Aboriginals/First Nations in Canada

[Riverwind]

The U.S. Supreme court isn't in denial and playing games. They know their forefathers made agreements with our people and are of the just and moral frame of mind that it's time to right the wrongs.

I realize that you have a twisted sense of morality, however, most people understand that righting historical wrongs must never create a new set of victims. Make demands that require the victimization of 500,000+ people and you will find that most people will give you very little sympathy.

[NativeCharm]

The U.S. Supreme court isn't in denial and playing games. They know their forefathers made agreements with our people and are of the just and moral frame of mind that it's time to right the wrongs.

I realize that you have a twisted sense of morality, however, most people understand that righting historical wrongs must never create a new set of victims. Make demands that require the victimization of 500,000+ people and you will find that most people will give you very little sympathy.

There WILL be some casualties (so to speak), as there was back when this all started. It is inevitable that there will be many people affected. Finding the outcome to minimize this is the goal. Can't please everyone.

[NativeCharm]

She:kon!

Until all the outstanding land disputes are settled and the treaties and agreements fully recognized and upheld, the ~new and improved~ normalcy will be land reclamations, road blockades and infrastructure disruptions. 20 years ago our Royaner warned your Prime Minister and Governor General that our youth were discontent with the inequity and injustices of ignored agreements and encroachments on our territories. 10 years ago the Royaner predicted that if the government did not come to the table to discuss these issues that the young adults would escallate the issues by confrontational action. Our Royaner were ignored and dismissed as Canada told us to go back in our corner and wait.

Today the youth of 20 years ago are the Warriors and Mothers in our community. They are no longer a patient lot, and have garnered the support of the old people who see their actions a necessary and compelling.

Prefaced by Oka and Ipperwash, this is the new land claims process, where we take back our territory and let your government prove we ever gave it up. Guess what? You government knows it is up a creek without a paddle and so it sees negotiation as an alternatve an expedient and necessary process. Funny how when the shoe is on the other foot, your government knowing it is sunk, wants to talk with us.

The government is starting from a weak position neither being the occupiers or the legal title-holders of the lands. You can all be assured that you won't be gaining much from these talks, since we are unwilling to negotiate ourselves into a loss.

O:nen

You couln't have said it better. It's almost like a nationwide epidemic. I'm one of the more "calm" ones.

[Okwaho]

The U.S. Supreme court isn't in denial and playing games. They know their forefathers made agreements with our people and are of the just and moral frame of mind that it's time to right the wrongs.

I think if you read the links more closely, you will find that there was a comittment to do no harm to one another and to work together. There was also a committment to fight back the more radical claims of the Oneida Wisconsin.

I'm sure if you read the agreements between out two nations you'll find we are called your "friends and allies"! Who stopped being friends and allies with who?

[Okwaho]

The more radical elements will ensure someone will be killed. But perhaps that is what is wanted all along.

Someone already has been killed by the more radical elements of your society!

[jdobbin]

I'm sure if you read the agreements between out two nations you'll find we are called your "friends and allies"! Who stopped being friends and allies with who?

Stop using exclamation points with me.

I still think that an injunction would have brought the same results of negotiation.

[jdobbin]

Someone already has been killed by the more radical elements of your society!

And now you are prepared to kill yourselves?

So there is no way to stop the coming war? You are prepared to kill yourself? You see no other way?

[Okwaho]

The U.S. Supreme court isn't in denial and playing games. They know their forefathers made agreements with our people and are of the just and moral frame of mind that it's time to right the wrongs.

I realize that you have a twisted sense of morality, however, most people understand that righting historical wrongs must never create a new set of victims. Make demands that require the victimization of 500,000+ people and you will find that most people will give you very little sympathy.

Just what I expected from you. You shout morality from the soap box of the internet claiming victimisation due to righting the immoral wrongs of the past! Who's twisted sense of morality? It's comical how everything is twisted to you until it's proven!

Round, round we go!

