Pipeline protestors need to be jailed

[eyeball]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

The NDP has turned into a race-based victims-rights organization where the victims are arranged in a hierarchy of oppression, and the ultimate enemy are all white people who don't have an identity to claim they're being oppressed. A party which was once the representative of the farmer and working man now sneers at and disdains them for their lack of sophistication and cultural enlightenment. The party now finds it support among ivory tower academics and the petty bourgeois.

C'mon it's really the pyjamas and AK47's that get your herd of goats isn't it?

[cougar]

37 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 We have a common interest: sustainable development and economic prosperity. 

There is no such thing.  This is utopia.

Economic prosperity (growth) is unsustainable.  Bringing 300,000 new people into the country every year while turning the healthy forests into a wasteland is unsustainable.

 

[cannuck]

36 minutes ago, jacee said:

2 Your disrespect makes you part of the problem, not the solutions.

3 Nonsense. The Wet'suet'en Nation Council was still trying to get BC Premier Horgan to the table January 20, 2020, prior to the Feb 6 RCMP raid. He refused again. 

4 It worked to get governments to the table, where both should have been long ago. 

 

I have as yet to encounter a band or council who has done diddly squat to EARN any respect, so they get none.

Horgan is a BC politician, not a treaty commissioner.

The government has always been at the table, the "hereditary chiefs" (WTF is THAT supposed to be????) left it 2 years ago.

[Zeitgeist]

14 minutes ago, cougar said:

There is no such thing.  This is utopia.

Economic prosperity (growth) is unsustainable.  Bringing 300,000 new people into the country every year while turning the healthy forests into a wasteland is unsustainable.

 

Actually with the right reforestation, community development, transportation, and energy infrastructure, we could develop Canada for the next 300 years, including with selective immigration.  It won’t be a zero carbon footprint economy and will require big carbon sinks.  
 

At that point let’s hope aliens and interstellar settlement take care of us.  Population should naturally plateau and decline with education and urbanization.  

Edited March 1, 2020 by Zeitgeist

[cougar]

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Actually with the right reforestation, community development, transportation, and energy infrastructure, we could develop Canada for the next 300 years, including with selective immigration.  It won’t be a zero carbon footprint economy and will require big carbon sinks.  

Clearly you have absolutely zero idea what you are talking about.

[Zeitgeist]

2 minutes ago, cougar said:

Clearly you have absolutely zero idea what you are talking about.

Cite.  It’s mostly about how we develop, not how much.  It won’t be your world.  It will be micro housing, rapid transit, and strict waste management and reuse.policies.  It will be a return to village, artisanal life for most.  

[Shady]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Go away Shady you don't have a clue.

You’re the one without a clue.  You’re opinions are extreme, fringe thinking, that the vast majority of Canadians don’t share.  STFU, nobody cares about your nonsense.

[Dougie93]

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It will be micro housing, rapid transit, and strict waste management and reuse.policies.  It will be a return to village, artisanal life for most.  

The Eskimo Communist Post Scarcity Utopia is at hand.

 

[Zeitgeist]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The Eskimo Communist Post Scarcity Utopia is at hand.

 

I was thinking more of St. Jacob’s or Niagara on the Lake.  

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I was thinking more of St. Jacob’s or Niagara on the Lake.  

What about your Ivory Tower ?

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

You’re the one without a clue.  You’re opinions are extreme, fringe thinking, that the vast majority of Canadians don’t share.  STFU, nobody cares about your nonsense.

What opinions and nonsense are you talking about exactly Shady? The need for documentation of an official surrender is not an opinion, UNDRIP is not an opinion, these are legal facts and laws. England's King gave specific orders to his representatives in Canada to secure the right to colonize and exploit Indigenous lands and resources with official documents obtained peacefully not thru war.

I realize your opinion we conquered Canada is quite mainstream and popular as opposed to being fringe in the context that term is usually used but are you suggesting fringe is now a label that can be applied to laws and facts? Want to bet SCC judges would tell government lawyers to STFU if they tried to explain Canada's position with the horseshit you're shovelling here?

