Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

The Coward of Caledonia?


Recommended Posts

He said the incident started at about 4 p.m. when Gualtieri and three of his workers.....

It was 4 adults against 3 youths, the youngest at 15. Seems to me that when Gualtieri showed up and "confronted" the youths they were intent on using force against them. However, it appears that the adults got the short end of the stick. It also sounds to me like self-defense is plausible, since had the workers stayed away as they were ordered to by the OPP, nothing would have happened.

Of course we do have to wait for the trial for all the facts to come out but sensational media is not a court of law and the Spectator has shown to be biased and even racist against native people.

FOUR adults? News to me!

Have you got a link for this? Preferably one not from Six Nations? I don't need to guess what they'll say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 402
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

FOUR adults? News to me!

Have you got a link for this? Preferably one not from Six Nations? I don't need to guess what they'll say.

It was in the post 3 or 4 above from the newspaper ....

During the hearing, Crown prosecutor Shane Hickingbottom provided the first detailed police version of the attack, which has been mired in controversy and conflicting stories from the start.

He said the incident started at about 4 p.m. when Gualtieri and three of his workers went to check a house he was building for his daughter and her fiancée.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does it matter to you?

Sure it matters, WB. In the interest of fairness all the evidence must be presented. The Crown has a case to make. Making statements before the trials begins doesn't mean that they have the goods necessary to ensure conviction. And I suspect that once all the evidence does come out a trial, there will be a much more balnced view of exactly what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure it matters, WB. In the interest of fairness all the evidence must be presented. The Crown has a case to make. Making statements before the trials begins doesn't mean that they have the goods necessary to ensure conviction. And I suspect that once all the evidence does come out a trial, there will be a much more balnced view of exactly what happened.

Including photos of the 15 year old's throat with abrasions on his adam's apple indicating application of considerable force against his windpipe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

So apparently developers are actually paying "fees" to the HDI. Well, if that isn't an indication of the breakdown of the rule of law in the province, I don't know what is. Basically, any large group in a concentrated geographic area with a serious agenda can basically start functioning as a quasi-government. Kind of like Hezbollah in Lebanon. What a joke.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So apparently developers are actually paying "fees" to the HDI. Well, if that isn't an indication of the breakdown of the rule of law in the province, I don't know what is. Basically, any large group in a concentrated geographic area with a serious agenda can basically start functioning as a quasi-government. Kind of like Hezbollah in Lebanon. What a joke.

Are they? Consider what the native lawyer spokesman actually said. 10 developers have paid fees. He didn't name any of them. They could be native developers, for all we know. Or "virtual developers" made up of militant native protestors who have never actually driven a bulldozer or hammered in a nail.

Wait a month or two for spring. If these are real developers when the ground thaws and dries we'll see construction begin. There should be signs posted with company names and contact information.

Me, frankly I don't buy it. I just can't see how any true business would commit large sums of investment money into such a dodgy situation, particularly if they were a public corporation. Would YOU invest by buying shares in a company that intended to develop on disputed lands? Would YOU have confidence in a return on your investment 20 years down the road? Perhaps you're more trusting. I wouldn't! I wouldn't trust any company that had principals who were involved with Enron and I wouldn't trust any institution like HDI that grew from a militant protest movement. Might as well invest on the Gaza Strip. It would just be irresponsible.

I CAN see why it is important to the natives that the world BELIEVE that developers are willing to trust and deal with them! If they get us to believe there are 10 then perhaps they also think that 10 more will come forth and actually give them not just their money but some credibility.

Remember the old folk story about "Stone Soup"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty hard to argue with what Wild Bill is saying. Natives do have very serious credibility issues, not just in Caledonia but across the country. Why? Well perhaps it has to do with the widespread habit of ripping people off.

Out here they now have problems buying major equipment, Combines, Trucks, that sort of thing. The reason being that many would enter into purchase agreements for items, take posetion of the items, take them to the reserve, make one payment, then never pay another dime.

