» PSYCHOPATHY AND SOCIOPATHY

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

Advocates hope ‘groundbreaking’ report on aboriginal women will put spotlight on Murdered Aboriginal Women

jimcraven — Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:42:17 +0000

Advocates hope ‘groundbreaking’ report on aboriginal women will put spotlight on Canada

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/advocates-hope-groundbreaking-report-on-aboriginal-women-will-put-spotlight-on-canada-1.2184253#.VLUqC0fV0-Y.gmail

Canada AM: Native women’s report

NWAC’s Vice-president Dawn Harvard shjares her reaction to a report and whether there has been a lack of police action.

CTV National News: Growing calls for action

One Toronto artist is drawing on the growing calls for an inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women. John Vennavally-Rao reports.

CTV News: Canada urged to hold nation-wide inquiry

As Robert Fife reports, Canada is being urged to hold a nation-wide inquiry into the murders and disappearances of indigenous women.

Marlene Leung, CTVNews.ca

@MarleneLeung

Published Monday, January 12, 2015 10:59AM EST
Last Updated Monday, January 12, 2015 8:50PM EST

Canada is obligated under international human rights laws to prevent violence against indigenous women by taking measures to address poverty and other socio-economic factors, according to a new report.

The report, released Monday by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, an arm of the Organization of American States, said Canada’s history of colonization, inequality and economic and social marginalization are some of the root causes of violence against indigenous women.

The commission started an investigation into British Columbia’s missing and murdered aboriginal women in 2013, on a request from the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) and the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA).

Photos

Dr. Dawn Harvard, right, of the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) looks on as Claudette Dumont-Smith, Executive Director of NWAC answers questions as they take part in a press conference on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Monday, Jan. 12, 2015. (Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

The report, which includes interviews with Canadian government officials, opposition politicians and aboriginal women’s groups, supports the call on the federal government to launch an inquiry into the issue.

“The IACHR considers that there is much more to understand and to acknowledge in relation to the missing and murdered indigenous women,” the report said.

“This initiative must be organized in consultation with indigenous peoples, particularly indigenous women, at all stages.”

During a news conference Monday morning, NWAC Vice-President Dawn Harvard called the report “groundbreaking.”

“This report is the first in-depth examination of the murders and disappearances (of aboriginal women) by an expert international human rights body,” she said. “These women and girls are being stolen from our families and our communities and it is time that somebody is taking this seriously.”

The RCMP estimated in a report released last year that about 1,200 aboriginal women and girls were murdered or went missing in Canada between 1980 and 2012.

‘Broader pattern’ of violence and discrimination

The report found that the disappearances and murders of indigenous women are part of a “broader pattern” of violence and discrimination against aboriginal women in Canada, who are significantly over-represented as victims of homicide. The report also found that they are three times more likely to be victims of violence than non-indigenous women.

It also found the following:

Addressing violence against indigenous women is insufficient unless underlying factors of poverty, and racial and gender discrimination are also addressed.
In accordance with international human rights standards, Canada is obliged to continue the investigation of unsolved cases of missing indigenous women.
The federal and provincial governments have a responsibility for the legal status and conditions of aboriginal women, and should provide a co-ordinated national response.

Despite calls for a national inquiry, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has repeatedly said that the justice system and police investigations are the best way to deal with the issue.

But Teresa Edwards of the Native Women’s Association of Canada said an inquiry is necessary to get reliable statistics and to understand the breadth of the problem.

Edwards — who said her group had yet to hear any government response to the report — also said too many people were dismissing the problem as solely an aboriginal issue, or blaming aboriginal men for the violence.

“What we’ve also discovered, and what this report lays out for Canadians to examine and to research, is that the men committing the crimes aren’t necessarily aboriginal,” Edwards told CTV News Channel said. “A high percentage of our women leave reserves and come to urban centres, and they’re still at risk.”

And at a news conference Monday, chair of the Feminist Alliance for International Action human rights committee Sheila Day said police action after the violence has occurred is only a part of the equation.

“The ground-breaking part of this report says Canada is also obligated to prevent the violence,” Day said. “And in order to prevent the violence, Canada must address the risk factors.”

Harvard said Monday that the NWAC hopes that the new report will put the international spotlight on the government’s response.

“It is our hope and our belief that this report will be known and noted around the world, and the response of the Canadian government will be cause for hope for our peoples or for further shame,” she said. “And we hope it will be cause for hope and for action to begin new change.”

