Status Natives

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Lol, I can see I've struck a nerve with you. It's not my goal to change the treaty, I have been saying all along that I think it should be updated, meaning amended to modern society.

I realize they are for both sides, I wanted to know if you feel they are reasonable the way they are written? I think they are not, no where near in fact. By the way you've felt the need to explain what you meant by MP leads me to believe this is some new knowledge for you that you'd like to share with us. Be careful what you wish for, people in parliament might figure out it only takes one moose, one elk and one deer to feed a family for a year.

No not really been dealing with folks like you for most my life and I'm still here.

Take your first paragraph, that's pure hypocrisy, you say you don't want to change the Treaty but you want to update or amend. How do you propose to update or amend without changing? By magic?

As for the folks in parliament, I'm sure this is high on their radar and will be right on it as soon as the scandals are settled.

You haven't really answered any of my questions that would lead to a productive discussion. Instead you obfuscate by asking the same question repeatedly.

To answer your question on their reasonableness, no they are not reasonable. The Indians were swindled of this great country in exchange for measly hunting rights and to live on land that is left over.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by Mb-MBR

No not really been dealing with folks like you for most my life and I'm still here.

Take your first paragraph, that's pure hypocrisy, you say you don't want to change the Treaty but you want to update or amend. How do you propose to update or amend without changing? By magic?

As for the folks in parliament, I'm sure this is high on their radar and will be right on it as soon as the scandals are settled.

You haven't really answered any of my questions that would lead to a productive discussion. Instead you obfuscate by asking the same question repeatedly.

To answer your question on their reasonableness, no they are not reasonable. The Indians were swindled of this great country in exchange for measly hunting rights and to live on land that is left over.

....and your last paragraph says it all...they get nothing else right?. please keep this civil....

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by hal53

....and your last paragraph says it all...they get nothing else right?. please keep this civil....

Maybe in Manitoba ALL they get is measly hunting rights.....we know for fact in Alberta they get a lot more than that....

Mb-Mbr are you Metis or a "full-blood" Native?

LC

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Maybe in Manitoba ALL they get is measly hunting rights.....we know for fact in Alberta they get a lot more than that....

Mb-Mbr are you Metis or a "full-blood" Native?

LC

Not a native, not a Metis, I'm Anishinaabe. What are you, if you don't mind me asking?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Mb-MBR

Not a native, not a Metis, I'm Anishinaabe. What are you, if you don't mind me asking?

I am Canadian.

LC

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I am Canadian.

LC

ok good to know....

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I am Canadian.

LC

Me too! Native Canadian, born and bred and proud of it. My family has fought to defend her borders!

[pickrel pat]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Me too! Native Canadian, born and bred and proud of it. My family has fought to defend her borders!

Who was your family fighting against?

[crownb]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Maybe in Manitoba ALL they get is measly hunting rights.....we know for fact in Alberta they get a lot more than that....

Mb-Mbr are you Metis or a "full-blood" Native?

LC

Lefty is right , it must be different in Manitoba, that's where you are from right?

[hal53]

Originally Posted by crownb

Lefty is right , it must be different in Manitoba, that's where you are from right?

he said a few pages back that he was full blood?, maybe something happened????

[trophyboy]

Indians should be given no special rights and privileges of any kind. Look where it has gotten them for the most part. We all should be equal. The fact that we give special rights and privileges to different ethnic groups causes nothing but animosity. Google Chief Louie from B.C. He has it right.

Besides we do not have enough game to sustain the never ending onslaught of hunting pressure from everywhere. Something has got to change drastically and soon.

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by hal53

he said a few pages back that he was full blood?, maybe something happened????

Not that I've noticed....

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by crownb

Lefty is right , it must be different in Manitoba, that's where you are from right?

Treaties and the Rights that flow to the Crown and the Indians are the same in all three prairie provinces...

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Mb-MBR

No not really been dealing with folks like you for most my life and I'm still here.

Take your first paragraph, that's pure hypocrisy, you say you don't want to change the Treaty but you want to update or amend. How do you propose to update or amend without changing? By magic?

As for the folks in parliament, I'm sure this is high on their radar and will be right on it as soon as the scandals are settled.

You haven't really answered any of my questions that would lead to a productive discussion. Instead you obfuscate by asking the same question repeatedly.

To answer your question on their reasonableness, no they are not reasonable. The Indians were swindled of this great country in exchange for measly hunting rights and to live on land that is left over.

I'll help you comprehend what I said, I said I'd like to see it changed, but I also said it's not my goal.

