charter.rights

Harper became PM 3 years before the recession and in those 3 years had spent us into a $16 billion deficit from the $13 billion surplus he was handed by Paul Martin. The recession did add to it, but the stimulus does not include the $1 billion party he hosted, or the yet to be delivered $100 billion jets he purchase in contravention of the government purchasing laws. Those kinds of things will put us over the $75 billion deficit mark. As far as deficits go, Harper has spent more money and created a bigger debt than any other Prime Minister in history - even more than Brain Mulroney. If he was such a good money manager how is it that he has reckless spent more than any other PM in history?

It also misses Harper and the PMO. They apparently knew (or in legal jargon, should have known) that Carson was a bad boy. Carson says he showed the PMO and Harper's former Chief of Staff his criminal record. Even though Harper now disavows any knowledge of Carson having a really long criminal history, it when his CofS was told, he would have known at the time. NOt only has Harper been bedding down with the Bloc and the NDP but not he is bunk buddies with a known ciminal who was using his public position to steal money from the government and filter it through his call-girl girlfriend. Shame.

No one is interested in trying to convince a Conservative that the world isn't flat. Rather the Liberal platform is aimed at convincing all the round-earthers that the red ship is a much smoother ride than that pumpkin head they have been riding for the last number of years...

I would rather have a finger pointed at me than Harper asking me to turn around and bend over. Funny that Conservative supporters are out there, on their knees and they believe Harper when he says right out of the Blue Book: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you...." "The in and out cheque is in the mail....." and "If you let me....in your.....I'll still respect you in the morning..."

What is disrespectful is criticizing a list of policies YOU haven't read. Go back and read the entire proposal and THEN come back for discussion. Arguing YOUR myths just isn't worth it to anyone.

Right. So Khadfi is innocent, in your mind, right?

Why do I think that took you lots of burning brain function to make that come-back? I can well imagine your spending 10 minutes in a blank gaze....

Way to go. You got Saipan a video so he can learn something....

It would be nice to also if we could purge the blondes once and a while too.....

And you are a global climate change naysayer, right? The science is there but you deny it why? Because you don't want to believe it.... 60,000 years ago the earth was a much different place than it is today. Lower sea levels in some areas of the world - such as Beringer land bridge - were exposed above the water. Continents were closer together and had vastly different coastlines than they do today. Get it in you head, ok? mtDNA is a theory. It makes conclusion not by finding similarities but by excluding them from other groups. They look for genes in the matrilineal line that exclude any other possibilities. That is like saying they must be blue eyed because they don't have brown eyes, without considering all the other possibilities. It isn't accurate given the fact that most indigenous people around the world refuse to give samples for testing and they are guessing using very small samples.

That means there is a valid land claim for all of Southern Ontario. And given the current market value it would be impossible for us to buy them out, even at a fraction of the real value. The only way to settle such a claim will be to provide equivalent land in return - good fertile farm land, and like BC parts of cities where Six Nations can set up businesses and developments to their benefit. But then...funnier than your thought, the government holds a trust account for Six Nations that is worth over $1 trillion. It hurts to think how we might begin to pay just the modest interest of $35 billion a year out to Six Nations without even touching the principle....

Except Six Nations has the paper trail where patents were illegally made for the land before the leases were up. And funny enough the 1763 Royal Proclamation provided that that kind of trickery was illegal. Even funnier that it is still the law today.

The use of mitochondrial DNA to determine origin is a theory and has a number of problems in that it is carried through the female lines only, and the hit is much like trying to determine that all blond-haired blue-eyed people originated in Germany. The use of mtDNA is exclusive, not inclusive, and has a margin of error that puts some doubt in its validity. It is a nice fad as theories go, but I wouldn't put a lot of weight behind it.

Ya i guess. I had you pegged for Clovis. You just confirmed it, thanks.

I didn't expect you to read it anyway. Anything that contradicts you, you seem just to skip over. History isn't always blood and guts excitement. But sometime is it necessary to set the legal record straight and the fact is Canada belongs to the Indians.

The problem is they are still trying to prove an Asian migration - which is a way to prove the Bering Strait theory is still valid. It might be BUT the other indications - unearthing of artifacts from 40-60,000 years ago - suggest that the migration took place long before sea travel was available. There is a high probability that the migration took place right out of Africa via the Antarctic. As long as Archaeologists are stuck on the Bering Strait they will not look as earnestly as they should. After all with Pre-clovis culture(Evidence of human habitation before Clovis)showing up who knows what else they will find if they instead look for it the 60,000 year occupation. In all the sites found that have potential for a 60,000 year old occupation, it appears the migration is from the south. Check it out.

