48 replies to this topic

[Peeves]

It seems some can demonstrate and break the laws while others are selected for arrests and charges.

Isn't that in the case of Caledonia, simply racist policies supported by government agency?
I think so.


Meanwhile, Gary Mchale is asking “where is the PC Party?”, adding “will you ever speak out”, “where is Toby Barrett?”.

The activist says the Conservatives should be “ashamed” that after 6 years, they continue to give Premier Dalton McGuinty “a free ride” regarding what he calls the “OPP racist policing policies”.

McHale also says any Conservative MPP’s with the courage to “want to know more” and do more to help average voters to contact him.

http://cd989.com/201...ndeed-peaceful/

Edited by Peeves, 30 April 2012 - 09:27 AM.

[jacee]

It seems some can demonstrate and break the laws while others are selected for arrests and charges.

Isn't that in the case of Caledonia, simply racist policies supported by government agency?
I think so.


Meanwhile, Gary Mchale is asking “where is the PC Party?”, adding “will you ever speak out”, “where is Toby Barrett?”.

The activist says the Conservatives should be “ashamed” that after 6 years, they continue to give Premier Dalton McGuinty “a free ride” regarding what he calls the “OPP racist policing policies”.

McHale also says any Conservative MPP’s with the courage to “want to know more” and do more to help average voters to contact him.

http://cd989.com/2012/04/peace-friendship-and-respect-rally-was-indeed-peaceful/

It was a beautiful day and a great crowd and a nice march. People came to to watch and participate in support.

There were a few of McHale-type loonies around, one with a baseball bat and some idiots yelling but they were very out of place.

This was a nice crowd, both marching and on the street watching.
There are more people who want peace and justice than want to make trouble.

It really is time for the federal government to stop stalling and make some progress in resolving these long outstanding claims.

[Savant]

The only 'racist' thing happening in Caledonia is the double standard that sees one 'race' (First Nations) allowed to flout the law, while those who live in the area (non First Nations) are harassed, threatened and police do nothing about it.

I've had many a debate with people about this, and when I bump into the rare supporter of First Nations, I just hand them a copy of Christie Blatchford's book "Helpless" and then wait for the reality to set in. Once they have finished reading it they are usually shell shocked.

The only ones who have 'failed' here are the First Nations residents who put themselves above Canadian law by invading DCE and attacking local residents. They deserve nothing so long as they continue to ignore Canadian law.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm glad that this rally happened. It seems to be another example of people doing themselves what their governments can't do.

[Peeves]

The only 'racist' thing happening in Caledonia is the double standard that sees one 'race' (First Nations) allowed to flout the law, while those who live in the area (non First Nations) are harassed, threatened and police do nothing about it.

I've had many a debate with people about this, and when I bump into the rare supporter of First Nations, I just hand them a copy of Christie Blatchford's book "Helpless" and then wait for the reality to set in. Once they have finished reading it they are usually shell shocked.

The only ones who have 'failed' here are the First Nations residents who put themselves above Canadian law by invading DCE and attacking local residents. They deserve nothing so long as they continue to ignore Canadian law.

My point.

[Savant]

My point.

I was agreeing with you...

For anyone interested, there is an excerpt from Christie Blatchford's book "Helpless", at the link below...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/caledonia-the-town-that-law-forgot/article1769901/singlepage/#articlecontent

It offers just a glimpse into what went on. There were other excerpts published, I'll see if I can dig them up. I was literally awestruck at what went on after reading her book.

For whatever reason the police in Canada only seem capable of two responses. Extreme pacifism, or excessive force.

[jacee]

The only 'racist' thing happening in Caledonia is the double standard that sees one 'race' (First Nations) allowed to flout the law, while those who live in the area (non First Nations) are harassed, threatened and police do nothing about it.

I've had many a debate with people about this, and when I bump into the rare supporter of First Nations, I just hand them a copy of Christie Blatchford's book "Helpless" and then wait for the reality to set in. Once they have finished reading it they are usually shell shocked.

The only ones who have 'failed' here are the First Nations residents who put themselves above Canadian law by invading DCE and attacking local residents. They deserve nothing so long as they continue to ignore Canadian law.

"Canadian law" says Six Nations should have been consulted before and development was ever planned for that land. The Supreme Court case law was clear about that. The lack of appropriate local policy does not excuse them from the law.

The racism is centuries old in that area but only infects some who still want to pretend that sovereignty and land rights were somehow taken away from Six Nations, and usually those who wish to make a profit off the land in some way, without any benefit to Six Nations.

The only people not welcome on the site are those who have shown ill intent in the past: Race has nothing to do with it. There's a lot of BS and some very serious blatant lies in Blatchford's book. She swallowed the racist propaganda whole, without verifying her 'sources' or the law. When confronted, she retreated and her 'book tour' was ended by her publisher. The Globe and Mail dropped her after it was published. She's now more appropriately back at the National Post.

The ones who have failed are those who keep trying to fan the flames of racism to serve their own ends and for personal gain. Charges have been laid, sentences have been served, compensation has been paid to affected residents. There's nothing to be gained from this negative approach you espouse, spider, and thankfully it wasn't much in evidence on Sat. Instead, I saw interested people on the streets, still afraid to openly support Six Nations but friendly nonetheless.

What remains now, as always, is for the federal government to acknowledge its liability and negotiate resolutions, but they continue to refuse.
The march was intended to draw national attention to the fact that the feds are still absent from any discussions and have displayed no 'good faith' intentions.

Personally, I don't believe they ever had any intentions of settlement, but they
sure spent a lot of our tax dollars on high-priced 'negotiators' for appearances only.

It's in the interest of everyone to resolve the issues, and I think both communities prefer that. It would be nice if the government would cooperate, but ...

At least it was a nice day, a peaceful march and it's to be hoped a step toward better local relations.

The site itself could be a wonderful educational site, with the village that stood there rebuilt. As a key location for the fur trade, it dates to before settlement and an era not well known. It's possible that the provincial government could pursue this without the feds, with some public support.

Edited by jacee, 02 May 2012 - 01:18 PM.

[Peeves]

"Canadian law" says Six Nations should have been consulted before and development was ever planned for that land.

The racism is centuries old in that area but only infects some who still want to pretend that sovereignty and land rights were somehow taken away from Six Nations, and usually those who wish to make a profit off the land in some way.

There's a lot of BS and some very serious blatant lies in Blatchford's book. She swallowed the racist propaganda whole, without verifying her 'sources'. When confronted, she retreated and her 'book tour' was ended. The Globe and Mail dropped her after it was published.

The ones who have failed are those who keep trying to fan the flames of racism to serve their own ends and for personal gain. Charges have been laid, sentences have been served, compensation has been paid to affected residents. There's nothing to be gained from this negative approach.

What remains now, as always, is for the federal government to acknowledge its liability and negotiate resolutions, but they continue to refuse.
The march was intended to draw national attention to the fact that the feds are still absent from any discussions and have displayed no 'good faith' intentions.

Personally, I don't believe they ever had any intentions of settlement, but they
sure spent a lot of our tax dollars on high-priced 'negotiators' for appearances only.

It's in the interest of everyone to resolve the issues, and I think both communities prefer that. It would be nice if the government would cooperate, but ...

At least it was a nice day, a peaceful march and it's to be hoped a step toward better local relations.

The site itself could be a wonderful educational site, with the village that stood there rebuilt. As a key location for the fur trade, it dates to before settlement and an era not well known. It's possible that the provincial government could pursue this without the feds, with some public support.

What you say is hardly supported by the facts in evidence, and,Christie Blatchford stuck to the facts. Otherwise point out her errors. She was extremely careful to be unbiased. I've heard those criticise the book, but not for errors or bigotry, but because it was critical.
If you don't like the truth as to how the natives have been painted, tell us the insurrection and violence, and rampant unacceptable behavior from your side/ perspective. Never mind 'the native claims' I refer to the native illegal behavior.

Edited by Peeves, 02 May 2012 - 01:11 PM.

[Peeves]

[quote name='Savant' date='02 May 2012 - 01:25 PM' timestamp='1335983116' post='791642']
I was agreeing with you...

I got that...shook me up.

[Savant]

"Canadian law" says Six Nations should have been consulted before and development was ever planned for that land.

And there was a signed statement by 37 chiefs that said they WERE consulted about it when they surrended the land in 1841. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about agreements being signed by native ancestors that current generations refuse to respect, yet they expect the current government to respect agreements signed by the governments of the day from over a century ago. Furthrremore, the courts issued an injunction against the First Nations ordering them off the property. The law applies to everyone, native and non.

There's a lot of BS and some very serious blatant lies in Blatchford's book. She swallowed the racist propaganda whole, without verifying her 'sources' or the law. When confronted, she retreated and her 'book tour' was ended by her publisher. The Globe and Mail dropped her after it was published. She's now more appropriately back at the National Post.

Wow you have so many facts wrong here, I don't know where to start. She wasn't 'dropped' by the Globe & Mail after publishing the book. In fact, the Globe & Mail went to great lengths to highlight her book, including a number of excerpts, as well as fasciliating an online Q & A with readers. For the record, it was Blatchford who left the Globe to return to the Post. Even the Globe said that much. Furthermore, it happened nearly a year later.

Next, you do know that Christie Blatchford is an award winning writer, right? She's won a National Newspaper Award, as well as receiving the Governor General's Literary Award in 2008 her previous book, "Fifteen Days: Stories of Bravery, Friendship, Life and Death from Inside the New Canadian Army". Trying to slag an author of her caliber is pretty silly imho.

Lastly, it's the epitome of ignorance to bash a book without having read it. So unless you have read it cover to cover, please don't humiliate yourself by suggesting that you somehow have any knowledge about the contents. I'm holding the book in my hands. If you want to debate the merits of it, let's do so. However, I won't debate anyone about a book they haven't actually read. Please don't waste my time.

You talk about 'peace', where was this 'peace' when they nearly murdered someone there? I could rattle off a dozen more violent incidents as well.

So please, don't make a mockery of the word 'peace' by using it to apply to the First Nations people involved in this. They have blood on their hands.

[jacee]

I was literally awestruck at what went on after reading her book.

That's understandable, Savant (I see you are using only your last name).
Some of us are more easily baffled by bullsh!t than others.

I have no interest in dredging up the misrepresentation, misinformation and racism propagated by Gary McHale and Christie Blatchford. I'll leave them to their own karma.

It all hinges on land claims, which Blatchford dismisses, along with Aboriginal and treaty rights (the Constitution). Her position seems pretty "dubious" to me.

I will only try to clarify that underlying issue by addressing the Federal government's handling of the land claim relevant to the Douglas Creek Estates: The property is a small part of the Plank Road Claim that extends half a mile on either side of Hwy 6 for the width of the Haldimand Tract. It includes the town of Caledonia, and is thus an extremely volatile issue.

Here is Six Nations summary:
http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/cslc5.htm
The issue is whether these lands were ever legally 'surrendered' to Canada by Six Nations - which of course would hinge upon whether appropriate compensation was ever agreed upon AND PAID.

I checked the federal government's chronology and this is the only mention of the Plank Road claim:
April 22, 2006: Representatives from all sides agree to talk about settling the DCE/Plank Road claim and to appoint ‘principal' representatives for each party.

There is no further mention of the Plank Road claim.
There is no resolution of that claim, nor has it been formally 'rejected'.
It is still outstanding and still extremely divisive, and key to understanding the volatile responses of some in Caledonia, and it can't be dismissed.

You'd think if the federal government had proof of payment they would bring it forward and end the uncertainty and volatility ... but they haven't.

I am hopeful that a new spirit of peace and friendship will be allowed to emerge. It's to be hoped that those who seek only to twist information and cause continuing division will be overruled. I find spiderfish's motives highly questionable in that regard.

I understand that some people in Caledonia know for a fact that there was some payment for their lots, and others don't know.

[jacee]

What you say is hardly supported by the facts in evidence, and,Christie Blatchford stuck to the facts. Otherwise point out her errors. She was extremely careful to be unbiased. I've heard those criticise the book, but not for errors or bigotry, but because it was critical.

If you don't like the truth as to how the natives have been painted, tell us the insurrection and violence, and rampant unacceptable behavior from your side/ perspective. Never mind 'the native claims' I refer to the native illegal behavior.

Those are my perceptions and understandings.
Only liars claim to be "unbiased".

Only resolution of land claims matters to me.
It is a matter of national honour.

[Savant]

That's understandable, Savant (I see you are using only your last name).

Wow, really? That's the best you got? (Since my user name flummoxes you, I'll give you a hint, it's french, not english.)

It all hinges on land claims, which Blatchford dismisses, along with Aboriginal and treaty rights (the Constitution). Her position seems pretty "dubious" to me.

Again your ignorance betrays you. Seeing as you haven't read the book, you are ignorant to the fact that her book was NOT about the land claims at all.

Let me quote from the first freaking page of her introduction.

"This book is not about aboriginal land claims."

That's the problem with ignorance, people unfortunately speak without knowing what they are talking about. You obviously haven't read the book, or you would know that your remarks are completely baseless. She didn't "dismiss" land claims, as you ignorantly suggested. In actual fact she doesn't cover the land claims at all. That's not what the book was about.

At all.

Why not grab a copy from your local library and read it? Then you can bash it all you like without appearing ignorant.

[jacee]

And there was a signed statement by 37 chiefs that said they WERE consulted about it when they surrended the land in 1841. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about agreements being signed by native ancestors that current generations refuse to respect, yet they expect the current government to respect agreements signed by the governments of the day from over a century ago. Furthrremore, the courts issued an injunction against the First Nations ordering them off the property. The law applies to everyone, native and non.

December 14, 2006: The Ontario Court of Appeal released its finding that Superior Court Justice T. David Marshall had erred in calling for enforcement of an injunction to remove protestors from the DCE lands.

Speaking of spin ...

But seriously ... where's the federal government's accounting for payment?
That's the normal process to prove a legal transfer of land - proof of payment. Don't you think the feds should just produce it to end the uncertainty?
Don't you think Canadians should demand that?

Edited by jacee, 02 May 2012 - 05:06 PM.

[jacee]

Wow, really? That's the best you got? (Since my user name flummoxes you, I'll give you a hint, it's french, not english.)

Yes I know.

Again your ignorance betrays you. Seeing as you haven't read the book, you are ignorant to the fact that her book was NOT about the land claims at all.

Let me quote from the first freaking page of her introduction.

That's the problem with ignorance, people unfortunately speak without knowing what they are talking about. You obviously haven't read the book, or you would know that your remarks are completely baseless. She didn't "dismiss" land claims, as you ignorantly suggested. In actual fact she doesn't cover the land claims at all. That's not what the book was about.

At all.

No it isn't, because she dismissed them as irrelevant ... but she was wrong about that.
The land claims are all that is important going forward.

Why not grab a copy from your local library and read it? Then you can bash it all you like without appearing ignorant.

Not interested.
I was there.
She wasn't.

And the only issue of interest to me is the resolution of the land claims, because I think that's what is needed for real peace in the communities.