Gary McHale Assaults a Six Nations Woman

[Wild Bill]

CHCH TV at Noon just reported that Gary McHale's bail conditions stand. He is banned from Caledonia and a number of other places as a condition of his bail.

Seems he made a deal with the bail court, got out as per the conditions he agreed to and then tried to have the conditions modified. Talk about two-faced....he agreed to the conditions - essentially lying to the court just to get out - and then attempted to say he didn't agree with it. BTW he represented himself.

Well, he has certainly proven his main point that the law is enforced differently for whites than natives! I'll never take it for granted that a policeman will automatically defend my rights again! I guess I was naive.

[charter.rights]

Well, he has certainly proven his main point that the law is enforced differently for whites than natives! I'll never take it for granted that a policeman will automatically defend my rights again! I guess I was naive.

He has proven no such thing. The only thing he has proven is that he and his white supremacist friends have way too much time on their hands.

Gladly the one benefit of his presence is that he has made the lands claims issue front and centre in the media. Seems the Brantford expositor has made that builder Quottrachicci (spelling?) from Brantford and the aboriginal lands claims the top newsmaker and news story of 2007. And McHale's opposition and big mouth has created vocal support for Six Nations and their claims all over Ontario. Another case of unintentional irony.

Certainly McHale has proven himself a fool. A lot less people take him seriously than they did during the summer of 2006. Maybe I should leave this for the 2008 predictions sections, but if McHale does move to Caledonia, I could easily predict that someone will burn his house down....and most likely it will be a Caledonia resident....but that is just an guess based on how many people truly hate the guy....

[Wild Bill]

He has proven no such thing. The only thing he has proven is that he and his white supremacist friends have way too much time on their hands.

Gladly the one benefit of his presence is that he has made the lands claims issue front and centre in the media. Seems the Brantford expositor has made that builder Quottrachicci (spelling?) from Brantford and the aboriginal lands claims the top newsmaker and news story of 2007. And McHale's opposition and big mouth has created vocal support for Six Nations and their claims all over Ontario. Another case of unintentional irony.

Certainly McHale has proven himself a fool. A lot less people take him seriously than they did during the summer of 2006. Maybe I should leave this for the 2008 predictions sections, but if McHale does move to Caledonia, I could easily predict that someone will burn his house down....and most likely it will be a Caledonia resident....but that is just an guess based on how many people truly hate the guy....

Well, he's helped prove the point to me! And I've seen no indication that he's any sort of white supremacist, unless we use your definition of that being anyone who disagrees with anything said by a native.

As I said, my confidence in the police has been severely shaken and it would take more than you scolding me to make me overlook what I've seen, heard and reasoned. I've made sure that my children have seen what has happened. Someday a cop might throw them to the wolves because it's politically expedient. As citizens we don't have much choice but to call a cop when we need one but I don't want my kids to be naive and take it for granted they'll be protected. After listening to the native points expressed on this board if a native spokesperson gave me the time of day I'd want a second opinion. Then again, with McGuinty they're in good company.

The irony is that before the Caledonia protests I was quite sympathetic to the aboriginal claims. I guess I still am, pretty well anywhere in Canada EXCEPT for disputes involving Six Nations! To me, when you use innocents as cannon fodder then that by definition is simple terrorism. And I can never vote for any politician who is willing to excuse such actions. Either we are all deserving of the protection of the law or none of us are. The natives have excused themselves by declaring themselves sovereign. If they're sovereign then they have no more claim to Canadian law than Belgium. You can't have it both ways.

[charter.rights]

Well, he's helped prove the point to me! And I've seen no indication that he's any sort of white supremacist, unless we use your definition of that being anyone who disagrees with anything said by a native.

As I said, my confidence in the police has been severely shaken and it would take more than you scolding me to make me overlook what I've seen, heard and reasoned. I've made sure that my children have seen what has happened. Someday a cop might throw them to the wolves because it's politically expedient. As citizens we don't have much choice but to call a cop when we need one but I don't want my kids to be naive and take it for granted they'll be protected. After listening to the native points expressed on this board if a native spokesperson gave me the time of day I'd want a second opinion. Then again, with McGuinty they're in good company.

The irony is that before the Caledonia protests I was quite sympathetic to the aboriginal claims. I guess I still am, pretty well anywhere in Canada EXCEPT for disputes involving Six Nations! To me, when you use innocents as cannon fodder then that by definition is simple terrorism. And I can never vote for any politician who is willing to excuse such actions. Either we are all deserving of the protection of the law or none of us are. The natives have excused themselves by declaring themselves sovereign. If they're sovereign then they have no more claim to Canadian law than Belgium. You can't have it both ways.

No innocents were targeted. Caledonians injected themselves into a dispute between, Six Nations, a developer and the government. Only when people started to take the law into their own hands, did they become affected.

