NDP BC invades sovereign Wet'suwet'en territory, RCMP arrest defenders

..here's the live video trudeau feed 

LIVE: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is speaking in the House of Commons regarding the protests outside the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory.

Over the weekend, Trudeau cancelled his trip to the Caribbean to meet with leaders there and instead met with members of his cabinet.

Members of the Mohawk territory say they’re not lifting the protest until the RCMP leave the Wet’suwet’en territory.

Rail services has stopped in many parts of the country and the Mohawks of Tyendinaga say they’re not going anywhere until the Wet’suwet’en peoples say they can leave.

..trudeau bla bla bla. scheer disgusting, lying, racist rant.

..singh calling trudeau to account.

..singh used the word colonisation but used it in the context of something in the past not current.

Who’s banking the Coastal GasLink pipeline?

quote:

1) JPMorgan Chase

JPMorgan Chase is the #1 backer of TransCanada Pipelines Ltd., and therefore of the Coastal GasLink pipeline.

JPMorgan Chase is the lead agent on the majority of the company’s loans. TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. currently has four loans worth a total of about $9.8 billion. Two of those, totaling $5.5 billion, were signed in December 2018 and increased the subsidiary’s available credit by two thirds. (We recently wrote up the details of those transactions.) JPMorgan Chase was the lead agent — the bank responsible for arranging the deal and coordinating between TransCanada and its lenders — on both of those new loans. That makes it the lead agent on more than half of TransCanada Pipeline Ltd.’s current credit. It’s also a lender to the company’s other two lines of credit.

JPMorgan Chase is one of two key bond underwriters. TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. issued nine bonds, totaling $9.3 billion, in 2018. JPMorgan Chase was a lead manager — one of two banks directing the bond sale — on eight of those nine transactions.

This makes JPMorgan Chase the #1 banker of TransCanada Pipelines Ltd., and therefore of Coastal GasLink pipeline, despite an Environmental and Social Policy (see p. 17) that expects clients to obtain free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples.

2) Bank of Montreal

Bank of Montreal is the lead agent on two older loans to TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. that add up to about $4.3 billion. It’s also a lender to the two new loans and participated in one 2018 bond sale.

3) Deutsche Bank

Deutsche Bank was the other lead manager, alongside JPMorgan Chase, on eight bonds (worth approximately $8.7 billion) that TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. issued in 2018. The German bank was also a lender to all four current loans.

4) Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce was the sole manager on one of the nine bonds issued by TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. in 2018, as well as a lender to all four current loans.

The Canadian bank also advised TransCanada on a November 2018 deal that sums up TransCanada’s backwards direction: the sale of its stake in wind energy facilities in Quebec, to the tune of $630 million, in order to fund Coastal GasLink pre-development costs.

5) 17 other banks

At least 17 other global banks are also supporting TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. in a range of roles on its current lines of credit and recent bond sales. These include: Alberta Treasury Branches, Bank of America, Barclays, Citi, Crédit Agricole, Credit Suisse, Desjardins, Export Development Canada, HSBC, Mizuho, MUFG, National Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of Canada, Scotiabank, SMBC, TD, and Wells Fargo.*

NDPP]</p> <p>[quote=bekayne]</p> <p>[quote=NDPP wrote:

Despite a clearly  expressed national consensus in favour of the Wetsuweten position 

Source?

NDPP wrote:

Open your eyes and smell the coffee.  But as always, present company excepted.

This coffee strong enough for you?

http://angusreid.org/coastal-gaslink-wetsuweten/

Letter of Support of the Unist’ot’en Camp

The Vancouver Secondary Teachers Association (VSTA) is writing in support of the Unist’ot’en Camp near Houston, BC.  We are concerned about the unjust treatment of the Wet’suwet’en people by the Federal Government’s use of the RCMP to forcibly remove them from their unceded and traditional lands.  The Provincial Government of British Columbia, as well as the Federal Government have both committed to uphold the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  Article 8.2.b of the Declaration states that “States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources.” The treatment of the Wet’suwet’en people is in direct contradiction to the aforementioned article.

Canada has made a solemn commitment to reconciliation and as Public School teachers, in light of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, we have been tasked and honoured with the duty of working towards building relationships between settlers and Indigenous people.  The only way that our nation will ever be able to achieve true reconciliation is by treating all Indigenous peoples with respect, which includes respecting their rightful claim to protect their territory.  We call upon your government to its promise and commitment to the TRB Calls to Action as well as the United Nation’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

..elizabeth may on power play.

Link

What's really illegal? The defence of unceded Wet'suwet'en territory or provincial permits for Coastal GasLink pipeline?

quote:

I asked Huson what she wanted to tell our readers. The first words that came out of her mouth was that she was not a "protester".

"I'm following Wet'suwet'en law by occupying my land," Huson declared.

She went on to describe how the province had "mismanaged every resource extractive industry that ever hit our territories".

Her father's territory was polluted by seepage of acidic waste from the Equity Silver Mine. This peaked in the 1980s and continued for many years after that.

"They had a breach of a tailing pond where [people in his] territory did salmon fishing," Huson said. "They can't hunt there anymore. And it's still not cleaned up."

That led to subsequent fights by the Wet'suwet'en against another mining project. 

But the highest-profile battle has been over the Canadian state's attempt to create an energy corridor through unceded Wet'suwet'en territory.

First, there was Enbridge's Northern Gateway project, which was eventually vetoed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau after various court battles.

Next, there was an attempt to push through the Pacific Trails pipeline, which would have delivered fracked natural gas to a Chevron LNG plant in Kitimat. Chevron is not proceeding, so that pipeline project appears to be dead.

The latest pipeline project is being advanced by Coastal GasLink, which is owned by TransCanada, New York–based KKR, and AIMCo, which manages Alberta public-sector pension funds.

quote:

Meanwhile, Tait declared that Wet'suwet'en laws would never support a project as destructive as the Coastal GasLink pipeline.

"We’re just in too delicate a position at the headwaters of the Wedzin’kwa [Bulkley and Morice rivers]," she said at the time. "Our whole society is structured around our salmon runs and access to our territories. So it’s at odds with our values.”

In a commentary on Straight.com, Unist'ot'en legal counsel Kate Gunn and Bruce McIvor wrote that the Supreme Court of Canada has concluded the province's issuance of permits—like the ones for the Coastal GasLink project—"is not based on established legal authority".

"It is based on the fact that the Province has proceeded, for over 150 years, to make unilateral decisions about Indigenous lands," Gunn and McIvor wrote. "The fact that the Province has acted since the 1860s as though it has full authority to decide how Indigenous peoples’ lands are used does not make doing so legal or just."

..while at the center of the struggle is as may puts it "this is a land issue, a title issue, a justice issue and only very incidentally a pipeline issue." the legal issue is being won by wet'suwet'en. governments and corporations are resorting to brute force. this will not get them far today as there is a larger struggle happening on a global scale.

..in canada climate justice has, as i've said many times, is the banner that most struggles are uniting under. the struggle re corporate domination, the destruction of the enviroment, neoliberal austerity policy. this climate justice is united with the wet'suwet'en and other indigenous struggle like tmx and the tarsands project. one of the main reasons other than the justice issue is the ability of the indigenous folk to force the powers that be to the table. to shut down canada. no other sector in canadian progressive society has that ability. 

..there will be no agreement coming from consultaion in the wet'suwet'en matter because we are at a crossroads. at the root of it is power/capitalism needs to extract and control everything and politicians are their puppets. vs the 99% who cannot continue to exist under those conditions.   

..there is maybe a possibility that another route is chosen and that maybe canada and bc will give even more cookies to the lng project. but this will not end the struggle nor the players involved. 

Power and Force in Canada: Wet’suwet’en Blockades and Occupation

Defenders and Leverage

Blockades and ‘illegal’ occupations are akin to labour strikes, in the sense that they hold hostage the priority of authorities in this country: productivity.

Note that the sovereignty of Indigenous nations has been repeatedly violated, especially in provinces like B.C. where most land, including big cities, is unceded. Legal precedents such as the Supreme Court ruling on Aboriginal title in the same area, affirms the use and occupation of unceded land as a validating Aboriginal title. However, the courts are a Canadian legal system, and although activists use them for legal disputes any legal ruling is one step abstracted from the human experiences.

To clarify, the legality is compelling and our legal system a legitimate authority. Our courts will need to increase clarity in moving forward. Reconciliation is largely dependent on the legal system recognizing Indigenous grievances as legitimate; from the missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirited people to disproportionate police violence.

That said, the injunction to remove Wet’suwet’en people from the pipeline route being enforced could have been the end of the story. But it is not, because of the blockades and occupations that halt productivity, so suddenly the Prime Minister decides that the issue is important enough to remain in the country.

Surely the left-wing block in B.C. would have still had marches in support, and some government officials would have reaffirmed their dedication to reconciliation. Eventually, the issue would be added to a long list of examples to be cited in political discussion.

It is only with the leverage that the momentum continues. Every relevant official in this country knows that there are consequences to ignoring the problem.

