Indigenous blockade in BC & related protests

[Dougie93]

Like I say, if the contract is null and void,  then I'm a free agent, running a Blackwater of my very own from Nevada.

God bless America, vive le Quebec libre.

Edited March 4, 2019 by Dougie93

[Guest]

Yeah, I always liked the Doobie Brothers.

[Dougie93]

More of a Lynyrd Skynyrd man, meself.

[jacee]

17 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

If the God of the Hebrews does not will it,  Elizabeth Windsor does not will it , if Elizabeth Windsor does not will it, I will not kill a man for you. 

Who you kill and die for is your business, but my business is Monarchism and Toryism, Nova Scotia Baptists and Upper Canadian Orangemen, and we will only kill and die for the Lord himself, Elizabeth Windsor his representative on earth, by the terms of the British North America Act, which is underpinned only the ceding of Nouvelle France to the House of Hanover in 1763

You are retired, right? 

I hope ... 

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, jacee said:

You are retired, right? 

I hope ... 

One never leaves the Regiment, but in a pine box feet first, colours flying, pipes skirling.

[jacee]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

One never leaves the Regiment, but in a pine box feet first, colours flying, pipes skirling.

One needs to be careful - if one is trained to use a gun on people - that everyone's Constitutional rights are respected. 

Not everyone who dissents from government is a valid target. Some are asserting their legal rights despite government opposition.

Every police officer and every soldier has to determine for themselves that they are following "lawful" - ie, Constitutional - orders.

[Dougie93]

Stay off my property and you wont get shot.  Problem solved.

[jacee]

24 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Stay off my property and you wont get shot.  Problem solved.

You can't shoot except in self defense And that's way off topic.

RCMP assault on Wet'suet'en people asserting Constitutional Aboriginal rights is the topic.

 

[Dougie93]

Not my problem,  F**k British Columbia.

[jacee]

44 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Not my problem,  F**k British Columbia.

Then you're in the wrong thread.

[Dougie93]

The thread itself has convinced me not to give a shit anymore. Mission accomplished.

[jacee]

On 3/3/2019 at 5:47 PM, Army Guy said:

The lesson here , RCMP and DND are federal depts., owned and operated by them...you may think we work for you, but in reality we work for the government end of story....

 

Every police officer and every soldier is responsible for upholding the Constitutional rights of every person in Canada. 

To only obey "lawful orders", not orders that violate any person's Constitutional rights.

That's on you, every officer, every soldier, every person's rights, everytime. 

Constitutional rights take precedence.

All else in unlawful.

Following orders is not your duty.

"Lawful" orders, must respect Constitutional rights.

That's on you, on the ground, every incident, every officer, every soldier, to every person in Canada, everytime.

The courts will hold each of you accountable to every single one of us.

Edited March 15, 2019 by jacee

[Army Guy]

On 3/14/2019 at 11:12 PM, jacee said:

Every police officer and every soldier is responsible for upholding the Constitutional rights of every person in Canada. 

To only obey "lawful orders", not orders that violate any person's Constitutional rights.

That's on you, every officer, every soldier, every person's rights, everytime. 

Constitutional rights take precedence.

All else in unlawful.

Following orders is not your duty.

"Lawful" orders, must respect Constitutional rights.

That's on you, on the ground, every incident, every officer, every soldier, to every person in Canada, everytime.

The courts will hold each of you accountable to every single one of us.

Once again you go down a road with little knowledge on the topic...

First off Police and soldiers have different powers , Soldiers are only allowed to be used in domestic ops with governmental orders, such as protecting Olympic games, or G-8 conferences or responding to a provincial request such as aid to power, dart missions, etc etc... ...the government has the right to suspend your rights when they feel it is nessicary , it has already happened in our history...they can suspend one or all of them as they see fit....During normal day to day operations Police will respect your rights given to you by our government of the time....Those same rights will govern all military missions in Canada...until you break the law, and some of your rights are going to be bruised a little..

Lawful Orders are not based just on your constitutional rights, they are based Geneva convention, military law, Canadian civil law, and government policies/ orders  at the time.. For example the riots in Toronto had gone on to long and the military was called in , they would have used force to stop those riots, the level of force is decided by the government, not soldiers...that means if for some crazy reason deadly force was authorized how many of your constitutional rights would have been broken..."as many of them as nessicary to complete the mission"..... Your rights can be changed at any time by our government...

The government decides what your rights are and they can be changed in an afternoon if need be....like I said the FLQ / OKA crises are an example....most of the citizens rights were suspended.

once again the government decides what is lawful and what is not....

The courts are run by the government in case you have not been following the SNC thingy.....

Edited March 18, 2019 by Army Guy

[jacee]

17 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Once again you go down a road with little knowledge on the topic...

