Hereditary Council Supporters Left Out of the Process - All Dressed Up at the Barrier and Nothing to Do

This just in!  By sheer chance, an informant was driving at about 1:30 pm through Caledonia on a "Tim run" (only Canadians will understand what this is).  He saw a CHCH mobile TV crew driving south on Argyle Street, and decided this could mean only one thing - activity at the barricade.  Sure enough the same Six Nations cast of characters present on the 5th (at the time of Gary McHale's march) were also sitting or standing around near the shack at the entrance to Surrey Street - on the west side of the barricade.  One person stood out from the rest as he was wearing a (well tailored) suit and tie.  Here follows the description, with photos, I was sent.

Someone from Caledonia had called CHCH, but also present was a reporter for "Turtle Island News" as well as the editor of that newspaper; and a reporter for "Two Row Times".  Clearly there was an sense of anticipation in the air.  A "plant" came over to speak with CHCH - an American residing in Caledonia who was with US Steel (based on the jacket crest he was wearing).  When asked why he and so many other unions such as CUPE supported Six Nations, the answer was that they supported them (unions) on the picket lines .........................



Al Sweeney of CHCH talking to Turtle Island News and the HDI



My correspondent was known to many there, and known to be less than supportive of the Hereditary Confederacy Chiefs Council position.  One reason being that all Court decisions had ruled that only the Elected Council were the legal representatives of Six Nations.  Any meeting with HCCC or their representatives such as Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) were of a courtesy nature only.  In reaching the barricade it turned out that the "suit" present was not the Aboriginal Affairs Minister, or the Mayor of Haldimand, but the legal representative for HDI, A D.  He was asked what his clan was, since there have always been questions as to why a non-Native was representing Six Nations people (although it is possible, as he was reported to have said on one occasion, that he was Mohawk on his mother's side).  He was unable to answer the question, and was clearly confused by it (meaning did not seem to have a ready answer, although he tried to speak his answers were not understood).  A woman (curiously the very slight woman who tore the sign from the neck of the Caledonia marcher on the 5th) had a ready answer, as follows, It doesn't matter, we have accepted him because he is of the right mind.  Ok, I guess that settles that. 

A D, in suit



Judging by what was said or inferred from the talk going around at the barricade, people were awaiting the possible arrival of Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer, and Haldimand Mayor Ken Hewitt.  It was general knowledge that there would be a meeting between these parties and the Chief Ava Hill of the Elected Council - but no one seemed to know where the "secret" meeting was to take place, or when, or whether they would make an appearance at the barricade. 

It was rather ironic that at the time I was reading "Turtle Island News", July 9, 2014, p.2, where there was some useful information in the article, Haudenosaunee Confederacy says Ontario can end any violence.  Here they reported that, The Haudenosaunee Chiefs Council, in a press release Tuesday said council received an invitation from Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer's office to attend a summit meeting Wednesday, July 9, 2014 that is expected to include representatives from Ontario, Haldimand County and the Six Nations Elected Band Council.  It seems that the HCCC were left out in the cold (actually it was a lovely warm day in Caledonia) and held out vain hope that they would be consulted - so instead were "waiting for Godot" - yet as we will see later, they set this up themselves.  Then in the article there is spin about how HCCC is taking steps to mitigate the damage caused by those nasty citizens of Caledonia who just won't give up trying to seek the truth and justice (not their words).  Further on in the article it says that, The release said Confederacy Council, at its July 5th meeting declined the invitation.  This of course begs the question, who were the group at the barricades, dominated by HCCC supporters, waiting for since the HCCC had declined being a part of the meeting?  Clearly they as well as the newspaper article were unclear as to the venue of the meeting, saying, A summit was planned for today somewhere between Toronto and Six Nations.

The release also, reminded Ontario of a recent Supreme Court decision in the Tsilhqot'in title and rights case which determined that Band Councils do not have the ability in Canadian law to represent the collective rights and interests of the original peoples of the land.  Having read this decision, I cannot see how the HCCC can extrapolate from this case to their own situation which is firmly rooted in a series of Court decisions such as Davey et al. v. Isaacs et al. (1974).  So encore, despite an offer to participate, the HCCC thumbed its nose at the process and sanctimoniously bowed out.  The release goes on to issue an outright WARNING, that they are, deeply concerned that there will be grave consequences for all people involved should the Crown's inaction continue.

The article gives a review of the recent decisions of Haldimand County Council concerning the barricade and the access road (Surrey Street), including the most recent proposed by-law to keep everyone off Surry Street, but, Hewitt could not say if the by-law would apply to both Six Nations people and non-native activists, although he hinted that it might apply to both.  If the latter statement proves to be correct, then the Mayor is being entirely fair and not favouring one side or the other.  Mayor Hewitt added that, "The problem is you can't write a by-law that picks race or culture or colour or culture," said Hewitt.  "If nobody's there then there's no stage for any issues.  I understand the argument of (Six Nations) people being there as the protector of land but if there's an agreement between us all that all people are unauthorized on that land then there is no need to protect it at this point.  The present author could not agree more - Mayor Hewitt is reflecting the views of all who advocate equal treatment before the law.  What Mayor Hewitt does acknowledge is that the County has no jurisdiction over the land surrounding the problematic streets (Surrey and Thistlemoor), which is owned by the Province.

The article ends with some frustration that, The Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Ministry did not return requests for comment again.

At about 2:30 everyone dispersed and the site was empty within a few minutes.  I am supposing that word had been received that the "officials" would be a no show at that location.

Rest assured, there will be a lot more to come pertaining to this issue.  I will try to provide the most up to date information.

DeYo.

Hold the Presses! "Riot" - Melee Breaks Out at DCE Barricade

UPDATE 12 July 2014:  If you wish to see a shining example of how the radicals do not respect anyone, even their own female elders, you must see this video uploaded from CANACE here.  It was taken during the melee of the 5th of July 2014.  This charming "gentleman" is also the one seen throwing tires on the fire in the middle of Argyle Street in 2006.  If you can stand to see and listen to this video (warning - extremely coarse and degrading language is used), recall the words he used to disrespect this female Six Nations elder, and the threats of what he would do to the daughter of a woman who is behind the videographer - we need to know what we are dealing with.  know that he is not representative of the Six Nations people, although unfortunately there are others who fall into this category on the extreme fringe of things.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, 5 July 2014 will go down as a day of infamy.  A peaceful picnic and march by citizens of Caledonia and their supporters was met by an "ambush" by Natives lying in wait, itching for a fight.  It all happened outside the barricade, the one that illegally blocks Surrey Street, and such anger, such outright hostility and righteous indignation - "how dare you challenge our authority, we are the true owners of this land" - those words were heard by reliable witnesses.  Like all stories, we need to go back to the beginning.

The reason given for the rally organized by Gary McHale was due to the backtracking by Haldimand Council, who had stated that they unanimously agreed that the barricade had to come down, then seemed to lose their will after Mayor Hewitt met with the radical Men's Fire and others at Six Nations and made it seem that the agreement to have a contractor remove the barricade was off.  Concerns were heightened when Gary learned of the most recent secret meeting of Haldimand Council which recommended that a by - law be enacted to keep "negative influences" away from the road.  Of course everyone suspected that this meant Gary, not Six Nations, and thus we are back to square one with a two-tiered system along racial - ethnic divides.  So the way this would(n't) work is that the Indians can stay at DCE and walk around at will, even HH and AM notorious activists; but the "bad townies" meaning all residents, and especially Gary McHale, had to be kept out.  Please note that this is all supposition, until we find out what, specifically, the Ontario, County, and Band Council has hammered out.  It is not fair to "taint" Haldimand County Council before we have all the facts.

