Author Topic: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants  (Read 51443 times)

Offline NDN_Outlaw

  • Posts: 104
Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« on: November 23, 2009, 01:58:47 pm »
"Chief" Ardy may not be profiting from her work like some frauds but her grandiosity remains troubling. I would say she is sincerely concerned for the plight of her people and this virtuous. BUT it is quite another matter to self proclaim to be a Chief and a clan mother. The Canadian definition of who is and who is not an NDN combined with the NDN definition of citizenship can become quite confusing. Especially in Canada where so much is up in the air right now. A right is not a right unless it is exercised and a chief is not a chief until they are recognized by their people. I still question her declared traditional status. 

Offline bls926

  • Posts: 655
Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2009, 02:09:53 pm »
"You are both seem to be claiming all descendents, no matter how far back and no matter how long it's been since they have had any relationship with a First Nation , should rightfully be considered Treaty Benificiaries."
are you nuts momma p? NO I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, i do belive that if you are a descendant of a Treaty Signator, you are entitled to be a beneficiary, its as simple as that, and yes if you are a PODIA, the govt has set it up that you can join the Native Councils, and get benefits, do i agree with it NO! but it is set up that way, so if a PODIA tells me they arent getting anything i send them to the Native Councils,
"I don't mean to be disrespectful , but in cyberspace it's really hard to know who anyone is or who or what they really represent. it takes a while to learn about someones point of view and see a pattern and an integrity there.- or lack of it."
now you have offended me by attacking my integrity, fine so be it....

apukjij, if you do not believe that distant descendants should receive benefits, why do you send them to the Native Councils? Just because it's set up that way, doesn't mean they are entitled to or should receive benefits. When there are First Nations who are not able to receive adequate help, why encourage those who don't deserve anything to take from the limited funds?

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 681
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2009, 02:44:16 pm »
Quoting myself
Quote
"I don't mean to be disrespectful , but in cyberspace it's really hard to know who anyone is or who or what they really represent. it takes a while to learn about someones point of view and see a pattern and an integrity there.- or lack of it."

Apukjij
Quote
now you have offended me by attacking my integrity, fine so be it....

My comment was a general comment about cyberspace. I 'm not endowed with amazing telepathic powers and niether is anyone else. It takes time to figure out where people are coming from.

You are just diverting from the issues I brought up by getting offended.

Sam / Apukjij
Quote
Quote
"I will briefly state what i wrote on those post. If you are a
descended from a Treaty Signer i believe you are entitled to join the
Native Council in NS, NB, PEI and NFLD. Thats the only mechanism to
give Metis and People of Distant Indian Ancestry (PODIA) a chance to
excercise the Treaty Rights they deserve. You can join and take part
in all the enteprenerial and business acumen programs they offer, they
have a fishing fleet excercising rights won by Jr. Marshall. They also
offer notifications on jobs and training programs availible. So when
Acadian Metis cry that they are not benifiting from Treaty, its a lie
WE HAVE A MECHANISM IN PLACE FOR PODIAS ITS JOINING THE NATIVE
COUNCILS IN EACH OF THE MARITIME PROVINCES. PODIAS WHO TRACE THEIR
HERITAGE BACK TO A TREAT SIGNATOR ARE NOT L'NU BUT TREATY INDIANS.
"


What is in bold  is the same thing John Williams is saying, and if there is a difference in your mind, it didn't come through in what you wrote.

And this will undoubtably be used by people wanting to make these claims as further justification.


See here;

http://pa-in.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=13275037517&topic=9271

Quote
Jeannine 01  2009
John I spoke to Ardy and she said I would be a beneficiary Indian to the Signatory Indians and this holds alot of weight because I am not status which is controlled by government. I have the forms here and it's all filled out but they only asked for information going as far back to my grandparents.

I also see where you said 

sam
Quote
Your assertion that only heirs of the signatories could negotiate Treaty, is suicide for our People because that gives the Chiefs the authority to sign aggreements without being accountable to the People if they meet your criteria. I seen you even want to run for Chief. That is your biggest folly. An Indian Act Chief is the lowest cretin we have in our communities.....,

I only somewhat grasp the implications of all this, but the thing that strikes me is that when a leader of any Nation signs a Treaty with another Nation, this Treaty is between the 2 Nations and hiers of those Nations, not the individual hiers of anyone who can prove they descended from the National leader who signed the Treaty.

