JUNE 13, 2015
‘A long journey’ to Home inquiry
Ex-residents hail news of restorative process
MICHAEL GORMAN MARY ELLEN MACINTYRE STAFF REPORTERS
newsroom@herald.ca @chronicleherald
A photograph flashed on the screen behind a speaker at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Upper Hammonds Plains on Friday afternoon.
It showed small, dark-eyed and chubby-cheeked children, their innocence and vulnerability speaking to the very reason everyone was gathered.
It was shown at the beginning of a video featuring Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil apologizing last October on behalf of the province to the children abused at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children.
Literally or figuratively, many in the room saw themselves in that photograph — frightened, hungry and separated from anyone who ever loved them.
“I was raised at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children from five to 12 years of age," said one man who asked for anonymity.
“Seven years of sadness and uncertainty."
The event was held to announce a restorative inquiry process into the decades of systemic abuse of children who resided at the Dartmouth-area orphanage, which opened in 1921 and closed as an orphanage in the late 1980s.
On the heels of last year’s apology and a $29-million classaction settlement, McNeil made good Friday on his promise for an inquiry. “This will be very different than any other public inquiry in Nova Scotia," McNeil told the gathering.
R atherthaninacourtroom,it will be held in various locations at different times over a period of up to 30 months, he said.
One question McNeil said he wants an answer to is, “How did we as a society allow children to be placed in harm’s way?"
Former resident Tony Smith, whose story of abuse at the home spurred much of the legal action, welcomed Friday’s announcement.
“It’s been a long journey to get here," he said.
The inquiry will begin in October and will mark the next major step forward. Smith said there were times when he doubted it would be possible for the terms of reference to be hammered out, given the number of groups involved.
People were able to come to an agreement, however, based on the idea of doing no more harm.
“We didn’t want a traditional public inquiry," he said. “It took some time for (participants) to make the connection as to what we (wanted) and when we did start to make that connection, it was the aha moment and everybody wants to get on board.
“What we’re trying to do is we’re not looking for blame, we’re not looking to attack anybody, we’re not going after anyone. We just want to find out the truth, what happened and why it happened, and what we can do to learn from this experience."
That means there isn’t a set number of meetings. People will come together when and where they need to share their stories and listen. There won’t be a presiding judge or lawyers crossexamining witnesses, but rather a sharing circle where people are supported and made to feel safe to share their perspectives and experiences.
Halifax Mayor Mike Savage told the gathering Nova Scotia has a proud past, rich in history, but that pride should never be used to hide “the ugly truth of racism," he said.
When Sylvia Parris stood at the podium, she told the group her heart was overflowing.
“The original foundation was one of love, hope, compassion and perseverance," said Parris, chairwoman of the board for the Home for Colored Children, which still operates as a place where troubled youth can seek help.
“We apologize to former residents who suffered harm — many of us are descendants of the residents," she said.
“We want to be part of the journey of healing and rebirth."
With those words, Smith joined Parris at the podium, saying a lot of residents never thought they would get an apology from the home.
“That was the missing piece: an apology from Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children," he said, smiling.
His words were followed by a standing ovation. Someone began a verse of We Shall Overcome and everyone joined in.
With a healing circle of lit candles in front of him, Tony Smith offers a statement from the former residents of the Home for Colored Children at Emmanuel Baptist Church Friday. The event was held to announce a restorative inquiry into systemic abuse at the facility. ERIC WYNNE • Staff
Nova Scotia Home For Coloured Children- Opened 1921
NOVA SCOTIA BLACK ON BLACK CHILD ABUSE
Chronicle Herald - June 13, 2015
HOME FOR COLORED CHILDREN
On the path to truth, justice
There are striking and hopeful things about the blueprint for the “Restorative Inquiry" into abuses at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children that the provincial government and former residents unveiled Friday.
First, this is not going look or behave like any past inquiry. It will be a series of frank truthsharing and, hopefully, healing, society-changing sessions, not a courtroom scenario of formal evidence and cross-examinations.
There won’t be a judge presiding, or a flock of learned counsel. A provincial or federal judge will be among the Council of Parties with overall responsibility for the inquiry. But this collective body will mostly be representatives of people and institutions who lived through the tragedy of abuse at the home, as victims or as stakeholders, and who now have a chance to turn that experience into a force for proper care of vulnerable children and for eradication of systemic racism.
The council will have two members from Voices, the group representing former Home residents. It will also have one reporting to the premier, one recommended by African Nova Scotian Affairs and one representing the Home for Colored Children.
It will have three members from the black community. Fittingly, for an inquiry into a terrible failure of child welfare, one will a youth or young adult. There will be two non-voting legal and restorative justice expert advisers.
The inquiry also breaks new ground in how it came to be. The premier gave negotiators a mandate to reach a solution satisfactory to the former residents. Voices worked with Dalhousie restorative justice expert Jennifer Llewellyn to design a collaborative process in which victims would not feel revictimized in telling their stories and in which government, police, Home and child-welfare officials could be willing, engaged participants (though the inquiry does have subpoena powers).
Voices spokesman Tony Smith, a former Home resident, told our editorial board the design team has been talking with victims and stakeholders for months to ensure they understand the inquiry is focused on avoiding further harm and giving everyone an opportunity to contribute. For example: “If you’re the Children’s Aid Society or Community Services, and you feel there are certain policies that may have failed, how can you bring that to the table so we can join together in partnership?"
Ms. Llewellyn says this outreach has already made it easier to win support for a restorative model. “People are craving the opportunity to be engaged in authentic ways that allow them to come to these processes with integrity and be able to make a difference." Figuring out from the start how parties can work constructively together is the key, she believes, to having recommendations and actions implemented.
There will be skepticism about whether such ambitious idealism will work. But the long failure to deal with this tragedy of racism and suffering children cries out for an effort that stretches our collective abilities and doesn’t shrink from trying a harder approach for better results.
Tony Smith says it best: “We’re not looking for blame. We’re not looking to attack anybody. We’re not going after anyone. We just want to find out the truth, what happened and why it happened and what we can do to learn from this experience."
--------------------------
June 5- 2015
CULTURAL GENOCIDE- CANADA, USA, AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, ASIAS, AFRICAS.... United Nations needs 2 step up here 4 healing as well.... am proud of how Canada is stepping up- Idle No More Canadians... we will Idle No More...
CANADIANS ARE WATCHING.... and it's time politicians and First Peoples make this work-it's time VIDEO
IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS..... from the everyday Canadians-Truth and Reconciliation Report | Rex Murphy Point of View: "This should be not an election issue, but the election issue," says Rex.
http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/Shows/The%20National/About%20the%20Show/Rex%20Murphy/ID/2668800357/
IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS... Elder Wisdom
----------------
June 3, 2015
JUNE 3- 2015- NDP HOLLYWOOD CRAP ... has ruined what should be historical commemoration and renewal of honour of our First Peoples of Canada.... and they ruined it.... ask the real First People- Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia
--------------------
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
The West’s intellectual suicide
Re: “Would-be holy warriors gather from around the globe” (May 23). In trying to come to grips with the reason why so many Western youth are joining ISIS to fight for the jihad, we would do well to consider the role played by cultural Marxism.
Cultural Marxism advocates the destructive criticism of Western culture including Christianity, capitalism, the family, patriarchy, sexual restraint, patriotism and nationalism. This philosophy is now overwhelmingly held by the Western cultural elite and has deep roots in the humanities departments of Western universities and in the media.
Our cultural elite relentlessly repeats over and over a long list of alleged Western evils: racism, the rape of the Earth by money-grubbing capitalists, sexism, colonialism, homophobia, xenophobia and religious bigotry (applied only to Christianity) and so on. By enforcing political correctness and discouraging genuine independent thought, the elite peddles a one-sided agenda of destructive pessimism about Western culture. Young people growing up in this anti-Western intellectual climate are taught to hate their culture and so it is little wonder that so many of them have made the trip to the Middle East to “find their place in the world” by fighting for the West’s destruction.
Peter Martyn, Tatamagouche
Chopping for shopping
“Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches or its romance.” — Theodore Roosevelt
Why "destory" in the URL? Well, because the purpose of this site is to
de-story, to deconstruct, the nefarious anti-Western ideology of
Cultural Marxism.
Cultural Marxism has been dubbed "the greatest cancer in the Western world" but few even know what it is.
Definition of Cultural Marxism:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”. Nonetheless, Cultural Marxists support the race-based identity politics of non-whites. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology. Critics of Cultural Marxism have maintained that Cultural Marxists intend to commit genocide against white people through mass non-white immigration, assimilation, transracial adoption and miscegenation.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Israel Ehrenberg (aka Ashley Montagu), Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Concepts to oppose Cultural Marxism:
Genophilia: The love of one's own race. A natural instinct that Cultural Marxists want to deny (at least for whites).
Identitarian Religion: An older form of religion that stresses ancestral obligations. Adamantly opposed by Christian Cultural Marxists (at least for whites). Throughout nearly all human history, identitarian religion (aka, ethno-religion), has been the norm.
Leukophobia: The irrational fear of whites organizing racially.
Nation: The very word 'nation' (from Latin 'nasci') implies link by blood. The traditional (non-Marxist) understanding of nation implies racial homogeneity. (Until very recently Europe has always been racially homogenous and USA, in 1960 census, was 90% white.)
Notable Quotes:
"The very essence of Cultural Marxism is the support of mass immigration / open borders."
"The end goal of Cultural Marxists is white genocide."
"Political correctness is Cultural Marxism."
"Cultural Marxists have taken over the institutions of the media, education, mainstream Christianity (conservative and liberal), law, and finance. Their goal is the annihilation of Western Civilization in general and white people in particular."
Further Reading:
Critiques from a secular perspective:
Kerry Bolton: "Revolution from Above"
Steven A Camarota: "74.7% of Mexican immigrants use some form of welfare in the USA" and "Legal and Illegal Immigration Driving Down American Wages"
Thomas Carter: "What Race Are Hispanics?"
Alfred Clark: "95% of white Americans have no African ancestry"
Gregory Cochran: "Zones of Thought"
Jason Collins: "Immigration Externalities"
F. Roger Devlin: "Immigration and Human Nature: A comprehensive diagnosis of our current insanity"
Documentary: The Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism, Pt. I & Pt. II
Peter Dodds: “International Adoption: In Whose Best Interest?”
Economy in Crisis: "Karl Marx supported free trade"
A.J. Fisher: "Problems with Mixed-Race Families, Marriages, Relationships and Adoptions"
Fjordman: "When Treason Becomes The Norm: Why The Proposition Nation Is Our Primary Enemy"
Free Congress Foundation: History of Political Correctness & Cultural Marxism
Génération Identitaire: Déclaration de guerre (Declaration of War)
Paul Gottfried: Strange Death of Marxism and "Yes Virginia, There Is A 'Cultural Marxism'"
Tim Haydon: "Cultural Marxist Terror in Academia"
Human BioDiversity: A Dictionary
Kathryn Joyce: "The Evangelical Orphan Scam"
William Lind: "The Origins of Political Correctness"
Kevin MacDonald: "Cultural Marxism & Immigration," "Immigration And The Unmentionable Question Of Ethnic Interests," and "The Boasian School of Anthropology"
Helmuth Nyborg: "The decay of Western civilization: Double relaxed Darwinian Selection"
Justin Raimondo: "Trotsky, Strauss and the Neocons"
Edwin Rubenstein: "Legal Immigration - The Bigger Problem"
Phillipe Rushton: "Ethnic nationalism, evolutionary psychology and Genetic Similarity Theory"
Phillipe Rushton: "Shared Genes: The Evolution of Ethnonationalism"
Science Direct: "Modern genetics proves race is real and important"
Science Direct: "Cultural Marxists Declare War Against Darwinism"
Smash Cultural Marxism: "An Introduction to Cultural Marxism"
Steve Sailer: "Where Dawkins Fears To Tread: Ethnic Nepotism And The Reality Of Race"
Steve Sailer: "How Diversity Destroys Social Trust"
Frank Salter: "Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests: Is It Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?"
Frank Salter: "Misunderstandings of Kin Selection and the Delay in Quantifying Ethnic Kinship"
Frank Salter: "The War Against Human Nature: Race and the Nation in the Media"
Stephen J. Sniegoski: "Trotsky and Neoconservatism"
Jared Taylor: "Pathological Altruism" and “Towards a World Brotherhood of Europeans”
Nancy Turner: "Key Characteristics of White Trash"
Western Spring: “The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan – The genocide of the Peoples of Europe”
Critiques from a religious perspective:
Christian:
West & Christ: "A Defense of Pro-Western Christianity"
West & Christ: "What is Christian Cultural Marxism?"
NeoPagan:
Stephen McNallen: "Megagenetics - Pt. I" [Pt. II]
Dominique Venner: “They’re All Rotten!”
------------------------
FACTS- FACTS-FACTS
-------------------
BLOGGED: WORDPRESS
‘A long journey’ to Home inquiry
Ex-residents hail news of restorative process
MICHAEL GORMAN MARY ELLEN MACINTYRE STAFF REPORTERS
newsroom@herald.ca @chronicleherald
A photograph flashed on the screen behind a speaker at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Upper Hammonds Plains on Friday afternoon.
It showed small, dark-eyed and chubby-cheeked children, their innocence and vulnerability speaking to the very reason everyone was gathered.
It was shown at the beginning of a video featuring Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil apologizing last October on behalf of the province to the children abused at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children.
Literally or figuratively, many in the room saw themselves in that photograph — frightened, hungry and separated from anyone who ever loved them.
“I was raised at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children from five to 12 years of age," said one man who asked for anonymity.
“Seven years of sadness and uncertainty."
The event was held to announce a restorative inquiry process into the decades of systemic abuse of children who resided at the Dartmouth-area orphanage, which opened in 1921 and closed as an orphanage in the late 1980s.
On the heels of last year’s apology and a $29-million classaction settlement, McNeil made good Friday on his promise for an inquiry. “This will be very different than any other public inquiry in Nova Scotia," McNeil told the gathering.
R atherthaninacourtroom,it will be held in various locations at different times over a period of up to 30 months, he said.
One question McNeil said he wants an answer to is, “How did we as a society allow children to be placed in harm’s way?"
Former resident Tony Smith, whose story of abuse at the home spurred much of the legal action, welcomed Friday’s announcement.
“It’s been a long journey to get here," he said.
The inquiry will begin in October and will mark the next major step forward. Smith said there were times when he doubted it would be possible for the terms of reference to be hammered out, given the number of groups involved.
People were able to come to an agreement, however, based on the idea of doing no more harm.
“We didn’t want a traditional public inquiry," he said. “It took some time for (participants) to make the connection as to what we (wanted) and when we did start to make that connection, it was the aha moment and everybody wants to get on board.
“What we’re trying to do is we’re not looking for blame, we’re not looking to attack anybody, we’re not going after anyone. We just want to find out the truth, what happened and why it happened, and what we can do to learn from this experience."
That means there isn’t a set number of meetings. People will come together when and where they need to share their stories and listen. There won’t be a presiding judge or lawyers crossexamining witnesses, but rather a sharing circle where people are supported and made to feel safe to share their perspectives and experiences.
Halifax Mayor Mike Savage told the gathering Nova Scotia has a proud past, rich in history, but that pride should never be used to hide “the ugly truth of racism," he said.
When Sylvia Parris stood at the podium, she told the group her heart was overflowing.
“The original foundation was one of love, hope, compassion and perseverance," said Parris, chairwoman of the board for the Home for Colored Children, which still operates as a place where troubled youth can seek help.
“We apologize to former residents who suffered harm — many of us are descendants of the residents," she said.
“We want to be part of the journey of healing and rebirth."
With those words, Smith joined Parris at the podium, saying a lot of residents never thought they would get an apology from the home.
“That was the missing piece: an apology from Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children," he said, smiling.
His words were followed by a standing ovation. Someone began a verse of We Shall Overcome and everyone joined in.
With a healing circle of lit candles in front of him, Tony Smith offers a statement from the former residents of the Home for Colored Children at Emmanuel Baptist Church Friday. The event was held to announce a restorative inquiry into systemic abuse at the facility. ERIC WYNNE • Staff
Nova Scotia Home For Coloured Children- Opened 1921
NOVA SCOTIA BLACK ON BLACK CHILD ABUSE
Chronicle Herald - June 13, 2015
HOME FOR COLORED CHILDREN
On the path to truth, justice
There are striking and hopeful things about the blueprint for the “Restorative Inquiry" into abuses at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children that the provincial government and former residents unveiled Friday.
