Occupations, barricades mean politicians can't ignore native issue

[jennie]

I am REALLY glad this is on the radar for the provincial election. That may just have something to do with the Six Nations press release too (below). The province wants to look good, and ALL of the permits and approvals for development ... like the half dozen or so already halted by Six Nations Sharbot Lake ... all the blockades ... all have authorization from the province

Tyendinaga- quarry license/toxic highway waste/condo

Sharbot Lake- uranium mining (feds have a role too?)

Grassy Narrows - logging

Six Nations - greenfield development

YES it is very good that this is on the radar for the election ... there could be some solutions generated.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/070905/...iginal_issues_1

Occupations and barricades mean politicians can't ignore native issues: Chiefs

Wed Sep 5, 1:39 PM

By Chinta Puxley

TORONTO (CP) - Ontario's next premier will need to quell growing frustration and anger among the province's aboriginal communities to avoid the sort of occupations, blockades and protests that have marked the past year, say native leaders who are plotting their own campaign strategy.

Ongoing occupations in Caledonia, Ont., and the southeastern Ontario community of Sharbot Lake, as well as the Aboriginal Day of Action this past summer, have brought native issues to the fore like never before, said Angus Toulouse, Ontario regional chief with the Assembly of First Nations.

"There is a lot of frustration, there is a lot of despair, there is a lot of hopelessness and there is a lot of anger (among) our people and especially the youth who are lashing out," Toulouse said.

"Things have to change."

No matter who wins the Oct. 10 provincial election, the victor will face a hefty task in rebuilding the province's shattered relationship with aboriginals, Toulouse said.

The first step will be to working out how to share with aboriginal communities the cash the province takes in from natural resources on traditional native land, he added.

"We are not necessarily waiting for a handout," Toulouse said. "It is what is rightfully ours."

...

Political leaders say they are taking notice.

All three mainstream political parties are talking about aboriginal issues, sounding off about how occupations are handled and how to alleviate the despair and frustration felt by many in the aboriginal community.

"We all realize now, as a country, that we've got to rectify these issues," said David Ramsay, Liberal minister of aboriginal affairs. "I think the public pressure is there to get these issues resolved . . . The stars are aligning here."

The Liberals have done as much as they can to lower the temperature in Caledonia, south of Hamilton, and bring the federal government to the negotiating table, Ramsay said.

The province is also working on a way to share wealth with aboriginal communities and has put Ramsay in charge of a ministry, rather than just a secretariat. But it remains clear "it's an area where governments have a lot of work to do," he said.

The Progressive Conservatives are vowing to improve living conditions in aboriginal communities by pushing Ottawa for help and facilitating land claims, but they do so with a caveat: illegal occupations won't be tolerated.

The NDP has promised better consultation with aboriginal people about how traditional lands are used and what permits are granted, as well as sharing the proceeds from any exploitation of their traditional land.

Conservative Leader John Tory - a vocal critic of the Caledonia occupation since it began more than a year ago - said serious problems like high dropout and suicide rates and a lack of health care are being overshadowed by illegal occupations and infighting between different levels of government.

"Caledonia is really not an aboriginal issue," said Tory, who has long said the Liberals should have put an end to the occupation when it first began.

"It's an issue of respect for the law and an issue of a civil society."

...

NDP Leader Howard Hampton said pointed questions are also likely to confront candidates in northern Ontario, where the future of mining and forestry development depends on the support of aboriginal communities.

"What we've seen in the last four years is a bureaucrat sitting in an office tower in Toronto will make a decision that has very significant impacts on the lives of aboriginal people and there is no consultation," Hampton said.

"Aboriginal people are not prepared to put up with that."

Howard Hampton is the only one who nailed the (legal) requirement of consultation http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....&pid=248548,

but the Libs will be 'talking about talking about it' with Six Nations, so they may be able to steal his thunder.

Tory has no ideas at all on this issue, to be polite. (I would have said "stick to education, John" but he messed that up too now.)

Edited September 7, 2007 by jennie

[jennie]

I think this is a very reasonable request ... "stop development on Crown Lands".

