Posit

Yes we do. You have predetermined that putting flammable liquids in a hot area will cause some sort of reaction without considering the mitigating measures that much smarter people than you have taken to prevent any issue. And that is the problem with "common sense" being presented as a rational position in any discussion. It is neither "common" or "sensible" but is indicative of someone who refuses to go beyond their own prejudices and look at the total picture while invoking "common sense" as an excuse to look no further. Einstein was a great philosopher as well as being a great scientist and mathematician. He was also quite comical and never relied on "common sense" to forward an argument.

Wrong again bucko. "(6)the north shore villages occupied locations on routes leading north from the homeland rather than independent locations on the north shore of Lake Ontario." "Once on the north shore, the interior and the northwest were accessible by three main routes: (1) from Lake Ontario to the Grand River and on to upper lakes." The maps, referred to by Konrad were prepared by the French in the early 1600's and they show a village near where Six Nations presently is situated. The Region surrounding it is referred to as "Iroquois du Nord". That is not to be confused with the other regions noted on the map that identify the Wendat, Neutral and Petuns where I have previously mentioned they were. You do know who Victor Konrad is, right?

There is only a fine line between common sense and racism. "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." Albert Einstein

We got you home safely, allowing you to walk off the transports instead of the body bags that those who did their own thing came home in. We can't all be that bad considering who we had to work with......

"A reassessment of the written documents and largely neglected maps of the period suggest that the Iroquois occupation of the north shore was highly ordered abd based on traditional trade routes and tribal territorial claims. It was an extension of the homeland. But innovations in subsistence, settlement and lifestyle did occur. The study of expansion to the north shore provides valuable insights into the delicate balance between the forces of change and continuity in post-contact Iroquois society." "In addition to village locations, the historical maps provide detailed information on portages, overland trails and non-village areas in the Iroquois cultural landscape. The distribution of these features is summarized in Fig. 1 and suggests the following: (1) settlements on the north shore and in the homeland were distributed along parallel east-west axes (2) distances between settlement on the north shore tended to be greater than distances between settlements to the south of Lake Ontario (3) there were more connections between places in the homeland system (4) the north shore villages were connected to the homeland settlements through fishing camps on the south shore (5) the distribution of north shore villages resembled more closely the distribution of south shore camps (6)the north shore villages occupied locations on routes leading north from the homeland rather than independent locations on the north shore of Lake Ontario." "Once on the north shore, the interior and the northwest were accessible by three main routes: (1) from Lake Ontario to the Grand River and on to upper lakes. (2) from either the Rouge coming across the moraine, into the Lake Simcoe drainage basin and on to Georgian Bay, and (3) the traditional route to Georgain Bay via the Trent system of lakes, rivers and small portages." Victor Konrad, Journal of Historical Geography 1981 Notice that the Iroquois were familiar with the Grand River (the Haldimand Tract) from "its mouth to its source" having lived there at the time. I'll let kengs333 explain to you who Victor Konrad is since he claims to be an expert and I'm just an incompetent historian......

Dbl post

Actually it fully explains your inept social skills in discussing this matter. Were you one of the misfits, did you join as a career soldier or did you flunk out of military college? I mean some of us officers used to call a 20 year service an "escape" from the real world.

Keep up with the program.... There was a offer on the table recognizing 4 claims. They would not have made the offer if there was no validity to the Haldimand Proclamation as some are wont to say. The Haldmand was Six Nations territory all 966,000 acres. The next part was based on the fact that there are 28 claims pending. The argument that Six Nations had no right at all to the Haldimand because the Proclamation never received Royal Ascent, or that the Simcoe patent undid the Haldimand Proclamation is moot. So now the negotiators recognize 4 of the claims and another 28 are pending....get it.....? As each one of the claims is examined no doubt there will be evidence presented on both sides to support their case. So far the stuff the government has presented they themselves have admitted doesn't hold water. Thus they made an offer and Six Nations immediately laughed out loud at it. Then out of respect and goodwill, the Confederacy asked for an accounting - why would the government offer $125 million, where is it supposed to go and how is it apportioned against each of the 4 claims, since one claim alone extends into the $billions? The short answer is: there is no apportionment and we simply drew a figure from the air and threw it on the table. Being gracious again, the Confederacy has requested that the government provide some accounting for that offer.....I expect the long answer to be not much different than the short answer given our negotiators' penchant for not taking these talks serious. The government -federal, provincial & municipal - are breaking the law. They continue to allow and approve development along the Haldimand without consulting Six Nations. They are also in contravention of the law concerning Tyendinaga, Grassy Narrows and Ardoch. So the question remains: "Do you support encouraging our governments to obey Canadian laws?" It has been asked an number of times and you seem afraid to answer. Seems you get caught in your own myths once the real "Rule of Law" is pointed out...

