» NAZI EUGENICS

Native groups use Macdonald’s birthday to raise issue of his legacy of residential schools

jimcraven — Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:52:59 +0000

Native groups use Macdonald’s birthday to raise issue of his legacy of residential schools

“If people really knew the history of Sir John A. Macdonald, I’m not sure if they would celebrate his legacy,” Deputy Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler from the Nishnawbe Aski Nation said. (ANDRE FORGET/QMI AGENCY)

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/stephen-harper-helps-celebrate-200th-anniversary-of-sir-john-a-macdonald-s-birth-1.2183044#.VLM3F3Q82VE.gmail

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/10/sure-john-a-macdonald-was-was-a-racist-colonizer-and-misogynist-but-so-were-most-canadians-back-then/

Nicole Ireland, QMI Agency

Jan 9, 2015, Last Updated: 5:57 PM ET

Aboriginal people in Canada say the 200th anniversary of Sir John A. Macdonald’s birth is anything but a cause for celebration.

“If people really knew the history of Sir John A. Macdonald, I’m not sure if they would celebrate his legacy,” Alvin Fiddler, Deputy Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, told QMI Agency. Nishnawbe Aski Nation represents 49 First Nation communities in Ontario.

First Nations and Metis people continue to live with the consequences of Macdonald’s policies — both as minister of Indian Affairs and as prime minister — to this day, Fiddler said.

In particular, Macdonald was “instrumental” in establishing the Indian Residential School system in the late 1800s. Back then, Macdonald insisted aboriginal children must be taken from their families and assimilated into the rest of society, rather than receiving education in their own communities.

“When the school is on the reserve, the child lives with his parents who are savages; he is surrounded by savages, and though he may learn to read and write, his habits and training and mode of thought are Indian,” Macdonald said, according to archived documents. “He is simply a savage who can read and write.”

That view led to a residential school system that lasted more than 100 years, tearing more than 150,000 First Nations, Metis and Inuit children away from their families and into boarding schools, where they were forbidden to speak their native languages or practice aboriginal culture and often lived in poor conditions. Many suffered abuse. Survivors — having been isolated from their parents — didn’t know how to bond with their own children, passing the trauma from generation to generation, according to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The commission was established when the Canadian government apologized for the residential school era in 2008.

Without understanding the complete historical picture, “it’s simply wrong for Canadians to be celebrating (Macdonald’s) legacy,” Fiddler said.

But Fiddler also sees the anniversary as an opportunity for people to learn more about that part of their history, with the hope that education can ultimately lead to reconciliation between aboriginal people and other Canadians.

“We need to have this conversation,” he said.

In a statement, the Assembly of First Nations said the anniversary has “different meanings for different people.”

“Many Canadians know only the conventional history of Macdonald as a ‘father of Confederation,’ yet for many First Nations the legacy of Sir John A. Macdonald is a painful one,” National Chief Perry Bellegarde said.

“First Nations are often lectured about ‘not living in the past’, but the decisions, policies and actions that are preventing First Nations from achieving the same quality of life and the full expression of our rights to control our lives and lands have a foundation in the early decisions of the settler governments,” he continued. “The commemoration of Sir John A. Macdonald’s birthday should be an opportunity to commit ourselves to understanding our past so we can understand how we can move forward together to create a country where we all thrive and benefit from the beauty and riches of this land.”

Click to enlarge and open in new window

Sure, John A. Macdonald was a racist, colonizer and misogynist — but so were most Canadians back then

jimcraven — Mon, 12 Jan 2015 02:27:06 +0000

Sure, John A. Macdonald was a racist, colonizer and misogynist — but so were most Canadians back then

Tristin Hopper | January 10, 2015 | Last Updated: Jan 10 1:27 AM ET
More from Tristin Hopper | @TristinHopper

Library and Archives CanadaJohn A. Macdonald was aboriginal affairs minister for 10 years — from 1878 to 1888 — and is often blamed for laying the institutional groundwork for today’s First Nations’ troubles.

In 1887, the first of Vancouver’s many anti-Chinese riots had just broken out when Sir John A. Macdonald stood up in the House of Commons to propose further measures to keep out the Chinese.

The Chinese took white jobs, he said. The Chinese would breed a “mongrel” race in British Columbia and threaten the “Aryan” character of the Dominion. Altogether, the prospect of having white working classes living alongside Chinese could lead only to “evil.”

But in an odd aside, Macdonald admitted that he was supporting the policy largely because he was running a country full of racists.

“On the whole, it is considered not advantageous to the country that the Chinese should come and settle in Canada,” said Macdonald. “That may be right or it may be wrong, it may be prejudice or otherwise, but the prejudice is near universal.”

Although they were laying the groundwork for one of the world’s most tolerant nations, the Canadians of 1867 largely took white supremacy for granted. Blacks were barred from staying in Toronto hotels. The average British Columbian saw Asians as a threat to racial purity. And almost everybody was fine with the expectation that the native way of life would soon be extinct.

On Sir John A. Macdonald’s 200th birthday, the country’s founding prime minister has no shortage of critics to deem him a racist, a colonizer and a misogynist. They’re right on all counts, but the man who founded Canada was the product of an age that made Archie Bunker look like Mohandas Gandhi.

“This is unfair, they didn’t know the things we know,” said Don Smith, a historian at the University of Calgary, responding to modern-day criticism of Macdonald.

Richard Gwyn, the author of a bestselling two-volume biography of Macdonald, warned in a recent piece for The Walrus that Canadians are lazily using the country’s founder as a “scapegoat” for the sins of the past.

“While Macdonald did make mistakes, so did Canadians, collectively,” he said.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/10/sure-john-a-macdonald-was-was-a-racist-colonizer-and-misogynist-but-so-were-most-canadians-back-then/

Criticisms of Macdonald generally centre on his policies concerning non-white Canadians. In short, he worked to keep out the Chinese, smashed Métis rebellions and set Canadian First Nations on track to decades of poverty and isolation.

But almost nobody gets a pass in 19th century Canada.

George Brown, Macdonald’s chief political rival, had a solid anti-slavery track record and urged racial harmony between Toronto’s whites and blacks.

At the same time, though, he also told Torontonians to distrust Jews, Catholics and the Irish. As refugees from the Irish Famine streamed into British North America, Brown wrote that these half-starved migrants were as much of a curse on Canada as “were the locusts to the land of Egypt.”

‘First Nations people in Saskatchewan, I would bet you $5 to a person, consider Macdonald the agent of their subjugation’

Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Macdonald’s Liberal successor, was famously responsible for boosting the Chinese head tax to $500 in 1903.

In 1886, Laurier told the House of Commons that it was moral for Canada to take lands from “savage nations” so long as they paid adequate compensation.

A native-ruled Canada would “forever have remained barren and unproductive, but which under civilised rule would afford homes and happiness to teeming millions,” he said.

Below the border, even Abraham Lincoln, Macdonald’s 1860s contemporary, held the view that as soon as the Civil War was over, the United States should get to work shipping all its black people back to Africa.

As the 16th president said in 1858, “there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”

Compared to the age he inhabited, say defenders, Macdonald was comparatively tolerant. He hung out with Irishmen, he had native friends, he urged unity with French speakers and he candidly acknowledged that the Canadian project was not going well for the country’s indigenous inhabitants.

“At all events, the Indians have been great sufferers by the discovery of America, and the transfer to it of a large white population,” he said in 1880.

Eldridge Stanton/Library and Archives Canada/PA-Sir John A. Macdonald

Macdonald oversaw the execution of Louis Riel, yes, but the man had staged two violent rebellions against his government.

“We still admire the way he tried to get Canadians to co-operate,” wrote historian Ged Martin in a recent piece. “But we don’t like the price that had to be paid, in sleaze and pork, to keep the country working together.”

The steepest price, by far, came on the aboriginal file. In addition to being Canada;’s first and longest serving prime minister, Macdonald remains the country’s longest-serving aboriginal affairs minister.

Serving in the post from 1878 to 1888, he laid the groundwork for basically every institution now blamed for the horrid state of Ottawa-aboriginal relations: The Indian Act, Indian Residential Schools and an over-bureaucratized Department of Indian Affairs.

“First Nations people in Saskatchewan, I would bet you $5 to a person, consider Macdonald the agent of their subjugation,” said University of Regina professor James Daschuk.

Last May, Mr. Daschuk, the author of a decidedly anti-Macdonald book, found himself in the somewhat awkward position of winning the Sir John A. Macdonald Prize for non-fiction.

‘He didn’t need to be so cruel’

That book, Clearing the Plains, based on 20 years of research, outlines how Canada capitalized on famine and disease in the prairies to force native populations to relocate to reserves well away from the coming railroad.

Mr. Daschuk notes that the evidence can still be seen on maps. In the once-populous areas southwest of Regina, there are only two First Nations reserves — both of which were established after the railroad was finished.

It was understandable for Macdonald to build a railroad to British Columbia or even pursue a policy of assimilation. But Mr. Daschuk says that what happened on the plains was needlessly draconian: Natives were barred from selling their agricultural products to white settlers, in some cases they were restricted from using modern farming implements and they could be arrested if found off their reserve without a pass.

“He didn’t need to be so cruel,” said Mr. Daschuk.

But it’s not like he had opponents. When critics accused Macdonald’s government of wasting money on feeding the Cree, the Prime Minister had no qualms in telling the assembled House of Commons that his agents withheld food “until the Indians were on the verge of starvation, to reduce the expense.”

As Don Smith noted in one of the few papers ever drafted on Macdonald’s aboriginal policy, the first Prime Minister was also somewhat progressive in his belief in Aboriginal title as something to be extinguished with treaties.

Other politicians of the era reasoned that the natives had never owned the land in the first place, so it was free for the taking.

In the 1880s, a landmark Ontario court decision ruled that “there is no Indian title in law or in equity. The claim of the Indians is simply moral and no more.”

As the ugly business of nation-building goes, Macdonald can still boast some of history’s cleanest hands.

Unlike Germany’s Otto von Bismarck, Macdonald didn’t unify Canada by engineering a series of bloody foreign wars. He never owned people, like George Washington. And he never personally killed anyone, like Simon Bolivar.

And even within the 19th century British Empire, the devastating relocation of several thousand native peoples was barely a blip.

As Mr. Daschuk noted, the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railroad was occurring at the same time as drought and negligent colonial management was conspiring to kill millions in British India.

But even if Macdonald wins the historical context game, it does not mean he will ever be anything less than an antihero for those Canadians who got the short end of the Confederation stick.

As Anishinaabe academic Hayden King wrote in a Twitter post this week, “’nobody is perfect’ is sooner to be adopted as a national mantra than rejecting [Sir John A. Macdonald] as a villain.”

National Post

• Email: thopper@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

FROM STTPML:

Canada Is The Only UN Member To Reject Landmark Indigenous Rights Document

jimcraven — Tue, 07 Oct 2014 00:38:22 +0000

Canada Is The Only UN Member To Reject Landmark Indigenous Rights Document

Posted: 10/02/2014 4:52 pm EDT Updated: 10/03/2014 9:59 pm EDT

Canada singled itself out as the only country to raise objections over a landmark United Nations document re-establishing the protection of the rights of indigenous people last week. It was a gesture one prominent First Nation leader called “saddening, surprising.”

“Canada was viewed always as a country that upheld human rights,” said Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations Chief Perry Bellegarde. “For Canada to be the only nation state to get up to make a caveat on the vote – that’s very telling.”

Bellegarde travelled to New York City to attend a special UN General Assembly meeting of more than 1,000 delegates and heads of state for the first-ever World Conference on Indigenous Peoples on Sept. 22 and 23.

On day one, nations voted on the adoption of the document – the first vote of its kind after the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was introduced in 2007.

In his opening remarks, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon spoke about the document’s significance, saying it helps “set minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of indigenous peoples” – more than 370 million around the world.