[Okwaho]

I'm sure if you read the agreements between out two nations you'll find we are called your "friends and allies"! Who stopped being friends and allies with who?

Stop using exclamation points with me.

I still think that an injunction would have brought the same results of negotiation.

That's the problem...to many people think before they have or know the facts.

Stop using exclamation points with me. ? Isn't that a denial of freedom of expression? I thought everyone was equal! lol

[jdobbin]

That's the problem...to many people think before they have or know the facts.

Stop using exclamation points with me. ? Isn't that a denial of freedom of expression? I thought everyone was equal! lol

No, it's annoying. It's like me writing like this: WAS THERE EVEN AN ATTEMPT AT GETTING A COURT INJUNCTION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT? IF THERE WAS AND IT WAS REFUSED, THEN YOU MIGHT HAVE A GOOD CASE FOR AN ONSITE PROTEST.

Now, does that look freedom of expression or does it just look annoying?

[Riverwind]

You shout morality from the soap box of the internet claiming victimisation due to righting the immoral wrongs of the past!

You are the one claiming moral superiority because your ancestors may have been shafted. If you demand things because of 'morality' then you better be prepared to be moral. Demanding the that 1/2 million be evicted from their homes is not moral by any reasonable persons definition. The fact that you cannot see that is extremely scary = makes me wonder what else you are willing the justify in order to satisfy your definition of morality.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

It's like me writing like this: WAS THERE EVEN.....

No your example is more like an internet nube that hasn't learned what the caps lock button is for. Using exclamations denotes emphasis. I get it and I'm sure so do many others.......

However if you are jaded by irrelevent symbols then good luck to you!!!!!!!!!

O:nen

[jdobbin]

Glad we have come to an understanding of how communication is done!!!!

And thanks for the insults!!!! I haven't personally attacked you but you feel that it is okay to do it to me!!!!

When every sentence is puctuated with an exclamation mark, it loses its importance!!!!

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

If you demand things because of 'morality'.....

Nope. We're demanding equity (not equality - we're not interested in joining your society or your corporate business you call Canada).

O:nen

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

I see you draught your sensitivity by example too! There were no insults. You did that to yourself.

O:nen

[jdobbin]

Calling someone names is not an insult?

[Riverwind]

Nope. We're demanding equity (not equality - we're not interested in joining your society or your corporate business you call Canada).

Equity would mean your claim should be tossed out completely because it is ancient history. The fact that your claim is even being entertained by the gov't and the courts simply illustrates the privileged status given to aboriginals in this country.

[FTA Lawyer]

The U.S. Supreme court isn't in denial and playing games. They know their forefathers made agreements with our people and are of the just and moral frame of mind that it's time to right the wrongs.

I think if you read the links more closely, you will find that there was a comittment to do no harm to one another and to work together. There was also a committment to fight back the more radical claims of the Oneida Wisconsin.

I'm sure if you read the agreements between out two nations you'll find we are called your "friends and allies"! Who stopped being friends and allies with who?

I can't say I've ever met a member of the Confederacy so it belies an argument that anyone now living (other than the current rogues of Caledonia...on both sides) has done anything to breach the historical treaties. In my view, it serves no useful purpose to try and assign the blame that rightfully belongs to an ignorant British Royal from 300 years ago to the current "non-native" citizens of Canada.

There is a big difference between present-day Canada being responsible for its past wrongs and present-day Canadians being accountable as the perpetrators of those wrongs.

Your statement underscores the point I have made earlier about the need to honour the spirit of the treaty if you want to rely on the treaty.

The old adage is that two wrongs don't make a right (the dual meaning of the phrase in this context is scintiliating!).

I am prepared to accept that Canada is clearly in breach of its obligations to Six Nations under the Haldimand Proclamation (and Simcoe and any other subsequent pledges). Six Nations would like to enforce their rights as set out in that treaty...which I again accept.

