Then its clear to me you don't understand my contention.
This may seem crazy, but it's entirely possible to simultaneously understand and reject your contention.
Don't be geese, they just said "If I understand" which they did not because they then proceeded with a line of logic I had already stated was not my position.
And it does seem crazy to outright dismiss better diplomacy in the years leading up to this, it seems downright callous to the lives we've lost to just throw up our hands "There was nothing we could have done differently, it was just fate!" like as if the conflicts in the past we engaged in were just inevitable. We should be ashamed supporting conservative international policy that acts counter to peaceful resolutions.
It is possible to hold both the ideas that diplomacy is important and preferable to war, and that the previous cessation of direct flights would not have had a measurable impact on this outcome
It is also possible to believe both of those things are true, and that actions could have been taken to prevent this last week's tragedy (though I struggle to think of much the Canadian Government could have done)
KetBra on
+3
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
They were on that ukrainian flight because there are no direct flights between Iran and Canada. These flights stopped in 2012 when the Harper gov't cut diplomatic ties with Iran. Which means the blood of 63 canadians is on the hands of Harper for this, and of Trudeau for not reversing this policy and resuming diplomatic relations with Iran over the past four years.
This makes me furious at the Trudeau Liberals. They've been acting like caretakers for the CPC for their entire first mandate, keeping the alt-right status quo instead of restauring our country and repairing the harm Harper did.
I wanted to reply to this last night and talk about how ridiculous of a post it was but couldn't find the words, I'm glad others have picked up the ball.
If you want to be mad at Trudeau for not doing "more" to combat the shit Harper passed, that's one thing, but pick your battles dude.
No, it is not ridiculous. This is us learning to pick our battles better as well.
Maybe its just that we've been pouring over all the details that lead to the point of Trump The Tyrant fucking up so bad, but its pretty clear at this point that creating the scenario where horrifying mistakes of Iran operators at high alert running soviet era technology involved Trump government tearing up Obama government deals to hit them with Sanctions again that cripple their banking and Harper government supporting that situation with Sanctions and removing diplomats that Trudeau government wasn't willing to embarrass the USA by reversing. Sanctions put their back up against the wall, we aren't blameless in putting those in place. Economic attacks are still an attack, we should know better after 2008, when credit gets fucked with we all suffer from lost opportunities and when Trump threw tariffs at us and called us, their longest and most steadfast allies, a national security risk, people lost jobs - we weren't exactly feeling like being polite with the USA then either. Sanctions are 100 times worse than that.
Its devastating that it was a civilian flight with us on it but this could have happened to anyone trying to exit that war zone, hopefully this grieving process will help sober up some of us and help us realize where we need to improve. We need to acknowledge our own responsibility in contributing to this, even if its brutally blatantly the USA's fault for drafting up orders to put in front of Trump on pulling the trigger on the assassination under a diplomatic white flag that would antagonize anyone into high alert, let alone Iranians.
We have. We have none.
At the end of the day we're a small fish next to a very big shark and we have to play the game with that in mind.
If you're unwilling to acknowledge something exists, you're very unlikely to make any changes that will have a different outcome. I have no desire to see things pushed to escalation all over again, so we're just going to have to agree to disagree that the status quo of no diplomacy and Sanctions is blameless in creating a situation ready to explode at the first bit of human malice or error.
You've provided zero reason why anything Canada has done has contributed to this problem in any way. This is all still some farcical silliness. Like people are desperate to find some reason why we must have something to do with these events.
Also, you should look at what happened with Europe, who actually have some decent amount of trade with Iran, and Iranian sanctions. Because, as ever, it's not as simple as just doing whatever you want.
You’re not wrong in that words are failing me to adequately make the case for better diplomacy.
So I hope you don’t mind if I use another’s from 2010 from the run up IIRC to Obama trying to improve relations with Iran
Undermining Communication and Increasing Misperception
In addition to information collection, one of the primary roles of an embassy is to serve as a conduit for communication between the sender and target state.29 Embassy officials constantly meet with both high-level members of the government and with citizens of their host country. Day-to-day communication is essential, not only to convey U.S. interests and understand host country concerns, but also to explain certain key U.S. decisions. Similarly, regular face-to-face communication in the target country also helps the sender state to forge relationships with people in the host state and develop these relationships over time.30
Diplomatic sanctions may hinder communication between the target and sender states, making miscommunication or misperception between the states more likely. Such sanctions create fewer formal channels of communication and contribute to increased resistance to other forms of state-to-state interaction in the name of isolation. Not only is communication reduced, but states are also more likely to be dismissive or uncertain about the nature of messages conveyed through alternative communication channels or third parties.
