Freedom Of Speech,An Iroquoian Tradition

[g_bambino]

Because it was a pay-me-later plan to which the Crown said "trust us". Yet even one of your Indian Agents had a hand in our pie and your governmetn conveniently forgot about it. Good thing we don't forget,eh?

Where did this plan come from? It is not outlined in either the Royal Proclamation or the Haldimand Treaty.

Our communties are supported by the half interest on that trust.

When I see evidence of this trust, I'll believe it.

We DO have our own electricity generation on the Grand River sustem. We do provide our own health care system, our own administration (no need for uncivil service workers like you guys , our own school system, ariport and every other thing a nation needs to survive.

I didn't contest that you've been given these things, but you still have no evidence that the monies that bought, built, or supply this infrastructure was or is purely yours, and not actually borne by all the people of Canada.

What you don't have that we have is sovereignty based on self-determination. Instead you have a Sovereign Monarchy who allows your government some autonomy on domestic issues but who must approve any changes to your system or the supreme law. So in reality Canada is not sovereign but a subset of the Queen's colony.

That's a bunch of babble if I've ever read it. I'm making an effort to read up more on the Royal Proclamation and Haldimand Treaty, could you please do the same for Canada's system of government? In particular, find such information that will help you understand that Canada has a queen because it is a sovereign kingdom, not because it is a colony.

Don't mistake our friendship with Canada as dependence. That fact reamins we have free-trade agreements with many countries around the world and in an instant all that timber, food, minerals and industrial goods can be shipped from our territory to any nation looking for a good deal. How long do you think it would take for Canada to survive if we authorized the Americans to come in to our territories (and those of allied First Nations) and harvest our resources to you detriment? You forget that the Americans are alos our allies and for a quick buck and some good stash they will help anyone out. Don't go down that road unless you are willing to take a huge loss.

I'm not taking any road, nor am I interested in your fear mongering. I just want you to prove that Six Nations are a sovereign people when there's so much evidence to the contrary.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

I wonder how to pronounce 'Haudenosaunee'?

I think I might call a few of those embassies that Okwahu claimed would accept these passports and see what they say. I doubt they will know what I am talking about.

[g_bambino]

I have found evidence of your trust fund.

However, these trust funds exist only through the Indian Act, and are only held for "bands" who live on "reserves" as defined by the Act. The Act states in s. 2 (d) that a band is:

...any tribe, band or body of Indians who own or are interested in a reserve or in Indian lands in common, of which the legal title is vested in the Crown...

, and in s. 2 (i) that a reserve is:

any tract or tracts of land set apart by treaty . . . for the use or benefit of or granted to a particular band of Indians, of which the legal title is in the Crown, and which remains so set apart.

So, by the very fact that the Six Nations on the Haldimand Tract receive monies from the Crown via a trust fund proves again that the territory belongs to the Canadian Crown, Six Nations are subject to Canadian laws (the Indian Act), and thus are not sovereign.

This claim of Six Nations sovereignty has been going on for centuries - even just after the granting of Royal Assent to the Haldimand Proclamation in 1784, Joseph Brant asserted that the Proclamation gave Six Nations nationhood status, and full sovereignty over the Grand River lands. But, the British Government then stated clearly that that was not their intent:

Brant interpreted the Haldimand Proclamation as having two effects:

(i) -- as being full national recognition of the Six Nations as an independent national community;

(ii) -- as a grant of the Grand River lands to the Six Nations in fee simple.

The British Government firmly resisted both propositions, and the Crown's position has never changed.

ISAAC ET AL. v. DAVEY ET AL.

Later, in 1793, Lord Simcoe, Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, gave Assent to the Simcoe Patent, but Brant refused to recognize its authority. 213 years after that Six Nations chiefs say the Simcoe Patent does affirm their claim to sovereignty over the Haldimand Tract!

Still, neither the Haldimand Proclamation nor the Simcoe Patent does any such thing, and the claims have consistently been dismissed in court after court, all the way up to the British Privy Council when Canadians still had the ability to appeal to that body, and to the Supreme Court after that.

The best part of it all is that the lands were given to the Six Nations in 1784 - prior to that the land belonged to the Mississaugas, was purchased from them by the Crown, and those Six Nations displaced from their previous lands which then lay within the United States were allowed to settle on it. The Haldimand Proclamation says as much plainly in its text:

...I have, at the earnest Desire of many of these His Majesty's faithfull Allies purchased a Tract of Land, from the Indians situated between the Lakes Ontario, Erie, & Huron and I do hereby in His Majesty's name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation, and such other of the Six Nation Indians as wish to settle in that Quarter to take Possession of, & Settle upon the Banks of the River commonly called Ours [Ouse] or Grand River...

