Here We Go Once Again: The Hereditary Council Seeks to Remove the Elected Council and Return to 1924 Governance

Below is one of the most astute and accurate assessments that I have seen in quite some time.  It is worth reading in whole, so it is included from "Two Row Times", 10 January 2016.  First some background.

In 1924, after multiple petitions from the progressive element (largely Mohawk) at Six Nations, the Government capitulated and substituted an elected band council for of governance for the crumbling remnant of the age old Hereditary Council.  Of course the Canadian Government has taken the blame in the minds of many (despite history and the facts), and its actions, carried out by the R.C.M.P. who locked the doors to the Council Longhouse, are deemed to be an act of "colonialism" etc. etc.  The fact is that the Government of the day was having difficulty in providing the agreed upon services and funds to Six Nations due to the growing complexity and the inability of the Hereditary Council (Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council - HCCC) to adapt to the changing circumstances.

Today there are two parallel governance systems at Six Nations.  The one who does all the day to day work such as ensuring that there are fire and police services, and that seniors needs are addressed and so on is performed almost entirely by the Elected Council (Six Nations Elected Council - SNEC).  It has been this way for almost 100 years, and in the meanwhile the Hereditary Council has been a largely ceremonial entity, constantly harping on how they are the only true body that has the right to govern Haudenosaunee / Six Nations people.  What seems to get lost in the shuffle is the indisputable fact that times have changed, and we are never going backwards - only in the minds of some hopeless romantics.  Not only that, but there are large fracture lines within the HCCC itself, and serious and acrimonious disagreements - for example about the role of the controversial and militant Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) who claims to represent the HCCC.  Factions tear at the fabric of the HCCC, yet they consider themselves the sole legal and moral inheritors of the system in place since well before Henry VIII of England ascended the throne and established the Church of England in the mid 16th Century...................... but which faction has the strongest claim to be inheritors of the "Great Law"?  See the blog posting here for further details about the forces that are destined to see the HCCC devolve into a series of squabbling adolescent cliques.

In order to operate a municipality (which is what the Six Nations Reserve is in all but name) requires knowledgeable people who can understand the need to balance the budget, and offer all of the requisite services to the 26,000 or so Haudenosaunee (about half of whom reside on the Reserve).  Only a formally educated individual (Grade 12 and preferably some college training) would be in a position to conceptualize the requirements of the issues facing their constituents, and effect a proper solution.  Most present Elected Councilors fall into this category.  Alas, many in the Hereditary Council do not believe in the value of a "formal" education involving maths and sciences, but rather focus on cultural and language matters as the topics which need to be taught to the youth.  The latter simply will not prepare young people for the world that awaits, and by in large will result in their being relegated to marginalized positions by virtue of a lack of skills in the highly technical digital world outside of the immediate boundaries of the insular worlds some create for themselves - or have foisted upon them by well meaning "educators" who will hold back their pupils from competing in a very complex world.  Hence "outside advisers" (such as the present legal adviser to the HCCC?) will be needed to bridge the gap.  So governing by a group of White folks hired to do the job is the best alternative?  What else would work if Six Nations went back to "the old ways"?

So in the following "what if" scenario, what would happen to life at Six Nations if suddenly the Elected Council was replaced by the Hereditary Council?  My prediction is utter chaos and a mass exodus - but I guess only time would tell.  However this is precisely the specter that hangs over Six Nations at present, since the HCCC are planning a Court challenge to the right of the Elected Council to govern.  This is rather ironic since the HCCC do not recognize Canadian or Provincial Courts as having jurisdiction over Six Nations people, the rationale being that the latter are a sovereign people. They have made the assumption, without evidence, that the Six Nations people would rather be governed by the traditional body than the entity recognized by the Indian Act for 91 years, and who have a good track record of being able to manage the many tentacles of a municipal government.  So who in the HCCC has knowledge of the water delivery or waste management systems?

Actually one can ask even more fundamental questions such as, "is the HCCC anything more than a shadow or echo of a once powerful system of governing the Six Nations people in place during for example the War of 1812?  Is it really the intact lineal descendant of the Councils of that era?"  In terms of today, as will be noted, the Mohawk benches are not filled.  Those who have been appointed, presumably by Clan Mothers (although many lineages have gone extinct and been replaced by individuals of not only other families, but other Clans) have credentials that are not open to inspection.  Hence the is no guarantee that the person appointed is in any way eligible or suitable for the "inherited" role.  Most at Six Nations do not know their Clan, and would not know where to turn to find out who represents them in order to petition Council or make a complaint.  The old system that served Six Nations well hundreds of years ago is no longer in existence - only a body which most certainly has cultural and linguistic ties to the old ways, but which has not provided effective governance for over 100 years.  If it was again parachuted into that role, the harsh reality is that we would not be seeing the intact descendant of that system, but an entity which has of late had only a role (but an unclear one) in pushing forward highly questionable land claims, extorting monies from wind turbine corporations and land developers; but nothing to do with say building a new fire station and ensuring that fire department members have suitable training.  That is a whole other ball game and strong arm tactics don't work in these circumstances.

Anyway, the present author could go on ad infinitum about this matter, but in a letter to the Editor of Two Row Times, Elected Councillor Helen Miller has once again been able to "hit the nail on the head" - so here is her take on things, in her own words:

Is HCCC prepared to govern Six Nations?

Well folks, it sounds like we might have a hot controversial summer again. According to Aaron Detlor, who is touted as the legal advisor for the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC), some Haudenosaunee people are considering a court challenge of the elected council’s and elected system’s authority to govern Six Nations along with the Indian Act. These Haudenosaunee people, he said, want the elected council removed.