No doubt you concede it answered yours..... "Does that sort of behaviour seem in keeping with what you think Canada's military does?" What the army did at Whiskey Trench was not beyond what misfits do when whipped into a frenzy. And BTW you can call me Captain, soldier.

Yep. Bit some claim he was murdered by the SQ. And I'm sure a lot of the the other soldiers saw his wet stain too.

Wrong the case in point is that In R v. Marshall the Court held oral history to be more weighted than the written agreement: 12 Thirdly, where a treaty was concluded verbally and afterwards written up by representatives of the Crown, it would be unconscionable for the Crown to ignore the oral terms while relying on the written terms.... You must have glossed over that statement.....The court ignored the terms of the written agreement since it was written by the Crown after the oral agreement had already been made. And in doing so they arbitrarily altered the context of the agreement without consent. "Copnsidering these same oral histories alos include animals turned into humans and vuce versa, I think we can all agree to dismiss them as interesting myths." And of course the framers of the Constitution put their faith in the invisible God......And the courts require a swearing on a book as one of the affirmations of "Truth". However much your ignorance again dominates your thinking processes, please pay attention. The context of oral history in Iroquois legality differs tremendously from the stories they tell to teach children lessons. Being less convinced of time lines Haudenosaunee story-telling is based on preserving the lessons derived from certain events. In some cases those stories are like the fairy tales we have told our children over and over again to drive home the lessons of a moral society. You do remember the Three Little Pigs, right. So do pigs really build houses? However, the context of the legal history, those events certified by Wampums and recitations is like the recall of an eye witness passed on to an officer investigating a crime. Yet much more powerful, since mnemonics was a skilled honed over generations. The repetition of oral recall of events had to be relayed over and over again and it was never dependent on one or two historians but committed to hundreds of historians throughout the Confederacy. And while the little memory games you played and lost in public school are not indicative, you would have to imagine hundreds with a photographic memory reading a years worth of Handsard and being able to go to the volume, page and paragraph to find a particular phrase made by a particular MP. The court has a number of tests by which it validates oral history and one of them is to be able to identify the lines in which it was passed down, confirmed by additional sources stemming from another line that matches. And regardless of your inferior opinions on the matter the Court has made oral history a valid source of historical information and recollection of agreements. And when the written does not jive with the oral, the Court must subject both to tests to try to determine the motivation behind a misrepresentation. So far very little of the oral history present thus far has been dismissed but quite a few British documents have been determined to be misrepresentative of the agreements that were made.

Wrong again chap. The Mississauga and the Iroquois were in tight together. They lived together and hunted the same territory without incident and trade goods back and forth. There was some trouble with the Blackfeet pushing into the north Superior at which the Iroquois occasionally offered their services. However, for the most part they were on friendly terms. The same thing with the Algonquin (and you would be surprised to know that many Iroquois were actually trilingual and some were even quadralingual). If you were really up on all those university documents you would have known that but since you don't I call your "evidence" bullshit. In fact I have quite a few archaeology reports for the north shore, and I know for a fact that they will not release them just to anyone - especially non-natives. Nor are they contained in university libraries. They are considered sensitive materials and you require a valid reason to obtain them. I know because I remember what I had to do and whose names to drop to get copies. So bullshit on the second account. And thirdly the Huron "extermination" is a fabrication. As I said the Jesuits made up a name for the North Shore Confederacy Iroquois to distinguish them from the South Shore Confederacy Iroquois. They are not the same as the Wendat who fled to Montreal when disease decimated their populations and after the French left them exposed to the British wrath. So interesting isn't it that you come here without any historical knowledge and try to bullshit a third time.

