BS: Native North Americans protest

Subject: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:08 PM

There have beed some threads on this. They became "heated", at best. Some were closed.

The OP requested some closures but mods closed at leat one other due to the nastiness.

The thread that currently appears(ed) before the subsequent thread, initiated by the same OP and then closed by request of the OP is here.

I propose that the othed tread be closed with one last post redirecting the reader to this post and that the discussion be centralized on one thread. And, of course, that all personal attacks be deleted as is the usual case in this forum.

If any mods or the OP of the other threads dislike this idea... delete this thread. It's just a suggestion for consideration of the mods and the real OP. Sorry if any of you think I am overstepping my... whatever... do what ya wanna do.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:11 PM

OH BOY DID I MESS THAT UP! I guess I was just so angry that I got mixed up... any chance a mod can "fix" it or delete it?

I apologize all ta hell!

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:14 PM

Agree, there should be only one thread, (link 'em if needed) with a respectful title and respectful discourse (representing a variety of views) and posting.

Simplicity and common sense dictates so.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Beer
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:14 PM

Ahhhh!!! now I get it. You just retired and now your looking for a new job.
Ad.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:26 PM

There should be a thread, if you can't take a joke regarding this thread topic...

But, I guess that one would likely be zapped also, if it involved native american Aborgiinal persons (native may be a no no to some)...that is, unless you lived very far from North America, never worked with or had friends that were of part of any of the groups being discussed, knew some of the issues directly, or had no such blood in your veins, yada yada, yada.

You know gnu, you have been unjustly whacked in these thread topics yourself, no matter where your sympathies, or logic falls.

Clams and chickens, religion and the middle east is much more easy to post to, arent' it bud?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:43 PM

It is a hard read to speak correctly. Here are some definitions and perspectives - some folks are sensitive, some are not and the interpretation differs:


A lots in a name

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: GUEST,Dabit Jij
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:47 PM

As a formerly active member whose account disappeared while on a sabatical from much of life, whatever term you use for First Nations People of South, Central and North America, they have been treated badly for hundreds of years. A good history book that covers this:

Stolen Continents: 500 Years of Conquest and Resistance in the Americas

The winners write history, and so the "discovery" of the "New World" in 1492 has long been hailed as one of history's most thrilling moments. But the inhabitants of the Americas saw this event and its consequences quite differently. Their ancestors had settled the New World thousands of years before. They had built great civilizations — some of them democracies, some of them aggressive empires — with cities as large as any then on earth.

When Columbus arrived, the Americas held about 100 million people, a fifth of the human race. Within decades, most of them were dead — victims of imported epidemics and barbarous assaults. The European invaders sacked mighty cities, destroyed great art, plundered fabulous wealth and seized the land for themselves.

But the New World's peoples did not perish entirely, and neither did their view of history, though it has been suppressed for centuries.

In Stolen Continents, Ronald Wright quotes the authentic speech and writing of five indigenous peoples — Aztec, Maya, Inca, Cherokee and Iroquois — over a span of 500 years. We relive their strange, tragic experiences through their eloquent words and see the European invaders through their shrewd, unblinking eyes. Weaving together their contemporary accounts with his own compelling historical narrative, Wright has assembled a powerful and disturbing account of what he terms "a holocaust that began five centuries ago."

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:52 PM

Gnu - Perfect opportunity for you! Instead of greeter at Walmart you can be greeter on Native American threads :-)

Hello sir, come in. May I direct you to the links in post 97...

Yes, madam, we do have some objective viewpoints. Try next to the butchery department

Hello, oh, it's you. F*** off down to Tescos...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:54 PM

THIS is what I wanted to post before I was distracted by other things...


There have been some threads on this. They became "heated", at best. Some were closed.

The OP on those threads requested some closures and mods closed at least one other due to the nastiness.

The thread that currently appears(ed) before the subsequently deleted thread titled "Idle No More", initiated by the same OP, is "BS: Get Harper Out - Petition (Canada)".

I propose that the other tread be closed with one last post redirecting the reader to this thread and that the discussion be centralized on one thread. And, of course, that all personal attacks be deleted as is the usual case in this forum.

If any mods or the OP of the other threads dislike this idea, do whatever.

