Caledonia problem didnt arise overnight

[Who's Doing What?]

The only real racists on this site, are those suggesting they are owed something simply because they are of a particular race.

Here we go giving deffinitions to that nasty "R" word again! I get warned for calling people imbiciles and you can still get away with calling us racists!

We tell the truth, back it up repeatedly and we're still called racists.

I've told you twice already about your Queen's debt. If you have an issue with it then take it up with her. I'm sure it won't be a problem since you've so elquently told us how great your "democratic system" is and think that we should opt to follow. Personally I don't think I'll be doing it. After researching it I find the following:

a) If I am not one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

If I am one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

c) If I own a big business I can have the loudest voice of all!

d) If I am not an at least an upper-middle class citizen I'll never be an MP much less Prime Minister!

e) If I am middle or lower class citizen I must carry the burden of taxes while the upper-middle and upper classes that can afford it get all the tax breaks!

f) The wealthier I am the more justice will be on my side!

g) Equality means that I can only have equal opportunity because as I can see from the items above I'll never be equal!

Nope...I think I'll stay within the Rotinonshonni!!! Thanks anyway!

When you use race as the reason for why one group should be put ahead of another group that is racism. If your plan falls into this category, well perhaps you need to rethink your plan.

[Riverwind]

Until the settlers can pass the requirements for citizenship in the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, they will not be allowed to vote or be elevated to any political position. It is a simple concept that even Canada engages in in dealing with immigrants.

Immigrants choose to come to Canada and know the requirements before they arrive. You are talking about annexing land where people already live. In that situation you have no right to impose limits or restrictions on when and how they become citizens.

so it is unlikely that 200,000 or so that might be elegible to participate, could sway the common opinion on any matter. And since ours is a concentual government, a majority vote is irrelevent.

In other words, you fully intend to set up a system designed to ensure that non-aboriginal majority are denied the voice that they deserve based on their numbers. It is a system that is slightly better than aparthied since non-aboriginals would at least have the theoretical right to participate in gov't. However, in practice, you still plan to deny them rights because of their cultural background.

Even as participants at the community level (which would be granted right away) it is highly unlikely that they could alter the current course given that those elevated to the position of Royaner must demonstrate their understanding of the prinicples of the Kayenera'kowa AND should they fail the interest of the Confederacy they could be impeached in a moment's notice.

In other words, your system is set up to ensure only people that share the culture imposed by the Confederacy have any rights. Thank you for confirming that I was right about the ethnocentric nature of the state you seek to establish.

You realize that imposing such a gov't on people would violate their rights as defined by the UN. This would give them the right to hold a referendum and seperate from the Six Nations and rejoin Canada. Six Nations would be powerless to stop that - especially since you keep running to the UN for help now.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

The Confederacy system is fully democratic. The Kayener'kowa is over 1000 years old and contains the pre-equisites for citizenship and immigration. If any of those 500,000 want to become citizens then they must follow our law to do it. If they don't then they can leave and seek a place in Canada where their rights will be further limited. We have every right to limit the extent to which settlers can participate, given that they are incapable of governing themselves and as such are no more than infants. Understanding the Great Law and the political system or consensus is critical to participation. As you have said so many times before, YOU can see how consensus could work for such large groups. That thought and statement is an impediment to participation.

Refugee Lebanese wouldn't come to Canada expecting them to change the consitution to suit them. As it stands those people living on the Haldimand tract are illegal aliens. They should be grateful we don't take the US approach and gather them up and expell them......For the time being their residency is a problem that we are negotiating to resolve. Rest assured your government is more than willing to hang the settlers out to dry. We are not, because we believe in their rights as human beings.

The system already exists. There is no "set-up" to prevent anything. Their ability to participate is hindered by their inability to understand the consensual process and its nuances. I have sat in many a circle with many o'seronni who would vocally abuse the process because it doesn't conclude in their agenda. Now you are doing exactly that by suggesting that because you are not capable of civil dialog that we are limiting you. Another crock by the Riverspin.

