Showing the natives of the prairies riding horses when you open up the documentary and are talking about pre-contact is incorrect. They did not initially hunt this way. Europeans brought horses here. (along with disease, smallpox as well as their pathetic notions of religion which they FORCED onto the people. We never asked for their bloody religion and angry god. Why do Christians push their beliefs on everyone? Leave us alone. NOT EVERYONE IS A CHRISTIAN or wants to be.
@cornacopiagirl I already have an education thank you.:) But I do think people like you need one. BADLY. Also, learn the word stupid because people like you SHOULD get over it. Obviously what you are really doing is complaining over absolutely nothing.
Big mistake about Acadia... Acadian settlements were definitely meant to be permanent. The settlers were there for 100 years living peacefully with the natives before a campaign of ethnic cleansing by the British. These French did not identify with Quebec or France in their struggle with Britain and yet anywhere from a one-third to half of them were killed through starvation and disease as the British expelled them from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
How come no one mentions the war of 1812 and the input the Native People gave in that great war to Establish the Dominion of Canada.All the while all I ever hear Natives are good for Nothing.AS well we gave alot of aid for the first settlers otherwise they would have froze to Death or torn up by wild Animals.And how much Land did the Natives give away on a verbal level without a war evr being fought over Land in most CASES.How many things we gave to this MODERN world.e.g maple syrup
I Am from "Salish Territory".. Salish Territory streches from between Washington state and part of British Columbia... We have been in this area for over 10,000years... such bull shite this is!!! look up Residential schools and native american genocide and everyone that is linked to them..... Such a Gull of Bull people come to be.
@wildhowlingwolf There is a wonderful book series going way back in time about native culture covering all of North America. They are historial fiction but with true facts from archeological digs. I couldn't lay them down. Amazing what was here..The first of the series is called PEOPLE OF THE WOLF.
Ever heard of path dependency? The treatment of the natives was abhorrent and mistreatment continues. The Lubicon Cree in Alberta. Attawapiskat in Ontatio. You cannot tell these people to just move on as they don't have the means to. History affects us all, I don't think you can fathom the implications of the treatment and relocation of these peoples.
PFFFTTTT!!! the first part is bullshit, they cant even prove it! ha! not that they did migrate from asia, whats really proven is "indian" artifacts were found BEFORE The Berringia bridge, and what pisses me off is that, First Nations History is never mention anywhere CORRECTLY, I though the Immigrants were SMART,(euro's) They only think of themselves, NATIVE PRIDE!
@GardenHillislandlake It is the past. And as I said, learn the past and move on. People should stop complaining over the past. Now go and get yourself educated.
@ralvarez15 ha! this shows that your just ignorant, and have no worries. well, the Indigenous have a hard life because they were lied to and still are. the past isnt just the past, the past is still the present for us, it's just disguised. please look into what the Indigenous are facing right now, and then you can say your 'beliefs'. and I am getting an education. know your history and learn from the Indigenous perspective, and compare the whites perspective with it. ok? thnx, get back to me. :)
@GardenHillislandlake LOL!! Nothing in what I said is ignorant. Its the truth. What is ignorant is that people like you still complain about the past and use the past to justify your own problems. Now that is ignorance. As I said, let go and move on. What happened has happened. Stop being ignorant and get a real education. And by the way, I view history in a neutral setting not leaning towards a side. If you were not uneducated you would have known that.:)
@GardenHillislandlake Yeah, that native chick i know who drives a 2008 dodge durango and is in college sure lives a hard life. damn! sucks to be a native!
@DJonX7 What do you know about being native? Are you native? did you grow up being looked down upon because of who your mother was? Did you see your brother being thrown from a moving vehicle and then having a beer bottle thrown at him? Were you forced to never speak your own language again? Really, get an education!
@GardenHillislandlake First of all, there are peoples in eastern Siberia that are genetically related to those of the Alaskan Eskimo. Second of all, they have found bones and artifacts in eastern Canada that show DNA incredibly similar to prehistoric humans of France. There was an ice bridge from Europe as well as Asia.
@maddmaxstar That's because they're not Canada. This is the history of the place that called itself Canada from it's foundation until 1812. The West and Atlantic are part of Canada now and I absolutely believe in modern Canada, but in 1840 they were just separate provinces of the British empire, like Australia, Ireland and Jamaica were. Likewise, Canada, Acadia, and Louisiana, were distinct, independent jurisdiction connected only by French overseas rule.Only southern Ontario + Quebec was Canada
"Bull Shyte" "Asian People" are "Asian people" And "Native People" are "First Nation" of the Land you call "North America" or "Canada/America"... it was no Battle at first, The "First Settlers" were all friendly until they could Kill the "Native People" all at once... but they didn't kill all of "Us"... Almost but..... Now we have to Acknowledge that.... "You have to Admit it is TRUE".... and Move on together in some way........ With Spirit there is a Way
@ralvarez15 How can we move on when white men are still slaughtering brown skinned people? It is way past time we evolved past this horrific way of being.
@landlogger White men still slaughtering brown people? Most of them didn't even slaughter brown people before. What planet are you living on? Sounds like someone is being racist.
L'acte de quebec only existed to calm all the angry french canadians that far outnumbered the english. The english treated the french like dirt and didn't accept their culture for a long time. The french weren't even allowed in the government without renouncing the catholic church. This is the most biased video I've ever fucking seen.
wrong,Irish monks landed in east coast long before 720 ad, as documented in st.Brenden's navigatio,ox hide boats with 30 monks. think think.its carved in rock,very cool history.very east coast.
Natives just get fucked no matter were they are in their continent. those are my descendants them and spanish ppl and damn white ppl can just have what ever the fuck they want
If the French at la forteress de Louisbourg would of pointed allot more cannons towards the mainland instead of the ocean, Canada would "probably" be more French today.
@Alphamask978 The treaty that ended that war was signed in1814. However the news did not get to every one fast. So there was a couple of battles in 1815 such as the Battle of New Orleans. So the war did formally end in 1814.
Wow I never knew that canadians were decendents of the english I thought they were portuguse or spanish maybe thats why they've got such good sense of humour lol! I always thought they were similar to us brits.
i hate what the white peoples did to the aboriginal peoples in Canada =( when i was studying the Canadian history i was very upset with what the whites did to them X( am not a native person but i really think that the white peoples have destroyed the aboriginal's traditions, history, land, language, and culture >x< so bad i hate it so much
@hispanicuscorpus that's because the war of 1812 was a stalemate. Neither side won. Though both sides claimed victory. In the Mexican-American war. Mexico lost fair and square.
@hispanicuscorpus no I dont believe he was fair. but i wasnt talking about that. I was talking about the realities of war. Its the victors that impose their will on the losers. and Mexico lost. Canada didn't lose so the same cannot be said about Canada.
