Pay up or leave

[Guest TrueMetis]

My buddy up in Cold Lake is Meti he showed me the apreciation of the Native culture every night he went out hunting and he fed his family on game, i just went allong to hold the spotlight and smoke weed lol but i know, i see the lifestyle and i got nothing against it its a self suficient lifestyle i wish more Canadians lived

Cool, Is he a full Metis? I read somewere that the average amount of Metis blood a person has now is 1/8 but I can't remember were I read that so I could be wrong (I'm 1/8). The one thing I'm gonna use my native hertitage for is to get into the bold eagle program which teaches alot about first nations cultures.

[Riverwind]

I could get tax exempt status but I don't I don't see the point. My point is the Treaties are Legal documents and I expect them to be honoured. The First Nations honour their side, the government should do the same. Ducking out of an Obligation is Wrong.

Sorry there are no such absolutes when it comes to government obligations that bind generations of people that had no input into the original agreement. Just like a father cannot compel his children to pay his debts a government cannot compell future taxpayers to support unfair deals. That is why no one should ever sign a deal with a government which is not completely fullfilled within a few years.

[Riverwind]

Nothing to do with race, but nationality. The natives signed the treaties as international. Why do you insist on pulling the race card on this?

Ok. The white south africans had a government where only white people had the nationality required to allow them to vote. I guess you are ok with that since it all about 'nationality' not race.

A non-racist treaty would be the treaty that joined Newfoundland to Canada. In that document there was no provision that granted special rights to 'status newfies' in perpetuity.

Treaties are not international documents or obligations. There are simply part of Canadian law and are only enforceable by Canadian courts. I realize that the 'international agreement' myth is popular in native circles right now but it has no basis in fact or law.

As for the race card, you are the one started with this comment:

To try to get the government to respect Aboriginal rights is next to a lost cause. The government must listen to the will of the majority, and the majority in Canada is racist to varying degrees.

[Craig1]

Sorry there are no such absolutes when it comes to government obligations that bind generations of people that had no input into the original agreement. Just like a father cannot compel his children to pay his debts a government cannot compell future taxpayers to support unfair deals. That is why no one should ever sign a deal with a government which is not completely fullfilled within a few years.

your wrong as allot of the people obligated were not here when the contract was made its like a corperation that signs a contract with its workers and gets mergered with another corperation your still held to that contracts. The part that is sticky is government intervention even though canada in itself is a corperation it has the ability to supercede contractual law. It has nothing to do with morals, ethics or even law or democracy but hierarchy and what the king sais goes.

[Griz]

You paid diddly you land squatting terrorist If you don't like it go back to Europe. Your dumb mentality is the huge drain. It's idiots like you that are the problem. Everytime I come on these forums I am more and more convinced that Canada is full of dumb rednecks and I am glad I converted. Do you ever realize how sick some of you sound? Grow up some? How can your spouses even live with the likes of you? They must be using you for money Goood grief, what a sick, dysfunctional society we live in...and as always blame the indians

I believe the economic are this. They are a huge drain, contribute next to nothing and want hand outs in perpetuity. I frankly don't know why they stay here. Surely the hunting grounds are better in russia?

[Griz]

Are you that dense? Whoah! Wait a minute, did you pull your education on law from a crackerjack box? Opps or maybe you got brainwashed about all the crap. Don't forget the whole SIberia thing is just a theory and still doesn't change the fact that the indians were here before the boat people from Europe got here. Back to your denseness...ever hear of precedence?

Sorry there are no such absolutes when it comes to government obligations that bind generations of people that had no input into the original agreement. Just like a father cannot compel his children to pay his debts a government cannot compell future taxpayers to support unfair deals. That is why no one should ever sign a deal with a government which is not completely fullfilled within a few years.

[CANADIEN]

There are some contracts terms that are unacceptable no matter what the parties agreed to. The contract terms that allowed people to buy and sell humans are good example. The terms of the treaties that grant special rights to anyone with the correct DNA are morally repugnant do not deserve to be upheld anymore than the slavery contracts.

Feel free to slide deeper and deeper into the absurd. I shall not stop you.

In a democracy we try to resolve such values conflicts by leaving the choice to the individual or the majority simply imposes their will on the minority.

Ineresting, considering that almost all treaties were negotiated by the CROWN in a positionb of force, in which they dictated the terms. Not the other way around.

So? The tax exemption still exists.

So, the tax exemppption is far from being as prevalent as some would claim.

I would like to see the department of indian affairs closed down and 100% control given to the native bands. The trouble is the chiefs don't want that.