Again, I sincerely apologize to all for messing up.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:03 PM

Whatever, gnu...I've lost interest..

The Idle No More thread is now closed, due to it being filled, as ever, with personal attacks against me from the same old, same old, who profess to be so bloody Squeaky Clean and 'Correct' whilst filling their posts with foulness and patronizing gobbledeeeeeeegook!

This thread is already very odd...

The 'Get Harper Out!' thread is continuing nicely, now that some of the Foul & Festering comments have been deleted.

Both my threads were started in Good Faith, for, silly me, happens to think the Idle No More Movement is one of THE most important things to happen for Indigenous People in a very long time. They've been bullied and shat upon for centuries and now, they've had enough...and who can blame them!

I just wish the rest of us had the guts they have to stand up for Mother Earth too, along with the next Seven Generations, but sadly, many people are far too busy searching through The Biggest Putdown booklets to give a fuck about the future of the planet, the future of Indigenous Peoples, or even the future of their children and grandchildren...

Sad, huh.....?

I'll leave you all to it.....

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:29 PM

I have neither children nor grandchildren. But we all leave behind something to those who come after and we all have a duty to them as well as to those who came before us. We are just very small piece in the tapestry and we would do well not to mess it up.

As for names -- the Shoshone, Bannock, Apache, Navaho, Potawatomie, Sac, Fox, Cherokee, Cree, Blackfoot, Crow, Brule, Yankton, Nez Perce, Seneca, Blood, Assinibone and members of other Nations that I've met prefer to be called "Indians" as a collective term ("Oh, hell, we're stuck with it," said Eric) or identified as a White Mountain Apache or a Ute or whatever. Many have said that they want to be called "Americans" (here in the US). As my friend Johnny said, "What does it matter? We're all Red under the skin."

And as another said, "Don't call me 'Native American!' Anyone born here is a native American."

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Charmion
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:46 PM

I used to say that, too, Rap. I am a native Canadian in that I was born here, and no less a citizen of this land than any other Canadian.

I was very pleased when officialdom adopted the term "aboriginal" and the various organizations popularized the phrase "First Nations".

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:47 PM

RapI am both American, as I share in life in one of the Americas, and Canadian.
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:23 AM

Also, as it has now been proven that first settlers on the North American continent came across the land/ice bridge from Asia, Indian is probably quite apt anyway :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:59 AM

""Also, as it has now been proven that first settlers on the North American continent came across the land/ice bridge from Asia""


The last documentary I saw questioned the "land/ice bridge" route theory (and was leaning towards sea voyages).

Has this been confirmed and is there something new on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:08 AM

This is a summary of the documentary I refer to Dave:

Code Breakers

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:39 AM

Could well have, Ed. I am working from something I saw about the land bridge some time ago and if it has been disproved since I am happy to accept new evidence. I thought there were some DNA links as well though? So, even if the Asian link is not exclusive there is some evidence that at least part of the early N. American cultures were Asian? Maybe I dreamed it!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 10:10 AM

the unofficial anthem of the Indian nations in the USA is titled "NDN Car" which spelling I use, often. It is by Keith Secola and his "Wild Band of Indians."

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 10:10 AM

Dave,

I am not sure if it was the Asian link that was disputed?

I believe it was more the ice/land bridge route of arriving during a specific period in time is being re-thoughtby science (supporting being in the Americas longer than earlier thought).

My recollection is that the Aboriginal communities oral tradition dates it back very far, and in some casesibly indicates a direct origin in the Americas.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 10:18 AM

Dave,
Additional info.

First peoples

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 11:38 AM

Skeleton May Be Reburied Before Study

September 29, 1996

By BILL DIETRICH (Seattle Times)

SEATTLE - — The Army Corps of Engineers' tentative decision last week to give a 9,000-year-old skeleton to Native Americans for burial instead of to scientists for study is a textbook example of the collision between discovery and the respect of culture.

And if the skeleton - found in July on the banks of the Columbia River in Kennewick, Wash., - is reburied after a waiting period that ends about Oct. 25, it will be the third time that the earliest evidence of early habitation in the Pacific Northwest will have been lost before study was completed by researchers.