During the Korean conflict, for instance, U.S. uncertainty regarding the credibility of a message sent from China through a third-party ambassador may have influenced China's decision to enter the war. At the time, the United States and China did not have diplomatic relations. While Chinese preparations to intervene began prior to the U.S. crossing of the 38th parallel, the decision to intervene does not appear to have been fully finalized and implemented until after the Chinese perceived Soviet support to be secured and the Americans actually crossed the 38th parallel.31 The Chinese even issued a warning after an emergency meeting on October 2, 1950, stating, “The American forces are endeavoring to cross the 38th parallel and aim to expand the war. If they really want to do so, we will not sit still and do nothing. We will surely respond. Please inform your prime minister of this position.” 32
Diplomatic sanctions detract from U.S. public diplomacy to the target state's people.
The warning, however, was issued through an Indian diplomat, who served as the third-party communicator between China and the United States. According to Secretary of State Dean Acheson, the reports from the Indians were consistent on this issue, but were not taken to be completely credible as the United States thought that Ambassador Kavalam Pannikar of India, who conveyed the message, was not the most reliable messenger.33 The United States viewed Pannikar as a biased messenger and distrusted him due to his “leftist” political beliefs. David Halberstam writes that Acheson “viewed Pannikar as a mouthpiece for Beijing and not a serious diplomat.”34
More recently, the lack of diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States contributed to another situation in which a message was passed through a third party from the Iranians to the United States and ultimately ignored. In May 2003, the Foreign Ministry of Iran sent a fax to the Swiss ambassador in Tehran proposing a “grand bargain” between Iran and the United States. The document addressed terrorism, Iran's nuclear program, and Israel, calling for direct talks in addition to U.S.-Iran working groups on disarmament, regional security, and economic cooperation.35 According to multiple sources, the United States neither responded to the fax nor seriously considered the proposal.36 While it is unclear whether Iran and the United States could have made progress on any of the issues had the proposal been addressed, the diplomatic climate combined with the U.S. policy of isolating the regime took even considering the proposal off the table.
Canada’s sanctions are supporting what can be read in the above article that recognized sanctions increase tensions and make war more likely. We supported them and their kill-whoever-he-feels-like President in creating the conditions that led to these horrible, unnecessary tragic deaths.
We still too closely mirror the failed USA international policies that led to this, it won’t be the last unnecessary deaths if we keep letting our warhawks follow their warhawks to war, even if they aren’t elected their bungling of international relations when they were need to be redressed even if it ruffles American feathers. We could have been trying to bring them both back to peace talks instead of propping up this dictatorial President, even minimally, on the world stage.
You accuse me of being silly, but good diplomacy is a very serious matter, sometimes it means not bolstering the bad intentions of our allies by using more nuance than officially ignoring the enemies they helped make.
What part of improved diplomatic ties with Tehran and good diplomacy would have prevented the anti-aircraft missile from being fired (almost certainly mistakenly) at a Ukrainian airliner due to tensions stoked by a US assassination? I am not being facetious. Remove the sanctions and have great diplomatic relations with Iran. Trump still gets elected president, still assassinated the guy, and still causes the Iranian missile strike that put their AA batteries on high alert. The plane still gets shot down. Maybe there are fewer Canadians on that particular flight, though with airfare probably not, but the flight still gets shot down killing hundreds.
Ok, so you're not trying to facetious but you're still trying to set up a straw man here you know can be knocked down. Physically, nothing short of hitting the AA first stops it from being fired for any reason the operators come up with, diplomacy doesn't physically sabotage a nation's defensive apparatus, they managed this feat of incompetence all on their own. You already know the answer of the how a plane gets shot down.
But wouldn't a few Canadians less on that flight be worth it? Remember, its not like we don't have a history of using diplomatic resources to make a situation better, got turned into a movie Argo where the USA got to take most of the credit for the operation:
Sorry, but if we want to pretend that we have no impact on Americans by our own lending credibility by as IIRC was once called "a coalition of the willing" by joining them in Sanctions or that our polite words in an official capacity wouldn't smooth enmities over even a little bit - at the very least operations like that aren't possible now since we entered into Sanctions, those assets are gone. No intelligence gathering we verify ourselves with experienced diplomats and their agents, no subterfuge of safe houses, no issuing of documents in country, no diplomatic pouches, nothing.