We all know our community is divided when it comes to governance. But is getting rid of the elected council and turning governance over to the HCCC in the best interest of our community? I don’t mean any disrespect to the HCCC, but it’s been 91 years since the HCCC (a.k.a. Hereditary Chiefs) governed Six Nations. According to the HCCC’s recent newsletter, there’s a move afoot to re-establish some of their own governance structures that existed pre-1924 in preparation for the removal of the elected council. Do we really want our governance to go back 91 years? In all likelihood the governance structures that worked back then won’t even be relevant today.

Six Nations is a completely different world from what our ancestors lived pre-1924. We have a population of over 26,000 people. The elected council has 750 employees to deliver the various programs and services. The elected council monitors the management of an $80 million budget. To protect the interests of Six Nations, the elected council has to keep on top of all the local, regional and national issues. Is the HCCC prepared to do all this?

Furthermore, we know the traditional system of governance is broken. The benches aren’t full and the chiefs who do sit on the benches are divided. It’s the same small group of chiefs and clan mothers who hang around with the HDI. The clan mothers are divided. The Mohawk clan mothers are not even given recognition. When I asked the Haudenosaunee Resource Centre for a list of the clan mothers there was no Mohawk clan mothers listed. Right now the only governance system that is working for the betterment of our community is the elected system.

I’m surprised the HCCC wants to remove the elected council. Since 1991 they have maintained they only wanted to govern the 8 Points of Jurisdiction. The HCCC would certainly have to change the way they do business. No more taking six months to a year to make decisions. No more shutting down for 10 days when someone dies. The HCCC can’t do that if they’re responsible for 750 employees and an $80 million budget. And for sure the HCCC would have to meet more than once a month and treat people equally and justly no matter what their political and religious beliefs and practices. Are they prepared to do all this?

People will tell us they support the traditional system. They support the ceremonies and the longhouses, the mid-winters, etc. But does that mean they would support the HCCC taking over the governance of Six Nations? Detlor claims it does. I disagree. Two years ago, Hazel Hill started a petition asking people to sign in support of the HCCC and very few people signed the petitions that I saw. After a while Hazel pulled the petitions from the stores. Somebody else tried to start a petition but it went nowhere. Some people say the overwhelming support for the land reclamation in Caledonia proved the majority of people supported the HCCC, but far as I know people were there to support the land. That’s why I was there. Other people will say because so few people turn out for the elected council election proves people support the HCCC. I’m of the mind the majority of people don’t support either council. As long as their life is good and their families are taken care of, that’s what matters.

Some people may not like the elected council and the elected system but we need only look around the community to see what the elected council has done for Six Nations. We have a wonderful community, lots of good services and facilities. We have our own Police Service. We have paved roads. We have a housing system that is fair to everyone. We have everything for our young people. Once the Youth & Elder’s Centre is completed we’ll have even more. Our seniors are taken care of.

Clearly the Haudenosaunee people Detlor speaks of are not looking at governance realistically. There would be more benefit to our people and community if the two councils worked together. But if the HCCC’s plan is to launch a court challenge to remove the elected council then our community members deserve to be consulted and deserve nothing less from the HCCC than a comprehensive Plan of Action as to how they plan to govern and to manage the administration.

Councillor Helen Miller
2251 Chiefswood Rd, Ohsweken ON 519 717 2565

DeYo.

Opportunist Ambulance Chasers Try to Scam More Money from the Government over Residential Schools Etc.

In an article entitled Compensation for Sixties Scoop and Day School Abuse, found in "Two Row Times", 28 October 2015, p.4, we learn that some law firm proposes that there are "victims of Canada's assimilation policies through residential schools and other legislative bodies that have fallen through the cracks when it comes to financial compensation".  The solution .............. a class action law suit to grab more money from the Canadian taxpayer.  Perhaps the election of Trudeau has opened the door to attempts to fleece the taxpayer that never would have flown under the Harper administration.

I have spoken many times in this blog about how controversial the Residential Schools matter is at Six Nations.  Many stepped forward to tell stories of supposed woes, garner the sympathy of whoever holds the purse strings, and obtained "compensation" for the pain and suffering they supposedly endured.  The party line says that you must all agree that this happened everywhere, not just in remote communities up north, no it was endemic and so all Residential Schools must be tarred with the same brush.  The approach worked well at Six Nations with the publication of a book entitled "The Mush Hole", pertaining to the Mohawk Institute in Brantford (actually on the Six Nations Reserve even to this day).  However if one looks at the objective facts, and speaks to respected elders who were there and whose stories have NOT been told, you will hear a very different scenario.  I have said on more than one occasion, while most will not speak against the party line at "inquiries" and the like, they will to insiders.  The most succinct statement of the reality was told to me in this way:  "At home we were beaten, had nothing to eat and learned nothing; at school we were beaten, had 3 meals a day, and learned something".  To deny these stories is to try to shape the past to fit the common myth - and the truth be damned.  Not only this, but most of the teachers at Six Nations in past years were taught at the Mohawk Institute - the story is now so distorted that most are inclined to listen only to those who relay their perceptions of the horrors they claim to have experienced - all other versions are suppressed.

So now some might say that a group of fly by night ambulance chasers are proposing to squeeze more money out of perceived abusers because it is possible that some at Six Nations may have not received enough or even any compensation.  Add in something called "Sixties Scoop" and "Day School abuse" where half of the students went home at night, but "were subject to the same life altering abuse as well", and you have the makings of a fine class action law suit.  What many seem to fail to realize that many of us across Canada had a rough time at school - it was not only Indian children who experienced brutality at school.  I was bullied and abused at Day School - that was indeed the experience of half or more of kids at school in the 50s and 60s, and even into the 80s.  I still carry the physical and emotional scars.  It was the times, and I don't want a dime in "compensation".  The times have changed for the better and methods instituted to ensure what I went through will be far less likely to be foisted on some poor youngster today.  Unfortunately there is a group of whiners and complainers who have no ambition and put the blame on everyone and everything but themselves for any misfortunes.  A suggestion here would be to take some responsibility and realize that *%it happens and it is how you deal with it that makes you strong - not blood money.

