# Why are the natives allowed to shut down the rail lines ?



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Gas stations are being shut why is the government & police not doing their job ?


----------



## DigginDoc (Sep 17, 2015)

I think the governments are afraid to deal with possible voters and the police are told not to arrest by the same government 
jam tarts without courts issuing injunctions. A sorry state of affairs. If you notice the demonstrators there are more whites than natives. Guess they took the day off from work?
Cheers 
Doc


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

to paraphrase the great Basil Fawlty.."who _WON_ the bloody wars anyway?!"


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Well if you seriously want an answer to your question lonewolf, I suggest you do some research. Start with this: http://www3.brandonu.ca/cjns/11.2/laforme.pdf

But if you aren't willing to take the time to read ALL of it, you need to realize it is not a simple question with a simple answer.

A simple description (but not enough to really develop a real understanding) would be the following. There is an ongoing argument regarding the 'sovereignty' of indigenous people. In this current situation, the argument is being made that as a sovereign nation they have the right to refuse the railway passage across their land. That as a sovereign nation, they are not subject to the laws of Canada and do not recognize the courts of Canada. That is the basis on which those blocking the railway are acting.

So the court can rule that it is an illegal act (as they have in this instance) to block the railway but if those protesting do not RECOGNIZE the courts right to rule, then they ignore it. That then leaves the government in the position of having to use force to remove them. Of course, as soon as they use force, it gets all the so called, 'bleeding heart liberals' upset. 

And jargey3000, as far as 'who won the war', no one did. Again, referring to the link above, it is all about treaty rights and what they mean in terms of sovereignty.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Personally I blame Harper for all this turmoil and strife.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> And jargey3000, as far as 'who won the war', no one did. Again, referring to the link above, it is all about treaty rights and what they mean in terms of sovereignty.


Treaty rights extend both ways...illegal blockades are breaking the treaties. And, if you read them closely you would discover that many of the "rights" they claim they to have as a sovereign nation don't exist. They are not their own nation.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> There is an ongoing argument regarding the 'sovereignty' of indigenous people. In this current situation, the argument is being made that as a sovereign nation they have the right to refuse the railway passage across their land. That as a sovereign nation, they are not subject to the laws of Canada and do not recognize the courts of Canada. That is the basis on which those blocking the railway are acting.



the wet'suwet'en protest against what they regard as illegal trespass upon their territory is neither an argument nor is it current. The principle is already embedded in canadian law.

in 2012 the supreme court of canada, sitting under chief justice Beverley mcLachlin, ruled that indigenous nations that had never ceded their territory to european-descended settlors - ie no treaty - are to enjoy the rights of sovereign owners of such lands.

the wet'suwet'en clans have never negotiated any treaty. This is the backbone of their legal position & it's a powerful one.

i haven't read all the opinions of the sitting SC justices on this matter (neither has anyone else in this forum); however i'm of a mind that chief justice mcLachlin would never have stomped all over the accumulated rights of the white settlors who live within, or seek to carry on business within, the hereditary clans' territories.

non-aboriginal settlors have lived, thrived & prospered in canada for going on 500 years now; they also have acquired rights as dwellers upon the same mother Earth, living under the same father Sky. In the end, we must all get along together.

peering far ahead, one would believe that the hereditary chiefs in the vast wet'suwet'en territory east of kitimat will eventually come to accept the pipeline. But - judging from their fury today - the necessary negotiating process ciykd take years.

farther to the south, the federal negotiating process with the indigenous opponents to transMountain Pipe II took only two or three years. It has been successul enough to start construction of TMP II, even though a few indigenous protest remnants still remain.

but in northewest BC, east of kitimat, there's been no negotiation with the network of hereditary clans & chieftains. That's one heck of an enormous piece of work & it's only just starting to come into focus. One could reasonably expect that resolving the wet'suwet'en crisis could easily take 5 more years.

in the meantime, i'm relieved & happy that the level-headed PM is not unleashing army, guns, jail or other violence. What's woken up across canada is another Oka. Just as native chiefs from as far away as BC thronged to Oka to join the Mohawk protest against destruction of their cemetery at Oka, we can see that indigenous communities across canada are rallying to support the hunters, trappers & fisher folk of the BC far northwest hereditary clans.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> Personally I blame Harper for all this turmoil and strife.



sags i look at it this way: centuries of sclerosed, frozen injustices, prejudices & racist acts have finally broken open under the gummint of justin trudeau. In whose thinking, all these past years, the views of his wife Sophie have played no small role BTW. Working to improve the fortunes of indigenous canadians was one of the first campaign principles the couple vowed to embrace way back in early 2015.

we're seeing turmoil like canada has not seen for a century in the zone of indigenous nation governance, that is for sure. Turmoil because progress is never even-steven. Progress is vivid, colourful, gutsy, even chaotic. Forward 2 steps here, backward one step there.

imho what we're witnessing is an epoch-shattering period in indigenous/canadian history. For the first time, many canadians are talking eagerly about coming together as partners in the stewardship of the lands we hold in common. Me i see more opportunity today for indigenous nations to build & change their fortunes than history has seen all these past 500 years.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> sags i look at it this way: centuries of sclerosed, frozen injustices, prejudices & racist acts have finally broken open under the gummint of justin trudeau. In whose thinking, all these past years, the views of his wife Sophie have played no small role BTW. Working to improve the fortunes of indigenous canadians was one of the first campaign principles the couple vowed to embrace way back in early 2015.
> 
> we're seeing turmoil like canada has not seen for a century in the zone of indigenous nation governance, that is for sure. Turmoil because progress is never even-steven. Progress is vivid, colourful, gutsy, even chaotic. Forward 2 steps here, backward one step there.
> 
> imho what we're witnessing is an epoch-shattering period in indigenous/canadian history. For the first time, many canadians are talking eagerly about coming together as partners in the stewardship of the lands we hold in common. Me i see more opportunity today for indigenous nations to build & change their fortunes than history has seen all these past 500 years.


 The unintended consequences of government action to try to solve a problem just makes matters worse. Kinda like the lady that swallowed a fly then ate a frog to kill the fly etc, etc.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Cake and eat it. I'm losing respect for these protesters very rapidly.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> in the meantime, i'm relieved & happy that the level-headed PM is not unleashing army, guns, jail or other violence. What's woken up across canada is another Oka. Just as native chiefs from as far away as BC thronged to Oka to join the Mohawk protest against destruction of their cemetery at Oka, we can see that indigenous communities across canada are rallying to support the hunters, trappers & fisher folk of the BC far northwest hereditary clans.


It's a delicate situation and could go very badly. I hope for the best.

The indigenous groups have valid complaints and they have rights here. They are standing up for their rights.

People with a resource extraction/development mentality don't seem to understand the message from land owners. The message should be clear now: no, you cannot simply go develop arbitrary land in Canada (in this case through this part of BC) without getting agreement from the owners of the land.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/11/canada-pipeline-indigenous-trudeau-treaty



> swaths of territory – never signed away by treaty or seized in war – still belong to indigenous nations who are fighting back against resource projects they say they never consented to.
> 
> Unlike the rest of the country – where relationships between indigenous groups and the state are governed by treaties – few indigenous nations in British Columbia ever signed deals with colonial authorities, meaning the federal government still operates in a vacuum of authority on their lands, said Gordon Christie, a scholar of indigenous law at the University of British Columbia


And this isn't even getting into the topic of how the government continually violates treaty rights, breaking the nature of the established treaties.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> It's a delicate situation and could go very badly. I hope for the best.
> 
> The indigenous groups have valid complaints and they have rights here. They are standing up for their rights.
> 
> ...


I understand that perspective.
However
1. Blocking railways in Ontario is a separate issue than opposing a development project in BC.
2. They have permission from the landowners.

Once the protestors started assaulting people, there is a decision to be made.
The Canadian police can step in and hold people accountable for those assaults, or they can let it degrade into a free for all.

Or they can take the path of giving the protestors a free pass to assault, while prosecuting the victims of their crimes.
Lots of Canadians don't like this. It's a breakdown of law and order, and an assault on our democracy.

If the land is not under Canadian jurisdiction. That's a dangerous path.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

I winced a little when I saw the term "natives" in the OP. The PC term, as I understand it, is "first peoples" or Indigenous Canadians.
This is a bigger story than simply shutting down a rail line. 
In the Vancouver area, the indigenous community wields significant power. There have been some real successes that are inspiring and one hopes will lead to a better picture in the coming decade. 
An interesting article was in the sun yesterday
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/va...-indigenous-groups-involved-in-shutdowncanada


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

I have to say that Rex Murphie's article in the Post today sums up my position on this perfectly.

_"Justin Trudeau has been a week now waltzing around Africa while, day by day back here in carbon-tax Canada, the country is seizing up. For the same past seven days apparently, Canada has been under the administration of what the media insists on calling “anti-pipeline” forces".

"Anti-pipeline is far too narrow. These are the anti-industry, anti-energy, anti-Alberta, climate-change save-the-worlders who have been harassing the country for years. The difference is in the past week they’ve upped their opposition, and from one end of the country to another decided to muscle their way to a victory by a storm of blockades, protests, traffic obstruction, and in the case of Victoria, B.C., actually shutting down the people’s legislature".

"How did Canada get to this point? Easy. The elevation of the doomsday cult of global warming, the insistence that Canada has some unique and precious role in saving the planet, the hostility to the oil industry that is the logical extension of that attitude has given vast license to anti-oil types to more or less do what they want".

"Environmentalists think they are a group apart. If 10 plumbers shut down a railway, or if loggers shut down the B.C. legislature, or if oil workers decided to “shut down Canada,” the RCMP and every security force in the nation would round them up, clap on the handcuffs and stow them away in a cell in a jiffy. But a few native bands, and the always available professional protesters who we have seen active since the days of the Seattle riots, decide to ride on the oil issue, and everyone in authority stands aside mute and fearful".

"And our always itinerant prime minister, on another vainglorious question — this time for a useless seat on the useless UN Security Council — urges “all sides to resolve this as quickly as possible."

"Meantime we are days away from the most significant policy decision this government will make — presuming it remains the government, which in the present circumstances is an open question — the Teck oilsands mine".

"Mr. Trudeau should be home. I know this is an agreeable time of year to be touring Africa, but a week under the carbon-taxed skies of Alberta or Saskatchewan right now would be so much more appropriate and useful".

"Oh yes, not one in a hundred Canadians, and I’m being generous, gives a damn about Canada getting a seat on the security council".
_
ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

dubmac said:


> I winced a little when I saw the term "natives" in the OP. The PC term, as I understand it, is "first peoples" or Indigenous Canadians.
> This is a bigger story than simply shutting down a rail line.
> In the Vancouver area, the indigenous community wields significant power. There have been some real successes that are inspiring and one hopes will lead to a better picture in the coming decade.
> An interesting article was in the sun yesterday
> https://vancouversun.com/opinion/va...-indigenous-groups-involved-in-shutdowncanada




glad to c u checking in on this thread

dubhmac we are counting on you to report true facts on this complicated issue as viewed from vancouver

meanwhile - schui la voix de l'est icit - the OPP & possibly the mounties may eventually have to clear the rail blockade by the Tyendinaga mohawk nation at desoronto ontario (the location just west of belleville). But not yet.

it won't be any surprise to the tyendinaga mohawk, they've frequently blocked the rail lines in the past to make a point, so taking down the rail blockade one more time should not be a national crisis

however, mucho discussion should be allowed to take place before the forces move in. Felicitations to BC premier who has already managed to secure sit-down talk sessions with groups related to the wet'suwet'en. 

meanwhile federal transport minister marc garneau & federal indian affairs minister marc miller are seeking talks/already talking with indigenous rail blockers in ontario & quebec (the kanawake mohawk are blocking a local commuter railway into montreal). Manitoba premier also said to be vigourously pursuing all communication avenues from his end.

a key blockade though are the Tyendinaga mohawk. They are a kind of bell-wether for native obstruction everywhere. Here's a tidbit of history: did ya'll know that they were originally from the kanesatake mohawk settlement at Oka, quebec?


* * * * *


it's a very, very, very long history. It began way back in the 16th century, long before canada ever existed. The french settled in new france to gain the fur trade. The Sulpician religious brothers promptly arrived to "look after" the religious, moral, medical & material needs of both the french settlers & the indigenous mohawk fur traders who were immediately attracted to the french fur buyers.

alcohol & smuggled fur trading soon entered the picture & the Sulpicians kept moving their "mission pour les sauvages" farther & farther away from what is now the Old Port district of ancient montreal. Eventually, sometime in the 18th century, the french king gave the Sulpicians the seigneurie at Oka as a kind of usufruct. The religious order was to hold the seigneurie in trust for the benefit of the indigenous natives ("les sauvages") who were entrusted to their care. Notice that king Louis XIV of france did not give the seigneurie to the religious brothers in outright ownership; they were only to hold the seigneurie as long as they would maintain their charitable mission for indigenous natives. Most in the Sulpicians' care, although not all, were Mohawk.

alas, things did not go well at Oka. The Mohawk were - & still are - a fairly aggressive & skilled trading nation. Understandably they resented the high-handed, absolute & lordly control of the Sulpician religious brothers. In fact, the Mohawk at Oka were forced to labour the Sulpicians's farm in slave-like conditions. Understandly, whenever they could, they rebelled.

in the late 19th century a major armed Mohawk uprising occurred in the Oka settlement. The Mohawk managed to burn down their Sulpician overlords' residence & also their roman catholic chapel. Miraculously, nobody died on either side. Following this insurrection, a splinter group of Mohawk either spontaneously left Oka or else they were expelled from Oka. 

the splinter group travelled not too far into ontario, settling just west of what is now belleville, ontario, to form the Mohawk Tyendinaga nation, which survives today & routinely blocks the nearby railway lines in sympathy during times of acute indigenous peril or concern.

it's an old story. Despite the serious national concerns, ottawa is handling things exactly right imho. Walk softly. Seek meetings. Communicate. Negotiate to get them off the rails. This has always worked before with the tyendinaga mohawk. Preventing the stage of guns & crossfire is crucial.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> I have to say that Rex Murphie's article in the Post today sums up my position on this perfectly.
> 
> _"Justin Trudeau has been a week now waltzing around Africa while, day by day back here in carbon-tax Canada, the country is seizing up. For the same past seven days apparently, Canada has been under the administration of what the media insists on calling “anti-pipeline” forces".
> 
> ...


_



it's such a pity about rex murphy. He's turned into another one of those sputtering, spewing, perpetually angry old mouthpieces. Not even making sense any more. What has coastal gasLink gas pipeline to kitimat got to do with permitting another tar sands mine in alberta that's currenty owned by Teck?

in his old age, rex m. has become a destroyer of canada. Never anything to say except explosive filth._


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> I have to say that Rex Murphie's article in the Post today sums up my position on this perfectly.
> 
> _"Justin Trudeau has been a week now waltzing around Africa while, day by day back here in carbon-tax Canada, the country is seizing up. For the same past seven days apparently, Canada has been under the administration of what the media insists on calling “anti-pipeline” forces".
> 
> ...


ditto


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

Robin Urback writes a good article on the Coastal Gas Link on page O11 of today's G&M (reprinted Feb 15th). 
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...-protests-for-the-first-nations-that-support/


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

jargey3000 said:


> ditto



next stop for poor ole rex is the nursing home

they know what to do with cases of incoherent verbal diarrhea


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> it's such a pity about rex murphy.


Thank goodness for writers such as Rex Murphy who haven't kowtowed to the woke politically correct society we have today.

ltr


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Thank goodness for writers such as Rex Murphy who haven't kowtowed to the woke politically correct society we have today.
> 
> ltr


ditto


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

dubmac said:


> Robin Urback writes a good article on the Coastal Gas Link on page O11 of today's G&M (reprinted Feb 15th).
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...-protests-for-the-first-nations-that-support/




saw that article ...

meh it's only her opinion that the hereditary clans are "small" whereas the elected band councils are mighty ...

nobody has those facts

black mac surely you're aware that the white man systematically tried to destroy hereditary clan systems of governance along with destroying the language, the religion & the culture of every single indigenous nation they encountered anywhere in north, central or south america? ever since the spanish arrived in the new world.

the above is a sweeping statement but the fact is that - miraculously - indigenous clan systems, languages, religions & cultures somehow mostly managed to survive. They survived by going underground.

when indigenous people today leap to accusations that the white man is still practicing Genocide, one of the things they mean is that the white man still pays no attention, or insufficient attention, to the underground surviving hereditary languages, governing systems & religions which they - white people - so recently tried to destroy.

it's obvious that TC Energy choose to solicit & obtain elected band council approvals only. But the band councils were imposed by the white man fairly recently. The white man thought that democratically elected band councils were a better form of government. Just as they thought english - or french - were better languages. Just as they thought christianity was a better religion. Just as they thought that everything "indian" - art, spirit religion, potlatches, languages, hereditary clan systems - had to be crushed & destroyed.

here is a much better globe & mail article that sets out to explore the little-known world of hereditary clan systems. It focuses on BC but it serves as an excellent introduction to the still semi-hidden, little-known, underground world of indigenous tradition.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...-system-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-protests-bc/


PS it's not too radical of an idea, i hope, to suggest that coastal GasLink could impose a temporary pause on its construction, in order to commence a systematic consultation of the hereditary & traditional clans who live in that vast swath of northwest BC? after all, as the Supreme Court of canada decided several years ago, it is indeed their land.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> Thank goodness for writers such as Rex Murphy who haven't kowtowed to the woke politically correct society we have today.



rex m. isn't a writer any more. He used to be funny but that was a very long time ago. 

these days rex just turns on the meatgrinder for any topic & out comes the same identical enraged alphabetic porn. Same apopleptic vocabulary. Same fierce & furious sentences but the thoughts meander & stumble. Always sounds like he's heading for a coronary.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> rex m. isn't a writer any more. He used to be funny but that was a very long time ago.
> 
> these days rex just turns on the meatgrinder for any topic & out comes the same identical enraged alphabetic porn. Same apopleptic vocabulary. Same fierce & furious sentences but the thoughts meander & stumble. Always sounds like he's heading for a coronary.


meh...that's only your opinion...


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

This is all Harper's fault. Trudeau is just cleaning up his mess.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

jargey3000 said:


> meh...that's only your opinion...



jargey even on your bad days you make way more sense than super-annuated semi-senile rex the pest


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

doctrine said:


> This is all Harper's fault. Trudeau is just cleaning up his mess.



how is it Harper's fault though

think the fathers of confederation. Poor old Sir John A. has certainly taken his licks from contemporary protestors. But think wilfrid laurier. William lyon mackenzie king. Think king's deceased mother, with whose ghost king used to rabbit on incessantly while in office, asking the phantom for strategic leadership advice.

think lester b. pearson. He won a nobel prize but he ignored indigenous canadians. Think john diefenbaker. Brian mulroney. Mulroney was the PM sent the army to Oka I believe.

none of em ever did one fat fig about the worsening aboriginal situations all over canada until justin trudeau took office.

even today, trudeau has to walk a tightrope between carefully taking part in ground-breaking new negotiations & placating the arch-conservative anti-indigenous voters like the ones you see in this forum.

so far the tightrope is working out perfectly. Talks are going to help.


.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

no question HP, the history of abuse, neglect, cultural destruction is beyond description, and perhaps, beyond any form of true reconciliation. I can't think of a more complex problem for Canada to correct or to try to correct - the list of grievances are long, and seem to vary in the degree to which they can ever truly be "fixed". What is "fixed"? I read somewhere from someone working with First Nations that it took 150 years of oppression, which nearly eliminated indigenous peoples, to get to where we are currently and it will take an additional 150 years to first recognize the problems, and solve and reverse (if possible) the damage done to Indigenous Peoples and their culture. I for one, believe the best way is to somehow have them* partner with us* & demonstrate that a much better future (jobs, declining poverty etc, housing etc) is possible (As Ms. Urback suggests). Is it true that most (20) First Nations bands along the gas route approve and want the Coastal Gas link to proceed for this reason (as she suggests)? Is it true that only one or two cheifs/bands disapprove and have contributed to the circumstance we are in? We both likely recall the impact of Elijah Harper & the rejection of the Meech Lake accord in the late 1990's. My point: whether it's Meech Lake or Coastal Gas Link, it takes a ton of work, meetings, collaboration, and accommodations to build these kinds of bridges to a shared future - it breaks my spirit a tad to see it all (potentially) go up in flames, because a few (emphasis on a few) don't share the vision.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

ms urbach is right when she says that the band councils deserve to see their carefully worked-out plans & aspirations take effect.

but i don't see why all parties cannot have everything in the end. I've always assumed that the hereditary clans would sign onto coastal gasLink if they could be given 1) the courtesy to be consulted in the first place; & 2) enough time for reflection & due diligence on their part.

look how quickly opposing nations were won over in the case of transMountain pipe. Little by little, with the feds working quietly & far from the media, indigenous nations along the TMP II route joined the agreements. 

and why not? ottawa was making very generous offers. Not since the CPR railway was built has such an infrastructure opportunity come through BC. But this time with TMP II - unlike the CPR - all indigenous nations were warmly invited to join as pro rata partners, to board the train as workers, owners & operators.

the same could happen/will happen wih coastal GasLink in the north. The big problem is that the hereditary clans don't see the opportunity yet. This step - making them aware - will take time IMHO. That's why i thought coastal GL should be prepared to pause construction for at least 6 months, so as to see if an aboriginal negotiation period could be prolonged or re-started.

i think it's fair to conclude that TC Energy totally omitted the hereditary clans & their chieftains. Whereas the federal gummint, in their last negotiation campaign for TMP II, omitted no one.

as to whether the hereditary clans east of kitimat include two chiefs or more chiefs, only by opening formal negotiations will canada ever get a notion of the population involved. Even then, due to the underground semi-secret nature of the hereditary kinship, there are probably members or even whole clans who will not come forward.


----------



## richno (Aug 15, 2016)

+1. 

Not as if this week was the only week available to deal with First Nations and reconciliation issues.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

TMX is potentially a new Coastal Gaslink disaster in the making. You see, not all Indigenous groups support TMX. At least four explicitly do not. Not a few members - the entire nations. And it runs through their territory - unceded or not. I believe they now have precedent to blockade railways until they too get their needs met. 

The government is losing control of the situation. Two new blockades in Toronto and one in Vancouver tonight.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

doctrine said:


> TMX is potentially a new Coastal Gaslink disaster in the making. You see, not all Indigenous groups support TMX. At least four explicitly do not. Not a few members - the entire nations. And it runs through their territory - unceded or not. I believe they now have precedent to blockade railways until they too get their needs met.
> 
> The government is losing control of the situation. Two new blockades in Toronto and one in Vancouver tonight.



how can anyone post something like this ^^ though

residual opposition to TMP II does not number "at least four" indigenous nations

it numbers one powerful nation - the squamish of urban vancouver - plus two or three very tiny groups. The Coldwater band, or example, totals just over 700 souls. The unnamed coalition of indigenous persons living along the fraser river valley is even smaller. Some current reports say that one of these has already dropped its opposition, which leaves the squamish plus two other miniscule indigenous groups.

of the three - or four - only the squamish will be able to carry opposition to TMP II further & even they - i would suspect - may only be cynically looking for an even larger settlement from the federal purse.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

all this scare talk about no propane, no heat, no chlorine, no water, no food, no jobs sounds like baloney to me

trucks are driving on the highways. Planes are flying. Propane in eastern canada is delivered by trucks which fill individually at the quebec refineries. They serve ontario at least as far as lake superior. I don't know about propane delivery to manitoba & western ontario, this may be by railcar first & then by local fuel delivery trucking services.

let's not get hysterical. The Mohawk have been shutting down transport for decades. The tyendinaga mohawk nation has blocked the railway tracks at belleville many times in the past. Kahnewake mohawk prefer to block the Mercier bridge from the south shore to montreal island, although this time around they seem to be holding the bridge in reserve in case they decide to up the ante. It's all familiar stuff.

marc garneau has it right. Canada is going to discuss the problems off the railway tracks. This may take a few days. If i were the mohawk, i would demand that coastal GasLink shut down construction at least until the summer, meanwhile re-starting indigenous consultation among the hereditary clans east of kitimat.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There was a news show with a couple of professors from Alberta, and they both questioned the financial viability of some of these new projects.

