In but another stroke of unparalleled genius, the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) has, in their infinite wisdom, decided to bar census workers from Statistics Canada from entering the Reserve to collect information for the 2016 Census. This information appears in Two Row Times, April 20th 2016, p.5 in an article entitled, "Six Nations Elected Council: Census workers not allowed to enter."
It is via the census information that the Government in able to assess the needs of a community. For example for funding fire and police services. Also, to plan for schooling in the short and long run, the Government needs to know how many children of a certain age live in which location (e.g., Smoothtown) so they can allot funds perhaps to build a new school where it is needed. If the Government, who dispenses the tax dollars earned by Canadian citizens including Six Nations who work off Reserve, is unaware of the ages of the people living in the Community (Six Nations) how might they be expected to provide funds for senior citizens? The SNEC decision would effectively place a set of blinders on Statistics Canada and thus risk serious under funding as this agency tries to guesstimate for example how many people who are over 65 or will be reaching that age within the next 5 years?
So in a gesture of defiance, or some sort of warped attempt to assert sovereignty, SNEC puts the Community at risk - and may be clumsily shooting itself in the foot. If SNEC expects transfer payments from Canadians (which is really questionable in the first place to a majority of taxpayers) should they not at the very least cooperate to the fullest extent to facilitate the obtaining of the data needed to make the requisite calculations? In a costs benefits analysis, is it worth being obstinate?
Edit: Since the census forms have been mailed out to all residents of Canada for as far back as I can recall, isn't it all a moot point? No one on the Rez or in Caledonia can expect to see actual human beings arrive at their doorstep to make inquiries, as would have been the case in the years before 1970 or so. The important matter here is that the Elected Council cooperate with Statistics Canada to ensure that the Six Nations will receive a fair share when monies are distributed.
DY.
Saturday, 23 April 2016
Lies About Genocide and Other Alleged Crimes at the Mohawk Institute Residential School Being Enabled by People Such as the Former Premier of Ontario
Introduction: I will shortly make the case that it was not only the Government and the Anglican Church who were involved in establishing the Mohawk Institute (known "affectionately" as the Mush Hole), but it was the Chiefs of the Six Nations (and therefore the Clan Mothers) who wished to have a school where their children could receive a useful education to prepare them to meet the challenges of the world as adults. What caused a re-examination of the whole matter of Residential Schools was the visit of the Hon. Bob Rae, former Premier of Ontario, and his particular appointment. The information is found in Turtle Island News, April 29, 2016, p. 4 in an article entitled, Former Premier Bob Rae tours "Mush Hole's" dark past.
What follows are my views on the Mohawk Institute (a place which I know very well), and the so called evidence of horrid things that happened there over the years. Some of this I have mentioned before in earlier blog postings, such as the posting here, and some is new to the subject as discussed in this blog.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Selective Use of Evidence: First, the entire residential school system was put under the microscope (with very selective viewing) quite recently. There is a great deal of irony in an august body called the "Truth and Reconciliation Commission", mandated by the Government of Canada and covered comprehensively here, when "truth" is not the object of the investigation. Is there a shred of detail about the many positives (more on this later) that should have been brought forward to provide a balanced report? The answer is a resounding no, because it would detract from "the message". What this one - sided and cherry picking exercise did was to actively seek to avoid any "evidence" that did not support what was already a foregone conclusion, in other words the "party line". It was already "known" that the Residential Schools were places where children were subjected to torture and even "mass genocide", and assorted other unspeakable crimes designed to eradicate Indian people, or at least remove the "Indian ness" from them. QED, now set up a Government commission to prove what is already accepted as the known, the supposed truth.
The Concept of the "Survivor" and "Cultural Genocide": So we hear of beatings, sexual abuse, starvation (all things common in homes on many Reservations then and now), from "survivors", who experienced this "cultural genocide". These underlined terms have become buzz words designed to con vince Canadians and governments around the world of the horrors that were perpetrated on our own doorstep. So this is the so called truth part, and of course the reconciliation part is money, lots of money, to compensate "survivors". Ultimately there have been more lies (or distortions) than truth told in the service of ensuring that the Government will ante up. When money is involved, stories become aggrandized - just the way things are since there was no penalty for lying or exaggeration built into the process.
So those who come in under the umbrella term of "survivor" (anyone who attended the school) had to make a choice. Speak up and tell the truth, or stay quiet and let the activists lead the willing to provide tales of unspeakable horror - none of which could be proven, but that was quite irrelevant. So sordid details abounded, and others who had different experiences and even recalled their days at the Mohawk Institute with nostalgia were never told (or heard by outsiders).
The Mohawk Institute in Perspective: The truth is that the Mohawk Institute trained many of the Six Nations teachers who went on to become teachers of generations of students on the Six Nations Reserve. Without the experiences and skills provided by the Mohawk Institute, which included members of many other Reserves (e.g., Muncey, Oneida, Saugeen) whose parents wanted their children to have a good education, the children would have been left way behind others in this country, and if they wanted to be say an architect, the doors would have been closed. But no, the focus is supposed to be on the horrid things associated with the residential schools.
The truth with respect to the early days can be found in the records of the times. First, the Chiefs of the Six Nations supported the Mohawk Institute, and for example, when the land surrenders of the 1840s were in progress, they asked that 200 acres be set aside near the Mohawk Chapel in Brantford for an Agricultural Institute attached to the Mohawk Institute to teach boys farming skills, as shown in the following Council Minutes from 1844:
Chiefs who signed Council Minutes:
(LAC, RG10, Volume 144, pp. 286-300 [83269-83287]).
Is it even remotely possible that the Chiefs and Clan Mothers did NOT know what was going on at the Mohawk Institute, and if all of the horrid things alleged to have happened there actually occurred, would they not put a stop to it?
Chronology of the Mohawk Institute: Here follow the factual chronology of the Mohawk Institute from the Church of England website found here:
Milestones
Outright Lies, Conspiracy Theories and Those Who Believe Them: Memory problems aside, there will be a real credibility gap if people can be shown to be spreading lies. There are stories along the lines of urban myths that have taken root and ultimately spun out of control, such that there abound bizarre and outlandish direct accusations of mass murder and genocide spun by adults who should know better. Many to most will believe the "party line" which has been propounded by community activists and their White anarchist and communist "friends" (without any first hand knowledge or having spoken with folks who attended residential schools). However, many also accept uncritically the far more wildly crazy fringe allegations that have been shown to be entirely unfounded, but still many still believe this patently absurd stuff and get all fired up about it - refusing to for example acknowledge that the generator of these allegations was a self - serving defrocked White guy who was on a mission of self promotion.
If you believe ANY of what is to follow, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I can sell you cheap. The website is found here:
BRANTFORD, ON, CANADA – Mass graves of Mohawk children have been uncovered by ground-penetrating radar at the Mohawk Institute, a residential school for Mohawk operated by the Church of England and the Vatican before its closure in 1970.
According to Rev. Kevin Annett, Secretary of the International Tribunal for Crimes of Church and States (www.itccs.org), the Mohawk Institute was “set up by the Anglican Church of England in 1832 to imprison and destroy generations of Mohawk children. This very first Indian [First Nations] residential school in Canada lasted until 1970, and, like in most residential schools, more than half of the children imprisoned there never returned. Many of them are buried all around the school.”
Preliminary scanning by ground penetrating radar adjacent to the now closed main building Mohawk Institute has revealed that “between 15-20 feet of soil” was brought in and put over the mass graves just before the Mohawk Institute closed in 1970 in order to camouflage the mass graves of Mohawk Children and avoid prosecution for genocide and crimes against humanity under the Geneva Conventions, the International Criminal Court, and cooperating national courts.
Furthermore, Rev. Kevin Annett states that instruments of torture such as a rack for torturing the Mohawk children in ritual torture have been found at the now closed Mohawk Institute. Eyewitnesses from the Mohawk community have stated they witnessed priests in red robes torturing children in ritual torture.
Rev. Kevin Annett states that instruments of torture such as a rack for torturing the Mohawk children in ritual torture have been found at the now closed Mohawk Institute. Eyewitnesses from the Mohawk community have stated they witnessed priests in red robes torturing children in ritual torture.
Annett has since been seen for what he is, a hoaxer, who has used the Six Nations gullibility to meet his own warped ends. He was even given a Mohawk name as a mark of honour - said name having since been withdrawn. NO mass graves (or a torture rack) have ever been found, just anomalies on "ground penetrating radar" which are to be expected since the site has been occupied since 1785. The only bones found are what you would expect of a residential site - animal bone. However if you haven't reached the "you have got to be kidding" place yet, it all gets even more "off the wall", as seen in the following quote from the same source -
What follows are my views on the Mohawk Institute (a place which I know very well), and the so called evidence of horrid things that happened there over the years. Some of this I have mentioned before in earlier blog postings, such as the posting here, and some is new to the subject as discussed in this blog.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission Selective Use of Evidence: First, the entire residential school system was put under the microscope (with very selective viewing) quite recently. There is a great deal of irony in an august body called the "Truth and Reconciliation Commission", mandated by the Government of Canada and covered comprehensively here, when "truth" is not the object of the investigation. Is there a shred of detail about the many positives (more on this later) that should have been brought forward to provide a balanced report? The answer is a resounding no, because it would detract from "the message". What this one - sided and cherry picking exercise did was to actively seek to avoid any "evidence" that did not support what was already a foregone conclusion, in other words the "party line". It was already "known" that the Residential Schools were places where children were subjected to torture and even "mass genocide", and assorted other unspeakable crimes designed to eradicate Indian people, or at least remove the "Indian ness" from them. QED, now set up a Government commission to prove what is already accepted as the known, the supposed truth.
The Concept of the "Survivor" and "Cultural Genocide": So we hear of beatings, sexual abuse, starvation (all things common in homes on many Reservations then and now), from "survivors", who experienced this "cultural genocide". These underlined terms have become buzz words designed to con vince Canadians and governments around the world of the horrors that were perpetrated on our own doorstep. So this is the so called truth part, and of course the reconciliation part is money, lots of money, to compensate "survivors". Ultimately there have been more lies (or distortions) than truth told in the service of ensuring that the Government will ante up. When money is involved, stories become aggrandized - just the way things are since there was no penalty for lying or exaggeration built into the process.
So those who come in under the umbrella term of "survivor" (anyone who attended the school) had to make a choice. Speak up and tell the truth, or stay quiet and let the activists lead the willing to provide tales of unspeakable horror - none of which could be proven, but that was quite irrelevant. So sordid details abounded, and others who had different experiences and even recalled their days at the Mohawk Institute with nostalgia were never told (or heard by outsiders).
The Mohawk Institute in Perspective: The truth is that the Mohawk Institute trained many of the Six Nations teachers who went on to become teachers of generations of students on the Six Nations Reserve. Without the experiences and skills provided by the Mohawk Institute, which included members of many other Reserves (e.g., Muncey, Oneida, Saugeen) whose parents wanted their children to have a good education, the children would have been left way behind others in this country, and if they wanted to be say an architect, the doors would have been closed. But no, the focus is supposed to be on the horrid things associated with the residential schools.