“I expect member states to meet their commitments, including by carrying out national action plans to realize our shared vision,” he told delegates.

The United States, who was among four nations (including Canada) who opposed the adoption of the original declaration seven years ago, notably reversed its position. President Barack Obama threw his administration’s support behind the declaration, regarding it as one that will “help reaffirm the principles that should guide our future.”

The document was adopted by all nations by consensus last week, but Canada was the only country to file its objections, flagging the wording of “free, prior and informed consent” as problematic.

Free, prior, and informed consent is commonly upheld as a key principle in international law. But according to Ottawa, it’s tricky wording that could be interpreted as “a veto to aboriginal groups and in that regard, cannot be reconciled with Canadian law, as it exists.”

“As a result, Canada cannot associate itself with the elements contained in this outcome document related to free, prior and informed consent,” the government explained in a statement.

‘Deeply Concerning’

Interim Assembly of First Nations Chief Ghislain Picard called the government’s objections “deeply concerning,” adding “Canada continues to embarrass itself and isolate itself on the world stage by offering to explain their vote.”

In the feds’ explanation, the word “veto” pops up three times, and Bellegarde says that’s inaccurate.

“Veto does not exist in the declaration anywhere,” Bellegarde said. “Why are they misleading and using that word?”

In 2007, Ottawa first used the same “veto” explanation in its statement rejecting the UN declaration.

Then in 2010, despite rejecting the declaration three years earlier, the federal government issued a statement saying: “We are now confident that Canada can interpret the principles expressed in the Declaration in a manner that is consistent with our Constitution and legal framework.”

Fast-forward to today and First Nation leaders, including Bellegarde, say they’re flabbergasted over the government’s flip-flopping and contradictory statements.

Bellegarde, who announced his candidacy for Assembly of First Nations chief on Wednesday, told The Huffington Post Canada in an interview the Harper government failed to consult with aboriginal groups in “any forums, any meetings, any dialogues” prior to the two-day UN conference.

He brought up recent decisions from Canada’s own Supreme Court which upheld aboriginal rights and titles and reinforced the necessity to obtain consent from aboriginal people on issues pertaining to property rights and claims.

In Tsilhqot’in Nation vs. British Columbia, a ruling written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, it clearly states government and other agencies who desire access to land conferred by aboriginal titles “must obtain the consent of the Aboriginal title holders.”

“This relationship between this government, our Crown, and Canada and its indigenous peoples does not have to be so unnecessarily adversarial,” Bellegarde said.

Strained Relations ‘Persistently Unresolved’

Prime Minister Stephen Harper did not join Bellegarde at the UN conference, nor did Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Minister Bernard Valcourt. Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq was in New York at the time, but opted to attend UN climate summit meetings.

Instead, new aboriginal affairs deputy minister Colleen Swords was sent to represent Canada.

Bellegarde said he pressed Swords for a clearer explanation of what “veto” means in the context of the non-legally binding UN outcome document and its application to Canadian law.

“No adequate response given back,” Bellegarde said.

The Huffington Post Canada asked Valcourt’s office for an explanation of Canada’s stance on the outcome document and received a written response.

“Our government is focused on working with aboriginal communities on our shared priorities, and we have in place a constitutionally-entrenched framework that ensures the consultation and accommodation, as appropriate, of aboriginal interests. This framework also balances the interests of non-aboriginal Canadians and it has served as a model for nations around the world,” read the statement.

Valcourt’s office also repurposed one line from UN human rights investigator James Anaya’s 22-page report from earlier this year about Canada’s relationship with its indigenous peoples.

“To quote the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ‘…Canada has taken determined action to address ongoing aspects of the history of misdealing and harm inflicted on aboriginal peoples in the country, a necessary step towards helping to remedy their current disadvantage,’” read the email.

However, Valcourt’s office failed to acknowledge that in the same July 2014 report, Anaya concluded: “The numerous initiatives that have been taken at the federal and provincial/territorial levels to address the problems faced by indigenous peoples have been insufficient.

“The well-being gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people in Canada has not narrowed over the past several years; treaty and aboriginal claims remain persistently unresolved; indigenous women and girls remain vulnerable to abuse; and overall there appear to be high levels of distrust among indigenous peoples towards the government at both the federal and provincial levels.”

See whole article at http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/02/canada-un-indigenous-rights_n_5918868.html

ADDITIONAL READING FROM STTPML:

http://sttpml.org/parts-i-and-ii-combined-breathtaking-hubris-and-hypocrisy-the-real-nature-and-foundations-of-anglo-american-imperiums/

http://sttpml.org/redskins-the-origin-of-the-word-and-genocide-behind-it/

http://sttpml.org/the-cia-and-wanted-nazi-war-criminals/

http://sttpml.org/papers-at-the-university-of-minnesota-center-for-holocaust-and-genocide-studies/

http://sttpml.org/canada/wasichu-the-continuing-indian-wars/

http://sttpml.org/nation-building-in-indian-country-the-blackfoot-constitutional-review-by-taiawagi-helton/

http://sttpml.org/indigenous-approaches-to-economic-development-and-sustainability-lecture-at-yunnan-university-china/

http://sttpml.org/corruption-and-genocide-in-indian-country-the-case-of-the-blood-kainai-blackfoot/

http://sttpml.org/canada/the-horrifying-anglo-american-roots-of-nazi-eugenics/

http://sttpml.org/canada/cooking-the-history-books-the-thanksgiving-massacre-anglo-american-genocide-the-father-and-slavery-the-mother/

Indigenous Peoples Forum on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery

jimcraven — Sat, 19 Jul 2014 01:37:22 +0000

Indigenous Peoples Forum on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery

A forum to address the implications of the Doctrine of Discovery in context of the standards established by the adoption on September 13, 2007 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Local – Regional – Continental – Global

Monday, November 25, 2013

A Concept of Native Title by Leroy Littlebear http://doctrineofdiscoveryforum.blogspot.com/

A CONCEPT OF NATIVE TITLE

By Leroy Littlebear (1982)

Presently in Canada the issue of aboriginal rights, Indian title, and land claims by the Indian people are issues that to the people of Canada are major concerns. These issues are of a major concern not only because if recognized as legitimate and legal it means the payment of large sums of money by the people of Canada to the Natives of this country, but they also have implications for the development and exploitation of the natural resources, especially oil and gas, and for the ecology.

But so far, neither the Canadian Government nor the people at large have come to grips with these issues. It is probably more correct to say that they do not want to come to grips with them. The courts of Canada have had several opportunities to deal with aboriginal rights, but not unlike the government, they too have avoided dealing directly the issues. They find one technicality or another to dismiss a case. In regards to land, aboriginal rights includes native title, and land claims almost exclusively deals with the issue of native title. In this short paper, the writer will attempt to present a concept of native title for purposes of educating these people who are in a position to do something about these issues. Three recent court decisions have attempted to deal with native title: Calder v. Attorney General of British Colombia[1], referred in layman’s terms as the “Nishga Case”; Kanatewat v. James Bay Development Corporation[2], and its sequel, James Bay Development Corporation v. Kanatewat[3], better known as the James Bay Cases; and Re Paulette and the Registrar of Land Titles[4].

In the Calder case, the Supreme Court of Canada held against the Nishga Indians of British Columbia. Their holding was to the effect that if the Nishgas had title, this title had long ago beenextinguished by adverse acts on the part of the British Crown. The Court also reasoned that Indian title does not exist independent of legislation recognizing it. But the court did not define Native Title. At the superior court level of the James Bay cases, the judge held that Indians had aboriginal title. But the Quebec Court of Appeals reversed the superior court’s decision and in essence held that there is no such thing as aboriginal title.

They reasoned that no treaties had ever been signed in the James Bay area, therefore, no Native title exists. But this of course, is ridiculous because treaties are a means of extinguishing Indian title and not a means of creating it. But both courts did not define Indian title. In the Paulette case the judge, in handing down his decision on whether the Indians of the Northwest Territories could lodge a caveat in regards to the land they were claiming, held that arguably the Indians had a legally recognizable interest in the land in spite of the fact that the area claimed was covered by a treaty[5].

He reasoned that the Treaty could not be interpreted as a total surrender and should be looked at as a peace and friendship treaty. At the Court of Appeals level, again, the lower court’s decision was reversed. The Court of Appeals in essence held that a caveat could not he lodged against a sovereign without its permission. Here again the court did not define Native title.

Important as these decisions are and the implications they have for aboriginal rights in Canada, the single most important decision is St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. v. The Queen[6], handed down by the Privy Council. The Council held “that the tenure of the Indians as a personal and usufructuary right, dependent on the goodwill of the sovereign”; that there has been all along vested in the Crown a substantial and paramount estate, underlying the Indian’s title, which became a plenum, dominium whenever that title was surrendered or otherwise extinguished”. In other words, the British Crown, prior to the discovery of North America, has always had title to the lands in North America in an a priori sense.

The result of the St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. case is that the British, by simply setting foot on North America and planting a rag attached to a pole on the shores, acquired the title to Indian lands. This ritual, i.e. the coming ashore and the planting of a flag and the claiming of the land for the Monarch, is sometimes referred to as “Discovery”. The Doctrine of Discovery is one justification for claiming fee simple title to lands in North America. But the doctrine has been abused, misconstrued, and misinterpreted by the white man. Chief Justice Marshall of the United States Supreme Court, and one of the first to use the Concept or Discovery in his decisions, said in theJohnson and Graham’s lessee v. Mc’Intosh case[7] that discovery was a doctrine meant to apply to the European powers for their own orderly conduct in dealing with the aboriginal people of North America.

Hence, discovery was not meant to apply to the Indians. It was not meant to mean fee simple ownership. To the contrary discovery can be analogized to a ‘business franchise’. Just as a business franchise gives exclusive rights to the owner of the franchise to enter into business relations with people, within the geographic area of the franchise, discovery was meant to give a European power which came to the shores of North America the exclusive right to deal with the Indians whose territory covered or included the particular area discovered by a European power. A right to deal with people certainly does not give ownership to their property.

Before moving on, the writer would like to consider two separate but not unrelated fundamental questions. Firstly, in regards to the reasoning of the Privy Council in the St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. case, the writer would like to ask, “What is property?” Most authorities would define property to be the relationship that people have about a thing.

Taking this definition and applying it to the statement by the Privy Council that the Crown has always had underlying title to the lands in question how is it possible to have a relationship about a thing, in this case, land, which a people do not know exists? In regards to the doctrine of discovery, it interpreted as giving fee simple ownership, rather than being in the nature of a franchise, then should not the doctrine have a geographic limitation, in the same way that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 has been held not to apply to terra incognita?

When it come to the consideration of Native title, most authorities reason that Indians have no concept of property ownership and therefore, how could they have title? But this is nonsense! It is high time the Government and the Courts stop using as premises false reasonings such as “personal and usufructuary right dependent on the good will of the sovereign” for stare decisissake.

At one time reasonings such as were forwarded in the St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. case may have held water and we can, at least, give them the benefit of the doubt because people probably did not know any better. But we know better today, and we know different. At least, we claim to be one of the most advanced societies this world has ever known.

It is time we put out intelligence to work in a way that will do justice to our claim! In order to understand the property concepts of any society, one must have some appreciation of the overall philosophy or habitual thought of that society. By habitual thought, the writer means the philosophical premises that are basic to a culture; premises that a society used to relate to the world. The habitual thought of Western Occidental society is very linear and singular. A good example of linear things is Western Occidental society’s concept of time. Time is conceptualized as a straight line. If one attempted to picture “time” in his mind, he would see something like a river flowing toward and on past him. What is behind is the past. What is immediately around him is the present. The question is upstream.

But one cannot see very far upstream because of a waterfall, the waterfall symbolizing the barrier to knowing the future. This line of time is conceptualized as quantity, especially as lengths made of units. A length of time is envisioned as a row of similar units. A logical and inherent characteristic of this concept of time is that once a unit of the river of time flows past, that particular unit never returns…it is gone forever. This characteristic lends itself to other concepts such as “wasting time”, “making up time”, “buying time”, “being on time”, which are unique to Western Occidental society.

