Friday, July 28, 2006

And now, the Rest of the Story...

In an effort to be totally fair about the Caledonia conflict, I am going to reference Ottawa Core's recent post, where a Native is expressing concern and sadness over the effect this "symbolic" occupation (H/T to Monte Kwinter) and its resulting tension has had on their young people when they attempt to mingle in the Caledonia community.

But of course, in Monte's world, thisn't really happening. ("I can't hear you!!!")

I have empathy for these young Natives. They are taught from a young age to protect what their feel are their rights. They inherit the attitudes and messages that perpetuate these conflicts and claims. I'm not disputing the possibility that they may have some legitimate reasons to do so.


However, there was one comment in the piece that struck me as something bordering reverse racism:

"...it really is sad for me to watch all of this being played out because I know that no matter how hard we work at trying to help our young people, to try and educate them about our behaviours and setting good examples; yesterday i was reminded of how other cultures don’t..."

I wish she would have said, "some other cultures".

She also suggests that Justice Marshall's frustration that his orders haven't been obeyed may be due more to selfish attitudes than anything else:

Is it simply the fact that his contempt of court order has not been enforced? Or does it run deeper into his inner concience and the fact that the land that he resides on does in fact fall within the Haldimand tract, and that perhaps it is not the foundation of society that he is worried about, but something a little more personal?


But the government's method of dealing with the situation by turning a blind eye is not helping anyone. Their definition of a successful outcome is a zero death count.

Yet, people can be hurt in other ways.


Update: Listen to Jeff Allan's rant on Newstalk 570!

BIGGER UPDATE: GWEN BONIFACE RESIGNS!!!!!!

This story has legs that just won't quit!

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

Young natives have been groomed to carry a chip on their shoulder, more jails should be built now.

liberal supporter said...

"Their definition of a successful outcome is a zero death count.".

I don't believe zero death count defines a successful outcome, but it does provide a better context for the eventual outcome. There is still a lot to come.

Like the biker gang investigations that fall off the radar and suddenly the cops announce a whole bunch of arrests, you will probably find the warriors who were violent being caught. The police would rather bring these guys in on racketeering or extortion charges, rather than run of the mill assault.

I think the fact they are investigating assaults gives the police more latitude in getting the rest of the story on these guys.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

L.S. - If I understand you correctly, you're saying that there is a lot more crime going on, and the police are likely wanting to bring them up on stronger charges?

Anon - I think the real culprit here is the government's refusal to deal with the issue. It is clearly not going away. Your comment, BTW, has strong racist undertones, IMHO.

PGP said...

Gwen B resigns!
First positive outcome of this fiasco.
Anything else on the horizon?
OMMAG

Zac said...

Ok, Joanne. As you requested here I am. I don't really know what to write. I think we've been through this topic over and over.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be your fair and balanced look at this situation but you've certainly managed to bring out the nutjobs on this post, as is evidenced by this anonymous comment here:

Young natives have been groomed to carry a chip on their shoulder, more jails should be built now.

I think it's been a while since I've heard such idiocy. I'm fairly suprised that such a comment got past your moderation. If your going to have comment moderation enabled, you might as well use it to filter out such intolerant garbage.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac, I see you have chosen to render judgement on the comments rather than the subject.

You are free to do so, and I haven't moderated your comment, but that was not what I was asking you to do. Just so we're clear.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

PGP - The Caledonia community is still asking for Monte Kwinter's resignation.

Could McGuinty be next? One could only hope.

Zac said...

I see you have chosen to render judgement on the comments rather than the subject.

Kinda hard not to when you see a comment like that.

that was not what I was asking you to do.

I also mentioned that I'm not sure what more I can say. You and I have danced circles around this subject and gotten nowhere. Are you looking for me to convince you of something? Do you want me to agree with you? Perhaps you'd like me to be the ceremonial whipping boy standing up for native rights as you and the rest of your buddies can argue with me? Would you like me to defend McGuinty? Kwinter? I'm really not sure what I'm supposed to do here.

Zac said...

The Caledonia community is still asking for Monte Kwinter's resignation.

If memory serves me correctly, they are also asking to recall their MP. I, just for the life of me, can't remember her name....

Who, oh who, could she be?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

they are also asking to recall their MP

I don't have any information on that Zac. Do you have a reference?

Zac said...

Check the Internet. There's plenty of stories about how the residents are angry with her.

Better yet, take a drive through her riding. You'll notice plenty of "Recall Finley" lawn signs other there. Someone came to my friends door a few months back asking her to sign a petition calling on Finley to resign.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Are we talking about the revered Diane Finley; the Minister who is providing Sara and many other stay-at-home Moms an opportunity to childcare their own kids? The same Minister who said that she is "urging Queen's Park to send police into a housing site occupied by native protesters to clear them out in an effort to return the town to "normalcy."???

Is that the Finley you are talking about?

Zac said...

Is that the Finley you are talking about?

No, the other MP for Haldimand-Norfolk.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Right. O.K. Thanks for weighing in here, Zac. Much appreciated.

Zac said...

Thanks for weighing in here, Zac. Much appreciated.

Ask and you shall receive...you know, mostly sarcastic and non-sensical.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

O.K., Zac. One last serious question: What is your honest opinion about how this has been handled by the Ontario Liberal government?

Zac said...

What is your honest opinion about how this has been handled by the Ontario Liberal government?

I've said from the very begining that this this situation falls on the shoulders of both levels of government. The feds have to deal with land claim and the province has to deal with public safety.