BUT...the treaty does impart an acknowledgment of two nations working as "friends and allies" as you have noted above. You cannot seek to uphold only the terms of the treaty that you like while simultaneously breaking the treaty yourself. What about the current Six Nations actions in Caledonia speaks of treating Canada like a "friend and ally"?

I actually meant what I said before that Canada may very well need Six Nations to continue its lawless occupation and contempt of "our" court because if both sides by conduct can be shown to have repudiated the treaty then neither will be bound by it anymore.

I hate to use an analogy that suggests violence is where this dispute is going, but you didn't hear the Japanese attempting to enforce its agreement not to go to war with the U.S. after they bombed Pearl Harbour nor did the U.S. talk about enforcing the same agreement after nuking the island. The behaviour of both parties in repudiating the agreement meant that it was voided and that a new negotiated settlement had to be reached.

I recognize that the lawsuit process has been long and drawn out and I will even go so far as to say that I understand Six Nations feeling they needed to get the government bureaucracy to get off its metaphorical ass to actually resolve the issue.

Mission accomplished...now end the fiasco, comply with Canadian laws and court orders and move off of the muddy field and into the boardroom and get your entitlement. If the government bull-shits around again, they can't say they didn't have fair warning about what you'd do (i.e. re-occupy the territory)

Start acting like friends and allies again (in spite of the fact that Canada has not done a very good job of doing so for the last 200 years) or you risk losing not only a moral but a legal claim to rely on the treaties that establish your entitlements.

FTA

[jdobbin]

Start acting like friends and allies again (in spite of the fact that Canada has not done a very good job of doing so for the last 200 years) or you risk losing not only a moral but a legal claim to rely on the treaties that establish your entitlements.

Thanks FTA.

Nice to have a lawyer about. Negotiation is where things are going to get done and threats, intimidation and standing around in a muddy field are just provocative.

[NativeCharm]

I often wondered why "her majesty" is not held accountable for the mess she made.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Didn't call you any names either. maybe you should go back and read what I said!!!!!!!!! It is short and sweet. Put aside what you want it to read!!!!!!

{Geez.....Anything to pick a fight off-topic. That is typical of internet nubes as well, although they don't seem to as practiced at as you are........}

O:nen

[jdobbin]

I read what you said and do take it is an insult. I was making a point that freedom of expression is not the same thing as etiquette in writing. Exclamation points are useless if they punctuate every sentence.

I have no idea why you even involved in this...at all. I have no problem listening to what someone says but I read it literally as I see it on the page. Exclamations sounds like screaming to me.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Get over your silly sensibilities for golly gosh darn sakes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The internet full of inuendo and hyperbole. Discussion boards are places of creative thought without the confinement of body language or facial expressions. If you are reading into ~anything~ then it is happening all in your own mind and you should be chatising yourself for being so sensitive to nothingness instead of me having to do it for you!!!!!!

THIS IS SHOUTING!!!!!!!

THIS IS JUST creative expression that replaces verbal tonal emphasis that would otherwise be noticed if we were having a face-face discussion.

Get over your misconceptions. They are disturbing the flow.....

O:nen

[NativeCharm]

Uhm, Dobbin I have to agree with Tsi here. You really are being a wee tad lil' bit insensitive, DONT YA THINK?

I mean come on already, this is the INTERNET. Buck up camper! Toughen up. I mean you don't see me complaining everytime one these yahoo's calls me a racist or an extremist. Which could offend me if I had any sissy blood in me.

Yes, I am saying to the same person who says "dahlin" is sexist language, whereas to me its a term of endearment. What you find offensive is more than likely not the intentions of others.

Ahh yes, back to "the flow". I really do spend too much time here

[jdobbin]

I am particularly sensitive to how language is used. I apologize for that. I read and hear things literally, particularly if I don't know the person. We all have our sensitivities to things. The demeaning use of language or misuse of language is hard for me to get used to. Intolerant language seems to be all around us.

I'm trying not to personalize things or to make them personal. I don't always succeed in either but I am trying.