Redneck Media

[Gerald]

Here is the wording of the derogatory article that was published by the National Post. (Relayed to us & thanks to Gerald McIvor) Read the article first, then the response by Grand Chief Ron Evans

Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs:

Sunday » April 23 » 2006

Hardly a ‘nation’

National Post

Saturday, April 22, 2006

We have some sympathy for the Six Nations’ land claim that led to Thursday’s fiery confrontation between provincial police and Six Nations demonstrators in Caledonia, Ont. But we have considerably less empathy for the protestors’ insistence that Canadian law does not apply to them because they are citizens of a sovereign Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) nation, and none at all for their violent tactics. If they want a settlement that respects their claims, they must give up the fantasy that they are not Canadians and cease all violence now.

Edited May 29, 2006 by Greg

[geoffrey]

Few things here:

a) It's against forum rules and copyright law to publish entire articles. Please post relevant snippets and comment on them. Thanks.

Where in that National Post article is there any information that is factually false. If you your going to decry it as redneck, you need to show evidence to the contrary. I happen to agree with the Post's stand on this, as I personally feel we should arrest all those blocking the roadway. My views on first immigrant rights has been made plenty clear elsewhere on this forum, so I won't elaborate. Of course, you'd view me as a redneck, but I'm far from it.

I just want equality before the law for all Canadians.

[PocketRocket]

I'm not quite sure where I stand on this particular issue as I have not given it all that much thought.

But I did get a chuckle out of this line from Grand Chief Ron Evans......

For thousands of years First Nations have exercised a very impressive conservation system that allowed all species to flourish and abound with absolutely no endangered species or extinct animals or flora.

"For thousands of years" Yeah. Right.

An aboriginal hunter-gatherer culture with no technology to speak of implementing a "conservation system"???

IOW, they did not have the ABILITY to be a threat to the environment, or to any of the species which Evans praises First Nations Peoples for "conserving".

[geoffrey]

As soon as the Indian's got weapons to hunt more efficently, they themselves nearly wiped out the Buffalo.

It was their technological impediments that prevented more mass-extinctions, not conservation. Let's be realistic here, 2000 BC Kyoto anyone?

[Nocrap]

The original article was based on history books written long after the Europeans first 'discovered' what they called the 'New World'. Based on that the implication is that the original settlers of North America stood around with their thumbs up their butts waiting for the 'white man' to come and show them the way. Early images portray the Natives as barely standing erect; in awe of their powerful visitors.

Give me a break.

In the early days this not so new world, was a business opportunity for Europeans. They set up trading posts and wrangled their own governments for rights to monopoly. However, while they conducted their business they had to ABIDE BY THE LAWS OF THE FIRST NATIONS. They knew that.

50 Europeans at Port Royal (including my earliest ancestor), conducting business with 10,000 Micmac and Maliseet. 13 Frenchmen at Kebec conducting business with countless original Nations. Who do you think set the laws?

It was only about 150 years ago, when England wanted to validate their claims to Canada that the old 'discovered, founded and settled' theory took on a life of it's own.

And to imply that scientific breakthroughs were only possible when NA was blessed with the presence of the Europeans. Another misrepresentaion of the facts. The First Nations were further advanced in heath sciences and medicine. They knew the importance of cleanliness at a time when Europeans only bathed twice a year and threw their garbage into the streets. Scientific minds like the druggist Louis Hebert, sacrificed everything for an opportunity to study medicine with the aboriginal people of NA.

Their agriculture; fishing and hunting skills, and mastery of the harsh climate kept the first 'settlers' alive in the early years.

Most things that set us apart as a culture took root with the orginal occupants: snowshoes, maple syrup, toboggans, democratic government (most of Europe was a Monarchy), hunting, fishing, etc. In Europe at the time, only the nobility could hunt or fish, and only the nobility had any say in governing their country.

