Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« The White House watch ends (for now) . . . | Main | World Cup »

Friday, June 09, 2006

Nothing like beating a member of the press to get attention

They’ve went from Kumbaya to Killing Floor in two and a half seconds:

Two camera operators who work for Hamilton-based CH television were assaulted Friday at the site of an aboriginal occupation.

One of the camera operators apparently had his equipment stolen during the alleged attack.

Officials at the station say the men were filming as part of the ongoing coverage of the standoff in Caledonia, Ont. where aboriginal protesters took over a housing construction site in February.

The two were positioned across the street from a Canadian Tire parking lot where a number of protestors had gathered, and were shooting generic stock video footage known as ‘b-roll’ when they were apparently ‘rushed’ and assaulted. (Canada.com)

This backs up the story of Matt Walcoff. Just a bunch of thugs that should be destroyed and removed from their duties as thugs. The article doesn’t say who assaulted them, but I’m willing to take a big guess. (c/p)

Posted by Darcey on June 9, 2006 in Aboriginal Issues | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d834c8c7a069e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Nothing like beating a member of the press to get attention:

Comments

This is the fruit of our political correctness and multiculturlism. It is special treatment for criminals if they happen to belong to one of the special groups. We need to insist on the rule of law applying to everyone regardless of colour or background. Justice being colour-blind does not seem to be the case.

Posted by: Alain | 2006-06-09 6:30:37 PM


excellent points...I concur.

Posted by: MarkAlta | 2006-06-09 7:12:33 PM


Amazing that it was "unclear" who attacked the camera guys while they were filming a mob of (probably drunken - why not throw in a stereotype) indians. I liked the footage from a couple weeks ago of the white resident being kicked in the head by a group of indians, and then the cops arresting him as blood pours down his half-conscious face, and the chugs go free. Why do Canadians tolerate these scumbags?

Posted by: Big Makk | 2006-06-10 1:55:35 AM


Big Makk: That's 'cause we're so darned polite, unlike those bad Americans.

Posted by: MarkAlta | 2006-06-10 3:38:36 AM


Very few courageous and honest Canadians left eh.

Posted by: J Morrison | 2006-06-10 6:23:13 AM


As Canadians, we are all equal, but some are more equal than others.

Posted by: Joel K. | 2006-06-10 9:42:30 AM


The perps?

Let me guess. They were from economically-deprived areas.

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-06-10 9:49:50 AM


I'm sure they represented a "broad strata" of Canadian ethno cultural communities.

Posted by: DrD | 2006-06-10 10:05:59 AM


Well, you see the problem is that we haven't organized basketball games for these thugs....that's why they're marginalized....

I asked before....where do these thugs get so much time off work to do all of this protesting??? Do they work? Where?

It's time for the OPP to step in, and do what they have to do to dismantle the blockades. It's also time to not worry about being racist when they do so. It's not true anyway. If someone is breaking the law, and they are arrested, there's nothing racist about upholding the law of the land.

Posted by: anonymous | 2006-06-10 11:44:21 AM


At this point I've had it with the damned Indians, Natives or aboriginals, whatever. It's time they became law abiding, taxpaying citizens like the rest of the hardworking people who pay for their special treatment. These boors should be cuffed off to jail and get the same treatment as any other hoodlums. What's it going to take for some action, someone getting killed?

Posted by: Liz Jackson | 2006-06-10 12:50:13 PM


Steady now, Liz:

There are plenty of white kids who buy into the drug culture and become criminals because it seems cool.

As I understand it, the natives in the Ontario standoff have some legitimate claim to the land.

Unless I'm mistaken, a developer cannot build anything on any land without approval of the landowner.

While we may disagree on the tactics being used to draw attention to this property dispute, I believe the natives have some legitimacy in their claims in this case.

All that other stuff you're spouting is a bunch of baloney at best. Check the facts. They're readily available.

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-06-10 1:13:44 PM


"What is it going to take for some action, someone getting killed?"

Liz
It already happened in Kanesatake in 1990, when a QPF officer was shot dead trying to remove a roadblock. What ensued was a standoff that lasted a couple of months and finally a military intervention.
In the meantime, the "ordinary" folks who tried the same "Indian strategy" by occupying the Mercier bridge that links Montreal and the South shore were arrested and charged with public mischief.
Just beautiful...

Posted by: Nothing New Under the Sun | 2006-06-10 1:38:05 PM


To Set You Free post: Where's the comparison between white kids buying into the drug culture here? I have checked the facts, have you?

Posted by: Liz Jackson | 2006-06-10 1:43:27 PM


Yeah, go Liz. Like Mike Harris said: "Get those f-ing Indians out of the park."