Anyone who can master the system can have an influence. Majority vote is irrelevent since full consensus is sought on every issue. The only limitations are through those that are incompetent. Even children are heard at the community level. You are proving to have less facalties than a child, so I'm pretty sure that you would be severely limited by your own incompetency.

{added in edit} Unlike Canadian politics, Government in our terms is never imposed upon people. We the people are the government and every decision is made by us. So in that regard if 200,000 settlers suddenly wanted in, it would have no effect on the other 1.5 million of us. Only through their use of pursuasion and good will would they be able to bend the outcome. YOUR agenda is lost befre you even started.

O:nen

[Who's Doing What?]

She:kon!

The Confederacy system is fully democratic. The Kayener'kowa is over 1000 years old and contains the pre-equisites for citizenship and immigration. If any of those 500,000 want to become citizens then they must follow our law to do it. If they don't then they can leave and seek a place in Canada where their rights will be further limited. We have every right to limit the extent to which settlers can participate, given that they are incapable of governing themselves and as such are no more than infants. Understanding the Great Law and the political system or consensus is critical to participation. As you have said so many times before, YOU can see how consensus could work for such large groups. That thought and statement is an impediment to participation.

Refugee Lebanese wouldn't come to Canada expecting them to change the consitution to suit them. As it stands those people living on the Haldimand tract are illegal aliens. They should be grateful we don't take the US approach and gather them up and expell them......For the time being their residency is a problem that we are negotiating to resolve. Rest assured your government is more than willing to hang the settlers out to dry. We are not, because we believe in their rights as human beings.

The system already exists. There is no "set-up" to prevent anything. Their ability to participate is hindered by their inability to understand the consensual process and its nuances. I have sat in many a circle with many o'seronni who would vocally abuse the process because it doesn't conclude in their agenda. Now you are doing exactly that by suggesting that because you are not capable of civil dialog that we are limiting you. Another crock by the Riverspin.

Anyone who can master the system can have an influence. Majority vote is irrelevent since full consensus is sought on every issue. The only limitations are through those that are incompetent. Even children are heard at the community level. You are proving to have less facalties than a child, so I'm pretty sure that you would be severely limited by your own incompetency.

{added in edit} Unlike Canadian politics, Government in our terms is never imposed upon people. We the people are the government and every decision is made by us. So in that regard if 200,000 settlers suddenly wanted in, it would have no effect on the other 1.5 million of us. Only through their use of pursuasion and good will would they be able to bend the outcome. YOUR agenda is lost befre you even started.

O:nen

If this thing is 1000 years old why wait til now to try and enforce it?

It would appear that had you wanted this enforced it should have been done since the time of Cartier. It is too late now to tell everyone they need to pass a test to get in.

[Okwaho]

The only real racists on this site, are those suggesting they are owed something simply because they are of a particular race.

Here we go giving deffinitions to that nasty "R" word again! I get warned for calling people imbiciles and you can still get away with calling us racists!

We tell the truth, back it up repeatedly and we're still called racists.

I've told you twice already about your Queen's debt. If you have an issue with it then take it up with her. I'm sure it won't be a problem since you've so elquently told us how great your "democratic system" is and think that we should opt to follow. Personally I don't think I'll be doing it. After researching it I find the following:

a) If I am not one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

If I am one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

c) If I own a big business I can have the loudest voice of all!

d) If I am not an at least an upper-middle class citizen I'll never be an MP much less Prime Minister!

e) If I am middle or lower class citizen I must carry the burden of taxes while the upper-middle and upper classes that can afford it get all the tax breaks!

f) The wealthier I am the more justice will be on my side!

g) Equality means that I can only have equal opportunity because as I can see from the items above I'll never be equal!

Nope...I think I'll stay within the Rotinonshonni!!! Thanks anyway!

When you use race as the reason for why one group should be put ahead of another group that is racism. If your plan falls into this category, well perhaps you need to rethink your plan.