First, this is not going look or behave like any past inquiry. It will be a series of frank truthsharing and, hopefully, healing, society-changing sessions, not a courtroom scenario of formal evidence and cross-examinations.
There won’t be a judge presiding, or a flock of learned counsel. A provincial or federal judge will be among the Council of Parties with overall responsibility for the inquiry. But this collective body will mostly be representatives of people and institutions who lived through the tragedy of abuse at the home, as victims or as stakeholders, and who now have a chance to turn that experience into a force for proper care of vulnerable children and for eradication of systemic racism.
The council will have two members from Voices, the group representing former Home residents. It will also have one reporting to the premier, one recommended by African Nova Scotian Affairs and one representing the Home for Colored Children.
It will have three members from the black community. Fittingly, for an inquiry into a terrible failure of child welfare, one will a youth or young adult. There will be two non-voting legal and restorative justice expert advisers.
The inquiry also breaks new ground in how it came to be. The premier gave negotiators a mandate to reach a solution satisfactory to the former residents. Voices worked with Dalhousie restorative justice expert Jennifer Llewellyn to design a collaborative process in which victims would not feel revictimized in telling their stories and in which government, police, Home and child-welfare officials could be willing, engaged participants (though the inquiry does have subpoena powers).
Voices spokesman Tony Smith, a former Home resident, told our editorial board the design team has been talking with victims and stakeholders for months to ensure they understand the inquiry is focused on avoiding further harm and giving everyone an opportunity to contribute. For example: “If you’re the Children’s Aid Society or Community Services, and you feel there are certain policies that may have failed, how can you bring that to the table so we can join together in partnership?"
Ms. Llewellyn says this outreach has already made it easier to win support for a restorative model. “People are craving the opportunity to be engaged in authentic ways that allow them to come to these processes with integrity and be able to make a difference." Figuring out from the start how parties can work constructively together is the key, she believes, to having recommendations and actions implemented.
There will be skepticism about whether such ambitious idealism will work. But the long failure to deal with this tragedy of racism and suffering children cries out for an effort that stretches our collective abilities and doesn’t shrink from trying a harder approach for better results.
Tony Smith says it best: “We’re not looking for blame. We’re not looking to attack anybody. We’re not going after anyone. We just want to find out the truth, what happened and why it happened and what we can do to learn from this experience."
--------------------------
June 5- 2015
CULTURAL GENOCIDE- CANADA, USA, AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, ASIAS, AFRICAS.... United Nations needs 2 step up here 4 healing as well.... am proud of how Canada is stepping up- Idle No More Canadians... we will Idle No More...
CANADIANS ARE WATCHING.... and it's time politicians and First Peoples make this work-it's time VIDEO
IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS..... from the everyday Canadians-Truth and Reconciliation Report | Rex Murphy Point of View: "This should be not an election issue, but the election issue," says Rex.
http://www.cbc.ca/player/Shows/Shows/The%20National/About%20the%20Show/Rex%20Murphy/ID/2668800357/
IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS... Elder Wisdom
----------------
June 3, 2015
JUNE 3- 2015- NDP HOLLYWOOD CRAP ... has ruined what should be historical commemoration and renewal of honour of our First Peoples of Canada.... and they ruined it.... ask the real First People- Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia
N.S. school survivors unimpressed with report
FRANCIS CAMPBELL TRURO BUREAU
Last Updated June 3, 2015 - 6:57am
Last Updated June 3, 2015 - 6:57am
Amando Lucio dances in front of a small crowd
gathered at the Sipekne’katik Multipurpose Centre on Tuesday. (FRANCIS CAMPBELL
/ Truro Bureau)
INDIAN BROOK – Debbie Paul wasn’t
in a conciliatory mood.
“It’s just another check-off in
the book,” Paul said Tuesday as she and more than 40 others listened to the recommendations
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission at the Sipekne’katik
Multipurpose Centre in Indian Brook.
“There is no time for the truth,
the hurt to come out.”
Paul spent five years at the
Shubenacadie Residential School, less than five kilometres away from Indian
Brook on the Indian School Road. She called the television broadcast too
orchestrated, too slick.
“Everything is timed right down
to the second, the speeches and everything,” Paul said. “That’s not the way
aboriginal people are. I’m not made that way, my spirit is not made that way.”
That spirit probably served as a
lifeline for Paul and other students at the residential school that accepted
its first children on Feb. 5, 1930, and closed for good on June 22, 1967.
“You never got any love in that
place, never any affection,” said Paul, who, at 12 years old was presented with
a watch and new wardrobe on her way out the door as the school’s last resident.
They were the first new clothes she got while living there.
Paul said her mother had four
children before she married. When she did marry, the step-father promptly
announced that “he didn’t want her bastards.”
Paul and her younger sister went
to the residential school, an older sister was sent to live with relatives in
Eskasoni and another sister went to live with a family in Indian Brook.
She said many of the kids she
knew at the school were swooped away from family to “get schooling and the
Indianness beaten out of them.”
Paul said beatings were pretty
regular at the school run by Catholic priests and nuns. She said even when they
went to church, if they fidgeted, they would have to stand in line for a
beating when they got back to the school.
Her sister, she said, was beaten
almost every day because she never learned to live by the “rules and the
unspoken rules.
“You were not allowed to stand on
a bench to look out the window, even at the first snowfall.”
Paul said she was sent to live in
Boston after she left the residential school and has tried unsuccessfully to
put the school years of physical, mental and sexual abuse behind her, often
times burying herself in the bottom of a bottle.
When the Truth and Reconciliation
hearing was held in Millbrook First Nation, she went to tell her story.
“There was a white lawyer, a
white judge. Everybody was white but me. They talked to me all day. It was a
hurtful process. I am insignificant. I don’t think they heard me. It was their
reconciliation, not mine.”
Her friend, Marcella Hillier, 61,
spent three years at the residential school. The two buddies sat together
eating lunch after watching the performance of Eastern Eagle drum band and a
pair of dancers, reunited in the pain of the residential school experience and
what they consider the inadequacy of the truth and reconciliation report.
“Not really,” Hillier said of
feeling any sense of reconciliation.
“Her and I are getting pissed off
listening to this,” Paul said.
Nearby in her Indian Brook home,
92-year-old Roseanne Nevin was watching the broadcast with her daughters,
Shirley-Anne Taylor and Sheila Nevin.
Originally from New Brunswick,
Nevin was placed in the residential school in 1934, just four years after it
opened.
“One of the things she said is
that every time there is something like this, they always forget about me,”
Taylor said of her mother, one of an estimated 1,000 children who lived at the
school in its 37-year history. “That makes me sad.
“They were talking about
childcare, murdered and missing women and all of these different
recommendations but they never once talked about living conditions for elders
or homecare for elders,” she said.
“That kind of bothered her
because I know that she said she never wants to go into an old-aged home. For
her, it’s like going back into the institution because it brings back too many
memories of when she was in the residential school, how she was treated in
there.”
The daughters explained that
their mother, the oldest resident of Indian Brook and likely the oldest
residential school survivor in the province, has dementia and has talked in
recent years about how lucky she was to have the residential school, a roof
over her head for her four-year stay there. But the daughters remember the
stories she told long ago about abuse at the school, painful stories that she
has since blocked from memory, including being forced by caretaker nuns to eat
food she had regurgitated.
“There isn’t (a lot of
reconciliation) and that’s really unfortunate,” Sheila Nevin said.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1290591-n.s.-school-survivors-unimpressed-with-report--------------------
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
The West’s intellectual suicide
Re: “Would-be holy warriors gather from around the globe” (May 23). In trying to come to grips with the reason why so many Western youth are joining ISIS to fight for the jihad, we would do well to consider the role played by cultural Marxism.
Cultural Marxism advocates the destructive criticism of Western culture including Christianity, capitalism, the family, patriarchy, sexual restraint, patriotism and nationalism. This philosophy is now overwhelmingly held by the Western cultural elite and has deep roots in the humanities departments of Western universities and in the media.
Our cultural elite relentlessly repeats over and over a long list of alleged Western evils: racism, the rape of the Earth by money-grubbing capitalists, sexism, colonialism, homophobia, xenophobia and religious bigotry (applied only to Christianity) and so on. By enforcing political correctness and discouraging genuine independent thought, the elite peddles a one-sided agenda of destructive pessimism about Western culture. Young people growing up in this anti-Western intellectual climate are taught to hate their culture and so it is little wonder that so many of them have made the trip to the Middle East to “find their place in the world” by fighting for the West’s destruction.
Peter Martyn, Tatamagouche
Chopping for shopping
“Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches or its romance.” — Theodore Roosevelt
----------
CANADA MILITARY NEWS: Idle No More- Cultural Genocide??? - it's time First Peoples Governed themselves and fixed their own problems on their lands and among their peoples- it's just right. UNITED NATIONS HAS BETRAYED ALL FIRST PEOPLES- CULTURAL GENOCIDE FALLS 2 UNITED NATIONS –LEAGUE OF NATIONS / ABORIGINALS OF THIS PLANET SINCE INCEPTION- #1BRising /Come on Canada all other nations have betrayed First Peoples - let's get this done and prosper and show the youngest nation on this planet is the best/ and f**k all the politicians cause not a one ever did right by First Nations Peoples Canada...not a one imho/
---------------
WORDPRESS:
CANADA MILITARY NEWS: Media's Cultural Marxism is Destroying our Canada vs NDP Hollywood CBC version of Cultural Genocide in Canada of First Peoples??? UNITED NATIONS WHERE HAVE U BEEN 4 INDIGENIOUS PEOPLES ON THE PLANET... USA Slaughtered millions of Indians whilst Canada's Queen protected her 'Red' Children amongs horrific poverty of all Canadians /NDP CBC's Hollywood Roadshow of Cultural Genocide betrayed the elderly and proud First People who expected respect, honour and finally the right 2 own their destiny
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2015/06/canada-military-news-idle-no-more-its.html
MEDIA'S CULTURAL MARXISM IS DESTROYING CANADA
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
What is Cultural Marxism?
Cultural Marxism has been dubbed "the greatest cancer in the Western world" but few even know what it is.
Definition of Cultural Marxism:
Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”. Nonetheless, Cultural Marxists support the race-based identity politics of non-whites. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology. Critics of Cultural Marxism have maintained that Cultural Marxists intend to commit genocide against white people through mass non-white immigration, assimilation, transracial adoption and miscegenation.
Notable Cultural Marxists: Antonio Gramsci, Horkheimer and Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Franz Boas, Israel Ehrenberg (aka Ashley Montagu), Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould, and Others
Concepts to oppose Cultural Marxism:
Genophilia: The love of one's own race. A natural instinct that Cultural Marxists want to deny (at least for whites).
Identitarian Religion: An older form of religion that stresses ancestral obligations. Adamantly opposed by Christian Cultural Marxists (at least for whites). Throughout nearly all human history, identitarian religion (aka, ethno-religion), has been the norm.
Leukophobia: The irrational fear of whites organizing racially.
Nation: The very word 'nation' (from Latin 'nasci') implies link by blood. The traditional (non-Marxist) understanding of nation implies racial homogeneity. (Until very recently Europe has always been racially homogenous and USA, in 1960 census, was 90% white.)
Notable Quotes:
"The very essence of Cultural Marxism is the support of mass immigration / open borders."
"The end goal of Cultural Marxists is white genocide."
"Political correctness is Cultural Marxism."
"Cultural Marxists have taken over the institutions of the media, education, mainstream Christianity (conservative and liberal), law, and finance. Their goal is the annihilation of Western Civilization in general and white people in particular."
Further Reading:
Critiques from a secular perspective:
Kerry Bolton: "Revolution from Above"
Steven A Camarota: "74.7% of Mexican immigrants use some form of welfare in the USA" and "Legal and Illegal Immigration Driving Down American Wages"
Thomas Carter: "What Race Are Hispanics?"
Alfred Clark: "95% of white Americans have no African ancestry"
Gregory Cochran: "Zones of Thought"
Jason Collins: "Immigration Externalities"
F. Roger Devlin: "Immigration and Human Nature: A comprehensive diagnosis of our current insanity"
Documentary: The Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism, Pt. I & Pt. II
Peter Dodds: “International Adoption: In Whose Best Interest?”
Economy in Crisis: "Karl Marx supported free trade"
A.J. Fisher: "Problems with Mixed-Race Families, Marriages, Relationships and Adoptions"
Fjordman: "When Treason Becomes The Norm: Why The Proposition Nation Is Our Primary Enemy"
Free Congress Foundation: History of Political Correctness & Cultural Marxism
Génération Identitaire: Déclaration de guerre (Declaration of War)
Paul Gottfried: Strange Death of Marxism and "Yes Virginia, There Is A 'Cultural Marxism'"
Tim Haydon: "Cultural Marxist Terror in Academia"
Human BioDiversity: A Dictionary
Kathryn Joyce: "The Evangelical Orphan Scam"
William Lind: "The Origins of Political Correctness"
Kevin MacDonald: "Cultural Marxism & Immigration," "Immigration And The Unmentionable Question Of Ethnic Interests," and "The Boasian School of Anthropology"
Helmuth Nyborg: "The decay of Western civilization: Double relaxed Darwinian Selection"
Justin Raimondo: "Trotsky, Strauss and the Neocons"
Edwin Rubenstein: "Legal Immigration - The Bigger Problem"
Phillipe Rushton: "Ethnic nationalism, evolutionary psychology and Genetic Similarity Theory"
Phillipe Rushton: "Shared Genes: The Evolution of Ethnonationalism"
Science Direct: "Modern genetics proves race is real and important"
Science Direct: "Cultural Marxists Declare War Against Darwinism"
Smash Cultural Marxism: "An Introduction to Cultural Marxism"
Steve Sailer: "Where Dawkins Fears To Tread: Ethnic Nepotism And The Reality Of Race"
Steve Sailer: "How Diversity Destroys Social Trust"
Frank Salter: "Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests: Is It Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?"
Frank Salter: "Misunderstandings of Kin Selection and the Delay in Quantifying Ethnic Kinship"
Frank Salter: "The War Against Human Nature: Race and the Nation in the Media"
Stephen J. Sniegoski: "Trotsky and Neoconservatism"
Jared Taylor: "Pathological Altruism" and “Towards a World Brotherhood of Europeans”
Nancy Turner: "Key Characteristics of White Trash"
Western Spring: “The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan – The genocide of the Peoples of Europe”
Critiques from a religious perspective:
Christian:
West & Christ: "A Defense of Pro-Western Christianity"
West & Christ: "What is Christian Cultural Marxism?"
NeoPagan:
Stephen McNallen: "Megagenetics - Pt. I" [Pt. II]
Dominique Venner: “They’re All Rotten!”
------------------------
FACTS- FACTS-FACTS
-------------------
BLOGGED: WORDPRESS
IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS-
#1BRising – Global Abuse of Aboriginals First Peoples- United
Nations Shame
BLOGSPOT: BLOGSPOT
IDLE NO MORE CANADA- One Billion Rising- Breaking the Chains- Global abuse of Aboriginals First Peoples- Canada/USA/Australia/New Zealand/Latin America – UNITED NATIONS SHAME- all politicans have betrayed Canadians 10,000 year peoples
From Chief Plenty Coups, Crow
“The ground on which we stand is sacred ground. It is the blood of our ancestors.”
https://nova0000scotia.wordpress.com/2015/05/31/idle-no-more-canadians-1brising-global-abuse-of-aboriginals-first-peoples-united-nations-shame/
------------------
IN OUR CANADA- -Women equal men by Law and Same gender love has been legal since 1969 and Disabilities are Abilities in Disguise - and our environment, troops and kids f**king matter
ALL political parties of Canada have failed our First Peoples... don't u dare blame just one party... u are all 2 blame... you all could change the world of our First Peoples in a minute... if u work 4 the people... and United Nations is a disgrace 2 all the world Indigenous Peoples women and children and we all know it..
--------------
WORDPRESS WITH BLOGSPOT:
Canada-USA-Mexico-Australia-New
Zealand- Suicides-Residential Schools Assimilation IDLE NO MORE CANADIANS
USA Pupils at Carlisle Native American school, Pennsylvania – 1900 Carlisle_pupils
PHOTO:
PHOTO:
BLOGGED: BLOGGED BLOGGED- BLOGGED
IDLE NO MORE CANADA-USA-MEXICO-AUSTRALIA-NEW ZEALAND- Suicides- Residential (boarding) School Assimilation- 1800s- 1900s- here’s the facts- our First People Matter, 10,000 years
-------------------
BEST ARTICLE- June 2 2015
From self-government to a Pope’s apology: 100+ ways to fix Canada’s relationship with aboriginal peoples
David Akin - June 2nd, 2015
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission lists more than 100 things that can be done to repair the relationship between Canada’s indigenous and non-indigenous peoples.
Chief among them: Give Canada’s aboriginal population self-government.
Many of the recommendations would require hundreds of millions of dollars in new spending. Some recommendations are symbolic. And many would change Canada’s justice, education, and health systems.
The recommendations are a response to what the commission concluded was a “cultural genocide” perpetrated for more than a century beginning at the country’s creation on Canada’s First Nations, Inuit, and Metis people. The chief tool of this cultural genocide was the residential schools policy.
One common thread among the recommendations is that all Canadians need to learn the history of residential schools.
So, for example, the commission believes no one should graduate from a Canadian journalism school without studying the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, treaties and aboriginal rights, indigenous law, Crown-aboriginal relations, and the history of residential schools.
Similarly, every civil servant working for a federal, provincial, territorial, or municipal government should received education about all those issues.
The oath of citizenship for all newcomers should be updated to include a vow that they will “faithfully observer” treaties with Canada’s indigenous peoples.
And, so that future generations of Canadians do not forget, the commission recommends a statutory holiday ought to be established — a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation – that would honour survivors and that monuments be erected in the national capital and in each provincial capital.
None of the recommendations, though, speak to improving governance, accountability or transparency for the hundreds of thousands of aboriginal Canadians who live in First Nations communities.
Some of the recommendations the commissioners make are straightforward, such as the repeal of Section 43 of the Criminal Code, the section that allows teachers (and parents) to use reasonable force to correct a pupil (or a child).
Some recommendations would be more complex to implement because of their cost and the involvement of different levels of government. There is a recommendation, for example, to close the gap between the amount spent per child on education on reservers and the amount spent per child off-reserve.
Some recommendations challenge the orthodoxy of the governing Conservative government. For example, the commissioners would prefer judges be given the discretion to depart from mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes is a core Conservative policy platform.
Other recommendations, if implemented, could challenge some fundamental legal concepts Europeans have used to justify their activities in North America since arriving here in the 16th century.
The Commission calls on Canada to issue a Royal Proclamation of Reconciliation, a document that would build on the Royal Proclamation of 1763, that would make aboriginal peoples “full partners” in Confederation along with Canada’s founding French and English peoples.
And Canada should also adopt and implement the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. While the Harper government has, over the years, moved to endorse the “aspirational” principles of that declaration, various cabinet ministers have said that it cannot be implemented because much of it would violate Canada’s constitution and charter of rights and freedoms.
Nonetheless, the commissioners call on federal, provincial, and municipal to “repudiate concepts used to justify European sovereignty over indigenous peoples and lands.” And the commission says that repudiation must be done not just by prime ministers and premiers, it must be done also by priests, prelates, pastors and — perhaps even — a pontiff.
Indeed, the commission calls specifically on the Pope to issue an apology to residential school survivors “for the Roman Catholic Church’s role in the spiritual, cultural, emotional, physical and sexual abuse … in Catholic-run residental schools.” The commissioners expect Francis to deliver that apology in person in Canada within the year.
And for those Catholic and other denominational schools that receive public funds, the commissioners ask that those schools include “comparative religious studies” in the curriculum which “must include segment on aboriginal spiritual beliefs.”
Chief among them: Give Canada’s aboriginal population self-government.
Many of the recommendations would require hundreds of millions of dollars in new spending. Some recommendations are symbolic. And many would change Canada’s justice, education, and health systems.
The recommendations are a response to what the commission concluded was a “cultural genocide” perpetrated for more than a century beginning at the country’s creation on Canada’s First Nations, Inuit, and Metis people. The chief tool of this cultural genocide was the residential schools policy.
One common thread among the recommendations is that all Canadians need to learn the history of residential schools.
So, for example, the commission believes no one should graduate from a Canadian journalism school without studying the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, treaties and aboriginal rights, indigenous law, Crown-aboriginal relations, and the history of residential schools.
Similarly, every civil servant working for a federal, provincial, territorial, or municipal government should received education about all those issues.
The oath of citizenship for all newcomers should be updated to include a vow that they will “faithfully observer” treaties with Canada’s indigenous peoples.
And, so that future generations of Canadians do not forget, the commission recommends a statutory holiday ought to be established — a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation – that would honour survivors and that monuments be erected in the national capital and in each provincial capital.
None of the recommendations, though, speak to improving governance, accountability or transparency for the hundreds of thousands of aboriginal Canadians who live in First Nations communities.
Some of the recommendations the commissioners make are straightforward, such as the repeal of Section 43 of the Criminal Code, the section that allows teachers (and parents) to use reasonable force to correct a pupil (or a child).
Some recommendations would be more complex to implement because of their cost and the involvement of different levels of government. There is a recommendation, for example, to close the gap between the amount spent per child on education on reservers and the amount spent per child off-reserve.
Some recommendations challenge the orthodoxy of the governing Conservative government. For example, the commissioners would prefer judges be given the discretion to depart from mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes is a core Conservative policy platform.
Other recommendations, if implemented, could challenge some fundamental legal concepts Europeans have used to justify their activities in North America since arriving here in the 16th century.
The Commission calls on Canada to issue a Royal Proclamation of Reconciliation, a document that would build on the Royal Proclamation of 1763, that would make aboriginal peoples “full partners” in Confederation along with Canada’s founding French and English peoples.
And Canada should also adopt and implement the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. While the Harper government has, over the years, moved to endorse the “aspirational” principles of that declaration, various cabinet ministers have said that it cannot be implemented because much of it would violate Canada’s constitution and charter of rights and freedoms.
Nonetheless, the commissioners call on federal, provincial, and municipal to “repudiate concepts used to justify European sovereignty over indigenous peoples and lands.” And the commission says that repudiation must be done not just by prime ministers and premiers, it must be done also by priests, prelates, pastors and — perhaps even — a pontiff.
Indeed, the commission calls specifically on the Pope to issue an apology to residential school survivors “for the Roman Catholic Church’s role in the spiritual, cultural, emotional, physical and sexual abuse … in Catholic-run residental schools.” The commissioners expect Francis to deliver that apology in person in Canada within the year.
And for those Catholic and other denominational schools that receive public funds, the commissioners ask that those schools include “comparative religious studies” in the curriculum which “must include segment on aboriginal spiritual beliefs.”
And while the Conservatives have resisted all calls for a national inquiry into murdered and missing aboriginal women — citing work the RCMP is already doing on that issue — the commissioners believe such an inquiry is an important part of the reconciliation process.
Other recommendations would create some new bureaucracies for reporting and monitoring on aboriginal society in Canada. The commission believes that, just as Parliament has a commissioner of official languages, there should be a commissioner of aboriginal languages.
Similarly, the commission believes a National Council for Reconciliation ought to be established, complete with monitors, evaluators, and reporters to track how well the reconciliation process is progressing, a process which the commission says could take generations to work out.
A National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation should get at least $10 million over the next seven years. And money should be set aside for local communities that engage in research associated with reconciliation.
The Canada Council for the Arts should be told that it is “a funding priority” to creat works that “contributor to the reconciliation process.” And the CBC,too, should get more money specifically for aboriginal programming.
Similarly, those involved in coaching or training sports teams should get special “culturally relevant” aboriginal training and new programs ought to be established specifically for the elite aboriginal athlete.
And while most survivors of the residential school system are entitled to some payments, the commission says the government could do one more thing: Waive any fees for survivors to reclaim their own family names from those imposed on them when they were sent to a residential school.
---------------
Aboriginal Curriculum Integration Project
Socials
The Apology to the Stolen Generations of Australia:
Relating to Canada's Aboriginal Experience
Teacher Note: Depending on the length of class time available, this lesson may take 2-3 sessions to complete.Learning Outcomes
Students will:
- demonstrate knowledge of the challenges faced by Aboriginal people in Canada during the 20th century and their responses, with reference to residential schools.
- Watch a movie discussing Australia's Stolen Generation and the removal of Aboriginal children from their homes by government authorities. Students complete a Four Quad organizer while viewing video.
- Complete a Jigsaw Instructional Activity on three articles discussing how Canadian government policy and legislation have impacted Canadian Aboriginal populations.
- Discuss key vocabulary.
- Compare and contrast the experiences of Canada's and Australia's Aboriginal populations in response to government policy and action.
- Reflect on new understanding.
Goals:
- Students will understand the impact Australian government policy had on Australia's Aboriginal populations; leading to the Stolen Generation.
- Students will understand the impact Canadian government policy had on Canada's Aboriginal populations; specifically, the residential school system.
- Students will compare and contrast the Canadian Aboriginal residential school experience and the Australian Aboriginal Stolen Generation experience.
Students will create a Venn Diagram comparing and contrasting the Canadian Aboriginal residential school experience and the Australian Aboriginal Stolen Generation experience.
Activate Prior Knowledge:
Canada's Aboriginal populations have faced many challenges as a result of federal government policies and legislation that govern Aboriginal life in Canada. In fact, there are many other Aboriginal and indigenous populations throughout the world that have also faced challenges as a result of immigration into their traditional territories. One example is the Aboriginal population of Australia and what has become know as the Stolen Generation.
- "The Stolen Generations (also Stolen Generation and Stolen children) is a term used to describe those children of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent who were removed from their families by the Australian and State government agencies and church missions, under acts of their respective parliaments. The removals occurred in the period between approximately 1869 and 1969, although, in some places, children were still being taken in the 1970s." (www.wikipedia.org)
To increase student understanding of Australia's Stolen Generation, students watch the movieRabbit-Proof Fence (2002, Alliance Atlantis: 90 mins) and complete a Four Quad Organizer while viewing the video. Students should record any new vocabulary words, important events from the movie, important images and pictures, and any emotions or reflections they have while viewing the movie.
Reminder: It is important to stop throughout the video and give students (A/B partners) opportunity to talk or respond to the video.
(Note: Rabbit-Proof Fence may be available at your School District Resource Center. If not, it should be available at most video rental stores.)
Once students have finished watching and discussing Rabbit-Proof Fence, teachers print out and distribute a What's Important and Why fact sheet and information from the European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights website. In A/B partners, students read the information and record the important facts under each heading; discussing the reasons why the facts were important. Facts under the heading What is Being Done should be recorded on the back of the What's Important and Why sheet.
------------------
Predict and Question:
Once the students have finished viewing and discussing Rabbit-Proof Fence, students now think about the residential school experience for Aboriginals in Canada and consider the following questions:
What do the students already know about the residential school experience in Canada?
Is the Australian Aboriginal experience similar to Canada's Aboriginal experience?
What are the students wondering about residential schools?
PROCESS
To increase student understanding of policies and legislation affecting Canadian Aboriginal populations, teachers print off the following three articles:
(Reed, K., & Quinlan, D. (1999). Aboriginal Peoples: Building for the Future (p. 44-49). Toronto: Oxford University Press Canada.)
Students break into groups of three and teachers distribute the articles using a Jigsaw format. For more information on conducting a Jigsaw learning activity, please visit the following link on the Jigsaw Instructional Strategy.
(Note: Depending on the size of class, expert groups should be no larger than 4-5 students.)
TRANSFORM
Students now take the information learned in the previous sections and create a Venn Diagram comparing and contrasting the Canadian Aboriginal residential school experience and the Australian Aboriginal Stolen Generation experience. Students may work in A/B partners or work individually. The Venn Diagrams may be created either on large poster paper or using a graphics program on a computer. Once completed students/student partner groups present their findings to the class.
REFLECT
On the back of their graphic organizers, students write at least two new ideas or questions they have regarding the Aboriginal experience in Canada and Australia. How has their thinking changed?
Extend Learning or Next Lesson
Students view footage of the Australian Prime Minister's Apology to the Stolen Generations.Students complete a What's Important and Why organizer while viewing/listening to the apology and consider the following questions:- Why did the Prime Minister make a national apology in Parliament?
- What were the main reasons that led to this apology?
- What promises did the Prime Minister make to help alleviate the problems Australian Aboriginals face?
- Should Canada's Prime Minister make a similar apology in Canada's House of Commons?
Other suggestions to extend student learning include:
- Researching more about Austrialia's Stolen Generation
- Researching more about Canada's Aboriginal populations and the residential school experience.
- Viewing the Canadian produced movie Where the Spirit Lives (1991, Cineglobe)
----------------
USA
------------
BLOGGED- WORDPRESS-BLOGGED WORDPRESS
IDLE NO MORE
CANADA-Systemic Abuse of First Nations, Inuit, Metis, Non Status women and
girls must stop/ Our troops did not die/wounded Afghanistan 2 come home and see
our women and girls abused in Canada/First peoples and Canadians must work
2gether/CANADA we all must do better – serious reading not 4 lighthearted
BLOGGED:- BLOGSPOT BLOGSPOT BLOGSPOT
IDLE NO MORE CANADA- the systemic abuse of Aboriginal-First Nations, Inuit, Metis and Non-Status Peoples 10,000- WOMEN AND CHILDREN is horrific- from among the reservations- tribes -2 the very laws that refuse 2 protect Canada’s women and girls- FIX THIS CANADA BY ALL WORKING 2GETHER – WE MUST DO BETTER/ First Peoples elected leaders must STOP ABUSING $$$$$- while their people lie in severe poverty… Canadians are weary of this and so are the First Peoples /CANADA we all must do better – serious reading not 4 lighthearted
IDLE NO MORE CANADA- the systemic abuse of Aboriginal-First Nations, Inuit, Metis and Non-Status Peoples 10,000- WOMEN AND CHILDREN is horrific- from among the reservations- tribes -2 the very laws that refuse 2 protect Canada’s women and girls- FIX THIS CANADA BY ALL WORKING 2GETHER – WE MUST DO BETTER/ First Peoples elected leaders must STOP ABUSING $$$$$- while their people lie in severe poverty… Canadians are weary of this and so are the First Peoples /CANADA we all must do better – serious reading not 4 lighthearted
------------
Canada's indigenous schools
policy was 'cultural genocide', says report
Truth commission delivers
verdict on church-run residential institutions
Schools were one of Canadian
history’s ‘darkest and most troubling chapters’
Representatives of First Nations peoples take
part in a march in Ottawa on Saturday as the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission wrapped up its work.
.
Photograph: Ben
Powless/Demotix/Corbis
John Barber in Toronto
Tuesday 2 June 2015 17.58
BST Last modified on Tuesday 2 June 2015 21.44 BST
Canadian governments and
churches pursued a policy of “cultural genocide” against the country’s
aboriginal people throughout the 20th century, according to an investigation
into a long-suppressed history that saw 150,000 Native, or First Nations,
children forcibly removed from their families and incarcerated in residential
schools rife with abuse.
After seven years of
hearings, and testimony from thousands of witnesses, the country’s Truth and
Reconciliation Commission called on Tuesday for a new era of forgiveness and
understanding even as it exposed the cultural and personal devastation
inflicted by the residential schools policy in excruciating detail.
“These measures were part of
a coherent policy to eliminate Aboriginal people as distinct peoples and to
assimilate them into the Canadian mainstream against their will,” the
commission’s final report declares.
“The Canadian government
pursued this policy of cultural genocide because it wished to divest itself of
its legal and financial obligations to Aboriginal people and gain control over
their land and resources.”
Financed by the award from a
huge class action suit against the federal government, the project proceeded
despite the reluctance – and occasional interference – of the Conservative
government of the prime minister, Stephen Harper. It was a “difficult,
inspiring and painful journey”, according to the commission chair, Murray
Sinclair, a Manitoba judge whose parents and grandparents both survived
residential schools.