The aboriginal people studied the solar system (Moose Mountain, Medicine Wheel, etc.), though we only learned of Stonehenge and the Pyramids in school.

They provided foot soldiers in most early NA wars including the American Revolutionary Wars and the War of 1812.

They were respected as allies by the early Euro-Canadians, and respected as individual nations within the continent. Only recent written history has tried to erase their contributions and entitlements.

Sending a lackey to negotiate on behalf of our government or the crown, is inexcusable.

[margrace]

Strange reading of history saying the Native Peoples got rid of the Buffalo, first time I have ever heard that theory. What history book are you reading Geoffry. It was the white man who learned he could control the Natives with the introduction of Alchol, it was the White man who sent small pox infected gifts to the Natives.

Yes we have a lot to be proud of and we made the colossal mistake of educating the Natives, now they have their own lawyers and can read the treaties as well as you and I.

[seabee]

Re; Nocrap and Margrace's postings.

These postings are excellent and must be taken seriously.

To the best of my knowledge, I have no First Nation blood; I was raised with all the Euro-American prejudices against NA.

At Expo 67, I got my real first direct contact with First Nations; I was profoundly impressed and had to scrap my prejudices.

For the last few years, I have spent a lot of time studying the history of the Colony of Canada (1608-1763), as much as possible from period texts. I can only agree with everything in these two posts.

I have concentrated in the last 8 months the 1754-1763 Conquest of Canada, again from period documents. I was surprised to see how important the contribution of the First Nations was to the French and Canadians. Some of the First Nations warrior came from as far as what is now Winnipeg. And if Montcalm had listened to them, the outcome of that war might have been very different.

As for the buffaloes, when the U.S. wanted to get rid of Plain Indians, whose culture was based on the buffalo for food, clothing, shelter, etc., rather than wage them a war, or perpetrate yet another direct genocide, they simply decided to eradicate the buffaloes. Not only did the U.S. government offer premiums to hunters who would kill buffaloes, but they called for hunters from everywhere in the world to come and join the extermination, with expenses partly or totally paid. These "Indians" were gradually forced to move north to what would become part of Canada.

In Québec, many historians consider that the main differences between the Québécois culture and that of France are due to its Amerindian cultural heritage; some even consider the Québécois culture as being a métis one.

[geoffrey]

Strange reading of history saying the Native Peoples got rid of the Buffalo, first time I have ever heard that theory. What history book are you reading Geoffry. It was the white man who learned he could control the Natives with the introduction of Alchol, it was the White man who sent small pox infected gifts to the Natives.

Yes we have a lot to be proud of and we made the colossal mistake of educating the Natives, now they have their own lawyers and can read the treaties as well as you and I.

Just as I'm sure you don't hold every currently living German liable for the holocaust, I don't hold myself responsibile for anything my ancestors may have done to natives. It's simply not my responsibility.

The Indians did kill all the buffalo. It was in trade with us yes, but as soon as they found out that they can have technology (however crude at the time), they decided that the death of all buffalo was worth their material wealth.

I love these people that have some impression that the Indians are non-materialistic or something. But at the first chance they got, they nearly wiped a species off the map for personal material gain.

[seabee]

I don't hold myself responsibile for anything my ancestors may have done to natives. It's simply not my responsibility.

This is correct.

On the other hand, living on, or profiting from, illegally or illegitimately acquired property is illegal.

If it cannot be proven that you were aware that the property in question was illegitimately acquired, then, it will only be seized from you. If on the other hand, it can be proven that you were aware, then you will be accused of complicity after the fact, a criminal offence in today's Canada.

So if today you are living on a land that was not legitimately acquired and that you are aware of it, then it is your responsability.

[margrace]

Just as I'm sure you don't hold every currently living German liable for the holocaust, I don't hold myself responsibile for anything my ancestors may have done to natives. It's simply not my responsibility.

