"Caledonia Blockade is Coming Down"

It was with immense joy that I read an article in the online version of "The Spec" (Hamilton Spectator, 24 June 2014) entitled, Caledonia Blockade is Coming Down (see here).  Oddly, the online edition of our local "Sachem" (see here), while including information about for example the expansion of the Kinsman parking lot in anticipation of the replacement of the 9 span bridge over the Grand River, has not yet included any other information from Monday's meeting of the Haldimand County Council - which was held behind closed doors.  It is also not in the hard copy of the newspaper, published Wednesday (today), perhaps the information about the blockade will be found in next week's edition by which time there may well be a lot more information to include.  The online paper does, however, include an article of 24 June 2014 on the events at the Surrey Street entrance, and the citizen's arrest by Gary McHale, events occurring since 8 June 2014 (see here).

A Blockade of Argyll Street on 16 June 2014:

First I will discuss the online Sachem data, since clearly these events helped precipitate the action by Haldimand County Council on Monday 23 June 2014.

Barricades Moved from the Blockaded Argyll Street to Blockade Surrey Street

The above picture is from the Sachem.ca.

 

After recounting the Gary McHale citizen's arrest (discussed in previous blog postings), the reporter describes a key event of the previous Monday, 16th of June 2014 where activists blocked Argyll Street for a short time, then moved the barricade to block Surrey Street.  Shades of Caledonia, April 2006 when such a blockade caused irreparable damage in the relations between residents of Caledonia and Six Nations.  Apparently at the time the Ontario Provincial Police saw this blockade of Surrey Street as a sensible compromise.  As the communications officer noted, it would take the complaint of a citizen for them to act to address the new blockade situation.  It appears that there were no more than a dozen activists (how many Native and how many White "solidarity supporters" is anyone's guess - I wasn't there, and knew nothing of this event).  Apparently the Six Nations Band Council could not be reached for comment.  Since this was the doings of the rival Hereditary Chiefs Council, I am not sure what sort of comment would be forthcoming.

 

Haldimand County Council Votes to Dismantle the Surrey Street Blockade:

 

1)  Information from The Hamilton Spectator (Spec) of 24 June 2014, Caledonia Blockade is Coming Down: Mayor Ken Hewitt said the vote took place behind closed doors Monday night. The county will hire a contractor to take apart the barrier — fashioned with metal, concrete and other materials — at Surrey Street in Caledonia. 

 

The street is a closed road leading into the former estates. "For us, the intent is really to clean up that area, obviously we have to ensure emergency vehicles have access," Hewitt said.  

 

"It is not the council's intention to "cause any undue stress," to anyone, he added.  Mayor Hewitt further added that, he wants to see the issue resolved, and the land used in a way that brings the community together.

                           

"I don't want to diminish land claims, but those could be going on for many years to come. I'd like to see the land represent something that brings people together."

                           

The county will be asking Ontario Provincial Police to "maintain peace" while the work is going on.

Haldimand OPP Constable Mark Foster said it has been relatively quiet at the site recently, adding that police had not been informed of the council decision.

 

As to the Six Nations (actually the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council only), Blake Bomberry, a member of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council, said in an emailed statement that the chiefs are "in discussion with Ontario about the Haldimand County decision."

While the site has remained largely peaceful, he acknowledged there have been "issues of mischief recently" that the Haudenosaunee Development Institute has been working with the province to address.

                           

A Six Nations Council spokesperson said the council planned to gather Tuesday night to discuss the issue, and would not be able to comment until Wednesday.

2)  Information from Turtle Island News (TIN) of 25 June 2014, Haldimand council votes to take out Kanonhstaton hydro towers, p.2: The Reserve newspaper adds a few pieces of additional information on the matter.  Apparently the vote of the Haldimand Council was "unanimous".  Furthermore, Mayor Hewitt told TIN that, his council voted to remove the hydro tower at an in-camera meeting Monday night, calling it "an illegal blockade" and saying it is causing a "barrier" between Six Nations and Caledonia.

Furthermore, Hewitt claims the driveway - also known as Surrey Street - is a public road.

"It's an unopened road that is registered with Haldimand County.  It was deemed or felt that we have issues with the signage and the road being closed by someone who is not Haldimand County.  What we'd like is to remove the barricades, clean up the site and start moving towards more of a progressive and positive solution for both communities than to continue to put wedges and barriers between the two communities".

The HCCC continues to maintain that while there are "issues" they are working with the Ontario Government to effect a solution.  However Haldimand County has not contacted the HCCC about the matter, and the HCCC is now in talks with Ontario about the actions of Haldimand County.  However Mayor Hewitt is, attempting to contact Six Nations elected Chief Ava Hill to notify her about their plans.  Haldimand County will only consult with band council on the issue, said Hewitt, adding that he has no plans to speak with the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council before the County's contractors attempt to remove the hydro tower.

Mayor Hewitt added that, While the former Douglas Creek Estates land is provincially owned, Haldimand County maintains ownership of all roads.  The County is obliged to keep all roadways open for access.  Also, Haldimand Council has decided to have the illegal barriers removed and the entrance to the former Douglas Creek Estates land reopened.  The County will seek the assistance of the OPP to maintain peace while a contractor will be hired to perform the work".

 

Conclusion: This brave move on the part of the Haldimand County Council, unanimous at that, which is the proper decision based on the facts of the matter, speaks well for the leadership of our Mayor Ken Hewitt and his Council in making difficult decisions.  He can continue to stand firm knowing that the facts of ownership of this property are crystal clear (they were stolen from the legal rightful owners by Six Nations activists), and that there will be overwhelming support by his constituents in his quest for justice.  I have worked with the Mayor before and know him to be an honourable person, and expect that he will not cave into inevitable bogus name calling of "racist", "colonialist" and such nonsense by both the SN activists and their White Communist Anarchist union backed supporters (puppeteers).

 

Blog Credits McHales for the Proposed Removal of the Blockade:

 

Without a doubt Mark Vandermaas has been among the most dedicated opponents of the illegal occupation of the Douglas Creek Estates, and has been present at most or all protest events.  His blog, "Caledonia Victims Project" (see here) has been of immense help (as have the websites of Gary McHale and Jeff Parkinson) to local residents in keeping us abreast of developments.

 

In Mark's most recent posting (24 June 2014) he credits both Gary McHale and his wife Christine McHale as being responsible for the Council's decision.  He comes to the conclusion that a letter written by the latter to Premier Kathleen Wynne was what tipped the scales.  With due respect, Premier Wynne has been hyper focused on the Election and is positively giddy about "World Pride Week", which is taking place in Toronto this week.  I am not aware that Premier Wynne, born and raised in Toronto, has any inkling whatsoever about the Caledonia situation.  There is nothing in her actions or words that would lead me to believe that she either cares, or is informed about this subject.  This does not in any way take away from the robust and valued support given to the cause by the McHales.  What is clear is that the HDI was triggered to act (construct the blockade) due to the citizen's arrest of John Garlow by Gary McHale, and a subsequent action by Randy Fleming.  Hence Gary is a key ingredient in the chain of events.

 

Only Council knows what drove them to make the decision to remove the blockade.  I am also not quite so confident as Mr. Vandermaas about Six Nations just rolling over on this new development.  The occupiers and their supporters may be more than the usual handful that appear during local protests.  The numbers who tacitly support the take over are unknown, and it is not just a few "thugs" who are involved in one way or another.  Six Nations, particularly the Hereditary faction, have a tremendous amount of time, resources and credibility invested in "Kanonhstaton".  I would predict a much rockier course until justice is served, but only time will tell.  If the good name of Six Nations is badly stained by another riot by terrorists, they will likely have to deal with the shame for generations.  A second riot will not ever be forgiven by some of us.  It is a critical time for Six Nations and others who call this area home.  We must all play our cards well - using rational reasoned arguments rooted in the factual evidence.  Those who fly off in some emotional based direction would do a disservice to those of us on both sides who want to see resolution.

 

I expect that more information will be forthcoming very soon, and will include it in a subsequent posting.
 

A very encouraged,

 

DeYo.

 

 

 

 



Content of E-Mails and a Phone Call Sent to Federal, Provincial, County Authorities and the OPP about the Blockade of Surrey Street

A few months ago I contacted various officials, explaining my frustration with situations such as the difficulties being experienced by the owner of Grand Island BBQ in selling his property in Dunn Township, Haldimand County.  Here, although there was irrefutable evidence that the Six Nations Chiefs in Council had surrendered the property in 1834, they were pushing forward with claims here - the impetus being millions of dollars available from Samsung by the simple act of declaring the lands "contested".  It worked, and Samsung, for absolutely no valid reason, granted $65 million over 20 years to Six Nations - convinced that they held some sort of "rights and entitlements" to the land where Samsung wanted to erect industrial wind turbines.  They bought into the lie, perhaps because it was simply easier to work with Six Nations than risk their ire - irrespective of the validity of their claims.  Since I had ample evidence that Six Nations had no historical or legal rights in this matter, all that having been given up 180 years ago, I had run out of patience. 

The situation at Grand Island was just rubbing more salt into the wound that was still an open sore - Caledonia 2006.  For the past 8 years Six Nations activists had been illegally occupying Douglas Creek Estates, which they renamed Kanonhstaton.  Recently they have had the effrontery to claim that the Provincially owned land belongs to them, and that they have the right to erect a perimeter fence around the entire 40 acres, and turn the land into, in the words of the Director of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI), enforcement arm of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC), a "gated community".  That threat was "made good" when, under the authority of the HCCC, Surrey Street, a public entrance to Provincially owned land, was blockaded with the stolen and vandalized Hydro One tower (once flanking the entrance, but now the two parts have been dragged across the road and "fortified" by positioning huge concrete blocks across Surrey Street).  My previous blog posting of 20 June 2014 provides details and pictures of this, the latest slap in the face of those of us who reside in Caledonia.

Frustration led to action once again, in the form of two e-mails and a phone call. 

A)  The e-mails below were sent to the following individuals:

1)  Bernard Valcourt, (Federal) Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.
2)  David Zimmer, (Provincial) Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.
3)  Diane Finley, M.P.P. for Haldimand - Norfolk.
4)  Toby Barrett, M.P. for Haldimand - Norfolk.
5)  Ken Hewitt, Mayor, Haldimand County.

------- Date of  first e-mail: Saturday, 21 June, 5:15 p.m.

Greetings to all,

I am writing to each of you, and tomorrow I will be phoning the Ontario Provincial Police to lodge a formal complaint.

 

The situation will be familiar to all of you, although the recent particulars perhaps not.  The Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) through their enforcement wing the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) is once again committing illegal acts.  Their actions come on the heels of the verdict of the Ontario Superior Court in Brantford, slapping their Director and Legal Council with a heavy fine for violating the Court injunction against disrupting various projects within the City of Brantford.  In this instance, despite the fact that the former Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) land belongs to the Province of Ontario, they have continued to illegally occupy it as if it were their own.  At present, as per articles in the Turtle Island News and Two Row Times, they plan to place a perimeter fence around the entire property and turn it into a "gated community".  Surely all would agree that this is a blatantly illegal act which cannot be permitted to proceed.  If allowed to do as they please, those who permit this are in effect enablers and will be responsible for the initiation of more blatant acts of defiance in the efforts of Six Nations to deny the land surrenders between 1834 and 1848.

 

The attitude of "we can do as we please" is reflected in the most recent actions at DCE where the HCCC radicals, who are, based on their threats, the HDI, have taken it upon themselves to completely block the main public access road to DCE off Argyll Street in Caledonia.  Pictures and more details can be found here:  http://deyoyonwatheh.blogspot.ca/ in the lead article of 20 June 2014.

 

It is time, in my opinion, for the Federal Government researchers to state in the clearest possible terms that the land was surrendered in 1844-45 (as noted in the above article), and that the land is on title in the Ontario Land Registration system.  It does not belong to Six Nations and has not belonged to them for the past 170 years.  It is a travesty that Six Nations have not formally been informed of historical and legal realities, and as a consequence the people of Caledonia continue to suffer, and will do so for the foreseeable future as the emboldened Six Nations expand their horizons to illegally acquire more land.  We have suffered for 8 years, surely none can expect that we are going to be able to patiently wait another 8 years while Six Nations consolidates their hold - "possession is 9/10 of the law".  The late Justice Marshall's injunction of 2006 needs to be honoured, and the occupiers sent packing, perhaps after being given copies of the surrenders of 1845 signed by up to 67 Chiefs in Council.

 

In the strongest terms, I suggest that the documents pertaining to the specific surrenders be spread on the table before the representatives of both the HCCC and the Elected Band Council.  If they wish to initiate legal action that would be a blessing since, as Justice Harrison Arrell of the Ontario Superior Court in Brantford has said in a preliminary report, the Six Nations have the weakest possible case in relation to present land claims.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

------- Date of second e-mail: Monday, 23 June, 2:22 p.m.

 

Hello again,

 

My contact has informed me that they will publish the response given by each government agency to the request, as written in my previous e-mail, that the law be served in this matter.  I called the Cayuga Detachment of the OPP yesterday to report this event (blockading Surrey Street) as a crime. 

 

After 8 years of dilly dallying, it is time to take action and tell Six Nations that they have no valid claim to the Douglas Creek Estates property, and that the Injunction of Justice Marshall of 2006 will be enforced and all illegal occupiers removed.

 

We anxiously await your response in this matter.

 

Respectfully,

B)  A phone call was made to the Ontario Provincial Police to report a crime.

At 9:15 a.m., on Sunday 22 June 2014 I contacted the Cayuga Detachment and provided information by phone about the blockade of Surrey Street, including the names of those I suspected of having perpetrated the crime, and requested that the matter be investigated.

What is next?

We wait.  I will report on what responses are received from each of the individuals noted above.

DeYo.

Six Nations Activists Have Blocked Road Access to Provincially Owned D.C.E. (Kanonhstaton): So Who is in Charge?

After reading Christie Blatchford's recent article in the National Post (20 May 2014) entitled, Caledonia natives still calling the shots in land dispute (see here) I was left feeling unsettled.  Indeed, who is in charge? 

When I was at the Canadian Tire store and the adjacent Tim Hortons I noted in the distance that there were two new Mohawk Warrior flags installed on the twisted barricades composed of the Hydro One tower that had been vandalized and stolen by the occupiers in 2006.  After reading the article by Christie Blatchford, I realized that the HDI (Haudenosaunee Development Institute) were extremely agitated by the McHale "intrusion" and that they were likely to move quickly to assert their dominance and pretend ownership.

My short drive to the site shocked and angered me.  As can be seen in the photo below (taken today), the two pieces of the Hydro One tower that flanked Surrey Street, the entrance to DCE from Argyle Street, have been moved to form a single unit.  Very large concrete blocks (requiring heavy equipment to move) have been placed across the road and the shoulders arching along to the ditch - ensuring that no car or such motorized vehicle will be able to enter DCE from the main entranceway.  This would appear to be the handiwork of the HDI, the most radical group to emerge from the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council.  It would appear that they have gotten a jump start on those things they have threatened to do - meaning placing a fence around the entire perimeter of DCE, and turning the DCE into a "gated community".  The property is known as Kanonhstaton - The Protected Place - to the radicals who "reclaimed" these lands which were and are legally in the possession of the those named in the Ontario Land Registry for the parcel of land.



Entrance Road to DCE Kanonhstaton Now Completely Blocked and Barricaded



 The map below provides a geographical orientation, with the Grand River off the map to the north (top), and the junction of the 6th Line and old Highway 6 (Argyle Street) to the south (bottom).


The Entrance to DCE is via Argyle Street and Surrey Street (the latter completely blocked)



More on the specifics of the most recent development later, but first some review and background.

Legally the Province of Ontario owns the land (after purchasing it from the developers, Henco for $15 million), and it is registered in the Ontario Land Registry system.  However as noted in my two recent postings, Gary McHale challenged the status quo by the simple act of  walking on the public access road, Surrey Street, which belongs to the Province.  This is a perfectly legal act.  However he was confronted by the lone occupant (Six Nations member) of the single building on the site that has not been trashed and demolished, was assaulted by this "land protector", resulting in the arrest of the latter by the OPP.

Certain Six Nations members were livid - particularly those affiliated with the Hereditary Confederacy Chief's Council (HCCC) and its enforcement arm, the Haudenosaunee Development Institutue (HDI) which is well known for strong arming developers into paying an "application fee" to ensure that no "unpleasantness" would occur on the site being developed.  Some would term this extortion, and in fact members of the HDI and other activists have been fined for ignoring Court injunctions to cease and desist from interfering with the right of developers to develop their land.  Via rulings of the Ontario Superior Court, a substantial fine of over $800,000 was levied, later reduced to $350,000 and via a plea deal reduced further to about $125,000.  The HDI claims the land at DCE for the HCCC - although if anyone at Six Nations were to have legal rights in the matter it would be the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC).  Despite the fact that the land has not been turned over to anyone or any group by the Province, the HDI are insisting that the DCE property is theirs to do with as they wish - including the planting of trees, and the erection of a perimeter fence. 

As I have noted on numerous occasions, the various levels of government are acting as enablers since no one will state the legal realities to Six Nations and the world at large - it is Provincially owned land!  Not only that but the entire premise of the Six Nations having a stake in the property is based on a false premise since the land was surrendered 170 years ago.  As of 1844 and ratified in 1845, the land was surrendered to the Crown - end of story - or at least it should have been if evidence and ethics mean anything. 

See here for the evidence relative to the surrender of Six Nations lands including the property where the DCE is situated (Report by Joan Holmes & Associates to the Corporation of the City of Brantford).  The most relevant section is page 8 (stamped "16" in upper right corner), Six Nations Chiefs in Council meetings 17 & 18 September 1845, signed by 66 Six Nations Chiefs.  See here for Garry Horsnell's chronology and analysis of these and related events.  Below is a map of Oneida Township showing the "tier of lots" to the east of the Plank Road (Argyle Street), with what is today Oneida Road being the boundary described at the junction of the tier of lots and the Reserve requested by the Chiefs in Council:


Oneida Township 1879 with the Plank Road Leading Diagonally North to South from Caledonia to Hagersville and Oneida Road Heading Along the Present Reserve Boundary to Include the 6 Lots in Concessions 1 to 6 plus the River Range Traversing a Straight North to South Route

See here for the evidence that the Superior Court of Ontario, as represented by Justice Harrison Arrell, views Six Nations land claims as resting on the weakest possible foundation.  Unless Six Nations can come up with some hard evidence that will counter the above solid evidence, they are beat - at least in the legal sense.  I doubt very much that they will give up their irrational beliefs.  Many times I have personally heard a certain Six Nations activist, known for her sporting red hats, say that "Caledonia is ours".  No amount of rational arguments, or evidence in the form of the actual signatures of the 66 Chiefs who signed the surrender, has shaken the bedrock of belief.

In this blog I have repeatedly presented the factual basis of the ownership of the DCE - but as noted over and over, facts mean nothing to the HDI and their supporters.  It is only what they believe that has any meaning whatsoever.  So in essence, they make their own reality. 

Guess We Know Who is Calling the Shots

The sheer audacity of the move is also reflected in the following picture:

 

Classy Sign

The "militancy factor" is seen in the number of Mohawk Warrior flags that accompany the Confederacy flag as seen here:

 

Three Mohawk Warrior Flags - Note Smaller One by Yellow Sign





Some further pictures to round out what one sees today:

  

"The" House in the Distance - Yes That is Another Mohawk Warriors Flag

In a very presumptuous move, the "Welcome to Six Nations" sign greets visitors - well, there are no visitors, and the add about Six Nations Tourism at the very bottom of the sign is such a bad joke.

 

 

The Flag which to Many in Caledonia Represents Violence and Brutality





So the HDI or other representative of the HCCC has illegally blocked the only public roadway into Provincially owned land.  I know the "unofficial" entrance via 6th Line, but it can get muddy.  This blockade is an illegal act of defiance, and is deserving of swift action on the part of the various levels of government.  The question is, do they have the where with all (stones), or intestinal fortitude, to do what is mandated by law - or will Six Nations once again be given a "pass" and allowed to proceed without impediment?

It will be important to contact the Ontario Provincial Police, the Mayor of Haldimand, the Member of Provincial Parliament for Haldimand - Norfolk, and his Federal counterpart to see what can be done to bring justice and the rule of law to this place.  If they are unwilling to act, then, after 8 years of this illegal battering, is it time for the citizens of Haldimand and adjoining regions to stand together and do what has long been needed to deal with the terrorists?  Let us never forget.  The acts of April 2006 and subsequent events were acts of terrorism.  With lulls of relative quiet perhaps we have deluded ourselves into thinking that all is well.  Alas this is an illusion.  Six Nations have their sights set not only on DCE but also the Burtch Correctional Centre lands, and Provincially owned lands in South Cayuga Township - which they now want "returned" (although long surrendered).  Next ............ 

It only takes the rule of law and the establishment of the evidence in the matter - what I have been pleading for, so that a legal settlement will be established so that a just resolution can be effected.  My words (and those of others of like mind) have fallen on deaf ears.  I can assure all, based on what I have learned to date, this orderly and peaceful approach will never fly.

According to the 29 claims submitted to date (see here), what do Six Nations want?  The description of each claim suggests that all Grand River (Haldimand Tract) properties are at risk of being "reclaimed" in the manner of DCE.  My previous postings have outlined the specifics here. 

Based on the wording of these claims, they are going after property throughout "the land belonging to the Onkwehonwe or real people", in other words six miles on each side of the Grand River - will our government protect your property rights?  They didn't do it in the case of DCE, so why should we believe that they will act any differently down the road?

A thoroughly disgusted,

DeYo.

 



The Two Row Wampum Myth - Fantasy Rears its Head Once Again

In most newspapers, an editorial is written by the editor of the paper, and the author's name is clearly evident.  This is the case with Turtle Island News (TIN) where the editor's picture is included with the editorial, and her name is found immediately below under "Editor".  Everyone hereabouts knows that Lynda Powless is the Editor, and that she writes the editorials for TIN.  However things are not so clear with the Two Row Times (TRT), where a recent editorial is unsourced, and when seeking to find who is assigned the role of editor, two names are given - Jonathan Garlow (a status Six Nations member) and Tom Keefer (a White Communist Anarchist who has insinuated his way into the upper echelons of this newspaper where he is also the General Manager).  Should anyone question Keefer's destructive role in Caledonia, a few minutes of Google searching or seeing the data here should dispel any concerns about the accuracy of the statement.  I attended the march in 2012, and all the preceding events leading up to the march, and speak not only from what is peppered across the Internet, but also personal experience.  Perhaps the words coming from TIN that there is only one Reserve newspaper have some merit, considering that TRT is headed by a group of non-Native Anarchists, and offers the latter a "legitimate" platform for their radical leftist and anti - establishment views.  Amazingly, it also allows a Keefer family member, a physician at Brantford General Hospital, to write a column railing on with anti-scientific nonsense linking obesity to "colonialism".  But I digress.  So did Garlow or Keefer write the editorial entitled, "True equality between nations", TRT, June 11th, 2014, p.6?  It begs the question as to who is calling the shots, the White owner / employees, or the Six Nations members affiliated with the newspaper.  Since I am in deep disagreement with much of the content of the editorial, whomever wrote it, I will sift through it clause by clause in an attempt to point out how skewed and factually incorrect the content is.

The editorial was triggered by the McHale "citizen's arrest" of John Garlow Kawaowene on 8 June, 2014.  The two previous blog postings seen below provide the detail, including beliefs versus facts as shown in multiple videos taken at the time.

The editorial stated that, McHale has promoted his political ideology of Canadian supremacy through a rhetoric of forced equality that violates the Two Row Wampum.  This statement is a supposition and not backed up with a single fact.  It is correct that McHale advocates one law for all in Canada, as his website and his book (see previous postings) demonstrate - but this is a given for those who choose to live within the boundaries of Canada - boundaries that are respected by all other countries world wide. 

The "Editor" continues, Our Onkwehonwe hospitality towards the newcomers, and our relationship with the Canadian/British Sovereign has been limited and defined in the Two Row Wampum and the Kaianerekowa (Constitution of the Peoples).  It is important to pause here to clear up some errors in fact. 