They also questioned if companies will still be around in 100 years when much of the reclamation work (tailing ponds, etc) is scheduled to take place.

The Tech Frontier project would generate 100,000 Olympic size swimming pools of toxic tailings and would not be fully reclaimed until 2131, long after the 40 years of production was over.

Given the steady move towards alternative energy sources these are valid questions to ask about these massive projects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz6GTJ5HdIM


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

It's interesting to read the article posted by Coastal gas Link on feb 14th on the status of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline here : https://www.coastalgaslink.com/what...-gaslink-statement--pipeline-route-selection/

Then, have a look at what is posted by the Vancouver Sun on the same topic - the Coastal Gas Link Pipeline here : https://youtu.be/SsbihAgb6O0

The Office of the Wet’suwet’en (OW) Hereditary Chiefs, from what I can tell, preferred a different route for the pipeline, the Macdonnell Lake Route, which parallelled an existing pipeline - the Pacific Northern Gas 10 inch pipeline. The Coastal Gas Pipeline engineers and company did not support this suggestion made by the OW, given the 7 points (bulleted) - which include more (8) river crossings, more disturbance/destruction of lands etc, and a reduced benefit to the first nations in the area.

6 years later, the OW still has not responded to the coastal gas pipeline regarding proposed changes, the Morice River North Alternate (MRNA), to the pipeline route.

Now...fast forward to how the media "play" all this in the news. The Anti-climate Change, the Anti-poverty, and the anti-capitalist, and BC Civil liberties organization all jump on board lend their support to the grievance(s) made by the OW - despite the fact that the OW would have been pleased as punch to allow the coastal gas P/L to have simply followed an existing pipeline route. I should add that many/most of these protesters have no idea of the history involved - they only use the grievance to promote their own message - that is to pooh-pooh any kind of resource development in the guise of supporting first nations.

wow.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

It's interesting to read the article posted by Coastal gas Link on feb 14th on the status of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline here : https://www.coastalgaslink.com/what...-gaslink-statement--pipeline-route-selection/

Then, have a look at what is posted by the Vancouver Sun on the same topic - the Coastal Gas Link Pipeline here : https://youtu.be/SsbihAgb6O0

The Office of the Wet’suwet’en (OW) Hereditary Chiefs, from what I can tell, preferred a different route for the pipeline, the Macdonnell Lake Route, which parallelled an existing pipeline - the Pacific Northern Gas 10 inch pipeline. The Coastal Gas Pipeline engineers and company did not support this suggestion made by the OW, given the 7 points (bulleted) - which include more (8) river crossings, more disturbance/destruction of lands etc, and a reduced benefit to the first nations in the area.

6 years later, the OW still has not responded to the coastal gas pipeline regarding proposed changes, the Morice River North Alternate (MRNA), to the pipeline route.

Now...fast forward to how the media "play" all this in the news. The Anti-climate Change, the Anti-poverty, and the anti-capitalist, and BC Civil liberties organization all jump on board lend their support to the grievance(s) made by the OW - despite the fact that the OW would have been pleased as punch to allow the coastal gas P/L to have simply followed an existing pipeline route. I should add that many/most of these protesters have no idea of the history involved - they only use the grievance to promote their own message - that is to pooh-pooh any kind of resource development in the guise of supporting first nations.

wow. Despite all this, I like to think that common sense will prevail, and that the OW and Industry can reach and agreement. The lesson, as I see it - is that the media can twist dialogue into all kinds of weird things.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> There was a news show with a couple of professors from Alberta, and they both questioned the financial viability of some of these new projects.
> 
> They also questioned if companies will still be around in 100 years when much of the reclamation work (tailing ponds, etc) is scheduled to take place.
> 
> ...


This was one of the concerns about windmills that was ignored.

I think new developments should be required to set aside a cleanup fund that is segregated, and a priority creditor, just like pensions should be.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

So sick of the way Canada is spiraling. Doesn't help that we have such a lousy leader. We should just move forward, all this talk of reconciliation will never allow that. The past is the past and there wer injustices all over the world but people move on.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Saw a hilarious interview of protesters at Victoria. Most of them assumed Coastal Gaslink carried bitumen...no clue it was nat gas. Most also assumed it originated in Alberta and was not accredited to BC. Completely clueless.

The reporter asked the protest organizer why were no First Nation members in her protest....that was the end of the interview.

And our idiot leader wants to negotiate with these turnips?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eder said:


> Saw a hilarious interview of protesters at Victoria. Most of them assumed Coastal Gaslink carried bitumen...no clue it was nat gas. Most also assumed it originated in Alberta and was not accredited to BC. Completely clueless.
> 
> The reporter asked the protest organizer why were no First Nation members in her protest....that was the end of the interview.
> 
> And our idiot leader wants to negotiate with these turnips?


Only privileged rich people can take all this time off to protest.
Unless they're funded by someone .....


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

dubmac said:


> It's interesting to read the article posted by Coastal gas Link on feb 14th on the status of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline here : https://www.coastalgaslink.com/what...-gaslink-statement--pipeline-route-selection/




thankx - you've found & posted a crucial resource from the coastal GasLink website.

did u read the linked letter dated 21 august 2014 from coastal GL president Richard Gateman to the Office of the Wet'suwet'en in Smithers BC

coastal GL copied 14 hereditary chiefs involved in the north Morice river deviation, so there's a fact. At least 14 hereditary chiefs are involved, not 2 as some have claimed.

evidently the OW have never replied to the coastal GL letter, which lack of action seems to have been a mistake on their part. No one knows exactly why they never replied.

black mac won't you please look carefully at the letter. Beautifully written, it's a snow job. It spins - in dulcet silken lawyer's language that no indigenous fisherman could ever hope to match - exactly why coastal GasLink intends to get its way with its plan to construct a 48" pipe across wet'suwet'en territory.

the letter & the press release refers to meetings which had already taken place between the wet'suwet'en chiefs & coastal gasLink executives. Meetings at which coastal had discussed their years of aerial survey, engineering survey, hydrological survey, vegetation & wild life studies, which had led them to design the pipeline route they chose.

evidently the wet'suwet'en had countered by saying that they wanted the new 48 inch pipeline to follow the route of the existing 10 inch Paciic Northern Gas Pipeline route, an older pipeline that had been built to serve 4 communities located in the territory.

it is certainly possible that coastal gasLink is correct when it argues that its chosen route is shorter, cheaper & less harmful to the environment.

it's also possible that the wet'suwet'en chiefs, nearly all of whom would have been taken out of school as young as 8 or 10 years of age, felt totally intimidated by the sheer slickness & literacy of calgary-based Trans Canada Pipeline lawyers, upon whose stationary the letter was written.

it's also clear that the company-proposed north Morrice river deviation is a flash point. I don't know why. One might speculate that this part of the Morrice river is an important salmon spawning ground & the salmon fishery is the bedrock of the wet'suwet'en economy; but one would have to learn more hard facts in order to find out exactly why the Morrice river deviation is such an explosive issue.

all in all, i don't see anything in dubmac's valuable amplification of the story that rules out some kind of accord in the end. It's a positive sign that the wet'suwets'en had accepted & lived with the smaller PNG pipeline for so many decades.

me i continue to believe that it would be a good idea for coastal GL to declare a pause in construction. Could be something as brief as 3 months. Meanwhile coaxing the hereditary chiefs back to the bargaining table.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It looks like a smaller diameter pipeline and a slightly different route would be the solution. 

The government should tell the company that is the only option they will approve. They can take it or leave it.

The government of Canada represents the people, not the shareholders of big corporations.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

I agree that the company meet the OW requests to follow the 10 inch route. I'm kind of surprised that TC Energy didn't see this was all a disaster in the making. I guess a university degree can only do so much.

No question HP that the language and logic applied by TC Energy was lost on the OW - several of bulleted points are veiled excuses that, to follow the 10" would be to double the cost of the P/L. The OW don't care about the cost - which is within their right - as their relationship to the land is more significant to them than any excuses about costs. I'm surprised TC refers to it in their letter. But 6 years? I don't know why this didn't pop up on the TC Energy radar earlier, nor do I know why the OW doesn't engage.

Not sure, but I think one reason the OW prefer a different route, as well, was to move the P/L further away from an OW healing centre. Again - if so, then I wish they'd say so and get on with it.

As sags suggested, Coastal Gas should follow the 10' P/L. A pause/delay in construction would also be prudent. First Nations don't engage in expected ways. A deadline doesn't mean time limit to them - maybe it signifies more of a threat - I don't know.

But what about the protesters/activists who know so little of the details? I wonder, do they really care at all about the benefits and improvement to the lives of FP in the OW lands? Perhaps Ms. Rabybould should get involved - but it's loaded.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

If this had been dealt with on day 1 this would be a non story by now. Just remove the handful of Mohawks "blocking" the rail line and it would have not built like this. I agree with the natives...they actually aren't blocking the line, CN should have also just rolled the trains down the track....good luck getting in the way of a train. 

One of their complaints is that CN had no right to build tracks on their "nation". How can you negotiate with a party that will not negotiate in good faith? Does anyone think this is a reasonable stance at all. I also find it odd the Mohawks are not communicating with media. What exactly do you want? The world awaits your demands.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

robfordlives said:


> If this had been dealt with on day 1 this would be a non story by now. Just remove the handful of Mohawks "blocking" the rail line and it would have not built like this. I agree with the natives...they actually aren't blocking the line, CN should have also just rolled the trains down the track....good luck getting in the way of a train.


That doesn't sound very nice and I'm glad you're not in government.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> That doesn't sound very nice and I'm glad you're not in government.


How _nice _is it that the Wet'suwet'en call for pipeline opponents to "shut down Canada"?

ltr


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think people standing up for their rights (ownership of *their* land) is very admirable.

In fact I think every conservative in the country can agree that property ownership is extremely important... this has always been a very important conservative value.

So in fact, all conservatives including Harper & Scheer should be applauding these people for standing up for their property ownership.

like_to_retire, don't tell me you're arguing for socialist/communist values -- that ownership means nothing and that the rights of legitimate owners should be ignored?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I think people standing up for their rights (ownership of *their* land) is very admirable.
> 
> In fact I think every conservative in the country can agree that property ownership is extremely important... this has always been a very important conservative value.
> 
> ...


Well that's kind of the point.
The railway was legally built with appropriate ownership or easements at the time.

Allowing a few troublemakers to ignore the law like this is unacceptable.
Clear them out and enforce the law.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> It looks like a smaller diameter pipeline and a slightly different route would be the solution.
> 
> The government should tell the company that is the only option they will approve. They can take it or leave it.




sags i don't think it's as simple as shrink-the-pipe-&-change-the-route

did you look at the big map of the region attached to Gateman's august 2014 to the wet'suwet'en chiefs? 

it shows the existing 10-inch PNG pipe as circling quite far to the north of the proposed coastal GL route, whose pipeline at 48 inches will be nearly 5 times the size. The proposed coastal pipe cuts straight across the territory, through pristine virgin forest, to kitimat.

nobody seems to have said anything about Spooking the Wildlife, which has been the story of indigenous nations ever since europeans landed in america. Noise, construction, roads & buildings being built, pipelines, dams, towns, you name it ... poof! all the wild animals immediately flee. The hunter/fisher/trapper economies of the local indigenous nations collapse.

i've read that in northern quebec right now, where lumber companies & exploration miners have built thousands of KM of logging roads just during the past decade, evidently all the wildlife has already vanished. The local inhabitants are Cree & Mistassinni whose livelihood is fishing & trapping. For some reason that i can't quite comprehend, even the fish have left the rivers (although how fish are able to pick up that the previously pristine environment is being destroyed i do not know)

the OW would have to be thinking that the old pipeline right-of-way has long since been engineered & accomplished. Its destructive effect upon the environment has already stabilized. Whatever wildlife had fled the white man's noisy technology are now history.

now all of a sudden comes coastal GL & they are talking about a brand-new monster pipeline, to be pierced through virgin forest & river that has hardly ever known even as much as a whiff of fumes from a gas engine.

it's easy to see why the hereditary chiefs would want coastal GL to stick with the already penetrated ROW for the old pipeline. It's much less destructive of the fish & the wildlife in the territory.

* * * * *

at the same time, it's also easy to understand the coastal GL engineers. A monster 48 inch diameter pipeline is a completely different animal from a 10-inch pussycat. There are issues of stability of soilbeds & rockbeds to support the weight; issues of gradient slope of hillsides & river valleys; all sorts of engineering concerns.

over-riding everything is the extra cost which coastal GL complained about in its letter of august 2014. Costly extra length of existing PNG pipeline ROW. Costly extra time to build.

then there's coastal's slightly racist argument that the northern PNG old pipeline route is a poor choice because it was built to deliver gas to consumers in four northern BC towns, therefore a ROW following its route brings danger from a new & much bigger pipeline too close to those white man's towns. Notice the unspoken assumption that gas explosions in virgin forest land won't matter to the wet'suwet'en or any other indigenous people who happen to dwell there .each:

* * * * *

a very difficult matter to resolve. Would be a good idea for coastal gasLink to pause construction to allow for a time-out breather.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Allowing a few troublemakers to ignore the law like this is unacceptable.
> Clear them out and enforce the law.



been over this many times already

it's indigenous land
in large part, although not entirely, it's their law

folks yelling for the police to come bust things up are just yelling irritably as usual

the key protesters are the Mohawk on the rail tracks at tyendinaga

talk em down - which the liberal cabinet is doing - & it'll be easy to send all the youthful Extinction Rebellions in victoria & toronto back home


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

robfordlives said:


> One of their [tyendinaga's] complaints is that CN had no right to build tracks on their "nation". How can you negotiate with a party that will not negotiate in good faith? Does anyone think this is a reasonable stance at all. [



ok they do have a point. The first mohawk to arrive outside belleville & found tyendinaga were united empire loyalists fleeing american war of independence in order to remain loyal to the british crown.

the railway came later. In those days the rail barons didn't ask permisson to build of anyone. Not much has changed today btw.

all mohawk reserves in canada sent many of their own into canadian regiments to fight with the Allies during WW I & WW II. In recent years canada has done a good job to find these forgotten heroes - also african-canadian soldiers - & honour them.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> I think people standing up for their rights (ownership of *their* land) is very admirable.


Yep, and now you can't even escape to the USA since Indigenous protest shuts down Thousand Islands Bridge.

Nice, standing up for their rights.

ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> Yep, and now you can't even escape to the USA since Indigenous protest shuts down Thousand Islands Bridge.
> 
> Nice, standing up for their rights.



ltr here's a shocking thought for your gen: women are falling for aboriginal services minister Marc Miller by the trainload

it's the knobby bones & the curly red hair & the movie star intensity

did u know Miller is the only ottawa politician in either house who's learned from scratch to speak the mohawk language?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> ltr here's a shocking thought for your gen: women are falling for aboriginal services minister Marc Miller by the trainload


Well, that seems rather shallow of the woman involved. They should be more concerned about our country and its economy than pining for some man. This is what got our pretty PM elected isn't it?

ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

^^ u are still not getting it

it's his politics they're going for. Best way forward for the country.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> ^^ u are still not getting it
> 
> it's his politics they're going for. Best way forward for the country.


Well, I'll have to disagree.

I had a handful of urls to refute your assertion that Trudeau won for his politics rather than his looks, but the software on this site amusingly wouldn't allow their posting.

The headlines were:

* liberal-boxing-strip-teasing-new-pm
* Canadas-hot-new-PM-Justin-Trudeau
* canada-s-new-prime-minister-justin-trudeau-is-a-smoking-hot-syrupy
* trudeaus-victory-ogles-shirtless-photos

I think you get the idea................

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Good looks and great intellect.....a winning combination.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Well, that seems rather shallow of the woman involved. They should be more concerned about our country and its economy than pining for some man. This is what got our pretty PM elected isn't it?
> 
> ltr


That's the problem, style of substance.

He's good looking, nice hair, good body, nice smile.

But he's a moron and talks down to everyone.

When I say he's a moron, I mean on all the responsibilities of running the country. 

The guy has an EQ and understanding of politics that's truly exceptional. << in politics he's a damn genius. Few other politicians can withstand this many ethical scandals and conflicts of interest, and incompetent bumbling , and he seems to skip over it with ease. 
Unfortunately what the world needs now is more good leaders, not narcisistic #[email protected]%s like Trudeau and Trump.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> did u know Miller is the only ottawa politician in either house who's learned from scratch to speak the mohawk language?


Wow, impressive!


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

like_to_retire said:


> Yep, and now you can't even escape to the USA since Indigenous protest shuts down Thousand Islands Bridge.


That protest lasted 2.5 hours and the bridge is now open. Hardly the end of the world:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/thousand-islands-bridge-canada-us-protests-1.5466440

Don't worry guys. Your oil & gas developers will be steamrolling through native-owned land again before you know it!


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> Don't worry guys. Your oil & gas developers will be steamrolling through native-owned land again before you know it!


I really feel to show your commitment with your beliefs you should stop driving your car, and turn the heat off in your home.

ltr


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think oil & gas products are very useful, and they make my life better. But I also think it's important that they are extracted and transported without violating the rights of first nations groups.

All of these things can be achieved together; this isn't a black & white issue. Perhaps it means *slower* oil sands development, or slower construction of new pipelines.

And that's OK. When you're working with many different stakeholders, it's unrealistic to expect everything to go super fast. Patience is a virtue.

(I have a large position in Enbridge, and I would prefer that they respect the rights and ownership of first nations than built and expand at the fastest pace possible)


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> All of these things can be achieved together; this isn't a black & white issue. Perhaps it means *slower* oil sands development, or slower construction of new pipelines.)


Slower? How could it get any slower? It's been a decade of discussion after discussion, appeal after appeal. Nothing will ever satisfy these people other than shutting down all oil and gas extraction.. I think you could show your solidarity to the cause by shutting off your heat tonight. And no more driving a car. Don't you care about the environment?

ltr


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I don't have any solidarity to a 'cause'. I like it when people's rights are respected -- including their autonomy over the land they own.

If it takes decades to sort out what permissions the resource extractors have, then so be it.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

As has been said, this shite has been going on for a decade. Enough already. The vast majority of FN agree with the pipeline and route. 

There were years of opportunity to make wishes known. There is no veto by anyone. I do not have a veto if a transmission line passes by my back yard. Neither does anyone else.

This is really nothing more than an attempt at extortion. It is not even just basic NIMBYism.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

We don't have a leader with a pair...probably hiding under his bed while Butts makes him a mug of coco. I doubt Sheer or Marge Simpson would do any better either. Our government & opposition is an embarrassment but nothing unexpected, just another Sunny Day.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Prepare to open your cheque books, ladies and gentlemen. Contrary to what Trudeau says, it won't be resolved with just dialogue.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> As has been said, this shite has been going on for a decade. Enough already. The vast majority of FN agree with the pipeline and route.



what preposterous drivel

the grand chief of the BC union of indigenous chiefs says that the elected band councils that signed to support coastal GasLink'd new pipeline represent communities that are not on or even near the proposed pipeline route.

grand chief Stewart Phillip reiterates what everybody knows: the band councils were created by the white man's Indian Act. By this Act, traditional hereditary systems of governance were driven underground. Were, in fact, made illegal.

at one point not too long ago, indigenous persons could even be jailed in canada for speaking their own language.

however, the hereditary systems survived, in most regions & districts in semi-secrecy.


https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundaye...t-phillip-on-wet-suwet-en-stand-off-1.5462456


in kahnewake mohawk territory near montreal - arguably one of canada's wealthiest & most successful indigenous communities - very few residents bother to vote in band council elections. They tolerate the elected band council chief because he is a militant, as militant as any in the mohawk warrior society.

there is, of course, a hereditary chief in kahnewake. He stays underground, keeping more or less out of the white man's public view. There are also traditional clan elders as well as the powerful clan mothers. The white man's elected band council chief pays strict attention to all these shadowy figures.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Trudeau is holding a multi-party meeting with NDP, Bloc, and Greens. The Conservatives have not been invited, due to a rather unhelpful speech Scheer just made.

Jagmeet says: "What Scheer said was reprehensible... designed to pit people against one another... what Scheer said is not a way forward. I denounce what he said, and he has shown no desire to work together".

Honestly I didn't even realize Scheer was still in parliament. Scheer is doing Alberta and Conservatives in general a huge disservice. Through their campaigning messages and pattern of hostility, Conservatives have locked themselves out of federal politics.

Here's how government is operating today:

Liberals + NDP + Bloc + Greens
and
Conservatives


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> The Conservatives have not been invited, due to a rather unhelpful speech Scheer just made.


One of best speeches he ever made. 

Hear, hear....

ltr


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> ... Honestly I didn't even realize Scheer was still in parliament.


??? ... pretty sure it was in the news as well as other speeches.

Or in your mind - does resigning as party leader = stepping down mid-term?


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I realize he's still around, but he had become so insignificant in my mind -- no power, no relevance, no vision -- that I hardly ever noticed him. I guess if he gives an 'angry conservative' speech once in a while, he can still be noticed.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> I guess if he gives an 'angry conservative' speech once in a while, he can still be noticed.


Compared to typical "milquetoast liberal" speeches where nothing ever gets done and we let anyone break the law resulting in our country shutting down.

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Scheer dusted off his usual "call in the RCMP, order in the military, and release the Kraken" speech.

I am not sure what he thinks that would accomplish. Maybe he wants to post guards in turret towers along the route of the gas pipe ?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Scheer dusted off his usual "call in the RCMP, order in the military, and release the Kraken" speech.
> 
> I am not sure what he thinks that would accomplish. Maybe he wants to post guards in turret towers along the route of the gas pipe ?


What he would accomplish is an end to this situation. A real shame the Liberals are in power for such an important issue that the Conservative would quickly resolve. After a decade of "dialogue" I think it's time to let the adults resolve this.

ltr


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Arrest them and throw them in jail. Illegal blockades are breaking the treaties...and if there were no treaties signed then they're just run of the mill law breakers with no special rights.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Scheer dusted off his usual "call in the RCMP, order in the military, and release the Kraken" speech.
> 
> I am not sure what he thinks that would accomplish. Maybe he wants to post guards in turret towers along the route of the gas pipe ?


The vast majority of people support the pipeline.
The communities along the route want and voted FOR the pipeline.

Democracy doesn't mean always getting your way.
We can't let a small non-representative group stop anything they don't like, it's undemocratic.

We can't let these terrorists take over our country.
That's what they are, they're illegally using force to achieve a political goal. 

It's time for law enforcement to step up and do their job.
If they're not going to enforce the law, they're encouraging more of this type of behaviour, and really risking escalation.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

justin case some of you missed this:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/re...me-of-justin-trudeaus-disastrous-sloganeering


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

sags said:


> Scheer dusted off his usual "call in the RCMP, order in the military, and release the Kraken" speech.
> 
> I am not sure what he thinks that would accomplish. Maybe he wants to post guards in turret towers along the route of the gas pipe ?


Kinda glad he's not in power. Resolving conflicts with Conservative values: "release the hounds".