You can still avoid your fear by either moving out of the area, or beginning to learn and understand the issues. Giving McHale a soapbox, makes you collateral damage to his being a target.

The OPP are doing exactly what they need to do and using citizen vigilantism to try to control their actions is as foolish as McHale is. McHale can be excused because of his disordered personality. You should know better.

Edited January 1, 2008 by charter.rights

[jefferiah]

No innocents were targeted. Caledonians injected themselves into a dispute between, Six Nations, a developer and the government. Only when people started to take the law into their own hands, did they become affected.

You can still avoid your fear by either moving out of the area, or beginning to learn and understand the issues. Giving McHale a soapbox, makes you collateral damage to his being a target.

The OPP are doing exactly what they need to do and using citizen vigilantism to try to control their actions is as foolish as McHale is. McHale can be excused because of his disordered personality. You should know better.

You are being ridiculous. McHale did not do anything. He organized a counter protest because like many people with functional brains he stands on the opposite side of the issue. Is it only ok for natives to organize and protest? Did McHale punch out the window of an elderly man's car sending him to the hospital with a heart attack and then beat up the camera men who were filiming it? Seriously the fact that people in Caledonia stand on an opposite side of the issue and make a stand in protest is hardly "taking the law in their own hands". Nor is it vigilantism. But the recurring violence from the natives, along with this pathetic false allegation from the woman who approached McHale and pulled this stupid stunt is nothing but terrorism. I don't care. No one cares anymore about how often you scream racism. Being native does not give you a free pass to act like an idiot. No one buys it.

Come on now. Let's be honest here. Watch the video. You know as well as I do that woman is pulling something. He did not push her.

The citizens of Caledonia are not being racist to the Natives. The OPP is. The lack of enforcement by the OPP is tantamount to saying "Natives are hopeless, so we have to special nice to them."

Edited January 1, 2008 by jefferiah

[Rue]

Ask any person who works in the field of domestic violence and they'll tell you that wife assault rates by Native men is considerably higher than the national average.

Also, pretty much every written account of the Iroquoian Indians describes the treatment of women as, well, fairly disrespectful in relation to contemporary European standards--which says much. Women were expected to do all of the menial labour, working in the fields, etc. while the privileged male warriors were always lazing around when not hunting or on the warpath.

You are absolutely wrong. Dead wrong. Provide the reference for the second paragraph. Your claim that women were expected to do all of the medial labour is false. Your comment that male warriors lazed around when not hunting is false. You have once again engaged in fabricated racist stereotypes. Provide the source for them Keng.

Each and every time you try pass of your hatred as a statement I am going to call you on it Keng as I am now and say you are wrong and because you do this repeatedely, i.e., provide these remarks with no reference point, they are evidence they are deliberate and I again state you make them knowing they will incite hatred.

Well Keng once again you come on this forum posing as an expert only this time on domestic violence within aboriginal society and once again you provide zero references.

Unlike you Keng I am not a self-professed expert nor to I proclaim myself as righteous and holier then others. I am a simple man full of humility and it is precisely why for me to be able to mediate domestic violence I can not do so through moral judgement.

I have been mediating family and domestic violence issues for over 20 years and I do not come on this post to judge and smear aboriginals as you do but to once again provide a counter-balance to you trying to exploit this issue for your own hateful agenda.

What I do know Keng because I do not come on this board to make things up as I go along issuing racist slurs, is that traditional Aboriginal society experienced did not have high rates of family breakdown. In fact in their traditions, husbands and wives are expected to respect and honour one another, and care for one another and be honest and kind to each other.

So now Keng. You came on this forum and stated that matriarchal societies featured women who sexually deceive and manipulate men and that is why they are sinfu.

What I also know is that for example in Mohawk nation, like many or most aboriginal nations, they have a matriarchal society where women are honoured for their wisdom and their vision and creativity-what I also was taught by aboriginals is that the gift of life a woman carries (and the Chinese call the valley of life) is a gift from the creato.

What I know is in traditional aboriginal cultures, contrary to what you may think, men and women were equal in spiritual power and each although different is part of the same spiritual whole. The creator has both female and male energy or spiritual elements.

I am aware of Ojibway and Cree stories where a woman was said to have come to the earth ( a living element which we live on ) to care for the earth. I am no expert but I know Nokomis, a wise woman is said to have humankind about healing and knowledge.

I have watched Ojibway people pray, and I saw them acknowledging the Mother Earth as part of a ceremony with a pipe. I know to many aboriginal nations the earth is considered woman, and sweetgrass they burn in ceremonies is a symbol for her hair.

What I also know is much of what we domestic violence mediators and therapists incorporate in our practice is based on aboriginal healing principles as well as many other mystical traditions similiar to there one and which can be found in many ways of life, i.e., Wiccan, Judaism, Rastafarianism, Gnostic Christianity, Hinduism, Buddism, Taoism, etc. to name but a few.

