My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Love it or leave it! Peace.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Did Canada pay ...? I sold my land, we signed all the papers, but the buyer never paid me! Now he's building on my land saying he has the 'papers' and claiming he owns it! Ridiculous! you say? Not in Canada! you say? Wait ... The settlement of any land claim involves establishing the validity of historical documents - proclamations, treaties, surrenders, sales, leases, etc. Sometimes, wandering around in these discussions and the fancy words in the documents, people lose sight of the big picture: What if the documents are all in order but Canada simply did not pay the costs associated with the agreements? What if ... for example ... our government agreed to compensate Six Nations for land flooded to build the Welland Canal ... and then Canada simply never paid? What if ... Canada agreed to administer sales/leases for surrendered land, and then Canada simply never paid them the money? Canada holds Indigenous land 'in trust'. Any transactions are to be recorded and the money deposited in Six Nations account. Six Nations has been asking for a complete accounting of the money in their account for many decades, and the feds have not complied: It appears the money is not there! So ... no matter how many 'surrenders' Canada has, they are not worth the paper they are written on if Canada did not keep its part of the agreement. If the terms of an agreement are not honoured by one of the parties, particularly payment, the property reverts to the original owner!

Canada stonewalls on treaty obligations ...

Canadian governments, after taking land from aboriginals and forcing them to live on reserves, have consistently stonewalled on treaty obligations.

First Nations protest pipeline ..."haven't been consulted"

First Nations protest pipeline

Protesters say they haven't been consulted and are demanding a share of the revenues

Darren Bernhardt,

Published: Monday, September 29, 2008

KERROBERT - Led by two men on horseback, roughly 60 First Nations people carried placards and marched through Kerrobert on Monday afternoon as part of a demonstration centered on the construction of a 1,590-kilometre oil pipeline known as the Alberta Clipper through traditional Treaty 6 territory.

The protesters say they haven't been consulted and are demanding a share of the revenues.

"We want to put out a message that we've had enough, that we're going to stand together as Indian people to make sure we get our fair share of the resources that come from our traditional lands," said Red Pheasant First Nation Chief Sheldon Wuttunee, who led the procession through town, wearing a ceremonial headdress.

Wuttunee was among the protesters, as Native leaders set up camp on the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. pipeline near Kerrobert to make it known they want a share in the construction and revenues.

Richard Marjan/The StarPhoenix

The march concluded at the Kerrobert headquarters of Enbridge Pipelines Inc., the company behind the pipeline project.

Construction on the pipeline is currently taking place near the Red Pheasant reserve, located 85 kilometres northeast of Saskatoon. Several kilometres of top soil have been removed to prepare for trenching.

Wuttunee and several of his band members, along with supporters from the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) and First Nation bands in Manitoba, Alberta and B.C. as well as across Saskatchewan, have also set up a campsite adjacent to the pipeline path just south of Luseland.

Four teepees have been erected, including one directly on top of the pipeline path.

Enbridge is planning to send 800,000 barrels of oil per day to Wisconsin and TransCanada Pipeline is sending another one million barrels per day to the United States, said Roseau River Anishinabe (Manitoba) First Nation Chief Terrance Nelson, whose band has also had issues with Enbridge.

"Farmers get payment if they have title to the land. Municipalities gets paid. The provincial and federal governments get paid. And what are they going to give you? Nothing, not even a royalty. A few token jobs, maybe," Nelson said to the group of supporters during a press conference at the campsite prior to the march.

"Good for you to stand up and say, 'Enough is enough. We own that land. We're sure as hell not going to give it up to everyone else.' "

Enbridge spokesperson Gina Jordan said they have had public consultations with 40 First Nations and Metis groups over the past two years.

"We are looking forward to continuing discussions with Red Pheasant and other First Nations. We want to make sure they have participation (in the pipeline project)." She added that several First Nations people are employed in the construction, contracting and security fields regarding the pipeline.

When asked repeatedly about sharing royalties, Jordan said "royalties are a federal government issue so they're not something I can comment on."

Senior management from Enbridge, Jordan said, are intending to meet with Wuttunee and other First Nations officials as soon as possible, but she did not know when that might happen.

Wuttunee has said the camp will remain set up "until we are dealt with."

Protesters representing Treaty 4 First Nations brought traffic on Highway 1 east of Regina to a crawl on Sunday and barricaded the road leading into a pipeline construction compound on Sunday as part of protests planned provincewide, and possibly for across Canada.

Earlier this month, Wuttunee warned action was being considered to halt construction of a multimillion-dollar oil pipeline until First Nations feel their issues have been addressed. Wuttunee's concerns centred on employment, with the chief alleging Enbridge had reneged on a written pledge to provide jobs and contracts to First Nations people.

Meanwhile, Standing Buffalo First Nation -- one of four bands without a treaty with the Crown -- hit a roadblock this summer when the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal refused to quash a decision allowing Enbridge to expand a pipeline into the Weyburn area. The band had argued the pipeline traversed traditional Dakota-Lakota land and that the band had not been consulted.

Sunday's action was centred on the Waschuk Pipeline construction compound, located just west of White City. At about 3:30 p.m., Treaty 4 members led by about 15 people on horseback began the trek east down Highway 1.

More coverage:

Brantford citizens speak out...

Builder's project sparks opposition Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION, EXPOSITOR STAFF Posted 6 hours ago

Builder Mike Quattrociocchi's attempt to start work on the second phase of his controversial Grand River Avenue housing project is meeting resistance from neighbours and Six Nations activists.

Floyd and Ruby Montour paid Quattrociocchi a visit Monday morning at the site, near Jarvis Street, where his company, Mayberry Homes, is about to build 20 housing units.

The two native activists warned the builder they are opposed to his second phase, just as they protested the first one built a year ago next door. And said they want him to consult with the native organization Haudenosaunee Development Institute.

Workers were excavating the site last week in preparation to start construction, but no work was going on Monday when the Montours visited. Quattrociocchi agreed to meet members of the organization on Friday, but he said in an interview that he reserves his right to resume excavation.

"Nothing's changed from the original dispute," said the former city councillor. "They say it's native land and want me to consult. I'm tired of consulting. It means we talk and they say, 'it's native land and we want money.'"

Floyd Montour said he and other activists have a duty to oppose the project.

"We have to step up to the plate, because it's native land," he said. "He got away with one before. He knows it, and everyone knows it. Deep down, he's chuckling about it."


