Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 No ... I would expect compensation from the government that made the mistake in the first place ... and yes, I know that means I would be paying it through my taxes.You are avoiding the question. You are making the assumption that these treaties could be settled with existing revenues. What if yor are wrong - what if the cost of meeting treaty obligations cannot be paid for without huge tax increases. How much of a tax increase would you be willing to pay?The federal gov't collects about $200 billion/year in income taxes. There several first nations groups that are talking about settlements that can be as much as $1 trillion. If you add up the claims of all groups across the country you could be talking about $3-4 trillion dollars. It would take 100 years to pay off those claims if we increase income taxes by 20% to $240/billion. Would you be willing to pay an additional 20% in income taxes for the rest of your life? Don't avoid the question by insisting that it 'won't happen'. The numbers I gave are probably on the high end but they are not completely rediculous based on claims made today. What is your limit where you would say screw the treaties? 10%, 20%, 50%? (to clarify a 20% increase on a 30% income rate would bring the tax rate up to 36%). Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 ...and do not most people have title insurance these days ... I do!Won't do you any good:Who is protected with title insurance? For a risk to be covered, it has to have existed as of the date of the policy. As with any type of insurance policy, certain types of risks might not be covered. For example, native land claims and environmental hazards are normally excluded. Be sure to talk to your lawyer about the types of risks that may not be included in your policy. http://www.cityandcountryhomes.ca/buyers.html Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon!The negotiations will progress at a substantial state. If the government stalls they will be potentially faced with a confrontation to move them along. We have always understood that peaceful means like negotiation and honest dialog are the path to resolving our differences. However, when government officials attempt to sabatouge the talks, or delay them unreasonably our only recourse is to start talking by digging in and turning off something important. So if you can return to your polite demeanor and stick to decent discussion without continually repeating yourself I may consider continuing offering you our position for your entertainment purposes. But really I find your whole racist being a mild form of retarded development and hope that through our discussions I can enlighten you to the point that you can be free from your bias and prejudice and be enlightened to the Truth. That is my hope. Open your mind. Anything is possible. O:nen Thank you Tsi. My ears were starting to ring from Riverwinds howls of protest! (Resistance is futile, my dear.) I would like to let the readers know that I am not Indigenous ... just a supporter ... and I have been at the Haudenosaunee Six Nations reclamation site several times ... before and after the OPP raid, the Bread and Cheese day melee, power shut down, during several of Caledonias Friday Night hate fests (Idiot Night) and other times. It was peaceful and safe behind the Haudenosaunee barricades, kind and wonderful people, intelligent and fascinating conversations ... and confident and very very focused. I am proud to associate with such decent and principled people. And the Clan Mothers ... bless them ... we are lucky to have their leadership! The traditional leaders of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy are an example to us all. Watch and learn. A lot of the locals, however, were SHAMEFUL!!!!!!! ... not just the usual liquor fuelled bunch, but in particular the BUSINESS community. They were ... and are ... incredibly arrogant, racist and ignorant. Seems all it takes to make them lose their grip entirely is a little dip in their pockets. And boy, did they lose it!! Grown men and women having two year old temper tantrums in front of children! It was just disgusting! No shame, no principles ... no decency. All the news coverage about the ongoing strife at the barricade ... that was NOT Six Nations but the locals ... Six Nations barricade was 100 yards away from the police line! Yes, I know that is not how the media portrayed it. They lied. After a few interviews where the media would only talk about violence and not at all about the issues, Haudnosaunee did not want to talk to them anymore so they got smeared in the mainstream press. It was the locals threatening the police, spitting on them, assaulting them, SCREECHING right in their faces incessantly. And then the kids started imitating the adults. ... and still to this day, no local authorities have spoken out against this behaviour ... instead, they have supported and inflamed it. Caledonia deserved everything it got, in my opinion, because they brought it on themselves with their ignorant behaviour. And to this day, Haudenosaunee teenagers cannot go to town without being called racist names. I truly hope this is not repeated in other communities. PLEASE pass this message along!! Resistance is NOT helpful. The law is the law ... the Constitution is the law ... the treaties are the law ... and public decency should be the law if it is not. It just happens that this time the law is on the side of Indigenous people, and it is long overdue. Considering all the times the law has been used against them ... It is their turn ... please understand: We tried to destroy them as a people. We have heavy dues to pay. I hope we do it well so that we can be allies once more. There really are no alternatives. Time for Canada to step up. Thanks for reading this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 