Visionseeker Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 It's about time. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...rwash-park.html Way to go Ontario. Now let the healing begin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 It's about time.http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...rwash-park.html Way to go Ontario. Now let the healing begin. Indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 As long as we do not put any more money into it. I am sure it will store more than a few old cars someday soon Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 It's about time.http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...rwash-park.html Way to go Ontario. Now let the healing begin. "healing" - that's sooooo liberal....It's just good to see that our original inhabitants have one more place to stretch out in and be human...it's there place...and not the place of Harris or for people like him to harrass and pull rank - Harris is not better than they.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 I am sure it will store more than a few old cars someday soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radsickle Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) Hooeh to Dudley and Hooeh to his brother Sam. Sam Edited June 4, 2009 by Radsickle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 It's about time.http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...rwash-park.html Way to go Ontario. Now let the healing begin. Yes, it's good to know that even in this day and age you and your buds can grab your rifles, head out onto someone else's land, and then demand that land be given to you, and it will still work. Well, as long as you're some kind of visible minority type anyway, and you're dealing with a really spineless, gutless government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visionseeker Posted June 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 Hooeh to Dudley and Hooeh to his brother Sam.Sam Yes. To Sam. Raise a glass or, better yet, your own personal expectations. May Sam's spirit give the eagles a new member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visionseeker Posted June 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 (edited) Yes, it's good to know that even in this day and age you and your buds can grab your rifles, head out onto someone else's land, and then demand that land be given to you, and it will still work. Ownership of the land is sometimes disputed, not with rifles, but through the ledger of history: rifles only come out when governments refuse to read. Well, as long as you're some kind of visible minority type anyway, and you're dealing with a really spineless, gutless government. Man, you really got issues don't you. I gotta ask, when you wake up in the morning, do you pick the object of you hate then? Or do you let a few hours pass before you pick a target to piss on? Repeat after me Argus: I am a visitor on the big turtle... Once you understand that basic premise, we can explore the remaining verses. Edited June 6, 2009 by Visionseeker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 (edited) Yes, it's good to know that even in this day and age you and your buds can grab your rifles, head out onto someone else's land, and then demand that land be given to you, and it will still work.Well, as long as you're some kind of visible minority type anyway, and you're dealing with a really spineless, gutless government. There were no rifles at Ipperwash. As Dudley George's uncle said under oath: If we'd even had a .22 there would have been one dead cop that night ... but we.didn't.have.any. And yes ... it is a good day! Edited June 6, 2009 by tango Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 There were no rifles at Ipperwash.As Dudley George's uncle said under oath: If we'd even had a .22 there would have been one dead cop that night ... but we.didn't.have.any. And yes ... it is a good day! Oath? That means we must accept it as true? The protesters at Ipperwash had an agenda. I happen to agree with that agenda but that has nothing to do with true or fiction. Dudley's uncle had strong reasons to paint the OPP in as bad a light as possible. All the protesters had strong reasons not to trust the governments involved. Was that uncle in a position to know if every other protester was unarmed? He could have made a sincere statement without it being a truthful one. We have all heard government spokespeople lie under oath. Cops too. I don't know the uncle involved so I cannot give an opinion of his character but that doesn't mean I would accept anything he says as gospel, oath or no oath. No, all that counts is hard evidence and we appear to have little or none. That being said, the point is moot anyway. We have no evidence that the natives were armed, only OPP fears and after Oka, such fears were absolutely justified! In the face of no supporting evidence, it is much more likely that the claim of arms is simply an OPP excuse; an attempt to confuse the issue. Even if there WERE arms the OPP had no justification for shooting a protester unless there WAS clear and hard evidence that an officer was about to be shot himself by such a protester! A police officer does not have the right to shoot an unarmed criminal, even if he was afraid there MIGHT be a gun! What was different about Ipperwash except an officer's fear? After we sift through the little we know FOR CERTAIN, we cannot say if the natives were or were not armed. We DO know that no one has proven that Dudley George was armed! All we know is that at least one officer was very afraid. This is much more likely than him being some racist idiot out to kill natives. I'm not saying there are no racists on the OPP but surely few or none would be so stupid as to shoot a protester just for the fun of it, with such obvious repercussions. For that reason I still have to attach some blame to the native protesters, in that there's no way they could have been unaware of the ambient fear of armed native protests after incidents like Oka. If they didn't count on such a fear as a tool in their protest they would have been fools, which obviously they were not. That being said, it still doesn't justify the shooting of Dudley George. It just makes it more understandable. The situation escalated too quickly, with each side being unaware of how its actions were truly affecting the other. I see a lot of parallels with what happened to the students at Kent State, Ohio back in the 60's. That shooting should never have happened either but sadly, the factors involved made it almost inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 ....I see a lot of parallels with what happened to the students at Kent State, Ohio back in the 60's. That shooting should never have happened either but sadly, the factors involved made it almost inevitable. Close enough...it was May 4, 1970. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 Oath? That means we must accept it as true?The protesters at Ipperwash had an agenda. I happen to agree with that agenda but that has nothing to do with true or fiction. I would say the natives had an excellent case from what I've read, that they deserved to get their land back. I would point out, however, that the land they wanted back, the land which belonged to them, WAS NOT Ipperwash Provincial Park. That being said, the point is moot anyway. We have no evidence that the natives were armed, only OPP fears and after Oka, such fears were absolutely justified! In the face of no supporting evidence, it is much more likely that the claim of arms is simply an OPP excuse; an attempt to confuse the issue.Even if there WERE arms the OPP had no justification for shooting a protester unless there WAS clear and hard evidence that an officer was about to be shot himself by such a protester! From what I've read the fun started when some natives with clubs attacked some people. A native was arrested, and the rest of them tried to get him back and fought with police. Then a couple of native trucks came out of the trees, driving at police. A number of shots were then fired by a number of officers. A police officer does not have the right to shoot an unarmed criminal, even if he was afraid there MIGHT be a gu That again is simply not true. A police officer may use whatever level of force he believes is needed to protect himself or others. That means, among other things, you can shoot someone dead if they come at you with a baseball bat or club, or if they drive at you or someone else with a car or truck. In any event, a proper resolution of this would have been to return the land to the natives which was seized in ww2 - not Ipperwash Provincial Park. As far as Dudley George, that's merely a distraction, though it became a cause celebre among the empty headed liberal types. As far as weapons are concerned. I'm quite sure the natives had weapons present. Whether they brought them out or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 Close enough...it was May 4, 1970. I don't remember the kent state people carrying clubs or driving cars at police... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I don't remember the kent state people carrying clubs or driving cars at police... It seems you don't remember much about the event at all.....so here is a refresher: http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/lewihen.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I just love the First Nations elders now that they have taken control and learned very well how the white man's game is played - It's called blackmail - used to control those with the proverbial skeleton in the closet. Most certainly the Natives - have some sort of intellegence service - and have gathered very dirty information on some supposedly important people who have broken legal and moral codes - The prolonged interaction between politicans - judges and lawyers - and buisness men (developers) has been very useful - they figured out that the whole damned system is corrupt...now they lead the white man around like little piggy ponys with a ring in their nose - and nipple... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I just love the First Nations elders now that they have taken control and learned very well how the white man's game is played - It's called blackmail - used to control those with the proverbial skeleton in the closet. Most certainly the Natives - have some sort of intellegence service - and have gathered very dirty information on some supposedly important people who have broken legal and moral codes - The prolonged interaction between politicans - judges and lawyers - and buisness men (developers) has been very useful - they figured out that the whole damned system is corrupt...now they lead the white man around like little piggy ponys with a ring in their nose - and nipple... Are you opining based on your own milking of the welfare system, or do you have another point of view your are trying to advance? First Nations politicians play the game by the rules laid out by our politicians. Who can blame them when the mudslinging and accusations are used to manipulate politicians into action? We expect no less of our lobby groups and insiders to push the politician when they won't change their policy. A morally and financially corrupt system like the Canadian Government can only produce morally corrupt and financially self-interested players. The failure of this system lies not only in those who play by the rule, but those who criticize while taking hand-outs from the system in their own self-interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Are you opining based on your own milking of the welfare system, or do you have another point of view your are trying to advance?First Nations politicians play the game by the rules laid out by our politicians. Who can blame them when the mudslinging and accusations are used to manipulate politicians into action? We expect no less of our lobby groups and insiders to push the politician when they won't change their policy. A morally and financially corrupt system like the Canadian Government can only produce morally corrupt and financially self-interested players. The failure of this system lies not only in those who play by the rule, but those who criticize while taking hand-outs from the system in their own self-interest. That's a low blow. How much longer do I have to put up with twits like you? I payed my damned taxes - if I am taking an early retirement - so what - I might just come out of retirement once I found that society deserves my services - but with the like of cowardly and spiteful you - It makes me wonder if staying out of your silly system might be best. Now that we have put the personal attacks aside - YOU must realize that we do have those that are respectable in positions of power - that are NOT totally saintly human beings - do you really believe when their lawyers get in the back room together that they do not subtley threaten and coerce each other? Of course they do - Harris is no angel - nor are the first nations leaders - Caladonia came to a grinding hault because there was a stand off between their lawyers and the govs....what else could it be? As for "hand outs" - 500 and seventy dollars with the banks taking ten - Is not a hand out - it's not even pocket change - send me 5000 a month and I will glady provide some work and service - in the mean time - thanks for the cigarettes chump! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) That's a low blow. How much longer do I have to put up with twits like you? I payed my damned taxes - if I am taking an early retirement - so what - I might just come out of retirement once I found that society deserves my services - but with the like of cowardly and spiteful you - It makes me wonder if staying out of your silly system might be best. Now that we have put the personal attacks aside - YOU must realize that we do have those that are respectable in positions of power - that are NOT totally saintly human beings - do you really believe when their lawyers get in the back room together that they do not subtley threaten and coerce each other? Of course they do - Harris is no angel - nor are the first nations leaders - Caladonia came to a grinding hault because there was a stand off between their lawyers and the govs....what else could it be? As for "hand outs" - 500 and seventy dollars with the banks taking ten - Is not a hand out - it's not even pocket change - send me 5000 a month and I will glady provide some work and service - in the mean time - thanks for the cigarettes chump! I just asked the question, bud. I wanted to know if you could be objective.....and you answered in a round about way that you can't.... It is real easy to point fingers and complain about corruption. Yet when you can't acknowledge that you are part of the corrupt thinking that goes on in this country then your complaints are moot. Taking welfare, or other hand-outs when you are capable of working is the lowest of blows in society. The social safety net is there for people who can't work, or who need temporary assistance while they find other employment. Yet you admit that is it a choice - that if you feel like it you might at some point in the future become a net contributing member of society. You are doing at a lower level what politicians are doing at the higher level. You are milking the system out of choice, regardless of how it affects others. If you don't like the game being played amongst politicians, then I suggest that you get yourself out of the situation you have created for yourself and do something about. Making change requires and different way of thinking. Using the same kind of thinking that created the problem in the first place is hypocritical. And sorry...I don't get the "thanks for the cigarettes"...I don't smoke, nor do I contribute to those that do... Edited June 7, 2009 by charter.rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 I just asked the question, bud. I wanted to know if you could be objective.....and you answered in a round about way that you can't....It is real easy to point fingers and complain about corruption. Yet when you can't acknowledge that you are part of the corrupt thinking that goes on in this country then your complaints are moot. Taking welfare, or other hand-outs when you are capable of working is the lowest of blows in society. The social safety net is there for people who can't work, or who need temporary assistance while they find other employment. Yet you admit that is it a choice - that if you feel like it you might at some point in the future become a net contributing member of society. You are doing at a lower level what politicians are doing at the higher level. You are milking the system out of choice, regardless of how it affects others. If you don't like the game being played amongst politicians, then I suggest that you get yourself out of the situation you have created for yourself and do something about. Making change requires and different way of thinking. Using the same kind of thinking that created the problem in the first place is hypocritical. You know how it started - The Feds - started garnisheeing my cheques - I could not get them to understand - that an entertainment payroll company was NOT and employer - The Feds can take 100% of your last cheaque on "termination" - everyday I worked freelance was considered a termination -----so I started getting cheques that looked like this. $ 0.00 I swear - I could not reason with them - and they would not bundge - They said that I could work off a small tax debt in about 7 years - well - I need money to operate - and some group of lawyers and an immigrant tax collector just laughed at me - they persecuted me - they sent tax bulls to my agents office - they terrorised everyone in my circle and no one would touch me or hire me - THEN - I spend 5 years on a law suit that had nothing to do with the tax dept - five long years and all I saw was corruption - top to bottom -----------I just can't particiate - because I was in a glamour industry (film) they all thought that I was a crook with a Porche hidden away somewhere - I worked my sorry ass off 18 hours a day 25 days straight - I supported my children - and I burned out - the gov was not helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 You know how it started - The Feds - started garnisheeing my cheques - I could not get them to understand - that an entertainment payroll company was NOT and employer - The Feds can take 100% of your last cheaque on "termination" - everyday I worked freelance was considered a termination -----so I started getting cheques that looked like this. $ 0.00 I swear - I could not reason with them - and they would not bundge - They said that I could work off a small tax debt in about 7 years - well - I need money to operate - and some group of lawyers and an immigrant tax collector just laughed