Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Renegade

Six Nations occupation at Caledonia

Recommended Posts

CALEDONIA, Ont. (CP) - The spectre of a deadly standoff that scarred Ontario's conscience 11 years ago sprang back to life Thursday as police mounted a dramatic pre-dawn raid against a group of native protesters staking their claim to a disputed tract of land.

No sooner had police arrested 16 protesters in the early-morning darkness, hundreds more members of the nearby Six Nations reserve scrambled to the scene to take up their defence of land they say was stolen from them more than two centuries ago.

Shadow of Ipperwash looms large during latest police raid on native protest

A native group has taken the law into its own hands by occupying land over which there are disputed land claims, further the provincial police, despite one boched attempt have failed to enforce a court order for the native groups to stop the occupation.

There has been a history of native group occupation:

Aboriginal standoffs in Canada

(CP) - Prominent standoffs involving aboriginals in Canada since 1990:

April 20, 2006: - Police attempt to end 52-day native occupation of a southwestern Ontario construction site; Six Nations members are defiant and set massive fire leading to the site in Caledonia, Ont., to thwart police.

Oct. 25, 2005: - A seven-hour native standoff prevents planned construction of $27 million casino project on Stoney First Nation land west of Calgary.

Oct. 7, 2005: - Three-hour standoff between RCMP and Adams Lake Indian Band near Kamloops, B.C., ends with band chief charged and illegal video gaming machines seized.

January 2004: - About 50 aboriginal police officers are held hostage and Grand Chief James Gabriel's house is burned down in a native standoff in Saint-Jerome, Que., over chief's attempts to crack down on the community's drug trade. Seven Mohawks later found guilty in riots related to standoff.

Sept. 6, 1995: - Three aboriginal protesters shot by police in a gunfight at Ipperwash provincial park in southwestern Ontario. Dudley George dies. The natives had taken over the park two days earlier, saying it was a sacred burial ground.

Aug. 27, 1995: - Two RCMP officers wearing bullet-proof vests hit by gunfire from native rebels holed up on private ranchland at Gustafsen Lake, B.C.

July 1995: - Breakaway group known as Stony Pointers take over Camp Ipperwash in southern Ontario. Military personnel withdraw from base, slated to be returned to natives.

June 1995: - Micmacs from Nova Scotia set gill nets in New Brunswick's Miramichi River and blockade road to native-run fishing camp. Stones thrown at police and one officer thrown in river. Protest ends quietly a month later.

May 1995: - Upper Nicola Indian band members blockade road to huge B.C. ranch on Douglas Lake after several members charged with illegally gill-netting. Blockade ends just before scheduled RCMP raid.

April 1995: - Members of Adams Lake band in B.C. stop equipment from reaching planned park near Chase, B.C., on ancient burial site.

December 1994: - Loose-knit group of two dozen begin month-long occupation of Revenue Canada office in Toronto to protest change in income tax law.

March 1990: - Kanesatake Mohawks set up blockade near Oka, Que., to stop town from expanding golf course onto burial ground. Quebec police officer killed during police raid in July. Standoff ends after 78 days.

I don't dispute the validity of the claim, but our courts are the mechanism to solve such disputes. My issue with the Six Nations and with other native groups who act similarly is why are they above the law? Why do our security forces treat them with kid gloves and not enforce the law? Surely in the rest of society we don't tolerate this behaviour. Why tolerate it from native groups.

As yet another example 50 Mohawks blockaded a train in sympathy with Six Nations. Again no one was arrested despite the trespassing and costly disruption. Natives End Rail Blockade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are they all on welfare or not?

I agree that we shouldn't allow this sort of thing. The police should move in and cart them away. If the natives want to get violent, well, that's up to them. But I dislike the spectre of police standing around and not only doing nothing but protecting the lawbreakers from the citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrest them all, lock them up. They are disputing working people's lives. Obviously, since most of them don't understand the meaning of work, they won't appreciate this.

Your right to protest ends when it impacts others ability to make a living.

I have no patience for those that pay nothing into Canada and take more out of it than anyone else. It's racism at its finest that gives us our aboriginal issues. They deserve nothing past you and I. If any of us (assume we are all non-native) parked our cars on train tracks in protest, we'd surely be arrested ASAP. Instead, we tolerate it with these people.

