Friday, May 31, 2019

Fake Election Issues: A Guide to the Coming Tsunami

Fake Election Issues - Headgear

You know when Spring is in the least in the Vancouver lower mainland.  When the wind is blowing from the East, you can smell the stench of cow manure.... as farmers in the Fraser Valley prepare their fields for planting.  In the same way, you can smell when a fall federal election is in the can smell the stench of the fake issues that are relentlessly pummeling us from the East, in the bought-and-paid-for main$tream media.

Katie ["turdblossom"] Telford, le dauphin's "Carl Rove", has been seeding the Canadian media outlets with the usual assortment of fake election issues.  This selective planting will, with careful political cultivation, flower into a harvest of votes from the gullible goyim come fall.  In fact, as my headline suggests, there will be a virtual tsunami of phony, scary boogah, booghah issues that will, it is hoped, scare us into voting le Dauphin in for another four years of continuing the process of selling Canada to the USrael perps.

While more are surely on the way, here is a selection of the fake issues that have already been planted:

1.  Fake Headgear fearmongering.  The headline is "one-third of Canadians don't want politicians to wear religious symbols".  The photo accompanying the story is of a man wearing a Yarmulke.  Everyone knows that Jewish men rarely wear this small cap in public.  BUT, Sikhs commonly wear the turban...and muslim women wear the hijab.  So this boogah story is really all about attacking ethnic Sikhs [Jagmeet Singh, leader of the New Democratic Party wears a turban] and muslims.  Folks, there once was a time when politicians in Canada would not stoop to deliberately stirring up ethnic conflict.  Now, its par for the course.

2.  Abortion.  The newz has been full of the issue lately.  Most Canadians thought that the abortion issue had been put to rest years ago...and it had.  But the Liberals are dragging the smelly corpse out of the grave and parading it around again...why?  Well apparently Alabama had some vote about abortion recently and le dauphin is using that to scare women in Canada...alluding to Conservative opposition leader Andrew Scheer being "soft" on women's rights.

Booghah! Booghah!

PM Trudeau says he'll bring up anti-abortion laws in U.S. during meeting with VP Thursday

Trudeau "bravely" brought up the topic during discussions with Vice President Mike Pence the other day.  Say, BTW, why is Canada only getting state visits by the "vice" president now?  Trump has never made a state visit to Canada in the three years he's been in office.  Is this some signal that Canada has been demoted from "nation" to "one of the US "states"?  I say we should have got the Deputy Prime Minister to meet with Pence...anyhooooo.

Back to the fake subject of abortion.  This fear mongering is directed at women voters.  We're supposed to be so afraid that our rights will be removed [by Scheer] that we'll hold our noses and vote for Dauphin again.  I'll tell you what.  I'll vote for Trudeau Jr. when turdblossom starts directing fearmongering at the male voter.  When we see stories in the media about bringing back castration for men who commit sex crimes...that's when I'll vote for Trudeau.  lol.

3.  Daycare  I haven't seen too many media reports about that old chestnut of a promise for "universal daycare"...yet.  But I'm sure such stories and promises are in the works.  This old standard is a sure fire vote getter.  Promise 'em universal daycare and then...once elected, never mention the daycare topic again...until the next election.

Such an insult to normal intelligence.  One [abortion] you Won't be able to get.  The other, [Day Care] you WILL be able to get.  Both bullshit!  Both fake issues.

I'll tell you what.  If and When Trudeau goes to the Grassy Narrows First Nations Reserve and actually hands them a cheque for the mercury poisoning healing centre that the Liberals promised during the Last Election...that will get my attention.

Thursday, May 30, 2019

Assange gravely ill -- His health condition is directly related to Presstitute abandonment of Journalism Ethics

Julien Assange

If reports in the alternative media are true, Wikileaks founding editor Julian Assange is gravely ill.  He's currently being held in the hospital wing of a UK prison.  Even his lawyer says Assange is so ill that he [the lawyer] can no longer communicate with the Wikileaks editor.

