sda2.jpg

January 16, 2011

Oh Canada

Part 2 and 3.

Posted by Cjunk at January 16, 2011 12:39 PM
Comments

Thanks for the link.

This one is an absolute must see as Blatchford continues on a National scale to dispel the myth that uttering the words “land claim” grants immunity to those who used it to commit reprehensible crimes against their neighbours.

Jeff Parkinson – Canadian Advocates for Charter Equality
www.JeffParkinson.ca
www.Youtube.com/CanaceHD

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 16, 2011 1:48 PM

Very interesting.

That total incompetent McGuinty completely dropped the ball and used the police as dummies.

Christie alluded to the natives having some valid issues in the Caledonia area and knowing a little of the treaties made with the Six Nations in the 1700s agree with her, but that being said, this whole incident was mishandled from the get-go and the radicals took over and inflamed some of the others. A lot of innocent people were hurt, both physically and financially.

Posted by: Ken (Kulak) at January 16, 2011 2:01 PM

Thanks for the links cjunk. Interesting to hear Christie's side of it without some screaming nut-bars calling her a racist.

Posted by: Pat at January 16, 2011 3:21 PM

And the Mohawks have been hunting deer in the Hamilton Conservation Area! (http://phantomsoapbox.blogspot.com/2010/12/whos-to-blame-here-really-though.html)

Who knew? This is a tiny conservation area in the middle of an urban area and people are running around with guns because the Natives have made a claim that it is a traditional hunting ground -- no warning sings nothing. Families go there for hikes and picnics, children running around unawares.

And the fact is it isn't traditional -- it's artificial and the deer that are there were "seeded".

Posted by: ricardo at January 16, 2011 3:37 PM

If you've got the spare cash, I can't recommend her book on the subject enough.

Posted by: RL at January 16, 2011 3:38 PM

Intersting point.

The prof that emailed in the bit about how the natives where given the Haldiman tract after the American revolution indicates that someone owned the land before them.
Now who might those original residents be and I wonder if they where compensated or was the land taken from them?

Posted by: gimbol at January 16, 2011 3:58 PM

Vote Liberal.

Posted by: My Name is Nobody at January 16, 2011 4:00 PM

PS: There's an easy way to settle this. With an army. I like the line "natives and non natives." I have relatives in Ontario that derive from families who were there in 1740. Are they not "natives?""

Posted by: My Name is Nobody at January 16, 2011 4:04 PM

Unlike the Mohawks and the rest of the original 5 Nations, Six Nations peoples did not pre date Europeans in Canada. They fled New York State after the American Revolutionary War & were granted asylum in Canada on what is now referred to as the Six Nations reserve.

While the Canadian Federal Government recognizes and is (at a ridiculously slow pace) negotiating hundreds of land claims with the Mohawks, Oneida,, Cayuga, Tuscarora, Seneca, & Onondaga, they have made it clear that there is no valid claim to the property known as the Douglas Creek Estates in Caledonia.

In fact it is the official position of Six Nations that they sold the property in question, but were insufficiently compensated, thus there is a claim for money, not land on the table.

The use of the words “land claim” by those who came to the DCE from Quebec, BC, and New York State to perpetrate the worst of the violence against Caledonia seemingly paralyzed the OPP & McGuinty Liberals who were at the time conducting a politically motivated, spoon fed, multi million dollar tax payer funded inquiry into the events at Ipperwash in 1995 which is an issue that will hopefully be exposed & resolved by the next Ontario Government.

That the Ipperwash Inquiry which completely failed to address the issue of non Natives being victimized while the OPP refused to enforce the law (sound familiar?) has been used by the McGuinty government and the OPP to justify their cowardly inactions in Caledonia is a disgrace.

Jeff Parkinson – Canadian Advocates for Charter Equality
www.JeffParkinson.ca
www.Youtube.com/CanaceHD

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 16, 2011 4:34 PM

In clip 2 of the interview, Blatchford freely admits to being a one-sided hack (her words) after Paikin provides some historical context about the Six Nations issue:

10:24 - “I defer to historians to write history. What I write is journalism. It’s current events. I write one side of it.”

