Cookslav

http://www.calgaryherald.com/entertainment/Idle+More+protests+gain+little+support+according+survey/7824883/story.html Some more intersting stats, An Ipsos Reid poll, done exclusively for Postmedia News, shows only 31 per cent of Canadians think shutting down roads and railways is a legitimate form of protest. Traffic and border slowdowns by protesting First Nations are expected around the country Wednesday. But disapproval doesn’t mean the public wants police to crack down. Most respondents (59 per cent) said if road and railway shutdowns occur, police shouldn’t arrest protesters; they should back off and let matters be resolved in other ways. “I think it reflects a certain level of sympathy with the (aboriginal) issue,” said Ipsos Reid CEO Darrell Bricker, “but also I think it reflects the legacy of native standoffs.” This cool-down approach is most favoured in British Columbia (where 75 per cent don’t want the police to make arrests) and Atlantic Canada (74 per cent), according to the poll. It’s less favoured in Alberta (where only 45 per cent would suggest the police back off) and Ontario (47 per cent). The poll surveyed 1,000 people online from Jan. 11 to Jan. 14. It is considered accurate to within 3.5 percentage points, 95 per cent of the time.

Amen. Its been my issue from the start. By the way...just food for thought and something to read. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/01/18/kent-roach-and-david-schneiderman-police-are-right-to-be-cautious-with-idle-no-more-protesters/ The basic message of the article is questioning if a Court injunction to stop the protests is warranted or not. The Author is a little to the left...suggesting the prostests should be allowed to continue. Have a read...draw your own conclusions What I find more interesting are the comments....pages and pages of comments. Idle no more protests ares not as supported as you might think. People are slowly but surely voicing oppinions.

Lets see---I've attached links from---ex-Pm's---Farmers unions----authors-----reporters---Pam Palmater---gave personal experiences Yep you have, But theres been a wee bit of unsubstanciated/personal oppinion as well... You know it and so do I I Suppose I could go back and copy/paste and quote it but that would be silly when its all right there in the last few pages. Its just a point to make... If you're going to throw stones at someone for not quoting sources, then be sure your not in the same glass house is all I'm saying. I'm not saying I'm any better... I'm laying out quotes and speaking to the evidence posted, but I'm also not condeming an oppinion based on the lack of a news link....its all here in the thread for the most part, or common knowledge IMO. By the way you skirted around my Question.... "Are you implying that First Nations are a Nation with in our nation and are to be considered sovereign and not Canadians?" Dr. Pam seems to be pushing this... Its a valid question... As a tax payer I think I have a right to ask if we are funding $9 Billion annually to support a sovereign nation with in Canada. I'm just curious as that idea didn't sit well with Canadians when it was put to a Quebec referendum in 1995....thats fact in the history books

I'll second that Thats like the pot calling the kettle black, but welcome back to the debate LOL.... But they are not fellow countryman?...are they? I thought they don't want to be called Canadian....they are a nation with in a nation being paid by Canada, but don't dare ask questions about where the money goes.... Miss Doctor Pam says "We don't need Canada interfearing" So which is it...fellow counrtyman....or freindly neighbor? Or does it even matter as long as we keep paying that $9 Billion tab each year.

Fair enough... Keeping it factual is always best and to be honest getting to the facts or getting to the answers is probobly one of my biggest pet peeves with the whole movement/this thread....the credible sources posted including my own are factually "based" on the words of activists and journalists who are not providing solid sources for their information themselves. Its frustrating....a whole lot of hypothisis and oppinion based on potential future issues and not current standings. Points have been made and discussed and there has been a lot of factual "observation" pointed out as well. But the meat of the issue IMO is the gaps in the ideology are vast. They are what they are...who's right vs who's wrong is a matter of oppinion and not fact and there fore cannot be discussed in this avenue with out being locked down.

What are you implying? Quebec is not a sovereign nation? Are you implying that First Nations are a Nation with in our nation and are to be considered sovereign and not Canadians?

If thats the case then I say nuts... I don't want my tax dollars funding a seperate nation. I don't want my social services being drained by a Nation whcih does not pay in to the system. What gain does that give me, or my children. Quebec pays taxes, and they are a distinct society....not a Nation with in a Nation Quebecs citizens are Canadian Citizens... BIG difference between the 2 situations.