My biggest question. Why are we paying them welfare to protest against our government? We should cancel all the welfare cheques of those we find at the protest. My tax dollars sure aren't going to fund Indians sitting on their asses demanding their "entitlements" and "rights", taking more money away from taxpayers hard work.

Hell, if I had the rights of an Indian, I'd be doing much better right now. No university tution, no taxes. I'd have an extra $10k a year easy in my pocket. When will we stop allowing ourselves to be second class citizens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Angus and geoffery, I agree with you guys. In the latest update the mayor tried to stand up for the tradespeople who's livelihood has been disrupted by this standoff.

Haldimand County Mayor Marie Trainer was confronted at the site by two protesters furious that she took to the airwaves saying residents of this southern Ontario town have been hurt economically by the protest and don't have money coming in automatically every month.
First Nations protesters enraged anew over comments by Caledonia, Ont. mayor

Well this caused a storm of controversy. The council couldn't back away from her comments fast enough. They muzzled the mayor from speaking further on the issue. I don't see how the mayor's comments were inaccurate in any way.

While I can't seem to find anyone who is on the Native's side in this dispute, I think as a country we are hampered by a sense of guilt. This sense of guilt causes us to shower benefits and special treatment on native groups far beyond what we do for anyone else. It time we got over it. Its time native groups got over their sense of entitlement for special treatment.

If they want to stay on there reserve, fine, but do it without the economic support of the taxpayer. If they want to integrate into society, fine too, but don't expect special treatment. But do one or the other and stop this constant display of childishness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My daughter and I, driving from Salmon Arm BC to Red Deere took a short cut just out of Canmore. When we arrived at our destination we were told that we should not drive that way. Evidently we went right through the middle of The Stoney Indian Reserve and it is considered by Albertans to be a place to stay out of. I wonder why. I have driven through many reserves in Ontario and there is no sense of being in the wrong place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The land belongs to them by order of the British crown and was repossessed by the .gov. They've filed many complaints over the years but to no avail. Here is a short article on the subject.

The question is not whether they have a valid claim on the land. It's up to the courts to decide if they do or not. The question is that they have taken enforcement of that claim into their own hands.

If I think I have a valid claim on my neighbour's land, and I find that the court process is too slow to resolve it, should society tolerate my unilateral occupation of my neighbours house? Apparently the answer is yes but only if I'm a native.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My daughter and I, driving from Salmon Arm BC to Red Deere took a short cut just out of Canmore. When we arrived at our destination we were told that we should not drive that way. Evidently we went right through the middle of The Stoney Indian Reserve and it is considered by Albertans to be a place to stay out of. I wonder why. I have driven through many reserves in Ontario and there is no sense of being in the wrong place.

You wonder why?

Oct. 25, 2005: - A seven-hour native standoff prevents planned construction of $27 million casino project on Stoney First Nation land west of Calgary.

Any group willing to override rule of law is one you should be cautious of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renegade:

Why do our security forces treat them with kid gloves and not enforce the law? Surely in the rest of society we don't tolerate this behaviour. Why tolerate it from native groups.

We tolerate protests from almost any group. Construction workers tied up traffic yesterday in downtown Toronto and the police didn't break it up.

Argus:

So are they all on welfare or not?

Anti-Indian comment. You don't know if they're on welfare or not.

I agree that we shouldn't allow this sort of thing. The police should move in and cart them away. If the natives want to get violent, well, that's up to them.

You may not care whether we have a riot on our hands or not, but our politicians care very much. None of this happens in a political vaccuum.

Geoffrey:

Your right to protest ends when it impacts others ability to make a living.

See my comments about the politics of the situation. There is less of a native presence in the eastern part of Canada, and possibly more collective guilt about their situation.

I don't think Canada should just walk away from the problems of Indians given that we were there when it started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Angus and geoffery, I agree with you guys. In the latest update the mayor tried to stand up for the tradespeople who's livelihood has been disrupted by this standoff.
Haldimand County Mayor Marie Trainer was confronted at the site by two protesters furious that she took to the airwaves saying residents of this southern Ontario town have been hurt economically by the protest and don't have money coming in automatically every month.
First Nations protesters enraged anew over comments by Caledonia, Ont. mayor

Well this caused a storm of controversy. The council couldn't back away from her comments fast enough. They muzzled the mayor from speaking further on the issue. I don't see how the mayor's comments were inaccurate in any way.

