Six Nations Crisis- “Canada’s Pandora’s Box?”

[Riverwind]

If the government walks away from the table, they can take Canada to International Court. The precedents there are clear.

The international court is irrelevant. The only law that applies within the territory of Canada are the laws of the Canadian gov't and Canadian constitution. The majority in this country are not going to accept any resolution that involves significant sacrifices. Some native activists realize that (e.g. Phil Fontaine) and wish to focus on solving problems rather than upholding treaties. Other natives (e.g. Bill Wilson) think that non-aboriginal Canadians are slaves that exist only to provide income for aboriginals.

It is perfectly reasonable for the Canadian gov't to walk away from any table that has people like Bill Wilson sitting at it.

[saga]

If the government walks away from the table, they can take Canada to International Court. The precedents there are clear.

The international court is irrelevant. The only law that applies within the territory of Canada are the laws of the Canadian gov't and Canadian constitution. The majority in this country are not going to accept any resolution that involves significant sacrifices. Some native activists realize that (e.g. Phil Fontaine) and wish to focus on solving problems rather than upholding treaties. Other natives (e.g. Bill Wilson) think that non-aboriginal Canadians are slaves that exist only to provide income for aboriginals.

It is perfectly reasonable for the Canadian gov't to walk away from any table that has people like Bill Wilson sitting at it.

This is not the place for personal attacks. You might want to consider editing that out.

I am interested in why you think Canadians will consider the International courts irrelevant.

I believe we already made the sacrifices ... that is what the surplus is for !!

[Riverwind]

Has it occurred to you that your opinions may be incorrect and extremely offensive to some who post on this board ... this board that exists for the purpose of promoting honest and fair dialogue ...

I found your statements equating residential schools to genocide _extremely_ offensive. How does using hyperbole and emotionally loaded terms like 'genocide' fit into the definition of 'fair and honest dialogue'?

Freedom of speech is not absolute in Canada ... one is not free to promote hatred and your freedom only extends to the point where it interferes with the freedoms of others... like freedom from bias due to genetics ... race in this case.

Ah yes. More bullying techniques you learned from the native rights crowd. Expressing opposition to institutionalized racism in the form of aboriginal rights is not racism - in fact the reverse is true. I oppose racism in all forms.

[Riverwind]

This is not the place for personal attacks. You might want to consider editing that out.

Bill Wilson is on the record saying that natives should have just killed off every white settler instead of co-operating with them. He is one of the people who believe that non-aboriginals should be reduced to being tenets on land owned by aboriginals. The term 'slaves' was a bit strong but not a completely inaccurate representation of his beliefs.

I am interested in why you think Canadians will consider the International courts irrelevant.

Canadians only care about the international court when it is used against someone else (i.e. George Bush). If the international court ruled that Canadians would actually have to make sacrifices then you can bet that Canadians would quickly dismiss the court as irrelevant (which it is).

[saga]

This is not the place for personal attacks. You might want to consider editing that out.

Bill Wilson is on the record saying that natives should have just killed off every white settler instead of co-operating with them. He is one of the people who believe that non-aboriginals should be reduced to being tenets on land owned by aboriginals. The term 'slaves' was a bit strong but not a completely inaccurate representation of his beliefs.

I am interested in why you think Canadians will consider the International courts irrelevant.

Canadians only care about the international court when it is used against someone else (i.e. George Bush). If the international court ruled that Canadians would actually have to make sacrifices then you can bet that Canadians would quickly dismiss the court as irrelevant (which it is).

Why IS it irrelevant...

[Riverwind]

Why IS it irrelevant...

It has no ability to enforce its judgements. Sovereign nations are free to ignore its rulings - the US does all of the time. Obviously, a ruling against Canada would be politically embarrassing in places like Europe. However, many other countries would not care or, more likely, support Canada's desire to settle aboriginal rights issues in a way that is fair to all citizens.

When it comes to dealing with aboriginal issues there has to be a bit of good cop-bad cop approach. I am deliberately taking the side of the bad-cop in this forum because I feel too many people have forgotten that non-aboriginal Canadians have rights too and we should not be ashamed to stand up for ourselves when confronted with native extremists. In the end we need a political solution that both sides can live with. This issue can never be resolved by any court (even the supreme court of canada does not have that power).