They know there will be lands to be returned, and that they will likely be the 'Crown Lands' in the Haldimand Tract or nearby.

Developing on those lands at this point in negotiations is a blatant insult.

I don't know what development is involved.

I am glad there seems to be some movement from the government on that ... willingness to talk about ...

... maybe talking about it ... big step for the governments. biggrin.gif

Ori:wase :

Media Release :

Communiqué:

For Immediate Release

Sept. 6, 2007 Confederacy optimistic but, wants halt to development on crown lands within tract

GRAND RIVER TERRITORY SIX NATIONS- Six Nations Confederacy Council negotiators are optimistic movement may be coming from Canada, in right of the crown, over Six Nations land rights.

However, at the same time Confederacy Royanni (Chiefs) are calling for a halt to all development on crown lands within the Haldimand Tract, while negotiators work on a formula to determine how the amount of restitution to Six Nations, will be arrived at. Royanni met in a full day’s session with Canada and Ontario representatives at the Oneida Business Park Thursday.

Six Nations Confederacy Council lead Negotiator, Mohawk Chief Allen MacNaughton said he is optimistic with Thursday’s discussions. “Canada realizes we have land rights here and it is now a case of developing a formula that will determine what restitution will be or is worth.” Chief MacNaughton said the Canada has not ever adequately explained how it came up with the $125 million offer it made several months ago. “There was a ballpark figure thrown out of $125 million, with no explanation, that is not and has not been satisfactory. There was no formula used, there is no satisfactory explanation.”

As a result he said , “it will be up to Haudenosaunee Six Nations, to gain, come up with a solution. We will be working for the next 30 days on a formula .” Mohawk Chief Allen MacNaughton says Six Nations Haudenosaunee want to see an end to direct action being taken by developers on disputed Six Nations lands.

“Canada and Ontario see the civil actions, our people take against development on our lands as direct action that threatens the talks. However, they do not see that their developers are committing the same kind of action on our lands. Development of Six Nations lands, without our permission is direct action that we do not take kindly to,” he said.

He said “the table has agreed there must be discussion started to stop development on lands the Crown holds under its Ontario Reality Corporation. There is land there, without third party interests, that once cleared of development could be returned to Six Nations.”

Chief MacNaughton said, The Confederacy is also developing a process to work with developers who are caught up in a void being created by Canada and Ontario’s failure to resolve Six Nations land rights. The Six Nations Haudenoniso (Confederacy Council) will continue to work towards a peaceful, fair resolution of its more than 200 year old land rights issues throughout Southern Ontario.

Mohawk Chief Allen MacNaughton

Confederacy Council Lead Negotiator

Edited September 7, 2007 by jennie

[M.Dancer]

Yet another thread on the same topic?

Is this the cyber EQ of the illegal blockade? Spamade?

[jennie]

Yet another thread on the same topic?

Is this the cyber EQ of the illegal blockade? Spamade?

This is the only thread in this forum. Can I help it if people keep replying?

If you read the first post, it is about what the politicians have to say about current blockade issues ... a new perspective.

Then there is the current update from the Six Nations negotiating table. Is that not of interest?

I will delete it if you insist, as I am tired of these snide remarks.

[jennie]

Tory wouldn't allow aboriginal occupations

Friday, 2:00 a.m. Zero tolerance if he's premier

By Sun Media

KINGSTON, Ont. — As premier, John Tory says he would enforce a “one law for all” legal system and apply it to aboriginals who occupy lands as a form of protest against proposed developments.

The Progressive Conservative leader suggested Thursday he would establish a zero-tolerance policy on aboriginal land occupations if he is elected premier of Ontario on Oct. 10.

“We can’t have even legitimate complaints settled by people taking the law into their own hands,” Tory said. Algonquins have set up a campsite on private property in eastern Ontario near Sharbot Lake, where Oakville-based Frontenac Ventures has staked several uranium mining claims.

The Algonquins say they are protecting their land, which is a disputed territory subject to ongoing land claim negotiations, from environmental harm.