Edited March 1, 2020 by eyeball

[DogOnPorch]

33 minutes ago, eyeball said:

UNDRIP is not an opinion, these are legal facts and laws.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or DOTROIP) is a non-legally-binding resolution passed by the United Nations in 2007. 

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or DOTROIP) is a non-legally-binding resolution passed by the United Nations in 2007. 

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or DOTROIP) is also a legally-binding law passed by the BC legislature in 2019.

[scribblet]

Have not seen one credible news report that makes it clear with whom the Liberals  are negotiating; Hereditary, elected, Grand, band, et al chiefs. We are being scammed by radical protesters and interveners.  The courts, 20 elected chiefs and a majority of hereditary chiefs is not viable but a secretive deal between the Feds, the Prov and (? exactly who - hereditary chiefs is success? This is absolutely nuts!      If they are negotiating with Chief Woos AKA Frank Alec,  who has hadthe title Chief Woos for less than a year and I have read he  tole it from matriarchs who were supposed to hold the title for life.

As the Office of whoever meets with government officials, about twenty members of the community (Wet'suwet'en and non-Indigenous) are rallying at the office in support of poverty reduction and economic development. 

[Zeitgeist]

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

What about your Ivory Tower ?

 

Height restrictions.  I already asked.  They won’t issue me a permit.  

[cougar]

6 hours ago, cannuck said:

That makes the term I have used for the last 70 years and will continue to use: "Indian".

The main problem I see with this is they have nothing to do with India.   The fact someone decided to call them 'Indians" because that someone thought they found a new route to India is indeed offending.    Maybe we should give them the right to come up with a name for themselves as a group and use it.

Same with black people.  They were called n* in the past which was apparently so offending that I cannot even use it here.  Then "black" was offending too.  Now they call them "people of color".  I still do not think this is a proper term.   If they can think of a name they can identify with and be proud of, I can use it.   This would make everyone's life a bit easier.

Edited March 1, 2020 by cougar

[Argus]

50 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Have not seen one credible news report that makes it clear with whom the Liberals  are negotiating; Hereditary, elected, Grand, band, et al chiefs.

One thing we know, the politicians want this to go away. And they don't care what they have to pay to make that happen since it's not their money anyway.

[Argus]

43 minutes ago, cougar said:

The main problem I see with this is they have nothing to do with India. 

And yet I keep seeing signs that say "This is Indian land" during the blockades.

[cougar]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

And yet I keep seeing signs that say "This is Indian land" during the blockades.

This is because of generations of people using the wrong terminology.

I want to be able to call the residents of India or immigrants from India  "Indians" and not "East Indians".  There is no such thing as West Indians, although I have heard of the West Indies (the Caribbeans)

[Nefarious Banana]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

This is because of generations of people using the wrong terminology.

I want to be able to call the residents of India or immigrants from India  "Indians" and not "East Indians".  There is no such thing as West Indians, although I have heard of the West Indies (the Caribbeans)

They call each other 'Indians' . . . . it's an inside joke.  The politically correct snowflakes are laughed at by the 'Indians' . . . . 

Edited March 2, 2020 by Nefarious Banana

[jacee]

13 hours ago, scribblet said:

Have not seen one credible news report that makes it clear with whom the Liberals  are negotiating; Hereditary, elected, Grand, band, et al chiefs. We are being scammed by radical protesters and interveners.  The courts, 20 elected chiefs and a majority of hereditary chiefs is not viable but a secretive deal between the Feds, the Prov and (? exactly who - hereditary chiefs is success? This is absolutely nuts!      If they are negotiating with Chief Woos AKA Frank Alec,  who has hadthe title Chief Woos for less than a year and I have read he  tole it from matriarchs who were supposed to hold the title for life.

As the Office of whoever meets with government officials, about twenty members of the community (Wet'suwet'en and non-Indigenous) are rallying at the office in support of poverty reduction and economic development. 