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

When it comes to dealing with aboriginal issues there has to be a bit of good cop-bad cop approach. I am deliberately taking the side of the bad-cop in this forum because I feel too many people have forgotten that non-aboriginal Canadians have rights too and we should not be ashamed to stand up for ourselves when confronted with native extremists. In the end we need a political solution that both sides can live with. This issue can never be resolved by any court (even the supreme court of canada does not have that power).

There is a disparity between your rights and those of Native people. Yours have been seriously limited by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and subjective laws imposed by the governments. Laws and regulations are designed to limit your rights, not to free them.

On the other hand the Haudenosaunee (Six Nations) have a differnent consitution and supreme law that actually defends our rights and our participatory democracy. It is based first on the right of non-interference and requires each individual to be reponsible for their actions. The premise behind the law is that all people are inherently peaceful and respectful. And when they don't appear that way then something must be infereing with their inherent qualities. We then observe and help the person return to his or her good-thinking through a number of processes.

The differences in thinking between Haudensaunee and Settlers cannot be emphasized enough. There will never be a blending of our nations because it would be like trying to mix colour with sound. There would always be an attempt by the wind section people to downplay the significance of the coloured people. Our only hope is to mainatin and support the Two Row Wampum and live in separate parallel systems.

Canada cannot "settle" aboriginal rights. Our rights surpass the right of Canada. We are not citizens, nor are our rights defined by Canada. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, merely recognizes aboriginal right above and beyond control and certifies that pre-existing right by treating or practice is still valid for aboriginal people. This means in short that you can't tamper with our rights. You can only (and must) accept them.

So the real issue isn't about aboriginal rights - our right to lands a owners, our right to resources and livelyhood from the lands etc. It really should be about your loss of rights through the manipulation of business interests that formed the Corporation of Canada and now limits your ability to anything about it - including being able to actively participate in your democracy. That is what is relevent.

O:nen

[jdobbin]

Canada cannot "settle" aboriginal rights. Our rights surpass the right of Canada. We are not citizens, nor are our rights defined by Canada. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, merely recognizes aboriginal right above and beyond control and certifies that pre-existing right by treating or practice is still valid for aboriginal people. This means in short that you can't tamper with our rights. You can only (and must) accept them.

This really doesn't offer any solution, does it? What if Canadians don't accept this?

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

It isn't a matter of whether Canadians accept this. It is the law of your land. If you try to change your law, under international law we still exist as an sovereign Nation. Plus any atttempts to subjagate us would only lead to further erosions of the Peace we have enjoyed between us.

The best bet for Canada is to try to negotiate a settlement in which you can continue to enjoy your security and habitation of our lands. Given that the occupied areas of the Haldimand Tract alone are worth in excess of $1 trillion you have a long way to go before you can buy your way out of this predicament. I forsee Canada giving up its taxing authority over people who live within the boundaries of our territories and diverting any taxes collected in say the last 25 years to our administration. Those living on our territorial lands could then have the option of joining our nations under the requirements for immigration define in our Great Law. Otherwise they could be left with the option of Canada purchasing their interests (land and buildings) and handing them back to Six Nations...kind of like the Israeli government did to those illegal Israelis occupying the west bank and Gaza.

On the other hand once people understand the nature of our participatory democracy, they might just want to stay on and join the Confederacy as a citizen.

O:nen

[jdobbin]

On the other hand once people understand the nature of our participatory democracy, they might just want to stay on and join the Confederacy as a citizen.

Are you sure the policy of the Six Nations is to welcome outsiders onto their land or to evict them?

[jbg]

Natives who demand huge settlements for archaic treaties are, by definition, not reasonable. IMO, they are extremely greedy people looking to cash in on a genetic lottery ticket that they don't deserve.

I agree. Natives who demand huge settlements for archaic treaties are, by definition, not reasonable. IMO, they are extremely greedy people looking to cash in on a genetic lottery ticket that they don't deserve.

The First Nations did not develop the land. I believe that demanding land, in improved condition, for what had been undeveloped land is a shakedown. They should be offered all of "their" land back, on a silver platter; if they pay for the improvements, up front.

[Riverwind]

It isn't a matter of whether Canadians accept this. It is the law of your land. If you try to change your law, under international law we still exist as an sovereign Nation.