No ... I would expect compensation from the government that made the mistake in the first place ... and yes, I know that means I would be paying it through my taxes.You are avoiding the question. You are making the assumption that these treaties could be settled with existing revenues. What if yor are wrong - what if the cost of meeting treaty obligations cannot be paid for without huge tax increases. How much of a tax increase would you be willing to pay?The federal gov't collects about $200 billion/year in income taxes. There several first nations groups that are talking about settlements that can be as much as $1 trillion. If you add up the claims of all groups across the country you could be talking about $3-4 trillion dollars. It would take 100 years to pay off those claims if we increase income taxes by 20% to $240/billion. Would you be willing to pay an additional 20% in income taxes for the rest of your life? Don't avoid the question by insisting that it 'won't happen'. The numbers I gave are probably on the high end but they are not completely rediculous based on claims made today. What is your limit where you would say screw the treaties? 10%, 20%, 50%? (to clarify a 20% increase on a 30% income rate would bring the tax rate up to 36%). The people who have benefited most from the land should pay: The clearcutting, strip mining corporations and developers and banks and real estate companies and financial advisors (a stab at Ken Hewitt, king of the Caledonia screechers) and the Bay St boys who make money from financing them should pay. They are the ones who have reaped the benefit of using the land, mortgaging the land, etc. They are the ones operating for profit. They are the ones hiding their money so they do not pay income tax. They are the ones screeching the loudest in their ignorance and lack of humanity. This is a human issue. An issue of contrition, apology, and doing the best we can to support them in regaining their lives from over a century of oppression ... by us. Paying for a century is quite reasonable, all things considered. I am exempting farmers ... they are stewards of the land too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 The people who have benefited most from the land should pay: The clearcutting, strip mining corporations and developers and banks and real estate companies and financial advisors (a stab at Ken Hewitt, king of the Caledonia screechers) and the Bay St boys who make money from financing them should pay.You are avoiding the question again. How much would _you_ be willing to pay to resolve land claims. You answers so far seems to indicate that you are not willing to pay anything and that you believe that someone else can be made to pay to make your conscious feel better.Why should anyone care about your prinicpals if you are not willing to put _your_ money where your mouth is? Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 The people who have benefited most from the land should pay: The clearcutting, strip mining corporations and developers and banks and real estate companies and financial advisors (a stab at Ken Hewitt, king of the Caledonia screechers) and the Bay St boys who make money from financing them should pay.You are avoiding the question again. How much would _you_ be willing to pay to resolve land claims. You answers so far seems to indicate that you are not willing to pay anything and that you believe that someone else can be made to pay to make your conscious feel better.Why should anyone care about your prinicpals if you are not willing to put _your_ money where your mouth is? Depends ... how much are the corporations paying in your scheme... or are you planning to saddle the wage earners with all of it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 The people who have benefited most from the land should pay: The clearcutting, strip mining corporations and developers and banks and real estate companies and financial advisors (a stab at Ken Hewitt, king of the Caledonia screechers) and the Bay St boys who make money from financing them should pay.You are avoiding the question again. How much would _you_ be willing to pay to resolve land claims. You answers so far seems to indicate that you are not willing to pay anything and that you believe that someone else can be made to pay to make your conscious feel better.Why should anyone care about your prinicpals if you are not willing to put _your_ money where your mouth is? Depends ... how much are the corporations paying in your scheme... or are you planning to saddle the wage earners with all of it... ... and will you please stop being so friggin rude!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 Depends ... how much are the corporations paying in your scheme... or are you planning to saddle the wage earners with all of it...I don't want to get into a debate about the fairness of the current taxation system. For the purposes of this question assume that everyone has the same percentage increase in taxes which means the rich would pay more. What is your limit? Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 Depends ... how much are the corporations paying in your scheme... or are you planning to saddle the wage earners with all of it...I don't want to get into a debate about the fairness of the current taxation system. For the purposes of this question assume that everyone has the same percentage increase in taxes which means the rich would pay more. What is your limit? NO ... not the individuals ... the corporations and bankers etc. who made money off indigenous land ... how much will they pay in your scheme... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 NO ... not the individuals ... the corporations and bankers etc. who made money off indigenous land ... how much will they pay in your scheme...Corporate taxes would go up by the same percentage too. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 NO ... not the individuals ... the corporations and bankers etc. who made money off indigenous land ... how much will they pay in your scheme...Corporate taxes would go up by the same percentage too. ok ... so what does that leave for the wage earners ... how much corporate tax is actually paid in Canada ... any at all ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saga Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 *There is a legal method, and a method that should result in jail time.Six Nation's chose the second, Geoffrey, Were you there... Did you see violence before the police attacked them... there was none, is none except when they are attacked or invaded. They are peaceful ... and then they defend themselves ... well ... unarmed. It was peaceful there, and the fire and the drums and the singing ... awesome. I visited occasionally ... supporter. There would have been no violence had the OPP not raided violently with guns drawn and other weapons and force used. Six Nations has been raided violently by police before ... 1924 ... elected band councils imposed at gunpoint and treaty wampum stolen (HINT ... purposeful destruction of evidence of treaties that Canada was then choosing not to honour.), Haudenosaunee religion and democracy was also criminalized by the 1924 Indian Act that the RCMP were enforcing that day.... 1952 has been mentioned ... deaths have been mentioned not sure when ... 1959 ... same thing violence, injuries ... not sure what they stole that time. ... and 100 years of forbidden religion and culture, children torn from their homes on threat of taking them permanently, and many were and many children and babies have disappeared. (new book: A Little Matter of Genocide) ...and many children escaped and could not go home so they went to the city streets. ... and many generations of families lived and with the self-perpetuating damage ... and we caused that purposely with Canadian policy and mandate and under federal oversight. Do we own it yet ... Do we own up ... Does Canada step up ... ...*and unfortunately, the leadership isn't being held responsible for disobeying a court order, Haudenosaunee leaders stepped up ... they acknowledged leadership in the reclamation of their land, which is the only way for them to do it when it is in private hands. They acknowledged influence, but not complete control of the men on duty at the site. Sneaking in or hurling insults from one street or yard or hiding place or another was Caledonia boys frolic in between the rallies. Caledonias leaders, however, have not stepped up at all and they continue to encourage the racist agitators by not addressing the need for decent behaviour in their town. THE COURT ORDER IS GONE now. It was Hencos injunction ... they do not own it any more. The police are on peacekeeping duties ... and if you look at the media pictures of the former noisy !blockade!, it is in fact a police line facing the !noisy! people of Caledonia. Haudenosaunee Six Nations are 100 yards away ... scoffing and chuckling in hurt and disgust and disbelief. Check out timmers videos...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS8xvInmPUo The judge threatens punishing the contempt charges quite harshly, though, for the dozen or so women, men and youths sleeping in a field unarmed, kicked awake with guns in their faces, in violation of their fundamental rights. The government knows ... there are precedents ... the surrenders were sloppy. Haudenosaunee are the title holders to the Haldimand Proclamation territories ... 6 miles deep on either side of the Grand River, source to mouth (L Erie) ... *the massive public property damage (which we all pay for from taxes now), and the violence towards police officers. Someone needs to be fined at the very least, in a major way. The Six Nations at least need to pay for the rail bridge and roadway they destroyed. ahhh ... the rail bridge ... historic Six Nations entrance to town ...bridge that needed repair and the town would not ... for years. 50% of Caledonias business was from Six Nations. ... but they got reimbursed for lost business... let the town absorb it as a cost of doing business ... dirty business. ....What further awareness do I need then this group broke the law? As soon as you did that, everything else went out the window. The time for awareness campaigns and higher learning ended the minute the court order was disrespected. Yes, laws were broken on both sides. Six Nations police work in partnership with OPP. Haudenosaunee justice is in progress too. How many police were assaulted ... who did it ... who set three barns on fire... what old man swerved to try to hit two Six Nations men ... crimes no one talks about because they know it was not Six Nations. I hope you read my long post on p11. peace out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne' Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon! From my perspective you are the one seeking an inequitable relationship with other Canadians. You are the one insisting that aboriginal groups deserve special rights because they happened to be here first. An equitable relationship between all people in society starts with the presumption that everyone has the same rights no matter what their genetic heritage. I realize that you prefer to use the term 'inheritance' instead of 'race base rights' and I will concede that there is a subtle difference. A Haida visiting from BC would have no more rights on Six Nations land than a non-aboriginal. However, I don't believe that anyone has an absolute right to any inheritance no matter who they are. The fact that most egalitarian democracies have some form of inheritance tax is evidence that I am not the only one that believes that future generations have do not have an absolute right to everything that their parents