Thats a very quick summary of my long winded post! I just don't think you can have it both ways... Take the money, complain about the way its used, then tell the people who gave you the money to butt out... And then denounce being affiliated with them publically but also ask for public support in the same breath.... How unorganized and confusing is that?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/bill-c-45-simply-makes-it-easier-for-first-nations-to-lease-land/article6780103/ I found this Article interesting as well on the other side of the coin... The intentions are not laid out quite so sinister. I have a civilized question that I'd like oppinions on with regards to the Protest. What is the end game? What is this protest hopping to come away with? What objectives are expected to be reached? In an ideal world...what ends this? And at the risk of being called a toll...which I am not...I simply don't agree with the protest and lets not forget the OP was asking for thoughts, and oppinions. My bigger question that remains unanswered....are first Nations people Canadian Citizens? Do we have a soveriegn nation living with in our Nation?

Oh thats not it at all... I've read way to much which is why its so frustrating. The more I read, and learn the more I realize I'm right LOL... The message of the movment is not clear, and a lot of the mind sets are actually quite upseting to me. I saw this video along with much more... But I'll give you my commentary LOL... So she opens the video speaking about The Harper Government....and I quote "their solotary objective, their policy objectives for first nations has never changed from the time they developed it in the 1800's until now on the books, the number one objective is to continue until there is not a single indian left in Canada. And with that goes the treaties and reserve land and everything else." She speaks of Provisions the government has made in Bill c-45 in which the Government seeks to eliminate Indians, treaties and reserves as a whole.....thats a big accusation. Where is the proof? Where is the source? Where is this written? Seriously...this is just smoke and mirrors, nothing but smoke and mirrors. She alledges Indian Affairs is given "$9 Billion annually" from the Federal government But 50% pays for the Indian Affair employee salaries. Ok lets just say for the time being that this is true.... You do realize despite the gross misallowcation of funds that even if her stats are correct and Half the $9 billion is spent on office salarys thats still leaves $4.5 billion dollars in funding that Natives are recieving. I hate to burst her buble but lets put some common sence to her comments. $9 Billion= 50% for fat cat salarys =$4.5 Billion divided by 6000 employees(her stats) Well folks that equals $750,000/ year/ employee I think her math a bit unrealistic. She's a great motivational speaker, but her delivery on Facts is in need of some polishing. Now here is a quote that got under my skin.... "We're not on a Nation to Nation Basis" She's right...100% right If first Nations were on an equal "NATION" basis why would we even be arguing about the level, effectiveness or missallowcation of CANADIAN Tax dollar funding The we as CANADA are giving to first Nations people???? Thats like my Neighbor borrowing money for the 5th or 6th time to heat his home and then having him complain that I didn't lend him enough, when he's never paid me back from before, nor does he ever intend to? The good doctor goes on to say the Average cheif gets Paid only $36K/year (unless your in attawapiskat of course) vs the average "Canadian" salary of $46K as if they are somehow hard done by. First I'd point out that I can't verfiy her stats and secondly I'd like to point out the Average Canadian is not paid in Tax dollars and after they pay income tax that cheif will make MORE then the average "Canadian" Oh and by the way the Average "Canadian" is PAYING that Salary with their taxes. She goes on to talk about how apparently the Cheifs and senior community leaders have "Absolutley no control of the funding models" and no say in how the money is spent and claims their budgets will be slashed if they complain out of spite.... She then admits there are probematic leaders in the community but thats Their business, and they have methods to deal with them. She finishes with a bomb shell....and I quote "We don't need Canada interfearing" So let me get this strait.....She's complaining that they have no control over how much or where they spend the $9 billion dollars of CANADIAN FUNDING they recieve, but in the same sentence says Canada should mind their own business??? She then critiques the media as a whole for painting the cheifs as being corrupt and wasting money, and blames the Government for setting up a smear campaign, but neglects to mention how Indian Affairs has also used the Media's Cameras in places like Attawapiskat to point out poor living conditions....and how they plastered smear campaigns on TV's across Canada with accusations of government corruption and neglect. But then when the government decides to step in and investigate the accusations the good Doctor has the audacity to say "We don't need Canada interfearing" Here is a simple question for the supporters of this movement... Are First Nations people Canadian Citizens or not? Are they enjoying the roads, healthcare, education etc... I don't care if you want to revoke citizenship....just don't complain that you're not getting your fair share of my tax dollars if your not even willing to be called a Canadian Citizen. Thats a huge disconnect in my books. I also love the saber rattleing... "We didn't sign treaties with harper, we signed them with the queen" Firstly...what Treaty are we talking about, what proposed changes is the Harper government attempting and more importently if she's going to get pushy. I'd like to remind her that actually.....SHE didn't sign any treaty. Perhaps her Great, Great, Great....Great grandparents did some signing. Back that was also back when the Queen ran this land, which she no longer does. So her saber rattleing quarel is irrelevant. Then there is this Navigable water act change, and the referance to strip mining.... I guess she'd have us beleive the change to the act is directly related to strip mining. WHERE....how is this applicable? WHY....where is the corelation? I neither agree nor disagree with her concern here....I simply don't understand her concern. She'd get a bit more suport with some examples, or actual facts. Right now she's simply lumping in another topic to argue with out any sunstanciall proof of intent or examples. Are we though...are we talking different issues? Thats kinda my point??? Are the protests just about Dr. Palmater's movment and her many oppinions? Is that all The natives are protesting? It just seems the protest has become about pretty much any issue that could contain the word native, or Indian, and its lacking direction and leadership. And alienating the First Nations people from "Canadians" reeeeeely does not seem like a smart move to me.... I'll give her the nod of approval on one point.... I share her beleif that all governments are corupt, be it a Native chief, Liberal, conservative, NDP provincal, municiple or Federal cronny. They are all crooks and need to be watched, so fo those who are in this protest as a watch dog I Applaud you, but the Movment it's self is not well thought out. I stand behind my earlier statement that there are ALOT of people out there who are not understanding this movement, not supporting it and sick of it. I'm not speaking for all Canadians, but I know the protest is not as well recieved as you might think....you want proof....I can't give it, but then again can you prove me wrong....nope. Funny thing about oppinions....everyone has one.

