Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne'

She:kon! Native people have no more rights - let alone any ~special~ rights more than anyone else. The problem is that by participating in your government system and authorizing your politicians to do anything they choose after they are elected, you have allowed them to limit your rights in the form of the Constitution, laws and regulations. As non-Canadians and Onkwehon:we we recognize the rights bestowed upon us just for being human beings and our political system is such that they cannot remove them unless we expressly consent to it. Having lost or compromised your basic humans rights and through the imposition of laws you prescribed to control others you, as Canadians have seriously limited yourselves. Speeding is against the law, no? And yet you have laws that say going over a certain speed limit is unlawful and subject to a penalty. You all speed. So your complaints are not unlike trying to state that Germans have ~special~ rights because their government has chosen not to place any speed limit on the Autobaun. There is nothing more that we would like as Onkwehon:we than for you to enjoy freedom the way we do. However, since you have demonstrated time and time again that you are incapable of taking the responsibility to regulate and control yourselves, the government has taken it upon themselves to do it on your behalf. No we have no more rights than you do. You are just more limited. As non-Canadians we are not subject to those limitations anymore than an American is limted by them in his everyday affairs. O:nen

She:kon! Until the settlers can pass the requirements for citizenship in the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, they will not be allowed to vote or be elevated to any political position. It is a simple concept that even Canada engages in in dealing with immigrants. However, once they do meet the requirements it would still not be a problem. There are approximately 1.5 million Confederacy Haudenosaunee represented by 50 Royaner in the Grand Council, so it is unlikely that 200,000 or so that might be elegible to participate, could sway the common opinion on any matter. And since ours is a concentual government, a majority vote is irrelevent. Minds are changed and challenged through the art of pursuasion and it is unlikely that coming from a backward and undemocratic political system like Canada's that most of them would be capable of aquiring that skill quickly. Even as participants at the community level (which would be granted right away) it is highly unlikely that they could alter the current course given that those elevated to the position of Royaner must demonstrate their understanding of the prinicples of the Kayenera'kowa AND should they fail the interest of the Confederacy they could be impeached in a moment's notice. So you see, there are no voting rights to obtain. In order to participate they must hold a good mind. We do know that at least those like Riverspin that have been overly vocal don't possess that characteristic (and in particular good listening skills) so by their own inadequacies they would be incapable of particpating in real democracy. O:nen

She:kon! Riverspin is grasping at straws. The originator of the word "genocide" clearly intended that it would broadly include cultural, language or economic extermination in its meaning. Under the residential School programs children were stolen from their parents - often at gunpoint - and shipped off to unknown places far away from their communities. Their parents were never told where they were sent. They were beaten, molested and abused for speaking their languages, practicing their culture or just for sounding and acting like an Indian. It is estimated that nearly 50% of the children sent away never returned - many being murdered by the priests and principals of the schools. Those who did come back were saddled with all kinds of physical, emotional, mental and spiritual dis-eases that lingered through the generations. Whole communties are now suffering as a result of those genocidal attacks on innocent children. Saying that this is not genocide is purely moronic, given that there has been a clear indictment of the Churches and agencies that abused the children (yet the deaths remain unrequited). There have been admissions but not to the extent of the accusations. If the shoe were on the other foot and we swept in the middle of the night and kidnapped your children to an unknown location with the intent of beating the anglo out of them, there is no doubt for a second that you would be crying the same points, and making the same claims. But of course because it is the mainstream ill-thinking under attack, you would think it a different event. Riverspin is lost in his own rhetoric. I've experienced this kind of government spin after obfuscation doesn't work they try to change the definition of the words. It is clearly a lost cause, since the word and its meaning is universal, from the beginning that the term "genocide" was coined. O:nen

She:kon! "As such, the fact that QEII is actually the head of state means almost nothing in terms of the day to day expense of running our country." Granted. However, the point to be made is that Canada cannot change its Constitution, legal or parliamentary system without the Queen's consent. Canada cannot be sovereign with some other agency (other than the citizens - as in the States) in charge of its supreme laws. On the issue of Native sovereignty and the treaties and proclamations made by the Crown, Canada does not have legal authority to ignore or unilaterally amend these laws because they are equal to that of Canada's supreme law, and may only be opened with the approval of the Queen. O:nen

She:kon! Judge Marshall has no legal authority to compel Six Nations people leave their land. His attempts to stop the negotiations is a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Fundamental Freedoms 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion ( freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication. © freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association. He cannot reasonably restrict the negotiations from occurring unless the parties represent a threat to the security of persons or the country. Ignoring his injunction and contempt order is not a crime since neither are valid anyway. Seems the good judge is making this personal and attempting to inject his own form of racism into the fray. Too bad he doesn't have the legal authority to make his make-believe powers come true. We'll just be ignoring him, as usual. O:nen

She:kon! The UN definition is probably not an accepted definition in Rwanda either but the rest of us recognize genocide when we see it. Those who don't have something to hide, being complicit it the crime. Genocide means cultural genocide too! The definition provided by the originator of the word clearly identifies the intended application of the word when it was coined. You're grasping at straws. You lost this argument so move on. O:nen

She:kon! Riverspin, The draft declaration cites a definition of cultural genocide that is accepted by those that support the declaration. That makes it globally accepted definition. Later on in the document the stages of cultural genocide. You're in the last phase according to the article. 1. Classification People are divided into "us and them". "The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend... divisions." 2. Symbolization "When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups..." "To combat symbolization, hate symbols can be legally forbidden… as can hate speech". 3. Dehumanization "Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder." "Hate propaganda should be banned, hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished." 4. Organization "Genocide is always organized... Special army units or militias are often trained and armed..." "To combat this stage, membership in these militias should be outlawed." 5. Polarization "Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda..." "Prevention may mean security protection for moderate leaders or assistance to human rights groups..." 6. Identification "Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity..." "At this stage, a Genocide Alert must be called..." 7. Extermination "It is "extermination" to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human." "At this stage, only rapid and overwhelming armed intervention can stop genocide. Real safe areas or refugee escape corridors should be established with heavily armed international protection." 8. Denial "The perpetrators... deny that they committed any crimes..." "The response to denial is punishment by an international tribunal or national courts." That doesn't surprise me coming from you as a party hack, since the Conservatives harbour a racist genocidal cadre hiding in their extreme right wing..... You've lost another argument Riverspin. Move on. O:nen

She:kon! Actually it is genocide if the intention of the gun bearer was to shoot the people and not rob the bank and the gun bearer is part of a dominent group with clear aims at exterminating the rights and or lives of the ethnic group. The gun-bearer is not part of a group then he is just a racist. What is happening the Onkwehon:we IS genocide. Your denial is absolute confirmation. Proof. O:nen

She:kon! From Wikipedia - Genocide "The term "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin (1900–1959), a Polish Jewish legal scholar, in 1943, from the roots genos (Greek for family, tribe or race) and -cide (Latin - occidere or cideo - to massacre). Lemkin said about the definition of genocide in its original adoption for international law at the Geneva Conventions: Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."[1] From Wikipedia - Cultural Genocide "Cultural genocide is a term used to describe the deliberate destruction of the cultural heritage of a people or nation for political or military reasons." "Article 7 of the "United Nations draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples" (26 August 1994) defines "Cultural genocide" (emphasis added)[1]: Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for: (a ) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities; (b ) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources; (c ) Any form of population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights; (d ) Any form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative or other measures; (e ) Any form of propaganda directed against them." Accordingly, Canada is still engaged in the genocide of Onkwehon:we with its apartheid system and Indian Act controls. O:nen

She:kon! Yes it is correct. The 500,000 non-native people living along the tract would not get a vote at the Confederacy Council or in the election of Royaner, as it stands. They would be considered immigrants and must apply for and pass requirements to become Haudenosaunee before they would be offered that priviledge. This is not unlike any nations immigration policy and it is not discriminatory. It is a measure of security and continuity. In Canada, immigrants must pass and test and be scrutinized by a judge: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/applications/.../CIT0300E5.html To pass the test you must demonstrate an understanding of: + the right to vote in elections in Canada; + the right to run for elected office in Canada; and + voting procedures and how to register yourself as a voter. You will also be asked questions to check your knowledge and understanding of: + Canada’s history; + Canada’s geography; and + the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. The test will take about 30 minutes to complete. If you are asked to appear in person for an interview with a citizenship judge, the interview will take about 15 to 30 minutes. All of the questions on the citizenship test and the questions asked by the citizenship judge are based on the information in the study guide, A Look at Canada. You can't just move into any country in the world and expect to automatically enjoy the rights and priviledges of their citizenry. O:nen

She:kon! We are dealing with GWB since Haudenosaunee still hold lands in the US. GWB and the US Congress recognize our sovereignty. O:nen

She:kon! Hilter sent 65,000,000 jews with the blessing of the German people because they believed they were the superior race. It was neither a moral or a legal act. Just because people believe something is so, doesn't make a myth anymore real. If those 33,000,000 Germans could have been told the truth it is likey they would have changed their mind. O:nen

She:kon! Riverswirl, Spin spin spin you go...... Your argument is lost again. We proved that Canad neigher has the legal capacity as a Crown Corporation to change law than does Walmart set the minimum wage. LOST! YOUR moral argument is irrelevent. SPIN SPIN SPIN you go. In a strictly moral sense it is immoral to steal something and expect to benefit from it. How old are you? 13? O:nen

She:kon! Riverwind, There's that circular reasoning again. The two refutes you made? Both of them were brought up by you as a defense to the "it is not a legal issue because your country has no jurisdiction" and "morality has no place because irrelevent". You've lost it. Admit it and let's move on. You have no more possible answers to justify your wrong conclusions. As Bugs Bunny would say "My you're turning a wonderful shade of ultra-maroon...." O:nen

She:kon! It is the Conservative way to make a conclusion first and worry about the facts after. Riverwinds circular logic fools no one. Like the Tasmania Devil he just digs himself a deeper grave with each spin. O:nen

She:kon! Riverwind, You still have it backwards. If a man steals a car and sells it to another, the other is not morally entitled to keep once he becomes aware it is stolen, even though he has fixed the engine, spruced up the inside and put on new tires. It is immoral to profit benefit from ANY crime. Your legal argument is exhausts and now your moral argument fails the test as well. What else do you want to try? O:nen

She:kon! The rail bridge - a piece of junk in disrepair that burned. We didn't burn it down! ~Someone~ did start the fire but no one knows for sure. Hwy 6 / Plank Road - is on our unceded territory. It is our highway and we can make improvements anyway we want. If we can keep the blockheads that incite violence away and protect our people by doing so, then digging up the road is definitely an improvement. Assaulting police officers. Now this is a funny one. There were no authorized Haudenosaunee peace officers assaulted. There were some unauthorized foreign invaders on our land that were arrested, and perhaps in resisting arrest they were roughed up a bit but when you trespass and bring your armed American ATF friends with you into another country, you should expect to be treated seriously. There were no assaults but there were a number of deportations. There were no Canadian laws broken as Canadian law does not apply. O:nen

She:kon! Riverwind, That is an assinine position. The law says Peter Whitmore served his time and was free to go, even though every psychologist and prison guard that ever met him siad he was a 100% risk to offend. Not only did the law state he was free to go, he did not have to report to anyone and was free to go anywhere in the country without tabs. Your morality didn't save the two boys he attacked and molested, one of whom he kidnapped and held against his will. Your false -cheap-labour conservative evangelism never stopped gay marriage, or abortion. The liberal government invented adscam and suck the public teet of millions of dollars and funneled them in to liberal party hack's pockets. The law and people who make the law are immoral and inequitible. Your mythical morality ahs no place in the business world, the justice system or the government. You should rethink your position unless you prefer delusion over reality......come to think of I believe you do! O:nen