Which is why First Nations leadership is demanding a greater autonomy.

Only in BC and only 2-3 bands have signed onto deals with those terms.

So now it's the first Nations' fault when governments drag their feet and will not re---open treaties to make them more equitable for the FN?

[CANADIEN]

I doubt you would argue that if there were treaties that granted tax free status to groups of white people.

If the situation was the same, I would.

[CANADIEN]

Sorry there are no such absolutes when it comes to government obligations that bind generations of people that had no input into the original agreement.

Good, can Quebcers renegoociate the 1763 treaty, you kknow THAT one?

Just like a father cannot compel his children to pay his debts a government cannot compell future taxpayers to support unfair deals.

Yet the blatant unfainess that was imposed upon first Nations by those treaties is ignored, and one minor detail, to do with the way the grossly inadequate payment is being made, have people in a knot.

[CANADIEN]

Ok. The white south africans had a government where only white people had the nationality required to allow them to vote. I guess you are ok with that since it all about 'nationality' not race.

Now the comparison is with Apartheid era South Africa. What's next, Nazi Germany?

[CANADIEN]

You paid diddly you land squatting terrorist If you don't like it go back to Europe. Your dumb mentality is the huge drain. It's idiots like you that are the problem. Everytime I come on these forums I am more and more convinced that Canada is full of dumb rednecks and I am glad I converted. Do you ever realize how sick some of you sound? Grow up some? How can your spouses even live with the likes of you? They must be using you for money Goood grief, what a sick, dysfunctional society we live in...and as always blame the indians

Spare us the racism and the stupidity, will you?

[Argus]

That's an uninformed response. Obviously you haven't informed yourself of the law and have no clue about the relevant economics either.

About time you did.

We STILL have more guns than you. Stop pestering us or we'll kick YOU out.

[Argus]

Even more so, however, is the idea that Aboriginals should just pack and leave. Last time I checked, this was their homeland.

It's the homeland of everyone born here. But it's funny how the political correctness police - ie, you - don't have a problem when natives suggest the rest of us pack up and leave. The moment anyone returns the suggestion, though, in storms the PC fascists to start calling people names. So utterly and drearily predictable.

Funny though, that some of the people who advocate this non-sense are also the ones who cry out "this is the country our ancestors built" when whining about recent (non-white/non-Christian) immigrants.

You have a cite, or just blowing your noxious views out of your ass again?

Now, sure there are those who will say "they should just pay the same taxes as the rest of us and be treated the same way as the rest of us". Fine, and I agree... as long as they are actually treated like everyone else. First step should be to bring legitimate land ownership claims to a fair and rapid conclusion -

Riiight. Let's do it rapidly, even though some pieces of land are "claimed" by a half dozen different "nations", and even though the amount of money they feel they should be paid in compensation exceeds the gross domestic product of the United States.

"the rest of us" usually do not have to negociate for decades for onwership of our property to be acknowledged.

I don't know about you but I bought and paid for my land.

[Argus]

Aboriginal leadership is indeed needed to bring communities together to develop and implement solutions. That being said, First nations are exactly that, NationS, with an emphasis on the plural. Any "solution" that starts from the premise they should stop thinking of themselves as invididual entities is even more doomed to failure than piecemeal approaches.

No one sane defines a few hundred people in the bush as a "nation".

[CANADIEN]

It's the homeland of everyone born here.

Including Blacks born here, right?

But it's funny how the political correctness police - ie, you - don't have a problem when natives suggest the rest of us pack up and leave.

What is funny is how poor your reading skills are.

Here's what I wrote previously:

Like it or not, this is 2009. which means that the descendants of the immigrants from Europe or elsewhere in the World are not going anywhere. This is our land too, and why justice and simple common sense demands respect for the historical rights of the descendants of the first inhabitants, the notion that non-Aboriginal Canadians should consider themselves as ppertual renters or jst leve is wrong-headed and, quite frankly, racist.

[Argus]

You (conveniently?) forget that First Nations were and are still forbidden by law from selling land to anyone but the Government.

That law was put in place because if not many of the "nations" would have sold their land away for a case of whisky.

[Argus]

Are you that dense? Whoah! Wait a minute, did you pull your education on law from a crackerjack box? Opps or maybe you got brainwashed about all the crap. Don't forget the whole SIberia thing is just a theory and still doesn't change the fact that the indians were here before the boat people from Europe got here. Back to your denseness...ever hear of precedence?