The Royal Proclamation 1763 is legalized under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Supreme Court of Canada has spent the last 30 years unraveling the complicated mess the Family Compact put us in by ignoring it so many years ago. J. Brant did not sell any land. He created 99 year leases for land with the intent of having the settlers clear the land for Six Nations benefit and prove a means for agricultural produce for Six Nation people. The Crown tried to declare the leases invalid, but had no legal control over J. Brant, or Six Nations, since it is the sovereign territory (not a reserve as per treaty) of Six Nations. Sames goes for all of southern Ontario, which was held by SN at the time of the Proclamation, but has since been claimed by Canada without any surrender having taken place. That was illegal, and remains illegal today. The British High Court in 1982, Lord Denning clarified the status of "Indian Lands" proclaimed in the Royal Proclamation as a "plenum dominum" until such time the land was surrendered to the Crown. The Supreme Court, J. Laskin provided in DELGAMUUKW v. BRITISH COLUMBIA that aboriginal title was as sui generis that cannot be fully explained under common laws of real property but had various dimensions such as inalienability in that aboriginal lands could only be transferred to the Crown (accordingly Laskin wrote: "...this does not mean, however, that Aboriginal title "is a non-proprietary interest which amounts to no more than a licence to use and occupy the land and cannot compete on an equal footing with other proprietary interests..."); source, in that aboriginal title arises from the occupation of Canada prior to the Royal Proclamation 1763 and; it is communal in nature in that it is held by all members of an aboriginal nation. The problem is that while the British (read Family Compact) might have wanted to take full control of the land away form Aboriginal people, they failed to realize that many dimensions and layers to title. Territories overlap, and as such a surrender cannot give away the land belonging to another nation. At the same time those nations who entered into treaty with the Crown, also reserved perpetual rights over the land listed in the treaty. The result of this "mistake" by the Crown left land as a sui generis ownership, now shared but not owned by the Crown. All particular First Nations did it seems, was surrender some of their rights to certain tracts without giving up the land ownership. See above. In 1757 the Mitchell Map identified Six Nations territory as extending north to the Ottawa River, east to Montreal and the Ohio River, west to The Mississippi River and Detroit and south to the forks of the Mississippi and the Ohio. However, they brokered lands surrenders for other First Nations, so had a huge cache of land at their disposal. Of particular interest to this discussion the Mitchell Map clearly displays a number of labels centred in Southern Ontario describing the Six Nations territory. Then in 1763 the Royal Proclamation was issued with an accompanying map that also recognized the SO was under Six Nations Territory. To clarify how the Mississauga were able to enter into the Robinson-Huron Treaty and the Williams Treaty we fall back not only on the sui generis title but also the plenum dominum declaration by the then Crown of Canada and Great Britain. 100 years earlier (about 1656), Six Nations entered into the Two Spoons-One Bowl Treaty with the Mississauga that invited them into southern Ontario to help protect the land. In essence, the Mississauga were given a "use permit" having been friendly towards Six Nations and this friendship eventually resulted in the Mississauga becoming the 8th member nation of the Iroquois Confederacy (The 7th was the Nicariage who resided in what is not Michigan). So land was NOT surrendered, nor could it have been with the Crown fully aware that southern Ontario was Six Nations Territory. So to get around it and given that Six Nations refused to surrender any of their lands, the Tories (Family Compact - VicTorians) sought a surrender form the Mississauga. However, given the fact that the Mississauga did not hold title to SO, that Treaty is somewhat void. In a word: no. Archaeologists have found a number of Six Nations member communities up and down the St. Lawrence, Lake Ontario and Lake Erie and date back to over 1000 years ago (the latest excavation at Burlington, a Seneca village site has been preliminarily dated back to 750 AD). Throughout the contact with the Jesuits Six Nations people have always been along the north shores as they have occupied the south shores, and the Jesuit Relations describes numerous visits to their villages. The fact is that Six Nations has always been in southern Ontario - at least for over 1000 years. The Wendat (or people mistakenly call the Huron) occupied territory around Georgian Bay, along with the Neutrals and Tobacco Nations whichi inhabited the Lake Huron, St. Clair regions. During the Jesuits Missions, small pox and other diseases brought by the missionaries decimated the populations of these nations so much that other nations - the Mississauga and Six Nations - were making uncontested hunting excursions into their territory and harassing their hunters. Many of the Wendat fled Ontario finding refuge in Quebec where they reside today. Many other fled to Michigan into the "Beaver Hunting grounds" where they harassed any nation coming there to hunt. many Neutrals and Tobacco fled with them while others joined the Iroquois Confederacy as adoptees of the Seneca Nation. Once the resident nations vacated Georgian Bay area, Six Nations moved in, leaving most of the territory to the Mississauga for their use and settlement. By the late 17th century Six Nations had control of most of Ontario and the continental US outside of the 4 British colonies and the territory claimed by the Hudsons Bay Company. In 1763 when their ownership was certified by the British Crown, recognizing that Six Nations could not be removed, nor could settlers or land speculators occupy their Ontario territory. Only the Mohawks were expelled by the US after the American Revolution. The Iroquois Confederacy officially remained neutral throughout the Revolutionary War. However, a number of Mohawks commanded by Captians Joseph Brant and John Deseronto fought for the British and the newly formed US government saw the Mohawks as a continuing threat. Capts Brant and Deseronto petitioned the King to give the protection in their Ontario lands and so set aside a tract that prohibited all settlers and land speculators from entering into, and provide a safe place for resettlement of the Mohawks and those who want to resettle there with them. Then Governor wanted them to settle at the Bay of Quinte being capable of responding to any threat by an anticipated US invasion. However, Joseph Brant demanded that their lands along the Grand River be set aside under the Kings protection and all present settlers and occupiers were to be evicted upon their arrival. Capt. Deseronto retreated with a number of Mohawks that were not loyal to Brant, first to Kahnawake and Kanesatake, and then eventually to the Bay of Quinte. This is a straw man argument not worth responding to. You are subscribing to myth and speculation without any basis in fact. Read the UN Declaration of Indigenous Rights for a clearer picture of what Canada has endorsed. The Supreme Court has provided that land cannot be alienated, except in a free and voluntary surrender that meets the tests for a surrender set out in the Chippewas of Sarnia v. Canada. While the layers of lands claims runs pretty thick today, Six Nations has a legitimate claim not only to all of the Halidmand Tract, but to the rest of Southern Ontario. How that gets resolved is a matter for negotiation, but I assure you that we cannot afford a financial settlement. Six Nations wants their lands back and were are pretty much in the position that land transfer will be the only affordable solution. Keep in mind that the Government of Canada holds an Indian Trust account on behalf of Six Nations that is estimated today to be worth more than $1 trillion. We still have that whole issue to deal with and given the current compound interest rates paid on those accounts it will be worth about $2 trillion by 2025.

He already has....

Six Nations does. It comes in the form of the Nanfan Treaty 1701 which shows that it surrendered Ohio, and Michigan to the British but reserved what is now southern Ontario under their own sovereignty. Then in the maps that accompanied the Royal Proclamation 1763 southern Ontario is clearly identified in a number of places as being "Six Nations Territory". After that time the only way that British or Canada could occupy use or claim land was to accept a free and voluntary surrender from Six Nations. In the history of Canada there has never been a surrender by Six Nations. Thus the Royal Proclamation supersedes all deeds and claims under the supreme law of Canada.

double post

Sure: Royal Proclamation 1763 says that all lands outside of the 4 Colonies are "Indian Lands". (BTW there were no treaties for most of Canada and later treaties only cover about 1/3 of the vast territory Canada now claims). But there was never any surrender of land since Nations had overlapping territories. The best that could happen is that Natives surrender ~some~ (but not all) of their rights to certain tracts. Canada still legally belongs to First Nations. And infact, southern Ontario is still the sovereign territory of Six Nations. There has never been any treaties with them, nor have they ever surrendered any part of Ontario as required under the law.

You mean Canada wasn't stolen? You want to provide references for that statement please?

NO. You have been eating too much that you think it tastes good...

Laugh all you want. 1100 AD Mohawks were much more democratic and organized than the cabbage breeding ergot-eating Europeans of the same era.

Elections are boring. The threads are started by the same 4 or 5 posters here trying to drive home partisan points. The biggest decision most Canadians will have to make in this election, is whether or not to get off the couch, go to the local polling station and cast a spoiled ballot. They are all a bunch of self-serving hacks not worth the interest of the average Canadian.