“The residential school
experience is clearly one of the darkest, most troubling chapters in our
collective history,” Sinclair told a news conference in Ottawa.
From the 19th century until
the 1970s, more than 150,000 aboriginal children were forced to attend
Christian schools to rid them of their native cultures and integrate them into
Canadian society.
Children inducted into
residential schools were forbidden from speaking their native languages and
subjected to routine physical abuse, inadequate nutrition and neglect. Sexual
abuse was common, according to the survivors who testified at commission
hearings throughout the country.
“They were stripped of their
self-respect and they were stripped of their identity,” Sinclair said.
More than 3,000 children
died and were often buried in unmarked graves without any identification or
notice to their parents. Death rates among indigenous children at residential
schools were higher than among Canadian soldiers in the second world war, the
report found. These were schools that often had no playgrounds but always had
graveyards, according to commissioner Marie Wilson.
“Parents … had their
children ripped out of their arms, taken to a distant and unknown place, never
to be seen again,” she said. “Buried in an unmarked grave, long ago forgotten
and overgrown. Think of that. Bear that. Imagine that.”
The report makes 94
recommendations to repair the resulting damage to First Nations society, which
is easily apparent throughout Canada. Native children are eight times more
likely than other Canadian children to be wards of child protection services,
according to Wilson. They are massively overrepresented in the country’s jails.
“We need reconciliation so
that broken families can become whole again,” she said, “and we need
reconciliation so that a broken country can become whole again.”
Many of the recommendations
in the report aim to repair cultural attitudes that remain unchanged from 100
years ago, including changes to educational curricula to promote “a broader,
less-Eurocentric vision of our country”, according to Wilson. The report also
calls for a national research program to advance the understanding of
reconciliation itself.
“The words of the apologies
will ring hollow if Canada’s actions fail to produce the necessary social,
cultural, political and economic change that benefits aboriginal peoples and
all Canadians,” the report said.
Aboriginal affairs minister
Bernard Valcourt responded to the report by promising the government’s
continuing “commitment to joining Canada’s aboriginal peoples on a journey to
healing and reconciliation”.
Although Harper has balked
at using the word “genocide” to describe the experience, his 2008 apology to
victims of the residential schools policy set the stage for the settlement that
financed the commission.
“The burden of this
experience has been on your shoulders for far too long,” Valcourt told Monday’s
conference, to warm applause from a large, mainly Native audience. “The burden
is properly ours, as a government and as a country.”
The commissioners
recommended that Native spiritual beliefs be included in the religious
curriculum in government-supported Catholic schools, and they called on Pope
Francis to issue an apology within one year for the church’s role in the “spiritual,
cultural, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse” of First Nations children.
Canada has failed to protect
indigenous women from violence, says UN official
Taking aim at the federal
government, the report also calls for a public inquiry into the recent fate of
hundreds of missing or murdered aboriginal women and girls – something it has
strongly resisted in the past. The commission has had a troubled relationship
with the federal government since its inception, causing its original
commissioners to resign and leading to accusations of obstruction throughout
its seven-year research.
“Our leaders must not fear
this onus of reconciliation,” Sinclair said. “The burden is not theirs to bear
alone; rather, reconciliation is a process that involves all parties of this
new relationship.”
COMMENT:
The Residential Schools were
for the most part a very regrettable mistake. However we do need a sense of
balance:
1. Some students did have a
positive experience. In fact in the 1950’s and 1960’s the chiefs supported the
continuance of the Residential Schools are took over their management.
2. The world genocide is
regrettable. Especially as only around 25% of aboriginal students went to the
residential schools at their maximum. Obviously you cannot wipe out the compete
culture if leave out 75%
However the main point is
what is to be done? Guilt will not solve the issues.
The proposals of the
commission lack any real substance to address the significant problems facing
the Canadian aboriginal community. Plus the Chiefs have not advanced a coherent
strategy to address these issues.
-------------------
WORDPRESS- WORDPRESS- WORDPRESS
CANADA MILITARY NEWS: In My Opinion- how about we take all the europeans as refugees 2 our Canada/ how about we thank the USA on this f**king day/how about we make our children realize $$$$ who the parents are and behaviour matters/and First Nations- start looking after your children -8 million of us grew up in horror of WWII many in worse than u- stop it/UNITED NATIONS DISBAND…imho
BLOGSPOT
CANADA MILITARY NEWS: In My Opinion- how about we take all the europeans as refugees 2 our Canada/ how about we thank the USA on this f**king day/how about we make our children realize $$$$ who the parents are and behaviour matters/and First Nations- start looking after your children -8 million of us grew up in horror of WWII many in worse than u- stop it/UNITED NATIONS DISBAND…imho
IMHO..
HEY CANADA- how about we take all the Europeans being driving out of their lands and homes by ‘so-called refugees’ POINT OF ORDER- LET’S THANK THE REAL AMERICANS WHO ENSURE THIS F**KING PLANET HAS SOME SENSE OF FREEDOM….. IMHO
THE United Nations had allowed 14 savage mass murderers go free after their tribunal……… including BABY DOC. WHO RAPED, PILLAGED MURDERED AND STOLE HAITI’S $$$$$
and
WITHOUT THE USA ON THIS DAY… WE WOULD BE PURE WHITE, BLUE EYED AND PURE….. AND EUROPE- U WOULD NOT EXIST
WITHOUT THE USA ON THIS DAY… WE WOULD BE PURE WHITE, BLUE EYED AND PURE….. AND EUROPE- U WOULD NOT EXIST
WITHOUT THE USA- 9/11 WOULD BE A DAILY OCCURRANCE…..EVERYWHERE… AND JUST ABOUT IS…
and
political bullshit and $$$$$$ greed has hijacked our planet…..
AND WORLD AND HUMANITY GIVING A SHEEEET- DON’T THINK SO…. HOW’S EBOLA WORKING FOLKS???? ANYONE GIVE A SHEEET LATELY??? IMHO
and
POINT OF ORDER- RUSSIA DOES NOT GIVE A SHEEET….. NOR SHOULD THEY…
and
POINT OF ORDER-
NOBODY WANTS FILTHY, MEAN, IGNORNANT AND LAZY (way 2 many) PEOPLE OF THE MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICAS – WHO PROCREATE IN THE MILLIONS AND RELY ON THE GOVERNMENT 2 TAKE CARE OF THEM……
!WHO DO NOT WANT 2 BECOME PART OF YOUR COUNTRY
!WHO DO NOT WANT RESPONSIBILITY
!WHO DO NOT WANT RESPONSIBILITY
!WHO DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE MILIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DISPLACED- AS SAUDI AND IRAN SAY- BLOW THEM UP- KILL THEM AND START OVER…
!WHO HATE WOMEN
!WHO HATE WOMEN
!WHO HATE EDUCATION
!WHO WANT THE WORLD DESTROYED….
-and O CANADA……
POINT OF ORDER- is a 16 year old who ran from abusive parents and refused 2 listen 2 any rules in foster care….. and was and was attacked and raped….by first nations boys/men of FIRST NATIONS-
11 % of missing FirstNations/Inuit/Metis girls/women are caused by their homelife……..
89% of thousands and thosands of women living off the street of CANADA are missing and murdered- there is where the inquiry and funding needs 2 be…. we must stop the abuse in the homes…..at the source…. come on….
WHY ARE FIRST NATIONS/METIS GIRLS TREATED SO VICIOUSLY AT HOME???
Rinelle Harper calls for inquiry into murdered and missing aboriginal women, a month after she was left for dead in riverbank
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/09/rinelle-harper-calls-for-inquiry-into-murdered-and-missing-aboriginal-women-a-month-after-she-was-left-for-dead-in-riverbank/
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/09/rinelle-harper-calls-for-inquiry-into-murdered-and-missing-aboriginal-women-a-month-after-she-was-left-for-dead-in-riverbank/
ONE BILLION RISING- break the chains- no more excuses… no more abuses
Canada’s Shania Twain wrote Black Eyes, Blue Tears back in the 90s…. and put it 2 music and played it around the world…. Shania kicked country music’s ass and the black hats… and woke the world up 2 girls count… girls are equal and … girls can do anything they dream on…. Shania Twain was adopted when she was 2 by Objiway Gerry Twain (she adored her Grandpa Twain) who adored his wife, Sharon. Shania grew up in the ‘Reserves, Bands’ of First Peoples of Canada – 10,000 years – and knew exactly what it was like 2 live in poverty, dispair and the injustice and abuseive abuse abuse among the Reserves themselves let alone of the horrible treatment of Canada’s First Peoples as all Governments of Canada and all polticial stripes- throwaway trash….. Shania Twain is a hero to so many women globally…. and has over one billion fans…. shania walked the talk and kept her soul, her honour and the respect of herself and her fans….
Canada’s Shania Twain wrote Black Eyes, Blue Tears back in the 90s…. and put it 2 music and played it around the world…. Shania kicked country music’s ass and the black hats… and woke the world up 2 girls count… girls are equal and … girls can do anything they dream on…. Shania Twain was adopted when she was 2 by Objiway Gerry Twain (she adored her Grandpa Twain) who adored his wife, Sharon. Shania grew up in the ‘Reserves, Bands’ of First Peoples of Canada – 10,000 years – and knew exactly what it was like 2 live in poverty, dispair and the injustice and abuseive abuse abuse among the Reserves themselves let alone of the horrible treatment of Canada’s First Peoples as all Governments of Canada and all polticial stripes- throwaway trash….. Shania Twain is a hero to so many women globally…. and has over one billion fans…. shania walked the talk and kept her soul, her honour and the respect of herself and her fans….
Shania started food banks at all her shows, including kids from each and every town, supported and played 4 troops be4 it became noticed, and said – feed your own kids first and those of your communities, villages and cities- 4God’s sake look after ur kids….. Shania is one of China’s favourite artists- and one of the world’s – Shania made women matter and girls believe in empowerment of education and freedom… and equality….
BLACK EYS, BLUE TEARS… SHANIA TWAIN
Shania Twain – Black Eyes, Blue Tears – Live!
“Black Eyes, Blue Tears”
Black eyes, I don’t need ’em
Blue tears, gimme freedom
Positively never goin’ back
I won’t live where things are so out of whack
No more rollin’ with the punches
No more usin’ or abusin’
I’d rather die standing
Than live on my knees
Begging please-no more
Black eyes-I don’t need ’em
Blue tears-gimme freedom
Black eyes-all behind me
Blue tears’ll never find me now
Definitley found my self esteem
Finally-I’m forever free to dream
No more cryin’ in the corner
No excuses-no more bruises
I’d rather die standing
Than live on my knees
Begging please-no more
Black eyes-I don’t need ’em
Blue tears-gimme freedom
Black eyes-all behind me
Blue tears’ll never find me now
I’d rather die standing
Than live on my knees, begging please…
Black eyes-I don’t need ’em
Blue tears-gimme freedom
Black eyes-all behind me
Blue tears’ll never find me now
It’s all behind me, they’ll never find me now
Find your self-esteem and be forever free to dream
and
and
Family of 16-year-old girl attacked in Winnipeg thankful she survived
By: The Canadian Press
Posted: 11/11/2014 1:08 PM | Comments: 0 | Last Modified: 11/12/2014 7:33 AM
Police investigate at the scene of an assault near Donald Street and Assiniboine Avenue Saturday.
TREVOR HAGAN / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS Enlarge Image
Police investigate at the scene of an assault near Donald Street and Assiniboine Avenue Saturday.
WINNIPEG – The family of a 16-year-old Manitoba girl who was beaten and left for dead in an icy Winnipeg river is thankful she survived the attack and is now recovering.
Grand Chief David Harper, head of the organization that represents northern Manitoba First Nations, is a distant relative of Rinelle Harper and has visited with her and her family in hospital.
Related Items
Articles
• Family of 16-year-old girl attacked in Winnipeg thankful she survived
• Winnipeg police appeal for help in case of teen assaulted, dumped in river
• Police identify 16-year-old girl who was assaulted and thrown into the Assiniboine River
• Family of 16-year-old girl attacked in Winnipeg thankful she survived
• Winnipeg police appeal for help in case of teen assaulted, dumped in river
• Police identify 16-year-old girl who was assaulted and thrown into the Assiniboine River
He said the family is grateful the Grade 11 student is alive, especially when they think of Tina Fontaine, a 15-year-old aboriginal girl who was killed and dumped in a Winnipeg river earlier this year.
“They are very thankful that they are with Rinelle right now. She’s recovering and that is something they are very thankful for,” Harper said Tuesday.
“We are in a serious dilemma here, not only in Winnipeg but throughout Canada, in how these women are being just trashed … For them to be treated like that is totally unacceptable.”
Police say Rinelle was out with friends Friday night when she was attacked near a downtown bridge and ended up in the Assiniboine River. She managed to pull herself out of the water onto a walkway, where she was discovered by a passerby and rushed to hospital in critical condition.
Officers called the attack “sexual in nature.” They took the unusual step of identifying the victim, with her parents’ permission, in the hope of cracking the case.
CTV Winnipeg is quoting unnamed police sources as saying they have obtained surveillance footage from a building in the area that is helping them retrace the girl’s steps.
The sources say the cameras also captured images of two males that were with her.
Harper said Rinelle is slowly recovering her memory, but she doesn’t remember much about what happened the night she was attacked.
“She was beaten up. Her legs were bruised and she had stitches on her head and her eyes are still red,” he said. “At one point in time, they thought they were going to lose her. She was in really, really critical condition, but she’s slowly starting to regain her mind and everything else so we are hoping for the best.”
Harper said Rinelle is originally from the Garden Hill First Nation in northern Manitoba. He said most Harpers from that area are related and Rinelle is the great niece of the late MP Elijah Harper.
She has been in Winnipeg for the last two years studying at Southeast Collegiate, a high school operated by northern First Nations. She was staying at the school’s dorm, he said.
Harper remembers Rinelle growing up in Garden Hill with her sister, who was a year older but looked like her twin.
“They came from a good family. They were always dressed nice and well taken care of. They participated in many things … She was brought up in a healthy home,” he said. “They are well known in the community.”
Harper said Rinelle’s mother wants to take Rinelle back to the reserve to finish her education, but Rinelle wants to stay in Winnipeg.
Police have said Rinelle was not known to them before she was attacked.
There are some startling similarities between her attack and Tina’s death.
In August, Tina’s body was pulled from Winnipeg’s Red River wrapped in plastic.
Originally from the Sagkeeng First Nation, Tina had been in the city less than a month and had run away from foster care a week before her body was found. Her death has been ruled a homicide, but there have been no arrests.
Police have said they are treating the two cases as separate investigations.
Harper said the family hopes the case serves as another wake-up call for society.
“They don’t want anyone going through the same thing,” he said.
“It’s very tragic and they wouldn’t want any family — it doesn’t matter what race — they wouldn’t want any family going through this tragedy and make sure young women, and young girls especially, are looked after properly.”
— By Tim Cook in Edmonton.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/family-of-16-year-old-girl-attacked-in-winnipeg-thankful-she-survived-282308331.html
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/family-of-16-year-old-girl-attacked-in-winnipeg-thankful-she-survived-282308331.html
——————————–
FIRST NATIONS NEED 2 START FIXING THEIR OWN MESSES NOW…. COME ON!!
Mohawk First Nation’s ‘Marry out, move out’ rule is indefensible, Jeffrey Simpson argues http://trib.al/ksOTXnc via @GlobeDebate
—————–
1. Manitoba sorry for failing to protect Phoenix Sinclair … – Cbc
http://www.cbc.ca/…/manitoba-sorry-for-failing-to-protect-phoenix-sinclair-1.2518147 – Similar
31 Jan 2014 … Phoenix Sinclair inquiry report released 2:26 … system failed the five-year-old girl before she was murdered by her mother and stepfather in 2005. … We deeply regret and are profoundly saddened by the loss of this child,” she said. … In June 2005, Phoenix was beaten and left to die on a basement floor.
http://www.cbc.ca/…/manitoba-sorry-for-failing-to-protect-phoenix-sinclair-1.2518147 – Similar
31 Jan 2014 … Phoenix Sinclair inquiry report released 2:26 … system failed the five-year-old girl before she was murdered by her mother and stepfather in 2005. … We deeply regret and are profoundly saddened by the loss of this child,” she said. … In June 2005, Phoenix was beaten and left to die on a basement floor.