You can look at it as the Indians got swindled, truth is they would have be wiped out if they didn't sign.

For the record, I am not prejudice. I grew up with aboriginal friends, and anyone reading this from Fort Chip will know Bert Bourque, I dated his daughter for a long time, and we became good friends.

I'll tell you this Mb-MBR, I grew up in the outdoors, and as a matter of fact I'm at my cabin right now getting ready for a moose hunt in the morning. I work in the city to support my family but I spend nearly every weekend outdoors. It means every bit as much to me as it does to you. I have white friends who are Indians now so to speak because they are part métis, where does it end??? You don't need treaty right for sustenance in this day and age any more than I do, if you think you can convince me any different you dreaming.

Enjoy your privledges, but don't try and taunt me to try and take them away from you, we both know it's not going to happen today, but if enough people take notice it might.

[pickrel pat]

Mah!!! You guys are crazy!!!

[brownbomber]

Didn't think this would last 7 pages without being locked. I'm so proud of AO

[Smokinyotes]

I was born in the 60's in Alberta. My parents were born in Alberta in the 1920's. My grandmother was born in Ontario in 1906. My grandfather was born in 1886 in Norway and moved to Canada in 1902. So I pretty much consider myself an Albertan born and bred. What gives anyone in this province more rights than me or anyone else. It is primitive that we all don't live by the same rules.

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I'll help you comprehend what I said, I said I'd like to see it changed, but I also said it's not my goal.

You can look at it as the Indians got swindled, truth is they would have be wiped out if they didn't sign.

For the record, I am not prejudice. I grew up with aboriginal friends, and anyone reading this from Fort Chip will know Bert Bourque, I dated his daughter for a long time, and we became good friends.

I'll tell you this Mb-MBR, I grew up in the outdoors, and as a matter of fact I'm at my cabin right now getting ready for a moose hunt in the morning. I work in the city to support my family but I spend nearly every weekend outdoors. It means every bit as much to me as it does to you. I have white friends who are Indians now so to speak because they are part métis, where does it end??? You don't need treaty right for sustenance in this day and age any more than I do, if you think you can convince me any different you dreaming.

Enjoy your privledges, but don't try and taunt me to try and take them away from you, we both know it's not going to happen today, but if enough people take notice it might.

Have a good hunt, hope you get what you're looking for.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Mb-MBR

Have a good hunt, hope you get what you're looking for.

Thank you Mb-MBR, I hope to get a moose to feed my family for this winter. It was never my intention to try and shun you for who you are, only give my opinion on sustenance rights. I wish you all the best and hope we all can keep enjoying the great Canadian outdoors!

PS, I am hunting with my sons god father, who happens to have two sons with treaty rights. He's been reading along with my posts this evening. Above all, I am an outdoorsmen and look forward to hearing stories and seeing pictures of the great experiences we all are going to have in the future!

Good night and good luck!

[Mb-MBR]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Thank you Mb-MBR, I hope to get a moose to feed my family for this winter. It was never my intention to try and shun you for who you are, only give my opinion on sustenance rights. I wish you all the best and hope we all can keep enjoying the great Canadian outdoors!

PS, I am hunting with my sons god father, who happens to have two sons with treaty rights. He's been reading along with my posts this evening. Above all, I am an outdoorsmen and look forward to hearing stories and seeing pictures of the great experiences we all are going to have in the future!

Good night and good luck!

Kurt...........I enjoyed the debate and am glad it was civil. I have nothing else to add to this debate and hope the meat pole is full by nights end.

[Red Bullets]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

You don't need treaty right for sustenance in this day and age any more than I do, if you think you can convince me any different you dreaming.

Enjoy your privledges, but don't try and taunt me to try and take them away from you, we both know it's not going to happen today, but if enough people take notice it might.

People taking notice.

Kurt, The treaty processes that you might think Canadian Government decides is much bigger than that. Canada is part of the United Nations.


below are excerpts from article,... http://www.amnesty.ca/our-work/issue...igenous-people)


"In 2007 there was a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples created. This declaration encompasses indigenous peoples from around the world.

Only 4 countries, including Canada, would not sign this declaration. All four of those countries have reversed their positions and have since signed this declaration.
(if Canada had not signed, I believe there may have been implications with the UN and global community.)


Today, Canadian courts and courts around the world are beginning to use the Declaration to interpret national laws. And human rights bodies from provincial commissions to the expert bodies of the United Nations are using the Declaration to interpret state obligations. Key provisions of the Declaration -- such as the right of Indigenous peoples to say no to unwanted development on their lands -- . "

The international "global" community comes into play and Canada's gov't is under the microscope.