These legal eagles say, as you hear on TV all the time with lawyers offering their personal injury services, that we "will only be paid if you win your case based on a percentage of compensation paid to the client".  A cynic here might say that what the lawyers are hyping is that, "you too can also be compensated for 'cultural genocide' and assorted ills, it merely requires you to step forward and sign on the dotted line - what do you have to lose?

It would not be surprising if some would feel contempt for those involved in such questionable actions for monetary gain.

DeYo.

Continued Threats by HDI and HCCC - Claims of Treaty Rights Etc. Now Recognized as Myths and Fairy Tales - The HDI Outlandish Assertions Fall on Deaf Ears

Well, unsurprisingly, it seems that the once powerful and influential Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI), which claimed to speak for the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC), the Hereditary Council replaced by the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) in 1924, is about to sail into the sunset and sink under the weight of its own rhetoric and changing times.

It would not be an understatement to say the not only residents of Caledonia, but also the Provincial and Federal Governments, and even the HCCC itself are getting sick of, or losing faith in, the HDI, which emerged after the Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) / Kanonhstaton reclamation / theft and the brutality, arson and anti - social behaviour  on the part of many Six Nations members as the activist - militant group self proclaimed to speak for Six Nations on any matter dealing with "unsurrendered" land (that was in fact sold 170 years ago), and bogus "treaty rights".  People are now starting to catch on - rhetoric (attended with non - transparency) and not fact is all they have to offer.

Here I will summarize my take on the events of the last three weeks as seen in the "Sachem", "Turtle Island News" and Two Row Times" newspapers.  There is no need here to provide, as I have in all other postings, complete references.  The data can be found in the above three newspapers, and in my numerous postings (complete with photographic copies of the actual original documents) below.

Recent Events:  HDI is upset because the Province will not negotiate or accommodate or consult with them (or the HCCC) on the following matters:

1)  Completing the repairs of the Cayuga Bridge (which the HDI shut down in 2014).  The Province maintains that the legally constituted authority to negotiate with them is SNEC - and they are absolutely correct.  If the HDI wants to be included they will need to work out things through with SNEC or risk Six Nations be seen as a community divided (which it is), and lose all credibility.

2)  Then there is the mega 3000 plus residential homes project along McClung Road to create, eventually, a "second Caledonia" equal in size to the present community.  Personally I believe that this would be a disaster, what with one bridge (which also desperately needs to be replaced) and a traffic nightmare on Argyle Street at any time of the day which would rival what one would find anywhere in Los Angeles - and to double the trouble with twice the vehicles crossing the one bridge!  So I would love to see this ill conceived project grind to a halt, but the HDI does not have the clout to do it.  They tried, using as a pretext the assertion that the archaeology was not properly done.  Actually it was.  I am very familiar with ASI (Archaeological Services, Incorporated) and they have followed the letter of the law on the matter and have brought in monitors from Six Nations and New Credit - just not the HDI monitors (whose training is questionable and whose demands for payment are embarrassing).  At any rate consultation with Aboriginal Communities is a guideline not a standard of practice in archaeology - so by having monitors from both New Credit and Six Nations (just not those with HDI approval) they are actually doing more than is required.

3)  A similar situation is brewing at the Tutela Heights residential development project in Brant County.

A Major Problem for the HDI:  There is no law or legal precedent or even requirement that HDI be involved in any way.  HDI maintains that only they have the connection to the Crown and the governance body which is legitimate.  That is only true in a fairy tale world.  They say that everything in not only the Haldimand Tract, but Southwestern Ontario is "Treaty land", coming under the supposed "Nanfan Treaty of 1701" and the "Haldimand Proclamation".  They even trot out the "Two Row Wampum" arrangement of 1613 to bolster their argument.  The problem here is that not one of these entities gives Six Nations any claim to lands beyond the 45,000 plus acres which now comprise the Six Nations Reserve in Tuscarora, Oneida and Onondaga Townships.  As I have shown over and over with all the original supporting documentation - the Six Nations claims are a myth, and nothing more.  Taking each in turn:

1)  The Nanfan document of 1701 is nothing more than a request by 20 Five Nations chiefs that their Sovereign Lord the King of England grant them beaver hunting rights on lands in Southwestern Ontario.  A couple of problems here.  The document was never given the seal of the then Governor of New York, John Nanfan; nor was it given the Privy Council Seal in England.  It is not a treaty, it is a request.  Secondly, the Five Nations had no right to request anything in this particular geographical region.  After the Five Nations had committed acts of genocide to remove the Wyandotte (Huron), Attiwandaronk (Neutral) and other tribes in the area between 1642 and 1649, by 1696 the Mississauga and their allies had destroyed 8 Haudenosaunee settlements north of Lake Ontario and had taken the lands by conquest from the Five Nations.  No group can negotiate for lands that do not belong them.

2)  The Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 is not in any legal sense what the HDI is claiming.  Southwestern Ontario was Mississauga land in 1784 when Governor Sir Frederick Haldimand purchased the land along the Grand River and allowed the Six Nations and their allies to settled upon these lands, but the title to the lands was vested in the Crown.