I would rather Iranian-Canadians be able to shelter in a home we've vetted as a diplomatic asset or have in real time information on travel advisories based on good intel gathered locally in Tehran, instead of rushing on to commercial flights either too late or too soon, however you may judge it in hindsight, while the USA and Iran enter into hostilities for just the most banal of reasons. With diplomacy, its not impossible that our citizens could have been leaving by way of less high alert paths overland, by water, a completely different airport, or on a specially designated diplomatic charter flight.
How do I get through to you, my fellow Canadians, on just how fucking useful good diplomacy is as a tool in promoting peace over war, especially in this case?! I'm at a loss in response in this thread, that in light of all these things, we double down on the conservative policies that led us here in our grief rather than have a moment of self reflection. Our dead deserve better than this, damn it!
On what are you basing the idea that they were fleeing Tehran out of concern for their safety rather than taking part in long planned travel arrangements on a regularly scheduled commercial flight and flightpath? Iran and Ukraine have strong diplomatic ties and foreign relations, with both having embassies in each other's capitals, if they were going to warn various flag airlines about not operating that night. Iran also has far more direct control over Tehran Airport and air traffic, which they could have grounded if they wanted to keep the skies clear that night. You could place as much blame on the weather in Kiev for this incident as Canadian foreign policy.
Are you sure you're being serious? You sure you don't have some smarmy grin pasted across your face behind the keyboard you're typing this out on?
Yes.
If I understand your contention: a Canadian foreign policy that fully reversed Harper's regarding Iran might have potentially resulted in a restoration of direct flights between Tehran and Toronto. Which might have potentially drawn Canadian passengers off the doomed AUI flight, depending on airfare versus layover &c. decisions among passengers. And which might have potentially been placed into a different takeoff slot to not pass in front of the same AA battery at that same time. (Which would have resulted in an Air Canada flight being shot down instead, it's not as though they were intentionally targeting a commercial airline) And thereby saving Canadian lives by having fewer on Flight 752.
Because that is what strikes me as four thin reeds duct taped together, and I can't see a more direct path between improved Canadian diplomacy and fewer souls onboard.
Then its clear to me you don't understand my contention.
My contention is that the USA wouldn't feel as secure in the build up to this situation of high, alert in which in similar high alerts tragedies have happened before and it just happened again, if the USA had not had a "coalition of the willing" in not just occupying Iraq, regime change, and fighting ISIS because of the failure of the previous deliberately bad intel to justify the case for war, a time period in which various political propaganda in USA has been making threats about the need to go to war with Iran too, but also in us closing embassy's and more from 2012 onwards in support of USA Sanctions against Iran rather than supporting Obama's deal and trying to calm tensions or at the very least have assets that could gather unfiltered intel of the situation on the ground.
To only narrow the contention down to the tragic Ukranian flight is too narrow.
This whole tangent started by literally saying the blood of those passengers are on Harper and Trudeau's hands. Nothing you have said since has made that any less ridiculous a claim.
Better diplomacy between Ottawa and Tehran would be a good thing. That is a true statement that is wholly independent from what happened. Even if it had been in place for the last decade it would not have prevented Trump from assassinating the General, Iran from having to respond, and so their AA batteries being jumpy when the flight crossed its path.
With the tensions around the world now I saw "Radiological" Alert and assumed the worst. What is really worrying is that they are not saying nothing happened.
With the tensions around the world now I saw "Radiological" Alert and assumed the worst. What is really worrying is that they are not saying nothing happened.
The alert that just came out said there was no situation occurring.
“We can assure everyone within a 10 km radius of our Pickering plant that everyone is safe knowing that Mike continues to diligently press buttons on various control panels,” explained a plant official. “What most of these buttons and do-thingies activate, we’re not entirely sure, but the plant is not a smouldering crater, so it must mean we’re doing a good job.”
“And, thanks to Mike, we now know where the emergency alert button is located,” added the official.
With the tensions around the world now I saw "Radiological" Alert and assumed the worst. What is really worrying is that they are not saying nothing happened.
The alert that just came out said there was no situation occurring.
Considering that the provincial government is pretty corrupt and incompetent right now, I'm going to remain skeptical.
“We can assure everyone within a 10 km radius of our Pickering plant that everyone is safe knowing that Mike continues to diligently press buttons on various control panels,” explained a plant official. “What most of these buttons and do-thingies activate, we’re not entirely sure, but the plant is not a smouldering crater, so it must mean we’re doing a good job.”
