UN investigates Canada's treatment of Aboriginal Peoples

[dogspoiler]

i take ROYAL offence to the term 'reserve'. NATIONS should be respected as such, codified or not. the perpetuation of the concept of a 'reserve' is a nationalist perspective of a perceived but otherwise unreal 'canadian'.

I know several natives, they call themselves Indians and say they live on the Rez. But I guess you can have your ROYAL offence.

[Homeownertoo]

i take ROYAL offence to the term 'reserve'. NATIONS should be respected as such, codified or not. the perpetuation of the concept of a 'reserve' is a nationalist perspective of a perceived but otherwise unreal 'canadian'.

Indian bands are not in any way to be considered nations. Yes, I know it would make you feel better to award them a title that implies so much more than they are. But facts are not fantasies. Indian groups in North America historically, and today, comprised tribes, clans, chiefdoms, and in a few cases rose to the political level of confederacies of tribes. The only North American group that might qualify as a nation was the Cheyenne, for reasons that do not apply in Canada.

Nation is a term that has certain meanings quite apart from the sense of nation-state (which is not remotely applicable to Indian bands). As everyone knows, the reason Indians want to call themselves nations is because it makes them look, in the eyes of the world, as if they are on the same level as real nations and so deserve to be treated as such. They are not. They are simply tribes or clans within a larger nation, in this case Canada, without the rights of a nation-state to which they belong. And anyway, most of these so-called nations are no more than Bantustans existing on the dole of the national government to which they owe allegiance.

[coffeeFreak]

Homeownertoo, individual bands are not referred to as nations, however, the larger groups are, such as Okanagan Nation, Shuswap Nation, Cree Nation etc.

[maryjane48]

Indian bands are not in any way to be considered nations. Yes, I know it would make you feel better to award them a title that implies so much more than they are. But facts are not fantasies. Indian groups in North America historically, and today, comprised tribes, clans, chiefdoms, and in a few cases rose to the political level of confederacies of tribes. The only North American group that might qualify as a nation was the Cheyenne, for reasons that do not apply in Canada.

Nation is a term that has certain meanings quite apart from the sense of nation-state (which is not remotely applicable to Indian bands). As everyone knows, the reason Indians want to call themselves nations is because it makes them look, in the eyes of the world, as if they are on the same level as real nations and so deserve to be treated as such. They are not. They are simply tribes or clans within a larger nation, in this case Canada, without the rights of a nation-state to which they belong. And anyway, most of these so-called nations are no more than Bantustans existing on the dole of the national government to which they owe allegiance.


yes we all know your opinion on theses so called tribes, but the reality is if they want to identify them selves as a nation, that is their right to do so , and it very Canadian to let them :)

[A_Britishcolumbian]

since we last visited this thread we have seen evidence of torture and experimentation on aboriginals come to light in the mainstream media, as well the so called 'federal government' has refused to admit their role in the atrocities and continue to withhold the true extent of their horrible acts.

now the UN, in tandem with the media has discovered a few hundred more victims of the ongoing genocide.

Report of 1,000 murdered or missing aboriginal women spurs calls for inquiry
APTN reports RCMP arrived at tally after contacting other police forces across Canada

The Canadian Press Posted: May 01, 2014 11:05 AM ET

The Conservative government is resisting renewed calls for an inquiry into murdered and missing aboriginal women and girls despite a media report that suggests there may be hundreds more cases than previously thought.

Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney was asked Thursday to finally call a inquiry in light of a report by the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network that Canada may be home to more than 1,000 cases of murdered and missing women.

His answer, in short: no.

Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett questioned how the Conservatives can continue to resist an inquiry in the face of so many unresolved cases.

"This media report says the government's own numbers show nearly a doubling of known victims of what was already a national tragedy," she said in a statement.

"How can a government that refuses to call a national inquiry, in the face of these shocking statistics, claim that they are tough on crime or supportive of victims?"

The broadcaster cited an unnamed source Wednesday in a report that said the Mounties have now identified more than 1,000 cases of missing and murdered aboriginal women and girls — significantly more than previous estimates, which had pegged the tally at more than 600.

The RCMP arrived at the new number after contacting more than 200 other police forces across the country, APTN reported.

The Mounties would neither confirm nor deny the report Thursday.

Supt. Tyler Bates, director of national aboriginal policing and crime prevention services, referred questions to the RCMP's media relations office in Ottawa.

Spokeswoman Sgt. Julie Gagnon said the RCMP report is not finalized and it would be premature for her to comment further.

"The RCMP is currently completing a national operational review to gain the most accurate account to date of missing and murdered aboriginal women in Canada," Gagnon wrote in an email.

Earlier this year, the RCMP said it completed a "comprehensive file review" of more than 400 murdered and missing aboriginal women and girls within its jurisdiction, and would keep looking into other outstanding cases.

and even with all this mounting evidence in support of our charge of genocide, rather than come clean on the issue, the so called 'federal government' remains silent on the issue, and it is speculated we will have to take them to court to force an inquiry, hardly the stance one would expect from a 'body' innocent of the charge.

The Native Women's Association of Canada has said it is aware of even more cases of murdered and missing aboriginal women and girls than the RCMP tally.

President Michele Audette said her association is now looking into whether it would be feasible or possible to take the federal government to court to try to force a national inquiry.

"There's little bees at the office trying to find out if it's possible. If it is, I think we should challenge," Audette said in an interview.

"It's a human-rights issue. We do it for salmon. We do it for corruption ... how come we don't have the same thing for missing and murdered aboriginal women?"

It has long been estimated that there are hundreds of cases of missing and murdered aboriginal women dating back to the 1960s.