Now you want to talk about rates of violence and suggest they are hirer in aboriginal communities fine, but no you can not use it to infer aboriginal people are more violent or their culture condones this. That is absolute fabrication based on your need to insult them and smeer them.

The rates are disproportionately hirer then in mainstream society not because their cultural values condone it or fuel it but precisely because it continues to be caused by Western culture being imposed upon their culture and preventing its people from being allowed to celebrate and follow their own traditions.

The violence you refer to is inter-connected to drug and alcohol abuse, unemployment, forced abduction of their children, and policies that robbed them of their land, split up their families and ignored, violated their families, and violated their rights.

You want to point yoru finger of moral contempt Keng I suggest you start with your own values and the words you have used when referring to women on this forum. You are in no position to lecture or condemn anyone.

[jefferiah]

I am aware of Ojibway and Cree stories where a woman was said to have come to the earth ( a living element which we live on ) to care for the earth. I am no expert but I know Nokomis, a wise woman is said to have humankind about healing and knowledge.

I have watched Ojibway people pray, and I saw them acknowledging the Mother Earth as part of a ceremony with a pipe. I know to many aboriginal nations the earth is considered woman, and sweetgrass they burn in ceremonies is a symbol for her hair.

Well, I am sure some people have seen Stalin kiss a small child too. Woop dee doodle. In Caledonia people have watched the peaceful natives punch the window out of an elderly mans car sending him to the hospital with cardiac trouble, and then turn on some camera men who captured the incident. Not to mention the attack on Mr. Gaultieri and the false allegations against McHale who has done nothing illegal or violent.

A native ceremony is not always indicative of the reality Rue.

Edited January 2, 2008 by jefferiah

[AngusThermopyle]

Actually Rue, domestic violence against women and children in Aboriginal communities is almost three times the national average, nice way to show deep and abiding respect for women. We should learn from them, don't ya think? Now I know you'll probably launch into one of your tediously long self promoting rants about racism and blah blah blah, then try to prove I'm wrong.

Sooo... I cant give you a link to prove this. It's a PDF document, download, not HTML website. If you Google "Aboriginal Domestic Violence In Canada" you will find this PDF. It's a lengthy read but well worth it, I suggest you read it. That way you can try to refute what was said with facts rather than some idealized crap about Earth Mothers and Sweet Grass.

[Rue]

Well, I am sure some people have seen Stalin kiss a small child too. Woop dee doodle. In Caledonia people have watched the peaceful natives punch the window out of an elderly mans car sending him to the hospital with cardiac trouble, and then turn on some camera men who captured the incident. Not to mention the attack on Mr. Gaultieri and the false allegations against McHale who has done nothing illegal or violent.

A native ceremony is not always indicative of the reality Rue.

No this is not about kissing children. Its refraining from crude hateful statements that depict people as demons which is what Keng constantly does and what makes it hideous when he's called on it, he tries to claim he is a victim and being persecuted for his Christian beliefs.

No one, least of all aboriginals denies they have problems in their communities but to use it as a platform to inspire hatred is what I challenge,

I also state it again, the crisis in aboriginal communities is directly related to a cultural and legal imperative unilaterally imposed upon them that created the conditions-in fact, if one is going to be objective and fair and make comparisons, then they must make an effort to understand what aboriginal cultural really said about its families and women and not engage in the kind of viciousness Keng does.

I do not deny or condone violence but I report it without demonizing an entire people as Keng does.

I also know when aboriginal communities are allowed to take control and deal with their conflicts using traditional methods, they do not have the kinds of domestic problems we are talking of-I have seen it with my own eyes in clinics and healing centres and some of our best domestic violence containment strategies come from aboriginal traditions and healing principles.

No its far more then burning sweet grass and the anger and violence you talk about at Caledonia is repulsive-I do not condone violence of any kind but its part of a larger conflict, its not an isolated phenomena and to defuse it we all need to refrain from demonizing each other and as Keng has done in past posts and the last one, try depict aboriginals in a deliberately hateful way he knows is insulting and hurtful.

I know some have this built in sentiment that they are superior to or feel hard done by, because aboriginals will not give up their culture and collective rights, I do not.

Some of us who are not aboriginal look to the elders in their community as spiritual teachers and guides and we see the anger in some of their children we know it is similiar to the anger in our children.

We all want to learn to make sure all children do not have to be angry.

Now that may sound quant or stupid Jefferiah, but when you mediate violence it really is that that simple- your role is to try help defuse violence in homes-hoping you canfind alternatives to expressing anger or violence to to interupt and circumvent cycles or legacies of violence that flow from people being intolerant of one other.

Edited January 3, 2008 by Rue

[Rue]

Why is it that white trash with cash have taken over all our ...

