Author Topic: BC v Wet'suet'en  (Read 1775 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waldo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4031
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #30 on: February 11, 2020, 11:33:20 am »
Vancouver Transit has police...    it’s not so weird.

over a many years travel period I had occasion to meet/know several Translink police officers - many of whom are retired RCMP and city police members... collecting full pensions from their prior police work

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5910
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #31 on: February 11, 2020, 12:07:26 pm »
over a many years travel period I had occasion to meet/know several Translink police officers - many of whom are retired RCMP and city police members... collecting full pensions from their prior police work

Pretty cushy job, their constables are paid more than some of the municipal police forces
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #32 on: February 11, 2020, 03:46:38 pm »
Why would they cancel rail travel if they didn't block the lines?  They've blocked lines many times in the past.

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/protesters-blocking-via-rail-tracks-force-train-cancellations-for-fourth-straight-day-1.4804912
"We're not blocking the tracks. We're just standing beside them."
Plow truck guy
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4_HzYul6d7w&feature=share

Quote
Many of these protestors don't care about what's lawful or unlawful.  They don't even recognize Canadian law:

The Mohawk territory near Belleville isn't even their traditional land, it was a piece of land they moved to after being given to them by the British in the late 18th century after their territory was lost in New York State when the US took it over after the US won the American Revolution vs the British.  It's a reserve that's was part of British Crown and now Canadian Crown territory.  This person doesn't even know what they're talking about

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culbertson_Tract_Land_Claim

The Culbertson Tract is bigger than the Tyendinaga reserve, part of the Simcoe Treaty.
Their claim is already validated and in negotiation for settlement (land/money) ... for 10+ years.

Quote
Anyways, this is all about a dispute over who is the rightful bargaining government agent:  the elected band councils, or the hereditary chiefs.  The elected band councils of all the bands with territory along the gasline route have consented to the pipeline project, but the hereditary chiefs haven't.  The [provincial] courts and BC gov says it's the band councils, but the chiefs and supporters disagree, so here we are. https://globalnews.ca/news/6517089/wetsuweten-bc-pipeline-protests/

It isn't about which is the rightful bargaining agent.
It's about all of them being consulted.

The traditional Chiefs and Council are the Aboriginal rights and title holders on behalf of the people. (SCoC: Delgamuukw 1997)

Their objection is that the BC Crown did not consult with them, though their title is recognized.

BC NDP Premier John Horgan has refused to consult with traditional Council, and in a very disrespectful manner.

He's counting on them not appealing the injunction to the higher courts, and he's likely right ... but it's slimey... not fair dealing ... evading the law ... typical of Canada and the Provinces.

The traditional Council has some ideas about where the pipeline could go without as much disruption to the salmon runs and village sites ... but no one has consulted with them.

The Crown has a duty to consult.
Failure to do so can also be taken to court.

Our governments continue to be slimey.

And we continue to have protest and disruption because rights and title are being violated.

The Supreme Court directed governments to reconcile Aboriginal and Crown titles.
When are governments going to start doing that instead of fomenting police violence and nation wide  disruption?
« Last Edit: February 11, 2020, 04:35:41 pm by Granny »

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #33 on: February 11, 2020, 04:37:11 pm »
Pipelines are annoying

Getting rid of fossil fuels will solve quite a few problems.

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #34 on: February 11, 2020, 04:42:57 pm »

Crown "duty to consult" does not give Indigenous Groups a veto; respective Supreme Court decisions as:

In this case the Crown's "duty to consult"  was not carried out.

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #35 on: February 11, 2020, 04:44:37 pm »
In any election or referendum the only ones who count are the ones who voted.

Participation rates can be informative.

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #36 on: February 11, 2020, 05:33:03 pm »

arrests by the RCMP in Wet'suwet'en claimed territory reflect enforcement of a court order... police arrests at the Port of Vancouver also reflect upon a court order being served. Near Belleville Ontario, more pointedly 'Tyendinaga Township':

as for your Facebook gem stating the OPP is investigating whether, as you say, "laws were broken or evidence falsified to get that Belleville area injunction"... mainstream media outlets have not written anything to support such a claim! The waldo calls bullshyte!

No worries. The OPP have it handled.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/protests-continue-1.5457149

“The OPP calls on those involved to abide by the injunction and to not (put) public peace or anyone’s safety in jeopardy.”