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/

The RCMP, the Highway of Tears, and a Prime Minister Who Doesn’t Care

jimcraven — Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:19:34 +0000

The RCMP, the Highway of Tears, and a Prime Minister Who Doesn’t Care

DERRICK ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2014 4:46 PM – http://westcoastnativenews.com/the-rcmp-the-highway-of-tears-and-a-prime-minister-who-doesnt-care/

By Samuel Vargo

The first and only sweep of the North Saskatchewan River on Sept. 3 resulted in the discovery of a body. The cadaver was found only 15 minutes into the search, and stretches of the river outside the Edmonton city limits were explored.

Conducted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), along with firefighters and park rangers, the search wasn’t launched to find anyone in particular. It was just a way for these officials to test the water, riversides and islets for human remains. Late summer was a good time to conduct this expedition — with the water level of the river low. The North Saskatchewan River’s shoreline, along with sand bars, gravel bars, and any place where a floating body could come to a rest were perused and investigated.

The victim’s name and any other pertinent information regarding the discovery of this corpse in the river was not disclosed by Canadian law enforcement officials. The case remains under investigation, according to reports.

Welcome to the horror show: Canada has become a country of innumerable ugly fatal horrors – real The Silence of the Lambs sort of stuff – with around 1,200 missing and murdered indigenous women reported and/or discovered during the span of the past few decades. And all this has resulted into a game of political football for the country’s national political leaders.

What happens when the Prime Minister of a country is a Pontius Pilate, washing his hands of the blood from a whole cross-section of his country’s populace? And what happens when the police are allegedly and believed to be raping and killing defenseless and powerless aboriginal women? And what if this RCMP is actually a malevolent police organization, serving as the nation’s elite police force?

Yes, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are Canada’s premiere police outfit – but under Stephen Harper, Canada’s Conservative Party Prime Minister – the RCMP has reportedly been acting, and reacting, more like an army of thugs – as far as many indigenous people are concerned.

According to APTN National News: “The RCMP has been blasted by a human rights organization for failing to protect Indigenous women in northern British Columbia, including the victims of the Highway of Tears, where dozens have been murdered or gone missing.” (See:http://aptn.ca/news/2013/02/13/report-alleges-rcmp-officers-gang-raped-b-c-woman-calls-for-action/)

[The Highway of Tears murders is a series of unsolved murders and disappearances of young women along the 800 km (500 mi) section of Highway 16 between Prince George and Prince Rupert, British Columbia, Canada from 1969 until 2011. Police list the number of victims at 18, but estimates by aboriginal organizations range into the 40s, largely because they include women who disappeared a greater distance from the highway. (See:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Tears_murders )]

“‘I feel so dirty. They threatened that if I told anybody they would take me out to the mountains and kill me, and make it look like an accident,’ according to one woman, who told Human Rights Watch that in July 2012, four police officers took her to a remote location and raped her. She said it wasn’t the first time; and that police officers had raped her before and threatened to kill her if she said anything.” (See ibid: http://aptn.ca/news/2013/02/13/report-alleges-rcmp-officers-gang-raped-b-c-woman-calls-for-action/))

Results of interviews conducted by Human Rights Watch with 50 Indian women last summer raises some daunting questions about the integrity of the RCMP. This leading advocacy group for human rights did their homework, alright. And it was an in-depth and comprehensive report – hardly vague, cursory, or sketchy. “Human Rights Watch conducted an additional 37 interviews with families of murdered and missing women, indigenous leaders, community service providers, and others across 10 communities.” (See: http://aptn.ca/news/2013/02/13/report-alleges-rcmp-officers-gang-raped-b-c-woman-calls-for-action/)

“The report also claims Mounties have sexually assaulted Aboriginal women. Human Rights Watch issued an 89-page report filled with details and first-hand accounts from women who allege they’ve been raped by Mounties, victims of excessive force and other abusive treatment. (See ibid: http://aptn.ca/news/2013/02/13/report-alleges-rcmp-officers-gang-raped-b-c-woman-calls-for-action/)

According to Indigenous Nationhood, “The most disturbing of all reports is the 2013 report entitled Those Who Take Us Away: Abusive Policing and Failures in Protection of Indigenous Women and Girls in Northern British Colombia, prepared by Human Rights Watch. This report concluded that Indigenous women and girls are not only “under-protected” by the RCMP, but are, in fact, the objects of RCMP abuse. They highlighted the many allegations of RCMP officers sexually exploiting and abusing young Indigenous girls. There are reports of confinement, rape, and sexual assault on Indigenous girls, and some have led to lawsuits. They also reported on a class-action lawsuit against the RCMP by its own female officers – for sexual harassment and gender discrimination.” (See: click here )