Manitoba sorry for failing to protect Phoenix Sinclair … – Cbc- FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE OF CANADA GAVE UP ON PHOENIX SINCLAIR
———————–
POINT OF ORDER …… make ur teenagers understand the rules and who the parents are OR DON’T HAVE FU**ING KIDS…
———————
HEY EUROPEAN YOUTH- BEAUTIFUL YOUTH…. COME 2 CANADA AS REFUGEES…. UR WORLD IS BEING RAPED AND PILLAGED BY LAZY CREEPY PEOPLE WHO DON’T GIVE A SHEEET ABOUT ANYTHING….
—————–
———————
HEY EUROPEAN YOUTH- BEAUTIFUL YOUTH…. COME 2 CANADA AS REFUGEES…. UR WORLD IS BEING RAPED AND PILLAGED BY LAZY CREEPY PEOPLE WHO DON’T GIVE A SHEEET ABOUT ANYTHING….
—————–
HEY WORLD…. WHEN IT COMES 2 COUNTRIES CANADA CAN COUNT ON- USA/UK/AUSSIES/KIWIS AND SOMEDAYS… MAYBE EUROPE…
—————————
Did you mean: CANADIANS THE WEST AND DECENT CHRISTIANS GIVING UP ON USELESS UNITED NATIONS WHO LET MASS BUTCHERS GO FREE AND HUG MONSTERS AND DESPOTS OVER INNOCENCE AND DECENCY…. IT’S TIME UN FADED AWAY AND HUMANITY WITH PROTECTION OF OUR NATIONS RULED….
————————
BLOGSPOT:-
most of these missing Aboriginal women come from abuse at home!!!! and Canada knows it….. 11% of all missing women/girls in Canada are Aboriginal…… ABORGINALS MUST CLEAN UP THEIR SONS AND FATHERS AND STOP ABUSE!!!
O CANADA-PROSTITUTES-SEX TRAFFICKING-Let’s talk about it Canada/ Women Equal Men in our Canada- PROSTITUTION- how can any politician condone the abuse of women…. DID THE HIGHWAY OF TEARS TEACH US NOTHING???-… did little girls and women horrendously abused teach us nothing…. women kneeling b4 men??? Seriously in 2014- and u want 2 make this NewAgeMedia Pretty… oh so Pretty??? in the year 2014??? ONE BILLION RISING- break the chains- no more abuses-no more excuses -RELOCATION REVISITED: SEX TRAFFICKING OF NATIVE WOMEN IN THE UNITED STATES- 2 many First Nations children dumped in2 foster care- How many MISSING CANADIAN PROSTITUTES IS THE QUESTION-DON’T DISCRIMINATE- git r done- ONE BILLION RISING- Walk a mile in their shoes Canada -we were going 2 help and change the world -4 all the good political greed and indifference is worst enemy of humanity /PAEDOPHILE HUNTING /Sept. 20 2014 REZA and CODY- pimped hundreds of children after torture and rape- WTF CANADA???
----------------
--------------------
---------------
Mental Health Matters
-------------
BLOGSPOT
IDLE
NO MORE CANADA- MI'KMAQ MONTH IN NOVA SCOTIA- 11,000 years- We mourn Albino
Moose murdered- must learn Mi'kmaq nature's way pls./Some fall fun Annapolis
Valley/Good Books/Mi'kmaq traditions, history and videos
Kawliga, In Mi'kmaq Joel Denny Eskasoni
----
O CANADA- COUSIN MARY- FLUDD- WOMEN EQUAL IN
CANADA FROM 70s
Fludd was a Canadian rock band in the 1970s, best
known for their 1973 hit "Cousin Mary".
Cousin Mary lyrics
Cousin Mary was a lady who could really hold her
own
She went fighting for her country
She went fighting for her home
Then there's the time she lost her husband
He was fighting for the right
She'll be leaving in the morning
Won't you please say goodnight
(Harmonica pattern)
All the money in the world
Couldn't tie old Mary down
You can believe her when she tells you
She's had her turn around
There could be knights and kings in amour
Horses waiting just to fight
She'll be leaving in the morning
Won't you please say goodnight
She'll be leaving in the morning
Won't you please say goodnight
Oh lovely lady
Oh lovely lady always out there (pause)
She'll be leaving in the morning
Won't you please take good care
(Harmonica)
Oh lovely lady
Oh lovely lady
Always out there (pause)
She'll be leaving in the morning
Won't you please take good care
(Harmonica)
-----------------------
BLOGGED
Saturday, July 20, 2013
ONE BILLION RISING CANADA- Women and the right 2
vote- country by country- Please honour those women who sacrificed so much 4 ur
privilege 2 vote - pls honour us
blogged:
F**k Canada Memorial University Student Union-
PROFESSOR IS RIGHT- So is the following teacher- The Day I taught my students-
how NOT 2 rape- it needs addressing in all schools and universities- IN THEIR
FACES- 4 all the Rehtaeh Parsons.... don't hide Student Unions- 5 Canada
universities have brought horrible shame- CANADA STUDENTS- man and woman up....
in class- all the time- ONE BILLION RISING
----------
BLOGGED:
ONE BILLION RISING- NO MORE EXCUSES-HELP LINES 4
KIDS- F**KING PAEDOPHILES- CHILD ABUSERS- PREDATORS OF WOMEN- WE MUST DO BETTER
CANADA- IDLE NO MORE CANADA-IDLE NO MORE
----------
BLOGGED: THE GREATEST SPEECH AT UN NEVER HEARD #1BRising
BLOG:
ONE
BILLION RISING-no more abuses or excuses-Women Matter -October CANADA- John
Baird addresses UN 4 Women's Rights and horrid abuses of girls -women/Cher
nails it/Congo disgrace/USA-Canada Child Sex Trafficking- Canada women equal
men...period- ?CAN'TRESTOF THEWORLD?
------------------
----------------
BLOGGED:
CANADA
MILITARY NEWS: Nova Scotia Domestic Violence Shelters/BULLYCIDE-BULLY HELP
SITES/Homeless Shelters/UK /Australia/Canada- u matter- MARCH 8- INTERNATIONAL
WOMEN'S DAY.... One Billion rising- breaking the chains- no more excuses- Nova
Scotia honours Warrior Woman Rita MacNeil March 8th concert of remembrance/SEPT
22- NEWSFLASH- Justice 4 Rehtaeh Parson- one of abusers pleads guilty
------------
IDLE NO MORE- thx 2 American friends 4 the share ....
------------
-------------
IDLE NO MORE CANADA- Phoenix Sinclair's Godmother still on hungerfast- on CHILD ABUSE IN CANADA- especially First Peoples
------------
Idle No More proxy
---------------------
idle no more- thank u 2 jour troops of Canada and USA and always our Rangers of the North
---------------------
IDLE NO MORE-Sitting Bull - real, raw and righteous. IDLE NO MORE
---------------
Cultural Genocide yes it does wash but only 2 a point - the Media's Cultural Marxism has completely eradicated the horrific life and times of landing and building in a new foreign land- Canada protected the Queen's Red Children whilst USA slaughtered millions of them FACT.... ..... Canada's Queen Victoria loved the First Peoples- her Red children.... and USA 's cultural genocide was actual but also slid in2 all poverty children- white among the many... yet nobody brings that up... or the Americas or Australia or the Africas .... Residential Schools were everywhere in the world... Idle No More Canadians is a strong and pure cause especially of the youngfolks of today...and Canada- it's time we brought all our history up 2 date. DON'T LET NDP HOLLYWOOD CBC SPOIL THIS... and apparently they did.... Don't let America Hollywood sheeeeet spoil this... please.... let this be about Canada's First Peoples youth.... we deserve better Canada... history, humanity and each and all of us matter.... Cultural Marxism in the media must stop....
3. It was (INSERT-CULTURAL) genocide. Get used to it.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck/FilesA “Walk for Reconciliation” in Vancouver in 2013.
Looks like we better get used to it. “Cultural genocide” has become the go-to catch phrase for the residential schools. Actually, appalling as the residential schools program was, no one committed any genocide. But the phrase has caught on, and accuracy isn’t going to matter from here in.
--------------
[PDF] Bad dreaming: Aboriginal men's violence against women and children
L Nowra - POLICY, 2007 - test.cis.org.au
... First, he argues, violence against women featured in traditional indigenous culture; child sexual
abuse did not. ... the perpetrators of the violence by refusing to criticise aspects of Aboriginal culture
and ... Power Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present by ...
abuse did not. ... the perpetrators of the violence by refusing to criticise aspects of Aboriginal culture
and ... Power Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present by ...
----
CANADA'S ABORIGINAL TREATIES
Aboriginal Treaties
Aboriginal treaties in Canada are constitutionally recognized agreements between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples. Most of these agreements describe exchanges where Aboriginal groups agree to share some of their interests in their ancestral lands in return for various payments and promises.
Aboriginal treaties in Canada are constitutionally recognized agreements between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples. Most of these agreements describe exchanges where Aboriginal groups agree to share some of their interests in their ancestral lands in return for various payments and promises. On a deeper level, treaties are sometimes understood, particularly on the Aboriginal side, as sacred covenants between peoples that establish the relationship linking those for whom Canada is an ancient homeland with those whose family roots lie in other countries. Thus, treaties form the constitutional and moral basis of alliance between Aboriginal peoples and Canada.
Introduction
Aboriginal treaties in Canada are constitutionally recognized agreements between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples. Most of these agreements describe exchanges where Aboriginal groups agree to share some of their interests in their ancestral lands in return for various payments and promises. On a deeper level, treaties are sometimes understood, particularly on the Aboriginal side, as sacred covenants between peoples that establish the relationship linking those for whom Canada is an ancient homeland with those whose family roots lie in other countries. Thus, treaties form the constitutional and moral basis of alliance between Aboriginal peoples and Canada.
On the Aboriginal side, the sacredness and binding character of treaties is not found primarily in the documents’ legalistic language. Instead, the true force of treaties is rooted in what was actually said, often in Aboriginal languages, at the time of the negotiations when treaty deliberations were frequently accompanied by ceremonial conventions such as the smoking of sacred pipes (calumet) or an exchange of symbolically significant presents (e.g., wampum belts). Accordingly, many contemporary Aboriginal peoples look to their elders who are schooled in the oral histories as the highest authorities on the spirit and intent of the treaties.
On the Crown side, the principles for treaty making with Aboriginal peoples were articulated by King George III in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which established the constitutional foundations of Canada after the government of France withdrew its claims to North America. The constitutional character of past and future treaties between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown was renewed in the Constitution Act of 1982, which describes itself as "the supreme law of Canada." Section 35 of that document both recognizes and affirms "existing Aboriginal and treaty rights."
In 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada in the Sioui case determined that "treaties and statutes relating to Indians should be liberally construed and uncertainties resolved in favour of the Indians." In that case, the court introduced into Canadian jurisprudence a principle adopted from a 19th-century ruling in the United States that such treaties "must therefore be construed, not according to the technical meaning of its words to learned lawyers, but in the sense in which they would naturally be understood by the Indians."
In spite of the constitutional character of treaties, these deals were often viewed cynically by those non-Aboriginal people responsible for both making and implementing them as cheap and expedient ways to strip Aboriginal title from most of the lands in Canada so that resources could be exploited by other groups.
The tendency on the part of federal and provincial governments has been to continue to interpret treaties as legalistically as possible, while holding to the position that Aboriginal peoples "ceded, surrendered, and yielded" all their Aboriginal rights and titles to their ancestral lands through treaties.
This narrow view of treaties essentially as real estate deals by which Aboriginal groups sold all their interest in vast parcels of land in exchange for reserves, small one-time payments and small continuing payments (usually five dollars per Treaty Indian per year) has produced a huge schism. On the one hand is the view of treaties as legal instruments that extinguished Aboriginal rights. On the other is the view of treaties as instruments of relationships between autonomous peoples who agree to share the lands and resources of Canada. Seen from this latter perspective, treaties did not extinguish rights but rather confirmed rights through recognizing that Aboriginal peoples have the capacity to act as self-governing participants on the international stage. Bridging the gap between these two views of treaties poses a huge challenge to the people and lawmakers of Canada.
Treaty Traditions
Covenant Chain Treaties
The conventions and protocols of treaty making that are, and were, being applied to the largest part of Canada have their origins in the old Covenant Chain. The Covenant Chain refers to an elaborate diplomatic relationship developed after 1676 between several Anglo-American colonies and various Aboriginal nations in northeastern North America. At the council grounds near Albany, officials from the colony of New York regularly negotiated with representatives of the League of the Haudonosaunee, otherwise known as the Longhouse League, the Haudenosaunee, or the Five, and later, Six Nations Confederacy. By developing treaty relationships with the League members, but especially with the powerful Mohawk, Crown officials began developing the largely mythical legal presumption that their government's jurisdictional reach extended through the Haudenosaunee deeper into the Aboriginal territories of Canada.
Treaties and Wampum
When Crown officials spoke of renewing treaty relationships with their Aboriginal allies, a usual metaphor would refer to polishing the links of the Covenant Chain. It would be almost unthinkable for those Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal diplomats schooled in the Covenant Chain tradition to make treaties without signifying their major features on wampum belts composed of shell beads woven into appropriate symbolic representations. To accept a wampum belt in formal council was to agree to adhere to the principles embodied in its woven design. The wampum thereafter served to help perpetuate the memory of the treaty. The use of wampum as an instrument of treaty relationships spread widely throughout eastern North America in the 17th, 18th and early 19th centuries.
Maritime Treaties
There is another tradition of treaty relations sometimes also described as the Covenant Chain. This tradition links the British Crown toMi’kmaq and Maliseet peoples whose ancestral lands cover most of the Maritimes, plus parts of the Gaspé Peninsula. Unlike those treaties flowing from the principles in the Royal Proclamation, the Maritime treaties do not directly deal with the apportionment of land title. Instead, these agreements, whose keystones are the Boston Treaty of 1725 and the Halifax Treaty of 1752, were primarily mutual promises of peace and friendship. The agreements also guarantee Aboriginal right to trade without hindrance, the right to fish and hunt in their customary manner, and the right to receive annual supplies of food, provisions and ammunition from the Crown.
In this era, the Mi’kmaq and Maliseet were overwhelmingly Roman Catholic. They were often deeply attached to their priests, as well as to their French-speaking Acadian neighbours, with whom they intermarried. As a result, occasionally they opposed the British, but this stance was modified somewhat through the treaty-making process.
In 1985, the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the continuing force of the Treaty of 1752 by reversing a conviction for hunting out of season against James Simon of the Shubenacadie reserve. In spite of the Simon case, provincial governments in the Maritimes, like elsewhere in Canada, have difficulty accepting that treaties between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples limit provincial jurisdiction in Crown lands.
1754–1814: The Zenith of Treaty Making
Overview
The most volatile era in the history of treaty relations between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown occurred between the outset of the Seven Years’ War in 1754 and the close of the War of 1812 in 1814. During this period, North America was the scene of intense warfare: first between imperial France and Great Britain; then between American revolutionaries and the loyalist proponents of a united empire; and finally between the armies of the United States and British imperial Canada. In all these conflicts, Aboriginal nations wielded considerable influence because of skilful diplomacy and because their fighting forces could effectively battle in conditions that were extremely difficult for European and Euro-North American soldiers.
Consequently, in the decades before the conclusion of the War of 1812—before relative peace descended on the new border separating British North America and the emergent American republic—various Aboriginal confederacies rose to prominence on the world stage. They made treaties, waged war and advanced their self-interests through foreign policies that affect the geopolitical shape of North America to this day. Researchers seeking to understand the contemporary constitutional meaning of Aboriginal and treaty rights, as recognized and affirmed in the country's supreme law, therefore must look to this era with particular care.