“And, thanks to Mike, we now know where the emergency alert button is located,” added the official.
Mike must be related to Homer Simpson.
0
Options
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
*eyeroll*
But also, hurray for minor amounts of CPC vote splitting. Dismay for all-but-assured continued LPC rule ... Man, is there ever a happy moment in politics anymore? :P
So turns out that nuclear warning this morning did not originate from OPG; it was generated by the Provincial Emergency Operations Centre (PEOC) which is a government agency and not run by OPG.
*eyeroll*
But also, hurray for minor amounts of CPC vote splitting. Dismay for all-but-assured continued LPC rule ... Man, is there ever a happy moment in politics anymore? :P
"With the expected seats we're going to win in Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the Conservative Party of Canada will never govern again," Downing said.
This article is a treasure trove.
In the 2015 federal election, Downing ran with the Christian Heritage Party and told CBC in 2019 he's since been involved with federal Conservative Party boards and as a campaign manager with the former provincial Wildrose Party. Before that, he was an RCMP officer who was suspended for uttering threats against his ex-wife.
EDIT:
Then again, it would be a lot funnier if I didn't have the nagging feeling the national media will build up this delusional alt-right wife-beater as a serious political force, like they did with Bernier.
Johnson, 56, and his granddaughter were using government-issued Indian Status cards, his birth certificate and her medical card. He said the employee became suspicious and went upstairs with their cards.
He believes the employee might have been suspicious because he had $30,000 in his account — an amount he and every other member of the Heiltsuk nation received in December from the federal government as part of an Aboriginal rights settlement package.
He says the employee then told them to come upstairs to retrieve their identification. Not long after, they saw police walking toward them.
"They came over and grabbed me and my granddaughter, took us to a police vehicle and handcuffed both of us, told us we were being detained and read us our rights," Johnson said.
Johnson says when he saw his granddaughter in handcuffs, crying, he was heartbroken.
"You can see how scared she was … It was really hard to see that," he said.
Johnson says he believes he was racially profiled.
...
Well, I know which bank I won't be holding any accounts with...
Johnson, 56, and his granddaughter were using government-issued Indian Status cards, his birth certificate and her medical card. He said the employee became suspicious and went upstairs with their cards.
He believes the employee might have been suspicious because he had $30,000 in his account — an amount he and every other member of the Heiltsuk nation received in December from the federal government as part of an Aboriginal rights settlement package.
He says the employee then told them to come upstairs to retrieve their identification. Not long after, they saw police walking toward them.
"They came over and grabbed me and my granddaughter, took us to a police vehicle and handcuffed both of us, told us we were being detained and read us our rights," Johnson said.
Johnson says when he saw his granddaughter in handcuffs, crying, he was heartbroken.
"You can see how scared she was … It was really hard to see that," he said.
Johnson says he believes he was racially profiled.
...
Well, I know which bank I won't be holding any accounts with...
Why the fuck would you handcuff them?
It's not like dangerous bank robbers in body armour or some shit.
I hope everyone involved in the decision to call authorities is fired and has to apologize and I'd say I hope the cops who cuffed them are fired but we know how that will go.
What a bunch of racist shit bags. "oh no, a (racist term here) has some money in his account, must be illicit, get him!"
I work for one of the other major Canuck banks, and while I'm not at the branch level, I still end up having to take all of the training around fraud identification and money laundering. What happened at that BMO branch in no way reflects anything I've ever seen as far as ways of handling a suspicious situation goes. Generally when there's a transaction you're not sure of, it's all information gathering, and notification up to internal departments who then take care of reviewing things, and you placate the customer in the interim. Calling the cops is like, beyond the pale.
I work for one of the other major Canuck banks, and while I'm not at the branch level, I still end up having to take all of the training around fraud identification and money laundering. What happened at that BMO branch in no way reflects anything I've ever seen as far as ways of handling a suspicious situation goes. Generally when there's a transaction you're not sure of, it's all information gathering, and notification up to internal departments who then take care of reviewing things, and you placate the customer in the interim. Calling the cops is like, beyond the pale.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the procedure (for white people) is:
Photocopy all ID provided
Open the accounts requested
Deposit the funds provided with a hold on them until they clear
If the funds don’t clear, then you confiscate/lock them down, and forward the ID copies to the relevant authorities.
