Author Topic: BC v Wet'suet'en  (Read 11523 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #225 on: February 21, 2020, 01:20:43 am »
the same way weakAndy hasn't been able to string together anything he would do as PM..... actually do... steps he would take - practical steps/actions, let the waldo ask you to state your want for PM Trudeau to be your, uhhh... "strong champion". What would you have PM Trudeau do; specifically do - practical steps/actions?

I venture a guess that anyone who adopts MAGA to their avatar has a relatively narrow minded concept to such things, similar to the idiots who wear MAGA hats. Everybody who challenges me, throw them in jail. I bet andy has a few of those hats in his closet. 

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10186
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #226 on: February 21, 2020, 06:01:11 am »
the same way weakAndy hasn't been able to string together anything he would do as PM..... actually do... steps he would take - practical steps/actions, let the waldo ask you to state your want for PM Trudeau to be your, uhhh... "strong champion". What would you have PM Trudeau do; specifically do - practical steps/actions?

Call out the blockades for what they are - illegal acts of extortion - and pressure the Premiers to have them end the blockades.
"Nipples is one of the great minds of our time!" - Bubbermiley
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12463
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #227 on: February 21, 2020, 08:17:14 am »
Call out the blockades for what they are - illegal acts of extortion - and pressure the Premiers to have them end the blockades.

This won't happen because no politician wants blood on their hands.  Dudley George's ghost stayed with the Conservatives for years, even today he is mentioned.


Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #228 on: February 21, 2020, 09:33:36 am »
member wilber... being member wilber - now joined by MAGAmanGraham!  ;D Step beyond your right-wing reflexive - try reading what I actually wrote. I said there was a right to counter-protest. Once your heroes stepped beyond the 'from a distance' shouting/hurling insults (by both sides), once they encroached into the immediate space of the protestors to dismantle the blockade, their actions became those of vigilantes.

your emphasis on the absence of violence/force is meaningless - it's the action of vigilantes that increases the likelihood for violence.

The protesters aren’t encroaching on the space of others? That space belongs to the protesters? You mean the protesters who blocked entrance to the BC legislature and trie to make a citizens arrest on Horgan at his home? Oh what double standards you have,

I hope this can  be resolved peacefully but if it doesn’t happen fast, this is just the beginning of citizens taking action on their own.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2020, 09:35:38 am by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8713
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #229 on: February 21, 2020, 10:43:25 am »
The protesters aren’t encroaching on the space of others? That space belongs to the protesters? You mean the protesters who blocked entrance to the BC legislature and trie to make a citizens arrest on Horgan at his home? Oh what double standards you have,

you're just being silly now! My words: "the immediate space of the protestors", certainly doesn't presume upon or attach ownership to said space. My words: "encroached upon the immediate space of the protestors", speaks to the confrontational aspect of that encroachment with it's potential to solicit response that could result in violence between the 2 sides. 

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8713
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #230 on: February 21, 2020, 11:00:29 am »
Call out the blockades for what they are - illegal acts of extortion - and pressure the Premiers to have them end the blockades.

with a focused and repeated emphasis on required dialogue, PM Trudeau has also repeatedly spoken of the need for protestors to respect the rule of law; i.e., they're acting unlawfully in terms of injunctions issued by the respective provincial judiciary. PM Trudeau has also, several times now, acknowledged the most significant impacts the blockades are having. The word, your wanted word, "extortion" is not, quite obviously, conducive towards successful dialogue; a word, your wanted word, fitting the Conservative/CPC mould reflected by the recent words of CPC leader/candidates, weakAndy, mmmKay, O'Tool, etc..

perhaps you could further elaborate on what you mean/imply with your words "pressure the Premiers". Make sure to include, by extension, exactly what you believe/interpret the provincial Premiers can... should do; specifically so, particularly as to my inference that you're expecting political direction of law enforcement, ala police-state infringement upon democracy, upon democratic society.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #231 on: February 21, 2020, 11:06:40 am »
It is extortion though. That’s the whole intent.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #232 on: February 21, 2020, 05:10:35 pm »
It is extortion though. That’s the whole intent.

Nonsense.

Canadian governments have ignored the requests of Wet'suet'en Chiefs for over 20 years to come to the table and reconcile rights and titles.

It's the BC RCMP holding the country hostage right now. They haven't left Wet'suet'en Territory as they said they would.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #233 on: February 21, 2020, 06:08:02 pm »
Nonsense.

Canadian governments have ignored the requests of Wet'suet'en Chiefs for over 20 years to come to the table and reconcile rights and titles.

It's the BC RCMP holding the country hostage right now. They haven't left Wet'suet'en Territory as they said they would.
Of course it is.

I’m not talking about the Wet’suet’en so much as all the others who have jumped on the bandwagon all over the country to use this dispute for their own purposes. My guess is that most of them don’t really care about the Wet’suet’en personally.