No! That's your plan. To take us out of our way of life and assimulated with yours. What are you trying to pull a Riverbend? Go back and read the posts. It's quite clear what I was saying and you know it. Now matter what angle you try to approach in this issue your not going to change the facts. Your wrong now give it up and move on. By the way...you used the "R" word again!

[Okwaho]

She:kon!

The Confederacy system is fully democratic. The Kayener'kowa is over 1000 years old and contains the pre-equisites for citizenship and immigration. If any of those 500,000 want to become citizens then they must follow our law to do it. If they don't then they can leave and seek a place in Canada where their rights will be further limited. We have every right to limit the extent to which settlers can participate, given that they are incapable of governing themselves and as such are no more than infants. Understanding the Great Law and the political system or consensus is critical to participation. As you have said so many times before, YOU can see how consensus could work for such large groups. That thought and statement is an impediment to participation.

Refugee Lebanese wouldn't come to Canada expecting them to change the consitution to suit them. As it stands those people living on the Haldimand tract are illegal aliens. They should be grateful we don't take the US approach and gather them up and expell them......For the time being their residency is a problem that we are negotiating to resolve. Rest assured your government is more than willing to hang the settlers out to dry. We are not, because we believe in their rights as human beings.

The system already exists. There is no "set-up" to prevent anything. Their ability to participate is hindered by their inability to understand the consensual process and its nuances. I have sat in many a circle with many o'seronni who would vocally abuse the process because it doesn't conclude in their agenda. Now you are doing exactly that by suggesting that because you are not capable of civil dialog that we are limiting you. Another crock by the Riverspin.

Anyone who can master the system can have an influence. Majority vote is irrelevent since full consensus is sought on every issue. The only limitations are through those that are incompetent. Even children are heard at the community level. You are proving to have less facalties than a child, so I'm pretty sure that you would be severely limited by your own incompetency.

{added in edit} Unlike Canadian politics, Government in our terms is never imposed upon people. We the people are the government and every decision is made by us. So in that regard if 200,000 settlers suddenly wanted in, it would have no effect on the other 1.5 million of us. Only through their use of pursuasion and good will would they be able to bend the outcome. YOUR agenda is lost befre you even started.

O:nen

If this thing is 1000 years old why wait til now to try and enforce it?

It would appear that had you wanted this enforced it should have been done since the time of Cartier. It is too late now to tell everyone they need to pass a test to get in.

You really need to learn your history. Every European country that came here knew about it. The United States and every modern governing system borrowed from it but only enough that they could still control and limit their people. I thought you looked up the Two Row?

[Riverwind]

Refugee Lebanese wouldn't come to Canada expecting them to change the constitution to suit them. As it stands those people living on the Haldimand tract are illegal aliens.

They are already there therefore you have no business imposing your system of governance on them. If Canada annexed Lebanon because of some historical treaty then the millions of Lebanese would mostly definitely have a right to demand that Canada adjust its constitution to accommodate them.

Majority vote is irrelevant since full consensus is sought on every issue.

By that logic Six Nations could not collect any taxes from the annexed land since you would have to have to get the "settlers" to agree. How would you resolve that issue? I am pretty sure that your claims of "consensus" based decision making is a sham - a society made up of people with diametrically opposed groups could never survive on that basis. Therefore the only way your society could work is if the institutions are rigged to ensure the minority can impose its will on the majority. Everything, you have said confirms that this is the case.

So in that regard if 200,000 settlers suddenly wanted in, it would have no effect on the other 1.5 million of us.

The bigger problem is what happens if the 500,000 settlers want out. You could not stop them. That is one reason why this debate is pointless. Six Nations could not keep the territory even if it got it.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Succession is not an option under the Kayenera'kowa. The Clan Mothers and the Women are the title-bearers of all the lands and you those who wanted to opt out would have to convince them it was for the benefit of the next seven generations to let the lands go. That's an unlikely outcome.

The settlers could refute the taxes. However if they did they could also be refused services. Their water, sewer and roads could be cut off or tolls - much like the 407 - could be implemented. However, we're confident that we would not need a tax system - at least in the way it is there now. Through co-operatives, there could be enough revenue to keep all of our needs in check.