If these Treaties get watered down to nothing more than an agreement between the Nation of invaders and the individuals who can prove descent to the person who signed the Treaty , it becomes an agreement of a Nation with individuals - not an agreement between Nations.     

And this interprtation will undoubtably be used to proceed to the next step , which is, if people can't prove they descend from a Treaty signer , than even if they are a member of an unbroken chain of families who are members of the Nation that signed these Treaties, they are not legitimate Treaty Benificieries

What is really disturbing is Ardy actually sounds like she is promoting this interprtation 

http://pa-in.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=13275037517&topic=9271&start=30&hash=2db17f190e92e2247709a52a4c5afcc6#topic_top

Ardy
Quote
John Williams,

I have certainly read enough already! Those that claim an "unbroken direct line" to a Treaty Signatory is very impressive. With the records that survive today concerning genealogical ties, along with yDNA and mtDNA proof to back those claims would appear to fit into this forum whereby some are asking for 'sources' to back certain CLAIMS.

Where is your proof of descendancy with DNA to back up your claim? I, for one, would like to see it. In your case you state the line is unbroken and direct, so that would mean a yDNA test along the father line. The Haplogroups for Natives in North America are; A, B, C, D and X. I point out that all Natives in Atlantic Canada had been DNA profiled years ago and the same as in the USA.

Two years ago I challenged the Chiefs to a DNA test so they could prove they had a right to sign my rights away and the rights of my children and grandchildren and those not yet born. Not one stepped up to the plate. My test came back, Haplogroup C, no line unbroken, and I sent them a copy and asked where theirs was. No reply of course.

This test is not "invasive" as some Indian's would want you to think. There is also an Autosomal test which would give a percentage of your Aboriginal/Native heritage claimed. mtDNA would give you Maternal lineage.

That Ardy imagins DNA can fairly be used to determine membership and leadership abilities in a First Nation - and that Ardy is actually promoting this , is scarey.

First those autosomal tests are about as accurate as eyeballing someone and guessing their admixture. I started a thread on DNA and what it can tell and what it can't be learned from it in the link below.

http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1375.0

Second, although I understand Ardy is very pleased to learn her mtDNA shows both she and the last known survivor of the Beothuk share a common ancestor, mtDNA and YDNA show only a very small part of a persons ancestry.

It is entirely possible and even likely, that many people will have one matrilinal line which originated on this continent when this persons  other nine hundred and ninty nine ancestors originated in Europe.

Conversely, it's entirely possibly and even very likely many people who are almost full blood will have a patrilineal line or matrilineal line which is European. There was quite a bit of intermarriage , and thedescendents often remained with the tribe . And it's also important to note , this wasn't all Native women marrying Native men and a substantial number of Mi'kmaq women living today will have a European matrilineal line.

That doesn't mean they are less Mi'kmaq than someone with one Mi'kmaq ancestor who was born in the 1600's who just happens to have that ancestor on their matrilineal line.

Apukjij
Quote
i have to go back to this, i have to express my disappointment in you momma p, i have read every thread youve posted to for a year and a half, and your the last person i expected to put words in my mouth on this site, now i dont trust you, and if anyone in Mi'kmaq country asks about you, and they are reading these posts because Ardy posted in her facebook this thread, i will tell them you are not to be trusted...

And Apukjij , thats just mean.

I'm not putting words in your mouth, I am pointing out whats been said and how you come across to people reading what you write.

I have tried to sort this out privately but you never replied to the main issues, and then you said it couldn't be discussed because it is private internal affairs of the Mi'kmaq people.

But you discuss it and promote this in your public posts in facebook.

So I think if it is something being promoted publicly it is something that can be discussed publicly. Seems fair to me.

You know, I don't like to toot my own horn at all, but I don't feel safe doing what I do here, and many times I have seriously considered stopping participating here. But things keep coming up. And I think if I don't do what I see needs to be done,  nobody else looks like they are going to . So I do.

In exchange I get a lot of criticizm, and even threats.

And then I get told you will spread it around I am not trustworthy because i've dared to question the consquences of some of your own words.

well Thanks for that.