@3dwardcullen69 if Russia attack the US and ask America to sign over Alaska, what politician in they right mind would do it?..in the case of Mexico the U.S assigned a Manuel de Pena Pena to be Mexico president Sep 1847 to Nov 1847 and he sign the sale..this is the conundrum about history. US say they sold us the land, Mexico say it was a robbery.....I dont think Canada will get such a treatment
@hispanicuscorpus You're doubting that Canada would get the same treatment based on what? On the fact that Mexico lost the war against America. Well, Canada never lost the war of 1812. How could they get the same treatment?
@3dwardcullen69 exactly all border were return to it original marks...in the case of mexico it was part of manifest destiny idealogy. if it was the purpose of the US goverment to go north young men,,would there have been such treatment to Canada and if it did,,,will Canadian will have re-conquer lost territory in a second war. a fact that was never lost by Ullisse S Grant in the case of Mexico,his memoir talked about "be Ware of the phoenix to the south" he was expecting mexico to reconquert
@hispanicuscorpus Ok I will attempt to make this as clear as the English language will allow me to. Mexico, lost the war against the United States. Mexico HAD to cede territories to the United States because they HAD NO CHOICE, NO OTHER OPTION. Canada, did not lose ITS war against the United States, Canada lost territories, but it also gained territories from the US. A treaty was signed to return all territorial gains on BOTH sides. In short, Canada had an option, Mexico had no options.
@3dwardcullen69 Crystal...i understand your point..my point is....The US took over a huge population of Mexican in the southwest...just like the Brist took over Quebec but preserve it culture,,(big mistake some canadian might add) the Mexican in the southwest did not get such galant treatment...again i do understand your point, i just think those folk from that time have a double standard
@hispanicuscorpus well had the US taken over Canada, including Quebec. I'm sure the french and British Canadians would have assimilated just as the Mexicans or Spanish living in the south had. The concept of Manifest destiny wasn't exclusive to the Mexicans. It just so happened that Mexico got the shorter end of the stick. If it wasn't Mexico, it would have been Canada.
1812 was more a defense of the US's belief in manifest destiny. Most of NW Canada was unsettled by Europeans so the US thought it could grab it up. The Aboriginal population was paramount in the defense and Canada would not exist without their brave efforts. The US was also arming the French and fighting a proxy war, hence the boarding of the ships and the taking of prisoners. The 13 colonies did not want to honor treaties with Natives so they went to war with England.
@Mahoivlich Although the natives played a crucial role in the war of 1812. In my opinion, Canada's survival was based on the natural defense of the great lakes. The Royal Navy guarded important passes on this natural defense, which deterred the Americans from launching an effective offensive. It was also due to the fact that most of the American forces were only militia.
@3dwardcullen69 wrong, America had an military during 1812. the real reason why Canada survived. the British stop tacking over American ships and left our land. England knew that they couldn't keep Canada and America didn't have any real attentions on taking Canada.
@mrfwest Learn to read, write and probably speak English before addressing me sir. After which, learn some real history, come up with an understandable, legible argument and then come back. Because not only does your comment not make sense, from what I can interpret, its also wrong.
@3dwardcullen69 first this is youtube, it doesn't matter what i type as long as you understand
ask yourself... if America wanted in Canada, why didn't they try again? it was clear England couldn't continue supporting that war.they were attacking American ships and send troops to American before the war.
England knew that they were destined to lose Canada to America. they provoked the war to limit America power over its territory
@mrfwest Your knowledge of the war of 1812 is mediocre at best. There were many reasons why the US did not attack again. The main reason is because it was not strong enough to take on the royal navy, which was at that time the most powerful in the world. The UK didn't get involved because they had Napoleon to deal with. Another main reason they didn't attack Canada again is because there was a huge public outcry against the war by British loyalists in America, which threatened the young republic
@3dwardcullen69 " British loyalists in America, which threatened the young republic " no they either fought foe England or fled the country. loyalists were few in numbers and weren't an issue you are giving too much credit to England. they were the strongest but not nearly strong enough to keep fighting france and America separately and they knew it. it was just too much land for foot soldiers. especially sense the LA purchased increased the border sized
@mrfwest So you think that every British loyalist either fled to Canada or suddenly disappeared? evidently your knowledge of the time is still lacking. America back then was not the same as it is today. It was divided on many national issues. Including on how much ties it had to the crown. There was a significantly large minority of British loyalists at that time. it is the reason the federalist party in the US was disbanded. Stop seeing this time period in black and white, its way more complex
@mrfwest Also, I'm not giving credit to the British Empire, I just understand the time period. And I read history with an open mind. It is true that the US severely outnumbered British troops in North America on land. But most of those troops were only militia. When put against seasoned veterans of the Royal navy, British land forces aided by the natives, the Americans fled. That IS what happened. that is documented history. and that is ONE of the main reasons why Canada survives today.
@3dwardcullen69 it didn't matter is the royal navy was better or not. America didn't flee, they retreated... its a difference
America never wanted Canada and that's why survived. ( the only reason ) countries cant control countries that far away, it was only a matter of time until England lost canada
@mrfwest Whether they fled or retreated is arguable and subject to debate. Because had they only retreated they would have at least defended Washington, the heart of America. America did want Canada, even after the american civil war. They tried and failed, and realized it wasn't worth the fight. Especially since it was dividing the US. But there has always been an animosity towards Canada by Americans in the 19th century. Same goes for Canadians towards Americans in that time.
@3dwardcullen69 America wanted to fight England, so its a retreat. American knew forts in the south were better suited for gorilla warfare... and they led them deeper into American soil.
America was fighting the British after the civil war and our country was not divided or in danger of being divided. they didn't want it. if America wanted Canada we would stay out of ww2, then take Canada by force -
@mrfwest The US wanted to fight the British Empire to take Canada. They found their reason to declare war when the Royal Navy would stop American ships in search of deserters. America was a divided country at this time and only really united AFTER the war of 1812. When a strong sense of nationalism befell on both Canada and the US. America never really abandoned its plans to take over Canada until the end of the 19th century. After the civil war there was a call to go to war with Canada.
@3dwardcullen69 America went to war with the British Empire because the were inhabiting American soil and kidnapping American ships. they feared American power over its territory
" America was a divided country at this time and only really united AFTER the war of 1812 " bullshit { happy voice } the civil war was after the war of 1812 if the weren't divided that war would have never happened
after the 19 century? (1800-1900 ) what change... nothing... America never wanted Canada
@mrfwest Obviously the civil war happened after the war of 1812.DUH.My point was that even after the civil war there was a call to arms to take over Canada, which was never realized. This is how I know you're just talking out of your ass about stuff you don't know nor have you bothered to research. If you did. you would know that before 1812, US was divided on whether or not to go to war with the British over Canada due to the many British loyalists in America. The US wanted Canada for 100 years
@3dwardcullen69 you are the one talking out of you ass. loyalist left the country after the revolutionary war. if there were any left they didn't have any power, certainly not enough to divide America. america didn't want canada
i they did what change? why didn't America take Canada after ww2
@mrfwest How? when Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying "Canada is like an apple, when it ripens, it will fall into our hands"? When Americans wanted to go to war with Canada because the British were helping the Confederacy? See you dont know hese things.. yet im the one talking out of my ass? Do you honestly think all the British loyalists vaporizedt?? and to answer your last question, ww2 happened during the 20th century, not the 19th...Seriously dude read more, im tired of educating u
@3dwardcullen69 the point is... what stopped America from wanting Canada if they did ( which they didn't )America didn't wake up during the 20th century saying .... " we no longer want canada " what changed?
loyalist had no power in America ( if there were any ) - confederates wanted no part in England, they wanted to be separated from the union
@mrfwest Of course there were loyalists in America during the war of 1812, and the dismemberment of the federalist party is proof of that.
