Posit

Both. They have lied at the negotiation table and falsified the records they have been presenting as historical fact and when confronted about their fake documents their answer is "we need more time...." Canada is not acting in good faith. Of course you are only getting information from media whores right now. How about waiting until the facts are in? From what I have heard, the builder and his two sons tried to evict the protesters and ended up receiving the worst of it. The Development process created by the Confederacy runs above the Ontario - municipal processes and provides more strict guidelines for those builders who want to move forward. Those who do not want to go forward or those that do not want to follow the process get stopped completely. In this particular case the main developer was in the process of making an agreement to stop building when this rogue sub-builder took the matter into his own hands.

Do you consider falsifying records, lying to Six Nations and making a mockery out of the negotiation process is "doing something nice"? Just wondering also, if you believe that blowing up your neighbours house is justified because you wanted to help them with some landscaping....... Six Nations has invented a brilliant process to allow developers to move forward while comply with criteria that protects the environment, reduces pollution potential and controls urban sprawl. The only other alternative during negotiations is to shut them down completely. If it were you, which would you prefer?

Wake up call for the resident racist: You never owned Canada, nor have you ever really been in control of it, boy. Canada belongs to US - all of US - and we just let you stay here for our entertainment. If you have a problem with that then there is some land available in Mississippi that once belonged to KKK White Sheet, James Ford Seale. He no longer has a need for it since they convicted him in the 1964 death of Charles Moore. But you would fit right in and you wouldn't even have to hold ~anything~ back.

Certainly, that is still a possibility since Canada subscribes to the UN and the Declaration passed. Although a domestic court has no authority over the treaties themselves since they were recognized agreement between sovereign nations. The Declaration would definitely have an influence in the World Court in determining whether or not the treaties were seriously being complied with. Like most guidelines, the declaration does not supplant laws but proved the means to interpret them. I see this as Aboriginal Nations 1, Canada 0.

Yes but we did find out through the Six Nations side that our government was throwing money at them with no basis or accountability to where the values came from. It was a brain-dead move that not only our negotiators look like morons but it demoralizes the whole process. I do believe that the Six Nations side is also waiting for the government to come up with all that documentation they said they had that Six Nations had sold the lands in question. Seems the last British records the Confederacy negotiators put on the table prove they didn't. Estoppel IS being applied Geoffrey since the government promised to maintain a trust of land and money on behalf of Six Nations. It turns out they used the money and the land for their own interests. The occupation of the land prevents development which in turn prevents a further damage to that trust relationship. The government has lied about their trusteeship and that is sufficient cause to use estoppel as a legal reasoning for the reclamations and blockades. Highways passing through First Nations territories are not OURS. We have an agreement of free passage over their lands. However, they still have the right to close them down when the agreements that form those rights of way are in abeyance. Our government has no title to ANY native lands that wasn't invented in the early 20th century. Before that the treaties are all we have. And in law, one side cannot make unilateral decisions to change the agreement. Sure we could tell the natives to shove it but ignoring treaties means the agreements resort back to the way things they were before they were made. In the end we would left with Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City as our only Canadian settlements. Your anger and petty fears are no replacement for proper and legal settlements with the natives.

That has been my position from the get-go, as well.

In my lifetime professional experiences I have never encountered a "mistrial" for a preliminary hearing. The prelim is provided in order to ascertain if there is sufficient evidence to proceed to trial. The testimony of Julian Fantino lasted 3 hours. The basis of the judicial process is to let the "public" and the defendant know there is sufficient reason to refer the case to trial. It is extremely Nazi-like for the Superintendent of the police force (who was neither a witness to most of the summary charges of mischief or involved in the arrest of Brant) to testify for 3 hours and then have the courts proceed to trial on that basis - especially since a deal to remove rail barricades was made with the local department and Fantino came back a week later and directed them to issue charges. One more example of native injustice and where the rule of law does not apply to natives IMO.

Lots of Canadian domestic law is not in compliance with the Charter - especially those laws that are institutionally prejudiced against aboriginal people. While the Charter does provide basic human rights, the government ignores its obligations under it to consult and accommodate First Nations when developing on lands in which they hold a constitutional interest. As well, proportionally First Nations people overpopulate Canadian prisons because they are treated differently under the justice system. And lastly as recently as the last couple of months, the Canadian police and judicial system have proven they can detain native people - Shawn Brant -, use unreasonable search against their supporters and hold hearings in secret (media blackouts for pre-trial testimony ) while the unreasonably excessive gestapo-styled OPP can exercise brutal force against First Nations women, children and old people while serving a civil court injunction that had no basis in law (as determined by a higher court). There will be more than lobbying going on in the next decade and I suspect that not only civil disobedience but violent confrontation will become the norm in society until aboriginal people's rights are properly recognized and applied.

