't giving the whole truth, but that's no surprise...look who makes up the media. On second thought, I do hope that some of those racists come on to me. so I can show them proper manners. Everyone should be thankful that at least one of us here is not just talking about Caledonia, but actually doing something about it. Semper Fi!

Theo: I don't see it as a strange take. The man is clearly a man of peace. I wish I was strong enough in my beliefs that I could turn the other cheek. If I was him, I'd be screaming for revenge, but he sees it as yet another unnecessary loss in an unnecessary war. I get the same impression from Capt. Goddard's dad.

Well, I can say that I've had the honour of seeing the PM's pussy.

Shoot....and here I thought that was the Oiler's bench last night! No wonder the line changes seemed especially long.....

Shady; See what I mean? I haven't argued on this thread at all, but merely added a few amusing statements. I can't understand what he is referring to with respect to arguments on this thread. river: Lad...you misinterpret me...don't think I'm personally insulting you. I'm only pointing out that you are....special. ...and as a special person, you have a way of thinking that is unique among the masses! I mean, its not eveeryone that can deny Canadian history as vigorously as you do. I, for one, consider you a special friend.

shady: Please don't fault river for not "getting" it. In my experience exchanging posts with the lad, I quickly found out that common sense and truth are not only meaningless in his world, but pointless as well. In other words, If someone asked all of us to jump, Riverend who reply "how high" while the rest of us would reply "How far". Comprende?

On another interesting note, all news sources are saying that al-Zarqawi was given up by the "no. 2 or No. 3" person in al-Qaeda in Iraq. Would this not have been a convenient way for an Iraqi underling to get rid of a Jordanian overlord and supplant him in the resistance? How do we know that things haven't got worse now?

I hear God has a hot glove hand, but he tends to butterfly too soon and isn't as adept with his poke check....but man-oh-man he lets everyone know that the crease is His....

What would've anti-war protestors said if they had been on the beaches of Normandy back during D-Day? I assume the following: 1. AHHHHHH....AHHHHHHH....Oh God.....AHHHHHHH 2. I'm hit, i'm hit....help...help...I'm bleeding....MOTHER!!!!!! 3. Hail Mary, full of Grace, the lord is with thee.... 4. We've got to get out of here, we've got to get out of here..... 5. DIG...DIG......damn you!!!!!!! 6. Nicht schiessen Kamerad! Bitte, Bitte.... 7. Get under the seawall....find cover, find cover and return fire!!!! You...with the flamethrower...take out that pillbox! 8. Hello....hello...this is an anti-war protestor on Dog Green beach....the first wave has foundered and we are under heavy fire from the bluffs....we need naval gunfire support and I mean now! This is worse than Anzio...

I think what the Americans need to do now is allow common Iraqi citizens to abuse the body, drag it behind a car or two, make a video of it all and sell it throughtout the Muslim world, with a vignette of G.W. at the end inviting people to "bring it on". Or...T-shirts can be made with al-Zarqawi's death photo on it, with headings like "bring it on" or "Do you want some of this" or "a good terrorist" or "Kill 'em all and let Allah sort them out"...or the piece de resistance: "Look, my God is Stronger than Yours".

CNN has a great "headshot" of al-Zarqawi in death CNN Feel free to copy it, blow it up, and piss on it.

I don't really think so. I think there are still many insurgents left who seem to have been operating very well without the direct guidance of al-Zarqawi. On the other hand, Coalition forces were able to make an facial ident on his body, so I can understand if Coalition forces celebrate by parading his misbegotten, terrorist head on a pole. It would be a kind of poetic justice for Nick Berg, Ken bigley et al. But the insurgency will continue.....

Please Mr. terrorist...don't behead my Prime Minister.... CBC news