Oleg you engage in the same kind of simplistic racist scapegoating as others. Whether its whitetrash, aboriginals, gays, Jews, women, it remains the same-a negative generalization based on your subjective preconceptions that are not based on fact but you externalizing your own feelings of inadequacy. With due respect whitetrash is a lazy hateful way of dealing with an entire group of people even if you believe some of them are evil.

[Rue]

Actually Rue, domestic violence against women and children in Aboriginal communities is almost three times the national average...

Angus I do not deny the above nor do I condone it. What I am challenging is trying to use it as a rationalization for making negative generalizations against an entire people and suggesting their cultural values promote this.

What the statistics show is that this violence flows from very clear, measurable social issues related to poverty and unemployment caused by non aboriginal laws and cultures that were forced upon aboriginals leading to this disaster. The alcoholism, drug abuse, poverty, violence, is not because of their cultural values. That was and remains my point-and no I do not condone domestic violence nor do I romanticize or glorify aboriginals, just talk about them witht he same respect you would expect if I was handling a domestic crisis in your family.

Would you take me seriously if I told you the reason why you have a problem is because you are white trash?

That is all I am saying. Please don't mistake respect with naivite. I have been attacked by crazies in my line of work from many cultures. Lol. They all hurt when they connect.

See as a mediator, when I see people in Caledonia or anywhere else lashing out at each other, I see no right or wrong people, just angry potentially dangerous people. My first concern is to seperate them and assure they do not hit each other. It is that simple. At this initial level I have no time to morally judge.

At the next level I then try work on helping each side develop a language to communicate where each side does not make assumptions about the other or refer to them in a negative way.

I am not trying to do anything that you would not expect of someone who is supposed to be trained in the law and to help people use reason over violence to resolve issues.

DOn't you find it strange that these discussions always revert to name calling? Why?

What is it that humans can't resist the negative words about each other?

[AngusThermopyle]

What is it that humans can't resist the negative words about each other?

There are a couple of reasons that seem to be possible and quite likely. One, those words are an expeditious means of showing disapproval or disagreement. The other that I see is that many times emotions overtake reason and those words are a strong manner in which to manifest these emotions.

It's true, one can not judge an entire group by the actions of some. I tend to disagree with the use of unemployment as a factor caused solely by our society however. As I've said before, I've offered jobs to quite a few Natives and had them react as if I had the plague, some even with hostility. Too bad for them I suppose, if they accepted the offer and were sincere they would quite possibly end up with Journey Man papers and a very good future.

You can only help people so much, then the onus falls on them to help themselves. Unfortunately I haven't seen too much desire to do so on their behalf. Not to say that holds true for all of them though, we just promoted a young guy to foreman, terrific worker, knowledgeable about the trade, and a nice kid too. The ones who refuse to help themselves are the ones I look upon with scorn, and sadly there are a great many of them around here.

[Wild Bill]

I do not deny or condone violence but I report it without demonizing an entire people as Keng does.

No its far more then burning sweet grass and the anger and violence you talk about at Caledonia is repulsive-I do not condone violence of any kind but its part of a larger conflict, its not an isolated phenomena and to defuse it we all need to refrain from demonizing each other and as Keng has done in past posts and the last one, try depict aboriginals in a deliberately hateful way he knows is insulting and hurtful.

Now that may sound quant or stupid Jefferiah, but when you mediate violence it really is that that simple- your role is to try help defuse violence in homes-hoping you canfind alternatives to expressing anger or violence to to interupt and circumvent cycles or legacies of violence that flow from people being intolerant of one other.

I quite agree that it its illogical to demonize an entire people. Peoples do not commit acts, either positive or negative. Individuals or numbers of individuals do.

In Caledonia however it would seem that Dalton and the OPP have made a grievous error. In trying to defuse the situation they were more worried about offending the natives than the townsfolk. They seemed to have taken it for granted that the townspeople would be less violent than the natives.

In this regard they were obviously right but they have paid a price. The townspeople may have been less prone to negative actions but they have become even more hurt and resentful. When an OPP dispatcher tells you "Don't call us anymore. You're on your own!" it is quite a shock to your idea of citizenship and the way the "system" is supposed to work.

Like the emperor's new clothes, no one in authority wants admit their true fear is that there are non-local militants among the protesters who would use violence or perhaps even firearms. After all, it is rather absurd to assume it was townspeople who burned out the hydro transformer and blacked out the entire area for some days.

Because of this assumption, the authorities seem to feel that anything that avoids further damage or bloodshed is a success. Unfortunately, the consequences of this approach fall on the townsfolk.

i guess the difference is that if they can contain the situation then it doesn't affect the government's fortunes across the whole province. Losing the Caledonia riding for the next hundred years is a small price in comparison.

That's why Fantino has such an obvious hate on for McHale. McHale is shouting "The Emperor is nude!" At all costs he must be silenced, by Fantino's lights.