Another characteristic of this linear concept of time is that each unit of time is totally different and independent of similar units. Consequently, each day is considered a different unit, and thus a different day. Every day is a new day, every year is a new year. From this the reader can readily understand why there is a felt need among Western society to have names for days and months, and numbers for years. In general, Western philosophy is a straight line. One goes from A to B to C to D to E, where B is the foundation for C, and C is the foundation for D, and on down the line.

Many Native people think in terms of cyclicity. Time is not a straight line. It is a circle. Every day is not a new day, but the same day repeating itself. There is no need to name each day a different name. You only need one name: day. This philosophy is the result of a direct relationship to the Macrocosm. The sun is round; the moon is round; a day is a cycle – daylight followed by night; the seasons follow the same cycle year after year.

A characteristic of cyclical thinking is that it is wholistic, and the same way that the circle is a whole. A cyclical philosophy does not lend itself readily to dichotomies of categorizations, nor fragmentation, nor polarizations, whereas linear thinking lends itself to all of the above. Linear thinking, also, lends itself to singularity. For example, “there is only one great spirit”, “only one true rule”, “only one true answer”. These philosophical ramifications of Western habitual taught result in misunderstanding wholistic concepts.

Westerners relate themselves to only one aspect of the whole at the time. The linear and singular of philosophy of Western society, in the cyclical and the wholistic philosophy of most Native people can readily be seen in the property concepts each society has. British concepts of ownership or title dissimilar to Native concepts of land ownership. An underlying premise of the British property system is that no one can own land in the same way that one can own a book. One cannot possess land in the same way that one can possess a book. Possession forms a large part of ownership. Since one cannot own land in the same way that he can own a book, a system has been devised by the British to give symbolic ownership. This system is known as the estate system.

Under the estate system one cannot outrightly own the land, mainly because land outlasts human beings. The land was there before the present owner, and will still be there after the present owner passes. Consequently, one can only have an interest in the land called an estate. The British developed a hierarchy of interests or estates. At the very top is “a fee simple absolute”. It is a possessory fee simple absolute, the largest estate known to the law. Even though a parcel of land has geographic bounds, when considered in terms of time, this estate is said to be of infinite duration. It is a present, freely alienable, possessory estate. There are no other outside interests. A fee simple absolute can be symbolized as A (grantor) to B (grantee) and his heirs. On down the line come the defeasible estates.

The first defeasible estate is the fee simple determinable (with a possibility of a reverter). It is possible that A, a landowner in a fee simple absolute will grant land to B with a condition, or limitation which will cause the estate of B to come to an end upon the happening of a certain event. The fee simple determinable can be symbolized as A (grantor) to B (grantee) plus a condition (so long as liquor is not sold on the premises).

The interest retained by the grantor is known as a possibility of a reverter. The grantee has all the same rights in regards to the land as one having a fee simple absolute except for the one condition, hence he has a lesser interest than one having a fee simple absolute. Another defeasible estate is the fee simple subject to a condition subsequent. It can by symbolized as A (grantor) to B (grantee) on the condition that liquor is never sold on the premises; but if liquor is ever sold on the premises, the grantor shall have a right to enter. This interest is not greatly different from the fee simple determinable. The main difference is the interest retained by the grantor.

In the F.S.D., the grantor interest automatically terminates on the happening of an event. As soon the condition is broken, the fee reverts back to the grantor. In the F.S.S.C.S. the fee does not automatically revert back to the grantor on the happening of an event or when the condition is broken. The grantor or his heirs must exercise the right to re-enter before the fee reverts back. If the right of re-entry is not exercised, the fee remains in the grantee in spite of the condition being broken.

Another step down the hierarchy of estates is the Fee Tail, which has been phased out of British common law. The fee tail limits the class of heirs capable of inheriting to those who likewise answer the description of lineal descendants. When and if the line of lineal descendants runs out, the estate tail comes to an end. The Grantor retains a non-posessory, future estate called a reversion. A fee tail can be symbolized in legal language as follows: A (grantor) to B (grantee) and the heirs of his body.

There are a number of other interests or estates such as a life estate, indefensible vested remainders, contingent remainders, executory interests, and a number of non-freehold estates. But for our purposes, the above will suffice. A couple of observations can be made in regard to the estate system.

Firstly, the system is linear vertically. The system is also very singular. It is geared to the individual ownership of land. Secondly, an underlying goal of the system is to facilitate transferability of the different interests. Thirdly, the system necessitates an extensive and complicated registry. It makes possible to chronologically trace previous owners. If one went back far enough to the original source or original owner, one would discover that it is the Crown or the Monarch. In other words, the source of title is the Crown. Indian ownership of property, and in this case, land is wholistic. Land is comunally owned. Indian property ownership is somewhat akin to joint tenancy: the members of a tribe have an undivided interest in the land; everybody, as a whole, owns the whole.

In regards to title, to use the language of the estate system, the Native concept of title is somewhat like a F.S.D., or a F.S.S.C.S, or a F.T. or a combination of all three. It is as though the original grantor of the land to the Indians put a condition on it… “so long as there are Indians”; “so long as it is not alienated”; “on the condition that it be used only by Indians” etc. In other words, the Indian concept of title is not equivalent to a fee simple, but is somewhat less than fee simple. This is not to say that they were not capable of conceiving a fee simple concept.

If one attempts to trace the Indian’s source of title, one will quickly find the original source is the Creator. The Creator, in granting land, did not give the land to human beings only but gave it to all living beings. This includes plants, sometimes rocks, and all animals. In other words, deer have the same type of estate or interest as any human being. This concept of sharing with fellow animals and plants is one that is quite alien to Western society’s concept of land. To Western society, only human beings have a right to land, and everything else is for the convenience of human beings.

The concept of the Indians of sharing with fellow living things is not unrelated to the concept of social contract that has been forwarded by some philosophers.

For instance, Rousseau and Locke refer to a social contract to explain the origins society and government. But their social contract refers to human beings only. If the idea of a social contract is applied to Native people, one will find that it includes not only human beings but all other living beings. An observation about the Indian’s concept of land title includes a reference back to the basic philosophy. Indian property concepts are wholistic.

Ownership does not rest in any one individual, but belongs to the tribe as a whole, as an entity. The land belongs not only to people presently living, but it belongs to past generations and to future generations. Past and future generations are as much a part of the tribal entity as the living generation. Not only that, but the land belongs not only to human beings, but also to other living things; they, too, have an interest. The question inevitably arises as to just what the Indians surrendered when they signed treaties or engaged in activities that today the government claims were actions on the part of the Indians extinguishing their title.

Firstly, the Indian concept of land ownership is certainly not inconsistent with the idea of sharing with an alien people. Once the Indians recognized them as human beings, they gladly shared with them. They shared with Europeans in the same way they shared with the animals. But sharing here cannot be interpreted us meaning that Europeans got the same rights as any other Native person, because they were not descendants of the original grantees, or they were not parties to the original social contract. Sharing certainly cannot be interpreted as meaning that one is giving up for all eternity his rights.

Secondly, the Indians could not have given a fee simple in any land transaction they may have engaged in, because they did not have a fee simple. They were never given a fee simple by their grantor. It is well known in British property law that one cannot give an interest greater than he has.

Thirdly, Indians could not have given an interest equal to what they were originally granted, otherwise they would be breaking the condition of the fee granted. Not only that, but they are not sole owners of the original grant. The land belongs to the past generations, the yet to be born, and the plants and animals. In order to give an interest equal to the original grant, one would have to get a transfer from those holding an equal interest, and these would include the dead, and the yet to be born, and the plants and animals. Has the Crown ever received a surrender from these other living entities?

Fourthly, the only kind of interest that the Native People have given or transferred is an interest lesser than they had, for one can always give an interest smaller than he has. For instance, if one holds an F.S.S.C.S., one can always give away a life estate. From the above one can readily conclude that the Indians did not surrender very much if they surrendered anything at all. Fifthly, the above philosophy, property concepts, and ramifications and implications thereof, may sound ridiculous and fairy-tale-like, but what philosophy does not? Do biblical stories make more sense? To Native people they sound rather ridiculous and make believe. Does the “Crown” as a fictitious entity make more sense? The writer does not think so.

Canada as a sovereign nation, via the Crown, claims ownership and sovereignty over all the land within its boundaries. But how does one gain ownership and sovereignty over particular piece of land? One can gain sovereignty through aboriginal rights which basically means that one is the original occupier of a particular piece land. One can gain sovereignty through conquest. One can gain some land rights through adverse possession. One can gain title through conveyance. Lastly and uniquely to the Americas, and claimed to be just by Europeans, one can gain title through discovery.

If we look at Canada, and ask again, “How did she gain title to the lands within its boundaries? “ It certainly cannot claim title via aboriginal rights. Only Native people can claim aboriginal rights. It cannot claim sovereignty through conquest. Who did it conquer? Sure, one or two small tribes may have been conquered, but certainly not most Indian tribes. On the contrary, she chose to enter into peace and friendship treaties with most tribes.

If one tribe was actually conquered, it certainly does not mean that all Indians were conquered. Conquest has geographic limitations in the same way that the Royal Proclamation has geographic limitations. In the Nishga case, the court in a roundabout way, suggests that the Crown gained title to lands in British Colombia via adverse possession, i.e. adverse acts on the part of the crown. But the theory of adverse possession could not apply to Native peoples because the land was not individually owned.

Secondly, adverse possession does not apply to a sovereign because an underlying assumption of the theory of adverse possession is that the adverse possession must have his title recognized by a higher entity. In the case of the sovereign, there is no higher entity. If the Crown can claim any type of interest, it can legitimize this claim through conveyance and only through conveyance. But as the writer has already shown, the Indians surrendered if they surrendered anything at all, is a lot smaller to what the government lays claim to. It certainly is not a fee simple.

The only other means by which Canada can justify its claim to Indian lands is through discovery. But then the writer has shown how discovery has been misinterpreted and misconstrued. When the courts and the government say the Indian’s title is dependent on the goodwill of the sovereign, and that the Indian’s interest is a mere burden on the underlying title of the crown, the question to ask is: “What did the Crown get its title from? And how?” When the courts refer to Indian title, they should say something to the effect of, “the title or interest of the Crown is a mere personal and usufructuary interest dependent on the goodwill of the Indians.”

The Indians have all along had a paramount estate underlying the Crown’s interest. The Crown’s interest is a mere burden on the title of the Indians. As a conclusion to this short paper, the writer would like to state that his hope that he has in some small way contributed to a better understanding of the Indians property concepts, which in turn, hopefully, will facilitate a better understanding by those who are not familiar with Indian thinking. The writer hopes that, in some small way, by this paper, he has contributed toward educating non-Indians about why and the basis for the land claims the Indians are making.

If justice and fairness are underlying goals of today’s government and court system, then the concepts and the philosophy of Indian people should certainly be taken into consideration and given as much weight as British concepts and philosophy. But if justice and fairness are not underlying goals, then we should stop covering ourselves with a false aura of sacredness and bring out things in the open, so everybody knows where they stand. In other words, if we cannot be bothered with justice and fairness, we should, at least, be truthful.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Calder V. Attorney-General (1971). 13 D.L.R. (3d) 64, 74 W.W.R. 481.

[2] In Re Paulette, (1974) 42 D.L.R. (3d) 8.

[3] Kanatewat V. James Bay Development Corpo ,and the Attorney General of Canada, Quebec Superior Court of Appeals, November 22, 1973

[4] James Bay Development Corp. V. Kanatewat, Quebec Court of Appeals, November 22, 1973.