Montour was referring to the smaller first phase, which native activists halted temporarily, until other Six Nations Confederacy officials relented and let Quattrociocchi finish.

"We won't let it happen a second time. He'll be laughing all the way to the bank if we do."

Meanwhile, neighbours have been keeping a vigil since last week on the excavation. They have been tracking a truck with videocameras as it hauls dirt and cement blocks over to Alfred Street, then dumps the contents on private property overlooking Shallow Creek Park.

Those living around the park find the growing pile an eyesore, while those on Grand River Avenue wonder how fill from a property that Quattrociocchi calls a "brownfield site" can be so easily moved and dumped in a neighbourhood.

"We'd like the city to examine more thoroughly this material before letting it be moved like that," said Mary Ellen Kaye, who heads a group called Keep Our River Public, which opposes Quattrociocchi's projects along the Grand.

"But you know, even if it's clean fill, it looks ugly beside the park."

Quattrociocchi has an agreement with the owner of the property on Alfred. The owner wanted the fill brought in to buttress the bank. The deal allows Quattrociocchi to dispose of the unwanted fill cheaply and avoid paying $10 a ton at the landfill site.

Doug Clark, director of the building department, said Monday there are no regulations limiting the movement of clean fill to a private residential property.

Alfred Street neighbours and users of Shallow Creek Park have voiced their complaints.

Terry Chandler, who lives on Hilda Street but regularly takes his children to play in the park, said he is upset to see a big encroaching pile. "It certainly doesn't make the park look good," he said.

Article ID# 1224801
Gag rule restricts right to disagree CITY COUNCIL Posted 1 day ago

I just got back from a seminar in Los Angeles at the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Although the centre began as a museum to the Holocaust, it has evolved to expose cross-cultural intolerance in all its manifestations. Oh, how easy the love of money evolves into Nazi-es-que policy if not resisted.

When I read about the new gag order that Brantford's mayor and city councillors have put on its members (we'll call it "The Calnan Rule"), I almost laughed out loud. I had just seen and heard about how the strategic policy of targeted laws and injunctions, coupled with economic fear-mongering, has been used to promote certain political agendas, and the restriction of one's right to disagree with that agenda.

I'm tempted to call the Wiesenthal Center and suggest they open a new Brantford wing as a present case study on the matter.

What on earth is going on in that concrete bunker over at Wellington and Darling streets?

Regarding the community meeting held last Wednesday night when developers and city hall tried to push more unnecessary development in the Hardy Road area, I understand it did not go well for the developers, but at least one federal candidate seems to know where the bear pooped in the buckwheat.

High-fives for the Six Nations' delegations and those citizens opposed to the destruction of this unique and valuable, archeological, geological, and biological treasure.

Sounds like it was a great victory, brought about by co-operation between the natives and "naive" (as some would label us) on the matter.

But it was only the first round. This project means a lot of money for a few individuals, and a huge tax fix for the, addicted-to-development city hall. This fight is far from over.

We must keep speaking out. We can't let up on the pressure, and, for the Earth's sake, we can't let them enforce the Calnan Rule on us, too.

Jim Windle


Greenbelt should be extended


Posted 6 hours ago

Knowing the Hardy Road proposed development area as a frequent cyclist and hiker, I was moved by citizen group spokesman Jerry Klievik's visual presentation during the city ward meeting. I have seen the deer, the unique vegetation, the wetlands, the cold water creek, and even wild turkey. I have passed the open green spaces, and welcomed the clean air into my lungs while along the trails on my bike, being thankful that, without having to expend carbon miles, people of Brantford can enjoy such beauty.

I wanted to thank the people like Ruby Montour, Clive Garlow and Vince Gilchrist who have the courage not only to speak for what belongs to Six Nations, but also for being watchful to help protect the land and the river so future generations would be able to enjoy the gifts of Mother Earth. Questions and comments during the meeting were so eloquently given from the heart and, hopefully, our municipal leaders will understand a greater vision about tomorrow is not always about economics and greed.

Citizens need to continue to petition the province to expand the designated greenbelt in Brant. We need to insist that our municipal leaders retract their submitted response to Places to Grow and support the greenbelt initiative so that building will take place in core areas which already exist and are waiting for renewal.

Ann Gloyn Brantford

Developers should pay fees to natives LAND CLAIMS Posted 6 hours ago

I am in agreement with developers paying the fees to the native group. The city could eliminate its permit fee portion as it will easily recoup monies in the long term through property taxes, etc.

After all, if developer has thousands to invest in building and has prior knowledge about land claims issues, then to have peace of mind, the developer should concede on this issue. The money requested is miniscule in overall costs to erect buildings.

As for the money natives receive from the federal government, it also is miniscule when you take into account the big picture of where all money is doled out.

As a taxpayer, I don't mind if a small portion of taxes goes to help the needy in society, be they seniors who get old-age pensions or tax credits for children or general welfare.

I feel that the natives are not being given money for nothing, but are being reimbursed for past agreements with government, concerning land surrenders, squatters' rights, and mineral rights to mention a few.

Our government has to be made to realize that when it takes, then there is an obligation to give back. All societies must live in harmony, and give and take is a part of it.

I feel that more people need to research history before making an assessment based on partial or no knowledge of past events.

Elizabeth LeBlanc Brantford

Duty to consult - Government says "Be patient"

Government Staying Out Of FSIN Protest
FSIN decline invite to a meeting

The Government is urging First Nations to remain patient when it comes the duty to consult.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled companies must consult when it encroaches on reserve and traditional land.

There is currently a peaceful protest along the Trans Canada outside Regina on that issue with Enbridge.

Minister June Draude says First Nations have told her there are a number of issues to discuss - work on traditional land and a promise to employ First Nation people that hasn't yet been fulfilled.

Draude set up a meeting with Enbridge which the First Nations leaders declined to attend.

The leadership defends that decision arguing they've had enough of words...the time is for action

'Thank you for your letter' - prime minister
Peter Irniq Special to Northern News Services Published Monday, September 29, 2008

NUNAVUT - Here is a response I got from the Prime Minister Stephen Harper for my letter of June 2, 2008.

Reconciliation will only begin when we Inuit will be able to tell our stories in Inuktitut language to the Truth and Reconciliation commissioners who can understand and speak Inuktitut and appreciate our experiences.

The problem I see with the current makeup of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is that they are into something they don't have the slightest idea about, particularly about Inuit experiences. None of them have any idea when about the time that I was being taken away from our summer outpost camp at Tinujjivik. They don't have the slightest imagination of how we lived in a tent, with our husky dogs around us and how peaceful it was.