First off Police and soldiers have different powers , Soldiers are only allowed to be used in domestic ops with governmental orders, such as protecting Olympic games, or G-8 conferences or responding to a provincial request such as aid to power, dart missions, etc etc... ...the government has the right to suspend your rights when they feel it is nessicary , it has already happened in our history...they can suspend one or all of them as they see fit....During normal day to day operations Police will respect your rights given to you by our government of the time....Those same rights will govern all military missions in Canada...until you break the law, and some of your rights are going to be bruised a little..

Lawful Orders are not based just on your constitutional rights, they are based Geneva convention, military law, Canadian civil law, and government policies/ orders  at the time.. For example the riots in Toronto had gone on to long and the military was called in , they would have used force to stop those riots, the level of force is decided by the government, not soldiers...that means if for some crazy reason deadly force was authorized how many of your constitutional rights would have been broken..."as many of them as nessicary to complete the mission"..... Your rights can be changed at any time by our government...

The government decides what your rights are and they can be changed in an afternoon if need be....like I said the FLQ / OKA crises are an example....most of the citizens rights were suspended.

once again the government decides what is lawful and what is not....

The courts are run by the government in case you have not been following the SNC thingy.....

Army Guy, you are wrong about a lot of this, and you need to talk about it with someone in authority that you respect. 

The Constitution and people's constitutional rights do take precedence. 

Suspending Constitutional rights across the whole country did happen in peacetime during the FLQ crisis, and once during the war, but NOT for OKA.

The courts are government ... the Judicial Branch of  government. Politicians cannot tell the courts what to do. The courts can strike down legislation passed by Parliament if it violates Constitutional rights.  

"Riots" in Toronto ... I assume you're referring to the 2010 G20? There were no "riots", but the Toronto police violated the Constitutional rights of over 1000 people. Lawsuits continue. 

And the RCMP aren't much better. They think they can violate Constitutional Indigenous rights, and violate a people's freedom of expression if they speak out.

I can't begin to address all the errors in your post, but it's very disturbing that a Canadian soldier would think and act that way, huge gaps in your training. Your duty is to the people of Canada.

I can only say ... Once again you go down a road with little knowledge on the topic...

[Army Guy]

Quote

 

The Constitution and people's constitutional rights do take precedence. 

Suspending Constitutional rights across the whole country did happen in peacetime during the FLQ crisis, and once during the war, but NOT for OKA.

 

whoop there it is.....

The Parliament of Canada, a provincial legislature or a territorial legislature may declare that one of its laws or part of a law applies temporarily ("notwithstanding") countermanding sections of the Charter, thereby nullifying any judicial review by overriding the Charter protections for a limited period of time. This is done by including a section in the law clearly specifying which rights have been overridden. A simple majority vote in any of Canada's 14 jurisdictions may suspend the core rights of the Charter. However, the rights to be overridden must be either a "fundamental right" guaranteed by Section 2 (such as freedom of expression, religion, and association), a "legal right" guaranteed by Sections 7–14 (such as rights to liberty and freedom from search and seizures and cruel and unusual punishment) or a Section 15 "equality right".^[1] Other rights such as section 6 mobility rights, democratic rights, and language rights are inviolable.

Such a declaration lapses after five years or a lesser time specified in the clause, although the legislature may re-enact the clause indefinitely. The rationale behind having a five-year expiry date is that it is also the maximum amount of time the Parliament or legislature may sit before an election must be called. Therefore, if the people wish for the law to be repealed, they have the "right" to elect representatives that will carry out the wish of the electorate.^[2] (The provisions of the Charter that deal with elections and democratic representation (§§3-5) are not among those that can be overridden with the notwithstanding clause (§§2,7-15).)

The notwithstanding clause reflects the hybrid character of Canadian political institutions. In effect, it protects the British tradition of parliamentary supremacy under the American-style system of written constitutional rights and strong courts introduced in 1982.^[3] Former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien also described it as a tool that could guard against a Supreme Court ruling legalizing hate speech and child pornography as freedom of expression.^[2]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_33_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

Not in OKA...let me ask you this did the Natives involved in OKA crises have freedom of movement, could they leave on their own accord...yes or no...What about the rights of ABORIGINAL peoples of Canada these are basic rights, i'm sure there are a lot more examples. once again if they were not suspended, then why has no one been charged, in a court of law...

 

let me give you a better example in the discourse that happened around the country during the OKA crises, DND was used as the enforcement of legal court orders, to ensure native protesters did not cross or disrupt certain areas , and in doing so were authorized to use force, and could detain unruly band members....sound like they had all their rights afforded to them....

You keep trying to correct all my mistakes, maybe you this time you could provide sources with your accusations.

