Posit

Nope. From what I have heard, Shawn Brant as well as many Mohawks from the Bay of Quinte bank at the BMO conveniently located at Ohsweken on Six Nations. They have already been tested and found that they are on reserve technically and the money stored there by First Nations people cannot be seized (or even examined).

Indian Act: " 89. (1) Subject to this Act, the real and personal property of an Indian or a band situated on a reserve is not subject to charge, pledge, mortgage, attachment, levy, seizure, distress or execution in favour or at the instance of any person other than an Indian or a band." Assets, bank accounts, unincorporated businesses, vehicles, houses, boats, etc. are all considered real and personal property of an Indian under the act. While it is possible to seize off-reserve assets, on reserve chattels cannot be touched. The Band as a Corporation can be sued in theory but the assets of the band cannot be touched in the same manner. That is part of the double edged sword of control we have over the natives, where these kinds of protections are offset by the apartheid restrictions placed by the Indian Act. However, holding the band liable for the action of some rogue protesters is like trying to hold Toronto liable for and OCAP protest that gets out of hand. It just ain't gonna happen.... In proper perspective, Indians cannot be sued by non-natives. However,within any First Nation they have the right to sue and repossess between natives. In all context CN's law suit will go no where

I say for a company that says they earn $100 million a day they hired some pretty dumb lawyers. Indians can't be sued. No one, not even the courts can seize assets on any reserve. One of the protections we offer under the Indian Act. CN are a bunch of fools. Not only that I think they just became an even bigger target with the help of the OPP who lied to get the last blockade down. My bet is when the next one goes up it will be there for a long time. CN should invest more in trucking.

"These particular protesters have a "right" to occupy and use lands they believe is theirs? Why are they allowed to skip the Fence Line Viewer Committee and court and go straight to occupation? Where is this special right spelled out?" The Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies that the Royal Proclamation is still in effect. The ownership is in question simply because Six Nations claims to have proof that the land was never ceded and only leased. They have plenty of documentation to back that up. As well, the federal government has admitted that they do not have documentation to the contrary and that their assertion that the land was ceded comes from " a number of sources" to wit they have not yet provided to the negotiating committee. Henco never held "clear" title to the lands. The land claim to the plot is an impediment that the local and provincial governments should have heeded. And so the Confederacy was within their rights both under the Charter and under federal statute to repossess the lands. That is common law. And the province can't purchase something that was leased, so in essence all they are able to do (and did do) was to purchase Henco's "interest" in the lands - a pay off to have Henco "go away". The fence viewers are by passed because municipalities and provinces don't hold jurisdiction over native issues. Only the federal government has a say in the dispute. Further the government has decided that the courts are not the way to settle these matters (since it is likely they will lose most of them) and so they prefer negotiation where they can have a chance to improve the settlement above and beyond what a court might order. Nevertheless, the reclamation of lands in question lit a fire under the federal government to negotiate. Since native occupation prevents further development, the government is under pressure by developers and citizens to settle these claims once and for all. Too bad the government is still bargaining in bad faith. I forsee a long and tumultuous decade coming our way.....

"Prior to this the lot, and what sat on it, was private property and the occupation was indeed illegal." This is where you are wrong. This is a fence line dispute and in any fence line dispute the remedy is to first apply to the municipalities Fence Line Viewer Committee and failing that take it to court. In civil disputes the first thing that must be established is who the owners are and whether or not there was ever an agreement to move the fence line. The negotiators are still stuck on who the owners are. Once that is established it will be easier to determine how it will be resolved. However, the original occupation and the continued residency on the lands in question is not "illegal" as you say. It is one party to the dispute simply exercising their right to occupy and use the lands they believe is theirs. As to Henco....they knew well in advance (they were warned by Six Nations) during the Development Review process that the land was under claim. They choose to ignore that notice but in the end by the government paying them off they won either way - they really had nothing to lose.....

150 years ago IS a problem today simply because Canada prevented natives from protesting by statute. It has only been the last 40 years or so that land claims could be dealt with. And as the government began to lose case after case in court they again have tried to manipulate the issues by requiring natives to apply to the Specific Land Claims process - where the government is judge and jury. Seeing again that even when they controlled the situation they stood to lose their cases, the government decided to use stall tactics. Negotiation is a relatively newcomer to the process and only because natives have exercised their rights (read Charter of Rights and Freedoms) to occupy and reclaim the lands in dispute. It is up to our government to negotiate in good faith and find a resolution hat corrects the illegal actions they have taken and returns lands back to the natives. The problem isn't 150 years old. It is only about 20 years old - the time since land claims research began and the processes to recognize and adjudicate the claims came into effect.

There have been charges laid and people arrested in Caledonia. for the petty crimes committed during some heated exchanges. However the occupation of the land in Caledonia is not illegal. Natives are there with the permission of the provincial government. Further to Rue's historical statement, it is public record that the British began selling off land on either side of the Plank road at least 6 months before the Six Nations Chiefs were supposed to have signed the deal. This is a clear indication that a fraud took place.

No. I didn't fill in the second half. Nothing of the sort. I simply responded using the term I ended you quote....to illustrate a point.

I'm a lot older than that margrace...a lot older......

