caledonia thread gone
- Thread starter bkow1231
- Start date
I though you people liked it when people "called it as they see it" and forgo all that "political correctness"?
Or maybe you only like it when people "call it as YOU see it"?
So what's it going to be, are we all going to be able to ignore "political correctness", or are we all going to abide by "political correctness" ... here's your chance, you get to set the rules ... but you also have to live by them.
Or maybe you only like it when people "call it as YOU see it"?
So what's it going to be, are we all going to be able to ignore "political correctness", or are we all going to abide by "political correctness" ... here's your chance, you get to set the rules ... but you also have to live by them.
You do what ever you want woolfy, I can handle it.woolf said:
Just remember that whenever you or your pals says something that exposes they hypocracy you live by, I'm gonna call you on it.
No you can't ... as soon as someone used the same abusive labelling on you as you use on others, you got all insulted.lookingforitallthetime said:
You're giving yourself way too much credit if you think I find your comments insulting. I'd have to care what you say for that to happen.woolf said:
No woolfy, I wasn't insulted. I merely pointed out the racist way in which I was "labelled" a racist.
danmand said:
What is a "white thrash"??
If theres some new club out there why wasn't I contacted.
I assumed this was a typo. I avoid pointing out other's typos and spelling errors for obvious reasons.LancsLad said:
Those who live by the sword, die by the sword
lookingforitallthetime said:I assumed this was a typo. I avoid pointing out other's typos and spelling errors for obvious reasons.
Those who live by the sword, die by the sword
Danmand's posts are usually error free, so I thought he was coining some new age limp lib, lattesucking code word for right thinking people. Its a matter of semantics.
PS> That was not an anti-semantic remark.
My perspective on this is simple... if it was your father that stole the land, then something should be done. if it was your grandfather, or greatgrand, then most likely... but in many cases we are talking about many generations. it's time for the first nations to take care of their problems today, look to building a future, then look at the past...woolf said:
Today's first nations people are on a path to destruction, and land claim money is not going to help them...
I have had a lifetime of dealings with first nations people, have witnessed the descrimination and hard ships that they face, but I have watched families (mom, dad, kids) push the grocery cart loaded with beer empties to the beer store on welfare day... I have always kept an open mind and hope for the first nations people..
That all changed during a visit to a town in Nova Scotia... On that trip a met a beautiful Mikamq girl and her friends... She was university educated and worked in the band office. I got to know her over the span of the evening and after many beers, we drove out the her home on the reserve... During the evening, I was fascinated to learn about their lives, and what they thought about their current situation...
Unfortunately, after the novelty wore off, and they got more comfortable, I became quite disgusted with the attitude. The university educated girl had the worse attitude of the three. The other two girls were down to earth type of people. Yet they all complained about how terrible their situation was, how ripped off they were by the govt and how everyone else in Canada had it so good , but they had it really crappy.
Yet they all drove brand new trucks and each of the three girls had at least two children... each child had a different father...
The one girl that invited me to her house, had two children, and she had left them with her 15 year old niece... who was drunk and passed out on the couch when we arrived....
The girl that invited me to her house made $48K tax free, and still complained that life was unfair to her... The general attitude sucks
Thanks for you insightful reply... how can you tell the difference between Bull Shit and regular cow shit???bkow1231 said:
slowandeasy:
I don't agree with your "many generations" take ... this means that stalling and lies become an effective method of a country in getting out of making reparations. And as a matter of fact, this is exactly how we have come to this situation in the first place.
Many of these land claim cases go back "many generations" exactly because the government used stalling tactics, and made promises that were never kept. So the government has an automatic out here ... they first stall the whole situation by drawing out the negotiations for a generation, then bring it to the courts for another generation, then promise to do something and take another generation to finally admit they have no intention of following though on their promise, then spend another generation in the courts, and then another promise that takes another generation to determine wasn't serious, then a generation of further negotiations, then finally we just tell the Aboriginals their time has run out? This doesn't seem very fair to me.
As for your personal experiences, I can't comment directly on it, but I too have known Aboriginal people who have succumbed to the "trailer park trash" mentality that somehow the world is responsible for all their problems.
But this is a result of being ghettoized and happens to all peoples ... we see it in inner city ghettos when we discuss Blacks, the reservations when we discuss Aboriginals, and trailer parks when we discuss Whites. In all these cases, people with the attitudes you describe do themselves and their cause little good, but also in all cases there are examples of ways to go about changing these conditions and helping build successful communities.
I certainly don't wish to see land claims settled in the favour of Aboriginals if all that means is that they get to live in more spacious slums, but with these land claim victories there must also come the ability to build their own community, and control their own destiny.
A bigger reservation where the "free homes" can have an extra bedroom, and the drive way can fit four "free vehicles" instead of just two is not the answer ... allowing them to have their land back, and to be able to administer the land and use its resources as they see fit, to allow them to build their community and be sovereign over it, is what seems to be working in the jurisdictions where it is being attempted (mostly in the north.)
I don't agree with your "many generations" take ... this means that stalling and lies become an effective method of a country in getting out of making reparations. And as a matter of fact, this is exactly how we have come to this situation in the first place.
