Subject: nanews02.039 From: gars@netcom.com (Gary Night Owl) To: Internet Recipients of Wotanging Ikche Message-ID: _ __ _____ __ _ __ ___ ____ _ __ ___ ' ) / / ') / / ) ' ) ) / ) / ' ) ) / ) / / / / / / /--/ / / / ___ / / / / ___ (_(_/ (__/ ( / (_ / (_ (___/ '__/_ / (_ (___/ ' O ____ _ , ___ _ , ___ O o O / ' ) / / ) ' ) / / ' O o O / /-< / /--/ /-- VOLUME 02, ISSUE 039 O o o o o O __/_ / ) (___/ / ( (___, 24 September 1994 O o O O o O K A N O H E D A A N I Y V W I Y A O ( N A T I V E A M E R I C A N N E W S ) This issue contains articles from FidoNet Indian Affairs Conference, UseNet newsgroups alt.native & soc.culture.native, NATIVE-L & NATCHAT Mailing Lists, Genie (General Electric) & UUCP e-mail. <----<<<< >>>>----> This newsletter is a way of keeping the brothers and sisters who share our spirit informed about current events within the lives of those who walk the Red Road. It is archived at the Native American FTP site ftp.cit.cornell.edu in the directory /pub/special/NativeProfs/newsletters; and is being sent to gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo) should he wish to include it in his NATIVE-L or NATCHAT lists. "Friends, with all manner of difficulties I have been pursued. These I fear not. Still alive I am." __ Dakota Council Song +- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -+ | Indian Pledge of Allegiance | The Indian Pledge of Alleg- | | iance was first presented | I pledge allegiance to my Tribe,| on 2 December '93 during the | to the democratic principles | opening address of the Nat- | of the Republic | ional Congress of American | and to the individual freedoms | Indian Tribal-States Relat- | borrowed from the Iroquois and | ions Panel in Reno, NV. NCAI | Choctaw Confederacies, | plans distribution of the | as incorporated in the United | Indian Pledge to all Indian | States Constitution, | Nations. | so that my forefathers | | shall not have died in vain | Walk in Beauty! Night Owl +- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -+ O'siyo Brothers and Sisters! This is a time to remember that the last moon of Summer signals the coming of cold days. Do you know a grandmother or grandfather who could use help finding a way to keep warm? A bit of fire wood or a blanket might make a greater difference than you can know. Dohiyi Oginalii Night Owl , , (*,*) Gary Night Owl gars@genie.geis.com (`-') P. O. Box 672168 gars@netcom.com ===w=w=== Marietta, GA 30067, U.S.A. gars@igc.apc.org ----------- News of the people featured in this issue ---------- Part A: Usenet and e-mail Part B: NATCHAT and NATIVE-L lists - The James Bay Crees - Conferences and Powwows - online and Quebec Secession - Innu to Boycott Environmental - Legend: How Grandmother Spider Assessment Hearings Brought Fire to the People - Lakota Declaration - Indian Claims Commission - Mary Brave Bird Interview - Poem: Moon Dreaming Thunder - Verse: Hawai'ian Book of Days - Conferences and Powwows - offline ------------------ clip here for news feature -- 8< ------------ --------- "RE: The James Bay Crees and Quebec Secession" --------- Date: Tue Sep 20 19:31:28 1994 From: Stewartshp@aol.com Subj: The James Bay Crees and Quebec Secession UUCP email "The status and rights of the James Bay Crees in the context of Quebec secession from Canada" Speech by Grand Chief Matthew Coon Come at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC, September 19, 1994 A week ago today, a secessionist government, the Parti Quebecois, was elected to rule in the Province of Quebec. Another secessionist party, the Bloc Quebecois, already sits in the Canadian federal Parliament as the Official Opposition. The leader of the Bloc Quebecois, Mr. Lucien Bouchard, spoke here in this Center in March. It is no secret that the elected government in Quebec now intends to make every effort to take Quebec out of Canada. The issue of Quebec's secession from Canada has moved from the hypothetical to the distinctly possible. I believe that America's interests will be challenged by the events now taking place in the Province of Quebec. I believe that Americans in particular, with their persistent and heartfelt sense of justice and fairness, and their concern for fundamental human rights, cannot turn their backs on threatened abuses or injustice. I am here because something wrong could soon take place in my country. I am here because the Aboriginal peoples, who have been the historical victims on this continent for five hundred years, are in danger once again of being dispossessed and shoved aside. This time it is proposed that we simply be handed from our country to a foreign country against our will and without our consent. I am a Cree Indian--an elected leader of my people. The Crees have lived, since the end of the last Ice Age, in the territory surrounding James Bay at the southern end of Hudson's Bay. The Inuit people live to the north of us, and together we occupy a territory about twice the size of California. We are indigenous, that is, Aboriginal peoples, and to this day are the only peoples to live permanently in this territory. Long before there was a Canada or a United States, our territory was given its name, Eenou Astchee, the people's land. We Crees number about 12,000; we continue to hunt, fish, and trap as a major economic pursuit; and we live in nine different communities that are spread out over hundreds of miles. It is a beautiful, and for the most part, pristine land that has only come under development pressure during the past twenty years. We have always been the majority