Treaties and the Seven Years' War
Responding to the power of the French-Aboriginal alliance, the British imperial government in 1755 took away the responsibility for Aboriginal treaty making from the colonies. Instead, a northern and southern branch of the British imperial Indian Department were created as extensions of the military and placed directly under the king’s authority. The northern branch, with Covenant Chain expert Sir William Johnson at its head, was essentially the first seed of government for English-speaking Canada. There is a direct line of administrative continuity between Johnson's department, which polished and extended the old Covenant Chain, and Canada's modern-day Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. Sir William Johnson, with the help of his Mohawk consort and adviser, Molly Brant, successfully neutralized the old French-Aboriginal alliance during the Seven Years' War through a series of treaties that guaranteed the protection of Indigenous lands from acquisitive Anglo-American colonists.
After the British victory over the French in 1759 on the Plains of Abraham, Johnson made further agreements with the seven nations of Canada who inhabited Catholic missions near Lake Ontario and along the St. Lawrence Valley (see the Treaty of Oswegatchie 1760). These transactions promised the Aboriginal peoples security in regards to their lands, trade and religion. One of the transactions, the Murray Treaty of Longueuil (1760), was the subject of litigation that resulted in the groundbreaking 1990 Supreme Court ruling on the Sioui case.
The Royal Proclamation of 1763
Once the French army had been defeated in North America, the British government faced the question of how to conduct relations with the Aboriginal peoples who still dominated most of Canada. An emerging Aboriginal confederacy (spearheaded by the Odawa leaderObwandiyag, also known as Pontiac) captured nine British posts in Canada in the spring of 1763 and made this question even more pressing.
Sir William Johnson was pivotal in formulating the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which, in theory, created clear borders for the new British province of Québec and for the 13 Anglo-American colonies, and reserved the vast territory beyond the Appalachian Mountains for Aboriginal peoples.
The proclamation also laid out a procedure for the future opening of portions of Aboriginal territory for colonization and settlement by the Crown's non-Aboriginal subjects. That procedure established the basic principles for the negotiation of Crown-Aboriginal treaties in British North America and, after 1867, in the Dominion of Canada. The king decreed that no individual person or colony could purchase territory from Aboriginal peoples; instead, the British Crown was to be an essential actor in negotiating treaties.
Affirmed by Section 25 of the Constitution Act of 1982, the Royal Proclamation forms the constitutional basis for Aboriginal treaties. These principles are still being applied in modern-day treaties being made with Aboriginal peoples in, for instance, British Columbia (seeNisga’a).
The Treaty of Fort Stanwix, 1768
When the major fur-trade companies of Pennsylvania made claims against the British government for damages incurred during Pontiac's stand, Indian Department officials moved to compensate them through a major land transfer. The Fort Stanwix Treaty, the first major transaction negotiated according to the terms of the Royal Proclamation, moved the border between Aboriginal territory and the Anglo-American colonies significantly westward to the banks of the Ohio River. This led to the emergence of hard-line Shawnee leaders in the debate among the Aboriginal peoples of the Great Lakes–Ohio Valley area about who was authorized to cede land in treaties.
Treaties and Land Speculators
Sir William Johnson, who was a land speculator himself, hoped that the Fort Stanwix Treaty would satisfy the entrepreneurial wants of the business community in both the Thirteen Colonies and Britain. However, the deal only fed the speculators’ acquisitiveness.
Some of those speculators, whose political representatives included Benjamin Franklin in Pennsylvania and Lord Shelburne in Great Britain, attempted to counter the Royal Proclamation by insisting that Aboriginal nations could make land-ceding treaties directly with private colonization companies. Just when it seemed these powerful business interests were about to prevail, however, the British government responded in 1774 with the Québec Act, which favoured the fur-trade interests of Montréal over the land-speculation interests of Philadelphia and the treaty rights of Aboriginal peoples over the expansionistic aspirations of Anglo-American settlers. This act was a major factor in the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1776.
British Betrayal of Aboriginal Allies in the Treaty of Paris, 1783
While many Aboriginal peoples tried to avoid getting mired in the American Revolution, many others believed that a British victory would be the least threatening outcome. After all, it was the frustrated proponents of western expansionism who had driven the American Revolution forward. Those Mohawk who followed Joseph Brant had been especially active allies of the British. In spite of Indigenous peoples’ important role, the diplomats who redrew the map of North America after the war paid no heed to the heritage of Crown treaties with the Aboriginal peoples. In the Treaty of Paris, 1783, a new international border was created along the Great Lakes that ignored both the Covenant Chain and the Treaty of Fort Stanwix. Indigenous nations were not invited to the Paris negotiations even though it was their lands that were traded back and forth.
Many Indigenous peoples, together with officials of the British army in North America, were thunderstruck at this betrayal. To meet the resulting crisis, Québec Governor Frederick Haldimand made treaties in 1784 with the Mississauga north of Lake Ontario to open two large plots for those Six Nations people who opted to migrate rather than live under the jurisdiction of the United States and New York State.
In the years ahead, Brant chose to sell individual parcels of his people's Grand River lands, which were part of the Haldimand Grant. He based this right to sell lands directly (at full market value) to non-Aboriginal buyers on the claim that his community was not limited by the Royal Proclamation, which prohibited transfers of Aboriginal territory to anyone but the British sovereign.
Greater Canada and the Crown-Aboriginal Alliance
Haldimand also prevailed in the decision of the British to retain possession of the military posts south of the Great Lakes as support for the Montréal-based fur trade, whose hinterland continued to include the northern Mississippi Valley. Similarly, retention of southernmost posts of greater Canada signalled to the Aboriginal peoples west of the Ohio River continued imperial support for resistance to the US government’s agenda of westward expansion.
The system of treaty alliance between the Crown and the Aboriginal peoples of Canada briefly recovered from the diplomatic setback of 1783. Indeed, on the commercial level the alliance expanded and flourished as never before. That expansion was marked in the growth and prosperity of Montréal whose leading entrepreneurs organized the North-West Company (NWC). Not only did the NWC hold and develop its trade network throughout the northern Mississippi Valley and thereby strengthen the Crown's alliances with Aboriginal peoples there, the NWC's agents were also led by Aboriginal guides to the West Coast and the northwesterly reaches of present-day Canada.
In so doing, these NWC geographers, traders and diplomats, including Peter Pond, Alexander Mackenzie and David Thompson, expanded the influence of British imperialism and Canadian commerce throughout wider expanses of Aboriginal territory. They competed against the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC), who since 1670 had developed an extensive commercial presence among the Aboriginal peoples of what was then called Rupert’s Land and theNorth-West Territories. Elaborate protocols of diplomatic and economic relations — visible manifestation of treaty relations — developed between Aboriginal peoples and HBC officials. These ceremonial aspects of Aboriginal-HBC negotiations came into play later in the 19th century when Crown officials negotiated the Numbered Treaties to facilitate the expansion of the Dominion of Canada.
Treaties and Aboriginal Title
Aboriginal peoples refused to accept the new international boundary that cut their ancestral territory in half, or that their lands south of the new border now belonged to the United States. Officers of the British Imperial Indian Department, many of whom had Aboriginal ancestors, wives and mixed-ancestry children, tended to share this consternation. Under their urging, the British government developed the official position that Britain had not actually ceded to the United States the lands north of the Ohio River and south of the Great Lakes. All that had been transferred was the British sovereign's exclusive right to purchase land from Aboriginal peoples through treaties according to the principles outlined in the Royal Proclamation.
Not surprisingly, the US government resisted this interpretation. In 1790 and 1791, however, the small and ill-organized army of the weak federal government were twice defeated by the well-armed fighting forces of a resurgent Aboriginal confederacy, also known asTecumseh’s Confederacy.
In 1793, the US president, George Washington, accepted that Aboriginal nations retained the great country west of the Ohio River. This acknowledgement has major constitutional implications to this day, when there is still considerable argument about whether Aboriginal title is merely a right to occupy and use land, or whether this right runs deeper to, for instance, ownership of subsurface mineral rights.
A Sovereign Aboriginal Nation-State
Aboriginal victories over the American army prompted the British government to adopt a new strategy that was the most ambitious expression of the treaty alliance system between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples. The imperial government planned to encourage the confederacy to the point where that polity could assert international sovereignty over the lands between the Ohio River and the Great Lakes. The envisaged country, which would probably have been called Indiana, was also known as the Indian Buffer State.
In the eyes of British imperialists, this sovereign Aboriginal nation-state would have shielded what remained of British North America from the expansionistic designs of the new American republic, whose most aggressive ideologues increasingly viewed North America through the lens of manifest destiny and imagined that the entire continent was the United States' God-given inheritance.
Jay’s Treaty, 1794
The prospects for creating the new Aboriginal nation-state became dim when the confederacy suffered defeat at the Battle of Fallen Timbers. As a result, British officials agreed to abandon the posts south of the Great Lakes. The terms of this 1794 agreement, known asJay’s Treaty, also stipulated that Aboriginal peoples could freely cross the international border. This stipulation was included largely so that the Montréal fur-trade would not be cut off from its commercial relations with Aboriginal peoples in the northern Mississippi Valley.
Although Jay’s Treaty is not technically an Aboriginal treaty, its terms have had important ramifications. The US government has honoured the agreement to the extent that Registered Indians from Canada have been able to live and work in the United States without restriction. The treaty is not recognized as binding by Canada — a position that is periodically challenged, especially by those Aboriginal nations such as the Six Nations, Ojibwa and Blackfoot peoples, whose lands are bisected by the border.
Tecumseh and Indian Treaties as Instruments of International Law
The prospects of a sovereign nation-state for the confederacy re-emerged in the first decade of the 19th century as relations between Great Britain and the United States deteriorated. At the movement’s heart were two Shawnee brothers who urged Aboriginal unity to defend their dwindling lands.
At first, the religious visionary Tenskwatawa was the more influential of the siblings. When he related his prophetic revelations to others, Algonquian-speakers of several nationalities flocked to his side, creating the new community of Prophetstown, south of Lake Michigan.
Tecumseh, the Shawnee prophet's brother, gave the movement political direction. As war between the United States and Britain became imminent, Tecumseh advocated coordinated action. Tecumseh aimed to elevate Indigenous treaty-making authority above the level of domestic contract to the level of full-fledged international relations. To assert this degree of sovereignty, the confederacy would need a central government, a strong fighting force and a powerful ally. Great Britain could be that ally, though it fell primarily on Aboriginal peoples to generate the unity that was needed to counter the American plan to absorb Aboriginal territory.
The War of 1812
The Shawnee strategists' independence was compromised in 1811 after General William Henry Harrison’s American forces overran the confederacy's capital at Tippecanoe. This forced Tecumseh to form closer links with the British Imperial Indian Department, and Tecumseh accepted a commission as brigadier general of the British army.
When trade embargoes and conflicts at sea finally sparked the War of 1812, the rapid mobilization of the confederacy's fighting forces were a deciding factor in the early course of the conflict. Especially decisive was the role of the Aboriginal peoples in the British takeover ofMichillimackinac and Detroit. The events of 1812, therefore, vindicated, for the British, the utility of the treaty system.
Other Consequences
For those on the Aboriginal side of the alliance, the outcome was more tragic. After Tecumseh was killed in battle in 1813, the confederacy largely disintegrated. In the years that followed, the Americans largely destroyed the Aboriginal territory east of the Mississippi. Rather than move West, however, many Indigenous people from south of the Great Lakes migrated across the border that was established in 1783 but not solidified until 1814, when the Treaty of Ghent ended the War of 1812.
Pre-Confederation Treaties
The Mississauga and Other Upper Canadian Treaties
When the Loyalists moved to Québec in the years after the American Revolution, the provisions of the Royal Proclamation were loosely applied in obtaining permission of the Mississauga peoples for this influx. This migration resulted in the division of Québec into two jurisdictions, Lower and Upper Canada.
Canadian Governor General Lord Dorchester attempted to correct the Crown's sometimes careless approach to treaty making in 1794. In preparing to move the capital of Upper Canada from Niagara-on-the-Lake to York, now the site of Toronto, it was discovered that there was little evidence to prove the Crown had properly documented the purchase of the site. Lord Dorchester directed that a new agreement be made with the Mississauga. Realizing the importance of the Crown-Aboriginal alliance to Canada’s security, he directed that all future treaties should be conducted "with great Solemnity and Ceremony according to the Ancient Usages and Customs of the Indians."
These instructions renewed a tradition that, with a few notable lapses, was generally followed in the making of subsequent treaties, and included a strict prohibition on distributing alcohol during negotiations. This contrasts with the United States, where the practice was relatively common.
Before the end of the War of 1812, treaties with the Mississauga north of the Great Lakes were negotiated with the Aboriginal confederacy’s diplomats, whose objective was to secure recognition of their nation-state. After 1814, Aboriginal peoples’ bargaining power diminished, although the martial character of the old alliance was renewed until the late 1850s, at annual ceremonies at British posts on the Great Lakes, where Crown officials distributed presents to Aboriginal veterans and their families.
By the mid-1830s, treaties covered most of the arable lands in Upper Canada. These treaties involved an initial distribution of goods and money with promises of small annual payments. Only gradually did the principle develop that agreements should include allocation ofreserves.
The Bond Head Treaties, 1836
In 1836, Lieutenant-Governor Sir Francis Bond Head dramatically shifted Aboriginal policy. He negotiated treaties with a variety of Aboriginal groups, including the Wyandot ( or Huron) near Windsor, Ontario, the Saugeen Anishnabek, and a group of largely Protestant Anishinabek who had established a transportation company along the strategic old Toronto Portage route between Lake Simcoe and Georgian Bay. Bond Head's objective was to cancel all efforts to remake Aboriginal peoples in the image of Christian Euro-Canadian farmers. Instead, he wanted to move farming Aboriginal peoples toManitoulin Island, where they could hunt and fish in isolation from the corrosive forces of “civilization” — and also fulfil the lieutenant-governor’s stereotype of noble savagery.
Manitoulin was designated permanent Aboriginal territory in a treaty at the gift-distribution ceremonies at Manitowaning in 1836. The plan was to use Manitoulin to receive not only the displaced Aboriginal agriculturalists from Upper Canada, but also the expected Aboriginal refugees from south of the Great Lakes, whose lands the American government now claimed.
Because Bond Head's plan seemed consistent with the rudimentary apartheid then being advanced by the British government in South Africa, the plan was initially accepted by the British Colonial Office. Soon, however, Bond Head's dubiously transacted treaties attracted the ire of the Aborigines' Protection Society, a Protestant coalition in Britain. Largely because of this activism, the Colonial Office reverted to the policy first adopted in 1830 of encouraging Aboriginal peoples to adopt the ways of their Euro-Canadian neighbours. Imperial authorities, however, never annulled the Bond Head treaties, which the Aborigines’ Protection Society considered unjust land deals aimed at satisfying the land hunger of the lieutenant-governor's political friends.
Bond Head never succeeded in persuading Aboriginal peoples in the more arable southern lands to move to Manitoulin. In fact, in negotiating with the Saugeen people, he found they mostly wanted a commitment that the Crown would protect their ancestral land from squatters. In response, Bond Head promised the Saugeen that "proper Houses shall be built for you, and proper Assistance given to enable to become civilized and cultivate Land, which your Great Father engages for ever to protect for you from the Encroachments of Whites."
These words capture the trade-offs involved in this and many subsequent treaties. In many treaties, Aboriginal peoples agreed to open the majority of their lands for non-Aboriginal settlement in return for secure tenure in smaller areas. In addition, in many treaties, the government promised sufficient resources and education to adapt to the new economic and social modes of life.
The Robinson Treaties
The concept of reserves was advanced in 1850, when Crown representative William Benjamin Robinson secured agreement from Aboriginal leaders to "cede, grant, and convey unto Her Majesty" about 50,000 square miles (129,500 km2) north of the upper Great Lakes. These transactions, known as the Robinson-Huron and Robinson-Superior treaties, provided for the creation of 21 new reserves, each to be held by the Crown for the "use and benefit" of the groups whose leaders' names and marks were on the agreements.
Also part of the bargain were initial payments worth £4,000, plus "perpetual" annuities valued at £1,100. Officials of what was by then called the Province of Canada had been pressured to authorize treaty negotiations by both Governor General Lord Elgin and Chief Shinguakouce and his followers. In a relatively minor 1849 confrontation given the overblown title of the Michipicoten War, the latter had asserted their uncompromised interest in Precambrian Shield, where Canadians had already begun minor mining operations.