Posted by: Howard Roark | 2006-06-10 2:34:42 PM


Liz:

I take you at your word when you say you have checked the facts.

Now please tell me, who has title to the disputed lands?

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-06-10 2:41:05 PM


Just another bunch of thugs using violence to influence a political (or legal) outcome. Just like islamist bombers, anti-glob/anarchist moltov chuckers, anti-abortion snipers, eco-terrorist tree spikers, etc... I thought the anti-terror legislation was designed to combat this kind of stuff?

The odds of seeing violent natives prosecuted under the Act? Hovering around zero.

Posted by: db | 2006-06-10 3:13:50 PM


Thugs? Maybe.

If somebody tried to build on your property without your permission, would you just quietly let them do it?

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-06-10 3:39:26 PM


I would imagine you would contact a lawyer to defend your property, or would engaging in violence be your first move Set you free?

Posted by: Howard Roark | 2006-06-10 4:39:10 PM


SYF: Wake up ! law abiding citizens would let the court injunctions and justice system do its job. these characters only use the courts when it suits their purpose.

Posted by: MarkAlta | 2006-06-10 4:51:00 PM


Set you free post: Have you read "Through Indian Eyes"? We have a black,shameful history with Natives in North America but we have evolved and even the Natives do not live as they did centuries ago. We have a Country with laws which should apply equally to all who live here. Crazy Horse of the Oglala Sioux said "we do not want your civilization, we would live as our fathers did and our fathers before them" one has to wonder if they could have endured without civilization, warts and all.

Posted by: Liz Jackson | 2006-06-10 4:56:30 PM


Liz,

The reason why they call themselves First nations, is they want to be recognized as being many different peoples. And fact is, they have hundreds of languages and cultures. And many First Nations would like to see the Indian Act gone, because it is racist, and so they can be considered to be in and of the rest of Canadians.

The Liberals made that promise, through Jean Chreten back in the 70's. It never happenned (not new), because it really was not as important to carry through, as it was to dangle the promise at the end of a schtick!

Meanwhile, issues on and off reserves remain unchecked, and more and more young First Nations people get sucked down the drugs-and-violence pileline while whistle-blowers cry out against the corruption, graft and nepotism, while gaining more resemblance to the disputed territories in the middle east, than to well or over-funded archaic systems, where the number one issues are the lack of education, easy access to drugs, highest suicide rates in the world and weight issues and diabetes crisis that make the rest of North Americans look skinny. This goes on, while the role models, the ones living the good life, get buried behind the invisibility of easily accessible assimilation, where success is seen as just another Canadian, and failure, as in 'oh there goes one of them'!

Meanwhile, the situation gets addressed with more leftists patchwork solutions, and we, the rest of the taxpayers sit around feeling guilty that nothing we do ends the cycles of abuse, poverty, drugs and violence that the leftists quickly stick in our faces. And the only people who have the guts to say anything about it, are either leftists or folks who enjoy pointing to other people's sufferring, with further victimology.

The point here, is that success stories need to be presented, without victimology. The way through the problem, is not by doing any more studies about poverty on reserves. What must be studied, is successful reserves. And they are out there. That way, their model can be presented to the rest, so others can look and see, and gain an epiphany!

Posted by: Lady | 2006-06-10 8:00:40 PM


Screw reserves. Indians must integrated into Canadian society wholly and completely. Yes, you are right that the Indian Act should be abolished but the Native "leadership" will not allow it to be. They're quite happy "governing" a failed system as long as they're doing okay.

Posted by: Roark | 2006-06-10 10:21:52 PM


The people protesting are just on a 'band wagon' SYF, not one of those people owns any land - it is collective 'owned' land. The reserve system is a template for Communism. It is not Plato's 'Utopia' on those reserves, people are so at the mercy of the chief and his thugs that they will grasp at straws to get attention. They are trapped in 'nothingness'. Queen Victoria was not a Canadian, she signed those agreements so the Hudson Bay Co and other British investors could go unmolested into the 'hostile lands' and bring $$$ home to England. When the people of Canada took over and we became an independent nation, all those agreements should have been null and void. The individual Indian people should have been given the opportunity to homestead - they were not, ever wonder why not? Ever wonder why WWI and WWII Canadian Indian vets were not given INDIVIDUAL DVA benefits?
Anyone born here is a First Canadian, the First Nation concept is archaic and is only a tool for lawyers, indian chiefs and people in 'the Indian business'; the $$$$ for anyone living on reserves is directly relative to favor with the big shots on the reserve - Chief and his supporters. Think of Stalin and you get the picture. The 'big shots' roll around in luxury with money they did not earn if they 'play the game.' The 'Canadian Indian rights system' has to be abolished if Canadian Indian people are to prosper.