[5] Treaty No.11 (1921)

[6] St. Catherine~~(1887) 13 S.R.C. 577.~~

~~[7] Johnson V. Macintosh 21 U.S. (8)~~

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Catholic Groups in Solidarity with Indigenous Peoples Ask Pope Francis to Rescind Papal Bulls from 15th Century

LORETTO COMMUNITY Sisters of Loretto/Co-Members of Loretto Nov. 25, 2013 For more information, call/e-mail Jean Schildz, (314) 962-8112, ext. 106 jschildz@lorettocommunity.org

For Immediate ReleaseThirteen Catholic Groups in Solidarity with Indigenous People Join Their Request to Ask Pope Francis to Rescind Papal Bulls from 15th Century

Thirteen Catholic groups today announced their request to Pope Francis to issue a formal rescission of the 15th century papal bulls that provide the basis for the Doctrine of Discovery.

Joining together to make the request are the Loretto Community, together with the elected leadership of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, the 19 member congregations of Dominican Sisters Conference, the Sisters of St Francis (Rochester, Minn.), Sisters of St. Joseph (Concordia, Kan.), Sisters of St. Joseph (Philadelphia), Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth (Kan.), the Congregation of Sisters of St. Agnes (Fond du Lac, Wis.), Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Casa Loreto, Rome), Sisters of St. Joseph and Associates of Buffalo New York; Pax Christi International; as well as the 8th Day Center for Justice which is funded by 34 congregations of religious men and women; and the Franciscan-founded Nevada Desert Experience in collaboration with Chief Johnnie L. Bobb of the Western Shoshone National Council.

The membership of the 13 groups includes women and men religious and laypeople. The groups’ request stands in solidarity with indigenous peoples’ persistent requests to every pope since 1984 to do the same. Columbus’ arrival in the Western Hemisphere began an era of horrific violence based on religious intolerance.

The Doctrine of Discovery justified this violence in addition to the seizure of any land not owned by Christians.

The 13 groups cited above call upon Pope Francis to start a new era of justice with a public declaration that formally rescinds Dum Diversis Bull of 1452, which granted the pope’s blessing “to capture, vanquish and subdue the Saracens, pagans and other enemies of Christ and put them into perpetual slavery and to take all their possessions and their property,” and Inter Caetera Bull of 1493, which granted authority to Spain and Portugal to “take all lands and possessions” so long as no other Christian ruler had previously claimed them.

The 13 groups cited above also ask Pope Francis to create a new papal bull that promotes ethical norms in harmony with Gospel values. Other Catholics have raised their voices in solidarity with this worldwide indigenous peoples’ request, notably Pax Christi International in a prior communication to the World Council of Churches, and the Religious at the United Nations signing a letter to Pope Francis originated by the Passionists International. It is likely that other Catholics have similarly stood as allies, and more are expected to experience the call to do so.

All voices in solidarity are welcome. The requested actions would be a moral victory for indigenous people, and one long overdue. Recent popes have made gestures of reconciliation, moving the Catholic Church and the world at large forward to this important moment. Indigenous groups stand firm in their requests for rescission and repudiation of the official bulls, seeking the same formality with which they were issued.

The 13 groups previously cited stand in solidarity with these requests of indigenous neighbors, far and near. These groups draw inspiration from their Catholic heritage and Gospel values of peace and justice. Many members of these communities were shocked to learn of the doctrine, saddened at the delay experienced by indigenous peoples and eager to show solidarity with the justice-based effort.

The past year for many communities has been one of slowly coming to terms with something that indigenous peoples have experienced for centuries. The 13 Catholic groups making this request join with other denominations that have made similar announcements, including the World Council of Churches, the Episcopal House of Bishops, the Philadelphia, New York and Canadian Yearly Meetings of the Religious Society of Friends and the Boulder Friends Meeting (Quakers), the United Methodist Church, Unitarian Universalists and many others.

To join in this effort, please contact Loretto Papal Bull Rescission Committee members Libby Comeaux (libby.comeaux@gmail.com) or Mary Helen Sandoval (mary.sandoval.ms@gmail.com).

_____________________________________ *Today’s relationships between governments and indigenous people in the Americas, Africa and Oceania have as their foundation the “Doctrine of Discovery.” It is a principle of international law with roots dating back to 15th century papal bulls. These decrees largely were used to justify Western Europe’s dominion over lands occupied for thousands of years by indigenous peoples. They made possible the European age of “discovery,” sanctioning and promoting the conquest, colonization and exploitation of non-Christian lands and peoples.

Residential Schools Commission Calls For 30-Year Seal on Records: Crimes, Cover-ups, Like Lies, Can Only Beget More of the Same

jimcraven — Thu, 17 Jul 2014 07:43:23 +0000

-

Residential schools commission calls for 30-year seal on records

-

A lawyer for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has presented an alternative option to destroying the testimony of about 38,000 claimants — lock it in a vault for 30 years.

–

PHOTO BY BLAIR GABLE https://www.facebook.com/torontostar?fref=photo

-

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/07/15/residential_schools_commission_calls_for_30year_seal_on_records.html

-

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has been looking through documents stored at the Library and Archives Canada Preservation Centre in Gatineau.

-

By: Tim Alamenciak News reporter, Published on Tue Jul 15 2014

-

The claims of 38,000 residential school survivors could be headed for a vault instead of an incinerator depending on the direction of a judge.

-

On the second day of arguments over the potential destruction of documents detailing abuse at residential schools, Julian Falconer, the lawyer representing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, proposed an alternative to eradication — locking the documents away for 30 years and then transferring them to Library and Archives Canada.

-

“You’re guaranteeing the claimants that no one can access their information for three decades and you’re not putting yourself in that irreversible position the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is worried about,” said Falconer. “The minute you destroythis portion of history, you alter the ability for generations to come to remind people what was done to these individuals.”

-

Under the commission’s proposal, survivors would have the option of voluntarily sending their files to the National Research Centre, an archive set up at the University of Manitoba. Falconer also said the commission would accept a 50-year seal on the records if 30 years was deemed to be too short.

-

Related:

-

Survivors of residential schools push back against document destruction

-

Truth and Reconciliation Commission gets access to thousands more documents

-

Government ordered to hand over documents about infamous residential school

-

The proposal from the lawyer working for the claims secretariat called for all records to be destroyed two years after the last residential school survivor has their claim resolved. Justice Paul Perell, the judge charged with administering the case, said he favours a retention period of at least 15 years in any case.

-

Edmund Metatawabin, a survivor of St. Anne’s residential school, has previously opposed the destruction of the documents. He also opposed the suggestion that the records would be locked away and in the hands of the government.

-

“In 30 years time, who’s going to remember this issue? Who’s going to be interested in opening this file?” said Metatawabin, who also decried their destruction.

-

Metatawabin said the historical records are vital for Canadians to remember the past and learn from it.

“I am one of the survivors who was abused and I say don’t hide them. The people who are trying to hide them never felt all of these abuses, never felt helpless at the hands of perpetrators and predators, never stayed in bed and hoped that nobody would touch them during the night. It was hell to be in there,” said Metatawabin.

-

Those who testified in the individual hearings did so with the understanding that their testimony would remain confidential, according to Steven Cooper, partner at Ahlstrom Wright Oliver & Cooper LLP, a firm that has represented more than 2,000 survivors.

-

“I can assure you that the vast majority of survivors are aghast at the notion that their records would be maintained,” said Cooper in an email. “Ninety per cent of clients don’t want to see any record of the hearing and are relieved by the thought that the records will be destroyed. Some will only give their testimony on that understanding.”

-

The commission’s proposal would pass the documents to Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada to be sealed for at least 30 years and a large-scale “enhanced notice” program to inform claimants about the fate of their transcripts, applications and decisions. The notice would also give survivors the opportunity to voluntarily submit their materials to the archive in Manitoba.

-

At the end of 30 years, the documents would be transferred to Library and Archives Canada where they would be subject to the federal Access to Information Act and Privacy Act.

-

“A destruction order means it’s irreversible. You create an act that can’t be changed about accounts that are some of the most detailed accounts we have access to,” said Falconer. “A court should be empowered to open that vault in two generations to deal with what neither you nor I can anticipate.”

-

The hearing is scheduled to continue Wednesday.

-

-

STTPML COMMENT Personal by Jim Craven/Omahkohkiaaiipooyii

-

I have served as a “Tribal Judge” on a UN-NGO-Sponsored Tribunal on Indian Residential School Atrocities, I know personally, have interviewed and helped to prepare for trials that never came, well over 200 survivors; and my own mother, a Blackfoot Indian, suffered at the hands of the Mormons; although they did not run Residential Schools as in Canada, they operated the same and committed the same vile crimes against children and others who opposed them.

-

Further, some of those records I and some colleagues have seen. Here is some of the why they want them sealed:

-

1) A whole lot of Canadian history and many history books, will have to be rewritten or be exposed for what they are: cover-ups of genocide and a lot of Canadian notables, after whom many buildings and monuments are named and to whom they continue to pay tribute and cover-up their crimes–not just past, but present and intended for the future.; A whole lot of monuments, building names, awards, etc will look very differently when the history books are written by new generations of scholars. The FBI is part of the “Justice” Department, and the headquarters building is named after J Edgar Hoover, a mobbed-up racist, anti-Semite, extortionist, blackmailer, hid and used as extortion weapons, more crimes than he ever had any real hand in solving. Having a building that is supposed to be about justice named after Hoover is like having a shelter for battered women named after the serial killer Ted Bundy.

-

2) The stories told, by different people, from different nations, time periods and clans, who had never met each other, but were abused by the same persons, in the same ways, with the same modus operandi, all these testimonies are not just corroborative, they are a powerful and human indictments and exposures of the system and all those so proudly and smugly white folks (along with non-white collaborators and sell-outs) so proud of their “pure and delightsome” white skin they had nothing to do with, so proud of their “stock” and Anglo-American genes they also had nothing to do with, luminaries of Canadian history, psychopaths and sociopaths many of them.

-

3) They show willful, calculated, premeditated and conscious genocide (no need to cover-up what is clean only what is dirty; no need to avoid going to paper if honest and truthful–only if something to hide and attempting to escape exposure and accountability; no need to take reprisals against those bringing phony charges–disprove them–only those bringing the truth); What comes out from the records I and my colleagues have seen can only be described as being as depraved and psychopathic as anything we have seen including from the Axis fascist powers.

-

4) They show crimes in the present and that will continue into the future unless exposed and prosecuted with the possible bill due mounting into the billions of dollars. Many of the offenders are dead, but their inbred scions, who would be nowhere without the family name, genes and connections, now in positions of power, are very threatened. Their whole Calvinist rationale for rule (White skin, power and wealth the sign and proof of being preordained to rule in God’s grace) crumbles.

-

5) The City Council of Vancouver , BC just voted to give notice that the City of Vancouver, BC is on un-ceded, non-Treaty land of several Indigenous nations. That is what the Residential School system was really all about in addition to pure racism, forced assimilation and the rest of it: to break the connections of the nations with their traditional lands and Peoples to destroy any property rights (in the colonizer’s terms) as well as the nations themselves. A a common historical land base, along with common culture and language, common institutions of governance and leadership selection, common history, common economic life, common desire to remain a People; these are the fundamental facts on the ground, plus international law (not recognition or non-recognition by other recognized nations or nation-states) that define and protect, when defined as a nation, the rights of all nations to sovereignty, not to be exterminated, and thus also self-determination, independence, right of indigenous-built social systems, freedom from outside interference in internal affairs not having external effects; and thus the genocide that built and still lives alive and well, some in the same old forms and instruments, some new forms and instruments– all open and naked as defined by Canadian law;

-

6) I have seen some “visitor logs” of some Residential Schools with some of the “Great Names” of Canadian history, some of whom were famous when they made overnight “inspection visits” for one of the Churches or for the Government. Why would these notables be bothering with, let alone staying overnight, at some of these “schools” that were all in isolated places for a reason? They were serial abusers handed children to abuse as favors and gifts of bonding from the school administrators. The police knew about it and even provided security for the visits. When modern forensic techniques are applied to the content of those files (various kinds of sociometric and econometric and network analyses), all sorts of new discoveries will shake the academic world; a cloistered, privileged and self-censoring world that has stayed so safe,with safe topics, from safe paradigms, safe sources, in the safe journals, or the safe media, with safe scopes and depths of analysis and writing, they will be exposed for what they are and represent by the realities they willfully, blindly and with depraved indifference, ignored and even disputed and covered-up.