The fact that you have trouble comprehending the basis of a consensus system really is rooted in your ignorance. Lots of info is available on the net or in the library which describes our government system and the basis of consensus. Maybe you should start there since you've lost so many arguments here you are beginning to look like a teenager trolling the net for 13 year olds.

The land is not theirs to bargain with. So if 500,000 people wanted out, they would either have to take up a trillion dollar collection and buy their lands outright (providing the Clan Mothers let it go) or face a hundred thousand dollar a year lease that would go on forever. Ask those at Sauble Beach how they liked the rent increases.........

O:nen

[Who's Doing What?]

The only real racists on this site, are those suggesting they are owed something simply because they are of a particular race.

Here we go giving deffinitions to that nasty "R" word again! I get warned for calling people imbiciles and you can still get away with calling us racists!

We tell the truth, back it up repeatedly and we're still called racists.

I've told you twice already about your Queen's debt. If you have an issue with it then take it up with her. I'm sure it won't be a problem since you've so elquently told us how great your "democratic system" is and think that we should opt to follow. Personally I don't think I'll be doing it. After researching it I find the following:

a) If I am not one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

If I am one of the majority my voice will never be heard!

c) If I own a big business I can have the loudest voice of all!

d) If I am not an at least an upper-middle class citizen I'll never be an MP much less Prime Minister!

e) If I am middle or lower class citizen I must carry the burden of taxes while the upper-middle and upper classes that can afford it get all the tax breaks!

f) The wealthier I am the more justice will be on my side!

g) Equality means that I can only have equal opportunity because as I can see from the items above I'll never be equal!

Nope...I think I'll stay within the Rotinonshonni!!! Thanks anyway!

When you use race as the reason for why one group should be put ahead of another group that is racism. If your plan falls into this category, well perhaps you need to rethink your plan.

No! That's your plan. To take us out of our way of life and assimulated with yours. What are you trying to pull a Riverbend? Go back and read the posts. It's quite clear what I was saying and you know it. Now matter what angle you try to approach in this issue your not going to change the facts. Your wrong now give it up and move on. By the way...you used the "R" word again!

I don't want to assimilate your way of life. Go have a PowWow they are pretty nice. Do a sunrise ceremony, have a feast, do whatever, but don't tell me you are entitled to my land because of your race.

What you are saying is your race is better than all other races in North America and by devine right of race alone you are entitled to all the land.

That is Racism.

[Who's Doing What?]

She:kon!

The Confederacy system is fully democratic. The Kayener'kowa is over 1000 years old and contains the pre-equisites for citizenship and immigration. If any of those 500,000 want to become citizens then they must follow our law to do it. If they don't then they can leave and seek a place in Canada where their rights will be further limited. We have every right to limit the extent to which settlers can participate, given that they are incapable of governing themselves and as such are no more than infants. Understanding the Great Law and the political system or consensus is critical to participation. As you have said so many times before, YOU can see how consensus could work for such large groups. That thought and statement is an impediment to participation.

Refugee Lebanese wouldn't come to Canada expecting them to change the consitution to suit them. As it stands those people living on the Haldimand tract are illegal aliens. They should be grateful we don't take the US approach and gather them up and expell them......For the time being their residency is a problem that we are negotiating to resolve. Rest assured your government is more than willing to hang the settlers out to dry. We are not, because we believe in their rights as human beings.

The system already exists. There is no "set-up" to prevent anything. Their ability to participate is hindered by their inability to understand the consensual process and its nuances. I have sat in many a circle with many o'seronni who would vocally abuse the process because it doesn't conclude in their agenda. Now you are doing exactly that by suggesting that because you are not capable of civil dialog that we are limiting you. Another crock by the Riverspin.

Anyone who can master the system can have an influence. Majority vote is irrelevent since full consensus is sought on every issue. The only limitations are through those that are incompetent. Even children are heard at the community level. You are proving to have less facalties than a child, so I'm pretty sure that you would be severely limited by your own incompetency.