This blatantly racist by-law (if it emerges as many suspect)would be precisely the sort of action that we had spent 8 years fighting against.  Any wonder that concerns were heightened. We have learned over the years that no matter what, no matter who, no matter when, the activists running DCE have expressed an adamant refusal to be told what to do, or even to negotiate a sane and sensible solution to the problem of the blocked road.  All of us knew that we were being set up once more to be relegated to second class citizen status, while the very people who stole and occupied land that was duly and legally surrendered 170 years ago would be given free rein. I have searched all of the relevant documents, and there are NO irregularities upon which to pin any claim to recover land the ancestors wished sold so that the monies could be deposited in the Six Nations Trust Fund.  The "it's ok for you to be there, but not you" assertion is simply not acceptable, or an option.  I apologize in advance for jumping to conclusions - but past behavior is the best predictor to future behavior.

This sign was not well received at the barricade



The group met at a location in central Caledonia and travelled from there to the property purchased by RF, situated at the south end of the DCE property.  At that point a Bar-B-Que was set up, and all there socialized for more than an hour. 



The picnic at the part of DCE owned by a Caledonian



When the participants had finished their meal, most took Canadian flags, and one person had a sign which gave the date the land on which DCE sits was surrendered to the Crown, while another had around his neck a sign offering a copy of the surrender for anyone who wished to have one.  Lets just say there were no takers for the latter.  Another sign carried to the barricade related to the need for an apology.

View of cars of Caledonians toward barricade





As to the sign welcoming requests for copies of the surrender, one of the first things someone at the barricade did (a tiny but feisty woman with ill manners), was to "pop up out of nowhere", and rip the sign off the holder by grabbing on to the cord and simply yanking.  If the attachment had been metal, it could have sliced open the carotid artery of the person whose only "crime" was to offer factual material to all interested parties, irrespective of racial - ethnic group.  This was but one of many bad mannered and disrespectful acts that were to occur in the midst of a general melee.


Enroute to barricade with an "escort"



Six Nations members on access via 6th Line cat calling during interview

From the sidelines there was a constant verbal harassment by Six Nations and supporter (mostly the former) when Gary stopped to give an interview to CHCH TV reporter Al Sweeney (kudos to them for showing up and taking the time to as a series of excellent questions), and also reporters for "Turtle Island News" and "Two Row Times".  These were apparently the only media present.  There were however bloggers and others present and also taking videos and pictures.  It will be interesting to see what will show on the tapes of the event once they are published.

There were about 20 Ontario Provincial Police officers present, including a Native Liaison Officer.  Vehicles continued to arrive via the road off the 6th Line until more than 50 (an estimate) Six Nations and supporters were there compared to the 20 of so "townies and supporters".  Clearly outnumbered, the latter (and the police) were subject to all sorts of verbal and physical abuse. 

Reporters



At the actual barricade site itself, there were lines (some arm in arm) of Six Nations and supporters and groups or very agitated and angry looking young men and women.  In my entire life I have never heard more profanity, and more hurling of threats as occurred at the barricade on that day.  They were nothing more than schoolyard bullies.  The OPP and the Caledonia contingent were the target - the venom was coming from Six Nations.  I did not hear a single word of profanity or anything more than raising of voices by the Caledonia group; and yet the Six Nations group behaved badly making the usual "trailer trash" seen on COPS to appear positively gentrified by comparison to the embarrassing behavior of the Six Nations members who were present. 

The tapes show the usual suspects who appear at all such rallies, including one or more with restraining orders which were broken, and which were caught on tape (presumably to be used for prosecution later).  There were relatively minor assaults breaking out in clusters along the margin of the barricade.  None of the Caledonians went beyond the barricade, but Six Nations had a full presence there and more and more were arriving from the access off 6th Line.  It is true that some Caledonians did goad on some of the most unsavoury elements, even by simple non - verbal behaviours such as blowing a kiss, which seemed to infuriate some rather thin skinned "Natives".  One of the latter claimed that he sleeps in the chipboard shack just behind the barricade, probably to try to avert any night time attempt on the part of Haldimand Council contractors to remove the barricade.  He is also one of the two individuals seen throwing tires on the fire made in the middle of Argyle Street in 2006 - still wearing the same shirt.  As to how many of these worthies have actual jobs is anyone's guess - Chief Clarence Louis of the immensely successfully Osoyoos Band in British Columbia says the first criteria for any warrior is, "has a job".

To be frank, although there were calm elements among the Six Nations, they were few and far between and did not make their presence known.  The brash, noisy, boorish, disrespectful, no class - low class, angry types were front and center.  Some of the older individuals simply went around bumping into Caledonians in a sort of passive aggressive manner.  It is positively scary to think that what was seen here (soon to be uploaded via video tape for all to assess) is in 2014 a microcosm of Six Nations, and thus might represent a cross section of all of Six Nations.  I desperately hope that his is not true, and will seek clarification on this point in due course.  Unfortunately I did recognize a number present who I thought were moderate and rational ........................... I expect that many who would be horrified by what they would see simply stayed away. 

A bit of the melee at the barricade

 

A perspective at the barricade - Caledonia crew with sign that was not well received



Perspective at the barricade - Six Nations view - three OPP officers on right



Toward the end of the melee various citizen's arrests were enacted.  As I understand it, Gary McHale made a citizen's arrest on an OPP officer, apparently because the latter supposedly released a "Native" wanted in a criminal matter, and insisted that he be driven, with the "officer under arrest" and a witness to the Cayuga Detachment.  Then JW, a reporter for "Two Row Times", made a citizen's arrest on Gary McHale, supposedly for "inciting a riot".  The latter action may be problematic to the person making the arrest due to the circumstances, it was a melee not a riot, and the instigators of whatever it was were "Native", and Gary's intimate knowledge of the law in these sort of situations will be deployed.  All parties were headed to the Cayuga Detachment and further information is pending.  Despite being present, I am still unclear as to what the issues were.  Perhaps the videos noted below will clarify matters.

Gary McHale enroute to Cayuga Detachment



Media Coverage:

1)  CHCH TV Hamilton:  See here.  CHCH was the only non - Reserve media outlet to cover this story directly.  My thanks to them for venturing into this place, a world away from Toronto or Hamilton, where in the past their (CHCH) reporters have been assaulted and their equipment stolen by Six Nations militants.

2)  The Hamilton Spectator:  The most recent article on DCE came out today, although it did not mention the "gathering" on the 5th.  This article can be seen here.

3)  The Brantford Expositor:  Nothing to date.

4)  The Sachem:  See here for the article in the Sachem of 7 July 2014 which summarizes key events of the last few weeks, and provides some coverage of the "melee".  It was excellent that they included the entire wording of the sign at the top of this posting.

Citizen Coverage:

1)  CANACE video, 5 July 2014, of Gary McHale arresting OPP officer, click here.

2)  CANACE video, 4 May 2014, of Gary McHale and other citizens (including Natives who believe in his cause) trying to walk along a public (Haldimand County owned) road (Surrey Street).  The content reveals volumes about the people who consider themselves "defenders of the land" (when in fact they have no title or rights other than those possessed by other Canadian citizens).  Click here for a shocking expose - yes, you heard it right, the woman said "shoot him".

Other coverage will be included as it becomes available.  Other than "Turtle Island News" and "Two Row Times" (although a question can be raised as to whether their seemingly biased reporting counts as real journalism or merely propaganda) were present.  However if either provides a video it will be included here for completeness sake.  Whatever "press coverage" is given to the event will be posted next Wednesday (date of publication).  Here is a prediction.  One or both will excoriate McHale and the Caledonians, and paint a picture of the Six Nations people as heroes, victims of colonialism, and defenders of the land (despite the irrefutable fact that they stole the land from the legal owners).  We will see what sort of slant is given by Rez reporters, or whether they attempt to present both sides of the argument in a fair and objective manner - and which of the two newspapers best demonstrates the basic principles of their profession.