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Prairie Guy said:


> Arrest them and throw them in jail. Illegal blockades are breaking the treaties...and if there were no treaties signed then they're just run of the mill law breakers with no special rights.


Yay for more violence. Give your head a shake.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fstamand said:


> Prairie Guy said:
> 
> 
> > Arrest them and throw them in jail. Illegal blockades are breaking the treaties...and if there were no treaties signed then they're just run of the mill law breakers with no special rights.
> ...


We can't let people use violence to overrule the free and democratic choice of the people. 

They had their say, they had their chance, the people decided, and they voted yes. 
The opposition that lost are the ones using force, and that can't be allowed to continue.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> We can't let people use violence to overrule the free and democratic choice of the people.


My point exactly. Turn your statement around: works both ways.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

fstamand said:


> Yay for more violence. Give your head a shake.


Since when is arresting lawbreakers "violence"? Your parents did a very poor job teaching your right from wrong.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is a thorny issue all right, and it is obvious that Andrew Scheer's freakouts are not helpful, which is why the other party leaders ditched him to the sidelines.

It is comforting the PM and opposition are working together to create a solution.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Prairie Guy said:


> Since when is arresting lawbreakers "violence"? Your parents did a very poor job teaching your right from wrong.


Maybe these guys have something to say? So we ignore them and just jail them (or just open fire like the RCMP did a few weeks ago)?
The situation was ignored for so long (ahem harper years), their only option left is pacific manifestations. How would you recommend they get the attention they need?
Did your parents teach you that there are others then you living in this world? Did they teach you values other than ego-centrism ?


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Yes, everything is so simple when you're a simple minded armchair quarterback, isn't it.

Most of those posting here have no real understanding of the issues at all. There are no shades of gray, no questions about sovereignty or colonialism, in their world. Everything is just black and white for them, might is right and money rules all.

Why not try to UNDERSTAND what the issues are before spouting a simple minded opinion?
https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/e...t-indigenous-law-and-the-raids-on-wetsuweten/

https://thetyee.ca/News/2020/02/14/Wetsuweten-Crisis-Whose-Rule-Law/


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Longtimeago said:


> Yes, everything is so simple when you're a simple minded armchair quarterback, isn't it.
> 
> Most of those posting here have no real understanding of the issues at all. There are no shades of gray, no questions about sovereignty or colonialism, in their world. Everything is just black and white for them, might is right and money rules all.
> 
> ...


Totally agree, and to quote one of your links:

_"Respect for Indigenous law and human rights must be at the core of any way forward. Article 27 of UNDRIP calls on countries to *cooperate* with Indigenous Peoples to create an impartial and transparent processes to adjudicate Indigenous land, territorial and resources rights (including those that are traditionally held)."_

I don't know what's so difficult to understand?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fstamand said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > We can't let people use violence to overrule the free and democratic choice of the people.
> ...


I don't think it works both ways, and I don't think most Canadians are on board with your idea that violence should overrule democracy.

The reality is that the whole point of our democratic institutions is that they are preferable to violence. That's why preserving the rule of law is so important.

The government seems willing to permit illegal acts. The illegal acts will continue and they will escalate. That's bad for everyone.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Longtimeago said:


> Yes, everything is so simple when you're a simple minded armchair quarterback, isn't it.
> 
> Most of those posting here have no real understanding of the issues at all. There are no shades of gray, no questions about sovereignty or colonialism, in their world. Everything is just black and white for them, might is right and money rules all.
> 
> ...


Greenpeace and a highly biased perspective? If you wanted simple minded opinions, you certainly chose the right places.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> I don't think it works both ways, and I don't think most Canadians are on board with your idea that violence should overrule democracy.
> 
> The reality is that the whole point of our democratic institutions is that they are preferable to violence. That's why preserving the rule of law is so important.
> 
> The government seems willing to permit illegal acts. The illegal acts will continue and they will escalate. That's bad for everyone.


My point was that if we use violence, it will envenom the situation. Don't be an Andrew Sheer.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fstamand said:


> Maybe these guys have something to say? So we ignore them and just jail them (or just open fire like the RCMP did a few weeks ago)?
> The situation was ignored for so long (ahem harper years), their only option left is pacific manifestations. How would you recommend they get the attention they need?
> Did your parents teach you that there are others then you living in this world? Did they teach you values other than ego-centrism ?


There was a vote, their side lost. 
Time for them to accept the results of the democratic process. 
I voted against Trudeau, I lost. I accept he's the PM. 
I complain about it, I criticise his actions. 
But I don't get violent about it. 

That's the line, yes to expressing yourself. No to assault and violence to "get your point across"

They've gone down the road of violence, that is wrong.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> I don't think it works both ways, and I don't think most Canadians are on board with your idea that violence should overrule democracy.
> 
> The reality is that the whole point of our democratic institutions is that they are preferable to violence. That's why preserving the rule of law is so important.
> 
> The government seems willing to permit illegal acts. The illegal acts will continue and they will escalate. That's bad for everyone.


You didn't even bother to read the two links I just provided did you MrMatt. If you HAD, you would know to QUESTION who is committing 'illegal acts'. 

If the land is not 'ceded' and the hereditary band chiefs have NOT consented to a pipeline across their land, then the pipeline company is committing an illegal act in trespassing onto the land to build their pipeline. Why don't the RCMP arrest them? 

It is a question of WHOSE 'rule of law' should apply and it is not as simple as you obviously think it is. All you are doing is showing your ignorance of the issues. Pipeline workers have a right to be protected but the pipeline company does not have a right to build without consent. They are TWO separate and distinct issues. When the RCMP is 'protecting the workers' they are at the same time enabling the pipeline company to trespass illegally according to every Provincial, Federal and International Court of Human Rights law.

How do you reconcile that MrMatt? Please provide your detailed analysis of the situation.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> There was a vote, their side lost.
> Time for them to accept the results of the democratic process.


Again, you show you do not know the facts.

There was a vote yes, by the hereditary chiefs who all opposed the pipeline going through their land. Why then does the pipeline company not accept the results of that democratic process?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > There was a vote, their side lost.
> ...



Ahh yes, the argument that the recognized government isn't legitimate. That's an issue that needs to be worked out. 

However the issue here is the illegal rail and road blockades.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

This can only go on for so long till violence will result imo. No food, no jobs, no transport, no leadership makes for a very unsavoury recipe. As with others, I did not vote for Trudeau but he was elected and I have to go along with that, as useless as I think he is. Maybe I should get together with a few other like minded folks and blockade the Trans Canada ? I mean, it goes right by my place and I know there was a right of way but I didn't agree with that either. Hey, listen to what we want, move that road and get rid of Trudeau. In the meantime we will force people out of jobs, food, transport and other necessities, we may even damage the road to get our point across, peaceful like, might even go and protest outside the transport minister's house too. What a mess this country is becoming. We are like a tanker of oil and explosives floating near the rocks, while the Captain takes off on vacation, urging concerned residents to talk and look for a peaceful solution without firing up the motor on the ship.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Longtimeago said:


> If the land is not 'ceded' and the hereditary band chiefs have NOT consented to a pipeline across their land, then the pipeline company is committing an illegal act in trespassing onto the land to build their pipeline. Why don't the RCMP arrest them?


This is a good point.

Why are the pipeline companies allowed to use land against the wishes of the land owners? We can't tolerate this in a country that obeys the rule of law - and yet I have not heard of any police action against the energy company.

It's precisely this kind of bias in law enforcement that, justifiably, angers the First Nations so much.

*In fact, look at how much damage has been caused by the energy company violating the rule of law*. All these rail blockages and protests are consequences of the energy company breaking the law.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Longtimeago said:
> 
> 
> > If the land is not 'ceded' and the hereditary band chiefs have NOT consented to a pipeline across their land, then the pipeline company is committing an illegal act in trespassing onto the land to build their pipeline. Why don't the RCMP arrest them?
> ...



Wait, so you are saying that because the Federal government approved an energy project I have the right to blockade your house? 

Like I understand the logic, I just really don't agree. 

Just because you feel wronged by one party, doesn't mean you get to lash out at whomever you want to. 
That's the issue. 

If they have a concern, they can address it with the relevant authorities, but leave me out of it. 
We hired team Trudeau to deal with this. Go talk to him.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Mechanic said:


> This can only go on for so long till violence will result imo. No food, no jobs, no transport, no leadership makes for a very unsavoury recipe. As with others, I did not vote for Trudeau but he was elected and I have to go along with that, as useless as I think he is. Maybe I should get together with a few other like minded folks and blockade the Trans Canada ? I mean, it goes right by my place and I know there was a right of way but I didn't agree with that either. Hey, listen to what we want, move that road and get rid of Trudeau. In the meantime we will force people out of jobs, food, transport and other necessities, we may even damage the road to get our point across, peaceful like, might even go and protest outside the transport minister's house too. What a mess this country is becoming. We are like a tanker of oil and explosives floating near the rocks, while the Captain takes off on vacation, urging concerned residents to talk and look for a peaceful solution without firing up the motor on the ship.


You have to ponder on what constructive actions Harpy did during the Idle No More saga. Oh wait. Nothing.
At least Trudeau (I hate him too BTW) is trying to use dialog and understand the situation (WITH other parties) instead of just jail them or "fire at will".


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> If they have a concern, they can address it with the relevant authorities, but leave me out of it.


See ya!


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fstamand said:


> You have to ponder on what constructive actions Harpy did during the Idle No More saga. Oh wait. Nothing.
> At least Trudeau (I hate him too BTW) is trying to use dialog and understand the situation (WITH other parties) instead of just jail them or "fire at will".



Trudeau has been PM for over 4 years, he has clearly not done enough to address the problems.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I realize he's still around, but he had become so insignificant in my mind -- no power, no relevance, no vision -- that I hardly ever noticed him ...


Ignoring the leader of a party because he's on his way out, eh?

With a minority gov't that needs support, I'd have thought a leader would be more relevant than if there was a large majority.




james4beach said:


> ... I guess if he gives an 'angry conservative' speech once in a while, he can still be noticed.


Like it or not ... he's expressing what is out there in the general population. He's on his way out but the heckling during question period, comments here and phone in shows suggests it's more than Scheer wanting to be noticed.

He has stepped down so he's likely got little incentive to attempt to be noticed versus expressing the views of the party and constituents.


Cheers


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

James apparently does not understand eminent domain. Govt can confiscate at fair market value any private property in the public interest for the public good.

However, James also doesn't seem to understand that a pipeline doesn't take ownership of surface land except for surface facilities. It is merely an easement with conditions just like the municipal water line to one's house.

James, I can't imagine you are that remotely inept. Just blather and rhetoric perhaps?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> It is comforting the PM and opposition are working together to create a solution.


I'll bet these workers aren't comforted............

 Railway blockades: Via Rail announcing Wednesday it is laying off 1,000 workers as of Thursday, as a result of the rail paralysis.

ltr


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> James apparently does not understand eminent domain. Govt can confiscate at fair market value any private property in the public interest for the public good.
> 
> However, James also doesn't seem to understand that a pipeline doesn't take ownership of surface land except for surface facilities. It is merely an easement with conditions just like the municipal water line to one's house.
> 
> James, I can't imagine you are that remotely inept. Just blather and rhetoric perhaps?


You may want to understand the situation more in detail. The fact of the matter is that most of Canadian territory is not actually owned by the government and is occupied indigenous territory. All of the Ottawa valley for example is unceded Algonquin territory, meaning that it still belongs to the Algonquin as they have never established a treaty that gave the land to the Government of Canada. So the whole issue of eminent domain is out the window.

There is obviously some issues on who represents the Wet'suwet'en (band council vs hereditary chiefs), which is something that really needs to be worked out internally.

So, no it's not as simple as this is government/private land and we can do what we want, it is land that doesn't technically belong to Canada, because the territory was never transferred to Canada, under an existing treaty.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

As you wish. It is semantics. Winners have gotten the spoils since **** erectus walked this planet. In my opinion, it really is first and foremost crown land until ceded otherwise, not the other way around. Canada was just asleep at the wheel in exercising its status and are paying inordinate extortion today for its ineptness.

We will continue to unravel as a country until we grow some balls. And look like fools to the international community in the meantime.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Aboriginal title can be trumped by government if it does so for an important public purpose.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

so, is this one of those "it's-not-about-the money" situations...?
I wish they'd all quit "to-spend-more-time-with-my-family"...


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> As you wish. It is semantics. Winners have gotten the spoils since **** erectus walked this planet. In my opinion, it really is first and foremost crown land until ceded otherwise, not the other way around. Canada was just asleep at the wheel in exercising its status and are paying inordinate extortion today for its ineptness.
> 
> We will continue to unravel as a country until we grow some balls. And look like fools to the international community in the meantime.


The Supreme Court of the Canada says otherwise: https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/...ation-ruling-a-game-changer-for-all-1.2689140

And there was a Royal Proclamation back in in 1763 which stated that all land is considered aboriginal land unless ceded by treaty, which still holds: https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/royal_proclamation_1763/.

So, it goes far back in history, and isn't as simplistic as you may think it is.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> Aboriginal title can be trumped by government if it does so for an important public purpose.


As the Supremes have said. This silliness may continue until public sentiment becomes more antagonistic. Indigenous groups may well rise against their own on matters of principle vs practicality.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> There was a vote, their side lost.
> Time for them to accept the results of the democratic process.



there was never any "vote." Please stop posting fiction.

the company solicited the recently-imposed white man's band councils. These receive & dispense the federal gummint largesse under the Indian Act, so they know very well where their bread gets buttered.

company offered each band council a truly flabbergasting amount of money, which some are calling bribes . For example, $340 million in cash across the life of the pipeline in return for doing next to nothing, says the globe & mail.

doing a very rough math, with 20 band councils & assuming a 50-year lifeline for the pipeline, each band council would be paid roughly $300,000/year to allow the pipe to pass through their district. 

sure there'll be some work - keep the vegetation around the pipeline cut, walk the district portion of the pipe several times a year in order to inspect it for defects. Work that could be done by 2 persons working part-time, easy peasy.

but $300k to pay 2 part-time workers sounds exorbitant to me.

note: the above $340k does not include salaries & wages for either initial installation workers - these are budgeted at just under a quarter of a billion $$, says the globe - nor does it include repair personnel if some real defect on the pipeline develops. No, the $340k handout to the docile & obedient band councls is merely standby money. As in Glad-to-have-your-approval-how-does-$300,000-a-year-no-strings-attached sound?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Winners have gotten the spoils since **** erectus walked this planet. In my opinion, it really is first and foremost crown land until ceded otherwise, not the other way around. Canada was just asleep at the wheel in exercising its status and are paying inordinate extortion today for its ineptness.
> 
> We will continue to unravel as a country until we grow some balls. And look like fools to the international community in the meantime.


A true reflection of AltaRed's values... there we go.

There is the message, along with some antique masculine bravado: we, the European conquerors, are the *winners* and we took this land... it is ours. We make the rules and even our own legal system can simply be ignored when it suits us -- because we're the boss.

Why don't you go visit those Mohawk blockades and share your thoughts with them.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Eder said:


> Aboriginal title can be trumped by government if it does so for an important public purpose.



another piece of fiction

judges & constitutional lawyers have addressed themselves to the concept of veto. All are stymied & perplexed. Obviously the hereditary clans should not be allowed to have a veto ... but on the other hand, how can it be called sovereignty if it doesn't include the right to control what goes on in the territory?

i think that even MP might be stumped by this one, at least for a while. Meanwhile the veto yes-or-no saga rolls on.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)




----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

This will soon be over... Once QC runs out of propane and JT's constituents are freezing, he'll withdraw the RCMP from the wetsweatin (sp) land and put a hold on the gas pipeline construction so that there can be more endless consultations and discussions with hereditary chiefs. 

The protestors will all go home and John Horgan can go F himself with a large pipe.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Userkare said:


> This will soon be over... Once QC runs out of propane and JT's constituents are freezing, he'll withdraw the RCMP from the wetsweatin (sp) land


?? quebec has propane from Valero storage tanks in the montreal east tank farm

they receiving feed from valero's jean gaulin refinery near levis quebec (short distance downriver) (pipeline working) (we've had this discussion several times)


here's what's happening: a few trains are back & running. Moral suasion has begun to wear on the Tyendinaga mohawk, exactly as the trudeau cabinet expected. A very few mohawk voices are already speaking out, saying OK you've made your point, time to wrap it up.

did y'll see the older mohawk lady wearing the beautiful long bright blue embroidered skirt at the rail blockade point, speaking with the Warrior Society? she was - i believe - a clan mother, sent deliberately to calm the young Warriors.

the mohawk did the exact same thing at Oka. The Oka uprising was full of young Warrior Society braves all keen to sacrifice their lives for the noble cause, etc. Very soon, out came the clan mothers from Kahnewake & Kanesatake, to talk down the young braves with the wisdom of the elders. The clan mothers moved inside the barricades with the warriors & lived with them for the rest of the duration. At least 2-3 weeks i believe.

everything is going according to trudeau cabinet plan. Once they can dialogue the warriors away from the railway tracks, the rest of the protests will subside. Not a fingernail broken.

the real work lies back in BC. It's useless these oldsters in cmf forum puffing themselves up with hot air about how the majority of wet'suwet'en have voted for the pipeline et patati et patata.

the reality is that nobody even knows how many wet'suwet'en souls are alive, let alone how big their territory is. Certainly nobody knows how many belong to the hereditary clan system. Or how many are loyal to the band councils, since voter turnout for the white man's band councls is traditionally very low in indigenous communities.

the hereditory clan chiefs are making things even more obscure by keeping to their secretive semi-underground identities. But then, not too long ago it was the white man who had made the hereditary chief system illegal in the first place - in fact put em in jail for speaking their own language - so no one can be surprised when the clan chiefs hesitate to step into the spotlight.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

james4beach said:


> Why don't you go visit those Mohawk blockades and share your thoughts with them.


 His mom would probably not let him.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> there was never any "vote." Please stop posting fiction.
> 
> the company solicited the recently-imposed white man's band councils. These receive & dispense the federal gummint largesse under the Indian Act, so they know very well where their bread gets buttered.
> 
> ...


The elected councils approved it.

Yeah, there was compensation.
I got compensated to go to work today, that's the way it works.

The pipeline paid for the permission to cross their land.

Elected representatives, how dare we!!!
Maybe we just need more foreign white people to tell us what to do. I'm sure some over priviledged white people have all the answers.
https://torontosun.com/news/national/warmington-greta-thunberg-adds-fuel-to-blockade-fire


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> The elected councils approved it.



the Indian Act imposed band councils did what they were supposed to do. That's not any kind of vote by all the wet'suwet'en people.

nobody knows how many souls stand on the other side of the looking-glass. The hereditary side.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> The elected councils approved it.


It may be worthwhile to do some background reading. Namely that this has been an issue for over a year.

Here's a quick primer of the issues: https://globalnews.ca/news/4833830/band-councils-hereditary-chiefs-indigenous-governance/

A few key points:
- band councils are set up by the Canadian government and you can argue that they only have jurisdiction over Canadian lands;
- the territory in question is unceded land and therefore not the property of Canada, therefore, the band council has no jurisdiction over the decision; and
- as it is unceded, the land essentially falls under the jurisdiction of the hereditary chiefs.

While TC Energy worked with the band council, they didn't work with the hereditary chiefs which is the problem. It's like your neighbour negotiating construction development on your property, and then you are wondering why all of a sudden there is a condo on your property.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

My golf buds and I were just discussing whether Trudeau was more useless than Horgan. The consensus was that Horgan at least tried, lol. Then somebody said it could be worse....we could have the Green party in. At least we can golf while the country sinks.....for now, while we can still afford to drive there


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

BTW I just saw that an anti pipeline blockade was torn down by some upset locals in AB. That's awesome, especially as we don't seem to have a government that can do anything. Good for them, I would help if I were closer too and will certainly help tear down any that go up in my area.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> It may be worthwhile to do some background reading. Namely that this has been an issue for over a year.
> 
> Here's a quick primer of the issues: https://globalnews.ca/news/4833830/band-councils-hereditary-chiefs-indigenous-governance/
> 
> ...


More like my spouse gave permission without telling me, then some random person setting up a blockade on Younge St saying they support me.

Clearly someone needs to figure out who's in charge because it sounds like their left hand doesn't know what their right hand is doing.

Hereditary leadership tends to cause problems, which is why most of the modern world has ditched monarchies. 
Even in Canada, the monarchy is really a vestigial instution.

But that's separate from the REAL ISSUE.
We have people illegally using violence and intimidation for political aims. That's a big problem, and the government has a responsibility to respond to this escalation, or it will get worse.

There are already multiple reports of citizens enforcing the laws against the illegal blockades, and I don't think it's going to be long before those actions become dangerous.

They can keep talking about the other issues. But it's time for the illegal blockades to stop.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

james4beach said:


> Why don't you go visit those Mohawk blockades and share your thoughts with them.


Not the least bit interested in the Mohawks nor their dated views. We have moved on by a few centuries since then. Either they can participate in the modern world or be ignored and run over. 

By way of example native Hawaiians learned to assimilate and take part in ever evolving society.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Mechanic said:


> BTW I just saw that an anti pipeline blockade was torn down by some upset locals in AB. That's awesome, especially as we don't seem to have a government that can do anything. Good for them, I would help if I were closer too and will certainly help tear down any that go up in my area.


Another one was visited and removed by residents on Vancouver Island. Should be a start to taking the country back from the clueless I hope.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> More like my spouse gave permission without telling me, then some random person setting up a blockade on Younge St saying they support me.
> 
> Clearly someone needs to figure out who's in charge because it sounds like their left hand doesn't know what their right hand is doing.
> 
> ...


Again, you need some more background, hereditary leadership is not akin to monarchy. There is a specific set of procedures/ceremonies where people are assigned house titles.

Blockades are not the real issue. The problem is that people look at the symptoms and think that is the issue without looking at any sort of bigger picture. Great, so we cart everyone off to jail. Next week, more people show up doing the same thing, and this time decide to escalate and bring firearms for self-preservation. How does that address the problem? Obviously there are some who are participating who have no clue on any of the underlying issues, just like on this forum.

The Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs have asked for meetings only if the RCMP leave their territory. Let's put it this way. That territory is not Canadian territory and belongs to the Wet'suwet'en people. Wouldn't you agree then that the RCMP is illegally occupying a sovereign nation? Pulling out the RCMP and conducting talks is really the only way to resolve this. Otherwise it will keep popping up over and over again.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

Mechanic said:


> My golf buds and I were just discussing whether Trudeau was more useless than Horgan. The consensus was that Horgan at least tried, lol. Then somebody said it could be worse....we could have the Green party in. At least we can golf while the country sinks.....for now, while we can still afford to drive there


where the heck are you golfing....THIS time of year???
(and, who's Horgan?)


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

bgc_fan said:


> The Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs have asked for meetings only if the RCMP leave their territory. Let's put it this way. That territory is not Canadian territory and belongs to the Wet'suwet'en people. Wouldn't you agree then that the RCMP is illegally occupying a sovereign nation? Pulling out the RCMP and conducting talks is really the only way to resolve this. Otherwise it will keep popping up over and over again.


Tens of millions of Canada believe this is Canadian land and that is ultimately what matters. Once the diehards understand public sentiment, including that of the majority of indigenous people themselves, is against them, they will fold their tents. If it comes up again, rinse and repeat.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> Not the least bit interested in the Mohawks nor their dated views. We have moved on by a few centuries since then. Either they can participate in the modern world or be ignored and run over.