So after a bit more research on Dr Pam Palmater... No offence but she's as scambled as the movement? She's speaking out against the governments supposed plan to "make provisions" that Would allow the government to remove someones "status" and "remove treaty rights"....but she gives no specifics as to who, or which treaty? She talkes about the "offence" our government commits when addressing the Nation in public by calling the people Canadians....in her oppinion it should be "First Nations & Canadian peoples"...that pretty much make sick. I'm just being 100% honest hear but no matter how hard I look and no matter how much I read There is a serious lack of direction for this movement and I do think despite a few vocal folks most of Canada is getting a bit sick of this mix mash of protests that no one seems to understand. I suppose I could agree with some concerns from an enviromental stand point, but then again....is that the movements objective??? Nope....its only a fraction of the platform. I think the good Dr. Palmater is far more intersted in running for national chief of the Assembly of First Nations then the movemnet itself if you ask me. Which is ironic....considering her "anti politcs" speak. Its just odd that someone so against the system seems to want in so bad I'm trying...But I just can't get on board with this movement because I think its poorly conceived, poorly planned and VERY poorly communicated. Maybe I'm bias... I'm not a big Native affairs Backer to be blunt... I'm not a racist heck I don't hate anyone. But where I sit when I watch the news 90% of the people protesting are between the ages of myself, and my parents....I'm sorry but I just don't think anyone in those generations have anything more owed to them then we have currently in place as far as Treaty agreements, and the social benefits we all enjoy(such as healthcare etc.) ANY financial or social assistance no matter how small....is still a perk. Free schooling, not having to pay taxes...cripes sign me up I'll take it if its offered. If there is a right that was promised that is being taken away then that is a different story. I say lets hear it...in specifics, with easily obtained sources and something substanciated....I'm all ears and my mind is open...sell me on the cause. I don't know, I guess I'm just kinda frustrated at the whole situation. Call me what you want...I don't mind I just don't think ANYONE in this country deserves any more then what me or my kids are entitled to based on what race, creed or color or age you are. If it were up to me...No one would pay tax, and we'd all live a happy life in the country doing what we like to do, when we want to do it. But thats a pipe dream.... So given the choice I'd say anyone getting anything from the system should pay taxes, should vote and have a say....and thats that.