If Assange dies in custody it will be the first murder of a journalist aided and abetted by his fellows in modern Main$tream Journalism.  In times gone by, the only insurance policy that a journalist had, if he went into a war zone or other dangerous territory, was the assurance that his or her fellow journalists would band together and cry out as one on his/her behalf, on behalf of the laws protecting freedom of speech, demanding his safety and/or release.

Assange has been abandoned by the presstitute "journalists" of today's media.  They don't regard him as one of them because he isn't on the Deep State payroll.  They are too stupid and venal to realize that all journalists are under threat...if the Deep State can maintain its death grip on Julian Assange.  "First they came for Assange....".

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Canada wants China to "Call us" re Legal Cases that are currently before the courts--Hey, Isn't that Illegal?

OTTAWA — Global Affairs officials wanted Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland to tell a senior Chinese Communist Party official in December that China should stop spreading "inaccurate" information about the Canadian justice system following the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, The Canadian Press has learned
Canada is bawling and whining that "China won't talk to us."  Ottawa is saying that ever since the Federal Government (bowing to it's USrael handlers) illegally arrested Huawei CEO Meng Wanzhou at the Vancouver airport, failing to immediately advise Meng what they were up to and thus allow her to get legal counsel, China has been ignoring Canada's entreaties to negotiate.

Canada's discomfort became immeasurably more acute when China took the liberty of arresting two Canadian spies in China.  Now China won't talk about them either.  Canada insists that China has not been "playing fair" over the imbroglio that Canada has been forced into by its handlers... It almost makes us look like we're an occupied country, for gawd sakes!

Canada wanted China to stop ‘inaccurate’ talk about justice system in

Canada wants China to quit casting aspersions on our (((justice))) if it was somehow in the captivity of foreign political agendas.  Our justice system is perfectly fine, thank you.  At least we've allowed Meng Wanzhou to be kept under house arrest, and not hold up in a Chinese prison like our two spies.

Worse than anything that the Chinese have said about our (((justice))) system...the fact they've stopped taking our filthy garbage and waste has become an international environmental and diplomatic disaster.  First Philippines and now Malaysia have shouted out that they're sending hundreds of containers full of Canadian filth back to Canada.  Previously, China used to take our garbage, no questions asked.  But they stopped that a year or so ago when our handlers began to rein in their economy. Now it's a full out trade war and Canada is caught in the cross-fire.  Canada tried to find alternative destinations for our "recyclable" waste but apparently it's not worth anything to anyone.  That's usually the problem with "waste".

Do you think that some Asian world power whispered into the ears of the Philippine's and the Malasians not to take our filth--just like some other world power whispered into our ear to arrest Meng Wanzhou?  Could be.

Above all, why should China call us and risk being accused of trying to interfere in a case that is before the courts?  I don't understand how Canada could even ask China to "negotiate" because under the Canadian (((justice))) system such political interference is so clearly illegal.

The moral of this sad story, folks, is that once a nation cedes its's future...and that of each and every one of its out of its hands.

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

RFK Jr. Speaks about the Gardasil Vaccine

RFK Jr. Speaks about the
Gardasil Vaccine

Found this video on Nomadic Everyman's Blog.  As a social worker, I once had a 15 year old girl who was in Ministry care [I was her legal guardian] who was vaccinated with the Gardasil Vaccine at her school without my consent.  I found out about it later at a parent/teacher meeting.  She was vaccinated by nurses who came to the school.  The teacher told me that it was okay for the child to give her own consent to the vaccination, even though I had to provide written notes so that she could attend field days.

US Memorial Day Blowback

Arlington National Cemetery, USA


US Army Unpleasantly Surprised After Asking Veterans About Impact of Serving

On Thursday, the US Army asked veterans on twitter a simple question, “How has serving impacted you?” As Memorial Day approaches, whoever is in charge of the Army’s social media was probably hoping for some nice responses about all the benefits they think come with serving, college education, the bonds formed with fellow soldiers or the invaluable life experience. But the sad reality that our nations veterans and their families face showed itself in the thousands of heart-breaking replies to the question.