In 1968, the discovery and excavation of the Marmes rock shelter, the site of cremated human remains up to 11,000 years old, was cut short months later when the site was covered by the rising waters of Lower Monumental Dam on the Snake River.

And in 1992, the oldest complete skeleton found in the Northwest - the remains of an approximately 20-year-old female - radio-carbon-dated at 10,675 years old and found at Buhl, Idaho - were returned to the Shoshone-Bannock tribe for burial before study was completed.

The latest decision, made by Lt. Col. Donald Curtis Jr., the corps' Walla Walla district engineer, will be a heartbreaker for scientists. The decision was dictated by a 1990 federal law, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA.

"Something of [the Kennewick skeleton's) antiquity is a national treasure," said Douglas Owsley, curator at the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. "I think it is very important it be documented" or studied.

The July discovery in Kennewick of the skeleton with Caucasian features and a spearhead lodged in its pelvis is just the latest among recent anthropological discoveries raising questions about the origin of the first Americans.

But NAGPRA, written to end callous collection of Indian bones by requiring respectful burial, makes no distinction between bones a few centuries old that can be linked to present-day tribes and those thousands of years old.

Calling it one of the hardest decisions he has had to make, Curtis said he will wait until about Oct. 25 to see if other tribes join the Umatilla, Yakama, Colville, Nez Perce and Wanapum tribes in asserting jurisdiction over the find.

"Yes, this is an American Indian in the broad sense of the term," said Washington State University anthropologist Grover Krantz. "But I don't think it should be returned and buried. To whom would it be returned? This is not the ancestor of anybody living today."

Krantz says he thinks the Caucasian-like people represented by the skeleton died out in a severe drought about 9,000 years ago and were replaced a few thousand years later by ancestors of today's Indians. Another theory, by Texas A&M University anthropologist Gentry Steele, suggests that the earlier group intermarried with later arrivals.

But unless Northwest tribes change their stand on the issue, it appears unlikely that DNA tests or other analysis will be done on "Kennewick Man" before he goes back into the ground.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 01:34 PM

"I am working from something I saw about the land bridge some time ago and if it has been disproved since I am happy to accept new evidence. I thought there were some DNA links as well though?"


Trouble is, few anthropologists agree on anything, and no two of them agree on everything.

The Land bridge through the Bering Straits is based on the idea that the Ice Age reduced the sea level enough to expose the land. Trouble is that the people would have found a continent covered with massive sheets of ice. Why come here?

Humans are basically hairless. Since most characteristics are survival traits, who could believe that humans are not originally from a moderate or tropical region?

DNA studies have advanced so fast in the last 20 years that it makes one's head spin.

Right now, the best DNA experts say that the America's native peoples fall into 5 reasonably distinct groups. One of the groups is basically Caucasian. None is Negroid.

There is a growing feeling that the primary migration in South America was from the Pacific islands by a group that does not currently exist. They were Proto-Australioid.

No American remains found (so far I know) are older than 14,000 years.

They migration has been steady and continuous for a long time and from several continents. Actually, it's still going strong.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:25 PM

Thanks Ed and pdq - Always an education coming here. Well, for some anyway :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:30 PM

pdq...
Kennewick Man.

Not Caucasian.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: GUEST,999
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:37 PM

Story I heard a decade back had to do with some Inuit who were visiting China. The group had a Chinese interpreter with them. Some Chinese people came over to the group and asked what part of China they came from. (The visitors were from Canada's eastern arctic.)

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Rapparee
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:50 PM

I don't see any reason why the land bridge AND the sea voyage theories are incompatible. No one can say for certain "This, and only this, is the way it happened." Clovis-type points have been found in New Mexico (No kidding! Near Clovis, in fact!) but also in the Chesapeake Bay area and in France. This does not prove that people from the Clovis area visited France, nor does it mean that in a great AH-HA! moment that type of point was developed in three different places at the same time. What it means is that we just don't know yet.

Was South America settled by people walking all the way from Siberia? Or did they use boats? There's a bunch of evidence accruing that people did both.

Rarely is anything absolute.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:54 PM

BTW... been PMg and email back and forth with a nuber of people on this subject and I would like to post something.