A car dealer actually went bankrupt around here because he sold too many units to Natives that were never paid for. He had a few problems with other folk but overwhelmingly his main problems collecting were with Natives. Of course he didn't get too much sympathy as the general belief was that he should have known better.

So are these credibility issues racial or deserved? Well part of it might be racially motivated but I believe the majority of it is earned and based on experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty hard to argue with what Wild Bill is saying. Natives do have very serious credibility issues, not just in Caledonia but across the country. Why? Well perhaps it has to do with the widespread habit of ripping people off.

Out here they now have problems buying major equipment, Combines, Trucks, that sort of thing. The reason being that many would enter into purchase agreements for items, take posetion of the items, take them to the reserve, make one payment, then never pay another dime.

I had heard once that one of the innumerable problems with the Indian Act is that natives cannot hold clear title to property on the reserve. This means that getting a mortgage or a major loan for property on or stored on the reserve is a problem, since a loaner would have no claim to any collateral.

Perhaps one of our lawyer posters could chime in.

(Having said that last bit, why am I thinking of Phil Hartman on Saturday Night Live?)

Edited by Wild Bill
Link to post
Share on other sites
I had heard once that one of the innumerable problems with the Indian Act is that natives cannot hold clear title to property on the reserve. This means that getting a mortgage or a major loan for property on or stored on the reserve is a problem, since a loaner would have no claim to any collateral.

Perhaps one of our lawyer posters could chime in.

(Having said that last bit, why am I thinking of Phil Hartman on Saturday Night Live?)

I must state that I am not admitted to practice anywhere outside of the Courts of the State of New York and the Federal Courts in New York State, and the Second and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeal, coverning respectively New York, Vermont and Connecticut, and Tennessee, Kentucky and Ohio.

The lack of clear title by the "owner" of the property would appear to severely limit that property's value as collateral for a loan. If lending must proceed essentially on the basis of the goodwill of the borrower in repaying (especially when the borrowers have no discernable income) the land is useless as collateral. This severely limits any ability to develop the land, as the funds for development must then come from moneys already in the hand of the "owner", which may be quite limited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I must state that I am not admitted to practice anywhere outside of the Courts of the State of New York and the Federal Courts in New York State, and the Second and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeal, coverning respectively New York, Vermont and Connecticut, and Tennessee, Kentucky and Ohio.

The lack of clear title by the "owner" of the property would appear to severely limit that property's value as collateral for a loan. If lending must proceed essentially on the basis of the goodwill of the borrower in repaying (especially when the borrowers have no discernable income) the land is useless as collateral. This severely limits any ability to develop the land, as the funds for development must then come from moneys already in the hand of the "owner", which may be quite limited.

The Indian Act further limits anyone from seizing property belonging to an Indian on reserve, so even chattels are off limits. In some areas of Ontario banks have struck a deal with the First Nation's Band to have them underwrite mortgages and in the event of non-payment the band pays the bank. However, funds are limited and that is why there is no housing market economy available on reserves. That is a serious limitation to economic development and the government can be blamed for the poor economic conditions on First Nations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Indian Act further limits anyone from seizing property belonging to an Indian on reserve, so even chattels are off limits. In some areas of Ontario banks have struck a deal with the First Nation's Band to have them underwrite mortgages and in the event of non-payment the band pays the bank. However, funds are limited and that is why there is no housing market economy available on reserves. That is a serious limitation to economic development and the government can be blamed for the poor economic conditions on First Nations.

It really is beginning to look like the Indian Act was written and administered for years by the worst sort of socialist "white-assed liberals"!

The negative consequences of their impractical, idealistic methods of social engineering are plain for anyone to see today.

If one is surprised at a bad outcome to their argument they should check their initial premises. The Indian Act seems to be one giant, super size bad premise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Indian Act was enacted under Alexander MacKenzie Canada's second Prime Minister. He was a Conservative. However, the concept came from Sir John A MacDonald Canada's 1st and 3rd Prime Minister.
Alexander McKenzie was a Grit (source).
Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course! That was a slip.
I thought I knew that McKenzie was a Grit but I will admit to checking, since I know little about Canada (I'm a Yank from the NYC area).
Link to post
Share on other sites
The Indian Act was enacted under Alexander MacKenzie Canada's second Prime Minister. He was a Conservative. However, the concept came from Sir John A MacDonald Canada's 1st and 3rd Prime Minister.