You probably have no idea how many times I feel like hanging up the porcupine suit and doing something else. Or how ready I am to call it a day....
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 02:56:19 pm by Moma_porcupine »

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 681
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2009, 03:48:00 pm »
This thread got split off from it's begining , as that aspect of of this has been resolved . The beginings and a lot of what people are reffering to here can be found in the thread below.

http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=2456.0

It would be really helpful if the moderators could make a note at the begining of new threads that they start by splitting off part of an older thread, so people can find where it began . Otherwise anyone reading it will be completely confused by references to things that are no longer a part of the thread...
« Last Edit: November 23, 2009, 03:51:16 pm by Moma_porcupine »

Offline Diana

  • Posts: 431
  • I Love YaBB 2!
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2009, 04:16:39 pm »
This thread got split off from it's begining , as that aspect of of this has been resolved . The beginings and a lot of what people are reffering to here can be found in the thread below.

http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=2456.0

It would be really helpful if the moderators could make a note at the begining of new threads that they start by splitting off part of an older thread, so people can find where it began . Otherwise anyone reading it will be completely confused by references to things that are no longer a part of the thread...


I for one am throughly confused. I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I still don't see how this ardy person is who she says she is. My crap detector is still on high alert. Also, I want to add, enough with the Tonto speak! I find this insulting and very stereotypical. No one talks like that.


Diana 

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 681
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2009, 05:15:09 pm »
I also wish this thread could have been left intact and just moved to ECT with the change of title I suggested. There is a lot said in the first part which is relevent here. Splitting the thread just makes a confusing matter a lot more confusing.

And although Ardy's genealogical claims are true , there is probably some legitimate questions about how a person rightfully would come to be a hereditary Chief within the Mi'kmaq traditions, and if Ardy has gone through this process, why does she say she is Chief of herself and a Nation of one. I agree that just doesn't sound very likely to be what a Hereditary Chief is, in the traditional sesne. While I really admire and appreciate her honesty about this, the appaerntly unconventional claim does raise questions and concerns.   

I guess I should add a link to some 1/2 baked research which I have been circulating privately, as this would help provide a bit of context to what is percolating around in my mind as I ask about this .

http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcwzmv4g_60dzqrvcgp 

I need to emphasize this research is put together from stuff I have come across online or heard of indirectly and it may be I am way off track in some of my interpretations. But there is enough here to raise some very real concerns.

A bit of Apukjij's perspective is probably explained by a comment of his in the thread on Acadian Metis .

http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1187.0

Reply #9
Re: Acadian Metis ?
Apukjij
Quote
We have also fought hard and long for the two National Aboriginal Caucus associations, the Native Council of Nova Scotia and the Native Council of New Brunswick. i suggest very strongly that Ms Swan and the Bras D'or Lakes metis to join such a council. because in the Tri-Partite negotiations involving Treaty Beneficiaries and the rights they have with the Feds and the Province; the Native Council of NS and NB are the only metis organizations that are sitting at the negotiation tables in the Maritimes and they are already serving the people very well.

I may be mixed up, but from what I found on line I believe the native Council of Nova Scotia is a CAP affiliate. CAP is the organizations discussed in the link above.

I want to be clear ,I am not interpreting this comment as Apukjij saying they in any way agree with how their political representives may be being manipulated in the bigger picture. Any more than I believe federally recognized Chiefs are all colaberators with the non native government against their own people. And I know for a fact there is some good and trustworthy people involved in some of these organizations.

Just, there is some evidence that makes me think things are being intentionally funded and manipulated to disempower First Nations  in canada.  And that people like Apukjij, who are feeling abused by the previous system , that was intentionally set up and funded by the non native government, to disempower First Nations people , might be vulnerable to being enticed into a new situation , which is also being intentionally set up and funded by the non native government, to disempower First Nations people....

I myself have no right to speak on these matters , but the only cure I know for coruption open discussion where everyone tries to identify the truth and their common concerns and goals. at this point it seems every one is pointing fingers at the political organizations everyone else is involved in, and accusing each other of corruption.

So maybe openly talking about it is a good idea.

Considering the general principles and precedents being set here, it seems very very important that the foundation of these new definitions is sound . And i am puzzled at the lack of public discussion I see about this.

I really don't know much, and am just groping around with a small candle in the dark myself.

And I am sorry if I am asking about the basis of policies that some people feel should be private internal issues.

