Nothing new yet bump

This is so upsetting. Stand offs get like this as it is very difficult for everyone to keep cool when emotions are escalating. Unfortunately neither the Native protestors nor the police have experts at blocades that are trained in conflict resolution. The ironic thing is that meeting face to face can lead to great achievements but not in this type of a situation. My prayers to all involved. E.

Okay where to start. First there should be more media coming out tomorrow from reporters who actually saw first hand some of the events that occurred yesterday. Needless to say that some of the accounts in this news article are not eyewitness as the Expositor reporter wasn't actually there to see the actual incidents.
That's not to say that things did not happen and that things did not get tense.
To be clear this is not a standoff situation al Oka and the tense part of this protest was resolved by the afternoon.
Yes people still will be protesting because the overall issue remain to be solved.

A bit on Gary Mchale and some back ground to add some context. To be brief the guy is a well known agitator and propaganadist with an agenda along racial lines. Though he will vehemnently disagree with that sentiment. That's tough I know more then enough to back that up. His rallies have been attended by known suprememists of the likes of Paul Fromme though he himself will deny any association or agenda in that area. Par for the course. He's good at that part of what he does. He currently is using the courts to push his agenda and is currently on a watch list of several anti-hate groups as well as by legal authorities. He currently is embroiled in several civil defamation suits against people who run internet forums as well as a 7 million dollar suit launched by 22 members of the OPP. He has threatened defamation suits against the Ontario Police Commissioner Julian Fantino and Aboringinal Affairs Minister Micheal Bryant. He also has been charged himself with conspiracy to commit mischief and is awaiting trial on that charge. As part of his bail conditions he's actually banned from stepping foot in several local counties.
It is felt by many that his current legal endeavors in getting private prosecution charges laid are as much a part of garnering 'evidence' for his own legal matters then as part of some self professed altruist motives. He's an interesting fellow to say the least.

In terms of the point of the actual charges getting laid and essentially through that first part of the process it proves nothing one way or another as said evidence is not actually weighed or investigated as part of that initial process by the other party. It only is a statement that said evidence exists that meets the criteria for the charge and is basically a considered a one sided view of the affair. It does not go through the same sort of process that police or the crown go through when they decide to lay charges.
Currently there is a group that is actually working on going through the same process and to get charges laid on him and other associates on a number of different counts.

As for the statements made by Steve Powless. Contrary to the newspapers reporting him as spokesperson, he isn't, and does not represent the views of the protesters or SN's. His words are his own and people are quite upset that it was reported this way to seem like he was speaking in some sort of official capacity especially considering the overt inflammatory nature of them and how it paints the entire situation and all the people involved. It's media though and these type of things play really well. He has a right to his views as anyone in this country does but not as reflection of something official in this case.

Duane Maracle who was arrested was let out on bail today, without conditions and the initial statements made by the police about the incident that appear in the paper do not reflect the charges that were read out in court. Essentially there was no 'punch' nor was it what set things off. Maracle initially was grabbed for obstruction and the alleged assault occurred after he was grabbed. Witnesses including a couple of reporters said the essentially what happened was that when he was grabbed by several officers his elbow was yanked and hit the officer in the face and knocked his sunglasses off an action for which he immediately apologized for at. When the charges were read they reflected this testimony as they said the alleged assault was that that the officer was hit in the nose knocking off his sunglasses in a struggle....not a 'punch' that set the whole thing off.
All of this is on video so I expect the 'truth' will make itself known.

The second person has been indentified and it is doubtful that people are going to contest that charge or get upset about it because they were as upset about it happening because it was in their view uncalled for. They weren't there to fight. If they were, there wouldn't have been woman and children in the group.

Why are all these details important to comment on here? It's not to try to deflect or discount or even argue whether the protest has merit in and of itself it's that taking just basic media accounts of events such as these are problematic in getting the real picture and jumping to conclusions and assumptions based on them. There is always more much much more to the story and they do get things wrong. Generally the closer in time the accounts come out to the actual situation being reported the more chance there is that it won't be entirely correct, completely in context and with perspective. That seems to occur after. Frustrating though at times because the initial accounts always seem to have more merit no matter how much they're countered or when the media themselves realize they got it wrong and report the correct information.

There is also the issue of bias, which tends to rear its ugly head when racialized groups are involved that does need to be considered when reading about situations. I can give numerous examples of how bias has played out in the media since this land dispute started a couple of years ago though to be fair it has gotten much better then it was initially mostly due to efforts of both natives and non-natives alike to point out the instances and essentially educate on the issues and different perspectives so that the actual reporting is more fair to all.