Tory said he would have “firm but friendly” conversations with aboriginal leaders to tell them his government would not stand for such tactics.

(Well, McGuinty has never talked to them ... so that at least would be an improvement.)

He didn’t elaborate on what that meant.

(He never has elaborated on what he means.)

Late last month, Superior Court Justice Gordon Thomson issued an injunction against the Algonquins, ordering the blockade to end.

It has been ignored to date.

(The police are wisely seeking advice from their lawyers. They don't want to be sued or vilified.)

The Sharbot Lake blockade is one of several ongoing aboriginal occupations in the province.

Tory said he wouldn’t “just sit back” and allow occupations to “go on in place after place after place.”

He also admonished Premier Dalton McGuinty for not using the courts or the “moral authority” of the premier’s office to end land disputes.

.................

Ah! There it is ... the "moral authority". Well at least he has an idea.

Tory doesn't understand, though, that the feds cannot take aboriginal communities to court.

If the feds EVER stuck their nose in a courtroom on this issue, they'd be ordered to do the Crown's duty and "consult and accommodate" to uphold the honour of the Crown, according to the law that governments have ignored again and again.

If Tory got in, he would quickly learn that the governments' supply of "moral authority" is a bit thin ... and their legal authority too.

Edited September 7, 2007 by jennie

[jennie]

Our Story: Uranium Prospecting in our Backyard

Tuesday June 12, 2007 05:38 PM

By Gloria Morrison

This past January, I was interviewed on CBC’s national radio program As It Happens. Journalist Carol Off asked what I had learned since I discovered that our land had been staked for uranium mining exploration.

I want to share the heart-wrenching questions that my husband and I are left to ponder as we await the bulldozers, chain saws and earth moving equipment to begin their destruction of our much beloved paradise.

During the first week of October 2006 my husband Frank was out collecting firewood to top up our winter supply. We own 100 acres of land, of which 80 acres is mixed woodlot and 20 acres is rolling meadow. He came upon an area where several of our trees had been severed, and the four feet of trunk that was still protruding from the ground where the trees once were had been squared into posts, were tagged and had notes made on the newly razed trunks. The steel tags had numbers and the emblem for the province of Ontario. The pen writing included a date from the previous week and a man’s name. Besides the several severed posts there were about 30 trees that had been ‘blazed’ along approximately a 1200 foot line of pink marking tape.

At that time, Frank correctly guessed that our land had been staked for mining. We had not received any notification or warning that this was going to happen. ... http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/free_...ranium_morrison

Edited September 8, 2007 by jennie

[jbg]

NDP Leader Howard Hampton said pointed questions are also likely to confront candidates in northern Ontario, where the future of mining and forestry development depends on the support of aboriginal communities.

"What we've seen in the last four years is a bureaucrat sitting in an office tower in Toronto will make a decision that has very significant impacts on the lives of aboriginal people and there is no consultation," Hampton said.

"Aboriginal people are not prepared to put up with that."

[/i]

Howard Hampton is the only one who nailed the (legal) requirement of consultation http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....&pid=248548,

but the Libs will be 'talking about talking about it' with Six Nations, so they may be able to steal his thunder.

Tory has no ideas at all on this issue, to be polite. (I would have said "stick to education, John" but he messed that up too now.)

Why don't the FN's focus on learning and accomplishment and less on pigging the public trough?

[jennie]

Why don't the FN's focus on learning and accomplishment and less on pigging the public trough?

Why don't you?

Didn't you say you were a Yank?

In that case our public trough is none of your business.

Besides there has never been room for Indigenous people there ... it is too jammed with politicians!

[jbg]

Didn't you say you were a Yank?

In that case our public trough is none of your business.

Yes, I am a Yank. Why not respond to the merits of my post?

[WestViking]

Why don't you?

Didn't you say you were a Yank?

In that case our public trough is none of your business.

Besides there has never been room for Indigenous people there ... it is too jammed with politicians!

