jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Big Guy, on 24 Jun 2014 - 10:55 PM, said:THIS HAS BEEN IN LIMBO AND NEGOTIATIONS FOR 8 YEARS - 8 YEARS!Largely because Six Nations is run by a bunch of delusional yahoos that don't have the power to negotiate a reasonable compromise that their own band members would not immediately repudiate. That never happened. Slander and lies aren't helpful either.What did happen on this particular claim is that the federal government could provide no evidence of ever acquiring that land legally, so they refused to negotiate any more. They also refused to officially 'deny' the claim so ... yes, "limbo" is the right word for what the feds did. 'Wasting our time and money negotiating in bad faith' is also an accurate description of what the feds did. So is 'They were losing so they walked off the field'. eta Hamilton-Port Dover Plank Road claim: http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/cslc5.htm Edited June 25, 2014 by jacee Quote
-1=e^ipi Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) You weren't around to sign the Canada Health Act either. You want out of that deal too? Just deposit your health card in the trash and pay for it all by yourself. Actually, I want Canada to move to a mixed system like Germany or Switzerland; our current system sucks. And currently I do not have a health card because I got mugged. It gets a bit tricky getting rid of all of the laws and treaties made before you were born because ... well ... Canada wouldn't exist and you wouldn't be here. Have I advocated 'getting rid of all laws'? No. You state-institutionalized racist policy advocates are the ones arguing that 'we' (whatever 'we' means) signed the treaties so state-institutionalized racism must be maintained indefinitely. Edited June 25, 2014 by -1=e^ipi Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 Actually, I want Canada to move to a mixed system like Germany or Switzerland; our current system sucks. And currently I do not have a health card because I got mugged. Have I advocated 'getting rid of all laws'? No. You state-institutionalized racist policy advocates are the ones arguing that 'we' (whatever 'we' means) signed the treaties so state-institutionalized racism must be maintained indefinitely. So you think individual Canadians should be able to pick and choose which laws they want to follow and ignore the rest? You won't find a country like that anywhere. But at least here you are free to spew such nonsense. . Quote
Michael Hardner Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 THIS HAS BEEN IN LIMBO AND NEGOTIATIONS FOR 8 YEARS - 8 YEARS! Neither the Provincial nor the Federal governments appear to be interested in a solution. Unfortunately, this latest declaration by the municipality will reignite the problem. It looks to me like no government officials will get involved until somebody gets killed. That may happen soon. In fact I predict that a death will be required before any government begins to take this problem seriously. I thought that there was some kind of negotiation happening, but I can't find any article that backs up that idea. The land is owned by the province, right ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Remiel Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 How is it meaningless to suggest that had things gone differently no one who was born would have been? The question of whether it is good or bad too have been born is not only not meaningless, it is a question that should be answered before any other arguments about "What should be done now?" can be made. Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I thought that there was some kind of negotiation happening, but I can't find any article that backs up that idea. The land is owned by the province, right ?Yes it is.And it's part of the larger Hamilton-Port Dover Plank Road claim. http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/cslc5.htm There are 29 Six Nations claims currently submitted. These are 4 other claims where some negotiations did occur, but weren't completed. http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/lsuNegotiations.htm Since negotiations went nowhere, litigation is being pursued covering financial transactions on many claims: (See 'Litigation update', bottom right hand corner.) http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/index.htm Edited June 25, 2014 by jacee Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 The Social Contract, people. That's why the status quo is a problem. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 I dont see what white guilt has to do with it. If I make a deal with a black person to trade his property for my promise of future payments, then I say to him "Im keeping your property but Im going to stop making the payments"... and the court finds I breached my contract... is that "White guilt"? Even if the natives here happened to be white scandinavians it wouldnt make any difference. Its not about race its about breach of contract. You're right...a deal is a deal. And in all the deals we see the following two excerpts: 1. do hereby cede, release, surrender, and yield up to the Government of Canada for Her Majesty the Queen and her successors for ever, all their rights, titles, and privileges whatsoever to the lands 2. And Her Majesty the Queen hereby agrees with her said Indians, that they shall have right to pursue their vocations of hunting throughout the Tract surrendered as heretofore described, subject to such regulations as may, from time to time, be made by the Government of the country, acting under the authority of Her Majesty and saving and excepting such Tracts as may be required or taken up from time to time for settlement, mining, trading or other purposes by Her Government of Canada; or by any of Her Majesty's subjects duly authorized therefor by the said Government. Where in the treaties do you see any portion where the natives are to get compensated for said resources which clearly they had no right, title or priveledge to AND which was clearly would