Michael J Neel replied, “26 brothers dead. Only 8 in theater. Psyche ward myself after 3 attempts. Everything we accomplished in Mosul was wasted. Every life we gave was spat on. That’s how serving impacted me.” Veteran Drew Turner said, “Let’s see. Lost the functional use of a hand, developed a rare movement disorder and cancer both likely from burn pit exposure, enjoy sleeping 3 to 4 hours most nights due to nightmares and during the day random anxiety attacks all due to PTSD, 7 herniated discs, arthritis…”

Former Army Chaplain Bill Cork replied, “Given me memories of twelve soldiers who chose suicide, three killed in preventable rollovers, another dozen sexually assaulted, and lots of people and families broken by immoral acts in a war that won’t end.”

Not all the people who replied were veterans themselves, some were friends and family of soldiers who committed suicide. One user, Sandy Almon, said, “My son served and did one tour of OEF, he made it back, re-enlisted, and shot himself in the head.” In a report released by the VA in 2018, it said veterans accounted for 14 percent of the countries suicides in 2016, despite only making up 8 percent of the population. 6,079 veterans took their own lives in 2016 alone.

PTSD is all too common in veterans today; according to the VA’s website 11-20 percent of veterans who had served in Iraq have been diagnosed with PTSD. User Joe Burchett replied, “I spend sleepless nights wracked with guilt because none of the horror and suffering I’ve seen even matters; because we’re all just grist for a pain-mill run by madmen; because if I speak up and say “endless war is wrong” my battle buddies, fighting their own demons, ostracize me.”

Veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan may have a higher risk of cancer due to exposure to burn pits, where all types of waste and garbage was burned, from IEDs to human waste. User 07Mjf55 mentioned that in their reply, “I served in Iraq across the street from the burn pits. 1 year later I was dx with lupus & 10 years later I was dx w/Stage 3 Breast Cancer. I still can’t get 100% perm & total disability because the VA says “I might get better.” There’s no cure for lupus!”

The thread did not go according to plan, and the US Army went on to do some damage control and tweeted, “To everyone who responded to this thread, thank you for sharing your story. Your stories are real, they matter, and they may help others in similar situations. The Army is committed to the health, safety, and well-being of our Soldiers.” They also tweeted out the phone number to the Veterans Crisis Hotline.

“My cousin committed suicide while on duty at the armory after coming home from a tour abroad.” –Lacy M. Johnson(@lacymjohnson)

“Depression, anxiety, still can’t deal well with loud noises. I was assaulted by one of my superiors. When I reported him, with witnesses to corroborate my story, nothing happened to him. Nothing. A year later, he stole a laptop and was then demoted. I’m worth less than a laptop.” –schmox(@IvoryGazelle)

“My best childhood friend lost his mind after his time in the marines and now he lives in a closet in his moms house and can barely hold a conversation with anyone. He only smokes weed and drinks cough syrup that he steals since he can’t hold a job.” –Mattao Mischief Melly(@Matthew05761231)
“I’ve had the same nightmare almost every night for the past 15 years” –Mike Prysner(@MikePrysner)

“I carried half of my best friend to the back of a medic Humvee after an IED killed him. My brother died after a mortar strike on the way to a funeral for another soldier. I have mangled joints, PTSD, hearing loss, and lupus. I’m also unemployed.” –Tybalt Wallace(@SyntaxAgility)
Read thousands more here.


Greencrow:  It's never pleasant to discover that you, or your loved one, was simply cannon fodder for globalists/foreigners/banksters.

Monday, May 27, 2019

((((Journalism))) On The Ropes?

Reporter Clark Kent Would Be Appalled
if he had to do (((journalism))) today

Oh!  For the halcion days of "genuine" journalism, as illustrated above by the "mild mannered reporter", Superman's alter ego, Clark Kent.  Back in "those days", journalists followed the story, the truth, wherever it least that's what we were led to believe before we learned about Operation Mockingbird .  Perhaps journalists were ALWAYS bought and paid for deep state shills.  Who knows?  But at least they didn't sell one another out like in the present deplorable case regarding Wikileaks journalist, Julian Assange.