Including, of course, the Aboriginal politicians who refuse to allow extension of the Human Rights Act to Aboriginals on reserves. The same Aboriginal politicians also do not want to account for government funds they accept on behalf of their tribes. Strange that.

[jennie]

Including, of course, the Aboriginal politicians who refuse to allow extension of the Human Rights Act to Aboriginals on reserves. The same Aboriginal politicians also do not want to account for government funds they accept on behalf of their tribes. Strange that.

Yes you mean ... the CANADIAN aboriginal 'governments' .... formerly known as 'Indian' Agents ... they administer Canada's Indian Act. Those 'elected' Band Councils are Canada's creation ... Canada's problem.

If you don't like them, think they are corrupt, talk to the Minister of Indian Affairs, Chuck Strahl. They are his responsibility, those are his problems. Canada created the system, installed the Indian Agents who provided a shining example of corruption.

With some exceptions, they are not generally the people of the barricades, not the people now willing to confront our governments, confront us, to demand justice and respect in land disputes.

[Posit]

Yes. And considering that they get in with less than 10% voting in some case they surely do not represent or exemplify native people.

Some nations have their own laws and Constitution. We have no right to interfere. (And i would suggest that most native people are more cognizant of human rights, and more free people than you or I).

[jbg]

Some nations have their own laws and Constitution. We have no right to interfere. (And i would suggest that most native people are more cognizant of human rights, and more free people than you or I).

I get it. They can interfere with us by blocking our roads. We cannot interfere with them.

Interesting.

[scribblet]

Very interesting, and so is this http://listentotruth.blogspot.com/2007/09/...ing-of-opp.html which shows recorded communications between the OPP and Native communications in the terrorist occupied area.

In one, there is a 6 minute piece concerning shots being fired through the door of a detective who lives in the area.

In another, a Native is heard to say: "We'll shoot the bastard" in reference to a truck which had made a wrong turn onto the DCE property. Why doesn't the media report on this stuff....

DCE Natives authorize the shooting of OPP officers

When the OPP chase a vehicle that refuses to stop, the DCE criminals take note and decide to interfere. Listen closely and you will hear Natives authorizing one another to shoot OPP officers.

Later they interfere with the routing of an ambulance and dictate not only that the OPP must leave the scene (which they do to appease the Native Criminals) but also what route they are "allowed" to take back to Caledonia.

This 52 minutes of tape is by far the most damning evidence to date of 2 Tiered Justice, and that the OPP and McGuinty government have kept this a secret is a serious risk to public safety.

Please note this tape consists of both OPP and Native Radio transmissions from DCE during the same incident.

[Posit]

I get it. They can interfere with us by blocking our roads. We cannot interfere with them.

Interesting.

No, you don't get it. The roads that were blocked and the lands that were occupied were on their own lands. We have been using those roads and extracting resources from those lands without authority.

And no we can't interfere with them. That is the law.

Are you a law-abiding citizen?

[M.Dancer]

Why don't the FN's focus on learning and accomplishment and less on pigging the public trough?

I think it a return on an investrment issue. Why bother doing what every canadian should do when you can claim 1110% of Canadian territory (through multiple and opverlapping land claims) that will one day be settled with cash?

On the other hand, it has created a cottage industry, professional aboriginal protesters and lawyers.

[M.Dancer]

No, you don't get it. The roads that were blocked and the lands that were occupied were on their own lands. We have been using those roads and extracting resources from those lands without authority.

And no we can't interfere with them. That is the law.

Are you a law-abiding citizen?

The lands don't belong to them until they can prove it in court and the court decides in their favour. Until then they are merely claimants. Obviously many land claims are messed up. Many claims have competing claims by different nations. Can two different bands or nations own the same land? Just becasue someone has a claim in court doesn't make it legitimate, otherwise every defendant would obviously be guilty.

I think that all claims should be subject to penalties equal to the annoyance they cause.

would a 1000 acres per day of blockade seem fair?

[jennie]

I get it. They can interfere with us by blocking our roads. We cannot interfere with them.

Interesting.

Only when WE have already violated the laws:

The blockades, in all 4 cases in Ontario, are there to prevent invasive uses of their land that they do not want on their land.

