- 0 Posts
- 99 Comments
6·6 months ago…polished environments and character models…
No more triangle titty. ;_;
Unfortunately, many media outlets do not understand the differences and serve only to further confuse their viewers on the topic. The only source I would trust regarding any indigenous topics is APTN. The linked video briefly describes the differences between elected and hereditary chiefs in Wet’suwet’en law, though this may be different with other tribal law systems.
I will only add that the elected chiefs, representing their respective reserves, have a conflict of interest since the funding they rely on to provide for their people comes from the government, which is obviously not on their side. For them, it was either endorse the pipeline or lose funding from the government, which would probably mean losing their land.
Also, this video talks about RCMP disinformation tactics using the media to misrepresent the people who’s land is being taken away as criminals.
As if the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was just expensive PR.
Should spend more, 220m seems a bit low.
I wonder how many people have microscopes in their homes. 🫣
1·8 months agoWhy did you have to look? Now the magic that keeps it all together has been dispelled. :(
Why not both? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well, wouldn’t those technically be the same monument?
As long as there’s no added sugar, the fruit juices should be fine. Not all sugars are equal, and fructose is a long chain sugar so it’s more like a fuse then the dynamite (glucose).
I was commenting on the irony of seeking reconciliation when laying charges against indigenous people for practising their rights as laid out by their treaties. Sorry that went over your head.
10·9 months agoToday, on the history of memes…
That would be good, but given the Governments track record (regardless of which party is involved) I doubt anything like that will be implemented.
Hello there, fellow kids. [real]
“We recognize that fisheries … are of great social, cultural, spiritual and economic importance to many Indigenous peoples, and we remain committed to upholding Indigenous fishing rights, including the treaty right to fish for a moderate livelihood,” department spokesperson Lauren Sankey said.
Then why are you charging them?
“Our approach to enforcing the Fisheries Act is based on respect for conservation, transparent and predictable management and reconciliation.”
Then why are you charging them?
The Supreme Court of Canada’s 1999 Marshall decision said the Mi’kmaq, Maliseet and Passamaquoddy bands in Eastern Canada could hunt, fish and gather to earn a “moderate livelihood,” though the court followed up with a clarification two months later, saying the treaty right was subject to federal regulation to ensure conservation.
In my view, that means the colonial fisheries have a set amount, and any other fisheries are deemed illegal in the name of conservation. Rather, conserving the lobster and fish population for the colonial fisheries.
Just another way the Canadian government handily interprets treaties to it’s own benefit and oppresses indigenous people. Classic Canadian Government.
Yes, exactly. You won’t do anything about the issues that are much more immediate because “they” have created these other issues for you. It certainly is important that people don’t have their right trampled on just because of their sexual orientation though, and the funny thing is it seems to be the same group that are protecting those that are fucking everything up environmentally. I hope votes are enough to stop it all.
It’s almost as if the headline is clickbait or something. Bullshit article about a bullshit survey that can’t even be called a survey.