The Indians did kill all the buffalo. It was in trade with us yes, but as soon as they found out that they can have technology (however crude at the time), they decided that the death of all buffalo was worth their material wealth.

I love these people that have some impression that the Indians are non-materialistic or something. But at the first chance they got, they nearly wiped a species off the map for personal material gain.

Geoffrey robbing people will always be regarded as wrong. The native peoples were robbed of their land whether you like it or not. Can it be reversed? I don' see how, can it be solved? Yes it can but it will take some very unselfcentred people to do it and Oil people are not the ones who will.

The eradication of the Plains Indians by the Union army was an indirect form of corporate welfare for politically connected railroad companies who enlisted the coercive powers of the central state to steal Indian property while engaging in a genocidal policy. Like many citizens today, the Indians were victims of governmental power, not of capitalism or European culture, as today's politically-correct historians insist.

[Riverwind]

On the other hand, living on, or profiting from, illegally or illegitimately acquired property is illegal.

Personally owned property has always been treated differently than property controlled by a sovereign state. Every country in the world exists because one sovereign entity took over the territory of another. In fact, it was a perfectable acceptable thing to do (under international law) until the middle of the 20th century. Those of us living today have absolutely no obligation to go back and apply the standards of today to events that happened 100s of years ago.

[Michael Hardner]

It seems to me that this situation could have been avoided if there were responsive and responsible leaders on both sides engaging in a process. The damage that has been done to the communities will take years to heal.

[August1991]

Strange reading of history saying the Native Peoples got rid of the Buffalo, first time I have ever heard that theory.

There were as many as 100 million bison in North America around 1800. By 1900, there were at most a 1000 or so remaining.

The slaughter of millions of American bison by 19th century white hunters is a historical given -- the most famous conservation horror story in American history. The problem, says a growing number of scholars, is that it didn't happen.

Scholars argue that Indians used the buffalo as their principal entree into the market economy in the 1840s; armed with horses and guns, they embarked on the destruction of the vast herds to supply the growing demand for buffalo robes.

Some link

[Machinations]

Strange reading of history saying the Native Peoples got rid of the Buffalo, first time I have ever heard that theory.

There were as many as 100 million bison in North America around 1800. By 1900, there were at most a 1000 or so remaining.

The slaughter of millions of American bison by 19th century white hunters is a historical given -- the most famous conservation horror story in American history. The problem, says a growing number of scholars, is that it didn't happen.

Scholars argue that Indians used the buffalo as their principal entree into the market economy in the 1840s; armed with horses and guns, they embarked on the destruction of the vast herds to supply the growing demand for buffalo robes.

Some link

Let's be fair here - buffalo were certainly overhunted by the natives for trade with the Europeans, but the incentive was there - guns were a huge technological leap over bows and arrows, so you can hardly blame them. (not crossbows or composites mind you, just ordinary bows). However, the nail in the coffin of the great buffalo was the train. Settlers would and did fire indiscrimately from trains at passing buffalo herds, leaving the carcasses to rot. There is blame to go around in this regard.

That being said, the editorial is hardly racist or as the OP offhandedly remarks, 'redneck'. Care to back it up? In so much as the article says that the rule of law should apply equally to all citizens - thus advocating the arrest of the protestors who have caused property damage - I agree with the author.

[Temagami Scourge]

Rocket:

"For thousands of years" Yeah. Right. An aboriginal hunter-gatherer culture with no technology to speak of implementing a "conservation system"???

well, Chief evans is actually right. I know that you think natives to be stone age, but they had a lot more going for them than Canadians believe...and we have to attribute this to the Canadians educational system.

First off, the Indians that first met the French were able to diagnose and treat scurvy. That usually makes the point that there was already medical knowledge here while Europeans still believed that fruit was poisonous, but that's beside the point.