The governments approved these uses without consulting with the Aboriginal communities affected.

The government, representing the 'Crown' has a legal "Duty to Consult and Accommodate" prior to approving uses of traditional and treaty land.

The government has failed to consult with them about these invasive uses of their land, evading the law instead.

Thus, they blockade to prevent illegal, unapproved uses that have drastic consequences for their land and their lives.

Until Canada and Ontario obey the courts and consult with them first, imo they have every right to blockade.

Edited September 10, 2007 by jennie

[Posit]

The lands don't belong to them until they can prove it in court and the court decides in their favour. Until then they are merely claimants. Obviously many land claims are messed up. Many claims have competing claims by different nations. Can two different bands or nations own the same land? Just becasue someone has a claim in court doesn't make it legitimate, otherwise every defendant would obviously be guilty.

I think that all claims should be subject to penalties equal to the annoyance they cause.

would a 1000 acres per day of blockade seem fair?

What jenny said....plus

In the case of Caledonia, they are using "estoppel" - a legal remedy - to prevent further development on lands under claim. In Tyendinaga, Grassy Narrows and Ardoc, all the lands are recognized native lands. The government won't go to court because they know they are in the wrong and the legal remedy normally issued by the courts is to return the undeveloped properties and provide market value compensation for the rest. Something like this would total in the trillions just for compensatory damages plus the government would loose control of all the resources on unceded lands. The government has chosen to negotiate these claims in hopes of getting a better deal than they know the courts would issue as a penalty.

Perhaps if we look at damages done to unceded territories and the resources removed without their permission, WE should be compensating them! Our little inconveniences of having to detour around a blocked road don't come even a smidgen close to the enormous inconvenience and injustice suffered by aboriginal peoples. You trivialize the injustice and that makes all Canadians look pathetic.

[geoffrey]

What jenny said....plus

In the case of Caledonia, they are using "estoppel" - a legal remedy - to prevent further development on lands under claim.

You have no idea what estoppel is, do you? It has nothing to do with the trespassing, vandalism and mischief of these Indians.

In Tyendinaga, Grassy Narrows and Ardoc, all the lands are recognized native lands.

Recognized by who? You can't just recognize something yourself. I recognize your house as mine, now give it here. Ridiculous. They have no such court order.

The government won't go to court because they know they are in the wrong and the legal remedy normally issued by the courts is to return the undeveloped properties and provide market value compensation for the rest. Something like this would total in the trillions just for compensatory damages plus the government would loose control of all the resources on unceded lands. The government has chosen to negotiate these claims in hopes of getting a better deal than they know the courts would issue as a penalty.

The Crown has no choice but to answer if litigation is filed against them. Why aren't the Indians suing for their land?

Perhaps if we look at damages done to unceded territories and the resources removed without their permission, WE should be compensating them! Our little inconveniences of having to detour around a blocked road don't come even a smidgen close to the enormous inconvenience and injustice suffered by aboriginal peoples. You trivialize the injustice and that makes all Canadians look pathetic.

What unceded territories. Where have we forcibly evicted Indians from their permenant dwellings?

[Posit]

You have no idea what estoppel is, do you?

Of course I do. It is the legal means to enforce the government to live up to its agreements - particularly the Royal Proclamation which provides that no native lands can be sold or leased unless it is done directly with the Crown and the full native community has agreed to it - while preventing any development of the lands that would create further damages by the Crown's failure.

It has nothing to do with the trespassing, vandalism and mischief of these Indians.

There is no trespassing, vandalism or mischief taking place. The only damages occurred at Caledonia in response to a threat by the townspeople to prevent Six Nations people from passing freely into the town.

Recognized by who? You can't just recognize something yourself. I recognize your house as mine, now give it here. Ridiculous. They have no such court order.