“The threat of domestic and random violence on one side, and mistreatment by RCMP officers on the other, leaves indigenous women in a constant state of insecurity,” said Meghan Rhoad, women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Where can they turn for help when the police are known to be unresponsive and, in some cases, abusive.” reads another article, “Canada: Abusive Policing, Neglect Along ‘Highway of Tears’” (See: click here)

But there’s evidence there are other dynamics at play with these disappearances and murders, and the RCMP cannot take on all the blame. But with such blatant evidence being exposed by Human Rights Watch, the RCMP cannot be seen as a scapegoat, either.

Case in point: On Tuesday, Sept. 16, Canada’s youngest serial killer, Cody Legebokoff, was sentenced for the murders of Jill Stuchenko, 35, Cynthia Maas, 35, Natasha Montgomery, 23, and 15 year old Loren Leslie. Justice Glen Parrett handed down the sentence in a Prince George court room, after jurors deliberated for nearly a full day, coming to their guilty verdict. Legebokoff killed the four young women around the Prince George area within a 14-month span in 2009 and it wasn’t until November 2010 when the first murder charge was laid against him. In October 2011, three more charges were laid against him, and at the time, he was only 21 years old. (See: click here)

The courtroom was packed for Legebokoff’s sentencing, as the Crown asked the serial killer to be placed on the National Sex Offender Registry. During sentencing, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Glen Parrett said the “faint hope clause” would be applied to Legebokoff, which could allow him to apply for parole after serving 15 years in prison. The provision was repealed in 2011 for multiple murders, but the murders in this case were committed before the law was changed. (See: click here)

“I just bit my lip, as you can see,” was the reaction to the comments about parole from Doug Leslie, the father of 15-year-old Loren Leslie. (See: click here )

A movement, “Am I Next?’ has been launched in the world of social media by Canadian aboriginal women. Begun by Holly Jarrett of Hamilton, Ontario, Jarret’s impetus for beginning this online movement was that her cousin falls into the Canadian missing and murdered indigenous woman class. Jarrett is a cousin of Loretta Saunders, who was, at the time of her murder, a graduate student at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Loretta Saunders was allegedly murdered earlier this year by her tenants, when she went to collect rent. But there are some mysterious circumstances surrounding her disappearance, including the fact that the 26-year-old, pregnant Saunders had been researching the issue of missing and murdered indigenous women in Canada for her thesis when she went missing herself. (For more, see:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/09/09/am-i-next-indigenous-women-canada-ask-social-media-156814 )

“Our family is Inuit, and Loretta has now become one of the over 1,186 missing or murdered Aboriginal women she was fighting for,” wrote Jarrett on Change.org. “It is time for our government to address this epidemic of violence against Aboriginal women. Our family is gathering strength and we will not let her death be in vain. We will fight to complete Loretta’s unfinished work.” (See ibid: click here)

And what’s Stephen Harper doing about this problem? Well, evidently, the Prime Minister doesn’t even consider it a problem, if his actions are indicative of the way he feels about this horrific and nefarious monster unleashed on the poor Indian women of Canada.

Canada’s political leaders are also vilifying P.M. Harper for his insensitivity, callousness, and utter disregard for human life. “This is not acceptable in a country like Canada. It is time for a full public inquiry into the root causes of so many deaths and disappearances of aboriginal women and girls. It is time for a national action plan to confront this issue,” David Langtry, acting chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, said in a statement issued on Aug. 19.

But insensitive and bull-headed Harper wants nothing to do with such a proposal. The Conservative government refused this much-needed national inquiry, despite pressure from Canada’s aboriginal leaders, its provinces’ government leaders and other federal officials. Harper said during the third full week of August that Fontaine’s death was a crime and should not be viewed as a “sociological phenomenon.”

“We should view it as crime. It is crime against innocent people, and it needs to be addressed as such,” Harper said.

Stephen Harper, along with other federal Conservative Party leaders, have stated that they want to address the missing and murdered aboriginal women issue through aboriginal justice programs and through the national DNA missing person index. Leaving the investigations into what some estimate to be more than 1,200 missing and murdered aboriginal women to a police organization that many feel has a culpability in some of this criminal activity, indicates that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is covering for the RCMP. Harper’s solution? It’s the let the fox watch the henhouse mentality – which is disgusting, nauseating, and absolutely unacceptable!

