You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Debate Forum - Week 12 - Broken Treaties

in #ungrip7 years ago

Despite the fact that the Federal Government and her subjects have apologized for their behaviour in the past, they continue to engage in violent behaviour. Does that behaviour constitute a failure to live up to the terms and conditions of the treaties and if so, does that invalidate the treaty due to non-performance, fraud and violence?

First and foremost, were the treaty agreements made in good faith? Or were they an end to a means? Were they made under duress? Did all parties understand the terms and conditions?

I am not a lawyer, but to me, when two or more parties agree to certain conditions and those conditions are broken by anyone of the parties, then you have a breach in the contract or agreement. So in my mind, the contract becomes null and void.

Apologizing and having said apology accepted, does not give permission to continue the fraud and violence, on either part. Two or three wrongs do not make it right.