The treaties are not being respected by the Canuck government (Cg). The Chinese are listening to the Natives on that issue. They will meet with with the Natives soon to discuss developement of natural resources.

Let that sink in fer a minute... more for some of you, I expect.

Now, her's something else few seem to understand. The Cg, well, Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada, pays ROYALTIES on the natural resources to the Natives (the dollars receieved by the Natives are NOT Canuck taxpayer dollars... they are ROYALTIES from resources and are property taxes which are actually RENT under British common law because NOBODY OWNS LAND under British Common Law EXCEPT the Royals and they don't OWN THE RIGHT TO THE LEASE of it in Canada UNLESS they respect the treaties - ya don't pay yer rent, ya lose yer property. It's BRITISH COMMON LAW. Got that?). Now, if the Royals who signed the treaties don't honour those treaties it equals a breach of contract, a breach of the lease agreement, and the Natives can negotiate with the Chinese to have the Chinese delevope resources in return for royalties.

That's it in a nutshell and I can't be arsed to prrof read that either, even tho not proofing my OP landed me in a state of apology early on in this thread.

As I said to one rather pissed off PMer, it's gonna be VERY interestind and actually fun to watch this shit play out. Only one problem will always exist... the whites have guns and they have used them in the past = he who has the gold rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:02 PM

...from gnu's link above:


"In February 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a cultural link between any of the Native American tribes and the Kennewick Man was not genetically justified, allowing scientific study of the remains to continue.

In July 2005, a team of scientists from around the United States convened in Seattle for ten days to study the remains, making many detailed measurements and determining the cause of death.

Kennewick Man was not a Native American and has more in common with Polynesians, according to the most recent study of the remains."


Original inspection in 1996 showed that it was not the same as most American Indians.

Futher studies bear that out.

There are as many opinions as there are anthropologists.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:16 PM

Good point Rap.
In the past the land-ice bridge theory seemed to be the only game in town in science.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:43 PM

pdq... my point is that I do not believe my Native brothers have a "clain" to the land because they were "here first". They were not. However, they have a claim to the land un TREATIES.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

Nobody seems to get, have gotten, what I have been saying all along. Especially about the atrocities and the land "ownership". Maybe I haven't been linear in all of my posts but I guess the deal is : this is complicated unless ya know ALL of the history (and I don't... I know what I know because I have seen it up close and personal).

Fact is... it can ONLY move forward based on understanding, trust, transparency and compromise that is genuine and good for ALL and that just ain't happening... on BOTH sides. I also said in my PMs and emails... the White man is not going home because he is home...

Nobody owns the earth... he merely occupies the space he takes up and he has a duty to use it wisely and at least leave it as he found it when he leaves. That's Native law as taught to me. Many could learn from that and that is part of the message in Idle No More as I understand.

This ain't rocket science. It's life... it's future. The past is the past and it is well documented but there are those who subvert that past and those who subvert OUR future. United we stand, divided we are fucked.

I think I need some time back in the woods. It's been far too long since I petted a moose on the nose or teased a beaver or played chase with a partridge or pissed off a squirrel or had a chickadee in my hand or had a Moosebird chatter at me for a piece of my cookie or... All of this grandstanding and anger messes up my spirit and sucks me into being angry too. My health suffers so I can't get to the woods. Brings tears to my eyes. Maybe a fire in my backyard... bake a can of beans in the can in the fire if I can find my caribou skin mitts... them teflon oven mitts at Walmat just don't cut the grass.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:42 PM

I never come to Mudcat intending to argue with people, so I will say I agree with everything gnu said.

Now, do all these people look the same to y'all:

                                                                         Eskimo

                                                                         Apache

                                                                         Algonquin (complex)

                                                                         Aztec (complex), Mexico City

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:56 PM

"Don't one of these folksters look like the other?"

The third one does kinda look like an angryly confused New Brunswick Irishman, who has not been to the woods for awhile. So, as with the common DNA in humanity, there is indeed proof of a common resemblance among us all. I am now convinced.:)

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Rapparee
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:17 PM

I think the second one was my Great-Uncle Jerry, taken the day they raised the taxes on his boat.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:12 PM

They look the same to me, pdq.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:52 PM

Please look at the bridge of the nose, eyelids, inner corner of eyes and iris.