In the Robinson Treaties, the Crown promised that Aboriginal peoples could hunt and fish throughout the ceded territory "as they have heretofore been in the habit of doing." This promise, the first of its kind in an Aboriginal treaty, was made, Robinson explained, so that Aboriginal peoples could not make future claims in return for loss of "their usual means of support."
Saugeen and Manitoulin Treaties
The two final major pre-Confederation treaties were signed in 1854 and 1862. They cover the Saugeen Peninsula north of Owen Soundand part of Manitoulin Island on Lake Huron. By the terms of the 1836 Bond Head treaties, both of these regions had been reserved for Aboriginal peoples, which heightened the acrimonious atmosphere that generally characterized the remaining pre-Confederation treaties.
In both instances, Aboriginal sanction was secured under sordid and somewhat dubious legal circumstances. Crown regard for Aboriginal interests seemingly had diminished along with Aboriginal military significance.
The Saugeen and Manitoulin treaties stipulated that the Aboriginal peoples involved would be paid regular interest on funds from all Crown sales of the ceded territories. This promise, a future subject of controversy, proved insufficient to win the participation of an entire community of Roman Catholic Odawa on the eastern portion of Manitoulin Island. With support from their Jesuit missionaries, these Odawas successfully resisted signing the Manitoulin treaty. To this day, Wikwemikong, Ontario, remains an unceded Aboriginal reserve.
Post-Confederation Treaties
The Numbered Treaties
The 11 Numbered Treaties were negotiated between 1871 and 1921 as the Dominion government sought to extend its sovereignty over western (and portions of northern) Canada. Confederation in 1867 set the stage for Canada's purchase, from the Hudson's Bay Company, ofRupert's Land and the North-West Territories. As a result of the transfer, the Canadian government legally assumed responsibility for the "protection" and "well-being" of the region's Aboriginal peoples.
The duty of compensating Aboriginal peoples for their interest in the annexed territory also fell to Canada. Hence, the treaty-making system that had evolved in Upper Canada was exported westward. Further development of the treaty system was based as much on economic pragmatism as it was on any conception of Aboriginal rights. During the 1870s, the US government spent over $20 million a year fightingPlains peoples. This amount was larger than the entire budget of Canada, and so federal officials relied on treaties to ensure a relatively peaceful acquiescence to Euro-Canadian settlement from the territory’s 35,000 Aboriginal inhabitants.
Crown officials negotiating the first Numbered Treaties were instructed to offer terms similar to those in the Robinson Treaties. The Aboriginal delegations in these and subsequent bargaining sessions, however, made it clear that more was expected. Aboriginal participants were navigating increasingly circumscribed options. Aboriginal peoples sought to cope with the destruction of Indigenous economies — notably, the decimation of the buffalo on the prairies — through treaties. The spirit and intent of 19th- and early 20th-century treaties, from some Aboriginal peoples’ perspectives, thus includes a commitment from the Canadian government for the instruction and material aid necessary for transitioning to a new way of life.
Métis Scrip
The Canadian government attempted to acknowledge the special relationship of the Métis to the treaty proceedings, by paying “half-breeds” for their Aboriginal inheritance with dollar-valued land certificates known as scrip. Efforts to implement this program were often undermined by the largely fraudulent activities of "jobbers," who amassed the majority of the resources originally earmarked for the Métis communities.
The North-West Mounted Police
The newly formed North-West Mounted Police (NWMP) became an important factor in the negotiation process. Following their arrival in 1874 in present-day southwest Alberta, the NWMP became influential among the Siksika, Piikuni, Kainai, Tsuu T’ina, and Stoney-Nakoda. The police force earned esteem by protecting Aboriginal peoples from American whisky traders. In this atmosphere of relative law and order, Crowfoot, Red Crow and other leaders signed Treaty No 7.
Modern Treaties
It was in Ontario and the Prairie provinces, then, where the development of a system of land tenure was most firmly founded on Aboriginal treaties. Elsewhere in the country (i.e., most of British Columbia, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, Québec and theMaritimes), non-Aboriginal settlement proceeded without purchase of Aboriginal title. Even so, reserves were allocated that became the home of registered Aboriginal peoples who, while lacking treaties, nevertheless fell under the direct administrative control of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.
This ministry has felt itself more governed by the federal Indian Actthan by Aboriginal treaties. Hence, the fine legal distinctions between Treaty Indians and registered Aboriginal peoples not covered by treaties have blurred under the standardizing regime of the Indian Act. As well, throughout most of the 20th century there has been little inclination on the part of the majority population to grapple with the legal fact that Aboriginal title has never been extinguished over large parts of the country.
Aboriginal peoples from British Columbia were largely responsible for breaking through the weight of political inertia that had set in around Aboriginal land question since the early 1920s. Although some treaties had been made in the 1850s on Vancouver Island, officials since then have consistently resisted the view that Aboriginal peoples in the province have inherent Aboriginal rights. The Nisga’a people of the Nass River Valley have long opposed this position. Their activism eventually resulted in the Supreme Court of Canada’s split 1973 decision that suggested Aboriginal title endures throughout most of British Columbia. This ultimately resulted in the successful Nisga'a land claim—the first treaty in British Columbia since 1899.
The Nisga'a case was one of several key developments that helped cast Aboriginal rights into the spotlight in Canada during the 1970s. The pivotal event had been the publication in 1969 of a federal White Paper on Aboriginal policy, which reflected the ideology of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. He advocated ending treaties and thereby removing special status for Aboriginal peoples.
To Trudeau, who also opposed special constitutional status for the Province of Québec, it was an "anomaly" to have treaties between groups within Canada. Aboriginal peoples strongly opposed the White Paper, and became far more organized and vocal as a result. Their bargaining was strengthened in 1973 by the Supreme Court's Nisga'a decision. The result was a change in federal policy.
An Office of Native Claims (ONC) was established to resolve Aboriginal land disputes. The ONC defined two types of claims, specific and comprehensive; the latter, in essence, are modern-day treaties. The Specific Claims Tribunal (2008) has since supplanted the ONC. A comprehensive claim can be made for any part of Canada where Aboriginal title has never been ceded.
The 1975 James Bay Agreement could be described as a modern-day treaty. As in earlier times, a move to open up a new resource frontier — in this case, the hydroelectric potential of the rivers flowing into the eastern half of James Bay — led to the negotiations with Aboriginal peoples. Although the enormous hydroelectric project was initiated in the early 1970s without their sanction, the area's Cree and Inuitasserted their unceded Aboriginal rights through the courts and the media.
In the complex settlement that resulted, new features were added to the older treaty template. Most significantly, the agreement established a basis for various institutions of Cree and Inuit self-government, such as school boards, and health and social service agencies. In 1978, the Northeastern Québec Agreement was concluded with the Naskapi band of Shefferville. It is basically an adjunct of the James Bay Agreement.
The negotiation of modern-day treaties stagnated during Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’s first term. Relegating Aboriginal affairs to a low priority between 1984 and 1988, however, backfired during Mulroney's second term. In June 1990, Elijah Harper, an Oji-Cree MLA from Manitoba, blocked a sweeping revision to the Canadian Constitution negotiated at Meech Lake (see also Meech Lake Accord: Document) by the 11 first ministers without Aboriginal representation. The next month, an argument between the Mohawk of Kanesatake and the town council of Oka over a proposed golf course flared into an armed standoff (see Oka Crisis).
These tumultuous events led to the infusion of new political capital into Aboriginal affairs. In 1991, a Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples was created just as a surge of political will was invested into modern-day treaty making.
This surge was mostly evident in the territories north of the 60thparallel, where bilateral negotiations led to the making of theGwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement in 1993, theNunavut Land Claims Agreement in 1993, the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement in 1994, and the Umbrella Final Agreement with the Council for Yukon Indians, also in 1994.
Building on the James Bay Treaty (1975) and the Inuvialuit Treaty (1984), more recent treaties enable Aboriginal communities to set up municipal and corporate structures to provide services and to participate as shareholders in the exploitation of natural resources.
The negotiation of modern-day treaties has been especially difficult in the Canadian provinces, where three rather than two kinds of government must agree in order to reach resolution. Nevertheless, in 1992 negotiations with some BC Aboriginal nations began. That led to the basic outlines of an agreement in 1996 with the Nisga'a people. The deal puts the Nisga'a in control of 5,180 of the 62,160 km2 of their ancestral territory.
In keeping with the historic role of the Nisga'a in forcing the issue of unrecognized Aboriginal title, their treaty sets precedent. Behind the Nisga'a are over 50 other BC Aboriginal nations negotiating similar agreements (the final agreements for the Tsawwassen First Nation and the Maa-nulth First Nations have taken effect as of April 2009 and April 2011, respectively). All of these nations together might end up with title to about five per cent of British Columbia, an amount that roughly corresponds with the Aboriginal proportion of the overall BC population.
In a historic decision on 26 June 2014, the Supreme Court of Canadagranted the Tsilhqot’in Nation title to 1,700 km2 of land in BC. With the ruling the Tsilhqot’in have exclusive rights to the land and any associated benefits and profits, and must grant their consent before any economic development occurs.
Significantly, the ruling clarifies the meaning and criteria for establishing Aboriginal title. In order to establish title, an Aboriginal group must prove continual and exclusive occupation. In addition, Aboriginal groups with legitimate claims — whether ongoing, settled, or merely possible — must be consulted and grant consent before economic development may proceed.
Conflicting Views
British Columbia treaties have been criticized by both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. Some non-Aboriginal critics charge that modern treaty making puts too much emphasis on race and ethnicity. Echoing the 1969 White Paper, members of the Reform Party of Canada tended to lobby against the treaty system, arguing that it undermines individual equality and one law for all Canadians. This political position is expressed by the BC Foundation for Individual Rights and Equality, an organization partially modelled on groups in the United States that advocate for non-Aboriginal people who own plots amid American Indian reservations.
Aboriginal activists in British Columbia and elsewhere have also criticized the Nisga'a treaty. The critique tends to focus on concessions the Nisga'a have made in regards to federal and provincial taxation. An extreme form of protest was manifest at the armed stand made by the Defenders of the Shuswap Nation at Gustafsen Lake in the summer of 1995. This group, whose members drew their ideas and style partially from the American Indian Movement, questioned the legitimacy of a process that they said used the imagery of treaty making to cover over the old patterns of colonization: co-optation of Aboriginal elites; dispossession through the extinguishment of Aboriginal rights; and cultural genocide through the assimilation of Aboriginal peoples into the Euro-Canadian mainstream.
Another Aboriginal critique of treaties involves concern that modern-day treaties should not use the language of surrender and extinguishment. As the Nisga'a Tribal Council asserted in a submission to the federal government, "Extinguishment severs a First Nation's link with our past… Canadians must come to understand that our enjoyment and use of our lands and resources in the years to come is based not on a grant from the Crown, but is a vital part of our ancestral inheritance."
Any debate over surrender and extinguishment must grapple with the federal government’s fiduciary obligation towards Aboriginal peoples. This obligation, which was given clear judicial articulation by the Supreme Court in the 1984 Guerin case, derives from the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and other legal instruments. At its most extreme, this trustee-like role of Aboriginal peoples turned them into wards of the state.
The question arises of how the government of Canada could fulfil its fiduciary responsibility in treaties in which Crown officials had Aboriginal negotiators sign documents that extinguished Aboriginal rights. How could the Crown be the chief beneficiary of treaties that formalize the surrender of these rights? Were Crown officials in a position of conflict of interest?
Manitoba Judge A.C. Hamilton addressed these issues in a 1995 report to the minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Developmententitled A New Partnership. He wrote: "It appears to me that the demand that one party sign a surrender of rights recognized and affirmed by the Constitution is a flagrant breach of the Crown's fiduciary obligation." Judge Hamilton proposed several options on how modern-day treaties might be worded to avoid the pitfalls of extinguishment while providing non-Aboriginal interests with assurances that their land titles would be safe from challenge.
Excluded Groups
There are still Aboriginal groups whose representatives were not present at treaty negotiations. The most famous such group is the Lubicon Cree, whose ancestors were not present in the making of Treaty 8 in 1899. The reserve-less Lubicon, whose territory is in the midst of Alberta's lucrative oil patch, have faced tremendous resistance, both politically and in the courts, in their search for a settlement. They have been frustrated in their efforts to find a secure niche through a modern-day treaty.
Other Aboriginal groups excluded from the treaty system include the Teme-Augama Anishnabai, the people of the tiny overpopulated Long Lake 58 reserve, and the people of the Pic-Heron Bay reserve. These communities were passed over in the 1850 negotiation of the Robinson Treaties.
Ntesinan
After extensive international lobbying, the Innu of Labrador finally entered into treaty negotiations in 1996 with Canada andNewfoundland. The major motivation beneath the negotiations is the discovery and purchase by Inco of a huge nickel deposit at Voisey's Bay in Labrador. Before the discovery, the Innu had successfully drawn attention in Europe to their assertion of Aboriginal title in their lands, which they call Ntesinan. The Innu particularly resisted the low-level jet training facility in Goose Bay. This criticism gained the attention of peace activists and environmentalists, who used their influence to publicize the effect of NATO’s war preparations on Innu hunting culture. In appealing to international public opinion, the Innu employed tactics similar to those of the Lubicon Cree in their (ultimately frustrated) efforts to make a modern-day treaty as a means to survive as a distinct Aboriginal society.
Treaties in Canada's Constitutional and International Law
Patriation and the Constitutional Conferences
Aboriginal and treaty rights have been a controversial and difficult issue during the patriation of the Canadian Constitution with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
On 5 November 1981, nine provincial governments (excluding Québec) entered into the federal government's patriation plan on the condition that Aboriginal and treaty rights be stripped from the draft constitution.
However, a compromise was soon reached. Section 35 of theConstitution Act recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights. Premier Lougheed of Alberta was instrumental in inserting the word "existing," expecting this would lead to a more limited judicial interpretation of Section 35.
Aboriginal peoples argued that Canada lacked authority to sever the relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the imperial Crown without consent. Their challenge to the legality of patriation ultimately led to Chief Justice Lord Denning’s judgement of January 1982, in which he confirmed that treaty relationships entered by Indigenous peoples in Canada before 1923 had indeed been with the Crown in respect of the United Kingdom. Through constitutional evolution, however, the treaty rights of Aboriginal peoples had come to be vested with the Crown in the right of Canada. "No parliament," proclaimed Lord Denning, "should do anything to lessen the worth of these guarantees."
Aboriginal peoples held to their conviction that Aboriginal self-government is an inherent right, and must be constitutionally recognized as such. In the 1987 Meech Lake Accord, the first ministers, while recognizing Québec as a "distinct society," failed to recognize this right. This failure led to Elijah Harper’s stand on the floor of the Manitoba legislature, which contributed to the Meech Lake Accord’s demise and the armed standoff at Oka.
The Charlottetown Consensus Report
Four Aboriginal organizations, including the Assembly of First Nations, were included in the next round of constitutional deliberations. These deliberations culminated in the Charlottetown consensus report, which was subjected to a national referendum in 1992. The Charlottetown document, which was approved by the federal and provincial governments of Canada, included a proposed addition to Section 35 stating, "the Aboriginal peoples of Canada have the inherent right of self-government within Canada." The word "inherent" was intended to demonstrate that the right was derived not from the Crown but rather from the histories, distinct identities and self-determination of Aboriginal peoples whose existence predates that of Canada.
The Charlottetown document was rejected as a basis for constitutional amendment by a majority of Canadians in all jurisdictions except Ontario. While most Inuit voters happily sanctioned the deal, Aboriginal voters largely rejected it. This rejection marked a lack of confidence at the grass-roots level in the Assembly of First Nations. In the Prairie provinces, the Aboriginal rejection was also an expression of unhappiness with the format of multilateral negotiations. By its very nature, this federal-provincial-Aboriginal format undermined the integrity of bilateral, nation-to-nation treaty making with the Crown that in the view of many Aboriginal peoples still defines their alliances with the Canadian state.
Treaties and Québec
The provincial election of the Parti Québécois government (1994) and the referendum on sovereignty (1995) highlighted treaty issues in a debate about partitioning Québec if Québec declares independence.