3)  Going from the sublime to the ridiculous is the supposed "Two Row Wampum" treaty or agreement of 1613.  Somewhere, perhaps on the present Onondaga Reserve near Syracuse NY, is a document written in old Dutch supposedly in 1613, but of highly suspect provenance, which is a trade agreement between two Dutchmen (only one of whom can be identified), and four Mohawks whose status is unclear.  There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that it is a treaty, nor do the signators have authority to make any such arrangement.  Somehow this questionable piece of paper became linked to a wampum belt that has two purple rows set on a background of white wampum (shell beads).  Its age is unknown,  Its provenance is unknown.  Its meaning is unknown.  However, I would venture to say that many to most at Six Nations believe that this is a valid arrangement between the Crown (despite it being signed long before England took New Netherlands in 1664), and that each purple row represents a vessel - one being a canoe (the Five, later Six, Nations) and the other a ship (the Dutch and later the British Crown).  Boiling down the supposed meaning (there being nothing objective to support it) is that the canoe and the ship were to sail independently on their own course not interfering with each other, but interacting to their mutual benefit as befit the circumstances.  Sorry not a shred of evidence, but the belief is strong to this day and data or evidence take a back seat to what is believed to be the case - which is also held out as "proof" of a sovereignty arrangement between Six Nations and the Crown - which in fact it does nothing of the sort.

Serious Problems Facing the HDI:  So now the HDI is being left out of any consultation process on the bridges along the Grand River, Developments such as the McClung Road Development near Caledonia, and most recently the Tutela Heights Development in Brant County.  The Government and the developers are holding their ground this time and in the case of the McClung Development, they have obtained an injunction (Cayuga Court) such that any interference with the project will result in the Ontario Provincial Police being called and the protesters being charged with trespass if they try to impede the developers.  This is more or less what happened with DCE, so what is different this time - two things basically.  In addition to the fact that the HDI has no legal authority there are some other difficulties they will inevitably face.

First, at long last the County, and the "Little Crown" (Ontario) and the "Big Crown" (Federal Government) are playing hard ball and turning to the law which says they only need to consider any negotiations with SNEC as the proper representatives of the Six Nations people.  That is the law.

Second, one might ask why it is not likely that another 2006 take over event will occur at either McClung or Tutela Heights.  In a word, geography.

What those who do not live here would not realize is that the DCE property at the south end of Caledonia is within a few minutes of the Reserve and that by driving down 6th Line and taking the dirt road before Argyle Street (old Highway 6) Six Nations reinforcements could stream down to the site in seconds without having to pass through more than a few farms enroute to the protest site.  Taking McClung as an example, they would have to find their way to Argyle Street and then get locked in traffic like the rest of us trying to cross the bridge.  Even closer access is Stirling Street Bridge which at one time brought traffic from the Reserve to Argyle Street near the Bridge - but that went up in flames during an episode of arson during the 2006 take over of DCE - and it is doubtful that it will ever be rebuilt.

Chiefswood Bridge off Highway 54 (Sutherland Street in Caledonia paralleling the Grand River and leading to McClung about a mile east of the lights) is another access point - but distant.  Either way the OPP would have ample opportunity to "discourage" and "disperse" - something not available to them in the 2006 crisis.  So in this instance the "phone tree" and social media would not be particularly helpful, and only the most dedicated of souls would venture into such uncertainty where they would not have their neighbours and kinfolk streaming down right behind them.  The OPP could send them on "detours" that would highly discourage any organized agglomeration of Six Nations radicals.  Here the OPP would be in a position to "shine" and perhaps redeem themselves in the eyes of local residents - something that surely is in their awareness.  Any hearty souls who did make it to McClung would probably be met with a lot of angry Caledonians who would be in a position to block the exit of the protesters, and give the OPP the opportunity to arrest the leaders and clip off the head of the snake.  All entirely different from the dynamics of 2006.

Also, it has become apparent to many at Six Nations that 2006 created a public relations nightmare and deep wounds.  It is questionable whether there would be the same level of support for an event of that nature in 2015 - just as things are beginning to normalize.

Basically the HDI have been partially declawed and defanged, and whatever they do they are likely to run into a "roadblock".  Even on the Reserve they are under intense scrutiny by those who see them as lacking in any transparency, and making decisions on their own without Council (HCCC) approval.  These are not halcion days for the HDI - these times were in the past.  Perhaps some are coming to realize that in order to survive, even the HCCC is going to have to change.  Nothing can stay the same from Stone Age times.  That is not the way the modern world works - it is more along the lines of adapt or become obsolete and fall by the wayside.  This is the danger that the HCCC faces unless it changes to meet the challenges of the times.  The HDI would drag them back to maladaptive ways and along paths to meet their ultimate demise. Clearly if HDI is to play a role in the Six Nations community it will need to also change - what it is doing is not working - to continue in this way is called perseveration which is a clear sign of pathology.

DeYo.

More Threats by Men's Fire, This Time to "Shut Down" Enbridge Pipeline Work

Well, if it isn't Highway 6, it will be something else.  In what seems to be a rather pathetic attempt to keep themselves "relevant", Men's Fire have decided that they must be consulted or dire consequences will ensue.  Of course the target is not some trailer park in Drumbo, but the mega wealthy Enbridge's number 9 oil pipeline.  The route of the pipeline is shown below:

A close up view of the above would show that Line 9b does not dip anywhere below Highway 403.  In other words it does not pass through Six Nations Territory.  However, that is of no concern to Men's Fire and like minds - through some twisted logic Six Nations still has a stake in lands that they sold 150 or more years ago.