Another useless opinion from a sport who feels inferior. I sense lots of fear in this boy. Anyone else?

Oh...and you mean like this soldier who pissed his pants? Lasagna and Soldier Little boy misfits.

Silly goose. The Iroquois didn't need herds of deer. Meat only made up about 15% of their diet. And for the most part they grew most of what they needed, practicing no-till corn cultivation, companion planting and crop rotation eons before the old world cabbage farmers understood the concepts. And their practice of harvesting resources from the land allowed the under storey to prosper and small animals, deer and other game actually came to them. They preserved and stored vegetables in root cellars that would sustain an entire community of 5000 people through the winter. They had access to medicines that still are not understood fully in the mainstream today. They had farming communities comprised of 100 to 500 people that provided the major villages with produce and they even cultivated apples, strawberries, grapes, raspberries, and a number of other fruits and vegetables. While corn, beans and squash made of the majority of their diet, they also had amaranth grain, carrots, potatoes, and quite a few other things that they traded with other nations. Also cultivating tobacco was a major trade item to woodland peoples and in return the received technologies and other trade goods that they then traded for other goods. Your ignorance is telling of a person who never studied Canadian history beyond the 3rd grade. Instead of looking like a blob of empty inventive, why not get yourself a bonafide education and learn a little about Canadian history, instead of trying to invent it using your xenophobia as a guide. Try "Indian Givers - How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World" , Jack Weatherford. Its available at most Canadian libraries and is an eye opener on just how much we owe the natives for the world food supply and other technologies.

I agree. The Canadian Armed Forces, the RCMP and the OPP are all terrorist organizations. A Mohawk Warrior is best described as a member of a community militia, raised to defend their territory but being farmers, and business people, husbands, fathers, sons and grandfathers most their lives.

Go watch the video "Rocks at Whiskey trench Absolutely. Remember Somalia in 1993? That provides ample evidence of the ruthless behavior of some Canadian soldiers. The murder of an innocent boy is one thing but the military cover-up is a whole other subject. You mean like this? Somalia

WTF? Canada is a "peace-loving" country? Take a guess at what country in the world has had troops in EVERY war in the world since its inception? Yep! Canada. I would call your statement a myth.

The introduction of Canadian law into these discussions has no relevance in deciding what the Natives were bound to do. However, it provides insight into what we as Canadians are OBLIGATED to do under the law and presents a basis for the Crown's intentions in honouring treaties and agreements at the time they were written. A case in point is the Royal Proclamation 1763 being affirmed and protected under the Constitution. This inclusion demonstrates that it was the intention of the Crown at the time it was written to set aside "Indian lands" that were off-limits to colonial expansion and that any such expansions could not occur through greedy land barons and unscrupulous dealings with settlers as it had in the US expansions. Rather the Crown was clear in providing that lands could only be ceded to the Crown itself IF the Indians wished to part with it. Applying the "Rule of Law" according to our modern Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that all land dealings with individuals within the Haldimand Tract were illegal and prohibited. So I supposed, that if there is not a Crown title showing up in any of the land transfers, the ownership of the land remains in Six Nations' names and jurisdiction.

Any appeals to doing the morally right thing in this matter hold no water considering the thug behaviour of Canadian people for the last two hundred years. I corrected your sentence for you kengs333.