Many of these land claim cases go back "many generations" exactly because the government used stalling tactics, and made promises that were never kept. So the government has an automatic out here ... they first stall the whole situation by drawing out the negotiations for a generation, then bring it to the courts for another generation, then promise to do something and take another generation to finally admit they have no intention of following though on their promise, then spend another generation in the courts, and then another promise that takes another generation to determine wasn't serious, then a generation of further negotiations, then finally we just tell the Aboriginals their time has run out? This doesn't seem very fair to me.
As for your personal experiences, I can't comment directly on it, but I too have known Aboriginal people who have succumbed to the "trailer park trash" mentality that somehow the world is responsible for all their problems.
But this is a result of being ghettoized and happens to all peoples ... we see it in inner city ghettos when we discuss Blacks, the reservations when we discuss Aboriginals, and trailer parks when we discuss Whites. In all these cases, people with the attitudes you describe do themselves and their cause little good, but also in all cases there are examples of ways to go about changing these conditions and helping build successful communities.
I certainly don't wish to see land claims settled in the favour of Aboriginals if all that means is that they get to live in more spacious slums, but with these land claim victories there must also come the ability to build their own community, and control their own destiny.
A bigger reservation where the "free homes" can have an extra bedroom, and the drive way can fit four "free vehicles" instead of just two is not the answer ... allowing them to have their land back, and to be able to administer the land and use its resources as they see fit, to allow them to build their community and be sovereign over it, is what seems to be working in the jurisdictions where it is being attempted (mostly in the north.)
That was my private joke... I put the (BTW...that was a joke) after the fact because I realized that some people might not understand the joke..bbking said:
But that's exactly what you want to do, excuse all behaviour on an overall sin.bbking said:
You blame the sin committed against Aboriginals as being some "general sin", one committed by "a government" and not directly related to you or any one individual ... then you turn around and expect all Aboriginals to pay for the sins of a couple of the people who supposedly represent them.
The "fight" is between the Aboriginal people, and the Canadian government ... in this fight, some times individual people get hurt. Somehow though, it's only when it's non Aboriginals that are hurt that some people seem to give a shit. Individual Aboriginals can have their land stolen, be discriminated against, given 2nd class justice, etc. and the excuse is that because "you" are not doing it then it's not right for the Aboriginals to take action that affects "you" or "your" tax dollars ... if on the other hand individual Aboriginals do something you believe is illegal or unethical, you would have the "every" Aboriginal in the country suffer for the sin of one person.
So, "someone", not "me" stole the Aboriginals land and left them in poverty, but it wasn't me, so have them Damn Indians go learn to live with their little frustrations ... then in almost the same breath we can hear; "An Aboriginals set a tire fire on the middle of a public road, it's time we stop listening to them, end all negotiations and tell them to go take a hike." Seems your own little frustrations need to be addressed swiftly and with deliberate fierceness ... while they should address their little frustrations by shutting up about them.
Seems to me you're being a Hypocrite unless you take Aboriginal frustrations as seriously as you take your own.
Okay Sheik, I'm guilty, I made an assumption that may or may not be true. So ....., lets hear the moderators speak up, and explain in detail why they have been deleting these different threads about the Caledonia issue.Sheik said:
Why have the threads been deleted, what was offensive about the comments. If you don't want people to make assumptions, you can start providing them with some facts.
The 6 Nations had no problem going to the courts as well ... and have been in them (this round) since 1995 (after having had the land stolen out from under them, piece by piece, since 1792.) In the meantime the contractors were going ahead with the development anyway despite there being decent evidence to support the Aboriginal claims.bbking said:
So let's suppose that they let the contractors go ahead and build a subdivision, then years later it is found that the land claims are valid ... does the 6 Nations get to keep the subdivision? Or more likely will they be told "it's too late now, you should have said something!"
So what would you do if your family had been fighting to keep your land for 200 years, and you yourself had been fighting in court for 10 years with what you considered a valid claim only to find the someone was selling off your land while you were "taking the legal route"?
bbking said:
There was no ruling against them ... the contractors just decided on their own that the court case had nothing to do with them and that it was only an "accounting" issue about who was going to pay the 6 Nations for some unpaid bills when they own the lands ... the 6 Nations claim was very legitimate.
The crown claims they go the 6 Nations to sign over the lands for the good of the people of Canada back in the 1800's I believe it was.
But that agreement was one that only 6 of the 37 or more Chiefs signed, and it didn't mention anything about what lands they were talking about or any compensation for the lands.
The 6 Nations went form owning 6 miles on both sides of the full length of the Grand River to having it twice unilaterally shrunk without compensation and by fiat from the government, to leasing some of the land back to Canada for development purposes (which was then just handed over to Canada without compensation because since it was developed they couldn't just give it back now) to fighting in the courts for 10 years to save what was left only to see it start to be "developed" out from under them again while they tried to do play the game by "the rules".
I don't blame them one bit for standing up for what is theirs.
where did you get this info the six nations free press or maybe the mohawk warrior news letter and gun and cigarette runner.wolf i would like to watch you cry when they camp out on your land and take your home and the way you live your life. onlly aboriganal massages for you dick headwoolf said:
