Top dentists make $1 million on reserves


CDNBear
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

You forgot the monarchy

I'm glad you finally, openly admit that you hate Aboriginals, Asians.

Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Freedoms are based on the Magna Carta, forward looking thinking people don't completely take documents, treaties or contracts word for word. Magna Carta is about limiting arbitrary govt. It wrote of "free men", which now includes all people. It didn't then. But it took political pressure for this to occur. As a result, progress is being made as we speak.

Just get taught about the Magna Carta in grade 11 history class did ya?
 
dumpthemonarchy
#62
The king, crown, they are flexible when they need to be, and when they are forced to be. Nothing is absolute, no monarch, no document, not anything.
 
CDNBear
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Nothing is absolute, no monarch, no document, not anything.

Well ya, the rivers could stop flowing, the sun could stop rising, or however that is interpreted by law.

But until that happens, the contracts are binding.
 
PoliticalNick
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

LOL... No I didn't.

The Magna Carta was th edocument that limited the powers of the Monarch, and preserved the basic rights of the citizenry. A treaty, borrowing tenets of the Magna Carta, is a contract between, in this case, the Crown and the original inhabitants of this land.

We have previously discussed this too. If Canada is no longer under rule of the crown then your treaties are invalid, if it is then the Magna Carta is still in effect due to its perpetuity clause. You have to pick one or the other.
 
dumpthemonarchy
#65
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

We have previously discussed this too. If Canada is no longer under rule of the crown then your treaties are invalid, if it is then the Magna Carta is still in effect due to its perpetuity clause. You have to pick one or the other.

Right, cherry picking. Sorry, it's not allowed. Everyone gets all their political rights all the time now. No one can be denied any more. Everyone is equal, that's the new theory, it doesn't always work that way in practice, but we are always working on it. That's progress.
 
CDNBear
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

We have previously discussed this too.

I remember you were just as confused then too.

Quote:

If Canada is no longer under rule of the crown then your treaties are invalid, if it is then the Magna Carta is still in effect due to its perpetuity clause.

You'll have to explain how you think all that goes down.

Quote:

You have to pick one or the other.

No, you need to read up on what the Magna Carta (external - login to view) is.

Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Right, cherry picking.

No it isn't. What you do is cherry picking.

Quote:

That's progress.

Coming from a regressive fascist, that's funny.
 
Cannuck
-1
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

But until that happens, the contracts are binding.

No contract is binding unless somebody is willing to do whatever is necessary to enforce it.
 
CDNBear
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

No contract is binding unless somebody is willing to do whatever is necessary to enforce it.

Gee thanks pumpkin, did one of your kids tell you that?
 
Cannuck
-1
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Gee thanks pumpkin, did one of your kids tell you that?

No, I told you that. Apparently, you were unaware.
 
CDNBear
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

No, I told you that. Apparently, you were unaware.

Your perception skills are still being retarded by your admitted stupidity.
 
PoliticalNick
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Right, cherry picking. Sorry, it's not allowed. Everyone gets all their political rights all the time now. No one can be denied any more. Everyone is equal, that's the new theory, it doesn't always work that way in practice, but we are always working on it. That's progress.

It's not cherry picking. Supposedly we no longer recognize the crown as the leader of Canada since the constitution was falsely adopted in 1982. If this is true then any deal with the crown is no longer valid. If the Dominion of Canada still exists and is ruled by the monarchy then the Magna Carta has to still apply due to clause 63.

The Magna Carta 1215 (external - login to view)

63. Wherefore we will and firmly order that the English Church be free, and that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly, fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid. An oath, moreover, has been taken, as well on our part as on the art of the barons, that all these conditions aforesaid shall be kept in good faith and without evil intent.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Right, cherry picking. Sorry, it's not allowed. Everyone gets all their political rights all the time now. No one can be denied any more. Everyone is equal, that's the new theory, it doesn't always work that way in practice, but we are always working on it. That's progress.

Everyone is equal and free to practise lifestyles according to their culture. There are exceptions described in the law, but nothing in native culture is included. Get over it.
 
dumpthemonarchy
#73
The fed govt divides Canadians by race through the Indian Act, this is racist. Therefore it is to be stopped, as legally, and as quickly as possible. The law needs to be changed, the law makes race here.
 
CDNBear
#74
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

The fed govt divides Canadians by race through the Indian Act, this is racist. Therefore it is to be stopped, as legally, and as quickly as possible. The law needs to be changed, the law makes race here.

Ya, I've been saying for years too.
 
PoliticalNick
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

The fed govt divides Canadians by race through the Indian Act, this is racist. Therefore it is to be stopped, as legally, and as quickly as possible. The law needs to be changed, the law makes race here.

I agree, so its time to do away with Aboriginal affairs and special status and rights and all be Canadians equally.
 
CDNBear
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

I agree, so its time to do away with Aboriginal affairs and special status and rights and all be Canadians equally.