So much for your ancestral homeland, sovereignty based on self-determination, and the reliability of oral history!!

[Okwaho]

She:kon!

Your error in comprehension is that we are Six Nations - Haudenosaunee - not "First Nations" in general. Our soveriegnty is NOT given to us by the Crown but comes by right of preceeding the Crown's presence.

Once you correct your errors, then we'll discuss it further.

O:nen

Six Nations are First Nations, are they not? I'm merely using the term First Nations in place of Indians - but I can use the latter if that's what you prefer, or is what is more accurate.

Still, according to the Royal Proclamation, evidently all Native lands fall under the sovereignty of the Crown - read the quotes again, and pay attention to what is highlighted in italics. Regardless of whether or not Six Nations preceed the presence of the Crown in North America, today Six Nations are within the Crown's sovereignty, not their own.

No! Indigenous lands do not fall under British Sovereignty. We've tried to explain this on numerous posts and threads. You are not reading it properly and taking most of it out of context! Here is a map that shows the land under British (east of the red line) control as opposed to "Indian Territory." As I've mentioned before, this is what ignited the American Revolutionary war. In the Proclamation the British are claiming the French controled lands as British. http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/proc63.htm

[Okwaho]

I wonder how to pronounce 'Haudenosaunee'?

I think I might call a few of those embassies that Okwahu claimed would accept these passports and see what they say. I doubt they will know what I am talking about.

Go for it!!! The question is...will you tell the true answer you recieve!

[g_bambino]

No! Indigenous lands do not fall under British Sovereignty. We've tried to explain this on numerous posts and threads. You are not reading it properly and taking most of it out of context! Here is a map that shows the land under British (east of the red line) control as opposed to "Indian Territory." As I've mentioned before, this is what ignited the American Revolutionary war. In the Proclamation the British are claiming the French controled lands as British. http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/proc63.htm

It says prominently in your cited website that the French ceded the territories to the west of the thirteen colonies to the British at the end of the French and Indian War, but the Royal Proclamation limited the ability for the colonists to expand. It was that limitation which was partly to blame for the revolutionary war, and, as I said, once the US Americans issued their declaration of independence, the Royal Proclamation was rendered null and void within the United States, allowing the US Americans to expand westward uncontested - and slaughter a good number of Natives along the way. Compare that to the relatively peaceable westward expansion north of the border where the Royal Proclamation still applied, and still does apply today. Thus, Native lands now fall within the sovereignty of the Canadian Crown.

[Okwaho]

I have found evidence of your trust fund.

However, these trust funds exist only through the Indian Act, and are only held for "bands" who live on "reserves" as defined by the Act. The Act states in s. 2 (d) that a band is:

...any tribe, band or body of Indians who own or are interested in a reserve or in Indian lands in common, of which the legal title is vested in the Crown...

, and in s. 2 (i) that a reserve is:

any tract or tracts of land set apart by treaty . . . for the use or benefit of or granted to a particular band of Indians, of which the legal title is in the Crown, and which remains so set apart.

So, by the very fact that the Six Nations on the Haldimand Tract receive monies from the Crown via a trust fund proves again that the territory belongs to the Canadian Crown, Six Nations are subject to Canadian laws (the Indian Act), and thus are not sovereign.

This claim of Six Nations sovereignty has been going on for centuries - even just after the granting of Royal Assent to the Haldimand Proclamation in 1784, Joseph Brant asserted that the Proclamation gave Six Nations nationhood status, and full sovereignty over the Grand River lands. But, the British Government then stated clearly that that was not their intent:

Brant interpreted the Haldimand Proclamation as having two effects:

(i) -- as being full national recognition of the Six Nations as an independent national community;

(ii) -- as a grant of the Grand River lands to the Six Nations in fee simple.

The British Government firmly resisted both propositions, and the Crown's position has never changed.

ISAAC ET AL. v. DAVEY ET AL.

Later, in 1793, Lord Simcoe, Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, gave Assent to the Simcoe Patent, but Brant refused to recognize its authority. 213 years after that Six Nations chiefs say the Simcoe Patent does affirm their claim to sovereignty over the Haldimand Tract!

Still, neither the Haldimand Proclamation nor the Simcoe Patent does any such thing, and the claims have consistently been dismissed in court after court, all the way up to the British Privy Council when Canadians still had the ability to appeal to that body, and to the Supreme Court after that.