Honestly... One of the biggest issues here is the Native arguement its self. So is this protest about attawapiskat Scandal, the Algonquin land claim or Bill C-45??? There is no clear direction here? They are NEVER going to get the support of the general public if they can't get their basic message out. My $0.02 The attawapiskat Scandal IMO is a misappropriation of funds that was handled by the Natives in this case...its pretty plain to see if your asking me The Algonquin land claim is bogus...there never was any treaty to begin with, only the age old arguement of "this was once my land" when in reality its not. Its Canadian land, and had been since the day Canada was conceived. Its been to long to re-open that debate....unless of course I can lay some claim to the lands once owned by my great, great, great grandparents and expect to have it given to me. And really....unless I'm missing something I've read, read and re-read Bill C-45 and I personally don't see what the issue is here....Its there to speed up some proccess time and cut some red tape on Native Land leases options which still require the approval of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. Honestly I don't get the static over this??? The office of Aboriginal Affairs should really look into hireing a pulic relations representitive to polish up their image, and stream line their message, because the lack of clarity is not helping their cause one bit.

I'm no Biologist but, I'm fairly certain the Commercial netting has a hell of a lot more to do with low fish numbers then the angling does. I can't speak for the area toursim industry as I'm not familiar with the levels of dependancy on price sensitivity vs. available fish that fit into the slot sizes and limits but I'm guessing it will have some impact. And long term if that money isn't translated into a stocking program that actually works....its not helping a thing. So to me it just seems the decisions made are a bandaid solution. Limiting the anglers (tourist or local) and their catch numbers seems is a simple drop of water in a big puddle. The only way to get Fish numbers up IMO is to police, limit, or stop the commercial fishing, increase stocking programs and potentially look into adding some sanctuary waters... Admitedly this would also effect the local economy, but IMO its a more sustainable long term plan.

You think I'm whining?? ? I just don't think its cool to call in sick for the purpose of fishing if your not sick I guess....different strokes for different folks? Not Trashing the thread, just say'n my $0.02 same as everyone else. Heck my Dad used to take me out of school to go fishing on his holidays as well and I have some fond memories from those days. Usually it was a Friday that he booked off, or a Monday to extend his weekend....all in all some great fun. But it was quite another story though when he'd get called into work on his "planned" extra day off that we PLANNED to go fishing on because some one got the "sunny day flu"....Catch my drift? Sometimes your fake sick day causes others to work harder, or perhaps even loose their day off all together. I for one have lost valuable home time to cover other peoples illness time and honestly....its all good. I have Zero issue with it because I know someday they'll recipricate. But I'd have a 100% different feel on the issue if I knew it was someone putting their personal time above mine. Thats all. Not trying to crap on the thread....just say'n somtimes the idea of taking offf to fish on a "sick day" is not always cool.

Take this with a grain of salt but where I come from you call in sick when your sick. You book time off to go fishing so your employer can plan to cover the absence. Some might argue if your employer is less then honorable then who cares...but you should remember that calling in sick almost never hinders the business owner, or even the managment. However it does often screw over your co-workers... It may be different in each industry but in my place of work we're a small team. So when you call in sick I'm short handed and we're all working harder to cover your sorry butt. We are all 100% fine with that because we trust that you are indeed ill and we trust your going to cover us when we're down and out. But if I got worked like a dog to cover you so you could go fishing and I found out about it....you had better beleive I'd be looking to have you replaced with someone a little more honest and forthcomming. Just my $0.02

Can't say much about the Ford but I've heard they are decent trucks but don't let anyone know I said it....I Drive a Chev But I can tell you my Brother is Almost ready to pay somone to take his Dodge from him LOL... Apparently the Dodge is a great truck which performs well...but the Fuel consumption is ridiculous

Not gonna watch a single game or buy a piece or merchandise and they can all go to H, E double hockey sticks... Maybe someday I'll be "re-interested" but for now I'll support my Juniors. Those over paid cry baby's got a lot of sucking up to do IMO.

