McGuinty's Cowardice on Display

[madmax]

double post

Edited November 23, 2009 by madmax

[madmax]

You obviously don't know much about policing. Once an injunction is laid, it becomes a policing matter. Neither the courts or government can direct the police, or require them to "enforce" an injunction. Injunctive relief is a civil matter, not criminal, so the use of force is not an option in the majority of cases.

What court do you go to if you are charged with violating an injunction. Criminal or Civil.

[Shwa]

You're confusing the acts themselves with the way in which they were carried out. The Mafia at least has the capability to operate covertly, thriving precisely because it is able to fly under the radar of authorities. In Caledonia, however, natives crudely set tire fires on highways, burn down hydro stations, beat, threat, cheat, thieve, and bribe, and celebrate it openly with brandished guns and silly "warrior" flags. Easy comparison.

LOL! No, I am not confusing the acts, I am comparing the purpose of the the acts the results. Oka had results. Ipperwash had results. Caledonia has results. And once things are all settled up, the "natives" will settle back down having achieved their objective. As it has always been. The Mafia on the other hand will never achieve their objectives and will continue to covertly main, murder, rape, cheat, theive, bribe, etc. This is "the way" in which these things are carried out.

[charter.rights]

What court do you go to if you are charged with violating an injunction. Criminal or Civil.

The "contempt of court" charges for ignoring an injunction would go to criminal court. However, the requirement that the court ensure that full consultation has taken place, must be considered before determining guilt. Protesters cannot be found guilty if the court and the Crown have not fully discharged their duty.

[Shwa]

All well and good, Max, but as I said, the quarrel is not about the land claims. It's about the TACTICS of the SN protesters!

But the SN protesters TACTICS are the result of a quarrel about land claims. While trying to divorce the tactics from the issue is convenient, it is a non-starter. The tactics are a direct result from the quarrel regarding the land claims and the previous years of inaction by several layers of government to address that issue. And, whether you like it or not, the tactics are pretty effective in that they have gotten results. By and large they have achieved their objective.

I also feel badly for those innocent residents of Caledonia; it is a nice town with mostly nice people. Their Timmies is top notch. Sure they took an economic hit, but it could have been avoided long ago and most of the smarter Caledonians know that. They will recover in time and everyone will go back to doing what they were doing before.

[g_bambino]

I am comparing the purpose of the the acts the results. Oka had results. Ipperwash had results. Caledonia has results. And once things are all settled up, the "natives" will settle back down having achieved their objective. As it has always been. The Mafia on the other hand will never achieve their objectives and will continue to covertly main, murder, rape, cheat, theive, bribe, etc. This is "the way" in which these things are carried out.

Sorry, what? Every action has results; deliberate actions are intended to bring about desired results. To achieve personal gain, the Mafia intentionally extorts, threatens, and murders. To achieve personal gain, the "warriors" at Caledonia intentionally threaten, vandalise, and intimidate. The only difference between the two groups is, as I said, their level of sophistication; the Mafia is required to be Machiavellian and covert because it must contend with police oversight that Natives operate freely without. If these tactics were more unsuccessful than not, they wouldn't be used again. But, as you noted, Ipperwash had results, and Caledonia has had results, so it would be logical to surmise that if First Nations want results in future, they'll employ the same thuggish methods.

[Shwa]

To achieve personal gain, the "warriors" at Caledonia

Ahhh, this is where your whole perspective goes off the rails. Don't be frightened, you are not alone in this.

The "warriors" act for the "gain" of the community and this is their charge. Always has been, always will be. I highly doubt that you have any insight into the historical, political, social or legal make-up of the "warriors" so your comments about them will be highly suspect including attempts to generalize, sterotype or ostracize. Or compare with the Mafia LOL

So, the "warriors" gained their objectives for their communities in Oka, Ipperwash and now Caledonia. Pretty good record so far so their methods must be effective.

[g_bambino]

The "warriors" act for the "gain" of the community and this is their charge.

Personal gain doesn't necessarily refer to one individual alone; many people can gain personally. Perhaps I didn't use sufficiently clear vocabulary, but I understand that the Six Nations "warriors", in their minds, believe they are doing good for more than themselves. That self-appointed nobility doesn't, however, excuse the ploys they've chosen to reach their ends.

And do please recall that it was you who raised the Mafia, not I.

[+]

Edited November 23, 2009 by g_bambino

[Wild Bill]

I also feel badly for those innocent residents of Caledonia; it is a nice town with mostly nice people. Their Timmies is top notch. Sure they took an economic hit, but it could have been avoided long ago and most of the smarter Caledonians know that. They will recover in time and everyone will go back to doing what they were doing before.