The best part of it all is that the lands were given to the Six Nations in 1784 - prior to that the land belonged to the Mississaugas, was purchased from them by the Crown, and those Six Nations displaced from their previous lands which then lay within the United States were allowed to settle on it. The Haldimand Proclamation says as much plainly in its text:

...I have, at the earnest Desire of many of these His Majesty's faithfull Allies purchased a Tract of Land, from the Indians situated between the Lakes Ontario, Erie, & Huron and I do hereby in His Majesty's name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation, and such other of the Six Nation Indians as wish to settle in that Quarter to take Possession of, & Settle upon the Banks of the River commonly called Ours [Ouse] or Grand River...

So much for your ancestral homeland, sovereignty based on self-determination, and the reliability of oral history!!

And therein with all of your babled bedlam lies the first evidence of "Cultural Genocide"! The Indian Act is not even mentioned in your constitution because it is in total contradiction of our agreements that it protects! It is in fact your law breaking its own law!

By the way...nice try on the Ours River quote! The name of the River refered to in the Royal Proc. is OUSE not Ours! The French named the river Grande Rivière in the 1700s and Simcoe renamed it Ouse after the Ouse river in England. Grande Rivière is still in use today under the anglicized pronounciation "Grand River."

I find it quite comical that you would scoff at our oral history yet you can't understand your own written history! Then again maybe you don't want to because it reinforces our oral history! That seems to be the pattern here. We give you the evidence you ask for and you're never satisfied with it. It only goes to show...people only believe what they see but, when they see it they don't want to believe it!

[Okwaho]

No! Indigenous lands do not fall under British Sovereignty. We've tried to explain this on numerous posts and threads. You are not reading it properly and taking most of it out of context! Here is a map that shows the land under British (east of the red line) control as opposed to "Indian Territory." As I've mentioned before, this is what ignited the American Revolutionary war. In the Proclamation the British are claiming the French controled lands as British. http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/proc63.htm

It says prominently in your cited website that the French ceded the territories to the west of the thirteen colonies to the British at the end of the French and Indian War, but the Royal Proclamation limited the ability for the colonists to expand. It was that limitation which was partly to blame for the revolutionary war, and, as I said, once the US Americans issued their declaration of independence, the Royal Proclamation was rendered null and void within the United States, allowing the US Americans to expand westward uncontested - and slaughter a good number of Natives along the way. Compare that to the relatively peaceable westward expansion north of the border where the Royal Proclamation still applied, and still does apply today. Thus, Native lands now fall within the sovereignty of the Canadian Crown.

Not unless they are ceded or surrended to the Crown!

[Chuck U. Farlie]

I couldn't call the Dutch Embassy in time today, as I was working.... which makes me wonder what Tsi and Okwahu do for a job, since they always seem to be posting... maybe they work for Ontario Works????

Anyway... I went to The Netherlands Embassy website as it was one of the countries on your list that accepts your passport. Under the Visa section I found this list:

http://www.mfa.nl/ott/visas_and_consular/v...n_you_require_a

Dutch Visas

So, I will have to verify with a phone call, but its not looking good. I don't seem to see Haudenosaunee, Six Nations, Native North Americans, or anything similiar in their list of nations that either need visas or don't need visas.... hmmmmm???? If I have some time tomorrow I will call the embassy, and I have no reason to lie about what I find out Okwahu.

Countries whose nationals need a visa for a stay of under three months:

Afghanistan

Albania

Algeria

Angola

Antigua and Barbuda

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bahamas

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Barbados

Belarus

Belize

Benin

Bhutan

Bosnia-Hercegovina

Botswana

Burma (see Myanmar)

Burkina Faso

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Cape Verde Islands

Central African Fepublic

Chad

China (People's Republic)

Colombia

Comoros

Congo (Democratic Republic)

Congo (Brazzaville)

Côte d’Ivoire

Cuba

Djibouti

Dominica

Dominican Republic

East Timor

Ecuador

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Fiji Islands

Gabon

Gambia

Georgia

Ghana

Grenada

Guinea

Guinea-Bissau

Guyana

Haiti

India

Indonesia

Iran

Iraq

Jamaica

Jordan

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kyrgystan

Kiribati

Kuwait

Laos

Lebanon

Lesotho

Liberia

Libya

Macedonia

Madagascar

Malawi

Maldives

Mali

Marshall Islands

Mauritania

Mauritius

Micronesia

Moldavia

Mongolia

Morocco

Mozambique

Myanmar (formerly Burma)