{added in edit} Unlike Canadian politics, Government in our terms is never imposed upon people. We the people are the government and every decision is made by us. So in that regard if 200,000 settlers suddenly wanted in, it would have no effect on the other 1.5 million of us. Only through their use of pursuasion and good will would they be able to bend the outcome. YOUR agenda is lost befre you even started.

O:nen

If this thing is 1000 years old why wait til now to try and enforce it?

It would appear that had you wanted this enforced it should have been done since the time of Cartier. It is too late now to tell everyone they need to pass a test to get in.

You really need to learn your history. Every European country that came here knew about it. The United States and every modern governing system borrowed from it but only enough that they could still control and limit their people. I thought you looked up the Two Row?

You're too late to start making people jump through hoops to join your country. If there were criteria for citizenship they should have been laid out in the beginning. Not trucked out centuries later and expected to be followed.

[Riverwind]

Succession is not an option under the Kayenera'kowa. The Clan Mothers and the Women are the title-bearers of all the lands and you those who wanted to opt out would have to convince them it was for the benefit of the next seven generations to let the lands go. That's an unlikely outcome.

Succession would be their right under UN conventions since they would be a majority population forced to be part of a state against their will. I heard your clan mothers have gone to the UN many times seeking support for your claims. Do you honestly think that you can appeal to the UN for help now and then ignore its requirements later?

The settlers could refute the taxes. However if they did they would also be refused services. Their water, sewer and roads could be cut off or tolls - much like the 407 - could be implemented.

Or they could simply keep their existing munipalities running by paying taxes to them as the have always. Attempts by Six Nations to sabotague infrastructure would likely be met with equal violance.

The land is not theirs to bargin with. So if 500,000 people want out, they would either have to take up a trillion dollar collection and buy their lands outright or face a hundred thousand dollar a year lease that would go one forever. Ask those at Saugeen how they liked the rent increases

People that occupy a land today have rights that supercede any historical rights that Six Nations may have. In the end, it is impossible for any nation to hold onto land occupied by people that don't want to be part of that nation unless they are willing to resort to violence. Even then, violance will only have a limited effect since the conflict would severly damage the economy. Face it - the demographics make it impossible for Six Nations to succeed in the end.

[Okwaho]

I don't want to assimilate your way of life. Go have a PowWow they are pretty nice. Do a sunrise ceremony, have a feast, do whatever, but don't tell me you are entitled to my land because of your race.

What you are saying is your race is better than all other races in North America and by devine right of race alone you are entitled to all the land.

That is Racism.

You'd better go back and read your posts on the assimulation issue your talking circles again.

This is our land because it was our land. Your ancestors and all that followed came from some place else and enjoyed our generosity and hospitality. They decided they would like to stay and we as good neighbours accommodated them under several agreements. It just happens that we happen to be of a different genetic make up then you are. You're the one that is constantly using the "R" word and trying to make the vain attempt to connect everything to the "R" word. You have forever lost this argument so grow up and move on.

Oh and you said the "R" word again.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

Your perspective is all warped.

Illegal occupiers have no rights. The UN has no such conventions to interfere in the policing of their state.

Cities and towns within the Haldimand tract will be subject to our territorial governments. If we say they pay taxes to us then they pay or they face the tax man...you know that 260lb guy with the Huron haricut and lead-based ink tattoes on his face, who will come knocking on your door a 5:300 in the morning with a brigade of mace-spraying warriors. I'm sure they can find things to use your house for, if you are unwilling to pay for its upkeep.

Occupiers do not exceed the historical rights of the Haudenosaunee. Period. You're in lala land if you think they do. Besides we're just gonna take it back first and ask questions later. I doubt you have the balls to stand up to any one of us.

O:nen

[geoffrey]

Cities and towns within the Haldimand tract will be subject to our territorial governments. If we say they pay taxes to us then they pay or they face the tax man...you know that 260lb guy with the Huron haricut and lead-based ink tattoes on his face, who will come knocking on your door a 5:300 in the morning with a brigade of mace-spraying warriors. I'm sure they can find things to use your house for, if you are unwilling to pay for its upkeep.