I'm not disagreeing with you as far as the need for conflict resolution. I'm simply saying that in Caledonia the government appears to have been extremely shortsighted in their tactics and has severely compromised any hope of ever regaining the trust of the townspeople or achieving a re-establishment of a positive relationship between the two communities.

The initial offense was from the OPP to the natives. The unfortunate result was that the natives used protest tactics AGAINST THE TOWNSFOLK and not specifically targeted against the OPP and government. The townsfolk feel like they were made into cannon fodder. Not surprising, since that's what indeed happened, by definition! Now the people involved in negotiating a resolution seem unwilling to admit to this, perhaps for fear of offending "native pride".

So they've offended the townsfolks' pride! And made them feel that they are no longer protected by the "system" as citizens.

Surely things could have been handled better.

[AngusThermopyle]

Surely things could have been handled better.

They probably could have been. One thing is sure, they couldn't have been handled any worse.

Another issue is loss of credibility. With all thats been happening many people are just using their bullsh*t filters when it comes to Native issues in Caledonia. Claims that it wasn't natives who burnt the transformer, or the bridge needed to be demolished, stuff like that. Blatant and rather childish attempts to rationalize plain bad behaviour. Or the guy in court who tried to claim diplomatic immunity. It's hard to take a group seriously when they constantly demonstrate the fact that they run around in clown shoe's.

And yes, the issue of imports from the states does raise it's ugly head. It cannot be denied that these guys are agitators, nothing more. They came up for Oka, they came up for Ipperwash, and now they're here at Caledonia. In a normal scenario these thugs would be cooling their heels in jail right now. This isn't normal though is it? So we let imported Native thugs run rampant as a matter of political expediency.

[kengs333]

You are absolutely wrong. Dead wrong. Provide the reference for the second paragraph. Your claim that women were expected to do all of the medial labour is false. Your comment that male warriors lazed around when not hunting is false. You have once again engaged in fabricated racist stereotypes. Provide the source for them Keng.

So I'm "dead wrong" for making a factual statement, am I? Says much about open to the truth you are.

As I stated, contemporary accounts of Iroquoian societies indicate that women were treated poorly, that they were expected to remain around the longhouse watching the children, tending the crops, and harvesting and processing said crops. The comment about the male warriors was taken from the Jesuit Relations, and I can only assume that is accurate. Why wouldn't it be? Don;t you think that male warriors would feel themselves privileged by their status since warfare was an integral aspect of their society as well. Also, does it not seem interesting to you that observers from a supposedly sexist European society would find that women are treated poorly?

Each and every time you try pass of your hatred as a statement I am going to call you on it Keng as I am now and say you are wrong and because you do this repeatedely, i.e., provide these remarks with no reference point, they are evidence they are deliberate and I again state you make them knowing they will incite hatred.

All I'm doing is stating facts about Indian culture to counter the attempted whitewashing of the truth. Modern day Indian activists don't really seem all that concerned about being racist when they point out (supposed) injustices perpetrated by Europeans against them. The thing is, their ancestors, the supposed victims of European injustice, weren't exactly stellar humanitarians themselves, and all I'm doing is simply illustrating this point in order to add some perspective to the discussion. Personally, I don't think anyone has the moral authority in this matter, and the only way current problems can be solved is if people stop dredging up the past in order to instigate present day political actions.

Using your logical, wouldn't factual statements about the Holocaust be "deliberate" attempts to "incite hatred" towards Germans?

Well Keng once again you come on this forum posing as an expert only this time on domestic violence within aboriginal society and once again you provide zero references.

I never claimed to be an expert. Ask anyone who works in the field about this issue and they'll tell you that the rate is higher among Indians.

Unlike you Keng I am not a self-professed expert nor to I proclaim myself as righteous and holier then others. I am a simple man full of humility and it is precisely why for me to be able to mediate domestic violence I can not do so through moral judgement.

Nothing in all of your ranting has suggested you have any understanding of the concept of humility.

I have been mediating family and domestic violence issues for over 20 years and I do not come on this post to judge and smear aboriginals as you do but to once again provide a counter-balance to you trying to exploit this issue for your own hateful agenda.

Just stating the facts, that's all.

What I do know Keng because I do not come on this board to make things up as I go along issuing racist slurs, is that traditional Aboriginal society experienced did not have high rates of family breakdown. In fact in their traditions, husbands and wives are expected to respect and honour one another, and care for one another and be honest and kind to each other.

How many times are you going to be allowed to label people as racist just because they present facts that shatter your naive beliefs? Needless to say your fantastical comment about Indian marriages is not supported by the facts. Nice try, though.

What I also know is that for example in Mohawk nation, like many or most aboriginal nations, they have a matriarchal society where women are honoured for their wisdom and their vision and creativity-what I also was taught by aboriginals is that the gift of life a woman carries (and the Chinese call the valley of life) is a gift from the creato.

