Smallc Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 I just can't ever see you giving up Canada for Earth. Actually, a perfect world would make that the ideal situation. We are not anywhere near a perfect world, and so I'll settle for membership in what is one of the best clubs in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Doing that would require the treaties all be abolished. All they serve to do is institutionalize racism. We are either all literally the same, or we are not. That's right. It would also mean climbing out of the well of sovereignty we've all fallen into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Actually, a perfect world would make that the ideal situation. We are not anywhere near a perfect world, and so I'll settle for membership in what is one of the best clubs in the world. Fair enough if you don't mind making room for a few new clubs and clubhouses along the way. Notice how there are more countries instead of fewer as time goes by? There must be a good reason for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Fair enough if you don't mind making room for a few new clubs and clubhouses along the way. Notice how there are more countries instead of fewer as time goes by? There must be a good reason for that. As I said, it isn't a perfect world. Maybe some day. We have to deal with today, and the problems that we can fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Yeah well, that's only going to get harder. We're moving in the wrong direction in a world where natural, social and political capital are all pretty much maxed out. Someday is here right now assuming it hasn't already passed us by. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Notice how there are more countries instead of fewer as time goes by? There must be a good reason for that. People have very different ideas about what "a perfect world" means? One man's utopia is another's nightmare. Edited January 26, 2015 by Bryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'm sure you'll be free to move to Mars once we take over the Earth. The universe is your cherry, you just have to go pick it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Nepinak's whole premise is that aboriginal people are more than other Canadians. That's not the type of thing MLK would ever fight for. Like I said, MLK would be appalled. Again, that's just a comment from you, a pretty serious slam, may or may not be true, may or may not be defamation ... no quotes or other evidence to support your claim ... . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Again, that's just a comment from you, a pretty serious slam, may or may not be true, may or may not be defamation ... no quotes or other evidence to support your claim ... . Well, that's your opinion. I'm in Manitoba and witness things all of the time. Would you deny that Nepinak fights for the continuation and even extension of treaty rights? If not, then I'm not sure what you're going on about. My advice to you is this - quit threatening everyone with the defamation charge (it's not) and let the conversation continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Again, that's just a comment from you, a pretty serious slam, may or may not be true, may or may not be defamation ... no quotes or other evidence to support your claim ... . Small c is not entirely off the mark Jacee. Native fishermen where I live are gearing up to go back to commercially fish for a living, as we speak. When push comes to shove and there are not enough fish to go around Ottawa will be pushing non-natives out of the way. We simply have different rights that are not as far reaching as native people's. Taken to a far enough extreme with other natural resources that are in tight supply or dwindling and you can see how things are bound to get worse as we continue down this road. Technically speaking if it came down to who got to simply eat a fish if your life depended on it, you'll have to get in a line that's based on the priority our confederation and constitution has assigned you.Funny how the country Sir J built us still looks a lot like the one he lived in. The only way forward is to transcend sovereignty and surrender to the Earthlings and universal human rights for all. Edited January 26, 2015 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Well, that's your opinion. I'm in Manitoba and witness things all of the time. Would you deny that Nepinak fights for the continuation and even extension of treaty rights? If not, then I'm not sure what you're going on about.That's just the law. My advice to you is this - quit threatening everyone with the defamation charge (it's not) and let the conversation continue.My advice to you is don't defame individuals publicly.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Small c is not entirely off the mark Jacee. Native fishermen where I live are gearing up to go back to commercially fish for a living, as we speak. When push comes to shove and there are not enough fish to go around Ottawa will be pushing non-natives out of the way. We simply have different rights that are not as far reaching as native people's. Taken to a far enough extreme with other natural resources that are in tight supply or dwindling and you can see how things are bound to get worse as we continue down this road. Technically speaking if it came down to who got to simply eat a fish if your life depended on it, you'll have to get in a line that's based on the priority our confederation and constitution has assigned you. Funny how the country Sir J built us still looks a lot like the one he lived in. The only way forward is to transcend sovereignty and surrender to the Earthlings and universal human rights for all. It's been the other way around for a long time, to our advantage eyeball. The courts see it differently now. I respect your perspective, don't know the answers. I just don't think smallc's approach of defaming an individual is helpful at all. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 My advice to you is don't defame individuals publicly. Unless you provide evidence that I have (I haven't) according to the law, I didn't. Also, I doubt Nepinak would care that I claim he's trying to keep and extend treaty rights. Even if he does, that isn't damaging to him. It seems that you're simply trying to shut down discussion you don't like. Too bad really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I just don't think smallc's approach of defaming an individual is helpful at all. I haven't done that, so quit claiming it. I've seen you do this to several people in the last few weeks and it isn't helpful to discussion on this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) ....The only way forward is to transcend sovereignty and surrender to the Earthlings and universal human rights for all. Interesting concept proposed now that the age old advantages are going away and courts are backing up treaty rights ? Now it should be fair for all ? Edited January 26, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Now it should be fair for all ? It always should have been. Two wrongs don't make a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 It always should have been. Two wrongs don't make a right. Enforcing treaty rights is not wrong. Complaining about is after generations of resource exploitation is funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Enforcing treaty rights is not wrong. The fact that they exist is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 The fact that they exist is. First Nations...treaties...or both ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 The second, although in a round about way one could argue for the first in a legal sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 The second, although in a round about way one could argue for the first in a legal sense. OK...but that approach is easily broadened to the very existence of Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 OK...but that approach is easily broadened to the very existence of Canada. Any concept can be taken to the point of ridiculousness yes. An ideal world would see you being right. This isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Any concept can be taken to the point of ridiculousness yes. An ideal world would see you being right. This isn't. I have no dog in this fight. Treaty rights are routinely enforced by the courts in my neck of the woods. I guess the laws and courts are not fair for some when rulings no longer favour the status quo ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) The fact that they exist is.Blame Sir John A.Or howl at the moon. Equally effective. . Edited January 26, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 bush_cheney2004, on 26 Jan 2015 - 02:28 AM, said: OK...but that approach is easily broadened to the very existence of Canada. Any concept can be taken to the point of ridiculousness yes. An ideal world would see you being right. This isn't. b-c is right, smallc. Canada exists because of the treaties. They are our treaties. . 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.