If I had said that against your people, I'd could face criminal charges.

[Riverwind]

Illegal occupiers have no rights. The UN has no such conventions to interfere in the policing of their state.

Not true at all. You might have a case if the occupation was recent and done as a deliberate attempt to usurp land. However, the people have been there for generations and that gives them rights that cannot be ignored. Even if they were 'illegal occupiers you have no right evict them and must give them equal democratic rights. Besides it does not make difference what the UN says in the end - politically speaking you would have no choice but to grant the rights.

you know that 260lb guy with the Huron haircut and lead-based ink tattoos on his face

How many of those guys do you have - few hundred maybe a 1000? They would be pretty busy trying to collect taxes from 500,00 people. Especially, if some those people decided to fight back.

Occupiers do not exceed the historical rights of the Haudenosaunee. Period. You're in lala land if you think they do. Besides we're just gonna take it back first and ask questions later. I doubt you have the balls to stand up to any one of us.

I wouldn't bet a lot of money on that. People can afford to be complacent right now. They expect their gov't to throw some cash at Six Nations and some land for symbolic purposes and make the problem go away. If the problem does not go away and Six Nations tried to assert its sovereignty you would probably see people taking quite a different attitude.

But it is good to see you being honest and admitting that Six Nations fully intends to use violence to enforce its claims. How many people would you be willing to kill in order take land from innocent people that did nothing wrong other choosing to live in the wrong place at the wrong time?

[Okwaho]

Cities and towns within the Haldimand tract will be subject to our territorial governments. If we say they pay taxes to us then they pay or they face the tax man...you know that 260lb guy with the Huron haricut and lead-based ink tattoes on his face, who will come knocking on your door a 5:300 in the morning with a brigade of mace-spraying warriors. I'm sure they can find things to use your house for, if you are unwilling to pay for its upkeep.

If I had said that against your people, I'd could face criminal charges.

He's joking! I have a scalp lock and only weigh 155 lbs. and the tatoos aren't lead-based they're charcol-based.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Your viewing from your violent filter. All that hate in your mind must be collecting in a pool.

Six Nations will not instigate violence against anyone. Violence is a rot in your soceity not ours.

“Brother! –If you white people murdered the Saviour , make it up yourselves. We had nothing to do with it. If he had come among us, we should have treated him better” Red Jacket 1811

O:nen

[Riverwind]

Six Nations will not instigate violence against anyone. Violence is a rot in your society not ours.

Glad hear it - I believe in non-violence too. That is why I blather on so much about respecting democratic rights and what not.

But if Six Nations will not instigate violence how will it assert its sovereignty over lands occupied by 500,000 people that do not want to be part of Six Nations? Perhaps you are dreaming that the Canadian gov't would do your dirty work so you could keep up that non-violent fiction.

Whether you like or not sovereignty is about the willingness to use violence to enforce that sovereignty. Now adays that is generally not necessary because people usually acknowledge the sovereign power of the gov't that claims sovereignty. However, anyone who wants to change the status quo must do it by persuasion or violence. Six Nations will never persuade those 500,000 people to join willingly so violence is the only option if you want to enforce your claim.

You could, of course, recognize that you could never achieve your goals without violance and, as a non-violant people, negotiate a compromise that would give you more than you have now but ensure that you could keep whatever you get without using violance.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

We use the art of pursuasion and every once in a while we throw in a little orenda. Works every time! People will do what ever you ask them to do, if they believe it will benedfit them.

However we will use force to DEFEND our sovereignty. Make no mistake.

O:nen

[Riverwind]

However we will use force to DEFEND our sovereignty. Make no mistake.

Spin it whatever way you want - but going onto other people's property and trying to take it way would make _you_ the instigator of the violance.