10:41 - “We wrote about what happened. And we didn’t have to do the rest of it. I’m a newspaper hack.”

11:02 - “I’m used to writing 1,000 word clunks...I’m a newspaper hack. I write modern, current events, and I don’t have to give the broad 360 degree perspective.”

No one with a working brain cell should take anything Blatchford writes as anything more than an ongoing effort to promote herself. Devoid of context and history, her book is a one-sided joke. And if you don't believe me, just watch the clip again. She says so herself.

Posted by: Kaplan at January 16, 2011 4:42 PM

That Blatchford admits to focusing on one side of the story does nothing to diminish her credibility as a Governor General Award winning author. How for example is she “promoting herself” by telling the public about the attempted murder of a police officer in June of 2006 by a DCE occupier?

If we are to subscribe to the logic that “Kaplan” appears to be using where both sides of every story must be told for the writer to have credibility, then every news story about a murder (or any other crime) would have to allot equal space to telling the story of the perpetrator.

Aside from that, how exactly does a claim to a piece of property justify what the thugs who invaded DCE & terrorized innocent people did? What about those who beat Sam Gualitieri nearly to death in the home he was building for his daughter? Is that story less true or less worthy of being told if the reporter doesn’t interview the people who left Mr. Gualtieri with permanent brain damage?

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 16, 2011 5:34 PM

Historically Southern Ontario was the domain of the Neutral/Tobaccos/Hurons.....all of which were exterminated by Iroquois raids and then invasion. In the absence of european colonials the land would be theirs by right of conquest....like the Saxons, Danes and later Normans in Britain....or the Francs(Germans) in France.
The French/Indian War and later American Revolution made this colonial war and the Iroquois in Canada United Empire Loyalists.
It is interesting to note that the only FN reserves in the US east of the Mississippi are the 6 nations reserves in Northern New York and Pennsylvania----authorized by the Peace of Paris which ended the French/Indian War.

Posted by: sasquatch at January 16, 2011 5:41 PM

@Kaplan

With my working brain cell, I was able to determine that the rule of law had completely broken down in Caledonia without reading one word that Ms. Blatchford wrote about it.

Which of course is the real issue. Which of course you choose to ignore.

Posted by: Matt Hillier at January 16, 2011 5:50 PM

Kaplan -

Why don't you address one of Ms. Blatchford's claims - Was the OPP using " two tiers of justice " here?

Here's another one to address: Were any non-native people harmed in this sad episode? Were any actions by committed by Six Nations members wrong? Which ones?

You don't really believe that the non-natives affected by this don't deserve a voice defending them in the public eye, do you?

Posted by: small c conservative at January 16, 2011 6:02 PM

I read her book and literally wept that our freedoms have come to mean absolutely nothing to liberal leaders in this country. Read it and weep for Ontario, race based policing at the expsense of rule of law for all citizens.

Posted by: Rose at January 16, 2011 6:28 PM

Jeff Parkinson, you're dealing entirely in false equivalencies, so I won't even bother with your inane commentary.

Absolutely the rule of law had broken down at certain points. But Blatchford mistook her book-writing project for another one of her sob-sister commentaries. She had the space to tell the whole story, not just a fraction of it.

Her book holds zero credibility as a source of what happened, and why it happened.

Posted by: Kaplan at January 16, 2011 7:25 PM

Oh, Kaplan, your life would be devoid of meaning and you would have nothing to live for it you couldn't find some past injustice rant and rail about. Consider yourself lucky that she left you some crumbs to lick up off the floor like a flea and worm infested cur. Most of us get on with life, while you and your type wallow incessantly in pits of grievance because the world isn't perfect. An examination of this type of mental illness is in and of itself worth a good 400+ page book. Care to be the subject of Blatch's next book?

Posted by: Louise at January 16, 2011 7:48 PM

"Jeff Parkinson, you're dealing entirely in false equivalencies, so I won't even bother with your inane commentary."