While I can't seem to find anyone who is on the Native's side in this dispute, I think as a country we are hampered by a sense of guilt. This sense of guilt causes us to shower benefits and special treatment on native groups far beyond what we do for anyone else. It time we got over it. Its time native groups got over their sense of entitlement for special treatment.

If they want to stay on there reserve, fine, but do it without the economic support of the taxpayer. If they want to integrate into society, fine too, but don't expect special treatment. But do one or the other and stop this constant display of childishness.

The mayor tells it like it is but gets in trouble for it, just not pc you know to tell the truth about of taxdollars.

Wonder how the people who do support the natives would feel if these guys decided to squat in their subdivision and claim it. Its time the politicians took a stand and said enough is enough. Not mention demanding accountability for where the billions of tax dollars go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We tolerate protests from almost any group. Construction workers tied up traffic yesterday in downtown Toronto and the police didn't break it up.

Michael, accually the OPP has a specific policy for the handling of native incidents such as this. If all protesters are treated the same, why have a special policy? I have read a newspaper article that this policy is one in which both sides be treated with "mutual respect". Why is that specific to native confrontatons? Shouldn't all protests be treated with the same "mutual respect".

My disdain for preferential treatement is not selective. If the construction workers distupted traffic, the police should have broken it up and arrested the violators. I'm sure if I disrupted traffic I would have been arrested no matter how righteous my cause. Or is it only ok to violate the law without consequences in large visible groups?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wonder how the people who do support the natives would feel if these guys decided to squat in their subdivision and claim it.

But they are not. They only ask for what is rightfully theirs, They've been filling complaints for the past 25 years and haven't even been acknowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But they are not. They only ask for what is rightfully theirs, They've been filling complaints for the past 25 years and haven't even been acknowledge.

1. The claim is far from black-and-white as you portray it

But it was never clear – though Brant thought it was, according to at least some historians – whether all this land was actually ceded to the Six Nations, or whether it was merely the area from which they were to choose the portion they wanted to live on. (Today they are a community of about 26,000.)

The result was the usual meandering hodgepodge of Canadian history. Much of the Haldimand Tract was sold, some by Brant in the early going (suggesting natives did have at least some actual ownership); more was just appropriated by settlers or communities. Lawsuits abounded, the reserve grew smaller and at least 29 land claims have been filed with the federal government since the early 1980s

Inside native politics: the dispute within the dispute in the Six Nations standoff

2. What evidence do you have that the legal complaint has not been acknowledged? Even if it takes 100 years to settle, they need to respect the rule of law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael, accually the OPP has a specific policy for the handling of native incidents such as this. If all protesters are treated the same, why have a special policy?

I didn't say they were treated the same.

I have read a newspaper article that this policy is one in which both sides be treated with "mutual respect". Why is that specific to native confrontatons? Shouldn't all protests be treated with the same "mutual respect".

I don't think it's a mutually exclusive arrangement. The answer is 'yes' basically.

My disdain for preferential treatement is not selective. If the construction workers distupted traffic, the police should have broken it up and arrested the violators. I'm sure if I disrupted traffic I would have been arrested no matter how righteous my cause. Or is it only ok to violate the law without consequences in large visible groups?

Basically, yes. If you have a large visible group, and you're holding signs then you likely have some political beef. Whoever is in power at the time wants to diffuse the situation, or at least contain it so you'll be allowed to march and to inconvenience people so that the images on television don't show civil unrest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if it takes 100 years to settle, they need to respect the rule of law.

Do you really think it's reasonable to wait 100 years for justice ? Would that be fast enough for you if you lost your land ? At a certain amount of powerlessness, rage takes root.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if it takes 100 years to settle, they need to respect the rule of law.

Do you really think it's reasonable to wait 100 years for justice ? Would that be fast enough for you if you lost your land ? At a certain amount of powerlessness, rage takes root.