In the Shield, Natives used a family grounds system where a male family head inherited hunting grounds based on watershed boundaries. There may be anywhere between a dozen to two dozen or more family reps in a nation, with each rep being responsible for an area 300-400 miles square. The family would move to a different area depending on the season...they knew where to go for the best berries at the ripening stage, they knew where to hunt Moose in the fall and spring, they knew where to put bear traps etc.

Most importantly, they knew the value of water. A value that isn't contemplated by many North Americans today.

Why?

Because Euro-americans, in all their "wisdom" have a habit of fixing boundaries on water lines. they run boundaries down the middle of lakes, streams and rivers, which Natives never did.

Why is this a problem?

because whatever Hull shites out, ottawa gets to drink. When those Yankee chemical plants pumped toxins for decades directly into the Niagara river, the flow of the water brought the toxins to -of all places- Toronto!

how can we tell that time haven't changed?

Easy! 1) Walkerton and 2) Saskatoon.

Man...500 years in-country and the simplest things still haven't been figured out...but will anyone listen to the Natives? Naaaa....too stone-age.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Rocket:

"For thousands of years" Yeah. Right. An aboriginal hunter-gatherer culture with no technology to speak of implementing a "conservation system"???

well, Chief evans is actually right. I know that you think natives to be stone age, but they had a lot more going for them than Canadians believe...and we have to attribute this to the Canadians educational system.

First off, the Indians that first met the French were able to diagnose and treat scurvy. That usually makes the point that there was already medical knowledge here while Europeans still believed that fruit was poisonous, but that's beside the point.

In the Shield, Natives used a family grounds system where a male family head inherited hunting grounds based on watershed boundaries. There may be anywhere between a dozen to two dozen or more family reps in a nation, with each rep being responsible for an area 300-400 miles square. The family would move to a different area depending on the season...they knew where to go for the best berries at the ripening stage, they knew where to hunt Moose in the fall and spring, they knew where to put bear traps etc.

Most importantly, they knew the value of water. A value that isn't contemplated by many North Americans today.

Why?

Because Euro-americans, in all their "wisdom" have a habit of fixing boundaries on water lines. they run boundaries down the middle of lakes, streams and rivers, which Natives never did.

Why is this a problem?

because whatever Hull shites out, ottawa gets to drink. When those Yankee chemical plants pumped toxins for decades directly into the Niagara river, the flow of the water brought the toxins to -of all places- Toronto!

how can we tell that time haven't changed?

Easy! 1) Walkerton and 2) Saskatoon.

Man...500 years in-country and the simplest things still haven't been figured out...but will anyone listen to the Natives? Naaaa....too stone-age.

Stop being so logical Temagami, you have to look at the world through the westerners eyes. Everything we've done in the past (and present of course) was OK. We are the good guys, didn't you know that? All we do is for the greater good, ...of us... Never mind the genocide of the aboriginal people living in North America or Australia. It was for your own good.

We've become a ethnocentric society scared of the other side never giving dissenting opinions a second though. Assimilate of be destroyed basically.

[Temagami Scourge]

Lost:

You're right....Silly me...I've clearly overstepped my boundaries and went and got all uppity! I really need to learn my place!

By the way, I'm assuming you are Euro-Canadian, so I'd like to take a moment to thank you for snowmobiles, STOL aircraft, bondage pornography, doorbells and Shake n' Bake.

Thank You

[lost&outofcontrol]

Lost:

You're right....Silly me...I've clearly overstepped my boundaries and went and got all uppity! I really need to learn my place!

By the way, I'm assuming you are Euro-Canadian, so I'd like to take a moment to thank you for snowmobiles, STOL aircraft, bondage pornography, doorbells and Shake n' Bake.

Thank You

I don't know where I'd be without shake n' bake.

And I helped !

[Machinations]

By the way, I'm assuming you are Euro-Canadian, so I'd like to take a moment to thank you for snowmobiles, STOL aircraft, bondage pornography, doorbells and Shake n' Bake.