The way you talk reminds me a lot of the Godfather movies. Always claiming to be non-violant abd out to look after the best interests of people but always ready to send the goons out.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

No it doesn't. The OPP understand what happens when we are left alone and what happens when we are attacked. No doubt they wish to leave us alone. The premise of sovereignty is being willing to defend your independence. You needn't instigate aggression to live peacefully as a nation. Only westerners believe that violence is a means to and end. That's exactly why Harper has no problem sending young boys to the killing fields of Afghanistan. He believes that violence will lead to peace....how obtuse is that thinking.....

O:nen

[Riverwind]

No it doesn't. The OPP understand what happens when we are left alone and what happens when we are attacked. No doubt they wish to leave us alone. The premise of sovereignty is being willing to defend your independence.

Right. But you don't own the streets of Kitchener today - very few of your people live there. The people there today will likely ignore any claims of sovereignty you make. At that point you will have a choice - you will have to attack people that are not threatening you with violence or accept that you do not have sovereignty over those lands and you never will.

If you attack people who are not threatening you with violence then you are not defending anything - you are the aggressors. If you are willing to do that then you should stop using the 'we are a peaceful people' schick because it is clearly not true.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

...very few of your people live there.

I wouldn't say 9000 people living in Kitcher is insignificant.

However pursuasion is a powerful ally. You don't need force to move people. All you need is incentive and opportunity and they will move themselves. If your governmetn follows through on their plan to entice industry and commerce out of the region is would only take a few years before Kitchener is a ghost of its former self. And if they begin expropriations as they have proposed, then that should take care of the rest (of course once people get a drift of the loss occuring in the market values of their homes, they will sell sell sell at clearance prices. All this will be evidennt once the government announces the Agreement in Principle.

Tell me Riverspin....will you be the first to jump ship or the last to defend a worthless plot?

O:nen

[Riverwind]

However persuasion is a powerful ally. You don't need force to move people. All you need is incentive and opportunity and they will move themselves.

Not likely. Most people will have all of their assets tied up in properties that they cannot sell. They will figure out pretty quickly that they can simply ignore your claims of sovereignty. There would be a few years of tension but eventually Six Nations would have to give up its claim.

Think about it - I am just one person who thinks ahead and analyzes the possible outcomes of conflicts. Most people are not even considering what they would do if Six Nations tried to assert its claim because the possibility is so remote. However, if the worst happend you can be assured that many community leaders will realize what I have pointed out and persuade people that non-violent resistance will free them of the oppression of Six Nations just like Gandi used it to free India from the British.

Faced with non-violant resistant Six Nations would have no choice - it could try to use violance but find itself crushed or simply give up its claims - just like Britain did with India.

No matter what laws and treaties exist, Six Nations can never defeat the laws of demographics.

[Who's Doing What?]

I don't want to assimilate your way of life. Go have a PowWow they are pretty nice. Do a sunrise ceremony, have a feast, do whatever, but don't tell me you are entitled to my land because of your race.

What you are saying is your race is better than all other races in North America and by devine right of race alone you are entitled to all the land.

That is Racism.

You'd better go back and read your posts on the assimulation issue your talking circles again.

This is our land because it was our land. Your ancestors and all that followed came from some place else and enjoyed our generosity and hospitality. They decided they would like to stay and we as good neighbours accommodated them under several agreements. It just happens that we happen to be of a different genetic make up then you are. You're the one that is constantly using the "R" word and trying to make the vain attempt to connect everything to the "R" word. You have forever lost this argument so grow up and move on.

Oh and you said the "R" word again.

I don't want to assimilate your way of life.

If you would behave like reasonable people you could likely achieve alot. But no, you want it all. You want it now. And you don't give a rats ass about any of the other people living in this country.

You are the ones who started playing hardball. It is going to cost you all the extra liberties you enjoy. In the end every race in Canada will be treated equally. The fight you have started will end the favoritism that has been given to the natives in several areas.

And if one race is favoured over another, it is racism. I see you are afraid of the word now, calling it the "R" word. Racism is racism no matter what colour the person perpetuating it. Or were you one of those people who thought only white people could be racists?