Indian societies were matrilineal, not matriarchal. Men still ruled, and men still felt themselves to be superior to women. That's simply the way it was. I can think of one group of Indians that valued women based on how much weight they could carry.

What I know is in traditional aboriginal cultures, contrary to what you may think, men and women were equal in spiritual power and each although different is part of the same spiritual whole. The creator has both female and male energy or spiritual elements.

Yawn... So what?

I am aware of Ojibway and Cree stories where a woman was said to have come to the earth ( a living element which we live on ) to care for the earth. I am no expert but I know Nokomis, a wise woman is said to have humankind about healing and knowledge.

I'm aware of an Ojibway story in which beings from the moon came to Earth on a large bowl made from white brich bark--does that mean UFOs exist(ed)?

I have watched Ojibway people pray, and I saw them acknowledging the Mother Earth as part of a ceremony with a pipe. I know to many aboriginal nations the earth is considered woman, and sweetgrass they burn in ceremonies is a symbol for her hair.

So what?

What I also know is much of what we domestic violence mediators and therapists incorporate in our practice is based on aboriginal healing principles as well as many other mystical traditions similiar to there one and which can be found in many ways of life, i.e., Wiccan, Judaism, Rastafarianism, Gnostic Christianity, Hinduism, Buddism, Taoism, etc. to name but a few.

These "mystical traditions" are not legitimate, in my opinion, and are part of the problem.

(the rest has been deleted because it bores and tires me.)

[kengs333]

What the statistics show is that this violence flows from very clear, measurable social issues related to poverty and unemployment caused by non aboriginal laws and cultures that were forced upon aboriginals leading to this disaster. The alcoholism, drug abuse, poverty, violence, is not because of their cultural values. That was and remains my point-and no I do not condone domestic violence nor do I romanticize or glorify aboriginals, just talk about them witht he same respect you would expect if I was handling a domestic crisis in your family.

I'll admit that the Indians may have been a little more limited by external factors than some other racial minorities in Canada, but in the end, I don't think that this is an exuse for the problems that they have (or have had). This kind of attitude tends to perpetuate these problems, because it tends to foster in these people a sense of fatalism that keeps them from actively seeking solutions to their problems or mitigating them as best they can. I know people who have lived under brutal conditions in Russia, forced to relocate to desolate regions and live under harsh conditions, but they are because of their faith temperate people--they neither smoke, drink to excess, do drugs, or engage in any other self-destructive/anti-social behaviour--and they are not governed by hostility and a need for revenge. There are so many people like them in this country and throughout the world, and the world is a better place for it. They are like this, as I've said, because of their faith, and it only stands to reaon that people who are not like this are the way they are because of their lack of faith. Any way you look at it, "traditional" Indian spirituality is not suited for guarding people against the vices that afflict modern society--anyone who suggests otherwise is either naive or wilfully being deceptive; whatever the case, trying to restore Indians to their forgone spirituality is, in my opinion, wrong--it's destructive to the individual, as well as to society.

[Wild Bill]

I'll admit that the Indians may have been a little more limited by external factors than some other racial minorities in Canada, but in the end, I don't think that this is an exuse for the problems that they have (or have had). This kind of attitude tends to perpetuate these problems, because it tends to foster in these people a sense of fatalism that keeps them from actively seeking solutions to their problems or mitigating them as best they can. I know people who have lived under brutal conditions in Russia, forced to relocate to desolate regions and live under harsh conditions, but they are because of their faith temperate people--they neither smoke, drink to excess, do drugs, or engage in any other self-destructive/anti-social behaviour--and they are not governed by hostility and a need for revenge. There are so many people like them in this country and throughout the world, and the world is a better place for it. They are like this, as I've said, because of their faith, and it only stands to reaon that people who are not like this are the way they are because of their lack of faith. Any way you look at it, "traditional" Indian spirituality is not suited for guarding people against the vices that afflict modern society--anyone who suggests otherwise is either naive or wilfully being deceptive; whatever the case, trying to restore Indians to their forgone spirituality is, in my opinion, wrong--it's destructive to the individual, as well as to society.

I think you have started to touch on what is perhaps the real problem: tribalism!

Consider, the native culture is strongly based on belonging to a tribe. The "white" european culture, while often having had a strong nationalistic streak, still puts much more emphasis on the individual. We do not punish someone for the sins of his fathers, or praise him for acts done by his uncle rather than himself.

The problem with identifying your selfworth by your tribe and not your own actions is that when you belong to a primitive tribe it's easy to feel outclassed. Europeans came to this continent with much superior technology and organization. Even native tribes that waged fierce battles with the "invaders" had to do it with captured or illicitly obtained weapons. The white man's musket was far superior to their arrows.