I wouldn't be to proud to be a Canadian wanting equality for all. You better have a talk with your Prime Minister about Canada's stance on equality and ending racism/favouritizm amongst Canada's people.


This is where Canada stands regarding the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies...ada_CERD80.pdf

[j m]

Originally Posted by Red Bullets

People taking notice.

Kurt, The treaty processes that you might think Canadian Government decides is much bigger than that. Canada is part of the United Nations.


below are excerpts from article,... http://www.amnesty.ca/our-work/issue...igenous-people)


"In 2007 there was a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples created. This declaration encompasses indigenous peoples from around the world.

Only 4 countries, including Canada, would not sign this declaration. All four of those countries have reversed their positions and have since signed this declaration.
(if Canada had not signed, I believe there may have been implications with the UN and global community.)


Today, Canadian courts and courts around the world are beginning to use the Declaration to interpret national laws. And human rights bodies from provincial commissions to the expert bodies of the United Nations are using the Declaration to interpret state obligations. Key provisions of the Declaration -- such as the right of Indigenous peoples to say no to unwanted development on their lands -- . "

The international "global" community comes into play and Canada's gov't is under the microscope.

I wouldn't be to proud to be a Canadian wanting equality for all. You better have a talk with your Prime Minister about Canada's stance on equality and ending racism/favouritizm amongst Canada's people.


This is where Canada stands regarding the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies...ada_CERD80.pdf

Despite finishing a nightshift this morning, I read the entire link posted. Unless I missed something in the document, Canada's position is that the declaration mentioned does not affect our current laws. I will have to remember to send a message to the PM thanking him for not allowing the UN to bypass our own parliament to pass laws in our country. Any other stance would open a truckload of cans of worms for our legal system. We have too many of those already.

[Dacotensis]

Originally Posted by j m

Despite finishing a nightshift this morning, I read the entire link posted. Unless I missed something in the document, Canada's position is that the declaration mentioned does not affect our current laws. I will have to remember to send a message to the PM thanking him for not allowing the UN to bypass our own parliament to pass laws in our country. Any other stance would open a truckload of cans of worms for our legal system. We have too many of those already.

Well put jm.
The UN has also introduced things like
"The rights of the child"

Based upon what the un suggested in their documents I have read on the subject, Canadian courts are non conformists about those recommendations as well.
Look no further than divorce cases and how skewed and biased our courts are in that department.

Like Kurt. I believe change will come one day as well.
It won't be in my lifetime.
Might take another four generations

Perhaps when Canada and the USA become one country the current agreements will have a chance to be ripped up.
Then, there will be a chance for all to be treated as equals.

[elkhunter11]

Take your first paragraph, that's pure hypocrisy, you say you don't want to change the Treaty but you want to update or amend. How do you propose to update or amend without changing? By magic?

Many people have never bothered to read the actual text of the various treaties, so they are unaware of one statement in particular, that appears in many treaties. Taken from Treaty 5.

Her Majesty further agrees with Her said Indians, that they, the said Indians, shall have right to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered as hereinbefore described, subject to such regulations as may from time to time be made by Her Government of Her Dominion of Canada,

In other words, the government of Canada, can impose regulations on hunting and fishing by natives, without violating the terms of the treaties.

[riden]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Many people have never bothered to read the actual text of the various treaties, so they are unaware of one statement in particular, that appears in many treaties. Taken from Treaty 5.

Quote:
Her Majesty further agrees with Her said Indians, that they, the said Indians, shall have right to pursue their avocations of hunting and fishing throughout the tract surrendered as hereinbefore described, subject to such regulations as may from time to time be made by Her Government of Her Dominion of Canada,


In other words, the government of Canada, can impose regulations on hunting and fishing by natives, without violating the terms of the treaties.

To be fair though, you stopped your quote mid sentence. What follows next limits the scope that that statement to mining, lumber and settlement only and that the regulations can only be applied to lands where they can't hunt. Ex: Can't hunt a National Park.

[elkhunter11]

What follows next limits the scope that that statement to mining, lumber and settlement only

Keep reading, it is you that stopped in mid sentence, since there are two parts to the statement, one being the regulations mentioned, and the other being excepting certain tracts of land.You missed one key phrase, applying to the second part, that being,"or other purposes", which is not defined, and is so broad that it could be applied to agriculture, recreation or "other purposes".

that the regulations can only be applied to lands where they can't hunt. Ex: Can't hunt a National Park.

Could you point out the wording in the treaty that specifies that?