What’s the difference between blocking a road until you get what you want and taking control of someone’s computer until you get what you want? They are both extortion. The problem with the self righteous is they are so convinced of the righteousness of their cause, it justifies any actions they take, regardless of how it affects the rights of others.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #234 on: February 21, 2020, 06:56:17 pm »
*** CoastalGasLink's final environmental report rejected. Construction will be delayed months. ***

https://ricochet.media/en/2945/coastal-gaslink-environmental-assessment-rejected-construction-to-be-delayed

Now CGL and RCMP can leave Wet'suet'en Territory and the governments can get to work to reconcile Aboriginal rights and title with Crown rights, as directed by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1997.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2020, 07:01:20 pm by Granny »
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #235 on: February 21, 2020, 07:30:45 pm »
Private companies soon won't touch Canada with a barge pole when it comes to infrastructure projects. Governments will have to do them on their own. Trans Mountain is just the first.

Coastal Gas Link was selected to build the line in 2012 and filed its first environmental assessment application in 2014. In future, what company is going to spend hundreds of millions and years in an exercise that is likely to be futile.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2020, 07:39:26 pm by wilber »
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10186
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #236 on: February 21, 2020, 10:33:48 pm »
with a focused and repeated emphasis on required dialogue, PM Trudeau has also repeatedly spoken of the need for protestors to respect the rule of law; i.e., they're acting unlawfully in terms of injunctions issued by the respective provincial judiciary. PM Trudeau has also, several times now, acknowledged the most significant impacts the blockades are having. The word, your wanted word, "extortion" is not, quite obviously, conducive towards successful dialogue; a word, your wanted word, fitting the Conservative/CPC mould reflected by the recent words of CPC leader/candidates, weakAndy, mmmKay, O'Tool, etc..

perhaps you could further elaborate on what you mean/imply with your words "pressure the Premiers". Make sure to include, by extension, exactly what you believe/interpret the provincial Premiers can... should do; specifically so, particularly as to my inference that you're expecting political direction of law enforcement, ala police-state infringement upon democracy, upon democratic society.

Today Trudeau chose to do just what I said.  Move to end the blockades.  He didn't call them "extortion" (which they are), he chose more politically sensitive language.  But he did say they can't keep using illegal barricades and force thousands of people out of jobs and costing who knows how many companies lots of money.

Today Trudeau, i'm surprised, made a very good speech and said all the right things.  He was firm but respectful of the indigenous.  I think most would have liked this to come sooner, but it's a very complex situation with a ton of stakeholders and that takes time to coordinate.

All Trudeau is asking for is the same as my position: he wants the court injunctions followed, the law followed, and that means the illegal barricades coming down.  Law enforcement's job is to enforce the law, that's what they should do now:  enforce the court injunctions and ensure the barricades and protestors are removed from the tracks.  Trudeau said the police can do this in whatever way they see as best in order to best keep the peace, which i agree.
"Nipples is one of the great minds of our time!" - Bubbermiley
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10186
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #237 on: February 21, 2020, 11:12:45 pm »
Nonsense.

Canadian governments have ignored the requests of Wet'suet'en Chiefs for over 20 years to come to the table and reconcile rights and titles.

It's the BC RCMP holding the country hostage right now. They haven't left Wet'suet'en Territory as they said they would.

That's not all the protestors want.  They also want the gasline construction entirely ceased.

Trudeau said the protestors haven't come to the table here, they want their demands met or nothing.  This is a complex situation and it's hard to figure who is supporting what and who speaks for who etc.

It's in the hands of the courts now.  The federal or BC governments nor the Wet'suet'en Chiefs can just do whatever they want.  Nobody on this forum is, to my knowledge, a lawyer on aboriginal rights and law in BC/Canada.
"Nipples is one of the great minds of our time!" - Bubbermiley

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #238 on: February 21, 2020, 11:22:08 pm »
That's not all the protestors want.  They also want the gasline construction entirely ceased.

Trudeau said the protestors haven't come to the table here, they want their demands met or nothing.  This is a complex situation and it's hard to figure who is supporting what and who speaks for who etc.

It's in the hands of the courts now.  The federal or BC governments nor the Wet'suet'en Chiefs can just do whatever they want.  Nobody on this forum is, to my knowledge, a lawyer on aboriginal rights and law in BC/Canada.

Apparently you're not. The BC courts have already issued injunctions some time ago. They simply have not been enforced in an attempt not to fan the flames. Latest I hear the RCMP is willing to back away here in BC and so the hereditary chiefs will now come to the table.

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10186
Re: BC v Wet'suet'en
« Reply #239 on: February 21, 2020, 11:32:23 pm »
Apparently you're not. The BC courts have already issued injunctions some time ago. They simply have not been enforced in an attempt not to fan the flames.

No sh!t.  You're not a lawyer either, you just read the news like everyone else.  And since you're not a lawyer you can't tell me if the injunction is constitutional or not.  The Wet'suet'en chiefs can appeal the injunction, all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if they want.

The injunctions won't be deemed illegal just because the hereditary chiefs say so and a bunch of protestors block rails.
"Nipples is one of the great minds of our time!" - Bubbermiley