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

..2.24 min youtube video

Rail blockades escalate, disrupt commutes

...

Wet’suwet’en protesters standing on the highway, at Mount Newton X-Road, in Central Saanich. #yyj

Link

..good 6 min interview

Metro Morning

As the police arrest protesters in Tyendinaga, Jesse Wente questions the myths that Canadians believe about themselves

Supporters of the indigenous Wet'suwet'en Nation's hereditary chiefs block access to the Port of Vancouver as part of protests against the Coastal GasLink pipeline on Feb. 24, 2020.

Petition to the House of Commons in Parliament assembled

Whereas:

• Canadian constitutional law is accountable to the human rights obligations outlined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP);
• Canada has also committed to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report "Calls to Action";
• The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called on Canada to: immediately suspend work on the Coastal GasLink pipeline until free, prior, and informed consent is obtained from Indigenous Peoples; immediately cease the forced eviction of Wet’suwet’en Peoples; prohibit the use of lethal weapons against Indigenous Peoples and guarantee no force will be used against them; withdraw the RCMP and associated security and policing services from traditional lands;
• Hereditary Chiefs have the right to grant consent, or not, for activities on their territories; and
• The Coastal GasLink project has the potential to release massive amounts of methane through the extraction, transport, liquefaction and regasification processes.

We, the undersigned, citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to commit to upholding the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Calls to Action by immediately:.....

Alberta motion, from Jason Kenney's twitter:

"Be it resolved, that the @LegAssemblyofAB unequivocally denounce the illegal blockading of Canada's core infrastructure, including railways, pipelines, ports & roadways & call for the law to be enforced without delay.”

The Alberta NDP voted in favour. 

The BCNDP is colonizing as we speak. 

The Sask NDP supports pipeines too. 

All 3 parties are enemies of human rights. 

..1.5 min video

It’s takes village to stop a genocide — Mohawks set up giant tent

Even as a train rolled by last night, Mohawks gathered in a harsh rainstorm to put up a massive series of tents to house people on Wyman Rd. The people are building infrastructure and capacity for those willing to stand up against RCMP and OPP bullying on unceded indigenous lands. Supporters of the Wet’suwet’en and Mohawks are invited to come and join the camp. Bring your own tents, plan to stay a while, follow the direction of camp organizers, bring what you need to support yourselves, and come be a part of history.

THIS HOUR: Release from the B.C. RCMP says they’ve reached an agreement to withdraw from the Morice Forest Service Road to allow negotiations to happen. That was a key precondition for the #Wetsuweten hereditary chiefs. http://bc.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2130&languageId=1&contentId=63473… #cdnpoli #bcpoli #WetsuwetenStong

..translated by my browser

Kahnawake chief Joe Norton links indigenous mobilization to global climate fight

In a statement that went unnoticed this week, the grand chief of the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake, Joe Tokwiro Norton, linked the current struggle of Aboriginal people across Canada directly to the global climate movement.​

Norton has accused Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other politicians of not understanding the issue of the solidarity movement towards the community of Wet'usuwet'en, British Columbia, which opposes the authorities' decision federal authorities to impose the construction of a gas pipeline on its territory without having previously obtained the consent of its hereditary chiefs.

"No one here is going to do Mr. Trudeau's dirty work," said Norton on Wednesday. Our people demonstrate peacefully on our own territory. The Prime Minister, and all the other politicians, should understand what is at stake. It is not just an Aboriginal dispute. It is also an issue that affects the millions of people concerned about climate change and the voracity of companies who constantly want to expand the exploitation of fossil fuels and who, therefore, seek to allow these fuels to drain to markets in pipelines. "

It is not the first time that indigenous people have combined their fight for the respect of their lands with campaigns waged around the world against the unrestrained exploitation of oil and gas, the combustion of which dangerously warms the planet. Representatives of indigenous communities took part in the big climate demonstration on September 27 in Montreal with Greta Thunberg.