The precedent as far back as history goes, in every corner of the Earth, is that whicher group can take and hold the land becomes the "owners" of the land.

That would be me.

[Argus]

You paid diddly you land squatting terrorist If you don't like it go back to Europe. Your dumb mentality is the huge drain. It's idiots like you that are the problem. Everytime I come on these forums I am more and more convinced that Canada is full of dumb rednecks and I am glad I converted. Do you ever realize how sick some of you sound? Grow up some? How can your spouses even live with the likes of you? They must be using you for money Goood grief, what a sick, dysfunctional society we live in...and as always blame the indians

I never blame the indians. I blame morons. There are way too many of them in Canada, and especially, way too many on this forum.

[Argus]

Including Blacks born here, right?

Have I EVER suggested otherwise?

What is funny is how poor your reading skills are.

Your first posts on this thread came about after the initial poster had made his suggestion with regard to the rest of us "getting out" and you had NOTHING to say to that. You only came a running when a couple of people suggested natives should get out if they didn't like it.

It was like, this big alarm goes off in the back of your tiny head "Ding! Ding! Ding! Someone's saying something bad about Brown people! It's PC man to the rescue! Dont worry, little brown people! PC man is here to protect you!"

[CANADIEN]

No one sane defines a few hundred people in the bush as a "nation".

Congratulations. You just called the makers of the Merriam-Webster dictionary insane. That's the same people whose definition of predilection contradicts yours, btw. Guess dictionaries are not your forte.

[charter.rights]

Ineresting, considering that almost all treaties were negotiated by the CROWN in a positionb of force, in which they dictated the terms. Not the other way around.

Not exactly true. In most cases treaties wee negotiated because the British (and Canada) wanted access to land that the Royal Proclamation 1763 said they couldn't take without a process. Sure many nations were swindled but not true in the case of Six Nations.

In their case the Haldimand Proclamation the other settlements of Six Nations in Ontario was the result of a treaty during the American Revolution. Essentially in this case the British knew they needed the Mohawks on their side and so they gave away not only land but resources and any control (like taxation or law) over Six Nations people.

To add my two cents, the legal premise of whose homeland this is need only go back as far as the Royal Proclamation 1763 which defined all lands as "Indian Lands" outside of existing British colonies. Further, through the Quebec Act 1774 they clarified that jurisdiction over French settlements were also under British sovereignty. However, it is a myth that the British ever took control of land - especially land in Ontario where some had settled. Instead, even today the lands remain the territory of Six Nations, with the British (and now Canada) only having legal authority over the people.

You should note that anything to do with land - property law, development laws etc - deal only with uses and authority, in other words people issues. Land itself has no rights, save and except the Crown has assumed rights by way of treaty over certain lands. Canada is a Crown corporation and has no right to land, or use of land. They were given authority over people and to this day only govern Canadians' use of land and their behavior in society. They were not given authority (nor under international law can authority over another nation be assumed) over First Nations. Thus the Indian Act (you should read it some time) merely defines the government's interaction with First Nations and not the authority over them. The Cartwright Treaty clearly defines the relationship that the Crown and First Nations defined for the application of law.

[CANADIEN]

I never blame the indians. I blame morons. There are way too many of them in Canada, and especially, way too many on this forum.

Too many? I count two so far. Griz and you.

Edited August 14, 2009 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

Have I EVER suggested otherwise?

I forget. You'll tolerate Blacks if they were born here... as long as they stay away from your neighbourhood. I stand corrected.

What is funny is how poor your reading skills are.

Your first posts on this thread came about after the initial poster had made his suggestion with regard to the rest of us "getting out" and you had NOTHING to say to that. You only came a running when a couple of people suggested natives should get out if they didn't like it.

Let me quote my first posting on this thread AGAIN (and as a bonus, I'll even correct my typos);

Like it or not, this is 2009. which means that the descendants of the immigrants from Europe or elsewhere in the World are not going anywhere. This is our land too, and while justice and simple common sense demands respect for the historical rights of the descendants of the first inhabitants, the notion that non-Aboriginal Canadians should consider themselves as perpetual renters or just leave is wrong-headed and, quite frankly, racist.

Edited August 14, 2009 by CANADIEN

[Argus]

Congratulations. You just called the makers of the Merriam-Webster dictionary insane. That's the same people whose definition of predilection contradicts yours, btw. Guess dictionaries are not your forte.

Like sanity is not yours.

[Argus]

Too many? I count two so far. Griz and you.

Wow. Congratulations. I didn't think you were smart enough to count that high.