Why don't you just admit you don't have an answer for the simple question of how a land claim, legitimate or otherwise justifies the use of violence against innocent people.

Her book lays out a series of events that took place which are well documented. That you find her lack of coddling the criminals disagreeable doesn't change the accuracy of her reporting.

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 16, 2011 7:53 PM

Interesting all the usual suspects ducked out on a chance to "correct" Blanchford to her face. Heh. We really are living in an Orwellian bizzarro world where fact and truth are attacked as hate.

Posted by: Occam at January 16, 2011 8:14 PM

Kaplan, if you listen to Blatchford describe what a "Hack" is to her it is not the derogatory one you state. She describes herself as only a journalist that reports on facets of a story not the entire scope from every angle. As she mentioned several times she only wrote on the slice of how the rule of law, supposedly enforced by our provincial police, was ignored and actually withdrawn from protecting the citizens of Caledonia, full stop.

The OPP let all of us down and if another incident like this happens to say, you, I am sure you will be ecstatic when your sworn protectors just walk away.

We saw a similar incident at the G20 where police officers were ordered to stand down and accept the damage to property and our city's reputation as just collateral damage by their political masters.

Posted by: dave at January 16, 2011 10:42 PM

Who's ranting and railing, Louise? I'm pressing for some context, without which Blatchford's piece is a one-sided joke. Myself, I like facts. I can see why you rush to Blatchford's defence. Her ill-informed, badly researched and one-sided book fits the narrative you so enjoy, that of the white victim and the violent aboriginal. But there's more to the story here. You know it, Blatchford knows it and I know it.

Jeff Parkinson, you've done nothing more than prove my point. At no time did I ever suggest, in any way, that a land claim justified violence, or that criminals should be coddled. You're a simpleton, and putting those words in my mouth makes for an easy rebuttal for you. Sadly, I didn't say that, and I certainly don't think it.

Posted by: Kaplan at January 16, 2011 11:40 PM

Who's ranting and railing, Louise? I'm pressing for some context, without which Blatchford's piece is a one-sided joke. Myself, I like facts. I can see why you rush to Blatchford's defence. Her ill-informed, badly researched and one-sided book fits the narrative you so enjoy, that of the white victim and the violent aboriginal. But there's more to the story here. You know it, Blatchford knows it and I know it.

Jeff Parkinson, you've done nothing more than prove my point. At no time did I ever suggest, in any way, that a land claim justified violence, or that criminals should be coddled. You're a simpleton, and putting those words in my mouth makes for an easy rebuttal for you. Sadly, I didn't say that, and I certainly don't think it.

Posted by: Kaplan at January 16, 2011 11:40 PM

Blah, blah, blah. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Posted by: Louise at January 17, 2011 12:07 AM

Kaplan? sounds liberal to me!

Posted by: larben at January 17, 2011 12:48 AM

What I get from this story is lazy Indians can claim "victim", and do what they want,all the while,screwing it up like they always do.
That is untill some whitey has had enough, and shoots the f&#ker. Aka occupier, or more likely petty thief.

Then everyone is sad, wringing their hands,and the Indian is still portrayed as "the victim". Laughable but still tragic. Some role model, no wonder they're doomed.

Posted by: eastern paul at January 17, 2011 12:54 AM

This can't be winning her friends. The truth rarely does.
No one it seems in Ontario wants this in the public as less as possible.
JMO

Posted by: Revnant Dream at January 17, 2011 2:12 AM

Anyone defending the native terrorists ever worked on a reserve??? I have, my brother in law has and many of my friends have and with a few exceptions they are sh1t holes of their own making. Most of my native friends and acquaintences agree. Houses being torn down for fire wood before they are completed, holes cut into bathroom walls so the animals can drink from the tub.

Traditional hunting rights my a$$. They want traditional hunting rights, great, hunt traditionally! Land claims? What a futhing joke. B.C. would lose 110% of itself if all claims went through. Seems land becomes traditional or sacred when it becomes worth something!

The Indian (wait, first nations peoples) act needs to be scrapped RFN!! Give the good folks there 2 generations to get their feces together and hand the existing land over to do as they wish.