Namibia

Nauru

Nepal

Niger

Nigeria

Northern Marianas (Islands)

North Korea

Oman

Pakistan

Palau

Papua New Guinea

Peru

Philipines

Qatar

Russia

Rwanda

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Salomon Islands

São Tomé and Principe

Saudi Arabia

Senegal

Serbia and Montenegro

Seychelles

Sierra Leone

Somalia

South Africa

Sri Lanka

Sudan

Suriname

Swaziland

Syria

Tajikistan

Taiwan (Republic of China)

Tanzania

Thailand

Togo

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Tunisia

Turkey

Turkmenistan

Tuvalu

Uganda

Ukraine

United Arab Emirates

Uzbekistan

Vanuatu

Vietnam

West Samoa

Yemen

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Countries whose nationals do not require a visa for a stay of three months or less:

Andorra

Argentina

Austria

Australia

Bolivia

Brazil

Brunei

Bulgaria

Canada

Chile

Costa Rica

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

El Salvador

Estonia

Finland

France

Germany (Federal Republic)

Greece

Guatemala

Honduras

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Japan

Liechtenstein

Lithuania

Malaysia

Malta

Mexico

Monaco

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Norway

Panama

Paraguay

Poland

Portugal

Romania

San Marino

Singapore

Slovakia

Slovenia

South Korea

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States of America

Uruguay

Vatican City

Venezuela

[Chuck U. Farlie]

In the picture of the Haudenosaunee passport, the photo caption says: "Reflecting their claim to soveriegnty, many Iroquios carry passports issued by the Six Nations Reserve in Canada. The passports, bearing instructions in French, English, and Iroquois, are recognized by 36-nations around the world, not including the United States."

I find it interesting that it states that they are issued by the Six Nations Reserve in Canada. I also now see where Okwahu et al got their '36 nations accept it" quote.... however, just because it's in a caption in this book does not mean that it is fact. I personally will call one or two of the country's embassies on your list, but so far I have found no verifiable proof that your passports are accepted anywhere - except for this page from some book, which can hardly be taken as fact.

[g_bambino]

And therein with all of your babled bedlam lies the first evidence of "Cultural Genocide"! The Indian Act is not even mentioned in your constitution because it is in total contradiction of our agreements that it protects! It is in fact your law breaking its own law!

By the way...nice try on the Ours River quote! The name of the River refered to in the Royal Proc. is OUSE not Ours! The French named the river Grande Rivière in the 1700s and Simcoe renamed it Ouse after the Ouse river in England. Grande Rivière is still in use today under the anglicized pronounciation "Grand River."

I find it quite comical that you would scoff at our oral history yet you can't understand your own written history! Then again maybe you don't want to because it reinforces our oral history! That seems to be the pattern here. We give you the evidence you ask for and you're never satisfied with it. It only goes to show...people only believe what they see but, when they see it they don't want to believe it!

No, the Indian Act isn't mentioned in the Constitution because it does not consist any part of it. It is simply an Act of Parliament, but one which applies to Natives. It has been argued that much of it was rendered invalid by the Canadian Bill of Rights, and later the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but again, court after court has said that it remains in full effect.

If you truly and utterly believe it does not apply to you, then why do your chiefs still accept the payments out of the trust fund that the Indian Act stipulates you should receive? That's a tad bit hypocritical, isn't it?

Anyway, any references to river names weren't mine - it was taken directly from the text of the Halidmand Proclamation.

If something, pertinent to this discussion, from "my" written history correlates with "your" oral history (aside from the point that the Royal Proclamation limited colonial settlement on dedicated Indian lands) then please provide it.

[g_bambino]

It says prominently in your cited website that the French ceded the territories to the west of the thirteen colonies to the British at the end of the French and Indian War, but the Royal Proclamation limited the ability for the colonists to expand. It was that limitation which was partly to blame for the revolutionary war, and, as I said, once the US Americans issued their declaration of independence, the Royal Proclamation was rendered null and void within the United States, allowing the US Americans to expand westward uncontested - and slaughter a good number of Natives along the way. Compare that to the relatively peaceable westward expansion north of the border where the Royal Proclamation still applied, and still does apply today. Thus, Native lands now fall within the sovereignty of the Canadian Crown.

Not unless they are ceded or surrended to the Crown!