One issue that will surface, because it always does, is that this is aboriginal land.  It is not.  The Haldimand Tract was granted to Six Nations for their use, but the title is vested and is still vested in the Crown.  The fact that Six Nations have no business to put their noses in matters outside of IR 40 the Six Nations Reserve just simply will not sink in - largely because their claims go unchallenged.  No one in Government (Provincial or Federal) has the guts to come out and say to Six Nations that, "you alienated all rights, title and deed to these lands 200 years ago and do not have any legal standing relating to the lands in this area".  No one in authority seems willing to tell the truth and challenge the thugs who insist that if they don't get their way, all hell will break loose.  It is total insanity, but welcome to politically correct Canada.

In "Turtle Island News" of 23 September 2015 is an article entitled, Enbridge in talks with Six Nations Men's Fire over Line 9 (p.7).  Here we are informed that Men's Fire wish to be informed about "pipeline safety and integrity digs" - routine operations for Enbridge.  Recently members of Men's Fire met with representatives of Enbridge, in Brantford, to talk about spill safety regarding the company's plan to reverse the flow of oil in its Line 9B pipeline that runs through Haudenosaunee Territory.

Two concerns immediately come to the fore.  First, as noted, Six Nations have absolutely no rights relating to what Enbridge does or does not do.  Secondly, we are on the verge of hypocrisy here when Men's Fire concern themselves with matters that are actually providing a safe means of transport of oil near Six Nations lands.  Surely they are aware that oil rumbles across the aged railway bridge every day on tracks that I, based on personal inspection, would say are "marginal".  What if the whole trainload hit a defective spot in the tracks and all the tanker cars ended up in the Grand River one mile east of the Six Nations Reserve?  This scenario is better than a well maintained pipeline which, by comparison to railway transport, is many times more safe and secure.  The big picture seems to elude Men's Fire.  They are well aware that the railway which runs through the area where the Stirling Street Bridge was until it was torched by Six Nations activists in 2006 (and has not, and will not be repaired).  The political fall out of addressing anything to do with the railway makes it an unlikely target at present.  No one ever seems to think of the monumental environmental disaster which is immanent on their doorstep, but would rather focus on politically expedient topics like pipelines where there is already a host of militant groups that will provide them with support.

Men's Fire question, 'Who gave them the authority to go through our territories?' He [B.M.] said there needs to be an emergency management team in place, manned by Six Nations [presumably paid by Enbridge] people, in case of a spill.  'The people here in the community; they're the ones who know the layout of the land.  They know the medicines it (an oil spill) could harm.  They know how it could impact the environment.  Our people know that.'  Really, the average Six Nations person has the expertise to address the effects of an oil spill - how did that come about?  Who knows the "layout of the land" in the area north of Highway 403?  There are "regular Canadians" who would be in a far better position to have the knowledge to cooperate effectively with Enbridge.  Six Nations has a serious problem with the environment on the Reserve - perhaps that should be addressed before claiming some sort of magical expertise to understand the impact of a potential oil spill outside of their own land.

Of course, Men's Fire get to the threats.  They told Enbridge that if they don't comply with Men's Fire, they'd shut down the reversal project.  That would be an illegal act, and if anyone had any guts they would simply obtain a Court Injunction and have the OPP arrest any who violate the terms of the Injunction.  Line 9 is a long way from "reinforcements" available at the Reserve, so it may be a hollow threat - except for the fact that corporations have been known to comply with Men's Fire or HDI (Haudenosaunee Development Institute) since it is politically risky to challenge Indians, the perceived "guardians of the land" (take a trip to the Reserve and see the reality about how well the term "guardians of the land" fits).

Then, enter factionalism.  Men's Fire have not been paid for this "required" work.  However, B.M., was under the assumption that HDI (Haudenosaunee Development Institute) did get consulting fees (from Endridge).  In other words payola has already crossed palms, but Men's Fire did not see any of it.  The Director of the HDI denies that any negotiations with Enbridge have taken place, and notes that Men's Fire have not contacted them about the matter of acting in the role of an emergency management plans.  The finger of blame was also pointed at the group of Six Nations working with developer Steve Charest (whose project is at Eagle's Nest in Brantford).

As to Enbridge, they noted that the integrity digs have already been completed.

All in all, plenty of blame in relation to a non - issue, once again stirring up the simmering pot at Six Nations.

DeYo.

Rifts within the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council and the Disruptive Role of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute - Updates

What follows is essentially a follow up to the recent posting found here.

In the 5 August 2015 issue of Two Row Times (TRT), there are two items of interest.  There is little use in providing an edited version here when TRT is online and easily accessed.

1)  Article: Disruption at Confederacy Council during HDI report.  See here.

The article provides the most recent examples of the rifts emerging within the HCCC, largely due to the antics of the HDI including "rudely" interrupting and breaching protocol as well as the usual lack of transparency allegations.

2)  Letter to the Editor: Council Observations.  See here.

The author repeats the concerns expressed above, and notes the "one sided 'reporting' on it in a certain local newspaper".  Gosh, I wonder what newspaper that would be - since there is only TRT and one other.  The frustration and anger of the writer is clearly in evidence.

Sovereignty and Hypocrisy

Well, the previous blog posting discussing "inconsistency" in relation to the use of the sovereignty concept at Six Nations, and alluded to some hypocrisy in the way it all plays out.  No more alluding - we can now use the word hypocrisy full bore.  In what has to be at the very least a completely embarrassing (to some) and classic example of the "do as we say, not as we do" philosophy, we find that the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) at the center of yet another controversy.  Here from the git go they have been preaching (without evidence) that "we are a sovereign people and need not consult with either the Federal Government nor the Ontario Provincial Government".  They have consistently maintained that they are the true representatives of the Six Nations community, and that they are not Canadians, but Haudenosaunee people.  Of course this does not stop them from taking all the goodies (e.g., grants, transfer payments) that can be got from both the Canadian and Ontario governments legally available only on the basis of being citizens of Canada.  They claim that Ontario has no jurisdiction over lands that they decide (with no evidence) belong to Haudenosaunee people (e.g., the Douglas Creek Estates which their thugs have "reclaimed"), and no longer belong in the Ontario Land Registry system, but one of their own creation - the "Haudeosaunee Land Registry").  They maintain that if they deem it in their best interests to speak to Ottawa or Toronto, then it is on a nation to nation basis as they refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the Government of Ontario as having any role in Six Nations affairs.