A United Nations human rights investigator called that statistic disturbing last year during a fact-finding visit to Canada in which he also urged the Conservative government to hold an inquiry.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/report- ... -1.2628372

[A_Britishcolumbian]

RCMP uncovers 1,186 cases of missing or murdered aboriginal women 63

QMI AGENCY

FIRST POSTED: THURSDAY, MAY 01, 2014 03:42 PM EDT

RCMP have uncovered 1,186 cases of missing or murdered aboriginal girls and women over the past 30 years in Canada, the highest estimate to date, reports the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network.

RCMP commissioner Bob Paulson revealed the numbers after an anonymous source told APTN the number was over 1,000.

The source also said the federal government has delayed the report's release. Paulson promised it would be made public within a month.

Of the 1,186. 1,126 have been murdered and 160 are missing.

The Native Women's Association of Canada, using secondary sources such as media reports and court rulings, previously pegged the number at 580, with most occurring between 1990 and 2010 and few dating back to the '70s. Earlier information is hard to track down, the report said.

Ottawa researcher Maryanne Pearce pegged the number at 824 in January.

The news has prompted renewed calls from the Opposition for a federal inquiry.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/05/01/rc ... inal-women

[Homeownertoo]

Homeownertoo, individual bands are not referred to as nations, however, the larger groups are, such as Okanagan Nation, Shuswap Nation, Cree Nation etc.

It is true that individual bands are not referred to as nations. But neither does the group of bands constitute a nation. They consititute a tribe. Appending the term 'nation' is a political step, not an anthropological or sociological one. Consider, for example, the use of the words tribe and nation in other contexts. In ancient Britain, you had the Picts, Scots and Angles (each made up of many bands), all tribes, not nations. In Israel, you had the twelve tribes that comprised the nation of ancient Israel. You had the Germanic nation, a loose grouping of numerous German tribes, and much the same in Gaul/France. None of these are comparable to any of the so-called First Nations, which are simply bands or groups of bands (in one case in the Fraser Valley, a single person who traced her ancestry to a now-dead band and got herself offically declared a First Nation). The use of the term First Nations is political, intended to lend the impression that they negotiate with the government of Canada on a nation-to-nation level. That is a fraud and that is why this pretense should be stopped.

[maryjane48]

It is true that individual bands are not referred to as nations. But neither does the group of bands constitute a nation. They consititute a tribe. Appending the term 'nation' is a political step, not an anthropological or sociological one. Consider, for example, the use of the words tribe and nation in other contexts. In ancient Britain, you had the Picts, Scots and Angles (each made up of many bands), all tribes, not nations. In Israel, you had the twelve tribes that comprised the nation of ancient Israel. You had the Germanic nation, a loose grouping of numerous German tribes, and much the same in Gaul/France. None of these are comparable to any of the so-called First Nations, which are simply bands or groups of bands (in one case in the Fraser Valley, a single person who traced her ancestry to a now-dead band and got herself offically declared a First Nation). The use of the term First Nations is political, intended to lend the impression that they negotiate with the government of Canada on a nation-to-nation level. That is a fraud and that is why this pretense should be stopped.

fancy a israel defender wanting to keep the natives in canada in poverty tick tock indeed :)

[Homeownertoo]

Thanks for the smear. That's all I expected from you.

[Liquidnails]

It is true that individual bands are not referred to as nations. But neither does the group of bands constitute a nation.

So what, in your words, constitutes a nation?

[Homeownertoo]

Good question. We find the answer in the use of the word to describe sociopolitical arrangements/entities before the word itself became politicized into garbage like First Nations (and they weren't even the first!).

Without resorting to convenient dictionary definitions, which happen to be all over the place today, we can agree it has an ethnic component (sharing of same culture, language, traditions, shared economic basis), a historical component (shared descent) and a political one (territory that is substantially governed in common).

And importantly, it means something in terms of stage of sociopolitical development. Some people (and some dictionary definitions) would assign the term to both (and everything in between) a family occupying a cave and the nation of France. Such trivial use of the term obliterates any meaning it has.

Thus has arisen a continuum of terms to describe the organizational arrangements people have made as they developed from cave clans to modern nations. These include clans (family based), bands (cohesive collections of families) tribes (multiple bands that share the components mentioned above but not a central political structure), and nations, which are tribes that collected together in a cohesive political form. We can see practical examples of these different forms throughout history, such as the tribes of Israel that collectively formed the nation of Israel, or the tribes of Britain (Picts, Scots, Angles) that failed to form a nation of Britain, or England, Scotland, etc. In North America, when Europeans arrived there were no or almost no nations of tribes. In western Canada, the closest they came was the Cree. It never coalesced politically into a nation, however. In eastern Canada, there was the Iroquois confederacy, which was a confederacy of tribes, not nations.

Some people with dispute the above, but they don't do so in any substantive way without depriving the word nation of any substantive meaning. I believe words are supposed to have meaning beyond the politically correct fashion of the day. Some people think otherwise.

[Liquidnails]

Words are powerful and have use beyond their definition. I think it boils down to the fact that "Nation" has a connotation of political sovereignty. Most natives I know don't care what you call them, as long as you mean no disrespect.

I can see your point... Use of the term Nation may not be correct in the strictest sense of the word, and its definition will depend on who you ask.

[A_Britishcolumbian]

So what, in your words, constitutes a nation?

by the terms of the un and the so called "federal government of canada"

a nation is a group of people that have drafted and ratified a constitution. a constitution constitutes a nation.

a kingdom/monarchy does not require such, no constitution necessary to exist.

[maryjane48]

Thanks for the smear. That's all I expected from you.

the only smearing going is your attempt to paint native americans as a bunch of beer swilling fools who don't deserve any type of recognition?

[the truth]

and your point is