“As Canadians, I believe we want to look after each other, and I think we want to protect the most vulnerable, especially missing and murdered aboriginal women from being victimized,” said Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger. “It’s an issue that affects communities all across Canada.”

“For Stephen Harper to say that there’s not a systemic aspect to this, I think is just — I think it’s outrageous quite frankly,” said Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne on Aug. 22,

A heartbreaking discovery on Aug. 8: finding 15-year-old Tina Fontaine’s corpse in the Red River in Winnipeg. Fontaine’s little body was stuffed in a bag.

Fontaine, who was originally from the Sagkeeng First Nation, had only been in Winnipeg less than a month. She ran away from foster care, something she’d done several times over the past year, but until the time her body was discovered, the girl had always been returned safely back to the living facility which housed her. Ms. Fontaine’s case is being considered a homicide and authorities have not disclosed whether the child was sexually assaulted.

The grisly discovery of Fontaine’s remains has spurred Canadian political leaders to consider conducting an inquiry into the country’s missing aboriginal women. But leave it to Prime Minister Stephen Harper to be a political butcher to this very important matter. According to CNC News Calgary: “Despite Canada’s premiers and territorial leaders endorsing calls for a public inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women last year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Thursday (Aug. 21) that the issue should not be viewed as a sociological phenomenon, but rather as crime.” (See: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/stephen-harper-s-refusal-of-national-inquiry-shows-canada-s-shame-metis-leader-1.2744889 )

“Tina must not disappear into the oblivion of statistics: almost 1,200 missing and murdered aboriginal women over the past three decades,” Langtry said in the recent Human Rights Watch statement.

With emotions still running high three weeks after Fontaine’s body was discovered and feeling relief that there had been hints of a national roundtable being planned to discuss issues and concerns around Canada’s missing and murdered aboriginal women, a peaceful protest camp was set up in Winnipeg’s Memorial Park. The weekend camp quickly grew from a modest four tents to more than 50 tents.

“I’m pretty emotional about it,” said Chelsea Cardinal, who was crafting moose-head medicine bags at the camp. Cardinal, who is a mother and a social worker, admitted that the federal government’s plan to initiate a roundtable discussion on this salient issue – facing all aboriginal Canadian women – could be seen as a partial victory in a war that has claimed so many of the lives of her sisters. (See: click here )

“It’s the shame of Canada now that people realize what’s happening in this beautiful country,” said Muriel Stanley Venne, a human rights activist and Metis leader in Edmonton. “This is my country and I’m ashamed of the fact that there’s so many of our women that are murdered on a kind of regular basis.” (See ibid: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/stephen-harper-s-refusal-of-national-inquiry-shows-canada-s-shame-metis-leader-1.2744889 )

In this writer’s opinion, Stephen Harper should answer to issues like the missing and murdered aboriginal women in cold, hard, factual political and humanitarian terms. Much more action is needed besides a roundtable of national leaders discussing missing and murdered Indian women. It should be made a top issue of Harper’s government, not sloughed off, like this irresponsible and arrogant buffoon has shown in his words and actions.

And I laughed very bitterly when I heard that a B’nai Brith executive said he plans to nominate Harper for the Nobel Peace Prize. I thought to myself, Why doesn’t Frank Dimant nominate some ISIS leader to receive the Nobel? To me, a mixed-blood Indian and a supporter of Idle No More and the American Indian Movement, it makes just as much sense.

Meantime, it’s business as usual for Harper and his Conservative Party. As long as there’s another large virgin forest to destroy so dirty crude can be sucked out of the soil around the trees’ roots, he’s one very happy camper. Anyone who is so intent on destroying God’s creation certainly has put no value on human life, and being the kind of nasty bully Prime Minister Harper has shown himself to be — in many areas of the Canadian body politic — it’s apropos that this egregious maniac pick on such a poor, defenseless, and almost voiceless subsection of Canada’s population — aboriginal women, along with young Indian girls.

Canada’s Trails of Tears and Corruption in Indian Country

jimcraven — Sun, 21 Sep 2014 07:44:11 +0000

Twila Eagle Bear-Singer Removed

Play video

7Feb/14, Kainai High School, Blood Tribe Reserve, Treaty7, Twila is removed from spectators’ stand by Blood Tribe Police at Stephen Harper speaking event. Police claim her tweets made her ineligible…

00:02:27

Added on 2/07/14

6,314 views

In Southern Alberta, Harper and Duncan received names and head dresses from the Blood #148 and the Piegan #147 Indian Reserves; contrary to values, beliefs and traditions of the Blackfoot Confederacy.