Most people need to train themselves in critical observation.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: bobad
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 10:03 PM

Epicanthic fold is common in people of Asiatic origin.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 07:31 AM

OK, gnu, I will see if this thread on the same topic remains on top.
Warning, this column, while "thought provoking" is kinda graphic and may not be suitable for all:

Column By Terry Glavin, Ottawa Citizen

Idle No More or the Demon Harper? There's another choice

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 07:37 AM

From The Regina Leader-Post:

Enough 'idling' - it's time to talk

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 07:43 AM

Perspective, National columnist CLAIRE HOY

Why the double standard?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 05:56 PM

pdq... shoulda stated my point of "look the same" better... they all look human to me. Get the idea?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: pdq
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 06:16 PM

I am trying to answer questions that were asked by several posters.

Sorry if that gets people off the usual (and unproductive) talking points.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 06:22 PM

Unproductive? I gotta bite my tongue unless ya can explain that one.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: ollaimh
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 12:10 PM

it is pure ignorance to either calim that the term native american applies to anyone born here, or to calim that native land claims do not result from their being here first or to argue that s skeletonfrom a man who died thousands of year ago has any relevance to thaose natuive land claims.

that's the great disapointment about midcat crawlers.

folk used to be progressive and fight racism, now people on midcat use every wrinkle thay can thinbk of to try and discredit native claims.

native claims are simply inherited land rights. when you oppose them you are in reality saying that you can inherit your fathers land but natives should not be able to because they have a different legal system--thats the very definition of rtacism.

OF COURSE THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT LEGAL SYSTEM. the canadian and american legal system wasn't here when the natives living here and creating their unique society;

however every bug comes out from uder a rock to nit pick.

natives of the americas have been subjested to the worst genocide in human history, the genocidal residential schools intentionally infected native children with lethal diseases, (admitted by the byce report by the canadian supervisor of medicine for residential schools), they were subjest to illegal and un authorized medical experiements(look up the acanadian anglican church journal), there are many many other abuses.

most of you should be ashamed og yourselves, but you are too uneducated and ignorant to feel proper shame.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: ollaimh
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 01:24 PM

for those who don't understand native land claim laws, and property law in general i will elucidate.

in canada and the united states if you buy some land you can pass it on by inheritance to your heirs. if the you who owns the land is a trust repressnting many people, then you can pass it on by inheritance to your heirs. if you are a native group that owned a poiece of land in trust you for the group(tribe), you can do the same. you have to demonstrate by credible evicdence that you have a line of descendants who owned the land in question back before anyother claimant. thats it. you don't have to prove you were first. no ,one white or native has to prove that to inherit land. if your too dumb to get that then you argue that a set of bones of unknown origion in oregon makes the calim untenable. if kennebeck man or anyone else cvan show his descendants were in possession of the land untill someone esle claimed ot then they have a claim. not because they were there forst, just because they were there before the other claimannt. its really common senxse. of course this is the kind of issue that brings out peoples bigotry to overrule common sense. so they claim that natives likked the mega fauna(Q's particular racism) to rebutt native rights claims. or they calim that a skeleton of unknown ancestry rebutts the claim.


the thing that rebuts the calim is a prior calim and an unbroken descent from that claim.

furthermore. people from other cultures get to tell you what they want to be called. when you are told that a gael wants to be called a gael or that a aborigional pseron wants to be called a native, then you shut the f up and say thank you for telling. unless you are a racist. then you copme up with every bigoted arguement you can think of.

finaslly people from other cultures have different laws, traditions naming conventions and even speak english differently from the mainstream. if this bothers you you need to go get some ethnic and race sensitivity training and probably some anger management. you take these clear expressions of hate to your grave and beyond--try to "not be evil" as google says. you and everyone esle ultimately benifits from not being evil.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Charmion
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 01:54 PM

olliamh, I'd like to point out that cultures and their legal systems evolve. So do their languages. Indian, Native, Aboriginal, First Nations -- all these terms are convenient short-hand used to refer collectively to a large and highly varied group of peoples whose main point of similarity is that they have lived in North, Central and South America from time immemorial.