The archaeology performed by professional archaeologists in the last 50 years of the north shore dates to the 11th century. One of the obstacles archaeologists have up here is that the high acidity of the land quickly erodes bone and other organics. However, the examination of cherts and ceramics definitely link the north shore peoples with the Confederacy and the carbon-dating of charred corn and soils where successive fires were built prove the dates. These recent findings in addition to new information (debunking the common myth that that Iroquois are newcomers) has caused archaeologists and anthopologists to revisit their first premise. Now it is provincial law that an archaeological survey must be conducted pre-development because they are aware that Iroquois settlements pre-date any settler occupations and their occupations were extensive through all of southern Ontario. The Tobacco were located in small villages around Windsor / Lake St. Clair. The Neutrals were located between them and them and the Wendat who were located up the Bruce Penninsula and all were relatively small nations comprising of about 50,000-80,000 people. This was overshadowed by the expansion of the Iroquois Confederacy, who by the mid-1500s had reached a total population of about 1,000,000 people in about 250 villages primarily focused in the central south shore region but scattered throughout the north shore regions extending as high as the Kawarthas (Apsley / Bancroft Area) East to Montreal and West to where present day London is. The North Shore was a strategic gateway to the northern trade routes and the Confederacy had always maintained a presence there. In about 1660, the Confederacy hand over the care-taking of the North Shore West region to the Mississauga and many moved south to the Council Fire areas to bolster and help protect villages that had been diminished by sickness and conflict. However, there remained substantial populations of Confederacy people on the central and east region of the North Shore. When the Confederacy returned in the late 1700s to reclaim the land, the Mississauga had no problem relocating to the North Shore of Superior where the majority of the Mississauga had retreated away from the British settler expansions. There were many that stayed and lived in the North Shore villages. A check of family genealogy for the region, family names and nations shows there were lots of intermarriages between nations. The Mississauga, Algonquin, Wendat, Petun, Neutrals and Erie and Iroquois were not at war as Hollywood types like to proselytize. The reduction of populations that seemed to occur during the period coincide with the increase in populations of the Confederacy as each of the remaining nations on the north shore came under the protection of the Great Law. Neither were they "forced" to join but found it practical when the French abandoned them and retreated to Quebec in the mid 1600s.

The Mississauga were merely caretakers of the lands when the Confederacy returned. More than a hundred years before the Confederacy left the lands in the care-taking of the Mississauga until such time as they returned to claim it. This was witnessed by a Courier du Bois and Governor Couiller of the French Colony at Taiagon (present day Toronto). By the time the Confederacy had returned there were few Mississauga living in Southern Ontario since they were less inclined to live close to the British settlers whom they found to be uncivilized and ignorant of the treachery of the lands and the seasons. Brant simply brokered the relocation payments required to send the last remaining Mississauga back up to the North Shore of Superior. There was no sale, even though the British boasted there were. The Haldimand IS and WAS Confederacy land. The archaeology tells the whole story. BTW Brant was referring to the constant encroachment by the settlers whom the British guaranteed would not be able to squat on their lands, cheat Indians, or attempt to convert them to Christianity.

For the most part you are wrong. What you described is a soldier - a trained killer - and it doesn't surprise me that you would miss the mark since the western world view is dominated by the "violence is solution" attitudes. A Mohawk Warrior is a father, a son, an uncle or a grandfather who steps up when his community is threatened. Most are without any formal training. They know what has to be done and aren't afraid to do it, even if it means they will be harmed. They are about defending their people and are not interested in attacking anyone. When the event that caused them to congeal is over, they will return home to their jobs and their families as if nothing had ever happened. A Mohawk warrior is just a man that cares enough to do something about it. I believe this is where their tenacity comes from. (That and being raised by women with big ovaries...instead trying to prove their nuts.)

The courts are out of the picture and the government has already started buying lands so they can be returned. I guess you'll just have to go away mad, eh?

Ummm.....I've seen the DOCUMENTARY and the woman that quote was talking was caught on news film as the soldiers threw her into the river and slammed into the abutment. It isn't an allegation unless you are blind as well as being dumb.... Watch the movie and then come back and say it didn't happen. BTW 25 Mohawk warriors held off 2000 CAF at Oka. That equates to 1 Mohawk warrior is worth 400 Canadians soldiers. Seems like pretty fair odd given that 399 are Canadian misfits and the other one is stoned on drugs. Talk about hyperbole...They didn't hold Chateauguay "hostage" what a pedantic statement......They merely blocked the bridge that crossed Kahnawake - their own territory. As far a Chateauguay goes it was a despicable act by cowardly Canadians throwing rocks at children and causing the death of an old person. One of the bleminsh in our recent history that make me ashamed to call myself Canadian.