She:kon! Ah...the whining of the cheap labour conservatives...... We're hardly supremists given that fact that we have welcomed and continue to welcome people from all over the world to Kayenke. We even let you come here and multiply considering the fact that your distorted worldview is one based on violence and inequality....and then you cry about "fairness". What a joke that is..... I understand the other side of the problem well. Your problem is that you are incapable of seeing our side of it because your distorted worldview breaks it up in to "us and them" thinking and when it is for OUR benefit as "them" then YOU as "us" must be losing something. That cheap-labour mentality makes you fear your losses and regardless of the end payout, you can only see the immediate loss. I know your thinking system well. I know that it is totally based on myth and fear and with a careful word or two either is easily invoked. I know that you have been mass-conditioned to be a "worker" feeding the public trough and through them ultimately slaving for big business. I know that you are often frustrated by your own inability to get ahead, thinking that if you just work a little harder or a little longer you will be more comfortable and secure. I know that your children have no support community as the result of your making latch-key kids out of them. They are going through their own turmoil right now and they are blaming you for it too! I know that you think having lots of money in the bank is your security yet you have no idea what you could eat in the wild if the bank suddenly closed. You are a missfit, and an worrier and without someone's reassurance from those around you, you often lose your identity. I understand your myths as a western anglo-european Christian thinker and the fears that the insitutions instilled in you. I understand the backward mentality of your upbringing, being a left-over from the me-generation and using others for your own self-gratification. Yes I understand the otherside. Your belief and your assertions of Canadianship are myths which do not resemble your illegal status, your insecurity or your lack of ownership of everything. And dispite all of that you are also a liar having previously said you would no longer respond to me. However, I take no offense at your crimes, since you gained your penchant for lying from the the Church whose goal it was to subjagate you and make you a slave to them..."for your own good". And even though you have consciously detached yourself from them, you remain plagued with the dis-eases they gave you. So for your lie, you are forgiven and for your ignorance you are forgiven. An intelligent person would have easily recognized the gifts offered to them. A not so intelligent one, however, refuses the gifts and condemns the deliverer to his own misery. O:nen

She:kon! Since thick and slimy is your fortay I'll repeat it once more. Six Nations already has an agreement in principle that all the lands in the Haldimand Tract belong to us. We have something Canada wants - the people....all 500,000 of them that if removed from your tax base will create some major financial headaches. We're not negotiationg for the land as it is something we already have possession of. Tell "What's his name" that an election won't solve a thing. The government has no authority. Only the Crown can come to us to open negotiations on the land. And if he wants to use violence against us, then bring it on. I'm not afraid of some out-of touch Toronto hick holding a fork in his own defense...... O:nen

She:kon! Again by right of the Royal Proclamation Canada has no land base. They have treaty interests but they do not physically own the land nor is it part of Canada. A Crown Corporation cannot own land. It can manage it but it can never own it, nor control it. By treaty with the Crown the Haldimand tract is not "shared lands". Its title is 100% Six Nations. So far neither the Crown, nor Canada has proven there were any land transfers that are legally binding, so the 6 miles on either side of the Grand River from its mouth to it source title is still ours. Settlers have moved onto our territories some with the blessing of the Indian agent, some with the approval of Joseph Brant and most others as squatters. This occupation is illegal and it has been noted as earlier as 1810 that the squatting was a problem for us. Since your government has done nothing about, given ample opportunity to correct it by locating familys and small communities, the problems is theirs. If they refuse to do anything about after this next round of talks then we will look to other measures to clear a path to Erie and Shelburne. There isn't a thing that anyone can do to us except visit violence upon us. And while a rattlesnake may be harmless when left to silther away in the field, it you corner it and attempt to block its way, it will strike with venomous accuracy. And once the poison is inject you will be a long time recovering. Not only do we have many non-native friends and advocate in Canada and the US but we have a contingent of other first nations that will come to our aid. Our network of trade and commerce established 2000 years ago still winds its way acroos the continent and I doubt there is anything you do that will interfere with that. As well you should always keep in mind that upwards of 90% of First nation people live in your cities and towns and you would not recognize the majority by physical characteristics. They are watching everybit as much as advocates and human rights watchers are , noting how inept Canada is towards aboriginals and how ignorant the majority of Canadians are about our history, culture, politics and present treatment by the government. Riverwind you might consider, that the haldimand tract has already been recognized / returned to our control. The only dilemma facing the negotiators now at the table is what to do with the 500,000 or so non-natives living. As I mentioned earlier, your government has some pretty obtuse ideas about that but in the end the land is already ours. There is no more negotiation about it. That is the agreement in principle. End of story. O:nen