Therefore, while it comes as absolutely no surprise to myself and other HDI "watchers", some, including the people they are supposed to represent, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) have been taken off guard with regard to certain recent HDI actions which were apparently done without consultation with the HCCC Chiefs and Clan Mothers.  Furthermore, these actions appear to be clearly hypocritical.

Reporters with the "Two Row Times" paper have unconvered some apparently "shady dealings" which call into question whether the HDI simply operates on principals of convenience, and seemingly those that will maximize the primary goal - the obtaining of as much money from as many sources as possible for the HDI, without any accountability.  In the interests of clarity, the present author will use large quotes from this TRT article of 22 July 2015 and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions.  I suspect that those who have been following this blog over the years will just be shaking their heads in another, "you have got to be kidding" moment.  This time they may have seriously overstepped their bounds, and will be in for a lot of "explaining" (again) to their parent body, the HCCC.  There are already significant "rumblings of discontent", and these may ultimately coalesce into a storm - although the HDI have been very "slippery" and been able to find their way back into the good graces of the people of Six Nations as they have on and off since 2006. Something of a Teflon group to deal with, but to date they have always managed to land on their feet.  Here follow some relevant quotes, all with grey background and directly from TRT.

SIX NATIONS – A recent Corporate Profile Report confirms that the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) is operating as a numbered corporation, registered under the jurisdiction of Ontario as ‘2438543 Ontario Inc.’.

Two Row Times obtained documents showing land was purchased on Pauline Johnson Road, just outside the borders of the Six Nations Reserve. The April 2015 purchase occurred between a Brant County resident and a corporation named only as ‘2438543 Ontario Inc.’.

Local residents near the Pauline Johnson Road property informed the TRT that the land had been “sold to HDI”.

Copies of the land transfer given to TRT did not name HDI, but instead listed a corporation with the same mailing address as HDI.

An online search through the Ministry of Government Services listed ‘2438543 Ontario Inc.’ as a “Corporation under the jurisdiction of Ontario”. Hazel Hill is noted as the Director of the Corporation, which was launched in October of 2014, and identifies Hill as a Canadian resident.

Additional research confirmed that on May 27, 2015 a change was submitted to the corporate structure: adding Aaron Detlor as Secretary and Brian Doolittle as President. Both men are also at the core of HDI and are listed on the document as Canadian residents.

HDI has publicly stated numerous times they have been “legislated” by the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) as the “administrative arm” of the community’s traditional governing body.

However, since the formation of the Confederacy the Haudenosaunee people have stood on the grounds of sovereignty – not being under the jurisdiction of Ontario and that the Haudenosaunee people are not Canadians.

HDI has also publicly condemned the Elected Council as a merely an extension of the federal government, further declaring the Confederacy is the legitimate self-governing body of Haudenosaunee people of the Grand River Territory.

Employees of HDI have insisted they are only operating under the leadership of the HCCC. HDI lawyer Aaron Detlor recently addressed the question of why he is on Six Nations, saying, “…because the Confederacy has asked me to do that work. The Chief’s Council asked me to do the work, so I do the work. I do negotiations. I draft agreements.”

HDI has also very publicly stated that registering land under the HDI, would protect and preserve Six Nations sovereignty by not requiring registration under the Ontario Realty Corp.

TRT emailed HDI to seek clarification regarding the formation of this corporation operating out of the HDI office at the GREAT building in Ohsweken.

HDI media director and publisher of the Turtle Island News, Lynda Powless, responded to those questions, saying that at the November 2014 meeting of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council, the formation of this corporation “was publicly discussed and a full description given and HCCC approval received (Dec. 24th).”

Profile reports for the numbered corporation however, state that the corporation was formed on October 20, 2014; before Powless said the approval was given.

Six Nations residents, clan mothers and chiefs the TRT has spoken to seem to know nothing about the corporation and were upset when shown the corporate profile.

TRT has also obtained copies of a letter written by HDI Director Hazel Hill, showing that despite several Canada-wide protests over the controversial Enbridge Pipeline, HDI has engaged with Enbridge to seek some form of financial restitution in exchange for their support. 

This information points to the possibility that much of what HDI does is for its own enhancement in the jockeying for power that is the undercurrent playing out there.  It suggests that it is all about the MONEY, and the disposition of the money (who gets what) is unknown since HDI will not open their books.

The hypocrisy part enters the picture when you look at the "ideals" of the HDI (sovereignty being non - negotiable), versus their "actions" (backing off the sovereignty dogma is fine when convenient).  So they are not Canadians unless their are funds and perks that can accrue by claiming Canadian status; and they are anti - pipeline unless the pipeline corporation is willing to cough up some cash then the whole matter quietly is shuffled to the side.  I am sure that many people believe that this cannot possibly be true, there must be an explanation that keeps the HDI shining as a beacon for Haudenosaunee sovereignty and for being in the forefront of environmental awareness.  If so, where is the evidence?  They say they will open the books, but then put so many stipulations about say clan membership and so on such that no one is going to be able to meet the criteria and have access to the full range of books.  "Trust me" they say.  It reminds me of an old Al Greene song, "The Snake" - about a kindly person who took in a cold and hungry snake and it ended up biting her with its venomous fangs, and as the woman was dying the snake said , "what did you expect, I am a snake".  Alas the woman did not see that early enough and was far too trusting - and paid the ultimate price.