According to the traditionalists and Nii tsii ta pii ko waiks, these bestowments should never have occurred. The community of the Blood Indian Reserve have refused to acknowledge the bestowment and is viewed as treason and blasphemy according to the teachings of the Blackfoot Nation.

These two individuals(Harper and Duncan) are advocates of Genocide! Current Aboriginal Affairs Minister Valcourt also believes and implements genocide.

-
Valcourt has received all the information about corruption on the Blood Indian Reserve and refuses to intervene or request an investigation.

In the Blood Tribe Lands Department, the Director along with its Committee members are using this department to launder kickbacks and is shared by the Chief, Chairman and Elliot Fox. They charge a $13 an acre signing fee; it is reported that the Reserve has at least 200,000 acres under cultivation.

If this amount is accurate (200,000 x $13.00 per acre) = $2.6 million dollars unaccounted for annually. These cheques were not obtained by the Tribal auditors – Meyers, North and Penny – Lethbridge, Alberta; they were shared by one of the farmer’s book keeper; “she was told to keep quiet about these cheques or they will not be allowed to farm on the Reservation”. Many of the farmers have indicated they have had to pay this amount and is still currently being practiced.

We were able to locate copies of cancelled cheques 1 farmer paid to Elliot Fox, copies are on this link, they go back to 2001.

http://sttpml.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Lands-Fraud-Cheques.pdf

Another issue that has surfaced was the First Nations Education announcement on February 7th.2014 at the Kainai High School, Chief Weaselhead and his Councillors endorsed this deal. Community members were shocked to hear that the Blood Tribe has agreed to this legislation. The community was never informed and knew nothing about it. Some of the youth who showed up to ask questions were escorted out, a link is enclosed for your information.

http://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/harper-visits-blood-rez-women-forcibly-removed-for-tweeting/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC1UavTCT6k&sns=em

Piikani unrest

BY MABELL, DAVE ON SEPTEMBER 25, 2014.

http://lethbridgeherald.com/news/local-news/2014/09/25/piikani-unrest/

Dave Mabell

Lethbridge Herald -BROCKET

dmabell@lethbridgeherald.com

With a band election scheduled this winter, members of a local First Nation are demanding that their council – with just seven members, and no chief – scrap its plans for a new hockey rink.

Piikani Nation member Dominic Crowshoe, describing “third world” conditions on the reserve at Brocket, vowed Wednesday to raise a teepee on band administration land in protest of decisions being made by seven council members as their terms near an end.

Although the Piikani received $64 million in compensation for loss of land when the Oldman Dam was built, he said band members are no better off. Crowshoe said council has not effectively addressed unemployment, alcohol and drug abuse issues.

Piikani member Angela Wolf Tail, speaking at a small gathering outside the band’s Administration Building, called on band members “to join me in standing against the corruption that has plagued our nation.”

She told reporters a group of seven council members is too few to pass or alter band council resolutions. Now a non-member – a federal judge – will be making decisions about the community’s future.

Elected chief Gayle Strikes With A Gun was suspended in 2012 over allegations of nepotism and a conflict of interest in dealing with a financial transfer. She was later ousted, leaving the band council without its leader.

Wolf Tail called on Piikani members to vote against their council’s plan to use $2 million of the $64 million received in 2002 to build an ice sports facility.

That money, she said, “can be better spent on building a homeless shelter, and a few homes for those who need them most.

“We still live in poverty,” she said. “Masking our homes with siding doesn’t cover up the insides of these homes, where up to three or more families are living in one house.”

A vote on changes to the band’s “custom election bylaw” should not be on the same ballot as the ice arena question, she added. Band council has ordered a referendum on Oct. 6 and 7, asking for project approval as well as a decision on whether the next council should consist of a chief and 12 councillors, or just eight.

As well, voters will be asked if council’s term should be reduced from four years to three.

Wolf Tail also spoke against band council’s decision to invite a Court of Queen’s Bench justice to rule on aspects of a Piikani Investment Corporation proposal. She said it involves a debt of more than $14 million.

September 19, 2014 3:18 pm

NDP forces debate on murdered and missing aboriginal women

By Staff The Canadian Press

http://globalnews.ca/news/1572981/ndp-forces-debate-on-murdered-and-missing-aboriginal-women/

ABOVE: NDP Peter Julian discusses the parliamentary maneuver they used to force a debate on murdered and missing aboriginal women

OTTAWA – The NDP has used a tactical ploy to force a debate in the House of Commons about the need for an inquiry into murdered and missing aboriginal women.