be used by the Government of Canada. Is that in your magical version of the deal? I have no problem with honoring THE DEAL but its quite clear that the bleeding heart courts of our country have leaned so far from the facts of this deal that people have no idea what the actual deal was. This is why I find it funny that people like you romanticize about this deal in the first place. The reality is the natives saw what was happening and were willing to take whatever they could get. Brits coming from the East, Americans from the South. You make this sound like it was a well mastered negotiation.....it wasn't. It was a form of surrender that allowed them to exist peacefully and hope for some kind of future other than annihilation. Of course the natives have become wise to the bleeding heart courts and will push the issues whenever and where ever they can. The deal is a deal for them as long as it favors them. Heaven forbide someone calls it for what it is. Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Your vague generalizations have no relevance to the Six Nations claims as there is no such 'surrender' treaty involved. Each case, each piece of land has unique circumstances and documentation. http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/ClaimSummaries.htm As the government says ... Specific claims deal with past grievances of First Nations related to Canada's obligations under historic treaties or the way it managed First Nations' funds or other assets. To honour its obligations, Canada negotiates settlements with the First Nation https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100030285/1100100030289 Edited June 25, 2014 by jacee Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Six nations links are not a good source. They're a militant organization without a need for the truth. Edited June 25, 2014 by Smallc Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 Your vague generalizations have no relevance to the Six Nations claims as there is no such 'surrender' treaty involved. The Hallimand Claim wasn't a treaty...it was a statement made which was never even agreed to by the Six Nations. The surrender of 1844 did however have the leaders of the Six Nations agree that the land should be sold. Similar to the Papaschase, now you have current day natives coming up with stories of conspiracy and coercion. Quote
-1=e^ipi Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 So you think individual Canadians should be able to pick and choose which laws they want to follow and ignore the rest? No I never claimed this. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 That's why the status quo is a problem. I'm actually interested in what you say here. Go on. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 Six nations links are not a good source. They're a militant organization without a need for the truth. ...and we all know that the "Crown" has always been a very truthful source. [/sarcasm] Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 ...and we all know that the "Crown" has always been a very truthful source. [/sarcasm] You could probably save yourself a bit of typing time by not bothering with the "sarcasm" title. It usually goes w/o saying. Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 I'm actually interested in what you say here. Go on. The status quo is damaging. It results in people seeing aboriginals as leaches, as not pulling their weight, as being different. It isn't helpful or a free and peaceful society. More than that the status quo results in chiefs living in luxury while many of their own citizens languish in poverty. It's almost completely indefensible unless you have something to gain from it - and I do. Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 ...and we all know that the "Crown" has always been a very truthful source. [/sarcasm] The Crown is the source of every law and legal judgement. Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 The Hallimand Claim wasn't a treaty...it was a statement made which was never even agreed to by the Six Nations.It was a royal proclamation - ie, law - that recognized their rights in the Haldimand tract in perpetuity. The surrender of 1844 did however have the leaders of the Six Nations agree that the land should be sold.Link?I thought it was 1845 when they agreed to allow the feds to lease some lands in the Plank Road tract, but the feds sold it instead and never put the money in Six Nations account. No money, no deal. . Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 No I never claimed this.You said you "never signed" or agreed to the treaties.. Quote
jacee Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 Six nations links are not a good source. They're a militant organization without a need for the truth.That's uncalled for, and I haven't seen you prove that anywhere.. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 The status quo is damaging. It results in people seeing aboriginals as leaches, as not pulling their weight, as being different. It isn't helpful or a free and peaceful society. More than that the status quo results in chiefs living in luxury while many of their own citizens languish in poverty. It's almost completely indefensible unless you have something to gain from it - and I do. I'm interested in how you connect your ideas to the Social Contract. Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 That's uncalled for, and I haven't seen you prove that anywhere. . That's not uncalled for. Their website is full of half truths or less. Quote
Smallc Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Posted June 25, 2014 I'm interested in how you connect your ideas to the Social Contract. It affects negatively the way our society functions. Quote
-1=e^ipi Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 You said you "never signed" or agreed to the treaties. . Yes. How do you get from there to "You think individual Canadians should be able to pick and choose which laws they want to follow and ignore the rest"? Quote
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.