Indigenous blockade in BC & related protests

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, scribblet said:

As I understand it, 20 democratically elected Chiefs and  Councils along the Eagle Spirit LNG pipeline  along with roughly 125 of 130 hereditary Chiefs, have all said yes to the pipeline and related $600 million in benefits that flow to aboriginals   Should these 5 hereditary Chiefs should have VETO over our economy and the lives of people who need this pipeline. 

I think this is part of a broader indigenous strategy. If indigenous activists achieve a situation whereby what essentially amounts to universal consent is required for any resource project to proceed, resource development in this country will grind to a halt. Everybody else, including federal Libs, should seriously consider the implications of this. The more radical indigenous activists seems to equate 'reconciliation' with capitulation. If this approach prevails, we face a future of escalating conflict rather than the sunny ways JT promised.

[Hates politicians]

On 1/9/2019 at 11:14 PM, Dougie93 said:

Your assertion was not that they had a de jure veto, you said "inherent" veto, which means de facto,  and they do have a de facto veto, because they are the title holders of the land and that makes it their property,  and people are very attached to their property, so if you try to roll over them, that will backfire into the governments face, because if any First Nation decides to resist as the Mohawks did at Oka, the same that happened at Oka is going to happen again, and at Oka, the Mohawks used force, and they won.

The issue here is that the government is not as afraid of the Pacific Northwest Coast indians, because as of right now they are comparatively docile bourgeois pampered indians, but the government  don't even dare step one foot on Mohawk land, because the Mohawks are not docile and are rather reasonably well trained paramilitaries and heavily armed.

Some first nations are docile and some are not, but any which chooses to flip to the not docile camp can veto the government by asymmetrical use of force, otherwise known as guerilla warfare, which is what the Oka Crisis was in the summer of 1990.

 

Build a wall around them and cut off the money to them. Also no fossil fuels to them.

[Hates politicians]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

The only law which can imposed on the Mohawks by force, is the law of armed conflict, but the Mohawks are a match for CANSOFCOM, the police can't handle the Mohawks, the Mohawks could and would run circles around civilians, to include peace officers.

Nothing a b52 loaded to the max would'nt solve

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Hates politicians said:

Build a wall around them and cut off the money to them. Also no fossil fuels to them.

Not me, I would decline such an unlawful order, and so would the Chief of the Defence Staff, because the Chief of the Defence Staff has an awesome pension, and you can't spend your pension from jail, you'll have to recruit your own army if you want to do that.   And without an army, I would suspect that the indians would just shoot you. /shrugs

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Hates politicians said:

Nothing a b52 loaded to the max would'nt solve

The American Commander-in-Chief wouldn't side with you, if Canada ever incites an internal insurrection, the Americans will be all over that and will use it to their advantage by imposing themselves as arbitrators.  That is to say, under the rubric of continental security Washington will step in put the screws to Canada using the indians are their leverage, by cutting Canada out of the process and treating with the Indians directly. 

[Hates politicians]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

Phhhhht. It would result in no such thing. Shooting armed insurgents is not a crime of any kind in any country in the world.

Maybe I'm wrong but I think that their is still a law on the books that say's anymore than 5 indians in a group is an uprising and they can be shot.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

So Argus goes on internet forums and publishes to the World Wide Web in perpetuity, vociferously and bombastically advocating that Canadian Confederation in right of the British Crown should commit Crimes Against Humanity by waging Genocidal Aggressive War of annihilation upon the First Nations, who are also subjects of the British Crown by solemn treaty,  without regards whatsoever for national and international law and the laws of armed conflict, nor restraint,  nor proportionality, nor humanity.

Noted.

He advocated no such thing, you loon. And stop talking about laws you clearly don't understand.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Argus

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Hates politicians said:

Maybe I'm wrong but I think that their is still a law on the books that say's anymore than 5 indians in a group is an uprising and they can be shot.

I don't care if they're natives or whites or Scientologists. If they pick up a weapon and stand against police it's entirely legal to shoot them down.