That's not how reality works. As I have said, the tactics of the SN protesters directly affected the townspeople, first and foremost! The only effect on the politicians was some embarrassment from hearing the cries of the townsfolk. Politicians are used to that. It wasn't McGuinty who had to cross a protest line and show some BS passport to get to his home. It wasn't Diane Finley who had ATV's in her back yard all night. One would almost think that SN protesters AVOID directly targeting politicians!

These tactics are what inevitably lead to escalation. Again, as I have said before, someone living in Caledonia is NOT going to put up with being cannon fodder for the native protesters in their dispute with the governments! He is NOT going to simply shrug his shoulders and say "Oh well, the natives are pissed at the governments so I guess that means I should just grin and bear it!"

The natives are hurting HIM! That leads to a feeling of entitlement to retaliate. As Bruce Cockburn once sang "If I had a rocket launcher, I'd make somebody pay!"

Part of the problem is that somehow the SN protesters think that non-natives think of themselves as part of a tribe, a tribe which includes our governments. Nothing could be more wrong! Most non-natives see governments as something separate in themselves, over which we have little control. We see ourselves as individuals and individuals are not prone to collective guilt. So if protesters block our entry to our homes we don't just sit there feeling ashamed because governments have failed to make natives happy. Governments have failed to make everyone else happy as well!

The outcome is that before the protests non-natives often felt it was them and natives against a common enemy, namely government. Now the townsfolk feel they are alone, that both SN and governments are against them.

Frankly, the tactics of SN seem to have been very primitive, inept and poorly focused. With a bit more forethought they could have had the townsfolk on their side from the very start. Now it's too late.

Meanwhile, McGuinty has made it perfectly clear to every citizen in Ontario that if it's politically expedient citizenship means nothing in terms of police protection. You will be on your own.

This is not a healthy state of affairs.

[Wild Bill]

You're going to get nothing out of Charter Rights besides anti-non-native hyperbole. He's utterly blinded by his single minded agenda.

That's not news to me! I've had CR on 'ignore' for a couple of years now. You're right, he has a single minded agenda. This means I always know what he will say and I can always count on him delivering it in a snotty, condescending and insulting manner. It was from CR that I learned that I must be a racist since the definition is anyone who disagrees with him about native protest actions.

I don't have that many folks on my 'ignore' list. I don't mind at all listening to people who disagree with me and often I learn something new. It's just that I find CR so uncivil that it makes debate too unpleasant to be worth it. In my school days we used to call people like that 'nuddzis', but an explanation would take several pages of thread drift!

Life's too short to bother!

Edited November 23, 2009 by Wild Bill

[Shwa]

"That self-appointed nobility doesn't, however, excuse the ploys they've chosen to reach their ends."

You see? By saying "self-appointed nobility" proves you have no coherent understanding about "warriors" and what they stand for, how they operate, what their goals are, etc. You have assigned them a false attribute based upon some weird 'noble savage' prejudice you have.

The "ploys they've chosen" have achieved their objective. No one needs an excuse because they did what they set out to do. And they were only brought into the situation as a last resort - a fact that seems to be lost on many people.

And really, what was the overall cost of their ploys in relation to their objective? Very, very minimal. No towns were burned down, no tortures, murders or mass graves, no dead policemen or Natives. What a couple of black eyes and some hurt feelings? More people get hurt at boxing competitions and even they sign waivers.

[Shwa]

That's not how reality works. As I have said, the tactics of the SN protesters directly affected the townspeople, first and foremost!

Then the "townspeople" either should have thrown their hat in with the SN protesters and supported their legal claim from the beginning or taken their lumps for inaction disinterest. Maybe the "townspeople" should have calmed down the yahoos in their midst.

But from what I have seen of Caledonia over the summer, there doesn't appear to be that much damage done to the "townspeople." I still saw Mohawks grabbing a coffee at the Timmies without any brawls. All in all the place looked as quiet and quaint as when I first visited many years ago.

Much ado about nothing.

[charter.rights]

Then the "townspeople" either should have thrown their hat in with the SN protesters and supported their legal claim from the beginning or taken their lumps for inaction disinterest. Maybe the "townspeople" should have calmed down the yahoos in their midst.

But from what I have seen of Caledonia over the summer, there doesn't appear to be that much damage done to the "townspeople." I still saw Mohawks grabbing a coffee at the Timmies without any brawls. All in all the place looked as quiet and quaint as when I first visited many years ago.

Much ado about nothing.

People like Wild Bill perpetuate myths and are probably removed well away from any direct contact with Caledonia. Also he makes a huge error in thinking by trying to generalized what happened to one individual to the whole town. When the truth does come out (as it will in this case) we will find that Caledonians were as responsible for their own fate as they blames others for being.