The federal government has been non-existant on this file and its disappointing. Their absence has, in my opinion, contributed to the length of the stand off.

The provincial government has not been a shining example themselves but their hands are fairly tied because of the federal government's silence. The OPP should have done a better job to keep the sides seperated but in total honesty if the province had directed the OPP to run in guns blazing and tear down the blockade and jail the protesters the result would have been horrible. People would have been hurt, possibly killed, and the land claim would not be settled but rather surpressed.

Also, think to yourself for a second: if you thought you had a legitimate claim to something and viewed it as your property, would you give up? I think not. The blockade would be back up and we'd be in the same situation. Heavy handed tactics are not the answer here.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac, it bothers me too that the Federal government has not been very forthcoming with how they plan to handle the situation. You're right. Both levels of government need to be communicating the game plan.

if you thought you had a legitimate claim to something and viewed it as your property, would you give up? I think not.

This is only the beginning, Zac. Should we all just pack it in and hand over all the land east and west of the Grand River that they feel belongs to them? Why wait? Just do it now.

Zac said...

Should we all just pack it in and hand over all the land east and west of the Grand River that they feel belongs to them?

The land that I believe you are referring to is mostly under treaty. I could be wrong though.

Either way, some friends just showed up at my house, so I'm off to the bar to use cheap pick up lines on intoxicated women. We can open this up more tomorrow if you want. If not, its been fun chatting as always. Take care.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

lol! Have a great time, Zac. Don't let them take advantage of you!

Joanne (True Blue) said...

The land that I believe you are referring to is mostly under treaty

Pardon my ignorance (I'm just an ordinary Jo, ya know), but could you please explain the difference between that and the Caledonia land claim?

Zac said...

No problem Joanne.

We have numbered treaties which divides most of the country. The situation in Caledonia is that the land was given to the six nations by Governor Simcoe in appreciation for them helping the British fend off the hated yanks. The Crown approached the six nations later and asked them for a plot of land so they could build a road which would end up being Highway 6. The issue here is that, did the crown have the right to sell off the remaining land to private interests?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

That's interesting, Zac. My question now is, how did that land get legally sold to the developers? Usually there is a title search done in Provincial Land Registery offices.

So how did this get past the gatekeeper? And is there not some kind of statute of limitations with respect to these types of disputes?

And why did the natives wait til the mansions were built before they started to occupy the land?

Zac said...

how did that land get legally sold to the developers?

That's the heart of the issue Joanne, how was it legal?

The crown sold the remaining land to a man. I forget the man's name but he never put anything on it. The land was past down in his will to relatives who past it down in their wills nd it eventually landed in the lap of Henco industries who decided to do something with it. Most of the six nations never even knew about this until houses started going up.

And why did the natives wait til the mansions were built before they started to occupy the land?

Joanne, you must understand that this is not recent. The six nations have been in court for years over this. If memory serves me correctly, the first court challenge came in 1996. The six nations occupied the land when the realized that they could never get a fair hearing. This is an ongoing issue where the six nations felt they had to take drastic measures to stop the development and subsequent division of, what they feel, is their land.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Thanks for the background history, Zac. That provides some valuable insight.

What confuses me though, is when you say, Most of the six nations never even knew about this until houses started going up. , and yet, If memory serves me correctly, the first court challenge came in 1996. The six nations occupied the land when the realized that they could never get a fair hearing. This is an ongoing issue...

So, when did they actually challenge the land claim, or am I missing something here? thanks.

Zac said...

The legal challenges, I believe although I could be wrong about the exact year, began in 1996. These were conducted through the assembly of First Nations primarily. Most six nations residents were not aware of the challenge until the development started.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

O.K. That's where I'm getting confused. What is the difference between Six Nations and First Nations? (And how do you know so much about this?)

Zac said...

What is the difference between Six Nations and First Nations?

The first nations is the aboriginal community in Canada as a whole. The Six Nations is a groupings of 6 seperate "tribes" that run along the Grand River, notably the Mohawk, Oneinda, Onodaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora. They are a seperate band yet still First Nations.

Mac said...

First Nations is politically-correct-speak for the descendants of the tribal people who lived in North America before European immigrants arrived. This expression was designed to emphasize who was here first and their status as separate nations.

Six Nations is the name adopted by a group of tribes who were granted reserve lands along the Grand River in 1784. That grant was conditional on the land being used for farming or other agriculture use. When that condition wasn't met, the land grant was reduced in 1792. It is that revocation which is still being disputed some 214 years later.

The tribes were the Mohawks, the Oneida, the Tuscarora, the Onondaga, the Cayuga and the Seneca. These were all sub-tribes of the Iroquois. Some years after the reserve was formed, another tribe, the Munsee, migrated from Delaware and joined the Six Nations.

To put the Caledonia dispute into perspective, here's a time line of the significant developments.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Wow, thanks to both of you! Mac, that time-line is very useful. Thanks for providing the link. So glad you're back, and that you survived that oppressive heat.

Anonymous said...

this "conversation" is not only embarrassing (it reads like a teenage party line...get a room you two) it's rife with erroneous data (hey, we're bloggers, let's report it like it's true (ala steve janke).

i'm sure your hearts are in the right place, god bless you both, but it doesn't take much effort to know that diane finley's riding is the mp of the region. of course, if you two lovebirds are speaking in code so no one can understand you i'm sorry for shaking my head and leaving you to your own devices.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Anon - Huh?

if you two lovebirds are speaking in code... Sorry, you lost me there. Why don't you try saying what you mean?