Offline clanmother

  • Posts: 27
  • TTT
    • Micmac Lock
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2009, 02:20:32 am »
Kwe' Moma,

I have been attacked by others all of my life and over the years I have developed the shell of a Turtle, the water just runs off my back.  People fail to remember that Mi'kmaq women have feelings too.  The things which I have written are not things I want to say - they are things that must be said.  The truth hurts us all - even Ardy. It is not my objective to offend anyone. As for the INAC Chiefs they do not legally or otherwise represent me in respect to Treaty or other matters.  I only represent my Treaty Heirs.  And, 5 children came from my womb.  Dr. Speck's historical writing's confirms that we originally existed in family groups.  I was not born a Canadian citizen as that Law applied to Indians after 1959.  I have never applied for Canadian citizenship. I belong to the Tribe of MicMac. We are a Matriarchal society.

The Chiefs have declined the offer of unity which I have extended to them many times in the past.  I have considerable knowledge in the field of Treaty & Aboriginal Rights and I have a lot to offer, if I was ever to be given a chance to participate in the inner circle of the Tribe.  The INAC Chiefs, local MLA & MP refuse to meet with me to hear my legitimate concerns in respect to the present NS Treaty Talks Tri-partite - Talks which the decisions shall affect my Treaty Heirs.   I have no political representation at any level of government within Canada.  The Supreme Court of Canada has expressed in recent Landmark decisions pertaining to Treaty Rights that all Aboriginals must be consulted in respect to political decisions affecting our Rights.  The Honor of the Crown is at stake in its dealings with Aboriginal people.  The Mi'kmaq Leadership has a Fiduciary responsibility to our people too, as they are elected under the Indian Act, under the Laws of Canada, to act in the capacity as the representatives to the Crown.

The Eskasoni Band does not allow all of its members, whom are Registered Full-Status Indians under the Act  and living on the reservation, to exercise their Right to Democracy by way of Electoral Ballot to be issued for Voting purposes in the Election of the INAC Chief & Council held under the Indian Act Band Elections Rules, as dictated by The Supreme Court of Canada in the Corbierre 1999 decision; which struck down voting eligibility requirements in respect to an Indian's ordinary place of residence.  Therefore, the Eskasoni Band Chief is not elected by a Majority of Band Members and has no Legal Right to enter into agreements, in exchange for monies, on behalf of those members which have not been Consulted or Compensated, and furthermore, have been denied their Right to Vote in Band Elections held under the Indian Act.  Therefore, The Crown's Legal Duty to Consult all Aboriginals, whose Rights are at Stake, has not been met by Her Majesty & the Queen's Representatives.

INAC Leaders are living in denial, enjoying a lavish lifestyle while our people continue to suffer daily in an ongoing downhill spiral.  The media may paint the picture that the daily lives of Aboriginal people within Canada are improving and that we get everything for free, but, all is not as appears.  I have not received from any government, whether it be Red or White, as much as 10 cents in my life for being an Indian.  The INAC Chiefs & Councils receive a considerable sum of money to act as leaders - I lead from my Heart.  The Mi'kmaq Grand Chief has an elected Chief under the paternalistic Indian Act, however, everyone acknowledges his Title and bows to him and the man won't even take my calls.  My particular people have no representation on the Grand Council - Sante Mawiomi.  The same denial of representation applies to the Assembly of First Nations Nova Scotia self-appointed Chief - who also has an elected Chief under the Indian Act.

The Title of Chief which I acclaim to was originally bestowed upon me by my people, the grassroots L'nu of the Traditional Mi'kmaq District of Kespoogwitunak many moons ago.  Like Geronimo, I shall not fail my people for the Trust which they have placed in me, a Mi'kmaq Woman.  This is a Life which I was born into, at no time did I make application to others to be Mi'kmaq.  I was born Mi'kmaq.  The present deteriorating situation within the Mi'kmaq community of despair, poverty, drugs, alcohol, sexual abuse, inadequate housing, incest & suicide does not have to presently exist in the manner it does.  We, the Mi'kmaq, are presently in a state of Turmoil.

We cannot continually place singular blame upon the Whiteman when today's problems are allowed to continue by those elected to represent others; representation under a foreign system of Indian Act policy.  The present political structure & leadership of the Mi'kmaq Nation must look inward and address our people's own economic & social struggles and other hardships & injustices.  Then and only then can one claim to have honored the Title of Chief, which they have all so handsomely been rewarded for by the Department of Indian Affairs.  This is my Traditional Role as an Alkonquian Mi'kmaq Clan Mother.