[Dougie93]

Basically, if Canada goes to war with the Indians, since its the same Indians on both sides of the border, that would touch off in the USA as well, at which point the Americans would simply take control, Canadian Confederation would be decapitated, the politicians would be sent to the kiddie table to wait until they were summoned,  the Continental Defense and Security Agreement would be invoked, and the Americans would sort it out, including having the Canadian military under their control, reporting to the American combatant commander at US NORTHCOM

[Argus]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Basically, if Canada goes to war with the Indians, since its the same Indians on both sides of the border, that would touch off in the USA as well, at which point the Americans would simply take control,

Yeah, bullshit. The only thing the Americans would do is ship weapons and ammunition to the Canadian army, and maybe use their drones and satellites to give us better information.

 

[Dougie93]

Just telling you how it would be.  Obviously Canada doesn't provide for its national security, and so obviously the Americans have ensured that Canada has signed away authority for them to take control in the event of, under the Continental Defense and Security Agreement, all that just window dressing, they would do it even if Canada hadn't transferred that jurisdiction.

Tellin' ya, Canadian Confederation is a failed state, it's propped up by the Americans and nothing else, you don't run your own national security, the Pentagon runs it for you.

[PIK]

On 1/10/2019 at 4:28 PM, eyeball said:

Its a global conflict PIK and there's no shortage of assholes on either side.  You'll probably have to send in tanks, I can see this conflict making the War of the Woods seem like a peace process.

All governments and the courts and the natives have all signed off on this, these people have no right being there and should all be thrown in jail. Enough of this childish BS, end it now ,with a heavy foot and make a huge example out of these eco terrorists.

[Dougie93]

In the event of internal insurrection, at that point our de facto representative is going to be General Jonathan Vance, Chief of the Defence Staff, would be reporting to the officer providing Canada with the logistics tail to conduct operations, since Canada doesn't have one of its own, and that man is at this juncture General Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy,  Commander NORTHCOM at Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Not that General Vance would mind methinks, used to be my boss, he's a serious dude, so I would assume he would be looking for the Americans to step in,  if the government screwed the pooch like that.

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

He advocated no such thing, you loon. And stop talking about laws you clearly don't understand.

Pretty sure the loon is the talk raging lunatic who is advocating mass murder in defence of the Crown against the subjects of the Crown, mass murdering your own people extra-judicially as you are advocating, needs only Responsibility to Protect invoked, Canada's own contribution to international law, but there are actually multiple statutes which render what you are advocating, not only a war crime, but as I said, Crimes Against Humanity, see; Nuremberg.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, PIK said:

All governments and the courts and the natives have all signed off on this, these people have no right being there and should all be thrown in jail. Enough of this childish BS, end it now ,with a heavy foot and make a huge example out of these eco terrorists.

Pinochet would be proud of you PIK. 

I'm surprised the CPC doesn't vow to dial things back to square 1, declare war against Canada's indigenous peoples and do it right this time.  Provide an example for immigrant peoples everywhere on the planet.

It'll be good practice for when humane beings begin exploiting exploring the galaxy.

[Argus]

21 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Pretty sure the loon is the talk raging lunatic who is advocating mass murder

No, I'm advocating law and order. Those who pick up rifles to oppose that deserve to get shot. Nor is that considered murder.

Rest of your crap deleted as bloody idiocy.

 

Edited January 12, 2019 by Argus

[turningrite]

On 1/11/2019 at 4:09 PM, Dougie93 said:

The American Commander-in-Chief wouldn't side with you, if Canada ever incites an internal insurrection, the Americans will be all over that and will use it to their advantage by imposing themselves as arbitrators.  That is to say, under the rubric of continental security Washington will step in put the screws to Canada using the indians are their leverage, by cutting Canada out of the process and treating with the Indians directly. 