I think it is quite fair for people of European descent who were born in Canada to describe themselves as native Canadians because that's what the word means. So are Mohawks and Anishnabe, but that doesn't make the guy with the red hair and freckles and the family name that begins with O and an apostrophe any less a native-born Canadian.

At a certain point, we all have to accept that we have a right to belong where we were born, whatever our ancestry. That's because society cannot function if certain members are branded as guilty because of wrong actions by their ancestors, especially if they are forced into acts of contrition for sins they did themselves commit.

When a person dies, his debts are paid from his estate. If he dies destitute and heavily in debt, his creditors have no right to sue the children of the deceased -- who also got nothing -- for what the dead man owed them. It's a pity, but there it is. Everyone has to go forward making the best of a bad situation.

Of course, a healthy society does everything it can to eliminate gross injustices such as the current appalling state of many First Nations communities in Canada and the limited prospects faced by too many aboriginal individuals. But Canada's society includes many millions of native-born individuals whose ancestors arrived comparatively recently, and these people are also entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of their lives and property.

Canada is not a zero-sum game. Fairness for First Nations is possible without, first, vilifying and, ultimately, dispossessing everybody else.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Charmion
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 01:56 PM

Sorry -- above, I meant "forced into acts of contrition for sins they did NOT themselves commit."

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 03:30 PM

Technical point of "law" question. In order to claim that one owns land, do they have to be actively using it, taking care of it, marking it? In British law, that is the case and it also requires paying rent.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 03:33 PM

Where does that come from gnu? That requirement seems a bit odd to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 03:42 PM

gnu, are you talking about adverse possession" or "squatter's rights, where someone else owns land, and someone is claim ownership because they used it for a number of years?

Or, are you talking about something else??

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 03:54 PM

Sonnet 27/09/04 On the Opening of NMAI CMXXXIII

I listen to the songs of life, as told
By dark-eyed beauties, hair the color of
True wisdom: Quiet words that power hold
To speak of family, work; hopes, tears, and love.
I see the flash of fire in eyes, that tell
Of old injustice, but a smile for all.
What have we done, to past redeem, or spell
Out what we owe for what greed let befall?
I feel the beat of drums: Power to move
Both feet and hearts. What will the future show?
How can this nation honest fairness prove
Unless we make amends for what we know?
We have no reason, now, to debt deny:
How will our conscience to this call reply?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:06 PM

Ed... oops... ya gotta pay taxes (rent). Actively using it only applies in the first three years and those laws only apply to newly aquired Crown Lands. Ya gotta keep it marked to avoid usage claims... blah, blah, blah.

If ya "squat", active use and marking is a "gotta be". Moreso than Right of Way.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:14 PM

I don't understand what you refer to gnu.

Are you talking about the process to acquire government owned land? Are you talking about historic laws? I suspect land ownership laws differ by country.

If I already own land, yes, I have to pay taxes ( where governments deem it so). But, there is rarely conditions that I have to use the land for a specific purpose to keep it.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:20 PM

In Bermuda, non-residents are only allowed to buy land that is very high in value.
In Mexico, non-residents are only allowed to purchase high valued property (as not to compete with the locals).

IN PEI, you are not allowed to buy more than 3,000 acres (the Irving law)without government permission, and non residents pay higher taxes.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:22 PM

Sorry, I meant to say

In Mexico, non-residents are not allowed to purchase property (it must be leased with options to release).

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:25 PM

This says it clearer:

Mexican land use laws

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:32 PM

THE PROPERTY OF THE KING
AND MINERAL RIGHTS IN CANADA
by Harry Valentine

""Nations historically increased their wealth and expanded their territory by invading and conquering other nations. The Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Khan dynasty, the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire were all directly and indirectly formed through military action. The British ruling class developed the notion that Britain was chosen by God to rule all existence and that all existence on earth was rightfully the property of the King of England.

When the British navy arrived in new lands during the era of colonial expansion, local populations were regarded either as subjects to the king of England or invaders who had to be driven out by military force. Such was the case in some of the islands in the Caribbean where native populations were decimated. Resources that were found in the colonial lands were regarded as being the property of the crown. This included salt that was left on the beaches of India where seawater had evaporated. That people who lived in a hot climate needed salt for their survival was irrelevant.