It is difficult to make the case that if the Mohawk blockade in Bellville was not so economically consequential the Minister of Indigenous Services would still be negotiating with them as equals. “There’s a lot more work to be done, and I have a few messages I need to go back to the prime minister with,” contributed to a public response that takes them seriously, in a way that land defenders in Wet’suwet’en territory were not afforded.

In short, movements like the Black Civil Rights or labour rights are successful when they find good leverage, and Wet’suwet’en self-governance is no exception. So, how do authorities respond?

At Gunpoint

On February 7th, 2020, a media account of the Gidimt’en clan posted a video showing four land defenders on a structure, asking an officer to stop pointing a gun on them.

The gun appears to be a rifle and can be seen pointed directly at the camera that one land defender is holding. Also in the video, some of the other police are speaking to what appears to be a media member with sound equipment.

One land defender says “They are making the media leave because they do not want them to see them pointing their gun at us. I have nothing, please take down your weapon,”.

This situation ended without loss of life, and the RCMP’s statement implies that there never should have been a concern in the first place.

 “The ERT member did not point the firearm at any protestor during the operation. The riflescope has a large objective lens which allows the viewer to observe people or objects without pointing a rifle at anyone,”.

This explanation is highly contested. The officers had binoculars. The police vastly outnumbered the land defenders, which appeared to be unarmed. The person who has the gun pointed directly at him was filming from a place with good visuals of officers, so it is reasonable to assume that they could see him and assess the risk the person posed.

So why use a firearm as a tool to look at someone?

“... it was unknown whether there were any other persons inside the structures of the camp area. Police officers cannot simply assume there are not threats in situations such as this,” an RCMP officer is quoted saying.

Hunting rifles are not uncommon in the area so it is reasonable for police to consider that risk but the same land defender quoted earlier explicitly states that he “is of no harm,” to the officers. It is also reasonable to assume most Canadian’s want to live in a country where their police only point guns at civilians when there is an imminent threat, and in this case, that threat is questionable at best.

So why make a public statement excusing the use of a firearm as a tool to look at someone?

The RCMP says "this was the most suitable and only piece of equipment to quickly and effectively observe the persons at the scene," and claims that as soon as it was established that there was no threat, the officer switched to binoculars.

This explanation ignores the real relationship between police violence and Indigenous communities; at the very least it is poor optics. When officers are sent to peacefully enforce something, it is intuitive that appearing to point a gun at someone is not de-escalation.

And that is a charitable explanation, because if it really was an honest mistake then when the optics were pointed out to the police, there should have been some reaction. It was clearly pointed out by the person pleading with the officer to not point his gun at him, in real-time, and there is no evidence that even one of the many officers there acknowledged the concern, or changed the practice. Likewise, the RCMP statement doubles down on the practice.....

Epaulo, if you consider the point that "whites want land" which I think is a fair analysis there is a scary trend here. With global warming there was a recent statement that much of the arctic in the next few decades can grow food. You can consider that the land the whites were less interested in -- Northern land, that Indigenous peoples were forced on to --  is now under threat.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/climate-change-farming-1.5461275

Go to the cited article and look at the maps.

Paladin1 wrote:

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Can I ask a few practical questions of you?

Here are the answers to most of the questions you could possibly have. A sort of FAQ file.

Settlers use a number of strategies to maintain the colonial status quo, including distorting or dismissing the past, doublespeak and deceit, divide-and-conquer politics, paternalism, invoking a singular “rule of law,” and, of course, violence and coercion. Our hope is that by exposing some of the discursive tactics in the settler playbook – and putting them in historical context – we can help settlers to see these “moves to innocence” for what they are. As well, we want to show that settlers can choose how to respond in these moments. Instead of treading the familiar paths of colonial hubris that have led to so much pain and damage, we invite settlers to recognize the limits of our knowledge and experience and to listen to Indigenous elders, youth, scholars, and knowledge keepers. In the case of the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs, their calls are clear: the RCMP must leave their territory and the Coastal GasLink project must pause for nation-to-nation negotiations.

http://activehistory.ca/2020/02/exposing-the-settler-playbook-responses-...

Update from Wet’suwet’en chiefs meeting. Discussions by phone with @Carolyn_Bennett happening. Ministers wanting Mohawks to stand down. Chiefs adamant that meetings will only happen after Rcmp leave territory, all charges dropped, cgl adheres to eviction. #Wetsuweten #bcpoli

Link

Atiya Jaffar

FYI CN was planning to lay off workers well before railroad blockades. Making this announcement now was a strategy to villainize #WetsuwetenStong demonstrators.