The British aided the confederacy during the civil war, that's why when the Union won the war, there was a public rally in US to attack Canada.
During the 20th century Canadian and American relations improved. And public animosity between both countries receded. Americans no longer believed in Manifest Destiny and an isolationist view grew more popular.
@mrfwest I have stated many proofs which back my comment. These are facts that I have read about in text books in great detail, but they are also available on the internet for anyone who has the will power to learn about.
Just what is YOUR argument based on? your false intuition? A sense of history that is clearly lacking? How can you tell me that I'm the one whos wrong when you have quite limited knowledge of American and Canadian history? Where are your proofs? Oh thats right, you just know
@3dwardcullen69 you said that america wanted canada ( they didn't ) .... where my proof study actions, cause and effects ---why would England attack ships & set up forts in America? they feared America expansion and wanted to limit America power over its Canadian territory
if america wanted Canada why didn't America take it during ww2? if America " wanted canada " why did they stop " fighting for it "
@mrfwest cause and effect? LOL you're being ridiculous. I gave you historical evidence, you say study cause and effect? what type of bs is that? Are you saying that peoples opinions don't change over time? So by your logic, public opinion in America stayed the same throughout Americas history. There was no such thing as manifest destiny because "America never wanted Canada", and the war of 1812 must have been a big hoax right? please.. Youve been proven wrong on all levels, so now you're bsing.
what was i proven wrong about? what change there mind?....people don't wake up saying " we don't want it anymore " especially if we could have easily taking it about 75 years after the civil war
"war of 1812 and manifest destiny a big hoax right?" no, it was real it just wasn't about " wanting Canada " because we didn't. look up manifest destiny
your saying U.S were just fighting England on a impulse and stop on a impulse-- bullshit
@mrfwest So what your saying that public opinion towards Canada was: just let it be? That is wrong on so many levels. Americans were angry at the British at that time for aiding the confederates during the civil war! What is so hard to understand? Its just that the American government didn't want to go to war with the British right after the civil war. Peoples opinions do change gradually over time when persuaded by the government, and animosity lessens due to prolonged peace. thats just reality
@3dwardcullen69 " So what your saying that public opinion towards Canada was: just let it be? "
America didn't have any opinion towards Canadians or Canada... there were just there. sure Americans were mad at the British. but that isn't enough for them to try to take a British territory
"persuaded by the government, and animosity lessens due to prolonged peace. " U.S had no ill will towards Canada, and who did the government persuade? the government
@mrfwest Just as the US had no opinion about Natives just so long as they die Quietly.
Manifest Destiny came about because US attempts gave up on belief that the United States would eventually encompass all of North America is known as "continentalism".
@Eddythebeast666 completely different, it was the natives land. why would we fight the British for land? we wouldn't. this manifest destiny thing you keep repeating is something you don't understand. america didn't want canada
"US attempts gave up on belief that the United States would eventually encompass all of North America "
please, if we really wanted canada we would have took it after ww2
@mrfwest Expansionism. You took land from who ever wasn't strong enough to beat you off. The Topic is 1812 American motivation since impressment had been resolved along with the trade issue & we had nothing to do with Native hostility in the first place why did the USA continue the war after we called an armistice?
If the argument was that you wanted leverage to force concessions as your historians claim what exactly was it you wanted?
@Eddythebeast666 "we had nothing to do with Native hostility in the first place"
who is " we? " the British were the ones causing trouble with the natives, not Canada. America had issues with England. " If the argument was that you wanted leverage to force concession " no, that's what England wanted
you should look up the word "armistice" it doesn't stop war. its more of a brief truce.
@mrfwest For the last bloody time we are British. Canada is British. Every one who has Queen Elisabeth II as head of state is Bloody British. Stop making distinctions that don't exist. When did we reject our British heritage? When did we expel the Monarchy?
What evidence do you have of that we were behind Native Hostility. I've looked at American claims. They say we were but produce no evidence of it.
@Eddythebeast666 there is clearly a distinction. Britten is composed of few countries in Europe. ( England, wales, Scotland etc... ) Canada was just British territory that ran the country in it own way.
the same way there is a distinction between Gwam and the u.s or purto rico and the u.s the fact that the native had weapons made in England and were taught how to use them by England. you may have British heritage but, you were not brittsih
@mrfwest Yes the Queen is English & head of the United Kingdom which is located in the British isles.
The name British isn't popularly used anymore (not even in the British isles) except in a historical or geographical sense but regardless of popularity it is still accurate & shall be so until we formally break with the Commonwealth.
I know its hard for a Yank to understand but YOU don't get to define who WE are. You lost that right when you rebelled against the crown.
@Eddythebeast666 the queen is not British. she is German and any British person will tell you that. Canada isn't British and any British person tell you that. you aren't British and never was... this is just canada lousy attempt to find identity
@mrfwest Why is the queen German? Her great, great grandfather was German. Why does this make Queen Elizabeth german? In that case, a large proportion of white americans are british
@foreverengland British people said she was German and most people in America is 6 or 7 generation Americans. great, great grandfathers isn't enough to make even 1% British
@mrfwest Eh??? So, a person who's only foriegn relative is a one person from 5 generations ago and they aren't even 1% British. You're very strange. Even the Irish football team would struggle to persuade FIFA to allow them to play for them and you only need to have drunk guiness to qualify to play for them, lol. So, as Prince Charles would be 6th generation, would he suddenly jump from less than 1% British to totally British as with your calculations?
@foreverengland no, what i said was...... if everyone in american backtracked their family tree 6 or 7 generations, America ( the country ) would still be less than 1% British.
i was responding to your comment " Why does this make Queen Elizabeth german? In that case, a large proportion of white americans are british "
@mrfwest Natives had weapons scavenged from where ever they could mostly taken from dead solders. The Cree popularly lined their cloths with red wool taken from British uniforms.
Britain did not have arms to spare nor the time to train Native forces as the Napoleonic wars had stripped Canada of all but minimal defenses, there were not enough guns for Canadian militia let alone natives.
@Eddythebeast666 " Britain did not have arms to spare nor the time to train Native forces as the Napoleonic wars "
England didn't have a shortage of arms or soldiers because of the Napoleonic wars... its been proven England were aiding the natives... who showed them how to use the guns? dead soldiers? England have been aiding natives since the beginning.