In the latest newz about the man, Assange is imprisoned in a UK prison for....what?  Some trumped up charge which may lead to him being deported to Sweden or, horror of all horrors, to the US where the "trumped" [I use that term literally] up charges could result in a 170-year sentence for telling humanity the truth about the illegal war in Iraq.

From RT we learn that one of his "sources" Edward Snowden, has spoken out on Assange's behalf from his refuge in, of all places, Russia:


‘War on journalism’: Snowden slams US indictment against Assange 

The fate of journalism as we know it is now at stake, after Washington indicted Julian Assange under the Espionage Act, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden tweeted in reaction to 17 new charges against the WikiLeaks founder.

“The Department of Justice just declared war – not on Wikileaks, but on journalism itself,” Snowden tweeted Thursday, adding “this is no longer about Julian Assange: This case will decide the future of media.”

The Thursday charges threaten to put Assange behind bars for over 170 years, if he is convicted.

WikiLeaks has too reacted by slamming the move as “madness” and declaring “the end of national security journalism” and even the First Amendment itself.

Assange was arrested by British authorities in April after spending almost seven years under political asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Washington is seeking the journalist’s extradition, having previously unsealed an indictment against Assange alleging conspiracy to hack Pentagon computers in 2010...."


Greencrow:  The most disturbing aspect of the entire "Assange affair" is the absolute silence from the presstitutes in the main$tream media.  By their stony silence about Assange's continued imprisonment for doing what every journalist is SUPPOSED to do...every single one of them proves that he or she is NOT a journalist.  Here is what blogger Xymphora said this morning:

"The Guardian's war on Assange:  Dump the Guardian!"
The question isn't whether Assange is a journalist.  Who in the fuck would want to be insulted by being called a journalist?  It is whether a future American court will be able to distinguish things that some future reporter did, or is claimed to have done, from what Assange did, or is claimed to have done.  Don't let them get you tied up in investigating what 'journalist' means. 

For one thing, Assange can't possibly be a journalist, as he doesn't lie constantly. …"

UK blogger Craig Murray provides even more evidence that Truth gets a microscopically small "platform" in the M$M these days in his recent expose about the (((media))) lies surrounding the OPCW fact-finding mission to establish who perpetrated the chemical attack in Douma, Syria.  As readers will recall, this was the attack that initiated the US, UK and France air assault on a Syrian airbase, killing several Syrian military.  Here is the astounding twisting and mangling of the OPCW findings, as described by Murray [reprinted from the blog, Aletho news]:

"....Yet – and this is why Ian Henderson is more important to your understanding of the world than Theresa May – the OPCW Fact Finding Mission reflected in their final report none of the findings of their own sub-group of university based engineers from two European universities, but instead produced something that is very close to the amateur propaganda “analysis” put out by Bellingcat. The implications of this fraud are mind-blowing.
The genuine experts’ findings were completely suppressed until they were leaked last week. And still then, this leak – which has the most profound ramifications – has in itself been almost completely suppressed by the mainstream media, except for those marginalised outliers who still manage to get a platform, Robert Fisk and Peter Hitchens (a tiny platform in the case of Fisk).

Consider what this tells us. A fake chemical attack incident was used to justify military aggression against Syria by the USA, UK and France. The entire western mainstream media promoted the anti-Syrian and anti-Russian narrative to justify that attack. The supposedly neutral international watchdog, the OPCW, was manipulated by the NATO powers to produce a highly biased report that omits the findings of its own engineers. Which can only call into doubt the neutrality and reliability of the OPCW in its findings on the Skripals too.

Greencrow:  Yes, readers, journalism IS on the ropes.....BUT, but, but, ….help is on the way....or is it?  In these pre-election dayz and monthz, the Federal government of Canada has announced that the Canadian media is in dire trouble and needs help....$600 million of help in the form of grants and tax relief.  The Liberals have determined that the small local newspapers in cities and towns all across Canada are "dying" from lack of ad revenue and need to be propped up with federal tax dollars.

The truth is that nobody reads those free newspapers that regularly litter your doorway.  The news about the local flea market, dog pound, the dreary minutes of the City Council meetings and the back fence fight between nosy neighbours is not a draw.  All the REAL news can now be found on the Alternative Internet.  You don't need to get ink all over your fingers and end up with a heap of disorganized newsprint cluttering your coffee table. The real need is to end newsprint copy for good and save all those trees.  But, yet, the farce continues:

From the CBC

"Ottawa under fire for plan to dole out $600M to media

Ottawa is being criticized for the way it plans to prop up cash-strapped news outlets — $600 million was set aside in the last budget, money that will be doled out by a panel of experts. But the plan to help the media is being questioned by many journalists."

Greencrow:  IMO this $600 million slush fund is just the latest, most crass and brazen move to control the press and "weed" out any potential truth tellers into the future.  With all the independent blogs and alternative news sites like RT and PressTV that are garnering ever-increasing readership and threatening the purveyors of the "official stories"...this money and particularly the "panel" that will be established to distribute it will be like building a fortress around the "official stories" and protect the lies from assault by the truth.  The composition of the panel already includes a member of the Unifor Union of "Journalists".  I suppose this Union is the mechanism that controls the press...and kicks out any truth tellers.  I knew there must be a mechanism but didn't know what the mechanism was until now.

From CT

Minister vows transparency over $600M media fund, defends inclusion of Unifor 

Rodriguez announced this week that he is asking eight associations that represent journalists in Canada to offer up a candidate to work on the independent panel tasked with making recommendations on who should be eligible for the tax measures. These groups include journalism associations and advocacy groups that represent reporters across Canada, including French-language and ethnic press organizations, and the union Unifor.

Including Unifor has raised concerns, given that the union has and continues to campaign against the Conservatives and Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer.

The union, which does represent 11,900 people in the media sector, has billed itself as “the resistance” to Scheer, and his “worst nightmare.” The organization as a whole represents workers in several other industries as well including in the auto, retail, manufacturing, education, and hospitality sectors..."

Greencrow:  Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer opposes the "stacking of the deck", but only because it's stacked against HIM.  Once he gets in power he'll stack the deck to his own liking.  So that's the way "journalism" works in the west, folks.  Mainstream journalism today is just another tool in the hands of the Deep State.  They manipulate the public with it and control all the "official stories" we're forced to believe.  Otherwise, they keep the supine population in the darkness of ignorance, petty distractions and carnal corruptions.  The real truth tellers end up dead like Gary Webb or in prison, like Julian Assange.

Here are some illustrative examples of this contention gleaned from the news just in the past few hours:

1.  If you've ever said anything about 9/11 truth...ever in your entire must disavow it...or the media will gang up on you and you will be ostracized forever:

2.  From PressTSmokey the Bear and all the other "public service announcements" in the MSM will never mention this:

Settler filmed starting fire in West Bank Palestinian
fields is actually an Israeli soldier

A new video released by an Israeli human rights organization shows Israeli settlers setting fire to West Bank fields, contradicting earlier claims by the Israeli military that Palestinians were behind the arson.

3.  Also from Iran's PressTV - US poised to destroy Venezuelan emergency food program
You won't find the Cdn MSM reporting on this:

"Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro says the United States is poised to destroy a military-run emergency food program through bringing criminal charges and sanctions against people involved in the plan, which is feeding millions of people across the crisis-hit country."


Greencrow:  The above news stories are only three of the dozens of stories that you would never know about--if you limited yourself to just the Western Mainstream Media.  This proves, at least to the sentient, that the only real news these days is in the alternative media.  Independent bloggers and news sites on the Internet, not "federal slush fund supported outlets" are the future of the truth.