inhabitants of our territory, which we have never left. We have never been involved in an armed conflict or uprising with Canada or any colonial power. We have never, until recently, faced any political threat to our territory or our existence as a people. We have our own language, culture, history, legal system, social structure, traditions, and beliefs. We have always conceived of ourselves as one people, tied together by the land we share and care for, and upon which our survival has always depended. We Crees are not "nationalists." That concept does not exist in the Cree language. Our tie to the land is not just political, it is also physical. We are part of our lands. Our connection to the land is, to this day, barely understood by others. Few who have claimed over the centuries to own and govern our lands have even been there. On the 2nd of May 1670, King Charles II of England "granted" the entire Hudson Bay drainage system to the "Company of Gentleman Adventurers Trading into Hudson's Bay," also known as the Hudson's Bay Company. He named this vast area of land "Rupert's Land" in honor of his cousin Prince Rupert. This grant lasted until 1870, when Rupert's Land was annexed to Canada by Queen Victoria at Windsor. The colony of Canada at that time was just three years old. Thirty or so years later in 1898 and 1912, Rupert's Land was broken up and given to the Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. Thus it was not until 1912 that the largest part of Eenou Astchee, the Cree Territory, somehow became part of the Province of Quebec. The Cree Territory was never part of the historical entity known as Quebec. In colonial terms, it was a territory under exclusive Canadian federal jurisdiction until 1912. During all of these years of Royal and colonial gifts, transfers, and jurisdictional changes, we Crees were never consulted, or even informed. This was all done without our consent, and without our knowledge. Based on the racist beliefs and practices of those days, we were described in colonial documents as wild creatures and squatters. However, certain conditions on the settlement of Native rights and interests were attached to the 1912 Act of Parliament that granted our lands to Quebec. But nothing was done, and still no one spoke to us for a further 60 years. Then in 1971, again without so much as notifying the Crees, Quebec and its provincially owned electric utility Hydro-Quebec, started construction of the massive James Bay hydroelectric project that would flood and destroy several sensitive regions in the Cree territory. We went to court, and won a landmark case on our rights. But Quebec's highest court summarily overturned our plea for relief, which we based on the requirements of the 1912 Act transferring a portion of Rupert's Land to the Province of Quebec. Quebec argued that we Crees had the legal status of "squatters," living on, but not in possession of our traditional land. Unabashed, the Court ruled that our rights to our lands had been extinguished by King Charles II's distant gift to Prince Rupert, way back in the 1600's! Ironically, the Supreme Court of Canada stated in 1990 that the James Bay hydroelectric project was "initiated without regard to the rights of the Indians who lived there, even though these were expressly protected by a constitutional instrument." But this statement came too late for the Crees. We had already entered into the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement back in 1975. This Agreement, which was entered into under conditions of duress and real oppression, is now purported to have "remedied" the previous 400 years of colonial manipulation. Such as it is, the Agreement is a treaty that was negotiated within a federalist context, between the Crees, the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec, as a Canadian province. This is critical in the current context. This treaty established and confirms rights and obligations emanating from two levels of government, with intentional and inherent checks and balances which were fundamental to us. In particular, it is specifically recognized that the Parliament and the Government of Canada have a "special responsibility" to the Crees. The rights we have in this treaty with the governments of Canada and Quebec are specifically enshrined within the Canadian Constitution. In confirming this Agreement by law in 1977, the Parliament of Canada simultaneously enshrined permanent Cree rights as citizens of Canada and residents in the Province of Quebec, as well as the other rights contained in the treaty. These terms and conditions may only be amended with the consent of the original signatories. Our relationship in perpetuity with the federal Crown and Parliament are, in law at least, not subject to unilateral abrogation or transfer. I will complete this short history by jumping back to the 18th century, recalling that France surrendered its part of what later became the Province of Quebec in 1763, in the Treaty of Paris. That surrender and extinguishment followed the conquest of the French by the British on the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City in 1759. Importantly, the borders of the Province of Quebec were intentionally drawn in 1763 to exclude the lands of the Hudson's Bay Company, which included the Cree Territory far to the north. Throughout this time, the Crees' way of life went largely unchanged, because there was little or no contact with government authorities; and although our rights were purportedly affected, we