And bumbino has been on my ignore list for years as well, since I prefer not to read the rants ignorant propagandists whose only interest it to see how many licks he can get in by bashing people he sees as his inferiors.

I am only interested in the law, and to suggest that I am anti or pro-native is absurd. I believe the rule of law must prevail and since the government continues to refuse to comply, they must ultimately be held accountable - even for the protests that result from them failing to consult and accommodate. While the Indian Act does provide that the laws of general application apply on reserves, it does not mean that all laws of Ontario are applicable. So there are still many things that natives can do within their own territories that we have no business about....

Edited November 23, 2009 by charter.rights

[g_bambino]

You see? By saying "self-appointed nobility" proves you have no coherent understanding about "warriors" and what they stand for, how they operate, what their goals are, etc.

The "ploys they've chosen" have achieved their objective. No one needs an excuse because they did what they set out to do. And they were only brought into the situation as a last resort - a fact that seems to be lost on many people.

I don't? Only the "warriors" believe their actions are noble; what other way, then, to describe that but as a self-appointed righteousness?

The rest of your post is merely excuse-making: It's not their fault; the "warriors" were forced to act that way. Odd, given that there are plenty of other methods by which one can achieve a desired goal; ones that don't involve harassment, intimidation, violence, and vandalism aimed at people who, as Wild Bill pointed out, have no ability to do anything about the Natives' problems, anyway. Further, if the squatters have achieved what they set out to do, why are the they still there, still barricading roads, still carrying out what amounts to little more than extortion?

[c/e]

Edited November 23, 2009 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

And bumbino has been on my ignore list for years as well...

What an utterly bizarre thing for CR to say, given that he was responding to my posts until two days ago!

[Argus]

The "warriors" act for the "gain" of the community and this is their charge. Always has been, always will be. I highly doubt that you have any insight into the historical, political, social or legal make-up of the "warriors" so your comments about them will be highly suspect including attempts to generalize, sterotype or ostracize. Or compare with the Mafia LOL

The Warriors are thugs, killers and criminals, the same as the Mafia. They act for themselves and their personal profits.

The Warriors disturbed many other Mohawks as well; indeed, a majority of Mohawks were strongly opposed to the Warrior’s new activities. Tensions were building in Akwesasne over the illegal activities, and a large "Anti" faction was trying to halt them. On Tuscarora and Akwesasne, the Warriors had long used violence to intimidate their own community and the outside police. By now, they were going too far: The band police had been frightened into non-action, kids were dropping out of school to work as smugglers, and the authority of traditional leaders and family heads was being flouted on a daily basis. In the face of the growing violence, the Antis took up arms and blockaded traffic to the casinos in April 1990. The Warriors came out to attack the Antis, and Akwesasne soon echoed with the sound of massive gunfights.

Mohawk Warriors

[Shwa]

Only the "warriors" believe their actions are noble; what other way, then, to describe that but as a self-appointed righteousness?

More noble-savage-ism. Fact is, they achieved their objective using tried and true methods and the community is better off for it. The rule of thumb here is to negotiate as per the law.

The Warriors are thugs, killers and criminals, the same as the Mafia. They act for themselves and their personal profits.

More ignorant-savage-ism. Provide the MacKenzie Institute link that provides the counterpoint to that article and we will see how balanced the MacKenzie Institute really is when it comes to Native issues.

Can't find one? I didn't think you would.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Shwa

[g_bambino]

More noble-savage-ism.

Yes, one could surmise that the "warriors" do consider themselves to be noble savages.

Fact is, they achieved their objective using tried and true methods and the community is better off for it. The rule of thumb here is to negotiate as per the law.

This works only if one assumes that the sole community involved is the Six Nations one and the sole law involved is that of the aboriginal "warriors".

[Shwa]

Yes, one could surmise that the "warriors" do consider themselves to be noble savages.

No, I was referencing your out-of-date attitude towards Native people and how you assign stereotypes to those folks. Hardly helpful and more informative about you than any "warriors."

This works only if one assumes that the sole community involved is the Six Nations one and the sole law involved is that of the aboriginal "warriors".

Nope. It works for both Six Nations and Caledonia because the issue is all but over with. The "warriors" achieved their objective and both communities can get back to normalizing their relationship. The law I speak of has been well documented by others in previous messages.

[Wild Bill]

No, I was referencing your out-of-date attitude towards Native people and how you assign stereotypes to those folks. Hardly helpful and more informative about you than any "warriors."

Nope. It works for both Six Nations and Caledonia because the issue is all but over with. The "warriors" achieved their objective and both communities can get back to normalizing their relationship. The law I speak of has been well documented by others in previous messages.

Really? Just what objectives have been achieved? What have the warriors gotten out of it? What have the townspeople gotten out of it? What incentive is there for the townsfolk to "normalize" the relationship? What logical reason do they have to ever trust SN again?

[g_bambino]

I was referencing your out-of-date attitude towards Native people and how you assign stereotypes to those folks.

Then you misread what I wrote.

It works for both Six Nations and Caledonia because the issue is all but over with. The "warriors" achieved their objective and both communities can get back to normalizing their relationship. The law I speak of has been well documented by others in previous messages.

Only in the eyes of one party: the Six Nations "warriors".

[charter.rights]

Really? Just what objectives have been achieved? What have the warriors gotten out of it? What have the townspeople gotten out of it? What incentive is there for the townsfolk to "normalize" the relationship? What logical reason do they have to ever trust SN again?

Com'on WB.....I thought you were smarter than that....

Six Nations has the government at the negotiating table, there have been some offers, but no acceptance (which means the government is defintly interested in finding a way out), development certainly stopped on DCE (which was the initial goal) and Haldimand is rethinking its way of doing business. That is really a success story.

There was no objective on behalf of Caledonia. Certain meatheads thrust themselves into a disagreement that was none of their business. The Hennings' certainly were successful - they made about $18 million without hardly having to put a shovel in the ground. That is what entrepreneurship is all about - making the most money with the least effort.....

The incentive for normalization is really so simple that even Doug Fleming can figure it out....Business and economy are the driving force. Without normalcy with Six Nations, Caledonia's downtown core could potentially die. It is their interest to serve Six Nations (and get a piece of their wealth) every bit as much as it is to promote tourism and local shopping.

This just goes to show how you are so detached from that community....after all...the fight wasn't between Caledonia and Six Nations (and most people from both communities fully understand and embrace that)but between the government and Six Nations. And having watched and studied this for the last 10 years, it appears that Six Nations is winning.

[madmax]

Six Nations has the government at the negotiating table, there have been some offers, but no acceptance (which means the government is defintly interested in finding a way out), development certainly stopped on DCE (which was the initial goal) and Haldimand is rethinking its way of doing business. That is really a success story.

Wishful thinking. This is failure not success.

There was no objective on behalf of Caledonia. Certain meatheads thrust themselves into a disagreement that was none of their business.

Those individuals came in to create shit and they succeeded for a time. Now they are seen for the clowns that they are, people with an agenda and its not Caledonia.

The Hennings' certainly were successful - they made about $18 million without hardly having to put a shovel in the ground. That is what entrepreneurship is all about - making the most money with the least effort.....

And there is a lineup of Developers who want to engage in the same windfall. Some developers in financial hardship and unable to make payroll have encouraged SN activists to show up. Others see the situation as WIN WIN, with the bigger payout coming from the government.

And having watched and studied this for the last 10 years, it appears that Six Nations is winning.

Sounds like propoganda to me.

They day we all win is the day there is an understandable negotiation process and when identified interests on Six Nations are able to offer a unified voice at the negoitation table. The same is true for the Canadian Government who has many different interests often in opposition to one another and then different legal tactics that get in the way of progress.

What you call winning, I call a dogs breakfast.

[charter.rights]

Wishful thinking. This is failure not success.

Those individuals came in to create shit and they succeeded for a time. Now they are seen for the clowns that they are, people with an agenda and its not Caledonia.

And there is a lineup of Developers who want to engage in the same windfall. Some developers in financial hardship and unable to make payroll have encouraged SN activists to show up. Others see the situation as WIN WIN, with the bigger payout coming from the government.

Sounds like propoganda to me.

They day we all win is the day there is an understandable negotiation process and when identified interests on Six Nations are able to offer a unified voice at the negoitation table. The same is true for the Canadian Government who has many different interests often in opposition to one another and then different legal tactics that get in the way of progress.

What you call winning, I call a dogs breakfast.

success

One entry found.

Main Entry: suc·cess

Pronunciation: \sək-ˈses\

Function: noun

Etymology: Latin successus, from succedere

Date: 1537

1 obsolete : outcome, result

2 a : degree or measure of succeeding b : favorable or desired outcome; also : the attainment of wealth, favor, or eminence

3 : one that succeeds

Nope. It definitely was a success...if only to stop development on contested lands...

[Oleg Bach]

Looking through some of the articles I can't help but notice all the stupid things both sides did. Did anyone on either side ever just stop and think?

Yes they did stop and think. The first nations stopped and thought that their white counterparts are corrupt...and the other side were surprised and taken back by this fact - that first nations had figured out that they were crooks - it took them three hundrend years to stop trusting the white man..they were late in this realization - but they got there eventually.