I consider myself the only Legitimate Chief of the Tribe of MicMac residing in Nova Scotia today - as I have not been empowered by decree of Foreign Legislation & Policy.  Native Customary Law is still valid in the Land known today as the Maritimes and if my words were untrue - then the British Regime would not be presently executing Talks with the INAC Band Chiefs to obtain Title to the Land of the MicMac.  I rely on my Treaty Rights to access Bounty provided by the Creator to be used as sustenance for personal consumption & ceremonial purposes; in my struggle to survive, as I continue to occupy the Traditional Territory of my Ancestral Homeland of Mi'kma'ki.

I do not like writing letters defending Treaty & Aboriginal Rights.  I would rather be playing my guitar, out on the land hunting & fishing and spending happy time with my people.  It has been a difficult life.  It shall not be long and I shall be 60 years old.   My bones are getting old & tired after many moons of walking Mother Earth.   I do not have many more seasons of hunting moose left in me and I would only like to enjoy my Indian Summer years in peace & harmony with all Mother Earth's creations before my Bones return back to the soil of Mother Earth, whose womb I stem.  But, until that time comes - I shall continue to defend my people & remain Caretaker of the Land of my Ancestors, as I have a duty to those in the Spirit World - who gave their lives for us to be here today.

Moma you have raised some interesting points and I heed your words as advice.  This goes beyond your role as an NAFPS investigator.  Thank you.  And, ... your work is not finished here yet Moma_porcupine, so, may I suggest that you take the word "Quit" out of your vocabulary. You are Good Medicine for the Allied Indian Nations.

m'sit nogamah,
 TTT
« Last Edit: November 24, 2009, 10:10:06 am by clanmother »
TTT

Offline NDN_Outlaw

  • Posts: 104
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #7 on: November 24, 2009, 02:59:32 am »
What specific clan do you represent ?

Offline clanmother

  • Posts: 27
  • TTT
    • Micmac Lock
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #8 on: November 24, 2009, 09:56:40 am »
NDN_Outlaw - The most powerful of all clans - Mooin - the Bear Clan.  The bear always sits at the bottom of the Totem Pole. Therefore, she cannot be toppled, but yet, she carries the weight of all other clans upon her shoulders.  The old wives tale of being at the bottom of the Totem Pole has been spoken in recent times to mean being treated poorly in situations or a bad spot to be in, however, it means exactly opposite - it is the most powerful & safest place to be.  As explained to me by my Grandmother at a very young age - many moons ago.
TTT

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 681
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2009, 12:40:23 pm »
Clan Mother

I appreciate your kind words, and I am sorry if some of the harsher things that have been said hurt your feelings. When I meet someone who can can put our common goals ahead of wanting to be respected right away or being annoyed when people like myself are sometimes rude, I respect that.  And we all have blind spots sometimes. Working with other people can be hard on those. Though it might not be apparent I would much rather work with people than fight. I think most of us feel that way. 

But at the same time honesty and holding ourselves and each other accountibile is really important. If we ever loose that, we will become just as corrupt and damaging in our actions, as the frauds and exploiters we seek to expose.

There is some good folks who participate here. I have learned a lot from the privilidge of being able to talk with them. One thing I have learned is that someone I have a passionate disagreement with on one issue, can be a very helpful at a later point. I really treasure that and I'm always happy then that I did not actually eat them for breakfast .  ( hint hint )

I have heard about there being problems with coruption in some tribal governments. 

For the sake of the strength of your whole community , I hope you can find ways to work with all your community members, including the people who are Chiefs. The old divide and conquer senario is really painful to watch, getting played out again and again and again...

I can't support that.

Take Care
« Last Edit: November 24, 2009, 01:14:33 pm by Moma_porcupine »

Offline NDN_Outlaw

  • Posts: 104
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2009, 06:54:29 pm »
I am Bear Clan too. The clan heads are not inheirted. The positions simply belong to the oldest surviving male and female members. Plains people never had much use for inheirted positions. Everything had to be earned. A great freedom came with this. Respect for the aged was recognized. The clan leaders both female and male don't dictate but are the authority on protocols. The clan structure I speak of is the Saulteaux aka Chippiwa aka Anishinabe plains people. Most Cree are part Saulteaux and most Saulteaux are part Cree. I was adopted into the Saulteaux Bear Clan and was given certain responsibilties. I never heard the clan heads boast or dictate. They simply serve and are quite humble about it. My beware meter goes up whenever I hear people proclaim themselves to be this or that. The real people don't brag.

