Shale gas protesters clash with police in Rexton, N.B.

Shale gas protesters and RCMP trying to enforce an injunction are clashing in Rexton, N.B., leading to at least five police vehicles being set on fire and the arrest of a First Nations chief.

Shale gas protesters clash with police in Rexton, N.B.

I can tell you this much about this clash..... Although there are people from all walks of life supporting the cause on site at this protest, the primary focus will be on First Nations people. The unfortunate part about that is the focus will be negative now. The problem isnt the majority who gather, its the crazies who are just looking for confrontation. In my opinion when the chief incited violence when in this statement found here halifax.mediacoop.ca... "Furthermore, we have been instructed by our people that they are ready to go out and stake their claims on unoccupied Crown lands for their own use and benefit.” He is essentially promising the First Nations People that if they win this battle they will get some free land.....Ummm you can see how the "crazies" would react to that right?

Im thankful they have taken up the cause to protect our lands, Im worried that this overshadows the cause.

reply to post by Tybrus


hell yeAH, at least someone knows how to get it done, the trick is after this event the people must do it again and again and agian, maybe the candians can come down to merica and do a workshop on how a protest is spose to go down

It's sad that it has come to this, but inevitably as we have witnessed with many similar causes, violence very quickly brings an end to the situation. It's mainly the fringe activists who are blamed for being the architects of this kind of outcome, but it makes you wonder. We know these causes are usually infiltrated by law enforcement officers, and maybe part of their role is to orchestrate the violence?

When the deck is stacked against you by the gov't as it bought and paid for by these demons, what is a good man supposed to do when his family's lives and land are threatened?

Just turn and walk away?

Just say, "well, your kangaroo court said it was legal, so just poison everything"?

Violence doesn't weaken any cause, to think that falls into their trap and further enslaves you to servitude.

Derek

reply to post by Tybrus


You sound pretty ignorant of the situation.

Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 “recognizes and affirms" the "existing" Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada. Aboriginal rights derive from the long-standing use and occupancy of Canada by Aboriginals prior to European settlement. In order for an aboriginal custom, practice or tradition to be considered an aboriginal right, it must be integral to the distinctive culture of an aboriginal society. These include the right to hunt, trap, fish, gather and follow Aboriginal customs, practices and traditions on ancestral lands. Treaty Rights include the specific rights of the Aboriginal peoples embodied in the treaties entered into with Britain and, after confederation, Canada.

In addition to the right to use their ancestral lands, First Nations in the Maritime Provinces assert that they did not surrender their lands to the Crown, so they also claim title to the land itself. Aboriginal title has not been proven in the Courts.

The common law duty to consult is based on a judicial interpretation of the obligations of the Crown (federal, provincial and territorial governments) regarding established or asserted rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada and refers to the obligation to ensure that Aboriginal people are adequately consulted about matters that may affect an Aboriginal or treaty right.

In three landmark decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada: 1. Haida Nation, and 2. Taku River Tlingit First Nation, both in 2004, followed by 3. Mikisew Cree First Nation in 2005, it was determined that the Crown has a duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate when it contemplates conduct that might adversely impact Aboriginal or treaty rights, or Aboriginal title. The duty stems from the Crown’s unique relationship with Aboriginal peoples and its’ responsibility to reconcile Aboriginal and nonAboriginal interests.

The Province of New Brunswick has a duty to consult with First Nations when contemplating an action or a decision that may infringe upon proven or asserted Aboriginal and treaty rights. The Duty to Consult Policy provides direction to the provincial government on consultation with the Mi’gmag (Mi’kmaq) and Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet) First Nations in New Brunswick (listed in Appendix A). It applies to strategic and operational decisions made by the Crown or its’ agents, affecting Crown land and resources under provincial jurisdiction that may adversely impact the exercise of Aboriginal and treaty rights. The Policy outlines the types of decisions that may trigger the duty to consult, the roles and responsibilities of the Federal and Provincial Governments and First Nations and provides guidance to ensure that adequate consultation has taken place on matters that may affect Aboriginal and treaty rights. The Aboriginal Affairs Secretariat will assist in this interpretation and will take the lead establishing consistent policies, procedures and practices across the provincial government.

Source

The only reason our title has not been proven in court, is because we did not do things the way europeans did. We did not need some piece of paper saying it was our land. Had we known, we would have made one up long before europeans came. That is all the original "titles" were that anyone holds on the land of north america. Just a piece of paper made up by some self important european official. It was theirs, because a piece of paper they made said so.

reply to post by TKDRL


I was going to say they never signed away their land to France or England. The Europeans simply claimed it in the name of their king and here we are.
It's Micmac land and they can do whatever they want with it.
Including defend it with their lives and sacred honor if it comes to that.
Let's hope the negative publicity will make the frackers back down.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Come to think of it, even if we did have make up our own piece of paper prior to europeans coming, the monarchy would have just said it was not valid and legal, because they didn't make it......

reply to post by Tybrus


I think the First Nations should carry out a purge of ALL CROWN LANDS AND AGENTS.

those thieving "roy-ELs" are still PROFITING off of stolen property..

CANADA is being PUNKED daily allowing a CROWN to have a dime..

DEATH TO THE CROWN.!!

