From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 05:29:05 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Here's hoping Rhino or Goat don't find themselves out on the street watching >>as an Indian tribe takes over their homes...

-------------------------
The British Columbia Supreme Court decision in Cowichan Tribes v. Canada >>(Attorney General), 2025 BCSC 1490 found that the Cowichan Tribes proved >>aboriginal title under the test from Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997) and
Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia (2014):

Cool. For our next trick, Great Britain goes back to the Britons and
France to the Gauls.

Land title was a fiction from English law. There was no native title to >extinguish because they had no land tenure system.

(1) Sufficient Occupation

(2) Continuity

(3) Exclusivity

How many centuries of taxes did they forget to pay? That's the duty of
the land owner. Fork it over.

Effect on Private Property:

This was the first Canadian court decision to declare aboriginal title over >>lands including fee simple (private) ownership. The court ruled that Crown >>grants and vestings were issued without statutory or constitutional authority >>(violating Article 13 of BC's Terms of Union and reserve policies), >>constituting unjustifiable infringements on aboriginal title under the Sparrow
and Tsilhqot'in frameworks.

These grants did not extinguish title, as provinces lack jurisdiction to do >>so; instead, aboriginal title coexists as a prior, senior right that burdens >>fee simple interests.

[In other words, good luck ever selling your house.]

I've never heard of a senior right burden on fee simple. The banks will
have to foreclose on the Indians.

For developed and private lands (about 125 privately held properties in the >>claim area): Fee simple titles held by third parties (private owners) remain >>valid and indefeasible under the Land Title Act until reconciled through >>negotiation or further litigation.

Ah. There is no justice, just endless work for lawyers.

Can the Indians now be sued for land and water pollution and other
nuisances?

Owners can continue using their property but aboriginal title constrains >>incompatible uses (e.g., no new developments without consent or >>justification).\

[Gee, thanks, judge for your permission to continue to live in my own house.]

Legal defenses such as limitations periods, laches, and bona fide purchaser >>status were rejected by the court, despite being both relevant and legitimate >>defenses, in order to "prioritize reconciliation".

It's moviePig law!

[In other words, appeasing the Indians is what's important here so if we have >>to ignore the law to keep you white people from prevailing here, that's what >>we're going to do.]

Effect on Public Property:

Titles held by Canada (mostly industrial) and the City of Richmond (mostly >>undeveloped) were declared defective and invalid, with the ruling suspended >>for 18 months to allow transfer back to the Cowichan Tribes (except a 12-acre >>airport fuel depot). All lands belonging to the Vancouver Fraser Port >>Authority were ceded back to the tribe.

Wow. The artificial land too that the Indians had the technology to
build?

The ruling creates uncertainty for private landowners in Richmond, who may >>face clouded titles but not immediate eviction from their homes or loss of >>deeds.

Affected homeowners were not formally notified during the trial (a 2017 ruling
by the judge deemed it necessary to avoid hostility), leading to surprise when
the verdict was handed down and a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging >>malfeasance by the government.

You can joke about it but nobody's laughing in British Columbia. This
suit involved property in Richmond BC (which is a southern suburb of
Vancouver) while I live in North Vancouver BC (no gold star for
guessing which side of Vancouver that's on!) and there is a lot of
both outrage and fear about this court decision. Both in terms of
property valuations (municipal taxes are based on land property values
here and I can assure you nobody is getting any tax breaks on this!)

Vancouver is on the east side of the Georgia Strait while the Cowichan
band (the plaintiffs) are on the west side of the Strait. Meanwhile
yesterday's #1 newspaper headline was a claim by tribes in Washington
State and Alaska for land rights in British Columbia.

https://vancouversun.com/news/us-tribes-demand-say-key-bc-economic-decisions

To which most non-native citizens are basically saying "You have GOT
to be ****ing kidding me!"

Lastly besides the Cowichans, there are the Squamish, T'sleil-wa-tuth
and Musqueum tribes EACH claiming rights to ALL of Metro Vancouver -
please understand that we are talking about 3 tribes with a population
of about 2500 people apiece claiming ownership over the entirety of a
city with a population of 2.6 million people.

In other words, ignoring the Cowichans, they want to be paid by the
taxpayer 3 times over for the same piece of land.

I say our government should tell them "You have 2 years to figure out
which of you claims which pieces of territory - and we will reject ALL
claims over particular properties if more than one of you claims
rights to that parcel of land.

I don't wish to be unkind to them but having your entire city claimed
by 3 (or 4 depending on what part of town we are discussing) different
groups each saying they expect to be fully compensated is not
consistent with having a thriving economy. Vancouver International
Airport is already covered with signs "acknowledging" "ownership" by
the Musqueum.

As I say it's NOT a small thing for people here.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

Adam H. Kerman wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Here's hoping Rhino or Goat don't find themselves out on the street watching >> as an Indian tribe takes over their homes...

-------------------------
The British Columbia Supreme Court decision in Cowichan Tribes v. Canada
(Attorney General), 2025 BCSC 1490 found that the Cowichan Tribes proved
aboriginal title under the test from Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997) and
Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia (2014):

Cool. For our next trick, Great Britain goes back to the Britons and
France to the Gauls.

Land title was a fiction from English law. There was no native title to extinguish because they had no land tenure system.

I think these are claims arising not out of the state of the land prior
to European colonization, but rather _after_ the land title system had
already been established.