First the Two Row Wampum is a concept which continues to perpetuate itself, but its origins are mired in obscurity.  I have devoted considerable blog space to this topic.  There is no clear validity for this assumed "relationship agreement" with the boat and the canoe travelling in parallel (represented as the two purple stripes on the wampum belt said to accompany the agreement).  The story and documentation that goes along with this concept has been severely criticized by academics and it is basically flawed.  For example, wampum used later to record treaties and attest to the appointment of Chiefs simply cannot be shown to exist in Six Nations country before the 1630s - yet the supposed document signed by 4 otherwise unidentified Aboriginal persons and two Dutchmen is dated 1613 and only speaks of trade - nothing else - but somewhere along the way obtained the moniker, "Treaty of Tawagonshi" (the latter the hill where the supposed document was supposedly signed).  It was not an agreement with the British Crown, but merely two Dutch traders residing in New Amsterdam before the British took over this colony in 1664.  So to pin so much on what amounts to a document that many academics consider to be forged in the 19th or 20th Centuries, and a belt whose age is undetermined, cannot possibly be accepted uncritically except by those who are "true believers".  Even such respected Six Nations historians as Rick Hill acknowledge the lack of evidence, but slough it off because there is "oral history" (which is as soft as a cotton ball).  See here for his "talking points" by clicking on the link "Two Row History".  Clearly this concept is being confused with the valid "Covenant Chain" agreement of 1671 onwards - but it is again a friendship and mutual support agreement - nothing whatsoever being said about sovereignty.  As it stands today, anyone who questions the sacred nature of the Two Row Wampum agreement can expect to be called "racist" or similar term.  Facts mean nothing.  If in fact the concept and details of the supposed Two Row Wampum agreement is valid, then where is the evidence?  If I am wrong, in other words the mountain of evidence is somehow in error, then it is incumbent upon Six Nations leaders to clearly and unequivocally prove the validity of the Two Row Wampum, thus clearing up the inconsistencies, so we can move forward.  Hence I challenge Six Nations to provide evidence that can be verified by objective parties such as university academics.  If Six Nations cannot do this then the detailed research I have provided stands and the Two Row Wampum as articulated by those at Six Nations without references is unsupported and relegated to the category of myths. 

I grew up believing in the validity of both the Two Row Wampum and the Nanfan Treaty, and merely accepted both as correct without bothering to ask any hard questions - it was simply not acceptable to do so and I knew it.  I am "all grown up" now and as an individual educated in the scientific method, am highly skeptical of anything without hard evidence, cross validation and the like.  So now, after all these years, when I apply the litmus test of scientific inquiry to both of these "sacred cows", I find that both fail miserably on all counts.  I was duped.  In this blog I have attempted to set the record straight with evidence that is properly sourced, and data which is contemporary with the events being described - such as the so called "Nanfan Treaty".  Apparently it is easy for people who want to believe to accept the "party line" without question.  Life is more comfortable by so doing - at least to those who have not been taught to question everything.  That which is valid will stand up to close scrutiny, false information will not.

Secondly, it should also be noted that the Kayenkeragowagh (Great Law) was first committed to writing in the mid 1800s by Eli Parker and others, and at Six Nations there were two versions circulating by the end of the 19th Century.  One was written by Seth Newhouse (Mohawk) and the other by John Gibson (Seneca).  The Hereditary Chiefs chose the latter and it was selected as the "correct" version - although somewhat controversial at the time.  Without a doubt the most comprehensive study of the Great Law was William N. Fenton, The Great Law and the Longhouse: A Political History of the Iroquois Confederacy, Norman OK, University of Oklahoma Press, 1998.  The field work was done in the 1940s and 50s at Six Nations with informants such as Simeon Gibson, Joseph Logan, Howard Skye, Alexander General, and Jake Thomas.  The work is 786 pages in length and is detailed and comprehensive.  I am unaware of a better source.  It is interesting that not once does Fenton or any of his informants appear to mention "Two Row Wampum" - a curious omission, or a reflection of reality?  To to see that Great Law as something immutable cannot be sustained based on the number of versions seen in Six Nations communities in New York and Ontario.  Interpretations have changed over the years, but now, as far as I know, the published Gibson version is the one memorized and recited each year.  The Newhouse version is only found in manuscript form, the apparent original (a house fire destroyed some of it) is found at the Library and Archives Canada in Ottawa (I have read the original).

The British Crown never considered the Five (later Six) Nations as "equals".  Both the British and the French claimed parts of North America as their sovereign territory.  The various deeds and surrenders from the earliest days of the British rule to the 19th Century consistently spoke of "our Great Father the King of England".  Even the much vaunted (by Six Nations), but entirely fraudulent, Nanfan "Treaty" of 1701 explicitly states that the Five Nations are subjects of Britain and its Sovereign (as opposed to the French).

Despite all this "reality business" the "editor" continues to speak about how, Equality between nations does not mean that they are subject to each others constitution: what we are talking about is international equality.  Furthermore, all along the Canadian colony has knowingly suppressed our true nationalities and true citizenships to our particular sovereign nations.  This is a fabrication, but one commonly heard (after all the more something is repeated and not challenged, the more likely someone is to believe a myth as fact).  There is one Nation, Canada, and all who reside within its boundaries are Canadian and subject to its laws.  When Bill C-10 (outlawing contraband tobacco) becomes law, Canada will have the right to enforce the law anywhere in Canada - Six Nations knows this hence all the fuss now going on lobbying Ottawa for an exemption.  Whether Canada choses to enforce the law at Six Nations is another matter entirely since the whole matter is such an "issue", and the Government tends to tred lightly in areas where Native issues obtrude.

Things get a little more odd when the editorial states, During his ongoing siege of our community, McHale has systematically and arbitrarily denied the evident and chosen nations of the men and women he targets and harasses, ramming his own confused notions of equality down our throats, and arbitrarily spreading Canadian 'equality' forcibly onto the peoples of free nations who have never defined themselves as Canadian and who have never become subjects of the British/Canadian Crown.  The latter first.  Six Nations were declared subjects and signed agreements as to the sovereignty of the British Crown from the early years of British rule, and this was confirmed in the Proclamation of 1763 and subsequent acts.  Just where precisely does it say that the Crown has rescinded sovereignty of all peoples of the Canadas - English, French and Native?  These are the three "founding peoples", based on various documents coming from the Federal Government, but they are not each sovereign (although French speaking Quebecers have long been pushing in this direction).  The ownership of the Haldimand Tract, purchased from the Aboriginal occupants, the Mississauga, was not transferred to the Six Nations.  The right of occupation of these lands were given to Six Nations in 1784, is still to this day the lands are vested in the Crown such that no land sale here is legal unless surrendered to the Crown and the monies derived from the sale put into trust for the Six Nations.  Deniers of history run into the roadblock of the facts - as inconvenient as they might be.  Those who have not studied the matter in detail could be snowed by arguments based on oral tradition and such, generally presented with much emotion, but those of us such as myself who have made inquires via a search of the primary source documentation will be harder to convince because the data does not support the position of the Six Nations on this subject.

To add to the sheer outlandishness of what is written, the unnamed author states that, McHale has arrested a non-Canadian without the process of extradition.  McHale's crusade may put him and everyone else in a constitutional crisis, and may have violated the covenant of peace between the British Crown and the Onkwehonwe.  Some Canadians may call that an act of treasonous contempt.  I have no doubt that the White "solidarity" Six Nations supporters funded by the unions, and the Communist and Anarchist groups would promulgate this stance.  However, most Canadians will see the business for what it is - but a "constitutional crisis" - as if.  Outlandish and off the wall claims only make the cause seem dodgy, and potential sympathy (if there was any) dissipates.

The editorial ends by stating that, We are Onkwehon:we and we deserve to be respected as the equals that we are and have always been under the Two Row Wampum.  Indeed, no argument here.  That is the point of what McHale is saying.  We are all equal under the law and all deserve to receive its protections.  If anyone wishes to push to hard on the "we are not Canadians" theme, there is going to be a major backlash where many will say if that is true, then you will need to stop accepting Canadian taxpayer Welfare and Transfer Payments.  That has not happened, and is not likely to happen.  As these developments and claims profiled in the present blog become more apparent to all Canadians, not just the folks hereabouts, I would predict an increasing call for dismantling the Reserve system (at least for those who, like Six Nations, cannot claim to be Aboriginal to the lands where they are presently settled - Grand River Ontario is not Upstate New York), all lands in the possession of those with location tickets to have these documents converted to deeds in fee simple, and after a transition period, no more "perks" (that includes the right/entitlement not to pay certain taxes), so that all are truly equal to carve out their own destiny.  The lands are geographically within either Brant County (Tuscarora Township, Onondaga Township between Middleport and Onondaga, and the Glebe Lands with the old Mohawk Institute and the Mohawk Chapel) or Haldimand County (the strip of Oneida Township along Oneida Road).  It would be simple to add these clearly defined areas to either the Brant County or Haldimand County Land Registry.  Be careful what you ask for ........

DeYo.

Six Nations Perspective on the Citizen's Arrest at Douglas Creek Estates (Kanonhstaton)

As predicted in the previous posting, both newspapers on the Six Nations Reserve carried articles on the citizen's arrest of "a Six Nations land protector" by Gary McHale.  As expected, at least by myself, the descriptions provided bear little resemblance to the reality shown in graphic detail in the various U-Tube videos of the entire scenario (see here).  I will discuss the content of each of the two newspapers in turn.  Selected key expressions will be bold printed and examined as to what it may mean to one or more communities.

1)  Two Row Times, Wednesday June 11th, 2014, McHale protest opens old wounds at Kanohstaton (as spelled here) pp. 1-2:

On the front page we see a picture taking up fully half of the page space, showing a photograph and caption - A Six Nations land protector was the subject of a "citizen's arrest" by Binbrook resident Gary McHale.  Fearing that McHale and his group of half a dozen supporters were going to enter his home Kawaowene stood in front of McHale as he approached.  In a bizarre twist of events when the OPP arrived they arrested Kawaowene injuring him in the process.

Here the term "land protector" probably refers to the self proclaimed role as a custodian of Six Nations land, and is linked to Kanonhstaton ("Protected Place") the name Six Nations use when referring to the former Douglas Creek Estates (presently land owned directly by the Province of Ontario).  Many residents of Caledonia would tend to use the term "occupier", or a more pejorative term, in reference to the individuals who are roosting illegally at the one remaining house on the former development site.

The picture does show what appear to be cuts and abrasions on the left side of the "land protector's" face.  The U-Tube videos noted in the previous posting do show a take down by the OPP where the use of force was minimal, and absolutely necessary as the perpetrator was resisting arrest.  One can only surmise whether the scrapes occurred as a result of the take down.

Page 2 of the article shows another picture of the face of the above individual situated immediately under the words "opens old wounds".  Again what appear to be facial abrasions are evident here.  The caption reads, "Land defender John Garlow".  The text terms Gary McHale as a "well known agitator", who arrived at Kanonhstaton, "to continue his agenda of keeping the wounds of the 2006 land reclamation open".  Actually for many residents of Caledonia the wounds will always be present, and most particularly since no one at Six Nations has ever apologized for the violence and degradation foisted upon those residing most closely to this site.  Also most know that the land was taken illegally, and that while many at Six Nations may claim the land as theirs, the facts are crystal clear that this was land properly surrendered by 67 Chiefs in Council in December of 1844 - and that be demanding to have it back is behavior that conforms to the old stereotype of "Indian giver" (something is legally sold to everyone's satisfaction, buyer's remourse sets in, and the party or those who follow want the item back).

It is probably true that Gary McHale is an "agitator" meaning that he has seen a gross injustice, and has been unrelenting in his stance about one law for all, all treated equally before the law.  To impute the motive of a nefarious plan to keep the wounds between Caledonia and Six Nations alive and "fresh" does seem to be a stretch.  Since 2006 the "peacekeeper" role of the OPP has made this concept, taken for granted in most of Canada, a joke in the Caledonia area since Natives and non-Natives have been treated differently by the OPP with the latter being carted away in paddy wagons while the Natives who had committed actual illegal acts such as assault being allowed to remain - and may or may not be arrested at some later date.  A two tiered system of justice - anathema to most Canadians.

Continuing with the text, it says that "53-year-old Kawaowene (English name John Garlow), was roughed up and arrested by the OPP". 

The video clips clearly show that on the contrary, Mr. Garlow was not "roughed up" and it was his own choices that led to the manner in which he was arrested (the police had no choice but to enact a take down due to non compliance of Garlow). 

The article goes on to say that, "In 2007, to put an end to the roadblocks, and potential violence, Ontario purchased the land" from the developers.  In other words the Liberal Government of Ontario caved in and negotiated with terrorists - never a good idea as history shows.

Certain creative liberties with the facts are evident in the statement that McHale and his "followers", walked, "right up to the front of the house".  What the videos show is Mr. McHale walking on the public road, and at no time being on the land surrounding the house.  Also the statement that the bodies of McHale and Garlow "collided.  Garlow shoved McHale away from him".  Hence the citizen's arrest for the illegal act of assault.  After 911 was dialed and the OPP officers showed up, "talked to McHale, but rather than arrest him for instigation, they came to Garlow and placed him under arrest for assault".  It would make no sense for the OPP to arrest someone who is merely walking along a public road for "instigation" (which would never stick in Court), but rather the perpetrator of the act of assault - a serious crime.

The report then says that "Garlow offered token resistance to police" and that a "very brief scuffle ensued and Garlow was taken to the ground by OPP officers who, according to witness Norm Thomas, mashed Garlow's face into the gravel while subduing him with handcuffs".  What the video shows is Garlow refusing to comply with the requests of the officers, and thus the consequence was inevitable - but compared to any other take down I have witnessed, what is seen in the video is a very gentle approach where the police called him by his first name and requested that Mr. Garlow come with them.  Then apparently, Garlow "was carried away by police officers with his face about two feet from the roadway".  The video shows officers repeatedly requesting that Mr. Garlow stand and walk, but the latter would not comply and so was carried with each officer holding Mr. Garlow under one of his arms on the way to the police cruiser, "causing him shoulder and arm damage".  Mr. Garlow refused to stand up and walk, and ended up being dead weight, so what happened was inevitable.  Then he lay stretched out face down on the back seat of the car, refusing to sit up or in any way comply with the reasonable requests of the officers. 

What is evident is that what information is being given to the reporter does not at all tally with the very clear visual and auditory interaction at the time shown in the various U-Tube videos.  Readers can see the videos and assess the details without myself or the reporter giving very different perspectives on the events.

The scene then shifted to the situation at the end of the ride in the cruiser where, "Garlow's token resistance continued at the police station when he decided not to speak English any more and reverted to his Cayuga tongue, refusing to answer to the name John" - except to one officer who showed him respect by using his Cayuga name.  This behavior is expected of a somewhat younger individual, but a 53 year old man ...............  Then when it came to signing documents (release forms), Garlow said, "I would not sign my slave name".  Instead he used an X to sign the document (a mark, as if illiterate, which may or may not be the case).  He was released "on his own recognizance", with the promise to appear for the Court date of 22 July at the County Courthouse in Cayuga.

So the name he goes by most of the time, John Garlow, is a "slave name"?  I have no idea where this interpretation is coming from.  He is known as John Garlow to most of the Community - but despite his use of the name for everyday purposes, the name .....................  Perhaps a history lesson would be a propos here.  Since there is a "Garlow Line" (road) on the Reserve, and there is a family connection, many years ago I was curious as to the origins of the name and decided to do some research.  A colleague suggested that I check out the source noted below, and I kept a few notes which I have managed to locate.  The Garlow name and the Garlow ancestors did not come to Six Nations until 1822 or 1823 when the White man John Garlow and his part Native wife arrived from New York State and applied to become members.  The records state that there was a difference of opinion within Council as to the eligibility of this family with very little evident Native heritage.  In some manner, reasons unknown, their application was approved and the family were enumerated as either Oneida or Mohawk.  In 1822 there were no Mohawk still residing within the ancestral homeland - except those who chose to integrate with the general population along the Mohawk River.  There were, however, some Oneida residing in the area after the Revolution. The source for this information on the Garlow family can be found in David K. Faux, Iroquoian Occupation of the Mohawk Valley During and After the Revolution, Man in the Northeast, Number 34, Fall 1987, pp. 27-40.  So the original Garlow was White, and never a slave - so the statement of Mr. Garlow is all the more curious.  All Garlows in the Mohawk Valley and Ontario descend from Johann Christian Garlock (Garlick, Gerlach, Garlow) born 2 May 1672, Heidelberg, Baden - Wurttemberg, Germany; died 1764, Stone Arabia, Montgomery County, NY.

Apparently Garlow had attempted to text for "assistance" (for example reinforcements streaming down 6th Line), but everything happened so fast and when the expected "troops" arrived, the OPP and McHale supporters were long gone.  Apparently Mr. Garlow was displeased that he was there all alone and did not receive the expected support.  He stated, "If people are not going to start coming here to protect this land, I am not going to be staying here anymore.  I'll go with another nation and do what I have to do, or just retire from it all".  Clearly he is very discouraged.  Over the years many have stayed in that house, and a lot of bad things have occurred there (e.g., suicide, rape) and the place may have accumulated a lot of bad karma.  Perhaps the ancestors are saying that the land was sold 170 years ago with the express wish, stated in the deeds, that no one in later generations try to second guess them - and that agreement has been violated since 2006.

Mr. Garlow made an interesting statement to the reporter.  He said, "To a warrior, jail is something that a warrior just accepts" and continues with his philosophy of serving time in jail.

The use of the term "warrior" can mean many things, but to successful Chiefs such as Clarence Louie, Chief of the Osoyoos Band in British Columbia for 29 years and responsible for many entrepreneurial projects which have made his Band very wealthy, it first and foremost means one thing - "Has a job".  Chief Louie has no time for Natives who call themselves warriors, but use welfare and other Canadian Government handouts from taxpaying citizens to fund their militancy.  See his inspirational story here.

2)  Turtle Island News, June 11, 2014, Security Kanonhstaton; group descends on property, man charged, p. 7: 

This article includes much of the same material as found in the above version.  A few additional facts do emerge though.  Mr. Garlow described his take down without accepting any part of the blame for forcing the police into this situation, and making it seem that the officers were unnecessarily rough - which is certainly not seen in any of the videos - but perception is reality for some.  He was processed at the Cayuga OPP detachment, and charged with assault.  The Court date given here is 10 July - so someone has their facts wrong.

Apparently the "incident prompted a swift response from the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI), who are working to get a fence set up around the perimeter of Kanonhstaton, creating what the Director calls a "gated community".  This is a bit premature and presumptuous since it is the Province who is the legal owner of the land.  As the Director states, "The HCCC is awaiting return of those lands and others to the HCCC from Ontario".  That might not be all that easy since the HCCC (Hereditary Confederacy Chief's Council) are at loggerheads with SNEC (Six Nations Elected Council), and the Director is upset that in 2010 the latter walked away from the negotiating table leaving things up in the air.  Then there is the ownership question - the Federal Government maintains that this land was surrendered in 1844 and Ontario stands by its land registry system - so this could be a muddled mess for someone who is clear minded to see through and find resolution.

Basically this business reflects the chronic inability of anyone at Six Nations to take personal or collective responsibility for their actions.  The tendency is to point the finger at others, and play the role of victim.  Classic.

Meanwhile, a "stop the violence" march is planned, according to Mr. Garlow, traversing from the church just north of Kanonhstaton, to the OPP satellite station on the south side of Caledonia on Argyll Street.  It is not clear what "stop the violence" means.  Surely not trying to gain support to stop the OPP from doing their duty - something Caledonians have been "begging for" since 2006.  If the White "solidarity" groups are going to be there it will infuriate Caledonians who have seen enough of their Anarchist - Communist antics since 2006.  They have been the true instigators of problems by stirring the pot to meet their political agenda.  Apparently the event will take place in the next week or two.  I will attend and provide my observations in a subsequent posting.  This could get interesting!

DeYo.

The Ontario Provincial Police Enforce Individual's Right to Make a Citizen's Arrest - Noted Six Nations Activist in Jail!

Well, will wonders never cease.  Only days ago I was railing on about the ineffectiveness of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), and the fact that since 2006 none of us in the Caledonia area can be sure whether when we dial 911 that anyone will come to our assistance.  Around here police responsiveness is a function of, for example, how agitated members of the Six Nations community happen to be - or so it seems.  Since the Ipperwash Inquiry, and the recommendations coming from the resulting report which paints "Natives" (status Indians) as victims, the OPP have thrown away the policy and procedures manual that is supposed to apply equally to citizens throughout Ontario.  In the Caledonia area, proximal to the Six Nations Reserve, the OPP have adopted what is known as a "peacekeeper" role, in place since the riots at the south end of Caledonia which began 28 February 2006.  Thus for the past 8 years residents of Caledonia (as well as Haldimand and Brant Counties) have been guinea pigs in an experiment that has been an abject failure - although the Native agitators and their White solidarity supporters are fine with it.  So locally, if you are Native (largely status Six Nations members) you could expect to be treated with kid gloves, while those citizens classified as non-Native could expect to have the full weight of the law thrown against them.  It is not fair, it is not even remotely reasonable in any democracy, but for 8 years that has been the status quo hereabouts.  The details, including some excellent examples, can be found in Gary McHale, Victory in the No-Go Zone: Winning the Fight Against Two-Tier Policing, Toronto, Freedom Press, 2013.  In one day (Sunday 8 June 2014), within the span of one hour, due to an assault on Mr. McHale, all that has changed.  Allow me to explain.

On 8 June 2014 I had planned to attend a rally organized by Gary McHale and CANACE (Canadians for Charter Equality) in order to purchase a book that would be available there - Daniel Dickin, Liars: The McGuinty - Wynne Record, Toronto, Freedom Press, 2014. I knew that it would be touching on subjects important to myself and other residents of Haldimand County.  I expected that it would chronicle the failures of the Liberal Government in Haldimand County, including not only their response to the theft of private property in Caledonia by Six Nations members, but also the fall out of their destructive Green Energy Act of 2009 which is literally chewing up our rural landscape with useless wind turbines.

Due to rain, the event had to be cancelled.  Disappointing, but little did I know at the time, history was about to be made.  Gary McHale and a photographer went to Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) to exercise their right to walk on a public road.  As background, the DCE property, although it was legally surrendered by 67 Chiefs of the Six Nations in Council in 1844 (170 years ago), and registered since then in the Ontario Land Registry system without any liens, DCE is claimed as unceded land by Six Nations (the evidence as to these facts having been discussed in many previous postings on this blog).  Objective reality is either ignored or of no concern to those involved in what they term the "reclamation" - while it could better be described as theft.  It was taken by force in April 2006 by Six Nations (largely members of the Confederacy or Hereditary Council supporters), complete with violent acts of anarchy such as demolishing a Hydro One transmission tower to block Argyll Street, burning the Stirling Street Bridge, destroying a Hydro One substation plunging the area of Caledonia and Six Nations into darkness, assaulting police officers.  The occupation and horrific deeds perpetrated against citizens who lived nearest to DCE (e.g., an assault against a resident in his home resulting in permanent brain damage) resulted in the Ontario Government quietly shelling out over $15 million to the legal owners of the development to keep the land in limbo, likely so that they could sweep the matter under the carpet indefinitely.  An excellent and factual compendium of the sufferings of the residents of Caledonia and surrounds, as well as the responses of the OPP and the Liberal Government, can be found in Christie Blatchford, Helpless: Caledonia's Nightmare of Fear and Anarchy, and How the Law Failed All of Us, Toronto, Doubleday Canada, 2010.

Since 2006 the land has been "designated" as Six Nations land by the occupiers (despite the evidence - which carries no weight to uninformed "activists") - complete with a "Welcome to Six Nations" sign to help legitimize (in the minds of many at Six Nations) the occupation.  Despite the objective fact that the land belongs to the Provincial Government, and Six Nations has no legitimate legal claim to the property, many Natives persist in living in a fantasy where the land belongs to the Six Nations - by virtue of this or that imagined right or entitlement.  What is tremendously galling to many is that the Ontario Government continues to pay the taxes and fund the infrastructure which allows the Six Nations occupiers to reside there in comfort - at taxpayers expense.  Many here appear to be poorly educated and unemployed (this latter "status" allowing them to arrive on scene at a moment's notice), but strut around with a sense of entitlement worn as a chip on their shoulder, and an attitude that "because I believe it so, it must be so".  No one in government at any level except local municipal officials has done anything to advance the issue and attempt to find some sort of resolution - in part because they have run into the brick wall of factionalism where you have to get approval of both the Hereditary and Elected groups, but they are not on speaking terms, but are ready to blame the government for "inaction".  So the ugly stains of the 2006 occupation such as the Hydro One tower barricade (cut in two to form an "entrance way" to the site) and the burned out big rig trailer, are still situated as they were 8 years ago, and somehow this is ok for the self proclaimed "custodians of the land" (despite the obvious hypocrisy).

So on Sunday Gary McHale exercised his right to walk on a public roadway, and was challenged near the one house left standing on the Provincially owned DCE site (all the others have been trashed).  See here for a description and videos of what happened.  In summary, JG, a very well known activist walked out to "greet" Mr. McHale and attempted to block his movements.  What can be seen in the video taken at the time of the encounter is the situation escalating very quickly, and JG shoving Mr. McHale - which is an act of assault.  Mr. McHale immediately initiated a citizen's arrest (all perfectly legal in Ontario), someone called 911, and within a very short time (apparently under 10 minutes) two OPP officers arrived on the scene.  Mr. McHale showed them the video, and, to many of us in Caledonia what followed next is something not seen in 8 years - the OPP officers doing their duty without regard to the racial - ethnic make up of the perpetrator.  They immediately walked over to JG and informed him that he was under arrest.  This did not go over at all well - it must have been an immense surprise that the OPP were challenging a Native without the usual cadre of Native Liaison Officers and support staff.  Frankly, my jaw dropped.  These officers never raised their voices, were consistently polite despite the boorish and immature behavior of the perpetrator.  Non compliance was met with a warning, then a take down with JG being forced to the ground (in as gentle but firm a manner as possible).  The officers were entirely professional, and followed through with each warning.  Eventually JG refused to walk to the OPP cruiser so was lifted there by two officers while curses flowed freely, as did assertions of "you have no jurisdiction here" and "this is Six Nations land" (along with a lot of words beginning with the letter "f").  The officers calmly said that they will talk about that later, but the handcuffed JG simply would not get in the car without an embarrassing display of the sort of trailer park behavior one expects to see on COPS - here clearly resisting arrest.  Finally JG was delicately "fit" into the cruiser and one of the other Natives present challenged the OPP, who then asked Mr. McHale whether this individual had tried to disrupt the citizen's arrest.  The answer was no, so the OPP drove off with JG on his way to the Cayuga OPP detachment for processing. 

I could not be more proud of our Provincial police force in this instance.  They did their duty with professionalism and without any hesitation.  Has there been a policy change at the OPP, or was this simply a case of officers, as is their right, deciding to act in accordance with the law and effecting an arrest based on the evidence seen in the video?  JG was adamant that he could not be arrested because of a video.  Alas for him, he was wrong.

Kudos OPP, and in particular the two officers who effected a "by the numbers" take down showing the utmost concern for the welfare of the person being arrested.  It doesn't get any better than this.  Also, thanks to Gary McHale for his unrelenting stance on challenging the "peacekeeper" role of the OPP that is a legacy of the Ipperwash Inquiry; and his actions in support of the belief in one law, applied equally, for all citizens.

What will be interesting to see is the reaction at Six Nations once the news becomes widely known - probably via the two Reserve newspapers which are published on Wednesdays.  I trust that most realize that what happened was an example of the law being applied fairly and based on the clear evidence that an assault had occurred.  I have reviewed the video multiple times and it would be impossible to fault the officers.  What I expect to see is the hard liners questioning the jurisdiction of the OPP at the DCE.  Again, since it is Provincial land, of that there can be no question, the OPP has every right, and the duty, to enforce the law here - especially since the Six Nations Police have kept their distance, and at any rate work cooperatively with the OPP in effecting law enforcement in the area.

DeYo.

Six Nations Deal with Samsung: Haldimand County Gets the Shaft as Lies, Corruption and Greed Prevail in Wind Turbine Deals

Updated 26 June 2014. 

In a previous blog posting (see here) I made the point that Samsung has provided Six Nations with a $65 million bribe that is little more than "hush money" to facilitate their billion dollar "green energy" project situated in Haldimand County. In contrast, the amount of money allotted to Haldimand County, which is on the direct receiving end of the destructive sweep of industrial turbines and solar "farms" across the landscape, is a paltry $20 million.  The Mayor of Haldimand is of the opinion that this is the best deal that can be negotiated (he is probably correct), so was willing to pose shovel in hand along with the then Elected Chief of Six Nations and two Samsung officials in a photo op seen below (reference here). 



This inequity is scandalous to say the least - but the greatest injustice being perpetrated here is that Six Nations have no legitimate right to one dime of Samsung's money.  The fact is that by asserting jurisdiction via a 300 year old fraudulent "treaty", and lands legally surrendered 180 years ago, Six Nations can sit back, reap all of the ill gotten benefits, and not have to worry about these hideous blights on the landscape being anywhere near their doorstep.  In this case the rationale being employed is the second of their "aces up the sleeve" - asserting that they never surrendered lands in this part of the Haldimand Tract.  Here Six Nations rely on the categorization of the properties in both Townships as being "contested lands", resulting from the claim made in 1995, almost 20 years ago.  Here, despite the irrefutable documentation dating back to the surrender of 1834, Six Nations has managed to keep the specific claim that they have unceded lands in both Dunn and South Cayuga Townships "unresolved", and to this day it still remains on the books with the Federal Government.  This claim is a total fairytale, but no one is challenging them, so full speed ahead. 

In fact, every time the Federal Government attempts to address the matter, the Six Nations jurisdictional issues surface and everything falls apart and so back to square one.  By this I mean that while the Elected Council is mandated as the official body with the legal authority to negotiate with the Government, the Hereditary Council will typically demand that their voices be heard and one or both Six Nations factions walks away from the table, with the result that the Government is left holding the bag.  However the perception is that the Federal Government is dragging its heels, when the truth is that Six Nations is unwilling or unable to "get its act together".  So everything is delayed, and seldom is anything settled.  However it works to the collective advantage of Six Nations since with the matter "up in the air", they can assert that the Federal Government has failed in their duty, and so as "victims" of the process, they will try to convince commercial enterprises such as Samsung that matters will eventually be settled in their favour, and proceed accordingly, as if their perception that the Ontario Land Registry is invalid amounts to objective reality.

Thus in Haldimand and Brant Counties, all Six Nations has to do is to assert that a parcel of land is "contested", and it gives Six Nations carte blanch to do as they please in "negotiating" settlements.  In some quarters this would be called extortion, particularly since questioning the views of either the Elected Council or the Hereditary Council (or even rogue groups loosely linked to one or the other of these bodies) has resulted in chronic work stoppages and the veiled threat of violence - unless a Court injunction is obtained through the Superior Court of Ontario.  Meanwhile the County of Haldimand, which is being torn apart by the direct infestation of the march of these monstrous eyesores moving east from Jarvis across the landscape eastward toward the Grand River, gets a token sum little more than pocket change over the 20 year term of the agreement.  The irony is that Six Nations, who have no rights to any of the land on which the turbines will be built, nor will they suffer in any way from the presence of these turbines, will be the ones to harvest large sums of money for doing nothing more than sitting on their hands.  A door opens and "magically" vast sums of money flow unimpeded to the Reserve in the form of yearly "royalty" cheques.  A reasonable question can be posed at this point - is this in any way, shape or form fair?

It is best to ensure that one is not comparing apples to oranges, and hence to find a comparable project, to see what Samsung is negotiating with communities in other parts of Southwestern Ontario.  First, as a reference point, an overview of the project impacting Dunn and South Cayuga Townships.

Lake Erie: Samsung - Haldimand County (South Cayuga and Dunn Townships):  This project will include 67 wind turbines, 250 megawatts; and a 736 acre "solar farm" - the "Grand Renewable Energy Park" (GREP).  In this deal the then Six Nations Elected Council Chief, "drove a hard bargain", reminding all about the $24 that the Native owners received from the sale of Manhattan Island - as if this event from 350 years ago has applicability today.  However despite the fact that Six Nations have absolutely no legitimate claim to any of the land on which the turbines will be built, they will receive $65 million from Samsung, and the deal was sweetened by another $10 million by the Provincial Government (see here).  The source of the funds from the latter is of course the Ontario taxpayer.  To add insult to injury, those residing on the Six Nations Reserve do not pay taxes on monies earned here (tax is a dirty word hereabouts), and with the status card don't have to pay taxes n many purchases off Reserve, so it is the general citizenry of Ontario who will be shouldering this burden.  Haldimand County will receive a total of $20 million over the 20 year span of the project - from Samsung - but the Provincial Government did not see fit to offer its own taxpaying citizens any "sweetening".  In South Cayuga Township much of the land being used for the Samsung projects is likely the leased land obtained by the Province when they purchased a slew of family farms during the 1980s for anticipated use in building a residential complex to service the anticipated expanded Nanticoke industrial complex.  Not one home was ever built on this land, which was offered back to the original owners on lease. 

Despite what Six Nations would have you believe about their having "Nanfan Treaty" rights in Southwestern Ontario, and owning considerable unceded lands here - the "treaty" is bogus, and the actual number of acres owned within this part of the Haldimand Tract is zero.  As noted previously, the catch here, which allows Six Nations to profit when having no stake in the land base, is that they have submitted a claim to the Federal Government in 1995 - one which still stands on the books.  Thus despite the published evidence that there is no valid claim here, the mere submission of a claim means that the land is considered to be in the "contested" category, and so Six Nations have flexed their muscles as if the land was actually part of their land base (which was legally ceded to the Crown in 1834).

Lake Huron: Samsung - Kincardine:  A good example of a Samsung wind turbine deal elsewhere in Ontario is the 90 wind turbine, 180 megawatt Armow Wind Project at Kincardine on the shores of Lake Huron.  Even though the community there will be on the receiving end of a more favourable deal from Samsung, residents are far from happy, and some who negotiated leases believe that they were lied to and cheated.  The region will receive $16.5 million over 20 years (close to the amount in the deal with Haldimand County) - but there is no infusion of cash to local First Nations groups.  I have no idea why there is no issue surrounding "consultation" and "engagement" coming from the nearby Chippewas of Saugeen to the north and the Ipperwash group to the South.  I suspect that the reason has something to do with the fact that the treaties are legitimate and there is no one trying to amend history and the facts to elbow their way into a process where they do not belong, or make false claims.  Should someone wish to do so, in all probability it is patently evident that the claim would fall on its face - so why bother. 

Kincardine Wind Farm



Some details of the situation at Kincardine can be found in the article seen here.

Haldimand and Kincardine - The Consultation and Accommodation Process (Engagement Process):

A major difference between the two regions in terms of the wind turbine agreements that have been struck is that in Haldimand the "Native issue" has obtruded.  Since 2006 repeated attempts to assert false claims by Six Nations have resulted in a series of government enablers who have not stated the facts in the clearest possible terms.  The Federal Government has yet to step forward and make a direct and clear statement that can be quoted by media outlets (although they have alluded to their view that the Surrender of 1841 and all previous such agreements are valid).  I do not recall an occasion when they have stated specifically that the "Nanfan Treaty" is a fraud, and cannot be used as a basis to require "the engagement process" as defined by the Federal Government in projects across the length and breadth of Southwestern Ontario.  Instead they simply stall when the matter surfaces.  Secondly, all of the Six Nations claims to unceded land made after the General Surrender of 1841 are false, and warrant no further consideration.  The Province of Ontario has stated (although not clearly and openly in for example statements on their Aboriginal Affairs website) that they stand by the Ontario Land Registry system which shows no outstanding claims to lands in the Haldimand Tract (Haldimand and Brant Counties).  I have, in many previous blog postings, laid out all of the evidence and there is no reason why the Government researchers should not also provide their assessment of the matter in a written and freely available form - but they have left it up to bloggers and other interested parties to state the obvious, create a written record available to the public, and assume any fall out.  The 2006 Caledonia "reclamation" clearly instilled fear of the Six Nations in both Federal and Provincial branches of Indian Affairs - generally leading to inertia when the taxpaying citizens, and the concepts of truth and justice, call out for action.

Summary and Conclusion:  So the bottom line is, Six Nations rakes in $75 million (Samsung plus Provincial Government) and no risk and no negative impact of any description.  Haldimand County's take is $20 million (and having to absorb all of the impact and fallout).  Examples of the negative consequences to those "on the front lines" include damage and blight to the landscape; citizens impacted by decreased property values and possibly significant health issues; as well as environmental damage such as the death of thousands of migrating birds.  So for example, at the end of the 20 year agreement, with the cost being about a quarter of a million dollars to remove each turbine, who will end up picking up the tab when / if the company that signed the agreement is no longer in existence or reneges of the terms of the agreement.  Answer, the County of Haldimand and the taxpayers of Ontario.  How will a major stakeholder, Six Nations, be impacted after 20 years?  It does not appear that they will in any way be "touched" and so "no risk, big rewards", period.

Until the "Nanfan Treaty" is exposed for the grotesque fraud that it represents, Six Nations will continue to use this document to assert bogus "treaty rights" across Southwestern Ontario, and threats of "unpleasantness" if their wishes are denied (creating a fear and intimidation factor).  Meanwhile companies will be involving themselves in the completely unnecessary "engagement process", and coughing up cash to keep Six Nations content for fear that without the payola, work stoppages and bad press will torpedo the project.  So for the moment, Six Nations has everyone over the barrel and is able to call the shots - with no one challenging the 800 pound gorilla in the room - the lack of validity of their claim to lands under the supposed "Nanfan Treaty" and to previously ceded lands within the "Haldimand Tract".  The former applies to wind projects in places such as Port Dover and Port Rowan (Norfolk County, outside the Haldimand Tract).  In all probability the reason why Six Nations does not press the issue in locations such as Kincardine is a lack of resources.  It is difficult enough for Six Nations to get a vanload of "activists" to travel to nearby Norfolk County to assert their will.  The second of the two options open to Six Nations relates to lands within the Haldimand Tract, the present matter under consideration in two townships of Haldimand County. 

Who would have thought that the tentacles radiating out from the 2006 Caledonia land "reclamation" would extend so far and wide - and go unchallenged by all levels of government.  As long as the Ontario and Canadian taxpayers are willing to allow this situation to continue without a whimper, the problem will only amplify.  Is that really ok? 

It is sad in that Six Nations claim to be "custodians of the land", with a special relationship that involves respecting mother earth.  In practice it seldom works this way over the long haul.  Initially one group was vehemently opposed to the wind projects, and in particular the removal of an eagles nest to make way for a turbine.  As I detailed in a previous posting, this group took action and sent members to initiate work stoppages.  Here we see actions such as this being used for the good of all Ontario citizens based on ethical principals - protecting the environment.  Alas, some deal was struck and they backed away and their voices are no longer heard in relation to this issue.  I know of no group at Six Nations who are currently opposed to the wind turbine projects - although some turbines are relatively close to the southeast end of the Reserve.  So much for taking the moral high road.

My connections to the Six Nations community will never trump the perspective my training in science has given me.  In other words the reliance on facts and the weight of evidence in order to arrive at the truth.  Here, in the present situation, truth and justice are being made subservient to deceit and false assertions, and that is never acceptable.

The Six Nations engagement process problem is compounded by an incompetent, corrupt and unsympathetic Provincial Liberal Government, reflecting the attitudes of Downtown Toronto, who continue to place us on the alter for sacrifice to their warped "Green Energy" policy.  They abandoned us to our own fate during the Caledonia crisis of 2006 when neither they nor the Ontario Provincial Police would render assistance when we were under direct threat.  Nothing has changed, they have abandoned us again in 2014.

At a personal level, I am in the process of watching the Township where I spent much of my youth, and where I have many family and friends, be forever changed, demolished as a monument to the crass corruption in government and the greed of large corporate empires.  With each new turbine that appears on the horizon, another piece of my heritage and my memories is demolished.  Cry as I do deep inside, all I can do at this point is to send out the message by my blog postings and hope that others will realize the grave injustices being committed here.  Much of what is transpiring is in the name of political correctness and the obsessive effort to avoid being called "racist", as if presenting the facts and telling the truth warrants such an epithet.  This is one of the ways the Six Nations manipulate matters to their advantage - I have seen the constant efforts of Six Nations to paint themselves as victims, and lies are told over and over to the point where they are accepted as fact - and it tends to be a successful strategy.  What does Samsung (a Korean corporation) hear?  Do they have an impartial historian on staff to assess the claims being put forward?  I doubt that it really matters - what matters is that politics, not the truth.  Six Nations will continue to up the ante in pressing their case.  The Psychology 101 concept of reinforcement shows that any behavior that is rewarded tends to be repeated.  So we can see what is over the horizon - more of the same until someone in authority steps forward and says, NO MORE.

If Samsung can afford to "donate" $65 million to Six Nations, and the Provincial Government "sweeten the deal" with $10 million, why are funds of this scale not being offered to Kincardine and other municipalities across Ontario?  I can see no justification for granting monies to Six Nations, so Samsung and Ontario should be prepared to up the ante and give more to the municipalities "hosting" these unwelcome "guests" (industrial wind turbines) that will undoubtedly overstay their welcome and continue to multiply across our rural Ontario landscape.

Note 1:  Please tune in to Sun TV Network 4 June 2014, 8 pm Eastern Time, for the documentary "Down Wind" - which will portray what we in rural Ontario have suffered by virtue of the actions of corporate and government interests that are in the process of destroying our way of life, our communities, and demolishing our environment for all generations.

Note 2:  The most comprehensive site relating to the wind turbine situation across Ontario is "Ontario Wind Resistance" (see here).  

Update:  Mayor Ken Hewitt and Council are clearly frustrated with Samsung, who has treated Haldimand with callous neglect since day one.  They voted to ban Samsung contractors from using any of Haldimand's gravel roads (citing complaints over dust, and Samsung's failure to live up to agreements as the reason).  See here for details.  This will "put a crimp in their style" since many of the roads where turbines are either being or are proposed to be installed are off of gravel roads, a long way from any paved road.  Kudos Mayor Ken Hewitt and Council!

DeYo.