But in the context of the current crisis, Mr. Norton's words have a particular resonance because they inscribe the solidarity movement for the community of Wet'usuwet'en in an international and much broader movement. His statements are reported in Iori: Wase , an online newspaper from Kahnawake. They had little or no echo in the French media in Montreal.....

..another way to look at it..you can make a wheel with spokes with indigenous sovereignty at the center. the spokes are related/connected issues..not separate. 

ie..if indigenous folk see themselves as caretakers of mother earth how can that be separated from climate change.

Counter-protester removed from Winnipeg demonstration:

Quote:

Police removed a man who had tried intervening in the protests. The man was seen entering one of the circles, before being physically ousted by protesters. The man was eventually taken away by police. Some of the protestors told CTV News they were a little shaken up by the incident.

"There was just one individual who I guess was angry at the protest. I think it was a lack of understanding," one protestor said.

"A man decided to breach our circle and put his hands on Indigenous women. He put his hands on me," another protestor said.

Alderville First Nation Chief Dave Mowat and Council have issued a statement declaring their full support for Wet’suwet’en.

The statement reads as follows:

Alderville First Nation Chief and Council declare our full support for the Wet’suwet’en hereditary leaders and peoples and the struggle in protecting their aboriginal title and land base. In 1997 the Delgamuukw decision brought down by the Supreme Court of Canada provided an in-depth account of aboriginal title claimed and proven by the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan peoples in British Columbia. This case is critically important and is a core element in this current dispute. Aboriginal title is not a fiction, it is not simply an inconvenience for those corporate and political agendas that help drive the erosion of aboriginal lands, of natural resources, literally of biodiversity. It is real and must be understood and respected or any hope for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reconciliation agenda is dead.

The history of Alderville First Nation is in part one of encroachment and the imposition of colonial law designed to break the back of the people. We too have had our immense struggles in holding on to and protecting our rightful place, our lands, and presence in society. Our voices historically have been silenced too often. As a result, we fully support the voice of the Wet’suwet’en and the requirement of their full, free, prior and informed consent not only over the natural gas project occurring at present but for all such projects that stand to impact their lands. Anything less is unacceptable because to reiterate, their aboriginal title is real and intact!

Chief and Council also respect the concern and the focus our membership is placing on this issue, and in our young people for your willingness to engage and stand up in support. This is a turning point in Canadian history, and we are all a part of that history. We also ask that peaceful expressions of support be employed (in all instances across Turtle Island), and that education and the understanding of aboriginal title remain at the centre of that support. Learn it, discuss it, express it in a way that educates and informs. By not losing sight of this and by understanding its critical importance in this struggle the collective voice of Alderville First Nation shall be heard loud and clear alongside the Wet’suwet’en and all Indigenous people!
Chi Miigwech
The Chief and Council of Alderville First Nation

Indigenous civil rights blockades should be met with a new diplomacy, not violence

Canada is at a critical crossroads. The Wet’suwet’en conflict brings us to a deciding moment in Canada, one that will shape the future of the nation. The divisive conflict is about land, Indigenous law, human rights and the nature of civil disobedience.

quote:

The national support for the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs includes the support of an increasing number of First Nations and non-Indigenous Canadians from coast to coast to demand the removal of the RCMP presence on Wet’suwet’en territory.

Indigenous resistance to encroachment on their own lands is being viewed as unlawful rather than as a conscientious act of civil disobedience, similar to historical figures like Rosa Parks, M.K. Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. Peaceful demonstrations by Indigenous Peoples and allies are acts of conscientious objection to laws that need to be re-examined if we are to move to peaceful co-existence, joint resource governance and wealth management.

Indigenous protesters and allies are standing up against unjust laws by making injustice visible to a larger public.

Increasing numbers of non-Indigenous people are demonstrating their support for the hereditary chiefs across Canada. Those people have been viewed by the premier of Alberta as creating “anarchy”, and by the leader of the Conservative Party as needing to “check their privilege” rather than as people of conscience engaging in the right to protest.

quote:

Since the hereditary chiefs did not sign the agreements signed by the band councils, Coastal GasLink did not meet the standards of Articles 18 and 19 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which affirms that “states shall consult and co-operate in good faith with Indigenous Peoples through their own representative institutions.”

