🚀 go-pugleaf

"David Deilley" <google@integrate.com> wrote in message
news:de74397d.0212082308.66e60f59@posting.google.com...
> "Stephen Eggleston" <seggleston@shaw.ca> wrote
>
> > {SE} Another wonderful example of Deilly's brilliant dialogue.  I am
sure he
> > refers to a redneck Albertan there,
>
> [Deilly]No - just an inbred hillbilly of undetermined location
>
> > {SE} More substantively, 9000 years is the basis of Aboriginal claims to
> > inherent rights.
>
> [Deilly]9000 years had nothing to do with it.
> British law recognized whichever "tribes" occupied the land at trhe
> time of contact as "possessing" that land, and said that this
> "possession" remained intact until it was relinquished in a treaty
> with the British Crown.  (As an aside, most historians agree that the
> motive here was not based on respect for the "tribes," but to prevent
> anyone else (e.g. the Hudson's Bay Company) from doing side deals.)
>
>
> >{SE} The British clown (or is that crown?) failed to negotiate
> > settlements in some parts of the country and that is why we are where we
are
> > at here in BC.  Land claims generally aren't an issue in other parts of
the
> > country, because treaties were signed (irregardless of whether the First
> > Nations knew what they were doing) and the British law stands in this
> > country.
> >
> > {SE} That our First Nations are destroying what is left of them through
> > alcoholism, drugs, glue, whatever, is something we should all care
about.
> > They are people too, eh?  Try showing some humanity -- even the lower
beasts
> > show compassion for those who suffer ("human refuse" -- a wonderful way
to
> > characterize a million people in our country -- bloody redneck! -- do
you
> > actually know what that refers to you poor example of humankind?!).
>
>[Deilly] Exactly - and then you take ME to task for stereotyping him as an
> inbred ignoramus.

=======================================
{SE} Great job of snipping everthing, Mr. Deilly. Thanks so much for moving
this all forward.  I wasn't responding to you at all, but trying to inform a
couple of Brits or Aussies or something (from what I reckoned) who had not
the faintest idea of what they were talking about in the Canadian context.

{SE} If you could control that reflex reaction of yours once in a while (you
are becoming seriously irritating, even to lefties), you might find that
some people are actually fundamentally in agreement with you from time to
time.

Cheers!
====================================
>
> > {SE}Are
> > they to blame for their situation?  Hmmm... Partly, maybe.  Is the
> > government to blame.  Definitely.  Are we (all of us, collectively) to
> > blame? Definitely (we are all accomplices, no less than the guy who
drives
> > the get-away car).  Are we going to find a solution that doesn't involve
> > some sort of really significant compensation, long term support, etc...?
> > Not likely.
> >
> > {SE} Get real. It is an issue.  What do you suggest to address it?
>
> [Deilly]Negotiate treaties that bootstrap them into the mainstream
economy,
> while recognizing that they need to overcome a toxic spiritual legacy
> as a result of eight generations of having the shit kicked out of
> them.
======================================
{SE} I believe my posts have fundamentally agreed with what you said
immediately above, although I try hard not to use language as silly as yours
and respond with something substantive.  From what I have seen from you
Deilly, I would ask you to STFU, even when I agree with you because you are
an embarrassment to intelligent discourse.

Cheers!