Offline clanmother

  • Posts: 27
  • TTT
    • Micmac Lock
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2009, 10:56:45 pm »
To employ the words of Judge John R. Nichols of Nova Scotia Provincial Court when he acquitted my Blood Brother, Beaver - Maybe my people have a different culture and burn different tobaccos than other Clans. At no time am I Bragging or Boasting. Aboriginal People within Canada have remained passive & silent far too long. I can see us, as Indians, losing out rights within Canada in the next 10 to 15 years; if the status quo should remain Docile within our Nation. Also, my mtDNA results indicate that Cherokee & Chippewa Blood runs through my veins too. I inherited my Mother's Tribal Clan as our Customs dictate; as we operate under a Matrilinreal Blood-line of descendency, and Power is passed to the Eldest Daughter, from generation to generation. Humble is your concept for Taciturn in my Tribe. The Mi'kmaq are one of the most fierce of all Warriors, as history has recorded.  A major hurdle we must overcome is to teach the Whiteman & some within our Allied Indian Nations not to streo-type all Indians in one dimension. You seem to all paint us all with the same brush. I assert my Rights, Title & Sovereignty at anytime a situation arises which may jeopardize my people's Land or legal standing that supports it. You proclaim to be humble, however, I find you to be mean spirited and thinking like a person who just likes to stir the pot, always picking something apart; a fault finder - always looking for the negative. And, I can tell after many moons of walking my Mother Earth that you have adopted the paternalistic way of the Whiteman, as your writings indicate; as I cannot relate to in my Tribal History of a Man ever serving in the capacity of Clan Mother. In Mi'kma'ki, the Women Rule by the Laws of Natural Justice. In other words, maybe you operate under a different Clan System. To be Indian is to be many things ... and, in Mi'kmaq Traditional Government the Clan Mothers appoint the Male Chiefs and, until the day comes that a True Man is up to the Task of fulfilling the Role of Chief, - This Mother Bear shall remain the Chief of the Bear Clan of the Tribe of MicMac!  Now, I shall return to my Den ... TTT
TTT

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 504
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #12 on: November 25, 2009, 12:34:56 am »

clanmother said
Quote
Also, my mtDNA results indicate that Cherokee & Chippewa Blood runs through my veins too.

clanmother, mtDNA can't indicate the ancestry of specific Tribes.    Where abouts did your Cherokee ancestors come from?

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 681
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #13 on: November 25, 2009, 02:53:17 pm »
As much as I understand people being curious about some of Ardy's personal claims , and I would love to ask about her reference to the Mi'kmaq? totem? poles? her grandmother told her about , probably the issue of predominately non native people being encouraged to claim themselves as Treaty benificiaries is more important than Ardy.

So getting back to that ...

Here is a simple straightforward definition of who a Treaty benificiary is

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/treaty+Indian

Quote
treaty Indian
n. Canadian
A status Indian belonging to a band that has signed a treaty with the federal government.

In many cases it sounds like what Aboriginal Title means is still being worked out in canadian courts.

As the courts find that Aboriginal title exists and Treaties made with Aboriginal people must be respected, more and more people seem to come forward insisting they are Aboriginal people 


Quoting from, page 359 of Mi'kmaq Elder Daniel Pauls book " We were Not the Savages " about genocide in canada .

 ( with the typos and errors being my own transcription errors ) 

Quote
"Inclusion of the word Aboriginal in section 35 of the Canada Act
without adaquet definition of it's meaning is beging to cause all
kinds of problems for First Nations. People are coming out of the
woodwork claiming to be aboriginal. And this is how the government
recieves them: Employment and Immigration Canada defines an
"Aboriginal" as anyone who "percieves him / herself to be a Indian. "
29. people who have marginal if any First Nations blood in their veins
have availed themself of this interpretation and are taking advantage
of benifits normally reserved for registered Indians."

So along comes CAP, discussed in the Google Doc posted above, which not only asks that some of it's members be included as benificiaries but that it wants all of it's members to have a part in the process deciding who the benificieries should be.   

http://www.abo-peoples.org/media/current/CAP_Claims_Settlement_Jun13_07.html

Quote
The National Chief was clear in his call for the engagement of the broader First Nations community. “We believe it is Canada’s fiduciary and moral responsibility to undertake purposeful steps to ensure that all treaty beneficiaries and off-reserve First Nations peoples are granted their entitlement to full and effective participation in all stages of negotiation and settlement of such claims,” said Chief Brazeau.