She:kon! Riverwind, 1) What will you do if the SCC rules that Six Nations surrendered the land legally in the 1800s and has no claim on the territory today? Will you just accept the result because it is 'the law'? The Supreme Court of Canada has no standng in Kayenke. 2) If you are not willing to accept a lawful ruling of the SCC that goes against Six Nations then please explain why any non-aboriginal Canadian should accept a ruling that goes in favour of Six Nations? There will be no rulings in Canada either. The result will be an international treaty, enforceable upon each nation by their own rules and enforcements. You have no choice in accepting what your politicians dictate - you gave then a mandate to do anything they want. In addition as with current treaties with First Nations or the Free Trade agreement as example, a succeeding government government cannot throw out a preceding government's agreements without following the mechanism for dissolving them. In any case the failure to abide by treaties, means that all lands revert back to 100% First Nations' control and Canada must vacate forthwith. Get this one point....if that is all you are capable. Haudenosaunee Confederacy are not Canadian. Our recognition by the Crown puts us in a nation to nation relationship with Canada. Our sovereignty is above that of Canada, (since Canada is not a sovereign nation) and makes us direct allies with the Crown and her comptroller, the British Government. We are also allied with the US and any number of other countries in the world. Nothing Canada dictates affects us and it is only through the offers of peace, friendship and goodwill that we assist them or they us. No ruling , no law of your petty government has any force and effect because we are not Canadian and never will we be enticed to join you in your pathetic myth of nationhood. O:nen

She:kon! Jerry, First of all Metis are not native. They are Metis and they only exist through the recogntion of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On the other hand I have many more real native friends and probably just as many non-native friends as you do. I am self-employed, earn a substantial living and live off territory. I don't pay taxes because I am not Canadian and my Nation doesn't use a tax system. However, I do rent an office on reserve, employ local people and try as much as possible to buy in the community. On the other hand Canadians have been duped into paying personal taxes since the 2nd world war implementation as a temporary war effort. Now your government and the bureaucrats that extract priviledge from their positions are addicted to your tax dollars. We all pay our dues in one way or another. Most fair minded people, to which I wouldn't count you in those numbers see the inequity and illegal land grabs the government has made over the years and like us want to see restoration in some form or fashion. Your refusal to see the consequences of your position, make you the least fairminded here, save and except Riverwind who admits his bias because he is a Conservative and well it is just their nature to hate everyone..equally. The final resolution doesn't concern you and as a Canadian without the ability to even elect people that represent you to government, you are essentially impotent in being able to sway official opinion on this matter. While your tantrums and pedantic retorts are entertaining, in the end they really mean nothing. On the other side of that same coin, because our governance model requires the negotiators to come back to us frequently, for our advice and ratification, I have all kinds of influence in how the end result pans out. Certainly my being heard in the community is an important influence but not any more so than being able to listen clearly to what other's have stated and then provide an agreeable suggestion to resolve the problem to the consensus of the community. THAT is real representation. So you can babble on all you want. You can stomp your feet and cry foul. In the end you are just a singlular dude without any say in the outcome, and according to the way your aristrocratic / autocratic system operates, when this is all done your MP's and MPP's will tell you what they decided without your consent. No doubt the way things are going at the table, you may not be too happy while we'll be delighted! There is no appeal, no impeachment process nor any complaints department for your government. Your best bet is only to elect someone else whenever Harper gets around to calling another election. Next time you might want to vote Green Party as your vote will means just as much going to a non-status party than it does to an official one. O:nen

She:kon! Advocating violence Riverwind is something I expected from you. If you can't win a disagreement beat them up and then take it. After all that is the Canadian way - full of violence and hypocrisy. Oka ratio: 1 warrior for every 100 Canadian troops. If you think your misfit pimply-faced armed forces can do anything but fill body bags, then I have a piece of land I would like to sell you in the Grand Valley...... We have the means to make our way anywhere in the world without your feeble atttempts to threaten us. You forget the woods and the darkness belong to us. Just as the Americans who died at Lundy's Lane who was more fearce, the British or us...... O:nen

She:kon! They know that they can eat at our table anytime they want. They won't be evicted. They'll be the first to pledge allegiance to the Great Tree of Peace. O:nen