Where did you ever come up with this? Why would the federal government incite an internal insurrection in the first place? We have a constitution that asserts the legitimacy of indigenous rights and successive governments have in recent decades demonstrated considerable restraint in dealing with indigenous affairs. These days, it's not generally the federal government that doesn't recognize the rule of law in dealing with indigenous activists. Instead, as we've seen in recent conflicts, many activists express their disdain for Canadian laws and some even dismiss their applicability altogether. Why would the Americans ever want to step into this quagmire? Personally, I can't see any upside in the Americans siding with Canada's indigenous activists as they'd risk raising expectations among their own substantially larger indigenous population. As an American relative has told me, the American view is largely that European Americans defeated their Indians (they still call them that or, alternatively, Native Americans) and now call the shots. I doubt that Americans will ever call their indigenous peoples "First Nations."

[Argus]

1 hour ago, turningrite said:

 I doubt that Americans will ever call their indigenous peoples "First Nations."

Nobody sane would call these nations. I'm not even sure where the term originated. Most of the reserve have a population of under a thousand.

The total population of the Wet'suwet'en 'first nation', some of whom are opposing the LNG pipeline,  is about 2400 people. That's a small town's worth of people. Calling it a nation just pumps up their egos and let's them presume there is some sort of equality between each of them and the federal government. 

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, turningrite said:

Where did you ever come up with this? Why would the federal government incite an internal insurrection in the first place? We have a constitution that asserts the legitimacy of indigenous rights and successive governments have in recent decades demonstrated considerable restraint in dealing with indigenous affairs. These days, it's not generally the federal government that doesn't recognize the rule of law in dealing with indigenous activists. Instead, as we've seen in recent conflicts, many activists express their disdain for Canadian laws and some even dismiss their applicability altogether. Why would the Americans ever want to step into this quagmire? Personally, I can't see any upside in the Americans siding with Canada's indigenous activists as they'd risk raising expectations among their own substantially larger indigenous population. As an American relative has told me, the American view is largely that European Americans defeated their Indians (they still call them that or, alternatively, Native Americans) and now call the shots. I doubt that Americans will ever call their indigenous peoples "First Nations."

Agreed.  Minority cultures always have a better deal in Canada, which is not a melting pot.  Canada is a cultural protectorate, though it can be costly.  When it starts to kill the goose that lays the golden egg in terms of jobs and tax revenue, that's where the line is crossed.  However, it's important to grow the economy responsibly, since all the money in the world won't protect you from poor air/water quality, violent protests, and lack of decent public services (education, transportation infrastructure, health, etc.).  It's about finding the right balance.

[bush_cheney2004]

On 1/14/2019 at 10:22 AM, turningrite said:

... As an American relative has told me, the American view is largely that European Americans defeated their Indians (they still call them that or, alternatively, Native Americans) and now call the shots. I doubt that Americans will ever call their indigenous peoples "First Nations."

 

Yes and no...the U.S. experience was far more violent and decisive, but also satisfied the ethos of some warrior tribes/bands.   To this day, Native Americans proudly volunteer for the U.S. armed forces, as can those from Canada (i.e. Jay Treaty).  Few Americans express any doubt about the legitimacy of "Indians" as Americans, with many examples incorporated into American history/culture.   And of course, the English colonial term "aboriginal" is not widely used in the USA.

 

[Dougie93]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Yes and no...the U.S. experience was far more violent and decisive, but also satisfied the ethos of some warrior tribes/bands.   To this day, Native Americans proudly volunteer for the U.S. armed forces, as can those from Canada (i.e. Jay Treaty).  Few Americans express any doubt about the legitimacy of "Indians" as Americans, with many examples incorporated into American history/culture.   And of course, the English colonial term "aboriginal" is not widely used in the USA.

 

And yet even Tatanka Iyotake went back to America, having discovered that Canada was a frozen wasteland with nothing to eat.

[Dougie93]

Thing about the Lakota, they were in the end laid low by their own doctrine, the Lakota were imperialists, it was a empire of force, they held the Black Hills as their Rome in effect, and the American barbarians sacked it, live by the sword die by the sword, too bad so sad.

