charter.rights

That isn't true. In fact a recent survey found that 80% of Canadians generally supported the "Occupy" movement. Thsi action by the City of London will have serious consequences. Watch in the next week of two for the beginning of the end for Joe Fontana.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/london-ont-police-remove-occupy-tents-from-city-park/article2230250/

I'm betting you might not have a penis left if you tried something like that. They take the protection of their sacred fire very seriously. I remember at one Pow Wow a guy tried to put a piece of paper in and before he even had his arm outstretched two big guys had him by the arms and escorted him out of the sacred circle.

Don't be silly. The Mohawks knew very well about land ownership and boundaries. They sold (or brokered on behalf of other nations) half of the continent to the British. The ownership of land is entrenched in their 1000 year old constitution. The Great Law of Peace: "Wampum 44. The lineal descent of the people of the Five Nations shall run in the female line. Women shall be considered the progenitors of the Nation. They shall own the land and the soil. Men and women shall follow the status of the mother." Six Nations retained Southern Ontario and never surrender it. They still hold a superior Aboriginal title to all lands contained therein.

Now you are getting it. Sure wish Caledonians and and Brant County residents would get it that easy. If they had there wouldn't have been any need to reclaim an illegally constructed subdivision.

And it really isn't "public property". It belongs to the Mohawks. It is their land.

They could but they won't because they respect boundaries. Unlike the Canadian government, us and it subsidiaries the Mohawks hold property rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And a simple gesture like placing a tall stick across your door will keep traditionalists (like Mohawk warriors) out of your house. However, your backyard may be fair game if it is convenient to them. In Ontario we are all just tenants of the land. The landlords are Six Nations.

So is a sacred fire and any land it is on, BTW.

I guess you think it is appropriate for Church goers not to complain if you brought cameras into church during communion? However, that is beside the point. Six Nations (which the Mohawk are a founding nation) still holds a plenum dominum Aboriginal title to Southern Ontario they have never surrendered. So not only can they have a sacred fire, smoke where ever they want (including banned restaurants)but they can hunt in the city and sell bags smokes if they wanted in High Park. These are all guaranteed Aboriginal rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and no by-law or provincial law can stop them. And while they may get arrested under criminal laws (if they were broken)chances are if they are practicing a tradition, they will be released. That is the nature of Supreme Law in this country. We respect rights above all else.

Rumour has it that Clement and then Baird are being groomed fro leaders of the CPC. Elliott and Flaherty (husband and wife) have nothing to worry about. They co-own a successful Whitby law firm and dance in international circles.

Seems it might not bee so bad. Fecal bacteriotherapy Researchers Hope To Control Obesity Through Fecal Transplants ...more fecal transplants Seems the cure for many stomach and intestinal illnesses might be to get rid of the germaphobes. As my dear old ma likes to say "You have to eat a peck of dirt before you die!" Seems she's right. Eat dirt and stay healthy!

Not quite. Institutions make settlement offers all the time. They do it to avoid not only the costs of lengthy trials, but for the most pay to avoid public disclosure of their abuses. Otherwise, there would be no need for non-disclosure clauses. In this case, the indication in the media is that Scouts Canada made the offers to silence the victims and protect their reputations. Red Cross got away with the same thing before the final end of the tainted blood scandal wouldn't die. Keep in mind that trials tend to victimize the victims all over again. If the offer of settlement (which the courts encourage) is substantial, then victims are often enticed into accepting the money, rather than being put on display over and over again, in the courts and on the front pages of major newspapers. Can you imagine what it might be like for a 12 year old to have to tell a bunch of strangers about being buggered by his caretaker on a camping weekend? Few 12 year olds have the capacity to endure such re-victimization for the sake of putting a pervert behind bars.

More likely it is to protect the institution.

They mistook them for Americans. They can't read the English on the uniforms.

If I get what the real issue is with the OWS protestors it is that the 1% did not earn their wealth without the contributions of the 99%. And while not all of the 1%-ers are guilty, a good majority of them earned their profits through usury, which in itself is a moral crime. If we believe that working hard is the key to success, then those of manipulate their way to wealth are criminals and for that I am incensed as well.