at me - they persecuted me - they sent tax bulls to my agents office - they terrorised everyone in my circle and no one would touch me or hire me - THEN - I spend 5 years on a law suit that had nothing to do with the tax dept - five long years and all I saw was corruption - top to bottom -----------I just can't particiate - because I was in a glamour industry (film) they all thought that I was a crook with a Porche hidden away somewhere - I worked my sorry ass off 18 hours a day 25 days straight - I supported my children - and I burned out - the gov was not helpful. FURTHER MORE: I am bitter and I am hurt - I only wanted to contribute - to assist in making the world a better place and all I got was a kick in the face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 FURTHER MORE: I am bitter and I am hurt - I only wanted to contribute - to assist in making the world a better place and all I got was a kick in the face. It is easy to blame others and difficult to take an honest introspective look at oneself...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 It is easy to blame others and difficult to take an honest introspective look at oneself...... Sorry but I am a realist - if someone strikes me in the face with a fist - I am not about to say that a butterfly touched down on my nose - nor am I going to say - Hey - that assualt if fine with me - I deserved to be abused - sorry for getting in the way of your fist - and please let me buy you a bandage to cover those skinned knuckles.. I know who I am - and I know who you are ...It is you that can not face the truth...I provided service in the form of energy to the American propogandist - They were the only ones that granted me an opportunity - Canada - is a private fuedal state - and no one wants me or my talents....I am a source of embarassment _ being the classic man that simply knows to much and is not wanted around - IF YOU are so concered - then set me up _ I will work -------------but I doubt if you can find a place for me in this miserable back water former British colony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 Sorry but I am a realist - if someone strikes me in the face with a fist - I am not about to say that a butterfly touched down on my nose - nor am I going to say - Hey - that assualt if fine with me - I deserved to be abused - sorry for getting in the way of your fist - and please let me buy you a bandage to cover those skinned knuckles.. I know who I am - and I know who you are ...It is you that can not face the truth...I provided service in the form of energy to the American propogandist - They were the only ones that granted me an opportunity - Canada - is a private fuedal state - and no one wants me or my talents....I am a source of embarassment _ being the classic man that simply knows to much and is not wanted around - IF YOU are so concered - then set me up _ I will work -------------but I doubt if you can find a place for me in this miserable back water former British colony. Being the victim is a role of convenience for you now.....isn't it....? You can keep perpetuating that victimization over and over again in your head, but you are now no longer a victim...you are a player. One who plays in the system of taking and not giving back. One who hides behinds his own choices and tries to victimize others for those choices. Welfare is your crutch. You don't want to work because you have someone else you can milk to support you. You can let the taxpayers support you because you think you paid taxes. I hardly see anything honourable in any of that. That is your life. That is your dis-ease. Just don't blame us or the government for it. Like a drug addict looking for the next fix. You bitch and complain about how your drug of choice - welfare - hurts you and how is destroys society. But you refuse to get off the drugs ad into rehab. And they you blab about some industrial, corporate or government welfare recipients get a share of the pie. They get more than you because they know the game much better than you do and they reap those benefits. If you really want to stop crooked politicians and self-service bureaucrats then you have to become legitimate. How can you be legitimate when you are taking from the same pot and don't even blink an eye about it.......? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 (edited) Sorry but I am a realist - if someone strikes me in the face with a fist - I am not about to say that a butterfly touched down on my nose - nor am I going to say - Hey - that assualt if fine with me - I deserved to be abused - sorry for getting in the way of your fist - and please let me buy you a bandage to cover those skinned knuckles.. I know who I am - and I know who you are ...It is you that can not face the truth...I provided service in the form of energy to the American propogandist - They were the only ones that granted me an opportunity - Canada - is a private fuedal state - and no one wants me or my talents....I am a source of embarassment _ being the classic man that simply knows to much and is not wanted around - IF YOU are so concered - then set me up _ I will work -------------but I doubt if you can find a place for me in this miserable back water former British colony. Been reading the quotes Oleg, since I've had CR on 'ignore' for months now. He's giving you some good advice amongst all his condescension. We often have little or no control over the hands that life gives you but we do have control as to how we play them. If you're waiting for someone to make things fair that will likely never happen. You might as well just keep doing whatever you can to make yourself happier. However, it's so ironic for CR to lecture you about self-responsibility, when in any debate about aboriginal peoples his stand is always the same - aboriginals always right, white man always wrong! Talk about your situational ethics! That's why I ignore him. His predictability detracts from any novelty to his thoughts. I wouldn't have bothered to jump in except I thought you should know that some folks like myself have a little sympathy for you. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, just that you're a fellow Canadian and if I had an opportunity I'd stand you to a beer! Edited June 8, 2009 by Wild Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.