-

7) Many of the children from the Indian Residential Schools both while in the schools and after they left and wound-up on the streets in urban areas, were used for medical experiments, to test vaccines (Hep B etc) as well as used in the infamous CIA MKULTRA program (1950s to 1974?) of Ewen Cameron in McGill. SearchForTheManchurianCandidate I have personally interviewed three victims of this program, taken at different times, but with the same modus operandi, with backgrounds that allowed them to be easily dismissed if they ever talked or could talk and remember; all three were urban Indians, Residential School Survivors of different schools at very different periods but all lured into the program through supposed “help agencies” for the poor. Also many of the students were sterilized under the Alberta Sterilization Act of 1928 and the B.C. “Race Hygiene” Act (that directly inspired the Nazis) mostly under ruses so they did not know until much later they had been sterilized.

-

8) The Catholic Church: The CC has just gotten around to admitting some past cases, paying out over 1 billion in sealed settlements so far, and the victims admitted to are all white, middle class, very presentable on camera and very articulate and believable; they have not even admitted all the abuses of Indian children and poor white children (now only in Ireland) and for how long; these records show some of it.

-

9) The 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was ratified by Canada in 1953 (Indians declared Canadian Citizens 1963) while the U.S. did not bother until 1988 to ratify it but passed a “sovereignty amendment” that vitiated the ratification (in the U.S. American Indians were declared American citizens in 1924 ratified in 1928). In both cases, treaties and conventions, when ratified by the respective governments that signed them, become part of the “Supreme Law of the Land”, but they even trump the Constitutions of the nations that signed them under “Supremacy Clauses” mandated by Canons of Treaty Construction and Contracts. Otherwise, nations could do what Canada and the U.S. routinely do and that is to take the advantages and consideration gained from a treaty or covenant, then ignore or refuse to obey the terms that are considered unfavorable (then do not sign the covenant to be selectively and conveniently kept by one party). These documents then, expose in naked, clear, irrefutable proofs, not only that Canada and the U.S. were built on genocide and theft not people of genius and certain bloodlines destined by God to rule; they indict not only the past, but all the present and future built on a rotten foundation of lies, theft, genocide and wars of the kind Nazis were hanged for at Nuremberg.

-

Residential_Schools Apology Not Acceptedpdf –
http://sttpml.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/redskins.mp3
– Judicial Findings From the Inter-Nation Tribunal on Indian Residential Schools in Canada Copy – Indigenous Epistemology and Scientific Method pdf – IndictmentRev1 – genocide-br-en-Clavero – conspiracy theories 387 – Residential_Schools (2) – http://sttpml.org/papers-at-the-university-of-minnesota-center-for-holocaust-and-genocide-studies/ – 44_Carroll_Quigley___The_Anglo_American_Establishment – psycophaths-at-work – eprint of international ed and imper 21598282.2011 – Residential Schools The Past is Present (PDF), Radio program with James Craven on The United Church, May 2000. Transcription. – Chronicles of Ecoimperialism: Real Whales, Real People (PDF), by James Michael Craven (Blackfoot Confederacy) (Click here for HTML version). – Paper on Blackfoot Nation (PDF). – Indictment Of The Federal Governme – http://sttpml.org/legal-case-against-the-government-of-canada-for-genocide-against-indigenous-people/ – –

From Truth to Truth: The Sacred Hoop. Counter-clockwise, each imperative to the left of a process critical for it; Clockwise, each is an imperative for the process is fundamental to the next imperative.

In a real Aboriginal Court, there are no: dueling expert witnesses each saying what the paying client wants from the same set of facts; no jury consultants, judge or venue shopping; no political hacks and megalomaniacs voted for patronage-selected as judges; no lawyers only take well-paying low-hanging fruit, looking to “win”; truth and the rest of it does not matter; no formalities and any ritual and process is to serve not obstruct the search for real truth. There is no playing games and slippery use of words and constructs depending on which side of an argument. There is no theatrics allowed but deeply felt emotions are encouraged as they may also yield probative evidence.

–

Without the continual and search for Truth, without fear or favor, there can be no Justice; Without Justice (for all concerned including the innocents tainted by crime of a relative) there can be no real Healing (except something like “get over it” and “we’ll go back to the same positions we did crimes in but this time learn from our “mistakes”). Without some Healing there can be no real Reconciliation (that is not just intended to avoid future litigation, discovery of crimes etc). Without Reconciliation, not some phony utterances (“Ok we are over it, now we forget and move forward and of course on our terms”) there can be no Prevention of Future Abuse. Without Prevention of Future Abuse, there can be no climate that values, respects and demands the search for Truth.

This is a small example of what this grotesque cover-up is designed to hide and where it leads to the present and some very powerful and entrenched interests:

PRIMARY SOURCE DOCUMENTS ON THE ANGLO-AMERICAN USE AND COVER-UPS OF “MEDICAL RESEARCH” OF JAPANESE AND NAZI WAR CRIMINALS

SEE and SEE and SEE and SEE

FINAL REPORT TO U.S. CONGRESS 2007 ON U.S. AND ALLIED COVER-UPS OF PROTECTION OF NAZI AND JAPANESE WAR CRIMINALS IN RETURN FOR “RESULTS” OF “MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS” TO DEVELOP CHEMCIAL, BIOLOGICAL AND ATOMIC WMDs CONDUCTED INCLUDING ON ALLIED POWs

ANGLO-AMERICAN ORIGINS OF AND INFLUENCES ON NAZI AND JAPANESE IDEOLOGIES, RACIAL THEORIES, “EUGENICS”, “MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS” AND WMDs and OTHER ATROCITIES

The origins of Nazi and Japanese fascist ideology, including “racial theories” have their origins of the imperial and colonial ideologies and racial theories of the British and American Imperiums. In fact both the Japanese and German fascist theorists, along with Hitler himself personally, acknowledged their “inspirations” to have been the historical experiences, policies and racial theories of British and American imperialism and colonialism in the above quotation from John Toland’s “Adolf Hitler Volumes I and II” and in “Hitler’s Secret Conversations” by Hugh Trevor-Roper.

From James Poole:

“He [Hitler] was very interested in the way the Indian population had rapidly declined due to epidemics and starvation when the United States government forced them to live on the reservations. He thought the American government’s forced migrations of the Indians over great distances to barren reservation land was a deliberate policy of extermination. Just how much Hitler took from the American example of the destruction of the Indian nations his hard to say; however, frightening parallels can be drawn. For some time Hitler considered deporting the Jews to a large ‘reservation’ in the Lubin area where their numbers would be reduced through starvation and disease.” (James Pool, Hitler and His Secret Partners: Contributions, Loot and Rewards, 1933-1945; Pocket Books, N.Y.op cit. p. 273-274).

and:

“Having been a devoted reader of Karl May’s (sp?) books on the American West as a youth, Hitler frequently referred to the Russians as ‘Redskins.’ He saw a parallel between his effort to conquer and colonize land in Russia with the conquest of the American West by the white man and the subjugation of Indians or Redskins. ‘I don’t see why,’ he said, ‘a German who eats a piece of bread should torment himself with the idea that the soil that produces this bread has been won by the sword. When we eat wheat from Canada, we don’t think about the despoiled Indians.’[James Pool, Hitler and His Secret Partners: Contributions, Loot and Rewards, 1933-1945; Pocket Books, N.Y. 1997 pp. 272-75]

And from some more “primary” sources in Anglo-American History:

“The depiction of Indians as wild beasts was quite common among early English and American leaders, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. David E. Stannard writes:

‘As is so often the case, it was New England’s religious elite who made the point more graphically than anyone. Referring to some Indians who had given offense to the colonists, the Reverend Cotton Mather wrote:

“Once you have but got the Track of those Ravenous howling Wolves, then pursue them vigourously; Turn not back till they are consumed… Beat them small as the Dust before the Wind.”

Lest this be regarded as mere rhetoric, empty of literal intent, consider that another of New England’s most esteemed religious leaders, the ReverendSolomon Stoddard, as late as 1703 formally proposed to the Massachusetts Governor that the colonists be given the financial wherewithal to purchase and train large packs of dogs “to hunt Indians as they do bears.”‘[American Holocaust: Columbus and the Conquest of the New World (New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press (1992)), p. 241]“

From Amherst College named after “Lord” Jeffrey Amherst (after whom many towns and cities were named and with statues of him in them all:

Amherst College china plates depicting mounted Englishman with sword chasing Indians on foot were in use until the 1970′s.

And from some of the earliest known forms of calculated Biological Warfare that later inspired the Nazis (from their own mouths) “Lord” Jeffrey Amherst:

“.. Captain Simeon Ecuyer had bought time by sending smallpox-infected blankets and handkerchiefs to the Indians surrounding the fort — an early example of biological warfare — which started an epidemic among them. Amherst himself had encouraged this tactic in a letter to Ecuyer. [p. 108] (Carl Waldman’s Atlas of the North American Indian [NY: Facts on File, 1985]. Waldman writes, in reference to a siege of Fort Pitt (Pittsburgh) by Chief Pontiac’s forces during the summer of 1763)

1763

“Sir Jeffrey Amherst noted for his deliberate use of smallpox-infected blankets as a weapon against Indians. Amherst and his British lieutenants were a marked change from the French commanders at the forts throughout the Old Northwest and Canada. He made no effort to build goodwill with Indian peoples. He had no respect for Indian leaders, treated them contemptuously, and frequently described them as ‘wretched people’. He put an immediate end to the traditional French practice of giving Indians ball and powder when they ran short; he also prohibited emergency provisions if game was scarce, and clothing or gifts of goodwill. Lord Amherst (for whom Amherst College is named) initiated a genocidal new policy:‘Could it not be contrived’ he wrote to one of his officers, ‘to send the smallpox among the disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every strategem in our power to reduce them’. Blankets were taken from the crest of the Appalachian Mountains. It delineated Indian country as west of the line; colonists lands as east of the line.” [Judith Nies “Native American History: A Chronology of a Culture’s Vast Achievements and Their Links to World Events”, Ballantine Books, N.Y., 1996, pp. 190-192]

and:

“The Seneca invaded forts in Pennsylvania. Delaware Indians attacking Fort Pitt (formerly Fort Duquesne, now Pittsburg) were presented with ‘gifts’ of blankets taken from the smallpox ward of the fort’s hospital. It started an epidemic that would rage through the Delaware villages and Shawnee towns of Ohio, decimating their populations. Still, by the end of 1763, eight out of 12 British posts had been captured and their garrisons ‘massacred’… Pontiac’s War became a major topic of debate in Britain. The English enlarged Sir Jeffrey Amherst’s powers to subdue the rebellion. (The smallpox blankets of Fort Pitt had been Lord Amherst’s inspiration).” [Judith Nies, Ibid, p. 195]

Conclusion

Bertolt Brecht summed-up the dangerous mentality of the smug elites who write checks with their mouths they pass on to others to cash with the blood and treasure of others.

Those who take the meat from the table,
teach contentment.
Those for whom the taxes are destined,
demand sacrifice.
Those who eat their fill, speak to the hungry,
of wonderful times to come.
Those who lead the country into the abyss,
call ruling too difficult,
for ordinary folk.

Bertolt Brecht

These wanted war criminals wound up as high level politicians (one a Prime Minister of Japan), at high levels of the Yakuza and other underground criminal conspiracies, as professors at prestigious universities and as “scientists” developing Anglo-American WMDs at places like Ft. Detrick. Md a notorious place for the development of biological as well as chemical weapons of mass destruction that then continued this work as well as covered-up where some of the “data” had come from and how it had been obtained.