But, those who were involved with and directly affected by the original
land theft (if they want to call it that) are long dead. There should be
some form of time limitation.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On May 15, 2026 at 8:38:15 PM PDT, "The Horny Goat" <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 05:29:05 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Here's hoping Rhino or Goat don't find themselves out on the street watching
as an Indian tribe takes over their homes...

-------------------------
The British Columbia Supreme Court decision in Cowichan Tribes v. Canada >>> (Attorney General), 2025 BCSC 1490 found that the Cowichan Tribes proved >>> aboriginal title under the test from Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997) >>> and
Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia (2014):

Cool. For our next trick, Great Britain goes back to the Britons and
France to the Gauls.

Land title was a fiction from English law. There was no native title to
extinguish because they had no land tenure system.

(1) Sufficient Occupation

(2) Continuity

(3) Exclusivity

How many centuries of taxes did they forget to pay? That's the duty of
the land owner. Fork it over.

Effect on Private Property:

This was the first Canadian court decision to declare aboriginal title over >>> lands including fee simple (private) ownership. The court ruled that Crown >>> grants and vestings were issued without statutory or constitutional authority
(violating Article 13 of BC's Terms of Union and reserve policies),
constituting unjustifiable infringements on aboriginal title under the
Sparrow
and Tsilhqot'in frameworks.

These grants did not extinguish title, as provinces lack jurisdiction to do >>> so; instead, aboriginal title coexists as a prior, senior right that burdens
fee simple interests.

[In other words, good luck ever selling your house.]

I've never heard of a senior right burden on fee simple. The banks will
have to foreclose on the Indians.

For developed and private lands (about 125 privately held properties in the >>> claim area): Fee simple titles held by third parties (private owners) remain
valid and indefeasible under the Land Title Act until reconciled through >>> negotiation or further litigation.

Ah. There is no justice, just endless work for lawyers.

Can the Indians now be sued for land and water pollution and other
nuisances?

Owners can continue using their property but aboriginal title constrains >>> incompatible uses (e.g., no new developments without consent or
justification).\

[Gee, thanks, judge for your permission to continue to live in my own house.]

Legal defenses such as limitations periods, laches, and bona fide purchaser >>> status were rejected by the court, despite being both relevant and legitimate
defenses, in order to "prioritize reconciliation".

It's moviePig law!

[In other words, appeasing the Indians is what's important here so if we have
to ignore the law to keep you white people from prevailing here, that's what
we're going to do.]

Effect on Public Property:

Titles held by Canada (mostly industrial) and the City of Richmond (mostly >>> undeveloped) were declared defective and invalid, with the ruling suspended >>> for 18 months to allow transfer back to the Cowichan Tribes (except a 12-acre
airport fuel depot). All lands belonging to the Vancouver Fraser Port
Authority were ceded back to the tribe.

Wow. The artificial land too that the Indians had the technology to
build?

The ruling creates uncertainty for private landowners in Richmond, who may >>> face clouded titles but not immediate eviction from their homes or loss of >>> deeds.

Affected homeowners were not formally notified during the trial (a 2017
ruling
by the judge deemed it necessary to avoid hostility), leading to surprise >>> when
the verdict was handed down and a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging >>> malfeasance by the government.

You can joke about it but nobody's laughing in British Columbia. This
suit involved property in Richmond BC (which is a southern suburb of Vancouver) while I live in North Vancouver BC (no gold star for
guessing which side of Vancouver that's on!) and there is a lot of
both outrage and fear about this court decision. Both in terms of
property valuations (municipal taxes are based on land property values
here and I can assure you nobody is getting any tax breaks on this!)

Vancouver is on the east side of the Georgia Strait while the Cowichan
band (the plaintiffs) are on the west side of the Strait. Meanwhile yesterday's #1 newspaper headline was a claim by tribes in Washington
State and Alaska for land rights in British Columbia.

https://vancouversun.com/news/us-tribes-demand-say-key-bc-economic-decisions

To which most non-native citizens are basically saying "You have GOT
to be ****ing kidding me!"

Lastly besides the Cowichans, there are the Squamish, T'sleil-wa-tuth
and Musqueum tribes EACH claiming rights to ALL of Metro Vancouver -
please understand that we are talking about 3 tribes with a population
of about 2500 people apiece claiming ownership over the entirety of a
city with a population of 2.6 million people.

In other words, ignoring the Cowichans, they want to be paid by the
taxpayer 3 times over for the same piece of land.

I say our government should tell them "You have 2 years to figure out
which of you claims which pieces of territory - and we will reject ALL
claims over particular properties if more than one of you claims
rights to that parcel of land.

Your government should tell them to just be happy with what they have.

The Lakota Sioux descended out of the Black Hills and massacred the Kiowa, the Ponca, and the Pawnee without mercy. The Sioux were, in turn, driven from
their claimed lands by the Chippewa. And don't even get me started with the atrocities committed by the Apache and the Comanche or we'll be here all day.

The proposition-- pushed by anti-white leftists-- that these were peaceable nomads living harmoniously off the land before the white man came is the most fanciful legend of them all. They were slaughtering each other for hundreds of moons before the first white man stepped foot in North America.

One tribe conquered another, lusting for their game and their land, just as they were finally conquered by the white man for no less noble a cause.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2