:biggrin:


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Hereditary leadership tends to cause problems, which is why most of the modern world has ditched monarchies.



as bgc fan says, it's clear you don't understand indigenous hereditary kinship systems.

they have nothing to do with descent from monarch to one of his children, usually the eldest born.

the globe & mail is doing a good job describing how hereditary kinship works in northwest BC. Anthropology textbooks can be helpful too. Here's a clue: native hereditary systems worldwide tend to be matrilineal/avuncular. In iroquois culture a clan mother will often appoint her brother's son - ie her nephew - as chief.

but she can also appoint a valourous outsider


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

what's happening in BC doesn't appear to have anything to do with the wet'suwet'en or any other indigenous people

it looks like a messy Arab Spring is erupting 

poor john horgan he's going to have his hands full


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> Tens of millions of Canada believe this is Canadian land and that is ultimately what matters. Once the diehards understand public sentiment, including that of the majority of indigenous people themselves, is against them, they will fold their tents. If it comes up again, rinse and repeat.


I think the Supreme Court of Canada is what ultimately matters and it has ruled in the favour of aboriginal rights. Unless you like the idea of a land with no rule of law.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

jargey3000 said:


> where the heck are you golfing....THIS time of year???
> (and, who's Horgan?)


Retired in AB and had nothing to do all winter except shovel and scrape, so came out to the Island for a longer golf season. Horgan is the NDP Premier out here that likes his taxes.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Don't worry, talking will solve this. Minister Bennett is in BC today and tomorrow to meet with the chiefs. Of course, the chiefs are going to be in Ontario with the Mohawks. This shows you how well this is going.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

bgc_fan said:


> I think the Supreme Court of Canada is what ultimately matters and it has ruled in the favour of aboriginal rights. Unless you like the idea of a land with no rule of law.



evidently the decisions are slightly fuzzy at the edges though. My take from this article is that chief justice Antonio Lamer introduced the view that utilities & large corporations planning projects of national importance should have the right to encroach on indigenous territory.

however other justices offset this view to reflect that such encroachment could not take place if it would negatively affect the ability of descendents of the original native inhabitants to work their land as their ancestors had done, ie carry on fishing or trapping livelihoods.

there's a huge, huge gap there ^^ which lawyers on both sides could argue to their hearts' content.

do the above give an indigenous people a veto over their own unceded territory? or not?


https://www.lavery.ca/en/publicatio...otin-aboriginal-title-and-the-common-law.html


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it occurs to me that if coastal GasLink is willing to pay $340 million to 20 BC bands merely for the right to build a short pipeline across their territory, then TC Energy back when it was transCanada Pipe should have offered several billion $$ to then-premier of quebec Philippe Couillard for its Energy East pipeline to traverse the province as far as the new brunswick border.

as for Keystone XL, the proportionate cost of that mother in fees that TC Energy would have to pay to various US state governments plus washington beggars the imagination.


PS since when are pipelines & other utilities like highways, railroads, even flying thru air space, all paying raw $$ to the host countries they pass through?

i mean it's a good idea but usually the revenues are more discreetly paid in the form of terminal fees, harbour fees, customs fees etc.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> evidently the decisions are slightly fuzzy at the edges though. My take from this article is that chief justice Antonio Lamer introduced the view that utilities & large corporations planning projects of national importance should have the right to encroach on indigenous territory.
> 
> however other justices offset this view to reflect that such encroachment could not take place if it would negatively affect the ability of descendents of the original native inhabitants to work their land as their ancestors had done, ie carry on fishing or trapping livelihoods.
> 
> ...


Not being a lawyer, I would be interested in legal take on this. But I think key is the fact that you can't negatively affect the descendents.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> as bgc fan says, it's clear you don't understand indigenous hereditary kinship systems.
> 
> they have nothing to do with descent from monarch to one of his children, usually the eldest born.
> 
> ...


I do understand that there are variations.
I don't care what the actual route of the appointment is.

I don't approve of appointed dictators. 
- I fully expect you to claim that it's different here.. blah blah blah.

That's actually irrelevant. 
They have 2 governments in conflict, they can sort out their own issues.

My issue is the illegal blockades down here. 
The problem is that our economy and livelihood is being held hostage by rich and foreign forces, and our government is doing nothing to stop this flagrant violation of our laws.

The thing is they're looking for an excuse to justify these blockades.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> This is a good point.
> 
> Why are the pipeline companies allowed to use land against the wishes of the land owners? We can't tolerate this in a country that obeys the rule of law - and yet I have not heard of any police action against the energy company.
> 
> ...


Interestingly, the CEO of CN Rail when commenting on the disruption to their services, referred to CN as a 'victim' in this dispute. I have to agree with him on that point. It got me wondering what would happen if CN now decided to SUE all parties for loss of income. That could be an interesting court battle. Sue the pipeline company, sue the provincial and federal governments, sue the Indian bands, sue the RCMP, sue them all.

I think they would have a strong case they could argue.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> ... PS since when are pipelines & other utilities like highways, railroads, even flying thru air space, all paying raw $$ to the host countries they pass through?
> 
> i mean it's a good idea but usually the revenues are more discreetly paid in the form of terminal fees, harbour fees, customs fees etc.


Maybe not at the country level ... but there are references to railways paying property taxes and then a separate city tax levy for railway roadways, rights-of-way and on land used as transmission or distribution corridors owned by power utilities.

Manitoba, Alberta and Saskatchewan are described as taxing railways per ton and mile.


That's in addition to corporate income tax, payroll taxes etc.


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Longtimeago said:


> Interestingly, the CEO of CN Rail when commenting on the disruption to their services, referred to CN as a 'victim' in this dispute. I have to agree with him on that point. It got me wondering what would happen if CN now decided to SUE all parties for loss of income. That could be an interesting court battle. Sue the pipeline company, sue the provincial and federal governments, sue the Indian bands, sue the RCMP, sue them all.
> 
> I think they would have a strong case they could argue.


I do feel bad for CN Rail, and they are not at fault here. Their business has been disrupted through no fault of their own.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

So the idiots blocking the tracks in Spruce Grove yesterday were that extinction group of man buns...after they finished piling garbage on the tracks & filming it they left the scene leaving their crap behind. A few good Albertan's brought a pickup truck and cleaned the tracks off so the potash train could get thru. 

The G&M called the act of cleaning up vigilantism.


Seems someone derailed a CN train in Quebec yesterday...was it coincidence or criminal?
https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mobile/cn-investigating-after-train-derails-in-lanaudière-1.4818107


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I do feel bad for CN Rail, and they are not at fault here. Their business has been disrupted through no fault of their own.


With lots of ripple effects from goods not being able to be received or shipped. 

There's also VIA rail and it's customers.


Cheers


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Pretty sad state of affairs. The country just seems like a ship adrift with no-one at the helm, and all the wildlife squabbling over birdseed that spilled on the deck......but, that's probably about right


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Mechanic said:


> Pretty sad state of affairs. The country just seems like a ship adrift with no-one at the helm, and all the wildlife squabbling over birdseed that spilled on the deck......but, that's probably about right


I can't be the only one hoping the PM goes back on vacation before he makes a mess out of this too.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I do feel bad for CN Rail, and they are not at fault here. Their business has been disrupted through no fault of their own.




as usual i have a minority opinion. This one goes that federal minister of transport marc garneau & CN Rail have been in lockstep agreement & cahoots "every minute" since the belleville blockage began. That "every minute" is a direct quote from minister garneau himself.

there's something about the CN lockdown that looks far too melodramatic this time. The tyendinaga mohawk have blocked the rails & they've also blocked highway 401 countless times before. Each time they were talked down off the railway or the highway without any of the high drama we're seeing in 2020.

meanwhile i haven't heard of a single person who's been more than inconvenienced. Agree that some rail passengers have been stopped for a few days & those urgently requiring transport have had to fly or take buses. However many principal rail circuits have been restored & more will be back up & running ASAP.

country residents have been receiving propane deliveries by truck as usual. I do not know of anybody who is missing as much as a stick of celery or a safety pin or a cell phone battery. I do not know of anybody who has actually stopped working under recent layoff. Some may have received layoff notices that are not yet in effect.

in other words, it's a big national media show being put on by the federal gummint w the hand-in-glove cooperation of CN rail.

* * * * *

what would be the purpose of such a show? it's to pressure the tyendinaga mohawk, show them how badly the country is suffering due to their blockade near belleville, get them peacefully away from the tracks ASAP without sending in the police or the army as was done with tragic loss of life at oka & ipperwash.

now comes the part where nobody is going to believe me. I'm writing from a bit of experience though. The Warrior Society - it's the warriors who are blocking the tracks at tyendinaga, not the elected band council of the town - are trained by the hereditary mohawk culture to serve as the highest expressions of protection & justice. The Warriors are - they believe - acting as peacekeepers in the protection of native rights & native land.

* * * * *

well, justin trudeau knows all this. So does marc miller. So does marc garneau. They know perfectly well that moral suasion will work with the Warrior Society better than any application of armed gendarmerie.

so they've whipped up CN rail into what sound like alarming pronouncements & they're all waiting while sensible voices in the indigenous communities call the Warriors off the tracks. See, the clan mothers are already out there at the railway crossing. All over canada, we're hearing from indigenous leaders that the Warriors have made their point, it's time to stop the radical demonstrations.

the fact that youthful non-aboriginal hoodlums have used the tyendinaga episode as an excuse to rebel all over the rest of canada is a totally separate story imho. A story that has nothing to do with aboriginal rights imho. 

what the youthful ROC uproar is telling us is that non-native generation Z canadians today are far more seriously alienated than all us older generations have ever been believing. That's the story we ought to pay attention to, not the story that the naughty Warriors are At It again.


.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Letter drafted from The Chiefs of the Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations stand in solidarity with Indigenous Sovereign Nations. Love the closing line.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Well...as the Grand Chief of Holidaying Albertans I stand in solidarity for the rule of law & I demand the immediate removal of all rail blockades & demand The Grand Chief of the Confederacy to attend a meeting with me to demonstrate his secret hand shake. 

Sheesh....Enoch being involved is as silly as Quebec's premier being involved or me being involved.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Just goes for show how they want this resolved. And how the conservatives are just, once again, missing the mark.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

And with this, we see Peter Mackay's real colours. He's worse than Scheer and will certainly alienate East coast and Aboriginals voters if he gets voted as leader of the cons. Well done!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/pol...about-rail-blockades-after-critics-suggest-he


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

RCMP are withdrawing from wet'suwet'en territory

a major move. For sure trudeau & cabinet had a big hand in it.

it's pretty dazzling to observe. Trudeau & Co are masterminding a small war operation right before our eyes & it appears they're quickly succeeding. Not one fingernail has been broken.

as with any conflicted operation, information can't be immediately disclosed to the public. 

all in all, a strategy worthy of his father. No, make that better than.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

His father was more decisive (and perhaps more intelligent) but Justin Trudeau seems to have a good head on his shoulders. He has surrounded himself with good people and, with those recent meetings, is also willing to ask other party leaders for help and guidance.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

JT is indeed a good team player. One can clearly detect the hands of marc miller, marc garneau, bill blair, caroline bennett, chrystia freeland & pablo rodriguez, plus others we haven't glimpsed yet, in this story which is still slipping in & out of confidential territory.

they're also saying that alberta-born RCMP director brenda lucki is playing an important role here


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> JT is indeed a good team player. One can clearly detect the hands of marc miller, marc garneau, bill blair, caroline bennett, chrystia freeland & pablo rodriguez, plus others we haven't glimpsed yet, in this story which is still slipping in & out of confidential territory.
> 
> they're also saying that alberta-born RCMP director brenda lucki is playing an important role here


Oh please, Brenda Lucki has done absolutely nothing and ask the rank and file what they think of her recent promotion. Today the gov't offered these guys an olive branch and they laughed in the face of rule of law. At this point this gives carte blanche for the gov't to go in using FULL MILITARY FORCE to clear any and all blockades. This ends tomorrow at noon with any kind of effective leader.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> JT is indeed a good team player. One can clearly detect the hands of marc miller, marc garneau, bill blair, caroline bennett, chrystia freeland & pablo rodriguez, plus others we haven't glimpsed yet, in this story which is still slipping in & out of confidential territory.
> 
> they're also saying that alberta-born RCMP director brenda lucki is playing an important role here


An important role of what, doing nothing? The silence is deafening on the west coast to federal offers of talking. This isn't even a negotiation.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

Has everyone noticed that TC Energy stock is up nicely the last 10 days. TC Energy and partners on this will sue the government to oblivion if this project does not go through and even if delayed/costs increased. As a shareholder I almost want that scenario to happen. $40Bil at 10% rate of return over 25 years, we are talking over $200Billion in damages in what would be a slam dunk case. I should be thanking Trudope profusely lol

Meanwhile Rogers today indicated they would kill 5000 jobs and $1Bil+ investment in capital if proposed Lib rules are enacted on telcos. This government truly wants to destroy business in this country


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Thought it was Telus saying that. I hope Telus sticks to its guns. I also hope a number of other companies start swinging the lumber too. Ottawa has become quite incompetent when it comes to economic policy.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> Thought it was Telus saying that. I hope Telus sticks to its guns. I also hope a number of other companies start swinging the lumber too. Ottawa has become quite incompetent when it comes to economic policy.


Interesting, so the government wanting to open up the market to mobile virtual network operators in a bid to lower cell prices is a bad thing for consumers? I guess we should enact legislation to maintain oligopolies then.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

AltaRed said:


> Thought it was Telus saying that. I hope Telus sticks to its guns. I also hope a number of other companies start swinging the lumber too. Ottawa has become quite incompetent when it comes to economic policy.


There's a thread on telus.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Andrew Scheer and others demand the government "order" the police to remove the blockades.

It wasn't long ago that Scheer and the same people were complaining the government illegally interfered with justice by lobbying AG Jody Wilson Raybould.

The hypocrisy of the Conservatives is on full display. They advocate for a police state when it suits their agenda, and want the government to stay out when it doesn't.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Andrew Scheer and others demand the government "order" the police to remove the blockades.
> 
> It wasn't long ago that the same people were complaining the government illegally interfered with justice by lobbying AG Jody Wilson Raybould.
> 
> The hypocrisy of the Conservatives is fully revealed. They prefer a police state when it suits their agenda.


Let's see, we hire police to enforce the laws and court orders. 
There are laws being broken, and court orders being ignored. Asking law enforcement to enforce the law is a reasonable request. 
Telling a prosecutor to drop a criminal prosecution is a different thing.

Many parts of Canada are losing faith in our justice system. This is a big problem. 

Vigilantism is on the rise. 
Even in the cities im hearing reports of people getting "roughed up", because the police aren't doing enough to deter crime. 

We aren't asking for anything ridiculous, we have laws, they should be followed, or law enforcement should take action. It's that simple.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

It's the job of the police to remove illegal blockades. Failure to do so is neglect of duty, regardless of the skin colour or culture of the law breakers.

If the Indian industry wasn't so lucrative for the chiefs and grand chiefs it would have ended decades ago. But as long as they can line their pockets nothing will change.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

A pro-pipeline convoy blocked Wellington St here in Ottawa last year. This illegal blockade was frowned upon by many, including myself working downtown stuck in traffic.
Yet this was ok from a conservative point of view. No arrest or police intervention (again this would have created an uprise of the albertan "protestors").

Double standard much ?? Only conservatives can do blockades now?


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Heck even the CP encourages dialog for cause resolution. AND remove police from the equation.

https://www.cpr.ca/en/media/cp-supp...ruFSAF7zR4Ye3wzDF1PzH32_QfUGJl6RfYSvRDcC1EUKk

What is wrong with you "shoot first, ask questions later" conservatives ? Glad Scheer lost the elections, we would have more than barricades to deal with.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> ?? quebec has propane from Valero storage tanks in the montreal east tank farm
> 
> they receiving feed from valero's jean gaulin refinery near levis quebec (short distance downriver) (pipeline working) (we've had this discussion several times)


So, how long is that supposed to last? I still see in news that there are shortages in QC and Atlantic. All I have to go on is what I see/read on news; I have no direct knowledge of the QC LNG infrastructure.

https://business.financialpost.com/...in-quebec-forces-companies-to-ration-supplies
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/quebec-...th-rail-blockades-entering-3rd-week-1.1393070


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

fstamand said:


> A pro-pipeline convoy blocked Wellington St here in Ottawa last year. This illegal blockade was frowned upon by many, including myself working downtown stuck in traffic.
> Yet this was ok from a conservative point of view. No arrest or police intervention (again this would have created an uprise of the albertan "protestors").
> 
> Double standard much ?? Only conservatives can do blockades now?


it sure sucks when the right does the same thing the left does, doesn't it? Just imagine if they did it just as often and threw in some of the violence the left is so fond of.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

fstamand said:


> A pro-pipeline convoy blocked Wellington St here in Ottawa last year. This illegal blockade was frowned upon by many, including myself working downtown stuck in traffic.
> Yet this was ok from a conservative point of view. No arrest or police intervention (again this would have created an uprise of the albertan "protestors").
> 
> Double standard much ?? Only conservatives can do blockades now?


So, blocking a street in front of the Canadian Parliament, protesting gov't policy for one day = blocking rail lines, crippling cross-province travel and shipments of goods for over 2 weeks for nothing to do with CN/VIA ??????

I don't think anyone would have been very upset if the protests blocking the rail was for one day.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Userkare said:


> fstamand said:
> 
> 
> > A pro-pipeline convoy blocked Wellington St here in Ottawa last year. This illegal blockade was frowned upon by many, including myself working downtown stuck in traffic.
> ...


I don't like protests that violate the law. 

Just because you're in the losing side of the debate doesn't excuse illegal behaviour.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

CN respects the hereditary land claims and supports the natives. Other companies should do the same.

Halt the pipeline and re-route it around the traditional land. Don't approve any projects involving traditional lands in the future.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> CN respects the hereditary land claims and supports the natives. Other companies should do the same.
> 
> Halt the pipeline and re-route it around the traditional land. Don't approve any projects involving traditional lands in the future.


If they're willing to turn down economic development, cut financial transfers.
I'm getting increasingly annoyed with all the people wanting handouts, but are unwilling to do the work.

Even in this case, most of the people want the pipeline, and the economic benefits, but a few naysayers.

Most of the people protesting have nothing to do with the issue, they just want to cripple the Canadian economy.
Some of them are not only not First nations, some aren't even Canadian.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Halt the pipeline and re-route it around the traditional land. Don't approve any projects involving traditional lands in the future.


Yeah, no use creating jobs for Indigenous people and lifting communities from poverty even though all 20 elected band councils along the Coastal GasLink pipeline route have signed benefits agreements with the company that will result in these B.C. First Nations reaping multibillion-dollar benefits. Yeah, just go around those lands, it will save us all a lot of money and hassle.

ltr


----------



## Barwelle (Feb 23, 2011)

fstamand said:


> A pro-pipeline convoy blocked Wellington St here in Ottawa last year. This illegal blockade was frowned upon by many, including myself working downtown stuck in traffic.
> Yet this was ok from a conservative point of view. No arrest or police intervention (again this would have created an uprise of the albertan "protestors").
> 
> Double standard much ?? Only conservatives can do blockades now?


These rail blockades are so much bigger than blocking off a street. 

You can reroute vehicle traffic around wellington street. You can't reroute rail traffic around blockades on major rail lines.

We rely on rail to export many commodities that support the entire country in some way or another. Rail blockades aren't just a minor inconvenience for afternoon traffic. Rail blockades cripple our economy, they make us look like unreliable trade partners and will have ripples for years to come. Markets turn to alternate suppliers

I am speaking as a farmer, who buys the daily essentials, pays accountants, lawyers, financiers, temporary labour, truckers, ag-related government workers, people in various workshops (tire shops, mechanics, welding, parts, etc etc)... all the people involved in the supply chain for anything I purchase as well as all the people involved in the process of sending my production to the end user... all these non-farmers that have work from farmers being able to export our products are now 'beneficiaries' of this attack on our ability to generate revenue that many share along the way, as well as tax revenue for our governments that are used, in part, to fund support indigenous programs.

I'm not against protesting. But this is ridiculous.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, no use creating jobs for Indigenous people and lifting communities from poverty even though all 20 elected band councils along the Coastal GasLink pipeline route have signed benefits agreements with the company that will result in these B.C. First Nations reaping multibillion-dollar benefits. Yeah, just go around those lands, it will save us all a lot of money and hassle.
> 
> ltr


The thing is, failure to enforce the law hurts the poor more than the rich.
It's something lefties don't seem to understand.

The people want this, a few don't, so we let the lawbreaking hooligans decide for us?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Barwelle said:


> These rail blockades are so much bigger than blocking off a street.
> 
> You can reroute vehicle traffic around wellington street. You can't reroute rail traffic around blockades on major rail lines.
> 
> ...




barwelle what exactly is it that you cannot obtain on the farm in alberta these past couple of weeks because of the tyendinaga rail blockage in ontario?

i am not counting flash blockades like the one that set up up, then dismantled in edmonton or other flash blockades by non-aboriginal groups popping up in cities all over canada. These appear to be manifestations that have little to do with the indigenous slogans they are using/exploiting. Police should shut those down asap.

however the mohawk blockades are a different species imho. Far more serious, although unlikely to affect alberta farmers. It was not for no reason that the wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs travelled straight to the mohawk in ontario & quebec in order to gauge support.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> barwelle what exactly is it that you cannot obtain on the farm in alberta these past couple of weeks because of the tyendinaga rail blockage in ontario?
> 
> i am not counting flash blockades like the one that set up up, then dismantled in edmonton or other flash blockades by non-aboriginal groups popping up in cities all over canada. These appear to be manifestations that have little to do with the indigenous slogans they are using/exploiting. Police should shut those down asap.
> 
> however the mohawk blockades are a different species imho. Far more serious, although unlikely to affect alberta farmers. It was not for no reason that the wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs travelled straight to the mohawk in ontario & quebec in order to gauge support.


Why does it matter who it's hurting?
The point is the illegal actions are hurting innocent people, and they need to stop.

This mess isn't hurting the PM, it's not hurting the cheifs, it's not hurting the people who can afford to take all this time off work.
It's hurting ordinary Canadians, and most importantly the First Nations that are trying to get economic development.

Looking at this as an investor, I would demand a HUGE risk premium to develop anywhere near these disputed areas.
This is seriously impacting the reputation of Canada as a place to do business.

If all the required permits are granted, and you have injunctions, and you still can't move forward, while the police sit on the sidelines, and politicians do nothing, why would you invest at all?

The real losers of this are the First Nations who want to build a sustainable economy.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> First Nations reaping multibillion-dollar benefits.




what multi-billion dollar benefits? globe & mail stated $340 million in payments to the band councils supporting pipeline, across the 50 year estimated life of the pipeline. That works out to roughly $350,000 annual payment to each band council.

in addition there will be a flush of construction work, with both native hires plus many local native businesses, all prospering significantly. This prosperity will migrate from community to community but cannot last longer than the 2-year time period for construction of the pipe. Following the construction period, indigenous locals who have been trained & who are motivated will have to migrate away to find work.

the challenge - as with transMountain pipe - is what kind of permanent new businesses can be incubated in the native communities? businesses that will carry on & prosper for decades after the pipeline has been built?

i did glimpse a factoid that coastal GasLink has promised 10% ownership to friendly indigenous bands. This - divided among 20 bands - is realistically only a piffle, but as a token it represents a significant step in the right direction. It's not enough to flush indigenous communities with easy cash, then after 24 months the white man's construction boom collapses & local native communities are left worse off than before.

i was happy to see coastal GL offering as much partial ownership as they can - the primary shareholder is TC Energy & they cannot be expected to give away the house.

but to pretend that there are "billions" of dollars going to wet'suwet'en peoples, or even hundreds of permanent well-paid jobs being created, is total fiction. There will be money changing hands, for sure. There will be a brief construction-related economic boom, for sure. Some wet'suwet'en are asking if these are worth damaging their ancestral lands for the next century or more.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Why does it matter who it's hurting?
> The point is the illegal actions are hurting innocent people



an oxymoron ^^

who, exactly, has been hurt so far? if it doesn't matter who is being hurt, then why fester on the topic?