Just like I said to the Adjudicator's Training Session in Calgary, "I might as well have been kidnapped in broad daylight, right in front of my parents, my sister and her husband and my little brother."

It's okay for Harry Laforme to go on CBC Newsworld and say, "yes, we want to hear from Inuit and about their experiences." But what if we Inuit don't want to tell our stories to this commission?

Dear Mr. Irniq,

Thank you for your letter regarding my full apology, on behalf of all Canadians, to former students of Indian Residential Schools. I greatly appreciated receiving your kind words of support for the apology and your thoughtful comments regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

No apology could erase this sad chapter in Canadian history. However, I believe our government has demonstrated our sincere commitment to achieving reconciliation with Aboriginal people across Canada.

Please be advised that I have forwarded a copy of your correspondence to my colleague, the Honourable Chuck Strahl, P.C., M.P., Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians. I am confident that the minister will carefully consider your comments and suggestions.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.


The Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P.

Prime Minister of Canada

Monday, September 29, 2008

INDIANS THREATEN ON CANADA RESERVE; Minister Stewart to Give Six Nations Chiefs a Chance to State Grievances. LAND CONTROL DEMANDED Court Officers Showered With Missiles When They Attempt Evictions in Ontario.

Special to The New York Times.

May 12, 1922, Friday

Page 13, 536 words

BRANTFORD, Ontario, May 11.--So serious has the situation on the Six Nations Reserve near Brantford become that Charles Stewart, Dominion Minister of the Interior, head of the Indian Department, has arranged to come here ... View pdf here ... Six Nations, Brantford: 1922 or 2008? Who can tell?? Fooled you a bit did it? Ah yes ... deja vu ... it is so clear as Six Nations people say: They have been saying the same things since 1922 ... 1867 ... 1784 ... 1701 ... Canada ('the Crown') has been doing the same things all along ... talking a lot and saying nothing, occupying, developing, mining, logging ... failing to reasonably consult with Indigenous Nations and not adequately accommodating their "Aboriginal and Treaty Rights" on traditional Indigenous land: A say in development and a share in revenues ... in 2008? g , , , , ,
INTENT? The children who did not come home from Canada's 'Indian' Residential Schools From GrannyRantsON GENOCIDE? INTENT?

As Chrisjohn explains, the glitch in Canada's garden begins with the problem that, according to European law, title to most of the land in Canada still belongs to its original inhabitants.

_Globe and Mail's Independent investigation, "The Lost Children of Our Schools." April 28, 2007. "The myth ... Canada meant well ... That myth may at last fall when Canadians take a close look at the abysmally high death rates among children ... in the schools"

FACT _Gary Merasty, MP, House of Commons of Canada, 2007 "I stand here for numerous victims whose stories will never be told, whose remains are scattered across our land in unmarked graves, scars on the land and even larger scars on our nation's psyche." GENOCIDE?

"I could argue all five, but the fifth one is a slam dunk," says Chrisjohn. "There is absolutely no way Canada can deny that they legislated the transference of children from their parents to the church authorities."

RESPONSIBILITY _Dr. Roland Chrisjohn, St Thomas U, NB You have a responsibility as a citizen of the world to know what your government is up to and resist [their] unlawful actions," he says. "The crime of genocide is being covered up. Now it's a double crime."



Self-determination and self-governance are key issues for indigenous peoples' human rights. Self-government means aboriginal people regaining control and management over their own land and resources, education, health, employment and justice systems.
LEGISLATE THAT! Legislate respect for the Crown's duty to consult and accommodate Indigenous First Nations. And get INAC's hands off the budget of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission! And what is the status of the 'Task Force' into the deaths and disappearance of children in the residential schools?
Have they sent a letter to Elders to acknowledge the loss of the children? To say that we are sorry we lost half of their children? To say that we are searching for records and graves of the lost children to properly inform them of the fates of the lost children? 50,000? 75,000? How many children died or disappeared? Has the Task Force identified the locations of burial grounds? The number of graves? The causes of death of thousands of Indigenous children for a hundred years, in the care of the government and the churches?
Does it really make any difference what 'colour' our government is if none of them tell the TRUTH? SHOW ME!!

MSM reports ...

No more jail time for Shawn Brant

Aboriginal activist found guilty

Last Updated: 29th September 2008, 3:10pm

BELLEVILLE, Ont. — Aboriginal activist Shawn Brant will not spend any more time in jail for his actions in two blockades last year near Deseronto, Ont.

In an unexpected move, what was to be the start of three weeks of pretrial motions in the case turned into a 30-minute trial Monday morning in Belleville.

Judge Stephen Hunter found Brant guilty of three counts of mischief exceeding $5,000.

Brant was charged for an April 2007 protest that halted rail traffic on CN Rail’s main line, and for leading a blockade during last year’s aboriginal day of action in June that shut down Hwy. 401.

Brant was sentenced to 57 days of pretrial custody, a 90-day conditional sentence and one year of probation.

During his probation, he is banned from participating in or organizing any unlawful protests and owning weapons — with the exception of those used for aboriginal hunting and fishing.

Mohawk protester Brant gets light penalty for blockades Last Updated: Monday, September 29, 2008 | 1:54 PM ET Facing numerous defence motions that would have laid bare police actions, the Crown dropped most charges Monday against an aboriginal protester who helped organize a blockade last summer of an Ontario highway and rail line, and agreed to a slap-on-the-wrist-penalty for the remaining ones. Shawn Brant, a Mohawk from the Tyendinaga Territory near Desoronto, Ont., was facing nine counts of mischief and breach of bail conditions for his role in two demonstrations: the June 29, 2007, national day of action for aboriginal peoples and an earlier event in April 2007. Both protests saw the temporary closing of the CN Rail line that carries Via Rail trains from Toronto to Ottawa and Montreal. The day of action also resulted in the shutdown, for several hours, of Highway 401 and Highway 2. On Monday, as part of a deal with the defence, the Crown dropped all but three of the mischief charges, on which Brant was found guilty. Even though the Crown had previously announced it would seek a jail sentence of 12 years, it agreed to have Brant receive a sentence of time already served in pretrial detention, plus a 90-day conditional sentence to be spent on his reserve. Brant said outside court he accepted the deal for the sake of his family. It means the Ontario Provincial Police's "illegal actions" in handling the protests will remain secret, he said, though it will mean OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino will have to face questions about his conduct. "Commissioner Fantino has always said he couldn't comment because it's before the courts. Well, now it's settled, and it's time the public hears from Mr. Fantino," Brant said. OPP's 'broken promises' Brant's lawyer Peter Rosenthal was preparing to argue in court in Napanee, Ont., on Monday that, in the case of the April 2007 demonstration, the OPP had agreed not to charge Brant if the blockade was lifted peacefully and promptly — which he says it was. But police broke their promise, Rosenthal's defence motion said, at Fantino's insistence because of his "personal and political attitude towards Brant." (In a wiretapped phone conversation, Fantino would later threaten Brant that "your whole world's going to come crashing down" because the OPP chief would "do everything I can within your community and everywhere to destroy your reputation.") The motion to have the resulting charges dismissed argued that "the breaking of the OPP promise of immunity must be considered in the context of the long history of broken promises made by Canadian governments to First Nations peoples in Canada." The defence also would have challenged the constitutionality of the Criminal Code's emergency wiretap provisions, which the OPP used during the national day of action for aboriginal peoples to bug the phones of Brant and his fellow organizers. Section 184.4 of the Criminal Code authorizes wiretaps without a judicial warrant in "exceptional circumstances" – namely when the situation is too urgent to get a judge's permission and there is a threat of a crime causing serious harm to any person or to property. But the OPP knew days ahead of time about the planned day of action protests, meaning there was no reason not to get a judge's approval beforehand for the phone surveillance, another defence motion said. Land dispute Tyendinaga Mohawk leaders are in talks with a federally appointed land claims negotiator to try to resolve their dispute over more than 400 hectares of land on the Bay of Quinte in Ontario – about 25 kilometres east of Belleville – including the site of a quarry and other businesses. The Mohawk community has been negotiating with the federal government since 2003. Protesters are angry that gravel continues to be hauled off parts of the land while negotiations are ongoing. The protesters, who say talks are progressing too slowly, began an occupation of the quarry in March 2007. Before Monday, Brant had been free on $100,000 bail, amid tight conditions, since Aug. 31

More ...
It is the efforts to strengthen Mohawk Nations' economies and sovereignty that threaten the implementation of Canada's colonial agenda. The policing agendas of the Canadian government aim to crack down on this assertion of self-sufficiency and strength, not, as they claim, "organized crime".
CROWN BUYS FANTINO'S SILENCE WITH BRANT'S FREEDOM - Statement from the Tyendinaga Support Committee (Monday, September 29th, 2008) Today, in a Belleville court, a conviction for three counts of mischief was entered against Mohawk spokesperson Shawn Brant for his role in the CN rail line and Highway 401 blockades which took place in April and June, 2007. Brant has been ordered to stay on the Tyendinaga reserve for three months and to be on probation for one year. Originally, the Crown had been asking for 12 years in jail for Brant. While Shawn Brant will face no more jail time for the blockades and will not go to trial, there are still 16 people from the Tyendinaga facing criminal charges for defending their community. The critical issues which prompted the Mohawks to take action have yet to be addressed. Most of the community does not have drinkable water. Most households have been unable to drink the water from their own taps for at least the last decade. The reserve school, with 300+ students, ranging in age from 2 to 13, who attend daily, has had its water deemed unfit for human consumption for the past eighteen months. In addition, the lands which comprise the Culbertson Tract and Simcoe Deed have yet to be returned. This despite all levels of governments' admission that the lands do legitimately belong to the Mohawks of Tyendinaga. In Shawn Brant's case, the dramatic turn-around by government lawyers came after disturbing details of OPP impropriety, abuse of practice and the flaunting of policing guidelines created after the Ipperwash Inquiry were made public in July of this year, following the lifting of a publication ban on Brant's preliminary hearing. Abuses revealed included OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino's threats to Shawn Brant that "your whole world's going to come crashing down", the orders to have snipers and armored personnel carriers on standby, and the presence of an undercover police officer posing as a media cameraman. The preliminary hearing also revealed that the OPP used an obscure section of the Criminal Code to implement an emergency wiretap of Brant and other Mohawks' telephone conversations, on June 28th, 2007, even though the National Day of Action had been publicly planned for months. The Crown went to great lengths to try to keep this critical information from becoming known and was successful in keeping the material under a publication ban for about a year. The release of these damning details prompted calls for the firing of OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino. Pretrial motions, originally set to begin today, would have seen Commissioner Fantino subpoenaed to answer for his conduct leading up to and during the 2007 Aboriginal Day of Action. Since the blockades of 2007, CUPE Ontario has passed a resolution in support of the Mohawks of Tyendinaga, NDP MPP Peter Kormos has called for the firing of OPP Chief Fantino and thousands of people have attended events, made donations and signed petitions in support of the Mohawks and their demands. Shawn Brant's arrest and the excessive prison sentence that the crown sought against him were part of an attempt to destabilize the community of Tyendinaga. However, the Mohawks of Tyendinaga remain united and continue to fight for what should already be theirs: land and clean water. The Tyendinaga Support Committee is a Toronto-based organization working to support the Mohawks of Tyendinaga. For more information, visit: or email us at
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fantino hasn't been fired yet, but they went to great lengths to keep his mouth shut. He already almost blew two difficult situations sky high, with his mouth. Pointing guns at men women youth and elders didn't help either. This isn't over yet. Fantino must go. He's a friggen disaster looking for a place to happen! granny ------------------------- More BACKGROUND from TMT Support ... For more information, please read the following article:



- Tyendinaga Support Committee

In April 2008, the Mohawk community of Tyendinaga was subjected to an unacceptable escalation of police tactics, including the drawing of guns by OPP officers on unarmed Mohawks. At the time, the OPP laid unfounded, fear-mongering claims, saying they saw 'one long gun' at the quarry reclamation site, a land reclamation that the Mohawks have been holding for more than a year, as part of their struggle for the return of the Culbertson Tract. The language of the alleged threat is not unfamiliar to Native people in Ontario. In 1995 Stoney Point protester Dudley Charge was shot and killed by the OPP during a land reclamation at Ipperwash provincial park after an officer thought he saw him holding a "long gun," though the protesters were in fact unarmed.