If people had spoken up during the time that Indian kids were stolen, removed to schools thousands of miles away from their communities, sexually and physically abused and some murdered, there would not the legacy we have today. The RCMP recently admitted that they conducted 60 investigations revealing 619 victims identifying 40 perpetrators within the Residential Schools system over a 48 year period. THEY didn't see a problem. Neither did the thousands of workers that worker along side the abusers. I for one can't believe some of them didn't see or know what was going on. However, we know that over 50,000 children from 1880 to 1995 never returned home, that many were neglected and many were murdered. Had well meaning "small voices" raised an alarm back in 1907 when Dr. Peter Bryce made his report to Parliament, or when his book was published in 1922, there would not be hundreds of thousands in generations of dysfunctional Aboriginal adults today. The point (not to get into yet another debate about native genocide) is that when good people do nothing, and say nothing then it opens the doors for pedophiles and abusers to have their way with children. You say "We stringently watch each other." but based on the number of occurrences that pedophiles and their victims were quietly silenced, I would suggest that you don't have that capability to identify a pedophile. I would suggest that the hundreds of Scout leaders where Ralph Rowe, a former Anglican priest and Scoutmaster ( Scouts Canada kept 'confidential list' of pedophiles) operated had no idea. Yet he is known in the many organizations he was with to have molested over 100 kids (and the total could be as high as 500) under the watch of hundreds of volunteers. Very often we hear stories about pedophiles who were outstanding leaders in the community. So "watching" each other is about as valuable as taking blood samples and then dumping them down the drain. So pedophilia and child abuse are crimes that must be punished. Then again discovering that a child is being sexually or physically abused and doing nothing is also a crime. In my mind it is far too easy to simply to pay out the victims and quietly dismiss the perpetrators, in order to protect the Scouting Organization. Scouts (like the Red Cross was in the tainted blood scandal) should be sued into oblivion, with the Board of Directors who developed those policies facing criminal or civil penalties. We cannot let this go such that everyone believes that it is OK just to hide the truth and quietly bury the victims in money. As I said before, I appreciate that you are an upstanding volunteer, as there are many. However, the Scouting Organization failed the victims, as well as the thousands of volunteers and parents that had trust in them. And for that they should face the ultimate penalty. Death by dismemberment.

Count on CBC to get hold of a copy of the 911 tapes. They have said repeatedly that they have verified the information twice after the fact with their sources and have every confidence in what was said. I'll wait for it because as far as I am concerned, regardless of what actually was said Ford acted badly.

And how do you think pedophiles got into Scouts? In many districts here in Ontario there are no enough leaders to keep Cub and Scout meetings going. They'll take anyone that can pass a police check.

You mean they challenged the power structure within Scouts Canada......what a surprise. I bet you are executive, aren't you.... And from my recollection, they dared to question and object to the outrageous increase in fees as one of their founding principles.

They were only returning 60% in our district. Putting future young men and women into an organization that is tainted by scandal and corruption would not set a very good example. I know of a number of other scouting type groups that have managed to maintain a strictly voluntary organization. Baden Powell would be ashamed if he knew what was going on today.... Keep in mind I am a scout to this day and take my oaths and responsibilities seriously. However, there is no place for these kinds of dishonour to the scouting movement. It would be much better if we just moved on. BTW Do you remember the Red Cross?

One devil at a time.

While I wasn't a leader, I spent a lot of time at meetings and camps with my 2 youngest in Scouts, one boy and one girl. The leaders were caring and respectful at all times. One leader was removed for putting his hands on one of the more difficult boys and was promptly dismissed. However, I object to Scouts Canada quietly dismissing pedophiles and paying off the parents of the abused. By right these criminals should have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and their names made public. What Scouts fails to acknowledge is that scouting was not the only organization these types of people were involved in. Pedophiles within the organization were known to have embedded themselves where ever they could gain access to children. For me the CBC expose does reveal one more bit of information that wasn't evident in their documentary. Back when my kids belonged to the local organization there was a sudden increase in the fees for enrollment and when I questioned it back in the 1990's I was told that Scout Canada's insurance rates had risen drastically. No wonder now. @ScouterJim. I don't question your commitment to the scouting movement. My brother-in-law is still a leader as well and he has that same level of dedication I saw in the many leaders I encountered over the years. However,I believe it is time to disband the organization - not just for this one exposure either. Over the years I have witnessed how the Scouts Canada national administration has become bloated and bureaucratic, demanding and expensive. As a volunteer fire fighter our association used to donate directly to the local Beaver, Cubs and Scout troops on a regular basis. Suddenly the stream changed, where the National Office wanted the money to flow through them, and then they would return a portion that they felt was appropriate (they were essentially stealing charity donations). After about 7 years of diligent support, that officially stopped our donations (although we continued to donate to camps or to provide equipment in non-cash ways). So it is time to stop ALL the corruption and bureaucracy in Scouts Canada. I'm sure another start up similar to Scouts could be created that you could participate in. Certainly we need that kind of mentor-ship in society but not at the expense of provide pedophiles and self-aggrandized individuals access to our children.

Showing up at someone's door is neither in bad taste or wrong. There is an implied invitation to everyone's front door, walks and driveway to the public and that includes the press. Ford is a public figure and his private life is only private behind that front door. Once he comes out he is fair game by the media to be questioned and photographed / interviewed. What is in bad taste is Ford lying about what was said, or that he was protecting the privacy of his daughter (who was no where present), or that he would misuse 911 emergency services because he was caught off guard. Ford needs to grow up.

100% Treaties in Canada never ceded the land outright. It merely traded some sui generis land "rights" for guarantees. Aboriginal rights exist over most of Canada. However about 30% of Canada has never been ceded. Those lands remain as a plenum dominum aboriginal title. Come back when you can demonstrate that a Treaty was not made in the US under the threat of extermination or duress.

You can't be selective about treaty rights. Either all of them are upheld or they are not. Violating some treaty rights means that you are still violating tribes' rights.