[From "This is my ancestral land (my parents visited me once)"]

You just can't please the jackpine savages

According to a CBC News story from Bobby Hristova, members of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation are voicing their displeasure after being left out of the Grey Cup acknowledgements[…]

The Gimmie-Credit Indians and the Had-No-Saucy-Sneeze Confederacy are two different groups. So when Leroy Hill stood and claimed that the Grey Cup was being played on his tribe's "sacred territory" yadda yadda yadda, was he outright lying? Did he falsely claim that his tribe owned the land? Was the vaunted oral history in error? After all, when the British wisely took over this empty continent they unwisely paid lip service to who the Red Indians claimed were the proper "owners" (whatever that means in their backwards tribal thinking) of the land in question: these treaties which pretended a couple wandering tribes were equivalent to Russia or Switzerland still had to pick a "current owner". So is this the Had-No-Saucy-Sneeze Indians cleverly retroactively seizing the land from around Hamilton?
[…]
The issue is that of course more than one group could have been in the same general vicinity of Edmonton or Hamilton over the 18,000 years of human migration through the region. That is, in fact, the key problem with these land acknowledgements: we're rewarding the most recent thieves of the land to use their own failed logic against them
[…]
If the Cree simply were the secondmost recent occupiers of this land, why not include the most recent occupiers: to wit, the British?[…]We shouldn't give two shits who else land "belonged" to other than the current owner: in this case Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth II and all her rightful non-Charlie heirs