You only "own" what you can take and defend. Hell, you don't even "own" you own house or car. People have always been enslaved and told how free they were. I'm amazed that the pressure has built enough that people are openly starting to say #$@% your laws. Hells yeah! That takes true balls. Whispering to people to be quiet or the master will come and beat you, well, that can kiss my ass personally. Some person coming and telling me they have every right to steal from me and imprison my soul because they made a new rule and the paper is proof. I say it's time somebody got their ass kicked and the piece of paper pounded into their face.

TKDRL
reply to post by Tybrus

 

You sound pretty ignorant of the situation.

Not at all actually. I had already read what you just posted and that has nothing at all to do with my opinion. I agree with nearly everything with the exception of this: "we have been instructed by our people that they are ready to go out and stake their claims on unoccupied Crown lands for their own use and benefit." That is sending the wrong message. The main complaint is that the government is not being responsible with OUR lands. The message should be to protect OUR land not stake a claim and benefit from it.

Nowhere was it stated by Chief and Council to protect through peaceful measures... hence the outcome.

Here is an interesting side note. I know the lady who owns the property where everyone has setup their tents. Nobody asked her if they could use her property. She said, "Thats ok, I believe in their cause" but after several days of garbage strewn all over and holes being dug for waste when she approached the people to ask that they respect her property she was told off and that it wasnt her property.

If we are to lead the charge for environmental causes then let us lead by example.

I was watching this on the news yesterday.
What I noticed was that big energy knows they will get what they want regardless, the fact that they have a fleet of sonar trucks on the go illustrates that.
It's pretty maddening I assume to see the arrogance of big energy plowing ahead like permission has already been granted, like it already has.

Don't listen to them people, they are just worried about their wells and lakes and rivers, no biggy.

reply to post by Tybrus


Why shouldn't they stake claims? An invading force steals the lands through trickery and genocide over which the NAI have had stewardship for thousands of years and what, they're supposed to eat the monarchy's crap and say "mmm mmm good?" Sorry, that dog don't hunt here.

If the twisted law that is bent to protect everything BUT the people and all methods of negotiation and diplomacy become frustrated and fruitless, what do they expect people to do? It's about bloody time people took a stand against the overwhelming amount of BS, fraud, malfeasance and the constant criminal pressure from government, multinational industry and the international banking cartel.

"If you can destroy a thing, you can control a thing."

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by Tybrus


Awwww, a little garbage on her land, people on her land without permission? Sounds pretty familiar rofl. Where have I heard that from before?

reply to post by TKDRL


Wouldn't have mattered if our native ancestors had papers or not. Then they would have just made up some other BS like;
-- It wasn't notarized properly
-- not printed on "Official" paper
-- not the correct spacing recognized by his Majesty.

bobs_uruncle
reply to post by Tybrus

 

malfeasance

Thank you ... that is now my new favorite word for October.

reply to post by TKDRL


Yeah the irony both ways is astounding.

TKDRL
reply to post by Asktheanimals

 

Come to think of it, even if we did have make up our own piece of paper prior to europeans coming, the monarchy would have just said it was not valid and legal, because they didn't make it......

edit on Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:52:57 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

\

That's how it works. Remember the Feudalism?

feudalism describes a set of reciprocal legal and military obligations among the warrior nobility, revolving around the three key concepts of lords, vassals and fiefs.[2]

Pay attention to the "warrior nobility" also known as a warlord, son of a warlord, "someone who made a name for themselves".

The difference today being that there is less bloodshed when someone makes a name for themselves. Probably more suffering though...(maybe)

HanzHenry
reply to post by Tybrus

 

I think the First Nations should carry out a purge of ALL CROWN LANDS AND AGENTS.

those thieving "roy-ELs" are still PROFITING off of stolen property..

CANADA is being PUNKED daily allowing a CROWN to have a dime..

DEATH TO THE CROWN.!!

That happened already.

The first conflicts between Europeans and aboriginal peoples may have occurred around 1006 CE, when parties of Norsemen attempted to establish permanent settlements along the northeastern coast of North America (see L'Anse aux Meadows).[9] According to Norse sagas, the skraelings of Vinland responded so ferociously that the newcomers eventually withdrew and gave up their plans to settle the area.[10]
Prior to French settlements in the St. Lawrence River valley, the local Iroquoian peoples were almost completely displaced, probably because of warfare with their neighbours the Algonquin.[11] The Iroquois League was established prior to major European contact. Most archaeologists and anthropologists believe that the League was formed sometime between 1450 and 1600.[12] Existing aboriginal alliances would become important to the colonial powers in the struggle for North American hegemony during the 17th and 18th centuries.[13]
After European arrival, fighting between aboriginal groups tended to be bloodier and more decisive, especially as tribes became caught up in the economic and military rivalries of the European settlers. By the end of the 17th century, First Nations from the northeastern woodlands, eastern subarctic and the Métis (a people of joint First Nations and European descent[14]) had rapidly adopted the use of firearms, supplanting the traditional bow.[15] The adoption of firearms significantly increased the number of fatalities.[16] The bloodshed during conflicts was also dramatically increased by the uneven distribution of firearms and horses among competing aboriginal groups.[17]

He who holds the bigest sword wins this battle.....
and thats the government ..........who will promptly turn things over to the corporations.
Unless they "kill em all"......they will lose...........

My feeling is that the Summer of 2015 will become deadly in Kent county.

"SWN Resources Canada intends to drill four exploratory wells in the next phase of its exploration program for potential shale gas development in New Brunswick.

Two of the exploratory wells are planned for Kent County, in Saint-Charles and Galloway."
SWN Intends to drill

Here is the Environmental Impact Assessment