jennie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_indigenous_peoples I don't know how Canada deals with that. I think they all have a vote, just some choose not. Not sure.

Six Nations are very good managers. Always have been, I believe. Where is that may I ask?

Do you mean Palestinians? Are Celts indigenous in Spain? How interesting! Are they continuously resident there?

Hard work deserves credit for sure. Ownership must be respected too, though. These are the kinds of treaties that are being negotiated these days: Revenue sharing. Makes total sense to me, but it may be only just at the thinking stage. http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/nr/prs/s-d2003/02399bk_e.html

Look kengs333 ... the churches and governments were in cahoots to steal their land. It had nothing to do with capability and everything to do with fraud and deceit ... bilking them of their land and its resources. It was illegal then and it is illegal now. Canada is not being 'generous' by having a land claims system. It was legally required under International Law (Canada's UN obligations). Its purpose is to address the repatriation of Indigenous land illegally taken and to compensate for resources. If Brant did not have Power of Attorney from the Confederacy Council for a deal he did, the deal is not valid. These are the facts being established through negotiations now. ALL Canadians of 2007 benefit EVERY DAY from the resources from traditional Indigenous land. The economy of Canada depends almost entirely on natural resources. You owe, I owe, we all owe them for our standard of living ... EVERY DAY.

Some may consider themselves Canadian and vote. 75% of those who identify themselves as having aboriginal heritage do not live on reserves. Traditional people may not participate in Canada's system. There isn't one answer for all Aboriginal people in Canada. However, the Six Nations Confederacy people are traditional people and may consider it against their own law to participate in Canada's system of governance.

Those are excellent questions guyser. Especially the one about why the town approves the permits, and the province too. The Mayors up and down the Grand are getting together to put pressure on the province, because it gives the initial approvals. It will be interesting. They have to stop doing it now at least, though there are probably more in the pipe already.

hey folks, Here's a brief update that came from talking with somebody from Six Nations who was watching as things happened today. As many of you know, people from Six Nations have been trying to stop a new development on Stirling St. (about a kilometer away from the DCE reclamation site) in Caledonia. Last Thursday when some people from Six Nations went to stop continued development on the site, a fight broke out between one of the developers and some Six Nations youth. The developer ending up in the hospital and some of the youth were injured as well. Since that time, a group of people from Six Nations (who are not following the leadership of the Confederacy) have been occupying the Stirling site. The Six Nations Confederacy was negotiating with the developer before this issue blew up in the news, and has been trying to get the protesters to leave the site. They have also distanced themselves from the confrontation which took place. (An investigation of facts will be done by the Confederacy.) Today, police came to the site and arrested nine people who refused to leave the development for "mischief". (One person was tasered.) About a hundred or so people from Six Nations observed the arrests from a distance. The police blocked off Stirling St. at Argyle Road and kept Caledonians and the media away from the site. This is obviously something to keep following, but it is unclear to me if things will escalate, or if the people who were arrested have supporters that will continue their actions.

Well said Rue. "absurd" Thank you.

And I would add that until the 1950's the government made it illegal for any aboriginal to use the courts for land claims. There is absolutely no question that historically Canada has treated Aboriginal people almost as 'captives' and has stolen and used their land illegally. There is also no question that 'the jig is up' and Canada has to come clean and be fair, or be seen as a continuing aggressive, criminal oppressor of Indigenous Peoples for illegal gain.

Actually, the current climate seems to be shifting to the governments upholding the law. However, they don't do so voluntarily but have to be forced to by the courts. Show me where any government actions are not lawful. As for the radiation, no I have no data though no doubt there will be some prepared to present during the lawsuit. At this point it is a concern because of the old mine tailings and info about contaminated streams, and I believe the Algonquins have further data on it.

You can clarify what you are referring to if you like. Or answer my question: If they have to renounce 'something' to become a Canadian citizen, what are they 'renouncing' if not sovereignty?

Perhaps you have forgotten that the Euro conquest of North America happened at the end of the 'Dark Ages' when our so-called 'civilized' ancestors shat in the streets, ate with their hands and stuck heads on pikes. A better understanding of your own ancestry is in order. YOU ain't so 'civilized' as you want to pretend! This is a non-argument that has absolutely nothing relevant to say about land rights. An argument about the 'superiority' of the white race has no place in civil discourse.

Regardless of the amount of the settlement, considering the federal court precedent it is likely that they will win.

According to the 'Indian' Act, they are wards of the State. Do your homework.

You are dreaming in technicolour. Not going to happen. Their claims require legitimate attention. The government knows that.

Yes, I think so too. It was another 4 claims that the offer was made for, though: The offer from Ottawa involved the former Moulton township in Dunnville, the flooding of lands in Dunnville to accommodate the Welland Canal, the former Burtch correctional facility in Brant County and the Grand River Navigation Co. claims. http://www.sachem.ca/sachem/article_jun-08-07_d.html

I see ... so that would explain why the feds are negotiating? Why the feds already made an offer?

Their request is to return the children's remains to their families and tell the whole truth: There is no reconciliation without full disclosure. My request is to respect that our good fortunes as Canadians come from their land.

Sorry. You don't 'know' any of that until the facts are established. Yes, it can in some cases be 'undone' if, for example, Joseph Brant was given the authority for some transactions but not others. What matters in law, then and now, is what transactions the Confederacy authorized. These are the kinds of things being established in negotiations now.

Well maybe "many people" should have investigated Canada's record for oppressing Indigenous Peoples first. Maybe people should consider the HUGE role that natural resource wealth brings to EVERY Canadian EVERY day (including 8 straight federal budget surpluses.) Maybe people should learn where that wealth is coming from, who has rights to that land and what the rightsholders are getting out of it right now. EVERY Canadian benefits. EVERY Canadian owes.

Some may vote, some don't vote. Some are traditional, some aren't. There isn't one answer.

That will come out, I expect. It is the government and the churches who bear the direct responsibility. All of us 'whiteys' will have to determine for ourselves what responsibility we bear.

I'm not sure why you have to drag out the "racism" word; I'm for a united Canada, a Canada in which there are people of many races who are citizen; balkanizing it is the last thing I want to see happen. All people have a right to determine for themselves what country they wish to belong to. The people who were here before us have a right to join us or not, as they choose. This is the law.

If you were an 'Indian' would you go back to India? You do know it is offensive to use that word pejoratively?