Thank You

You're welcome for mathematics, antibiotics, sanitation, increased average life spans, cars and personal transportation systems, public transit, electricity, electronics and a stable and reliable food supply. There are thousands more I could list, but it's so absurd as to hardly warrant mention.

The Spanish conquistadors were incredible brutal - yet it is undeniable that technical advances followed conquest. Your cherry-picking of stupid, comical 'advances' muddies the actual point - the peoples in America prior to the Europeans arriving had only primitive technology.

Also, where did you get the ridiculous idea that the Europeans thought fruit was poison? Perhaps you are aware the term apple, was, in Roman times, used to describe a wide variety of fruit, including pears, plums, apples and others. The reason scurvy was a problem on long ship voyages was that fruit was not brought on board - it spoiled easily, and was not replenished. Cured jerky and stale bread were the order of the day. I suspect your ancedote about Indians helping Europeans cure scurvy comes from the fact that the Indians knew which fruit was NOT poisonous, while the Europeans were fearful of what they did not know.

Now don't get me wrong, there were many things learned by the Europeans from Indian peoples across America - however, the balance, by far, of the new technology was provided by Europeans.

[Temagami Scourge]

Machina:

Also, where did you get the ridiculous idea that the Europeans thought fruit was poison?

From Captain James Cook (1728-1779), whose crew on his first voyage believed that fruits were poisonous and refused to eat them until:

"Cook's determination to avoid deaths from scurvy, and his success, was a vital step in the creation of the British Empire. So important was the avoidance of the disease that Cook resorted to disciplinary measures to make his men eat their rations."

...and now you know fruit is good!

I'm surprised you weren't acquinted with this well-known snippet of history. I learned about it in grade school.

Were you educated in Canada?

Perhaps you are aware the term apple, was, in Roman times, used to describe a wide variety of fruit, including pears, plums, apples and others. The reason scurvy was a problem on long ship voyages was that fruit was not brought on board - it spoiled easily, and was not replenished. Cured jerky and stale bread were the order of the day.

Blah, blah, blah, blah...don't sweat it m-man, this is in my tome on the history of the Royal Navy, and gets reference in my other book on the Days of Sail. good reads both.

I suspect your ancedote about Indians helping Europeans cure scurvy comes from the fact that the Indians knew which fruit was NOT poisonous, while the Europeans were fearful of what they did not know.

In my experience, Europeans are always scared of what they don't know, so the majority of time they kill it if they aren't running away. That does not apply to the Bear fella in Alaska who made all those up-close movies of Kodiaks until his untimely death in the tummy of a large Kodiak. He has my respect.

On the other point, the Mik'maq didn't have tons of fruit, but they sure knew Cedar had vitamin C! A good cedar tea cures many ailments.

you should see what beaver castors cure...and here Europeans didn't think Natives had science.....

Now don't get me wrong, there were many things learned by the Europeans from Indian peoples across America - however, the balance, by far, of the new technology was provided by Europeans

So...does that make Europeans different in any way? 62% of all the foodstuffs we consume in north America were originally developed by Natives. A few years back, 75% of all foodstuffs came from Native beginnings.

To me, we blended technology. A polstyrene canoe is just as light as a birchbark canoe, and yet infinitely stronger. Toboggans are fun, but so are all the other sliding spin-offs developed after their initial use. Did you know Spadina Ave. in Toronto is built atop the old portage route between Lake Ontario and Simcoe? Actually, Spadina comes from the Algonkian word "Ishpatina", which conveys the idea of a trail that runs from a ridge top down to the water....which if you stand at Casa Loma and look towards Lake Ontario, you understand where the name came from.

Wow...we do lots together, but no one recognizes it.

oh, and thanks for Kraft dinner, Honest Ed's, "The Turner Diaries", CBC, sports jocks and syphillis.

[August1991]

Most importantly, they knew the value of water. A value that isn't contemplated by many North Americans today.

Why?