The Opposition caught Conservatives by surprise, waiting until they had filed out of the House after the daily question period.

The NDP then rushed their own members back in and out-voted the remaining Tories to approve the debate.

Romeo Saganash, an NDP member from northern Quebec region, has told the House that aboriginal women are much more likely to be victims of violence than non-native women.

Saganash says an inquiry is needed to get to root causes.

Conservative Susan Truppe defended the government’s record on murdered and missing aboriginal women.

Forensic Audit Shows Former Lubicon “Chief” Collected $1.5 Million While Community Went Without Running Water

jimcraven — Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:17:12 +0000

Lubicon Lake Band

September 09, 2014 10:02 ET

Forensic Audit Shows Former Lubicon Chief Collected $1.5 Million While Community Went Without Running Water

Former leadership spent more than $27.5 million dollars over a six-year period with little sign of benefits or investment in the Lubicon Cree community of Little Buffalo.

LITTLE BUFFALO, ALBERTA–(Marketwired – Sept. 9, 2014) - The Lubicon Lake Band Chief and Council are reacting to the results of an MNP LLP forensic audit into the Cree Development Corporation covering the period of March 1, 2006 to February 28, 2012.

The corporation, which was meant to provide economic development for the Lubicon Cree community, was controlled by former Chief Bernard Ominayak and his immediate family and supporters. In a period of just four years, Ominayak and his family paid themselves more than $3.3 million.

“For many years our community has suffered without basic necessities like running water, while a small number of people got rich,” said Billy Joe Laboucan, the recently elected Chief of the Lubicon Lake Band. “Dictatorship rule has cost our community tens of millions of dollars and countless opportunities. This is a wake-up call that never again should we allow ourselves to be governed in this way.”

The audit shows large sums being paid, including almost $1.5 million spent on financial and credit card payments and nearly $1.2 million on automotive costs. Community members say they do not have access to the cards or vehicles.

An open letter (http://ow.ly/BhcDW) has begun circulating in the community, calling on the former leaders to account for their expenditures and asking the current Chief and Council to hold restorative justice circles in the community.

“We may never know the full extent of what we have lost as a community financially, but we know what we have lost in trust,” said Chief Laboucan. “We are hopeful that this will never happen again because our members have seen the truth, they have a voice and they are able to make fully informed decisions. It will take all of us working together to heal and rebuild our community.”

The results of the forensic audit can be downloaded here: http://ow.ly/Bhf3X

The open letter can be read here: http://ow.ly/BhcDW

http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/forensic-audit-shows-former-lubicon-chief-collected-15-million-while-community-went-1945409.htm#.VBB-68Mnozg.email

CONTACT INFORMATION

Lubicon Lake Band
Andrew Frank
Communications Specialist
604-367-2112
www.lubiconlakeband.ca

Two Worlds Colliding

jimcraven — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:51:40 +0000

Two Worlds Colliding by Tasha Hubbard, National Film Board of Canada

“This documentary chronicles the story of Darrell Night, a Native man who was dumped by two police officers in a barren field on the outskirts of Saskatoon in January 2000, during -20° C temperatures. He found shelter at a nearby power station and survived the ordeal, but he was stunned to hear that the frozen body of another Aboriginal man was discovered in the same area. Days later, another victim, also Native, was found.

This film is an inquiry into what came to be known as Saskatoon’s infamous “freezing deaths” and the schism between a fearful, mistrustful Aboriginal community and a police force that must come to terms with a shocking secret.”

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

» PSYCHOPATHY AND SOCIOPATHY

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

Advocates hope ‘groundbreaking’ report on aboriginal women will put spotlight on Murdered Aboriginal Women

Advocates hope ‘groundbreaking’ report on aboriginal women will put spotlight on Canada

Related Stories

Related Links

Photos

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

The RCMP, the Highway of Tears, and a Prime Minister Who Doesn’t Care

The RCMP, the Highway of Tears, and a Prime Minister Who Doesn’t Care

Canada’s Trails of Tears and Corruption in Indian Country

Piikani unrest

NDP forces debate on murdered and missing aboriginal women

Forensic Audit Shows Former Lubicon “Chief” Collected $1.5 Million While Community Went Without Running Water

Forensic Audit Shows Former Lubicon Chief Collected $1.5 Million While Community Went Without Running Water

CONTACT INFORMATION

Two Worlds Colliding

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.