remained unaware of all of these jurisdictional implications. Our elders tell us the stories about the French soldiers coming down the frozen rivers to attack the Hudson's Bay posts in James Bay, but the Hudson's Bay Company remained, and English became the second language of the Crees. It was not until 1963 that the Province of Quebec sent the first government officials into the Cree Territory, but no services were provided then by Quebec, and little happened until the James Bay project in 1973. Last year the Government of Quebec held formal ceremonies commemorating its presence, "Thirty Years in Northern Quebec." In his study on secession, American scholar Allan Buchanan questions the legitimacy of secession in contexts where the secessionist group acquired all or some of its territory through unjust or nefarious means. Buchanan states: "This may be an accurate description of the situation in Quebec... For one thing, the French acquired at least some of the territory in unjust ways from the various Indian tribes (some now extinct, some virtually so, and others readily identifiable) who originally occupied the land. For another, some portions of present-day Quebec were ceded to the province by the English after unification." Even Quebec government officials do not really know Cree history. I remember that the Crees were rebuked in 1977 by Quebec officials for not speaking and using the French language. A law passed at that time prohibiting the public use of languages other than French in Quebec, was imposed in the Cree and Inuit Territory. After strong protests and demonstrations of civil disobedience by the Crees and Inuit, the French Language Law was imposed in the rest of Quebec outside of our Territory, but the Crees and Inuit won an exception substantiated upon our treaty rights. It is because our rights as Aboriginal peoples of Canada could forever and irrevocably be altered and diminished in this conflict, that I must speak to you. I wish to emphasize that I am not here today to express our fears about whether our human rights will be respected in an independent Quebec. We are promised daily by the secessionists that we will be well treated. But the Crees are not seeking such assurances concerning their rights in some future independent Quebec--that is not the point at this time. No, I am here because the process of secession itself, as proposed by the government of Quebec, involves imminent denials of fundamental human rights. The Parti Quebecois, now the Government of Quebec, proclaims the Quebecois--that is, anyone who may presently reside in the province--a people. The Parti Quebecois then claims for that Quebec people the fundamental right of self-determination, while in the same breath denying the Crees and other Aboriginal peoples this self-same right. The Parti Quebecois, now the Government of Quebec, states that we have no rights in our land, that these have all been extinguished through centuries of colonial acts. It always fails to mention, however, the extinguishments and surrenders of the territorial rights of Quebecers at the Treaty of Paris and again when Quebec joined Canada in 1867. The leader of the Parti Quebecois, now the Premier of Quebec, has stated that the Cree people have no valid claim on its territory because, he says, our rights were all extinguished when the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement came into force in 1977. He neglects to mention the many federalist aspects of the Agreement that bind his province and the federal government to the Crees. All these statements constitute a profound double standard, a discrimination we can only conclude is based on race, in breach of all international standards. An observer of this situation noted recently in the Cornell Journal of International Law: "A self-respecting international law cannot apply as lofty a principle as self-determination in a racially discriminatory manner: 'yes' for whites in Quebec, 'no' for indigenous peoples throughout Canada." All of these assertions of the Parti Quebecois, now the government of Quebec, involve breaches of domestic and international law and of our human rights. Fundamentally, there is no right for a portion of a State to secede, either in international or in Canadian Constitutional law. To accomplish its stated goal, the Government of Quebec will either have to persuade the Canadian State to amend its Constitution to dismember itself, or Quebec will have to secede unilaterally. In either case, we intend to ensure that the constitutional and human rights of the Aboriginal peoples are not violated. There are many injustices in the Americas that bring all of us to this point in history--wars waged, battles lost, the powerful against the weak, the caprice of monarchs, the treachery of tyrants. None of this is fair, but here we are, anyway, those of us who have survived. The Aboriginal peoples of the Americas have without doubt been the most tragic victims of European migration to the "New World." Yes, we fight against injustice, we file land claims in the courts, we demonstrate to defend our rights, we seek the further recognition of our status and rights in international fora. But this does not constitute an effort to turn back the clock on history itself, and to demand total independence and absolute sovereignty over our peoples and their territory. Much as some of us might like to, we recognize that the best we can do is defend and enhance the rights that belong to us as peoples and nations. As a result, we live in