The Coward of Caledonia?

[charter.rights]

Not only that, but we should give them the land AND pay them for it.

Legally, from 1763 there was a process that had to be followed for the Crown to purchase land from the natives. Individual settlers are prohibited from obtaining land from First Nations AND the Crown had to hold a public meeting of the natives before they could purchase land. Low and behold the law was never followed.

It would be easy to argue that since the law was never followed that civil law prevailed EXCEPT, the Royal Proclamation 1763 is entrenched in our supreme law today. In essence all land title defaults to First Nation possession unless and until the Crown can prove that the the surrender was legal, that the terms of any surrenders or treaties wee fulfilled (as in consideration) and that a surrender or treaty was agreed upon by the community via a public meeting. None of the treaties or purported surrenders meet this test.

So you are correct in a way. But since we aren't legally entitled to their land in the first place, we don;t have to give it back. We never owned it or held title to it ever. As well those lands that have been illegally occupied, and stripped of resources make us not only responsible for the damages but also for loss of use. Unfortunately that is the rule of law in Canada.

Now no one is suggesting that we should not abide by the rule of law, are you? Or are you only interested in a law of convenience that benefits us and not them?

[Smallc]

anyway

[gullyfourmyle]

Don't get too excited Angus. We'll have you fitted up for a set of zone implants and before you know it you'll be on your way to Caledonia to help the Aboriginals man the barricades while you yell and scream in your head.

Obviously there is a lot more to the situation than this discussion has touched on or it would have been over long ago. Any decision reached in Caledonia is going to set precedents across the country or at the very least, affect outcomes. There are lots of issues right across the country and some are in very sensitive areas. We have one here in Pickering. Caledonia is a very messy situation that's getting messier the longer it takes. There are lots of Aboriginal Groups right across the country and around the world waiting to see what happens.

No one wants to make a mistake. But the Aboriginals in Caledonia cannot afford to stand down for those reasons. The entire situation has come to a head.

The feds have two options:

1. They can leave the Caledonia situation alone and hope the media loses interest.

2. They can do their best to fix it once and for all.

The feds appear to have opted for Door #1. If they have, they've misjudged their opponents this time. The Aboriginals have the internet too and that makes everything different. In the past, the Aboriginals were isolated groups with not much education that could be picked off. Now they are a large united group with their youth being better educated. They are spread right across the country with the constitutional might to cause a lot more trouble than they have so far.

Think about this. The Caledonia problem festered right under everyone's noses for many decades without the European component really having a clue or giving a damn one way or the other. Why should they care? Think about what the Aboriginals are finally going to do as they now arrive late maybe but arrive in time with their agendas intact - again under everyone's noses and with constitutional backing and a lot of legal weight behind them.

As critical as people may have been about how the OPP have handled the standoff, you have to understand, as Fantino must have been made to understand since he shoved his oar in, that the legal situation is very likely in the Aboriginals' favour and the OPP probably have no right to interfere - just as McGuinty had no right to interfere.

Before the internet, the government could basically run roughshod over Aboriginal opposition and get away with it - and did countless times. Now it's not nearly so easy. Now, if a government or police official should try it and get caught crossing the line, nothing can save such an individual from personal civil prosecution under the Criminal Code. Being a civil servant of any sort will save no one in this situation since those involved are required to know the law and should know the law. Former Premier Mike Harris was extremely lucky to dodge jail time over the Dudley George incident. He would have taken that hit personally with absolutely no government protection. If the internet, You Tube, Face Book and a host of other applications had been up and running like they are now, Harris could be serving time by now.

The Caledonia incident is waking up politicians to the fact that their forked tongues can get them into a heap of personal legal trouble that was never an issue before now. Digital cameras, cell phones and the internet combined are going to bring tough love to politics like never before.

Angus, there are plenty of people who agree whole heartedly with your position. They have their reasons and those reasons might not have anything to do with right or wrong, ethical or not. Mostly not. They think possession is 9/10ths of the law and up until now, that's the way it's been. Most think Aboriginals are freeloaders. That is a callous notion born of ignorance, cultural selfishness and economic rapacious greed.

That mindset is part of the problem the Aboriginals have to overcome. It's a huge task that will take generations to accomplish - if there are enough generations left to us. But they have to try.

Part of that will come when the schools are forced to start teaching real post-European Aboriginal history. That I guarantee you Thermopyle, will make people squirm in their seats. All the governmental apologizing in the world amounts to nothing compared to driving home what really happened. The entire public should have to face it and own up to it. Just as the Germans were forced to do when they had to tour the concentration camps at the end of the Second World War. Nothing is left of our concentration camps as they were, but there are plenty of existing reserves that would make you sick.

Only then can some real healing take place for Aboriginal people - and by that I'm not suggesting that would in any way make amends for the damage done. But at least it would make all non-Aboriginals sensitive and knowledgeable of why the Aboriginals are as they are and why they are doing what they are doing. All of us need to be on that same page so we can start some sort of fresh.

The time is right for the Aboriginals to get some payback - justice in other words, and I'd be surprised if they didn't take advantage of that. They have to.

[Smallc]

Don't get too excited Angus. We'll have you fitted up for a set of zone implants and before you know it you'll be on your way to Caledonia to help the Aboriginals man the barricades while you yell and scream in your head.

Obviously there is a lot more to the situation than this discussion has touched on or it would have been over long ago. Any decision reached in Caledonia is going to set precedents across the country or at the very least, affect outcomes. There are lots of issues right across the country and some are in very sensitive areas. We have one here in Pickering. Caledonia is a very messy situation that's getting messier the longer it takes. There are lots of Aboriginal Groups right across the country and around the world waiting to see what happens.

No one wants to make a mistake. But the Aboriginals in Caledonia cannot afford to stand down for those reasons. The entire situation has come to a head.

The feds have two options:

1. They can leave the Caledonia situation alone and hope the media loses interest.

2. They can do their best to fix it once and for all.

The feds appear to have opted for Door #1. If they have, they've misjudged their opponents this time. The Aboriginals have the internet too and that makes everything different. In the past, the Aboriginals were isolated groups with not much education that could be picked off. Now they are a large united group with their youth being better educated. They are spread right across the country with the constitutional might to cause a lot more trouble than they have so far.

Think about this. The Caledonia problem festered right under everyone's noses for many decades without the European component really having a clue or giving a damn one way or the other. Why should they care? Think about what the Aboriginals are finally going to do as they now arrive late maybe but arrive in time with their agendas intact - again under everyone's noses and with constitutional backing and a lot of legal weight behind them.

As critical as people may have been about how the OPP have handled the standoff, you have to understand, as Fantino must have been made to understand since he shoved his oar in, that the legal situation is very likely in the Aboriginals' favour and the OPP probably have no right to interfere - just as McGuinty had no right to interfere.

Before the internet, the government could basically run roughshod over Aboriginal opposition and get away with it - and did countless times. Now it's not nearly so easy. Now, if a government or police official should try it and get caught crossing the line, nothing can save such an individual from personal civil prosecution under the Criminal Code. Being a civil servant of any sort will save no one in this situation since those involved are required to know the law and should know the law. Former Premier Mike Harris was extremely lucky to dodge jail time over the Dudley George incident. He would have taken that hit personally with absolutely no government protection. If the internet, You Tube, Face Book and a host of other applications had been up and running like they are now, Harris could be serving time by now.

The Caledonia incident is waking up politicians to the fact that their forked tongues can get them into a heap of personal legal trouble that was never an issue before now. Digital cameras, cell phones and the internet combined are going to bring tough love to politics like never before.

Angus, there are plenty of people who agree whole heartedly with your position. They have their reasons and those reasons might not have anything to do with right or wrong, ethical or not. Mostly not. They think possession is 9/10ths of the law and up until now, that's the way it's been. Most think Aboriginals are freeloaders. That is a callous notion born of ignorance, cultural selfishness and economic rapacious greed.

That mindset is part of the problem the Aboriginals have to overcome. It's a huge task that will take generations to accomplish - if there are enough generations left to us. But they have to try.

Part of that will come when the schools are forced to start teaching real post-European Aboriginal history. That I guarantee you Thermopyle, will make people squirm in their seats. All the governmental apologizing in the world amounts to nothing compared to driving home what really happened. The entire public should have to face it and own up to it. Just as the Germans were forced to do when they had to tour the concentration camps at the end of the Second World War. Nothing is left of our concentration camps as they were, but there are plenty of existing reserves that would make you sick.

Only then can some real healing take place for Aboriginal people - and by that I'm not suggesting that would in any way make amends for the damage done. But at least it would make all non-Aboriginals sensitive and knowledgeable of why the Aboriginals are as they are and why they are doing what they are doing. All of us need to be on that same page so we can start some sort of fresh.

The time is right for the Aboriginals to get some payback - justice in other words, and I'd be surprised if they didn't take advantage of that. They have to.

I suppose that one way to look at it. Its time, that we move forward. Aboriginal people have to quit playing the victim of a crime that is no longer happening. Apologies have been given, along with large amounts of land and money. Its time to accept it and move on.

There are many things that should be done. For starters, reserves should be made into communities and aboriginal people should be the same under the law as all others. Then, and only then, can people see eye to eye. Only when they are equal under the law. The problem is that many aboriginals won't accept that. They want to live in the past and they want to have their cake and eat it to. Now I will give you that there are stereotypes that aren't fair, but unfortunately, there are many that are. Its time to work to end the problems. The violence, the alcoholism, the poverty, and the culture of defeatism that exists for so many. Until that is done, there can be no progress.

[charter.rights]

I suppose that one way to look at it. Its time, that we move forward. Aboriginal people have to quit playing the victim of a crime that is no longer happening. Apologies have been given, along with large amounts of land and money. Its time to accept it and move on.

There are many things that should be done. For starters, reserves should be made into communities and aboriginal people should be the same under the law as all others. Then, and only then, can people see eye to eye. Only when they are equal under the law. The problem is that many aboriginals won't accept that. They want to live in the past and they want to have their cake and eat it to. Now I will give you that there are stereotypes that aren't fair, but unfortunately, there are many that are. Its time to work to end the problems. The violence, the alcoholism, the poverty, and the culture of defeatism that exists for so many. Until that is done, there can be no progress.

First of all there hasn't been "large amounts of land and money" handed over - not nearly. The cash in lieu of land settlements are for a fraction of what the land and resources is worth. Yet the government can (and do deliberately) prolong negotiations in order to wear the First Nations down, exhaust their financial resources to negotiated and bully their partners into submission. The return of land in any negotiated settlement is against government policy and where it has happened in some cases it is mostly out of the worthless way plots under 100 acres - hardly enough to sustain a community. The Supreme Court has ruled that First Nations have an inherent right to be consulted and accommodated over the use of land that is their traditional territory. This should mean meaningful negotiation, but to the government it just means more bullying and letting corporations get away without even so much as letting the First Nations know they are exploring and working on their lands.

You suggest that we move on. Should we continue to run roughshod over First Nations' Charter rights and ignore SCoC rulings? Should we continue to steal their children and place them in foster care far away from their homes and into non-culturally appropriate homes? Should we continue to ignore their cries that our dumps and mining habits have poisoned their drinking water and contaminated their food sources? Shall we move forward with demanding that natives become Canadians against their right to chose?

What I suggest you are saying is that we are to forget about what what we are doing to native people in this day and age because to settle up might cost us more than we are willing to share and through our collective greed it is better to kick natives when they haven't got the legal clout to fight back. What you are really suggesting is that we return to the patterns of the last 400 years and stop acknowledging rights and property issues so that we can do whatever we want without opposition.

Six Nations - the focus of this thread - have stated they are NOT Canadians and that they refuse to join Canada. Legally and constitutionally they right. In our history - especially since 1763, which is the beginning of our law and order society in Canada - Six Nations have never accepted, capitulated or treatied to become Canadian citizens (or British subjects). And in doing so they hold sovereign title over most of southern Ontario south of the Ottawa River and east of Lake Huron. If you truly want to move forward then we have to stop the charade that we know what is best for them, accept their autonomy and sovereignty, quit the myths that we somehow gain authority over their lands and then negotiate in good faith to find a way to live harmoniously with them. If we can't do that or are unwilling to do that then we deserve all the future disruption to our economy and development that they can muster. We are after all, breaking our own law and no one seems to be concerned with it.

It is a myth to believe that Canada, or its mother corporation - The Crown - hold legal title to any land. The legal reality is that Canada does not have a land base. It was formed as a confederation of business interests and in its inception never had land title to any part of the country. Treaties and surrenders only gave the Crown rights over some lands, but left the real title in the hands of the original peoples.

By the way, to correct another myth you seem to espouse....Six Nations and most other First Nations are hardly playing the victim. Instead, the result we are seeing that is spreading across Canada is the result of a secure resolve not to accept the continued manipulation of their lives and be ignored when developers and corporations steal what belongs to them. That isn't victimhood. It is power.