I work for one of the other major Canuck banks, and while I'm not at the branch level, I still end up having to take all of the training around fraud identification and money laundering. What happened at that BMO branch in no way reflects anything I've ever seen as far as ways of handling a suspicious situation goes. Generally when there's a transaction you're not sure of, it's all information gathering, and notification up to internal departments who then take care of reviewing things, and you placate the customer in the interim. Calling the cops is like, beyond the pale.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the procedure (for white people) is:
Photocopy all ID provided
Open the accounts requested
Deposit the funds provided with a hold on them until they clear
If the funds don’t clear, then you confiscate/lock them down, and forward the ID copies to the relevant authorities.
Which is why this seems very much like an issue of racist idiots at the local branch and racist idiots in the local police force. I would be shocked if the branch employees weren't stepping miles outside the lines of official BMO policy or training.
Which is why the relevant point for the bank as a whole is how management reacts here because almost certainly they only found out about this after the fact like the rest of us did.
Catholic board teachers in Ontario will be joining the Public board teachers in part time strikes starting next week. A completely avoidable situation unless you are Doug Ford
Question on this: I'm assuming this is the BC pipeline issue? From what I've read, the pipeline company signed agreements with every elected band council along the route and the opposition is coming from the fact that a number of hereditary chiefs believe that their assent is needed too. The courts have consistently ruled for the pipeline company due to the assent of the elected councils, so while I understand that, in general, Canada hasn't the best record with indigenous affairs, I have a harder time supporting the notion of a hereditary ruling class over-ruling the elected officials here.
That's basically the gist of it.
20 something nations signed on and the courts ruled it should proceed and so it will.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
The contention comes from the fact that the BC government has not signed a treaty with the Wetsuwet'en nation, despite the Supreme Court telling them to get on it back in '97. Which means that the land is unceded land, and the heredetary chiefs still have legal claim to authority over the land. Until that treaty is signed, we are using violence to remove a first nation from their land. Again.
+2
Options
El SkidThe frozen white northRegistered Userregular
I work for one of the other major Canuck banks, and while I'm not at the branch level, I still end up having to take all of the training around fraud identification and money laundering. What happened at that BMO branch in no way reflects anything I've ever seen as far as ways of handling a suspicious situation goes. Generally when there's a transaction you're not sure of, it's all information gathering, and notification up to internal departments who then take care of reviewing things, and you placate the customer in the interim. Calling the cops is like, beyond the pale.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the procedure (for white people) is:
Photocopy all ID provided
Open the accounts requested
Deposit the funds provided with a hold on them until they clear
If the funds don’t clear, then you confiscate/lock them down, and forward the ID copies to the relevant authorities.
Which is why this seems very much like an issue of racist idiots at the local branch and racist idiots in the local police force. I would be shocked if the branch employees weren't stepping miles outside the lines of official BMO policy or training.
Which is why the relevant point for the bank as a whole is how management reacts here because almost certainly they only found out about this after the fact like the rest of us did.
I also work for a financial institution. There are lots of laws around money laundering etc and the way it's supposed to go is:
- Get as much information about the reason for the transaction as possible
- Fill out a detailed form with all the details and your suspicions that goes immediately to people that get paid a lot of money to look at these transactions so they can decide if followup is required
- Don't give the person any indication anything might be wrong. It is spelled out in what amounts to large letters that it's not your job to talk to them about any potential problems with their transaction, and doing so might compromise the investigation.
Given this, I have a hard time believing that this was anything but pure racism on the part of the individual. I hope the bank does everything it can to make it clear that this is just their employee and they're taking appropriate measures to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Question on this: I'm assuming this is the BC pipeline issue? From what I've read, the pipeline company signed agreements with every elected band council along the route and the opposition is coming from the fact that a number of hereditary chiefs believe that their assent is needed too. The courts have consistently ruled for the pipeline company due to the assent of the elected councils, so while I understand that, in general, Canada hasn't the best record with indigenous affairs, I have a harder time supporting the notion of a hereditary ruling class over-ruling the elected officials here.
Its a bit more complicated than that, this is from last year:
A snippet from the article but it is informative to give the whole thing a read, not sure what exactly has changed significantly in the courts for this to not be a solid break down of the contention at the heart of this:
Public opinion on who is right and who is wrong continues to rage on social media and in the news. Inquiring minds want to understand why the Wet’suwet’en want to stop the development of the pipeline. They want to understand the differences between hereditary and Indian Act elected chiefs and council. Once you have answers to these questions, you can decide if this was an injustice.