Six Nations Picnic Planned for Sunday 6 June 2014:  It will be plainly seen in the available videos that Six Nations who were in attendance had no intention of permitting Caledonians to have their peaceful assembly at the barricade.  The people of Caledonia and their supporters had every right to have a picnic on property owned near DCE by one of them, and then peacefully march to the barricade carrying Canadian flags.  It was seen as some sort of "attack" by those Six Nations and supporters in attendance on the 5th.  Somehow they found out about the event and came in droves to make Caledonians as unwelcome as imaginable.  On the 6th Six Nations activists are planning a picnic and will be at the barricade.  Lets see how many Caledonians make an appearance to disturb their event.  My guess is that precisely zero will appear, since most of us realize that it is their right to hold such an event, and we should not disrespect it.  On the 5th Caledonians were shown the utmost disdain and intolerance.  Despite my ties and experiences of my early years, it is now clear to me that the Six Nations who have been radicalized and emboldened are racist and intolerant, and that to them while it is fine and right for them to have a picnic at the barricade, the same does not hold true for Caledonians, who in their eyes have no rights.  So much for the "mutual understanding" that Mayor Hewitt and others speak of.  That is a pie in the sky concept which does not apply at ground level.  Six Nations present behaved as bullies on the 5th - lets see what can be said about the events of the 6th.

Update 6th June 2014 - Six Nations Picnic:  I have driven past the DCE site from time to time on the 6th and all appears to be quiet on this front.  There are no Caledonians with signs, I saw not a single OPP car anywhere in the vicinity (compared to the numerous and specialized vehicles seen yesterday). 

Assessment:  Alas due to these events as they unfolded in front of the video cameras, it is all too clear that there is absolutely zero hope for Haldimand County Council, Ontario Aboriginal Affairs or their Federal counterpart to make any headway except by totally and utterly capitulating to the combatants.  I am hoping that this will never happen as it will cause a ripple effect through Caledonia and beyond, and make a mockery of true justice.  We would come to realize that to stop violent take overs in our own country, we will have to do our own policing since no one has the guts to challenge the criminals who are running amok at DCE, and emboldened - awaiting their next "venture".  Will your community be next? 

It was a relief not to see any "extraneous" flags flying on the 5th.  Often in the past there were CUPE union supported groups present, sporting the flags that reflect their "cause".  In the past there have been Palestinian flags at DCE.  What is particularly troubling about the latter group is that a hauntingly similar situation involving "skewed policing" that we have come to expect in Caledonia, occurred in Missisauga yesterday outside "Palestine House", whose radical Islamic affiliations are well know to all levels of Government.  As can be seen in the Sun News tape here, the Palestinians violently attacked bystanders with their flag poles injuring a man who wore "Never Again" on his sleeve.  A very slight Japanese woman barely escaped injury as she was escorted across the street by the Toronto Police.  Basically the police did nothing to avert the violence, thus emboldening the Palestinian attackers.  Assaults were clearly evident on the video tape, and unless the police will be making arrests in the matter after reviewing this evidence - shame on them.  It was the victims who were singled out by police for "enforcement procedures" including arrests.  It appears that two-tiered policing has moved from Caledonia and Ipperwash to the streets of Toronto - Missisauga.  It would appear that we are seeing the future in these incidents of selective enforcements, where the most violent elements (considered "oppressed minority groups" by some - although relatively few) are allowed to ran rampant while the police act as "peacekeepers" - which is a total joke as we have learned here in Caledonia.

I must note in all fairness that on this occasion, at the barricades in Caledonia, I did not see any evidence of two-tiered policing during the picnic and march of the 5th.  The female sergeant was, in my opinion, very even handed and was doing a fine job in the midst of the chaos all about her.  She has been at other events (e.g., 4 May 2014) where matters were kept under control.  There was no thin blue line facing only the Caledonians.  There was no sense of being "singled out" because we were on one side of the fray - as has been the case from 2006 to 2013.  The OPP officers were milling about calmly attempting to keep tempers under control and turn down the volume.  There is nothing in the way of any complaint that at this occasion, can be said about the actions of the OPP officers.  This makes two occasions (the other being the arrest of JG) where I had the sense that officers were doing their jobs without any "preference" or special treatment accorded one side or the other.  This bodes well, but we have been burnt so often in the past that it will take some time to regain the trust we had before 2006 - good start though.  This is why I was surprised by the actions of Mr. McHale (citizen's arrest of the sergeant).  Perhaps there was more than what I saw to explain the events which unfolded.

In a modern democracy it should not be the responsibility of everyday citizens to do whatever it takes to bring law and order to their own community.  We give up any vigilantism with the understanding that we will be protected. However, what are we supposed to do when the preferred methods of Dr. Martin Luther King have failed us time and time again.  We have given the OPP 8 years to "do something".  At this point many of us are thinking that we would like our present Government to do what Prime Minister Pierre E. Trudeau did during the Front de Libertion du Quebec (FLQ) crisis - send in the army - and speaking as someone who saw armed soldiers patrolling our streets, we were relieved and thankful for his actions.  Would that we had a P.E.T. today - we desperately need someone at the helm of Government with his moxy to take charge and rid us of this volatile anarchy perpetrated by Six Nations militants.  It is setting a dangerous precedent - something the average Canadian does not seem to see, but who will pay dearly later for their apathy when it all appears on their doorstep.

My conclusion here in relation to the two picnics, Caledonia on the 5th and Six Nations on the 6th, is that Six Nations operate with a double standard.  It is fine and expected for them to have a peaceful picnic, but wrong and divisive and provoking for Caledonians to have a picnic under the same terms.  This in many quarters would be termed two faced hypocrisy.  The Six Nations (an unknown percentage of the whole) have exposed a violent and contemptible streak that no one wants to talk about, but the summary of picture and descriptions from 2006 to 2010 in Christie Blatchford's book, and the recent videos (right to yesterday), are consistent and speak much more loudly than the spin used in the Rez newspapers and other sources to paint a picture they want you to believe but that is simply not true.  Come to Caledonia and see for yourself if you want to see the "real face" of Six Nations in 2014.  I am dreadfully ashamed.  I know that my Six Nations ancestors would be horrified to see what has become of their people.  As a rule, the uncles and aunties who over the generations stayed Rez side did not fare too well (violence and early death being standard fare), the ones who left were generally able to make something of their lives (with some notable exceptions of course).  The point has been driven home that the key to success is education not indoctrination; critical thinking skills not robotic recitation of entrenched beliefs.  The key to success clearly is the avoidance of locations ripe with toxic influences.

More and more the veil is lifted on this radical element, and the stark reality becomes apparent.  Unfortunately the vast majority of the residents of Six Nations who would have a more open minded approach were nowhere to be seen.  There were actually "Natives" present with the Caledonia group who see themselves as Canadian and are horrified at the trampling of human rights seen at such events.  None were current residents of Six Nations - it would simply be far too dangerous to show support of truth and justice because of the on Rez dynamics.

I urge the various Government agencies to use caution, assuming that those in Haldimand County are not going to rise up, that is something only Six Nations would do - this is a dangerous assumption.  I live here.  I have connections in all camps.  I am hoping for the best, but will prepare to take the actions needed to see justice done in this neck of the woods.  Hopefully cool heads will prevail and justice will be served by not pandering to the "demands" of Six Nations militants.  The problem is that many have dug in their heels.  They have invested so much time and emotional commitment into this "reclamation" to the point that they are absolutely unwilling / unable to see reason, common sense, the facts, the evidence, the truth or anything resembling these concepts.  Many have the attitude that it is my way or no way - I have heard this time and again with my own ears.

I will never abandon the methods of science and the deployment of hard evidence to determine who has right on their side.  We know who at present has might (not right) on their side, and who has shown a willingness to use it.  If we permit this, "it is so because I believe it to be so" attitude to prevail, we are cooked.  Our country is poised to descend into anarchy as our Government and our police forces abandon us to our fate.  Few people who are Six Nations are willing to speak out and speak the truth - there are strong social pressures to conform and keep up the appearance of a united front to the world (while in the background the factionalism is tearing the community apart).  We (Caledonians and right minded Six Nations) should be standing together in this - it is a human rights issue, and should be of concern to all.  But, this is Caledonia.