relatively stable societies, governed by known laws and procedures (though mostly not of our own making), which although frustrating and often unfair or unjust, are evolving to provide some means for us to pursue the interests of our people. Over time we will redress the wrongs we have suffered, within the framework of law and international human rights standards. We spend a great deal of time and money in the law courts and even at the United Nations. But, and I say this again, we have not tried to change history. In Quebec, something else is happening. In Quebec, a group representing less than half of the population of the province, wants to "correct" history. Automobile license plates in Quebec carry the motto, "Je me souviens," which means, "I remember." What is it that I, as a Cree Indian, am supposed to remember? Quebec was never independent. It was a French colony, surrendered by France in war--a strip of land along the upper St. Lawrence River where two European powers fought for control of Aboriginal land. From an Aboriginal point of view, both the French and the English are recent arrivals. Whatever upsetting defeat may have occurred on the Plains of Abraham in 1759, it does not begin to compare with the dispossession and oppression that has been practiced against the Aboriginal peoples. Now, the political leaders of the Official Opposition in the federal parliament and a provincial government in power, are demanding total independence and sovereignty for Quebec so that it can, as Mr. Bouchard claims, reach its full economic potential. Quebecers want to become a "normal people," Premier Parizeau stated last week. These are the reasons being put forward as the justification for the dismemberment of Canada. Under international law, the right of self-determination may not be exercised so as to affect the territorial integrity of a recognized State, unless that State violates the basic human rights and fundamental freedoms of peoples within its borders, which is when secession may become the only practical remedy. The Province of Quebec can hardly claim that the rights of its citizens are now being abused. The Prime Ministers of Canada have come from Quebec repeatedly through the history of Canada, including for 25 of the past 26 years. The leader of the Official Opposition in the House of Commons is a Quebecois; the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, which formed the previous federal government is a Quebecois; the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is a Quebecois, the Canadian Ambassador to the United States is a Quebecois. And as Mr. Bouchard told you, his secessionist party has been treated fairly in Parliament even though it openly avows the dismemberment of Canada itself. Quebec holds 75 of 211 seats in the House of Commons. One third of the seats in the Supreme Court of Canada are guaranteed to Quebec. Nevertheless, the secessionist government in Quebec has made public its program to separate from Canada, which will formally place Quebec on the course of secession. Within one year, Premier Parizeau has promised to hold a referendum on separation from Canada. If there is a yes vote on the referendum--even a fifty percent plus one yes vote--Quebec promises to separate. If Canada refuses, then Quebec will make a unilateral declaration of independence, and attempt to impose its own laws on an exclusive basis, throughout the territory of the existing province. As an Indian, I am terribly disturbed by this scenario, which makes no allowance for the rights of my people. In May, Mr. Bouchard stated publicly that the Aboriginal peoples in Quebec do not have the right to self-determination--in his words, "it does not belong to them." Yet Mr. Bouchard's chief legal advisor, Professor Daniel Turp of the University of Montreal, wrote in 1992:"The fact that [Aboriginal peoples] constitute peoples who are self-identified as peoples confers on them a right of self-determination at the same level as Quebec. Aboriginal nations and Quebecois both... have a right to self-determination. In terms of legitimacy, the Aboriginal peoples, the Aboriginal nations on their territory, are quite ahead of the francophones of Quebec, the anglophones of Quebec, all the Europeans and other nationalities on this territory." The secessionists are simply saying that we Crees may not choose to stay in Canada. They are saying that whether we like it or not, and with or without our consent, we are aboard the canoe of independence, and may not stay where we are on the dry land of Canada. We are being told that we must join with the secessionists to redress their historic wrongs. And if the Crees refuse to go with Quebec, what then? What will Quebec do if the Crees invoke their treaty rights as citizens of Canada, protected by the Canadian Constitution? What will Quebec do if we ask the governments to respect their own laws and respect our constitutional and treaty rights--the right to live on our lands in Canada and to benefit from all of the rights of Aboriginal peoples in Canada? Mr. Jacques Brassard, now a prominent member of the new government in Quebec City, stated in May that an independent Quebec would ensure that its laws are respected by those who may resist separation from Canada. He was referring primarily to the Crees. Mr. Brassard warned, "We would have to maintain order with the means of a modern state; that means laws, courts, and police forces, which are also institutions and instruments of a state." We Crees are not nationalists, and we