if we were a white community something would be done by now

But they are still a relatively small part of the overall population. Grossly overrepresented in certain areas though...

Nice photo-op.

Deank wrote:and now..basically the province is promising funding to fix the problem...


you dont have the fiscal authority to do so.

There isn't a problem around that the Appointed Premier doesn't solve by throwing money at it. That's become his MO.

And if it saved your house there would be no promblem with it , RIGHT

Just how many asses do you have your head up?

Pavolo wrote:And if it saved your house there would be no promblem with it , RIGHT

Whazzzup with you today? Chill a little pavolo. Can't we all get along?

Pavolo wrote:And if it saved your house there would be no promblem with it , RIGHT

pretty much yeah..because I dont live on Federal land and I am not a Federal responsibility and I pay a substantial amount to the province in teh form of various taxes.

So. You're saying that you pay taxes and should receive, nay demand, services? Okay. Seems right to me.

Saw a news blurb on this on Monday evening...about some woman forced from her home (some apartment in a hotel actually)...and her 8 (yes eight) children.

I don't know if she had a husband or even boyfriend...he wasn't in the story. Couldn't tell from the images of the kids if they even all had the same father.

But it made me upset again...to think that this woman (or girl...she looked about 20) has 8 children, who she can't afford, and from the video of her "home" has living in squalor conditions...and we (yes all of us) are supporting them.

THIS is a sign of an honourable and proud people?

No...THIS is a sign of freeloaders and beggars.

As she was crying to the camera about "what am I going to do now?" Maybe find a job? Maybe teach your kids to work (the oldest looked about 10).

The real problem is nobody seems willing to stand up and say ENOUGH. ENOUGH bleeding everyone else dry, and STEALING (yes it's STEALING) the livelihood from everyone else. Stealing their property, their lives, their medical care, their food.

And before some bleeding-hear crybaby starts screaming about how the "white man" STOLE everything from these natives 100 years ago...I'm going to say BULLS H I T!!!.

THESE are not the natives of 100 years ago. There has been blood-line mixing, changes in culture and attitude. What MAY have happened 100 years ago has nothing to do with what is happening today. Today even the "white man" lives differently and has adapted with societal and global development (well, most of them have).

I'm all for helping a town/city improve infrastructure and assist those who need it...IF they are willing and able to assist themselves. But in this case...all I've heard is how oppressed the area is, and how much they want everyone else to bail them out (quite literally). Until I start hearing that they have a plan in place, or are willing to put manpower behind any development which may take place...then I have little sympathy...as moving the entire population to a less volatile region would be cheaper and easier.

Abandon reserves period. How do you suppose other small towns are doing? They take care of themselves.

With the taxes you and I pay , after all they do not collect enough in most towns to pay for much. Well I agree that the natives should be able to get a back hoe and start the work them selves . It is not going to happen over night as we have made the bed they lay in and now we are reaping the rewards of it .

"Overnight?"

"WE have made the bed they lay in?"

Don't you see that is part of the problem? Let's assume the evil white man is responsible for 100% of every Indian problem. Let's further assume the evil white man will never, ever fix the problem. What then will the chiefs do to scratch and claw their peoples out from under this misery?

They must stop blaming everybody and their dog for their problems and start bringing themselves out from under.

And people like you and I need to stop blaming everybody else and make the chiefs accountable.

grumpy old man wrote:But they are still a relatively small part of the overall population. Grossly overrepresented in certain areas though...

They are now about 15% of Manitoba which is not small. More than half of them are younger than 20, and they are reproducing faster than the rabbits - so will be about half of Manitoba population in another 20 years or so. There are now already about 10 times as many "Indians" as there were before contact with the white man in this area!

AGEsAces wrote:The real problem is nobody seems willing to stand up and say ENOUGH. ENOUGH bleeding everyone else dry, and STEALING (yes it's STEALING) the livelihood from everyone else. Stealing their property, their lives, their medical care, their food.

This is not the proper terminology. I think the aboriginal tradition calls this HARVESTING - i.e. taking without doing anything in return. Before contact, they were harvesting and raping the environment, and now that they have treaties it's just another way of taking. This is what their tradition is all about!

eViL tRoLl wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:But they are still a relatively small part of the overall population. Grossly overrepresented in certain areas though...

They are now about 15% of Manitoba which is not small.

Hence the expression "relatively small" eh?

grumpy old man wrote:
Hence the expression "relatively small" eh?

Compared to most other provinces, it's actually relatively very large.

Heh heh he

AgesAces said
And before some bleeding-hear crybaby starts screaming about how the "white man" STOLE everything from these natives 100 years ago...I'm going to say BULLS H I T!!!.

They didn't steal it they were called treaties and that is what causes you so much grief . It was the easiest way to get what you wanted and they were easily duped eh.

I fundamentally disagree with the premise that the natives owned this land.

The treaties (negotiations) were 'of their time' and should not be second-guessed imo.

JTF wrote:I fundamentally disagree with the premise that the natives owned this land.

The treaties (negotiations) were 'of their time' and should not be second-guessed imo.

I believe this is where a great deal of the angst between "European" Canadians and "Native" Canadians begins.

I believe Indians were nomads, moving around the country following the food. I seem to recall reading somewhere that Indians didn't believe in land "ownership".

Is their claim to ownership a tactic to wring more money and concessions out of contemporary Canada?

Heh. Good point GOM.

Seems like money will change one's historical perspective....nomads suddenly become land barons.

"I believe Indians were nomads, moving around the country following the food. I seem to recall reading somewhere that Indians didn't believe in land "ownership"."

yes and no.

They had "territory" that was theirs to hunt on and any other tribe caught near it would be killed. But the reality is their territory did not span all of Canada, hell most times it barely was more then 1-2 miles away from the rivers and lakes.. Anyone want to guess why that was?

It was easier to hook up their jaccuzzis closer to water?

JTF wrote:It was easier to hook up their jaccuzzis closer to water?

That's just stoopid. Everyone knows that electricity didn't come to Manitoba until the late 1600's.

It was because that was where the bars were...

HA!

its because they did not have to. animals tend to come to bodies of water to drink. Some animals called fish have even been know to live in bodies of water. People live where the food is.

grumpy old man wrote:

JTF wrote:It was easier to hook up their jaccuzzis closer to water?

That's just stoopid. Everyone knows that electricity didn't come to Manitoba until the late 1600's.

It was because that was where the bars were...

Sad I thought you were above that type of comment .