In 2006, the Ipperwash Inquiry found that the 1995 murder of Dudley George was contributed to by centuries of discrimination and dispossession rooted in racism. Justice Sidney Linden concluded that Ipperwash revealed a deep schism in Canada's relationship with First Nations peoples and was symbolic of a grievous history of destructive government policies. The Inquiry made constructive findings and recommendations regarding policing, appalling decision-making, the wrongful use of force against indigenous people, and the racist demeanor of Ontario's then-Premier Mike Harris and the police.

Despite these findings, it appears that Ontario has opted for the criminalization of First Nations people over the resolution of outstanding land issues. Justice Linden's Ipperwash Inquiry policing recommendations are being flaunted by the OPP, and in particular, by Chief Julian Fantino.

What lessons have really been learned in the 13 years since Dudley George was killed? To what lengths are the authorities prepared to go in order to quash indigenous resistance and sovereignty?

Publication Ban lifted on the Preliminary Inquiry:

On Juy 18th, 2008, the publication ban on Shawn Brant's preliminary hearing, which took place in August 2007, was lifted in a Napanee Court, making crucial evidence available to public scrutiny for the first time. That afternoon, Crown prosecutors appeared before a judge of the Court of Appeal in Toronto. No defence lawyers were present, as they had received only 6 minutes notice of this second, frantic court appearance. The Crown successfully convinced the judge to issue a stay, on the grounds that the ban was in the accused, Shawn Brant's, best interests. The media was ordered to "immediately cease reporting on evidence heard at the preliminary inquiry and remove all related reports from websites".

Then, at shortly after 5pm the same day, lawyers for the CBC and Mr. Brant appeared before the same Appeals judge, along with Crown counsel. After substantial submissions, the judge lifted her earlier stay and dismissed the stay application altogether, ordering the publication ban lifted once more.

It is fairly rare for the prosecution to fight for a publication ban on court proceedingswhen the defence is opposed to it. In Shawn's case, the media coverage of the 2007 blockades and Shawn's role as spokesperson is vast. The public record of Shawn's very public actions stands, and the defence has no interest in suppressing evidence relating to the case. This begs the question: why has the Crown been so persistent in fighting to keep the preliminary hearing quiet? The evidence released after the publication ban was lifted gives some insight into possible answers.

Julian Fantino's Testimony:

With the publication ban lifted, disturbing information emerged. The evidence released included the testimony of Chief Fantino at Mr. Brant's preliminary hearing. The public learned about the conduct of Commissioner Fantino in relation to members of the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory, including his knowledge of wiretaps placed without the approval or oversight of a judge, his apparent dismissal of the authority and importance of Aboriginal OPP officers, the direct threats made to Mohawk spokesperson Shawn Brant, and Mr. Fantino's utter disregard of the recommendations of Justice Linden's Ipperwash Report.

Highlights of the evidence released include the following:

  • In June 2007, the OPP imposed wiretaps on members of the Tyendinaga Mohawk community without judicial authorization, using an emergency section of the Criminal Code. The lead investigator in Mr. Brant's case has acknowledged that the OPP was not necessarily going to disclose that these taps had occurred. Mr. Brant's lawyers were informed of the existence of the wiretap on his phone only on the Friday afternoon before his preliminary hearing was to begin on the following Monday.
  • Besides tapping the cell and home phone lines of Shawn Brant, the OPP also tapped three other phones: two of Shawn's friends, Mario Baptiste Sr. and Mario Baptiste Jr., and Shawn's brother, Gregory Brant, a prominent local lawyer. The latter is particularly shocking, given Gregory Brant has opposing political views from those of his brother and had no association to or involvement in the blockades of June 29th, 2007. It is not known whether the tap on his phone includes privileged solicitor-client conversations, which cannot be listened to by other parties.
  • At Mr. Brant's preliminary hearing, Fantino said he'd never heard of such a tap being used by the OPP and denied any knowledge of who had decided to implement the tap. Furthermore, Fantino refused to look into this question or provide defence counsel with further information about the wire tap or policy related to its use.
  • Fantino's wiretapped conversations with Shawn Brant on June 29, 2007 reveal him making numerous threats against Mr. Brant. Fantino said to Mr. Brant, "your whole world's going to come crashing down" and threatened to "do everything I can within your community and everywhere to destroy your reputation". Police Chief Fantino is also quoted as saying, " I'm now telling you pull the plug or you will suffer grave consequences."
  • During his testimony at the preliminary inquiry, Fantino appears to have perjured himself by admitting he knew of the existence of the wiretap on Mr. Brant's phone, on or before June 29th, and then contradicted himself, claiming he had no such knowledge until some time after June 29th.

  • Fantino laid the groundwork to come down on the National Day of Action blockade in Tyendinaga on June 29th with full force - a message sent to the Mohawks through intermediaries indicated that tanks, the military, snipers and SWAT teams were on standby to open Highway 401, despite knowledge that the blockade was already scheduled to be taken down at the end of June 29th. "There were in fact plans underway at that time for a forced removal of the blockade, weren't there?" Rosenthal asked him during his testimony. "Yes, there was," Fantino replied.
  • In his exchange with Mr. Brant, Fantino contradicted the OPP's guidelines for dealing with aboriginal groups, which were developed in the wake of the police killing of Dudley George. Disrespecting First Nations OPP officers and disrespecting their role as negotiators, Fantino refers to them at one point as "your (ie Shawn's) officers".
  • Contrary to the recommendations of the Ipperwash report, and OPP guidelines on policing aboriginal blockades, Fantino repeatedly showed no cultural respect for Mohawk processes of decision-making, asserting that Mr. Brant is "the man in charge" and can "pull the plug any time he wants to". Fantino refused to acknowledge or respect any process for reaching consensus within the community, despite repeated attempts by Shawn to make this clear during the taped conversations. In his testimony at the preliminary inquiry, Fantino dismissed this process as a "stalling tactic".
  • Evidence also included that of an undercover officer who stated that he posed as a media cameraman when he investigated the blockades of June 29, 2007, held as part of the First Nations National Day of Action. In its application to lift the ban, counsel for the CBC asserted that he had grave concerns about such activity by police officers.

Ipperwash Recommendations Ignored:

According to an OPP document drafted in the wake of the Ipperwash Inquiry entitled A Framework for Police Preparedness for Aboriginal Critical Incidents, local First Nations police must play a lead role in any police response to First Nations protest. The document calls for building a "trusting relationship" with "mutual respect" between the culture of First Nations people and police, as well as a need for "special concerns" with respect to aboriginal protests and blockades, given their historical rights.