DeYo.

Haldimand County Issues Press Release Regarding DCE

On 4 July 2014 there was a meeting of Haldimand County Council, and a summary has been published in "The Sachem" under the title of the present posting.  See here for the complete article.

While I could quote the entire article, the content is largely a repeat of what has been said before and discussed in recent postings on this blog.  The parts which I consider new or different in some way are the following in quotation marks:

Haldimand Council met on July 4th to discuss the next steps. They agreed with Six Nations Elected Chief Ava Hill’s comments that the Federal government needs to resume active negotiations on the native land claims for the long term stability of this area. Mayor Hewitt stated that “the Province needs to honour its commitment to work with both Haldimand County and Six Nations to actively develop a future use for the lands that benefits both communities.” At the local level, the focus needs to be on finding common ground which will lead to peaceful solutions. This is particularly important given the negative pressure being exerted by a few individuals, which will only serve to further divide the two communities.

The obvious question here is, who are these "few individuals" who have been exerting "negative pressure".  Could this be Gary McHale, the bane of the existence of Six Nations militants because he stands up for the rule of law and is against two - tiered policing - he has been the one constant here in Caledonia - ready to come to our defense despite considerable risks to himself (particularly from the Ontario Provincial Police).  It is solely because of the actions of Gary that the matter was brought to a head.  His simple act of walking down a public road, inadvertently challenging the "authority" of Six Nations has put the matter into the spotlight - especially with Sun News.  Had he not acted everyone would still be spinning their wheels.  Accolades should be given to Gary McHale, not the "demonizing" seen by not only Six Nations militants, but also by at least some (all?) on Haldimand County Council.  Shame on them.

Perhaps I am included here, since I have had a number of discussions with the mayor about the matter and my blog is anything but supportive of Six Nations "concerns".  If I was a Government official, I am sure I would have been sent for "sensitivity training" despite the fact that I am one of the Caledonians most familiar with Six Nations culture, history, and genealogy.

An important question needs to be asked? Does the list of those exerting "negative pressure" include HH of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute and AM of the Men's Fire?

Also noted was, At its meeting, Council reviewed a draft by-law which will remove public access rights on the roads leading into DCE. Such action is aimed at eliminating the unnecessary, negative disruptions that are occurring at the site. This by-law will be further considered at a future Council meeting. Council also authorized the Mayor to continue discussions with Six Nations and the Province regarding the DCE property.

So presumably this edict is a fascist - like attempt to stop Gary McHale from exercising his rights as a Canadian, and also for keeping all us pesky locals away from DCE.  Ok, I have a question, does this mean that Six Nations will no longer have any "public access" to the site?  It is not Six Nations land, and is actually land stolen from a developer and occupied illegally by Six Nations activists despite a Court Injunction issued by Judge Marshall of the Superior Court in Cayuga.  If there is a move to allow one group of citizens (those whose acts are illegal and highly disruptive) to wander about DCE at will (Six Nations members), but bars anyone who is not a member of Six Nations (or their outside supporters) from entering the premises (in other words Caledonian residents) - this is blatant discrimination, blatant racism at its worst.  However, before I make assumptions, more information is needed.

DeYo.

Ontario Aboriginal Affairs Minister to Intervene in Caledonia Barricade Impass

Recently I wrote to Hon. David Zimmer, the Aboriginal Affairs Minister for Ontario to alert him to recent developments, with the emphasis on the need to address the facts of the matter.  Specifically I emphasized that Six Nations have absolutely no legal claim to the former Douglas Creek Estates (DCE) (Kanonhstaton), that it is imperative to stop giving in to terrorists, and that under no circumstances (in my opinion) should Six Nations be given DCE.  See here for specific of e-mail.   I am convinced that if DCE is turned over to Six Nations it will set a very very dangerous precedent.  For example it will lead to expectations that they should also have the Burtch Correctional lands, and "surplus" lands in South Cayuga Township owned by the Province obtained by expropriating family farms with the odd belief that they would need it to create a residential satellite community to serve the Nanticoke industrial complex.  From there all doors are open, and that cannot be allowed.

For reasons not stated, David Zimmer had come to the conclusion that he would enter the fray and become directly involved in negotiations with various elements among Six Nations (that will prove to be a challenge), and Haldimand County.  Sun News Network has limited information here.

In an article entitled, Province hopes to help cool divide over Caledonia blockade removal, 4 July 2014 the "plan" is outlined - Aboriginal Affairs Minister David Zimmer's office is setting up a summit meeting with Six Nations chiefs and Haldimand County officials to find a "viable solution" after the county agreed to start tearing down the blockade at the former housing development site.  A very brief overview of the conflict is given - but little else since, No date or place for the meeting has been confirmed. 

Some further details are provided, but much is unclear or hazy.  What is stated is as follows:

"We hope to have our concerns recognized and Six Nations hopes to have theirs recognized," Haldimand Mayor Ken Hewitt said Friday. "Somewhere between the two is where we hope to land."

Chief Ava Hill said in an e-mail that she was withholding comment until the meeting date is confirmed and after she's had a discussion with the Six Nations council.

We will see where this leads.  I will go on record saying that it is unacceptable for the Province to give in to those who have terrorized Caledonia for 8 years.  Both the Elected and Hereditary Councils need to be told in no uncertain terms that no land, including DCE, will be forthcoming.  If they believe (despite what two Superior Court judges has said about their chances of success - zero to none - actually they said "weak") that they have a case, then take it to Court - but ultimately all rulings have been consistent, only monetary issues will be considered, absolutely no granting of land protected by the Ontario Land Registry system.

Giving Six Nations ANY LAND will open the door to anarchy. 

I hope that Hon. David Zimmer appreciates this fact.  Here follows a recent (5 July 2014) e-mail sent to David Zimmer:

Hon. David Zimmer

Ontario Minister of Aboriginal Affairs

 

Dear Sir,

 

I learned via Sun News that you have decided to attempt to intervene in the ongoing dispute in Caledonia.  While that is certainly a very positive step, and very commendable if only for the fact that very few politicians have "dared" even show their faces in Caledonia over the years.  The former Liberal Premier McGuinty never one came to Caledonia during our time of need.  We here have long memories.

 

As you may be aware, Six Nations politics is extremely complicated.  The chronic dispute between the Hereditary and Elected Councils is only the tip of the iceberg.  You may get one side on board, but that will be a signal to the other side to oppose everything to do with any agreement.  The two sides have yet to sit down together to effect any sort of agreement - even about trash disposal.

 

I know the entire situation very well.  My roots are here, I have studied Six Nations and local history in depth (e.g., sifting through all the relevant documents at Library and Archives Canada in Ottawa since the 1970s), and I can tell you one thing that is a complete certainty.  If you give Six Nations even an acre of land, the decision will come back to bite you.  Guaranteed.  They are set to exploit any such attempt and will then "demand" the "return" of not only Burtch Correctional Center lands (250 acres), but fully ceded (in 1834) Provincially owned lands in Dunn and South Cayuga Townships - then the door flies open to numerous other items on their agenda.

 

Perhaps the following posting will provide some useful details:

 

http://deyoyonwatheh.blogspot.ca/2014/07/ontario-aboriginal-affairs-minister-to.html

 

Sir, by all means come here and listen to what all have to say.  I am at this point begging that you will not consider giving Six Nations any land - hoping that this action is not on the table - since those of us who reside here will have to live with the consequences.  Please be aware that if Six Nations are, under whatever pretext, given the former Douglas Creek Estates, there will be a furious backlash from residents of Haldimand County and beyond.  You are dealing with international terrorists, and appeasement will not bring "peace in our time", as Chamberlain was to learn the hard way in dealing with Adolph Hitler just before WWII.