I think there is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of the role of Hereditary Chiefs, a term the rest of us assigned them actually, when we consider them all to be similar to monarchs when that is not the case. When I personally have inquired as to just what a chief does, usually when I've heard a First Nation member complaining about their Sachem or Ha'wiih, its struck me as very similar to our Senators:
multiple positions aka not a lone ruler
not elected
supposed to lead with honour and be aspirational community members
meant to be life long appointments
meant to represent long term welfare of a nation
meant to be a chamber of sober second thought
a part of the approval process of the ascension of decisions to laws
they hold votes among themselves
And while our federation’s senators also have its detractors, especially when senators don’t conduct themselves with honour, they are recognized as official but First Nations hereditary chiefs and elder institutions are not recognized as official, even when they are recognized in that First Nation’s constitution that they developed rather than imposed obligations in the Indian Act.
And dependent on which First Nation you got to know by listening to their life stories, I think you might find Chiefs aren’t ‘just born’ either, they are moulded by the teachings of their elders, recognizing their ancestors, and raised by their communities. In some of the harder hit communities, Residential School did generational damage to their family units and subsequently the chiefs institutions suffered as well. I learned about this when I asked “Who was the first set of chiefs that made the hereditary chiefs a thing?”and “By what criteria are new chiefs appointed?” Different Nations had different answers, not all their chiefs were the same, but more often than not I was told their duties and it sounded very similar to the role a Senator commits to.
Prior to colonization, many Indigenous nations, such as the Haida, Nisga’a, Nuu-chah-nulth and Kwakwaka’wakw had hereditary chiefs. The Indian Act imposed a system of governance in which chiefs had to be elected. For Indigenous nations that already had established lines of hereditary chiefs, this new system threatened to overturn traditional modes of governance. Even for people who were familiar with selecting chiefs by group consensus prior to the Indian Act, such as some Cree and Mohawkbands, the Act abolished various customs, such as women’s involvement in the election process (until 1951 when the Indian Act was amended).
Imagine tomorrow if the USA made our Senate illegal, not recognizing it in much the same manner, saying only our House of Commons would be recognized and only if we followed the rules exactly as set out in their North America Act. I am willing to bet, a bunch of Canadians would still recognize the Senate, disconnects between approved bills and the Senators would arise and protests would happen. That’s essentially what we are doing to Nations within our Federation when we don’t recognize their political structures as holding validity and why not finishing treaty ratification before land use agreements are signed like this leads to an up swell of protest. It is unfortunately a deeper issue than just a pipeline.
It's pretty silly to think your average Canadian would give much of a shit about the Senate disappearing imo.
They would if it was a foreign government colonizing us by force and imposing that the Senate will disappear because they don't approve of this mode of governance.
In fact, I think your average Canadian would become a staunch defender of the Senate in this scenario.
Question on this: I'm assuming this is the BC pipeline issue? From what I've read, the pipeline company signed agreements with every elected band council along the route and the opposition is coming from the fact that a number of hereditary chiefs believe that their assent is needed too. The courts have consistently ruled for the pipeline company due to the assent of the elected councils, so while I understand that, in general, Canada hasn't the best record with indigenous affairs, I have a harder time supporting the notion of a hereditary ruling class over-ruling the elected officials here.
Its a bit more complicated than that, this is from last year:
A snippet from the article but it is informative to give the whole thing a read, not sure what exactly has changed significantly in the courts for this to not be a solid break down of the contention at the heart of this:
Public opinion on who is right and who is wrong continues to rage on social media and in the news. Inquiring minds want to understand why the Wet’suwet’en want to stop the development of the pipeline. They want to understand the differences between hereditary and Indian Act elected chiefs and council. Once you have answers to these questions, you can decide if this was an injustice.
I think there is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of the role of Hereditary Chiefs, a term the rest of us assigned them actually, when we consider them all to be similar to monarchs when that is not the case. When I personally have inquired as to just what a chief does, usually when I've heard a First Nation member complaining about their Sachem or Ha'wiih, its struck me as very similar to our Senators:
multiple positions aka not a lone ruler
not elected
supposed to lead with honour and be aspirational community members
meant to be life long appointments
meant to represent long term welfare of a nation
meant to be a chamber of sober second thought
a part of the approval process of the ascension of decisions to laws
they hold votes among themselves
And while our federation’s senators also have its detractors, especially when senators don’t conduct themselves with honour, they are recognized as official but First Nations hereditary chiefs and elder institutions are not recognized as official, even when they are recognized in that First Nation’s constitution that they developed rather than imposed obligations in the Indian Act.