Posted by: jema54j | 2006-06-11 1:17:28 PM


Roark and Lady are dead on. As different tribes gained rights, settled claims and collected benefits, they chose their own paths. Some went left, others went right, they chose to govern as they saw fit.

Many bands are very successful, and not by building casinos and smoke shops. They welcomed outside investment and started logging and mining companies, tourism and land development. Their books are open to fellow members and the standard of living is as good as their non-native neighbours.

On the flip side, you have bands that have the worst kind of governace. Unaccountable leaders appointing close family members to council, closed books and a "let them eat cake" attitude towards other members of the band. Demanding more land, more benefits, and too frequently resorting to violence when they think the political process is too slow, or a legal ruling comes down against their interests.

I'd be interested to see a breakdown of suicide rates between bands with open governace vs. closed. Pro-economic development vs. traditional subsistance living.

Posted by: db | 2006-06-11 1:50:41 PM


Haven't the Indians learned anything the last ten or so years? Let the building happen, drag it through the courts, then they own it.

What happens in the real world if you don't bother surveying your property line and build on your neighbor's land?

The longer these protests are allowed to continue, the more popular they will become. Look at some other welfare junkies - East coast fishermen. They get away with blockading harbours.

All these clowns should be treated as terrorists. If that's too strong a term, comparing them to bombers or headhackers, YOU try driving through that blockade and see what happens. I know I'd be too "terrified" by these criminals to try it.

Seems the Ontario government is too "terrified" to do anything either.

Posted by: johnmac | 2006-06-11 3:22:31 PM


Now that the Caledonia natives have assaulted US law enforcement officials who were visiting the site of the standoff and subsequently warrants have been issued, has this become an international issue?

Posted by: feralmama | 2006-06-11 4:02:49 PM


FYI Set you Free: The developer IS the landowner.

In Ontario, any land on which a subdivision is to be built must first be brought into the Land Titles system. Under that system, the government examines the chain of ownership and guarantees good title to the land. If the government were to break its own guarantee, that would set a very dangerous precedent for property owners everywhere.

They are going to have to pay off the developers big time.

Posted by: Joan Tintor | 2006-06-12 8:08:31 AM


Joan:

Agreed on the philosophical plane.

Since I'm not familiar with the ownership issues, has in fact the development of the land be approved after titles have been established.

If that is the case, then the protesters have no leg to stand on ... even if they consider it ancient lands. Those ownership questions would have been settled in negotiations setting up reserves.

While all these other periheral issues are interesting reading, the question still stands ... who has title to those lands?

And, if the developer has title to what had previously been reserve lands, what was the nature and legalities of the transfer?

I agree the reaction by the protesters if way over the top and if the title transfer from reserve to developer was completely above-board, the perps should be locked up and the key thrown away.

I read somewhere one of the people arrested was a 45-year-old woman from Victoria. Just curious as to how this property dispute is any of her business.


Posted by: Set you free | 2006-06-12 9:30:01 AM


johnMac,

We simply cannot label all "Indians" with the same smear, the same as we cannot label all the rest of Canadians as serial killers, because of Pickton.

And further to this, folks who do not delineate between the good aspects of traditions, are left without an intelligent leg to stand on. Although assimilation is important in terms of getting along well (and not just superficially) what is meant by assimilation often means the destruction of one people's way of dress,
dance and party over anothers'. Pardon me, but not everyone wants to go around wearing a kilts, dancing to bagpipes, and drinking Scotch, even if kilts look great, bagpipes are awesome and Scotch is the cat's meow! And I have a hard time imagineing Aboriginals and Jews doing a Scottish dance in full Scotish regalia, even though it is not impossible in Canada, and would probably be alot of fun.

There is a vast difference between what has been done on that reserve in Ontario in particular, and the vastly peaceful friendly natured Aboriginals, who simply want to live life well, just like every other Canadian.

And many have commented about assimilation, as if the mainstream society was crispy-squeeky-clean! One mention of the Liberal part of Canada and adscam, and I bet every single hair on everyone, stands to attention!

But the matter is not about the painting of the Canadian landscape, as it is with the brush. When people are happy, working, making money, and having a good time with their loved ones, none of the differences in dress or culture matter. What does matter is how people treat eachother. In Canada, that means, with respect.

We have seen that there are many who would rather kill Canadians with explosives, rather than appreciate the complexity of our society as a whole. It is time to work together, and say 'whatever' to what we have no taste for, and appreciate the good values when we see them. And of course, we all have a vested interest in ensuring terrorists and murdering criminals and rapists are kept locked up, with they keys thrown away.

Posted by: Lady | 2006-06-12 10:00:39 AM



The comments to this entry are closed.