Comment by Chris on 18th July 2009
The last word in the article is missing the "e" it should be spelled with. I am not saying it is the writer's fault or the newspaper editor's fault or the printer's fault.
"We trust you appreciate our desire to advance this without delay and understand why we are blunt. We will be grateful to you for as prompt a response as you are able to provid"(sic)
Getting over that, there seems to be a certain amount of anger in this whole article. To quote: "I represent Wilps Haaxw, 2nd named House in Delgamuukw, as we develop an omnibus Global Indian Band in order to claim rights identified by Judge Vickers in his Tsilqoht'in decision as remaining subject to Aboriginal Title, being claims against Fee Simple tenure. I also notify you that we hold the ultimate Title to the Global Rights that logically exist in Canada and in British Columbia which must be "Recognized and Affirmed" under Section 35, CCAct 1982."
Okay, an "omnibus Global Indian Band" means what? If you believe you have claims to "fee simple tenure", which is basically all non-reserve land owned other than government owned, what are you suggesting? If you are suggesting that you can buy it from the owner at the price he/she wants to receive and he/she wants to sell, then that is the way it should work. If you believe that it is yours to start with and you'll take it from there, that is not the way it should be. But what do I know? The land my parents used to live on was taken from them during WWII and given to the white people because other people of my race bombed a friendly ally. We had nothing to do with it. We found our way back, and bought more fee simple land. To think that we can now have it taken away again at the whim of some judge, or the stroke of a pen, is not fair. Don't you dare say your life has been unfair? That would give me the opportunity to debate you unrelentingly as to whose life was harder to live? And global means world-wide? Where do you get to decide that now it is a global issue? I have spoken to so many "aboriginals" who refuse to believe that they didn't spring up here out of a cradle of civilization and did not come from Asia. How does that correlate? Maybe it should be a national issue until people accept the fact that they are global?
In response to the rest of the article or dictate:
"I am in the process of gradually persuading the Judiciary to support our Title and claim on grounds of higher utility than other claims, in particular those of the Federal, Provincial, Municipal, and of the First Nations and Reservation Administrations.
We see some conflict with the Treaty process which requires your consideration but in the main the Treaty Process addresses lands outside of Fee Simple tenure, which is our area of prime concern.
Please take NOTICE that we regard this as official NOTICE TO YOU and that you owe us due formal response otherwise we deem you to be in violation of the Constitution by failing to "recognize and affirm" our Title and to refusing to settle our claims.
Our immediate recourse is to file complaints with the Human Rights Tribunal for violating our Human Rights. We will also take civil action to make you comply with the fiduciary duty owed us.
I just love the ultimatums. Dayum. I know "damn" is spelled wrong. But if you are refused all your "claims" outright, will there be another "war". I work with many natives who are getting a little annoyed by the "needy" ones. Oops, now I know I touched a few nerves. But I learned long ago that my country doesn't actually owe me anything. Get a life.