This is crap. Colonized peoples do have a right to self determination under international law, however, this right can only be exercised if there is a distinct geographic area where the people in question are a majority. In other words, under international law almost all of the Six Nations traditional lands forever and irrevocably belong to the sovereign state of Canada since the majority of people living on that land today are not Six Nations people.

The Six Nations could try to organize a referendum in areas that they do control. However, I am pretty sure that those areas would not be sufficient to create a viable sovereign state. Whether you like or not Six Nations is part of Canada today and that will not change. There is the option of re-negotiating the division of powers between local and nation gov'ts, however, it is ridiculous to claim that Six Nations is a sovereign state.

The best bet for Canada is to try to negotiate a settlement in which you can continue to enjoy your security and habitation of our lands. Given that the occupied areas of the Haldimand Tract alone are worth in excess of $1 trillion

Natives have no claim on the value added to the land by non-native settlers. The land only has value today because it was available for free hold purchase from the gov't of Canada. If that land was not available for purchase most of it would likely still be wilderness and farms today and worth a fraction of its value.

If it can be shown that the land was taken illegally then the market value of the lands in the 1700s will be the basis for any settlement.

I forsee Canada giving up its taxing authority over people who live within the boundaries of our territories and diverting any taxes collected in say the last 25 years to our administration.

You obviously have no idea what taxes are. Taxes are not rents - taxes are fees to pay for services. Gov't do not run a profit - they only collect enough taxes to pay for services delivered. It is ridiculous to suggest that taxes on these lands should be paid to the Six Nations band since the Six Nations bands is incapable of delivering the services that these taxes are intended to pay for.

Such statements simply illustrate the unprincipaled and rather pathethic greed that is the rea; motivation for these native land claims.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Treaties are valid international agreements. You can renegotiate them but if you ignore them then you face the consequences - like Six Nation staking their land back.

Six nations is not in the business of evicting people from their homes. They are reclaiming (for the time being) those lands that are vacant or which have been developed without our consent. So while homes and local businesses are not part of the reclamations, parks, valley and conservation lands, public lands and un-tendered farms are. In the case of Caledonia, the developers was previously warned he did not have our permission to develop the land and when he started we were quick to move in and stop the devlopment so future home owners would not be in the same prediciment. Our present goal is to stop the encroachment. Negotiation with the government will determine what happens to lands that have already been encroached. However, you must realize that Canada is beginning negotiations from a deficit and it is likely that you will see more losses than gains on your side.

The Americans exercise their right to detach from Great Britian and to become self-determining. Canada did not. Instead business people decided to for a federation (an association ) in order to protect their interests from invasion and manipulation by the US. Canada incorporated - as a business entity only - under the laws of Great Britian, and the Crown. And even though you might belief the myth that Canada is a nation, it is not self-determining, nor does it possess the necessary land base to consider it a nations. As I said Crown lands - held in right of the Queen's interest - are Indian lands (by ownership) held in trust by the Queen. This protection was set up by the Crown because they witness the greedly land grabs that occured in the states and by writ prohibited the same thing happening here. The Covenant Chain describes our relationship and it is celebrated each year by Six Nations and the Queen as a reminder of our relationship.

If like you say land determines the nation then I would suggest that you are already Haudenosaunee more than you are Canadian. Being a Canadian really equates in a legal sense to nothing more than an employeeof a Crown Corporation who instead of paying you for your services instead steals from you through taxation.

O:nen

[Riverwind]

Treaties are valid international agreements. You can renegotiate them but if you ignore them then you face the consequences - like Six Nation staking their land back.

Like what? Six Nations are going to turn in a pack of terrorists like the Palistinians? There are millions of Palistinians so they can afford keep the war going for generation after generation. I am pretty sure Six Nations would run out of suicide bombers pretty soon.

So while homes and local businesses are not part of the reclamations, parks, valley and conservation lands, public lands and un-tendered farms are.

Lands that are parks today are parks because the gov't decided that it is not in the public interest to have development on those lands. If the Six Nations wants lands then it should purchase lands from a willing selling at market prices. Parks and other protected areas that are not available for sale to non-aboriginals should not be available for sale to aboriginals.

That said, there is plently of undeveloped land which the gov't does intend to eventually develop. That land could be a reasonable part of a land and cash settlement.