America just saw Napoleonic war as and opportunity to take action against what there were doing
@Eddythebeast666 Tecumseh war was aided by the British. the British-Indian alliance is well documented. it didn't stop until America placed the natives in reserves. what kind of " proof " are you looking for
@mrfwest That Tecumseh/Brock 1811 alliance is indeed very well documented as a treaty of aid should Canada be attacked. NOT as a British offer of support for hostile action against the USA.
Tecumseh would never have trusted British for anything more after the Battle of Fallen Timbers where after the US signed the Jay Treaty the British betrayed their Native allies.
I want names, dates, locations & recorded testimony, for example....
@Eddythebeast666 "That Tecumseh/Brock 1811 alliance was not "a treaty of aid should Canada be attacked. " as you so put it.... was not. Tecumseh was being added by the British well before 181l.
@mrfwest In reviewing the conduct of Great Britain toward the USA our attention is necessarily drawn to the warfare just renewed by the savages on one of our extensive frontiers... It is difficult to account for the activity & combinations which have for some time been developing themselves among tribes in constant intercourse with British traders and garrisons without connecting their hostility with that influence & without recollecting the authenticated... Part 1
@mrfwest If you look at Madison's wording he does not claim he has proof. He says "It is difficult to account for the activity" "without connecting their hostility with that influence"
Do you understand now?
He Is saying I have no proof but why would the Natives attack us for stealing their lands unless Britain is provoking them."
That is why the issue was never brought up at Ghent.
@mrfwest FYI: Many of Madison's documents were edited later in life by himself.
In his later years, Madison also became extremely concerned about his legacy. He took to modifying letters and other documents in his possessions: changing days and dates, adding and deleting words and sentences, and shifting characters. By the time he had reached his late seventies, this "straightening out" had become almost an obsession.
@Eddythebeast666 where is the proof to any of that and why did you ignore my comment? " Many of Madison's documents were edited later in life by himself. " bullshit.
i realize now that you have no idea what you are talking about
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875
American State Papers, 2nd Congress, 2nd Session
Indian Affairs: Volume 1
Page 324 of 861 So far, all I can find establishing British 'aid to Indians' amounts to a veiled threat by an agent not likely to have the authority in the first place: a 'Col. Butler' is alleged to have threatened such aid to Israel Chapin. I presume James Butler is meant, who died in 1796, so this is within the Treaty timeline
yes death rate illegal genocide - - surpressed indians and catholics and french - stole our land and caused war all over the wolrd and - -Britts even dragged the people of canada into war --- hummm - who is worse English Loyalist or Hitler - - atleast with hitler it was a much more faster death -------it is no wonder why the french want a place of there own and the indians - catholics
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!
This will help me ALOT for my history quiz tomorrow!! :)
2010superpeaceluver 1 day ago
Showing the natives of the prairies riding horses when you open up the documentary and are talking about pre-contact is incorrect. They did not initially hunt this way. Europeans brought horses here. (along with disease, smallpox as well as their pathetic notions of religion which they FORCED onto the people. We never asked for their bloody religion and angry god. Why do Christians push their beliefs on everyone? Leave us alone. NOT EVERYONE IS A CHRISTIAN or wants to be.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@cornacopiagirl I already have an education thank you.:) But I do think people like you need one. BADLY. Also, learn the word stupid because people like you SHOULD get over it. Obviously what you are really doing is complaining over absolutely nothing.
ralvarez15 5 days ago
@ralvarez15 go screw yourself loser and don't bother replying because I won't respond or continue to play with idiots like yourself
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@cornacopiagirl learn the word idiot and loser. Because I am far from it.:)
ralvarez15 5 days ago
You are an idiot. Read up on history.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
Big mistake about Acadia... Acadian settlements were definitely meant to be permanent. The settlers were there for 100 years living peacefully with the natives before a campaign of ethnic cleansing by the British. These French did not identify with Quebec or France in their struggle with Britain and yet anywhere from a one-third to half of them were killed through starvation and disease as the British expelled them from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
Search for "Acadian Expulsion"
neverville 1 week ago
i just came here for hw. dont thinkk i enjoy this.
keepondreaming44 2 weeks ago
How come no one mentions the war of 1812 and the input the Native People gave in that great war to Establish the Dominion of Canada.All the while all I ever hear Natives are good for Nothing.AS well we gave alot of aid for the first settlers otherwise they would have froze to Death or torn up by wild Animals.And how much Land did the Natives give away on a verbal level without a war evr being fought over Land in most CASES.How many things we gave to this MODERN world.e.g maple syrup
316bluethunder 1 month ago 6
what about of the owners of the land? the natives? Both, Ingland and french are forengers looks to me like botin of war.
tepan4d 1 month ago
is this the guy from ''land before time'' he must have thing for history...
MsHateseverything 1 month ago
BOTH FRENCH AND ENGLISH PEOPLE ARE GREEDY.
DADALINC 1 month ago
How the fuck is John Cabot an Italian name??!!
superhornet69 1 month ago 2
@superhornet69 Cabotto was his real name
mothman64 1 month ago
@superhornet69 I think......
mothman64 1 month ago
@superhornet69
Johni Cabotto or something.
He's Genoan*
LiamUe 3 weeks ago
@superhornet69 Giovanni Caboto
666tabarnak 3 weeks ago
I Am from "Salish Territory".. Salish Territory streches from between Washington state and part of British Columbia... We have been in this area for over 10,000years... such bull shite this is!!! look up Residential schools and native american genocide and everyone that is linked to them..... Such a Gull of Bull people come to be.
wildhowlingwolf 2 months ago
@wildhowlingwolf There is a wonderful book series going way back in time about native culture covering all of North America. They are historial fiction but with true facts from archeological digs. I couldn't lay them down. Amazing what was here..The first of the series is called PEOPLE OF THE WOLF.
landlogger 2 months ago
was it not britain lol?
icecoldisaac86 2 months ago
CANADA HAS HISTORY ??!!
mcmuffinone 2 months ago
@mcmuffinone More than any white man will know!!
wildhowlingwolf 2 months ago
What is it with people not understanding the difference between Britain and England?
11Cheesewaffles 2 months ago
ik mag niet naar de kapper gaan omdat het examens zijn
hero12354 2 months ago
Ralvarez, you're a complete douchebag. haha.
Ever heard of path dependency? The treatment of the natives was abhorrent and mistreatment continues. The Lubicon Cree in Alberta. Attawapiskat in Ontatio. You cannot tell these people to just move on as they don't have the means to. History affects us all, I don't think you can fathom the implications of the treatment and relocation of these peoples.
PeterGorskiMusic 2 months ago
@PeterGorskiMusic Your right about Ralvarez. You can't teach a closed mind, hey?
landlogger 1 month ago
just check out the first things this faggot narriator is saying, "native canadians are BELIEVED to have migrated from asian lands"
GardenHillislandlake 3 months ago
PFFFTTTT!!! the first part is bullshit, they cant even prove it! ha! not that they did migrate from asia, whats really proven is "indian" artifacts were found BEFORE The Berringia bridge, and what pisses me off is that, First Nations History is never mention anywhere CORRECTLY, I though the Immigrants were SMART,(euro's) They only think of themselves, NATIVE PRIDE!