Because Euro-americans, in all their "wisdom" have a habit of fixing boundaries on water lines. they run boundaries down the middle of lakes, streams and rivers, which Natives never did.

Why is this a problem?

because whatever Hull shites out, ottawa gets to drink. When those Yankee chemical plants pumped toxins for decades directly into the Niagara river, the flow of the water brought the toxins to -of all places- Toronto!

how can we tell that time haven't changed?

Easy! 1) Walkerton and 2) Saskatoon.

Man...500 years in-country and the simplest things still haven't been figured out...but will anyone listen to the Natives? Naaaa....too stone-age.

Temagami, take credit where credit is due. But a boastful manner is a sign of an inferiority complex.

I had never heard of this Indian definition of territory before. It makes a lot of sense and I can see why it was done this way because prey probably follows the watershed. Incidentally, the border between Quebec and Labrador is decided by the height of land and whether water flows to the Atlantic or Hudson's Bay.

I suspect too that watersheds will determine the territory for many environmental solutions.

Lastly, I am pleased to learn that native Indians defined property (or at least territory). Too often, I hear that natives followed a communistic system at one with Mother Earth or something. That claim never jibed with my knowledge of Native history.

[Temagami Scourge]

Brother August:

Temagami, take credit where credit is due. But a boastful manner is a sign of an inferiority complex.

Maybe in suburbia, but where I used to live in Jane/Finch, you have to learn to walk around with your chest puffed out or you are seen as an easy mark. Remember, I'm responding to an a-hole who makes provocative statements about Natives, not you.

water off a duck's back, bud.

I had never heard of this Indian definition of territory before. It makes a lot of sense and I can see why it was done this way because prey probably follows the watershed. Incidentally, the border between Quebec and Labrador is decided by the height of land and whether water flows to the Atlantic or Hudson's Bay.

I suspect too that watersheds will determine the territory for many environmental solutions.

It only works in the Shield area. The prairie peoples, mountain peoples and both coasts have a completely different manner of defining boundaries. That's why I disagree with the Ontario MNR's "township" system because the lay of the land makes things like fire response much more difficult. think of it this way; Temagami MNR region includes parts west of the Sturgeon river -which runs north/south and is an excellent natural watershed. If a fire occurs west of the highlands, but not closer to sudbury, then Temagami MNR has to make the response, when the ground is better suited for Sudbury to make the response by land, if necessary. Temagami would have to use boats and helicpters to make a response, as crossing the ridges and fording the streams to get there forces a delay, which means danger to those near.

Lastly, I am pleased to learn that native Indians defined property (or at least territory). Too often, I hear that natives followed a communistic system at one with Mother Earth or something. That claim never jibed with my knowledge of Native history.

yeah, I know. That's why I'm not fond of our educational system. In school, I was taught that Natives danced around fires and lived in the bush, but when I actually lived in the bush and began to learn the system, then it made a world of sense given the type of land in northern Ontario/Quebec/Manitoba.

It also made it easier to plan your canoe route at both high and low-water times.

[Machinations]

Machina:

Also, where did you get the ridiculous idea that the Europeans thought fruit was poison?

From Captain James Cook (1728-1779), whose crew on his first voyage believed that fruits were poisonous and refused to eat them until:

"Cook's determination to avoid deaths from scurvy, and his success, was a vital step in the creation of the British Empire. So important was the avoidance of the disease that Cook resorted to disciplinary measures to make his men eat their rations."

...and now you know fruit is good!

I'm surprised you weren't acquinted with this well-known snippet of history. I learned about it in grade school.

Were you educated in Canada?

Perhaps you are aware the term apple, was, in Roman times, used to describe a wide variety of fruit, including pears, plums, apples and others. The reason scurvy was a problem on long ship voyages was that fruit was not brought on board - it spoiled easily, and was not replenished. Cured jerky and stale bread were the order of the day.