[jdobbin]

Six nations is not in the business of evicting people from their homes.

I have no idea what the policies of a Six Nations community would be. I guess I'd have to look at your present situation. Do you have housing developments for non-Natives on your lands now? Can they become a citizen of the Six Nations? Do they have voting rights? If not, why not?

[Riverwind]

I have no idea what the policies of a Six Nations community would be. I guess I'd have to look at your present situation. Do you have housing developments for non-Natives on your lands now? Can they become a citizen of the Six Nations? Do they have voting rights? If not, why not?

The reserve system under the Indian Act does not allow anyone to own reserve properties. Native bands have to ask permission from Ottawa if they want to do something as simple as putting up a street lamp. The system is insane and needs to be scrapped but we can't get rid of it because too many native chiefs like the endless streams of cash coming from Ottawa.

The treaty with the Nis'ga in northern BC does not give non-Nis'ga living on Nis'ha lands the right to vote, however, the Nis'ga are not allowed to tax these people either. That makes it a reasonable compromise. However, that kind of compromise is not something that the native extremists are interested in.

Native extremists (like the recent poster here) are a lot like Palestinians that insist there can be no peace until the state of Israel is eliminated. They rant endlessly about historical wrongs but show no interest in finding a fair and balanced solution the recognizes the political realities of today.

[jdobbin]

The reserve system under the Indian Act does not allow anyone to own reserve properties. Native bands have to ask permission from Ottawa if they want to do something as simple as putting up a street lamp. The system is insane and needs to be scrapped but we can't get rid of it because too many native chiefs like the endless streams of cash coming from Ottawa.

The treaty with the Nis'ga in northern BC does not give non-Nis'ga living on Nis'ha lands the right to vote, however, the Nis'ga are not allowed to tax these people either. That makes it a reasonable compromise. However, that kind of compromise is not something that the native extremists are interested in.

Native extremists (like the recent poster here) are a lot like Palestinians that insist there can be no peace until the state of Israel is eliminated. They rant endlessly about historical wrongs but show no interest in finding a fair and balanced solution the recognizes the political realities of today.

This is why I can't accept at face value that people who live on claimed land would not be evicted.

[saga]

This is not the place for personal attacks. You might want to consider editing that out.

Bill Wilson is on the record saying that natives should have just killed off every white settler instead of co-operating with them. He is one of the people who believe that non-aboriginals should be reduced to being tenets on land owned by aboriginals. The term 'slaves' was a bit strong but not a completely inaccurate representation of his beliefs.

I am interested in why you think Canadians will consider the International courts irrelevant.

Canadians only care about the international court when it is used against someone else (i.e. George Bush). If the international court ruled that Canadians would actually have to make sacrifices then you can bet that Canadians would quickly dismiss the court as irrelevant (which it is).

Why IS it irrelevant...

Hmmm ... no answer ... however, I personally do not think walking away from the table is something our government will do. It behooves them to settle to avoid international acrimony. It would be nice if someone was thinking ahead to how we will all live together without acrimony. There will be some who will hold onto their colonial dreams, but the majority are more interested in making it right. This is Canada, after all, and we have high sounding ideals that most of us would like to see upheld.

I do believe that the some have pulled the wool over their own eyes, ignoring the reality of our situation with regard to the land we do not have legal title too, expecting it to go away. However, they are not going away ... they are going to the negotiating table and in many cases they want the land back! ... and then we will still be neighbours. I know this to be the case in Caledonia, and those who refuse to accept will be frustrated ... but they do that to themselves.

[Enskat Kenraken Ronkwe]

Native extremists (like the recent poster here) are a lot like Palestinians that insist there can be no peace until the state of Israel is eliminated. They rant endlessly about historical wrongs but show no interest in finding a fair and balanced solution the recognizes the political realities of today.

You are too funny Riv - lol

You complain about using the word " genocide " to describe the events that happened in recorded Canadian history - but then act like a hypocrit using your own inflammatory words in rebuttal ( apartheid, extremists or terrorists and more in previous posts )- very lame.

Your personal view suggesting that Natives want to eliminate Canada is totally contrary to what is represented by The Two Row Wampum - if you read and digested any of the links myself and others have posted you would realise this. The reality of the situation is that it is Canada that has been trying to erase Native culture, not the other way round.