"Luck" is a concept reserved for people who believe they lack. Nothing was taken out of context. You were quoted directly. Although I do understand how you aren't even aware of the words you select identify you line of thinking. To a schizophrenic when he says the Bogey man is after him, we tend not to take his words at face value. Same thing when we deal with insane people they do and say the strangest things.....

No no pyramid scheme, Sharkman. In reality there are no "levels". You either accept full abundance or you don't.

Yet another lost soul enters the picture trying to demonstrate his "self" importance. Yet insane people always see reality as a threat to their existence......

I don't have a monopoly on reality. There are many who have managed to wake up. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact..... It is a most futile action - your trying to understand. You would be much better off if you simply accepted "the fact" that you don't (and can't) understand "The Secret" from any vantage point in your current state. When you come to that realization you will have taken a step in the right direction...although there are no degrees of insanity nor is it possible to be a little bit insane. If you could stop world hunger, would you and why?

Ah but miracles are happening all the time. They are not special, nor are they rare. Insane people just don't notice them because they are too self-involved. Yet if you understood reality and Truth, you would understand how miracles are possible. They aren't magic.

Hence, it is impossible to describe reality for someone who embraces their own insanity. Tell me BC_chick, do you believe that miracles are possible? And do you know how they are done?

Canada's worst Canadian? Sir John A. McDonald. He was a lecherous drunk who used the office of Prime Minister for his own personal gain and anyone that stood in his way paid a huge price. Of course he set the tone for those that would follow him in the position, but I do believe he was the worst of all.

To those of us that know "The Secret" a village getting wipe out is as ethereal as a village that we have never visited. The principle is that once you fully understand reality, work is unnecessary and prosperity is a gift one accepts. You can certainly work yourself to death, but then even death is nothing but a dream.

Neither. It is intended to try to free people from their insanity....but in the realm of things, it is an impossible task to try to explain reality to insane people. And so it either makes people more insane or preaches to those who already understand that reality isn't what people like you think it is....

For anyone who understands the way the world really works, THE SECRET is no big "secret". However what is a big secret is that it is a moderately successful marketing ploy, on the backs of people who are looking for some meaning in life. There are still millions to be made if you can only think of another thing to call it.......How about "THE IDEA"? Its too bad so many people have been ripped off by their desire to feel "special". Being "special" isn't what THE SECRET (or whatever you want to call it) is all about.

What Suzuki and company wants to do is to take a suicide attitude.... of jumping with both feet into Kyoto (with our blinders on)....with total disregard for the impact on our economy! The Kyoto Accord was agreed upon by a consensus - a preponderance - of world leaders and scientists. The "junk" scientists who raise opposition to the international majority opinion are funded by or work for oil companies and such that stand to lose a portion of their global control. Harper and the Conservatives have put more faith in the market place at finding a cure for global warming and climate change than the scientists that agreed to a plan 10 or more years ago. That is what the fraud is about and why it is meant to mislead Canadians. Does the Kyoto have a cost? Absolutely! But climate change has a bigger cost - that of risking our children and the world's poor to lives of suffering through drought, weather destruction, habitat and fauna changes and reduced resources. IF our water supply were contaminated I have no doubt that people like you would be screaming to government to fix it. But because the air is invisible and the problem lies beyond your immediate affect, you would rather deny the science than to risk your own personal wealth. The fact of the matter is that the market place and the junk scientists that work for them have an abysmal record in caring for the environment or the depletion of natural resources. Putting your faith in them is about delusional as they come. There are pills and therapies for that kind of psychosis, you know.....

".....do we really know whats beyond death? " This is really is a limited and dogmatic statement. True spiritual thought questions death as an illusion / delusion and doesn't ponder what comes after "nothing"

Ah...its only money.... "Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned, the last fish has been caught, will we realize that we cannot eat money." Old Cree

The Bible is a compendium of many books. According to Christianity the Old Testament was essentially thrown out upon the arrival of Jesus and a litany of other texts arose. There have been lots of other books written that provide the same insight over the ages but too few are open enough to branch away from impugnable religious doctrine to explore it. Certainly some are in the spiritual enlightenment exploration but there are much more caught up in sleep, conditioned to believe that challenging the status quo is a bad thing. Religious freedom does not necessarily mean no religion and many people are entrenched in atheism, agnosticism, and even financial fascism with as much fervor as the most extreme ultra-religious groups. Money is the new God and there is no room for a single deity among modern society. Yet many attend churches - still - and profess commitment to ~some~ principles, more often than not they adhere to their own religious thought and when it differs from the Church they are quick to abandon it in favour of one that does. We still have a number of hypocrits walking the streets as well - those that attend Church or Synagogue for appearances and promptly begin screwing people first thing Monday morning. We also have those anti-religious that "swear to God" they do not believe but who are the first to invoke the vengeance of God upon their enemies. So back to the question of whether or not there are other God-given texts available today: Matthew 7:7-8 You have been given the answer already.

Quote by Al Gore when asked about the Conservative Government's environmental program. I would agree with him. Like most Conservative policies they are designed to provide loop holes or protection for big business. This plan will do nothing for the environment.

At a $1.06 or $1.20 per litre, gas is still affordable and reasonable. IF the higher prices of gas alarm you then I suggest buying smaller vehicles and driving less. If you own an SUV or a pick-up and live in or near a small town, then you can easily afford much higher prices for gas, IMO.