By various methods over the past 5 centuries (sale, conquest, or simple inhabitation) all lands in North America (north of Central America, that is) are now divided between five different countries: the UK, Canada, Denmark, France, and the United States. Within Canada all territory is within the jurisdiction of the Crown - there are no First Nations nations.

[g_bambino]

I couldn't call the Dutch Embassy in time today, as I was working.... which makes me wonder what Tsi and Okwahu do for a job, since they always seem to be posting... maybe they work for Ontario Works????

Anyway... I went to The Netherlands Embassy website as it was one of the countries on your list that accepts your passport. Under the Visa section I found this list:

http://www.mfa.nl/ott/visas_and_consular/v...n_you_require_a

Dutch Visas

So, I will have to verify with a phone call, but its not looking good. I don't seem to see Haudenosaunee, Six Nations, Native North Americans, or anything similiar in their list of nations that either need visas or don't need visas.... hmmmmm???? If I have some time tomorrow I will call the embassy, and I have no reason to lie about what I find out Okwahu.

My search for any official recognition of Six Nations passports gave the same result: nada.

[Riverwind]

My search for any official recognition of Six Nations passports gave the same result: nada.

Gotta love Google...

http://www.cic.gc.ca/manuals-guides/englis...22Haudenosaunee

The Haudenosaunee Passport is listed by Immigration Canada as a "Fictional passport issued by non-existent territories" in Section 5.13.

I find it hard to believe that other countries would accept travel documents that Canada uncategorically rejects as "fictional".

[kimmy]

My search for any official recognition of Six Nations passports gave the same result: nada.

Gotta love Google...

http://www.cic.gc.ca/manuals-guides/englis...22Haudenosaunee

The Haudenosaunee Passport is listed by Immigration Canada as a "Fictional passport issued by non-existent territories" in Section 5.13.

I find it hard to believe that other countries would accept travel documents that Canada uncategorically rejects as "fictional".

I got the same reaction when I tried to travel using my "Republic of Kimmy" passport.

-k

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Thanks Riverwind... I think that link says it all about the validity of this so-called passport.

I found this interesting link concerning Indian soveriengty.... its focus is in the USA, but there are a lot of parallels:

http://www.frontiernet.net/~mmulford/indsov.htm

"The Myth of Indigenous Americans' Sovereignty"

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Prove to ME that Canada is a sovereign country using the American Declaration of Independence. Nothing in it states you are so as far as they are concerned you are still a colony of Great Britian like they used to be.

O:nen

[Riverwind]

Prove to ME that Canada is a sovereign country

It has been proven to you so many times in many different ways. You really remind me of that shop keeper in the Mony Python parrot sketch. Too bad you aren't as funny.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Nothing has been proven. All people have presented is circular logic suggesting that Canada is soveriegn because the Queen is a Canadian and the Queen is Canadian because Canada is sovereign. All of that poop is hogwash.

But the challenge is to prove Canada is sovereign using only the Declaration of Independence as a reference.

Our sovereignty goes beyond ANY Canadian or British legal document. YOUR laws only apply to YOU. They neither apply to us or Americans when we are on our own soil.

O:nen

[Okwaho]

I couldn't call the Dutch Embassy in time today, as I was working.... which makes me wonder what Tsi and Okwahu do for a job, since they always seem to be posting... maybe they work for Ontario Works????

Anyway... I went to The Netherlands Embassy website as it was one of the countries on your list that accepts your passport. Under the Visa section I found this list:

http://www.mfa.nl/ott/visas_and_consular/v...n_you_require_a

Dutch Visas

So, I will have to verify with a phone call, but its not looking good. I don't seem to see Haudenosaunee, Six Nations, Native North Americans, or anything similiar in their list of nations that either need visas or don't need visas.... hmmmmm???? If I have some time tomorrow I will call the embassy, and I have no reason to lie about what I find out Okwahu.

Countries whose nationals need a visa for a stay of under three months:

Afghanistan

Albania

Algeria

Angola

Antigua and Barbuda

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Bahamas

Bahrain

Bangladesh

Barbados

Belarus

Belize

Benin

Bhutan

Bosnia-Hercegovina

Botswana

Burma (see Myanmar)

Burkina Faso

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Cape Verde Islands

Central African Fepublic

Chad

China (People's Republic)

Colombia

Comoros

Congo (Democratic Republic)

Congo (Brazzaville)