In regards to a fair solution - you beleive that Natives should just accept whatever scraps you would throw their way. If the Crown honoured agreements made and behaved in a " fair and balanced " manner the land issue would not be in question today. Irregardless of the time frame any person, entity or Nation who has any notion of what Honour is lives by the agreements they sign, and honour their own ancestors by maintaining these agreements. This is something totally alien to River - he is either spouting that a signed agreement shouldnt be honoured or it will cost too much money to implement a solution. It is a fact that a lot of money is owed to many Native Bands, and the longer it takes to reach a settlement the more interest keeps accumulating.... Even using 1700's land values then adding approprite interest still puts the debt owed in the hundreds of billions - maybe into the trillions by now. Did you do any research on your own with the links i provided about the Grand River Navigation Company who squandered additional funds being held in trust for Six Nations? ... didnt think so.

I have to reiterate once more for your benefit River that the treaties the Crown entered into were between two parties based on a land transaction. The Crown knew the terms of the agreement and agreed to them - opening the doors to share the land. Race isnt a factor - just so happens the parties to the agreement are of different races.

River, I know somwhere deep down in your twisted logic that you actually beleive that the Crown or the government is somehow the victim in all this.... take a deep breath man! All that is sought is written in the agreements - return the land or compensate for; the loss of use, resources taken, and tax revenue generated.

[Riverwind]

Why IS it irrelevant...

Hmmm ... no answer ...

Try looking more closely: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=124544

It would be nice if someone was thinking ahead to how we will all live together without acrimony.

I am. Too many people think that aboriginal rights are not a problem because they are some sort of affirmative action program for a disadvantaged minority group. However, that is mistaken thinking. Aboriginal rights are permanent entitlements that we could not get rid of even if aboriginals ended up being as wealthy as white south Africans under apartheid. A society where some people enjoy greater wealth and privilege for no reason other than their generic heritage is a society that will be split apart by racial conflict. If we want to have a society that is free from racial divisions in the future then we must completely eliminate this idea that some citizens have more rights because they carry the DNA of the first people to live in the country.

There will be some who will hold onto their colonial dreams, but the majority are more interested in making it right.

Opposing aboriginal rights has nothing to do with colonialism. Aboriginal treaties themselves are archaic documents that have no place a pluralistic multi-ethnic democracy. Insisting that these treaties be honoured as written a thinly veiled attempt to impose the colonial thinking on modern society where the aboriginals are the colonial masters. It is time to think about the future - not the past.

[Riverwind]

Your personal view suggesting that Natives want to eliminate Canada is totally contrary to what is represented by The Two Row Wampum - if you read and digested any of the links myself and others have posted you would realise this.

Read what I wrote - not what you would like to believe. I did not say natives want to 'eliminate' Canada. What I said is native extremists make demands that are so unreasonable that Canada has no choice but to say no - even if that means breaking treaties. I used the Palestinians as an example of an other group making ridiculous demands (eliminating Israel in that case).

Even using 1700's land values then adding appropriate interest still puts the debt owed in the hundreds of billions - maybe into the trillions by now. Did you do any research on your own with the links i provided about the Grand River Navigation Company who squandered additional funds being held in trust for Six Nations? ... didnt think so.

That is my entire point. It will cost too much to develop a compensation plan that natives will agree to so we have no choice but to say screw it. You can rant and rave all you want but that it the reality of the situation. Six Nations is not going to get a trillion dollar settlement no matter what the legalities are. Six Nations could negotiate a settlement of a few billion but I sure you will call that scraps.

Race isnt a factor - just so happens the parties to the agreement are of different races.

You did not sign any of these agreements yet you claim benefits because of your genetic heritage. That makes it a race issue. Furthermore, we are not talking simply about land and property - we are talking about special rights that only people with certain DNA are allowed to have. No matter how you want to spin it aboriginal treaties are all about race.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Aboriginal rights are permanent entitlements that we could not get rid of even if aboriginals ended up being as wealthy as white south Africans under apartheid.

Yep. Your problem stems from YOUR limitations not our rights. At least with being free you have something to aspire to.