Chief Alexander McKinnon from Nak'azdli First Nation, one of the elected band chiefs of the twenty band councils along the pipeline route, told CBC that in his community three councillors voted for the pipeline and three against it.

Chief McKinnon decided to vote in favour of the agreement despite a community referendum in which 70 per cent voted against the pipeline. He said his reasons for signing included both pressure from Coastal GasLink as well as his intention to ensure his community would have a voice on environmental decisions.

quote:

As an increasing number of Canadians stand together with Indigenous peoples to support reconciliation and the rights of Indigenous Peoples, we must look at this as a civil rights movement.

Canada Lays Bare the Lie it Calls “Reconciliation”

The Canadian state today is in the throes of a historic crisis of its own making, as it stands off against the Wet’suwet’en Nation, an Indigenous nation in northern British Columbia (BC) that is blocking construction of the Coastal GasLink (CGL)1 pipeline through their land (called the Yintah). The CGL pipeline would bring fracked gas from northwestern British Columbia to a planned LNG Canada liquid natural gas terminal on the BC coast at Kitimat that is to be built by an international fossil fuel consortium.2 Condensate, a byproduct of the fracking, will also be used as diluent needed to send tar sands oil through another planned pipeline, the TransMountain Expansion pipeline.

quote:

In many locations, standing injunctions and preemptive injunctions have been used to clear protests, but these have continued to be organized. Early on February 22, Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) moved in on the Tyendinaga railside encampment, but in response, a number of other blockades and occupations sprouted across the country. The mobilizations show no sign of ending soon.

Seeking to discredit the Wet’suwet’en traditional government and their supporters, the coordinated messaging of colonial governments and ruling class media has centred on disingenuous arguments that the Wet’suwet’en are “divided” – therefore the colonizer must decide! Some Indian Act bands on the pipeline route have consented to the project, but the traditional government of the Wet’suwet’en has not. And while the Ottawa-imposed Indian Act administration of the Wet’suwet’en may support the pipeline, its remit does not run to title and rights, which are the purview of the hereditary chiefs, a fact that Canada and BC know well. Nevertheless, despite lacking consent, the NDP-Green government of the province of British Columbia decided to plough ahead with the project, issuing all permits required and ante-ing up $5.35-billion in direct subsidies alongside a federal tax break of $1-billion. Courts granted injunctions against the Wet’suwet’en, once again deeming resource extraction of greater importance than the well-being and wishes of Indigenous communities.

For fractions of Canada’s ruling class, this carbon extraction project is a matter of economic and political urgency. In elite political circles, Alberta’s perennially offside politics are suddenly being framed as a national unity crisis of the highest importance, allegedly requiring both the federal government and Alberta to desperately expand Alberta’s carbon export capacity at any cost in order to address Alberta’s economic crisis, which is largely the result of collapsing demand for its expensive and dirty petroleum output. Large sums of money, including public pension fund monies and private capital, have already been committed to these heavily subsidized fossil fuel projects.

quote:

Recognizing Indigenous Title and Rights – and upholding FPIC – are Canada’s only way out

Yet despite all Canada’s attempts and its endemically Orwellian rhetoric on Indigenous rights, Indigenous Peoples are still here. Today as a result of the internet and social media, Indigenous people and nations are networked across Canada and North America. Decades of movement building and grassroots education and organization have laid the groundwork for today’s resistance. Indigenous intellectuals and journalists can now disseminate their message through social media and independent media, even while mainstream media continue to reflect the blinkered perspectives of their tiny social world. Younger generations who are cutting their teeth on climate change activism also understand solidarity more fluently, and are very conscious of Indigenous rights and the colonial character of the settler state.