“Medical” and “Delivery” Experiments to Develop Chemical and Biological Weapons Using Human Beings and even Whole Cities Started by Japanese and German Fascists Continued in the U.S. and Elsewhere Post-War

PLEASE SEE and SEE and SEE and SEE and SEE and SEE

“Redskins”: The Origin of the Word and the Genocide Behind It.

jimcraven — Fri, 27 Jun 2014 22:29:46 +0000

“Redskins”: The Origin of the Word and Genocide Behind it

What is life?

Crowfoot, a Blackfoot warrior [defender] and orator, said it well……..

“What is life? It is the flash of a firefly in the night. It is the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.”

Life is beautiful, mysterious, filled with strength and challenges….life roars like the lion, but has the gentle touch of a beautiful woman. There are no blacks and whites in life. There are no guarantees. But this is the beauty of life.

The Mystery…..

© The Feral Cat 2003 http://w3.gorge.net/feralcat/Redskin.html and

http://w3.gorge.net/feralcat/Redskin.html

-

Do you want to know the true meaning of redskin? The term used to refer to American Indians…the same one used by a national sports team….the same term that American Indians protest? It’s not about skin color. It’s about atrocities committed against this nation’s first people. So, if you are interested in truth….you’ll take the time to listen.

-

The time it takes to download, depends upon your internet connection. It will be a longer wait for dialup – but if you really want to learn truth, you’ll take the time to listen.

-

It is a short time to wait, for a valuable lesson in truth-the real truth. Is 8-10 minutes too long of a time to wait, to learn the truth?

-

The voice you hear is Rev. Goat Carson….his ballad will teach you the truth about what redskin really means. If you dare to listen to truth. Dare to listen!

Hanged at Nuremberg by the Allies, , setting precedent in international law binding on the prosecuting nations also , Julius Streicher was convicted as a propagandist of Nazism fomenting racist and anti-Semitic images that made genocide easier to conduct, cover-up, rationalize, euphemize, gain mass acceptance for and participate in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Streicher

-

LYRICS TO “REDSKINS” by Reverend Goat Carson

-

“REDSKINS” by Reverend Goat Carson (1999)———————————-

-

—– A lot of people don’t understand, they keep saying, “Goat, why are you guys so sensitive, about the, like, Washington Redskins?”And, well, the story of that word “Redskins,” that title, what that means, is such a sad, is such a heavy story, I said, well I must relay it, but I gotta balance it.

-

And I’ve been thinking about my mama quite a lot lately, and so I decided I’d just balance it out with her very favorite song. So here it is, the story of Redskins and mama’s favorite song.

-

You are my sunshine, my only sunshine, you make my happy, when skies are blue never knowing how much I love you please don’t take my sunshine away.

-

Well you know the story of Andy Jackson and his Indian Fighters. Now Jackson devised the Indian Removal Act, but his Indian Fighters had a very peculiar preoccupation, and that was skinning the Indians on the battlefield. They used to make pants, they’d be able to take an Indian and skin him from the hip down and make themselves a pair of pants, or they take, turn him over, start two strips, you know, from his neck all the way down to his heel, and that’d be reins for their bridle. This was of course to strike terror into people’s hearts [“Shock n Awe”], but it sort of became a joke. And hence the phrase “Redskins.

-

“The other night while I lay sleeping, dreamed I held you in my arms. Woke this morning, I was mistaken, you know I hung my head and cried.

-

Well after making bounties on the Indians in all states, which made it legal to hunt them basically, a source of income, the skins then became more and more of a novelty, quite collectible by the wealthy Easterners. And the fascination got to such a terrifying point that by the time of the Sand Creek Massacre, in which the calvary massacred an encampment of Indians who were flying the American flag, and they were right where they were supposed to be on the reservation, and the army surrounded them anyhow and cut them all down. It was mostly old folks, women and children, and so it wasn’t much of a battle. And of the 600 people that were killed that day, eyewitnesses report not a single body survived mutilation. Women’s genitalias was cut and turned into hatbands, their breasts into tobacco pouches, the same thing with the men’s testicles, even the babies were skinned, the little boys and girls.

-

My sunshine, my only sunshine you make me happy when skies are grey Never noticed how much I love you please don’t take my sunshine away

-

So back in the day calling an Indian a “Redskin” was like calling an aligator a purse, and considering the genocide policy of the government of the United States a team like the Washington Redskins is kind of like a team called the Auschwitz Lampskins

-

Ain’t she sweet, just a-coming down the street, Now I ask you very confidentially, Ain’t she sweet Ain’t she now Look her over once or twice Ask you very confidentially Ain’t she now Just cast an eye in her direction oh me oh my Ain’t that perfection I repeat don’t you think she’s kinda neat ask you very confidentially, Ain’t she sweet

_-

_________________

Ultra-rightists and racists see no big deal: http://religiopoliticaltalk.com/thin-skinned-over-the-redskins-warnings-of-government-overreach/

See Nuremberg precedent in the case of Julius Streicher hanged for fomenting a climate (images, newspapers, music, film, etc) of vile anti-Semitism and racism that made genocide easier to conduct, cover-up, gain some mass acceptance of and even participate in. Demonization via false comparison is an old tactic refined by the likes of Streicher and has the same intention of demonization and marginalization with false and defamatory equivalences. Geronimo was never a once-collaborator with nor ever praised by the very forces that later hunted him down.

http://www.expertwitnessradio.org/site/geronimo/

Imagine Osama bin Laden in the Inaugural parade of Reagan? Geronimo was put in the parade by Teddy Roosevelt, a vile racist, imperialist, anti-Semite, war monger, white supremacist and a leader of the eugenics movement that inspired the Nazi laws and policies, to show the “savage” Geronimo has been conquered along with “The West” This comparison is vile and racist and the kind Streicher was hanged for at Nuremberg.

http://sttpml.org/skull-and-bones-and-the-desecrated-remains-of-geronimo/

http://sttpml.org/skull-and-bones-and-like-secret-societies-fascist-cults-contentrated-

wealth-buys-power-and-vice-versa/ http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?

storyId=101626709 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/us/20geronimo.html?_r=0

http://sttpml.org/bush-family-skull-and-bones-nazis-and-eugenics-parts-1-4/

http://sttpml.org/parts-i-and-ii-combined-breathtaking-hubris-and-hypocrisy-the-real-

nature-and-foundations-of-anglo-american-imperiums/ http://sttpml.org/the-horrifying-

anglo-american-roots-of-nazi-eugenics/

redskins 21069

Wasi’chu: The Continuing Indian Wars

jimcraven — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 06:42:16 +0000

From Wasi’chu: The Continuing Indian Wars by Bruce Johansen and Roberto Maestas, Monthly Review Press, N.Y. 1979; Introduction, John Redhouse, 1979

“Gold is a wonderful thing! Whoever owns it is lord of all he wants. With gold it is even possible to open for souls the way to paradise!” [Columbus, letter to Isabella and Ferdinand, 1503]

Later, I learned that Pahuska [Lakota name “Long Hair for George Armstrong Custer] had found there much of the yellow metal that makes the Wasi’chu crazy.” [Black Elk, on the U.S. Army expediton to the Black Hills, 1874]

Introduction by John Redhouse

Wasi’chu is the Lakota (Sioux[sic]) word for ‘greedy one who takes the fat.’ It was used to describe a strange race that took not only what it thought it needed [and that “God’s preordination of them as “the Elect” made their needs and wants imperatives]. but also took the rest.

A Mountain of Indian Skulls

STTPML COMMENT:

Please view the following video by James Starkey that explains that Indigenous peoples and their languages have no words for or concepts of “race”, or even of different colors of skin having anything to do with anything. Wasi’chu refers not only to a certain mentality of greed, selfishness, ultra-individualism, predation, cut-throat competition, malignant narcissism, egoism, hedonism and megalomania, but also the the type of whole system that that nurtures, requires, reinforces and will collapse without that mentality: capitalism.

Race, or “blood-quantum”as a biological, even social, construct, is totally bogus and bankrupt pseudo-science. The Inuit, for example, have over 100 words for different kinds of snow and snow conditions, but only one word for people or human beings–“Inuit” (a true person) and have no words for people based on skin color or other phenotypical features commonly associated with the bogus concept of “race.” Wasi’chu come in all colors, religions, genders, sexual orientation, socioeconomioc status and class; but most of the Wasi’chu that the Lakota and other Indigenous Peoples confronted were white, and not only proud of it as if they had something to do with their being white, but they were full of certitude that they had been ordained by God to rule the “non-white” races as well as the “inferior stock” (“White Trash”) of the “white race” itself. But the word was always used to refer to mentalities, behaviors and systems that nurture and require the Wasi’chu mentality and consciousness.

Worse, the notion of race and “blood-quantum” it is a central instrument of genocide; Adolf Eichmann could have written this:

“Set the blood-quantum at one-quarter, hold to it as a rigid definition of Indians and intermarriage will occur; when that happens, the federal government will be finally freed from its persistent Indian problem.” (BIA Document quoted in “Legacy of Conquest” by Patricia Lamark p. 338)

Introduction by John Redhouse (continued)

Wasi’chu is also a human condition based on inhumanity, racism and exploitation. It is a sickness, a seemingly incurable and contagious disease which begot the ever advancing society of the West. If we do not control it, this disease will surely be the basis of what may be the last of the continuing wars against the Native American people.

Indians have been the victims of war and aggression for most of the past five hundred years, The so-called Indian Wars were always fought over the issues of land and resources. We have always had something that the Wasi’chu wanted. Even after five hundred years of war and genocide, we still have something that they want.

The Spanish conquered the Inca, Aztec, and Mayan civilizations in search of gold and silver. Today, wars are still being conducted for mineral wealth on Indian lands.

After the Indian wars of the 1880s were over, we were left with 150 million acres of land. the Dawes Act of 1887 reduced that to 50 million acres through a forced system of individual allotments. we were then assigned to seemingly worthless and barren lands called reservations. We own less than 3 percent of what we once had. And now the Wasi’chu wants all we have left.

In 1978 Indian people possessed 55 percent of the nation’s uranium supply and one-third of the low-sulfur strippable coal reserves. Both coal and uranium are vital to President Caret’s national energy policy. In April 1977 President Carter called the achievement of his energy policy ‘the moral equivalent of war’. To many Indian people that phrase meant that the Indian wars are not yet over and that we must again fight against the U.S. government and multinational corporate interests in order to protect our remaining land and resources.

Many Indian people feed that the Carter administration is one of the worst in modern history. They say that President Carter puts on a democratic face to the rest of the world by advocating human rights for all and treaty rights for Russians and Panamanians. And yet as far as the treatment of the Indian people is concerned, the U.S. government has one of the worst human rights records–and certainly one of the worst treaty rights’ records–in the world.

The authorizing legislation creating the Department of Energy allows the director of the agency to enter into a pact with the Department of Defense to seize unilaterally and hold areas of strategic significance if such action is justified as being in the ‘national interest.’ For Indian nations that have enough energy resources to make a difference in the future direction of this country, such a stipulation is equivalent to a threat to call out the calvary again.

In recent years the Navajo Nation has rejected a proposed lease by Western Gasification company (WESCO) to construct the nation’s first and the world’s largest commercial coal gasification plants on their reservation. The Navajo have also threatened to cancel the leases of Four Corners Power Plant and Navajo mine. The power plant is one of the world’s worst industrial polluting sources, while the mine is one of the largest coal strip mines in the western hemisphere.

The Northern Cheyenne and Crow Nations have each taken legal action to cancel the coal leases on their reservations. The Northern Cheyenne have to this date halted construction of the nearby Colstrip Power Plant. the two Indian nations sit atop one of the world’s largest coal deposits.

The Laguna Pueblo Nation is considering whether to renew its uranium-mining lease, which includes the largest uranium strip mine in the world.

