No worries. Red is my favourite colour anyway.
That was my point, read in context of the conversation that is not anywhere near how it comes across.
Attawapiskat chief goes on hunger strike
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
No worries. Red is my favourite colour anyway.
That was my point, read in context of the conversation that is not anywhere near how it comes across.
I disagreed with the implication because it was erroneous, as my reply clearly indicated.
You thought wrong. Which is why I took the time to point out the error.
read in the context of the conversation, I did not think anyone here would have a problem with the idea of over turning a low down treaty that was bought off in whiskey, so I consider it as a good example to pose the idea that a treaty can be over turned.
Except the fact that you missed my post that clearly answers that.
You thought wrong again btw.
Seeing as it has never happened, it wasn't.
You're batting zero.
Sometimes sitting peacefully in a tent, protesting treatment and asking for answers isn't enough.
Which is EXACTLY what many want done. Not just ignore parts, but tear up and throw away the whole damn thing as if it never happened.
Do you mind being specific about my errors?
Was I wrong about EI for less than a year?
Was I wrong about social assistance not being much?
Was I wrong about that I would like survive with charity and foodbanks?
Was I wrong about everything I own slowly deteriorating until I had nothing?
Was I wrong to ask an open ended question about whether it is similar for someone on a reservation? You could have answered that anyway you wanted. no?
Until that day I had no idea but apparently the local KFC franchisee and my friend did.
It was an educational day. I had no idea how many went to the park just to get their $5 based on the principle of it.
The $5 insult and having it adjusted for inflation is one of the points I've heard talked about which IMHO is a point that does needs to be addressed.
I agree.
But I can not bring myself to endorse lawless behaviour.
It is one of my core beliefs to not interfere with the lives of other people. Being financially or otherwise.
I know.
I blame ignorance, stupidity and bigotry.
How about you?
That one may be myth but I have seen rez houses where the siding has been pulled off and fed to the wood stove. Also flooring in one house but that one was kind of a party shack.
Go back and read my reply.
Failing to do so and carrying the string of the conversation along in order, would indicate you aren't looking for reasoned discussion.
Again, go back and read my reply.
Which can lead to problems when the Province pays more to those living off Rez than the Rez pays to people on Rez from Fed funding.
It makes for an exodus from the Rez which drops overall funding for the Rez which is based on Rez population.
Another stereotype...
Do you go dabbin'?
Are you trying to tell me you are unaware of the definitions of 'welfare' or the legal use of the word in treaty law, but feel compelled to put forward erroneous, if not silly, comparisons, and failed to understand the definition in which I used it?
My, how interesting.
Maybe expanding your vocabulary as well as you knowledge of what treaties are or are not, would help as well.
wel·fare
/ˈwelˌfe(ə)r/
Noun
- The health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group.
- Statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need.
The actual definition as used in treaty law is the first definition.
Go figure, lol.
Last edited:
Hair on ya bud for maintaining an open mind... I don't know about you, but all those white man canadian bastards look the same to me... Can't tell the f*ckers apart, I say
Oh c'mon now!
It is in no way unclear that the word was used in its first definition and not its second definition.
To "confuse" the two in the context of his statement is not even making a semantic argument! Yet you were clearly using it as the second definition of the word.