National Chief Brazeau also affirmed that such a position is not without legal precedent. “In the 1999 Corbiere v. Canada decision, rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada, it was affirmed that the principles of democracy, equality and respect for human rights are the grounds for ensuring that future land rights agreements are inclusive of all Aboriginal peoples,” asserted Chief Brazeau.


http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:iQfZjQln94gJ:www.constitutional-law.net/Sappier.DOC+%22
Treaty+beneficiaries%22&cd=14&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca7strip=1


Quote
2.  CAP is a national Aboriginal organization representing approximately 850,000 Métis, off-reserve and non-status Indians.  CAP is comprised of 12 provincial and territorial affiliates, including the Aboriginal Peoples Council of New Brunswick.  CAP was founded 33 years ago as the Native Council of Canada, and subsequently changed its name to the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples to better reflect the constituency and mandate of the organization.

That is debateable. I read that Brazeau who up until recently was the leader of CAP, and has now been given a seat in the canadian senate. CAP has never made it's membership lists public, or shown how many of it's members are off reserve status Indians or federally recognized Metis and how many are people claiming distant Indian ancestry ( PODIAs). While there may be many people in Canada who are legitmate Metis or off reserve status Indians, from what I read I don't think more than a small fraction of this are actually formal members of CAP, and many of these people are totally enraged that CAP feels it has a right to claim it is representing them as members at all.

The court record continues

Quote
(3) Beneficiaries of the Treaty

  25. CAP notes that the Appellant conceded that the respondents (status Indians who live on the Woodstock First Nation reserve) were beneficiaries of the Treaty, so the issue of to whom the Treaty applies is not directly raised.  CAP is concerned, however, that the Court of Appeal, in dismissing the appeal, expressed itself in a manner that may purport to limit the class of beneficiaries of the treaty.    The Court of Appeal’s Formal Judgment in R. v. Sappier and Polchies states as follows:

    1) The appeal is denied because the respondents possess both a treaty and an aboriginal right to harvest trees for personal use on Crown lands traditionally occupied by members of the Maliseet Community now living on the Woodstock (First Nation) Reserve.

        Formal Judgment of New Brunswick Court of Appeal dated July 22, 2004, Appellant’s Record (R. v. Sappier and Polchies), p. 85

  26. CAP respectfully submits that to the extent that this judgment purports to define the beneficiaries of the treaty right, it does not properly reflect either the jurisprudence of this Court or the wording of the treaty.  As noted above, this Court has been careful in treaty cases from Atlantic Canada not to limit the potential beneficiaries to those with status under the Indian Act, or living on reserve.  Rather, the test is whether the person claiming a treaty right has a “sufficient connection” to the historic aboriginal nation that made the treaty (which test may be satisfied by membership in a modern First Nation, or otherwise). For example, Donald Marshall Jr., who successfully asserted his treaty rights in R. v. Marshall (No. 1), was living off-reserve at the time he was charged.

This new openess of the definition is reflected in what the NS government is saying about the treaty process...

http://www.gov.ns.ca/abor/officeofaboriginalaffairs/whatwedo/negotiations/guidingframework

Quote
Legal Clarity

The courts have confirmed that the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia have rights protected under Section 35 of the Constitution Act. The nature and extent of those rights, as well as the responsibilities and authorities of governments with respect to those rights, remain largely undefined. In some cases, they remain before the courts.

“The existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of
Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed” Section 35.(1) of the Constitution

Nova Scotia would prefer to resolve legal uncertainty regarding constitutional rights through negotiation, not by the courts. Courts deal with matters of law but have no mandate to address other issues. A key interest of the province is to ensure agreements address the rights of all potential treaty beneficiaries. Beneficiaries are those individuals who are legitimately entitled to Mi’kmaq treaty and Aboriginal rights in Nova Scotia. This will require a fair and inclusive process to identify Mi’kmaq beneficiaries and appropriate mechanisms for all Mi’kmaq to participate in the ratification of agreements. It is the province’s view that it is important for the Mi’kmaq community itself to define its membership, as well as how the community is represented in the negotiations. Clarification of the rights of non-Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq within the province should be determined.

But it is not clear exactly who is being condidered " the Mi'kmaq community" Does that include PODIAs of distant Mi'kmaq descent?

Because CAP does include these people.

The link below makes some interesting reading.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/abor-e/13ev-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1&comm_id=1

I tried to find some parts to quote to point out all the double talk, but the whole thing is so outrageous I'm not even sure where to start.