Yet for Indian nations to defy the national policies of the U.S. government and multinational corporate interests is to defy the two most powerful forces on the face of the earth. To do so is to invite possible military intervention. For most Indians it would not be the first time. During the 1973 Arab oil embargo the U.S. government made contingency plans to intervene militarily in order to secure ‘our’ oil in the Middle East because it was in the ‘national interest’. So if the Wasi’chu government talks about using military intervention to secure ‘our’ oil in an area halfway around the world, what is it going to say about securing ‘our’ coal and ‘our’ uranium right here in Indian Country?

The Carter administration [and every one since] maintains a complete silence on any semblance of an Indian policy. Even President Nixon had an Indian policy. That is why Indian people are now saying that Carter’s Indian policy is really his energy policy.

Now enter the anti-Indian backlash. Although anti-Indian sentiment has always existed, it has now developed into a full-scale national anti-Indian movement aimed at stripping us of our legal rights and ultimately of our remaining land and resources. The strength of this movement has been manifested by the introduction of eleven pieces of legislation, several recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions adverse to Indian self-determination, and numerous state anti-Indian bills. The Congressional bills range from those that would abrogate all Indian treaties to those that would limit our water rights and tribal self-government. the state bills propose to disenfranchise Indian people of their right to vote and hold public office. The Supreme Court decisions have further undermined our tribal sovereignty and jurisdiction.

It is now said that we are facing the gravest crisis in our history as Indian people. We are still being faced with the military calvary. Now we are also being faced with the legislative, judicial, bureaucratic, and corporate cavalries, whose missions are one in the same: to destroy the physical and spiritual basis of our existence and survival as a people. What is left of our lives, land, water, resources, way of life, sovereignty, and future is being threatened. The Wasi’chu have already taken everything else. Now they want all we have left. Except for the Final Indian War, the circle is complete.

Niahuau Ahakanbith! (“The Whites are crazy!”)

Niathuau Ahakanith! (“The Whites are crazy!”)

Lakota Song, Ghost Dance, Wounded Knee, 1890

The Past is Prologue in The Continuing Indian Wars by Bruce Johansen and Roberto Maestas

The major thesis of this book is that the economic, cultural and political forces which propelled mercantile colonialism across the Atlantic are now in retreat; the Wasi’chu of today have found it increasingly necessary to exploit domestic people and resources to sustain their system. As this exploitation intensifies, all outside the Wasi’chu classes are learning what it is like to be “Indian”. (p. 18)

The story of the past Indian wars is a well-told one; it has been easy and comfortable to categorize the last century, and prior history, as a time inhabited by strangely unenlightened and greedy souls who plundered two continents. To categorize ‘the past’ as a separate time, unconnected to and not influencing the present, ignores the continuance of cultural, political, and economic beliefs and systems which transcend single human life spans. Our thesis is that the mechanisms which motivated the plundering of the past are still present–sometimes more subtle, sometimes more refined–with similar goals; the theft of life, land, and resources from America’s first inhabitants. (pp 18-19)

What have been called “The Indian wars” never were (and are not today) exclusively a matter between conflicting “races”. they have been (and are) matters of conflicting ideologies. Just as the Lakota did not call the invaders ‘palefaces’, but ‘the greedy ones’, the Cheyenne called them Veho–‘spiders’ [who surround and choke their prey]. The categorization of peoples by their [supposed] biological characteristics (including skin color) has been emphasized throughout history by the Wasi’chu as part of the colonial system of subjugation, but some non-Indians and many Indians have never fallen prey to this fundamental building block of racist thought.

The differences attributed to peoples’ intellects on the basis of biological characteristics have had a central place in the ideology, or rationalization, of subjugation. The domination of people is an act of war that demands first that those people be portrayed in the subjugator’s minds as an enemy, a less-than-human adversary. Throughout the history of conquest racial stereotypes have tended to stiffen when the need for Indian land and resources was greatest. Between times, the savages may have been noble, but they were still portrayed as savages. The image of the savage (which became embodied in U.S. Indian policy) has had two sides: the noble savage (Indian or child figure) and the ignoble savage (Indian as a warrior or as a resister). the stereotypes of Indians created in the European mind have been used to justify conquest around the world, from colonialism in Africa, to the British regime in India, to recent attempts on the part of the United States to ‘pacify’ Vietnam by destroying ‘gooks’. Any imperialistic culture finds it necessary, in defense of its own humanistic self-image, to demean its victims.” (p. 20)

Supporting Evidence (Source Documents)

http://sttpml.org/parts-i-and-ii-combined-breathtaking-hubris-and-hypocrisy-the-real-nature-and-foundations-of-anglo-american-imperiums/

http://sttpml.org/the-cia-and-wanted-nazi-war-criminals/

http://sttpml.org/the-horrifying-anglo-american-roots-of-nazi-eugenics/

http://sttpml.org/bush-family-skull-and-bones-nazis-and-eugenics-parts-1-4/

http://sttpml.org/canada/genocide-right-here-right-now-some-of-the-evidence/

Mi’kmaq Defender Speaks on Conditions in New Brunswick Prison: No Indigenous Spirituality. But Strip Searches, Bibles and Solitary Confinement in Abundance

jimcraven — Thu, 30 Jan 2014 01:13:04 +0000

From the Eagle Watch January 29, 2014

This kind of treatment in Canadian prisons is pretty standard, regardless of the “offense”. It is a procedure designed to break you down. Being Indigenous is itself an “offense” to many prison guards/cops. Being an Indigenous Warrior is like waving a flag in front of a maddened bull.

Money tends to protect brats who commit real crimes against people. O Kanada!!

Do not despair. Do not be consumed by the fires of Anger. Find your Healing in Mother Earth, the 4 Directions, the Elements and All Our Relations! Kittoh

http://halifax.mediacoop.ca/story/coady-stevens-mikmaq-warrior-speaks-conditions-new/20999

Coady Stevens, Mi’kmaq Warrior, speaks on conditions in New Brunswick prison No indigenous spirituality, but strip searches, holy bibles and solitary confinement in abundance

by Miles Howe Stevens spent weeks in solitary confinement and had random strip searches forced upon him [Photo: cynicalview]

K’JIPUKTUK (HALIFAX) – Yesterday we reported on the inability of indigenous inmates to pray in their traditional ways in the Southeast Regional Correctional Center (SRCC), in Shediac, New Brunswick. There is currently no indigenous-specific programming at the SRCC, and while there is a paid chaplain on staff, deputy superintendent John Cann noted that the SRCC was currently looking for indigenous spiritual elders only on a “volunteer” basis.

Yesterday’s article focused in some specificity on the spiritual plight of Germaine ‘Junior’ Breau and Aaron Francis, the two members of the Mi’kmaq Warriors Society that were arrested in the RCMP’s raid of the anti-shale gas encampment along highway 134, on October 17th. Denial of spiritual services in the provincial facility appeared as cruel and unusual punishment, and may be a breach of Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which allows for freedom of conscience and religion.

Coady Stevens, another of the Mi’kmaq Warriors who was jailed following the October 17th raid, relates that the denial of indigenous spiritual guidance at the SRCC was very much a real and debilitating factor during his two month stay at the facility.

Not only this, but denying spiritual access was only one of many punishing elements that the six members of the Warriors Society faced during their incarceration.

Stevens relays a story of extended solitary confinement, random and excessive strip searches and readily accessible Christian dogma within the prison, to the detriment of traditional indigenous spirituality.

“First they put us in the hole,” says Stevens, referencing the name given to a solitary confinement cell. “Then they put in [a] medical [holding cell], which is pretty much isolation. We were in there for 23 hours a day, and we were let out for an hour or a half hour every day.

“They split us up. There were six of us [Warriors] and they put us into twos. They put two of us into the ‘hole’. They put two of us into the ‘shoe’. And they put two of us into ‘medical’. They’re all pretty much the same thing, all pretty much the same cell. There’s not much difference, just a different name for it.”

Stevens notes that each cell was about 9 feet long by 7 feet wide.

“I was in the hole with Junior (who remains in custody). We were each in our own cell and if we wanted to speak we’d speak under the door. There was about an inch of space underneath.

“We went out at different times. So we never had contact, like I could not physically shake his hand. We were out at different times, so he’d walk by my cell, or I’d be out and I’d walk by his cell.”

Stevens says that this solitary confinement went on for between three weeks and a month. During this time he says he had no human contact except for the guards. He also notes that he was not allowed to call family members to let them know he was safe.

“It makes you go crazy, because the hole is like the jail within the jail,” he says. “There’s writing, a whole bunch of graffiti on the walls. It makes you feel like shit when you’re in there for three weeks straight. Especially when you’re thinking about what’s going on. And we had no contact. I kept asking for a phone call to my mother, the last thing she knew we were getting shot at with rubber bullets. She didn’t know if they were real or not. And they didn’t give me a call to my mother.”

During this time in solitary, Stevens also notes that he was strip searched either “six or seven” times. This is strange, as with no contact with any other human being, surely one strip search would have sufficed, if the intention were simply to examine whether the individual in question was in possession of any contraband substance.

“I was thinking: ‘Why are we getting searched? We can’t bring anything in, we’re already in the hole. We’ve been searched, how are we going to get something in there?’” says Stevens.

“Random search, though, that’s what they’d say. Random search. And they’d strip search you.”

As for requesting spiritual guidance, Stevens corroborates the story earlier related by Suzanne Patles; that the Warriors were being refused spiritual elders, despite making repeated requests.

“I asked for [the presence of a spiritual elder] several times, but they always gave me the runaround,” says Stevens. “I asked the chaplain and he said ‘Well, we’re trying to get someone, but we can’t really find anyone.’ From what I understand they were trying to get a volunteer, but it would have been hard for them to get a volunteer to come down on a regular basis.

“I put in about five written requests that were on the record. Once they got back to me. There was a time where I signed it, along with six other inmates that were native. And still nothing.”

The SRCC’s chaplain, however, apparently was quick to offer a holy bible to Stevens.

“It felt like the only way to pray was in a different religion, that I’m not,” says Stevens. “I could talk to the priest and the chaplain and there was a prayer group. There were other inmates that had prayer groups, but it was through the holy bible. And to me, I believe in traditional ways. And it felt like I had to [pray]. I even went to a point where I started reading the bible. And I never read the bible before.”

The lasting effects of this experience, to Stevens, are a loss of pride in himself, which he is only beginning to regain now. In an earlier interview, Stevens spoke proudly of finding a sense of pride and self – as an indigenous man – within the larger context of fighting for his traditional territory, and the protection of water. The invasiveness of repeated strip searches, the isolation and the denial of spiritual practices have cost Stevens his “inner peace.”

“The things that happened over the summer, I’d never seen something like that before,” says Stevens.

“With drumming and tradition, I never got in touch with my ways like that before.

“I had that pride, and that took a while to build up. And when they put me in jail, that pride kind of went away. They’re strip searching you and stuff, spreading for the guard, and it’s a very personal search, and you don’t have any pride after that. It kind of wore off, that inner peace feeling. Like I felt pretty good about the tradition and people coming together, and when I got out, all that was gone.”

About to engage on a West Coast speaking tour, Stevens notes that one of the lifelines while in prison was the vast number of postcards and letters he received from supporters all over the world.

“I got so many letters,” he says. “I got letters from people from the United Kingdom, from Northern Ireland, one form Australia. All across Canada. They were saying that we inspired them to do protests in their countries too. I saved all those letters.”

