Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, TimG said:

It is not about vulnerable children and you know that. This is just the latest excuse to get money from the government. If it was not 'vulnerable children' it would have been something else. These native bands constantly harping about how they want self government but only if someone else pays for it. Yet despite having their lifestyle subsidized for years they refuse to show any flexibility when Canada decides it needs to develop the industry that is needed to pay for those benefits. Sorry, I don't have much sympathy.

I don't have any sympathy for your 'white nation' ideology either.

Edited by jacee
  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, jacee said:

I don't have any sympathy for your 'white nation' ideology either.

Yawn. Native zealots screaming racist whenever someone expresses an opinion they don't like. Pathetic and tiresome. I take this as an admission that you have no rational argument to refute my point that there is a reciprocal relationship where natives enjoy the subsidies provided by (increasingly non-white) Canada in return for flexibility when it comes to developing the resources that pay the bills.

Edited by TimG
Posted
7 hours ago, jacee said:

I don't have any sympathy for your 'white nation' ideology either.

Because Canada is all about being a white nation.

Posted

white, brown, green.    Everybody will get the same percentage of benefit from the LNG industry in Canada: 0%.

 

Anybody taking odds on whether or not this plant gets built in the next 20 years?

 

I say 'no chance'. When you dither and dick around long enough on regulatory delays, it is possible to both pretend you support something and stop it dead.  Justin is just taking a page from Dads playbook on the Mackenzie Valley pipeline, the current Canadian  and World record holder for wankery(Large Government Division).  That one was proposed in about 1974, and received cabinet approval in 2011, about 38 years later.  Despite having local First Nations support by the end, the peole who would actually finaqnce it had forgotten entirely about it.  Same thing here.  See you in 2060 or so.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted
5 hours ago, overthere said:

Justin is just taking a page from Dads playbook on the Mackenzie Valley pipeline,

Actually Joe Clark had the first shot to do something about it, and failed. When Dad was returned to government he did in fact approve construction from Norman Wells to Zama, but land claim settlements still needed to be resolved. 

Posted
16 minutes ago, jacee said:

TimG's world is. 

No. Jacee's world is. Nothing in my statements had anything to 'white nation'. That is racist garbage you invented because you are incapable of responding to arguments made and prefer to simply call people racist if they disagree with you. The only racists are people like you who are obsessed with identity politics.

Posted
On 18/10/2016 at 8:51 AM, TimG said:

Yawn. Native zealots screaming racist whenever someone expresses an opinion they don't like. Pathetic and tiresome. I take this as an admission that you have no rational argument to refute my point that there is a reciprocal relationship where natives enjoy the subsidies provided by (increasingly non-white) Canada in return for flexibility when it comes to developing the resources that pay the bills.

The disbursements currently made to Indigenous Nations are, in theory, those negotiated by treaty in exchange for use of traditional lands, access to resources, etc. They are, again in theory, supposed to provide the same level of funding for education, health care, child welfare, senior care, etc. as for all Canadians. 

In reality, the payments are a drop in the bucket compared to Canada's unfulfilled legal treaty obligations, and the level of funding for (eg) Indigenous children's education, health and wellbeing is seldom consistent with that of other Canadian children.

That funding is sometimes used to threaten the wellbeing of children further, to extort submission of communities to corporate demands for resource extraction (poisoning environments), etc.

Imagine the outcry if our government threatened to withhold education funds from a municipality to force through a pipeline, etc.

It wouldn't happen to us, but it does happen to Indigenous communities.

 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, jacee said:

The disbursements currently made to Indigenous Nations are, in theory, those negotiated by treaty in exchange for use of traditional lands, access to resources, etc.

As I said. It is a reciprocal relationship. If aboriginal groups seek to block development of resources they are not living up to their side of the deal.

Posted

Ok, let's please back off from calling each other racists personally.  Certainly the issue can be framed in a cultural context, and you can recognize those contexts in various viewpoints but you all must be civil. 

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

Posted (edited)

It is time for the natives to join Canada. This idea that we must stay true to our ancestors way of life is a crock. How many more poor kids need to off themselves before the natives get thier act together. 

Edited by PIK

Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.

Posted
2 hours ago, PIK said:

It is time for the natives to join Canada. This idea that we must stay true to our ancestors way of life is a crock. How many more poor kids need to off themselves before the natives get thier act together. 

I think this would make a good new thread.

 

Note that an MP is getting a lot of traction by demanding immigrants have "Canadian values" which is another way of saying "Traditional Canadian Way of Life"

General question for MapleLeafWeb members - when is it ok to demand that people change their culture, or alternately when does culture need to be protected ?

There are lots of exmples to explore: CanCon, Quebec Language laws etc.

 

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,024
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    portman123
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...