Well wrong you are! It is the "culture of money" - not Canadian culture, but a culture none-the-less.

Nah. It doesn't matter if they change the law or not. This is a Charter issue and it is well above the authority of Canadian law and Parliament. Sure you can imagine that the Charter will be changed, but I highly doubt that the will of the provinces or the federal government would be capable of moving through the process of Constitutional amendment. Plus it would be political suicide for the governing party that pushes such an agenda. Polls are useless and absolutely no effect on Charter LAW or the Supreme Court's decisions. So go waste your energy on the backs of some other immigrants. It is a done deal.

What the majority of people think - even what the Prime Minister thinks - is irrelevent. Reasonable accommodation is defined by the Charter, supported by the Supreme Court of Canada as the way the Charter is to be interpreted AND is incumbent on all Canadians to exercise. If you choose not to be reasonable under the law then your business and even your household becomes open to litigation for failing to comply with the basic human rights afforded in the Charter. So go ahead and be angry about something you can't do anything about. I've always considered that that kind of energy exercised by xenophobes is a good distraction from having to participate in my reasonable and democratic society.

Harper doesn't have to agree. Our participation in the UN and under that our agreement to comply with international law (which has been democratically implemented) makes us accountable to uphold the law. The Declaration will pass today and Canada will be under pressure to comply with its intent. In the following weeks the campaigns will be on with Aboriginal people pressuring the government to start changing our laws to be consistent with the Declaration. Harper can certainly refuse to entertain any such ideas, however, doing so will be cause for UN-based sanctions for failing to comply with the basic human rights prescribed in the Declaration. The failure to accept the principles of basic human rights guaranteed for all people in Canada - including aboriginal people - is a black eye on Canada. It takes us down a couple of notches and proves that Canada is still very much a racist oligarchy and that we have a long way to go before we can even consider ourselves a democratic and free nation.

Its about reasonable accomodation, something many of seem to have trouble grasping. Its the law. You do believe in the rule of law, no?

The Health Care system was in crisis mode when McGuinty took over. Harris had plundered the public institutions in a failed attempt to punish the administration. It backfired when the administrations of health, education and natural resources simply passed the buck on to the end users. IMO McGuinty did the right thing. As far as governance, McGuinty's government has been quietly restoring confidence in the three institutions Harris gutted. He still has a long way to go. Besides, John Tory has claimed he will gut the institutions if he gets elected and return to Harris style government. The worst part about John Tory IMV is that he says he will take a confrontational position to First Nation lands claims. That can only further degrade the relationships all Ontarians have with First Nations and lead to more violent and more frequent clashes. I don't want that and I'm sure most Ontarians don't want to wake up to their streets their houses are on being blocked and no access to water, groceries or emergency services simply because the government is determined to ignore valid and legal claims and piss on the natives at the same time. John Tory is a threat to public peace and goodwill.

Actually the modern scientific theory presently being explored suggest that the migration may have taken place in the OPPOSITE direction, with the N.A. inhabitants moving across the ice bridge to Asia. Links have been provided previously. Please keep up with the adults, thanks....

EC operates at arm's length from government and the CEO has every right without interference to set EC policy - directives to local R.O.s. The law passed by Parliament was to request identification of all voters. The CEO has interpreted it to that to be consistent with the Charter Rights of individuals, Muslim women are not required to show their faces. Harper can't do a thing about right now. And since he took the unusual step of proroguing Parliament (which is itself is questionable) he'll have to wait until a full session returns to deal with it administratively. However, that will not be in time for Provincial Elections in Ontario, and not likely anything will pass before the next federal election (which by all indications will be called shortly after Parliament reconvenes). So all that Harper's horse monkey act is doing is....well....nothing....And all of those of you that want to crucify the religious rights of Muslims...well.....get over it. This is a lame duck.

I don't know where you were,but this has already been discussed. Human remains have been found in North Carolina dating 45,000 years ago. Thats 30 to 32 thousand years before the ice bridge and proves that N.A. was not populated via Asia. Older evidence (60,000 year old foot prints) has been found in South and Central America which indicates (along with aboriginal migration stories) that the Americas were populated from the south.

