VIDEO: Native occupiers ‘respectfully’ destroy and burn Reconciliation/Apology monument & Cdn flag in Caledonia

March 27/11 - Native occupiers of Douglas Creek Estates in Caledonia burn our Truth & Reconciliation/Apology monument and our Canadian flag within minutes of attacking us - all while OPP officers watchedIn my last article I posted photos showing how OPP officers stood by and watched on March 27/11 as we were swarmed by native thugs from the occupied Douglas Creek Estates in Caledonia who stole our Reconciliation/Apology monument; kicked it into the road; smashed holes in the sides; inserted Six Nations flags; then carried it off to be burnt along with our Canadian – all while OPP officers watched.

Jeff Parkinson caught the action on video which has now been posted. Watch as a woman in a rage attacks the monument and then kicks and drags the base into the road where a plainclothes OPP officer from the Provincial Liaison Team then pulls it off to the side of the road before it gets carried off to be burnt.

The most sadly amusing part of the whole video are the women insisting that we aren’t showing ‘respect’ to them while they destroy our monument.

And to think…these are the people who the OPP and the Ontario government have worked so hard to appease as they hold Caledonia hostage – still. These thugs are an embarrassment to Six Nations, and the OPP remain an embarrassment to Ontario for continuing to kowtow to them.

References

Mark Vandermaas, Editor
VoiceofCanada
info@voiceofcanada.ca

Advertisements

2 responses to “VIDEO: Native occupiers ‘respectfully’ destroy and burn Reconciliation/Apology monument & Cdn flag in Caledonia

  1. singlecellhiphop

    Your video has the wrong year on the comment regarding “one liners of the year 2010”, unless this video was from 2010?

    VoC: Hi SCHH. Thanks for picking up on that. I’ll have to let the video guy know. Mark

  2. As reprehensible as it appears to be , is a crime being commited if a Candian flag is destoyed ( or a flag from any country for that matter)?
    Did Gary McHale respect the rule of law on 27 March? Yes or no answers will suffice.

    VoC: Q1: It is not a crime to destroy a Canadian flag. It is a crime to swarm people, assault them, steal their property, and destroy it via arson or by smashing it. The greater crime, however, is for police officers to watch it happen. I can assure you that had we swarmed native people, stolen their flag and burned it the police would have arrested us.

    Q2: Yes, Gary McHale was obeying the rule of law on Feb 27th because he/we were given the right to have exclusive use of the property and the right to remove trespassers by the owner. Keefer and his gang were trespassing and committing acts of mischief by refusing to leave and thereby interfering with our lawful use of the property. The police refused McHale’s request to remove the trespassers. Section 41 of the CCC clearly allows an owner/agent to remove trespassers using reasonable force and to place them under arrest if they refuse. Suggest you review the Superior Court Injunction Endorsement re the Cayuga occupation in which the judge rebuked the OPP for refusing to aid the property owners and for threatening to arrest them should they exercise their right to remove trespassing occupiers. Refer to clauses 28-29:

    http://caledoniavictimsproject.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/1536412-ontario-ltd-v-hccc-hdi-ruby-floyd-montour-hazel-hill-cayuga-occupation-may-june-2008/

    Here’s an excerpt from s41 of the CCC:

    Defence of house or real property

    41. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using force to prevent any person from trespassing on the dwelling-house or real property, or to remove a trespasser therefrom, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

    Assault by trespasser
    (2) A trespasser who resists an attempt by a person who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, or a person lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority to prevent his entry or to remove him, shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation.

    R.S., c. C-34, s. 41.

    Mark