 

Best of luck, and trusting that you will make decisions that will endure, ...............

Update 6 July 2014:  Article from the "Brantford Expositor" on this matter - Minister pushes for meeting on Caledonia barrier, see here.

DeYo.

Haldimand Mayor Backtracks on Promise that Barricade Is Coming Down?

In the today's issue of "Turtle Island News" (TIN), 2 July 2014, p.5, is the article entitled, Haldimand Mayor puts threat to take out "barricade" on hold after private weekend meeting.

I have no patience with people, especially elected officials, who say they will do one thing, waffle, change their mind, and then retreat to the status quo.  Is this an example of flip flopping or the "Stockholm syndrome" - some sort of identification with the aggressors?  Perhaps, but it is more likely that the Mayor has little choice but to meet with the self appointed representatives of Six Nations in relation to this matter which is bound to cause discord, and if all cards are not played well, the terrorists could use any action as a pretext to escalate the situation to their advantage.  The Men's Fire and affiliated Haudenosaunee Development Institute have shown in numerous work stoppages in Haldimand and Brant Counties that they do not "play fair", and that the facts and the truth mean nothing to them - only their "agenda" holds any sway, and the end justifies any means.

As noted in postings below, Haldimand County Council had voted unanimously to remove the illegal barrier blocking Surrey Street, a County Road.  This structure is a legacy of the total breakdown in the rule of law, and the two - tiered policing that has been the order of things since local thugs, international organized criminal elements, lay abouts, White Communist - Anarchist supporters, and other unsavoury elements have plagued the site since day one.  Caledonia had been terrorized, and individual citizens brutalized by the uncaring, unfeeling, control freaks who made their life miserable particularly during 2006.  It is disappointing that the Mayor has concluded that these groups are even worthy of two minutes of his time ................. but until more is known, perhaps we need to give him some slack and the benefit of the doubt.

Since 2006, we here have learned that the police (Ontario Provincial Police), the Federal Government, the Provincial Government could care less about us rubes out in the sticks.  Let us suffer, there are not that many votes involved anyway.  So who is here to protect us?  Who can we call if we need assistance and there is a "Native issue" in progress?  I did report earlier on a well documented (by video camera with sound) take down of a Six Nations "land protector" who assaulted a citizen and was arrested in a calm professional manner by the OPP.  This event gives some hope that if individual officers have the discretion to make an arrest, they will do so - if there is no interference from "up top" (the most egregious examples being from the era of Commissioner Fantino who blamed everything on the one person we could depend upon, Gary McHale).

Here is what is reported in the above newspaper article.  There are no immediate plans to remove the security barrier at the front entrance of Kanonhstaton after a secret meeting on Sunday with Haldimand Mayor Ken Hewitt, the Six Nations Men's Fire, OPP and a handful of elected councilors.

Hewitt told Turtle Island News on Monday that he walked away from the meeting with more understanding of the "emotional attachment" Six Nations people have to the land at the former Douglas Creek Estates housing development on Argyle Street in Caledonia.

"I believe it was a very good start for me to appreciate and understand a lot of the dealings and the sentiments of the people ........... who are pretty emotionally attached to the property" said Hewitt.

"At the same time, it was an opportunity for me to express to them where we're coming from.  It was an opportunity for people to learn more about each other". 

The article once again perpetuates the lies that JG suffered numerous bruises and injuries when police arrested him after an altercation with Binbrook activist Gary McHale.  Any injuries, according to the multiple videos of the take down were caused by JG resisting arrest and placing himself in a situation where he caused a few scrapes, and perhaps sore arms because he forced the officers to carry him dead weight (refusing to walk to the squad car).

HH, the Director of the radical Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI, the extortion wing of the Hereditary Confederacy Chief's Council), gave her opinion that, Any concerns they have should be directed to Ontario rather than attempting to hijack what are very serious and established treaty rights and turn it into their own political platforms in a campaign stunt.  This is sheer nonsense since the Six Nations have NO valid treaty rights (only the fraudulent "Nanfan Treaty"), and it is the Federal Government not Ontario who negotiates with Native leaders - which would be the Six Nations Elected Council (SNEC) based on a number of key Court decisions such as "Isaac et al. v. Davey et al. (1974)" noted previously.  So the HDI and Haudenosaunee Men's Fire (HMF), who are responsible for so much chaos and destruction are allowed to rule the roost here and it is they who are calling the shots.  It is also they, and their stubborn insistence that they alone have the right to negotiate with the Government (any level of) who in turn caused SNEC, the legally constituted party for all Six Nations negotiations, enormous frustration to the point where they, walked away from the talks in 2010. 

The Ontario Government is saying that the Federal Government needs to return to the table before they former can get fully engaged, but the latter cannot do so because of the factionalism at Six Nations with infighting between HCCC and SNEC.  So basically the Ontario and Federal Governments are being told by Six Nations that they need to return to the bargaining table or that they are delaying or that ................. when the truth is that no level of Government knows who is in charge (so many competing factions make that claim) - yet they are blamed for holding up negotiations!  What is really incredible is that many people buy into this concocted story, where in fact it is the Six Nations who are putting everyone else into a no win situation yet have the audacity to point the finger of blame at "the Government". 

What is really galling are the veiled threats given to Mayor Hewitt.  There is not a shadow of a doubt that he and the Government are negotiating with terrorists here.  The article in TIN continues, saying, Sources said Hewitt was warned at the meeting if the county tried to forcefully remove the barrier, there would be a flare - up in the town "worst than what happened in 2006" when Six Nations reclaimed the land from developers.  Really, well that is a lie - there was no "reclamation" only "theft". 

Mayor Hewitt said that, As mayor, I only speak for council.  I can't simply remove a resolution that was passed.  (I said) I would give council an update on the meeting and encouragement that there was opportunity to discuss ways to assist each other in achieving our goals.  With due respect, that has been tried for 8 years with absolutely no success.  It is time to shift gears and put some teeth into the law.  An injunction was issued 8 years ago requiring the removal of all the protestors.  It has never been enforced (all hell broke loose when the OPP attempted to do so in 2006).

The world needs to see the evidence of the surrender of the land at DCE at the Onondaga Longhouse on 18 December 1844 by 45 Chiefs in Council, and again on 17 September 1845 by 66 Chiefs in Council, and the question is why 170 years later should descendants of those who granted the land to the Crown have any right to undo what Council agreed to so many years ago.  What is the rationale.  There is none that will wash and the world needs to know that the reclamation is based on greed, and perceived entitlement, not on law.  If the Flemish citizens of say Belgium decide that despite signed agreements by the legitimate authorities that they don't like what was done and they want the land to be assigned back to only the Flemish - would that be accepted, or does it make any sense?  A deal is a deal, and it was done in Haldimand to allow the Six Nations Community to remain intact as it was becoming evident that individual members were selling off their lots to White buyers and what remained of Six Nations territory was becoming a patchwork of plots and the Six Nations becoming scattered (many left in disgust for the American Northwest - Ohio - at this time where they hoped to live as a group in the Honey Creek Mohawk settlements and nearby Seneca settlements).

If there is an insurrection as described, then finally the military can be called in to clear the land of terrorists and restore order.  The law is fully on the side of the Crown, there is no gray area here.  If Six Nations members defied the law and threatened surrounding communities, it is the duty of the army to "take care of business" - something that should have been done long ago since there is not the faintest hope that the emboldened (thanks to the many enablers) activists will back away.  They have learned that if they press ahead forcefully, the "authorities" will always back down.  I have heard them laugh at the police and the Courts and anyone who "defies them" since, the attitude is that "the land is ours for the taking".  With my own ears I have heard activists say precisely this - and that "Caledonia is ours".  You cannot reason with people like this, as events since 2006 have shown, only the force of the law applied evenly to all Canadians can do that - and if it takes the army, it will show that a line has been crossed and that outright anarchy will not be allowed to prevail in this small section of Canada.  If no one else will assist us, the onus will be on our shoulders to deal with these domestic terrorists as befits the circumstances.