And dependent on which First Nation you got to know by listening to their life stories, I think you might find Chiefs aren’t ‘just born’ either, they are moulded by the teachings of their elders, recognizing their ancestors, and raised by their communities. In some of the harder hit communities, Residential School did generational damage to their family units and subsequently the chiefs institutions suffered as well. I learned about this when I asked “Who was the first set of chiefs that made the hereditary chiefs a thing?”and “By what criteria are new chiefs appointed?” Different Nations had different answers, not all their chiefs were the same, but more often than not I was told their duties and it sounded very similar to the role a Senator commits to.
Prior to colonization, many Indigenous nations, such as the Haida, Nisga’a, Nuu-chah-nulth and Kwakwaka’wakw had hereditary chiefs. The Indian Act imposed a system of governance in which chiefs had to be elected. For Indigenous nations that already had established lines of hereditary chiefs, this new system threatened to overturn traditional modes of governance. Even for people who were familiar with selecting chiefs by group consensus prior to the Indian Act, such as some Cree and Mohawkbands, the Act abolished various customs, such as women’s involvement in the election process (until 1951 when the Indian Act was amended).
Imagine tomorrow if the USA made our Senate illegal, not recognizing it in much the same manner, saying only our House of Commons would be recognized and only if we followed the rules exactly as set out in their North America Act. I am willing to bet, a bunch of Canadians would still recognize the Senate, disconnects between approved bills and the Senators would arise and protests would happen. That’s essentially what we are doing to Nations within our Federation when we don’t recognize their political structures as holding validity and why not finishing treaty ratification before land use agreements are signed like this leads to an up swell of protest. It is unfortunately a deeper issue than just a pipeline.
Ok, but if the chiefs are accepted locally as wise and respected authorities, why did the all band councils go against the elders' judgement?
Posts
Don't be geese, they just said "If I understand" which they did not because they then proceeded with a line of logic I had already stated was not my position.
And it does seem crazy to outright dismiss better diplomacy in the years leading up to this, it seems downright callous to the lives we've lost to just throw up our hands "There was nothing we could have done differently, it was just fate!" like as if the conflicts in the past we engaged in were just inevitable. We should be ashamed supporting conservative international policy that acts counter to peaceful resolutions.
It is also possible to believe both of those things are true, and that actions could have been taken to prevent this last week's tragedy (though I struggle to think of much the Canadian Government could have done)
fantastic way to wake up
Oops!
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
This whole tangent started by literally saying the blood of those passengers are on Harper and Trudeau's hands. Nothing you have said since has made that any less ridiculous a claim.
Better diplomacy between Ottawa and Tehran would be a good thing. That is a true statement that is wholly independent from what happened. Even if it had been in place for the last decade it would not have prevented Trump from assassinating the General, Iran from having to respond, and so their AA batteries being jumpy when the flight crossed its path.
The alert that just came out said there was no situation occurring.
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
Employee responsible for pressing wrong button for alert resumes pressing wrong buttons at nuclear plant
Considering that the provincial government is pretty corrupt and incompetent right now, I'm going to remain skeptical.
Mike must be related to Homer Simpson.
*eyeroll*
But also, hurray for minor amounts of CPC vote splitting. Dismay for all-but-assured continued LPC rule ... Man, is there ever a happy moment in politics anymore? :P
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
https://opg.com/media_release/opg-statement-about-pickering-nuclear/
This article is a treasure trove.
EDIT:
Then again, it would be a lot funnier if I didn't have the nagging feeling the national media will build up this delusional alt-right wife-beater as a serious political force, like they did with Bernier.
Pretty reasonable reaction from a 1%er and hopefully he does more than just tweet about it
SteamID: edgruberman GOG Galaxy: EdGruberman
The first time I read this all I could think was "Man, this guy really likes MILFs".
Don't we all?
Well, I know which bank I won't be holding any accounts with...
But all my accounts are already there...
Assumption of fraud just because a minority has money is horrible, and calling the police before anything can proven is a waste of everyone’s time.
The police were being ridiculous by handcuffing the pair instead of just taking their information and contacting them if anything further was needed.
MWO: Adamski
It's not like dangerous bank robbers in body armour or some shit.
I hope everyone involved in the decision to call authorities is fired and has to apologize and I'd say I hope the cops who cuffed them are fired but we know how that will go.
What a bunch of racist shit bags. "oh no, a (racist term here) has some money in his account, must be illicit, get him!"
Fuuuuuuuuuuuuck these people.