DeYo.

Sovereignty, Haudenosaunee Passports, and Inconsistency

This posting was triggered by an article in "Two Row Times", 15 July 2015, p.4, entitled, Haudenosaunee U-19 women will not travel on a foreign passport.  Before addressing the specifics of this article, it is necessary to explore the facts in relation to the assumption that would lead some at Six Nations to consider a Canadian passport to be a "foreign" one.

As bizarre as it may seem to many in say the United States, there are separatist movements in Canada.  The one which has received the most publicity is the separatists in Quebec.  Basically, there are a large number of Quebecois, largely those of old stock French Canadian ancestry, who want their own country.  In other words they want to separate from Canada and form their own country.  I can recall from childhood the emergence of the Front de Liberation du Quebec (FLQ).  The movement begun in 1963, involving such acts as bombing mailboxes, came to a head in the October 1970 ("the October Crisis") when the Quebec Minister of Labour Pierre Laporte, and British Trade Commissioner James Cross were kidnapped, and the former murdered.  With the resultant application of the War Measures Act (supported by the vast majority of Canadians), those Canadians living in Quebec and Ottawa for some months got used to having armed troops wandering our streets.  They were welcome to the Anglophone minority in Quebec who felt very threatened.  The senseless murder sealed the fate of the separatist movement for a time - but it never disappeared, although the militancy was much attenuated.  The movement shifted gears to become more political and formed the Parti Quebecois (PQ) which came into power during the 1976 Quebec election, defeating the incumbent Liberals and leaving the rest of Canada feeling that the country was about to fragment, and uncertainty became endemic.  In 1980 the PQ established a referendum for what they termed "sovereignty - association", however this initiative was soundly defeated - although during their term of office they enacted Bill 101 the "notorious" "Language Law" which is a red flag for many Canadians to this day (the "language police" are an all too real entity).  Referendums followed in 1985 and in 1995 - again, each went down to defeat, although the latter by less than one percentage point.  Later the Bloc Quebecois (or simply, "the Bloc") emerged at the Federal level and put forward an agenda that was hauntingly similar to what was seen with the PQ.

The supporters of independence have failed to consider the fact that Canadians would do everything in their power to make it difficult for Quebec to succeed in promoting their "romantic but unrealistic" viewpoint.  Canada would be unlikely to allow the perceived traitors to share its currency, consular offices, and on and on.  Furthermore the pro independence group underestimate the can of worms that would be opened.  The aboriginal groups stated they would never agree to an independent Quebec.  For example the Mistassini Cree, Kahnawake Mohawks, and other First Nations groups polled showed that over 95% wished to remain in Canada.  They have made it abundantly clear that they have agreements with Canada, and would do everything in their power to stand in the way of the independence movement.

While the assertion by many Six Nations of being a "sovereign nation" is not precisely the same as the situation in Quebec, the latter provides a relevant background or comparison point for a discussion of the "Six Nations version of sovereignty".

As I have noted many times, the concept that Six Nations are a sovereign people is a fiction, fueled by a fabricated document which is only a 1613 trade agreement with the Dutch and uninterpretable wampum belt (Two Row Wampum).  The second underpinning of this false assumption is a bogus "treaty" which is actually a gift of land with a request to retain hunting rights gifted by the then Five Nations to the King of territory not then owned by the Five Nations since it was taken from them by right of conquest by the Mississauga in 1696 (Nanfan "Treaty" of 1701).  There is nothing, except documents taken out of context, that could be used to support any claim that the Six Nations are a sovereign people.  In truth they acknowledged that they were subjects of the King of England and Great Britain, and their land tenure along the Grand River reflects this reality - the Haldimand Proclamation is a grant not in fee simple, but a document offering the Six Nations rights of occupancy of lands vested in the Crown.  See here for one of my articles on this subject.

This misconception, this twisting of history, has been in place since the Six Nations were acknowledged as allies of the Crown in the wars against France.  The word "allies" in the 18th Century context does not automatically invoke sovereignty - but that fact eludes many.

So we have Deskahe visiting the League of Nations in 1930, and various delegations at various times arguing that Six Nations were a sovereign people.  That has never been approved - only vague concepts of "rights to self - determination" by those who have no right to speak for the Nation of Canada within which Six Nations Territory is situated.  None the less, reality has never deterred factions at Six Nations who would assert that they are a sovereign people, and that their "nationhood" should be recognized by countries such as the United Kingdom or France or Botswana for example.  A "country" of about 23,000 is in theory feasible, but it would be a long road ahead to be accepted as such by the United Nations or any body charged with the responsibility of recognizing say the Czech Republic as a country after it broke away from Czechoslovakia, and earlier from the Soviet Union. One would be hard pressed to find any legitimate rationale for considering "Haudenosaunee" as anything but a region within Canada where people who call themselves Haudenosaunee reside.

In the above noted article in Two Row Times, we learn that, The U-19 Haudenosaunee Women's Lacrosse Team has dropped out of the World Field Lacrosse Championships which they were to compete in Edinburgh Scotland at the end of this month.  The reason, Haudenosaunee passports they were to travel on, were not acceptable according to Canadian, American and Scottish border crossing policies.