So was his medicine, his wagons, his lanterns, his clothing and so on. As the years went by if you were part of a tribe you didn't have a single concrete thing that could compete. You could take pride perhaps in higher "spirituality" but not in a better house, where you didn't have to sleep on benches to keep yourself off the ground full of fleas and chiggers.

Thousands of natives choose a different way. They left the reserve! They made their own way in mainstream society and many did very well for themselves. They rated their sense of selfworth as individuals and not as part of a tribe.

Some reserves have done well for themselves by adapting to the modern age. They see themselves more as a community than a tribe. They have industry and revenues that promote their common welfare.

Other reserves have stayed stagnant. Personally, I blame Canada's government and the Indian Act for helping to foster the problem. When a native cannot have clear title to property on the reserve he has no access to a loan of capital. This makes it very hard to create enterprise.

So for many growing up on a stagnant reserve it must be very easy to develop an inferiority complex. This leads to defensiveness, especially with adolescents. That's why we see the rise of a convoluted "faith" in natives originally living in some mythical Eden as "stewards of the environment". Supposedly, they lived in peace and harmony with one another and with Mother Nature. No one starved because food was plentiful and they all shared. There were no wars but rather more "athletic contests". Captured warriors were not actually tortured but rather given an opportunity to show their strength and courage in a noble fashion! Blood was only spilled because some white man liquored them up by forcing whiskey down their throats and paid them to do evil deeds!

It's all ignorance and pride! All based on putting the tribe before yourself! A native child is no more or less intelligent or capable than any other child. He has the same potential for greatness as any other. It is his TRIBE that may be primitive, NOT he himself!

Sadly, if his tribe doesn't change he may never get a chance.

[Rue]

There are a couple of reasons that seem to be possible and quite likely. One, those words are an expeditious means of showing disapproval or disagreement. The other that I see is that many times emotions overtake reason and those words are a strong manner in which to manifest these emotions.

It's true, one can not judge an entire group by the actions of some. I tend to disagree with the use of unemployment as a factor caused solely by our society however. As I've said before, I've offered jobs to quite a few Natives and had them react as if I had the plague, some even with hostility. Too bad for them I suppose, if they accepted the offer and were sincere they would quite possibly end up with Journey Man papers and a very good future.

You can only help people so much, then the onus falls on them to help themselves. Unfortunately I haven't seen too much desire to do so on their behalf. Not to say that holds true for all of them though, we just promoted a young guy to foreman, terrific worker, knowledgeable about the trade, and a nice kid too. The ones who refuse to help themselves are the ones I look upon with scorn, and sadly there are a great many of them around here.

I hear you and appreciate your comments above.

[Rue]

In response to Keng;

1-you claim you present facts where?

2-where are these contemporary accounts of Iroquoian societies you claim come from Jesuits?

4-who are the people you refer to who claim aboriginals are sexist?

You stated Keng;

"Personally, I don't think anyone has the moral authority in this matter, and the only way current problems can be solved is if people stop dredging up the past in order to instigate present day political actions."

But that is of course exactly what you did.

More to the point Keng you have rendered yourself an absurdity. You come on this forum precisely to proseltyze and exploit the memory of Jesus and yet you tell others they can not engage in what you constantly do.

Just who gives you the right to use the past Keng for your agenda but to forbid others to do the same? Can people only refer to legal treaties and contracts and past injustices and oppression if it suits Keng? Well?

You stated;

"Using your logical, wouldn't factual statements about the Holocaust be "deliberate" attempts to "incite hatred" towards Germans?"

The word is logic and no you are not using my reasoning. Factual statements do not incite hatred people using them to justify hatred do. The context in which a fact is used Keng determines whether it achieves a negative or positive purpose.

In your case Keng you do not even take the time to make the effort to use facts. You simply state subjective feelings and then claim they are facts.

So Keng why do you deliberately bait aboriginals by referring to them as Indians?

Tell me Keng would it not dawn on you India is in Asia? If you have so much hate and contempt you can not even acknowledge them with some basic basis courtesy and dignity you really believe anyone sees you as a true Christian let alone anything but a racist trying to bait people?

Keng you stated;

"How many times are you going to be allowed to label people as racist just because they present facts that shatter your naive beliefs?"

As long as you deliberately use the word "Indian" to bait people knowing its derogatory, as long as you continue to utter remarks and claim they are facts but provide no reference for them, as long as you assign negative general characteristics to an entire group of people and as long as you show your hatred and contempt for others with comments such as;

"I can think of one group of Indians that valued women based on how much weight they could carry.

Yawn... So what?"

and this one;

"I'm aware of an Ojibway story in which beings from the moon came to Earth on a large bowl made from white brich bark--does that mean UFOs exist(ed)?

So what? These "mystical traditions" are not legitimate, in my opinion, and are part of the problem."