Thankfully I have no bmo accounts or investments.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the procedure (for white people) is:
Photocopy all ID provided
Open the accounts requested
Deposit the funds provided with a hold on them until they clear
If the funds don’t clear, then you confiscate/lock them down, and forward the ID copies to the relevant authorities.
MWO: Adamski
Which is why this seems very much like an issue of racist idiots at the local branch and racist idiots in the local police force. I would be shocked if the branch employees weren't stepping miles outside the lines of official BMO policy or training.
Which is why the relevant point for the bank as a whole is how management reacts here because almost certainly they only found out about this after the fact like the rest of us did.
This is a "you don't work here anymore" situation for their brand so we'll see.
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
Question on this: I'm assuming this is the BC pipeline issue? From what I've read, the pipeline company signed agreements with every elected band council along the route and the opposition is coming from the fact that a number of hereditary chiefs believe that their assent is needed too. The courts have consistently ruled for the pipeline company due to the assent of the elected councils, so while I understand that, in general, Canada hasn't the best record with indigenous affairs, I have a harder time supporting the notion of a hereditary ruling class over-ruling the elected officials here.
20 something nations signed on and the courts ruled it should proceed and so it will.
I also work for a financial institution. There are lots of laws around money laundering etc and the way it's supposed to go is:
- Get as much information about the reason for the transaction as possible
- Fill out a detailed form with all the details and your suspicions that goes immediately to people that get paid a lot of money to look at these transactions so they can decide if followup is required
- Don't give the person any indication anything might be wrong. It is spelled out in what amounts to large letters that it's not your job to talk to them about any potential problems with their transaction, and doing so might compromise the investigation.
Given this, I have a hard time believing that this was anything but pure racism on the part of the individual. I hope the bank does everything it can to make it clear that this is just their employee and they're taking appropriate measures to make sure it doesn't happen again.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/12/10/banking_while_black_toronto_man_accuses_scotiabank_of_racial_profiling.html
Its a bit more complicated than that, this is from last year:
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2019/01/10/Unistoten-Movement-Law-Its-Side/
A snippet from the article but it is informative to give the whole thing a read, not sure what exactly has changed significantly in the courts for this to not be a solid break down of the contention at the heart of this:
I think there is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of the role of Hereditary Chiefs, a term the rest of us assigned them actually, when we consider them all to be similar to monarchs when that is not the case. When I personally have inquired as to just what a chief does, usually when I've heard a First Nation member complaining about their Sachem or Ha'wiih, its struck me as very similar to our Senators:
- multiple positions aka not a lone ruler
- not elected
- supposed to lead with honour and be aspirational community members
- meant to be life long appointments
- meant to represent long term welfare of a nation
- meant to be a chamber of sober second thought
- a part of the approval process of the ascension of decisions to laws
- they hold votes among themselves
And while our federation’s senators also have its detractors, especially when senators don’t conduct themselves with honour, they are recognized as official but First Nations hereditary chiefs and elder institutions are not recognized as official, even when they are recognized in that First Nation’s constitution that they developed rather than imposed obligations in the Indian Act.And dependent on which First Nation you got to know by listening to their life stories, I think you might find Chiefs aren’t ‘just born’ either, they are moulded by the teachings of their elders, recognizing their ancestors, and raised by their communities. In some of the harder hit communities, Residential School did generational damage to their family units and subsequently the chiefs institutions suffered as well. I learned about this when I asked “Who was the first set of chiefs that made the hereditary chiefs a thing?”and “By what criteria are new chiefs appointed?” Different Nations had different answers, not all their chiefs were the same, but more often than not I was told their duties and it sounded very similar to the role a Senator commits to.
Source: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chief
Imagine tomorrow if the USA made our Senate illegal, not recognizing it in much the same manner, saying only our House of Commons would be recognized and only if we followed the rules exactly as set out in their North America Act. I am willing to bet, a bunch of Canadians would still recognize the Senate, disconnects between approved bills and the Senators would arise and protests would happen. That’s essentially what we are doing to Nations within our Federation when we don’t recognize their political structures as holding validity and why not finishing treaty ratification before land use agreements are signed like this leads to an up swell of protest. It is unfortunately a deeper issue than just a pipeline.
They would if it was a foreign government colonizing us by force and imposing that the Senate will disappear because they don't approve of this mode of governance.
In fact, I think your average Canadian would become a staunch defender of the Senate in this scenario.
If that's your reaction I think you missed the point pretty hard.
Ok, but if the chiefs are accepted locally as wise and respected authorities, why did the all band councils go against the elders' judgement?