are not contemplating secession or insurrection. We have never and will never use violence. We ask ourselves however, in the face of the potential breakup of Canada: Who is it that is really threatening these things? This is the situation we face. If the Crees want to remain in Canada, we will have to face the police forces and army of a State that is itself acting in defiance of Canadian and international law. Mr. Bouchard was careful to avoid this question when he spoke here in March. He attempted to soothe the American people, to make it all look easy. My people are worried. At our Cree Nation Assembly in August, they gave the mandate to hold a Cree referendum if Quebec holds its promised referendum on secession. We Crees do indeed intend to make our own choice, to assert a right of self-determination at least equal to that claimed by Quebec. Of course, the new government of Quebec promises that it will adequately define and then respect the rights of the Aboriginal peoples in an independent Quebec, and they ask us to be content with that. But they ignore the fact that the very establishment of an independent Quebec through the process they describe will entail violations of our basic human rights and fundamental freedoms. Among these violations are denial of our nationality, denial of our right of self-determination as a people, unilateral abrogation of our treaty rights, and the imposition of a new international border between us and our brethren in the rest of Canada. Mr. Parizeau reacted immediately and heatedly to the Cree decision to hold our own referendum. He declared that the Crees would have to respect the wishes of Quebec in its own referendum. He stated that Quebec's borders were inviolable, that the territorial integrity of Quebec with its present borders could not be questioned. He stated again that the Crees, as an Aboriginal people, do not have a right of self-determination. These double standards are deeply disturbing, and make us fear for the future of our people. Premier Parizeau claims territorial integrity for Quebec, but not for Canada, a recognized State. He objects to the idea of a nation-wide Canadian referendum on Quebec secession, stating that Quebecers have the right to decide for themselves. However, when my people take a similar position and explain that the future of the Crees can only be determined by the Crees themselves, and that the Crees will not permit themselves to be forcefully integrated into the entire Quebec population, Mr. Parizeau demurs. The secessionists are now accusing the Government of Canada of engaging in a conspiracy with the Aboriginal peoples to use the Aboriginal issue to block separation. This is both paternalistic to us, and untrue. The Crees saw all of this coming several years ago. We began to research our rights under Canadian and international law. We sought to further delineate our rights, and to inform the international community of the threatened violation of our human rights. Our basic study on Cree rights in the context of Quebec secession was tabled before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 1992, and published subsequently in the New York International Law Review. The Aboriginal peoples, and the Crees in particular, have indeed now been recognized as crucial elements that could prevent the secession of Quebec. But it was not until May of this year that the Canadian federal Minister of Indian Affairs, Ron Irwin, finally stated the obvious, and confirmed the right of the Aboriginal peoples and their territory to choose to remain in Canada. The hostility and outrage of the secessionists was deafening, but in the end, they had to admit that he might have a point. After all, Mr. Irwin explained, the Crees have been on their lands for 5,000 years. The Canadian Prime Minister stated that Mr. Irwin was doing his job, and that as long as there was a Canadian Constitution, the federal government would have a special relationship with Aboriginal peoples. He also observed that while Quebec's borders as a province are guaranteed in the Canadian Constitution, there was no guarantee that an independent Quebec would have the same borders as the present Province of Quebec. We are confident that our position in law is clear. The Canadian Constitution recognizes us as a people. As a people, the Crees are entitled to enjoy the right of self-determination described in the two International Covenants and other United Nations instruments. International law experts consider that Quebec, as an administrative entity within Canada made up of diverse populations, is not a self-determination unit. An act of secession by Quebec would constitute a sufficient violation of the Crees' fundamental rights for us to invoke an external right of self-determination, and give the Crees, at the very least, the choice to remain in Canada. As for the purported extinguishment of Cree rights, legal experts note that the concept, like discovery, is increasingly being rejected as racist against Aboriginal peoples and incompatible with modern concepts of human rights. In any case, it must be noted that extinguishments of Cree rights, if they occurred at all, did so in a federalist context in which our rights to remain in Canada were enshrined. And if extinguishment is an issue to be used against the Crees, let us not forget that Quebec's sovereign rights were also extinguished and surrendered in 1763 and again in 1867. I have already referred to the conclusions of secessionist advisor Professor Daniel Turp, who has stated