All such remarks do keng is indicate you are intolerant of people and have contempt for them. That Sir makes you in my opinion in this case a racist. If you would prefer I can simply use the words "spiteful and hateful".

You stated;

" Needless to say your fantastical comment about Indian marriages is not supported by the facts. Nice try, though."

Keng would you please provide the specific reference you think I stated about Indian marriages and then provide your reference for stating what I said is "fantastical"?

You stated;

"Indian societies were matrilineal, not matriarchal."

Where is your reference Keng for this statement?

You stated;

"(the rest has been deleted because it bores and tires me.)"

That reminds me Keng of a Zen expression which is similiar to ones in Taosim, the Kabal and aboriginal and other mystic traditionss; " a man who professes boredom is a stagnant marsh-yes they both have a tendency to emit methane gas but they have a purpose-without them we would not appreciate the beauty of fast flowing waters and of course they are the birth place of other life forms that will take flight from the consequence of such stagnation. Its why so many birds live in marshes.

yah I know Keng, its mystical. You are bored with it.

Edited January 4, 2008 by Rue

[White Doors]

Oh, the obloviating!

I can't take it anymore!

[AngusThermopyle]

Did you mean bloviating? To talk or speak in a pompous manner.

I'm not familiar with obloviating, though I suspect it's meaning to be the same or similar to bloviating.

[Rue]

Oh, the obloviating!

I can't take it anymore!

Here turn to this radio station-I hope it helps.

http://www.last.fm/tag/smugness-free+christian+music

Oy another Vanilla Ice.

Edited January 4, 2008 by Rue

[Rue]

Did you mean bloviating? To talk or speak in a pompous manner.

I'm not familiar with obloviating, though I suspect it's meaning to be the same or similar to bloviating.

Here let me help you with the Yahoo dictionary and please note the reference to stagant waters;

ADJECTIVE:

smug·ger , smug·gest

Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent: "the smug look of a toad breakfasting on fat marsh flies" (William Pearson).

Also this reference from the garden web-site can help as it I believe captures what you and White Doors are trying to share-I hope it helps too;

http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/be...2531713.html?13

"Smokey, you profess to be friendly, then are smug and sarcastic. Instead of the PETA website, or this website, perhaps you should limit yourself to Joke-of-the-Day websites, and websites that educate. Bald-face Paper Wasps are not, not, not (emphasis for your benefit) at all agressive if you don't approach them with chemicals etc. I have experience, you have irrational fears. Getting suited up and spraying a neurotoxin around the yard is poor parenting. Maybe you should also visit a parenting site to help you with your problems."

[kengs333]

In response to Keng;

1-you claim you present facts where?

2-where are these contemporary accounts of Iroquoian societies you claim come from Jesuits?

4-who are the people you refer to who claim aboriginals are sexist?

Where did "3" go????

"Indian societies were matrilineal, not matriarchal."

Where is your reference Keng for this statement?

Seriously?

Its why so many birds live in marshes.

Birds tend not to live in marshes, rather by, near or on them.

[Rue]

Oh Keng, you have yet to provide one reference for anything you have said and I am waiting just like I have been waiting for the name of the Christian sect you claim you are a member of and you claim to represent.

Now you stated birds don't live in marshes but by near or on them. You see Keng in your attempt to try mock you do what? You prove the point birds live in marshes because when one uses the word "in" it can refer to by, near or on or besides. A marsh is a region Keng and so when you live in it it does not necessarily mean you crawl inside it. SO KENG IF SOMEONE SAYS THEY LIVE IN TORONTO it does not mean they live under the ground in the sewer system necessarily although it could be a possibility.

But its a start Keng. I am glad at least we are working on understanding the English language and how it doesn' have one just the one meaning you may want it to have.

Yes Keng its possible words have more then one meaning or context. Think about that one and get back to me on it. For example the word OY. When used in regards to responding to you by me if I respond with OY it could mean one of many things depending on the context.

Now then, let us do get back to the real issue that led to my last response to you. You see Keng, you made the statement that the problem with aboriginals is they believe in things from outer space and you find their belief in the mystical and such references by you which I would suggest are not accurate a problem.

That Keng is interesting coming from a man who professes he is an expert on the New Testament and spreads the belief that Mary was impregnanted from a non human being divinity which then created a son of this divinity to temporarily reside in a human body to save we humans from ourselves.

On the one hand you yourself believe in things from outside our world impregnating a human to create a son of a God to save the world but if anyone else might have a belief that consists of something supernatural, you dismiss it as a problem. Tad bit selective are we Keng? Morally judging again?

Its o.k. as long as the tale meets your approval right Keng?

Also do not worry Keng. The aliens and demons I know are not interested in meeting you. Trust me. Neitherwould the birds that live in the marshes you refer to. How do I know this? A little birdy told me so Keng. Oy. And a second oy.

Edited January 7, 2008 by Rue