This whole Caledonia craphole is all about political correctness gone mad!! If we can't get our own citizens to get with the program, how the futh do we expect immigrants to FIFO?!?!?!?!?

Posted by: Olde Spice at January 17, 2011 10:18 AM

@ Kaplan,

You say you like facts, so here are a few for your enjoyment.

The tide of public opinion is changing as more people realize what happened in Caledonia.

The government that allowed all of this to take place is unlikely to survive the next election.

Christie Blatchford is one of Canada’s most respected authors, and Helpless has done so well that the publisher had to order a second printing. Her opinion carries a lot of weight while yours carries none.

Cheers!

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 17, 2011 11:45 AM

@Kaplan

"Absolutely the rule of law had broken down at certain points."

So you agree on that point (with what appears to be the majority of people commenting). That you dislike Ms. Blatchford's work is irrelevant.

As Occam noted, it's quite telling that no one else would go on the show. It's not like Mr. Paikin can be accused of being a 'hack journalist', and anyone who went on would certainly be given an opportunity to tell their side of the story.

Of course it's very difficult to excuse the inexcusable, which probably explains their absence.

Posted by: Matt Hillier at January 17, 2011 12:01 PM

Jeff: You can't define fact as something probable or vica versa.

"unlikely to survive the next election."

You forget a fact that there will soon be more leftist/liberal/special interest/immigrant voters than before.

As well the Liberals are trying to move a 3 year stay in Canada to be eligible for old age pension.

Heck right now, there is only 33% voting in Calgary.

Posted by: johnbrooks at January 17, 2011 2:39 PM

Kaplan,

Admitting to a bias or conflict of interest does not invalidate your findings -- if you do it in University you get points for it; if you don't do it you can be thrown out for academic dishonesty.

By so doing and being up front, Blatchford is being an honest and responsible journalist and we can weigh her findings accordingly.

You Liberals can learn something from Blatchford's honesty: so how's all that lying and stealing and cheating and covering up conflict of interest working out for ya Libs so far?

Jus' thought I'd ask.

Posted by: ricardo at January 17, 2011 3:15 PM

You make a sound argument Mr. Brooks, but in my opinion, based on years of studying the political climate surrounding the events in Caledonia, we are nearing the end of the McGuinty reign. That something is likely should perhaps have been posted in a separate paragraph, but on occasion I lose my train of thought.

While Federally I would likely predict another Conservative minority while hoping that the Liberals can at least unseat Haldimand Norfolk MP Diane Finley, I think the people of Ontario have had enough of Mr. McGuinty. The new immigrant population that you mentioned is going to be burdened by the HST, the ridiculous price of gasoline which McGuinty drove up another 8% with the aforementioned HST, and the steadily increasing cost of hydro as the rest of us are, and people are always mindful of that which takes money out of their pockets.

Posted by: Jeff Parkinson at January 17, 2011 3:23 PM

Olde Spice at 10:18 AM: "Anyone defending the native terrorists ever worked on a reserve??? I have, my brother in law has and many of my friends have and with a few exceptions they are sh1t holes of their own making."
====================
Ditto.

But I put the blame mostly on the Indian Industry which consists of:

1) the legal team who are making a killing, of whom Tony Merchant is surely the king;

2) the academic wing, charged with creating the necessarily distorted narrative (kaplan might be one, or at least one of their dupes);

3) the politicians (both at the reserve level where it is also quite lucrative, where opportunity for graft and abscondment is rife, and in provincial and federal government), and;

4) the civil service where legions of cushy jobs pushing "special services" for and on behalf of Aboriginal peoples have been created, and in which many positions are required to be filled by a person of aboriginal ancestry.

Many of these provide very nice sinecures, the continuation of which depends entirely on keeping First Nations peoples at the bottom of the heap and ever more angry and demanding.

Thinking outside the box - an activity which may lead to the awakening of the great masses of Aboriginal peoples - is strictly forbidden and harshly punished.

Posted by: Louise at January 17, 2011 3:26 PM
Site
Meter