It isn't that difficult to sort out, if you read with an open mind

https://aptnnews.ca/2020/03/01/wetsuweten-chiefs-ministers-reach-draft-arrangement-in-land-dispute/

The Federal responsibility in these talks is rights and title arising from Delgamuukw 1997 (hereditary Chiefs) and that's the subject of the draft proposal:

Details of the draft deal, which centres on Indigenous rights and land titles, were not disclosed, however, and work on the Coastal GasLink natural gas pipeline at the heart of the dispute was set to resume on Monday.

Federal Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Carolyn Bennett said the talks are the start of a better relationship with the Nation.

“We, I believe, have come to a proposed arrangement that will also honour the protocols of the Wet’suwet’en people and clans,” Bennett said in a news conference in Smithers, B.C. “What we’ve worked on this weekend needs to go back to those clans and then we have agreed as ministers that we will come back to sign if it is agreed upon by the Nation.”

She said the proposal is about making sure “that this never happens again, that rights holders will always be at the table.”

BC ignored the duty of the Crown to consult with traditional leaders (title holders), and that failure, rights and title holders not being at the table, led to the current situation. It was, and is, the Federal government's responsibility to "reconcile Aboriginal rights and titles with Crown title". The draft agreement will bring all Wet'suet'en people together for discussion and there's likely to be broad agreement on going forward with that Federal process. These Federal talks, and agreement, will be a framework for agreements with other Indigenous Nations with title claims as well, a precedent that is clearly the jurisdiction of traditional Indigenous Councils that governed 'at contact'.

It won't solve the current pipeline issue though, which is still squarely a provincial issue and involves both traditional and elected Band Council leadership. 

 British Columbia Indigenous Relations Minister Scott Fraser acknowledged there was a disagreement over the natural gas pipeline going through traditional territory. ... 

Chief Woos ... stressed that the hereditary chiefs remain opposed to the pipeline in their traditional territory.

“We are going to be continuing to look at some more conversations with B.C. and of course with the proponent and further conversation with the RCMP,” Woos said. “It’s not over yet.” ... 

Shortly after the proposal was announced, Coastal GasLink issued a statement saying it would resume construction activities in the Morice River area, which is near the Unist’ot’en Healing Centre, on Monday. It also said the company is committed to talking with all Indigenous groups along its route. 

The issue of the current pipeline route running right through ecologically sensitive areas and culturally important ancient village and burial sites is not resolved and could flare again. CGL/TC Energy had time to reroute, but refused to 'bother people in the towns' with construction near them, and is currently still being very aggressive about moving ahead. They've ignorantly ploughed through archeologically important sites full of artifacts without doing archeological assessments first. This issue will still flare up again, I think. It's just the WRONG route. 

And the whole country has paid the price for CGL/TC Energy's stubborn, ignorant and aggressive insistence on taking the wrong route, IMO. 

Edited March 2, 2020 by jacee

[Zeitgeist]

Sounds like straightforward NIMBYism to me.  

[SkyHigh]

On 2/29/2020 at 2:06 AM, eyeball said:

Shady's aversions to accountability - anything that interferes in the capacity for lobbyists and politicians/public officials to meet and discuss public domain issues in secret. 

He picked a good forum member name. 

Apologies, I thought the lobbyist comment was directed at me.

 

[Rue]

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or DOTROIP) is also a legally-binding law passed by the BC legislature in 2019.

The BC government legislation is not the UN Treaty and constitutionally the BC government can not pass any native rights laws.  The BC government is limited on a provincial level to what it can do with native land rights to the point of making them symbolic but not binding. That said the gov. and native leaders seem to have entered into an agreement so everyone go home.

Edited March 2, 2020 by Rue

[Argus]

25 minutes ago, Rue said:

The BC government legislation is not the UN Treaty and constitutionally the BC government can not pass any native rights laws.  The BC government is limited on a provincial level to what it can do with native land rights to the point of making them symbolic but not binding. That said the gov. and native leaders seem to have entered into an agreement so everyone go home.

Yes, apparently we're now going to recognize the 'hereditary' chiefs too. So instead of just trying to deal with 600 native leaders we'll now be dealing with 1200. What fun. Bound to make it much easier to get things done.