> the real losers of this are the First Nations who want to build a sustainable economy


this is a mistake you are making. Two-year pipeline construction booms are the opposite of a sustainable economy. 

for more than half a century, western mining & resource extraction companies moving into 3rd world countries in south america, africa & asia have left social wreckage & devastation behind when the mines are done & the resource has been removed - some say stolen - from the host country. There have been changes in recent years. Third world countries have wised up.

a temporary pipeline construction boom should not be misrepresented as permanent sustainable economic development.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> what multi-billion dollar benefits? globe & mail stated $340 million in payments to the band councils supporting pipeline,


Yeah, my mistake, it was only $340 million dollars to rent a thin strip of land, plus construction jobs. Who needs that. I think they should save the money and find a way around. 

ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, my mistake, it was only $340 million dollars to rent a thin strip of land, plus construction jobs. Who needs that. I think they should save the money and find a way around.



surely sarcasm is not necessary ...

everybody knows why 2-year construction booms are money easy-come-easy-go, often with a lot of sadness & misery left behind in host communities when the projects wind down & disappear after 24 months. 

do you know, for example, that prostitution & alcohol use are 2 of the easy-money by-products that linger in ravaged communities in all 3rd world countries, long after the brief resource extraction or infrastructure project has ended?

in the coastal GL situation there are some positive aspects leading to sustainable development. The company has offered a tiny partial ownership - as a company owned by private shareholders they can't be expected to offer more - & may have done more to incubate permanent native businesses throughout wet'suwet'en territory than they are telling about. 

in a post upthread dubmac gave a link to coastal's website which included a lengthy 2014 letter from coastal CEO Rick Gateman to 14 hereditary chiefs. The tone of the letter was positive, cordial & informative. Gateman was telling the chiefs why the company did not want to re-locate the pipeline; but at the same time he also invited all the chiefs very warmly & sincerely to visit his company, coastal would take them on aerial flyovers together with their own geologists to help explain what they were doing with the pipeline & why.

a big problem then ensued which was that not one of the hereditary chiefs ever replied to the letter. Neither did their organized Office of the Wet'suwet'en (the OW) to whom the letter was also addressed.

that was 5 years ago. It is easy to understand that pipeline costs today have advanced, the company is more set in its intentions than it was 5 years ago, & adjustments today would be much harder to make.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

sags said:


> Andrew Scheer and others demand the government "order" the police to remove the blockades.
> 
> It wasn't long ago that Scheer and the same people were complaining the government illegally interfered with justice by lobbying AG Jody Wilson Raybould.
> 
> The hypocrisy of the Conservatives is on full display. They advocate for a police state when it suits their agenda, and want the government to stay out when it doesn't.


Please recant your statement after Trudeau's pathetic flip flopping as he has now called for the exact same thing the opposition did from a week ago and 90% of Canadians were calling for three weeks ago. Immediate arrest of all protesters and charged to the fullest extend of the law


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Userkare said:


> humble_pie said:
> 
> 
> > ?? quebec has propane from Valero storage tanks in the montreal east tank farm
> ...


Quebec refineries do not produce nearly enough propane for provincial needs. A significant portion has to come from Sarnia or even Alberta. The movement of goods in recent decades is based pretty much on JIT deliveries.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

robfordlives said:


> Please recant your statement after Trudeau's pathetic flip flopping as he has now called for the exact same thing the opposition did from a week ago and 90% of Canadians were calling for three weeks ago. Immediate arrest of all protesters and charged to the fullest extend of the law



flawless, brilliant strategy by the liberal gummint. Broad & generous invitations extended to the wet'suwet'en chiefs who were given reasonable & respectful delays to respond. But the chiefs have failed to reply.

moving on now to next level of the escalation, trudeau said the rail barricades are to come down & he is first looking to the protesters to dismantle their own railway obstructions.

this is what protestors did a few hours ago in st-lambert quebec. They had barricaded a commuter railroad. At 3:30 pm today, eight (only 8 !!) policemen surrounded their position but did nothing. At 7:30 pm the protestors bundled up their belongings & departed.

as of this post, another mohawk commuter rail barricade is still up on the south shore opposite montreal. Also the mother rail barricade at tyendinaga ontario is still operating.

trudeau did not say that protestors would be arrested. Neither did he say that protestors would be charged. What he did say is that the army would not be called upon.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

I see Mr. Trudeau is now revered for his decision to remove the blockades. This of course is the very same conclusion Mr. Scheer was maligned for at the start of the week in his speech to the house. It was considered so radical that he was not invited to any meetings on the topic.

Trudeau finally realizes that it's damaging and costly to our country._ “Let us be clear: all Canadians are paying the price. Some people can’t get to work, others have lost their jobs. Essential goods cannot get where they need to go.”
The situation was “unacceptable and untenable,” he said. “The injunctions must be obeyed and the law must be upheld.”_

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trudeau also said the police are independent and no politician can order them to act.

That is a quite different stance than Andrew Scheer demanding the police be ordered by the government to remove the blockades.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Trudeau also said the police are independent and no politician can order them to act.
> 
> That is a quite different stance than Andrew Scheer demanding the police be ordered by the government to remove the blockades.


Mmm, seems to me that Liberals disagreed with the entire speech and were quite disgusted by it, but there must be some fine point that I'm missing because they both sound about the same approach except that Scheer said it a few days earlier and everyone went apoplectic until Trudeau said the same thing and now it's brilliant. Doing nothing for a week and then coming to the same conclusion as Scheer doesn't seem that brilliant to me.

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Trudeau also said the police are independent and no politician can order them to act.
> 
> That is a quite different stance than Andrew Scheer demanding the police be ordered by the government to remove the blockades.


If the politicians and the courts and the civilian oversight boards can't tell the police to enforce the law, we have an accountability problem.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Remind me how we have an incompetent person with no skills running this Country. What a mess.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

The last 3 weeks have been such a mess.

What a total useless ****hole Trudeau has been.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

what would scheer have done, if he was PM ?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I fear this will get worse before it gets better.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fstamand said:


> what would scheer have done, if he was PM ?


I expect he would have pushed law enforcement to do their job.

When the government decides to stop enforcing laws, people feel emboldened to continue breaking them.

I hope they gathered evidence to hold those responsible for the damage  they've caused.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> I expect he would have pushed law enforcement to do their job.


So that's what dumbass JT asked yesterday, which put oil on the fire. Dumb move.
Harper would have done nothing, just like he did with the idle no more saga.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

fstamand said:


> So that's what dumbass JT asked yesterday, which put oil on the fire. Dumb move.
> Harper would have done nothing, just like he did with the idle no more saga.


Yup...natives are above the law. If you ask them to obey the law it's your fault if they get violent. Just like it was Trump's fault when Antifa thugs beat people and light cars on fire.

The left is NEVER at fault for anything they do.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Prairie Guy said:


> Yup...natives are above the law. If you ask them to obey the law it's your fault if they get violent. Just like it was Trump's fault when Antifa thugs beat people and light cars on fire.
> 
> The left is NEVER at fault for anything they do.


They went the Scheerhead way and it got worst. Go figure. Hey you got any idea, maybe send your MP a telegram.


----------



## Barwelle (Feb 23, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> barwelle what exactly is it that you cannot obtain on the farm in alberta these past couple of weeks because of the tyendinaga rail blockage in ontario?
> 
> i am not counting flash blockades like the one that set up up, then dismantled in edmonton or other flash blockades by non-aboriginal groups popping up in cities all over canada. These appear to be manifestations that have little to do with the indigenous slogans they are using/exploiting. Police should shut those down asap.
> 
> however the mohawk blockades are a different species imho. Far more serious, although unlikely to affect alberta farmers. It was not for no reason that the wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs travelled straight to the mohawk in ontario & quebec in order to gauge support.


As far as obtaining on the farm, nothing at the moment affected by tyendinaga that I'm aware of, for alberta farmers. Some of our fertilizer is railed in from the US. No affect there to my knowledge, but perhaps some disruption at least in terms of logistical issues.

At this point it is export that is more concerning. The BC blockade is stopping grain from reaching port. There are ships waiting for grain. These ships waiting in port means the grain companies pay demurrage, which is ultimately passed on to farmers in the form of lower bids for our product. Ships waiting also makes us look bad to export markets, potentially closing markets. https://www.producer.com/2020/02/grain-vessels-backing-up-on-canadian-west-coast/ 

Yes thankfully the one by Edmonton was quick to come down. 

Here's a more official source than I: https://www.producer.com/2020/02/elevators-delay-farmer-deliveries-as-rail-blockades-persist/

Also farmers are hardly the only ones affected. Just wanted to present one of many personal examples.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

robfordlives said:


> Please recant your statement after Trudeau's pathetic flip flopping as he has now called for the exact same thing the opposition did from a week ago and 90% of Canadians were calling for three weeks ago. Immediate arrest of all protesters and charged to the fullest extend of the law


Nope. Mr. Trudeau's statement was later clarified:

_Trudeau emphasized that injunctions to clear blocked rail lines must be followed — a comment Public Safety Minister Bill Blair later clarified on CBC Radio's The House. "He said that the injunctions that exist should be obeyed. He did not give direction to the police to enforce this," Blair said. "Governments don't give the police direction. Police are informed by the law, by the courts, by their policies and by their procedures."_

More nonsense and non-talk from Trudeau. If Trudeau actually said "enforce this", it would be enforced. If the police are doing nothing, it is only because they have direction to wait until the federal government does their talking. The police are clearly not enforcing the law. The courts have already criticized the police for not enforcing the injunction. If the law was enforced, those blockades would have been down at least a week ago. 

Anyone who expects the rail blockades to come down this weekend are dreaming.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Barwelle...I hope you guys make out OK...it always seem the farmer pays the price for the retards in the rest of Canada. Not just the latest Indian uprising...even jailing the Chinese chick ends up the farmers paying for our ineptness.

Wish I was 20 years younger...I'd get to see Alberta a sovereign nation.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

If you cons are so angry at trudeau, why don't you join the protest; seems like the natives are turning their protest into a JT hate party. Maybe lead to his demise? Or are you all too busy counting your money? (Insert sarcasm icon)


Or even better! Plan a convoy to Ottawa and block Wellington again. Hint: don't take the train.

You seem to be experts at sitting in your chairs being angry.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Barwelle said:


> As far as obtaining on the farm, nothing at the moment affected by tyendinaga that I'm aware of, for alberta farmers. Some of our fertilizer is railed in from the US. No affect there to my knowledge, but perhaps some disruption at least in terms of logistical issues.
> 
> At this point it is export that is more concerning. The BC blockade is stopping grain from reaching port. There are ships waiting for grain. These ships waiting in port means the grain companies pay demurrage, which is ultimately passed on to farmers in the form of lower bids for our product. Ships waiting also makes us look bad to export markets, potentially closing markets. https://www.producer.com/2020/02/grain-vessels-backing-up-on-canadian-west-coast/
> 
> ...




thankx for the insights barwelle

is vancouver harbour still blocked? i thought protests there had been brought under control?

here in east central canada the significant blockades are tyendinaga near belleville & the much smaller kahnewake block of a small local commuter train on the south shore opposite montreal. Traditionally the SQ never interferes w kahnewake, although they observe from afar. Never do the SQ enter mohawk territory, which is why the warrior society is getting away with the commuter rail barricade.

two other small blockades in quebec were chased down by the SQ within hours. Neither were native blockades. Like the edmonton manifestation, those are easier for the police to deal with.

but the mohawk blockades are worrisome. The warrior society are heavily armed & my gut feeling is that someone could quite easily die, as happened at oka. This is what ottawa has been trying to prevent.

the way i see it, the primary choices right now are 1) coastal agrees to leave wet'suwet'en territory, in which case the chiefs *say* they will come to the table; or else 2) the police have to interfvene.

i can see lots of problems with (1) but won't mention them right now, only to say that it looks to be a "negotiation" in name only & the wet'suwet'en chiefs appear highly unlikely to agree to a pipeline at this point in time.

the problem with (2) is that any police force at tyendinaga means not only high risk of armed resistance but such police action will likely also trigger a retaliatory blocade of the Mercier bridge into montreal, which could bring the army into the picture. The nightmare that ottawa has been working to avoid.

on the hopeful side of things, more & more clan mothers are starting to speak out, particularly in BC. I don't know if folks here understand the influence of the clan mothers & the elders in indigenous communities though.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Time for Trudeau to resign.

Get someone who can get the job done.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> thankx for the insights barwelle
> 
> is vancouver harbour still blocked? i thought protests there had been brought under control?
> 
> ...


I think the risk of an armed uprising is real.
I don't see that as an excuse to not enforce the law.

As for the pipeline approval, it seems like the anti pipeline protestors don't seem to recognize that IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

The anti-pipeline crowd just realized that tying into the messy problem of first nations is a great way to muddy the waters.
Remember, antipipline protesters don't want anything to happen.
Many of them don't care about economic damage, 
They know that as long as a small number of them are active, they can hold up projects longer than the companies can wait.


I think what we have to do, is trace the funds of the illegal protestors.
They're using violence and intimidation to further a political objective.
That's terrorism.

The antipipeline people have lots of time to waste causing trouble, someone is paying for it.
Investigate finances, cut off their funding.
If they're getting government funding of any sort, cut it off.
If it's "foreign charities" seize it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

JT is in the house so, chill, smoke a doobie, and don't worry... be happy.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> JT is in the house so, chill, smoke a doobie, and don't worry... be happy.


I think that's the point, he hopes everyone is so stoned, they don't realizing they "chilling" because they've run out of fuel for heating.

I think the reason JT finally said take action is because there is someone, somewhere, in government that pointed out if this continues much longer, it's not just jobs and livliehoods that are being damaged, but the potential for some deaths is possible.

The anti pipeliners might not care, but ordinary Canadians would be outraged.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I think that's the point, he hopes everyone is so stoned, they don't realizing they "chilling" because they've run out of fuel for heating.
> 
> I think the reason JT finally said take action is because there is someone, somewhere, in government that pointed out if this continues much longer, it's not just jobs and livliehoods that are being damaged, but the potential for some deaths is possible.
> 
> The anti pipeliners might not care, but ordinary Canadians would be outraged.




the above is screwed backwards

every rational person, not just in gummint, is totally aware that shooting could erupt. Has been aware for months now. Ever since the RCMP set up their satellite station on the morice river logging road & began arresting wet'suwet'en protestors.

the PM is aware. The entire cabinet is aware. It's to keep a lid on violence that ottawa has been making numerous sincere attempts to meet with the wet'suwet'en & the mohawk.

it didn't work. Now onto the next level. It's too bad the reserve at tyendinaga abuts the railway line, so the mohawk can come & go as they please, drive up supplies & additional warriors. If there were only a long supply road the police could occupy it & besiege them out. That's more or less how they ended the oka uprising - the mohawk retreated at the end into an addiction centre & holed up inside, while the army & the SQ surrounded the terrain & simply waited.

but the process took a couple weeks, which is not possible now.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> the above is screwed backwards
> 
> every rational person, not just in gummint, is totally aware that shooting could erupt. Has been aware for months now. Ever since the RCMP set up their satellite station on the morice river logging road & began arresting wet'suwet'en protestors.
> 
> ...


The problem is a lack of accountability.
The protesters feel like they can get away with no consequences.

A few million in fines and a bit of time in jail should do it.


Also ban the foreign protestors from entering the country. If you're in an illegal protest, you should be prohibited from entering the country.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

MrMatt said:


> Also ban the foreign protestors from entering the country. If you're in an illegal protest, you should be prohibited from entering the country.


I don't know how effective that would be since the anti-pipeline campaign can be foreign funded and there's not much that can be done about that it seems. I have read about lots of US based interference in these matters. The US organization 350.org always seems to be involved in our business and has a stated goal to end the use of fossil fuels, or US based Tides foundation who support anti-pipeline protests in BC. I don't know what could be done about foreign support - it isn't just physical professional protestors crossing a border. ....

ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it's only a straw in the wind but the first cracks in the hereditary chiefs' close-to-impossible conditions for negotiation may be appearing.

the original conditions were: 1) RCMP temporary station on morice river logging road to be dismantled; special squad officers to leave territory. The RCMP promised this step last week.

2) no RCMP patrol cars from regular detachment in houston to be allowed on wet'suwet'en territory.

this is the condition that's softening. Today hereditary chief Na'moks told the globe & mail that regular RCMP patrol cars out of houston are acceptable in the territory.



> “The local constabulary can look after the patrols,” Na’moks said of a detachment in nearby Houston. “The officers that they fly in and out on a seven-day basis is what we want gone from the territory.”


3) the hereditary chiefs have also demanded that coastal gasLink employees must leave the territory. This is the condition that seems impossible to meet. CGL has delivered & stored many valuable supplies along the proposed pipeline route within the territory, in preparation for construction to start this spring. Abandoning those supplies to possible vandalism & sabotage does not seem likely.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> the above is screwed backwards
> 
> every rational person, not just in gummint, is totally aware that shooting could erupt. Has been aware for months now. Ever since the RCMP set up their satellite station on the morice river logging road & began arresting wet'suwet'en protestors.
> 
> ...


People illegally holding blockades should be arrested. If they commit violence then appropriate action by law authorities is in order. If people are led to believe that by threatening violence that they can get what they want the country will eventually fall to anarchy.

There's a very good reason why you never negotiate with terrorists.


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

It pays pretty good to be a protestor. The GoFundMe for Molly Wickham is nearly at $300,000. 

https://www.gofundme.com/f/gidimt039en-strong


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

The other thing that hasn't been taken advantage of is the Mohawks own statements last week stating that the media is portraying this as a blockade. They said they wanted to let everyone know that they ARE NOT BLOCKING THE TRACK. If I was CN I would have had trains rolling 5 seconds later quoting these people as saying they weren't blocking the track. Why has noone thought of this???


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

robfordlives said:


> It pays pretty good to be a protestor. The GoFundMe for Molly Wickham is nearly at $300,000.
> 
> https://www.gofundme.com/f/gidimt039en-strong


Why get a real job? GoFundMe is another way for special and foreign interests to pay protesters and people who are used to slander. Christine Ford earned $700,000 for lying under oath about Kavanaugh.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it's surprising the way the vengeful people in this thread can only talk about how to punish indigenous protestors

but the critical issue right now has nothing to do with punishment. The critical issue right now is how to get em off the barricades without anybody getting shot to death.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> but the critical issue right now has nothing to do with punishment. The critical issue right now is how to get em off the barricades without anybody getting shot to death.


The critical issue is that people are illegally blocking a rail line. They need to be arrested, not shot.

Now, if the "protestors" are carrying weapons, then they are terrorists, not protestors, and need to be treated as such.

I would also seize all the GoFundMe money as it is proceeds derived from crime.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

^^ you don't seem to understand the situation

the warrior society are not going to meekly extend their wrists for the handcuffs

they're armed. One policeman was killed in crossfire at Oka. Same mohawks.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

Evidently the guys above think cops can just put their lights and sirens on, walk to them and cuff them. Then fill the jails (hint: you're paying for the jails, with taxes!).


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

They've won....Teck just killed the Frontier application. I like many of my colleques have already done will be applying for TN-1 Visa in United States starting Monday. I've had it


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

robfordlives said:


> They've won....Teck just killed the Frontier application. I like many of my colleques have already done will be applying for TN-1 Visa in United States starting Monday. I've had it


Edit: I personally know over a dozen highly intelligent professionals in varying sectors who have done so the last two years. Demand for these people is incredible down there.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

*it's over at tyendinaga*

it had to have been the most minimalist police raid in the history of the planet. Those OPP should have been microsurgeons.

about 40 OPP drove up to the railway barricade, stood easy at the edge of the territory defined by the arrest injunction & began staring down the 8 mohawk blocade defenders.

at first there was a lot of laughter, nervous giggles even, on the mohawk side. But the police stare continued.

the OPP did not talk. They did not smile. They stood easy, feet isosceles, meaning they were poised to spring into action in a split second. On & on they gazed, in total silence, at the mohawk protestors. Somehow they even managed to look friendly.

at minute 38 a blonde lady who looked & talked like a university TA walked up with 2 other police & said - very pleasantly - Guys you have to Leave or you're going to be Arrested.

60 seconds of F-word shouting by a young protestor & the OPP stepped forward. The scuffle was so brief it looked like the film had been speeded up. Ninety seconds & 6 mohawk were handcuffed. The remaining two took up aggressive body posture but almost immediately someone messaged them to Fall Back, so they did.

trains i imagine will be running this afternoon.

* * * * *

in kahnewake, the mohawk retaliated by partially occupying the Mercier bridge. They didn't block it - at least not yet - they drove its length & back in a motorcade at 10 kph, slowing other vehicle traffic to a crawl.


https://www.facebook.com/realpeoplesmedia2016/videos/2851629651541839/


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

robfordlives said:


> They've won....Teck just killed the Frontier application. I like many of my colleques have already done will be applying for TN-1 Visa in United States starting Monday. I've had it


That's the point, these protesters just cost Canada billions in investment immediately, and likely scared away many billions more in future investment.

Then they'll complain wages, benefits and pensions are too low, while they actively chase jobs and investment out of the country.

It was never about what the people want, it's about destroying the Canadian economy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Frontier mine wasn't financially viable, and no change to regulation or speeding up approvals would change that.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

robfordlives said:


> They've won....Teck just killed the Frontier application. I like many of my colleques have already done will be applying for TN-1 Visa in United States starting Monday. I've had it


Why just a TN-1? Have you considered immigrating there?

Why even put up with environmentalists and left-leaning Canadian government, when you could permanently live in a conservative, capitalist paradise?


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> ^^ you don't seem to understand the situation
> 
> the warrior society are not going to meekly extend their wrists for the handcuffs
> 
> they're armed. One policeman was killed in crossfire at Oka. Same mohawks.


Protestors carry signs not guns...they're terrorists, not protestors and definitely not warriors. Your envy of them is misguided but not surprising.

Now the terrorists know that they can get away with it, it will only escalate.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Prairie Guy said:


> Now the terrorists know that they can get away with it, it will only escalate.


It's now been demonstrated that disrupting transportation in Canada is an effective way to shut down the country without much effort and a government that will let you get away with it for quite some time.

ltr


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> It's now been demonstrated that disrupting transportation in Canada is an effective way to shut down the country without much effort




in a way the vulnerability of the national railroad system reminds me of the vulnerability of the atlantic-to-pacific southern border we share with the US. 

not to speak of the vulnerability of the coastline, arguably one of the longest triple ocean coastlines of any state on the planet. Or the vulnerability of our air space, particularly across the relatively unpopulated northern 2/3s of canada.

me i think canada should consider enacting new legislation that would provide considerably harsher penalties for those who obstruct railroads, highways, waterways, pipelines, hydroelectric systems, communication systems or other critical national infrastructure.

in the same way we should set up harsher penalties for immigration coyotes (aka "consultants") who knowingly & profitably recruit traffic from abroad to land illegally in canada.

harsher penalties in the future would apply to all canadians whether indigenous or not, regardless of their cultural or ethnic background. My thinking is that these would act as a deterrent. Historically canada has been too trusting imho. We've taken our vast & beautiful land mass for granted. But now the time has come to protect it more attentively.

i'm perfectly aware that the above ^^ kinds of preventative measures will cost more $$ for many federal departments & provincial gummints. Everything is involved, from police & RCMP to immigration, army & justice services.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> me i think canada should consider enacting new legislation that would provide considerably harsher penalties for those who obstruct railroads, highways, waterways, pipelines, hydroelectric systems, communication systems or other critical national infrastructure.
> 
> 
> harsher penalties in the future would apply to all canadians whether indigenous or not, regardless of their cultural or ethnic background. My thinking is that these would act as a deterrent. Historically canada has been too trusting imho. We've taken our vast & beautiful land mass for granted. But now the time has come to protect it more attentively.
> ...