GardenHillislandlake 3 months ago
@GardenHillislandlake some people just can't let go of the past can they? It happened. Oh well. Move on.
ralvarez15 3 months ago
@ralvarez15 this isn't the past, it STILL effects a lot of people, don't be so ignorant.
GardenHillislandlake 3 months ago
@GardenHillislandlake It is the past. And as I said, learn the past and move on. People should stop complaining over the past. Now go and get yourself educated.
ralvarez15 3 months ago
@ralvarez15 ha! this shows that your just ignorant, and have no worries. well, the Indigenous have a hard life because they were lied to and still are. the past isnt just the past, the past is still the present for us, it's just disguised. please look into what the Indigenous are facing right now, and then you can say your 'beliefs'. and I am getting an education. know your history and learn from the Indigenous perspective, and compare the whites perspective with it. ok? thnx, get back to me. :)
GardenHillislandlake 2 months ago
Comment removed
ralvarez15 2 months ago
Comment removed
ralvarez15 2 months ago
@GardenHillislandlake LOL!! Nothing in what I said is ignorant. Its the truth. What is ignorant is that people like you still complain about the past and use the past to justify your own problems. Now that is ignorance. As I said, let go and move on. What happened has happened. Stop being ignorant and get a real education. And by the way, I view history in a neutral setting not leaning towards a side. If you were not uneducated you would have known that.:)
ralvarez15 2 months ago
@GardenHillislandlake Yeah, that native chick i know who drives a 2008 dodge durango and is in college sure lives a hard life. damn! sucks to be a native!
DJonX7 2 months ago
@DJonX7 What do you know about being native? Are you native? did you grow up being looked down upon because of who your mother was? Did you see your brother being thrown from a moving vehicle and then having a beer bottle thrown at him? Were you forced to never speak your own language again? Really, get an education!
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@ralvarez15 You are and idiot. Sorry, you should get an education because you sound like an ill-informed jerk.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@GardenHillislandlake Nooo kidding!
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@ralvarez15 a VERY stupid thing to say - again, get an education.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@GardenHillislandlake First of all, there are peoples in eastern Siberia that are genetically related to those of the Alaskan Eskimo. Second of all, they have found bones and artifacts in eastern Canada that show DNA incredibly similar to prehistoric humans of France. There was an ice bridge from Europe as well as Asia.
DJonX7 2 months ago
@GardenHillislandlake They also found evidence of agriculture and town/city centers far before the Europeans invaded. =)
cursivenight 2 months ago
History of Quebec/Ontario. No show of the role Atlantic Canada played in History, Confederation, etc.. Same goes for the West.
maddmaxstar 4 months ago
@maddmaxstar That's because they're not Canada. This is the history of the place that called itself Canada from it's foundation until 1812. The West and Atlantic are part of Canada now and I absolutely believe in modern Canada, but in 1840 they were just separate provinces of the British empire, like Australia, Ireland and Jamaica were. Likewise, Canada, Acadia, and Louisiana, were distinct, independent jurisdiction connected only by French overseas rule.Only southern Ontario + Quebec was Canada
Mehtaphorical 2 months ago
i was there, it was always british...ALWAYS
AngryBroomHandler 4 months ago
Stop saying "someday become Canada"
SuperJacobchang 4 months ago
"Bull Shyte" "Asian People" are "Asian people" And "Native People" are "First Nation" of the Land you call "North America" or "Canada/America"... it was no Battle at first, The "First Settlers" were all friendly until they could Kill the "Native People" all at once... but they didn't kill all of "Us"... Almost but..... Now we have to Acknowledge that.... "You have to Admit it is TRUE".... and Move on together in some way........ With Spirit there is a Way
wildhowlingwolf 4 months ago
@wildhowlingwolf You are most kind. I have always noted our First Nations people have more wisdom than the invaders.
landlogger 4 months ago
@landlogger It happened. Oh well. Move on.
ralvarez15 3 months ago
@ralvarez15 How can we move on when white men are still slaughtering brown skinned people? It is way past time we evolved past this horrific way of being.
landlogger 2 months ago
Comment removed
ralvarez15 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@landlogger White men still slaughtering brown people? Most of them didn't even slaughter brown people before. What planet are you living on? Sounds like someone is being racist.
ralvarez15 2 months ago
@landlogger Thank you!! mauch appreciated.
wildhowlingwolf 2 months ago
TWAS THE BEAVER
STIHLmanful 4 months ago 13
L'acte de quebec only existed to calm all the angry french canadians that far outnumbered the english. The english treated the french like dirt and didn't accept their culture for a long time. The french weren't even allowed in the government without renouncing the catholic church. This is the most biased video I've ever fucking seen.
fear432 5 months ago
Where did you this information from?
rosetaffy1234 5 months ago
wrong,Irish monks landed in east coast long before 720 ad, as documented in st.Brenden's navigatio,ox hide boats with 30 monks. think think.its carved in rock,very cool history.very east coast.
natskiman 5 months ago
guy needs to learn how to pronounce KAY-bec
WyattLomaine 5 months ago
Natives just get fucked no matter were they are in their continent. those are my descendants them and spanish ppl and damn white ppl can just have what ever the fuck they want
MrPa1310 5 months ago
@MrPa1310 don't forget the Dutch :P
sweet0mistral 5 months ago
@sweet0mistral what about the dutch?
MrPa1310 5 months ago
@MrPa1310 you don't even know your nation's name. lol
DJonX7 2 months ago
If the French at la forteress de Louisbourg would of pointed allot more cannons towards the mainland instead of the ocean, Canada would "probably" be more French today.
trez337 6 months ago
I thought the war of 1812 lasted up to 1815 I could be wrong.
Alphamask978 6 months ago
@Alphamask978 The treaty that ended that war was signed in1814. However the news did not get to every one fast. So there was a couple of battles in 1815 such as the Battle of New Orleans. So the war did formally end in 1814.
regszikora 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Natives American are the first inhabitants of America
Inmate3able 6 months ago
Comment removed
Inmate3able 6 months ago
Comment removed
Inmate3able 6 months ago
Wow I never knew that canadians were decendents of the english I thought they were portuguse or spanish maybe thats why they've got such good sense of humour lol! I always thought they were similar to us brits.
dlfunky1 7 months ago
VIVE LE QUÉBEC LIBRE !