This has resulted in an uprising that is the nightmare of Canada’s security state and political and economic elites, one they cannot get out of until they own up to the choice before them and reckon with what they have so far willfully postponed. There can be no “reconciliation” until Canada “gets over it” and breaks with colonial domination and theft as its core policy toward Indigenous people by recognizing Indigenous title and fully implementing UNDRIP, including the essential principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent. •

'Revolution is alive': Canada protests spawn climate and Indigenous rights movement

Since a police raid on an Indigenous territory at the start of February, a wave of civil disobedience has surged over Canada.

Mohawks in Ontario and Quebec have erected rail blockades that paralyzed passenger and freight travel on some lines. Other protesters – Indigenous and non-Indigenous – have followed suit, blockading tracks across the country. Thirty-seven people were arrested in Toronto this week for standing on commuter tracks during evening rush hour, paralyzing the city’s Union Station.

Social media has lit up with fiery rhetoric over the climate crisis and Indigenous rights. Street marches have filled cities and towns across the country with the sounds of beating drums and chanting voices.

The movement has amassed an unprecedented array of allies at home and abroad. Greenpeace has thrown its weight behind this anti-pipeline, pro-Indigenous rights movement – as have independent groups as far afield as San Francisco and London.

The protests are dialing up the pressure on the prime minister, Justin Trudeau, who came to power promising both to repair Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples, and to make meaningful environmental policy changes.

Now people are calling his bluff. “Reconciliation is dead, revolution is alive,” protesters shout – the mantra of a burgeoning Indigenous rights movement.

quote:

The response from the Mohawks – thousands of miles across the country – was immediate and uncompromising, perhaps because they had lived through something similar.

In 1990, the Mohawks of Kahnawake and Kanesatake near Montreal participated in a 78-day revolt known as the Oka Crisis, over the planned expansion of a golf course on to a burial ground. For the Wet’suwet’en, the pipeline is the latest flashpoint in a decades-long fight over their exclusive rights to traditional territory, which at one point went all the way to Canada’s supreme court.

Though there are parallels between the two revolts, Diabo said the Wet’suwet’en movement has gained broader appeal because at its core, it is about Canada’s doublespeak on the environment.

Just six months ago, hundreds of thousands of Canadians joined climate strikes, including Trudeau himself – despite the fact that his government continues to pursue massive fossil fuel projects.

“We’re still debating the environment versus the economy,” Diabo said. “So it’s about their title and land rights – but this goes to the broader issues about Canada’s approach to climate change.”

quote:

Quebec’s premier, François Legault, even claimed without evidence that Kahnawake Mohawks had stockpiled AK-47s – an accusation swiftly denied by the Mohawks, who said Legault was trying to “incite a response”.Alberta, meanwhile, has proposed legislation that would jail pipeline protesters for up to six months and issue massive fines starting at $1,000 a day.

Glen Coulthard, an associate professor in the University of British Columbia’s political science and First Nations and Indigenous studies departments, and a member of the Yellowknives Dene First Nation, said governments are working hard to paint protesters in a negative light “to render these movements as insignificant – the acts of outside agitators – in order to discredit the broader issues being raised”.

But the participation of non-Indigenous people is critical to the Wet’suwet’en movement, said Diabo, adding that many Indigenous groups have stayed silent for fear of losing federal funding.

Sylvia McAdam, a founder of the Idle No More resistance movement and a University of Windsor law professor, as well as a Cree from Big River First Nation in Saskatchewan, said the participation of so many non-Indigenous people was heartening.

“Whether you’re protesting water [contamination], whether you’re protecting land, whether you’re speaking about white supremacy – those are all symptoms of the core issue,” McAdam said.

quote:

Successive Canadian governments have called for “reconciliation” with Indigenous peoples, but Coulthard argues that such calls have been little more than PR cover for land grabs and business-as-usual.

“Reconciliation attempts to create a business climate that is conducive to investment and legal jurisdictions that will facilitate non-Native economic development on Native land,” he said. “You’re seeing it fail. We’re witnessing it in real time.”