the view that the Crees would have the right to choose--Canada, Quebec, or even independence. Likewise, Gordon Robertson, former Clerk to the Privy Counsel, and once Canada's most senior civil servant, predicts that there may be dire consequences if Aboriginal constitutional rights are ignored. The secessionists like to say that it would be absurd for 12,000 Crees and 10,000 Inuit to determine the status of such a large area of land. This is of course, a political and not a legal argument. So is Mr. Bouchard's argument that Quebec is the only "nation" of 7 million people in the Western world who do not have their own State. New York City could make the same claim. Many Europeans comment on the fact that Canada is too large a country to have a population of only 28 million people. However, in the context of Quebec secession, the political arguments are likely to be just as important as the legal ones. The big questions are: What would Canada do? Would certain countries recognize Quebec? Would human rights be a factor in the decision to recognize the new State? And most critical for us: Would force be used against the Crees if we asserted our right to choose? The secessionists predict that all will be peaceful and reasonable. Nevertheless, they now state that they will assemble an army. Asked who threatens them, they reply that they need an army "just as any modern State." When I think of Mr. Jacques Brassard's comments about the instruments of a modern state, I can only think that one purpose of the Quebec Army will be to deal with the Aboriginal people who may reject being taken from Canada. The secessionists also raise the specter of an Indian uprising in Canada. If the right of self-determination of the Crees in Quebec is recognized, they claim, then all the Indians in Canada and the United States will have the right to set up their own countries and the situation would be intolerable. This line of argument is absurd. Please recall, it is not the Aboriginal peoples who are attempting to upset the political makeup of North America. I must repeat: the Crees are not secessionists and we are not nationalists. If Quebec makes no attempt to unilaterally change a constitutional landscape in which we are an explicit stakeholder, then the issue of our right to external self-determination remains moot. Our right of self-determination would arise from the fundamental denial of our rights in the process I have just explained. Self-determination conveys no right of secession in States where human rights are respected. The big question, as always, is: What would the United States do? Mr. Bouchard came here to Washington to tell the American people that he did not plan to take the campaign for Quebec sovereignty beyond Canada's borders. But he had just come from a meeting with the United Nations Secretary General; and he subsequently went to Europe to meet with the most senior members of the French government to discuss the secessionist cause. Here in Washington he told you that he was simply providing information on an internal Canadian issue. He said this, despite the fact that the secessionists have said over and over again that the success of their venture will depend on a favorable reception from the United States, and they have lobbied here to achieve this end. I will not pretend that I am not interested in your support. We Crees and the other Aboriginal peoples in Quebec need the support of the American people. We believe that the interests of the Aboriginal peoples are at stake, but also that the honor of Canada and the community of North American nations is also at stake. For this reason, we want you to ask tough, vigilant questions of Quebec now, and also if and when it requests membership in the club of nations. This membership should not be granted if its achievement can only be accomplished through the breach and denial of our fundamental human rights. So I ask: Where will the United States stand on this issue? Is it hands-off no matter what happens? Quebec secession is essentially an ethnic nationalism that is supported by barely half of the Quebecers of French descent (a majority of whom, by the way, agree that the Aboriginal peoples have the right to make their own choice). Mr. Bouchard told you in March that Quebec nationalism is "territorial nationalism." There is no such thing--and it is hard to imagine a territorial nationalism where two-thirds of the "national" territory only came into the province in 1912. No, these arguments were given only to quiet American concerns. It should be obvious that others may have a great interest in what happens in Canada. We have heard first-hand reports in Geneva that the secessionists have prior agreements with Belgium and France to quickly recognize an independent Quebec. It is impossible to predict the outcome of any new arrangements on the political make-up of North America, or on the changes in trade relations that could occur in the North American trading bloc if European interests secure political affinities in an independent Quebec. A New York Times editorial late last week stated, "The United States has political, economic and neighborly interests in keeping Canada whole, as well as a desire to avoid the chaotic unknown. As a global superpower, America wants stability on its borders, not neighbors engaged in a testy divorce....In power, the Parti Quebecois may yet convince the majority of Quebecers they would be better off as a nation apart. That would be unfortunate for all concerned." We Crees also have