Beagle.... Just busting your chops...differnt strokes for differnt folks

I'm fairly new to the Ice fishing scene but I've had the best luck with a simple Spit shot, hook & minnow. Some of the guys I go with use Jig heads tipped with minnows and swear by Chartreuse or orange but in truth....they don't get any more fish then I do so I'm not really sold that the Jig head (or color) adds anything to the waters I fish. I've used a Swedish Pimple, and jigging raps as well in a variety of colors and sizes but non produced better for me then a live minnow on a hook.

So to me...you described my Beagles to every detail My beagles are incredibly loyal....They follow me anywhere I go. They cry when I leave and meet me at the door with the most insane happy welcome you could imagin. I have 3 kids who they pla with day and night, they never bite, they never get agressive and they totally love my kids. I also have 4....yes 4 cats. They dogs love the cats....the cats are not quite as fond of the dogs though My first Beagle(Spud) we got from a rescue 2 years ago. I'm not sure but you may recall the thread in which he paid me back for adopting him BIG TIME...as our Garage caught fire and no one had noticed...except him. He went ballistic scratching at the door, barking etc... To draw attention to the issue....we caught the fire in time, and saved our home....barely. We saved him...he saved us so we're even LOL!!! But since I've noticed he is ridiculously freindly with other dogs and even more so with other hounds...beagles in particular. So we got him a brother in November named Buster. They are best buds, and hunting partners to boot. Those wasacally wabbits beware! Honestly, I love the Beagles temperment, and playfullness. Despite snoopys reputation...they are no dumb breed. Mine do plenty of tricks like fetch, shake, roll over play dead, stay....get that rabbit LOL... Anyway... Great dogs, and there are always a ton in the rescues this time of year. Many are used for the deer hunt in November and end up lost or abandoned. Just my $0.02 but for a mid sized dog they fit the bill for a sports dog (hunting) and a family pet perfect. My Grandfather had them as well as Black and Tan Hounds so I'm a bit Bias I guess being I grew up around them. Good luck!

Algonquin Park in the fall...on the Thunderbox....LARGE bull Moose came out of the brush behind me snorting and grunting and smashing his antlers in the trees. Best Laxitive EVER....done in seconds LOL!!!

I guess a wild animal....is just that...wild. I had not heard of any of these events and am a bit surprised. I too was under the impression there had never been a documented case of any wolf on human atacks. I know I've had a few cool experiences over the years, one particularily that sticks out happened 3 years ago in Algonquin park. We had a full Pack come through on the lake we were fishing....it was quite amazing to hear them howling from so close(unbeleivably loud) It was both haunting an wicked cool LOL!!! Mind you I was in a canoe so...I had zero worries regardless. I've never really been to concerned about them when camping...nor have I been overly concerned about the Coyotes as far a safety goes BUT... They have been getting pretty bold lately and I do have a bit of concern for my Dogs and Kids when they are out playing.

Gotta say it... Suban played well, but goalies can have hot and cold streaks and he's not got my confidence yet. Nice to see some back checking today though...although it defintly showed on the score board. I wonder if that was Spots game plan to control the aggressive American style or if it was just how the cards fell while playing a more skilled team? Either way to beat the Russians we'll need Suban on his game, and the D are going to need to clear the puck a bit better and the offense better get back inot their groove. You can't beat the Russians 2-1....you can count on them to score 2 or 3 goals. Thats their game....100% offense.

Sounds like we went to the same school of Hockey. One of my favorite coaches once taught us the 5 fundimental rules of hockey "attitude" Which to me still give me that pregame chill... Rule number 1...Keep your head up. Rule number 2...Never let your opponents forget rule number 1. Rule number 3...Thats YOUR puck and you should be mad when they have YOUR puck. Rule number 4...Play with in the rules and mind your temper (there are no good penalties.) Rule number 5...Keep your mouth shut and keep moving, let the coaches do the talking.

By the way....is anyone else other then me NOT impressed with the Canadian Defence? (or Suban at this point?) They are shakey...big gaps, problems gelling...I'm not optimistic about them yet. The Offense is doing what they are supposed to, I think thats hard to argue with 15 goals rallied in the last 2 games while getting contributions from 10 guys....that puts them as the number one offensive team in the tournament However... They also have 6 goals against making them the 3rd worst defensive team in the tournament. And lets face it...they played Germany and Slovakia. It may only be 2 games in but from where I'm sitting....we gots some issues in our own end.