DeYo.

Reporter Provides Erroneous Information in Comments to a Letter to the Editor of the Brantford Expositor

It was interesting to see a newspaper reporter, in this case from "Two Row Times" (TRT), comment on a Letter to the Editor submitted to another newspaper, specifically The "Brantford Expositor" (Expos) - by in this case submitting his own Letter to the Editor of the Expos entitled, Caledonia Barricade serves Purpose.  I don't know that I have ever seen that occur before.  Generally a reporter needs to maintain their independence and at least give the appearance of objectivity as a member of the media.  So when I saw the name JW, it tweaked my curiosity as to why, as a reporter for TRT, Mr. W would compromise professional standards or guidelines, and whether he had "crossed a professional line".  To be absolutely frank, I don't know if this is considered appropriate in media circle, I am only extrapolating from guidelines and standards in my own profession.  It would not have been as troubling if the letter was factual, but instead it was replete with unsupported opinions, and serious errors in fact.

The letter in question can be found here.

First some background.  JW, a non-Native person residing in Brantford, used to be a reporter and photographer with the Reserve newspaper "Tekawenake".  When the latter folded somewhat more than a year ago Mr. W and colleague TK, a White radical Communist - Anarchist who has caused untold suffering in Caledonia, became associated with a start up newspaper, "Two Row Times".  As it now stands Mr. W is a reporter, and Mr. K has risen in the ranks to become a General Manager and Editor of the Six Nations and "Dish with One Spoon" territory newspaper which competes with "Turtle Island News", which maintains that they are the only Reserve newspaper.  I don't suppose that it would be "fair game" to include any information that I overheard Mr. W say to another non-Native in a local restaurant about his situation, so that will not be included here.

The primary focus of the present blog posting is to challenge the factual content of Mr. W's (JW)letter.  I will do this by quoting from the Letter, then will offer sourced information to content.  In my opinion what was written by JW is largely Six Nations propaganda - the party line.  In italics below are excerpts from the letter by JW, then to be followed by my comments and evidence.

1)  Cam Martindale's letter published last Friday Shows that he is one of so many Canadians who have no idea what is going on around them. The key to understanding Six Nations is that they are not Canadians, but rather a distinct and sovereign people with a constitution that precedes ours by about 1,500 years.

I have been unable to locate Mr. Martindale's letter, however, the allegation of the latter's ignorance is going to be attenuated when examining JW's written assertions.  As to the comment that Six Nations people "are not Canadians" that is nothing but a political statement of politically correct dogma.  In fact Six Nations and all who live within Canadian boundaries and who are subject to Canadian jurisdiction are de facto Canadians.  Six Nations are subject to Canadian laws and any Criminal Code violations will result in the same sentence as any other Canadian.  Six Nations accepts Transfer Payments and Welfare from the Federal Government of Canada - so if they are not Canadian, they need to return a lot of money - and with interest. 

Six Nations are not aboriginal to Canada.  Their homeland is in what is today Upstate New York, United States of America.  So Six Nations are immigrants and refugees just as the White United Empire Loyalists who departed American territory after the Revolution.  The argument about sovereignty is specious.  There is not a shred of evidence to support it - but it is widely believed to be true.  Six Nations were given "occupancy rights" by virtue of the Haldimand Deed, but the title to the land was and is vested in the Crown and its successors.  It is true that in the 1640s the then Five Nations (including my own ancestors) committed an act of genocide, destroying all of the Nations residing in Southwestern Ontario.  However, attempts to settle or lay claim to the land from the 1680s was net with increasing hostility from the Mississauga and their neighbours (including the remnants of the Huron / Wendat who escaped the attempt at complete annihilation in the 1640s) such that by 1700 all 8 Five Nations settlements north of Lake Ontario had been destroyed and their surviving inhabitants pushed back to the aboriginal lands in what is today Upstate New York.  In each and every document or council dating from 1700 onward, the Six Nations recognized the sovereignty of the Crown and "His Majesty the Great King of England".  Never once has the Crown or its legitimate agents questioned that the Six Nations were subjects of the King - it was true of all within the lands claimed by Great Britain, just as the same situation was true of the lands claimed by the King of France (lands that ultimately came under the sovereign control of the British Crown).  I have written about this matter in numerous postings, with examples and sources.  So the claim that Six Nations (all 23,000 on and off Reserve) are a sovereign people is only wishful thinking, and of relatively recent origin.  It is the Mississauga, from whom Governor Sir Frederick Haldimand purchased the Grand River (Haldimand) Tract - it is the Mississauga (e.g., those residing on the New Credit Reserve near Hagersville) who are aboriginal to the Caledonia and surrounds area.

As to the antiquity of their Constitution.  First, it was never recorded until the mid 19th Century, so we do not know how much has changed since the founding of the "League" or "Confederacy".  One thing is absolutely certain though, and that is that JW's dates are nothing by a stab in the dark.  For those who want to look at hard evidence, there is nothing in the archaeological record to suggest the timeline proposed by JW - that the League was formed about 500 AD at which time a "Constitution" was established.  Anyone who wants to check out the facts here would be well advised to read a summary text by the doyen of Upstate New York archaeology (a man I know and respect), Dean R. Snow.  His book which is part of "The Peoples of America" series is entitled, The Iroquois, Oxford UK & Cambridge USA, Blackwell Publishing, 1996.

The data shows that the ancestors of those who would become the Five Nations began to arrive from what is today Central Pennsylvania circa 900 AD.  So not only are Six Nations not aboriginal to Southwestern Ontario, they are not entirely aboriginal (depending on definition) to Upstate New York.  They came from somewhere else, just like everyone else over the years - via migration.  At this time a new people arrived in Upstate New York, but with many of the pottery traditions continuing for some time - likely because the females of the defeated groups were incorporated into the Five Nations by adoption - a practice that extended into modern times.  So we are talking about 1100 years ago when the Five Nations made their first appearance as immigrants, displacing the former occupants.  The archaeological record shows increasing violence over time (cannibalism via cut marks on human bones; and torture, for example fingers severed and tossed among the garbage thrown over the palisade walls).  With the selection of sites for defense and the surrounding of villages with increasingly more substantial palisades we have evidence of warfare likely between the peoples who were to become the Five Nations.  Then, around 1500 AD there is a shift in settlement patterns suggesting that warfare was less of a concern (villages on flatlands and without palisades).  It would seem that about this time, say beginning circa 1400 AD a peace accord between those who would become the Five Nations was established.  As Dr. Snow concludes, Both Iroquois oral tradition and archaeological evidence for endemic warfare suggest that the League could not have formed prior to around 1450, and the process completed by around 1525 (p.60).  After this their violence was then directed outward toward neighbours not under the Great Tree of Peace - resulting in the wholesale destruction of the people in Huronia, the St. Lawrence Valley, Lake Erie shores, and down the Susquehanna River. 

2)  In speaking of Surrey Street JW states that,  a young Caledonia man drove a van down that same road at high speed and crashed it into the house where Six Nations people were sleeping, narrowly missing the gas meter. Those in the house administered first aid until the ambulance got there.  In fact, there is a lot more to this matter than the selective information presented here.  It was part of the ongoing chaos at the former Douglas Creek Estates site, which has included a number of rapes, assaults and other acts of violence.  The situation described by JW was kept out of the mainstream media - the only information I can find via google is on Six Nations Solidarity sites (hardly a reliable source) such as here.  It may have been reported in "Turtle Island News", or the now defunct "Tekawenake", but their content is not on google and my hard copies would have been recycled years ago.  What I recall is that the incident  involved not a White person as JW alludes, but a young Native male who was apparently bent on committing suicide, but the name of the injured person was withheld to protect the family.  Fortunately he failed, but this is a reflection of the horrors that have gone on here, perpetuated by Six Nations members and their invited outsiders, not the people of Caledonia.  That one single house is a microcosm or reflection of the social dysfuction that afflicts much (certainly not all) of the Reserve Community.