Please keep up with current events. The Crown negotiators, the Governor General and INAC have stated that the lands at Ardoch, Tyendinaga and Grassy Narrows are unceded native lands. There is no court that is going to hear the lands claims and the government has taken these claims outside of the Specific Lands Claims Commission BECAUSE they know they are legitimate claims. In the case of Tyendinaga, the negotiation isn't about deciding if any claim is valid. They are discussing what to do with the 500 or so non-natives currently squatting on Mohawk Territory. In the case of Ardoch, the Algoinquins have already established with the government that the lands in question are theirs and have been in negotiations for a number of years discussing compensation, land swaps and settlement.

The Crown has no choice but to answer if litigation is filed against them. Why aren't the Indians suing for their land?

Again please keep up and listen.....The GOVERNMENT created the Specific Lands Claims to avoid going to court. It is an independent tribunal that examines claims, certifies them and then sets them up for a negotiated settlement. IF they went to court it would be us holding the bag. The Six Nations claims total almost $80 billion dollars, just for the claims on the table (about 15% of the total claim of the Haldimand. Do you think that our government would risk going to court when they know that they would lose? The British paper trail, misappropriation of Six Nations trusts and lands that were never surrendered would nearly bankrupt the treasury. The government knows this and so instead of dealing with natives in the past they simply ignored them. Natives are saying they are tired of being ignored and have chosen the path of economic disruption, reclamations and blockades to stimulate the action of government to do something. And you know from my point of view they would be taking this course if it wasn't effective. So not only are they right in their claims of injustice, the blockades and protests are being held on their own lands and are all perfectly legal.

What unceded territories. Where have we forcibly evicted Indians from their permenant dwellings?

Most of Canada is unceded. Any land base without a treaty is considered unceded. That is one stream in the specific lands claims process. The second stream is in the treaty violations where specific promises were made in Treaty agreements but were never fulfilled. As of this date nearly 90% of treaties are in default by government and nearly 80% of the land base is unceded (without treaty). That includes the Arctic territories that Harper has recently laid claims to. None of those lands belong to us. They are still Inuit Territory.

Your own house isn't permanent so using that as a defense is a moot point. A bulldozer or a tornado could relocate you in an instant.

[jennie]

A bulldozer or a tornado could relocate (geoffry) in an instant.

I think it just did!

Edited September 11, 2007 by jennie

[geoffrey]

Of course I do. It is the legal means to enforce the government to live up to its agreements - particularly the Royal Proclamation which provides that no native lands can be sold or leased unless it is done directly with the Crown and the full native community has agreed to it - while preventing any development of the lands that would create further damages by the Crown's failure.

Wrong. Go take a course in the land of civilization on law and we can discuss the matter further.

The best case here involving anything to do with estoppel is on the government's side. The Indians failed to act and therefore conceded the land over the last hundreds of years and that is now enough to ignore further creditor complaints to the unpaid debt. No case law on that mind you, though have none on your side either... but you don't even understand legal terms you pretend to know things about.

There is no trespassing, vandalism or mischief taking place. The only damages occurred at Caledonia in response to a threat by the townspeople to prevent Six Nations people from passing freely into the town.

Vandalism: http://nefac.net/files/caledoniabridge.jpg

Trespassing: http://www.tao.ca/~tom/6nations/thumbnails/may22/pan1.jpg

If your not Canadians, get the hell off our highways.

Please keep up with current events. The Crown negotiators, the Governor General and INAC have stated that the lands at Ardoch, Tyendinaga and Grassy Narrows are unceded native lands.

Woohoo. Now let's see your title to those lands?

Again please keep up and listen.....The GOVERNMENT created the Specific Lands Claims to avoid going to court. It is an independent tribunal that examines claims, certifies them and then sets them up for a negotiated settlement. IF they went to court it would be us holding the bag. The Six Nations claims total almost $80 billion dollars, just for the claims on the table (about 15% of the total claim of the Haldimand. Do you think that our government would risk going to court when they know that they would lose?

$80 billion in a slam dunk case? Any lawyer in the country would pick that up in a heart beat. You see, the Specific Land Claims idea does exist, but you can still sue the government for whatever the hell you want. It may need to hit a few appeals, but if they truly owned the land, they'd get it. Unfortunately, since I see a huge lack of interest from crediable people in representing the Six Nations in a massive lawsuit, it's unlikely as sound a case as you say.