666Hablam 7 months ago
CANADA ROCKS
cinjonab1 7 months ago
i hate what the white peoples did to the aboriginal peoples in Canada =( when i was studying the Canadian history i was very upset with what the whites did to them X( am not a native person but i really think that the white peoples have destroyed the aboriginal's traditions, history, land, language, and culture >x< so bad i hate it so much
hazafaussa 8 months ago
Neither canada or american kept any land,,,,,they didnt give Mexico the same deal,,,just 10MM take or else
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus that's because the war of 1812 was a stalemate. Neither side won. Though both sides claimed victory. In the Mexican-American war. Mexico lost fair and square.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 i am sure General Winfield Scott was a fair as anyone could be
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus no I dont believe he was fair. but i wasnt talking about that. I was talking about the realities of war. Its the victors that impose their will on the losers. and Mexico lost. Canada didn't lose so the same cannot be said about Canada.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 if Russia attack the US and ask America to sign over Alaska, what politician in they right mind would do it?..in the case of Mexico the U.S assigned a Manuel de Pena Pena to be Mexico president Sep 1847 to Nov 1847 and he sign the sale..this is the conundrum about history. US say they sold us the land, Mexico say it was a robbery.....I dont think Canada will get such a treatment
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus Lol you're still missing the point...
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 :) enlightme
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus You're doubting that Canada would get the same treatment based on what? On the fact that Mexico lost the war against America. Well, Canada never lost the war of 1812. How could they get the same treatment?
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 exactly all border were return to it original marks...in the case of mexico it was part of manifest destiny idealogy. if it was the purpose of the US goverment to go north young men,,would there have been such treatment to Canada and if it did,,,will Canadian will have re-conquer lost territory in a second war. a fact that was never lost by Ullisse S Grant in the case of Mexico,his memoir talked about "be Ware of the phoenix to the south" he was expecting mexico to reconquert
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus Ok I will attempt to make this as clear as the English language will allow me to. Mexico, lost the war against the United States. Mexico HAD to cede territories to the United States because they HAD NO CHOICE, NO OTHER OPTION. Canada, did not lose ITS war against the United States, Canada lost territories, but it also gained territories from the US. A treaty was signed to return all territorial gains on BOTH sides. In short, Canada had an option, Mexico had no options.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 Crystal...i understand your point..my point is....The US took over a huge population of Mexican in the southwest...just like the Brist took over Quebec but preserve it culture,,(big mistake some canadian might add) the Mexican in the southwest did not get such galant treatment...again i do understand your point, i just think those folk from that time have a double standard
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus well had the US taken over Canada, including Quebec. I'm sure the french and British Canadians would have assimilated just as the Mexicans or Spanish living in the south had. The concept of Manifest destiny wasn't exclusive to the Mexicans. It just so happened that Mexico got the shorter end of the stick. If it wasn't Mexico, it would have been Canada.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 agree.nice chatting with you
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
@hispanicuscorpus same. rarely are history conversations on you tube civil.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 when you find the way to undo the past,,them my friend get ready for war. the past is the past, work to manage a better future.
hispanicuscorpus 8 months ago
boring
towndrunk55 10 months ago
1812 was more a defense of the US's belief in manifest destiny. Most of NW Canada was unsettled by Europeans so the US thought it could grab it up. The Aboriginal population was paramount in the defense and Canada would not exist without their brave efforts. The US was also arming the French and fighting a proxy war, hence the boarding of the ships and the taking of prisoners. The 13 colonies did not want to honor treaties with Natives so they went to war with England.
Mahoivlich 10 months ago
@Mahoivlich Although the natives played a crucial role in the war of 1812. In my opinion, Canada's survival was based on the natural defense of the great lakes. The Royal Navy guarded important passes on this natural defense, which deterred the Americans from launching an effective offensive. It was also due to the fact that most of the American forces were only militia.
3dwardcullen69 9 months ago 8
@3dwardcullen69 wrong, America had an military during 1812. the real reason why Canada survived. the British stop tacking over American ships and left our land. England knew that they couldn't keep Canada and America didn't have any real attentions on taking Canada.
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Learn to read, write and probably speak English before addressing me sir. After which, learn some real history, come up with an understandable, legible argument and then come back. Because not only does your comment not make sense, from what I can interpret, its also wrong.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 first this is youtube, it doesn't matter what i type as long as you understand
ask yourself... if America wanted in Canada, why didn't they try again? it was clear England couldn't continue supporting that war.they were attacking American ships and send troops to American before the war.
England knew that they were destined to lose Canada to America. they provoked the war to limit America power over its territory
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Your knowledge of the war of 1812 is mediocre at best. There were many reasons why the US did not attack again. The main reason is because it was not strong enough to take on the royal navy, which was at that time the most powerful in the world. The UK didn't get involved because they had Napoleon to deal with. Another main reason they didn't attack Canada again is because there was a huge public outcry against the war by British loyalists in America, which threatened the young republic
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 " British loyalists in America, which threatened the young republic " no they either fought foe England or fled the country. loyalists were few in numbers and weren't an issue you are giving too much credit to England. they were the strongest but not nearly strong enough to keep fighting france and America separately and they knew it. it was just too much land for foot soldiers. especially sense the LA purchased increased the border sized
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest So you think that every British loyalist either fled to Canada or suddenly disappeared? evidently your knowledge of the time is still lacking. America back then was not the same as it is today. It was divided on many national issues. Including on how much ties it had to the crown. There was a significantly large minority of British loyalists at that time. it is the reason the federalist party in the US was disbanded. Stop seeing this time period in black and white, its way more complex
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@mrfwest Also, I'm not giving credit to the British Empire, I just understand the time period. And I read history with an open mind. It is true that the US severely outnumbered British troops in North America on land. But most of those troops were only militia. When put against seasoned veterans of the Royal navy, British land forces aided by the natives, the Americans fled. That IS what happened. that is documented history. and that is ONE of the main reasons why Canada survives today.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 it didn't matter is the royal navy was better or not. America didn't flee, they retreated... its a difference
America never wanted Canada and that's why survived. ( the only reason ) countries cant control countries that far away, it was only a matter of time until England lost canada
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Whether they fled or retreated is arguable and subject to debate. Because had they only retreated they would have at least defended Washington, the heart of America. America did want Canada, even after the american civil war. They tried and failed, and realized it wasn't worth the fight. Especially since it was dividing the US. But there has always been an animosity towards Canada by Americans in the 19th century. Same goes for Canadians towards Americans in that time.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 America wanted to fight England, so its a retreat. American knew forts in the south were better suited for gorilla warfare... and they led them deeper into American soil.
