letter from Jacqueline House- 6Nations

[skyclad]

The Grand River lands have been claimed by the SN in Supreme Court case 406/95, the govt statement of defense was so overwhelming, that the SN went to Specific claims resolution where at least they can get 10,000,000 if they arbitrate. The govt case has 70,000 pages of documents and records printed from before 1784, on every issue involving SN Grand River Lands. Some documents actually come from the archives in London Britain.

In specific claims resolution they may not get land but financial compensation.

Some SN have decided to just seize the land because their case looks hopeless.

The negot in Caledonia are separate from the original 406/95 issue,

In other words we have 2 negot on the same land by two different parties.

Regardless, in mid 90's Henco went to the Six Nation Council Band and got an OK to build on the land. However the new council is not honouring that agreement.

Henco is not the only group that owns the disputed land, the other 6 builders are still negot. with the prov.

In general the 42 arces are not much good for any thing but farming or a casino complex, which is the size most natives casinos in the states occupy.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon! Riverspin,

Keeping this SACRED promise could cost $1 trillion dollars. This would mean that Canadians living today would have to pay a huge tax increase -> for example even if we doubled the GST to 12% it would still take 40 years to pay it. It is simply not reasonable to expect 30 million people to sacrifice so much for the 22,000 people living on Six Nations reserve today.

In 200 years of illegal occupation it is likely that through land speculation, industrial and commercial development and resource extraction, the benefits you have gained in that time have surpassed that $1 trillion value 10 times. If it takes you 40 years to pay off your debt then so what? You will be able to look to tax relief 40 years from now after the injustice has been restored and know that your account is settled. Otherwise we can make this drag on so that your children and grandchildren incur a compounded debt of $50 trillion for your inaction today. At some point you have to own up to your debt and pay back what you owe.....of course if this is the path of settlement that we agree upon........

We already discussed these options at length and your attempts to re-spin everything that has already been said in hopes that you can spin the facts around once again is simply a waste of everyone's time. I would suggest to Bluebird that she not allow herself to be abused by your incessent and obscessive denial of the facts and options of this issue.

O:nen

[geoffrey]

So if we paid the bill, you'll all become Canadian and not be a massive burden on welfare right?

Because the welfare cost of the Indians in this country is what I'm concerned about, especially since most is racially based. So if we give you all this money, how quickly will the Indians clean up their acts and show similiar economic indictators of their non-Indian counterparts?

[Riverwind]

If it takes you 40 years to pay off your debt then so what? You will be able to look to tax relief 40 years from now after the injustice has been restored and know that your account is settled.

Attitudes like your will ensure that Six Nations people get nothing. The people you are trying to extort money from know your demands are ridiculous and if the Six Nations leadership took a similar position then the gov't would be able to walk away from the negotiating table in without any guilt. In that situation, I am also certain that the gov't would have the political support necessary to make any constitutional changes necessary to wipe away any legal claim that Six Nation might have in Canadian courts.

I am sure Bluejay can educate you on the political nature of this dispute and the need for pragmatic solutions.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

So if we paid the bill, you'll all become Canadian and not be a massive burden on welfare right?

No. We are Haudenosaunee - a soveriegn and independent nation.

I've already establish through fact that Six Nations does not receive welfare money (or education or or infrastructure monies etc.) from Canada. The transfers that Six receives are only about 1/3 of the interest monies on the $30 billion trust account that Canada holds on behalf of Six Nations. At the rate they are going with interest and infaltion that trust is growing by about $1 billion every 8 years (compounded it could be every 4 years). So get off you high horse and face the facts. Canada owes us, not the other way around.

O:nen

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon! Riverspin,

As Rotinosoni, I am the "leadership" My opinion not only counts in what is discussed at the negotiations but my decision on the matter will declare the final outcome. Your opinion - that others will not accept the proposal - is totally irrelevent since your "leaders" speak and resolve without your input or acceptance. We are in a better position to prescribe the result than you are at even understanding the problems.

O:nen

[skyclad]

Perhaps you can explain to me who payed for the new high school on Six Nations land in the Caledonia area; on the reserve in Oshwegen, extra expensive because it was built like a long house. Yes our govt in Canada payed for that.

Not Ken Hill, or his father Reg Hill the cigeraette kings on the reserve, but Canadian taxpayers.

Further this high school, is not full, why? For native child that goes to a non reserve school in Caledonia or Hagersville, each native family gets a cash supplemnt from the the govt, the Canadian taxpayer.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Six Nation receives about $60 million a year in transfers. The interest on $30 billion amounts to $150 million a year.

You figure out who paid for it. I've given you the clues.

O:nen

[deirdrie]

why should canada keep having to pay for people who consider themselves not canadians the natives should be grateful for what them get just now pleas watch tsi people he is the no 1 troll of the world aka blain or saga

[Okwaho]

why should canada keep having to pay for people who consider themselves not canadians the natives should be grateful for what them get just now pleas watch tsi people he is the no 1 troll of the world aka blain or saga

What kind of lower than a snake deceitful crap are you trying to pull???