You see education is a two edged sword, the native peoples were not educated when their land was taken away from them, now they are and they are realizing how badly they were treated.

How about the farmers protesting in front of Harper's present home, do they get raided by the Police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if it takes 100 years to settle, they need to respect the rule of law.

Do you really think it's reasonable to wait 100 years for justice ? Would that be fast enough for you if you lost your land ? At a certain amount of powerlessness, rage takes root.

Exacly!

**OT** I vote for Micheal to become a mod if ever a position opens up. He's not a hot head like some of us(Like me!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The politically correct crowd won't be happy until we find a surviving trilobite we can give all the land back to. Read history, look at the course of civilization. Land is lost and gained all the time.

My concern is, who bungled the OPP response to this the first time. Either they underestimated the number and resolve of the protestors, or they failed deliberately under orders from the Liberal government. How are we supposed to trust the government to keep us safe if they can't even deal with a ragtag group of unarmed protestors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't say they were treated the same.

More than not being treated the same, they are treated preferrentially.

If you have a large visible group, and you're holding signs then you likely have some political beef. Whoever is in power at the time wants to diffuse the situation, or at least contain it so you'll be allowed to march and to inconvenience people so that the images on television don't show civil unrest.

That's exctly the point. The rule of law is usurped for political expediency, in this case so it doesn't look like we are bullying the natives. The OPP and police in general are sworn to uphold the law, not to make their political masters look good. The law is only just when it applies uniformly to everyone.

Even if it takes 100 years to settle, they need to respect the rule of law.

Do you really think it's reasonable to wait 100 years for justice ? Would that be fast enough for you if you lost your land ? At a certain amount of powerlessness, rage takes root.

Yes 100 years is a long time and I am guilty of exaggerating for effect. However, there are esclation mechanisms which no not resort to armed confrontation, and yes some disputes take a long time to resolve. Just recently a statue taken in 1929 was returned to Easter Island Easter Island statue heads home

Natives resorting to armed confrontation should expect an armed response. They will definately be on the losing side of that battle. It's too bad our government doesn't have the backbone to enforce the law, they would rather let the home building company go bankrupt, and let the tradespeople lose wages than take action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You see education is a two edged sword, the native peoples were not educated when their land was taken away from them, now they are and they are realizing how badly they were treated.

Very few people had a formal education 100 or 200 years ago. If they had an education they would see that they actually had the power in their hands to lead a very comfortable life. My guess is that it is actually the uneducated and unemployed natives who are at the heart of this confrontation. If they had a job to go to do you think they would camped out there for a couple of months?

How about the farmers protesting in front of Harper's present home, do they get raided by the Police?

Peaceful legal protest are fine. When the protest becomes illegal or disrupts the rights of others, they absolutely should be arrested and thrown in jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The politically correct crowd won't be happy until we find a surviving trilobite we can give all the land back to. Read history, look at the course of civilization. Land is lost and gained all the time.
Here, here. Maybe the descendents of the Angles should get together and sue the French gov't for the land they lost during to the Saxons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natives resorting to armed confrontation should expect an armed response. They will definately be on the losing side of that battle. It's too bad our government doesn't have the backbone to enforce the law, they would rather let the home building company go bankrupt, and let the tradespeople lose wages than take action.

The native protesters in Caledonia are unarmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the immortal words of John Wayne:

"Sure we took the land from the Indians, but they weren't using it anyway."

I'm sorry the "Native People" were dispossessed by my ancestors. But I refuse to buy into this all-to-pervasive "white guilt" complex I'm supposed to have. I won't spend one second of my time in pointless hand-wringing over something that happened before I was born. The reason this is still an issue today is the incompetence of previous governments in not disposing of these "land claims" with one simple word - NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The native protesters in Caledonia are unarmed.
Some of the protesters said they were unarmed, but police allege some demonstrators were wielding axes and clubs.

One officer was treated for head injuries after he was hit by a bag of rocks.

link
Several dozen men, many armed with stones, clubs, and baseball bats, gathered, apparently willing to confront the police.
Police Raid Fails to Break First Nations Action at Caledonia

The protestors claim to be unarmed, but apparently they only mean they don't have firearms. I would consider the use of any weapons to be armed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...