[Wild Bill]

What keeps being ignored by those who champion Six Nations is that most of the opposition to their position comes not from their goals but their tactics. In fact, I would expect that at least among the townsfolk of Caledonia, they Have burned their bridges and salted the earth as far as any support for their land claims.

If the natives had launched their protests at Queens Park or Ottawa they might have had a different reaction. Likely we would have seen many more non-natives cheering them on!

They chose not to. They attacked the citizens of Caledonia, their neighbours for generations. They blocked an important road, they tore down a transmission line tower, and although it can't be proven, a transformer behind their protest lines was destroyed, plunging the town into blackness for a weekend. The natives claim there is no proof they did this but when the transformer was behind their protest line, unreachable by anyone BUT protesters and given that no one else would have had the opportunity or the motive this is a specious argument only respected by anal-retentive lawyers.

The Caledonia folks are clearly fed up. While they are obviously upset with their own politicians it would be a huge mistake for Six Nations to believe that there is no resentment against THEM! The resentment is huge and grows more every day. Even if the claims were settled tomorrow that resentment will not abate for a long, long time.

In effect, the natives punched Caledonia in the face and then excused themselves by saying "Sure I hit you but don't get mad at us! Your government MADE us hit you! You should now join with us!"

It's a lame ass excuse that won't fly.

In my own heart I grew up sympathizing for native claims. I still do...but not for Six Nations. They chose to make their neighbours cannon fodder in their fight with the provincial and federal governments.

Because of these actions I no longer have any respect for their position at all. Arguments about the legitimacy of their land claims are just obfuscation about their lack of honour with their tactics, as far as I'm concerned.

Edited September 4, 2008 by Wild Bill

[Smallc]

By the way, to correct another myth you seem to espouse....Six Nations and most other First Nations are hardly playing the victim. Instead, the result we are seeing that is spreading across Canada is the result of a secure resolve not to accept the continued manipulation of their lives and be ignored when developers and corporations steal what belongs to them. That isn't victimhood. It is power.

Thats even worse, and its too bad you and so many others don't see it. What belongs to "them" (as they are people, as I'm a person, there should be no them and us. This is another one of these things that is being pushed to drive people apart. Native rights is a dangerous thing, because it further separates people that don't need to be separated anymore. This is part of not moving forward) is the same thing that belongs everyone, or at least it should be.

You suggest that we move on. Should we continue to run roughshod over First Nations' Charter rights and ignore SCoC rulings? Should we continue to steal their children and place them in foster care far away from their homes and into non-culturally appropriate homes?

Not culturally appropriate homes? So! The safety of the children is paramount, not their culture. Another old idea to keep us in the past. It seems that all you want to do is fan the flames for as long as possible.

Should we continue to ignore their cries that our dumps and mining habits have poisoned their drinking water and contaminated their food sources? Shall we move forward with demanding that natives become Canadians against their right to chose?

Yeah, lets not fix their water, thats exactly what I said They should have a clean environment and water like everyone else. That said, they should pay for and build their own houses. Native people living in Canada are Canadians. If they aren't then we certainly owe them nothing of our tax money. They shouldn't be receiving anything. Chew on that next time before you try to spout that drivel.

It is a myth to believe that Canada, or its mother corporation - The Crown - hold legal title to any land. The legal reality is that Canada does not have a land base. It was formed as a confederation of business interests and in its inception never had land title to any part of the country. Treaties and surrenders only gave the Crown rights over some lands, but left the real title in the hands of the original peoples.

Great, let just tear what is one of the most prosperous and influential countries, one that does its part around the world, to pieces. Lets take the land away from the majority that now live their to satisfy a few. Sorry, but it will never happen.

Everything your saying is part of the problem. Your stuck in the past, and if you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you've always got. Some day, someone will solve the problem, I just hope it isn't too far in the future.

[gullyfourmyle]

That was well said charter.rights.

The point about the dumps might seem like one of the minor points but it isn't. Nearly all dumps in Canada - and there are thousands upon thousands of them - leak poisons into the aquifers over which they sit. That means virtually all of the water resources we like to brag about are being contaminated at their sources.

There is no political will to fix any of them. I mounted a federal petition to try and have the problem addressed. Our current Minister of the Environment sluffed it off.

For those areas affected, drinking water is unobtainable in the midst of plenty unless it's trucked in. How weird is it to be a First Nation citizen and not have clean water?

You only need to take a short drive down the 401 towards Kingston to see the huge sign the Iroquois put up about their water supply having been destroyed. I forget how many years they've been without fresh water but it's a long time.

Without safe water, nothing lives. Hows that for genocide?

[charter.rights]

What keeps being ignored by those who champion Six Nations is that most of the opposition to their position comes not from their goals but their tactics. In fact, I would expect that at least among the townsfolk of Caledonia, they Have burned their bridges and salted the earth as far as any support for their land claims.

If the natives had launched their protests at Queens Park or Ottawa they might have had a different reaction. Likely we would have seen many more non-natives cheering them on!

They chose not to. They attacked the citizens of Caledonia, their neighbours for generations. They blocked an important road, they tore down a transmission line tower, and although it can't be proven, a transformer behind their protest lines was destroyed, plunging the town into blackness for a weekend. The natives claim there is no proof they did this but when the transformer was behind their protest line, unreachable by anyone BUT protesters and given that no one else would have had the opportunity or the motive this is a specious argument only respected by anal-retentive lawyers.

The Caledonia folks are clearly fed up. While they are obviously upset with their own politicians it would be a huge mistake for Six Nations to believe that there is no resentment against THEM! The resentment is huge and grows more every day. Even if the claims were settled tomorrow that resentment will not abate for a long, long time.

In effect, the natives punched Caledonia in the face and then excused themselves by saying "Sure I hit you but don't get mad at us! Your government MADE us hit you! You should now join with us!"

It's a lame ass excuse that won't fly.

In my own heart I grew up sympathizing for native claims. I still do...but not for Six Nations. They chose to make their neighbours cannon fodder in their fight with the provincial and federal governments.

Because of these actions I no longer have any respect for their position at all. Arguments about the legitimacy of their land claims are just obfuscation about their lack of honour with their tactics, as far as I'm concerned.

Hey B.G. you are so full of exaggerations and rhetoric.

1. Caledonia started with a reclamation of the land at Douglas Estates that was taken over BECAUSE Six Nations jurisdiction was ignored for nearly 5 years previously. The last straw was the construction of new homes on their land.

2. Caledonians injected themselves into the foray as if they had some rights surrounding the issue. They didn't then and they still don't. DC has nothing to do with Caledonia citizens and if not for the racists and rioters that love to stir up shit, it is highly unlikely that it would have made the news.

3. The did not tear down a transmission tower. The hydro towers were laying disassembled on the ground waiting to be erected. The transmission line is delayed indefinitely across Six Nations lands at least until there is some land claim settlement.

4. There has been no finding of fact on WHO set the transformer station on fire. I remember reading in the media that there was an eyewitness that said it was someone who ran towards town that set the fire but there has been no one found that did it. However, given that there were some arsonist attacks on Six Nations buildings since, it is just as likely that someone from Caledonia did it.

5. The Caledonia folks are NOT fed up. Only a few stupid instigators continue to push buttons and rally whenever anything "native" shows up. It is clear that these people are not politically motivated but racially motivated and have from time to time invited skin heads and known white supremacists to their rallies. The majority of Caledonians sit at home and look forward to the day that their Six Nation friends, family and clients can walk freely into town to shop, and enjoy each other's company.

6. Once the racists and agitators started hitting golf balls, assaulting old people and creating havoc in town, Six Nations people stopped shopping there. The actions of those few pathetic morons that continue to harass, and speak negatively are what is killing the economy in Caledonia. Until the good people of the the town stand up to those morons, it will remain that no one will come to shop. Basically, they got what they deserved.

7. No one really cares what your emotional attachment was Six Nations before or after the reclamation. This is a legal and sovereignty issue that is not only morally correct action under the circumstances, but has its basis in law - locked into the supreme law of Canada - the Charter. There was good reason for King George to declare in 1763 that all Indian lands were off limits to settlement or encroachment. Yet the governors and settlers ignored the law. We continue to ignore that very same law today.

8. The fight for land is not a provincial issue, since the province is merely an administrative branch of the federal government, who is merely an administrative branch of the Crown. The Sovereign, the Crown made agreements that all administrative branches MUST comply with. Six Nations has territorial jurisdiction to all of southern Ontario and that is entrenched in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which exceeds even the federal government's authority.

9. You may decry the tactics but the sad reality is that they work. In 20 years the federal government has finally taken them seriously and will continue to take them seriously or suffer the same on-going tactics. There is no doubt that this is one of the toughest negotiations in history with many other issues complicating the discussions. However, it has nothing to do with Caledonia or Haldimand County. And as long as Caledonians continue to let the racist morons represent them in the media, they will continue to be lost in all of this. Six Nations took a powerful and well calculated step. Perhaps Caledonians should the same and force the government to negotiate in good faith andin good time.

[Wild Bill]

9. You may decry the tactics but the sad reality is that they work. In 20 years the federal government has finally taken them seriously and will continue to take them seriously or suffer the same on-going tactics. There is no doubt that this is one of the toughest negotiations in history with many other issues complicating the discussions. However, it has nothing to do with Caledonia or Haldimand County. And as long as Caledonians continue to let the racist morons represent them in the media, they will continue to be lost in all of this. Six Nations took a powerful and well calculated step. Perhaps Caledonians should the same and force the government to negotiate in good faith andin good time.

Same old, same old.

How could a Caledonian have gotten behind the protest lines to torch the transformer? I wasn't aware there were a lot of retired ninjas in that town. What would be the motive? Deprive a town of electricity for a weekend just to frame the natives? Bit of a stretch...

Yeah, I know. If I disagree I must be a racist. Anyone who disagrees is a racist. Yet natives can attack the townsfolk because they are white and must bear the blame and endure the revenge for actions of people dead and gone who also were likely white, or at least non-native.

Who's the racist?

Anyhow, you don't have to convince ME. When I see a parade down the main street in Caledonia with YOU on the head float I might believe you. I've been there and have friends and acquaintances there who keep me informed.

Frankly, you sound like you're trying to convince the rest of Canada that the situation is different than those who live there well know.

Just a propaganda tactic, I guess.

What I do know is that people respond as to how they have been treated. The natives have made that the excuse for their actions. Perhaps the townspeople will decide to do the same.

Considering the speed at which a townsfolk blockade was formed to protest that of the natives, the citizens would seem to be highly motivated.

Then again, the fact that they would take exception to another blockade, this one not even as a result of anything they had done but rather in opposition to actions IN A DIFFERENT CITY I guess is proof that they must all be racists.

Talk about the ultimate in ad hominem arguments!

Edited September 4, 2008 by Wild Bill

[noahbody]

1. Caledonia started with a reclamation of the land at Douglas Estates that was taken over BECAUSE Six Nations jurisdiction was ignored for nearly 5 years previously. The last straw was the construction of new homes on their land.

There are several land sales that were defaulted on, but Douglas Creek Estates wasn't one of them. Payment was made and a crown deed was issued. Please explain how it then is "their land."

[gullyfourmyle]

Same old, same old.

How could a Caledonian have gotten behind the protest lines to torch the transformer? I wasn't aware there were a lot of retired ninjas in that town. What would be the motive? Deprive a town of electricity for a weekend just to frame the natives? Bit of a stretch...

How is that a stretch? Infiltrating an informal blockade in the middle of the night would be a piece of cake for anyone who has ever had training in woodmanship.

Yeah, I know. If I disagree I must be a racist. Anyone who disagrees is a racist. Yet natives can attack the townsfolk because they are white and must bear the blame and endure the revenge for actions of people dead and gone who also were likely white, or at least non-native.

Don't forget who attacked who first. While I'm not supporting anarchy, there has been much worse done to the natives than anything they have done back. If any of it had been done to you, I doubt you would be a model of restraint.

Who's the racist?

You apparently - or at the very least you aren't thinking through what you're saying.

Anyhow, you don't have to convince ME. When I see a parade down the main street in Caledonia with YOU on the head float I might believe you. I've been there and have friends and acquaintances there who keep me informed.

Some people will never be convinced regardless of arguments to the contrary. Nothing unusual about that.

There are still plenty of people who think slavery should be re-instituted. There are plenty of people who think wife beating should be legal. There are plenty of people who absolutely do not want a woman President in the US. There are people who still refuse to wear seat belts or quit smoking. There are lots of ridiculous excuses for abusive viewpoints. That doesn't make them valid. What you believe or not is your affair and your constitutional right. Luckily for us you and Angus have strong views or this would be a really boring thread.

Frankly, you sound like you're trying to convince the rest of Canada that the situation is different than those who live there well know.

The rest of Canada needs an education as I mentioned earlier. Some people on this thread would benefit too. If people like yourself are intent on continuing to deny the Aboriginals their due, then those same people need to first be properly informed. Denying the Aboriginals their rights is as charter.rights pointed out, simply committing another layer of crime on top of another. In your case should matters progress that far, it would come under the section in the criminal code where aiding and abetting is described.

Just a propaganda tactic, I guess.

Are all contrary opinions propaganda? What are you saying off line?

What I do know is that people respond as to how they have been treated. The natives have made that the excuse for their actions. Perhaps the townspeople will decide to do the same.

Thank you for that. The Aboriginals in Caledonia are responding to how they have been treated and they are responding with more restraint than I would if I were there.

Considering the speed at which a townsfolk blockade was formed to protest that of the natives, the citizens would seem to be highly motivated.

Certain ones among them are probably getting organized. In psychology terms it is called a race to the bottom - a lose/lose situation where no one wins. The townspeople are only going to make things worse.

Then again, the fact that they would take exception to another blockade, this one not even as a result of anything they had done but rather in opposition to actions IN A DIFFERENT CITY I guess is proof that they must all be racists.

Considering this aspect of the situation has been dealt with, I fail to see why you brought it up. It's meaningless and redundant.

Talk about the ultimate in ad hominem arguments!

You said it.

[charter.rights]

There are several land sales that were defaulted on, but Douglas Creek Estates wasn't one of them. Payment was made and a crown deed was issued. Please explain how it then is "their land."

The 1844 surrender is bogus. It does not meet the test required under the Royal Proclamation 1763.

[gullyfourmyle]

One more thing Angus and Wild Bill,

Don't lose sight of the fact that the builder, intentionally or not started the problem.

The fact that he didn't do his research is no one's fault but his.

In a car accident he would be paying for that. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

One way or another, he tried to take advantage of a situation and got burned. He's no martyr and the town should have realized that immediately and acted to end the situation. The correct end to the situation would have been to cede the property as it was when the issue arose. It would have been a timely wake up call to all levels of government that it has come time to pay the piper.

That would have created a precedent and that's no doubt why they didn't act. But by not acting, they invited the current nightmare. But the nightmare has always been there and at some point it has to be addressed. There is no way around it. All of the abuses on either side are simply distractions that keep the public's attention away from the core issue.

The Aboriginals are playing the situation like a fiddle. The longer we wait to face facts, the worse will be the outcome.

The inescapable fact is that every level of Canadian government has been committing criminal acts of almost every type imaginable against the Aboriginals for centuries. There is no way to hide that fact or hide from it and there is no way to rationalize it. This has to end and wrongs have to be redressed properly or as properly as they can be given the time that has passed. The fact that time has passed and many of the players have passed away does not change a thing.

[Ontario Loyalist]

The 1844 surrender is bogus. It does not meet the test required under the Royal Proclamation 1763.

What "test" is required by the Royal Proclamation of 1763?

If any of the sales and surrenders are "bogus" as you claim, then what about the purchase of the land from the Mississaugas in the first place? Six Nations is situated on land which was given to the Iroquois, and which they subsequently were not able to effectively manage on their own. Joseph Brant sold much of the land to speculators, and if anyone is to blame it is him; if the government hadn't stepped in to force Six Nations to conduct its affairs in a manner consistant with the contemporary laws, then there probably would be no Six Nations at all.

[gullyfourmyle]

There are several land sales that were defaulted on, but Douglas Creek Estates wasn't one of them. Payment was made and a crown deed was issued. Please explain how it then is "their land."

As I mentioned, every level of government commits criminal code offences on a regular basis. Most of the time they don't know they are doing it. That does not mean a crime has not been committed. Just because the Crown does something does not mean a crime has not been committed.

In every piece of legislation - somewhere it says this: "the Crown is bound."

That means the Crown is accountable. It also means the Crown is not above making mistakes and having to pay for them. Bound means liable. Even the Crown is not above the law.

You don't hear much about it because there are so many escape clauses, costs of doing business and ratholes built into our legislation that it's difficult to nail the perpetrators. That doesn't mean the crimes are not committed. It means that it's too expensive for a member of the public to prosecute. It also means that for the most part, you cannot count on the police to do their sworn duty in such a case because they mistakenly believe or publicly advise that they don't have jurisdiction in such cases. The fact is they do. What they do instead is obstruct justice. And that is a difficult hurdle to overcome.

Some of my investigations have been pretty scary affairs and all of my friends and neighbours think I should have 24 hour body guards due to some of the stuff I've uncovered. I have seen police literally shake in their boots at the thought of being drawn into these investigations. I know from first hand experience just how rough and ugly it can be when you start finding out incriminating details about public officials and events.

Those of you who are against the Aboriginals should take a deep breath and think about the legal and physical obstacles the Aboriginals have faced thus far. They are the only large organized group in Canada who have a clear understanding of just how deep the criminal behavior in our governments goes. They are fighting for their rights and a by product if they're successful will be that we will benefit from the indecent exposure of governments' filthy laundry. They have courage born of extreme abuse.

My research into government practices has revealed disgusting and mind-boggling abuses by civil servants. Abuse of power is routine. Instead of criticizing the Aboriginals we should be helping them and cheering them on. They are our only hope of wringing honesty out of cunningly corrupt government institutions.

I know what I've said sounds reactionary and fanatical but if any of you wants to work with me on any of these issues, or even a new issue, I guarantee you will do an about face in less than a day.

My hobby is investigating government crime. There is no shortage of subject material. Too bad no one is paying me to do it. I'd be set for life and well into the next.

[charter.rights]

What "test" is required by the Royal Proclamation of 1763?

If any of the sales and surrenders are "bogus" as you claim, then what about the purchase of the land from the Mississaugas in the first place? Six Nations is situated on land which was given to the Iroquois, and which they subsequently were not able to effectively manage on their own. Joseph Brant sold much of the land to speculators, and if anyone is to blame it is him; if the government hadn't stepped in to force Six Nations to conduct its affairs in a manner consistant with the contemporary laws, then there probably would be no Six Nations at all.

No. The land was not "given" to them. It was theirs free and clear long before the Royal Proclamation 1763, or the Nanfan Treaty of 1702. Mitchell's map of 1757 proves it. The map establishes that Six Nations' territory extended to the south shore of the Ottawa River from the St Lawrence to the west shore of Lake Huron through North bay and Nippissing, south to Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. The purchase from the Mississauga (at that time they were part of the Confederacy's Eighth Nation) was for relocation back to north of Superior (having been caretakers of the land through a previous Treaty with Six Nations). The Royal Proclamation 1763 was prescribed to protect Six Nations Territory from settlers and squatters, and from foreign entities trying to lay claim to it, in return for Six Nations alliance in defense of British colonies along the Lake Ontario shoreline.

Neither did Joseph Brant "sell" the land. He couldn't because the buyers (the settlers and colonists) could not legally purchase anything. That was the law (then and now) and if any transaction was not in accordance with the law then it becomes null and void.

The Royal Proclamation 1763 requires:

"...but that. if at any Time any of the Said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, the same shall be Purchased only for Us, in our Name, at some public Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians, to be held for that Purpose by the Governor or Commander in Chief of our Colony respectively within which they shall lie:...."

There is plenty of evidence that proves not only that the Chiefs and principles of Six Nations were against any surrender (they wanted leases) but that there was no public meeting held at Six Nations for this purpose. The government has suggested that after about 4 years of refusing to surrender land the Chiefs (who were not condoled Chiefs under Haudenosaune law) suddenly changed their minds and signed the surrender, despite the fact that historical records presented to the government prove that over half of the men who purportedly signed the surrender were on business in New York. Regardless, unless the public meeting is held and the community agrees, there can be no surrender. That's the law.

I'm assuming that you mean this: "In 1924, the rule of the traditional confederacy chiefs was terminated/forcibly removed in favor of an elected municipal government on the reserve."

Previous to this gunpoint removal by the RCMP, the Chiefs at Six Nations had petitioned the government and demanded that the law (the RC1763) and other agreements they ahd made be honoured unequivocally. After years of letters and demands, the Canadian response was to attack Six Nations, close the Council House and install a band government without community consent. To this day there are only 300-400 people out of 22,000 that vote in the band elections. The Confederacy government still operates and in fact they are currently leading the negotiations at Six Nations. Last year the council house was reopened and Confederacy meetings are held there on a regular basis.

The band governments imposed against the will of the people, are the problem we often hear about. They are full of the same types of corruption and nepotism that we hear about in our own government. If you are implying that Six Nations is better because of them, you had better rethink that position. The fact is that if not for the Confederacy being a watchdog, there would be far more corruption at Six Nations. The Confederacy is the only full participatory democracy in the world. With our Canadian oligarchy, we can't even come close to their freedom.

[Ontario Loyalist]

My research into government practices has revealed disgusting and mind-boggling abuses by civil servants. Abuse of power is routine. Instead of criticizing the Aboriginals we should be helping them and cheering them on. They are our only hope of wringing honesty out of cunningly corrupt government institutions.

What you fail to realize is that the ordinary citizen is not really responsible for what the government does. In fact, many probably have had issues with the government as well--before all this started, I mean. So basically these people know what governments are like, but suddenly Six Nations decides to hold them hostage over what they (Six Nations) perceives were wrongs committed against them. How would you feel if your life was disrupted because somebody you probably would agree with under different circumstances has decided to make you at fault for what somebody else did to them? You'd be pretty pissed off, too. The sad fact of the matter is that this is a perfect example of how ethnic tensions are created in other parts of the world, and this just should not be happening in Canada. These people from Six Nations were given the ability to educate themselves and integrate, therefore making it possible for them to address their grievances in a more rational and peaceful manner. Instead they prefer to use mob rule and anarchist tactics to disrupt society. That makes them responsible for any problems that they bring upon themselves, and one has to wonder whether or not it was just this kind of nonsense which eventually persuaded the government to get involved in their mismanaged affairs back in the mid 1800s.

[Ontario Loyalist]

The purchase from the Mississauga (at that time they were part of the Confederacy's Eighth Nation) was for relocation back to north of Superior (having been caretakers of the land through a previous Treaty with Six Nations).

Complete nonsense. The Iroquois and Ojibway were enemies, and the Ojibway had driven the Iroquois out of what is now southern Ontario. If you expect anyone to take you seriously when you blatantly fabricate history, you are sadly mistaken.

The Royal Proclamation 1763 was prescribed to protect Six Nations Territory from settlers and squatters, and from foreign entities trying to lay claim to it, in return for Six Nations alliance in defense of British colonies along the Lake Ontario shoreline.

Britain didn't have "colonies along the Lake Ontario shoreline" in 1763.

Neither did Joseph Brant "sell" the land. He couldn't because the buyers (the settlers and colonists) could not legally purchase anything. That was the law (then and now) and if any transaction was not in accordance with the law then it becomes null and void.

Well, Brant did sell the land. Whether or not you think it was legitimate two centuries after the fact is your problem. There are a lot of people on this planet who have ancestors who made poor financial decisions in the 18th century who wouldn't mind compensation as well.

There is plenty of evidence that proves not only that the Chiefs and principles of Six Nations were against any surrender (they wanted leases) but that there was no public meeting held at Six Nations for this purpose. The government has suggested that after about 4 years of refusing to surrender land the Chiefs (who were not condoled Chiefs under Haudenosaune law) suddenly changed their minds and signed the surrender, despite the fact that historical records presented to the government prove that over half of the men who purportedly signed the surrender were on business in New York. Regardless, unless the public meeting is held and the community agrees, there can be no surrender. That's the law.

Like I said, Six Nations is responsible for mismanaging their affairs.

The band governments imposed against the will of the people, are the problem we often hear about. They are full of the same types of corruption and nepotism that we hear about in our own government. If you are implying that Six Nations is better because of them, you had better rethink that position. The fact is that if not for the Confederacy being a watchdog, there would be far more corruption at Six Nations.

I'm under the impression that the problems are the result of internal fighting and power struggles. Again, an example of how Six Nations can't manage its affairs.

The Confederacy is the only full participatory democracy in the world. With our Canadian oligarchy, we can't even come close to their freedom.

Whatever...

[AngusThermopyle]

Those of you who are against the Aboriginals

From viewing the posts you've made so far I've observed that you make an awefull lot of unsubstantiated assumptions about others. For instance "against natives" "if you lived among them" and so on.

It may interest you to know that I live in a town that is situated smack dab between the two largest reservations in North America, the place Sitting Bull came to die. I work with them and just about every weekend there are Natives who are at my house socializing. My ex in Ontario was a good part Algonquin. Each spring I participate in several round ups out on the reserve. Does this mean I am "against them" or are these people, as CR argues in their totally arrogant and ignorant fashion, merely "tokens"?

If you took the time to do a little research you would realize that consistently I have stated that these issues must be dealt with in a fair and equitable manner. That does not mean just rolling over and believing any line of bull that some bum wants to spout in order to further their own personal agenda. Nor does it mean displacing or impoverishing the people of an entire country in order to satisfy the demands of a few. Nor does it mean excusing the illegal acts committed by some. You would further see that I have stated many times that a bum is a bum, whether they be White, Black, Asian or Native.

Further to this you would see that I believe personal responsibility is the key to success in anyones life. This is a point that CR just can't accept as they seem to believe the rest of Canada should be responsible for Natives for perpetuity.

What I will not accept is glossing over illegalities, accepting bullsh*t excuses, or revising history in order to further an agenda. Further to that I refuse to support those who can support themselves. Many times I have offered healthy young Natives a job and had them look at me like I had two heads as they turn and walk away. You may wish to work in order to support those who refuse to do so. Thats you, not me. As I've said before, a bum is a bum is a bum.

[Wild Bill]

One more thing Angus and Wild Bill,

Don't lose sight of the fact that the builder, intentionally or not started the problem.

The fact that he didn't do his research is no one's fault but his.

In a car accident he would be paying for that. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

One way or another, he tried to take advantage of a situation and got burned. He's no martyr and the town should have realized that immediately and acted to end the situation. The correct end to the situation would have been to cede the property as it was when the issue arose. It would have been a timely wake up call to all levels of government that it has come time to pay the piper.

That would have created a precedent and that's no doubt why they didn't act. But by not acting, they invited the current nightmare. But the nightmare has always been there and at some point it has to be addressed. There is no way around it. All of the abuses on either side are simply distractions that keep the public's attention away from the core issue.

The Aboriginals are playing the situation like a fiddle. The longer we wait to face facts, the worse will be the outcome.

The inescapable fact is that every level of Canadian government has been committing criminal acts of almost every type imaginable against the Aboriginals for centuries. There is no way to hide that fact or hide from it and there is no way to rationalize it. This has to end and wrongs have to be redressed properly or as properly as they can be given the time that has passed. The fact that time has passed and many of the players have passed away does not change a thing.

Pure crap! You either never followed the history or you prefer to revise it! This was not Oka and it was not Ipperwash. You really should look at every situation by its own merits and not lump them all together.

The builder spent a few years gathering all the pertinent permits and papers from whichever levels of government were involved. The Six Nations council was informed, as is mandatory in such matters. No one complained, no one objected, no one cared on the Six Nation side. Everything was done perfectly legally and in the open on the Caledonia municipal government side.

When the Douglas Creek Estate homes were nearing completion suddenly one morning a group of young native protesters, some of whom appeared to be "foreigners" to the town and area, showed up and began an occupation protest. Later the OPP came to evict them and botched it! A large number of natives came and joined the protest.

So the builder had done his research! If Six Nations had a beef they had YEARS to lodge their complaint! This was not a long standing land claim going back to Pocahontas' time. That history was dreamed up by those sympathetic to the protesters AFTER the fact! Six Nations could have lodged a protest before the first shovel ever went into the ground at the Douglas Creek Estates. The fact that they waited until the project was nearing completion is telling in itself.

Besides, I say again that the claims are irrelevant. The tactics are unforgiveable!

You don't end racism by allowing victims to take free shots at oppressing OTHER innocents! You just perpetuate the problem. For the natives to target the townsfolk just because they are white and were handy is in itself racism on the part of the natives! No one is responsible for another's actions just because they share the same skin colour! The natives should have specifically targeted Ottawa and Queens Park. They're the ones always bleating that the feds should be dealing with them as equals, after all. They took a cheap shot at their neighbours and if they don't understand why their neighbours now feel negatively towards them then they are living in la la land!

Edited September 4, 2008 by Wild Bill

[charter.rights]

Complete nonsense. The Iroquois and Ojibway were enemies, and the Ojibway had driven the Iroquois out of what is now southern Ontario. If you expect anyone to take you seriously when you blatantly fabricate history, you are sadly mistaken.

Britain didn't have "colonies along the Lake Ontario shoreline" in 1763.

Well, Brant did sell the land. Whether or not you think it was legitimate two centuries after the fact is your problem. There are a lot of people on this planet who have ancestors who made poor financial decisions in the 18th century who wouldn't mind compensation as well.

Like I said, Six Nations is responsible for mismanaging their affairs.

I'm under the impression that the problems are the result of internal fighting and power struggles. Again, an example of how Six Nations can't manage its affairs.

Whatever...

Myths. They are pervasive and inclusive in your mind. Maybe if you explore the real history and not the "British are the heroes" kind of fluff we teach in school you might be able to get past the myths and fabrications you think equates to history.

No, the Ojibwa and the Iroquois were not "enemies". There are a number of treaties (or wampum) that both hold sacred. During the beaver wars there were skirmishes and disagreements, but they were minor in nature and mostly instigated by the French trying to dislodge the Iroquois / British alliances that controlled southern Ontario trade. If you look at the Mitchell map 1757 you will see where the Mississauga were identified as the 8th nation of the Confederacy.

Yes my friend the British had colonies along the Lake Ontario shoreline in 1764. The British occupation was just beginning after the French were defeated. The Quebec Act 1774 was issued to protect those colonies and to further entrench the rules under the Royal Proclamation 1763 by saying that certain colonies, settlements and townships in Ontario and Quebec were under the domain of the Crown.

Again just so you don't get this wrong, Brant couldn't sell the land except to the Crown. This was never done and the 1844 purported surrender is bogus. It doesn't matter what you ~think~ was done, it couldn't be done. Period!

No. Six Nations does not "mismanage" their affairs now or ever. The fact is that the as recently as this past summer the Auditor General Sheila Fraser stated that First Nations are generally over-audited, and that the flaw is in Indian Affairs where paper reports gets lost or stalemated on bureaucrats' desks. For the most part the corrupt government system is responsible for all mismanagement. As well, First Nations are general under-funded by more than half of what municipalities are AND are responsible for things that municipalities are not such as their own health care system and education.

There is no more internal fighting and power struggles at Six Nations than there are at a typical town council meeting. Reaching consensus takes opposing positions and tries to find solutions. So divergent opinions are welcomed and embraced in a participatory democracy. You mistake is thinking that any of the sound bites the media grabs from different groups of people at Six Nations represents a split in opinion. In a participatory democracy the sum of all the parts equal the whole and so opinions capture by the media are just personal aspects of the overall opinion that is constantly developing and changing under their constitutional system of law. That is why no decision - including land surrenders - can be made without first asking the people what THEY want. The Chiefs are there to enforce THEIR wishes, not make their own agenda and then tell the people, like our politicians do.

[charter.rights]

Pure crap! You either never followed the history or you prefer to revise it! This was not Oka and it was not Ipperwash. You really should look at every situation by its own merits and not lump them all together.

The builder spent a few years gathering all the pertinent permits and papers from whichever levels of government were involved. The Six Nations council was informed, as is mandatory in such matters. No one complained, no one objected, no one cared on the Six Nation side. Everything was done perfectly legally and in the open on the Caledonia municipal government side.

When the Douglas Creek Estate homes were nearing completion suddenly one morning a group of young native protesters, some of whom appeared to be "foreigners" to the town and area, showed up and began an occupation protest. Later the OPP came to evict them and botched it! A large number of natives came and joined the protest.

So the builder had done his research! If Six Nations had a beef they had YEARS to lodge their complaint! This was not a long standing land claim going back to Pocahontas' time. That history was dreamed up by those sympathetic to the protesters AFTER the fact! Six Nations could have lodged a protest before the first shovel ever went into the ground at the Douglas Creek Estates. The fact that they waited until the project was nearing completion is telling in itself.

Besides, I say again that the claims are irrelevant. The tactics are unforgiveable!

You don't end racism by allowing victims to take free shots at oppressing OTHER innocents! You just perpetuate the problem. For the natives to target the townsfolk just because they are white and were handy is in itself racism on the part of the natives! No one is responsible for another's actions just because they share the same skin colour! The natives should have specifically targeted Ottawa and Queens Park. They're the ones always bleating that the feds should be dealing with them as equals, after all. They took a cheap shot at their neighbours and if they don't understand why their neighbours now feel negatively towards them then they are living in la la land!

You are still full of embellishments, inaccuracy and bullshit B.G. Maybe you should learn a few more facts before you come back to the discussion.

I would not considered Hazel Hill a young foreigner, would you? And the majority of the people that first occupied DC were grandmothers, mothers and children all from Six Nations. Most of the younger men and outside supporters didn't show up until AFTER the OPP raided the site and tasered and clubbed those grandmothers and children. There was a general call by the Confederacy that warriors were needed to defend Kanonhstaton against colonial attack. (The same type of call BTW that went out from Oka AFTER they were raided by the SQ).

Six Nations objections to the site were documented more than 5 years before the reclamation and they were ignored by Haldimand County council. Council has taken the position that lands claims are a federal issue and therefore they absolved themselves of having to pay attention to objections and demands for construction and development to stop. Legally, however, they are wrong. As corporations of the Province they are bound by the laws of the land. Since it is the law that the Crown must consult and accommodate BEFORE development, Haldimand is bound to delay development until that consultative process is complete. They have been on notice for 20 years that lands claims to the entire Haldimand Tract were on the books, and saying it is not their problem is no excuse.

The natives did exactly what they had to do. Stop construction and further development on their land. "Proprietary estopple" is the legal term that allows the first party to stop an action by a third party, in order to ensure that the terms of an agreement are upheld by a second party. The government and all its branches and corporations - including development corporations - must consult and accommodate. Six Nations IS within their rights to stop all development, regardless if permits and development agreements are in place. That is the law.

Six Nations had no involvement with Caledonia until the clowns and racist morons started marching the streets. By way of injecting themselves into an issue that is none of their business, these clowns brought it upon themselves.

[Wild Bill]

You are still full of embellishments, inaccuracy and bullshit B.G. Maybe you should learn a few more facts before you come back to the discussion.

I would not considered Hazel Hill a young foreigner, would you? And the majority of the people that first occupied DC were grandmothers, mothers and children all from Six Nations. Most of the younger men and outside supporters didn't show up until AFTER the OPP raided the site and tasered and clubbed those grandmothers and children. There was a general call by the Confederacy that warriors were needed to defend Kanonhstaton against colonial attack. (The same type of call BTW that went out from Oka AFTER they were raided by the SQ).

Six Nations objections to the site were documented more than 5 years before the reclamation and they were ignored by Haldimand County council. Council has taken the position that lands claims are a federal issue and therefore they absolved themselves of having to pay attention to objections and demands for construction and development to stop. Legally, however, they are wrong. As corporations of the Province they are bound by the laws of the land. Since it is the law that the Crown must consult and accommodate BEFORE development, Haldimand is bound to delay development until that consultative process is complete. They have been on notice for 20 years that lands claims to the entire Haldimand Tract were on the books, and saying it is not their problem is no excuse.

The natives did exactly what they had to do. Stop construction and further development on their land. "Proprietary estopple" is the legal term that allows the first party to stop an action by a third party, in order to ensure that the terms of an agreement are upheld by a second party. The government and all its branches and corporations - including development corporations - must consult and accommodate. Six Nations IS within their rights to stop all development, regardless if permits and development agreements are in place. That is the law.

Six Nations had no involvement with Caledonia until the clowns and racist morons started marching the streets. By way of injecting themselves into an issue that is none of their business, these clowns brought it upon themselves.

Pure revisionist drivel! I think I'll scroll back to the start of these threads. I think you may have contradicted your own self with this particular fairy tale of history!

You are so predictable. You'd paint Charles Manson or Richard Ing as lambs if they were native, I swear! It's like pushing a button. Natives are always blameless. Six Nations did everything right and nice. Everyone else is evil and wrong.

It's like a player piano. Just hit the button.

I'm hitting the ignore button.

[charter.rights]

Pure revisionist drivel! I think I'll scroll back to the start of these threads. I think you may have contradicted your own self with this particular fairy tale of history!

You are so predictable. You'd paint Charles Manson or Richard Ing as lambs if they were native, I swear! It's like pushing a button. Natives are always blameless. Six Nations did everything right and nice. Everyone else is evil and wrong.

It's like a player piano. Just hit the button.

I'm hitting the ignore button.

Good! Hit the ignore button all you want. You weren't keepoing up anyway. Real history involves extensive research of the archives and documentation that was never included in elementary grade history. You really should advance beyond the 6th grade if you want to know the truth about our relationship and legal obligations to Six Nations.

And no, I haven't contradicted myself. I've been playing the same song for ages because it is based on factual history. Try following the links I have provided or alluded to, starting with the Mitchell map 1757. It all moves forward legally from there.