I have no income from blogging to protect...I have no "real" career that could be threatened...I work for no one.  I only work to expose and disseminate the I see it.  Perhaps I do make mistakes from time to time, but they're not due to being beholden to anyone or anything--other than the truth. 

In conclusion, the Future of Journalism can only be found on the Internet and is told by bloggers such as this one:

Independent Journalist "Texas" 
Reporting from Donbass

Bloggers and Alternative news sources like RT and PressTV are under constant threat.  Relentless "algorhymic" isolation and minimalization continues by the "Big Brothers" of Google, Microsoft etc.  The same entities that imprisoned Assange are after us.  If they eventually manage to shut down bloggers like Texas, Paul Craig Roberts, Northerntruthseeker, Penny for your thoughts, Nomadic Everyman and many others, like little moi,, then, sadly, we'll be cast into even more of a "land of confusion".

Genesis "Land of Confusion"

Sunday, May 26, 2019

BREAKING NEWS: Texas in Donbass gets shelled during Saturday Night Visit to Frontline

Russell Bentley aka "Texas"

Saturday Night on the Avdeevka Front 18/05/2019 (ENG&RUS SUBS)

Watch this video.  It starts off quite peacefully as Texas is accompanying a truck bringing dinner to the frontline troops.  Things heat up, however, as they endure another [regular] overnight shelling coming from the "Nazis" on the Kiev Junta [Ukraine] side.  Next day, Texas shows us fragments of the shells...proving that "NATO", at the very least, is supplying the Kiev Junta side with weaponry/ammunition forbidden under the "Minsk Agreement".

This is the real news, folks.  My next post will be exposing the governmental ramping up of the "Fake News" we get here in Canada and the West.

Saturday, May 25, 2019

British Columbia will Appeal Crt. Decision it CANNOT regulate flow of bitumen through Transmountain Pipeline

Supreme Court of Canada In Session

The headlines in yesterday's newz looked dire for BC.  The ROC [Rest of Canada] no doubt chortled in BC's own Appeals Court ruled against the province's attempt to control oil tanker traffic through its narrow, dangerous and environmentally fragile waters.

Burrard Inlet is just a few kilometers from my home
The Transmountain pipline port is located 
on the coast near those two blue gas towers
in the centre of the photo

Please read the following snippets from CTV news below and I will have more comments to follow:


Court rules B.C. can't limit oil shipments in major blow for pipeline fight

VANCOUVER -- British Columbia lost the largest tool in its toolbox to halt the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion with a court decision Friday that concluded it can't restrict oil shipments through its borders.

The unanimous ruling from the B.C. Court of Appeal represented a major win for the project, which the federal government and Alberta see as crucial to getting more oilsands crude to overseas markets.


Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said the decision is an occasion for "real hope" for hard-working people and the project will allow his province to realize a fair price for its resources and create new jobs.

In light of the court's decision, we hope that the B.C. government will respect the rule of law and end its campaign of obstruction," he said.

Kenney also said the expansion could provide much-needed relief at B.C. pumps. Premier John Horgan has disputed that the project would ease sky-high gas prices, noting its purpose is to transport heavy oil for shipment overseas...."


Greencrow says:  Albertan Premier Kenney and many other Canadians just don't get it.  Even though Kenney basically admits that British Columbians are being punished at the gas pump for wanting to save their environment...he thinks we can be bought or bullied off our position of wanting to save our province.  Perhaps Kenny and Canadians even think this is the end of the matter.  Very wishful thinking, IMO.  Please read the subsequent newz story from the CBC regarding BC's intention to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.  I will have comments to follow:


B.C. to appeal decision over control of Trans Mountain pipeline oil to Canada's top court
'We believe we have the right and authority … to regulate harmful substances through B.C.,' AG David Eby says

"There's always been a tug and pull in our federation between the supremacy of federal jurisdiction versus that of provincial jurisdiction. And when comes to the environment, this is an untested area," he said.

Environmental charity Ecojustice, which was an intervener in the case, also expressed disappointment in the ruling.