want to give them. That is why I don't really make a distinction between 'race base' rights or 'inheirited' rights. Aboringal people have their full "inherent" rights intact. It is Canadians' rights that have been usurped by laws and regulations. That is something YOU should take up with Corporate Canada. You willingly give up those rights by being a Canadian citizen. OUR rights are untouchable and I find it moronic that you would insist that we give up our rights entrusted us by the Creator of All Things, just so you can feel better. Your mistake is that you confuse equity with equality. They are not the same thing. However, it doesn't matter anyway because an equal society - something that is supposed to be guaranteed under your Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is a myth. Rich people receive an different more lenient justice than poor people do. They receive more tax breaks and better health care even though these things are suppose to equal in your so-called equal society. They also receive better education and better access to higher paying jobs. The disabled, gays and lesbians and religious organizations are granted the same rights even though rulings will go in their favour when confronted with mainstream society. Your society and your corporate entity is anything but equal. Equity on the other equates to making sure that actions and differences have value, in human terms. Justice must be meaningful and relative. We own the land and we made agreements to share it with other people for our joint livelyhood. Yet Canadians have profited from our lands and have denied us a share of the gains. That is inequity. You create laws to control each other and then apply them to us with a mind to suppress us and marginalize us. That is inequity. But now I see your bottom line - that of most cheap labour conservatives. "How much is it going to cost?" Nevermind that you have destroyed much of the land in industrialisation or that clear cutting and open pit mining has irreparably damaged the eco-system. You ignorunts fail to recognize the costs in human terms or the costs of multi-generations' recovering from gencidal and apartheid Canadian policies that attempted to kill us off while those who perpetrated the crimes are protected by your institutions. You ignore that fact that the land your house sits on was never paid for, nor treatied for, nor leases paid to us. The profits that your companies have made without regard to the cost of proper care of their social responsibilities. You forget that you would not be here if not for our generousity and instead promote an inequitible relationship where we continue to suffer against injustice and poverty while you drive two of everything and replaced with new and improved. We OWN the land. That is a simple concept, no? What you do with it can only come about from here on in by our permission. Get used to it and tell your cheap labour conservative friends to get used to it as well. The world has turned on its axis and we all know that shite flows downhill. Perhaps you CLCs should consider investing in an umbrella factory. You're going to need lots of them. Mind you we have always been adept at identifying and deflecting the crap people like to spew in chunks. To compensate that one or two trillion dollars all one need do is to cream the top off the stock exchange for a year. Taxes are a ruse designed to keep you in line and hardly make a dent in the cost of running Canada. Profits and investment is where all the money comes from. O:nen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 You OWN the land? Now just a minute, I thought that First Nations people sought to be stewards of the land. Now I am hearing something very different. This seems to be about money, nothing more. It appears that what is sought is some sleezy means to extort a maximum of unearned profit based on some bogus arguement. I may have to change my position on this subject as well. I am all for legitimate settlement of claims in a reasonable fashion. Having said that I certainly don't support evicting anybody, nor do I support attempts at extortion based on the goodwill of a regretful nation for the actions of men long dead. I now offer my formal apology to the First Nations peoples for the travesties that have occured in the past and I promise not to support any future effort of like kind in the future. I wish those First Nations peoples all the best in their lives, but I will not support their efforts any longer until such time as those efforts are geared toward reasonable settlements. When the debate centres on financial matters, it is no longer about culture or justice it is all about money. Taking money from my family to give to First Nations peoples is not something I can personally afford to do. I am sorry, but that is a simple truth. Now that I have stepped onto the other side I think it would be prudent for the government to reconsider its position. No citizen in this country can own the mineral rights to their property. Why is the law not being equally enforced. All citizens must pay taxes. Why is the law not being enforced. The best defense is a good offence and it is time for the government to start fighting back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne' Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon! You've made two fundemental errors in stating your opinion. 