There are also many issues regarding the actual injunctions that are in play that actually have ramifications beyond just this particular situation and just SN's and FN's but for all citizens as essentially they set precedent on curbing all of our democratic rights to protest. This is likely one of the reasons that some of the top Charter rights lawyers in the country are now involved. In lawyer talk they refer to 'big guns' these people are the 'stealth bombers 'of lawyerdom. As well as it does play into some of the reasons that the people have chosen to defy them whether ones agree or not. Also important to note is that both the Traditional Chiefs Council and the Chief of the Band Council sit in support. This is actually an unprecedented in SN's history political and otherwise and though I doubt that most understand what that actually means it's a big friggin deal both internally and externally and is actually having ramifications across the Country and even the US for that matter. The situation also is directly connected with two other recent disputes in Sharbot Lake and KI which saw their respective leaders put in jail and both within recent weeks were overturned upon appeal and the respective judges severely chastized. The Brantford injunctions are actually modeled on these injunctions. It is the same lawyer and firm involved in all cases. So yeah again there is so much more to what is going on here.

Jadespring,

Hi,

Thanks for picking up the slack.

As you mention the news today is not quite so sensational as was initially reported. Not to say that the Expositor hasn't given up trying to find a sensational slant. Their reporter has talked to an individual who gives his name as "megadeath" which I suspect points to the individual's musical tastes rather than anything more sinister.

It appears that the arrest and ensuing activity are typical of arrests of this nature (meaning that whenever there is a scuffle during an arrest there is always contact that needs to be sorted out as to it being intentional or accidental in nature). It would appear that the Crown is satisfied that the contact was accidental.

You also point out correctly that the court cases I point to are in the very preliminary stages and are by no means done deals. The judgments so far have only indicated that there is enough apparent evidence to proceed to trial rather than simply dismiss any charges. Dismissal is still a possibility.

It is quiet at the site again today. This morning's rain should bring a reprieve from the scorching weather of yesterday.

Powless's comments appear to have been more bluster than actual threat and the more sober and rational leadership we are accustomed to seeing in Brantford at such actions appears to be asserting itself (referencing of course the Six Nation's representation).

Brantford City Councilors are either not talking to anyone or not talking to the Expositor about Monday.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Yes the media yesterday and today is definitely less in the sensational department.
Which seems to be par for the course. Flash bang!...okay now lets get more thoughtful and in depth. Reporters from the Teka and the Turtle were actually on scene and I expect that there coverage will offer even more perspective. Unfortunately they aren't easily accessible online because of the need for subscriptions. Understandable but also a pain. :)
The link to the expositor article
http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1115752

And I can confirm that your speculation about the name is most definitely connected with musical tastes and not some "I'm all about 'death' thing" :)

Whats interesting is that at Duane's Maracle's bail hearing yesterday he was released without any of the normal conditions because of arguments put forth from higher court rulings about situations regarding land claims and the people involved
The judge actually agreed, which was significant. I'm hoping that there will be some media analysis on that because it's important to try to get a grip on the 'legal' and 'law' issues that are at play here in order understand just how complex the situation is.

Don't really have anything to add from this distance, but wanted to say I appreciate the updates, and I am reading them.

I also want to add that I am following your reports Jadespring. I am finding it hard to get "hard facts" on this issue. When it was originally reported I said that I found it very distressing because I feared from the tone of how the press was reporting there was an agenda to inflame things. That may sound cynical but they do that sometimes and I was really worried that we would not get the true story. I was so glad that we have your input. Please keep letting us know what is going on. That will be especially important as things calm down as what often happens is when there is no conflict to report the press don't report at all. Blessings. E

No problem Elisabeth,

Things are quiet now.
I'm actually attempting to get permission to reprint the editorial from one of the local papers which actually addresses some of the recounting of the events and how even getting the most minor of details wrong can make a tense situation worse. It's quite good and says it better then I could. It's not available online unfortunately and I don't want to violate copyright and all that.
Hopefully tomorrow. They actually had reporters on scene and have video and tape to back everything up.

I am laying claim to all of the land within three miles on either side of the Grand River from the mouth of the river on Lake Erie to the Town of Fergus north of Guelph. Should any of you wish to build on my land I require that in addition to buying and paying for the building permit and getting approvals from the municipality (and the Grand River Conservation Authority where applicable) that you also submit your plans to me for approval along with your "application" fee which I will specify at the time of your application. Should you fail to make application to me and pay the fee, me and my friends (we like to call ourselves "the Killers" not because we want to scare the bejeezus out of you but because it sounds so rafish and we want everyone to know we just ADORE the music of the band that goes by the same name) are going to dress up in our best camo outfits, wraparound sunglasses and bandanas and blockade your street.

