Tuesday, 29 July 2014

The HDI Has Begun Illegally Constructing a Fence on the North Side of DCE - On Land Owned by Ontario Taxpayers

There is really no use in me giving details of the present development.  Very straightforward flaunting of the law - nothing new or unexpected for the HDI.  It can be seen in articles in "The Sachemhere, and "The Branford Expositorhere, and "CHCH TV" here

As to the two Reserve newspapers, "Two Row Times" is free, and is also available online here.  They have an article on page 3 identical for all practical purposes to the once noted below.  It is entitled, Fencing with the neighbours at Kanonhstaton.  They also emphasize that most of the neighbours along Thistlemore are supportive of the fencing or have expressed no opinion - few being in overt opposition, only those pesky McHale supporters who needn't be taken into consideration [my take on what they are saying].  We need to understand the dynamic here.  These are the people who in 2006 were constantly barraged with loud noise, ATV's spinning their tires, rocks being tossed in their backyards, spotlights being shone on their homes, threats and taunts directed their way, and often simply for the fact that they happened to live there.  Thus each person would develop a protective strategy to survive under the most adverse of circumstances where a bad situation could only get worse.  So a variety of survival responses can be expected from these unfortunate people.  One resident claims to be Metis of Sioux heritage and gives a "life is fine" account in relation to the feelings of his neighbours in the immediate vicinity.  Denial is a wonderful thing, at times - it is a protective strategy.  If everything was so wonderful, I trust that this man did not take a penny of the $20 million class action settlement to compensate residents impacted by the 2006 conflict - otherwise this would verge on hypocrisy.

Perhaps the most important report is found in "Turtle Island News" of 30 July 2014, p.3, Security fenced being built on Kanonhstaton with neighbours help.  This newspaper charges for the print version, and also to view the full online version.  Since I obtain weekly copies which may not be available to most, I will include a focus on the content of this newspaper (which consistently supports the Confederacy Council and HDI, and to a large extent ignores the Elected Council). 

As expected the Director of the HDI rails on about how Ontario has refused to meet with them under the terms of the new HDI "Communications Protocol"; and that the people send by Ontario to negotiate are, not honourable people.  What the Director is saying is not true, but it is either perception or deception - either way, those of us who understand how HDI works recognize the spin needed to paint themselves as victims who have tried so hard to be fair with Ontario only to be rebuffed.  That is so patently transparent - at least to some of us, but alas not all.  Those who do not understand Six Nations politics might well be bamboozled by statements such as these - they seem so sincere!  I expect that the Director is disappointed, and somewhat shocked, that the representative of Aboriginal Affairs Ontario, Phyllis Bennett, said the province does not agree with the installation.  "We do not support unilateral actions with respect to DCE," she said, "We are supportive of an all-party process".  Of course HDI has absolutely no intention of meeting with anyone except Ontario since they have some delusion about the Province turning DCE over to them to be placed in the HDI created land registry.  The Director, however, counters that, "the only unilateral decisions that have taken place during any of the negotiations were by that of the Crown who have continued to work behind the scenes to undermine the Haudenosaunee throughout the entire process, and have clearly made no real effort or attempt at reaching a peaceful resolution to the matter".  In other words despite the fact that the Crown has said repeatedly, THERE IS NO VALID LAND CLAIM TO THE DCE PROPERTY - IT WAS SURRENDERED IN 1844, the HDI are still accusing them of abrogating their responsibility.  How many more times do they have to repeat what the evidence clearly shows? 

The Director then directs her venom towards the Councillor for Caledonia who she accuses of allowing ATVs and snowmobiles on the site, thereby destroying trees and archaeological sites.  The only ATVs I have ever seen at DCE were those owned by Six Nations members and they did not show any respect for what was under their tires.  None the less, the Director has no compunction about accusing Caledonia residents of being the perpetrators of incidents that are in fact attributable to Six Nations members - and who is challenging her as to what evidence ............. oh yes, evidence is irrelevant.  Being of a "good mind" is of paramount significance - of course "being of a good mind" only means agreeing with HDI, otherwise you are not of a good mind.

As to the construction of the fence, apparently it came down to HDI having been "instructed" by the HCCC to construct the fence due to recent "disruptions" caused by Caledonia residents.  The Director was very pleased with "our people", and that they were, keeping a good mind, ...... considering, all the racism and the difficult situations we have had to deal with.