I believe that PMs are rank according to when they first served, which would make Sir John A. Canada's first PM only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are they? Consider what the native lawyer spokesman actually said. 10 developers have paid fees. He didn't name any of them. They could be native developers, for all we know. Or "virtual developers" made up of militant native protestors who have never actually driven a bulldozer or hammered in a nail.

I'm under the impression that the payments were made by developers all along the so-called Grand River Tract and that the government had advised them that the HDI has no legal right to be accepting such payments. I'm fairly certain that if what you say could be the case is in fact the case, this would have been revealed; I haven't heard anything since, though. Still, it's not a huge fee, so I can see why developers would be willing to pay a few thousand with the hope that it will exempt them from future "site security" situations. Whatever the case, it's extortion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm under the impression that the payments were made by developers all along the so-called Grand River Tract and that the government had advised them that the HDI has no legal right to be accepting such payments. I'm fairly certain that if what you say could be the case is in fact the case, this would have been revealed; I haven't heard anything since, though. Still, it's not a huge fee, so I can see why developers would be willing to pay a few thousand with the hope that it will exempt them from future "site security" situations. Whatever the case, it's extortion.

Maybe. Although why they'd pay when they've already seen how Six Nations has internal leadership issues is beyond me. Why would you pay extortion when it's already been demonstrated that a different group with a leadership claim would denounce the one who took your money and then either want more money or more likely, the DEVELOPED land?

No, that would not be good business. Anyway, time will tell if this is fact or propaganda. I live by Hamilton, ON, and I stll remember how protesters for an expressway project "salted" the site with a few arrowheads in hopes of getting it declared a historic native site to block the project.

These people run on faith. If you have faith then any means is perfectly justified to achieve your "noble" end. It's called "situational ethics", which means you can't trust their word because if they feel it's important enough they will cheerfully break any deal to achieve their goal.

If YOU ran a company that paid this extortion I wouldn't expect to sell much public stock afterwards. Any investor would drop you like a hot potato.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Maybe. Although why they'd pay when they've already seen how Six Nations has internal leadership issues is beyond me. Why would you pay extortion when it's already been demonstrated that a different group with a leadership claim would denounce the one who took your money and then either want more money or more likely, the DEVELOPED land?

No, that would not be good business. Anyway, time will tell if this is fact or propaganda. I live by Hamilton, ON, and I stll remember how protesters for an expressway project "salted" the site with a few arrowheads in hopes of getting it declared a historic native site to block the project.

These people run on faith. If you have faith then any means is perfectly justified to achieve your "noble" end. It's called "situational ethics", which means you can't trust their word because if they feel it's important enough they will cheerfully break any deal to achieve their goal.

If YOU ran a company that paid this extortion I wouldn't expect to sell much public stock afterwards. Any investor would drop you like a hot potato.

Unlike some others WildBill, I listen very carefully to your criticisms because you base them on what you have seen. Is it any different though then what non aboriginal contractors do to procure contracts? Lol. We both know what is done and said to procure contracts.

I think the stuff you are talking about actually would not be a problem for someone like you to deal with. It wouldn't take long for someone doing business with you to know you don't f..ck around and what you say is what you mean. People like you end up shaking anyone's hand and having a beer-its just a matter of time.

People like you are not the problem. The crap you are talking about is as a result of crap good people whether aboriginal or non aboriginal both agree is bullshit.

Direct, blunt, in your face, say it like it is people, are not what is causing this problem. Yah I have sat at tables with people slipping and sliding-you know exactly what happens WildB-they play their games, but eventually no one will work with them-whether they be native or non native for the exact same reasons.

Again call me naive, but I think you might find the reaction you would get in negotiations far differen then others. Sincere people transcend this shit and there are still business men you can shake hands with and their word means something-I know many and no amount of lawyers or politicians can change that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...