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm

At Least 4,000 Aboriginal Children Died in Residential Schools, Commission Finds

jimcraven — Sat, 04 Jan 2014 14:49:16 +0000

NEWS

At least 4,000 aboriginal children died in residential schools, commission finds

Truth and Reconciliation Commission officials expect toll to rise as more records reviewed

http://o.canada.com/news/national/at-least-4000-aboriginal-children-died-in-residential-schools-commission-finds/#.Uscp3cBFchd.twitter

Kimberly Murray, executive director of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on Parliament Hill. The commission has confirmed the deaths of at least 4,000 aboriginal children died in residential schools.PHOTO: DAVE CHAN/POSTMEDIA NEWS

Mark Kennedy

Published: January 3, 2014, 12:00 pm

Updated: 15 hours ago

A A A

OTTAWA — Thousands of Canada’s aboriginal children died in residential schools that failed to keep them safe from fires, protected from abusers, and healthy from deadly disease, a commission into the saga has found.

So far, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has determined that more than 4,000 of the school children died.

But that figure is based on partial federal government records, and commission officials expect the number to rise as its researchers get their hands in future months on much more complete files from Library and Archives Canada and elsewhere.

The disturbing discovery has cast a new light on the century-long school system that scarred the country’s First Nations peoples.

Residential school students at Fort George cemetery, November 3, 1946. HANDOUT/Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Evidence has been compiled that shows residential school children faced a grave risk of death.

“Aboriginal kids’ lives just didn’t seem as worthy as non-aboriginal kids,” Kimberly Murray, executive director of the commission, said in an interview.

“The death rate was much higher than non-indigenous kids.”

The commission has spent the last several years studying a scandal considered by many to be Canada’s greatest historical shame.

Over many decades — from the 1870s to 1996 — 150,000 aboriginal children were taken from their families and sent by the federal government to church-run schools, where many faced physical and sexual abuse.

A lawsuit against the federal government and churches resulted in a settlement that included payments to those affected and the creation in 2008 of the commission. Its job is to hold public hearings so people can tell their stories, collect records and establish a national research centre.

Students pose for photo outside Metlakatla Indian Residential School in Metlakatla, B.C. Commission. HANDOUT/Truth and Reconciliation

The commission has also established “The Missing Children Project” to assemble the names of children who died, how they died, and where they were buried.

The list of names will be contained in a registry available to the public. Murray said the exact number of deceased children will never be known, but she hopes more information will come from churches and provincial files.

“I think we’re just scratching the surface.”

Many perished in fires — despite repeated warnings in audits that called for fire escapes and sprinklers but were ignored.

“There was report after report talking about how these schools were firetraps,” said Murray.

She said it was well known that schools were “locking kids in their dormitories because they didn’t want them to escape. And if a fire were to break out they couldn’t get out.”

Many schools refused to spend money on fire escapes. Instead, they built poles outside of windows for children to slide down. But the windows were locked, and children were unable to reach the poles.

“It’s amazing that they didn’t make those corrections in those schools. There are just so many deaths that I think could have been prevented if they had done what they were supposed to do.”

Some children died as runaways and were found frozen to death in snowy fields; others who tried to escape their abusers drowned in nearby rivers.

Among the most famous incidents involved the deaths of four boys — Allen Willie, Andrew Paul, Maurice Justin, and Johnny Michael — who fled the Lejac residential school in British Columbia on New Year’s Day, 1937.

It was 30 degrees below zero. They were found frozen to death on a lake. An inquiry at the time found one boy, wearing summer clothes, had “no hat and one rubber missing and his foot bare.”

Murray said these types of deaths were far from rare.

“There were quite a few examples of children who ran away and died.”

Many died from tuberculosis because they were malnourished and were housed in poorly-ventilated buildings.

Some died of suicide, unable to bear the brutality of the schools.

The commission has even heard allegations — unproven by the commission — of manslaughter and murder.

“There are people who have been speaking out who say they’ve seen a child who was beat so brutally that they died. So there is that unanswered question: Whether the abuse was to the extreme that they were coming to their deaths at the hands of their abusers.”

“We have not found any records of confirmed manslaughter or murder but we have had people speak to that. Whether you are going to find that in a document is questionable.”

Residential school students at confirmation class at St. John’s Indian Residential School in Wabasca, Alta. HANDOUT/Truth and Reconciliation Commission

What happened to the thousands of children who died? Schools and the government would not pay to have bodies shipped back to their families.

And so they were placed in coffins and buried near the schools — some in marked graves, some in unmarked graves. Often, their parents in far-away reserves were never told what happened.

Murray said that although many of the deaths occurred up until the 1950s, children were continuing to lose their lives in more recent years.

“I think people can make it OK in their minds when they tell themselves it happened a really long time ago. I think it makes it easier for them to accept. But that’s not the reality.”

When the commission releases its report — likely by June 2015 — the massive document will chronicle the saga of deceased children.

Murray said the saga has left an “open wound” with First Nations communities.

“We hear from survivors and family members how important it is that they know what happened to their loved ones and to know where their remains are located.”

On Friday afternoon, a spokesperson for the federal government issued a written statement through email pertaining to the issue.

Andrea Richer, director of communications to Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt, made reference to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s 2008 apology in the House of Commons on residential schools.

She wrote that this apology “recognized that the Indian Residential Schools policy is a dark chapter in Canada’s history.”

“These are abhorrent examples of the dark pages in that dark chapter, and that is why we must continue the important work of reconciliation,” wrote Richer.

mkennedy@postmedia.com

Twitter.com/Mark_Kennedy_

Read more Articles from Mark Kennedy

Twitter.Com/Mark_Kennedy_© COPYRIGHT – POSTMEDIA NEWS

Related Articles:

http://sttpml.org/parts-i-and-ii-combined-breathtaking-hubris-and-hypocrisy-the-real-nature-and-foundations-of-anglo-american-imperiums/

http://sttpml.org/indians-jews-palestinians-and-zionists/

http://sttpml.org/blackfoot-indictment-of-the-governments-of-the-u-s-and-canada-for-genocide/

http://sttpml.org/the-survival-and-sustainability-of-the-blackfoot-nation-and-culture-presentation-to-16th-congress-of-the-iuaes-kunming-china/

http://sttpml.org/legal-case-against-the-government-of-canada-for-genocide-against-indigenous-people/

http://sttpml.org/corruption-and-genocide-in-indian-country-the-case-of-the-blood-kainai-blackfoot/

http://sttpml.org/papers-at-the-university-of-minnesota-center-for-holocaust-and-genocide-studies/

http://sttpml.org/canadian-prime-minister-harper-launches-first-nations-termination-plan/

http://sttpml.org/american-and-canadian-holocausts-it-not-only-can-happen-here-it-certainly-is-happening-here-and-it-has-been-happening-here-in-america-and-canada-from-their-beginnings/

http://sttpml.org/indians-jews-palestinians-and-zionists/

http://sttpml.org/genocide-in-north-america-today-wbai-radio-interviews-with-doug-henwood-and-tiokasin-ghosthorse/

MP’s Heart-Rending Song Will Change How You Look at Canada (Video)

jimcraven — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 22:01:03 +0000

MP’s Heart-Rending Song Will Change How You Look At Canada (VIDEO)

The Huffington Post Canada | Posted: 12/04/2013 12:21 pm EST | Updated: 12/04/2013 7:53 pm EST

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/12/04/charlie-angus-four-horses-video_n_4384818.html

GET CANADA POLITICS NEWSLETTERS:

SUBSCRIBE

FOLLOW:

Charlie Angus, Charlie Angus Four Horses, Charlie Angus Music, Charlie Angus Song, Charlie Angus Video, Four Horses Song, Four Horses Video, John a Macdonald Aboriginals, John a Macdonald First Nations, John a Macdonald Natives, John a Macdonald Starvation, Canada Politics News

Canadians like to think that the expansion into the West was more civilized here than in the United States — this song will change that.

In “Four Horses”, NDP MP Charlie Angus sings the agonizing story of John A. MacDonald’s policy to starve First Nations peoples in order to make way for the Canadian Pacific Railway in the 1880s.

Angus was inspired by the book Clearing The Plains by James Daschuk, which details how food promised in Treaty No. 6 was withheld by Canadian officials in order to force aboriginals to move to appointed reserves.

At the time, MacDonald even boasted that First Nations peoples were being kept on the “verge of actual starvation” in an attempt to silence critics of the mounting cost of the railway, according to Daschuk.

MacDonald’s policies were recently cited in an open letter urging the United Nations to declare Canada’s treatment of its aboriginal peoples “genocide.”

Angus told The Globe and Mail that MacDonald did many good things for Canada, but that we can no longer ignore “the policies that tried to destroy a people.”

“Mr. Macdonald has been able to escape all that because we write our history as boring, that all our people were well-meaning and boring,” Angus said to the Globe. “So that’s the whole line of the song: Forget what you were taught about the Medicine Line.”

Angus, who is also a professional musician and HuffPost blogger, has been an outspoken critic of the Conservative government’s approach to First Nations peoples. In 2011, he was among the first to shine light on the deplorable situation on the Attawapiskat reserve in his Northern Ontario riding. The emergency on the reserve captured the attention of the nation and is seen by many as the opening act of the Idle No More movement.

“Four Horses” is the first song off Angus’ new record “Great Divide.” Read all the lyrics below.

To Fort Qu’appelle came a Dapple Grey As children coughed blood in the autumn rains Broke the treaty when the buffalo failed And fenced the land for the CP Rail.There’s four horses at the Great Divide
Forget what they taught about the medicine line
Like a storm on a distant sky
Just four horses at the Great Divide

I saw a black horse at Cut Knife Creek
But the great Poundmaker was a man of peace
He spared the soldiers true to his word
So they hung the braves at Fort Battleford

The Third Horse danced for the Great White Chief
Hunger is lesson that is so easy to teach
Kill a warrior you need a gun in hand
To break a people you need a bureaucrat man

There’s four horses at the Great Divide
Forget what they taught you about the medicine line
Like a storm on a distant sky
Four horses at the Great Divide

A pale horse waits by the mission school
Progress they say can be so cruel
But the spirit lives on across the great north plains
And people are finding their voice again.

RELATED ON HUFFPOST:



Residential Schools: A Photo History





1 of 28





Archives and Library of Canada





» NAZI EUGENICS

Native groups use Macdonald’s birthday to raise issue of his legacy of residential schools

Native groups use Macdonald’s birthday to raise issue of his legacy of residential schools

Nicole Ireland, QMI Agency

Sure, John A. Macdonald was a racist, colonizer and misogynist — but so were most Canadians back then

Sure, John A. Macdonald was a racist, colonizer and misogynist — but so were most Canadians back then

Related

breathtaking hubris and hypocrisy – sttpml

The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics | – sttpml

American and Canadian Holocausts: IT Not only CAN …

Canada Is The Only UN Member To Reject Landmark Indigenous Rights Document

Canada Is The Only UN Member To Reject Landmark Indigenous Rights Document

Indigenous Peoples Forum on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery

Indigenous Peoples Forum on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery

Monday, November 25, 2013

A Concept of Native Title by Leroy Littlebear http://doctrineofdiscoveryforum.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Catholic Groups in Solidarity with Indigenous Peoples Ask Pope Francis to Rescind Papal Bulls from 15th Century

Residential Schools Commission Calls For 30-Year Seal on Records: Crimes, Cover-ups, Like Lies, Can Only Beget More of the Same

-

Residential schools commission calls for 30-year seal on records

-

A lawyer for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has presented an alternative option to destroying the testimony of about 38,000 claimants — lock it in a vault for 30 years.

“Redskins”: The Origin of the Word and the Genocide Behind It.

Wasi’chu: The Continuing Indian Wars

Mi’kmaq Defender Speaks on Conditions in New Brunswick Prison: No Indigenous Spirituality. But Strip Searches, Bibles and Solitary Confinement in Abundance

At Least 4,000 Aboriginal Children Died in Residential Schools, Commission Finds

NEWS

At least 4,000 aboriginal children died in residential schools, commission finds

Truth and Reconciliation Commission officials expect toll to rise as more records reviewed

MP’s Heart-Rending Song Will Change How You Look at Canada (Video)

MP’s Heart-Rending Song Will Change How You Look At Canada (VIDEO)