I edited the quote. 
I agree, but the reality is that there are almost no penalties as there is now.

People act this way because they feel empowered by the crowd, and know they likely won't face real consequences. 


I'd bet that even the protestors arrested for violating the court order won't actually spend any time in prison, or have to offer any compensation.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

I had speculated upthread that the Fed Gov't would step in to remove the rail blockade just before QC was nearly out of propane. I was rebuffed, even though I'd seen much on the news about impending shortages.

Today I learned that the situation had been averted, not by negotiating with the natives, or by force, but by negotiating a backroom deal with CP to allow CN to use their tracks to circumvent the blockade. 

Nicely played, but it probably won't work a second time, since that cat's out of the bag now, so to speak.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cp-cn-arrangement-blockade-1.5474684


_"But as a result of what multiple government sources are describing as a very "rare" collaboration between the two rail giants, CN trains have been circumventing blockades using alternate routes — some through the U.S. — to continue deliveries to Quebec and Maritime communities facing shortages of essential goods such as propane, chemicals for water treatment facilities and animal feed."_

_"The Retail Council of Canada told CBC News it didn't know about the deal. Neither did associations representing propane suppliers in Quebec and across Canada. The groups had been warning of looming supply shortages in Quebec and Eastern Canada, where families, farmers and companies have been rationing goods."
_
.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

This blockade silliness just continues to build societal resentment that will boil over at some point. Need to see more of it come from within indigenous communities themselves.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> Need to see more of it come from within indigenous communities themselves.


There is some push-back against the 5 hereditary chiefs among the 13 Wet'suwet'en house clans. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...-hereditary-wing-chief-voices-concerns-about/

The article states that in their culture, they are told to STFU by their elders,


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Not enough yet and we need other indigenous groups across Canada speaking up.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> Not enough yet and we need other indigenous groups across Canada speaking up.


This morning I was listening to my local talk radio station and they were interviewing Dale Swampy, who is president of the National Coalition of Chiefs and a member of the Samson Cree Nation. 

Holy cow, what a different story he tells compared to the big attention grabbing headlines we read every day. He articulated that Indigenous Canadians want natural resource development and that these few hereditary chiefs certainly don't speak for the majority of First Nations people.

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Good thing I don't take public transit. They're blocking commuter trains now.

I don't even think it is first Nations. 
Most of them want the jobs and investment. 

Probably just a bunch of rich, racist, white supremacist environmentalists who are hiding behind the lie of solidarity to push their agenda.

It takes a special kind of privilege to think blocking people getting to work on public transit is somehow reasonable.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Well we brought into law an easier way to clean things up in Alberta...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...would-jail-pipeline-protesters-for-up-to-six/

I doubt any of the protesters have any money for fines though other than the $100 that they were paid by Ecojustice.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eder said:


> Well we brought into law an easier way to clean things up in Alberta...
> 
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/can...would-jail-pipeline-protesters-for-up-to-six/
> 
> I doubt any of the protesters have any money for fines though other than the $100 that they were paid by Ecojustice.


They've started setting fires on the tracks in Ontario, I expect more blantant sabotage is going to start soon.

They're blocking essential supplies, they're attacking public transit.
These actions aren't a peaceful protest against a pipeline that the respective natives WANT on their land.

They're clearly crossing into active attacks on our infrastructure.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

in hamilton, the protestors were well-known anarchists, said the globe & mail (evidently the leader, a female, is already known to journos & police)

in st-lambert quebec the other day, the brief railway protest flew the black anarchists' flag, not the orange mohawk warrior society flag (note: the warrior society are not anarchists) 

the st-lambert protest lasted only a few hours, was ended successfully & peacefully by SQ police who quietly surrounded the protest zone for four hours but took no further action. After four hours the protestors bundled up their makeshift belongings & departed. 

i doubt the scattered protests still springing up have any indigenous members at all. Tentatively i think the new protests are coming from the black shirt anarchist contingent & also from a newer & younger group of radical university students who call themselves Extinction Rebellion. Globe has been publishing articles on ER. We should all try to learn more about Extinction Rebellion since i believe they are going to become more influential as time goes by.

to the best of my knowledge only one protest movement remains in eastern canada that is entirely indigenous. It's the mohawk blockade of the CPR rail bridge at kahnewake quebec, on the south shore of the st-lawrence just across from montreal. 

as mentioned upthread, the SQ (Sureté du quebec, the provincial police force) do not go into kahnewake. The railway has obtained an injunction against the bridge protestors but it will be extremely challenging to enforce. A more peaceful way with less risk of loss of life from armed warriors might be to besiege/ignore them off the bridge, a control response that has been utillized in the past with the same kahnewake community. However it does take a long time. Long as in the mohawk could halt rail traffic on the bridge for several weeks or months.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

wondering why CN has never appeared to have given a thought to moving the railway itself away from tyendinaga nation.

the mohawk have blocked both the railway & highway 401 many times over the past few decades. Wouldn't it be cheaper to construct deviations of both some 25 km north of their present routes?

the probem is that the tyendinaga reserve territory abuts directly on the railroad track. IE mohawk can crowd right up to the track as they did this past month, thus making train passage impossible ... while still insisting that legally they are merely enjoying their property rights on their own territory.

move the railway track north & immediately a swathe of non-mohawk canada appears to buffer the rail right-of-way. Mohawk trying to blocade would first have to cross this land.

moving the tracks & the highway at tyendinaga is a costly solution, but there have been enough mohawk blockades of both that could make it the cheaper solution.


edit: on 2nd thought i realize that the necessary land upon which to build new arcs of rail track & highway a short distance to the north ... this land might simpy not be available, ever. There might already be built up sections of old st-lawrence river community, commercial strips, main traffic arteries.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> as mentioned upthread, the SQ (Sureté du quebec, the provincial police force) do not go into kahnewake. The railway has obtained an injunction against the bridge protestors but it will be extremely challenging to enforce. A more peaceful way with less risk of loss of life from armed warriors might be to besiege/ignore them off the bridge, a control response that has been utillized in the past with the same kahnewake community. However it does take a long time. Long as in the mohawk could halt rail traffic on the bridge for several weeks or months.


If there is a court order, the police should enforce it.
if not we're just asking for vigilantism and escalation.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> If there is a court order, the police should enforce it.
> if not we're just asking for vigilantism and escalation.




like i said several times, the SQ (quebec provincial police) do not go onto kahnewake territory. Do not, as in never.

kahnewake has its own all-mohawk police force. They are called the Peacekeepers. The Peacekeepers have already said they will not enforce the CPR injunction against the railway bridge protestors.

i'm only speculating here but what's likely to unfold is that the protestors will be left to continue their barricade at the kahnewake entrance to the rail bridge. The situation is likely to drag on & on, with everyone including the protestors themselves gradually losing interest along the way.

eventually - even if the wet'suwet'en situation would not be resolved by that time - the bridge protestors at kahnewake are likely to give up. But the scenario could take weeks, even months.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> like i said several times, the SQ (quebec provincial police) do not go onto kahnewake territory. Do not, as in never.
> 
> kahnewake has its own all-mohawk police force. They are called the Peacekeepers. The Peacekeepers have already said they will not enforce the CPR injunction against the railway bridge protestors.
> 
> ...


If that police force is unwilling to enforce court orders, it's time to dissolve the police force.

There is a LOT of public anger at the polices continued failure to enforce laws. 

We have shortages of supplies, massive backlogs, and a lot of uncertainty for COVID-19. The government can't allow this situation to continue.

If we allow a small number of people take control like this, it will be a problem.

People are losing faith in our law enforcement and justice system.
Maybe it's time to get a new government.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

....some pretty strong language from the public safety minister:
The sentiment was echoed by Public Safety Minister Bill Blair.

"I think that's terribly unsafe and inappropriate,"

wow! tough talk...from a poloitician!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The onus is on the companies to negotiate settlements before construction. The police are not the companies enforcement force. No settlements = no construction.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The onus is on the companies to negotiate settlements before construction. The police are not the companies enforcement force. No settlements = no construction.


Not a single one of these blockades, particularly the commuter trains, aren't in any sort of negotiations I'm aware of. 

That's the point. 

Oh, and if there is a contract, they can breach it and take it to court. That's fine. 

But a court order, should be enforced. 
If the police don't want to enforce laws and court orders, they asking for vigilantes to take the law into their own hands.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

MrMatt said:


> Not a single one of these blockades, particularly the commuter trains, aren't in any sort of negotiations I'm aware of.
> 
> That's the point.


Not just that, but listen to some of the protesters say their issue is about native land being 'stolen'. WTF? They're being offered $$$$ to allow a right of way across their property.
This is what happens when the only source of information for some people is through social media.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Userkare said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > Not a single one of these blockades, particularly the commuter trains, aren't in any sort of negotiations I'm aware of.
> ...


Well the issue is these terrorists hate Canada, they just want an excuse.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Userkare said:


> Not just that, but listen to some of the protesters say their issue is about native land being 'stolen'. WTF? They're being offered $$$$ to allow a right of way across their property.



this is a reference to the situation from only one viewpoint. A narrow white man's viewpoint at that.

there are many sides to the wet'suwet'en story. Eight sides, ten sides, possibly more. Why don't you look for them? finding the pieces of the puzzle is just as interesting as observing flying squirrels.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I wonder sometimes if all the young people involved in protests fully understand the consequences of being arrested on criminal charges.

Perhaps if the police told them there was a court order that was going to enforced, and those who didn't comply would be arrested, charged and could be convicted and have a criminal record for life, it would help young people make the decision to leave peacefully on their own accord.

I remember a few years back, when the local university students held a big bash in neighborhoods around the school. It inevitably turned into a drunken mess every year.

The police cracked down and arrested people from videotapes that were taken. One young student was arrested for trespassing and damage to property.

I imagine that after leaving the cheering throng of fellow student hailing his bravery, the student soon discovered this adventure wasn't going to be as much fun as the party.

Sometimes during his arrest, fingerprinting, sitting in the police cells, and then being released on a promise to appear with a long list of conditions....that it may have started to sink in.

So he has to tell his parents, and they hire a lawyer and since the kid was videotaped the best they could do is try to mitigate the punishment so he didn't get a criminal record for life.

His lawyer pleaded his case with letters from his parents, friends of the family etc. etc....and said a criminal conviction would totally squash his chosen career path.

The kid received a criminal record, as a warning to others that kind of behavior wouldn't be tolerated. 

It is all good to be a protestor but you better be prepared to pay the consequences.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> this is a reference to the situation from only one viewpoint. A narrow white man's viewpoint at that.
> 
> there are many sides to the wet'suwet'en story. Eight sides, ten sides, possibly more. Why don't you look for them? finding the pieces of the puzzle is just as interesting as observing flying squirrels.


This isn't the wet'suwet'en story. This is about the illegal rail blockades.


WRT to the wet'suwet'en, they overwhelmingly want the project, they've just got a few noisy dissidents who don't like the project and are trying to stir up as much trouble as they can.

Western society is being paralyzed by a small amount of troublemakers.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> WRT to the wet'suwet'en, they overwhelmingly want the project, they've just got a few noisy dissidents who don't like the project and are trying to stir up as much trouble as they can.



you are so wrong!

mistermatt you've demonstrated with every post that you have no clue about indigenous history or indigenous facts or indigenous culture. You've posted ignorant nonsense time & time again.

you don't even appear to understand the legal issues which underlie the coastal gasLink/wet'suwet'en collision. You're incapable of grasping which factions are manipulating the truth. 

as for native warriors, student idealists, anarchists & others who keep staging railway, port & roadway hijackings in southern canada, it's of no help when you wag the finger & preach out condemnation like a nasty old-fashioned schoolteacher.

the young people are our future. We should be asking What is it that they are saying to us? clearly in southern canada the youth/native/anarchist faction is demonstrating that they will definitely rally to certain causes. We should be asking How can we communicate?

needless to say, we can't allow youth/native/anarchist to destroy. Where necessary the justice system should charge the more destructive actions. But we need to search for the page where we can all get together. This is what the federal gummint is doing.

nothing useful IMHO will ever come out of the kind of high-strung, hyper-anxious & brutal punishments that you preach.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> this is a reference to the situation from only one viewpoint. A narrow white man's viewpoint at that.
> 
> there are many sides to the wet'suwet'en story. Eight sides, ten sides, possibly more. Why don't you look for them? finding the pieces of the puzzle is just as interesting as observing flying squirrels.


Thank you, I am quite 'narrow'. I try to keep fit.

I actually did try to look into what the story was with the wet'suwet'en governance w.r.t. hereditary chiefs a few weeks back. It is a complex system where there appear to be 13 houses, or clans, each with a chief and sub-chief. I didn't find how the 5 hereditary chiefs were selected, but did see that there seemed to be some issues with who got to call themselves by certain hereditary names. There were apparently 2 women hereditary chiefs who favoured allowing the pipeline on their territory, but they were replaced by 2 men who didn't. There seems to be some brewing discontent among the houses over the selection of the hereditary chiefs, and their use of the hereditary names. The elected band council is a creation of the Indian Act and is responsible more or less for treaty related issues. Since the wet'suwet'en never ceeded their territory to treaty, they feel that the elected council has no power in this matter. It seems that they can't get a consensus amongst themselves, so the BC Gov't should have found another route. It looks good on Horgan; I hope he wears it in the next BC election.

If you listened to what JT said in a press conference, he indicated that he didn't want to meet directly with the 5 hereditary chiefs, and sort of insinuated that this would be an endorsement of sorts to their validity - that might anger the other houses that don't agree with the 5.

So how did I do? Since you apparently are the expert in wet'suwet'en culture, can you please fill me in on what I missed?

None of this, however, has anything to do with my statement about hipster protesters who say they are protesting the native lands being 'stolen' - when in fact the issue is whether they want to accept payment to cross their territory; nobody is stealing anything!

I never explicitly allowed Rogers or Bell to bury wires underground across my driveway, and don't receive a penny for it. Maybe I can go on social media and convince people to smash their phones in protest of Rogers and Bell stealing my property.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> This isn't the wet'suwet'en story. This is about the illegal rail blockades.
> 
> 
> WRT to the wet'suwet'en, they overwhelmingly want the project, they've just got a few noisy dissidents who don't like the project and are trying to stir up as much trouble as they can.
> ...


And they have the blessing of the RCMP.

RCMP commissionaire Brenda Lucki: "We have a specific policy that we have created for Indigenous blockades. Of course, enforcement is the last option."


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> this is a reference to the situation from only one viewpoint. A narrow white man's viewpoint at that.
> 
> there are many sides to the wet'suwet'en story. Eight sides, ten sides, possibly more. Why don't you look for them? finding the pieces of the puzzle is just as interesting as observing flying squirrels.


The only point of view they have provided is illegal blockades. Those won't convince me of anything except that they are lawbreakers with no valid argument.

Perhaps you can provide a coherent point of view rather than talking about flying squirrels and making unfounded racist attacks? But, I won't hold my breath waiting...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> I wonder sometimes if all the young people involved in protests fully understand the consequences of being arrested on criminal charges.
> 
> Perhaps if the police told them there was a court order that was going to enforced, and those who didn't comply would be arrested, charged and could be convicted and have a criminal record for life, it would help young people make the decision to leave peacefully on their own accord.
> 
> ...



sags have you ever heard of what's called the native justice system?

it's so effective in rehabilitating criminals & healing societies that have been injured that, occasionally, i hear of a white offender who has asked to be tried by a native justice system (i would have said "court" but that would smack of our police + court system) (the native justice system is nothing like that) (takes many articles plus books to describe it)

an important part of native justice is that punishment is worked out by everyone involved, including the victim(s). Some punishments include leaving the perpetrator out on the land with nothing except maybe a knife, for weeks on end. Of course the band does not cut him off, he has radio contact in case of emergency. But basically he has to find food, water & shelter for himself, in the wilderness, for several weeks.

this comes after extensive hearings before the clans with their elders. These can take more than one day. An important part of the justice ritual is that the victims tell their story & the perpetrator must listen & respond. 

afterwards, when they leave the perpetrator out on the land, the intention is that the ancestor spirits will come to him & help him to understand even more deeply, the wrong he has done to his entire people.

apparently the results, in terms of offenders who return to take up productive lives & never offend again, are so much better than the results from white man's jails.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

the globe & mail is doing a bang-up job of covering this watershed episode in canadian history. Watershed because so many critical issues are intersected. Watershed because the issues - environment, indigenous history - are sparking huge support, outrage against & general uproar across canada.

it's difficult to understand how hereditary kinship clan systems work. An observer really needs a post-doc in anthropology. Yet the squadron of talented globe journos who are covering all angles of the wet'suwet'en story are mastering all the details. The speed with which these scribes keep unearthing all the conflicting POVs in the story is breathtaking.

for example, globe has turfed out that 3 of the 5 hereditary wet'suwet'en chiefs are not actually wet'suwet'en people. Two are Gitxsan while the 3rd - the one who keeps himself so prominently in front of the media - "Woos" aka Frank Alec - is from the Babine Lake nation.

globe has also turfed out that, of the famous "20 elected band councils" who have signed benefit agreements with coastal gasLink, only five (5) are wet'suwet'en band councils. The other 15 yes-councils are from other nations.

globe has also published extensive profiles on wet'suwet'en hereditary sub-chiefs such as Rita George & Gary Naziel who oppose the 5 so-called hereditary chiefs & in fact say they are outsiders who have usurped power (very long story here which i'm not repeating) (but simple minds who are condemning one side or the other would be well-advised to study this ancient clan power struggle history first, before they speak out here in total ignorance) 

indigenous relations minister Carolyn Bennett, scheduled to meet with the hereditary chiefs today & tomorrow, is expert at navigating through the above-mentioned native factionalism. She doesn't get involved. "Those are issues that they - indigenous nations - will resolve for themselves," the minister likes to say.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Not everyone is in favor of the cycle of being slaves for the rest of their life & having their grandchildren be slaves to support reserves that are unable to hold them self up. Enough already, the government just keeps making matters worse by not treating everyone the same. No more money should go to the reserves. No more special tax treatments. Let them figure it out


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> you are so wrong!
> 
> mistermatt you've demonstrated with every post that you have no clue about indigenous history or indigenous facts or indigenous culture. You've posted ignorant nonsense time & time again.
> 
> ...


I'm capable of grasping the issues.
But the information I have is most people want the development, and some don't.
I assume that when the project was approved, all voices were considered and the final approval was made in compliance with applicable law.

But the losers didn't like that, so they've gone and taken extra-judicial action.


I can understand and accept all that.
So the issue was, was the approval given properly or not.
If it was, the project should go forward, if not they have some explaining on how that could happen.


As for the separate issue of Terrorism on the railway, that's a failure of law enforcement.
If I went and blocked the highway because I disapprove of something, I'd be arrested. 

The breakdown of law and order is why Canadians are losing faith in their democratic institutions, and why Canada is quickly becoming less a desirable investment destination.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I'm capable of grasping the issues.
> But the information I have is most people want the development, and some don't.
> I assume that when the project was approved, all voices were considered and the final approval was made in compliance with applicable law.
> 
> But the losers didn't like that, so they've gone and taken extra-judicial action.




you are not grasping the issues & you keep proving that you are an total ignoramus when it comes to first nation issues

the "information" you keep presenting is false

just look at your babble above about "applicable law." The fact is that the wet'suwet'en territory was never ceded to canada so what kind of law might be applicable is not even yet fully understood. How on earth could an antagonistic-to-native bully come along and decide in his ignorance that he has a mystical grasp of "applicable law" when nobody else does?

nobody even knows the statistical count of the number of wet'suwet'en people, let alone how many support the pipeline - obviously a good number - versus how many do not - again, obviously a good number.

* * * * * 

let's take the issue of your harsh condemnation of the mohawk rail bridge blockage at kahnewake. You demand that the Sureté du Quebec invade, arrest & charge the protestors or else you demand that the SQ be promptly abolished if they fail to obey your edict.

what you are entirely ignorant of is that kahnewake has its own police force called the Peacekeepers. The Peacekeepers are financially supported by both the federal government & the government of Quebec. There is a pact among the 2 levels of canadian government & the mohawk of kahnewake that the SQ & the Peacekeepers will cooperate together at all times.

the Peacekeepers are trained at a RCMP academy in saskatchewan. 

at present, with respect to the CPR railway bridge barricade, the mohawk are saying that communication & understanding between themselves & the SQ is excellent. In kahnewake itself, the Peacekeepers have said they will allow the barricade to stand. They have the right to make this decision.

the protesters at the bridge say they will continue the barricade until the wet'suwet'en chiefs in BC are satisfied with some kind of pipeline resolution that has still to be negotiated - assuming that negotiation is possible (imho the more stubborn parties are likely to be the wet'suwet'en chiefs, not the federal or BC gummints or coastal GL itself).

bridge blocking episodes have occurred in the past at kahnewake. Occupying the vehicular bridge or barricading the railway bridge (they are 2 separate bridges) is a tool that the kahnewake mohawk utilize when they believe that a grievance against white canada is extraordinarily important. The last episode was 30 years ago, over Oka.

typically, in the past, mohawk bridge occupations have resolved. Always peacefully, usually fairly quickly. 

* * * * *

please, i am asking yourself & a few others in this thread to kindly refrain from posting long strings of false fairy tales. You & these others appear to be maliciously trying to make a challenging situation far worse than it needs to be.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > I'm capable of grasping the issues.
> ...


I never said I have a full grasp of applicable law, because nobody has a full grasp of applicable law. It is effectively impossible to have a full grasp.

I said I believe the government approved it in accordance with the applicable law. 
That is a true statement. 


Yes, I harshly condemn these illegal protests. I am not calling for the SQ to do anything. I called for law enforcement to clear the illegal blockades.
That is also a true statement. 
It seems you are arguing with a position I never took.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Humble...

I am only slightly aware of how a native justice system would work, but in our courts there are offices for support for native people who are facing the courts.

It is also codified into the criminal code of Canada that native people receive special consideration for mitigating factors upon sentencing for crimes. 

I am not convinced the public would accept a separate system, except perhaps for the lowest level crimes. In any event, our prisons contain high numbers of indigenous people.

The public became outraged when a convicted murderess was transferred from prison to a healing lodge. The outrage reached the Minister and she was returned to prison.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mcclintic-healing-lodge-stafford-prison-1.4897105

Our justice system is broken and a native system may be better, but the public may not be ready to accept anything less than a system of retribution over rehabilitation.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I am all for investing alternative justice solutions.
However, I'm against race based systems. Sorry, but any system that treats people differently on race, gender, sex, religion or ethnic background differently is categorically unacceptable.



The issue in the Stafford case is a murderous pedophile in a high profile child sex case was moved there. 

Minor crimes I think would benefit from more rehabilitation, but some crimes, like hers, don't.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Oh and humble. 

Throughout my life I've experienced racial, gender, religious, ethic, as well as discrimination based on my ancestry.