You should be banned for even trying to suggest that Tsi is blain or saga!!!

[Riley]

why should canada keep having to pay for people who consider themselves not canadians the natives should be grateful for what them get just now pleas watch tsi people he is the no 1 troll of the world aka blain or saga

What kind of lower than a snake deceitful crap are you trying to pull???

You should be banned for even trying to suggest that Tsi is blain or saga!!!

BUSTED!!!! maybe you should be banned for an outright lie

Here's his post, and here's the link to his post

http://www.reclamationinfo.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=63

Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne'

Joined: 15 Jun 2006

Posts: 210

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 5:39 pm Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

She:kon!

While we're at it I thought it might be appropriate to introduce myself.

I'm Blain on the Caledonia Angry Women's site, although I have recently been banned because Kim's anger got the best of her ~again~. But in any case those of you who might be reading the site will find how disturbed they actually are. A few subtle and often times subliminal suggestions and they go off the wire. LOL A little poking with a tiny stick and these angry women (and that refers to the men posting there too.... Smile0 ) start flailing around like a bunch of ohta-flingin' monkeys. Ha ha ha ha.

Looks like we are in fine company together Timmer......

Maybe I'll see you at the BBQ at Kim and Jeff's place on Anti-Canada Day week-end. I hear there are going to be fireworks and all that happening in her neighbourhood.....Should be fun!

Wink

O:nen

_________________

Sasewatst ne owenna nok sasewatst sewawen:na tanon nonkwa:ti tsi nahoten kaya'torehtatsheri:yo

View user's profile Send private message

[skyclad]

Just so everyone knows Blaine sells hotdogs in Caledonia, sales are a little slow, so when in Caledonia buy one, join the 'support Blaine campaign'

[sweetums]

Just so everyone knows Blaine sells hotdogs in Caledonia, sales are a little slow, so when in Caledonia buy one, join the 'support Blaine campaign'

The best damn hotdogs you will ever find. Yum yum.

[deirdrie]

thank you riley now people can see the lies from tsi and others for themselves i have never tried to pull anything but show the people of canada the truth tsi does not sell hotdogs in caledonia but goes around causing trouble on furums using false names you will soon find out from his lies he writes

[Riley]

Now that I've read the rest of the thread that I linked above, it really doesn't show him to be in a good light - giving personal info on people, and veiled threats.

And he is a Rotinosoni? Which is what exactly? (not sarcastic, I really don't know) If this is an example of six nations leadership, they need to do clean up their house as well.

[jdobbin]

How many people is he on this forum? Has the moderator got rules on multiple identities?

[Riverwind]

How many people is he on this forum? Has the moderator got rules on multiple identities?

He is only one person on this forum.

[Temagami Scourge]

Just to sneak a quick point in, once we can assist the Caledonians in overcoming the influence of hard liquor, welfare fraud and chronic, long-term in-breeding, I truly believe that major strides will be made in the ongoing collegial relationship Six Nations has had with Caledonia.

Unfortunately, the free money that the province has handed to Caledonians to "ease their pain" for the ongoing land dispute may cause further turmoil within that community and in many other communities across Canada. I can see that many communities will begin pressuring the province to give individuals and businesses as much free money as possible for merely living near a First Nation. In the case of the citizens of Caledonia, this could clearly lead to greater dependance on government and create a whole new set of social ills in the town....as if alcohol abuse, welfare collection and in-breeding weren't enough.

However, as I've oft-stated, there are many on Six Nations who would be more than willing to lend a helping hand to Caledonians in overcoming their communal dysfunction.

The first step, of course, is to shake the Caledonians out of their current state of denial....

[Who's Doing What?]

You should really have a window open when gluing models together.

[FTA Lawyer]

FTA, I had made a post indicating that not all of us were of that opinion from the native poster you are referring to. I for one, appreciate the legal views you have expressed and am grateful for the knowledge you are sharing

Aiy Hiy, Chi Meegwetch!

Sorry...maybe I missed it...there are so many threads on this issue that I can't keep track!

FTA

[FTA Lawyer]

I jumped into the various Six Nations threads by saying that I spent hours reading up on the history of the dispute and stating that in my view Canada should not be fighting this fight as I saw considerable merit in the Confederacy's claim to the lands in question as well as considerable merit for the proposition that they were allies and not subjects of the Crown.

FTA, I as well have spent hours reading the history and have not come to the same conclusion as you mention. I would be curious to read some of your research that indicates that the Plank Road Lands, which Douglas Creek Estates is part of (1/2 mile on either side of the Plank Road for 6 miles on either side of the Grand River), were not part of a valid land surrender. If you could forward any links that support that position, it would be appreciated...as I have not found a lot in my quest for both sides of the issue...

Here are a couple of sources of information that I have read (FYI)...

http://www.citizensofcaledonia.ca/PDFDocum...imResearch2.pdf (someone's listing of a bunch of Google links)

http://www.citizensofcaledonia.ca/PDFDocum...FileNo40695.pdf (a review of the Six Nations claims and the government's Statement of Defence to those claims)

I didn't collect / record the links of the sites I researched...but I might be able to find a few of them on my other computer...if I can I'll post them.

One of the more interesting things that I came across was with respect to the "lawful surrender" of much of the disputed lands. The article I read described how basically any where from 15 to 50 Six Nations representatives were signatories on almost every document they've ever signed with the Crown, and on the lawful surrender docs. only 6 signed. The writer of the article posed the rhetorical question of why on likely the most important land transaction to date would only 6 people sign and then it turns out that the authority of those 6 people is in question?

Sometimes things don't pass the "smell test"...

FTA

[Riverwind]

The writer of the article posed the rhetorical question of why on likely the most important land transaction to date would only 6 people sign and then it turns out that the authority of those 6 people is in question?

The text of that document can be found here:

http://www.canadiana.org/ECO/PageView/9194...468075489fd6b9b

The document claims that those people were authorized by the Six Nations full council.

Even if it can be proven that those 6 people were acting without authority isn't it up the Six Nations to make that claim as soon as they became aware of the fraudulent transaction?

I am pretty sure that I would have no legal claim if my great-great grand uncle sold property that he owned jointly with my great-great grand father without the approval of my great-great grand father. Is this another situation where the claims of aboriginal groups are given special consideration for no reason other than the fact that they are aboriginal?

Also I am curious whether the law would distinguish between a situation where the 6 people were guilty of fraud and the gov't was mislead and the situation where the gov't colluded with the 6 to create some legal cover for a transaction they both knew was fraudulent.

[mister_v]

One of the more interesting things that I came across was with respect to the "lawful surrender" of much of the disputed lands. The article I read described how basically any where from 15 to 50 Six Nations representatives were signatories on almost every document they've ever signed with the Crown, and on the lawful surrender docs. only 6 signed. The writer of the article posed the rhetorical question of why on likely the most important land transaction to date would only 6 people sign and then it turns out that the authority of those 6 people is in question?

Sometimes things don't pass the "smell test"...

FTA

You must keep in mind that land surrenders with regards to the Six Nations on the Grand River did not require the involvement of other Iroquois bands that reside elsewhere (Tyendinaga, the USA, etc), the surrenders were simply agreed to with those residing at the Grand River. As a result, a much smaller consensus was needed for those land surrenders.

The significant land surrenders involving Joseph Brant as the signatory on behalf of the Six Nations were due to Brant being given power of attorney by the Six Nations.

[skyclad]

In the surrender of 1841 it was Joe Brant son John Brant who represented the council, he was a full fledged lawyer. I believe Joe Brant was dead at that time|?

[FTA Lawyer]

The document claims that those people were authorized by the Six Nations full council.

Even if it can be proven that those 6 people were acting without authority isn't it up the Six Nations to make that claim as soon as they became aware of the fraudulent transaction?

I am pretty sure that I would have no legal claim if my great-great grand uncle sold property that he owned jointly with my great-great grand father without the approval of my great-great grand father. Is this another situation where the claims of aboriginal groups are given special consideration for no reason other than the fact that they are aboriginal?

Also I am curious whether the law would distinguish between a situation where the 6 people were guilty of fraud and the gov't was mislead and the situation where the gov't colluded with the 6 to create some legal cover for a transaction they both knew was fraudulent.

There is no short answer to your question. In a Torrens land title system like we have in Alberta, the certificate of title reigns supreme with respect to actual ownership of the land. The government guarantees that anyone who has been screwed somehow out of their property will get a payout from the public purse, but the title holder is the owner and no one can legally "go behind" the title.

In some Eastern Provinces (at least when I was in law school) there still existed a system where lawyers or notaries had to actually research the title, finding all of the paperwork stored in peoples shoeboxes etc. to prove the chain of title lawfully passing...and if your lawyer screwed up, someone could come along and prove better title than you and actually get the property. Unfortunately, I can't tell you off the top of my head what the status is of any of the provinces other than Alberta.

Further, the concept of land ownership for aboriginals has never been the same as ours, so like it or not it will always be treated somewhat differently. Furthermore, the Six Nations situation seems to be particularly unique due to the proclamations of the land in question being very much different than a standard setting aside of some reserve lands as part of a more typical treaty.

Add in the possibilities of fraud by Crown agents and my gut feeling is that the Confederacy claim is likely the best one out there. I don't really think that they will walk away with the land (out from under the current residents) or with a trillion dollars, but I really would not want this one decided by a judge...negotiation is the key...it will be the best chance of both sides going away partial winners rather than finding an outright winner and an outright loser.

As for your hypothetical, the law would absolutely distinguish between a scenario where the gov't. was duped by fraudsters just as much as the Six Nations as opposed to one where the gov't. conspired with the fraudsters to screw the natives out of their land. Again though, probably just amounts to an increase in quantum of a "fair settlement" at this stage, and not any meaningful difference in the form of settlement.

FTA