Occupations, barricades mean politicians can't ignore native issue

[ScottSA]

During the Biosphere 1 and 2 experiments they discovered that trees have an upper limit of the amount of CO2 they could absorb. When the exceed that limit they begin to die. And with the yellow paste that hangs over the GTA most days, one less car would save a tree somewhere.

So driving a car kills trees in your imagination then? You can't actually cite the egregious murder of a tree, you just assume that one somewhere must be dead because I drive a car? I wonder how the number of trees has actually grown in this country in the last few decades what with all the car-tree-slaying going on.

[Posit]

So driving a car kills trees in your imagination then? You can't actually cite the egregious murder of a tree, you just assume that one somewhere must be dead because I drive a car? I wonder how the number of trees has actually grown in this country in the last few decades what with all the car-tree-slaying going on.

Do you have a little trouble focusing on the topic? Or is your OCD just a little out of hand today.....?

[ScottSA]

Do you have a little trouble focusing on the topic? Or is your OCD just a little out of hand today.....?

It was you who said this, right?

"Get over it. Stop driving to work and save a tree."

Yep. I thought so. Smoke another doob...but use a pipe to save the trees!

[AngusThermopyle]

Hmmm. So if driving a car to work kills a tree, how many does burning a massive pile of tires all day kill?

Or how many does burning a bridge kill?

Or how bout a large building?

I find it very unusual that you would attempt to justify vandalism and a rather large contribution to pollution by comparing it to driving a car to work.

You must be joking.

Right?

[jbg]

Indigenous Peoples in Canada and Palestinians just want to continue living in peace where they have been living for centuries.

It is only a problem because someone else wants their land.

Well, determining that these so called "indigenous people" are entitled to the land means that the non-indegenous can't have it, no? I mean, if the certainty of title is undermined, what bank in their right mind will lend against it?

[jennie]

Well, determining that these so called "indigenous people" are entitled to the land means that the non-indegenous can't have it, no? I mean, if the certainty of title is undermined, what bank in their right mind will lend against it?

I think it may be getting that way in the Haldimand Tract, where developers have searched title and found no documents of transfer from Six Nations to the Crown. They readily admit their titles are not clear.

[AngusThermopyle]

They readily admit their titles are not clear.

I haven't seen or heard of any developers saying that, personally. Could you tell me where this information is available?

It must be available somewhere as you appear to have this info.

[jennie]

I haven't seen or heard of any developers saying that, personally. Could you tell me where this information is available?

It must be available somewhere as you appear to have this info.

http://www.mohawknationnews.com/news/singl.../news/news4.php

To support our position, we recently had one of the major developers in Southern Ontario present to the Crown their findings on the research that we asked them to do. They were asked to research the title to the land which they now have in their possession and that they are currently considering for development. These lands are within the Haldimand Tract, currently part of Brantford, and the result of their research is similar to that of the lands in Haldimand. The Crown unilaterally issued patents, in this case, in 1853; and there is a huge gap as to how it went from Six Nations to the Crown. The gap is there because there is nothing that exists to show that we relinquished it. There was no surrender, there was no sale. These lands were intended for the purpose of leasing only and throughout the Grand River tract, you will find this practice of the Crown over and over again. In fact, at a recent speaking engagement, I encouraged everyone living within the Haldimand Tract to do their own title searches on their property, and find out exactly how these lands came into their possession. I am confident that they will come back with the same results - the Crown unilaterally issued patents without authority and without sanctioning. Those individuals have been defrauded by the Crown just as much as the Six Nations has. Today they continue to be defrauded because they are paying the taxes on those lands, taxes that Canada has no authority to levy.

While the 'Crown' maintains that there were valid surrenders, no such surrender was ever lodged on the title, and they have not yet produced any evidence of valid surrender despite repeated claims.

[AngusThermopyle]

Hmmm. Your source is Mohawk Nation News?

This would be the same Mohawk Nation News that posts articles about "The Red X" and his intergalactic travels and adventures? His trips to the third dimension (why not all the other dimensions, why only the third?) and his universe spanning (though "staticy") telepathic communications whilst being tortured in a dungeon by guys who were black Cowboy hats, tight black uniforms and Jack Boots?

Sorry if I find your source of information to be somewhat unreliable, in fact, down right ridiculous. How about a more credible source that doesn't dabble in Fantasy?

[kengs333]

I think it may be getting that way in the Haldimand Tract, where developers have searched title and found no documents of transfer from Six Nations to the Crown. They readily admit their titles are not clear.

I think it's fair to say that if someone occupies land for 150 years and no one does anything about it, at some point during that 150 years rights to the land are forfeited. If this wasn't the case, the nobody would have a valid claim to land anywhere on this planet. Face it, Joseph Brant sold off much of the land, and in many cases there is conclusive proof that the sales were legitimate. You can't come along 150 years later and say, well, what he did doesn't suit us anymore and so we still own this land. It doesn't work like that in the real world. And in the end, it only makes you people look bad.

[noahbody]

Jan. 18, 1841:

Six Nations council agrees to surrender for sale all lands outside those set aside for a reserve, on the agreement the government would sell the land and invest the money for them. A faction of Six Nations petition against the surrender, saying the chiefs were deceived and intimidated.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/caledoni...l-timeline.html

Jennie, do you believe this to be true?

[kengs333]

The answer is obvious enough...

[jennie]

Algonquins sue Ont., mining firm over uranium site

Tue Sep 18, 11:39 AM

OTTAWA (CBC) - Two First Nations communities have launched a $1-billion lawsuit against the province and a $10-million countersuit against a mining exploration company that is suing them for blocking access to a potential uranium mining site in eastern Ontario.

The Ardoch and Shabot Obaadjiwan Algonquin First Nations allege that Ontario breached their aboriginal rights and failed to consult them before granting a company mining rights to land they say belongs to them. The land is located near Sharbot Lake, about 60 kilometres north of Kingston.

The countersuit against Frontenac Ventures is intended to send a message to the company that launched its own $77-million lawsuit against the two communities in July, said Doreen Davis, chief of the Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nation.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/18092007/3/cana...anium-site.html

Crown's Duty to Consult:

Recent case law from the Supreme Court of Canada (Haida and Taku) has confirmed that the Crown has a duty to consult, and if necessary, accommodate Aboriginal interests when it has knowledge, real or constructive, of the potential existence of an Aboriginal right or title and contemplates conduct that might adversely affect it. Subsequent decisions of lower courts have begun to fill in the general framework outlined by the Supreme Court of Canada.

much more here ... http://www.google.ca/search?q=duty+to+cons...lient=firefox-a

---

EDIT

This post is the Opening Post of a previous thread once titled: Algonquins sue Ontario, mining firm over uranium site

subtitled: $1-billion lawsuit against the province which is no longer accessible as a separate thread.

As with all merged threads, all of the original posts from all of the threads are preserved and displayed in chronological order.

Edited September 24, 2007 by Charles Anthony
merged into current mutlitple thread

[jennie]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/caledoni...l-timeline.html

Jennie, do you believe this to be true?

I believe what I see ... and what I have seen is that the federal negotiators will not produce that surrender as evidence, though it is easily available to them.

I wonder why they don't use it as evidence? I wonder why, instead, they asked for six months to do the research on the Plank Road claim? That evidence is supposed to be presented at the next negotiation session.

Six Nations position now is the same as it was in 1841: The Council minutes show that what was approved was a surrender to lease the properties to provide income for Six Nations. However, some Chiefs were deceived into signing a surrender for sale (which they could not read). A surrender obtained through deceit is not a valid surrender.

[Posit]

I think it's fair to say that if someone occupies land for 150 years and no one does anything about it, at some point during that 150 years rights to the land are forfeited. If this wasn't the case, the nobody would have a valid claim to land anywhere on this planet. Face it, Joseph Brant sold off much of the land, and in many cases there is conclusive proof that the sales were legitimate. You can't come along 150 years later and say, well, what he did doesn't suit us anymore and so we still own this land. It doesn't work like that in the real world. And in the end, it only makes you people look bad.

....if someone occupies land for 150 years and no one does anything about it...

And of course here is where you argument falls apart. The FACT is that Six Nations since about 1798 had been petitioning the British to not only get rid of squatters but to comply with the proclamations and keep settlement away from the Haldimand. The leases were an attempt to solidify some of these illegal homesteaders so that they and the government would recognize Six Nation's claims to the lands. The British, after giving up in trying to get rid of squatters arbitrarily reduced the Haldimand Tract by almost 400,000 acres in 1840 something. Then wave after wave of consecutive Confederacy councils petitioned and complained about the continuing settlement of the Haldimand - in many cases as a result of the government agents fraudulently selling off parcels without Six Nations consent. In 1920 something the Canadian government went in to Six Nations with armed police and forced out the Confederacy government at gunpoint and installed their own Band government system not only against the wishes of the Confederacy but all Six Nations citizens. Six Nations (as were other natives) were prohibited by law to retain lawyers to argue against the government and it was only about 1970 something that the ban was lifted. However, since that time the government has refused to produce records that support Six Nations claims. When finally Six Nations sued the government over the lands claims and produced the evidence to support their claims, the government decided to take it out of the courts and place in front of negotiators. As a result the Six Nations claims were further stalled by bureaucratic time delays and deliberate sabotage of the process. IN 2006 when Six Nations people (with the support of the Confederacy) took back some of their lands, the government finally got serious about pursuing negotiations. However, since negotiations restarted the government has done little positive to move the talks along, instead choosing to allude to missing documents, and throwing money at Six Nations negotiators without proving an accounting of where they came up with the amounts.

So by all accounts, you just certified that Six Nations still owns the lands and has all rights to kick whomever they want off their territory. You see they HAVE done as much as they could about it, and the reclamations and occupations are the final act of a long and desperate process of justice and reconciliation.

In in the end, the actions of the Canadian government , the racism that pervades discussion boards like this and the continuing attempts to deny culpability make all of us Canadians look bad. Too bad we can be the honourable people we once believed ourselves to be. We are nothing less than thieves and scoundrels and I'm ashamed to be a Canadian.

[noahbody]

I'm no lawyer, but the only way I can see $1 billion in damages is if the entire band is emotionally distraught and unable to work.

[jennie]

I'm no lawyer, but the only way I can see $1 billion in damages is if the entire band is emotionally distraught and unable to work.

I expect it has to do with the damage to the land for allowing drilling for uranium without consent. Of course then there is also the damage from testing bombs without consent. The entire area is radioactive.

[kengs333]

....if someone occupies land for 150 years and no one does anything about it...

And of course here is where you argument falls apart. The FACT is that Six Nations since about 1798 had been petitioning the British to not only get rid of squatters but to comply with the proclamations and keep settlement away from the Haldimand. The leases were an attempt to solidify some of these illegal homesteaders so that they and the government would recognize Six Nation's claims to the lands. The British, after giving up in trying to get rid of squatters arbitrarily reduced the Haldimand Tract by almost 400,000 acres in 1840 something. Then wave after wave of consecutive Confederacy councils petitioned and complained about the continuing settlement of the Haldimand - in many cases as a result of the government agents fraudulently selling off parcels without Six Nations consent. In 1920 something the Canadian government went in to Six Nations with armed police and forced out the Confederacy government at gunpoint and installed their own Band government system not only against the wishes of the Confederacy but all Six Nations citizens. Six Nations (as were other natives) were prohibited by law to retain lawyers to argue against the government and it was only about 1970 something that the ban was lifted. However, since that time the government has refused to produce records that support Six Nations claims. When finally Six Nations sued the government over the lands claims and produced the evidence to support their claims, the government decided to take it out of the courts and place in front of negotiators. As a result the Six Nations claims were further stalled by bureaucratic time delays and deliberate sabotage of the process. IN 2006 when Six Nations people (with the support of the Confederacy) took back some of their lands, the government finally got serious about pursuing negotiations. However, since negotiations restarted the government has done little positive to move the talks along, instead choosing to allude to missing documents, and throwing money at Six Nations negotiators without proving an accounting of where they came up with the amounts.

So by all accounts, you just certified that Six Nations still owns the lands and has all rights to kick whomever they want off their territory. You see they HAVE done as much as they could about it, and the reclamations and occupations are the final act of a long and desperate process of justice and reconciliation.

In in the end, the actions of the Canadian government , the racism that pervades discussion boards like this and the continuing attempts to deny culpability make all of us Canadians look bad. Too bad we can be the honourable people we once believed ourselves to be. We are nothing less than thieves and scoundrels and I'm ashamed to be a Canadian.

You're avoiding the fact that much of the Haldimand Tract was sold off well before the 1840s by Joseph Brant, am I not correct? If the land was sold, then that's the way it is.

I'm not sure why you have to drag out the "racism" word; I'm for a united Canada, a Canada in which there are people of many races who are citizen; balkanizing it is the last thing I want to see happen. That makes me a racist? A tad hypocritical, isn't it, considering that the whole basis for Six Nations identity is acommon racial heritage?

[Posit]

You're avoiding the fact that much of the Haldimand Tract was sold off well before the 1840s by Joseph Brant, am I not correct? If the land was sold, then that's the way it is.

I'm not sure why you have to drag out the "racism" word; I'm for a united Canada, a Canada in which there are people of many races who are citizen; balkanizing it is the last thing I want to see happen. That makes me a racist? A tad hypocritical, isn't it, considering that the whole basis for Six Nations identity is acommon racial heritage?

No, you are not correct. Joseph Brant attempted to get the squatters to sign leases - succeeding at a few - but the colonial government converted them to sales without authority. In a number of other cases the Indian Agent took the money from the valid leases and embezzled it putting it into high cost expenses and investments like the failed Grand River Navigation company.

Six Nations identity is not linked to any racial heritage. There were lots of Dutch, English and French who were adopted at one time into the Confederate nations whose descendants are considered Mohawk, Seneca, Cayuga, Oneida, Onondaga, or Tuscarora. There were also lots of Mississauga, Algonquin Abernaki and other nations adopted into the nations and they too enjoy the full protection of the Confederacy and the Great Law. The Confederacy is a political entity and the Great Law is a Constitution of all the people who belong to it.

[Riverwind]

No, you are not correct. Joseph Brant attempted to get the squatters to sign leases - succeeding at a few - but the colonial government converted them to sales without authority. In a number of other cases the Indian Agent took the money from the valid leases and embezzled it putting it into high cost expenses and investments like the failed Grand River Navigation company.

This is story that Six Nations has made up to justify there current actions. If it had merit they could take it to court. Edited September 18, 2007 by Riverwind

[Riverwind]

I wonder why they don't use it as evidence? I wonder why, instead, they asked for six months to do the research on the Plank Road claim? That evidence is supposed to be presented at the next negotiation session.

The 1841 surrender specifically excluded some parcels of land around was I assume is plank road today. This means Six Nations may have a legimate claim to Plank Road lands. However, that does mean that Six Nations has any claim on the rest of the Grand River lands.

[AngusThermopyle]

The entire area is radioactive.

Could you provide more information please. How many rads per hour of exposure can one receive in this area now?

You are aware that the entire earth emits radioactivity are you not? We are also subject to Solar Radiation on a daily basis. This is why I'm interested in what the total count is now as compared to previous emissions for that area.

From a practical standpoint, preliminary exploratory testing has previously not increased levels of radioactivity in the area's being tested. This is why I'm curious as to how the levels could have increased in dramatic fashion due to exploratory tests in this instance. Or are the levels congruent with natural radioactive emissions?

[Posit]

This is story that Six Nations has made up to justify there current actions. If it had merit they could take it to court.

They've already been to court and the government asked them to negotiate when they received their copy of Six Nations' evidence. No doubt our government would try to mitigate damages through negotiation rather than pursue a court case if they knew they would lose.

The 1841 surrender specifically excluded some parcels of land around was I assume is plank road today. This means Six Nations may have a legimate claim to Plank Road lands. However, that does mean that Six Nations has any claim on the rest of the Grand River lands.

Every claim Six Nations has made so far is based on irregularities in the documentation prepared by the British or the Canadian government. In fact there are so many inconsistencies that the government has acknowledged that the document you cited earlier is not valid as evidence of a surrender. They have not brought any claim to the table in a frivolous manner. Each claim is valid or the governmetn would not have made an offer to settle 7 of the current ones on the table.

[jennie]

The 1841 surrender specifically excluded some parcels of land around was I assume is plank road today. This means Six Nations may have a legimate claim to Plank Road lands. However, that does mean that Six Nations has any claim on the rest of the Grand River lands.

Riv your misinformation is really just confusing people, I have to say: The 1841 surrender was the Plank Road lands.

There is no point really in discussing this issue, though, when the federal government is soon to present its evidence in negotiations anyway.

Wait for the facts, I say.

The process that is occurring in negotiations now, plot by plot, is clarification of the facts for every transaction.

The government has a position and evidence, and so does Six Nations, and the government gets to be the judge.

[jennie]

Could you provide more information please. How many rads per hour of exposure can one receive in this area now?

You are aware that the entire earth emits radioactivity are you not? We are also subject to Solar Radiation on a daily basis. This is why I'm interested in what the total count is now as compared to previous emissions for that area.

From a practical standpoint, preliminary exploratory testing has previously not increased levels of radioactivity in the area's being tested. This is why I'm curious as to how the levels could have increased in dramatic fashion due to exploratory tests in this instance. Or are the levels congruent with natural radioactive emissions?

There is an old mine there, tailings, old drilling sites, and of course blowing up bombs on the property doesn't help either.

No I don't know the exposure levels, just that they found testing equipment and records and obviously people who were working on the site were monitoring.