1, AAND, I agree.
2, "Special status/rights", are you ready to ban unions and other groups that garner more rights and special status, via collective bargaining, position? Didn't you once have the right to walk down a public street with a fully loaded, fully automatic weapon? The overwhelming majority of Canadians do not have that right.
3, The Indian Act, is what supposedly made all First Nations, Canadian.
4, Equally, see #2.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#77
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

The fed govt divides Canadians by race through the Indian Act, this is racist. Therefore it is to be stopped, as legally, and as quickly as possible. The law needs to be changed, the law makes race here.

Baloney. It's about culture, not race.
 
JLM
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

This seems a little steep. These dentists must get paid as soon as they get up, get on the plane, to the time they get off the plane and go to bed. This seems a little pricey.


I'm wondering if the main complaint here is about the dentists and their pay or about the ethnicity of the patients!
 
L Gilbert
#79
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

I agree, so its time to do away with Aboriginal affairs and special status and rights and all be Canadians equally.

I'll agreee with that.
 
Cannuck
-1
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Baloney. It's about culture, not race.

Nope, it's not really about culture. To suggest that is to suggest the culture of the Metepenagiag is the same as the Blood. That's like saying the culture of the Scots is the same as the culture of the French. We all know this isn't true.
 
PoliticalNick
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

1, AAND, I agree.

Glad to hear it.
Quote:

2, "Special status/rights", are you ready to ban unions and other groups that garner more rights and special status, via collective bargaining, position?

Getting something from an employer is different from getting special status or rights from the govt and being treated differently under the law.
Quote:

Didn't you once have the right to walk down a public street with a fully loaded, fully automatic weapon? The overwhelming majority of Canadians do not have that right.

There is nothing in the constitution that says I don't still have that right. All law abiding citizens should have that right. Just because a bunch of power-hungry idiots in Ottawa write something on paper and convince their armed thugs to enforce it doesn't make it right.
Quote:

3, The Indian Act, is what supposedly made all First Nations, Canadian.

And yet so many want to be non-Canadian (ie. sioux, haida, chippewa) except at certain times when they get their special entitlement.
 
CDNBear
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Baloney. It's about culture, not race.

I think it's racist and sexist.
 
PoliticalNick
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I think it's racist and sexist.

Agreed. There is a lot of racism and sexism in plenty of government policy.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I think it's racist and sexist.

The law is or the Act? I was referring to the law. DUHmpy said the law was racist.
 
CDNBear
+2
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

Getting something from an employer is different from getting special status or rights from the govt and being treated differently under the law.

It's called collective bargaining. The Crown got land, we got "special status and rights".

It's the same thing, collective bargaining.

I'm not guaranteed anything a unionized worker gets via collective bargaining. I'm not guaranteed employment in a union shop. In fact, union members, are given preferential treatment to fill union shop jobs. Legally.

It is illegal to give preferential treatment based on race.

Quote:

There is nothing in the constitution that says I don't still have that right. All law abiding citizens should have that right. Just because a bunch of power-hungry idiots in Ottawa write something on paper and convince their armed thugs to enforce it doesn't make it right.

Irrelevant. The overwhelming majority of Canadians, do not have the right.

Quote:

And yet so many want to be non-Canadian (ie. sioux, haida, chippewa) except at certain times when they get their special entitlement.

Incorrect. That entitlement, by contract, isn't based on Canadian citizenship.

Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

The law is or the Act? I was referring to the law. DUHmpy said the law was racist.

The Act, my bad. I thought you were referring to the Act.
 
dumpthemonarchy
+1
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

I'm wondering if the main complaint here is about the dentists and their pay or about the ethnicity of the patients!

The ethnicity of the patients is not important. It's about taxpayers getting fleeced, and most aborginals still getting lousy dental service because they lack the money. It's pathetic how some people who make just about nothing, are creating millionaires.

The fed govt is paying 7x more than the private sector, so it's news. Everyone is following corrupt bueaucratic racist laws thanks to the Indian Act, so all is fine, so far. Let's recind it and move on and make Indians Canadians. Most Indians will be happier and more successful. The leadership will bleat, but so what.
 
Cannuck
-1
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

The Crown got land, we got "special status and rights"..

Never thought I'd see the day where you would actually admit to that.
 
CDNBear
+1
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Never thought I'd see the day where you would actually admit to that.

Admit what?

That we were guaranteed certain concessions for the trading of land in our possession?

Or were you confused by the use of quotations to denote using PoliticalNicks terminology?

I can understand if it was the latter, well, the former or both for that matter. Your admitted stupidity must wreak havoc on your cognitive skills.
 
Cannuck
-1
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Admit what?

Seriously, see a doctor. You seem to getting worse with every post.
 
CDNBear
+1
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Seriously, see a doctor. You seem to getting worse with every post.

I can see how your admitted stupidity would make that simple question very hard for you to grasp.
 

Similar Threads

0
Dentists' tombs unveiled south of Cairo
by CBC News | Oct 22nd, 2006
2
Oil Shale Reserves
by I think not | May 8th, 2006
no new posts