Cayuga Bridge: View One Week After the HDI "Ordered" the Construction Company to Stop Work

As reported in a recent posting here, on 3 November 2014 the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) brought the repair work being completed on the 90 year old Cayuga bridge to a complete halt.  The question to be posed and answered in the present blog posting is, "what is the status of the work one week later?"  I will explore this matter via a set of pictures I took at the site today, 10 November 2014.

Considering that the HDI (the extortion and enforcement wing of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council - HCCC) has no official status viz a viz negotiating with any level of government be it County, Provincial or Federal, threatening the work crews at the Cayuga bridge about "action" should they not halt the construction is nothing more than an illegal act of a group of citizens with absolutely no authority, except that they assign to themselves. 

Their rational for initiating this action is ostensibly because the bridge work is infringement on the tow path of the Grand River Navigation Company (built in the 1830s) and river bed land claims.  The true reason is that they have not been able to get the Provincial Government to hand over the deed to Douglas Creek Estates (DCE), and they need to flex their muscle in some manner to get the attention of Toronto.

As the Federal Government has indicated, and the legitimate Six Nations Elected Council has accepted, there is no valid land claim which would require return of lands in the Grand River Tract now in the hands of third parties.  The land in the Lower Grand River was surrendered in a series of claims largely from 1834 to 1849.  There is no unceded lands whatsoever in the vicinity of Cayuga.  The tow path began upriver in North Cayuga Township, north of the Ruthven historic site, since the dam at Dunnville backed the water up to an area a mile or so above Cayuga.  So even if one could stretch things to find some sort of tow path claim, it would not involve the lands where the bridge is being repaired.  In addition, by the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 the Six Nations were granted permission to "occupy" the lands on both sides of the Grand River, but there was no ownership in fee simple, and the River bed lands were never mentioned - the lands were vested in the Crown and could only be sold to the Crown such that the latter would issue Patents to the purchasers who bought the improvements of individual Indians.  All such issuances were addressed by the Six Nations Chiefs in Council.

Secondly, there is no treaty covering the lands around Cayuga.  The so-called "Nanfan Treaty of 1701" is a document where the then Five Nations offered to turn over lands in what is today Southwestern Ontario to "Our Great Father the King of England" with the hope that he will grant hunting rights.  Alas, the land in question, were taken via a genocide of unspeakable proportions during the 1640s and 1650s which completely annihilated the aboriginal people of Southwestern Ontario, the Attiwandaronk (Neutral) people of the Grand River Valley and their neighbours.  However, by 1696 the Mississauga and their allies had destroyed the 8 villages constructed by the then Five Nations on the conquered lands and drove them back to what is today Upstate New York.  So doing the math, the Five Nations had absolutely no rights to the lands they so generously offered to surrender to the King of England since they were taken from them by conquest 5 years earlier.  Further emphasizing the fraudulent nature of this "treaty", which is actually about hoped for permission to continue hunting in these lands, the original document has neither the Colonial seal of New York nor the Privy Council seal of the Crown so it is a total fraud, and the document is an item of historical interest only.

Knowing that there is no valid land claim, and that the treaty under which the HDI claims entitlements is bogus, then the question is why would a construction company acquiesce to the demands of the HDI to stop work?  Why did they not call the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) whose Cayuga detachment is only two minutes away?  Why have they not applied to the Superior Court of Haldimand County in Cayuga for a Court injunction to remove trespassers especially when in similar cases the Court has fined HDI members and affiliates along with their non - Native legal council up to $385,000?  Many postings to this blog have been devoted to this subject.  Perhaps they have, but the information has not made it to the news media.

There is another matter also which is highly pertinent to the situation in Cayuga.  To the best of my knowledge, the HDI are not occupying the site, but have "warned" the construction company that they must stop work, and that they will simply "keep an eye out" for any infractions (meaning the company ignoring the threats or obtaining a Court injunction allowing their employees to return to work under the protection of the Court).  It is important to note that the HDI has logistical problems in areas away from the immediate orbit of the Reserve.  Whereas they can have a few hundred thugs at a site in Caledonia or Hagersville within minutes, Cayuga is a relatively long way away and they would have to traverse a lot of non Reserve lands where they could be apprehended by the OPP between home and their destination.  Under these circumstances, and especially if there was an immanent Court injunction, the HDI would have trouble in assembling sufficient available thugs.  Of course the question as to why they would be available on a moment's notice is a valid one.  The availability to occupy a site or shut it down for any period of time other than a few hours could only be accomplished by those whose jobs were "flexible".

Since I had no evidence as to any change in the situation from one week earlier, in other words that work continues to be at a standstill, the only thing to do was investigate.  Since it was a sunny day I decided to visit the gravesite of my parents, and enroute I "popped in" to Cayuga to scope things out.

I parked on the west side of the bridge (on the largely unoccupied side of Cayuga), and walked east toward the Grand River.  What follows is a series of pictures showing what the site looked like today, Monday, 10 November 2014, at about 2 pm.

Entering Cayuga from the east along Highway 3

The above sign shows the name of the construction company which was doing the bridge repair work.  It is a large and well respected firm, well known across the Province.



The sign is correct, there is a large jog to the right which takes vehicles around the repair work and back to the original alignment on the other side of the bridge.

 Continuing west toward "downtown" Cayuga the extent of the work becomes apparent.

This was apparently the place where workers would cross the bridge to the other (north) side where most of the work was happening (at one time).

This is the spot on the north side of the road where workers enter or entered - the K rail is slightly ajar.

Looking toward Cayuga along the left or north side of the bridge with the current structure to the right.

The access to the main construction site is completely blocked off.

Work, the new bridge, in progress - well at a complete stand still at the time of my visit in mid afternoon on a Monday.

The Dufferin construction trailer and enclosure on the north side of Highway 3 just west of the welcome to Cayuga sign shown in an earlier picture above.  The Dufferin Construction website has detailed plans and visuals of the Cayuga bridge project as seen here.  This reflects what "should" be happening.

So, the evidence suggests that one week after threats were issued by HDI to "stop work or else", there is nothing happening in the way of repair work at the Cayuga bridge.  So how many millions of dollars is the HDI costing Canadian taxpayers "this time"?  Once a Court injunction is issued, if they fail to comply, how much in the way of fines will be levied.  Hopefully it will be along the lines of the decision of Justice Harrison Arrell of the Superior Court of Brantford in 2010 - in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for disrupting the work at construction sites in Brantford and failing to comply with a Court injunction.  Only the very stiffest of fines will put a crimp in the style of this rogue group which has carved a path of wanton destruction from Brantford to Dunnville and beyond.  They must be stopped as they are becoming emboldened - as happens when enablers don't drop the hammer on blatantly illegal acts including threats, intimidation and extortion.

Update:  17 November 2014.  Apparently the Ontario Provincial government has had enough.  Work will restart on the Bridge shortly, as detailed in the 14 November 2014 article in the "National Post" here.

DeYo.

Response of Local MPP Toby Barrett to the Fence and Gate at DCE

It is interesting to compare the perspectives of the MPP for Haldimand - Norfolk, Today Barrett with that of the Director of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) in relation to the DCE property and the new gate blocking Surrey Street.

Here is Mr. Barrett's view as found in the 4 November online version of "The Sachem" and seen here in the article entitled, "Gate erected at the entrance to the DCE property":

During an interview, Haldimand-Norfolk MPP Toby Barrett said he is no fan of the fence.

“Regrettably, protests and intimidation has gotten results and they got away with it,” Barrett said. “It sends a real message that an illegal occupation is how you get what you want. You can put up a fence and put signs and symbols on the front basically saying this is us and we own it, but that is not the case. There is no valid land claim.

“I’ve called for an inquiry. Specifically with this fence, the question should be raised of who paid for this? It’s important to follow the money. Where is the transparency? That fence looks fairly expensive. I don’t think they just passed the hat down at DCE.”

Barrett said that although his office received numerous calls and emails when construction of the fence began, there were fewer people in contact when the gate was erected.

“After eight and a half years, there is less appetite to try and do the work that government is supposed to do for people in Caledonia,” Barrett said.

As a member of the Progressive Conservative opposition at Queen’s Park, Barrett said he has little power to do what’s necessary to resolve the situation at DCE. He is putting the onus on the municipal government and provincial Liberal government.

“The gate at the front is across a municipal road, Surrey Street,” Barrett said. “This gate or barricade, whatever one wants to call it, crosses not only Ontario government property but also Haldimand County property. Apparently nobody ever did say what are you doing, this isn’t right, cease and desist.”

I COMPLETELY AGREE with Mr. Barrett.  Clearly he is expressing the viewpoint of the people he represents!

On the other hand, the Director of the HDI is completely out of touch and is just engaging in spin in relation to this topic.  Specifically, she maintains that,

“All feedback we have received on the gate has been very positive,” Haudenosaunee Development Institute director Hazel Hill said in an email to The Sachem. “People are commenting on how good the site looks now with the rehabilitation the Confederacy has undertaken.”

With respect to the bold printed statement above the obvious question is, who in Caledonia is saying anything positive about the fence and gate?  If there is someone I would like to speak with them.  Incomers would not understand the history behind this symbol of our oppression.  To say anything to the militant Director of the HDI would be bizarre.  I suspect that the "people" she is speaking of are HDI supporters, or perhaps other Six Nations members - but residents of Haldimand for whom this is a gaping wound - I don't think so!  The sheer audacity of the action.  It was all done without the approval of the present owner of DCE, the Province of Ontario; nor the owner of Surrey Street which is now blocked by this gate, the County of Haldimand.  Seeing the gate every day reminds me of how this gate and its symbolic regalia represent how grossly incompetent and impotent various levels of government are in dealing with this terrorist threat on our doorstep.  We are left to the wolves, and no one but Mr. Barrett seems to care.

The fence and the gate must go.  It should be just a question of how and when.  However after 8 years of inaction and stumbles, it is becoming increasing clear that if we want something done about this situation, we will probably have to do it ourselves.

DeYo.

A Comparison of the Two Newspapers at Six Nations

If you live at Six Nations or surrounds, you have access to two hard copy newspapers that focus largely or exclusively on Six Nations issues and concerns (although sometimes the adjacent Mississaugas of New Credit get some print space).  Each of these newspapers has online versions - but there are major differences.  What is surprising though is that if you want to keep up with what is happening at Elected Council (SNEC) meetings - good luck, one paper is actively antagonistic toward SNEC, and the other largely ignores them.  Since SNEC is the only legally recognized (by the Federal Government) body representing the Six Nations community, this is a major omission.

"Turtle Island News" (TIN) is the older of the two, and considers itself the ONLY Reserve newspaper with the Editor of TIN going out of her way to emphasize that her competitor is really a Brant County paper, published in a barn somewhere off Reserve.  In trying to encapsulate the outlook of TIN, in my opinion it has become increasingly a mouthpiece of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and its professed "development" wing (actually the extortion and enforcement unit) the Haudeosaunee Development Institute (HDI).  The Editor has no tolerance for the Elected Council and, if the printed words are a reflection of true attitudes, then she has thrown her lot in with HCCC attempting to legitimize it to the detriment of SNEC and in the process tossing out the window all journalistic objectivity.

An example of the views of TIN can be seen in the most recent Editorial of 5 November 2014 (p.6) wherein rather ironic (and untrue) statements are made such as occurred after Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer's attempt to get all parties including HCCC / HDI to attend a meeting of all those who have a stake in the matter.  The message in TIN was that if Ontario did not get with the plan (to allow the Confederacy to become the sole group representing Six Nations), that, Wynne is on the verge of sending Ontario into yet another year of unrest and distrust with First Nations people with this my way or no way attitude.  Since when did trying to be inclusive warrant a statement such as this.  The only correct statement as to who insists on a "my way or no way" attitude is the HCCC / HDI who adamantly refuse to negotiate anything if the legally mandated Elected Council is present.  Anyone who would support having an unrepresentative unelected group who get their sole power mandate from inheritance (the whole system is ripe for nepotism and the favouritism that has torn apart many other First Nations Reserves) cannot be taken seriously.

I have tried very hard to find positive things to say about TIN but have come up dry.  They charge $1.30 per issue at Zehr's in Caledonia where I purchase the newspaper.  Their online edition requires a subscription which is outlandishly priced.  See here for what can be seen without a subscription.  Thus for example members of Six Nations living in say Hamilton or Toronto will be forced to chose whether they can budget for this paper when there is now serious competition.

The competition is in the form of the successor to Tekawanake, which for years was "the" Reserve newspaper.  It folded about two years ago but was quickly replaced by "Two Row Times" (TRT) which incorporated many staff members of Tekawenake.  Unfortunately, they also took on board hard line non - Native Six Nations supporters who are adamantly Communist and Anarchist.  These White people are even found at the editorial level, and their radical views on certain topics have compromised the integrity of the start up newspaper.  For example, one particularly unsavoury article was blatantly anti - Semitic and pro - Palestinian.  This sort of material should never appear in a newspaper geared towards using paper space to inform about Six Nations and more generally First Nations matters.  Also, I have had occasion to level criticism toward writers / reporters who had historical facts grotesquely in error.

However, I have noted of late a more moderate approach in TRT.  In the most recent edition, the Editorial was advocating that the "shell game" (I would term it the "blame game") stop whereby fingers are pointed by say municipal or provincial officials at the Federal Government leaving the ball in their court.  A number of good points were made in this editorial.  Also, there was an article on the evidence put forward by archaeologists and others that the ancestors of the present Native people of Canada came over about 15,000 years ago from Asia via the Bering Strait.  The article actually was quite well written and included data with which I am very familiar.  I agree that there is still much to be learned before we can put our seal of approval on the most popular migration hypothesis.  I never thought that I would support the content of this particular reporter, but there you go.  Furthermore they presented an entirely more objective version of the visit of Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer to the Onondaga Longhouse.

Also the fact is that at present anyway, TRT is free.  I pick up a copy at Zehr's the same time I pick up my copy of TIN and "The Sachem" (a Haldimand County newspaper) - but I don't have to pay for TIN.  See here for this weeks edition.  In addition, if I am travelling, I can still keep up with what is going on at the Reserve by reading the full articles in TRT which is free online.

So, will I be taking out a subscription to any local newspaper this year?  I am not about to pay good money to be barraged with propaganda and to be dinged a hefty price for it.  In the words of Popeye, "Your pays your money and you takes your choice" - or not pay as the case may be - unless I want to find out what the most radical off - center element is thinking and doing.  On principal I would rather get my news on this subject from almost any other source, and if I miss something, it is unlikely to be that momentous - if it was, the information will appear in other sources.

DeYo.

Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Minister Once Again Disrespected by Hereditary Faction

I will have to give Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer credit for persistence.  He seems to believe strongly in discussions with all those with a stake in a particular issue.  This is reasonable and rational, and laudable under virtually all circumstances.  The exception is when one is dealing with the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) representatives, the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI).  He recently came up against the HDI brick wall, after a visit to the Onondaga Longhouse, and it led to the disagreement over the deed to Douglas Creek Estates to morph into a disagreement about the Cayuga bridge - where, as noted in a posting below, work on repairs was stopped.  The Editor of "Turtle Island News" (TIN) stated in the Editorial of 5 November 2014 that, Zimmer's visit to Six Nations Saturday was nothing short of rude to put it mildly.  The Minister may wish to read the entire Editorial, and may be quite disconcerted by its content.  Since I can find no confirmation in any other report of the visit that would even give shaky support to this statement, I will attribute it to TIN's overt antagonism to anything involving the legal representatives of the Six Nations community, the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) and unquestioning support for the rogue Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and their thugee wing, the HDI.  There is little use in reading a paper which gives the truth such short shrift in the service of keeping the spotlight on the favoured faction.  The attitude is sealed with the clause that, Ontario would be wise to drop the patronizing attitude and work with Six Nations to find a solution.  And allowing the Confederacy's lead is the anwer.  Really - and what about the legally mandated group, SNEC?

In an article published in "The Sachem" of 6 November 2014 seen here entitled, Confederacy Chiefs stop work on Cayuga bridge over Six Nations land claim Mr. Zimmer's meeting with the HDI at the Onondaga Longhouse is described.  The article states that,

Supporters of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs halted work on a bridge project over the Grand River in Cayuga because they say it is encroaching on a Six Nations land claim and the province has not consulted with the traditional government.

The move Tuesday came after Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer spoke to the chiefs Saturday at the Onondaga Longhouse and appealed for them to join a “community-based process” to resolve “important issues” along with Haldimand County Council and the Six Nations-elected band council.

The most important issue is what’s to become of the former Douglas Creek Estates housing lands in Caledonia  .......... So the action at the Cayuga bridge is precisely for the reasons I had described earlier - DCE, and nothing to do with the stated "problem" of encroaching on the tow path and river bottom lands - a completely false and easily disproven claim.  The "sticky wicket" is still DCE.

The article goes on to report that, The Haudenosaunee Development Institute, which bills itself as the development arm of the Confederacy, .........  My readers will of course know that billing schmilling, they are in fact the extortion and enforcement arm of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC).  They provide the "muscle" (thugs) to get what they want.  Furthermore, Zimmer did not know what to make of the latest move by Haudenosaunee supporters following his appeal for the chiefs to join talks with Haldimand Mayor Ken Hewitt and Six Nations Chief Ava Hill.

He wouldn’t describe it as a rejection, saying the chiefs told him they wanted to reflect on what he had said and would get back to him. He is still waiting for a response.

Still, he was disappointed by the move. The $15-million to $20-million project is replacing a bridge built in 1924. Work is set to be completed by next spring.

“I don’t know why anyone would want to see repairs on a bridge stopped,” Zimmer said. “It doesn’t make sense.”

Of course "it doesn't make sense", and that is because Mr. Zimmer is a rational and reasonable person who unfortunately does not appear to understand what drives the HDI.  Those of us with connections to Six Nations are well aware of the real agendas and cross currents.  The HDI does not want to meet with anyone except the person in the Ontario Government who has the authority to give them the deed to DCE.  They consider themselves to be the ONLY true representatives of the Six Nations community, and refuse to sit at a table with not only the County of Haldimand but with the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) their arch rivals for power and control.  They want to abolish the Elected Council and return to the Stone Age with corrupt hereditary chiefs in control of the finances and all other aspects of life at Six Nations.  Mr. Zimmer was beat before he ever set foot in the Longhouse.  He should realize the correctness of this assertion in the statements of the legal representative of the HDI as follows:

Zimmer believed his proposal for a community panel — “a leader’s table” — has merit because it is not just the Confederacy which has an interest in resolving issues facing the area.

However, Detlor said that violates the obligation to deal with the Confederacy on a “nation-to-nation” basis.

So we further learn that not only does the HCCC / HDI believe that they are the legitimate representatives of the Six Nations community, but also that the Six Nations are a sovereign nation - despite the absurdity of the claim.  Absurd claims have never deterred the HDI.

Further details include:

The Confederacy and the province had a communications protocol in place that recognized how each would relate to the other but it expired in June after two years. Zimmer said it served its purpose and the province is pursuing a “broader approach” to resolve issues such as DCE.

Detlor said the Confederacy has already determined the future of DCE, which is to ensure it has the ability to have “free and undisturbed harvesting” for medicinal plants and small game.

“If the province wanted to raise any concerns, we had a communications protocol set up for that very purpose,” he added.

So Mr. Zimmer is once again hearing the HDI version of reality.  His expectation of a "broader approach" will NEVER fly with the HDI - they don't negotiate they dictate.

The spin about DCE being left as is for harvesting medicinal plants and small game is quite odd.  The site is a tick infested desert.  It was scraped clean of top soil leaving the sterile layer in which anything that will grow will be of the weed variety and even they will have a hard go of it as can be seen in the landscape there today.  I am not sure what "small game" is there other than rats and insects - perhaps these are now viewed as part of a "traditional diet".

While the matter is covered in "Turtle Island News", they have become the mouthpiece for the HDI / Hereditary Council and have disavowed any consideration of the legal reality - that the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) is the only body at Six Nations entitled to negotiate with the Federal or Provincial Government.  They therefore do not provide the reader with an unbiased source of information and what they print is largely in the arena of propaganda.  I will be less inclined to use this source in the future for this reason - and the fact that I am paying for something I can get for free in the other Reserve newspaper, which is unfortunately the haven for White Six Nations supporters with Communist and Anarchist predilections.

The HCCC has only symbolic and moral authority, being a vestige of a Stone Age system unable to cope with the realities of operating in the modern age.  Many at Six Nations look back longingly to a time when hereditary chiefs and clan mothers "ruled" the Confederacy (but never the local communities such as say the Upper or Canajoharie Mohawks when residing in Upstate NY - power was in the hands of village chiefs who earned this position by merit).  Over the years the entire system collapsed, with the American Revolution ensuring that many chiefly titles are vacant; and things in complete disarray where for example a Ball Clan member is now the chief of the Bear Clan lineage to which my ancestors belonged (the Mohawks never had a Ball Clan).  The decay is well documented in works such as Noon (1949) and Shimony (1963) which I have discussed in a number of previous postings.  The system was so completely dysfunctional at Six Nations that those who had some education, largely Mohawk Workers (a progressive faction at Six Nations), convinced the Federal Government (who was aware of the problem) that the internal rot was ensuring that no enlightened Six Nations member could expect to express their talents without leaving the Reserve to live elsewhere.  Thus in 1924 an elected system was entrenched as the legally authorized governing body at Six Nations.  Thus people could chose their own representatives, and they were accountable to the Six Nations community as a whole - not fettered by a system of nepotism and a lack of transparency where the chiefs were appointed by clan mothers for life and minimal chance of being "dehorned" or tossed out of office for misappropriation of funds or other opportunistic and illegal acts.  Despite the obvious flaws the Confederacy lingers and constitutes a parallel governing body with no legal authority, but with claims of being the only

The bottom line here is that the HDI are intransigent and will not budge an inch in their belief that they are the ONLY legitimate voice of the Six Nations community, and that whatever they dictate must be obeyed - no compromise.  Knowing full well how the HDI think and operate, it is amusing or sad to see someone like the Hon. David Zimmer, who seems to be acting out of genuine concern, expecting that reason and rationality are concepts that influence HDI behavior. 

DeYo.

Leaders of October 2014 Highway 6 Blockade Facing Criminal Charges by OPP

In the online version of "The Sachem", an article dated 5 November 2014 entitled, Three men facing mischief charges after highway protest (seen here) informs us that justice will be served in the blockade of Highway 6 on October 4th and 5th organized by the Six Nations Men's Fire.

The article is short enough that it can be quoted in full here:

Three men are facing mischief charges a month after a protest demanding a federal inquiry into the high number of missing and murdered aboriginal women.

Prior to the demonstration – which took place on Oct. 4 and Oct. 5 – members of the Six Nations Men’s Fire informed the OPP of their intention to hold a protest at the intersection of Highway 6 and Fourth Line.

“Due to the safety concerns, detour routes were set up at the Third Line to the south and the Fifth Line to the north,” said a media release issued by the OPP on Wednesday, Nov. 5.

“As a result of the interference on the highway the OPP commenced a criminal investigation which resulted in three persons being charged.”

Three men – a 58-year-old from Six Nations of the Grand River, a 52-year-old from Mississaugas of the New Credit and a 35-year-old from Hamilton – will appear in Cayuga Provincial Court at a later date to answer to the charges.

The key clause is highlighted in bold above by the present author.

As noted in previous postings, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) warned the leaders of this misguided effort to supposedly bring attention to the plight of missing and murdered women across Canada, that they were breaking the law and charges could be brought.  Since no charges were laid in a similar more spontaneous action (egged on by social media and one of the Reserve newspapers) one year ago (October 2013), it is indeed encouraging to see that the OPP is now taking very seriously its responsibility to apply the law for all citizens equally. 

As I have noted many times, if I or any other resident of Haldimand County who did not have an Indian "status card" tried to engage in the same behavior we would without a shadow of a doubt have been arrested on the spot and charged with an offence.  While it is upsetting that the perpetrators were not arrested when they set up the blockade tent on Highway 6, and that anyone using Highway 6 during the two days of the action was inconvenienced in one way or the other, I do agree with the OPP that for public safety sake, some modification of what might otherwise occur (immediate arrest) was the best course of action.  The reality, as those of us who live here well know, is that with the barrier being set up so close to the Six Nations Reserve, hundreds of protesters could have streamed down to the site within minutes if an arrest was made at the time.  Prudence called for slightly different tactics.  Perhaps the OPP have realized that by allowing the perpetrators to "get away" with the same crime in 2013 only emboldened those in 2014 who chose to use the same tactics because there were no consequences or repercussions. 

What is important is that the perpetrators will not get away with their misdeeds entirely unpunished.  Even if it means that they simply have to attend Court, their being "inconvenienced", as the County residents were, is a form of justice.  Hopefully they will receive a penalty entirely in keeping with the provisions of the law under such circumstances.  In other words the penalty should be exactly the same as if a resident of Haldimand County had committed the same act.  Equal application of the law is exactly what the local people such as myself have called for since the illegal take over of the Douglas Creek Estates in 2006 by a group of Six Nations militants.  I would recommend to the Court that they institute a zero tolerance policy for courtroom disrespect - which would get any other citizen of Canada ejected from Court.  In the past, Six Nations members have attended hearings and trials and from the audience gallery shouted obscenities and even threats against a Judge.  This must not be allowed to happen here or it will be a travesty, a complete mockery of our system of justice should Six Nations members be allowed to disrespect the Court.

Update 12 November 2014:  Some further clarification of the positions of the OPP and the protesters is found in an article in "The Sachem" found here.  Basically the OPP are saying that they had no choice but to close Highway 6 for safety reasons; whereas the head of Men's Fire maintains that they had no intentions of blockading the Highway and would have allowed emergency vehicles through.  I don't believe the latter.  I saw the vehicles on both sides of Fourth Line with Confederacy and Mohawk Warrior flags and they were blocking the Highway, as was the tent which had completely blocked the west lane of Highway 6.  How people were supposed to get through this blockade and whatever persons would be standing in the way is fortunately not something we had to worry about thanks to the proactive efforts of the OPP.

DeYo.

HDI Stops Construction Repair Work at the Highway 3 Cayuga Bridge

Considering that the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and their enforcement and extortion arm the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) have been frustrated by the fact that the Ontario Provincial Government will not play ball with them (hand over the deed to the Douglas Creek Estates property), it is not in the least surprising that they would initiate some action to get the attention of the Province.  The action by the HCCC Men's Fire blocking Highway 6 on the 4th and 5th of October 2014 under the pretend reason of demanding an inquiry into the missing and murdered aboriginal women, failed miserably.  So some other approach was expected - and now a month after their botched efforts, the HCCC affiliates are at it again.  The focus this time, the Grand River Navigation Company tow path and the Grand River river bed claim revived.  The target:  The Cayuga Bridge along Highway 3 now under major repair work.  The action:  A work stoppage.

In the online version of "The Sachem" is an article entitled, HDI issues press release in regards to Cayuga Bridge as seen here,  we learn that, the HDI have issued a press release as follows:

Cayuga Bridge work stops Ontario fails to consult

CAYUGA-The Ministry of Transportation has been put on notice and construction work on the Cayuga Bridge spanning the Grand River came to a halt Tuesday (November 3 2014) morning after workers were told Ontario had failed to engage with the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) on a bridge that encroaches on Haudenosaunee tow path lands and the bed of the Grand River.

Since I have done extensive research into the Indian Affairs (RG10) Series at the National Archives, I can assure readers that there is no valid tow path or River bed claim.  It exists only in the minds of the HCCC supporters for whom evidence is never needed, only belief in the validity of something, or the belief that they can get away with gross distortions of reality since they will not likely be challenged on their assertions.  Also, it is not the HCCC who has the mandate to deal with either the Ontario Provincial Government or the Federal Government - that role is by law assigned to the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC).  The latter simply give way to the former since the Six Nations community is divided on which body is the "legitimate" governing unit for the Reserve.  The HDI claims moral authority, and an atavistic return to romanticized Stone Age conceptualizations in the modern world.  The damage caused by the HDI and their precursors is immense.  The horrors and acts of terrorism seen during and after the violent take over ("reclamation") of private property at the Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) in 2006 is a classic example.  As the HDI became formalized, it emerged as the strong arm of the HCCC and would initiate work stoppages at developments on lands that it considered "unceded".  Since the Courts were not willing to tolerate criminal acts, and since the written evidence showed that by 1849 all of the lands outside the present day Reserve had been legally surrendered so that the monies could be places in the Six Nations Trust Account, they have occasionally been willing to act in work stoppages.  Thus in 2010 Judge Harrison Arrell of the Superior Court in Brantford fined the HDI members and supporters $385,000 for engaging in work stoppages involving land development.  This has not stopped the HDI (who are funded by extracting money from naieve land developers and industrial wind turbine corporations) from continuing with their illegal practices which have absolutely no regard whatsoever for the residents of Brant and Haldimand Counties. 

A number of my postings to this blog have explored the matter of bogus land claims.  SNEC has agreed with Federal Government researchers that any remaining claims are about fiscal irregularities in matters stretching back 170 years and which were never questioned by the Chiefs who signed the surrenders or their descendants.  That is to say, until the time was ripe for manipulating the public and increased radicalization that had been evident since the "Oka Crisis" of the 1980s and the "Ipperwash Incident" of the 1990s.  It is with a sense of entitlement that the HCCC, despite their lack of any official status, have attempted to foist their view of "reality" on both their own community and the general public (including the Federal and Provincial Governments).  Due to the factionalism within the Six Nations community, SNEC frequently gives in to the HCCC and allows them to take the lead in lost causes (e.g., the return of supposedly unceded land). 

Returning to the "press release", and again quoting from the article in "The Sachem", we see further details:

The Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) the HCCC’s development department, has been attempting to engage with the Ministry of Transportation for the past three (3) years with respect to MTO Projects which are impairing rights in areas of HCCC jurisdiction.

Despite repeated requests for a good faith engagement process the MTO has refused to sit down in good faith and consider the impact of MTO Projects on Haudenosaunee rights and interests, says HDI legal adviser Aaron Detlor.

Instead, he said, the Ontario Liberals would rather “cost the province’s manufacturing and construction industry tens of millions of dollars in work stoppages, shut downs and court costs as their failure to engage pushes the projects and Haudenosaunee into direct conflict”.

It seems that the HDI is able to make any false claim it choses and somehow the Ontario Government is expected to react.  Since it is a Federal Government responsibility the actions seem more geared toward getting the attention of the Provincial Government which has refused to negotiate with the HCCC without the legal party representing Six Nations, SNEC, being present.  HDI will have none of that.  They refuse to sit at any negotiating table with SNEC who they see as usurpers.  So when both the Federal and Provincial Government throw up their hands in disgust since they legally cannot deal with HDI or any other HCCC party without the legally mandated representatives of the Six Nations community, is it any wonder?

The work stoppages as noted have in the past resulted in fines against the perpetrators - although the fines have been reduced by negotiation.  At this point the present author is unclear as to who has paid how much in the above noted Court proceedings.  It is absolutely crystal clear however, that it is not the fault of the Federal or Provincial Governments (the HDI, because they want the deed to the DCE property placed in their hands, are now focusing on the latter) but the perpetrators in the form of the HDI and their thugs.

The legal representative of the HDI then said, after claiming that the Ontario Ministry of Transportation acknowledged the Six Nations claim (which I doubt very much), that, “the refusal of the MTO to deal in good faith has meant that the Haudenosaunee must now exercise their rights in and around the Cayuga Bridge project until the MTO is prepared to halt construction and sit down in good faith to begin discussions to determine if the Haudenosaunee are prepared to grant consent to allow MTO to proceed.”  So what are the Six Nations "rights".  Apparently this includes work stoppages.  Once again a completely uncreative and unproductive in the long run tactic of the HCCC supporters, and done with complete disregard to the innocent citizens whose lives will be negatively impacted. 

At Cayuga the geographical situation is such that the HDI thugs cannot expect reinforcement to stream in from the Reserve as they have in any actions in Caledonia (which is more proximal to the Reserve).  The protesters would be isolated, and with a large OPP detachment in Cayuga it should be a simple matter to enforce the law fairly and without prejudice by apprehending the protesters, jailing them, then by the Courts issuing stiff fines sufficient to act as a deterrent to any contemplated future actions of this nature.  Of course the question is once again, will the OPP continue to operate under a two - tiered policing arrangement with one set of rules and standards for the residents of Haldimand, and another (the kid glove treatment) for those who are defined as "aboriginal" (although are nothing of the sort any more than the Loyalist settlers who came to the Cayuga area as refugees in 1784 one year before the Six Nations Loyalist refugees arrived on the Grand River in 1785).  Six Nations are in a sense aboriginal to Upstate New York but only from about 900 AD according to the archaeological evidence.  This has all be discussed at length in previous postings.

The HDI representative then says,  “The HDI deeply regrets the failure of the MTO to come to the table in good faith and any inconveniences that MTO’s conduct will cause to the people of Haldimand County. We hope that the HDI and MTO will be able to sit down in a mediated process in the near future to resolve the failure of MTO to uphold the honour of the crown.”  This cynical statement is without a doubt said to mitigate the inevitable backlash (they have never before shown an ounce of concern for local residents).  It is not the Crown involved here - they are directly affecting the lives (once again) of the residents of Haldimand County (one wonders how much more tolerance will be bankable here), and are targeting the Ontario Government not the Federal Government (Crown).

The next statement is, A Communications protocol framework between the Haudenosaunee and Ontario Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has been in limbo since June. It was the first in a series of established processes for the Ontario government, as part of the Crown, in how Ontario and the Haudenosaunee will relate to each other, with its basis in the Two Row Wampum.  There are two matters that need comment here.

First, it is now clear that what the HDI are talking about is the intransigence of the Ontario Government in dealing with the HCCC without the participation of SNEC (the legal representatives of the Six Nations community).  They want the deed to the DCE property which is in the hands of the Provincial Government, particularly so since the HDI have spent a lot of money constructing a chain link fence and a decorative gate blocking Surrey Street in Caledonia (all illegally done).  This is the real issue, the claim about tow path lands is just a ruse.

They also say, in their "press release", that, Ontario instead of returning to the communications table have unilaterally established a new table that appears to include the Six Nations Band Council and Haldimand County Council and attempts to bring the Haudenosaunee Confederacy under the Indian Act system.  This is proof positive as to what I have been asserting, in other words that the HCCC here want Ontario to give up using the legal approach and decide on their own that the true representatives of Six Nations are the Hereditary Council that has been in existence since the Stone Age, but which as the modern age dawned showed that they were not up to the task and became completely dysfunctional such that the Mohawk Workers and other progressive elements at Six Nations pleaded with the Federal Government to install an elected system - which after much debate was done in 1924.

Secondly, referring to the "Two Row Wampum" is another of the many fantasies believed at Six Nations but which cannot be supported by anything remotely resembling evidence.  So the reality here is constructed, it is merely a perception - but we all know that perception is reality.  In fact the Two Row Wampum is entirely constructed of bogus "evidence".  The concept of the European "settlers" being in a boat and the Six Nations people being in a canoe and that both travel side by side without interfering with each other is unsupported.  The document which allegedly underpins it was found by the brother of one VanLoon at New Credit in the past Century and has been shown by academics to be a mixture of Colonial and modern Dutch - a forgery and a fake.  It is at best a trade agreement (not a treaty) signed by two Dutch colonists and four apparently Mohawk individuals in 1613.  So the document cannot be show to be valid, then what about the other piece of "evidence", the wampum belt.  At some point in time a wampum belt from the 19th Century surfaced and its two purple rows of beads on a background of white beads was interpreted (in modern times) as representing a ship and a canoe.  At this point a story came into being about the supposed agreement and it representing the immutable relationship between the English Crown (although the document was signed only by two Dutch traders) and the Six Nations people.  They are likely confusing this with the valid "Covenant Chain of friendship" concept that can be traced to 1676 and is well documented.  However here the relationship is focused on the hegemony of the Crown and the acknowledgement of Six Nations that their Great Father the King of England was the ruler of all in the colony of New York.  When the Six Nations came to Ontario as refugees after the Revolutionary War I can find no evidence of any "Two Row Wampum" agreement.  It is only in the 1900s when it was created.

So here we go again, except that the major impact of the illegal acts will be in Cayuga not Caledonia.  It is unclear as of now whether the HDI will block all traffic on the bridge at Cayuga, which would cause chaos and millions of dollars.  The citizens of Cayuga have never rallied to the defense of those of us in Caledonia so I wish them good luck as they begin to find out what we have had to endure - then maybe we can act together with all of the residents of Haldimand County to defeat these terrorists - that is if the police are unable or unwilling to do their jobs.  The HDI do not wish to negotiate except when they are guaranteed a certain outcome.  All they understand is the application of the law - although clearly they think that they should be immune, and that they can get away with criminal acts here as they have time and again in both Haldimand and Brant Counties. 

Perhaps you would like to ask yourself a question.  If the HDI "land protectors" or "warriors" have enough time on their hands to enforce work stoppages, what is their means of supporting themselves?

The bottom line here is, why should the construction crew listen to HDI thugs.  If they need police protection call the OPP who are two minutes away.  No one needs to obey a group of thugs who represent a rogue group at Six Nations.  The workers need to get back to their jobs and quit enabling the HDI and legitimizing their bully behavior. 

DeYo.

New Gate Blocking Surrey Street In Caledonia Has Been Installed at DCE

Will on a "Tim run" my reporter noticed "activity" at the Surrey Street entrance to the Douglas Creek Estates which has been occupied continuously and illegally by Six Nations supporters of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI).  Six Nations, via the signatures of 47 Chiefs in Council ceded the land on 18 December 1844.  However 170 years later Six Nations members chose to be "Indian givers" and have stolen this land, and after a violent encounter with the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) on 22 April 2006, have ejected the legal owners and resisted all attempts by the Federal, Provincial and County governments to eject these illegal trespassers.  The situation has been amply detailed in multiple postings to this blog.

In approaching the Surrey Street junction with old Highway 6 (Argyle Street), it was apparent that the perpetrators were in the process of installing a decorative gate to join the two sides of the chain link fence on the north and south sides of Surrey Street.  They were in the process of removing the old barricade (e.g., the stolen and vandalized Hydro One tower stub), with two gates at the readiness to attach to the mounts that have been there since earlier in the year.  Although the Haldimand County Council unanimously agreed to remove the old barricade blocking Surrey Street, they never followed through on this "threat" to the Six Nations occupants.  The result is that once again the reality is that here the laws have no teeth.  While there the reporter attempted to flag down an OPP cruiser, and although they slowed down, they did not stop.  Therefore I called the OPP and requested that they investigate the matter.  An officer visited my home and we had a frank and open discussion about the matter.

Here follows some pictures taken of the site on 25 October 2014 at about 3 pm.

Looking south from Argyle Street to Surrey Street

Looking north along Surrey Street to gate mountings on each side

Gate element on right showing "Two Row Wampum" symbol

Gate element on left showing "Confederacy" symbol

Out with the old and in with the new - old Hydro One tower replaced

More news as it becomes available.

Update:  The installers had completed the left side by 5 pm, while an entourage of about 20 people watched while sitting on concrete blocks of barricade facing the gate.

Update:  Pictures of the installed gate, 27 October 2014:

Concrete blocks still in place, but space for vehicle to enter

Full view from the north

Right - north gate open for vehicle access

Left - south gate closed

Seeing the gates swing on the mounts, and examining the construction, it would appear that the structural design is more apropos for a 3 foot man gate opening in a fence.  It looks as if the two large (30 feet or so) sides will likely warp and twist under the weight and stress.  Time will tell, but the structures seem more decorative than functional.

It is not known how much the fence and gate cost the HDI.  The funding likely came from the money lifted from various sources (e.g., land developers).  The work was completed based on the assumption that ultimately the Province of Ontario will turn over the deed to the Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) to the Confederacy - which is about as likely as the Pope turning Protestant.  Since the very act of constructing a fence and gate is a flagrant challenge to both the Provincial and County governments, and the outcome is quite uncertain, the action can be seen as an attempt to consolidate their hold on the stolen property.  It could well backfire if the laws of the land were actually enforced - which is a possibility that I doubt the HDI have contemplated since to date they have been able to do whatever they wanted at DCE with impunity.  If an eviction order is set in motion ...............

DeYo.