We could ignore and undo all the treaties. But that would mean that Canad would disappear entirely. It would mean that Canada would be US property and that all lands would revert back to Native peoples. You see, Canada and your forgoers the British were only here by agreement. You cannot advocate ignoring treaties and still exist as a Crown Corporation. It is obtuse thinking to suggest that you can.

So what about agreements. Can you survive without free-trade, or provincial divisions? Provinces are part of Confederation by those same types of treaties and agreements. The federal government has no authority excpt by agreement with their provincial business partners. Afterall that is what makes the federation - they are an association provincial business partners.......

So go ahead ignore First Nation treaties. You kill Canada in the same breath.

You want cash for your interest in the land you should appraoch the government for that. On your behalf they have profitted and continue to profit from the illegal extraction of resources and the contamination of lands in support of industrial expansion. So we don't need to buy back anything. We have already paid the price 10 times over. And even though that you can't and never will see any cash, that really is YOUR problem. Take it up with your courts. I'm sure that given you have no property rights, they will quickly dismiss your claim. And unfortunately in Haudenosaunee law you have no standing to lodge your complaints. Maybe you should take it to Ottawa and complain there?

O:nen

[jdobbin]

You want cash for your interest in the land you should appraoch the government for that. On your behalf they have profitted and continue to profit from the illegal extraction of resources and the contamination of lands in support of industrial expansion. So we don't need to buy back anything. We have already paid the price 10 times over. And even though that you can't and never will see any cash, that really is YOUR problem. Take it up with your courts. I'm sure that given you have no property rights, they will quickly dismiss your claim. And unfortunately in Haudenosaunee law you have no standing to lodge your complaints. Maybe you should take it to Ottawa and complain there?

This is what a lot of non-Natives fear. They think that they will have no standing in land that goes to First Nations and they will be evicted. You have said just now that they receive no standing. They are not likely to be granted membership in a First Nation either for fear that they might ask to become part of the province where they are located.

[Riverwind]

This is what a lot of non-Natives fear. They think that they will have no standing in land that goes to First Nations and they will be evicted. You have said just now that they receive no standing. They are not likely to be granted membership in a First Nation either for fear that they might ask to become part of the province where they are located.

I have said many times that Natives are asking for an Aparthied system in Canada. People have called me a rascist for even suggesting that is the case yet here we have a Native poster that more or less confirms that is exactly what they what.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Contrary to the opinion here, we can own and sell land on the reserve. All purchases must be approved by the Council and one must be a citizen of the Nation first.

As a Canadian you have no standing concerning Haudenosaunee issues. We have no dual citizenship requirements. You could petition to become a citizen of one of the Nations but you would have to spend some time with them and see if they would sponsor you. Even still, because your thinking is obtusely colonial you would have limited say in national politics. You could participate in the community politics, however.

You fears - a construct of your anglo-european Christian worldview - have no basis. Your cry of victimization is a typical Canadian response to change. Get over it. You injure yourself by maintaining a dogmatic position.

Canada is an apartheid system. We're not only asking for our own freedom but for yours also. Where else but in south Africa were people sent to encampments (reservations) away from the mainstream and told to assimilate or stay imprisoned for life? Where else but in genocidal europe were Jews separatede out and numbered (band status) so that they could be killed in order. While we do not compare in numbers to the Jews or South Africans that were murdered under those policies, we have been none-the-less subjected to cultural genocide which is the same thing by definition. The fact is that those policies and the genocide is NOT in the past. It is ever present in the entire law of the Indian Act and is perpetrated on your behalf not only by the Department of Indian Affairs but by the Minsitry of Justice and the Solitor General.

Our future is by our own self-determination as sovereign peoples will be. We want nothing to do with Canada, its policies or its racist segregation. We are a nation under our own authority and the exercise of reclaiming our lands IS a statement of that fact. You whining that we are tryint to turn you into something is some of the most obtuse racist crap I have heard yet. What you really fear is that we will do to you what you have been doing to us for 500 years. That really frightens you. Good thing we were founded on the Principles of Peace and the Good Mind, our personal Righteous Peacefulness holds as much significance as our assertion of our authority for self-determination. Still you might excite a few of our warriors from time to time whose minds get clouded with thoughts of justice, you can take solace in the fact that you cannot excite us as a nation. Our movement is thought-out, deleberate and ultimately successful because we are peaceful.

O:nen