3)  A firebomb burned down the first structure built where the barricade is now. A nearby smoke shop, with people inside, was firebombed. A trailer was firebombed. as well.  Well, I live here and this is news to me.  Any "firebombing" has been perpetrated by Six Nations members or their supporters (see Blatchford or any of the local newspapers) - for example the arson incident which resulted in the complete burning of the Stirling Street Bridge which crosses the railway tracks - which is to this day closed.  That was well reported and here is a picture:

Here is another picture of the April 2006 riot by Six Nations and their supporters, where fire was involved in the form of a tire fire in the middle of Argyle Street, Caledonia:













Where is it reported that a structure built where the barricade sits now was firebombed, and if it was, where is the evidence as to who committed the act?

The smoke shacks are clustered around the former Douglas Creek Estates, and most are illegally situated on Hydro One land.  There is a smoke shack that may have burned on the Caledonia bypass near the stub of the Hydro One tower demolished by militants to use as a barricade - at least there is a lot of rubble around the new one - but it is well known that that there is no love lost between "business rivals" in the smokes trade.  Where is the evidence that anyone from Caledonia had anything to do with these alleged incendiary acts.  This is very irresponsible reporting.  Wait, technically it is not reporting, just a "letter to the editor" and hence you can say what you want and not have to provide evidence - under the guise of "opinion" and "free speech".  There is the freedom to lie too - although one may get caught in the lie and then later have to take responsibility in some manner.

DeYo.

Legal Representatives for All Parties Agree, Six Nations Have No Valid Claim for Land, Only Money

It appears that there is a major disconnect between the legal teams representing Six Nations in so called "land claims", and some or most of the Six Nations members.

If you ask, as I have, any Six Nations member who shows up at the former Douglas Creek Estates when for example Gary McHale makes an appearance, what the true concern is, they will say the return of "stolen" land.  Many or most are under the impression that the Haldimand Deed gave them (or should have given them) rights as a sovereign people to do with the land as they pleased.  Thus they reject (or do not understand, or are unaware of) repeated rulings by various levels of the local, Ontario and Canadian (formerly Crown) Courts as it relates to land ownership.  So once again, perception rears its ugly head and many people are completely misguided because they not only do not know the legal rulings, but neither the facts upon which they are based.

In the video clip of the interview of Sun News with Gary McHale (25 June 2014), the latter asserts that time and again the Courts have universally agreed that disagreements relating to the land claims submitted by Six Nations in 1987 are not about the legal title of land ownership, but only about monetary compensation for perceived damages dating back 170 years.  It is time for me to make further specific inquiries.

Historical Record from 1841:  I have spent considerable time presenting the facts (documentation arising from the time before Confederation in 1867) which are freely available at the Library and Archives Canada (with microfilm copies at the Woodland Cultural Centre near Brantford) in various postings to this blog.  I have seen the original documents and assessed the content of the Council Minutes accompanying each surrender, the surveyor's records, the land inspection returns, and as well have obtained copies of other relevant documents such as the personal papers of the "Colonial" officials (e.g., Superintendant David Thorburn) charged by the Crown with the responsibility of ensuring that the duties of the Crown to the Six Nations are properly maintained.  My efforts have shown that there are no irregularities in the surrender of the lands within the Haldimand Tract with the exception of those parcels that the Chiefs, during the 1840s, wished to have set aside for the Six Nations as a Reserve so that they could live together as a people.  At the time there were farms and communities of White people.  Some of the White and Black people were mere squatters with no legal title, others had purchased the "improvements" of one or more Six Nations members and had deeds from them, and there were those who had legally recognized Patents stemming from 999 year leases granted by Chief Joseph Brant who was given Power of Attorney by the Six Nations Chiefs.   The result was that there were Six Nations groups interspersed as a patchwork quilt along the Grand River, extending back to the line shown in the survey accompanying the Haldimand Deed (1784) and Simcoe Patent (1793).  The record shows that the Government officials were concerned that the Six Nations would be so scattered that their existence as a community was in jeopardy.

The Six Nations Chiefs in 1840 were well aware of the problem, and in many cases frustrated not only at the White squatters, but their own people who made a practice of hopping from plot to plot of land, selling each after clearing a few acres then moving on to repeat the process.  The result was a demographic shift whereby there were as many non-Natives as Six Nations members residing on the Grand River Tract.  The only viable solution, other than moving west to unoccupied lands on for example Manitoulin Island en mass (an option that was considered), was to consolidate.  Since no one considered mass eviction of Whites as a viable solution since the large number of residents would need to be compensated for their improvements, and the monies taken from the Six Nations Trust account to pay for it. 

As I have noted before, the single most comprehensive published source on this subject, which includes copies of the original documents, is Charles M. Johnston, The Valley of the Six Nations: A Collection of Documents on the Indian Lands of the Grand River, Toronto, The Champlain Society, 1964.

On 5 January 1841, the Superintendent of Indian Affairs in Upper Canada, Samuel P. Jarvis, provided a very thoughtful consideration of all of the issues relating to the decision to form a compact Reserve in his presentation to a delegation of Mohawk Chiefs at a meeting in Toronto.  While Jarvis has been criticized for his handling of the Trust Account, it was his assertion that the lands should not be assigned in fee simple that resulted in a Reserve which boasts of vibrant Six Nations community to this day.  Had the lands been granted to each head of family in fee simple, the individuals had every right to sell their lands to the highest bidder.  This is precisely what happened in a number of American jurisdictions with the result that today there is no Reserve lands, or only parcels of land scattered randomly among the holdings of non - Members.  Jarvis suggested that all Six Nations families should have the right to remain on their present holdings, and move to the consolidated Reserve at a later date if they so chose.  So all of the available lands would be assigned to the Crown to be sold and the monetary advantage given to the Six Nations, with the exception of the farms at present in their actual occupation and cultivation, and of 20,000 acres as a further reservation (p.191).  The Chiefs at this time were in agreement, but asked that lands in the Johnson Settlement  be exempted unless conforming to their specific wishes.  This stipulation would change before everything was finalized prior to 1850.

On 18 January 1841 the "General Surrender" or "Surrender of Lands by the Six Nations" was read to the Chiefs and Warriors of the Six Nations upon the Grand River in full Council assembled at Onandaga Council House.  It was signed by members of each Nation (including two Mohawks).

Although the initial agreement, which is accepted to this day by the Federal Government of Canada as a binding agreement, stated that 20,000 acres would be reserved such that every head of family could be assigned from 100 to 200 acres of land, the Chiefs changed their minds many times between 1841 and 1848 when agreement was reached in the last remaining parcel (the Burtch Tract).  The total "land mass" which comprises the Six Nations Reserve today is about 46,000 acres, which is over double the amount noted in the original agreement of 1841.

Ultimately the choice was made of lands where there were no Brant Leases, and evicting the relatively few individuals residing there would make this choice of the primary focus of the consolidated settlement the most reasonable.  The initial choice, one that met the criteria, was Tuscarora Township.  Over the years between 1841 and 1848 there was a lot of back and forth, and ultimately the final choice was Tuscarora, plus lands between Onondaga and Middleport in Onondaga Township (both in Brant County), and a single strip of land six lots wide at the far eastern margin of Oneida Township in Haldimand County.  Finally there was a 200 acre parcel known as the "Glebe Lands" around the Mohawk Institute and the Mohawk Chapel - which remain as part of Indian Reserve 40 (Six Nations), noted as 40b. 