Extortion? Pish posh! Just think of it as cheap insurance that protects you against increased construction costs due to construction delays incurred by reason of civil unrest. Don't think of it as money! Think of it as "healing".

Just a few notes.
Native land claims negotiations and courts should be public.
There are very many worthy native land claims and many worthy native rights causes. Caledonia, Brantford et al. is among the weakest of these claims and causes and detract from the many wortty ones.
The legitimacy of some of the key groups is questionable, as is the legitimacy of their claims and their actions. The complaints of blackmail and extortion have considerable merit. Strongarm tactics support these claims.

While being a strong native rights supporter for many years I am moved to the fence on the Caledonia/Brantford issue.

Native land claims negotiations and courts should be public.
There are very many worthy native land claims and many worthy native rights causes. Caledonia, Brantford et al. is among the weakest of these claims and causes and detract from the many wortty ones.
The legitimacy of some of the key groups is questionable, as is the legitimacy of their claims and their actions. The complaints of blackmail and extortion have considerable merit. Strongarm tactics support these claims.

While being a strong native rights supporter for many years I am moved to the fence on the Caledonia/Brantford issue.

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

These are pretty broad statements. On what are your basing you're determination that the claims in question are weaker then other ones? And could you expand a little on the 'legimacy' question. Which groups are you talking about?

I am reading too, and appreciate the discussion of people who know much more than me.

The group conducting the protests and shakedowns of developers in Caledonia and Brantford are not the Six Nations Tribal Council. They are a large breakaway group that claims to be the continuation of the original ruling group (clan mothers) of the Iroquois Six Nations that preceded the democratic Tribal Council, which they view as an artificial construct of the Canadian government. Only clan mothers have a vote, not the whole tribe.
This group doesn't recognize the tribal council and demands to be a controlling party in all business dealings including land claims in spite of the fact that they have never been elected by a majority of tribal voters.
Thus I question the legitimacy of this group when they try to speak for the whole tribe.

A few weeks back I spent a day with a group of women from the Saugeen First Nation ~ they spoke in terms of discussions, reconciliation, respect for the earth and eachother. I did not sense that greed and power were a part of their being. Those women had answers ~ yet they will probably never make the headlines.

The Expositor listed a meeting by a group called Two Rows through Understanding and Education (TRUE) to discuss the media portrayal of the current land claims/land occupation situation with the Six Nations & Caledonia & Brantford. It is being held at Laurier Brantford's Odeon lecture hall at 7pm I believe. If I am able to go I will post back on here.

SLJudds: I am not a member of the Six Nations nor consider myself an expert about this issue but I do hope someone from that community would comment on what you have stated visa vis the views of the two governing structures. From what I have read in the past the Band Council was imposed on the Six Nations by the Canadian Government sometime in the 1920's because the Six Nations tried to file a compliant with the United Nations against the Government of Canada for monies held in trust that were generated from land leases held on the Haldimand Tract but were never given to the Six Nations. The perception was and maybe is that the majority of the members of the Six Nations don't recognize nor participate by voting for the band council and that the majority recognize the "Confederacy" or "Haudenosaunee". Whether this is true I don't know but I have heard this story quite a few times.

The obvious solution to this dual-leadership problem would be for the Haudenosaunee to run in an election and become the band council.I would be very surprised if this has not been tried. It would be a mistake to use Canadian standards to view Six Nations politics, however.

I suspect that the community behaves much like a large extended family - they are, in fact, a group of clans. A group in an extended family can go off and do their own thing while still being members of the family. Thus there are tribe members and outsiders. That is the most fundamental division in their lives. The Haudenosaunee are dealing primarily with outsiders and the tribal council deals with the nuts and bolts of running a cummunity. Thus they can avoid open clashes.

The police and the community view things as citizens and demonstrators (or terrorists). Anything that interferes with the Canadian preoccupation with making money (development) is viewed as almost an act of terrorism. Thus, they are the ones giving the Haudenoshee their power.

We view everything in terms of "right and wrong ", "authority and defiance", and we put a price tag on absolutely everything. Anything that inferferes with the making of money is the road to ruin. Nobody would dare give up their mantles of authority. Police in Canada always confront demonstrations by arming themselves to the teeth in a show of force, provoking more hostility from the demonstrators.

The Haudenoshee aren't the problem. The real problem is us.