Côte d’Ivoire

Cuba

Djibouti

Dominica

Dominican Republic

East Timor

Ecuador

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Fiji Islands

Gabon

Gambia

Georgia

Ghana

Grenada

Guinea

Guinea-Bissau

Guyana

Haiti

India

Indonesia

Iran

Iraq

Jamaica

Jordan

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kyrgystan

Kiribati

Kuwait

Laos

Lebanon

Lesotho

Liberia

Libya

Macedonia

Madagascar

Malawi

Maldives

Mali

Marshall Islands

Mauritania

Mauritius

Micronesia

Moldavia

Mongolia

Morocco

Mozambique

Myanmar (formerly Burma)

Namibia

Nauru

Nepal

Niger

Nigeria

Northern Marianas (Islands)

North Korea

Oman

Pakistan

Palau

Papua New Guinea

Peru

Philipines

Qatar

Russia

Rwanda

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Salomon Islands

São Tomé and Principe

Saudi Arabia

Senegal

Serbia and Montenegro

Seychelles

Sierra Leone

Somalia

South Africa

Sri Lanka

Sudan

Suriname

Swaziland

Syria

Tajikistan

Taiwan (Republic of China)

Tanzania

Thailand

Togo

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Tunisia

Turkey

Turkmenistan

Tuvalu

Uganda

Ukraine

United Arab Emirates

Uzbekistan

Vanuatu

Vietnam

West Samoa

Yemen

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Countries whose nationals do not require a visa for a stay of three months or less:

Andorra

Argentina

Austria

Australia

Bolivia

Brazil

Brunei

Bulgaria

Canada

Chile

Costa Rica

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

El Salvador

Estonia

Finland

France

Germany (Federal Republic)

Greece

Guatemala

Honduras

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Japan

Liechtenstein

Lithuania

Malaysia

Malta

Mexico

Monaco

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Norway

Panama

Paraguay

Poland

Portugal

Romania

San Marino

Singapore

Slovakia

Slovenia

South Korea

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States of America

Uruguay

Vatican City

Venezuela

A Visa has absolutely nothing to do with a passport you moron. A Visa is for residency in a country. A passport is to gain entry into a country.

[Okwaho]

Prove to ME that Canada is a sovereign country

It has been proven to you so many times in many different ways. You really remind me of that shop keeper in the Mony Python parrot sketch. Too bad you aren't as funny.

We have proven to you already that Canada is under British Sovereignty and therefore only has autonomy!

The Goveror General's Role is the proof we have provided you which you conveniently deny and use the "figure head" defence. That means you are either deluded or the GG's Roles are still completely intact as the Governments website says it is! http://www.gg.ca/media/fs-fd/G1_e.asp

We keep producing and yous keep denying and it's round , round you go!!!

[geoffrey]

Since Canada doesn't recognize your passport, and you don't have international flights from your reservation, my question to you... how the hell do you get home from your trips overseas?

[Okwaho]

Thanks Riverwind... I think that link says it all about the validity of this so-called passport.

I found this interesting link concerning Indian soveriengty.... its focus is in the USA, but there are a lot of parallels:

http://www.frontiernet.net/~mmulford/indsov.htm

"The Myth of Indigenous Americans' Sovereignty"

What are you the court jester? Not every country recognizes the pass port of certain countries.

For example:

Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and North Korea do not recognize Israeli passports.

Therefore by your "reasoning" Israel must not be a sovereign Nation and their passports must be bogus!!!

[g_bambino]

Our sovereignty goes beyond ANY Canadian or British legal document. YOUR laws only apply to YOU. They neither apply to us or Americans when we are on our own soil.

The Royal Proclamation and Haldimand Proclamation state otherwise.

[Riverwind]

What are you the court jester? Not every country recognizes the pass port of certain countries.

There is a huge difference between recoginizing the passport and having rules that bar holders from entring the country. These are the rules fore entering Iran:

Restricted entry

Nationals of Israel or holders of passports containing a visa for Israel (either valid or expired) will be refused entry under all circumstances. Women judged to be dressed immodestly will be refused entry.

http://travel.excite.co.uk/travel/guides/m...isaRequirements

It is clear from these rules that Iran acknowledges Israel as a government (why would it care about the stamps in non-Israeli passports if they did not think they mean anything).

OTOH, you have the Canadian gov't describing the Haudenosaunee passport as a 'fantasy' passport.

I willing to bet that any people (if there are any) who have successfully travelled outside North America with Haudenosaunee passports have applied for visas in advance. During the Visa application process they were likely required to produce identification that proves that the they are really a Canadian or American citizens. At that point the embassy issues the Visa and allows the Haudenosaunee passport to be used for that trip. When the person shows up at the country in question it is the Visa that gets them in - not the passport.