Consider the world we live in, with a very palpable terrorist threat resulting in stepped up security at every level, should this refusal be a surprise?  Entry into the UK is a privilege not a right.  It must be supported by documentation that can be validated through a computer based system that will allow customs agents to be satisfied that the individual does not pose a risk.  In other words, a foreign national who wishes to enter the UK or Canada or any other recognized country and has a criminal record which is equivalent to what is found in the Criminal Code of Canada will be barred admission.  The obvious necessity is to be able to access criminal records in the home country and Interpol.  An obvious problem is that Haudenosaunee is not a country, and at least since modern record keeping has been in place, can not in any way shape or form be considered to be a country.  So here someone or a group wishes to enter the UK but they are not from a recognized country.  There is also no evidence that their passport would meet even the most basic of security requirements such as holograms and other devices countries use to make counterfeiting very difficult.  Looking at the tattered example of a Haudenosaunee passport included in the TRT article, it would be hard to imagine the border agents not shaking their heads in disbelief in the UK.

While it is politically correct today to give "aboriginals" across the world special privileges (which many see as rights), this does not extend to the level of the ridiculous and absurd.  Anyone who has watched the show "Border Security" on DTour or National Geographic will realize the immense security issues that face agents in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.  Trying to imagine these first line defenders of the country trying to assess whether someone with a "dodgy" and unregistered Haudenosaunee passport is suitable for admission is a no brainer.  There is no way that the prospective entrant could conceivably be admitted on any basis whatsoever, hence they would be refused entry and turned back (placed on the next available flight to the country or origin).  A bit of a problem, there is no country called "Haudenosaunee".  This is an ethnic group residing within the borders of Canada and the United States, the latter two are recognized as countries world wide, but not elements within.

If Haudenosaunee was a "country" then where are the consulates?  What would happen if a Haudenosaunee citizen ran into difficulties overseas, to whom would they turn for assistance.  If they are saying that they are not Canadian, then there is no reason to expect any help from the Canadian Consulate.  They don't have their own currency or anything that would signal that they are an independent country.  There are no border check points at say the Chiefswood Bridge, or 4th Line or anywhere.  Haudenosaunee people do not have an International Airport.  They use Canadian infrastructure in getting to any major service such as a hospital.  They depend on tax dollars from the Ontario Provincial Government and the Canadian Federal Government to function (via Canadian taxpayers).  Haudenosaunee do not tax their own people for services such as fire and policing, the funds come from Canadian taxpayers.  They are entirely dependent on Canada for their existance.  None of this sounds in any way as if Haudenosaunee are a country.  Lets see what further information is provided by the above article about the stance taken by the women's lacrosse group.

It is stated that, The UK requires security standards that our Haudenosaunee passports do not meet, so they were willing to allow us to travel on Haudenosaunee passports along with a Canadian or American passport.  The Confederacy would not agree to this because we are not Canadian or American citizens.  The obvious question is, if you are not Canadian citizens, why are you willing to accept funding from a "foreign" country such as Canada so that you can have municipal services?  Apparently the Confederacy boils things down to the fact that there is a, lack of recognition of our Haudenosaunee peoples as a sovereign nation by some countries.  I think that should read "all" countries.  Then the old chestnut about Turtle Island and having always been a separate, sovereign nation is brought to the surface.  The spokesperson for the lacrosse team stated how proud they were of the stand taken by the team, which is a, proud statement for Haudenosaunee sovereignty and national pride.

While some comments were sensible, of the "it is rather a shame that it came to this" variety, there were some off the wall extremist points of view expressed.  One columnist wrote, This is BS ........ There is fault to be laid here.  For the U.S., Canada and the UK to deny our people the right to freely travel without claiming their citizenship is a crime.  This violates the Human Rights Conventions ..........  Would it also be "BS" if the Basques demanded the right to enter the UK based on their Basque heritage rather than on Spanish or French citizenship.  It would never be accepted by any country in the world, so why should it be any different for the Haudenosaunee?

The article ends with a discussion of the Jay Treaty of 1794 which has absolutely no relevance for travel to the UK or any other country in the world except the USA.

If the Haudenosaunee are so adamant that they are not Canadian citizens, not Canadians at all, then why are so many Haudenosaunee thrilled to represent "their" country (Canada) at Olympic and Pan Am Games?  This brings me to the second article in the TRT, p.18, entitled, Carey Leigh Thomas excited about Pan-Am Games.  The large picture on this page shows Ms. Thomas wearing a baseball cap with the maple leaf and "Canada" as its logo, and her uniform shirt says "Canada" and right beneath it is the symbol of Canada the country, a maple leaf.  It is reported here that, Carey-Leigh Thomas will be representing Canada, once again on the international sports stage this summer as a member of the Canadian National Softball Team which is getting ready for the Pan-Am Games in Toronto this summer.  Ms. Thomas is Six Nations, Cayuga, Bear Clan who was "proud" to make the "National Team".  As a star player for the Women's Softball team, she has been called, "an outspoken ambassador for Onkwehonwe women in sports", and sees herself as a role model for all young women (she has been able to successfully juggle being a star athlete and mother).  In her role she has traveled (presumably on a Canadian passport) to compete in games as far away as South Africa.

So are Six Nations only "Canadians of convenience"?  Does the concept of separatist, or sovereignist apply?  Most people would agree that in these situations, either you are in or you are out.  Either you are a member and a citizen or you are not.  Something is very very wrong when one attempts to reconcile the content of this article focusing on Softball athletes, versus the above article on Lacrosse athletes.  One is willing to represent Canada and the other is not?  It is all very strange, inconsistent, and some might say, hypocritical.

What can be said with confidence is that many Six Nations men volunteered for service to fight for Canada during both World War I and II.  They fought, in in some cases gave their lives, for Canada and to stop the rule of tyranny, fascism and Nazi monsters at a time when the freedom of the entire world was at stake.  They are honoured for their role.  These brave men did not serve as foreigners in some French Foreign Legion unit, they fought and died as a band of brothers, as Canadians with their countrymen in lands far from home - under the Canadian and British flags, not the flag of the Confederacy.

DeYo.