Blah, blah, blah, blah...don't sweat it m-man, this is in my tome on the history of the Royal Navy, and gets reference in my other book on the Days of Sail. good reads both.

I suspect your ancedote about Indians helping Europeans cure scurvy comes from the fact that the Indians knew which fruit was NOT poisonous, while the Europeans were fearful of what they did not know.

In my experience, Europeans are always scared of what they don't know, so the majority of time they kill it if they aren't running away. That does not apply to the Bear fella in Alaska who made all those up-close movies of Kodiaks until his untimely death in the tummy of a large Kodiak. He has my respect.

On the other point, the Mik'maq didn't have tons of fruit, but they sure knew Cedar had vitamin C! A good cedar tea cures many ailments.

you should see what beaver castors cure...and here Europeans didn't think Natives had science.....

Now don't get me wrong, there were many things learned by the Europeans from Indian peoples across America - however, the balance, by far, of the new technology was provided by Europeans

So...does that make Europeans different in any way? 62% of all the foodstuffs we consume in north America were originally developed by Natives. A few years back, 75% of all foodstuffs came from Native beginnings.

To me, we blended technology. A polstyrene canoe is just as light as a birchbark canoe, and yet infinitely stronger. Toboggans are fun, but so are all the other sliding spin-offs developed after their initial use. Did you know Spadina Ave. in Toronto is built atop the old portage route between Lake Ontario and Simcoe? Actually, Spadina comes from the Algonkian word "Ishpatina", which conveys the idea of a trail that runs from a ridge top down to the water....which if you stand at Casa Loma and look towards Lake Ontario, you understand where the name came from.

Wow...we do lots together, but no one recognizes it.

oh, and thanks for Kraft dinner, Honest Ed's, "The Turner Diaries", CBC, sports jocks and syphillis.

/sigh

If you don't want to acknowledge that the technologies (not necessary developed by Europeans, but certainly BROUGHT with them) that came with the settlers were absolutely revolutionary, fine. If you're not willing to recognize that, yes, Europe was leaps and bounds ahead, scientifically, fine. That does'nt mean it's not fact. I'll agree with you, in certain cases, about 'blended technology'. My point, however, stands that the majority of these advances came from overseas.

As an aside, I lived at Jane / Finch for 2 years. It ain't all flowers and chocolate, but it sure is'nt Detroit (where I also lived). I love Toronto.

[Temagami Scourge]

Machina:

If you don't want to acknowledge that the technologies (not necessary developed by Europeans, but certainly BROUGHT with them) that came with the settlers were absolutely revolutionary, fine. If you're not willing to recognize that, yes, Europe was leaps and bounds ahead, scientifically, fine. That does'nt mean it's not fact. I'll agree with you, in certain cases, about 'blended technology'. My point, however, stands that the majority of these advances came from overseas.

I have no doubt that europeans brought significant technology here, but as I said, so what? The only point you made is that european technology was superior that the "primitive" technology found here. We know that.

As an aside, I lived at Jane / Finch for 2 years. It ain't all flowers and chocolate, but it sure is'nt Detroit (where I also lived). I love Toronto.

Dee-Troy-it! Hey, I hang around Windsor on occasion and get plenty of Detroit stories. Here's a good Windsor joke: What does the "MGM" stand for at the new downtown MGM Grand hotel?

Might Get Mugged...

I used to live off Eddystone, by the all-night Commisso Bros. bakery, and across Jane at London Green court, overlooking the ravine. That ravine really echoed gunfire, but no one was ever shot. I think people used it for practice, and then ran away.

[Temagami Scourge]

For the interest of all, this is an email I received:

Shikon akwekon, (Hello to all of you, in Cayuga)

This is to let you know that CBC Radio 1 "The Current" will lead off its

show on Friday (May 26) with a focus on the issue of racist attitudes among the

residents of Caledonia during the conflict over the Six Nations' land

reclamation, and on racial-colonial attitudes in the white population of Canada

generally: