Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by joan

  1. Actually the first time she told this story I believe it was one fourteen year old girl and there was no mention of ships and props. This is a prime example of why I don't buy any of the propaganda from these people. As I've said before the story changes continuously to suit the flavour of the day.

    I'm curious though. How does a fourteen year old with a smashed pelvis manage to swim hard enough to avoid the vortex effect from the props? I've seen Zodiacs with 50 horse outboards get too close and it was everything the motor could do to break the suction effect. Was this girl related to Superman in some way. Must have been since with a smashed pelvis she wouldn't be using her legs to swim.

    The name of the film escapes me, but I believe she managed to hold onto the bridge support.

    Excuse me then for telling you things you already knew. Who woulda thought!

  2. Personally, I'm sick of natives who put up road blocks. Especially armed ones in camo like the Penticton band....and now these Caledonia bozos.

    Terrorists, all.


    By your mountains steep,

    Or down where the prairie grasses sweep,

    Now fold in slumber your laggard wings,

    For soft is the song my paddle sings.

    ---E. Pauline Johnson

    Well Pauline Johnson was a (Mohawk) "terrorist" too then! :lol:

    They are sons and grandsons, doing what their wives, mothers and especially their grandmothers want them too, that's all: defending the law, both theirs and ours ... because our governments don't 'observe' our laws or uphold our Constitution, see.

    Next time you see them, just wave and say thanks. Upholding Canada's Constitution is a tough job, but somebody has to do it!! ;)

  3. That's right, "written in black and white". Perhaps if the Indians had been inclined to educate themselves, they would be able to present more of an argument than "we have a two-row wampum that says..."

    It's hardly a threat, rather an observation, one that I would hope would cause you to reflect on the fact that people have grown less sympathetic towards the Indians. Guess not.

    Funny that you would inform the police of anything; I thought they were the instrument by which "white supremacist" Canadian government oppresses the people. Now you suddenly recognize them as a legitimate instrument for enforcing legitimate laws. Nice flip-flop. I'll tell you one thing, the police do keep files on social activists, radicals, and other forms of agitators, so my guess is that have something on you, and know all about how you work; so I wouldn't expect them to take you all that serious.

    Only you would make a sick "observation" like that.

    You are the one protesting the police. I have no problem with them.

  4. There's no difference in the fact that the lands were sold or surrendered and therefore there is no valid claim to them. Saying that this is not the case doesn't change this fact. Maybe there's an issue when it comes to how money was handled in respect to the Indians; the government, I suppose, has some responsibility in assuring that the Indians benefitted from the land sales since they couldn't do it themselves. But it's a complex issue, and difficult to sort out since everyone involved is long dead, and I don't think that the truth of the matter can ever be determined; sadly, the "settlement" will likely be based on politics and misplaced sympathy for the Indians, and in the end the rest of Canada gets screwed out of yet more money for something that none of us was responsible for. The Indians may get X-amount of millions of dollars out of this, but I think the general trend towards increased concern and sympathy for Indians in this province at least has peaked because of Caledonia, and I'm sure that if things were to happen to members of Six Nations not many people would be all that concerned anymore.

    The truth is written in black ands white very clearly on the lease and mortgage agreements arranged by the government. They say that if payment is in default, the land reverts to Six Nations.

    The Haldimand Tract reverted to Six Nations long ago, but the government doesn't have the guts to tell Canadians that they issued them fraudulent 'land titles', though most people know it is true.

    Six Nations will do a much better job of informing people of the truth. Our governments don't seem to know what "truth" is.

    The 1841 surrender of the Plank Road is no longer relevant. It put the land in trust of the government, but none of the sales and lease payments were made - except a few lots in Caledonia perhaps - so all of the land reverted to Six Nations due to default on payment.

    I'm sure that if things were to happen to members of Six Nations not many people would be all that concerned anymore.

    That is a disgusting, threatening, violent statement, and will be saved and remembered in the event something does happen to anyone. I will point the cops to you.

    Seems like you are really losing your grip. :P :P :lol: :lol:

  5. It could have something to do with the fact that they're, how should I put this? Ummm...how bout very race concious.

    I see that frequently when I go to the local pub and a few always like to use whitey and try to pick fights, unless it's one on one. They don't want anything to do with that.

    Speaking of 'race conscious', Angus ... you are just jumping all over about me mentioning 'white nationalists', aren't you?


  6. AT one day I hope you do get to meet some Warriors and are able to talk with them about that incident. Its not the kid they were talking down but what he symbolized. The actual kid and the honour he showed they respect-for them the kid is a symbol of the federal government hiding behind the kid. That emoting is seen as pride and saying enough is enough to the government. They know the kid was just a symbol. Their emoting was a message to the federal government they were cowards for sending soldiers.

    It has nothing to do with that soldier and everything to do with the government's inaction and hiding behind the armed forces rather than deal with the issue.

    To them its a matter of using the military as a cover for their lack of honour by trying to hide behind the honour of the military.

    The Armed Forces was not there issue-the federal government was and remains.

    If what you stand for and what made you join the armed forces is the same honour code the federal government and our politicians honoured, we would not have this problem AT.

    People like you when you shake someone's hand mean it. Your word is who you are. The legacy of our politicians not standing by their word is what has caused this mess and its the exact same honour code you live(d) your life by that will have to be incorporated by our politicians if this is to resolve itself-and I say it will precisely because people like you do exist and will make sure it happens.

    In the short term some pathetic racists will try use the event to taunt and incite, some hot-head outside agitators will try exploit the situation and some innocent people on both sides will be f..cked....but it will resolve itself because both sides are honourable good people.

    I did not know that story about the kid AT. Damn.

    Wet blanket time:

    At that time (OKA) two Canadian soldiers threw 2 fourteen year old girls from Kahnewake off the Mercier bridge. One narrowly avoided getting sucked into the propellor of a passing freighter, had a smashed pelvis and cannot have children. That is what I think of when I see that photo: How two young Canadian soldiers saw two angry 14 year old girls as enemies that should be disposed of.

  7. HDI formalizes a process that has already been occurring since November 2006. Developers throughout the Haldimand Tract began approaching the Confederacy for consultation at that time, and have continued to line up at their doors since.

    To date, developers have maintained confidentiality about their agreements with the Confederacy.

    I understand developers have been told there is no point in them trying to sue the Confederacy because they would lose in court.

    As yet, there is no sign of the developers suing the municipality/province for issuing permits in bad faith.

  8. So now it's "white nationalists" and not "white supremacists". Funny how the pro-Indian side always has to attach a supposed skin colour to their opponents.

    In terms of trolls, it's interesting that you would make such an assertion. I suppose you're aware of the fact that the moderators are also aware of your presence here, too.

    I occasionally slip and refer to them that way, but they identify themselves as "white nationalists"

    just to be clear.

  9. That being the case you should realize that no one particular aho is superior to another. Lack of such understanding is the first step towards aho'ism, you shouldn't go there.

    Well the particular group I was referring to above are those who call themselves "white nationalists".

    The choice of racializing their identity is theirs, not mine.

  10. They would be entitled to the amount of the trust unless the subsequent surrender (in '43 if I recall) said otherwise.

    Certainly ... except none of the settlers paid their mortgages or leases, so all agreements are in default and the land HAS ALREADY reverted to Six Nations, according to the terms of the leases and mortgages arranged by the government. See?

    And the government has not provided an accounting of Six Nations trust fund, so they are not negotiating in good faith toward even a financial settlement, because it is too big for our govs/us taxpayers to handle. See?

    So Six Nations is asserting jurisdiction, wants a say in development and a share of revenues. This is a much less drastic, more collaborative approach than bankrupting the province.

    As they say, "We are all still going to be here". Gotta work it out. No question about that.

  11. You must be talking about Six Nations.

    I really find your discriminatory judgemental manner to be a bit disturbing. You should realize that no one particular race is superior to another. Lack of such understanding is the first step towards racism, you shouldn't go there.

    I am not talking about a race. I am talking about aho's. They come in all colours. :lol:

    However, I was referring to self identified white nationalists, as above. If the shoe fits ... ?

    Otherwise, I am not talking about you. Your choice.

  12. Nice. You always retreat into the same defence when shown how full of waste products you are. I'd say you are interested since I was answering a comment you made that most certainly beyond any shadow of a doubt concerned my personal life. Not only that, without knowing the first thing about me you decided you knew what motivates me. Man! You are such a hypocrite.

    By the way, you never responded to my statement about your use of the term "people like that", why not? Oh, thats right, silly question. You didn't have to. It was obvious that you were once again being a hypocrite.

    Would that be anything at all like your use of the "broadbrush" when talking about non aboriginal white people? More hypocrisy, keep it up, gotta love consistency.

    I AM a non-aboriginal white woman. :rolleyes::lol:

  13. I am not sure what it is but with aboriginal issues it always seems to somehow turn into a very emotional debate questioning peoples' motives.

    There is a group of racist trolls who populate discussion boards to bait people and to promote their particular form of hatred. Their online home is stormfront.org. They are self-declared "white nationalists" who believe Canada should be a whiteman's country only.

    There are other paid agitators who also populate public discussion boards to promote their handlers' agenda, usually a corporate agenda.

    THAT is why every discussion about Aboriginal issues turns into a melee: because there are people who seek out such discussions to intentionally attack aboriginal people. It is either their (pathetic) 'life' or their livelihood.

    You can tell who they are: when confronted with their lie, they will turn around and say the same lie again tomorrow. It isn't about discussing and learning for them, but about imposing a rigid anti-native agenda on ALL Canadians. It is about sustaining systemic racism, for the cause of the white supremacists, or the corporations, or the governments, and in some cases the churches.

    I am pleased to hear you say the moderator is aware that such trolls are here to bait people. I am glad to know they are not the ones running the board. ;)

  14. Oops! Sorry Joan, you missed on that one!

    I actually have pretty good relationships with my ex's, all except one. I send gifts at Christmas and on birthdays to my little ex-part-Algonquin girl and her daughter. When we've talked recently she's even asked about us trying again. I'm tempted but said no. She has a pretty major drinking problem that I cant accept. I certainly don't hate her or wish her ill. You may be interested to know that she was as equally disgusted as myself when her relatives and friends would discuss various scams to fleece the government.

    Wow! Kinda puts a damper on your whole six nations are saintly proposal doesn't it. Her brother is actually a major power in the area of Aboriginal health, he does some pretty intense lobbying for increased benefits. On some issues I agree with him however I can not agree with his goal of total support for perpetuity. Hell, they even dragged me up to Caledonia one time when it all started. I ended up hitch-hiking home I was so disgusted with what I saw and heard.

    So Joan the lesson to be learn't here is never assume, it'll turn around and bite you in the ass if you do, like now actually. Oh, and by the way. These are some of the reasons I don't believe the propaganda coming from six nations. It's pretty hard to snow someone who has seen the reality in action don't cha know.

    I am not interested in your personal life. :rolleyes:

    I was just pointing out your use of the "broadbrush" in ascribing motives to ALL ABORIGINAL PEOPLE based on your experience with a few.

  15. ARE YOU SERIOUS? Now who's prejudiced??!!

    How you could come up with such a total non sequitur is frankly amazing! And to twist it into some kind of "proof" for your reasoning by saying that Angus is merely being emotional and that's why he doesn't believe you...

    I'm flabbergasted! And as a man I'm very insulted! How can you say that after a breakup most men hate all women? Seems more a reflection of what kind of men have been in your social circle, if you ask me! I've never known ANY man to have taken such a totally illogical view! They may have specifically hated their ex but the idea of all women being evil would not only not have occurred to them, if you had suggested it they would have laughed at you! Maybe you should find a different crowd.

    Madam, you should get some help!

    See the ;) ?

    It was a joke!

    get a grip. :rolleyes:

  16. No, as your link clearly states more than once, the land was to be disposed of.

    For the benefit of Six Nations ... funds to be placed in their trust account, which the government 'managed' as trustee.

    Whatever was not paid for is still their land. Very few payments were made, and money was embezzled from their account without permission. That is why the land in the Haldimand Tract is still theirs.

    Six Nations has been asking for an accounting of their trust fund for decades, possibly more than a century, and the government has not done it yet! WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU??

  17. Here's an interesting twist for a provincial government that declares that the Haudenosaunee Development Institute should be ignored by municipalities approving development:

    Haldimand's Official Plan delayed until consultation with Six Nations complete.

    The HDI is the planning branch of the Six Nations Confederacy and Haldimand township must consult with them before their 20 year development plan will be approved by the province. This would appear to be yet another lie the provincial government finds itself in. They can't suggest that no one consult with Six Nations (through the HDI) and then turn around and tell municipalities that they must consult BEFORE development is approved. Yet the province also says that they do not want lands claims shown on the plan.......They are merely doing the ostriche where it concerns lands rights.

    The next time Six Nations stops a development it is perhaps prudent to squarely blame the Province. They have the capacity to avoid future problems and yet simply ignore their legal responsibility to a degree that Six Nations MUST stop development on their lands.

    I think, to be fair, I have to say that Dalton has told developers to consult with the HDI, just not to pay them. Interesting that he is now incorporating HDI into the formal process of municipal planning. Excellent! That is what is needed to resolve disputes before they start!

    AND it is the LAW !

    So ... He had better make this the requirement for all other municipalities too!

    And he'd better shut up about not paying them too: All the municipal people in those discussion are being paid! <_<

  18. Sorry ... no link to article. Here's the link to the paper (subscription required)


    This will provide you with another side of the story, since the mainstream media just doesn't 'get it'.

    Turtle Island News, Six Nations: Editorial

    Ontario offered nothing, HDI fills void

    For the first time in 200 years Six Nations has begun to exert its jurisdiction over land it owns within the Haldimand Tract, that's land 10 km (or six miles) on either side of the Grand River.

    And that has Ontario throwing a hissy fit.

    Ontario wasn't overly concerned with Six Nations huffing and puffing about jurisdiction, land claims or sovereignty.

    To Ontario those are nice little political catch phrases that have meant nothing to the province as it continues on its merry way to develop Six Nations lands, without permission, and selling and buying Six Nations land without permission.

    But the political landscape has changed. Canada's Supreme court has ordered governments to consult with First Nations in cases of land disputes or where they have an aboriginal interest in the land.

    And that has Ontario kicking and screaming. For the first time they actually have to talk to First Nations people in Ontario, the province with the largest population of First Nations people, but the province with the least interest in working with First Nations and talking to them, until now, when the courts ordered them to.

    And despite the Supreme Court order, Ontario is still trying to wiggle out of its obligation to consult and there lies the rub.

    Instead of talking to Six Nations and working with them on a plan for lands under dispute, Ontario would rather hold a press conference and decry only Ontario municipalities can issue development fees. Yet Ontario doesn't bother to explain when it got permission from Six Nations in the first place to issue any kind of fees on Six Nations lands along the Grand.

    And it launches a misinformation campaign to Ontario voters that continues to leave them in the dark about Six Nations and other First Nations rights. In fact the campaign is bordering on terrorist activities. Instead, just like the Mafia style extortion tactics it accuses First Nations of, Ontario is using mainstream media who also don't understand their news stories aren't news, but propaganda that they too are spewing, simply because no one in Ontario wants to admit that in fact maybe, just maybe Six Nations is right.

    Because if Six Nations is right, so are all the other First Nations.

    The Six Nations Confederacy Council came up with a plan. A plan that brings all the parties to the table and invokes a disciplined policy that satisfies both the developers involved and allows for Six Nations interests.

    Ontario offered nothing. Because Ontario failed to fill the void, Six Nations did. Rather than see development stop up and down the Grand as frustration continues to grow among Six Nations people tired of no resolution to their long outstanding land claims, the Confederacy Council put in place a policy and plan that works with all the parties involved.

    And that no doubt irritates Ontario who wants to decide for Six Nations what 'consultation' will be.

    The attitude is paternalistic, smacks of political terrorism with the threat of OPP hanging over First Nations heads, but McGuinty grabbed a headline and satisfied the very small but vocal group of misguided individuals in Caledonia who's only gripe is no one has bought their houses, in their peaceful neighbourhood for the outrageous prices they have set on them, (some three times what the property is worth).

    The local economy is damaged not because of any Reclamation but because of the antics of Caledonia residents themselves. As a result of their road blocks, harassment, assaults, racism and threats, Six Nations people stopped shopping in that town, a town that suddenly realized that they exist because of Six Nations money. Talk about extortion rackets. Ontario wrote the book, implemented laws to justify their actions and then whined when Six Nations said enough is enough!


    A different story than you will hear from our governments and our media.

    Canada has no claim to the land, because Canada defaulted on payment and the Haldimand Tract land reverts to Six Nations, according to the original agreements. However, the negotiators won't tell the truth because the governments won't, so Six Nations is telling the truth to all people living in their jurisdiction, and they are asserting rights to have a say in development and a share in revenues.

    I say ... good for them! Because our governments will NEVER tell us the truth!

    Even though we all as citizens have to be aware ... sometimes they lie, or fail to tell the whole truth ... no different ... to the court they are both lies ... our courts ... are not entirely bad ... but our governments are.

    imo :rolleyes:

    Now I have a few links to find for documents you may want to check out. ;)

    - The supposed 1841 land surrender No. 50 pages 119, 120, 121, 122 & 123.


    What was surrendered was not ownership, but management of the lands, for the benefit of Six Nations. None of the terms of the leases and mortgages were ever kept (i.e., payments), so the land reverts to Six Nations according to the lease and mortgage agreements.

    I understand now why the developers are not pursuing litigation against the HDI, etc.: They have been advised they will lose. The law in Ontario, and the Supreme Court in Canada are coming through with the straight goods.

    Canadians listen up ...

    ... a say in development, a share of revenues in their territory.

  19. Well that account doesn't really match anything I've heard before about the bridge. Reading it is almost like reading a story invented for children, happy ending and all. This is what I mean when I say continuously changing childish reasons are given for such behaviour. It's also the reason I cant accept anything First Nations say at face value. My ex was part Algonquin (one of my ex's, I've got a few), I actually got to see the thought process in action on a personal level when her relatives and friends would visit. And yes, mention was made sometimes about how to obtain more money and power, nothing about righting historical wrongs. Just another reason why I have zero respect for these people. Their behaviour has certainly done nothing to sway my opinion lately.

    I am picking up this thread where it was before it was derailed ...

    Angus, you have just identified the source of your anger at Aboriginal people and it has nothing to do with land claims, law, whatever: It's personal.Perhaps you should look past your own experience and not paint all Aboriginal people with the same broad brush. Most men just all hate women after a breakup, not a whole race too. ;)

    We cannot deny the legitimacy of their claims. Why they pursue them, what they hope to gain is their business, not ours. If someone steals my lawnmower, I do not have to give an explanation about why I want it back. If I don't need it but just want it back for the power of controlling the person who stole it ... doesn't matter ... it's mine, that's all. If I choose to use it for parts, turn it into a go-kart, let it sit and rust, doesn't matter ... it's mine to do with as I please.

  20. And WE ARE NOT ALONE ...

    Assertion of rights on traditional Indigenous lands is a worldwide issue:


    Indigenous Rights and the Mayan Victory in Belize

    Implications for Indigenous Title Rights in Canada


    Energy Development Threatens Native Lands (U.S.)


    Independence movement: Republic of Lakotah (U.S.)

    On December 20, 2007, Indian activists announced the withdrawal of their group of Lakota Sioux from all treaties with the United States government.


    Chile-Argentina: Pascua Lama Mining Project on Hold

    Written by Daniela Estrada*

    Tuesday, 22 January 2008

    (Tierramérica) - Nearly two years after winning environmental approval from the Chilean government, the controversial Pascua Lama gold mining project of the transnational Barrick Gold Corporation remains without a launch date.

    And elsewhere in Ontario ...


    Chief Doreen Davis, of the Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nation indicated yesterday that she is pleased by the progress of mediated discussions that have been taking place between the Government of Ontario and her Community since December 2007. The mediation is with regard to a dispute over proposed uranium mining exploration near Sharbot Lake, Ontario on traditional First Nation lands that are the subject of on going land claims negotiations.

    Quite simply, imo, the 21st century is the century of Indigenous Peoples ... and the environment.

  21. And with this one tiny little sentence it gets even more interesting. You can rail against people for making statements that you view as stereotyping yet with that one little sentence you yourself have indulged in a major example of stereotyping. That is known as Hypocrisy, sometimes it can be unintentional and as such understood to a degree. This example however appears to have been fully intentional and as such should be seen as blatant hypocrisy.

    Now I'm not going to say you are using a pseudonym and masquerading as someone else but your style does seem very familiar. If you were hiding your on-line persona would that not indicate you are part of a group that could be accused of being "that type"?

    :rolleyes:<_< sure ... whatever! :lol: :lol:

  • Create New...