Of course I do. It is the legal means to enforce the government to live up to its agreements - particularly the Royal Proclamation which provides that no native lands can be sold or leased unless it is done directly with the Crown and the full native community has agreed to it - while preventing any development of the lands that would create further damages by the Crown's failure. There is no trespassing, vandalism or mischief taking place. The only damages occurred at Caledonia in response to a threat by the townspeople to prevent Six Nations people from passing freely into the town. Please keep up with current events. The Crown negotiators, the Governor General and INAC have stated that the lands at Ardoch, Tyendinaga and Grassy Narrows are unceded native lands. There is no court that is going to hear the lands claims and the government has taken these claims outside of the Specific Lands Claims Commission BECAUSE they know they are legitimate claims. In the case of Tyendinaga, the negotiation isn't about deciding if any claim is valid. They are discussing what to do with the 500 or so non-natives currently squatting on Mohawk Territory. In the case of Ardoch, the Algoinquins have already established with the government that the lands in question are theirs and have been in negotiations for a number of years discussing compensation, land swaps and settlement. Again please keep up and listen.....The GOVERNMENT created the Specific Lands Claims to avoid going to court. It is an independent tribunal that examines claims, certifies them and then sets them up for a negotiated settlement. IF they went to court it would be us holding the bag. The Six Nations claims total almost $80 billion dollars, just for the claims on the table (about 15% of the total claim of the Haldimand. Do you think that our government would risk going to court when they know that they would lose? The British paper trail, misappropriation of Six Nations trusts and lands that were never surrendered would nearly bankrupt the treasury. The government knows this and so instead of dealing with natives in the past they simply ignored them. Natives are saying they are tired of being ignored and have chosen the path of economic disruption, reclamations and blockades to stimulate the action of government to do something. And you know from my point of view they would be taking this course if it wasn't effective. So not only are they right in their claims of injustice, the blockades and protests are being held on their own lands and are all perfectly legal. Most of Canada is unceded. Any land base without a treaty is considered unceded. That is one stream in the specific lands claims process. The second stream is in the treaty violations where specific promises were made in Treaty agreements but were never fulfilled. As of this date nearly 90% of treaties are in default by government and nearly 80% of the land base is unceded (without treaty). That includes the Arctic territories that Harper has recently laid claims to. None of those lands belong to us. They are still Inuit Territory. Your own house isn't permanent so using that as a defense is a moot point. A bulldozer or a tornado could relocate you in an instant.

What don't you get? That the government cannot dictate to Elections Canada? It is simple. They operate at arms length from the government so that the democratic process is not interfered with. Where it concerns voting and election rules, the Prime Minister is an impotent monkey. EC challenged CPC on their election spending BECAUSE there were irregularities in the way money was spent and by whom. They are doing their jobs according to THE LAW and overseeing the election. You seem pissed because Harper got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. What? You didn't expect that? Well you should have......... The only way the policy decision of the Chief Election Officer can be challenged is in court. That's THE LAW. All this politicking by emotional grunts is really nonsense. Just get it in your head the the law, is THE LAW and there isn't much you can do about it......Get over it. The decision has been made. However I do see that you want to ignore THE LAW when it suits you. Maybe if you quit being so fickle and started to stand for law and justice you might not get so emotionally charged. Its bad for your young ticker.....

There's nothing wrong with it, or many of the other suggestions EXCEPT the Chief Elections Officer says the covering can stay if the Muslim women want them. He has the last word unless Harper takes it to the SCoC.

EC isn't making any new laws. They are prescribing a policy for all electoral districts. Parliament nor Harper can say beans about it, since EC runs outside of the authority of both of them. Sure parliament can make laws, but it has no effect when it violates a Charter Right. The CEO has determined that requiring a Muslim women to expose her face is a violation of the Charter. The ONLY solution would be for Harper to send it to the SCoC in the form of a challenge.

What jenny said....plus In the case of Caledonia, they are using "estoppel" - a legal remedy - to prevent further development on lands under claim. In Tyendinaga, Grassy Narrows and Ardoc, all the lands are recognized native lands. The government won't go to court because they know they are in the wrong and the legal remedy normally issued by the courts is to return the undeveloped properties and provide market value compensation for the rest. Something like this would total in the trillions just for compensatory damages plus the government would loose control of all the resources on unceded lands. The government has chosen to negotiate these claims in hopes of getting a better deal than they know the courts would issue as a penalty. Perhaps if we look at damages done to unceded territories and the resources removed without their permission, WE should be compensating them! Our little inconveniences of having to detour around a blocked road don't come even a smidgen close to the enormous inconvenience and injustice suffered by aboriginal peoples. You trivialize the injustice and that makes all Canadians look pathetic.

The Chief Electoral Officer just made a statement on CBC explaining why they made the decision. He also stated they will not be changing their policy on the matter. I guess Harper finds one more Canadian institution he can't circumvent the law around in favour of his narrow and legally impotent opinions......

Nope. Parliament does not control Elections Canada. EC is responsible to uphold the law and in their opinion Muslim women need not show their faces. And like any citizen, Harper can take the challenge to the SCoC if he wants. However, no amount of temper tantrums are going to change it.

Your birth certificate and Social Insurance Card are both valid forms of ID. No need for picture ID.