 Supreme Court to rule on M�tis land claim case The Supreme Court of Canada will issue a landmark ruling today on whether the M�tis were cheated out of an 1870 federal land deal that settled the Red River Rebellion.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
...
"It will be very clear our nation as a whole, you know, waited 143 years to find vindication and to find that Canada is now in a position where it realizes it did not fulfil its constitutional obligations."
The Manitoba Act, made in 1870, promised to set aside 5,565 square kilometres of land for 7,000 children of the Red River M?tis.
The land deal was made in order to settle the Red River Rebellion, which was fought by M?tis rebels struggling to hold onto their land amid growing white settlements.
Either we're honest, or we're liars and cheats.
I know what we have been, and what we could and should be.
Nope, just a Canadian who believes in justice.
Either we're honest, or we're liars and cheats.
I know what we have been, and what we could and should be.
Hmmm.. Where would you then stand if the Dakota then went after the Metis?
Or we could find a 21st century solution to this issue rather than bowing to a document written by men long dead, with no concept of life in our times?
If only they spent a fraction of the time working within their communities, tackling real issues that are causing their people much hardship.
And if they win this ruling, nothing changes. All the chronic problems with Native Canadians still exist.
If only they spent a fraction of the time working within their communities, tackling real issues that are causing their people much hardship.
Well, taxpayers will be on the hook for millions.
Enjoy paying that justice, Curt.
If only they spent a fraction of the time working within their communities, tackling real issues that are causing their people much hardship.
I have friends and members of my extended family who are classified as M�tis. You couldn't tell the difference between them and any other Canadian in even the smallest details.
I think M�tis shouldn't even be a classification.
Maybe I shouldn't say that after our freshly-minted Supreme Court decision.
I think M�tis shouldn't even be a classification.
I think no one should be a classification other than "Canadian".
I think no one should be a classification other than "Canadian".
I don't think that would hurt my feelings either.
I think M�tis shouldn't even be a classification.
I think no one should be a classification other than "Canadian".
I think M�tis shouldn't even be a classification.
I think no one should be a classification other than "Canadian".
You're about 143 years late on that argument.
If only they spent a fraction of the time working within their communities, tackling real issues that are causing their people much hardship.
I have friends and members of my extended family who are classified as M�tis. You couldn't tell the difference between them and any other Canadian in even the smallest details.
I think M�tis shouldn't even be a classification.
Maybe I shouldn't say that after our freshly-minted Supreme Court decision.
I agree. It's Natives in general who like to be classified as different from the rest of Canadians.