The truth with respect to the early days can be found in the records of the times. First, the Chiefs of the Six Nations supported the Mohawk Institute, and for example, when the land surrenders of the 1840s were in progress, they asked that 200 acres be set aside near the Mohawk Chapel in Brantford for an Agricultural Institute attached to the Mohawk Institute to teach boys farming skills, as shown in the following Council Minutes from 1844:
Chiefs who signed Council Minutes:
(LAC, RG10, Volume 144, pp. 286-300 [83269-83287]).
Is it even remotely possible that the Chiefs and Clan Mothers did NOT know what was going on at the Mohawk Institute, and if all of the horrid things alleged to have happened there actually occurred, would they not put a stop to it?
Chronology of the Mohawk Institute: Here follow the factual chronology of the Mohawk Institute from the Church of England website found here:
Milestones
- 1828 Mechanics’ Institute opens as a manual training day school in the Mohawk Village for Indian boys from Six Nations. School is located across the road from the Royal Chapel of the Mohawks on land granted to the NEC by the Colonial Government and Six Nations Chiefs.
- 1831 Some schoolboys are boarded at the Institute or in the Village.
- 1834 Dormitories added to provide residential quarters for ten boys and four girls.
- ca. 1837 Due to influx of non-native settlers, Provincial Government of Upper Canada orders Six Nations people to vacate land north of the Grand River (including the Mohawk Village) and to resettle on land south of the river, several kilometres from the school and chapel. Relocation is completed by early 1840s.
- 1840 School remains in its original location at former Mohawk Village and is expanded to take in 40 children, mostly boarders, and especially more girls. A waiting list exists through the 1840s.
- 1854–1859 School destroyed by fire and new building with subsequent additions erected a few hundred metres from old location. This site would be the final location of the school for more than a century.
- 1860 NEC acquires large farm and vocational training soon focuses on farming which becomes a profitable venture by the mid-1870s. School adopts the more familiar name, Mohawk Institute.
- 1868 Enrolment increases to 90.
- 1880s Some students attend Brantford Collegiate Institute as a means to qualify as teachers. By the mid-1890s, about 20 boys and 25 girls had become Indian school teachers at the Mohawk Institute and other residential schools.
- 1885 Government makes one time operating grant when school begins to accept students from other reserves.
- 1891 Start of annual per capita grants by government to assist NEC in operation of the school until 1922, when Indian Affairs Department assumes management.
- 1894 Orphans and destitute children taken in, some non-native. Large 3-storey wing added. Amendment to Indian Act makes education compulsory for native children.
- 1903 Main school building and barns are destroyed by fires set by students.
- 1904 Replacement building opens in October with authorized pupilage of 125. This structure, with later additions, will survive until it is closed in 1971. A small hospital is added to the school complex in 1908.
- 1922 Following earlier attempt by NEC to sell the school to Indian Affairs, a 21-year lease is agreed to instead. Government takes over school operation and NEC reduces most of its financial assistance. Building receives major renovation. Agreement requires principal to be an Anglican, nominated by NEC. Another attempt to sell school in 1930 is unsuccessful. Indian and Eskimo School Administration of MSCC, which is poised to take over most Anglican residential schools in 1923, loses interest in managing the Mohawk Institute when financial issues cannot be resolved with NEC and government.
- 1934 New dormitories added, increasing school enrolment to 150.
- 1946, Jan. 1 New 21-year lease takes effect, continuing the status quo arrangement between NEC and government. However, NEC is unable to continue providing modest financial support.
- 1948-1958 Classrooms added by renovating former army building moved to site and constructing new classroom block.
- 1955 Enrolment is 185 students.
- 1960s School evolves into a hostel, providing accommodation for children requiring special care and attention and for those from distant reserves lacking Indian day schools. Many attend Brantford public schools, as space permits. Enrolment declines as Children’s Aid Societies find foster homes for many of the Institute’s children.
- 1963 Farming is discontinued as the boys are in school all day and hired labour deemed too expensive. Farmland will be returned to local Indian band.
- 1965 New England Company sells its interest in the school building to the government for $100,000.
- 1969 April 1 Government assumes complete control of school.
- 1970 June 30 School closes. Most of the children in residence are from the north where new day schools have been constructed at their reserves. Only 23 students from Six Nations are in attendance this final year. By agreement with Six Nations Council, the government keeps a small staff to care for few remaining children kept in the hostel until foster care can be provided. School is finally vacated March 31, 1971 and building offered to Six Nations. Remaining school lands—a large part NEC claims title to—is ultimately returned to the Reserve.
- 1972 October Native run Woodland Cultural Centre opens at the former school site. Old building is renovated for administrative offices and a research centre and new museum is constructed adjacent to it. The museum is dedicated to the history and culture of the Iroquoian and Algonkian peoples and offers gallery space for special art and historical exhibitions.
Compiled by General Synod Archives, September 23, 2008.
Misconceptions of the Mohawk Institute: There are so many erroneous beliefs about the Mohawk Institute, it is impossible here to give a comprehensive account of all important matters. However anyone researching the subject needs to explore primary source documents and first hand accounts from the time spectrum during which the school was in existance. As a sample of what one can find with some researching of the matter is the 1911 Census of Canada for Brant County showing one of the pages listing the students at the Mohawk Institute. Some facts of note is that all over the age of 10 could read and write, and that the students only attended school for 4 months a year, with half the day spent working (e.g., the boys in agricultural pursuits) and the other half of the day in school. That is really not enough time to brainwash the children or perpetrate "cultural genocide" as is so commonly alleged. Below is a sample page (click on page to enlarge):
Many Former Mohawk Institute Students Have Fond Recollections of Their Days There: I have many times in this blog told of the off the record discussions I have had with elders (most attended the Mohawk Institute in the 1950s and 60s) who saw the school in a positive light, as for example offering 3 meals a day and the opportunity to learn something - neither of which they would have got at home.
In addition the Mohawk Institute did not close because of agitation from the Six Nations community. In fact they wanted it kept open. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission does mention one very key fact that puts almost everything in perspective. Volume 1 of the final report, entitled "The History, Part 2, 1939-2000." On page 93, it says that in March 1970, the "Six Nations Council" lobbied to have the Mohawk Institute kept open because many of the "successful members of Six Nations passed through the Institute." This information comes from counterpoise, a fellow blogger link here.
Abuse at the Mohawk Institute?: Some former students would acknowledge that there was physical abuse, but that is what they expected at home also. If one wants to simply talk about beatings, it was hardly unique to Indian residential schools. It happened in day schools throughout this country, and even in England upper class students sent there by their parents could expect daily canning - it was the times, and at the local level I can say from experience that excessive physical discipline existed in Haldimand County until the 1980s. So should every Canadian, and every English child who went to boarding school be eligible for "compensation" (money)? Sexual abuse happens everywhere, unfortunately. I would like to see some evidence, any evidence, that those who attended an Anglican operated residential school such as the Mohawk Institute experienced any where near the level of what went on in the Catholic schools right up to the last few years. There is a great deal of evidence about the latter scandal, but very little except anecdotal evidence about the Mohawk Institute. Unfortunately this behaviour did not just happen in schools, but also in the homes across all Reserves, including those at Six Nations, and for that matter all across Canada in general.
Why Are So Many Telling Stories of Awful Experiences at the Mohawk Institute?: Granted that there were issues at the Mohawk Institute, it would be astounding if there were not - do you want to hear my horror stories about my time at day school? No one is asking me about my horrid time at school and the scars I bear. No one cares. There is a huge difference in the mix here. In a word, money. If a strong case can be made for being a "survivor" and experiencing "cultural genocide" (whether true or not), there is a lot of money that will be handed over. It is a moral dilemma for many at Six Nations. Everyone else is coming up with stories (whether experienced first hand or heard third hand), and there will be compensation. So to think the whole exercise immoral and say nothing would take a tremendous amount of resolve. It would be truly instructive to learn of the numbers who refused to tell lies, exaggerate what at the time was the norm, or spread rumours. Telling stories about this subject not to convict a specific offender, but to be eligible for "compensation", seems really really questionable to some (myself).
How Reliable Are the Memories?: Science has shown us that while we may think we recall an event with point on precision, eyewitness testimony is fraught with difficulties - accuracy being the primary problem. It is a well established fact that all memories are subject to change over time, and that there is the possibility of creating false memories which are believed and believable. During the 1980s there was a rash of accusations of sexual abuse with the most incredible twists but which were believed (and even encouraged) by police interview tactics at the time. It is amazing (not) what you can get with a few leading questions. The phenomenon was called the "repressed memory syndrome". The most egregious example was the McMartin Day Care Center in Manhattan Beach, California. Here children were, under the "encouragement" of ill trained police investigators, coming up with the most off the charts descriptions of alleged sexual abuse there, involving dinosaurs, ritual abuse and every imaginable entity to weave into the tales of horror. Lives were ruined by these accusations, and the fall out permeated the clinical practices of health care professionals (including myself) who were required to disentangle these stories or accept them at face value.
As it turns out, the leading researchers on memory in the world, such as Dr. Elizabeth Loftus at University of California, Irvine stepped forward and testified in Court that the "repressed memory phenomenon" simply did not tally with what was known about human memory. Ultimately, with the use of taped sessions of therapist and police "interrogations" of "victims", it became evident that what was happening was "therapist induced memories" brought to the fore by badgering by well intentioned (but incompetent) therapists (and even police officers) who were now prone to seeing sexual abuse under every rock. Children were being coached (often unintentionally) by adults as to what they should be remembering, encouraged when the resulting tales were permeated by horrifying details that suggested ritual abuse, and disparaged if their memories were not in tune with those of others who had given testimony. This was a horrible period, and as a professional in the field, I was embroiled in many such investigations where my role was to use my clinical training, deeply rooted in the scientific method, to tease out fact from fiction. The point of this is that with the expectation to tell a certain version of an event or story, many people will comply rather than risk the censure of those who have preconceived expectations as to what they will be hearing. Rather than disappoint (this is especially true of children), the person being interrogated (questioned) will most likely capitulate to expectation and leading questions - it happens all the time, and is one reason why police often get false confessions. Hence it is entirely unclear how many memories of terrible things happening at Residential Schools are veridical (square with objective reality), and how many are induced or extracted false memories. I am speaking here only of the situation at the Mohawk Institute since I am not familiar with the Residential Schools elsewhere in the Country.
Many Former Mohawk Institute Students Have Fond Recollections of Their Days There: I have many times in this blog told of the off the record discussions I have had with elders (most attended the Mohawk Institute in the 1950s and 60s) who saw the school in a positive light, as for example offering 3 meals a day and the opportunity to learn something - neither of which they would have got at home.
In addition the Mohawk Institute did not close because of agitation from the Six Nations community. In fact they wanted it kept open. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission does mention one very key fact that puts almost everything in perspective. Volume 1 of the final report, entitled "The History, Part 2, 1939-2000." On page 93, it says that in March 1970, the "Six Nations Council" lobbied to have the Mohawk Institute kept open because many of the "successful members of Six Nations passed through the Institute." This information comes from counterpoise, a fellow blogger link here.
Abuse at the Mohawk Institute?: Some former students would acknowledge that there was physical abuse, but that is what they expected at home also. If one wants to simply talk about beatings, it was hardly unique to Indian residential schools. It happened in day schools throughout this country, and even in England upper class students sent there by their parents could expect daily canning - it was the times, and at the local level I can say from experience that excessive physical discipline existed in Haldimand County until the 1980s. So should every Canadian, and every English child who went to boarding school be eligible for "compensation" (money)? Sexual abuse happens everywhere, unfortunately. I would like to see some evidence, any evidence, that those who attended an Anglican operated residential school such as the Mohawk Institute experienced any where near the level of what went on in the Catholic schools right up to the last few years. There is a great deal of evidence about the latter scandal, but very little except anecdotal evidence about the Mohawk Institute. Unfortunately this behaviour did not just happen in schools, but also in the homes across all Reserves, including those at Six Nations, and for that matter all across Canada in general.
Why Are So Many Telling Stories of Awful Experiences at the Mohawk Institute?: Granted that there were issues at the Mohawk Institute, it would be astounding if there were not - do you want to hear my horror stories about my time at day school? No one is asking me about my horrid time at school and the scars I bear. No one cares. There is a huge difference in the mix here. In a word, money. If a strong case can be made for being a "survivor" and experiencing "cultural genocide" (whether true or not), there is a lot of money that will be handed over. It is a moral dilemma for many at Six Nations. Everyone else is coming up with stories (whether experienced first hand or heard third hand), and there will be compensation. So to think the whole exercise immoral and say nothing would take a tremendous amount of resolve. It would be truly instructive to learn of the numbers who refused to tell lies, exaggerate what at the time was the norm, or spread rumours. Telling stories about this subject not to convict a specific offender, but to be eligible for "compensation", seems really really questionable to some (myself).
How Reliable Are the Memories?: Science has shown us that while we may think we recall an event with point on precision, eyewitness testimony is fraught with difficulties - accuracy being the primary problem. It is a well established fact that all memories are subject to change over time, and that there is the possibility of creating false memories which are believed and believable. During the 1980s there was a rash of accusations of sexual abuse with the most incredible twists but which were believed (and even encouraged) by police interview tactics at the time. It is amazing (not) what you can get with a few leading questions. The phenomenon was called the "repressed memory syndrome". The most egregious example was the McMartin Day Care Center in Manhattan Beach, California. Here children were, under the "encouragement" of ill trained police investigators, coming up with the most off the charts descriptions of alleged sexual abuse there, involving dinosaurs, ritual abuse and every imaginable entity to weave into the tales of horror. Lives were ruined by these accusations, and the fall out permeated the clinical practices of health care professionals (including myself) who were required to disentangle these stories or accept them at face value.
As it turns out, the leading researchers on memory in the world, such as Dr. Elizabeth Loftus at University of California, Irvine stepped forward and testified in Court that the "repressed memory phenomenon" simply did not tally with what was known about human memory. Ultimately, with the use of taped sessions of therapist and police "interrogations" of "victims", it became evident that what was happening was "therapist induced memories" brought to the fore by badgering by well intentioned (but incompetent) therapists (and even police officers) who were now prone to seeing sexual abuse under every rock. Children were being coached (often unintentionally) by adults as to what they should be remembering, encouraged when the resulting tales were permeated by horrifying details that suggested ritual abuse, and disparaged if their memories were not in tune with those of others who had given testimony. This was a horrible period, and as a professional in the field, I was embroiled in many such investigations where my role was to use my clinical training, deeply rooted in the scientific method, to tease out fact from fiction. The point of this is that with the expectation to tell a certain version of an event or story, many people will comply rather than risk the censure of those who have preconceived expectations as to what they will be hearing. Rather than disappoint (this is especially true of children), the person being interrogated (questioned) will most likely capitulate to expectation and leading questions - it happens all the time, and is one reason why police often get false confessions. Hence it is entirely unclear how many memories of terrible things happening at Residential Schools are veridical (square with objective reality), and how many are induced or extracted false memories. I am speaking here only of the situation at the Mohawk Institute since I am not familiar with the Residential Schools elsewhere in the Country.
Outright Lies, Conspiracy Theories and Those Who Believe Them: Memory problems aside, there will be a real credibility gap if people can be shown to be spreading lies. There are stories along the lines of urban myths that have taken root and ultimately spun out of control, such that there abound bizarre and outlandish direct accusations of mass murder and genocide spun by adults who should know better. Many to most will believe the "party line" which has been propounded by community activists and their White anarchist and communist "friends" (without any first hand knowledge or having spoken with folks who attended residential schools). However, many also accept uncritically the far more wildly crazy fringe allegations that have been shown to be entirely unfounded, but still many still believe this patently absurd stuff and get all fired up about it - refusing to for example acknowledge that the generator of these allegations was a self - serving defrocked White guy who was on a mission of self promotion.
If you believe ANY of what is to follow, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I can sell you cheap. The website is found here:
BRANTFORD, ON, CANADA – Mass graves of Mohawk children have been uncovered by ground-penetrating radar at the Mohawk Institute, a residential school for Mohawk operated by the Church of England and the Vatican before its closure in 1970.
According to Rev. Kevin Annett, Secretary of the International Tribunal for Crimes of Church and States (www.itccs.org), the Mohawk Institute was “set up by the Anglican Church of England in 1832 to imprison and destroy generations of Mohawk children. This very first Indian [First Nations] residential school in Canada lasted until 1970, and, like in most residential schools, more than half of the children imprisoned there never returned. Many of them are buried all around the school.”
Preliminary scanning by ground penetrating radar adjacent to the now closed main building Mohawk Institute has revealed that “between 15-20 feet of soil” was brought in and put over the mass graves just before the Mohawk Institute closed in 1970 in order to camouflage the mass graves of Mohawk Children and avoid prosecution for genocide and crimes against humanity under the Geneva Conventions, the International Criminal Court, and cooperating national courts.
Furthermore, Rev. Kevin Annett states that instruments of torture such as a rack for torturing the Mohawk children in ritual torture have been found at the now closed Mohawk Institute. Eyewitnesses from the Mohawk community have stated they witnessed priests in red robes torturing children in ritual torture.
Rev. Kevin Annett states that instruments of torture such as a rack for torturing the Mohawk children in ritual torture have been found at the now closed Mohawk Institute. Eyewitnesses from the Mohawk community have stated they witnessed priests in red robes torturing children in ritual torture.
Annett has since been seen for what he is, a hoaxer, who has used the Six Nations gullibility to meet his own warped ends. He was even given a Mohawk name as a mark of honour - said name having since been withdrawn. NO mass graves (or a torture rack) have ever been found, just anomalies on "ground penetrating radar" which are to be expected since the site has been occupied since 1785. The only bones found are what you would expect of a residential site - animal bone. However if you haven't reached the "you have got to be kidding" place yet, it all gets even more "off the wall", as seen in the following quote from the same source -
The discovery of the mass graves of Mohawk children, uncovered by ground-penetrating radar at the Mohawk Institute comes on the heels of videotaped evidence by eyewitness William Coombes, who in Oct. 1964 witnessed Elizabeth Windsor, as Head of State of Canada and Head of the Church of England, visit an aboriginal school in Kamloops, British Columbia, choose 10 young aboriginal children, made them kiss her feet, and allegedly took them from the school for a picnic at a lake.
The 10 aboriginal children were never seen again. Mr. Coombes, who was to give evidence at the International Tribunal for Crimes of Church and States (ITCCS.org) of Elizabeth Windsor’s child genocide, was murdered in Feb. 2011. Fortunately, Mr. Coombes’ testimony was videotaped before his death and is available for the Tribunal.
There is more:
Rev. Annett made these revelations in an exclusive Oct. 7, 2011 interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre. In the interview, Rev. Annett acknowledges the close parallels between the Oct. 1964 personal child genocide and possible ritual killings of 10 aboriginal children by Elizabeth Windsor, Head of State of Canada and Head of the Church of England, and the child genocides occurring during the same period at the Mohawk Institute.
These parallels suggest that Elizabeth Windsor, as Head of State and Head of the Church of England was personally aware of, ordered, and participated in this systematic program of genocide and ritual torture and killings at Church of England residential schools operated by the Church of England and the Vatican.
These parallels suggest that Elizabeth Windsor, as Head of State and Head of the Church of England was personally aware of, ordered, and participated in this systematic program of genocide and ritual torture and killings at Church of England residential schools operated by the Church of England and the Vatican.
The above bolding in italics is that of the writer on the above website.
Clearly, a disconcerting number of people at Six Nations have been taken in by this hoaxer and his entourage. It is at this point where I simply cannot relay any further such nonsense - Queen Elizabeth personally orchestrating acts of genocide in Canada??? Where is the evidence? Answer - THERE IS NONE. However people will believe this stuff, even now - what is the bet that I don't get a comment from one of these people - I do every time I write about the "mass graves" delusion. There is a decided tendency for a disconcerting number at Six Nations to ascribe to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theory advocates do not use the requisite skills to methodically assess the merits of a patently outlandish "theory", and as a result end up giving it credence without being willing or able to factor in logic, reason and evidence (or lack thereof).
Sobering Facts: Despite the persistent believers of nonsense, there is evidence out there that would refute each and every off the wall belief - should one take the time to explore each in turn. For example, elsewhere I have provided evidence from the Anglican Church registers of the Mohawk Chapel across the road from the Mohawk Institute showing the burials that did take place - and that these burials are properly recorded. If one wanted this to be all hush hush, would you really record the burial in an Anglican register with name, date of burial, the fact of attendance at the Mohawk Institute, and the Reserve of the deceased? It makes absolutely no sense.
Furthermore, half of the children who attended the Mohawk Institute did not die there! The lives of most (as many as in the White community) can be followed via the Canadian Census taken every 10 years, and available online to 1920 and shows most of the former students at home on the Reserve or elsewhere after they left school - I know so because I have done so. The fact that some students died at the Mohawk Institute is not in the least surprising since during the early years of its existence, and even into the 20th Century, childhood disease and death was common. Not unusual, of 7 children, my grandfather and one brother were the only two to live to adulthood.
Using the Word "Survivor": Children who attended the Mohawk Institute are NOT "survivors" they are not even "victims". They are school attendees. If you are in a plane crash and many died, you are a survivor. The word "survivor" is being grossly misused to describe children who attended a school where they graduated and moved on. Some did die of natural causes as would be the case at home (pneumonia for example can kill anywhere). The word "survivor", only recently, has begun to be applied widely including those who have suffered sexual abuse. They are victims, not survivors. The only time "survivor" would be appropriate in a context beyond a disaster such as a plane crash is for true genocide such as perpetrated by the Nazis at Buchewald and other concentration camps. If you became a "resident" or "inmate" there, the statistical fact is that most died, and if you did not die you experienced unspeakable horrors - that is very well documented. If you are among the few who did not die, you are a "survivor". In this context the term only applies to genocide. However by calling school attendees "survivors" it paints a grim picture, allows you to use the term "genocide" (inappropriately) and sets the stage for more monetary extraction from the Canadian taxpayer's wallet.
Clearly, a disconcerting number of people at Six Nations have been taken in by this hoaxer and his entourage. It is at this point where I simply cannot relay any further such nonsense - Queen Elizabeth personally orchestrating acts of genocide in Canada??? Where is the evidence? Answer - THERE IS NONE. However people will believe this stuff, even now - what is the bet that I don't get a comment from one of these people - I do every time I write about the "mass graves" delusion. There is a decided tendency for a disconcerting number at Six Nations to ascribe to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theory advocates do not use the requisite skills to methodically assess the merits of a patently outlandish "theory", and as a result end up giving it credence without being willing or able to factor in logic, reason and evidence (or lack thereof).
Sobering Facts: Despite the persistent believers of nonsense, there is evidence out there that would refute each and every off the wall belief - should one take the time to explore each in turn. For example, elsewhere I have provided evidence from the Anglican Church registers of the Mohawk Chapel across the road from the Mohawk Institute showing the burials that did take place - and that these burials are properly recorded. If one wanted this to be all hush hush, would you really record the burial in an Anglican register with name, date of burial, the fact of attendance at the Mohawk Institute, and the Reserve of the deceased? It makes absolutely no sense.
Furthermore, half of the children who attended the Mohawk Institute did not die there! The lives of most (as many as in the White community) can be followed via the Canadian Census taken every 10 years, and available online to 1920 and shows most of the former students at home on the Reserve or elsewhere after they left school - I know so because I have done so. The fact that some students died at the Mohawk Institute is not in the least surprising since during the early years of its existence, and even into the 20th Century, childhood disease and death was common. Not unusual, of 7 children, my grandfather and one brother were the only two to live to adulthood.
Using the Word "Survivor": Children who attended the Mohawk Institute are NOT "survivors" they are not even "victims". They are school attendees. If you are in a plane crash and many died, you are a survivor. The word "survivor" is being grossly misused to describe children who attended a school where they graduated and moved on. Some did die of natural causes as would be the case at home (pneumonia for example can kill anywhere). The word "survivor", only recently, has begun to be applied widely including those who have suffered sexual abuse. They are victims, not survivors. The only time "survivor" would be appropriate in a context beyond a disaster such as a plane crash is for true genocide such as perpetrated by the Nazis at Buchewald and other concentration camps. If you became a "resident" or "inmate" there, the statistical fact is that most died, and if you did not die you experienced unspeakable horrors - that is very well documented. If you are among the few who did not die, you are a "survivor". In this context the term only applies to genocide. However by calling school attendees "survivors" it paints a grim picture, allows you to use the term "genocide" (inappropriately) and sets the stage for more monetary extraction from the Canadian taxpayer's wallet.
Bob Rae Enters the Picture: Bob Rae is the former (New Democratic Party) Premier of Ontario and later interim leader of the Ontario Liberal Party. I doubt not that Mr. Rae is a very intelligent man. However, it appears that he has not done any homework and has suspended his critical thinking skills. However, as noted in the above newspaper article, Mr. Rae has agreed to become a new Honourary Patron of the "Save the Evidence" campaign. Basically, the Six Nations community was divided on what to do with the Mohawk Institute - since some came to believe that it was a symbol of Canadian Colonialism etc. etc., and others who did not want to see part of their history erased. Just as I would not want to see my school torn down, many at Six Nations felt the same way about the Mohawk Institute which, by the way, has served as the Woodland Indian Cultural - Educational Center since it closed as a school. It has a superb library and research facilities, and is associated with the museum next door which houses Six Nations artifacts and art. The concept is then that by preserving the structure, somehow the evidence as to what happened there will also be preserved. Whatever. So, the Hon. Mr. Rae, another White enabler of the tall tales faction.
The Truth Has Yet to be Told: The truth is very elusive here in that those who can best shed light on the matter have not stepped forward but are held back by the wish to not go against the grain of the Community beliefs. So the factual / balanced story will likely never be told since the elders I have spoken with over the years are rapidly passing from the scene. Soon there will just be the biased written stories (e.g., in a very large book published on the "Mush Hole") and nothing to balance them - and all will believe that Canada wanted to "take the Indian out of the Indian" at the Mohawk Institute. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have said, from the git go the Chiefs supported the Institute as a place on the Reserve where their people could receive an education that would allow them to adapt to an ever changing world. Their words remain - however who but myself is even aware that the Chiefs and hence the Clan Mothers had anything except a negative view of the school? So we have those who recall their grandmother telling them ................ sorry, that does not cut it. Memory is too fragile to take at face value without supporting evidence.
Even the skewed and grotesquely biased "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" (TRC) includes one bit of correct history which sheds a positive light on the Mohawk Institute. Here they report, However, in March 1970, the Six Nations Council announced that it had not been properly consulted over the closure of the school. The council argued that “the Institute could still serve a very useful purpose. Many of the successful members of Six Nations passed through the Institute.” This information can be obtained from the TRC on page 93 here. In other words, in 1970 the Mohawk Institute was viewed as a successful school by the Chiefs of the Six Nations! In but a few years later, it will be "inconvenient" to acknowledge the truth, and so the "party line" becomes entrenched and it is all about the negative aspects - since that will mean more money, and a greater ability to capitalize on "victim status".
Someone needs to spend some time digging into the records at the National Archives in Ottawa and the Archives of Ontario at York University, as I did many years ago, and learn the truth. But once again the theme of this blog rears its ugly head - a troubling number at Six Nations would rather stick to their beliefs than assess the facts and face the truth.
All people who attended the Mohawk Institute need to be heard, without fear of reprisals, and the relevant documents, and archived oral testimony from before the Institute closed in 1970, will together hopefully speak to offer a clear voice from the past.
Even the skewed and grotesquely biased "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" (TRC) includes one bit of correct history which sheds a positive light on the Mohawk Institute. Here they report, However, in March 1970, the Six Nations Council announced that it had not been properly consulted over the closure of the school. The council argued that “the Institute could still serve a very useful purpose. Many of the successful members of Six Nations passed through the Institute.” This information can be obtained from the TRC on page 93 here. In other words, in 1970 the Mohawk Institute was viewed as a successful school by the Chiefs of the Six Nations! In but a few years later, it will be "inconvenient" to acknowledge the truth, and so the "party line" becomes entrenched and it is all about the negative aspects - since that will mean more money, and a greater ability to capitalize on "victim status".
Someone needs to spend some time digging into the records at the National Archives in Ottawa and the Archives of Ontario at York University, as I did many years ago, and learn the truth. But once again the theme of this blog rears its ugly head - a troubling number at Six Nations would rather stick to their beliefs than assess the facts and face the truth.
All people who attended the Mohawk Institute need to be heard, without fear of reprisals, and the relevant documents, and archived oral testimony from before the Institute closed in 1970, will together hopefully speak to offer a clear voice from the past.
DY.
Thursday, 14 April 2016
Its Too Late for the Intervention of Men's Fire and HDI! Planning Information, and Current Photos Showing Construction Work Well Underway
So, where are our "land protectors"? Why has the land on the west side of McClung Road and at the corner of Highway 54 and McClung Road, all part or the Empire Avalon project, been allowed to proceed unchallenged? The development at Douglas Creek Estates (Kanonstaton) on the south side of Caledonia was a drop in the bucket by comparison.
What follows are "official views" of the planned site, then photographs of what the site looks like in mid April 2016.
1) Official Plans from the County of Haldimand:
It appears that the County does not want photos of its development maps published outside its own website. Hence in order to see the many facets of the development, including the specific location of the two main parcels, the timetable of development of each site and other very helpful info it will necessary to go directly to their website as seen here in order to view the 5 most key maps, and other features of this development. The one below I was able to copy, thanks to a friend who was able to save it as a jpg file.
2) Plans from the Developer:
The Avalon - Caledonia website can be found here. The pictures below are from this site.
From the Avalon website we see things as the supposedly will appear upon completion of the project.
3) Photographs of Site as of 14 April 2016:
The pictures you are about to see show the depredation that has swept across our beautiful landscape - and where are the activists - the environmentalists, the First Nations who claim the office of land protectors, the citizens of Haldimand who, while not arguing against gradual change, can only see this as an act of willful destruction of hundreds of acres of fine farm land to accommodate the "homes" that legions of strangers will soon occupy? Anyone at all concerned that the traffic now is intolerable - get ready - double the size of Caledonia and what will we have? Might as well be living along the QEW!
It is with a sad heart that I provide the pictures below as a snapshot of the "McClung development" as of early April 2016 - it will only get worse, much worse:
What follows are "official views" of the planned site, then photographs of what the site looks like in mid April 2016.
1) Official Plans from the County of Haldimand:
It appears that the County does not want photos of its development maps published outside its own website. Hence in order to see the many facets of the development, including the specific location of the two main parcels, the timetable of development of each site and other very helpful info it will necessary to go directly to their website as seen here in order to view the 5 most key maps, and other features of this development. The one below I was able to copy, thanks to a friend who was able to save it as a jpg file.
2) Plans from the Developer:
The Avalon - Caledonia website can be found here. The pictures below are from this site.
From the Avalon website we see things as the supposedly will appear upon completion of the project.
Looking south with McClung Road on the left heading toward River
Looking north with McClung Road running diagonally at the right
3) Photographs of Site as of 14 April 2016:
The pictures you are about to see show the depredation that has swept across our beautiful landscape - and where are the activists - the environmentalists, the First Nations who claim the office of land protectors, the citizens of Haldimand who, while not arguing against gradual change, can only see this as an act of willful destruction of hundreds of acres of fine farm land to accommodate the "homes" that legions of strangers will soon occupy? Anyone at all concerned that the traffic now is intolerable - get ready - double the size of Caledonia and what will we have? Might as well be living along the QEW!
It is with a sad heart that I provide the pictures below as a snapshot of the "McClung development" as of early April 2016 - it will only get worse, much worse:
The "slough" between Highway 54 and the Grand River - it is usually dry land
The reason for the "slough" can be found on the north side of Highway 54
West side of water intake facility along the north side of Highway 54
The middle part of the water intake facility with work underway
The eastern most part of the water intake facility under construction
The reason for all the devastation
Show home - there will be a lot more of these (3,500) unless a miracle occurs
Across the road from the show home - reality sets in
A little further south along McClung Road (west side)
More ravaging of the land further south along McClung west side
Close to junction of McClung and Highway 54 - all set to scrape it into a bald headed prairie
The above pictures present the situation on 14 April 2016. Get used to it Caledonia. No one is coming to our rescue. We have been sold out by our politicians at the Town, County, and Provincial levels. The emphasis is clearly progress winning out against quality of life - it was a clear choice and the former seems to have won hands down.
Rather a shame that if Six Nations was going to make a stand in relation to development and land claims that they chose the paltry Douglas Creek Estates which at most would have included one tenth what we will see at McClung. Meanwhile we have a monster in our midst, and it is going to forever destroy the rural quality of life that I guess we all took for granted. Now we have this abomination, along with the array of wind turbines that now dot the landscape over most of Haldimand. How did this all happen so fast. We, the residents and farmers of Haldimand, are the ones who suffer while Six Nations reaps in the ill gotten benefits of the "wind deals" by pretending that there are treaty rights to consider (all bogus). Also our politicians can contentedly sit back and say, "look what I have done, look at all this progress". Some of us have utter contempt for the complacency and the underhanded hypocrisy for the blatant acts of self agrandization. By the time many of the citizens realize how we have been duped, it will all be ancient history and those who profited will be able to sit back on their laurels and enjoy the fruits of their duplicity. Hope they sleep well at night knowing that the have participated in an act of wanton rape against the land our ancestors treated with respect all these years.
A very disgusted,
DY.
Men's Fire Cause Disruption to Water Intake System at McClung / Empire Development
Well, unsurprisingly, Men's Fire, which is a militant Six Nations group affiliated with the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC), has once again attempted to cause "trouble" at the Empire Homes Development at the corner of Highway 54 and McClung Road east of Caledonia.
It will be recalled that they have done all in their power to be a thorn in the side of the developers (e.g., questioning the archaeological assessment process; asserting that the development cannot proceed without consultation and accommodation with the HCCC). Their actions have resulted in proactive steps by the developer (not wanting a repeat of the Douglas Creek Estates fiasco in 2006 which permanently halted development at that site) by securing Court Injunctions - about which more later.
In the 13 April 2016 edition of Turtle Island News, includes and article entitled, Six Nations Men's Fire shuts down water hook-up to development we learn that, The Six Nations Men's Fire shit down construction Wednesday morning on a water hook-up site to the controverial McClung Road housing development in Caledonia. Workers were back Thursday morning but Six Nations Men's Fire spokesman [B.M.] said the men will be back. Just when was not indicated.
Furthermore, The move came just after a Cayuga judge upheld an injunction barring a number of people - including the Men's Fire - from stepping foot onto the housing development site after the Men's Fire tried to appeal the injunction, which was granted in October 2015.
Since the Court Injunction is quite specific, it is questionable as to how Men's Fire could pull this off without contravening the law (although that has not stopped them before), and being arrested and charged by the Ontario Provincial Police. Men's Fire (and the Haudenosaunee Development Institute - HDI) are specifically noted in the Injunction. However, according to the spokesperson for Men's Fire, the water hook-up site -which is located on Hwy, 54 at McClung Road - is not part of the land subject to the injunction. I know the site pretty well, and Men's Fire may be correct in the specifics, but the wording of the Injunction would need to be inspected clause by clause to be sure. It all depends on where the shut off occurred, and where the boundaries of the development site are aligned.
The article states that, The 3,500 home "Avalon" development aims to draw water from the Grand River, just across the road from the water hook-up site. At present the hook-up works appears to have caused a back up of water along the flats between the site on the north side of Highway 54 and the River (in other words between Highway 54 and the River), however as of yet there does not seem to be any significant environmental damage beyond the "diggings" associated with the water intake.
The bottom line is that Men's Fire, HDI, and HCCC are angry that while the developer has not taken any but the most perfunctory steps to communicate with them (or the Six Nations Elected Council - SNEC) for that matter. In the view of the developer, McClung Properties Ltd., have done all that is necessary by, sending notices to the elected council and the HCCC and that no further consultation is legally required of them.
Of course the crux of the matter has nothing to do with the impact on the environment or any such matter, only perceived "land rights". Surprisingly, Men's Fire or others have not mentioned that the lands involving the development are "unsurrendered" (as was the case with Douglas Creek Estates in 2006 which resulted in a rash of violence, vandalism, arson, confrontations and so on). It is a mystery to this author why they have not gone the "this land was never surrendered" route - perhaps by now they have read the primary documents and seen the signatures of the chiefs of the Six Nations in the 1840s and realized that it was properly surrendered, and legal patents issued - that seems like a remote possibility, unless the Lands Office has revealed the truth to the HCCC and other groups who seemed to think that you could just wish these documents away, and set the truth aside.
For the moment the focus is on the "tow path" lands which were part of the defunct Grand River Navigation Company lands - Six Nations being one of the primary shareholders (and left holding the bag when the company went bankrupt). The spokesperson for Men's Fire, says any attempt to draw water from within Six Nations' "tow path" lands - 66 feet on either side of the Grand River - infringes on Six Nations' land rights. They maintain that, The tow path lands were never legally surrendered by Six Nations and constitute one of 29 land grievances band council has filed against the Crown.
The development company seems entirely undeterred by any of this since they are pushing ahead at full tilt, and have held an open house at the site.
Men's Fire and others don't seem to have a plan at present to put some teeth in their warnings about dire consequences if the developer does not consult with the various Six Nations factions. So, we will wait and see what is the next event in the saga - or whether it will simply fizzle out when faced against a site relatively remote from the Reserve, and little to no legal legs to stand on, and with a Court Injunction that this time may be enforced.
DY.
It will be recalled that they have done all in their power to be a thorn in the side of the developers (e.g., questioning the archaeological assessment process; asserting that the development cannot proceed without consultation and accommodation with the HCCC). Their actions have resulted in proactive steps by the developer (not wanting a repeat of the Douglas Creek Estates fiasco in 2006 which permanently halted development at that site) by securing Court Injunctions - about which more later.
In the 13 April 2016 edition of Turtle Island News, includes and article entitled, Six Nations Men's Fire shuts down water hook-up to development we learn that, The Six Nations Men's Fire shit down construction Wednesday morning on a water hook-up site to the controverial McClung Road housing development in Caledonia. Workers were back Thursday morning but Six Nations Men's Fire spokesman [B.M.] said the men will be back. Just when was not indicated.
Furthermore, The move came just after a Cayuga judge upheld an injunction barring a number of people - including the Men's Fire - from stepping foot onto the housing development site after the Men's Fire tried to appeal the injunction, which was granted in October 2015.
Since the Court Injunction is quite specific, it is questionable as to how Men's Fire could pull this off without contravening the law (although that has not stopped them before), and being arrested and charged by the Ontario Provincial Police. Men's Fire (and the Haudenosaunee Development Institute - HDI) are specifically noted in the Injunction. However, according to the spokesperson for Men's Fire, the water hook-up site -which is located on Hwy, 54 at McClung Road - is not part of the land subject to the injunction. I know the site pretty well, and Men's Fire may be correct in the specifics, but the wording of the Injunction would need to be inspected clause by clause to be sure. It all depends on where the shut off occurred, and where the boundaries of the development site are aligned.
The article states that, The 3,500 home "Avalon" development aims to draw water from the Grand River, just across the road from the water hook-up site. At present the hook-up works appears to have caused a back up of water along the flats between the site on the north side of Highway 54 and the River (in other words between Highway 54 and the River), however as of yet there does not seem to be any significant environmental damage beyond the "diggings" associated with the water intake.
The bottom line is that Men's Fire, HDI, and HCCC are angry that while the developer has not taken any but the most perfunctory steps to communicate with them (or the Six Nations Elected Council - SNEC) for that matter. In the view of the developer, McClung Properties Ltd., have done all that is necessary by, sending notices to the elected council and the HCCC and that no further consultation is legally required of them.
Of course the crux of the matter has nothing to do with the impact on the environment or any such matter, only perceived "land rights". Surprisingly, Men's Fire or others have not mentioned that the lands involving the development are "unsurrendered" (as was the case with Douglas Creek Estates in 2006 which resulted in a rash of violence, vandalism, arson, confrontations and so on). It is a mystery to this author why they have not gone the "this land was never surrendered" route - perhaps by now they have read the primary documents and seen the signatures of the chiefs of the Six Nations in the 1840s and realized that it was properly surrendered, and legal patents issued - that seems like a remote possibility, unless the Lands Office has revealed the truth to the HCCC and other groups who seemed to think that you could just wish these documents away, and set the truth aside.
For the moment the focus is on the "tow path" lands which were part of the defunct Grand River Navigation Company lands - Six Nations being one of the primary shareholders (and left holding the bag when the company went bankrupt). The spokesperson for Men's Fire, says any attempt to draw water from within Six Nations' "tow path" lands - 66 feet on either side of the Grand River - infringes on Six Nations' land rights. They maintain that, The tow path lands were never legally surrendered by Six Nations and constitute one of 29 land grievances band council has filed against the Crown.
The development company seems entirely undeterred by any of this since they are pushing ahead at full tilt, and have held an open house at the site.
Men's Fire and others don't seem to have a plan at present to put some teeth in their warnings about dire consequences if the developer does not consult with the various Six Nations factions. So, we will wait and see what is the next event in the saga - or whether it will simply fizzle out when faced against a site relatively remote from the Reserve, and little to no legal legs to stand on, and with a Court Injunction that this time may be enforced.
DY.
Thursday, 31 March 2016
"Echoes of 2006 and 2007 are being heard again" - Very real threats by Six Nations factions to strike "when the time is right"
An article entitled, McClung development mobilizes Six Nations, Two Row Times (TRT), 30 March 2016, p.8, warns that Six Nations factions (frequently at odds with one another) are uniting around the banner of their objection against the McClung development east of Caledonia.
Well, what has taken them so long? There have been rumblings of discontent since the development was announced, but only sporadic action (most behind the scenes). Perhaps this lulled many into a false sense of security that anything like 2006 would ever happen again.
Many Haldimand residents also have no desire to see the development, already underway, which would result in a new "city beside a city", in effect "New Caledonia", a community of about 10,000 new residents (thus doubling the present size of Caledonia) now forging ahead east along Highway 54 and up McClung Road. For some time people such as myself (in this blog) have provided alerts and warnings that the pot is simmering, and has the potential of boiling over.
The first move came from Men's Fire (an arm of the Six Nations Hereditary Council) confronting the developers, which resulted in a restraining order and approval to the developers to go ahead. Various groups at Six Nations are now saying that the judge erred, and did not take into consideration Six Nations land claims and "treaty rights". As I have noted in a number of blog postings before, there is no factual basis for any land claim (the land having been surrendered in 1841, and all the t's crossed and i's dotted by 1850 with Lord Elgin's Report), and Six Nations has no "treaty rights" - the "Nanfan Treaty" of 1701 is bogus; and the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 is not a treaty. Never the less this has never deterred Six Nations from pressing claims of one sort or another (e.g., in South Cayuga) and winning concessions (to avoid the unpleasantness of blockades and riots) in the form of for example monies from wind and solar development.
The land in question here is part of a Land Claim submitted in 1987, with unsubstantiated ownership claims (even with the clarity seen in the Ontario Land Records Registry Office documents; and the "Indian Affairs Papers, RG10 Series" at the National Archives), and "demands" for meaningful consultation, engagement and accommodation that must take place.
What is new in all this is the concatenation of factions now involved in the issue. It is no surprise to see Men's Fire, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and well as their very radical and controversial enforcement arm the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) come together to contest the development. What is surprising is that their "arch enemy", the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) are joining with (although not necessarily meeting with) the other Six Nations parties to confront this development head on. The TRT article describes the attempts by each of these parties to basically state (warn) the developers (and Haldimand County) that there needs to be meetings, and how each attempt has been rebuffed. So not only are representatives of the HCCC / HDI giving advice to potential buyers saying, exercise caution before investing in this particular development; but the position of SNEC is that they will be, ready to intervene to protect its interests and rights when the time is right. With the latter statement one might picture a coiled snake, poised and ready to strike and inject its poisonous venom against the target group.
It is interesting to note that the article states that, Although divided on many issues, this is one matter that galvanizes all of Six Nations people.
Perhaps the developer considers that the judgement of the Ontario Superior Court is sufficient - which under "normal" circumstances would be true. If that is the case, they don't understand the dynamics in this neck of the woods - or what history should teach us.
In the past I have blogged how Six Nations sees the Empire / McClung Road Development as little more than Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) north. Are people in Haldimand and the developer so naive as to believe that the same situation will not emerge ten years after the April 2006 take over of DCE, which to this day is still under the control of the Six Nations HCCC and HDI. Forty acres of tic infested wasteland (no top soil), surrounded by a fence, and guarded at the entrance to Surrey Street. No level of government has been willing to act and arrest the trespassers and return the land to its rightful owners (now the Province of Ontario). That describes DCE to April 2016. By now there should have been a few hundred new homes, and a thriving community. That never happened. What we got was chaos, anarchy, rule by force, and the abandonment of the people of Caledonia to thugs by all levels of government, and particularly the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) who established "no go" zones and citizens were left to their own devices after the violent take over ("reclamation") with the road blockades, assaults, infrastructure meltdowns, arson destruction (burning of the Stirling Street Bridge which has not been rebuilt to this day) - and billions of taxpayer dollars spent keeping a lid on things over the last 10 years. Those who do not live here can be forgiven for forgetting - but those of us on the front line cannot forget the violence and acrimony and lack of any support by any law enforcement agency. So perhaps we can be forgiven for being a little "twitchy" about the matter - been there, seen that, done that - the refrain being echoed last time was "never again" - so things could get ugly.
The article ends with a summary to the effect that, According to Six Nations people across the board, the $80 million proposed subdivision sits on unceded Six Nations land. This was the same argument that triggered the reclamation of Douglas Creek Estates located on the other side of the river. There is more than a veiled warning in all this rhetoric.
While on a personal level I vehemently oppose the development, my reasons are different. As noted, I am aware that the land was properly surrendered in 1841 and ratified at various points until 1850 so disagree with the rationale being put forward by Six Nations. However I don't want to see this development come to fruition because it will have a devastating effect on the environment and cultural aspect of Caledonia.
If things progress further, as I have said before, it is not hard to prove (it has already been done by the Superior Court of Ontario in Brantford, 2009) that the land claim is without foundation; or that so called "treaty rights" do not exist for the Six Nations refugees who came to Ontario in 1785 - nor their descendants (including myself). What is also important to the present writer, who only seeks the truth based on the preponderance of the evidence, Six Nations is not "playing fair", and therein lies the rub.
As noted in a previous post, in the 1980s agents of the Band Council arrived at the Indian Office in Brantford and systematically looted records that belonged to the Government of Canada. These documents were taken to the Woodland Indian Cultural Educational Center in Brantford, where they were microfilmed. I personally saw these documents in the library there and know that they, and the microfilm, were transported to the Land Office where I presume they remain to this day. What is particularly upsetting is that all of these records were in the process of being sent to the National Archives in Ottawa, but ultimately only part of the collection made it there because of a petition by D.H., a resident of Caledonia who wanted the records to remain locally so they could be studied by locals interested in family history. Alas, before she passed away D.H. came to my house and tearfully said that this was the worst decision she had ever made in her life - although little could she have anticipated what would transpire and is in no way to blame for a later act of theft.
The result is that the Land Inspection Returns (1844) for Oneida Township (where DCE is located) are at the National Archives of Canada and anyone can access the records. However the same collection, the Land Inspection Returns for Seneca Township (where the Empire / McClung Development is taking place) are hidden away and not open for inspection. Fairness would dictate that all parties have access to the same documents but that is simply not the case. The Six Nations have the upper hand here, although I don't imagine that anyone but the land researchers there and myself know the whole truth. However what seems to be reasonable and fair is that, in my opinion, any level of government refuse to negotiate on any land matter until the stolen records are turned over to the rightful owners, the Government and people of Canada. Then we can talk.
Before people get too worked up about fall out and consequences, they may wish to read some of my previous blogs where I have given a very clear rationale as to why a Caledonia 2006 is unlikely to morph into McClung 2016 - with geography playing the major role in the dynamic. Never the less, the threats will escalate, and there will without a doubt be forays and skirmishes which might include blockades (common in the past) to show the developers and Haldimand County that they are serious about claiming the land (or at the very least being included in discussions).
So get your collective heads out of your collective ............. and realize that the problem is not going away. I do hope that the developer, Haldimand County, and the OPP are all prepared for any and all contingencies - although again, I don't want to see the development proceed any more than the many factions at Six Nations do. I doubt that I will be standing against Six Nations, and may well be among them when the crunch comes - common cause and all that. Too early to know for sure.
DY.
Well, what has taken them so long? There have been rumblings of discontent since the development was announced, but only sporadic action (most behind the scenes). Perhaps this lulled many into a false sense of security that anything like 2006 would ever happen again.
Many Haldimand residents also have no desire to see the development, already underway, which would result in a new "city beside a city", in effect "New Caledonia", a community of about 10,000 new residents (thus doubling the present size of Caledonia) now forging ahead east along Highway 54 and up McClung Road. For some time people such as myself (in this blog) have provided alerts and warnings that the pot is simmering, and has the potential of boiling over.
The first move came from Men's Fire (an arm of the Six Nations Hereditary Council) confronting the developers, which resulted in a restraining order and approval to the developers to go ahead. Various groups at Six Nations are now saying that the judge erred, and did not take into consideration Six Nations land claims and "treaty rights". As I have noted in a number of blog postings before, there is no factual basis for any land claim (the land having been surrendered in 1841, and all the t's crossed and i's dotted by 1850 with Lord Elgin's Report), and Six Nations has no "treaty rights" - the "Nanfan Treaty" of 1701 is bogus; and the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 is not a treaty. Never the less this has never deterred Six Nations from pressing claims of one sort or another (e.g., in South Cayuga) and winning concessions (to avoid the unpleasantness of blockades and riots) in the form of for example monies from wind and solar development.
The land in question here is part of a Land Claim submitted in 1987, with unsubstantiated ownership claims (even with the clarity seen in the Ontario Land Records Registry Office documents; and the "Indian Affairs Papers, RG10 Series" at the National Archives), and "demands" for meaningful consultation, engagement and accommodation that must take place.
What is new in all this is the concatenation of factions now involved in the issue. It is no surprise to see Men's Fire, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) and well as their very radical and controversial enforcement arm the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) come together to contest the development. What is surprising is that their "arch enemy", the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) are joining with (although not necessarily meeting with) the other Six Nations parties to confront this development head on. The TRT article describes the attempts by each of these parties to basically state (warn) the developers (and Haldimand County) that there needs to be meetings, and how each attempt has been rebuffed. So not only are representatives of the HCCC / HDI giving advice to potential buyers saying, exercise caution before investing in this particular development; but the position of SNEC is that they will be, ready to intervene to protect its interests and rights when the time is right. With the latter statement one might picture a coiled snake, poised and ready to strike and inject its poisonous venom against the target group.
It is interesting to note that the article states that, Although divided on many issues, this is one matter that galvanizes all of Six Nations people.
Perhaps the developer considers that the judgement of the Ontario Superior Court is sufficient - which under "normal" circumstances would be true. If that is the case, they don't understand the dynamics in this neck of the woods - or what history should teach us.
In the past I have blogged how Six Nations sees the Empire / McClung Road Development as little more than Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) north. Are people in Haldimand and the developer so naive as to believe that the same situation will not emerge ten years after the April 2006 take over of DCE, which to this day is still under the control of the Six Nations HCCC and HDI. Forty acres of tic infested wasteland (no top soil), surrounded by a fence, and guarded at the entrance to Surrey Street. No level of government has been willing to act and arrest the trespassers and return the land to its rightful owners (now the Province of Ontario). That describes DCE to April 2016. By now there should have been a few hundred new homes, and a thriving community. That never happened. What we got was chaos, anarchy, rule by force, and the abandonment of the people of Caledonia to thugs by all levels of government, and particularly the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) who established "no go" zones and citizens were left to their own devices after the violent take over ("reclamation") with the road blockades, assaults, infrastructure meltdowns, arson destruction (burning of the Stirling Street Bridge which has not been rebuilt to this day) - and billions of taxpayer dollars spent keeping a lid on things over the last 10 years. Those who do not live here can be forgiven for forgetting - but those of us on the front line cannot forget the violence and acrimony and lack of any support by any law enforcement agency. So perhaps we can be forgiven for being a little "twitchy" about the matter - been there, seen that, done that - the refrain being echoed last time was "never again" - so things could get ugly.
The article ends with a summary to the effect that, According to Six Nations people across the board, the $80 million proposed subdivision sits on unceded Six Nations land. This was the same argument that triggered the reclamation of Douglas Creek Estates located on the other side of the river. There is more than a veiled warning in all this rhetoric.
While on a personal level I vehemently oppose the development, my reasons are different. As noted, I am aware that the land was properly surrendered in 1841 and ratified at various points until 1850 so disagree with the rationale being put forward by Six Nations. However I don't want to see this development come to fruition because it will have a devastating effect on the environment and cultural aspect of Caledonia.
If things progress further, as I have said before, it is not hard to prove (it has already been done by the Superior Court of Ontario in Brantford, 2009) that the land claim is without foundation; or that so called "treaty rights" do not exist for the Six Nations refugees who came to Ontario in 1785 - nor their descendants (including myself). What is also important to the present writer, who only seeks the truth based on the preponderance of the evidence, Six Nations is not "playing fair", and therein lies the rub.
As noted in a previous post, in the 1980s agents of the Band Council arrived at the Indian Office in Brantford and systematically looted records that belonged to the Government of Canada. These documents were taken to the Woodland Indian Cultural Educational Center in Brantford, where they were microfilmed. I personally saw these documents in the library there and know that they, and the microfilm, were transported to the Land Office where I presume they remain to this day. What is particularly upsetting is that all of these records were in the process of being sent to the National Archives in Ottawa, but ultimately only part of the collection made it there because of a petition by D.H., a resident of Caledonia who wanted the records to remain locally so they could be studied by locals interested in family history. Alas, before she passed away D.H. came to my house and tearfully said that this was the worst decision she had ever made in her life - although little could she have anticipated what would transpire and is in no way to blame for a later act of theft.
The result is that the Land Inspection Returns (1844) for Oneida Township (where DCE is located) are at the National Archives of Canada and anyone can access the records. However the same collection, the Land Inspection Returns for Seneca Township (where the Empire / McClung Development is taking place) are hidden away and not open for inspection. Fairness would dictate that all parties have access to the same documents but that is simply not the case. The Six Nations have the upper hand here, although I don't imagine that anyone but the land researchers there and myself know the whole truth. However what seems to be reasonable and fair is that, in my opinion, any level of government refuse to negotiate on any land matter until the stolen records are turned over to the rightful owners, the Government and people of Canada. Then we can talk.
Before people get too worked up about fall out and consequences, they may wish to read some of my previous blogs where I have given a very clear rationale as to why a Caledonia 2006 is unlikely to morph into McClung 2016 - with geography playing the major role in the dynamic. Never the less, the threats will escalate, and there will without a doubt be forays and skirmishes which might include blockades (common in the past) to show the developers and Haldimand County that they are serious about claiming the land (or at the very least being included in discussions).
So get your collective heads out of your collective ............. and realize that the problem is not going away. I do hope that the developer, Haldimand County, and the OPP are all prepared for any and all contingencies - although again, I don't want to see the development proceed any more than the many factions at Six Nations do. I doubt that I will be standing against Six Nations, and may well be among them when the crunch comes - common cause and all that. Too early to know for sure.
DY.
Sunday, 20 March 2016
More Paranoid Conspiracy Theories - This Time About White Settlers Committing Genocide and Burying the Bodies in Mass Graves or Hiding them in Museum Basements
Although upset by a completely off the wall if not bizarre statement in an Editorial in Two Row Times (16 March 2016, page 6) entitled, Our bones threaten them, I agree with most of what the author says.
The Editor makes the point that there are thousands of Native American skeletons housed in boxes in museums across North America. Of this there can be no denying. I also agree that it is (at least in today's view) disrespectful to treat human remains in this way. To add my opinion, the remains should be studied (and DNA tests be done to learn the stories about health and ancestry which the bones can tell us), ultimately they must be returned to the lineal descendants. If this is not possible, then they should be buried with due ceremony in the location in which they were found.
The editor cites the work of Samuel J. Redman who estimates that there are about half a million Native American remains held in various repositories in the USA and Canada, and an equal number in museums in Europe. I believe that this figure is on the high side, but there is no argument from me that there are large numbers, widely distributed throughout the Americas and to some degree Europe. The Editor then makes a rather odd (and unsupported) statement as follows: This figure does not account for indigenous remains stolen by Canadian scientists and officials. It is unclear what the author means here, although clearly the word "stolen" is emotionally loaded. Does this mean that there is some secret repository where aboriginal remains are being studied for some unspecified purpose. In the natural course of events, scientists publish their findings, that is how they justify their existence.
It is not long ago that pot hunting, which included grave robbing and keeping skulls for "trophies", was common in this area (Niagara Peninsula). It upset me to no end to know that these moral imbeciles were desecrating ancestors graves and there was nothing I could do about it. The police had no authority on private land; and frankly few Natives at the time (e.g., 1970s and 80s) seemed to care. Some local residents other than myself were of course outraged but powerless to do anything. Many quietly "did the right thing" when remains were discovered inadvertently (e.g., bones being unearthed during basement renovations, the bones being re interred as close to the home, the original burial site, as was practical. Still the grave robbers continued unrestrained by morality or law. The laws (e.g., Cemeteries Act) and views of what is acceptable have fortunately changed, and now there can be very stiff fines (e.g., $10,000) from someone who knowingly disturbs a human grave. The only people permitted to dig in a known site of cultural significance are licensed archaeologists. If the site is determined to have any First Nations link, then the local aboriginal group(s) will be contacted and invited to help oversee the work. Hence these days the representatives of the Six Nations Elected Council and the Mississauga of New Credit will be paid overseers. Although untrained, the Haudenosaunee Development Institute often demand to be present and paid - but that is another story, and one about which I have blogged about in the past.
The Editor goes on to discuss a rather obnoxious "papal bull" which justified taking property belonging to "pagans" and the like. Full agreement here, the papacy justified the oppression and slavery of indigenous people via such Vatican nonsense, but it had absolutely no influence on the Protestant British - who settled what is today Ontario and who were early on antagonistic towards any Catholic pronouncements. However the Editor states, Anyway, this stupid papal order must also have included the theft of bones because it continues to this day. That does not make sense, and seems tinged with a bit of paranoia. I know many of these (former) pot hunters / grave robbers and their motives were strictly personal (similar to collectors of baseball cards), but often the more principled of the group included a desire to learn more about the past of this country, and some donated their "finds" to local museums and the like since it seemed the proper thing to do (to their way of thinking).
The depth of "suspiciousness" and conspiracy theory thinking escalates with claims that,
Although the Doctrine of Discovery was upheld in Johnson v. McIntosh which was a 1841 Supreme Court case, there must have been other, deeper reasons why our settler friends have been stealing our bones like grave robbing thugs. Maybe it is because "Indian bones" are evidence in a colossal crime scene. If Henry F. Dobyns was correct, upwards of 90 million innocent humans were killed here in the least talked about genocide in human history.
I will pause here to explain that Dobyns was an anthropologist and demographer who is known as a "high counter". In other words the scientific community considers his numbers to be on the high side when in fact we do not know what the early Native population of the Americas was in fact. We only have very skewed estimates. There are three points I wish to make in relation to the Editor's take on things:
1) No matter how you slice things, Dobyns and every other author acknowledges that diseases inadvertently introduced by Europeans killed off the vast majority of how ever many people were here say 1500 AD.
2) In North America there were few documented cases of genocidal action by Europeans, and those involved at most a few hundred people. There were brutal wars such as King Phillip's War in 17th century New England. However, it needs to be noted that the Europeans were guided by and accompanied by Native allies who exacted their revenge against Native enemies. The English did not act alone. Furthermore, the aboriginals were doing precisely the same thing against the settler groups where whole communities were wiped off the face of the earth in barbaric no quarter given acts of genocide. There may be some justification for retaliation, but the scale at times on both sides was high - but nothing like what is suggested by the Editor above.
3) Closer to home, the only documented acts of genocide (things of this nature could not be "hidden" once European onlookers were present) were perpetrated by the Five (now Six) Nations! In what can be considered one of the most egregious and despicable acts of true genocide the perpetrators were the Five (now Six) Nations (which no doubt included my own direct ancestors). The Five Nations of what is today Upstate New York embarked upon wars of complete annihilation of their neighbours and enemies further afield, in what is often termed the "Beaver Wars". The process began in 1638 when the Seneca destroyed their neighbours to the west, the Wenro, whose survivors fled to the Huron / Wyandot near Georgian Bay. The primary conflicts took place between 1642 and 1657. During this time the Confederacy committed acts of genocide on the Huron Confederacy (leaving only a small group at Ancien Lorette near Quebec City, a cluster on Isle d'Orleans, and those who were able to flee to Christian Island then to the Upper Peninsula in Michigan and beyond). The Wyandot Confederacy was completely demolished, and the 20,000 member Nation reduced to a handful. These were the "lucky" ones since the Attiwandaronk (Neurtal), Petun, Eries and others were largely murdered en mass, leaving a few souls for purposes of torture and cannibalism. The evidence was recorded by Jesuit priests who were witnesses, and cross validated by archaeologists who found the remains of mass graves and pieces of bone removed during the torture ritual. There were NO White people living in the area who could be blamed for these acts by later generations of apologists. Our Haudenosaunee ancestors were the perpetrators and the truth demands that we acknowledge the facts. It rather puts the recent charges against Canada of "cultural genocide" in perspective.
Later the Five Nations would turn their attention south and administer the same treatment against the Susquehannoc. For many years Southern Ontario and the Great Lakes region were devoid of any human beings because if not killed (or at times assimilated), the peoples of the area fled west to avoid the inevitable. So when one wants to discuss "genocide" lets look at the home front first. There is no doubt that the Five Nations committed the most hideous and vile acts of genocide, which would fortunately never be repeated in North America by any group at any time.
The Editor then asks the question, Does Canada and the U.S. have something to hide? The answer is a resounding NO, but apparently the Six Nations do since no one seems to call a spade a spade. The Beaver Wars involved true genocide committed by the Five (now Six) Nations - we need to acknowledge this and quit blaming Canada for the ill defined term "cultural genocide". Lets look at real genocide first, and who is the guilt party.
So before Canada and the U.S.A. are blamed for some conspiracy of silence to ensure that people will keep mum on the genocide of countless millions of Native Americans we need to look at the facts - not myth and belief. When we do that it is the Six Nations who are to be seen in a very unfavourable light - as the only group to have committed true, verifiable, acts of wanton genocide. Always look in the mirror before looking beyond.
At the end of it though, I absolutely agree with the Editor that the bones of the ancestors need to rest in peace, and eventually be returned to the soil from which they came. A point well taken, and kudos to the Editor for bringing this matter to the fore.
DeYo.
The Editor makes the point that there are thousands of Native American skeletons housed in boxes in museums across North America. Of this there can be no denying. I also agree that it is (at least in today's view) disrespectful to treat human remains in this way. To add my opinion, the remains should be studied (and DNA tests be done to learn the stories about health and ancestry which the bones can tell us), ultimately they must be returned to the lineal descendants. If this is not possible, then they should be buried with due ceremony in the location in which they were found.
The editor cites the work of Samuel J. Redman who estimates that there are about half a million Native American remains held in various repositories in the USA and Canada, and an equal number in museums in Europe. I believe that this figure is on the high side, but there is no argument from me that there are large numbers, widely distributed throughout the Americas and to some degree Europe. The Editor then makes a rather odd (and unsupported) statement as follows: This figure does not account for indigenous remains stolen by Canadian scientists and officials. It is unclear what the author means here, although clearly the word "stolen" is emotionally loaded. Does this mean that there is some secret repository where aboriginal remains are being studied for some unspecified purpose. In the natural course of events, scientists publish their findings, that is how they justify their existence.
It is not long ago that pot hunting, which included grave robbing and keeping skulls for "trophies", was common in this area (Niagara Peninsula). It upset me to no end to know that these moral imbeciles were desecrating ancestors graves and there was nothing I could do about it. The police had no authority on private land; and frankly few Natives at the time (e.g., 1970s and 80s) seemed to care. Some local residents other than myself were of course outraged but powerless to do anything. Many quietly "did the right thing" when remains were discovered inadvertently (e.g., bones being unearthed during basement renovations, the bones being re interred as close to the home, the original burial site, as was practical. Still the grave robbers continued unrestrained by morality or law. The laws (e.g., Cemeteries Act) and views of what is acceptable have fortunately changed, and now there can be very stiff fines (e.g., $10,000) from someone who knowingly disturbs a human grave. The only people permitted to dig in a known site of cultural significance are licensed archaeologists. If the site is determined to have any First Nations link, then the local aboriginal group(s) will be contacted and invited to help oversee the work. Hence these days the representatives of the Six Nations Elected Council and the Mississauga of New Credit will be paid overseers. Although untrained, the Haudenosaunee Development Institute often demand to be present and paid - but that is another story, and one about which I have blogged about in the past.
The Editor goes on to discuss a rather obnoxious "papal bull" which justified taking property belonging to "pagans" and the like. Full agreement here, the papacy justified the oppression and slavery of indigenous people via such Vatican nonsense, but it had absolutely no influence on the Protestant British - who settled what is today Ontario and who were early on antagonistic towards any Catholic pronouncements. However the Editor states, Anyway, this stupid papal order must also have included the theft of bones because it continues to this day. That does not make sense, and seems tinged with a bit of paranoia. I know many of these (former) pot hunters / grave robbers and their motives were strictly personal (similar to collectors of baseball cards), but often the more principled of the group included a desire to learn more about the past of this country, and some donated their "finds" to local museums and the like since it seemed the proper thing to do (to their way of thinking).
The depth of "suspiciousness" and conspiracy theory thinking escalates with claims that,
Although the Doctrine of Discovery was upheld in Johnson v. McIntosh which was a 1841 Supreme Court case, there must have been other, deeper reasons why our settler friends have been stealing our bones like grave robbing thugs. Maybe it is because "Indian bones" are evidence in a colossal crime scene. If Henry F. Dobyns was correct, upwards of 90 million innocent humans were killed here in the least talked about genocide in human history.
I will pause here to explain that Dobyns was an anthropologist and demographer who is known as a "high counter". In other words the scientific community considers his numbers to be on the high side when in fact we do not know what the early Native population of the Americas was in fact. We only have very skewed estimates. There are three points I wish to make in relation to the Editor's take on things:
1) No matter how you slice things, Dobyns and every other author acknowledges that diseases inadvertently introduced by Europeans killed off the vast majority of how ever many people were here say 1500 AD.
2) In North America there were few documented cases of genocidal action by Europeans, and those involved at most a few hundred people. There were brutal wars such as King Phillip's War in 17th century New England. However, it needs to be noted that the Europeans were guided by and accompanied by Native allies who exacted their revenge against Native enemies. The English did not act alone. Furthermore, the aboriginals were doing precisely the same thing against the settler groups where whole communities were wiped off the face of the earth in barbaric no quarter given acts of genocide. There may be some justification for retaliation, but the scale at times on both sides was high - but nothing like what is suggested by the Editor above.
3) Closer to home, the only documented acts of genocide (things of this nature could not be "hidden" once European onlookers were present) were perpetrated by the Five (now Six) Nations! In what can be considered one of the most egregious and despicable acts of true genocide the perpetrators were the Five (now Six) Nations (which no doubt included my own direct ancestors). The Five Nations of what is today Upstate New York embarked upon wars of complete annihilation of their neighbours and enemies further afield, in what is often termed the "Beaver Wars". The process began in 1638 when the Seneca destroyed their neighbours to the west, the Wenro, whose survivors fled to the Huron / Wyandot near Georgian Bay. The primary conflicts took place between 1642 and 1657. During this time the Confederacy committed acts of genocide on the Huron Confederacy (leaving only a small group at Ancien Lorette near Quebec City, a cluster on Isle d'Orleans, and those who were able to flee to Christian Island then to the Upper Peninsula in Michigan and beyond). The Wyandot Confederacy was completely demolished, and the 20,000 member Nation reduced to a handful. These were the "lucky" ones since the Attiwandaronk (Neurtal), Petun, Eries and others were largely murdered en mass, leaving a few souls for purposes of torture and cannibalism. The evidence was recorded by Jesuit priests who were witnesses, and cross validated by archaeologists who found the remains of mass graves and pieces of bone removed during the torture ritual. There were NO White people living in the area who could be blamed for these acts by later generations of apologists. Our Haudenosaunee ancestors were the perpetrators and the truth demands that we acknowledge the facts. It rather puts the recent charges against Canada of "cultural genocide" in perspective.
Later the Five Nations would turn their attention south and administer the same treatment against the Susquehannoc. For many years Southern Ontario and the Great Lakes region were devoid of any human beings because if not killed (or at times assimilated), the peoples of the area fled west to avoid the inevitable. So when one wants to discuss "genocide" lets look at the home front first. There is no doubt that the Five Nations committed the most hideous and vile acts of genocide, which would fortunately never be repeated in North America by any group at any time.
The Editor then asks the question, Does Canada and the U.S. have something to hide? The answer is a resounding NO, but apparently the Six Nations do since no one seems to call a spade a spade. The Beaver Wars involved true genocide committed by the Five (now Six) Nations - we need to acknowledge this and quit blaming Canada for the ill defined term "cultural genocide". Lets look at real genocide first, and who is the guilt party.
So before Canada and the U.S.A. are blamed for some conspiracy of silence to ensure that people will keep mum on the genocide of countless millions of Native Americans we need to look at the facts - not myth and belief. When we do that it is the Six Nations who are to be seen in a very unfavourable light - as the only group to have committed true, verifiable, acts of wanton genocide. Always look in the mirror before looking beyond.
At the end of it though, I absolutely agree with the Editor that the bones of the ancestors need to rest in peace, and eventually be returned to the soil from which they came. A point well taken, and kudos to the Editor for bringing this matter to the fore.
DeYo.
Saturday, 19 March 2016
Six Nations Land Rights Under Threat - What is All the Fuss Concerning Algonquins in Eastern Ontario?
Of late there have been a few articles on the above captioned subject which concerns conflict between the Iroquois Caucus (IC) and the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO). The most recent article is found in "Two Row Times", March 16th 2016, page 18. The present author has not blogged about the matter since it seems relatively trivial. Now new information has surfaced which puts a whole new spin on the matter.
In essence, the AOO are seeking to establish a land base for nine of the 10 nations they represent. The petition relates to 117,000 acres of supposed "treaty land". The problem (or at least one of them) is that, a large portion of these lands are also part of the traditional land base of Iroquois Nations. Unfortunately it is unclear which Iroquois groups are potentially impacted here - Akwesasne, Tyendinaga, Six Nations or other. Since a Six Nations representative has stated that there are overlapping claims in Hogsbury (near Ottawa) and Innisville (near Barrie), it begs the question as to "by what right do Six Nations have a claim so far removed from the Grand River" - although this author is aware of a rather unique claim for lands near Hawkesbury that was addressed many years ago. The "Six Nations Land Rights Worker" has weighed in, stating that, "if the treaty is approved it will have far reaching affect for indigenous land rights across the board".
Other than apparent overlapping claims, there is another very interesting twist to this matter which bears some consideration since it could entirely alter the dynamics at Six Nations:
The controversy centers around the question, "among the AOO Algonquin group, who is eligible to vote, and what are the criteria for being considered eligible?" This may be of some concern to Six Nations since there was a lot of controversy in the Community over statements made by representatives of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) that only those who were 100% Six Nations could expect legal protection in the event of a confrontation with authorities over the attempt by the Federal Government to clamp down on the contraband cigarette trade. Some people became very nervous because, as is well known locally, everyone is admixed with European, the only difference being to what degree. So worries such as, "what if my mother's mother was European / local White, will that exclude me from protection? As I blogged about earlier, things got so tense that the HCCC legal counsel made a statement that they did not have the right to determine who was Haudenosaunee (Six Nations), so as long as a person could show that they were a descendant of a member of the Six Nations of the Grand River Band, they would come under the umbrella of protection.
A Land Claims officer as well as at least one Elected Counsel member have gone on record as being opposed to the AOO agreement, one of their main issues being that the Agreement in Principle includes 7,714 individuals eligible to vote, but only 663 (less than 10%) are Status Indians. Thus the majority are perceived as simply locals by some Six Nations officials, and should not be eligible to vote. Apparently, according to a memo from the Algonquin Nation Secretariat (ANS) who oppose the agreement, the majority here seeking the land base claim rights by virtue of Indian heritage but, their indigenous identity is linked to a "root ancestor" of Algonquin identity. In many cases, the claim of indigenous ancestry goes back to one person in the voter's genealogy in the 17th century. Thus, Algonquins who are relying on these root ancestors have had no intermarriage with anyone of Algonquin or Nipissing ancestry for at least 200, and in some cases, more than 300 years.
Perhaps some at Six Nations sense the possible ripple effect that could dramatically affect the definition of Haudenosaunee (People of the Longhouse - Six Nations of the Grand River). The HCCC has already indicated that they are willing to bring into the fold anyone who can point to a Six Nations of the Grand River ancestor (as far back potentially as 1785 when the people came to the Haldimand Tract). If the situation among the Algonquins is accepted and they get land and / or a monetary settlement, then it opens the door wide to who could have a say in matters concerning Six Nations land. Those of us without a status card, but who do meet the HCCC criteria vastly outnumber those 23,000 or so status Six Nations members and could potentially take over control of the process leaving Band Members in the minority and out voted in land claim disputes with the Federal Government - or at least being able to ratify or not ratify an agreement. That would be a frightening prospect to most at Six Nations since their agenda and that of the wider Haudenosaunee Community may be at odds, and the former would lack the authority to over rule the "root ancestor" group.
Perhaps I am reading too much into this, but surely the Six Nations land negotiators and Council members recognize the dangers if the AOO agreement is ratified. It sets a precedent for what could happen here. So in other words, the worry about overlapping land claims (between Iroquoian and Algonquin groups) may have much much wider implications. I will be watching this matter very closely.
DeYo.
In essence, the AOO are seeking to establish a land base for nine of the 10 nations they represent. The petition relates to 117,000 acres of supposed "treaty land". The problem (or at least one of them) is that, a large portion of these lands are also part of the traditional land base of Iroquois Nations. Unfortunately it is unclear which Iroquois groups are potentially impacted here - Akwesasne, Tyendinaga, Six Nations or other. Since a Six Nations representative has stated that there are overlapping claims in Hogsbury (near Ottawa) and Innisville (near Barrie), it begs the question as to "by what right do Six Nations have a claim so far removed from the Grand River" - although this author is aware of a rather unique claim for lands near Hawkesbury that was addressed many years ago. The "Six Nations Land Rights Worker" has weighed in, stating that, "if the treaty is approved it will have far reaching affect for indigenous land rights across the board".
Other than apparent overlapping claims, there is another very interesting twist to this matter which bears some consideration since it could entirely alter the dynamics at Six Nations:
The controversy centers around the question, "among the AOO Algonquin group, who is eligible to vote, and what are the criteria for being considered eligible?" This may be of some concern to Six Nations since there was a lot of controversy in the Community over statements made by representatives of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council (HCCC) that only those who were 100% Six Nations could expect legal protection in the event of a confrontation with authorities over the attempt by the Federal Government to clamp down on the contraband cigarette trade. Some people became very nervous because, as is well known locally, everyone is admixed with European, the only difference being to what degree. So worries such as, "what if my mother's mother was European / local White, will that exclude me from protection? As I blogged about earlier, things got so tense that the HCCC legal counsel made a statement that they did not have the right to determine who was Haudenosaunee (Six Nations), so as long as a person could show that they were a descendant of a member of the Six Nations of the Grand River Band, they would come under the umbrella of protection.
A Land Claims officer as well as at least one Elected Counsel member have gone on record as being opposed to the AOO agreement, one of their main issues being that the Agreement in Principle includes 7,714 individuals eligible to vote, but only 663 (less than 10%) are Status Indians. Thus the majority are perceived as simply locals by some Six Nations officials, and should not be eligible to vote. Apparently, according to a memo from the Algonquin Nation Secretariat (ANS) who oppose the agreement, the majority here seeking the land base claim rights by virtue of Indian heritage but, their indigenous identity is linked to a "root ancestor" of Algonquin identity. In many cases, the claim of indigenous ancestry goes back to one person in the voter's genealogy in the 17th century. Thus, Algonquins who are relying on these root ancestors have had no intermarriage with anyone of Algonquin or Nipissing ancestry for at least 200, and in some cases, more than 300 years.
Perhaps some at Six Nations sense the possible ripple effect that could dramatically affect the definition of Haudenosaunee (People of the Longhouse - Six Nations of the Grand River). The HCCC has already indicated that they are willing to bring into the fold anyone who can point to a Six Nations of the Grand River ancestor (as far back potentially as 1785 when the people came to the Haldimand Tract). If the situation among the Algonquins is accepted and they get land and / or a monetary settlement, then it opens the door wide to who could have a say in matters concerning Six Nations land. Those of us without a status card, but who do meet the HCCC criteria vastly outnumber those 23,000 or so status Six Nations members and could potentially take over control of the process leaving Band Members in the minority and out voted in land claim disputes with the Federal Government - or at least being able to ratify or not ratify an agreement. That would be a frightening prospect to most at Six Nations since their agenda and that of the wider Haudenosaunee Community may be at odds, and the former would lack the authority to over rule the "root ancestor" group.
Perhaps I am reading too much into this, but surely the Six Nations land negotiators and Council members recognize the dangers if the AOO agreement is ratified. It sets a precedent for what could happen here. So in other words, the worry about overlapping land claims (between Iroquoian and Algonquin groups) may have much much wider implications. I will be watching this matter very closely.
DeYo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)