It also calls for "fostering trusting relationships between the OPP and aboriginal communities" and for a "critical incident mediator" who, during an incident, meets with aboriginal leaders to identify key issues and interests and communicates those to the police commander at the incident. It is also the mediator's responsibility to "develop in concert with the incident commander, a mutually acceptable and lasting resolution strategy."

The evidence at the preliminary inquiry shows that this was indeed taking place on June 29, in Tyendinaga. The Mohawks were communicating and negotiating with members of the Aboriginal Liason Team.

However, the evidence also shows that Fantino repeatedly undercut such involvement by interrupting negotiations between the people blockading the 401 and First Nations constables with threatening calls to Brant's cellphone.

According to Shawn's lawyer, Peter Rosenthal, "The point is not simply that a commissioner of the OPP should speak more appropriately. The concern is that an OPP officer speaking like that in such a context could have derailed negotiations entirely, leading to a horrible outcome. Luckily, Brant and his colleagues continued negotiations with the First Nations officers to a successful conclusion, in spite of Fantino's provocations."

At the preliminary inquiry, Fantino was confronted with several points from the Framework. He was then asked by defence counsel: "I put it to you that the document that we looked at and the concerns of the Ipperwash inquiry, and many other concerns that you're aware of, have indicated that, in situations like this, for the public good as well as for the respect of the protestors involved, it's important to understand where they're coming from and deal with their cultural values and so on."

Fantino responded: "There's nothing in the spirit, the intent, or the written word in this document that justifies criminal conduct, or that exonerates people from accountability from criminal conduct, or that it [sic] absents me as a law enforcement officer from exercising discretion, or using the authority bestowed upon me to effect a lawful purpose."

Fantino was then asked: "And doesn't, though, that document and many other documents speak to the way you should do that in situations involving aboriginal protestors?"

He replied: "These are guidelines and they're principles; they're not a firm and fixed mandated way of doing business."

The Ipperwash recommendations were designed to avoid violence, regardless of whether criminal charges will subsequently be laid. For Fantino to dismiss the recommendations as mere "guidelines," given the grave consequences of racist policing which prompted them in the first place, should be cause for great alarm.

Fantino and McGuinty Respond:

A media storm followed the lifting of the publication ban. After allegations that Fantino had violated the Ipperwash recommendations were printed and broadcast in national newspapers and on national television and radio, Fantino issued two statements In one, he stated, regarding lesson he had learned from the controversy surrounding the OPP's handling of the National Day of Action at Tyendinaga, that "as a law enforcement officer, I happen to have all the right enemies". In another statement, Fantino said, in part, "Consistent with the recommendations from the Ipperwash inquiry, the OPP continues to work collectively with legitimate First Nations leadership and communities to ensure that both the interests of participants during lawful protests and public safety can be served in the best way possible."

The Ipperwash recommendations were not about what the police would consider to be "lawful protests," nor about working with what the police would consider to be "legitimate First Nations leadership." The entire Ipperwash report was designed to apply to incidents such as the reclamation of Ipperwash Park and the blockades of June 29, 2007. It was designed to avoid violence and the death of Native people standing up for their land. If Fantino remains Chief of the OPP, how can we be certain that future bloodshed will be avoided?

Fantino's conduct during these blockades was in contravention of both OPP guidelines and the recommendations of the Ipperwash report. Above and beyond this, his actions were threatening, unprofessional and discriminatory.

Following the public furor, which included NDP Justice Critic Peter Kormos' call for Fantino to resign or be fired, Premier McGunity was quoted as stating that Commissioner Fantino had "demonstrated tremendous discipline", and that his position is "a tough job when people get really hot".

An OPP Commissioner must have the ability to conduct himself appropriately in complex situations, an essential skill Fantino clearly lacked on June 29th, 2007. But even two months later at Shawn Brant's preliminary inquiry—not in a 'heated' situation—Fantino continued to demonstrate his lack of commitment to implementing recommendations of the Ipperwash inquiry. Fantino's public statements with respect to his conduct are an attempt to obfuscate and distract from the issues at hand – namely, how First Nations people are policed in this province.

It is important to note that in Justice Linden's 1,433-page report, the OPP received the bulk of the criticism for actions leading up to the shooting, including "the use of excessive force" and being "culturally insensitive''. Fantino's conduct on June 29th, 2007 directly contravenes the recommendations of Justice Linden, and sets an unacceptably dangerous and disrespectful precedent for government and police response to First Nations grievances.

The Premier's job should instead be to ensure that the Commissioner, a political appointee whom the Liberal government quietly handed an extension of term in early 2008, is thoroughly investigated, with a view to resignation.

What's Next:

The current situation in Tyendinaga has begun to look like a sweeping crack-down on community members and the stifling of resistance to increased policing and further development of the Culbertson Tract. At the time of writing, 16 men and women from Tyendinaga are facing charges stemming from the OPP stand-off in April 2008, all saddled at minimum with conditions of 'no protests' and 'not to be present at the quarry site'.

At the same time, federal monies are being poured into the Territory for policing matters, and an RCMP report has been released, citing federal government intentions to dedicate police "to fighting contraband, which he [Stockwell Day] said is funding organized crime and possibly even terrorists" in three Mohawk communities, including Tyendinaga. It is important to remember that the feds' concern with Native-made smokes and sales go much deeper than their own pocket book. It is not simply the lost tax revenue that they suffer, but the fact that the lost dollars go to sustain Mohawk families and other services and allows for the Mohawk Nation to stand, as it always has, as a clear and organized force of resistance against the Canadian government's practices of assimilation and control of First Nations peoples.

It is the efforts to strengthen Mohawk Nations' economies and sovereignty that threatens the implementation of Canada's colonial agenda. The policing agendas of the Canadian government aim to crack down on this assertion of self-sufficiency and strength, not, as they claim, "organized crime".

In late July, Larry Hay, the former police chief of the Mohawk Tyendinaga First Nation made public his efforts to take the Ontario Provincial Police to court after being fired by OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino for speaking out against racism in policing. "They've learned nothing from Ipperwash," said Hay, who is seeking a judicial review hoping a court will reinstate him in the job. He is considering a wrongful dismissal suit if a judicial review fails.

The community of Tyendinaga has, through working to re-establish a longhouse, self-governance, and economic self-sufficiency, long been a thorn in the side of the Canadian state, and its project of oppression and genocide of First Nations peoples.