No one is on CN property.
Public peace and safety are not in jeopardy.
All ok.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2020, 07:05:21 pm by Granny »

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5097
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #37 on: February 11, 2020, 07:17:11 pm »
The Crown has a duty to consult.
Failure to do so can also be taken to court.

Our governments continue to be slimey.

And we continue to have protest and disruption because rights and title are being violated.

The Supreme Court directed governments to reconcile Aboriginal and Crown titles.
When are governments going to start doing that instead of fomenting police violence and nation wide  disruption?

In what world is an NDP and Green Party government in BC trying to ripoff natives?  If they can't respect natives, no government ever will.  Me thinks there's more to this story than you're leading on.

Is there precedent for the governments needing to and consulting with both elected councils and hereditary chiefs?
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5097
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #38 on: February 11, 2020, 07:23:34 pm »
Getting rid of fossil fuels will solve quite a few problems.

Sure, but the technology and economic will has to exist before that happens.  Blocking pipelines will not eliminate fossil fuels.  They'll just be out of their cut.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline kimmy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4012
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #39 on: February 11, 2020, 08:05:43 pm »
Getting rid of fossil fuels will solve quite a few problems.

We're not going to feed 7 billion people on this planet with fossil fuels. 

Getting rid of a few billion humans would in itself solve some environmental problems, but I have a hard time cheering for mass starvation regardless of how much it would benefit the ecology.

 -k
Masked for your safety.

Offline kimmy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4012
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #40 on: February 11, 2020, 08:14:02 pm »
After reading some comments on social media today, I gather a lot of people who support these protests are under the mistaken impression that they're fighting an oil (or bitumen) pipeline.



Premier Horgan thought people would be on board with the pipeline if it was transporting clean, safe liquified natural gas instead of gross messy bitumen.  LOL, nope.  We can't build anything in this country anymore.  This is becoming such a joke.

I can only imagine what kind of protests we will be seeing once the Transmountain expansion nears the BC lower mainland. It's going to be a complete gong show.



Transport Minister Garneau says that the disruptions of rail service are illegal, and that he is "very concerned". At some point something is going to be done.

 -k
Masked for your safety.

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5910
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #41 on: February 11, 2020, 08:26:59 pm »
After reading some comments on social media today, I gather a lot of people who support these protests are under the mistaken impression that they're fighting an oil (or bitumen) pipeline.



Premier Horgan thought people would be on board with the pipeline if it was transporting clean, safe liquified natural gas instead of gross messy bitumen.  LOL, nope.  We can't build anything in this country anymore.  This is becoming such a joke.

I can only imagine what kind of protests we will be seeing once the Transmountain expansion nears the BC lower mainland. It's going to be a complete gong show.



Transport Minister Garneau says that the disruptions of rail service are illegal, and that he is "very concerned". At some point something is going to be done.

 -k

TMX will be fine until it gets to Burnaby.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5097
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #42 on: February 11, 2020, 08:59:42 pm »
Transport Minister Garneau says that the disruptions of rail service are illegal, and that he is "very concerned". At some point something is going to be done.

 -k

He also says rail protests need to be enforced or not by the provinces, not the feds.  If i were him, i wouldn't touch this with a 100,000 ft pole either.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5097
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #43 on: February 11, 2020, 09:02:22 pm »
After reading some comments on social media today, I gather a lot of people who support these protests are under the mistaken impression that they're fighting an oil (or bitumen) pipeline.

Premier Horgan thought people would be on board with the pipeline if it was transporting clean, safe liquified natural gas instead of gross messy bitumen.  LOL, nope.  We can't build anything in this country anymore.  This is becoming such a joke.

I can only imagine what kind of protests we will be seeing once the Transmountain expansion nears the BC lower mainland. It's going to be a complete gong show.

You have the big oil exporter province relying on the greenest environmentalistiest province in Canada.  Sparks were inevitable.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Online wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5910
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #44 on: February 11, 2020, 09:41:08 pm »
He also says rail protests need to be enforced or not by the provinces, not the feds.  If i were him, i wouldn't touch this with a 100,000 ft pole either.

Gee, and I thought transportation was a federal jurisdiction, that's why they are regulated by the Department of Transport. In the words of the Knights of the Holy Grail when confronted by the killer bunny. Run away, run away.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC