-
April 14th, 2016, 05:32 PM
#31
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett
-
April 14th, 2016 05:32 PM
# ADS
-
April 14th, 2016, 07:17 PM
#32
Sad about the kids. Is this the reserve that chief Spends was running a few years ago ?
That rug really tied the room together
-
April 14th, 2016, 08:28 PM
#33
Has too much time on their hands
Originally Posted by
cantcatchacold
Sad about the kids. Is this the reserve that chief Spends was running a few years ago ?
Yep, the soup diet media queen.... over the last 10 years if you add it up the reserve of about 2,000 received over $1,000,000,000 and you add in the reserve revenues from the diamond mine on "their" lands that is atleast $50,000 per person each year. She got the boot as I understand but there is alot she should be held accountable for!
The Conservative gov't started the first small steps in the right direction with the accountability legislation (same as the Unions, reversed by the Liberals) but it was going to be a long road in some reserves to get leadership that was both capable and accountable it seems. The gov't needs to step in and provide training and book keeping and disclosure of spending to make them accountable for the lives that corrupt chiefs are ruining. Hopefully getting the kids help (either on or off the reserve) is a big part of it! When Sun TV they went around to several reserves, some have good leaders building the economy, training and accountable... then there were chiefs like Spence that robbed, ruined and were incompetent!
-
April 14th, 2016, 08:47 PM
#34
Yet Spence was embraced and honoured by the Liberals. JT, Paul Martin and a bunch more all lined up at the teepee protest and flaunted her as a saint. She was actually checking into a luxury hotel at night and dining there. This is the level of common sense we now have running the country. Scary.
I’m suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.
-
April 14th, 2016, 09:35 PM
#35
Originally Posted by
FishFrenzy
(1) Living off the land IS POSSIBLE. Bring me facts that say you can't, not opinions. -This is not my opinion; it is impossible for the natives to go back to living like they did 200yrs ago (or however long you want to go back). They no longer have the knowledge, land or partnerships they once had due to the way the government structured their communities. Could they attempt to live strictly off the land in today's world? - sure. I was looking at this from a historical view based on the timelines you provided and asking why they couldn't live like they did 200yrs ago.
(2) 200 years ago (or maybe longer ago, before europeans arrived) ... Indians live off the land, and found a way to survive ... what I'm led to believe is that they had a "rich" life (not $$$, but rewarding). We can unpack that statement, it would take another 10 pages on this thread (not going to go there). Agreed, nothing to disagree with you on this. I was stating why it isn't possible to go back to that point in time as the world has evolved in such a way that lifestyles of the past aren't possible. Could they live off the land, yes. Traditionally, no.
(3) It's going to be hard to survive when you want to "live off the land" and also have the benefits of a capatistic society.
That's it. Point 3 is the key point. Please do not add any more words, do not draw any further conclusions, do not interpret it to mean anything else. My point was they were successfully able to benefit from both prior to the destruction of their society.
And sorry ... "Are you serious" is not very professional, it's what I expect from my 14 year old son (actually I expect better from him too). It's a pretty demeaning statement. Go back to when you wrote it, and think about your frame of mind ... be honest about what you were saying, not political and diplomatic. I've been around long enough ..." I know exactly what my frame of mind was... "I can't understand why this person would think this is possible / easy"... your condescending "SLOWLY, CAREFULLY" statements in your response tells me you expect others to follow your ethics, morals and professionalism, but when you feel slighted it's OK for you to demean others. As much as you want to believe my statement was made to call you a dumb a$*, you'd be wrong - it was exactly what was on my mind when I read your statements. Again... very easy to misinterpret others statements on the internet and again it wasn't my intention.
FishFrenzy
Not buying it. Lol!!! Are you serious? !?
You are just back tracking now. Done with you. If you don't even have the decency to apologize I don't need to waste time on you. I've been around for a long time my friend, and read people as a business.
Oh ... and my wife is half native American Indian.
-
April 15th, 2016, 07:29 AM
#36
Originally Posted by
MarkB
Not buying it. Lol!!! Are you serious? !?
You are just back tracking now. Done with you. If you don't even have the decency to apologize I don't need to waste time on you. I've been around for a long time my friend, and read people as a business.
Oh ... and my wife is half native American Indian.
Great 
FishFrenzy
Reply With Quote