As a native Canadian I feel that your use of "white man" as a pejorative is offensive. While I respect free speech, I believe hate speech is against forum rules.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> The public became outraged when a convicted murderess was transferred from prison to a healing lodge. The outrage reached the Minister and she was returned to prison.


i agreed with that one. She was not even a native person. She should never have been transferred to a healing lodge; justice best served in that case by keeping her in jail.


returning to native systems of justice, did i say they were "better" though. I think it's a good idea to be aware of both systems as well as prison/rehabilitation systems used in other countries (i'm sure our correctional services try to keep up) & to draw upon other ideas when they are particularly appropriate.

to the best of my knowledge, a "healing lodge" is not necessarily a part of native justice. For lack of space i left out the main part of the native system. Upon reflection, i believe it works best for lesser crimes such as theft, breaking & entering, & particularlly in cases of juvenile or first offender crime.

reportedly, here's how it works in traditional mohawk cultures. Please forgive that the following is only a rough idea, undoubtedly much is missing.

to judge a case, the villagers assemble in their clans (mohawk have 3 clans, Bear, Deer & Turtle.) The perpetrator & the victims, which include the victim's family& other involved parties, will play active roles . 

the actual crime itself is discussed in infinite detail. All the victims testify. Elders speak. 

typically, the Turtles sit apart but do not speak. Bear & Deer lead the discussion, which turns eventually to selection of an appropriate punishment. One that is to promote rehabilitation while at the same time offering as much help & healing to the injured as possible. Sometimes but not always, the punishment can include "going out on the land" for several weeks.

once a collective decision is reached, it's referred to the Turtle, who may accept or reject it. If rejected, the whole trial has to start all over again.

you can see that, if properly done, the emphasis is not upon revenge or harsh punishment. It's upon making the perpetrator understand how grave is the harm that he has done, not only to his victim, but also to the entire village where he hopes to live his life.

this is why i think it's appropriate for young or first offenders, although not for levels of crime such as murder, serial kiling, child molestation, etc.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> to judge a case, the villagers assemble in their clans (mohawk have 3 clans, Bear, Deer & Turtle.) The perpetrator & the victims, which include the victim's family& other involved parties, will play active roles .
> 
> the actual crime itself is discussed in infinite detail. All the victims testify. Elders speak.
> 
> ...


Okay, so in the case of the illegal rail blockades in Ontario,how would this work. 

They've victimized thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people, and done millions of dollars in damage.
Also they seem to feel this is an appropriate and effective strategy. 

How would this play out, particularly since many of the offenders refuse to acknowledge any behaviour that needs to be rehabilitated.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Yes, I harshly condemn these illegal protests. I am not calling for the SQ to do anything. I called for law enforcement to clear the illegal blockades.


how many times do you have to be told that the SQ is indeed "law enforcement." 

The Surete du quebec *is* the quebec provincial police force. It's the exact counterpart of the OPP. There is no other provincial law enforcement body in quebec.

once again - since you have so much trouble grasping facts - the Sureté du quebec has a stable & decades-old relationship with the Peacekeeper force of kahnewake. The SQ will not intervene in a case of controlled protest, which is what the present bridge blockade is.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I harshly condemn these illegal protests. I am not calling for the SQ to do anything. I called for law enforcement to clear the illegal blockades.
> ...



The FBI is also law enforcement, I'm not calling for them to intervene either.

I want the appropriate law enforcement agency to enforce the law. That's why I said law enforcement, I understand that different groups have different jurisdictions. 

If it is the Peacekeepers, they should do it, if it is the SQ they should do it.

What is so hard to grasp, there is a law, I want it enforced.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> What is so hard to grasp, there is a law, I want it enforced.


The issue is that humble thinks that some people are above the law. He/she won't say it clearly and tries to disguise it with a bunch of BS.

If you are native you are allowed to break the law. If you are white you are not allowed to break the law, and in fact, it's your fault that the natives are "forced" to break the law. That is the entirely of humble's argument.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > What is so hard to grasp, there is a law, I want it enforced.
> ...


The really sad thing is that most crime is intraracial/intra ethnic, and I'd argue intra social. 
Lack of enforcement in a group results in more crime against that group. 

Lax enforcement of laws hurts the very people you're letting off.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I want the appropriate law enforcement agency to enforce the law. That's why I said law enforcement, I understand that different groups have different jurisdictions.
> 
> If it is the Peacekeepers, they should do it, if it is the SQ they should do it.



we've already been through this. The Peacekeepers have said they're not going to do it. The premier of quebec has said quebec is against sending in the SQ.

typically in the case of kahnewake, the SQ would be reserved for the rarest case, which would be an armed uprising with bloodshed that the Peacekeepers could not handle. Such a thing is not going to happen in kahnewake right now.


one thing i observe about mistermatt's posts is that they are not grounded in reality. Instead, mistermatt constantly frets about what he thinks *ought* to be happening. There's a disconnect. It's not healthy.

a better way to proceed is to keep grounding, keep touching base with reality. This is what ottawa is doing with the twin related wet'suwet'en & blocade crises.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > I want the appropriate law enforcement agency to enforce the law. That's why I said law enforcement, I understand that different groups have different jurisdictions.
> ...


That's actually my point. 
The law ought to be enforced.
What is actually happening is law enforcement is letting lawlessness prevail.

Yes, the reality is a small group is violently opposing the rule of law. People are losing faith in the governments willingness to enforce the law. 

This is bad. This is a huge problem.


I can't believe you honestly feel violence is the way to resolve conflict.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Different laws for different folks. A Sudbury man was fined $125 for walking too close to the train tracks:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudb...-train-tracks-1.3079708?__vfz=medium=sharebar


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

Prairie Guy said:


> Different laws for different folks. A Sudbury man was fined $125 for walking too close to the train tracks:
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudb...-train-tracks-1.3079708?__vfz=medium=sharebar


_"A sign is probably a lot cheaper than to have two officers sit in a vehicle all day and giving tickets to people who probably don't know this law."

_Ummmmm.... A sign like this ? https://www.google.ca/maps/@46.5087...4!1sN0BY1LUsAPLx5KZPWycYnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

No sympathy for a guy who takes a baby in a stroller near rail tracks.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Userkare said:


> _"A sign is probably a lot cheaper than to have two officers sit in a vehicle all day and giving tickets to people who probably don't know this law."
> 
> _Ummmmm.... A sign like this ? https://www.google.ca/maps/@46.5087...4!1sN0BY1LUsAPLx5KZPWycYnw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
> 
> No sympathy for a guy who takes a baby in a stroller near rail tracks.


I agree that it's stupid. Perhaps had he created a blockade instead he could have avoided the ticket?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> I agree that it's stupid. Perhaps had he created a blockade instead he could have avoided the ticket?


Naw, he has to be an appointed dictator.. Then he'll be ok.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/wet-s...-think-their-message-is-being-heard-1.4833878
The thing that pisses me off, almost as much as the utter disregard for laws.

Is that the actual first nations involved appear to be generally FOR this development.
When a small number of elites get to decide the path of a population, bad things always seem to follow.

That's why democracy, as flawed as it is, is the best system we've got.
I guess the "hereditary chiefs" don't like democracy, and don't feel their people are capable of making decisions for themselves.

The fact that anyone thinks appointed dictators should be able to ignore the basic democratic human rights of a people, is offensive to me.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it's not really an agreement after 4 days this sunday, it's only an accord that they'll go on talking to each other.

hereditary chief Woos who also goes by Frank Alec says the wet'suwet'en people still oppose the pipeline. 

since in reality the wet'suwet'en are polarized on this issue, Woos must mean that the wet'suwet'en whom he & other hereditary chiefs represent, do still oppose the pipeline.

fed minister Bennett, BC minister Fraser & Woos are saying the "agreement" cannot be revealed at present because it still has to go to the wet-suwet'en people for approval (this last detail probably hammered out by the gummint ministers since they're fully aware that the native community is split over the pipeline)

just watch now, the media will be able to uncover the terms of the accord in a nothing of time. 


wild speculation here. I believe the greater part of the accord involves agreement over RCMP presence in the territory. Visibly armed riot control Mounties arresting native protestors on the Morice river logging road were the last & final outrage for all indigenous peoples in the region.

the mohawk of kahnewake, quebec, have offered to send some of their own fully-trained (also fully armed) Peacekeepers to maintain order in wet'suwet'en territory, if the Mounties withdraw.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> the mohawk of kahnewake, quebec, have offered to send some of their own fully-trained (also fully armed) Peacekeepers to maintain order in wet'suwet'en territory, if the Mounties withdraw.


Sorry but the Peacekeepers can't or won't even maintain order on the territories they have responsibility for now.

What makes you think they're capable or even willing to do so in BC?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Sorry but the Peacekeepers can't or won't even maintain order on the territories they have responsibility for now.
> 
> What makes you think they're capable or even willing to do so in BC?



there you go again, imposing your own quaint fictional idea of reality upon plain facts

misterMatt the truth is that you wouldn't know a Peacekeeper from a beekeeper, would you

like, mohawk Peacekeepers are a 40-year-old squadron trained by the RCMP themselves, who have the cooperation with & respect from all levels of gummint & police in eastern canada ... but you'd never heard of them until i mentioned their name, had you?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> there you go again, imposing your own quaint fictional idea of reality upon plain facts
> 
> misterMatt the truth is that you wouldn't know a Peacekeeper from a beekeeper, would you
> 
> like, mohawk Peacekeepers are a 40-year-old squadron trained by the RCMP themselves, who have the cooperation with & respect from all levels of gummint & police in eastern canada ... but you'd never heard of them until i mentioned their name, had you?


I am aware there are illegal rail blockades that the local law enforcement is refusing to address.
I do not think that a police force, which is unable to maintain order in their current area of responsibility, should take on additional responsibilities.

That's just common sense.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I think some people need to try doing some more research before they jump to conclusions and post opinions without really knowing what they are talking about.

Read this: https://globalnews.ca/news/6558792/coastal-gaslink-alternate-route/

Then read this: https://law.adelaide.edu.au/system/files/media/documents/2019-02/alr-37-2-ch06-oakes-davies.pdf

Some posters are all gung ho about 'legality' etc. but don't seem to understand that legality is not always in line with justice. Justice must be 'seen to be done' means seen by ALL and seen as not being biased for any reason.

It seems pretty clear that in this case, justice is not being seen by all as being unbiased. The 'law' may seem to be on the pipeline company's side but that isn't good enough.

The alternative route proposed will get the product in the pipeline from A to B. That's what the pipeline company wants to do isn't it? The alternative route will also get the Wetsuweten people who are opposed to the pipeline company's preferred route, what they want won't it? Both get what they want but oops, wait a minute, it will cost the pipeline company more MONEY. Nope, they don't want that so they try to use the law to get what they want. Make it a legal battle, that'll fix those pesky natives' wagon.

I think of where I live and what I would think if a pipeline company came along and said, 'we want to put a pipeline through your backyard and the backyards of your neighbours.' Some might say, 'OK, I'm fine with that' and some might say, 'No, I would rather you run it outside of my backyard.' There is no doubt in my mind that there would be those for and those against it, especially if some money were going to be paid. 

So say I am against it and I get told, 'it doesn't matter if you are against it, your neighbour is for it, so we are going to do it anyway.' You're never going to convince me that that is justice being done and seen to be done. Go around me and that will be justice seeing to be done.

This isn't the government being able to take my land through 'eminent domain'. This is a private company trying to take private land, not the government trying to take private land. https://mises.org/wire/canada-there...nment confers a,granted a license for theft.”

If the pipeline company cannot get MY agreement to put their line through my backyard, it does not matter whether my neighbours have agreed to let it go through their backyards or not. You need agreement from EACH owner and in this case, the 'owners' have not ALL agreed to it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> I think some people need to try doing some more research before they jump to conclusions and post opinions without really knowing what they are talking about.
> 
> Read this: https://globalnews.ca/news/6558792/coastal-gaslink-alternate-route/
> 
> ...


Talk about off topic. 
This is about the illegal rail blockades.

The pipeline, which was apparently agreed to before, and agreed to now, is a separate issue. 

Just because you might have an issue with a pipeline in your backyard, doesn't give someone halfway across the country justification to block someone else's driveway.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> The pipeline, which was apparently agreed to before, and agreed to now, is a separate issue.



still more fiction ^^

the above is not true at all. The wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs never agreed to any new pipeline. They still don't agree to any new pipeline. During & since yesterday's mini-summit news conference, chief Woos has repeatedly told the media that the hereditary chiefs are still opposing the CGL pipeline. 

evidently many wet'suwet'en support the anti-pipeline hereditary chiefs. On the other hand, many support the pro-pipeline band councils. The wet'suwet'en nation is totally split. 

the media have even dug up some interesting cases of divided marriages. Lucy Gagnon, for example, administers her band council office & supports the pipeline. But she's married to Alphonse Gagnon, one of the five hereditary chiefs who are most intensely opposed to the pipeline.

gagnon says the way she & husband keep their marriage going is to never discuss the pipeline issue. "I don't need war in my own home," she says.


it's true that, in southern canada, black flag anarchist groups have branded themselves onto the indigenous rights movement. I spotted them first about 5 years ago but undoubtedly the black shirts had been infiltrating native groups long before that. I doubt that genuine elders in any indigenous community are welcoming them, though.

many spontaneous rail & port blockades in southern canada were anarchist manifestations, not native manifestations, although the two longest-lasting were indeed mohawk rail barricades.

.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> many spontaneous rail & port blockades in southern canada were anarchist manifestations, not native manifestations, although the two longest-lasting were indeed mohawk rail barricades.
> 
> .


The fact that law enforcement encourages this behaviour is the problem. 

They encourage it by harassing and threatening those who want to remove the blockade or even report on them

Basically we have a racism problem. 
Certain groups seem to violate the law with impunity. 
This just incites them to become more lawless, and makes other groups more distrustful of them. 

Most blockades didn't start until they realized they wouldn't face consequences from law enforcement. 
Now some Canadians are seeing certain groups in a negative light. 

This whole illegal blockade mess has been bad for Canada, but particularly bad for Fist Nations who will suffer from a residual lack of trust and investment in their communities.

Maybe you don't care about First Nations people, but I do, just like I care about every other Canadian.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

never seen this trend mentioned in cmf forum but there's new growth happening in the radical indigenous separatist movement.

Kahentinetha Horn of kahnewake summed up the new radicalism last week to the montreal Gazette:



> “It’s over for Canada. It’s finished,” [Horn] said in an interview. “They tried to kill us all, but we’re still here. It’s our land. All of it. We own everything.”


hearing the same 3 little words from a pleasant-faced lady who heads the AFN of ontario. "We own canada."

land, or rather the lack of it for reserve natives, is a big grievance these days. I hardly know of a reserve in eastern canada that does not have a historical claim showing that its geographical size today is far smaller than the region originally allocated to its forefathers.

tyendinaga, kahnewake, kanesatake & six nation territories are among the reserves demanding that increased square kilometres should be added back to their geographies, as per historical maps & documents they possess.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> never seen this trend mentioned in cmf forum but there's new growth happening WW2 the radical indigenous separatist movement.
> 
> Kahentinetha Horn of kahnewake summed up the new radicalism last week to the montreal Gazette:
> 
> ...


Extremists on both sides exist. 
It's just as silly to say first Nations have no rights as it is to suggest that no land transfers of any type ever occurred. 

We need a real discussion, we can't let the extremists take control of the narrative.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> hearing the same 3 little words from a pleasant-faced lady who heads the AFN of ontario. "We own canada."


I heard that there will be a change to the lyrics of our national anthem..... "Oh Canada, our home on native land".


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

you can see why the relationship between land-rich northern nations who have never ceded their territories & crowded land-poor southern reserves stretches like an umbilical cord across canada.

to over-simplify, one could say that the northern nations have land but no money, while the southern nations have money but no land.

warming climate change is making/will make those vast isolated northern territories more habitable & more vital with increased population.

i'm just looking out 100 years or so. Assuming mankind lasts that long. I'm wondering whether indigenous sovereign nation separation is a future that could actually break up canada, perhaps in the next century. 

indigenous nations, for example, have coastlines & access to tidewater. The northwest passage is becoming navigable.

whereas landlocked southern alberta separation is a fantasy voiced mainly by old-timers who haven't yet grasped that the sun is setting on their principal industry.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The native groups have a window of opportunity to deal with a more conciliatory Liberal government right now.

They would be well advised to move forward in haste to secure agreements, even if they fall short of 100% satisfaction.

A future government might well consider everything already long since settled and dismiss the native claims out of hand.

For starters, the native groups need to form one voice to represent them in discussions. They don't appear to even agree with each other.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The native groups have a window of opportunity to deal with a more conciliatory Liberal government right now.
> 
> They would be well advised to move forward in haste to secure agreements, even if they fall short of 100% satisfaction.
> 
> ...


Each First Nation is independent, though they may have some common concerns. 

Secondly they don't always have clear governance systems that can negotiate.
In addition some feel that any leadership that doesn't respect their basic human rights isn't legitimate. 
For example the pipeline is a conflict between the elected government, and split opinions between some of the hereditary chiefs in the area.

Some will say only the elected councils are legitimate. 
Some say the hereditary chiefs are the legitimate authority. 
The further problem is that it is likely impossible to get unanimous agreement amongst any large group of people, and you basically arrive at an impasse. 

Canadians are generally ok and appreciate that our elected officials are empowered to act on our behalf. 
The first Nations don't necessarily have such representation.

The term first Nations is important, as it helps frame the discussion, the Canadian government is dealing with many independent groups, not just a single group. As independent nations they don't necessarily consent to being represented by parties from a separate nation who may not have their interests in mind.


Then dump in a lot of distrust and racism, and you have a big mess. 
There is racism in both directions, I find the pejorative "white mans" deeply offensive for example.
Insisting that the first Nations act as a single group is as ignorant as expecting Canada to just "pick one official language."


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Hereditary chiefs, is that like a royal family? Someone should tell them the Divine Right of Kings went out 200 years ago. Of the Royal Families that survive, their function is purely ceremonial or symbolic.

If one of these Hereditary Chiefs were to be elected by popular vote that would confirm that they speak for the people, otherwise, whoever won the election is in charge. Just as in England you have an elected Prime Minister and an un elected Queen, but everyone knows the Prime Minister and Parliament have the real power. If neither had the last word nothing would ever get done.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Hereditary chiefs, is that like a royal family? Someone should tell them the Divine Right of Kings went out 200 years ago. Of the Royal Families that survive, their function is purely ceremonial or symbolic.
> 
> If one of these Hereditary Chiefs were to be elected by popular vote that would confirm that they speak for the people, otherwise, whoever won the election is in charge. Just as in England you have an elected Prime Minister and an un elected Queen, but everyone knows the Prime Minister and Parliament have the real power. If neither had the last word nothing would ever get done.


Personally I think the UN is a disfunctional mess, but since the lefties love to appeal to them as some grand authority.

https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
Article 21.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Hereditary chiefs, is that like a royal family? Someone should tell them the Divine Right of Kings went out 200 years ago. Of the Royal Families that survive, their function is purely ceremonial or symbolic.
> 
> If one of these Hereditary Chiefs were to be elected by popular vote that would confirm that they speak for the people, otherwise, whoever won the election is in charge. Just as in England you have an elected Prime Minister and an un elected Queen, but everyone knows the Prime Minister and Parliament have the real power. If neither had the last word nothing would ever get done.


Imagine if the mayor of a small town of 1500 people (like the average reserve) was drawing a tax free $100,000 salary and had the power to decide who got the limited government paid for housing and how the millions of government funding was distributed. Also imagine that they never would have to account to the federal government how most of the money was spent.

If you were a chief, why would you want to change things?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

there's no way all members of the wet'suwet'en nation can agree on a new form of government for themselves - one that will include & balance the interests of the hereditary clan system & the elected band councils - by march 13th 2020.

absolutely no way. Two weeks is not even enough time, in winter, to organize local assemblies for discussion. Feast halls. Call them what you will.

the fed & provincial gummints must have known this. What they did, with their mini-summit meeting last weekend, was 1) initiate the process of confirming aspects of Delgamuukw, a process that could take years; also 2) on a practical level, Bennett & Fraser negotiated another whack of time during which coastal gasLink could proceed unhindered with construction of the pipeline.

how long a whack of peace time, nobody knows. Apparently the hereditary chiefs are currently even tolerating the continued presence of RCMP on the morice river territory.

this could actually be a good strategy, from coastal gasLink's pov. Two steps forward, kerfuffle, pause, negotiate, another two steps forward, new kerfuffle but with considerably less strength, pause, repeat.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> there's no way all members of the wet'suwet'en nation can agree on a new form of government for themselves - one that will include & balance the interests of the hereditary clan system & the elected band councils - by march 13th 2020.
> 
> absolutely no way. Two weeks is not even enough time, in winter, to organize local assemblies for discussion. Feast halls. Call them what you will.
> 
> ...


The first Nations already have elected councils. 
Usurping the will of the people with unelected chieds is a violation of basic human rights.
The government of Canada should not recognize any government or leadership that exists in direct violation of the peoples human rights.
It is important to note that in Canada in accordance with basic human rights, all governmental functions and authority are chosen by the people or their freely elected representatives.

Canada has a strong history of respecting human rights internationally. Let's continue this by treating First Nations at least as fairly as those in far off lands.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Back to the original topic, the whole pipeline approval process has nothing to do with native blockades.
I have no interest in illegal rail blockades, if the purpose is to push for recognition of illegitimate governments, that's even worse.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> The first Nations already have elected councils.
> Usurping the will of the people with unelected chieds is a violation of basic human rights.
> The government of Canada should not recognize any government or leadership that exists in direct violation of the peoples human rights.




talk about preposterous ignorance. The federal & BC gummints have just negotiated further steps in enforcing & expanding Delgamuukw (a 1997 supreme court of canada decision that recognized indigenous sovereign rule for the gitxsan & wet'suwet'en peoples) 

another 2012 supreme court decision under chief justice beverley mcLachlin reinforced aspects of Delgamuukw. As this thread has noted, from time to time supreme court justices have written on the extraordinarily complicated topic of hereditary sovereign nations' rights within a federal canadian structure.

at this point in time, there's no room for nagging "shoulds" & "oughts." The wet'suwet'en people are going to speak. Not all can possibly be said by the 13th day of march this year, but there's obviously a good range of opinion in the territory. Everything from business cooperation & linkup to coastal Gas to spiritual resistance.

the least we can do is listen with respect.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > The first Nations already have elected councils.
> ...


ignorance? From the person who refuses to spell government correctly? 

It not ignorance on my part. It's simply a principled stand in defence of human rights.

You can warble all you want about tradition and laws, rulings and opinions. 

Human rights first. 
I categorically reject any system that conflicts with basic human rights. 


Of course you don't care about human rights or first Nations, and you are free to have those opinions.
However your attitude that the first Nations people are somehow undeserving of human rights is disgusting.

I've heard from many people that some peoples "aren't ready for democracy". I find such statements arrogant and offensive. 

Many oppressors wish to deprive their opposition as less than human, and deny them their rights. I have to ask, for someone so informed, why do you hate First Nations people so much?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

there have to be numerous other unceded territories in the northern parts of various provinces

take quebec for example. Northern quebec is chock full of valuable mines & timber. The region, known as Ungava, extends to the arctic ocean, which will soon be fully navigable. 

many are aware that climate change will likely open up this region. In fact extensive logging got underway a couple decades ago. North central quebec is already criss-crossed by thousands of logging roads plus a number of adventure tourists ... & the local indigenous nations are totally steamed about this. Their wildlife & fish are fleeing, in some districts have already fled.

the James Bay Agreement with the Cree nation governs only a small geographical part of quebec. The rest of vast Ungava is unspoken for, i believe.

what's going on in northern alberta, manitoba, saskatchewan, ontario? any unceded territories up there?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> It not ignorance on my part. /quote]
> 
> 
> mistermatt you are one of the most pathetically ignorant parties in cmf forum each:
> ...