"The issue at the heart of this case goes far beyond a single pipeline project. What was at stake is the B.C. government's ability to step in and enact laws that will better protect communities and the environment when federal measures fall short." said Ecojustic lawyer Kegan Pepper-Smith.

"The Supreme Court of Canada has overturned unanimous decisions by the B.C. Court of Appeal in the past," he said. "For reference questions like this, provinces have the right to appeal."

According to Section 36 of the Supreme Court Act, the appeal is automatic and does not require leave.

When asked about the financial price tag of the appeal, Eby said it would be a "fraction of a fraction of the cost of a catastrophic diluted bitumen spill."

Greencrow says:  When I was a young person in my 20's I worked as an administrative assistant at the University of Western Ontario Faculty of Law in London, Ontario.  Back in the heady days of the late '60's and early '70's, The Josephine Spencer Niblett Faculty of Law, or "The Niblett" as it was affectionately referred to, was a catalyst of social upheavals of the time. The drug revolution [LSD and marijuana], the anti war movement [against the Viet Nam War] and not least was the "environmental movement".  The first time I ever heard the words "ecology" and "environment", they were spoken to me by a twenty-eight year old law professor.  He had done his masters in Berkley and came to the school all decked out in bell-bottom jeans, granny glasses, long hair and beard.  Those were heady days indeed.

Another movement that was shaking society at the time was the emergence of "aboriginal law".  We had several First Nations law students attending the school.  They were given special permission to take the courses --without having acquired the necessary academic credentials as the other students.  This was an early effort to promote inclusion in the legal arena.

Anyhooo.  One of the biggest legal decisions that was on everybody's mind was the Delgamuukw decision.  Although this decision was not handed down until 1997, it was beginning to wend its way through the court system in the late '60's and early '70's.  Everyone was saying that this decision would give First Nations constitutional rights that would change Canada forever.  Please read the following summation of the Delgamuukw Decision and I will have more comments to follow: 


Delgamuukw Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, 1997

“The Delgamuukw case (1997) concerned the definition, the content and the extent of aboriginal title. The Supreme Court observed that aboriginal title constituted an ancestral right protected by Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. Aboriginal title is a right relating to land sui generis, held communally and distinct from other ancestral rights. Aboriginal title is, therefore, in substance, a right to territory and encompasses exclusive use and occupation. The native people concerned must tender evidence of the existence of aboriginal title in respect of the following requirements: “(i) they must have occupied the territory before the declaration of sovereignty; (ii) if present occupation is invoked as evidence of occupation before sovereignty, there must be a continuity between present occupation and occupation before the declaration of sovereignty; (iii) at the time of declaration of sovereignty, this occupation must have been exclusive.” It is not necessary to prove a perfect continuity; the demonstration of a substantial maintenance of the bond between the people concerned and the territory is sufficient. In this respect the Supreme Court held that oral evidence could be admitted as proof. The court also ruled that aboriginal lands could not be used in a manner that was inconsistent with aboriginal title: if aboriginals wished to use the lands in ways that aboriginal title did not permit, then the lands must be surrendered. Aboriginal title cannot be transferred to anyone other than the Crown.”

….and from the Canadian Encyclopedia

The Delgamuukw case (1997) (also known as Delgamuukw v. British Columbia) concerned the definition, the content and the extent of Aboriginal title (i.e., ownership of traditional lands). The Supreme Court of Canada observed that Aboriginal title constituted an ancestral right protected by section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. Influenced by the Calder case (1973), the ruling in the Delgamuukw case had an impact on other court cases about Aboriginal rights and title, including in the Tsilhqot’in case (2014). 

Supreme Court of Canada Decision

Following an abandoned attempt at treaty negotiations with the province of British Columbia, the claimants decided to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, which heard their case on 16 and 17 June 1997. Six months later, on 11 December 1997, the court’s ruling addressed a number of issues, including the extinguishment of Aboriginal title, the use of oral history in testimony and the content and extent of Aboriginal title.