Notice how thoughout this discussion ( and in many parts to long to quote here) the CAP leader Patric Brazeau repeatedly sides steps questions asking how he would define an Aboriginal person, and instead he repeatedly accuses elected First Nations representives of being corrupt. His solution is to suggest there should be no more Indian Status for anyone. It's not at all clear what he thinks should replace this, except it sounds like it would include a lot more people who might have very distant Indian ancestry . He suggests replacing the current reserve system with a lot fewer centralized Native communities and that the reserves aren't really owned by the First Nations anyways and these lands really belong to the federal government.

This is the same thing , called centralization was attempted in NS in the mid 1900's. All it did was allow the federal government to neglect their responsiblities to a lot of people collected in one area while absorbing some lands previously occupied by First Nations. Daniel Paul discusses the disaster of decentalization in his book "We Were Not the Savages " 

As cyberspace and this message board seem to be being used to direct PODIAs to CAP,  in order to participate in defining who treaty benificiaries should be, I thought it would be interesting to hear is peoples opinions on this, or at least compile some of the things I am reading, so people can see what organizations  some people seem to be serving...

This situation reminds me of all the people who try to claim to be Cherokee tribes in the States.

Does canada have any clear criteria for federal recognition of people claiming to be an Aboriginal Nation?   

Maybe some public discussion would be interesting, or maybe it is just something people can read and if people are concerned they can investigate this for themselves and take appropriate action in their own communities.

I only dimly understand this , but what I see looks very strange.
===========
edited to correct formatting error which attributed my comment to what I previously quoted .

============
edited to correct a comment that CAP leader Brazeau was appointed not elected. He was appointed to the canadian senate and there is questions about who the members of CAP are who elect these people, but he was elected to his position by the provincial CAP affiliates..
« Last Edit: December 06, 2009, 12:53:34 am by Moma_porcupine »

Offline clanmother

  • Posts: 27
  • TTT
    • Micmac Lock
Re: Treaty Indians, First Nations, Descendants
« Reply #14 on: November 25, 2009, 03:09:25 pm »
My Grandmother told me the story of the Totem Pole as an example of the strength of the Bear. The Mi'kmaq never had Totem Poles. DNA evidence is accepted by the Courts everyday in its determination to convict or exonerate others. Family Tree DNA scientist say that I have Cherokee & Chipewa ancestry in my DNA markers. I am not a scientist. A Treaty Indian is one who stems from Ancestors who signed a Treaty. For example: Native Council of Nova Scotia represents Treaty Indians and Canada recognizes those Treaty Beneficiaries by allowing them access to harvest natural resources such as Moose, Deer, Fish, etc... without hindrance. I point out that NCNS is not a Band as defined under the Indian Act, as NCNS is not recognized as a Band; as it is situated outside of an Indian Reservation, as defined under the Act. So, all definitions of Treaty Indian may not be accurate. Aboriginal Title exist in the Land of the MicMac. I exercise my Treaty Rights wherever I choose in the Maritimes. The NCNS members exercise their Rights outside the reservation as well. Corbierre 1999 recognized that no matter where an Aboriginal resides that the Aboriginal has an interest in the community which they connect to. Section 109 BNA Acts 1867 everyone who holds land does so in the right of the province, subject to any other interest. In other words ... the underlying Title of the Aboriginal - Royal Proclamation 1763. CAP is just another splinter group comprised of a dozen smaller splinter groups who have taken it upon themselves to represent other people claiming Aboriginal ancestry. The governments recognize and deal with these groups. It is my opinion that all these groups which exist under the sanctions as registered non-profit societies of another Nation are not legitimate, unlike myself who draws no pay cheque or honorarium and does not need to be governed under the legislation of another Nation. At the time of the signing of the Treaty we are recognized as a Tribe, not bands. I do not need a Foreign Registry of Joint Stocks Legislation to tell me who I am - I am the Real Deal! Now, may I ask you, What's up with this mockery - " Mi'kmaq Burial Grounds Research & Restoration Association", that this thread originates from? The Association that the Author & Mi'kmaq Historian - Daniel Paul sanctions, but others dare to question in a Paternalistic Society the legitimacy of this group of people playing Indians. I go to the reservation - White people pump my gas & sell me tobacco, I go to the Wharf and White people fish the Treaty Boats, I go to the Band Hall & White Woman is on Band Council. Apparently, the White people got nothing left to take away from Indians -execpt our Ancestors remains ...
« Last Edit: November 25, 2009, 04:12:03 pm by clanmother »
TTT