Evidence for the Surrender of DCE / Kanonhstaton in 1845:  The best source for the primary source documentation of each transaction between 1841 and 1848 is the 2009 report to the Corporation of the City of Brantford by Joan Holmes & Associates as found here.  It should be noted that the  contentious lands along the Plank Road, the subject of so much acrimony today, including the location of the former Douglas Creek Estates, are specifically noted as being surrendered to the Crown on 17 September 1845 by the 66 Chiefs in Council who signed the document. 

Land Claims in 1987:  Six Nations made no further claims on this land until the submissions by the Land and Resources Department of the Six Nations Band Council in 1987 (see here). 

What Changed in 1995?:  By 1995 it was evident to Six Nations legal representatives that there would be no return of lands that were now lawfully patented by Crown Deed, and that the only recourse to any perceived and proven claims was monetary compensation (see here).  This has not stopped certain radical elements at Six Nations for making false claims of lands that were improperly sold and therefore must be returned to the Six Nations forthwith.  This despite the opinions of their own Counsel, and the facts as available in the archived documents.

Since 1995 Has the Federal Government Reaffirmed its View that there is No Validity to the Plank Road Claim(s)?:  The answer is yes.  For example in 2006, Federal Government representative Monique Dorion stated in no uncertain terms that, Ottawa was firm that there was no validity to the Plank Road claim (Christie Blatchford, Helpless: Caledonia's Nightmare of Fear and Anarchy, and How the law Failed All of Us, Toronto, Doubleday Canada, 2010, p.137).  Three years later,

"In a letter dated January 9, 2009, Chuck Strahl, the federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada said “the Government of Canada’s position is that the surrender of 1844 is valid”." (see here, p.11).

A Recent Court Case that Applies Directly to DCE / Kanonhstaton:  Evidence that to this day, the situation remains the same can be found in recent Court Injunctions issued against those who were blocking legal and lawful work on lands traceable back to a Crown Patent by developers who were attempting to build homes on their land.  A good example can be found in the conflict over Plank Road lands in Hagersville owned by John Voortman, and in the process of being developed by him.  He and his contractors were stopped from doing any work between October and December 2008 by the Haudenosaunee Men's Fire (HMF) led by Chief Alan MacNaughton.  Ultimately Mr. Voortman took the matter to Court and the following findings were made.  Only the key clauses are included.  The case was heard by Superior Court Justice Joseph Henderson, 3 April 2009.  The proceedings and conclusions have direct implications for the lands at DCE.  The full transaction can be found here:

[49] The position of the Six Nations Council is set out in their letter to Voortman’s counsel. Essentially, the Six Nations Council takes the position that the aboriginal interest in the land in the Hamilton-Port Dover Plank Road land claim was never lawfully surrendered to the Crown. But, in the legal action there is no claim for an interest in the land. That is, the Six Nations Council do not make a legal claim for possession of or return of the land. Rather, the 1995 legal action claims an accounting for all revenues that the Six Nations people should have received from the land.

[50] In summary, the Ontario Court of Appeal has found that there has been no conveyance of title to the Six Nations people, and the two recognized governing bodies of the aboriginal people, namely the Six Nations Council and the Six Nations Chiefs, have not made any claim for title to or possession of the property.

[51] Moreover, even if the HMF have the authority to speak on behalf of the Six Nations people, I note that there is no claim made by the HMF in this action or in any other action for the possession of or return of this property. The only request that the HMF have made with respect to the return of the lands is the demand that was made of Mr. Voortman Sr. at the meeting of December 21, 2008.

[52] Therefore, I find that there is no merit to the suggestion that the Six Nations people have a right to ownership of the property. I find that if there is an aboriginal claim it is for compensation for the loss of the usufructuary right regarding the property, not for title to the land.
.
.
.
[56] In the present case Voortman can trace its title back to the Crown Patents, and therefore, pursuant to the Chippewas case, Voortman’s title is presumed to be valid. That presumption is acknowledged by the Six Nations Council in its letter to Voortman’s lawyers. Moreover, even if the surrender of the Hamilton-Port Dover Plank Road land in this case is found to be invalid, given the decision in the Chippewas case, it is very unlikely that the court would set aside the Crown Patents.

[57] Therefore, I find that Voortman has a strong case to show that it is the legal owner of the property, and that Voortman is entitled to exercise its rights as the property owner. The arguments to the contrary are weak, and even if successful would not result in any change in the registered ownership of the property.
.
.
.
IV - CONCLUSION REGARDING SERIOUS ISSUE TO BE TRIED

[76] I now wish to summarize my findings with respect to whether there is a serious issue to be tried. I accept that Voortman is the registered owner of the property and therefore is entitled to exercise its rights as owner. I accept that the Six Nations people have an ongoing claim regarding these lands, but that claim is not for title to or possession of the lands; rather it is for damages.
.
.
.

THE RULE OF LAW

[84] Before I conclude I would like to emphasize the rule of law. All people in Canada are governed by the rule of law as confirmed in the preamble to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is, all people in Canada are required to obey the law. As a corollary, all people in Canada are entitled to know that every other person in Canada will be required to obey the law. If any person in Canada does not obey the law, the courts will enforce the law. In that way the public has some assurance that they can live in peace without fear of those who might choose to disobey the law.

[85] In the present case the representatives of the HMF delivered a message to this court that they did not accept the court process. Moreover, there was a veiled threat that if an injunction were to issue the HMF would have no choice but to continue their tactics of intimidation and criminal and civil disobedience. That threat does not alter or affect my decision today.

[86] The HMF clearly have a choice. An injunction will be issued today. The HMF may choose in good faith to abide by the injunction, live within the criminal and civil law, participate in peaceful demonstrations, and pursue whatever claim they believe they have through their own negotiations and/or court actions. They are not compelled, as was suggested, to disobey the injunction and engage in further criminal and civil misconduct.

[87] The rule of law means that the HMF will be required to obey any court order, just as any person in Canada would be required to obey a court order. The assertion of an aboriginal right does not permit any person, aboriginal or otherwise, to break the law.
.
.
.
CONCLUSION

[88] For all of the aforementioned reasons I find that Voortman is entitled to an Order for an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from entering onto the property and from obstructing Voortman’s development of the property.

[89] I also declare that Voortman has title to and is the owner of the property, and as such is entitled to exclusive possession of the property. I make this finding so that no other group can come forward to occupy the property as the putative land owner.

[90] This Order will be enforced by the Sheriff of Haldimand County with the assistance of the O.P.P. I also order that Voortman and its designates may use reasonable force to prevent any person from trespassing upon the property, and to remove any trespasser from the property in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada.

--------

So the simple question is, WHY ARE THE ACTIVISTS STILL OCCUPYING DCE AFTER 8 YEARS?  They are clearly contravening the law, and there is no possibility of the land being returned to Six Nations (the HCCC).  The above "Statement of Claim" of 1995 makes it evident that the only compensation that could be forthcoming to Six Nations is money.  The legal representatives of the Six Nations Elected Council have concluded that this is the only viable course of action.  Alas this does not stop rogue members from finding their own path and followers.  In particular, despite the ruling against the HCCC and Men's Fire, the Hereditary Council seems to have a short memory (from 2009) when they were given the clearest possible message via the Courts that their claim to land was without merit, and the Courts would not overturn what is registered in the Ontario Land Registry.  The only recourse is to push forward with monetary claims.  Of course the goal of the HCCC, and particularly their radical / enforcement arm, the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) is to twist the arm of the Province of Ontario and have the actual land at DCE returned to them as Reserve land.  If that ever happened it would make a travesty of the justice system, which to date has upheld the rights of land owners whose deeds can be traced back to Crown Patents, to ownership free of interference by groups such as the HMF. 

It would appear that without a shadow of a doubt, the legal and moral obligation of the occupiers is to remove themselves immediately and allow the legal system to determine whether there is any merit in the claim for monetary compensation for a matter extending back 170 years.  That is for the Courts to decide.

DeYo.