Fletch 27 Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) No Jaycee, Not everyone can go there... Please see the rule of law....NOT INTO PARLIAMENT!!!!!! Main floor... Check it out... He suckered the aboriginals in like puppets.. He should be ashamed.. The opposition should be ashamed... EDUCATE YOURSELF!!!!!! Please note Charlie Angus holding the door OPEN and against the law. This guy used the Indians like pawns.... And the Joe Oliver MET them in the hall to try to quelch Charlie Angus's tactics.... Crying shame that the NDP would play the Chiefs like this..... The NDP did NOT need to make them look like idiots... EDUCATE YOURSELF! Charlie Knew the rules.... Or he as well is an.... Well,,, see for yourself... Public gallery my A$$.... Simply shameful.. Edited December 19, 2012 by Fletch 27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) No Jaycee, Not everyone can go there... Please see the rule of law....NOT INTO PARLIAMENT!!!!!! Main floor... Check it out... He suckered the aboriginals in like puppets.. He should be ashamed.. The opposition should be ashamed... EDUCATE YOURSELF!!!!!! Please note Charlie Angus holding the door OPEN and against the law. This guy used the Indians like pawns.... And the Joe Oliver MET them in the hall to try to quelch Charlie Angus's tactics.... Crying shame that the NDP would play the Chiefs like this..... The NDP did NOT need to make them look like idiots... EDUCATE YOURSELF! Charlie Knew the rules.... Or he as well is an.... Well,,, see for yourself... Public gallery my A$$.... Simply shameful.. Charlie Angus brought Joe Oliver out to speak to them. Edited December 19, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch 27 Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 No, he didnt.. He was informed of the side-show out front by Baird and he left to de-fuze that crazy situation... So, your OK with Charlie Angus' using the aboriginals as pawns? You didnt answer that point... OK in this situation ? Maybe just in some.... Hypo-what? Critical??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/first-nations-chiefs-demand-to-be-heard-182139651.html?device=mobile After being invited into the building by NDP MP Charlie Angus, the chiefs first confronted Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver in the foyer outside the House of Commons, peppering him with questions about the taking of resources on First Nations land. When they tried to follow him into the chamber, they were stopped by a wall of security guards. Edited December 19, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 http://www.winnipegf...l?device=mobile After being invited into the building by NDP MP Charlie Angus, the chiefs first confronted Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver in the foyer outside the House of Commons, peppering him with questions about the taking of resources on First Nations land. When they tried to follow him into the chamber, they were stopped by a wall of security guards. Being invited into the building is not the same as being invited into the House of Commons chamber itself. It's a centuries old tradition that the House of Commons is a place unto itself, operating under its own rules, quite apart from the law of the land outside it. Nobody other than MPs is allowed in without the speaker's permission; not even the Queen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch 27 Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 Hypo what? Get the full video of Charlie leading them to the doors.... That guy is pretty manipulative I must say. I hope he apologized to the chiefs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 Being invited into the building is not the same as being invited into the House of Commons chamber itself. It's a centuries old tradition that the House of Commons is a place unto itself, operating under its own rules, quite apart from the law of the land outside it. Nobody other than MPs is allowed in without the speaker's permission; not even the Queen. Yes I understand that. Many of them were in the House when Harper spoke these words: Today, we recognize that this policy of assimilation was wrong, has caused great harm, and has no place in our country. … . There is no place in Canada for the attitudes that inspired the Indian Residential Schools system to ever prevail again. ... It will be a positive step in forging a new relationship between Aboriginal peoples and other Canadians, a relationship based on the knowledge of our shared history, a respect for each other and a desire to move forward together with a renewed understanding that strong families, strong communities and vibrant cultures and traditions will contribute to a stronger Canada for all of us. http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=2149 It appears that Harper was not sincere as he continues to impose laws that impact the lives and treaty rights of Indigenous Nations without consulting with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 It appears that Harper was not sincere as he continues to impose laws that impact the lives and treaty rights of Indigenous Nations without consulting with them. I don't understand what that has to do with the barring of those people from entering the House of Commons without invitation from the Speaker. I also don't yet see how any proposed laws or amendments to laws violate any treaties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NativeCharm Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 I also don't yet