The British paper trail, misappropriation of Six Nations trusts and lands that were never surrendered would nearly bankrupt the treasury. The government knows this and so instead of dealing with natives in the past they simply ignored them. Natives are saying they are tired of being ignored and have chosen the path of economic disruption, reclamations and blockades to stimulate the action of government to do something. And you know from my point of view they would be taking this course if it wasn't effective.

Where is the Indian paper trail that shows ownership of this land is theres? Where is the evidence they have permanent settlement in all of this land? Where is the evidence why they should be treated differently than anyone else that was expropriated from their property?

So not only are they right in their claims of injustice, the blockades and protests are being held on their own lands and are all perfectly legal.

Again, until you can provide a title, these lands legally belong to someone else. If I was CN rail, who have their own police that can enforce law on their land, I'd have each one of these guys arrested. If I was the OPP I would have moved in a long time ago and put these guys in jail. You have political weaklings for leaders in Ontario, so you don't see action taken.

That doesn't make it legal.

Most of Canada is unceded. Any land base without a treaty is considered unceded.

Unceded doesn't mean owned by the Indians. That's a ridiculous claim to begin with. 100% of the land in Canada is under the sovereign authority of the Government of Canada. That's the bottom line.

That is one stream in the specific lands claims process. The second stream is in the treaty violations where specific promises were made in Treaty agreements but were never fulfilled.

The government can abandon any contract it wishes at any time. In fact, they do this quite a bit. No reason why they can't bail out on a treaty.

As of this date nearly 90% of treaties are in default by government and nearly 80% of the land base is unceded (without treaty). That includes the Arctic territories that Harper has recently laid claims to. None of those lands belong to us. They are still Inuit Territory.

Links, links, links. Provide some documentation when you make ridiculous claims like that.

Your own house isn't permanent so using that as a defense is a moot point. A bulldozer or a tornado could relocate you in an instant.

Hmmm???

I think it just did!

Being mesmerized by someone lacking any coherent facts on the matter and blabbering out big sounding words is a poor reflection on one's intelligence. Posit has absolutely no legal basis for his arguments and most of it is typical "FN" talking points that turn out to be completely bullshit.

Like I said, if it were that slam dunk, someone would have gobbled up this case already.

[jennie]

Posit has absolutely no legal basis for his arguments and most of it is typical "FN" talking points that turn out to be completely bullshit.

Like I said, if it were that slam dunk, someone would have gobbled up this case already.

These are Six Nations positions, same as the government has positions. The evidence is on the negotiating table. The government's evidence is pretty sparse to date.

It is hard to keep up with this stuff. The government tells us nothing.

[Posit]

Yes but we did find out through the Six Nations side that our government was throwing money at them with no basis or accountability to where the values came from. It was a brain-dead move that not only our negotiators look like morons but it demoralizes the whole process. I do believe that the Six Nations side is also waiting for the government to come up with all that documentation they said they had that Six Nations had sold the lands in question. Seems the last British records the Confederacy negotiators put on the table prove they didn't.

Estoppel IS being applied Geoffrey since the government promised to maintain a trust of land and money on behalf of Six Nations. It turns out they used the money and the land for their own interests. The occupation of the land prevents development which in turn prevents a further damage to that trust relationship. The government has lied about their trusteeship and that is sufficient cause to use estoppel as a legal reasoning for the reclamations and blockades.

Highways passing through First Nations territories are not OURS. We have an agreement of free passage over their lands. However, they still have the right to close them down when the agreements that form those rights of way are in abeyance.

Our government has no title to ANY native lands that wasn't invented in the early 20th century. Before that the treaties are all we have. And in law, one side cannot make unilateral decisions to change the agreement. Sure we could tell the natives to shove it but ignoring treaties means the agreements resort back to the way things they were before they were made. In the end we would left with Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City as our only Canadian settlements. Your anger and petty fears are no replacement for proper and legal settlements with the natives.