One of the key participants was Mathew Coon Come, Grand Chief of the Cree (of Québec). In a Cree referendum during the Québec sovereignty referendum, 95 per cent of Chief Coon Come's people voted to maintain their alliance with Canada even if the government of Québec declared independence. A referendum of the Québec Inuit had similar results. Chief Coon Come then asserted that if Canada is divisible, so is Québec.
Coon Come based his position largely on the James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement of 1975. He explained, "Only sovereigns have the Treaty making power, and Québec as a province and not a State, does not have this power. The Treaty making power rests exclusively with Canada and the Aboriginal peoples."
Treaties and International Law
In 1987, the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations began a global study of "treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements between states and Indigenous population." The government of Canada attempted to derail the study, arguing that an international "focus on Treaties distorts the debate about Aboriginal peoples, whose plight today stems in most cases not from treaties or from a lack of treaties, but rather from their systematic exclusion from the economic, social, cultural and political life of the countries in which they live."
In spite of Canada's intervention, the UN treaty study continued under the direction of Cuban Special Rapporteur Miguel Martinez. In 1989, he visited the Onion Lake reserve in Saskatchewan to hear testimony from Treaty Indians. He issued a progress report in 1992, and his final report was published in 1999. His work influenced the UN’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on 13 September 2007, Article 37 of that declaration reads: “Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.”
Treaties and NAFTA
In spite of Aboriginal peoples’ efforts to gain recognition of their treaties as proof of their capacity to act as equals in international relations, the Government of Canada continues to maintain that these agreements lie exclusively within domestic law. This position was demonstrated in 1993 and 1994, when the Governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico instituted a new treaty that remade the commercial map of North America as a cohesive trading block. The negotiations that led up to the North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA) included no place for Aboriginal delegations. This sparked an uprising in Chiapas, Mexico, on 1 January 1994, the day the treaty came into force.
The politics of exclusion in NAFTA echoes the assumptions manifest in the making of the Treaty of Paris in 1783, in the transfer of the HBC titles to the Dominion of Canada in 1869–70, and in the making of the Meech Lake Accord in 1987.
Summary
Treaties constitute a thread of continuity woven through the earliest beginnings of the Canadian state until today. According to words spoken at some negotiations, they are to last "as long as the sun shines and the water flows."
The ornate script covering the older treaties expresses the British legalistic and imperialistic frame of mind. On the documents, Aboriginal leaders often marked their approval by drawing a picture of the animal totem of their clan. In these designs, different attitudes towards law, government, nature and society have been incorporated, however imperfectly, within the institutional structures of Canada.
Treaties have been viewed as everything from domestic contracts to international treaties between sovereign powers. In spite of inadequacies in the negotiation, maintenance, and renewal of Aboriginal treaties, the process itself demonstrates that Canada has grown and developed according to constitutional principles wherein recognition of Aboriginal rights is essential. These founding agreements between peoples constitute fundamental features in the unfolding drama of Canadian federalism. As Canada becomes home to an increasingly diverse population, the task of interpreting the significance of Aboriginal treaties for new generations of Canadians becomes ever more challenging.
-------------
Top 10 Failures of the United Nations
10
Terrorism
Many experts agree that “modern” terrorism began with the 1968 hijacking of El Al Israel Flight 426 by a Palestinian terrorist organization. The United Nations condemned the action, but failed to take any further action. These terrorist acts continued throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, with no reaction from the UN; a simple condemnation was as far as they would go.
With the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the UN finally took action, outlawing terrorism and punishing those responsible for the attacks. Unfortunately, this applied only to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. State-funded terrorist programs—such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Mossad—were unaffected. Nations that support groups that are widely linked to terrorism, such as Iran, are not held accountable specifically for these actions. To this date, the UN still does not have a clear definition of terrorism, and they have no plans to pursue one.
9
Nuclear Proliferation
At the creation of the UN in 1945, the United States was the only nation in the world to own and test nuclear weapons. In 1970, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was signed by 190 nations, including five nations that admitted to owning nuclear weapons: France, England, Russia, China, and the US.
Despite this treaty, nuclear stockpiles remain high, and numerous nations continue to develop these devastating weapons, including North Korea, Israel, Pakistan, and India. The failure of the non-proliferation treaty details the ineffectiveness of the United Nations, and their inability to enforce crucial rules and regulations on offending nations.
8
Sri Lanka
The small island nation of Sri Lanka experienced a bloody civil war lasting from 1983 to 2009, pitting the militant, separatist Tamil Tigers against government forces. In the final months of the war, the opposing sides were fighting in the heavily populated northeast coastline, a designated safe zone.
The fighting forced 196,000 people to flee, and trapped over 50,000 civilians. Independent experts urged the Human Rights Council of the UN to investigate claims of war crimes, and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon acknowledged being “appalled” by the situation, but the United Nations made no attempts to intervene on behalf of the civilian population. From January to April of 2009, over 6,500 civilians were killed in this so-called “safe-zone”.
7
Child Sex Abuse Scandal
Many nations plead for support from the United Nations in times of desperation and war. To the oppressed, the blue helmets of UN peacekeepers represent stability and safety. Unfortunately, this was not the case in numerous countries in the 1990s. Reports from Bosnia, Kosovo, Cambodia, Haiti, and Mozambique revealed a shocking trend; areas with peacekeeping forces saw a rapid rise in child prostitution.
Often, soldiers would reward the children with candy or small sums of money, so they could claim the sexual relationship was prostitution rather than rape. Senior officials in the United Nations refused to condemn the peacekeepers, as they feared this public shaming would discourage nations from joining peacekeeping forces.
6
Veto Power
The United Nations Security Council consists of fifteen nations, five of which are permanent: France, Russia, China, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The other ten nations are elected to serve two-year terms. The five permanent members enjoy the luxury of veto power; when a permanent member vetoes a vote, the Council resolution cannot be adopted, regardless of international support. Even if the other fourteen nations vote yes, a single veto will beat this overwhelming show of support.
The most recent use of the veto was by China and Russia, on July 19th, 2012. The Security Council attempted to evoke chapter VII sanctions from the United Nations Charter to intervene and prevent genocide in Syria. But the vetoes by China and Russia halted any international intervention. Since the Syrian Civil War began, an estimated 60,000 civilians have been killed, with thousands more displaced.
5
Srebrenica Massacre
This 1995 Bosnian War massacre was the single worst act of mass murder on European soil since World War II. After an ethnic cleansing campaign led by the Serbs targeted the Bosniaks, a largely Muslim community, the United Nations designated Srebrenica a safe-zone in 1993. Militarized units in the zone were forced to disarm, and a peacekeeping force was put in place, consisting of six hundred Dutch soldiers. The Serbs then surrounded the safe-zone with tanks, soldiers, and artillery pieces.
With the zone surrounded, supply lines were slow-moving at best. The UN forces were running low on ammunition, fuel, and food, as the Serbs continued to build an army around Srebrenica.
In July, Serbian forces invaded the area, forcing the small UN team back. As many as 20,000 Bosniak refugees fled to the UN compound in Potocari, seeking protection from the advancing Serbs. Despite the UN peacekeeping force present, Serbian soldiers entered the camp, raping Bosniak women and murdering freely while the Dutch peacekeepers did nothing. By July 18th, 7,800 Bosniaks were dead, due largely to an ill-equipped and unprepared UN force.
4
Khmer Rouge
Ruling Cambodia from 1975 to 1979, the Khmer Rouge practiced an extreme form of Communism, as dictated by their borderline-psychotic leader Pol Pot. Any suspected enemies were executed, including professionals and intellectuals. Ethnic Vietnamese, Ethnic Chinese, and Christians were executed en masse.
In 1979, the Vietnamese army invaded Cambodia to oust the Khmer Rouge and end the massacre. Pol Pot was forced in exile, and a new government was put in place in Cambodia. Shockingly, the United Nations refused to recognize this new government because it was backed by Vietnam, which had recently ended a decade-long conflict with the United States. Until 1994, the United Nations recognized the Khmer Rouge as the true government of Cambodia, despite the fact that they had killed 2.5 million Cambodians, amounting to 33% of their total population.
3
The Cold War
The Cold War exemplifies the failure behind the United Nations Charter. With the atrocities of World War II still fresh in their minds, the original founders aimed to foster human rights for all citizens of the world. In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was established, which was binding to all nations, along with the Convention Against Genocide.
Almost immediately, the USSR disregarded these. Civic rights were virtually non-existent. Stalin continued to rule with an iron fist, silencing all opponents. In numerous Soviet Bloc nations, uprisings demanding the rights established in the UDHR were crushed with force. With the United Nations unwilling to act upon such atrocities, the words in the charter were rendered meaningless for those who needed them the most.
2
Darfur
In 2003, the unstable nation of Sudan erupted in conflict, as various militia groups criticized and attacked the government for oppressing non-Arabs. Early in the war, rebel forces defeated the Sudanese military in more than thirty battles. Seeing that defeat was imminent, the government funded the Janjaweed, a group of Arab militants. By 2005, the Janjaweed were carrying out attacks on populated villages using artillery and helicopters, prompting condemnation by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Despite this condemnation, the UN did not enter Sudan, instead urging members of the African Union to intervene.
As the African Union attempted an intervention, it became apparent that the Sudanese military was destroying civilian populations. Reports emerged revealing that Sudanese military planes were painted white, to resemble UN humanitarian aircraft, only to drop bombs on villages. It was not until 2006 that 200 UN soldiers were dispatched to the area. Despite their limited presence, fighting continued until 2010. In seven years, an estimated 300,000 Sudanese civilians were killed.
1
Rwanda
The Rwandan genocide of 1994 details the gross inability of the United Nations to carry out its sworn duty to maintain peace and security. Following the Rwandan Civil War in the early 1990s, tensions between two ethnic groups, the Hutu and the Tutsis, were at a dangerous high. In 1993, UN peacekeeping forces entered the nation, attempted to secure the capital and enable humanitarian aid. The peacekeeping forces were not authorized to use military maneuvers to achieve these goals.
In January of 1994, a cable was sent from the Canadian Force Commander to the UN headquarters detailing the imminent threat of genocide by Hutu mobs on Tutsi minorities. The Security Council never received the cable, and the notice was largely ignored. Following the loss of eighteen American servicemen in the Battle of Mogadishu, the United States was largely unwilling to help in any intervention.
Most shocking in this series of events is the abandonment of a school by Belgian peacekeepers after ten soldiers were murdered. Thousands had flocked to the school for UN protection, and roaming gangs of Hutu supporters killed nearly all of them. Close to one million Rwandans were killed in the genocide, amounting to twenty percent of the population.
--------------
Eight Reasons Why the UN Human Rights Committee Is Ineffective
Author Geoffrey Robertson says that the United Nations Human Rights Committee has failed its purpose. He identifies eight reasons for this failure.
In 1976, the UN passed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This covenant, which had been in the drafting phase for nearly thirty years, was meant to present, in treaty form, the ideals encapsulated in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
To this end, the UN Human Rights Committee came into being. The purpose of the Committee was two-fold:
To study reports submitted every five years by state parties to the convention, and to make general comments on these reports,
To serve as the body to which individuals and groups could complain against states regarding the infringement of the rights spelled out in the convention.
However, according to author Geoffrey Robertson, the Committee has been a failure. Outside of a few cases, the Committee's influence has been negligible. Robertson identifies eight reasons for the Human Rights Committee's failure, and suggests ways that those failures may be overcome.
Evidence of Ineffectiveness
Is the Human Rights Committee really a failure? Yes, says Robertson. He provides the following evidence.
The Committee was established, in part, to serve as a forum in which individuals could file complaints against states for human rights abuses. However,
In twenty years of existence, the Committee had registered only 765 complaints. This is set against the backdrop of the two-billion individuals (from over 100 states) who could notionally call on the Committee for protection.
From the 765 complaints, the Committee only rendered 263 “views” in 199 cases (the Committee is only able to communicate its views, which carry no obligation for states),
In only 15 per cent of the cases have states implemented the Committee's views or offered any remedy to the applicant.
States that are not party to the convention are under no obligation to report to the Committee. However, even member states do not appear to take the Committee very seriously. In order to be required to allow individuals to communicate with the Committee, a state has to ratify the Optional Protocol. States such as the U.S., China and even Britain have not ratified the Optional Protocol. Additionally, even member states often ignore the Committee.
Libya
Perhaps one of the most potent symbols of the Committee's failure involves Libya. Libya submitted its report to the Committee in 1995. The report was dishonest to the point of absurdity. Muammar Gaddafi, Libya's leader since 1969, had just given the order for expatriate dissidents to be assassinated, and was thwarting justice over the Lockerbie bombing.
How did the Committee respond?
It took three years for the Committee to issue its verdict. It complimented Libya on its treatment of women and expressed polite concern over the murder and torture of oppositionists. Not surprisingly, Libya ignored the Committee's comments.
Then, in a move that Robertson says completely discredited the Committee, Libya was elected to the chair of the Committee in 2003.
Eight Reasons for Failure
Why has the Human Rights Committee failed its mission? What could help the Committee become effective? Robertson offers eight insights.
1. Government Mouthpiece
The eighteen “experts” that make up the Committee are more often government mouthpieces than independent experts. Some of the Committee members are actually in government service as ambassadors or cabinet ministers. This biases the Committee toward defending state actions rather than censuring them.
Until the Committee is made up of truly independent experts, there is little hope of serious state accountability.
2. Meets Infrequently
The Committee meets three times a year for only three weeks each. Robertson says that expecting the Committee to be able to do a year's worth of work in nine weeks is ludicrous.
If the Committee is to become effective, it will need to have sufficient time to carry out its commitment to monitoring and problem-solving.
3. No Hearings or Adversarial Proceedings
The Human Rights Committee holds no hearings. There are no live witnesses nor cross-examination. There is no provision for oral argument nor adversarial proceedings. All work is done on paper and, outside the input from some NGOs, based on state self report.
If the Committee has any hope of actually monitoring state behavior, it will have to have ways to gather information and hear perspectives outside state reports.
4. Depends on UN Secretariat
The Committee is a UN “organ,” not a quasi-judicial body—much less a court. It depends totally on the UN Secretariat for structure, budget and status. The UN's penchant to avoid member criticism is reflected in the work of the Committee.
The Committee must be able to criticize states—in more than polite “comments.” To do this, it needs to be independent of UN apron strings.
5. Not Focused on Individual Rights
The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights focuses on state duties toward individuals and not individual rights against states. It has no power as a court to protect individual rights. It cannot compel or even pressure states to abide by their Covenant duties.
The Committee needs some way of protecting individual rights rather than simply encouraging states to do their duty. There also needs to be some way of putting pressure on states to live up to the Covenant's standard of human rights.
6. No Independent Fact-Finding Capacity
The Human Rights Committee does not have any independent fact-finding capacity. This is a crippling weakness since it prevents the Committee from effectively monitoring state activities.
Even though the Committee has access to the Human Rights Commission's fact-finding reports, these are inadequate. The Committee must have the ability to gain information necessary in order to carry out its mandate effectively.
7. Work Is Unreported
What does the Committee do? What are its findings? The vast majority of human rights victims will never know. Committee proceedings are carried out behind closed doors, and its files are kept confidential. When Committee reports are published, Robertson says that they are rarely worth reading as they lack detailed reasoning.
It is difficult to see how the Committee can be very effective without broader public exposure.
8. No Enforcement Power
The Human Rights Committee cannot enforce its views. Assuming that member states even file reports, they can easily ignore Committee views. In fact, rather than increase a state's support of human rights, an individual's appeal to the Committee may even have a perverse effect. Robertson says that death row inmates are sometimes targeted for execution precisely because they have filed a complaint with the Committee.
Without any mechanism to enforce Committee views, states will have little incentive to take the Committee's views seriously.
The Problem Is Endemic to UN Bodies
Robertson says that it is not fair to single out the Human Rights Committee as unique with respect to the challenges it faces. In fact, the problems are endemic to the UN system. Because the UN is made up of member states, it will often go out of its way to avoid criticizing its members. Though the UN Security Council will occasionally level sanctions against a member state, the balance of history demonstrates that UN organs are more likely to turn a blind eye to human rights abuses.
https://clg.portalxm.com/library/keytext.cfm?keytext_id=122
---------------------