The court found that the provincial government had no right to extinguish the Indigenous peoples’ rights to their ancestral territories. Reaffirming the decision in the Van der Peet case (1996), the court deemed that oral history is an important type of evidence that courts must treat as equal to other types of evidence.

The court also clarified the content and definition of Aboriginal title, as previously explored in the Calder case (1973). It defined Aboriginal title as Indigenous peoples’ exclusive right to the land, and affirmed that Aboriginal title is recognized as an “existing aboriginal right” in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

However, the court also acknowledged some limitations with Aboriginal title. Traditional lands cannot be used in a manner that is “irreconcilable with the nature of the claimants’ attachment to those lands.” For example, a nation with ancestral claims to fishing rights may not use the waters in a way that would destroy its value for fishing. If Indigenous people wished to use the lands in ways that Aboriginal title did not permit, then the lands must be surrendered. Aboriginal title cannot be transferred to anyone other than the Crown.

In order to clarify how Indigenous nations must demonstrate Aboriginal title, the court created a test based on three key points: sufficient, continuous and exclusive evidence of territorial occupation.

Delgamuukw Test: Demonstrating Aboriginal Title

According to the Delgamuukw ruling, Indigenous people seeking to prove their title to ancestral territories must provide evidence of the existence of Aboriginal title in respect of the following requirements:
The Indigenous nation must have occupied the territory before the declaration of sovereignty. This means that the Indigenous nation must have demonstrated to other First Nations and to Europeans that it clearly used and occupied the land. This is different than the ruling in the Van der Peet case (1996), which established that Indigenous peoples need to prove that their traditional rights were integral to their culture when Europeans arrived. In the Delgamuukw test, it is sufficient to say that occupied land was integral to their culture at the time of contact.

If present occupation is invoked as evidence of occupation before sovereignty, there must be a continuity between present occupation and occupation before the declaration of sovereignty. In other words, there must be evidence of a continuous ownership of the land. However, it is not necessary to prove a perfect continuity; the demonstration of a substantial maintenance of the bond between the people and the territory is sufficient. In this respect, the Supreme Court held that oral evidence could be admitted as proof.

At the time of declaration of sovereignty, this occupation must have been exclusive. This means that the land had to have been the exclusive territory of an Indigenous nation, although they could have shared it with another Indigenous nation.

Influence and Impact

The Delgamuukw case is an important one in Canadian law because it provides information about the definition and content of Aboriginal title. The ruling also clarified the government’s duty to consult with Indigenous peoples, and affirmed the legal validity of oral history. After the case, other First Nations, most notably the Tsilhqot’in people in 2014, used the Delgamuukw decision in their own land claims cases.

Despite the importance of the case, treaty negotiations between the two nations, the province and the federal government continue. Various companies operate in their traditional territories without permission, and there is division within the community over participation in large energy projects, such as the LNG pipeline that is planned to run through traditional lands. In December 2018, Wet’suwet’en people prevented some Coastal GasLink representatives (whose pipeline is supposed to transport natural gas to the scheduled LNG facility) from passing through Indigenous territory (see Pipelines in Canada). The RCMP arrested 14 people associated with this incident on 7 January 2019. Three days later, Wet'suwet'en chiefs and the RCMP reached a deal to allow road access for pipeline workers. Therefore, while the Delgamuukw case raised and clarified issues relating to Aboriginal title, it did not outright resolve them.

Greencrow concludes.  British Columbians always knew that their case for control of their environment and coastline was going to end up in the Supreme Court of Canada.  Anyone with half a brain would have figured that out.  IMO, British Columbia has an extremely solid case in the Supreme Court of Canada.  The Delgamuukw precedent is very clear on aboriginal rights being embedded in the Canadian Constitution.

The irony [there are many ironies in this case] is, that for le Dauphin to get his Transmountain Pipeline through British Columbian First Nations territories...and for him to get his 7X heavier oil traffic tankers plying the coastal waters of BC...he will have to trash The Constitution Act of 1982...the legacy of his father, Trudeau Sr.

Good luck with that one.

Warning Sign