[jacee]

On 1/11/2019 at 4:35 PM, PIK said:

All governments and the courts and the natives have all signed off on this, these people have no right being there and should all be thrown in jail.

That isn't clearly the case.

Agreements have been signed with elected Band Councils ... BUT ... elected Band Councils have administrative authority ONLY on reserve lands. The proposed CGL pipeline is running through little or no reserve land. Elected Band Councils have no authority to consent to activity on the much larger unceded traditional territories. 

Wet'suet'en people have had no hearing in court yet, but will have three opportunities:

- Filing evidence (by Jan 31) for the permanent injunction hearing.

- Court hearing to determine whether the NEB hearing must be redone, including possible redo of environmental assessment.

- Filing for recognition of Aboriginal Title. 

It is not a done deal yet. A flimsy interim injunction is not the last word.

As for all the sabre-rattling here ... lol ... good grief! I certainly hope cooler heads prevail.

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by jacee

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, jacee said:

That isn't clearly the case.

Agreements have been signed with elected Band Councils ... BUT ... elected Band Councils have administrative authority ONLY on reserve lands. The proposed CGL pipeline is running through little or no reserve land. Elected Band Councils have no authority to consent to activity on the much larger unceded traditional territories. 

Wet'suet'en people have had no hearing in court yet, but will have three opportunities:

- Filing evidence (by Jan 31) for the permanent injunction hearing.

- Court hearing to determine whether the NEB hearing must be redone, including possible redo of environmental assessment.

- Filing for recognition of Aboriginal Title. 

It is not a done deal yet. A flimsy interim injunction is not the last word.

As for all the sabre-rattling here ... lol ... good grief! I certainly hope cooler heads prevail.

 

What a load of horse crap jacee, Canadian government has been dealing with native Americans for centuries now, and everything was fine until all the payments were handed out , pipe line companies had all the checks in the boxes, and boom another check is needed.......and wait one minute we forgot about old joe and his cousin marry, the witch doctor, tribal dentist/ doctor/dog breeder he has a say as well........How many layers does it take to get a pipeline built, everyone's pockets must not be filled by now.... What should be happening right now, going back and collecting all that money they paid out, and tell them when you grow up we will come back....Environment my ass this is all about money...how many liters of raw sewage does victory, Vancouver, pump into the ocean every day....How many tons of pollutants does their pulp and paper industry pump into the rivers and streams. the man with the suit case full of money needs to pack up and head some where else....and when fuel for their vehs reaches 3 bucks a liter.....I bet they sing a new tune....

This is just one more stalling technique...I say take that 40 bil project and move it to the east coast, we like jobs, and we love to burn fuel as well....let them tree huggers and the Natives tell it to someone else.... No sabre rattling, just time to put the boot down....or leave with all them jobs.... 

[Army Guy]

On ‎1‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 1:43 PM, Dougie93 said:

Would require CANSOFCOM, and would involve significant attrition, as the Mohawks are entrenched and dug in on the Res, it's actually a de facto battle position, and they dominate the approaches to as well.

Sorry I'm with Argus on this one, All the Mohawks at oka were no more than armed thugs in camo, maybe a few ring leaders had some training, the rest just young men from the reserve, no match for a 19 year old Canadian Infantry soldier with a few years of training.......The fact that the Airborne did mange to overwhelm all their positions including those dug in positions  in double quick time, without a shot fired speaks to that, I'm pretty sure a couple companies of Vandoos could have done the same thing, and you know how much I like those guys........lets not forget, they also had a few M113, M109 SPG, Leo tanks , Helos, some Airborne, and some fast air to intimidate them.

I think CSOAR would have these guys for lunch....Regardless of what wpns they had when that leo with the dozer blade went through that road block across the road that was the sound of the end... after that all you could hear was the sound of people running through the woods..Thats not the sounds of professionals but people scared shitless...