Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2024 20:10:28 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: [OT] The mass graves that never were?
References: <20240530193243.00006135@example.com> <edfl5jphmd18sajo178h29umkncgq4921p@4ax.com> <20240601120517.00001de5@example.com> <sa8p5j9mj0r18sb4ahs8m1uuglsv2vrilu@4ax.com>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2024 13:07:18 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-AB7B0D.13071702062024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 127
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-qw0vahUiwzciELCFSlNerfncXDjChCItGlr2n+baWBcFObIX4im9tlkfA36/oisfvb7UXctIVQaNtFM!R43aupSSnQG/o7IN2iS6LpXD/64pRApbPBnDHHB4NI1irobL7wlIG8hH+6oLU9kgdpiV/gM/XEbw!OcA=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 8163

In article <sa8p5j9mj0r18sb4ahs8m1uuglsv2vrilu@4ax.com>,
 The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

> On Sat, 1 Jun 2024 12:05:17 -0400, Rhino
> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Obviously the groups that have benefitted have been the aboriginal
> >> groups. A prime example are the "acknowledgements" you hear everywhere
> >> which implicitly recognize aboriginal claims that are by no means
> >> established much less valid.
> >
> >I despise those land acknowledgements. I participated in an online
> >health seminar last year via Zoom, had serious difficulties getting
> >connected and finally arrived about two minutes late for the start of
> >the meeting - and had to sit through a land acknowledgement. It kept me
> >from missing any of the useful content of the meeting but it irked me
> >to have to listen to it especially given that WE WERE ONLINE, not
> >standing on anyone's "sacred ground". 
> 
> Since retirement I have been 'attending' a lot of McMaster webinars
> which they publicize via the alumni association. Which of course is
> how I learned who their native neighbors were. (The difference of
> course being that southern Ontario is covered by native treaties
> whereas in most of southern BC - which is where 95% of the population
> is - native groups (I refuse to call them 'nations' since to me the
> idea of a 'nation' with under 10000 population being equal to Britain,
> France the US etc is beyond ludicrous) get all kinds of benefits from
> me and thee and have reserves but mostly no treaties) Obviously I know
> who all the tribes are in the areas of Vancouver and Victoria since
> you always hear them when there's a government announcement.

About a month and a half a go, I went to a city council meeting for the 
first time because I wanted to see what their plans were regarding some 
adjustments to traffic flow in my neighborhood.

The meeting started not with the Pledge of Allegiance to America, but 
rather an "acknowledgment" that America is systemically racist and the 
land our city is built on was stolen from the Gabrieleno Tongva tribe.

(And how does a native American tribe end up with a hispanic name in the 
first place? If that's what the original Spanish settlers called them, 
isn't it perpetuating the racism or whatever to memorialize them with 
the name their oppressors gave them?)

When it came time for public comment, I got up and told them that (1) 
you say it's "acknowledged" that America is systemically racist as if 
that's a settled question of fact and not open for debate or challenge. 
It is not. And (2) if you acknowledge the city and all its facilities 
are stolen property, I'd like to know your timeline for giving it back 
to its rightful owners. Because that's what you do with stolen property, 
is it not? You give it back. If you're not planning on giving it back, 
you're just a bunch of smug, insufferable leftist idiots who get off on 
signaling your dubious virtue to everyone else.

About half the rest of the people in the room gave me applause, which 
was far more than I ever expected in California. So maybe there's hope 
for us yet.
  
> >> Similarly, any time there is a discussion of disposition of public
> >> land there has become an expectation that aboriginal groups will be
> >> involved in the discussion - there's currently such a discussion going
> >> on concerning a large park on the west coast of southern Vancouver
> >> Island.
> >
> >I guess I can sort of see a role for indigenous participation if the
> >ownership of the land is contested but as far as I know, the land in
> >this city is NOT claimed by the Indians. 
> >
> >> On top of that you have demands - some of which have been
> >> granted - for closure of public parks for 4-6 weeks at a time for
> >> native ceremonies to be held where if you're not native you are barred
> >> from the park.
> >> 
> >That's just wrong. If it's owned by the government, it's flat-out
> >racist to deny non-indigenous people access to it. EVER. And if it's
> >indigenous land, then they control it ALL THE TIME, not just 4 to 6
> >weeks of the time. That proposal is just a way to give them full
> >ownership by stealth.  
> 
> As long as the government is FIRMLY committed to no transfer of
> parkland it's bearable - the one near me is adjacent to the main road
> from Vancouver to Whistler (which is a major ski resort).
> 
> >> Sorry - but I just don't buy it.
> >
> >The whole land claims thing is the can of worms that nobody will open,
> >at least in the southern part of the country. (If I recall correctly,
> >the Delgamuk (sp?) Decision did settle some claims, in the favour of
> 
> The legal case you're referring to is "Delgamuukw v. British Columbia
> (1997)" and didn't settle anything other than a court ruling that they
> had rights that had to be dealt with by negotiation and not government
> fiat. Obviously Justin Trudeau was in his mid 20s at that point right
> about the time he was doing several school productions in blackface.
> 
> The obvious question of course is where people like me would go if the
> aboriginal fantasy of 'no more white people anywhere in North America'
> since with one exception  no one in my direct ancestry came to North
> America after WW1 with some going back 300+ years.
> 
> As I've said before the ultimate question for me is "at what point do
> I become considered 'native' to Canada since if the answer is 'never'
> then we need to have a most unpleasant conversation" (since that would
> imply a race war nobody wants)
> 
> >the indigenous, back in the 70s but I believe it was all in the Far
> >North.) It's a matter that the courts COULD resolve, for once and for
> >all, but neither side seems eager to press for a court decision by
> >filing lawsuits. Not that I'd want them to under the current prime
> >minister! I'm sure his "progressive" running buddies and their
> >"activist" judges would LOVE nothing better than to give all the land
> >back to the Indians and Innuit! What an orgy of virtue-signalling there
> >would be from the Liberals if that happened!!! Of course the next day,
> >when reality set in, it would become obvious that the notion of
> >deporting all the non-indigenous people and taking away the land that
> >they paid mortgages on for generations or inherited was a non-starter
> >and would utterly gut this country. I imagine the indigenous people
> >would realize how catastrophic this all was for them very quickly too
> >as all that government money would dry up since there'd be no one left
> >to tax and almost no one left to govern since all the non-indigenous
> >people would be gone. 
> 
> I'm skeptical since JT has no aboriginal blood in his family tree as
> far as I know and in any case his family tree is 75% non French
> Canadian despite his name. Now I know Quebecers think they've been in
> North America longer than anybody else but most of the French
> settlement was 18th century...