America was fighting the British after the civil war and our country was not divided or in danger of being divided. they didn't want it. if America wanted Canada we would stay out of ww2, then take Canada by force -
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest The US wanted to fight the British Empire to take Canada. They found their reason to declare war when the Royal Navy would stop American ships in search of deserters. America was a divided country at this time and only really united AFTER the war of 1812. When a strong sense of nationalism befell on both Canada and the US. America never really abandoned its plans to take over Canada until the end of the 19th century. After the civil war there was a call to go to war with Canada.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 America went to war with the British Empire because the were inhabiting American soil and kidnapping American ships. they feared American power over its territory
" America was a divided country at this time and only really united AFTER the war of 1812 " bullshit { happy voice } the civil war was after the war of 1812 if the weren't divided that war would have never happened
after the 19 century? (1800-1900 ) what change... nothing... America never wanted Canada
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Obviously the civil war happened after the war of 1812.DUH.My point was that even after the civil war there was a call to arms to take over Canada, which was never realized. This is how I know you're just talking out of your ass about stuff you don't know nor have you bothered to research. If you did. you would know that before 1812, US was divided on whether or not to go to war with the British over Canada due to the many British loyalists in America. The US wanted Canada for 100 years
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 you are the one talking out of you ass. loyalist left the country after the revolutionary war. if there were any left they didn't have any power, certainly not enough to divide America. america didn't want canada
i they did what change? why didn't America take Canada after ww2
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest How? when Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying "Canada is like an apple, when it ripens, it will fall into our hands"? When Americans wanted to go to war with Canada because the British were helping the Confederacy? See you dont know hese things.. yet im the one talking out of my ass? Do you honestly think all the British loyalists vaporizedt?? and to answer your last question, ww2 happened during the 20th century, not the 19th...Seriously dude read more, im tired of educating u
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 the point is... what stopped America from wanting Canada if they did ( which they didn't )America didn't wake up during the 20th century saying .... " we no longer want canada " what changed?
loyalist had no power in America ( if there were any ) - confederates wanted no part in England, they wanted to be separated from the union
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Of course there were loyalists in America during the war of 1812, and the dismemberment of the federalist party is proof of that.
The British aided the confederacy during the civil war, that's why when the Union won the war, there was a public rally in US to attack Canada.
During the 20th century Canadian and American relations improved. And public animosity between both countries receded. Americans no longer believed in Manifest Destiny and an isolationist view grew more popular.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@mrfwest I have stated many proofs which back my comment. These are facts that I have read about in text books in great detail, but they are also available on the internet for anyone who has the will power to learn about.
Just what is YOUR argument based on? your false intuition? A sense of history that is clearly lacking? How can you tell me that I'm the one whos wrong when you have quite limited knowledge of American and Canadian history? Where are your proofs? Oh thats right, you just know
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 you said that america wanted canada ( they didn't ) .... where my proof study actions, cause and effects ---why would England attack ships & set up forts in America? they feared America expansion and wanted to limit America power over its Canadian territory
if america wanted Canada why didn't America take it during ww2? if America " wanted canada " why did they stop " fighting for it "
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest cause and effect? LOL you're being ridiculous. I gave you historical evidence, you say study cause and effect? what type of bs is that? Are you saying that peoples opinions don't change over time? So by your logic, public opinion in America stayed the same throughout Americas history. There was no such thing as manifest destiny because "America never wanted Canada", and the war of 1812 must have been a big hoax right? please.. Youve been proven wrong on all levels, so now you're bsing.
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 proven wrong? opinions change over time?
what was i proven wrong about? what change there mind?....people don't wake up saying " we don't want it anymore " especially if we could have easily taking it about 75 years after the civil war
"war of 1812 and manifest destiny a big hoax right?" no, it was real it just wasn't about " wanting Canada " because we didn't. look up manifest destiny
your saying U.S were just fighting England on a impulse and stop on a impulse-- bullshit
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest So what your saying that public opinion towards Canada was: just let it be? That is wrong on so many levels. Americans were angry at the British at that time for aiding the confederates during the civil war! What is so hard to understand? Its just that the American government didn't want to go to war with the British right after the civil war. Peoples opinions do change gradually over time when persuaded by the government, and animosity lessens due to prolonged peace. thats just reality
3dwardcullen69 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 " So what your saying that public opinion towards Canada was: just let it be? "
America didn't have any opinion towards Canadians or Canada... there were just there. sure Americans were mad at the British. but that isn't enough for them to try to take a British territory
"persuaded by the government, and animosity lessens due to prolonged peace. " U.S had no ill will towards Canada, and who did the government persuade? the government
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Just as the US had no opinion about Natives just so long as they die Quietly.
Manifest Destiny came about because US attempts gave up on belief that the United States would eventually encompass all of North America is known as "continentalism".
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 completely different, it was the natives land. why would we fight the British for land? we wouldn't. this manifest destiny thing you keep repeating is something you don't understand. america didn't want canada
"US attempts gave up on belief that the United States would eventually encompass all of North America "
please, if we really wanted canada we would have took it after ww2
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Expansionism. You took land from who ever wasn't strong enough to beat you off. The Topic is 1812 American motivation since impressment had been resolved along with the trade issue & we had nothing to do with Native hostility in the first place why did the USA continue the war after we called an armistice?
If the argument was that you wanted leverage to force concessions as your historians claim what exactly was it you wanted?
Only a land grab makes any sense.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 "we had nothing to do with Native hostility in the first place"
who is " we? " the British were the ones causing trouble with the natives, not Canada. America had issues with England. " If the argument was that you wanted leverage to force concession " no, that's what England wanted
you should look up the word "armistice" it doesn't stop war. its more of a brief truce.
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest For the last bloody time we are British. Canada is British. Every one who has Queen Elisabeth II as head of state is Bloody British. Stop making distinctions that don't exist. When did we reject our British heritage? When did we expel the Monarchy?
What evidence do you have of that we were behind Native Hostility. I've looked at American claims. They say we were but produce no evidence of it.
Before you can say that you need proof.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 there is clearly a distinction. Britten is composed of few countries in Europe. ( England, wales, Scotland etc... ) Canada was just British territory that ran the country in it own way.
the same way there is a distinction between Gwam and the u.s or purto rico and the u.s the fact that the native had weapons made in England and were taught how to use them by England. you may have British heritage but, you were not brittsih
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Yes the Queen is English & head of the United Kingdom which is located in the British isles.
The name British isn't popularly used anymore (not even in the British isles) except in a historical or geographical sense but regardless of popularity it is still accurate & shall be so until we formally break with the Commonwealth.
I know its hard for a Yank to understand but YOU don't get to define who WE are. You lost that right when you rebelled against the crown.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 the queen is not British. she is German and any British person will tell you that. Canada isn't British and any British person tell you that. you aren't British and never was... this is just canada lousy attempt to find identity
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest Why is the queen German? Her great, great grandfather was German. Why does this make Queen Elizabeth german? In that case, a large proportion of white americans are british
foreverengland 6 months ago
@foreverengland British people said she was German and most people in America is 6 or 7 generation Americans. great, great grandfathers isn't enough to make even 1% British
mrfwest 6 months ago
@mrfwest Eh??? So, a person who's only foriegn relative is a one person from 5 generations ago and they aren't even 1% British. You're very strange. Even the Irish football team would struggle to persuade FIFA to allow them to play for them and you only need to have drunk guiness to qualify to play for them, lol. So, as Prince Charles would be 6th generation, would he suddenly jump from less than 1% British to totally British as with your calculations?
foreverengland 6 months ago
@foreverengland no, what i said was...... if everyone in american backtracked their family tree 6 or 7 generations, America ( the country ) would still be less than 1% British.
i was responding to your comment " Why does this make Queen Elizabeth german? In that case, a large proportion of white americans are british "
mrfwest 6 months ago
@mrfwest Natives had weapons scavenged from where ever they could mostly taken from dead solders. The Cree popularly lined their cloths with red wool taken from British uniforms.