The plan is to construct the fence with a 10 foot buffer between "Kanonhstaton" and the properties along Thistlemore, ultimately extending the fence for a full 1000 feet (at least this is phase one of the project) which should take "a few weeks".  Apparently during the construction the, Haudenosaunee people joined by a number of  Caledonia residents, whose homes border the property.  This is a very interesting development since other residents were anything but happy over the situation, and one in particular stated that the construction violated the agreement she had with the two representatives of Ontario who, in 2006, said that she could extend her garden into the former DCE (owned then and to this day by the Province of Ontario).  The HDI (and the content of the article) then engage in a typical "blame the victim" strategy, suggesting that this "neighbor" profited from the $20 million class action lawsuit that compensated Caledonia residents for the effect that the "reclamation" (aka "theft") had on their lives.  They also noted that this resident had been "a visible presence" at the rallies help by Gary McHale, and was the only one to protest the installation of the fence - I seriously doubt that.  So they attempt to paint her as a villain, having a negative effect on all those running around with "good minds" and tearing up the property, cutting down trees and  erecting poles on land they don't own. 

To add to the chaos of the day, one Thistlemore resident has decided to befriend those who are making his life, and those of his neighbours, miserable.  He even said, I understand where you guys are coming from.  I always have.  Well he is bound to make even more friends among his Thistlemoor neighbours with statements such as these.  To add fuel to the fire, or rub salt into the wound, JC stated, in relation to ML, We had a couple of beers and shot the breeze.  What is particularly astounding is that this resident of Thistlemore has gone against the grain of the rest of the residents, and participated in the construction, bragging how he was on great terms with ML, perhaps the most violent of the criminals brought in from the USA during the violent take over. Yes, and today said, Throughout the occupation, I've treated you guys and neighbours and I have been treated the same way back.  Mr. JC. was "joking" with the Six Nations on site and showing support and empathy, and talking about inviting these criminals over for a barbeque.  There are traitors, there are always traitors - but the actions of JC are shocking.  I wonder if perchance he has, due to the trauma of 2006 and afterwards, developed Stockholm syndrome as a coping mechanism to deal with the total lack of control that the residents had over their lives - and to be at the "mercy" of such callous criminals and all around thugs.

        Comment:  The HDI need a reality check.  The land belongs to the Ontario Government, and erecting a fence on the property is illegal and only likely to anger Ontario who is trying to follow the rules - although not the arbitrary rules generated by the HDI.  Clearly the legal council for Ontario is well aware that the HDI have no standing.  It is the Elected Council that are empowered to negotiate with the Federal Government and the Ontario Government.  Adding the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and their spokesperson group the HDI is superfluous, but they were given the option of joining with the negotiations with the Province, County and Elected Council but outright refused to do so - and would only meet with Ontario, and only under the terms of the HDI "protocol".  A comment to the article about the fence in "The Sachem" seems on the mark:

"HDI said they would do it, and they are indeed doing it.  Unless Ontario has given them permission (they haven't) then this is an illegal act - correction ANOTHER ILLEGAL ACT BY THE HDI who have absolutely no respect for the laws of the County, the Province and Canada.  These are terrorists who since 2006 have maintained that they can do whatever they want - the law does not apply to them.  Hence the miles of Hydro One metal towers with no cable strung because the terrorists have threatened to attack any workers who try.  We all know how much protection these workers can expect from the OPP (unless the latter have new one law for all policies). 

The HDI are people who flaunt the law and need to be treated exactly as would you or I had we done the same thing.  In this case the fence needs to be pulled down, and the sooner the better.  The Superior Court of Ontario, Cayuga needs to issue another Injunction and this time it needs to be enforced competently by the OPP and with heavy fines that will make those issued by Justice Harrison Arrell in Brantford seem like pocket change by comparison.  The two individuals most responsible for this action are the Director and Legal Council for the HDI - as was the case in Brantford. 

Before, during or after the action to remove the fence, the County needs to remove the barricade blocking Surrey Street - on its own terms, not those dictated by the HDI."

I agree wholeheartedly.

As with any festering boil, it must come to a head before it can be healed.  Now is the time to lance the boil, waiting won't have any sort of productive impact.  If it means bringing in the army - they would arrive to cheers of joy!  If this is considered too drastic, then since the OPP take their "marching orders" from the Province of Ontario, who are also the owners of the DCE land, it will be interesting to see how both parties deal with this situation.  Of course we are all eagerly awaiting the response of our Haldimand County Council to see if their words have any value or are just hot air and smoke.  The barricade must come down, and it must be taken down by the County - no further negotiations are needed since HDI control what goes on at DCE, and they will not accept anything other than DCE on a platter.  No more talk.  Just action.



  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  2. Comment above removed since it was an advertisement for fencing products.