[jacee]

All that violent nonsense ... and they still didn't get to build the friggin golf course. 

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

All that violent nonsense ... and they still didn't get to build the friggin golf course. 

You’ll be happy with the new Liberal budget spending.  The biggest line item of new spending is on Indigenous affairs including land claims, to the tune of over $8 billion.  I’m surprised the Conservatives aren’t totally shitting the bed.  

[jacee]

15 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

You’ll be happy with the new Liberal budget spending.  The biggest line item of new spending is on Indigenous affairs including land claims, to the tune of over $8 billion.  I’m surprised the Conservatives aren’t totally shitting the bed.  

$4.5b in new money, and yes it's much needed. 

[Zeitgeist]

16 minutes ago, jacee said:

$4.5b in new money, and yes it's much needed. 

Only if it leads to a sustainable solution.  I suspect that it just perpetuates more dependence on outsiders and that more money will never be enough.  I really want to believe otherwise because conditions on some reserves are terrible.  I’d just like to hear for once in my lifetime from the majority of Indigenous commentators that more money from taxpayers is not the solution.  To truly own something is to create it.  Yes, many are born into poverty and some are born into privilege.  The state can play a role in leveling the playing field, as long as independence is the goal and realistic outcome.  I’m not convinced yet that that is the case here.  

Edited March 20, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[jacee]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Only if it leads to a sustainable solution.  I suspect that it just perpetuates more dependence on outsiders and that more money will never be enough.  I really want to believe otherwise because conditions on some reserves are terrible.  I’d just like to hear for once in my lifetime from the majority of Indigenous commentators that more money from taxpayers is not the solution.  To truly own something is to create it.  Yes, many are born into poverty and some are born into privilege.  The state can play a role in leveling the playing field, as long as independence is the goal and realistic outcome.  I’m not convinced yet that that is the case here.  

There are billions of dollars owing and oodles of land to be returned.

[Zeitgeist]

18 minutes ago, jacee said:

There are billions of dollars owing and oodles of land to be returned.

To whom for what?  Illustrate the continuous and exclusive occupation of a particular area predating British North America and continuing to the present day.  Bring forth the evidence and put it before the court.  What is concerning is that billions in taxpayer money has been earmarked to help pay for land claim litigation against taxpayers and to pay in advance for land.  Again, what is the statute of limitations?  How far do we go back?  My ancestors had land in the US.  I think we may be looking at extortion and a violation of private title.  I suppose the courts will decide.  Trudeau has certainly empowered land claimants, and young people are being conditioned to see the land as Indigenous territory through land acknowledgments.  I’m not a right wing person and I want to see Indigenous people thrive, but not through extortionate money and land grabs.  When the public learns what is happening, I think there will be outcry.  I guess we’ll see what unfolds.  An election is coming.  I want to see good ideas and support of Indigenous people.  Canadians can be quite generous, but that’s exactly my point, to not treat people like charity cases.  

Edited March 20, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[jacee]

44 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

To whom for what?  

https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100030285/1529354158736

44 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

extortion

 

44 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

extortionate

Educate yourself so you have something less ignorant and slanderous to say. 

Edited March 20, 2019 by jacee

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100030285/1529354158736

 

Educate yourself so you have something less ignorant and slanderous to say. 

I’ve read quite a bit about these topics   Have you?  I also deal with the political reality of different approaches to it in the workplace   

Mostly feel good empty rhetoric on the government web link you provided.  It comes down to land and money, which is where courts will have to be very careful and voters will have to consider what is a reasonable response to redressing past wrongs, sometimes very old injustices or losses of territory in a period when wars and conquest were common, including among Indigenous peoples.  People are working hard and deciding how their tax dollars should be spent.  I hope work takes place that builds long term success and self reliance.  

Edited March 20, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[jacee]

On 3/20/2019 at 1:54 AM, Zeitgeist said:

  It comes down to land and money,

I hope work takes place that builds long term success and self reliance.  

Yes.

[mowich]

On 3/19/2019 at 8:31 PM, jacee said:

$4.5b in new money, and yes it's much needed. 

Ah but it always is, isn't jacee with no accounting as to where the money is going.  With never a change in fortunes.

In case it missed your notice there are many well-run productive reserves in Canada.  High employment, low rates of alcoholism, drug addiction and all the myriad of ills that befall other reserves.  That being the case, why aren't the less fortunate reserves making regular trips to the successful ones?  Why aren't natives reaching out to other natives to help them get ahead?  Could it be that they might learn that it took hard dedicated work and patience to bring their reserves out of the sorry state that so many others find themselves in and, once knowing that there was a no big cash pay--out along with the knowledge given, no one was really interested.