That the government lawyers looked to ask for twelve years prison time for Shawn Brant is not about the blockades of last summer. It is about sending a loud message to First Nations people who are not interested in submitting to the exploitation of their lands and resources, nor the continued denigration and suffering of their communities. This was a state response of fear and concern that First Nations resistance will continue, and will succeed in forcing the rest of this country's population to realize that long-standing crimes against the Mohawk community of Tyendinaga, and all other First Nations communities, must be righted. ______________________________ R
Duty to Consult: Pipeline protest Protesters make stand at pipeline construction compound near Regina

Heather Polischuk, Leader-Post

Published: Sunday, September 28, 2008

REGINA -- Numerous members of Treaty Four brought Highway 1 traffic to a crawl and barricaded the road leading into the Waschuk Pipeline construction compound east of Regina on Sunday as part of province-wide -- and quite possibly Canada-wide -- protests.

In what they are terming "days of action," numerous bands and tribal councils across the province are taking part in or are in support of the protests, asking for a renewed relationship with the Crown in dealing with land issues. At the heart of this issue in Saskatchewan is the ongoing battle between First Nations groups and Enbridge Pipelines Inc.

"The boiling point, or the tipping of the scales, was some of the frustration that Chief Sheldon Wuttunee and the Red Pheasant First Nation had with their agreement with Enbridge Pipelines," said Treaty Four spokesman Edmund Bellegarde. "The pipeline is being expanded throughout this territory, throughout our territories and we feel that we're banding together with the Treaty Six First Nations and northwest Saskatchewan and we're taking the days of action here, so we are fully intending to be peaceful. We need to bring attention to our rights and our concerns that our elders have talked to us about and counselled us on our role as stewards of the land."

Treaty Four members erected a teepee at the T-intersection leading into the Waschuk Pipeline site on Sunday.

Troy Fleece, Leader-Post
Earlier this month, Wuttunee warned actions were being considered to halt construction of a multimillion-dollar oil pipeline until they feel their concerns have been addressed. Wuttunee's concerns had centred on employment, with the chief alleging that Enbridge had reneged on a written pledge to provide jobs and contracts to First Nations people.

Meanwhile, Standing Buffalo First Nation -- one of four bands without a treaty with the Crown -- hit a roadblock this summer when the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal refused to quash a decision allowing Enbridge to expand a pipeline into the Weyburn area. The band had argued the pipeline traversed traditional Dakota-Lakota land and that the band had not been consulted.

In Treaty Four territory, Sunday's days of action were centred on the Waschuk Pipeline construction compound, located just west of White City. At about 3:30 p.m., the Treaty Four members, led by about 15 members on horseback bearing two Treaty Four flags, began the windy trek east down Highway 1. RCMP was on hand to help deal with the traffic problems that resulted. Some disgruntled motorists responded to the blockage by cursing or waving middle fingers as they used a gravel road next to the highway to make their way around. Traffic was relatively back to normal within 20 to 30 minutes, as Treaty Four members set about erecting a teepee at the T-intersection leading into the Waschuk Pipeline site. Other than a man working security at the entrance, no one from Waschuk Pipeline was on site Sunday.

Officials from Waschuk Pipeline and Enbridge could not be reached for comment on Sunday.

Traffic problems may or may not be at an end, with the protest expected to continue for some time.

"We're going to be 24/7 occupation here and we will remain as such until we believe we have some commitments ...," Bellegarde said. "We will take as long as is necessary to get the proper parties to the table, being the federal and provincial governments and the industry players ... We're hoping to keep the lines of communication open with all of the government agencies and law enforcement officials. We want to make sure that we're peaceful, peaceful in our actions and our activities and we want to insure that that is kept throughout the whole process here."

Bellegarde said a news conference is expected to be held in Treaty Six territory near Kerrobert on Monday with a similar goal to disrupt an Enbridge project there, and more sites will likely be selected in the coming weeks in other treaty areas. Not only is Saskatchewan to be affected, but Bellegarde said treaty territories in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario will also be taking part in the action. While the Enbridge projects are key in the Saskatchewan action, Bellegarde said the days of action are about more than that one issue.

"This is bigger than the pipeline project," he said. "It's symbolic of the government's honour and duty through the Supreme Court of Canada rulings in the last two decades. The issue is duty to consult and we feel that we haven't had the proper consultation in a meaningful way as the courts say is the law in this country ... We're not anti-development. We understand that there are issues and sometimes this is the type of action that it takes to bring the attention and bring the governments to the table and if it means that some of the work is interrupted in the short term, we feel it's necessary for the long-term issues to be addressed ... We feel as treaty people that our ties to the land, our treaties, all of the projects, all of the exploration, all of the activity that are going on in our treaty territories and our traditional lands are being left by the wayside."

-- With files from CanWest News Service

Brantford: Considering development
Questions and challenges will help the city and developers make better decisions.
Considering development

Time has overtaken a proposal to build homes north and south of Hardy Road in the city's northwest. Ten years ago, plans to build houses on 200 acres would have had clear sailing at city hall. Not so now, as was shown at a public meeting Wednesday night.

About 200 people turned out to hear details of proposals for three developments that could provide homes for up to 2,000 residents.

Many in the audience were clearly critical. They included Six Nations members who pointed out that the area is subject to a land claim and concerns about archeology.

Other issues were raised by environmentalists, who wish to protect natural features of the area, and activists who seek a masterplan for the Grand River's waterfront.

The issue of transit in the Hardy Road area also was raised.

Not so long ago, housing development had the green light from city hall. The 200 acres formerly known as Hampton Estates were cleared for takeoff.

Things have changed. Only about half of the area has been set aside from development because of environmental concerns.

This has caused the land's three new owners -- Sifton Properties Ltd., Grandview Ravines and Sam Rizzo Estate -- to make new plans which require official plan and zoning changes.

Welcome to the complicated world of development in Brantford in 2008. What once was a fairly simple and largely unopposed process to develop greenfields into housing has become a dialogue with the community in general and specific stakeholders in particular.

That's good. Questions and challenges will help the city and developers make better decisions.

Greenfields and waterfront land are in limited supply. The environment cannot be taken for grant. If the Hardy Road developments proceed, the public must be satisfied that the projects are the way to go.

The process for approval is trickier and more expensive than the old ways of doing things. But the results will be thought through more completely.
It's a Grand thing to do Police, native students pull together, and find that's best September 27, 2008 The Hamilton Spectator PARIS (Sep 27, 2008)

Twenty aboriginal students from Hamilton and 20 Hamilton cops milled about on a narrow muddy shoreline in Paris, trying hard not to step on toes or accidentally clunk each other in the head with canoe paddles.