As the climate crisis becomes a top concern for a majority of Canadians, the Wet’suwet’en resistance movement represents an important shift in the country, said Coulthard.

“Canadians are recognizing that, in words and deeds, it’s Indigenous peoples who have demonstrated themselves as concerned about the environment and our long-term wellbeing. Canada sure hasn’t done that. The provinces sure aren’t doing it.

“So they’re getting behind people who have both stated historically – and have demonstrated right into the present – that they’re willing to take those obligations they have to the land seriously.”

The Ipsos poll is very problematic. I have said to people here that I have worked in this area. The way you ask a question is under control of the client and they will do it based on the result you want. It is a real art and in some cases a science.

So you can with some pollsters put in a very biased preamble. This is the most crude. I doubt that Ipsos would accept soemthign too blatant. Subtle preambles can make it through. Another way is how you order the questions. For example -- in this case asking other questions about for example the dangers or implications on the economy can have people thinking what the client wants them to thinkby the time they get the question that you intend to be public. It can even be part of an omnibus poll with another poll on a differetn topic coming first and biasing the results. 

The biggest way to bias the results is to consider how a question will be read and what the opinions might be out there. In this case if you want to show opposition or support to the protesters you would ask a question on this directly. However if you want to imply more opposition you would word it this way. Let me explain: Anyone who oppses the protesters will respond with unfaourable to the question. however, those who support the aims of the protestors but who are concerned about their safety, those concerned about the saftery of the public, those concerned that this is not an effective tactic and will turn people against them, those concerned about impact on the economy, those concerned that more people will abandon rail (enivronmentally better than roads) and damage the environment, those who would have prefered other direct action such as blocking highways -- will all see the protests potentially unfavourably. Some could even misread the question and see the protest unfavourably becuase they consider it outragious that in 2019 they would be forced to protest in this way. The question does not make it clear why they view the protests unfavourably or clarify that they do not actually support the protestors.

These issues will not distort a majority of the answers but a small number they can distort in one direction only if the question is artful. In this case I argue that it is as it is very unhelpful in terms of why but will be used to imply a lack of support. Just think if only 5% saw it in the terms I laid out above you would have a 10% swing from what might be an even split to a strong majority opinion.

At the end of the day polling is an art with serious ethical considerations. All-to-often we would need to know the disposition of the one asking the question (paying the pollster).

This question is the wrong quesiton -- you could have asked: do you support the aims of the protesters? Do you think the protests are justified? or do you think the pipeline should go through Indigenous territory over the expressed position of the Chiefs? Do you think that construction should ahve waited until the  Band councils and Chiefs had found an agreement? Do you think the Federal government ought to have considered the jurisdiction of the Band Council and the Chiefs and negotiated with the correct parties?  All those questions would produce different numbers. The questionned asked would probably produce the worst result from the perspective of the protesters.

National Student Walkout For Wet'suwet'en

Wednesday, March 4​

Everywhere

quizzical wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

quizzical wrote:

still at it i see. let's only listen to the smattering of Wet'Suwet'en voices  you wanna hear. grrrr

..it's more than a smattering.

..everyone involved in signing on to the pipeline knew they didn't have the authority to do so. knew of the  court decision. knew the hereditary chiefs were opposed. knew of the feasts held since 2011 opposing the pipeline. 

..and then there's this:

Chief McKinnon decided to vote in favour of the agreement despite a community referendum in which 70 per cent voted against the pipeline.

..grrr all you want..your case is weak. 

no actually it's not. but just keep on being a colonizer exploiting their divisions ignoring other Wet'Suwet'en voices and the expulsion of hereditary matriarchs and Chiefs because it aligns with your cause.

 

..you don't address the points i've made. you only attack me personally. 

..while it's true i'm a settler i am not a coloniser. i've fought against colonisation most of my adult life.

..in fact, i know that you know who the colonisers and violators of indigenous rights are in this case. canada, bc and cgl. 

Continued here.