1. The Haudenosaunee are not like other First Nations. We have a recognized and asserted nation to nation relationship with Canada and the US. We are sovereign peoples with a land base and separate government structure outside of the Canadian one. 2. We are not Canadian citizens. We are Haudenosaunee citizens with our own passports and immigration policies. Our ownership of the land is not the "we are the caretakers" that pan-indians like to present. Our women have been and will always be the title holders of land on behalf of our nations. A third error in your logic is that this is about money. It is about land. It is about stopping the furhter encroachment onto our territories, about development without our consent and about halting urban sprawl in towns and cities within our borders. Having the land base intact is not only important to our future generations - to give them a place to live, work and grow - but it is important to protect and maintain viable and productive farm land - some of the richest soils anywhere. We're not interested in your sympathy or your condemnation. The simple fact is that we just wish to be left alone - to stop your government's harassment of our people; to stop the genocidal policies implemented in the Indian Act and to restore equity in our nations. The Two Row Wampum provides the model under which we agreed to operate. The Covanent Chain - A Treaty of Goodwill and Friendship recognizes our common relationship and agrees that each of us are separate but may from time to time join by our joint agreement for economic or defense purposes. Our veterans have served in every conflict that Canada or the US has been involved in. We have reached out to other countries and broken down trade barriers on our common behalfs. That does not make us Canadian. It simply makes us partners in some ventures and as long as Canadians recognize our independence all will be well. The assertion of our ownership of the lands and our rights is necessary because progressive generations of Canadians ignore our compliants to your government. We had enough quite frankly of your unjust courts, the inequitable justice system and the bombardment of developer's encroachments. And since your government has refused to help us preferring instead to support the squatters, we have no choice but to reclaim our lands and stop the encroachments. We have ignored your imposition of band government and returned to our traditional council system under the Kayener'serako:wa - The Great Binding Law. Our legal system and political systems will determine our actions from here on in. We are self-determining and no longer consider ourselves partners with Canada. Perhaps we will seek agreements with the US or Cuba, or countries in South America giving them open access to our territories and people for trade purposes. Perhaps we will set up our own garbage dumps and electrical generating systems and place them adjacent to homes on the Canadian side of our borders. And while we are not interested in evicting illegal settlers from their homes, we will keep it under consideration should they not abide by our laws or defintions of their citizenship under the Great Law. YOUR government has put you in an untenable predicament. You don't own any land in North America and instead of working with us to continue your leases, we have been ignored, criticised and attacked. The negotiations may result in taking money or other lands in lieu of reoccupation of some of our territory. That is up to your government. We'll take the land first and only compromise if it is to our benefit. You must realize you don't hold the ace and starting negotiations from a 2 of Diamonds against our Kind of Clubs won't win you many hands. Expect the worse. The end result is bound to be better than that because we are reasonable and peaceful people. O:nen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 Expect the worse. The end result is bound to be better than that because we are reasonable and peaceful people. The Six Nations have historically also been know for war. Is that not true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne' Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon! No that is not true. We have never declared war on anyone. We have allied with the British, Canada and the US in some conflicts but never have we waged war on anyone. The myths that the Iroquois were at war with the Hurons or the Ojibway is also a myth perpetuated by the French and British in order to justify using violence against the Iroquois. O:nen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon!No that is not true. We have never declared war on anyone. We have allied with the British, Canada and the US in some conflicts but never have we waged war on anyone. The myths that the Iroquois were at war with the Hurons or the Ojibway is also a myth perpetuated by the French and British in order to justify using violence against the Iroquois. O:nen You don't have to declare war on someone to be at war. And being allied with someone in a war means that you are at war. It's funny how some Ojibways have a different attitude about who they have been in a war with. Read their websites and they have some bad things to say. But ultimately, they say they defeated the Iroqois. http://www.tolatsga.org/ojib.html That is just one of many stories written about the Ojibway and their history. Is that a myth or are they lying? Peace loving people don't have violent conflicts with their neighbors whatever the dispute. That is not to say that a society can't become peaceful but it is a willful re-writing of history to say that you never were at war with someone. For this reason, I am a bit fearful about the outcome of disputed territory and the promise of a peaceful outcome. You have already said here that Non-native people caught up in Iroquis land claims would be treated differently if the Iroqois were in power. You have said to take faith that Iroqois would do no harm. But you have also said that the Iroqois never declared war on anyone. The Ojibway say differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne' Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon! Nope. We have never been at war, even in support of others. Some people have chosen to join the actions and fight along side other soldiers but the official Haudenosaunee stance is neutral. The Ojibway hold the myths too, as do to Wendat. The Huron, was us - Iroquois - living on the north shores of the St Lawrence, and Lakes Ontario and Erie. We were not at war with ourselves. However, the British like to make stories like that up. And given British and Canadians have a penchant for violence it stands to reason that they would be prejudiced by that filter when writing their history. O:nen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 The negotiations may result in taking money or other lands in lieu of reoccupation of some of our territory. That is up to your government. We'll take the land first and only compromise if it is to our benefit. You must realize you don't hold the ace and starting negotiations from a 2 of Diamonds against our Kind of Clubs won't win you many hands.The Six Nations bands has about 20,00 people. The band is claiming territory occupied by 1/2 a million people or more. Even if the band was able to use the current legal system to extort the land from their legitimate owners I don't see how such a small band could hold onto the territory without the assistance of the Canadian gov't.In other words, the Six Nations has no negotiating leverage and must accept whatever the gov't of Canada is willing to offer. The legal system does provide a club that the Six Nations can use to extort some concessions, however, the effect of that club is limited because the Canadian gov't has the power to change the legal system if necessary. You can rant as much as you want about how the Six Nations has its own laws and constitution, however, you cannot change the political nature of this conflict. The Six Nations will not get the land it wants unless the majority citizens in Canada chooses to give it to them. In fact, lets assume that the law did allow the Six Nations to assume sovereignty over lands occupied by 500,000 non natives. These non-natives could then organize a referendum and vote to seperate from the Six Nations and rejoin Canada. This process is recognized under Canadian and international law. The fact that these 500,000 or so people would be denied the right to vote within the Six Nations makes it even easier to legally and morally seperate from the Six Nations and take their land with them. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon!Nope. We have never been at war, even in support of others. Some people have chosen to join the actions and fight along side other soldiers but the official Haudenosaunee stance is neutral. The Ojibway hold the myths too, as do to Wendat. The Huron, was us - Iroquois - living on the north shores of the St Lawrence, and Lakes Ontario and Erie. We were not at war with ourselves. However, the British like to make stories like that up. And given British and Canadians have a penchant for violence it stands to reason that they would be prejudiced by that filter when writing their history. O:nen All other First Nations just got it wrong about the Iroqois? Why would they believe that about the Iroqois? Because non-Natives told them that? I'm sure that if some Ojibway could you hear you now, they'd call you out on this. In fact, I think some might be angry at your response. And you've never really answered the question about what would happen if the Iroqois got what they wanted. If the land reverted to the Iroqois, would the non-Natives be able to become members of the community with *all* rights that an Iroqois had. And if not, why not? In fact, I'd like to hear exactly what you think the Iroqois land and people would be like if you got all that you asked for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne' Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon! My cousins and my grandmother are Ojibway. The stories they tell are the same as I have told you. Our nations lived together on the north shore. O:nen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 She:kon!My cousins and my grandmother are Ojibway. The stories they tell are the same as I have told you. Our nations lived together on the north shore. O:nen And that story is that the Iroqois have never been in violent conflict with anyone? Why do so many Ojibway believe that Iroqois fought them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dances with fishes Posted August 1, 2006 Report Share Posted August 1, 2006 Kwe Halito hi We-sha-cat-we-lo-ke-la-wapa Could it be the white brother still does not see who they are fighting? The same ones that corrupted your history also corrupted all This is from the old testement this not what natives follow and never did Woe to thee that spoilest and thou wast not spoiled;and dealest treacherously,and they dealt not treacherously with thee!When thou shalt cease to spoil thou shalt be spoiled;and when thou shalt make an end to deal treacherously ,they shall deal treacherously with thee I am new here i would like to introduce myself with a poem my son wrote that tells people where i and a many more stand I am not good with computers so i appologise if i mess up As I look at myself, I see the earth and the sun, I see the stars and the moon in the sky, As I look at your wealth, I see the curse of just "One", I see the toll it takes not knowing why, I see the mercies of many, And the curses of plenty, I see the knowledge and wisdom of youth, I see the judges unbalanced, So I stand now unsilenced, To say I see how you've hidden the truth, You keep changing the story, You make men to worrie, By thinking we're all gonna fall, You cut off the flesh, Of all those that know best, Then you feed it to he who's called Baal. peace dances with fishes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted August 1, 2006 Report Share Posted August 1, 2006 Could it be the white brother still does not see who they are fighting? Welcome to the forum. What white brother are you referring to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.