[Guy_Fawkes]

It's the partisan jab that makes me doubt the sincerity of his statement.

[andyt]

weaselways weaselways:

Thanks andyt

I don't agree with you, but will sure defend your right to voice your opinion same as everybody else. On this forum, trolling seems to mean going against majority opinion.

[andyt]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

It's the partisan jab that makes me doubt the sincerity of his statement.

Someone who is for honoring the treaty is likely to be anti-Harper. I'm probably in the minority who is anti-Harper and anti-natives are spatial. Maybe I should go back and put in a jab at Harper in my original comment, just for balance.

[Guy_Fawkes]

You could, and then I would call it trolling.

If you hate Harper that is fine, but throwing it in there to incite discourse over a political view seems like trolling to me. I could be wrong, but his statement makes the exact same amount of impact without the Harper jab.

[weaselways]

It just seems to me that many of the Harper apologies are for political points. This is a case where a specific injustice has been caused and a contrite apology is appropriate not one who's aim is to burnish the image.

[Brenda]

weaselways weaselways:

It just seems to me that many of the Harper apologies are for political points. This is a case where a specific injustice has been caused and a contrite apology is appropriate not one who's aim is to burnish the image.

How can you apologize sincerely for something you had no hand in, to people who didn't suffer?

[Guy_Fawkes]

That's a wonderful topic to discuss, but it doesnt have any baring on the validity of the claim that Saskatchewan First Nation have a right to be paid $4 million on a 126 year old debt.

[DrCaleb]

weaselways weaselways:

It just seems to me that many of the Harper apologies are for political points. This is a case where a specific injustice has been caused and a contrite apology is appropriate not one who's aim is to burnish the image.

So Harper did not pay them $5 back in the 1880s? Do they want an apology, or do they want $4M?

Who is tarnishing whos' image?

[andyt]

They should't pay the 4m, and that lousy Harper shouldn't offer one of his vote sucking apologies either.

How's that?

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

They should't pay the 4m, and that lousy Harper shouldn't offer one of his vote sucking apologies either.

How's that?

I think he should apologise, and give back the $5.

[Canadian_Mind]

andyt andyt:

How's that?

Rep worthy, if only you had a reputation bar.

[QBC]

andyt andyt:

They should't pay the 4m, and that lousy Harper shouldn't offer one of his vote sucking apologies either.

How's that?

Holy Crap...I agree with andy......

[Gunnair]

weaselways weaselways:

Treaty 6 was signed in good faith that faith wasn't kept. There should be no question or negoiation, give them the 4M, a real apology (not like those Harper seems to do for every group seemingly wronged) and be done with it.

[Gunnair]

weaselways weaselways:

It just seems to me that many of the Harper apologies are for political points. This is a case where a specific injustice has been caused and a contrite apology is appropriate not one who's aim is to burnish the image.

Outside of cheerleading anything that the current government might oppose, what kind of clue do you possibly have that these people are correct in their accusations?

$1:

"Chief Beardy had nothing to do with it," he said. "[Withholding the treaty annuity] was kind of a punishment for the people that participated. But then the other ones that didn't participate suffered along."

Not quite as it seems. The band did not make itself neutral and admitted that some of its members violently opposed the Canadian government. For that lack of control, the band, its council and chief were punished. Money was not paid to the band government - kinda like when Canada opts to stop sending money to countries that don't toe the political line and say, support terrorism and such.

[DrCaleb]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Not quite as it seems. The band did not make itself neutral and admitted that some of its members violently opposed the Canadian government. For that lack of control, the band, its council and chief were punished. Money was not paid to the band government - kinda like when Canada opts to stop sending money to countries that don't toe the political line and say, support terrorism and such.

I retract my previous offer of an apology and $5, and add a hearty "f- them".