Britain did not have arms to spare nor the time to train Native forces as the Napoleonic wars had stripped Canada of all but minimal defenses, there were not enough guns for Canadian militia let alone natives.
Where was this evidence found?
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 " Britain did not have arms to spare nor the time to train Native forces as the Napoleonic wars "
England didn't have a shortage of arms or soldiers because of the Napoleonic wars... its been proven England were aiding the natives... who showed them how to use the guns? dead soldiers? England have been aiding natives since the beginning.
America just saw Napoleonic war as and opportunity to take action against what there were doing
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest What proof?What proof?What proof?What proof?What proof?
Give me a damn link to where it was found.
Your historians don't say they just say it was proven.
The last time Britain had aided Natives The Northwest Indian War (1785–1795) which had been resolved with the Jay Treaty.
You don't get to say what is a fact with out proof, there is nothing to back up the claim nor do you get any say in who we are or are not.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 Tecumseh war was aided by the British. the British-Indian alliance is well documented. it didn't stop until America placed the natives in reserves. what kind of " proof " are you looking for
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest That Tecumseh/Brock 1811 alliance is indeed very well documented as a treaty of aid should Canada be attacked. NOT as a British offer of support for hostile action against the USA.
Tecumseh would never have trusted British for anything more after the Battle of Fallen Timbers where after the US signed the Jay Treaty the British betrayed their Native allies.
I want names, dates, locations & recorded testimony, for example....
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 "That Tecumseh/Brock 1811 alliance was not "a treaty of aid should Canada be attacked. " as you so put it.... was not. Tecumseh was being added by the British well before 181l.
2nd i never said the u.s didn't use natives
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest That was an example of the type of proof I'm looking for. We have excellent records of all supplies equipment treaties & activity.
Nothing exists of what the US accuses us of.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 before i proving anything i want to know , for sure... what you are part are you disagreeing with?
- England aiding native before and after the war of 1812.
- england taking American ships
- england wanted to take America during the war of 1812
- canada isn't British
- canada didn't have a serious or substantial part in the war of 1812
- the British wasn't causing issues within the united states
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest In reviewing the conduct of Great Britain toward the USA our attention is necessarily drawn to the warfare just renewed by the savages on one of our extensive frontiers... It is difficult to account for the activity & combinations which have for some time been developing themselves among tribes in constant intercourse with British traders and garrisons without connecting their hostility with that influence & without recollecting the authenticated... Part 1
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@mrfwest Part 2 ...examples of such interpositions heretofore furnished by the officers & agents of that Government.
Madison's speech before congress calling for war
Please provide the evidence for this claim. Start with that.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Eddythebeast666 " examples of such interpositions heretofore furnished by the officers & agents of that Government. "
no, state you points....clearly. i dont want to leave any room for back tracking what part dot you agree with
mrfwest 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrfwest If you look at Madison's wording he does not claim he has proof. He says "It is difficult to account for the activity" "without connecting their hostility with that influence"
Do you understand now?
He Is saying I have no proof but why would the Natives attack us for stealing their lands unless Britain is provoking them."
That is why the issue was never brought up at Ghent.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@mrfwest FYI: Many of Madison's documents were edited later in life by himself.
In his later years, Madison also became extremely concerned about his legacy. He took to modifying letters and other documents in his possessions: changing days and dates, adding and deleting words and sentences, and shifting characters. By the time he had reached his late seventies, this "straightening out" had become almost an obsession.
So don't count anything he wrote as proof.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 where is the proof to any of that and why did you ignore my comment? " Many of Madison's documents were edited later in life by himself. " bullshit.
i realize now that you have no idea what you are talking about
mrfwest 8 months ago
@mrfwest look up Madison your self.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 burden of proof. remember?
mrfwest 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrfwest If you want to justify a war damn right you need proof.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@mrfwest Where is the Proof of this aid? Where? What is it?
All you have are accusations I want proof.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@mrfwest Proof that the US used Natives
Pay Roll of a Corps of Indian Volunteers invited into the Service of the United States on the 17th Sept. to the 16th October, 1813
Names of War Chiefs
Capt. John-Onondagas & Oneidas,35 Warriors
Capt. Longbeard–Tuscaroras,16 Warriors
Capt. Coles-Onondagas from Buffalo,16 Warriors
Capt. Peters–Oneidas,89 Warriors
Capt. Harris–Delawares from Catteragas,7 Warriors
Capt. Farmers Brother – Senecas from Buffalo,87 Warriors
Capt. Jacob Hochbridge,5 Warriors
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 NICE!
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@mrfwest Just give me proof of British encouragement of Native Hostility before the 1812 War. American history books give nothing at all.
They state that such was a fact with out giving reference to any corroborating evidence.
Just a Bush lied to Congress about WMD in Iraq by falsifying data in order to get his war there, Madison had done the same in 1812.
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875
American State Papers, 2nd Congress, 2nd Session
Indian Affairs: Volume 1
Page 324 of 861 So far, all I can find establishing British 'aid to Indians' amounts to a veiled threat by an agent not likely to have the authority in the first place: a 'Col. Butler' is alleged to have threatened such aid to Israel Chapin. I presume James Butler is meant, who died in 1796, so this is within the Treaty timeline
Eddythebeast666 8 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 NOOOO KIDDING.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
the americans invaded quebec city in 1775 and burnt acadia to the ground also.
1988scottcarey 10 months ago
@1988scottcarey lol the Americans didn't exist in 1775. Learn your history
3dwardcullen69 10 months ago 16
Comment removed
1988scottcarey 9 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 well what are they now?
1988scottcarey 9 months ago
@1988scottcarey what are who now?
3dwardcullen69 9 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 ya they became American in 1776!
jimmy212145 7 months ago
@jimmy212145 indeed
3dwardcullen69 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i know righ like beavers rule!! hey why didn't they get a chance to rule most of the world? but seriously thumbs up if they rule cause they do!!!
BabySafetyTips2034 10 months ago
i know righ like beavers rule!! hey why didn't they get a chance to rule most of the world? but seriously thumbs up if they rule cause they do!!!
BabySafetyTips2034 10 months ago
Thumbs up if you think beavers rule
LEGO2014 10 months ago 2
@LEGO2014 This country was born on the backs of these amazing animals.
cornacopiagirl 5 days ago
@cornacopiagirl no because i am part of the ones that did that to the natives. well not my ancestors in particular but white people in general.
DJonX7 5 days ago
Nice Histroy lesson, thanks for sharing.
iamyournot 11 months ago
yes death rate illegal genocide - - surpressed indians and catholics and french - stole our land and caused war all over the wolrd and - -Britts even dragged the people of canada into war --- hummm - who is worse English Loyalist or Hitler - - atleast with hitler it was a much more faster death -------it is no wonder why the french want a place of there own and the indians - catholics
StJamesapostle 11 months ago
Canada and America live and fight like brothers.
CerebrateHyatt 11 months ago
its all about the beaver
itube70 1 year ago
this Sucks!!!
manatee4452 1 year ago