Ahead lay a 15-kilometre excursion down the Grand River to Brantford in a unique bridge-building experiment called The Journey.

Some of the teenagers were from Cathedral and Sir John A. Macdonald high schools in town, others from alternative educational programs. And for some -- cops and kids alike -- it was a journey into the unknown.

Sherri Nelson, a Hamilton police constable with an irrepressible smile, was paired up with Albert Sears, 18, from Six Nations who now lives in Hamilton's inner city.

One cop, one teen in each canoe -- the idea was that they'd leisurely canoe and chat and get to know each other.

It became immediately obvious that the Nelson-Sears partnership was not a good idea. In the excitement of all the bridge-building, no one bothered to check if either knew how to canoe.

Gripping their paddles as if they were poling a raft, both instantly lost their smiles as the current snatched them up.

"Steer left," Albert said urgently, "We've gotta go left."

"What do you mean, steer, aren't you steering?" Sherri cried. "Oh god we're twisting, how do you steer, Albert?"

Around them, cops and kids were bobbing on the waves, some guiding their canoes with expert strokes, some flailing away like waterwheels, but eventually all got under way.

By some miracle, Sherri and Albert managed to point the craft downstream and chatted about themselves. How Albert ran with a crowd that didn't like cops, how they told each other they were tough enough to take care of things themselves, how he wanted to be an electrician.

They didn't notice the growing ripples ahead of them. Without warning, the rapids turned them broadside and crashed them into a rock.

"Ahhhhhhhh," screamed Sherri as the canoe flipped, catapulting both into the rushing waters.

But as the current snatched her away, Sherri suddenly felt a hand dart down into the water and grab her hand as Albert pulled her to her feet in the chest-high stream.

"My sunglasses," moaned Sherri, "my $350 prescription, antiglare, scratch-proof polarized designer Ray-Bans. Let's go find them."

Together, in the ankle deep mud, they started laughing, now friends.

"This has been a really good experience," said Tara Williams, advocacy program co-ordinator with the Aboriginal Health Centre in Hamilton.

"It's good for our youth, especially those in the cities who don't often get a chance to get to do outdoor activities and develop relationships with others."

The Journey builds upon other Hamilton police initiatives in the aboriginal communities.

When he first heard about the chance to take a canoe ride with police, Brodie Staats, 15, was not impressed. "I thought, oh great, cops. Here we go again. Another fake event. But you know what, this was fun."

As they beached their canoes, Brodie's muscular cop partner challenged him to a Grand River throwdown. The cop was swimming before he knew what happened.

So Deputy Chief Ken Leendertse decided he had to defend the force's honour.

"Brodie, Brodie, Brodie," screamed the teens -- and a few of the cops -- as the two locked arms. Leendertse, too, found himself in the drink.


Sunday, September 28, 2008

This native land: Our debt to the first nations Writer and thinker John Ralston Saul feels Canada can't understand its true nature until it reconnects with its aboriginal roots. He discusses his vision with The Globe and Mail's Michael Valpy MICHAEL VALPY AND JOHN RALSTON SAUL

This is John Ralston Saul at work, thinking big. If you've got only one life to lead, why not spend it retelling your country's history, recasting its mythologies, completely reframing the society to which Canadians belong?

His new book, A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada, says our multiculturalism did not begin with the French and English trying to figure out how to live with each other. It began with illiterate, impoverished Europeans coming into contact with superior aboriginal societies and being accepted by them.

Canada's political culture of egalitarianism, and Canadians' constitutional genius for balancing collective and individual rights, did not begin with Confederation or Pierre Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

They began with the Great Peace of Montreal in 1701 when 39 first nations signed an extraordinary treaty with the governor of New France that brought years of economic harmony and wealth, mutual respect and a commitment by the French - alone among the European colonists of North America - not to exterminate or enslave indigenous peoples.

There has never been a monolithic society on the northern half of the continent, which is why the imperial British rulers of the late 18th century treated Canada differently from their other possessions - promulgating the Royal Proclamation of 1763 that guaranteed cultural and economic rights for aboriginal people, and the Quebec Act of 1774 that guaranteed language and legal rights for French Canadians.

That, Mr. Saul says, was Canada's true history until it was hijacked by empire supremacists in the 19th century and rewritten, resulting in a shredding of our unique social cohesion that has lasted to today.

But he finds hope. The old narrative is resurfacing, which is what his book is about: a rediscovery of the true Canada.

The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein said trying to fix a broken myth is like trying to repair a broken spider web. I'm wondering if that's what you're trying to do.

I don't think that we have a broken myth. I think we have something much more interesting and actually fun in a way. We've got a 400-year-old history, which is a long time, and the first 250 years are more or less - I'm not being romantic - about how we're going to live in this country, how we're going to do things, the collective unconscious put in place.

And then in the late 19th century, after Confederation, in the 1880s, the 1890s, you get this kidnapping of Canada by the [British] empire myth, the massive arrival of the northern Irish Protestants and the big arrival of the English, who probably wouldn't have caused much of a change if the northern Irish hadn't pushed so hard. And, of course, why wouldn't you want to be on the winning side, when the empire was going to live forever? So, in a way, they rewrote the surface mythology of Canada. You and I are still struggling with the leftover of that.

I read your thesis kind of doubtfully until I got to the part where you present the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the Quebec Act of 1774 side by side. And for the first time I realized, my god, the British imperial rulers really were dealing with three peoples, not just two - the aboriginals as well as the French and British.

And remember that astonishing thing which is never talked about, the Great Peace of Montreal in 1701. ... And you know the rewriting of our history in the late 19th century was so complete that all of this stuff was evacuated because the aboriginals were dying of our diseases and the people with power wanted them to die. Even if they weren't doing it on purpose, they wanted them to die, [which introduced] the whole mythology that this was a weak people. All that stuff is a very clear, very self-serving mythology because they plummeted from two million to 200,000 by the early 20th century.

Was our history really rewritten?

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Two Row Wampum Treaty

Two Row Wampum Treaty
"It is said that, each nation shall stay in their own vessels, and travel the river side by side. Further, it is said, that neither nation will try to steer the vessel of the other." This is a treaty among Indigenous Nations, and with Canada. This is the true nature of our relationships with Indigenous Nations of 'Kanata'.