Indians could be jailed for theft if they helped themselves to any salt they found on any beach. Only certain privileged people of British ancestry who were known as peers to the crown were allowed access to such resources and for their own economic benefit. Many acquired their wealth by trading in such resources as well as in spices that grew in the colonies. Nazi theorists recognized that precedent when they asserted that Germany had a right to the resources of other nations as well as a right to claim what was rightfully theirs. Storm troopers subsequently marched across international borders to exercise that right and occupy (and enslave) formerly sovereign nations.

A version of British law that gave the king dominion over the resources of the earth still exists in Canadian provincial law. The mineral resources that lie under the privately owned property in Canada are regarded as the property of the crown. That is spelled out in the Mineral Resources Act of every province and denies private property owners the right to the resources that lie under their land. The crown asserts a right to sell those mineral rights to persons other than the landowner and without advising private landowners of its intentions in this regard.""

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:55 PM

Ed... "A version of British law that gave the king dominion over the resources of the earth still exists in Canadian provincial law. The mineral resources that lie under the privately owned property in Canada are regarded as the property of the crown. That is spelled out in the Mineral Resources Act of every province and denies private property owners the right to the resources that lie under their land. The crown asserts a right to sell those mineral rights to persons other than the landowner and without advising private landowners of its intentions in this regard."

But, those laws apply in Canada to land owned by the Crown. The Crown doesn't own A LOT of the land in Canada... the Crown leases it through treaty with The First Nations. No?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 05:08 PM

I beleve this aricle may get you closer to understanding the different perspectives and aboriginal land use issues gnu. To get an understanding, you will have to put aside trying to understanding the land ownership from a non-aboriganal perspective.


Aboriginal rights to land

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 05:19 PM

Thanks Ed. I'll read that as soon as I can.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: ollaimh
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 08:39 PM

if you are goping to take legal advice from gnu well you are a lost soul. in fact if you are going to take any advice from gnu you are probably a lost soul.
gnu did you know that natives had a different legal syatem where they didn't pay land taxes, and still don't on reserves. i know the idea that there are people in the world who are different from you must be so bizzartro that your head is exploding. NATIVE HEKD LAND HAS NEVER BEEN SUBJECT TO TAX!!! YOU IDIOT!!
as to campion, no one is suggesting that, anyone lsoe anything. tthere are only a tiny number of land claims that are for presently deeded land, and they are for specific religious spots. in fact the present land claims in canada filed by native groups exempt deeded land within the claim in almost all cases as a concession to white power(rather kind of the native groups--a kindness i have never seen returned.

finally i am beginning to wonder if mudcat is worth the time when the sanest comment like campios still suggests that natives ae going to take something away from us. are any of you adults who can tie their shoes?

native land claims are for group inherited land under law that existed before the white man came, and as such are still mostly under bnative law when the get the land. its really simple. you have to be an idiot or a bigots not to get it.i admit these are ignorant bigots not idealogical bigots--they probably don't even know what an ideology is, but ignorant bigotry looks the same as any other form of hate to thoise subjected to it.

so gnu your love for your native brothers looks exactly the same as hate to all good and decent people

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: GUEST,999
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:56 PM

ollaimh: you stated you have a law degree but no longer practice. Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: Charmion
Date: 12 Jan 13 - 06:51 PM

I suspect olliamh doesn't practice law because he can neither spell nor find the Shift key on his computer, both required when one expects to get paid for producing written work. Lawyers do a lot of that. He also has trouble controlling his temper, never a good sign in a lawyer.

My name is Charmion, not campion, and gnu is not a racist.

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: GUEST,Boston
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 02:34 PM

‘‘I'm really troubled by what looks to be a breakdown in discipline,’’ said Grand Chief Doug Kelly of the First Nations Summit in British Columbia.

A ‘‘handful’’ of chiefs from Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario are creating an appearance of division. Atleo was granted a mandate to negotiate with Harper by a number of chiefs.

‘‘We didn’t vote for Theresa Spence as national chief.’’

Subject: RE: BS: Native North Americans protest
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jan 13 - 03:22 PM

olliamh...