see how any proposed laws or amendments to laws violate any treaties. Please check my previous posting on laws (and proposed) and Treaty violations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) I also don't yet see how any proposed laws or amendments to laws violate any treaties. I'm not sure of the specifics myself, but I know in general Harper is trying to circumvent his duty to consult with Indigenous Nations and to accommodate their Aboriginal and treaty rights: These include a say in resource developments and a share in revenues. Idle No More began with 4 women, Nina Wilson, Sheelah Mclean, Sylvia McAdam and Jessica Gordon, sharing a vision of bringing together all people to ensure we create ways of protecting Mother Earth, her lands, waters and people. The women began discussing the possible impacts that some of the legislation would carry if people do not do something. It became very evident that the women MUST do something about the colonial, unilateral and paternalistic legislation being pushed through the Government of Canada’s parliamentary system. They began with a piece of legislation called Bill C-45 which attacked the land base reserved for Indigenous people. The women decided that they would call a rally to inform the public that this bill intended to, without consent give the minister of indian affairs power to surrender the lands reserved. http://idlenomore1.blogspot.ca/2012/12/press-release-idle-no-more.html?m=1 And I know that once the women are roused to action, the men will be very persistent. Edited December 19, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Why don't some of these lazy-ass reporters get off their duffs and write a real story. Do some research on the more than 100 Native bands and see which ones are thriving, which are doing OK, which are challenged, and which are destitute. We never hear the good stories - only the bad.....and why aren't the good ones offering guidance to the destitute ones on how to improve their situation. Why do some thrive and others don't? One main factor could be/probably is the fact that some are in the middle of nowhere - away from any meaningful economic activity where jobs and income can generate some pride and self esteem. Lets have a report card on reservations - done by the First Assembly - lets measure where we're at, figure where we're going, and see how we're doing. Has anyone seen any basic information that quantifies the state of each band? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Canada has forgotten it's a treaty nation too This has gone on for too long. The Canadian government continues to mouth platitudes about its dedication to this relationship, while it slashes funding, ignores our emergencies, pulls out of comprehensive land claim discussions, 'consults' with us and then ignores everything we told them, all while pursuing a hard-line agenda which accepts only termination as a result. We have been backed into a corner and we are literally fighting for our lives. We are literally dying, in so many preventable and unacceptable ways. I'm not being poetic or hyperbolic here and I don't just mean culturally. We are dying. No one should expect us to stay quiet or polite about this. We have done what has been asked, we have played along to the constantly changing rules. It hasn't worked. It hasn't saved us. Idle No More is about saving ourselves. We will continue to talk, and meet, and submit hundreds of thousands of reports each year...but we will also rise. We are rising. You will find that you have many issues in common with us, as Aaron pointed out. This is not us against you. This is hopefully all of us. Together. The media are beginning to rouse from their pre-Christmas party stupor and respond ... “The treaty relationship was about mutual prosperity and sharing of the wealth,’’ she says. “Only one treaty partner has been wealthy and prospered.’’ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Please check my previous posting on laws (and proposed) and Treaty violations. That didn't explain how the proposed bills and amendments violate the treaties; what clauses in the acts of parliament run counter to what parts of the treaties. Regardless, if any part of an act of parliament is in contradiction to a treaty, it will be struck down by the courts. The treaties are part of the constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 What a tactful way to say, "you're stupid and wrong." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 That didn't explain how the proposed bills and amendments violate the treaties; what clauses in the acts of parliament run counter to what parts of the treaties. Regardless, if any part of an act of parliament is in contradiction to a treaty, it will be struck down by the courts. The treaties are part of the constitution. True. That's the long and expensive way around though, when it could be simpler ... negotiating a fair share of resource revenues would be a start. What's the point of the courts once again telling the govs to accommodate Aboriginal rights? Why should we pay more lawyers and bureaucrats to say the same thing? Just do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 I dont see any of them volunteering to go back to living the way they did before we got here, in fact most of the complaints are about not having enough of the modern conveniences that we invented and provide, but yet treaties signed under completely different circumstances from the world as we know it today should be 