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> MrMatt said:
> 
> 
> > It not ignorance on my part. /quote]
> ...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> humble_pie said:
> 
> 
> > You're the one who is trying to deny First Nations people their basic human rights.
> ...


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Another pullout influenced by the blockades.

_Warren Buffett, one of the world’s most influential investors, has pulled out of a proposed $9 billion liquefied natural gas project in Quebec over concerns about railway blockades and infrastructure challenges._

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Another pullout influenced by the blockades.
> 
> _Warren Buffett, one of the world’s most influential investors, has pulled out of a proposed $9 billion liquefied natural gas project in Quebec over concerns about railway blockades and infrastructure challenges._
> 
> ltr


The sad thing is that these massive investments disproportionately impact First Nations peoples.
The illegal actions of a few protestors has caused massive damage to our economy, particularly our more vulnerable members. 
It's time for the government to act like we are in fact a nation that respects the rule of law.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Berkshire refused to comment, so it is all speculation for the reasons they withdrew from the plan. 

They possibly considered the lack of viability in the Teck project as an indicator of problems.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

These projects cost enormous capital, and the viability in a fossil fuel industry decades into an uncertain future, is causing companies to put their money elsewhere.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Berkshire refused to comment, so it is all speculation for the reasons they withdrew from the plan.
> 
> They possibly considered the lack of viability in the Teck project as an indicator of problems.


Actually, the spokeswoman said it was due to the "current Canadian political context"
With ongoing legal opposition and illegal protests against pipelines, as well as a vocal anti resource development PM and government, we can be pretty sure what the political context is.

Unless of course you think she was lying.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> These projects cost enormous capital, and the viability in a fossil fuel industry decades into an uncertain future, is causing companies to put their money elsewhere.


Nope...they WANTED to invest here but illegal blockades and a weak PM who did nothing about it convinced them to take their business elsewhere. This isn't the first time and won't be the last time that it happens. Why would anyone want to invest in Canada when they know that a few thugs can shut them down and the authorities won't do a thing?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> Another pullout influenced by the blockades.
> 
> _Warren Buffett, one of the world’s most influential investors, has pulled out of a proposed $9 billion liquefied natural gas project in Quebec over concerns about railway blockades and infrastructure challenges._




alas the above ^^ is more falsification. The article is misleading. The headline is a bald-faced lie, although it's typical of the type frequently published by right-wing postMedia.

neither Warren Buffett nor berkshire has offered one word as to why berkshire is not participating in Energie Saguenay's decades-old dream to build an LNG deepwater terminal on the st-lawrence river near tadoussac. Not a word. Not even a comma.

it was a canadian spokesperson who added the reference to "political context." Stephanie Fortin, director of public affairs for canadian company Energie Saguenay, unfortunately took it upon herself to add the two qualifying words, according to the globe & mail.

why ms Fortin decided she had the right to speak for US conglomerate berkshire hathaway is unknown. But speak out rashly & stupidly, she did.

meanwhile, total silence from buffett & from berkshire. Berkshire is a longtime successful in canadian enterprises. As far as the public knows today, berkshire is not planning to invest in new gas pipeline deals anywhere on the planet, due to the unstable & challenged nature of the global O&G industry today.

here are the facts from the globe & mail:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...ps-out-of-energie-saguenay-investment-citing/


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Let's be clear, the spokesperson said, on the record, that the political context is why the investor withdrew.
Unless you present information to the contrary we have no reason to believe she is lying to us.

Does this person have a history of lying? Is there any evidence she's lying in this case?
Does the statement she made appear congruent with the situation? 

Based on all that I believe her.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> alas the above ^^ is more falsification. The article is misleading. The headline is a bald-faced lie, although it's typical of the type frequently published by right-wing postMedia.
> 
> ......................
> 
> here are the facts from the globe & mail:


hehe, from now on I'll try and not confuse the true _facts _that come from the left media and ignore the false statements from the right...

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> humble_pie said:
> 
> 
> > alas the above ^^ is more falsification. The article is misleading. The headline is a bald-faced lie, although it's typical of the type frequently published by right-wing postMedia.
> ...


CBC and the Globe article linked to both say that the reason was the political context. 
The spokeswoman was actually quoted in the Globe article. 
Apparently far right media like the CBC and Globe and Mail simply can't be trusted to report a quote accurately. 

I am very skeptical of the media (see posts on use of CFR), but to suggest they are resorting to falsified quotes to push their agenda is alleging actual malice. 
That's a particularly bold claim.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> humble_pie said:
> 
> 
> > You're the one who is trying to deny First Nations people their basic human rights.
> ...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> Let's be clear, the spokesperson said, on the record, that the political context is why the investor withdrew.
> Unless you present information to the contrary we have no reason to believe she is lying to us.



the lying parties are the parties trying to pretend that the statements doubting the "political context" for Energie Saguenay came either from warren buffett or else from berkshire hathaway.

as mentioned previously, neither buffett nor berkshire have said anything about the Saguenay. Not one word.

it's even possible that the rumour buffett or berkshire "might" be interested in investing in the tired old idea of a deepwater LNG terminal on the st-lawrence river is a 100% made-in-canada rumour. I wonder if buffett himself has even heard of this particular use of his name? certainly both jason kenney & francois legault are pushy enough to float such a rumour.

as already mentioned above, the spokesperson doubting the "political context" & thus inappropriately attempting to put words into buffett's mouth which he never uttered, is canadian stephanie fortin from canadian company Energie Saguenay.

obviously mlle Fortin has an agenda. Just like the O&G old-timers who will use any ruse to pretend that the global collapse in energy prices is somehow the unique fault of tiny canada & specifically the fault of the current liberal government.

it's time for the O&G old-timers to wake up to 2020. All over the planet - on every single continent - the O&G industry is in deep, deep, deep, deep trouble. It's the *R* word.


* * * * *

dreams about a deepwater LNG terminal on the south shore of the st-lawrence river - across from tadoussac, where the saguenay river empties into the st-laurent - have been around for at least a couple decades. 

in a former rendering of the idea several years ago, such a LNG port would have handled fracked gas from new england in the US, together with gas from wells just south of montreal city. That plan got nixed.

a subsequent rendering of the same idea had an early version of Energy East built along the south shore of the st-lawrence as far as cacouna (across from tadoussac). This dual-purpose pipeline would have carried both gas & alberta bitumen.

at cacouna, the bitumen pipe would have segued off from the gas pipe & turned southeast, heading for the new brunswick border & the port of st-John. But early on, TRP itself nixed that plan & instead promoted a bitumen only pipeline more or less as the crow flies from montreal east to new brunswick.

there was massive, substantial opposition in quebec to both of the above ideas. The whales were part of ithe opposition. The st-lawrence river at tadoussac is the breeding ground for the beluga whale colony.

there was other massive opposition to a deepwater LNG terminal for the saguenay river. Right now it's a dormant idea. 

young voters in quebec do not support current premier francois legault. He's kind of a temporary placeholder who represents a baby boomer generation of retirees. Younger voters are heading to the renascent parti quebecois, which is no longer seeking separation from canada. Young quebec voters have much in common with the NDP, the greens & the ottawa liberals.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Well, humble can make all the excuses in the world to defend his view, but the fact is that billions in investment was lost due to a few thugs that were allowed to shut down the economy with impunity. This wasn't the first time, and it certainly won't be the last time.

I'm 58 and retired with a pension so I'll be fine, but if I was 20 and concerned about my economic future I'd move out of Canada and leave people like humble to try to survive on their own in their fantasy socialist paradise.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Prairie Guy said:


> I'm 58 and retired with a pension so I'll be fine



no, you're not 58 & retired w a pension

better give it up bass player aka tygrus aka prairie guy. Everyone knows who you are. It's a pretty bleak picture.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Petronas cancelled a $36 billion LNG project in 2017, citing a weak future business outlook. Fossil fuel companies are finding it difficult to raise investor cash.

Berkshire sold some assets and bought some other stocks. It looks like Berkshire did the math and didn't see a sufficient return on their capital.

Berkshire hasn't commented on their decision and don't appear interested in offering any reasons for their decision. 

Alberta's Premier Jason Kenny has hinted at using taxpayer dollars and public service pension fund capital to pay for projects, because investor interest just isn't there.

These are huge capital intensive projects that require a 50 year payback horizon. Investors are questioning if these projects will still be around in 50 years.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> the lying parties are the parties trying to pretend that the statements doubting the "political context" for Energie Saguenay came either from warren buffett or else from berkshire hathaway.
> 
> as mentioned previously, neither buffett nor berkshire have said anything about the Saguenay. Not one word.



Berkshire didn't issue a public statement, but they assuredly told the company they pulled the investment from why they were doing that.

There are 2 possibilities

1. When they pulled out, they were clear about their concerns, they want to keep the door open in the future if other projects present themselves. The spokeswoman then relayed a concise statement on the reasons.
That is all logical and reasonable.

2. Berkshire said absolutely nothing, and provided no reason why they pulled the project. The spokeswoman then stood at a press conference and lied about the reasons.
This would damage future business relationships.
I don't think this is likely.

Looking at those I think the first option is much more logical, reasonable and believable.
The second option doesn't make any sense.


Finally, Warren and Charlie likely had nothing to do with the details of the deal. They hire good people to do the hard detailed work for them.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

my bad. The proposed deepwater LNG terminal won't be built upon the fair southern shore of the st-lawrence river after all.

they were planning to build up the saguenay fjord almost as far as lac st-jean, at what is presently a small split maritime facility partly located near the town of la Baie & partly located - this is the deepwater pier i believe - at a riverside settlement named la grande Anse.

ships loaded with liquified natural gas would then ply up & down the 54 nautical miles of the magnificent saguenay fjord, a world-famous tourist magnet of high mountains & pristine waters where the colonies of dolphins, beluga & humpback whales live & play. 

the indigenous atikamekw people of nearby wemotaci have already said they're not having a gas pipeline on their territory. Hundreds of quebec MDs have protested against shipping LNG through the picture-perfect fairytale saguenay fjord. The enviro protest movement hasn't even begun to complain yet.

afaik, smaller tankers able to navigate the sagueney fjord might not be best suited to cross the atlantic ocean. Therefore i'm asking myself whether the plans include transshipping the highly flammable compressed gas from small saguenay tankers into larger oceangoing tankers from a bigger terminal to be built at, say, cacouna. 

then there's the shrunken market for LNG for the present & for the near future. World is experiencing a glut of fossil fuels. On the eastern coast of north america, LNG is easily available from established US export terminals.

this is going to be one aitch of a nightmare story. You were thinking that RCMP locking up a few protestors on wet'suwet'en territory in BC was bad enough? saguenay will be worse, if plans go ahead to build it.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> no, you're not 58 & retired w a pension
> 
> better give it up bass player aka tygrus aka prairie guy. Everyone knows who you are. It's a pretty bleak picture.


Yes, I am 58 and have been retired for almost 5 years now. If I prove it, will you promise to leave the forum? 

I don't know who those people are that you keep accusing me of being. I do play some guitar...was there a "guitar player" on the forum in the past? Perhaps they also proved you wrong repeatedly and you still haven't gotten over it?


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

sags said:


> Petronas cancelled a $36 billion LNG project in 2017, citing a weak future business outlook. Fossil fuel companies are finding it difficult to raise investor cash.


Weak future business outlook heavily caused by the rest of the world leaving Canada in the dust. Australia alone in 2019 exported 77 MT of LNG, more than 5X the capacity of the first phase of LNG Canada.

https://www.jwnenergy.com/article/2020/1/australia-takes-crown-worlds-top-lng-exporter/

Teck's Frontier has taken 9 years and still haven't gotten a final approval to begin construction, Norway found a giant oil field (Johan Sverdrup) in 2010 and had it operational 9 years later.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> this is going to be one aitch of a nightmare story. You were thinking that RCMP locking up a few protestors on wet'suwet'en territory in BC was bad enough? saguenay will be worse, if plans go ahead to build it.


You're right, it will be a nightmare.
I'd bet that they won't lock up ANY protestors, at least for a few weeks or months.
It fits into Trudeaus anti-development agenda, rather than reject the projects outright, he'll let the protestors block it.

This is really going to damage the ability of Canada to attract investment.
Look at what the no arrest laws have done to California cities.

We have this on a national scale, as long as you're protesting jobs and investment.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Our PM cancelled yet another world tour/vacation to tell us that he caved in to a few unelected dictators and their thugs and then told the rest of Canada that he was powerless to do anything.

This is the very same guy who shut down a criminal investigation into his actions. He can do THAT but he can't stop a few bullies from shutting down our economy.

And once again the media refused to hold him accountable.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

The first call is actually up to the Provincial Premiers, or their Attorneys General. In Quebec and Ontario it is the OPP and Surete de Auebec. The army and the RCMP have to be invited in by the Provinepce.

And how do you cover off thousands of kms or rail lines across Canada with various choke points? You cannot.

Even if the army and police forces were called in this would only be resolved one way. Through negotiation.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

ian said:


> The first call is actually up to the Provincial Premiers, or their Attorneys General. In Quebec and Ontario it is the OPP and Surete de Auebec. The army and the RCMP have to be invited in by the Provinepce.
> 
> And how do you cover off thousands of kms or rail lines across Canada with various choke points? You cannot.
> 
> Even if the army and police forces were called in this would only be resolved one way. Through negotiation.


I'm all for negotiating, however once you start attacking our national infrastructure, we have a law enforcement issue.

That's the problem, when attacking infrastructure is seen as a valid way to get what you want on a poltiical issue, we're encouraging terrorism, and that's a serious problem.
Right now it's a small number of crazy people who just want to cause trouble, but what about when some nontrivial portion of the country follows their lead.


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

ian said:


> And how do you cover off thousands of kms or rail lines across Canada with various choke points? You cannot.


You do it by ensuring that punishment is so swift and severe that nobody is willing to risk attacking it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

accord1999 said:


> You do it by ensuring that punishment is so swift and severe that nobody is willing to risk attacking it.


What? enforce the law?
But, that's cruel!


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Enforcing the law rolls off the tongue very easily. The reality is there is a world of difference between catching, charging, going through the court process, the appeals processes and the sentencing procedure. 

It is not an arrest them, put them in jail, and it is all over..the trains are rolling again. This may be where public opinion is at the moment however it does not represent the reality of the situation. Andrew Scheer’s comments were for public consumption. I doubt very much whether the clear thinkers on that side of the House are in agreement with such a simplistic and dangerous approach.

Just one more reason why the sooner he goes the better it will be for that Party.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

So Trudeau is a clear thinker by legitimizing attempts to set trains on fire? I guess Canada is broken.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

ian said:


> It is not an arrest them, put them in jail, and it is all over..the trains are rolling again.


Yes, it's really that simple. When the thugs that block rail lines are all in jail the trains are rolling again. Who else will block the lines? You? sags? james?


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Not saying that Trudeau is a clear thinker. Just saying that the arrest and locked em up approach will not work in the long run. Even worse, it willsimply inflame the situation. This is not about one blockade. It could be about many, changing on a regular basis from place to place. Just try to get the authorities up to Hornepayne or some where in the Fraser Canyon before the natives disappear and hit another main line. That is the reality 

The late Jim Prentice essentially split with Haroer’s team and Cabinet in 2009 because he believed that no pipeline could be built without the agreement with, and financial participation of the First Nations. He felt any other way was doomed to failure. Alas, that message did not match the public stance of his Party and the industry.

His wisdom has been proven to be correct. Perhaps if both sides of the Commons had listened to his wisdom and learned from his experience we would be in a better place today vis a vis pipelines and our relationship with our First Nations.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Yup...don't arrest thugs because it will "inflame the situation". Let the terrorists call the shots. I'm sure everything will work out just fine :biggrin:


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

ian said:


> Not saying that Trudeau is a clear thinker. Just saying that the arrest and locked em up approach will not work in the long run. Even worse, it willsimply inflame the situation. This is not about one blockade. It could be about many, changing on a regular basis from place to place. Just try to get the authorities up to Hornepayne or some where in the Fraser Canyon before the natives disappear and hit another main line. That is the reality
> 
> The late Jim Prentice essentially split with Haroer’s team and Cabinet in 2009 because he believed that no pipeline could be built without the agreement with, and financial participation of the First Nations. He felt any other way was doomed to failure. Alas, that message did not match the public stance of his Party and the industry.
> 
> His wisdom has been proven to be correct. Perhaps if both sides of the Commons had listened to his wisdom and learned from his experience we would be in a better place today vis a vis pipelines and our relationship with our First Nations.


I agree, but we can't expect 100% agreement.
With a country of nearly 40 million people, unanimous agreement is impossible.

We have to let the democratically elected representatives make a decision and follow that.
There are a LOT of people very unhappy with the actions of the Trudeau government, but they aren't lashing out because they feel that the system is mostly fair, and they simply lost.
This only works as long as people have trust in the institutions, ensuring we trust them is the number one job of the government.


I understand that hit and run terrorist attacks are a problem. But when people see this as an effective way to get what they want, they will do it.
Also that it's very lopsided, it only takes a small number of people to cause billions in economic damage.
When you look at impoverished First Nations communities, you only have to look at the billions in projects being cancelled due to illegal protests.

The thing is the people who want to invest, build and improve can't resort to simply burining it all down.
There is a certain feeling of unfairness, the approvals were gotten, and a small number of dissidents who never approved of the project, or anarchists who just want to cause trouble can kill it.

If a foreign actor wanted to cause damage to Canada, supporting domestic terrorist groups in politially sensitive areas is a shockingly effective way.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't think the issues are that complex at their core.

Should companies have the right to build whatever they want on land they don't control. Should the government provide support for the company view with eminent domain laws ?

The native people have control over the land and a pipeline wants to build on their land.

The native people offered an alternative route for the pipeline that they believed would have less environmental impact on their land. 

The company refused, claiming the environmental impact on an alternative route would have been greater. Perhaps it would but that decision was up to the native's to make.

The government should halt all construction until the company reaches an agreement with the natives.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I don't think the issues are that complex at their core.
> 
> Should companies have the right to build whatever they want on land they don't control. Should the government provide support for the company view with eminent domain laws ?
> 
> ...


Well you skipped over the actual topic of this thread.
1. Should people be allowed to illegally block and tamper with infrastructure?
No
The other ones are pretty obvious.
2. Should companies do whatever they want? No, and nobody is suggesting that.
3. Should native people have control over their land? Yes, everyone supports that.

Really, they need to deal with 2 separate issues.
1. Enforce the law, the illegal action needs to stop.

2. The First Nations governance disaster needs to get resolved.
It is insane that after the elected representatives approve something, some unelected troublemakers can step in and say "no".

I really feel for the First Nations who are being disproportionally hurt by their lack of democratic rights. 
I think the Canadian government really needs to get serious, and only deal with the freely elected representatives.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

The largest investment company in the world has let it be known that Canada is a place they where no longer feel comfortable doing business. Trudeau's actions have shown that he would rather let an unelected dictator and convicted wife beater call the shots.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> I don't think the issues are that complex at their core.
> 
> Should companies have the right to build whatever they want on land they don't control. Should the government provide support for the company view with eminent domain laws ?
> 
> ...




sags i do appreciate that you are one of the few on here who is not fiercely & promiscuously racist.

however i also do take issue with your view on the alternate pipeline route.

former CEO Rick Gateman detailed both routes at length in the letter - cited far upthread by dubmac - which he wrote to the OW in 2014. Evidently there were numerous other CGL overtures to the wet'suwet'en from 2012 through 2017. However no representative of the hereditary clan system - certainly not their formal office known as the OW - apparently ever replied.

gateman's letter included a detailed map of both routes, which i've studied.

the "alternate route" is a much smaller existing pipeline, only 10 inches in diameter. It was built to deliver natural gas to four towns in the central/northwestern zone of wet'suwet'en territory. Houston, smithers, burns lake & a 4th town. 

because this pipeline had to angle quite far north, then west, then south again in order to serve those 4 towns, its loop is considerably longer than the new proposed coastal gasLink pipe, which cuts across central wet'suwet'en territory more or less as the crow flies.

the very proximity of the old 10" pipeline to the biggest 4 towns in the territory is another reason not to construct the new pipeline in the old right-of-way, gateman wrote in his letter. The old pipeline also crosses twice the number of salmon-fishing rivers as the new.

the new coastal gasLink pipeline is a different beast entirely. Its diameter is 48 inches, ie considerably more than four times the size when you configure casings, reinforcements & support structures.

different engineering considerations would apply to such a monster pipe. Some that occur to a non-engineer include depth of bedrock, gradient slope of valleys & mountain passes, how susceptible is surface soil to erosion & mudflow during spring melt.

but an engineering team would work with many more terrain considerations & variables than the few suggested in preceding paragraph & the result is the present route for the new CGL pipeline. AFAIK it's far too late to change this route.

in 2015 gateman went on record saying that a pipeline builder is always willing to consider alternate route suggestions early in the design phase, but he said that switching routes at late dates is close to impossible. It's worth mentioning again that evidently the wet'suwet'en did not make any alternate route requests during those early planning years.

IMHO the pipeline route is non-negotiable at the present time. It will be constructed as the CGL plan stands or not at all. Also IMHO, construction will likely be successful. It's my belief that the hereditary chiefs & the clan members they represent will gradually be won over.


.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

ian said:


> The late Jim Prentice essentially split with Haroer’s team and Cabinet in 2009 because he believed that no pipeline could be built without the agreement with, and financial participation of the First Nations. He felt any other way was doomed to failure. .



i don't recall the late jim prentice but if the above is his view, then he was 100% correct.

no persons understand this better than justin trudeau & his entire cabinet. Since 2015 they have worked exhaustively in this direction.

it's a fascinating, watershed moment in canadian history. Either the indigenous nations will join canada in a network of cooperative sovereign relationships, or their more radical warrior society elements are going to prevail. Nations in possession of unceded territories - there are several in northern quebec - have a big ace up their sleeve. They own their land, subject to certain qualifiers which provincial & federal supreme courts are still working out.

recently sags posted that "now" is the time for half-decided indigenous nations to come forward & join with canada, since future non-trudeau non-liberal governments will not be as patient or as accommodating.

imho the federal & BC gummints did an outstanding job during their four-day marathon negotiation with the wet'suwet'en last weekend.

ministers caroline bennett & john fraser broke the impasse. They recognized the hereditary chiefs along with the band councils, arranged for pipeline construction to re-start immediately without protest, while calling in a profoundly respectful manner for the wet'suwet'en community to return to its roots to re-examine the issue. 

_mirabile dictu_, bennett & fraser were even able to arrange for the RCMP to return to patrolling the territory, without so much as a murmur of complaint from the hereditary chiefs.


.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Thanks for the info Humble.

I don't believe that any form of self government for indigenous people would be supported by the majority of Canadians.

I think if such a policy were part of a Liberal election platform, they would be solidly defeated by the Conservatives.

The level of native racism in Canada is much higher than we like to admit.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> sags i do appreciate that you are one of the few on here who is not fiercely & promiscuously racist.
> 
> 
> .


Few?
I'd say the vast majority of people on this forum are not exhibiting racist behaviour.

There is nothing "racist" about saying the law should be enforced equally and fairly regardless of race.

The only people bothering me are people like you who want to deny First Nations their right to democracy, and destroy the future of their communities.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Thanks for the info Humble.
> 
> I don't believe that any form of self government for indigenous people would be supported by the majority of Canadians.
> 
> ...


I actually think self government has broad support.
The problems on Native reserves are primarily a lack of democratic institutions.

They can't make progress when the leaders aren't accountable to the people. 
To be fair, there are some where undemocratic leadership has been effective, but in most cases, it ends up doing more harm than good.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

If people can't accept an unelected dictator who is not accountable to the people then the only possible answer is racism.

Of course, racism is the answer to every argument the left loses.


----------