100% enforced? No, we should tear them up, let the 'nation' come after us for it. I wonder if their allies, like Iran, would come to their aid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 Ignorance can be cheap entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Road Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 Hmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Road Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 I tend to agree with Patrick Brazeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 Parsing the online comments on #IdleNoMore: How Canadians are failing a tolerance test Now, it would, at first blush, be easy to read some of the comments on those articles as intolerant. But let’s face it: people often misread online communication. So it’s only fair to give these folks the benefit of the doubt, and try to understand where they are coming from. It’s the Canadian way, eh? Here, then, are examples of several of the most common statements made in comments on these articles, thoughtfully translated so the tolerance really stands out. What they say: All people are equal, and should be treated the same. What they must mean: I’m willing to trade situations with any Inuit or First Nations person at any time. What they say: As a taxpayer I resent my hard-earned money going to support First Nations. What they must mean: I only want my taxes to go to the traditional stewards of the Canadian environment, like the oil industry, the forestry industry, the airline industry and the automotive industry. What they say: If First Nations and Inuit people choose to live way out there in the bush, it’s their problem. What they must mean: I wish a lot more First Nations people lived in my town. What they say: Aboriginal leaders are corrupt, or incompetent. What they must mean: Non-aboriginal leaders are the most honest, effective bunch of self-sacrificing saints ever to walk the face of the Earth. What they say: First Nations and Inuit people need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. What they must mean: I never had a single opportunity in my life. My people were downtrodden for a few hundred years, my language was beaten out of me, my family was broken by residential schools, my access to health care was poor, I was economically and socially isolated, I had little opportunity for jobs or education, and yet I became the selfless contributor to society that I am today all by myself. What they say: Native people need to get with the times and join the rest of Canadian society. What they must mean: A wasteful, polluting materialist culture for everyone! What they say: The Indian Act/Treaties should be repealed and special treatment for Native people should end. What they must mean: I’m totally awesome at economics, politics, anthropology, sociology, spirituality and geography, and I figured out a new system, that no one’s ever thought of, let alone tried to implement in the past. My idea redresses the problems of the past and creates stepping stones toward a new and profitable future together. I’m willing to spend my lifetime helping put it in place for the good of all. So let’s do that instead. There you have it. Canadians are a tolerant people, if you’ll just take the time to try to understand where they’re coming from. We can all be grateful for the the Idle No More movement. It has provided the opportunity to see our collective tolerance demonstrated so plainly. Here's looking at us! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Road Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 Chief Louiey www.cbc.ca/doczone/8thfire/2012/01/chief-clarence-louie-1.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 I tend to agree with Patrick Brazeau He's Harper's boy alright! Brazeau said people should focus on using the existing democratic “processes” to get the changes they want. http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/12/20/brazeau-attawapiskat-chiefs-hunger-strike-doesnt-set-good-example-for-young-aboriginal-youth/ Ya ... how's that workin for them?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 It's working pretty well, actually. Someone told me that they think he forgot where he came from. I don't think they realize where they're going. Later in the same conversation, they told me that they're not a racist, but they're with their people. I told them, that's the thing though, they're just as much my people as they are yours. Too many people are stuck in the past. Jacee is at the top of that list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) It's working pretty well, actually. Someone told me that they think he forgot where he came from. I don't think they realize where they're going. Later in the same conversation, they told me that they're not a racist, but they're with their people. I told them, that's the thing though, they're just as much my people as they are yours. Too many people are stuck in the past. Jacee is at the top of that list. I'm sure Harper's just too busy to talk to them ... too busy giving thanks for Canada's resource revenues from Indigenous territories, no doubt. You want to talk future smallc? Resource revenues ... a fair share ... as per treaties ... that's the future. Edited December 21, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 21, 2012 Report Share Posted December 21, 2012 Resource revenues ... a fair share ... as per treaties ... that's the future. That's the past. You simply don't recognize it yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.