strong political, economic and neighborly interests in avoiding the chaotic unknown. But there is an important connection between Cree and US interests. The US is correctly reticent about interfering in Canada's internal affairs. But it is beyond dispute that human rights issues are always a matter for international discussion and comment. It is also beyond dispute that the human rights of Aboriginal peoples, including in Canada, are not fully respected. It would be particularly unfortunate if Americans were to accept the position advanced by Michael Lind in his article in Foreign Affairs in May, where he implicitly condones the oppression of small groups as an acceptable cost of Quebec secession. "Quebecers, if independent, might be more inclined to oppress American Indians in Quebec," he observes just prior to an explanation that he is, of course, "not condoning any injustice." Full respect for the fundamental human rights of the Crees and the other Aboriginal peoples in Quebec would include our right to choose whether we wish to remain in Canada in the event of Quebec secession. The guarantee of Cree rights and full respect of our treaty with Canada and Quebec could seriously affect the Quebec secession option. Economically speaking, about 50% of the electricity generated in Quebec is produced in the Cree Territory, 50,000 megawatt-hours per year with a value of some $CDN2 billion per year. Half to all of the electricity exported to the US from Quebec is generated on Cree lands. $CDN 3 billion dollars' worth of timber and pulp is taken from the Cree Territory every year, and many millions of dollars more of copper, gold, silver, and other minerals. Much of this is imported into the United States. If Cree Territory remains in Canada, an independent Quebec would be a smaller, poorer country than it is as a Canadian province. Politically, if Quebec secedes with its borders intact, Canada would be split into two parts, east and west of Quebec. If however Cree Territory remained in Canada, Canada would remain continuous from coast to coast. I want to conclude with a frank explanation of our interest in this entire issue. The Crees do not oppose the aspirations and legitimate expression of self-determination by any people; and we certainly will do nothing to prevent an expression of self-determination by any populations in Quebec, so long as there is full and equal respect for the rule of law and our human rights. Quebec may well have legitimate claims; but it may make no valid claims to the Cree people or Cree Territory that would deny the Cree people's right to choose how we would be governed. What do the Crees want? Let me end by telling you what I want for my people, and what we want for all Aboriginal peoples. We want to become legitimate and genuine participants in our society and its government. We want the Aboriginal peoples, who today are the most marginalized peoples in our country, to have a fair share of the wealth of the nation. We want our people to be treated with respect. We want our opinions and our beliefs to be taken seriously. We want our lands and our environment protected from irresponsible and destructive development; and we want our people, who have cared for those lands and resources for thousands of years, to have a real say and stake in their future use. We want our people to benefit from the best educational and health services that we can provide. We want our people to have decent housing, sanitation, and clean water to drink, and meaningful economic choices. We want an end to tuberculosis, and whooping cough, and gastroenteritis and other endemic diseases that were eliminated in non-native communities in Canada decades ago. This is what we want for our people and I want for my children. So when and if that day comes, and my people have made their choice, and I am asked, you can hold me to my word--this is what I will ask. In the meantime, we ask to be treated equally and with respect for our fundamental rights, particularly in the context of the possible secession of Quebec from Canada. President Woodrow Wilson stated, "No right exists to hand peoples about from sovereignty to sovereignty as if they were property." We feel that these words are as applicable to the situation facing Aboriginal peoples in Quebec as they were when they were spoken. Thank you. --------- "RE: How Grandmother Spider Brought Fire to the People" --------- Date: 94/09/18 18:56 From: William R Lehr (w.lehr@genie.geis.com) Subj: How Grandmother Spider Brought Fire to the People GE Electronic Mail The First Fire In the beginning there was no fire, and the world was cold, until the Thunders, who lived up in Galun lati (Gah-lun-lah-tee), sent their lightening and put fire into the bottom of a hollow sycamore tree which grew on an island. The animals knew it was there, because they could see the smoke coming out at the top, but they could not get to it on account of the water, so they held a council to decide what to do. This was in the long ago time, when the animals could talk one to the other. Every animal that could fly or swim was anxious to go after the fire. The Raven offered, and because he was so large and strong they thought he could surely do the work, so he was sent first. He flew high and far across the water and alighted on the sycamore tree, but while he was wondering what to do next, the heat had scorched all his feathers black, and he was frightened and came back without the fire. The little Screech Owl (wa'huhu [wah-hoo-hoo]) volunteered to go, and reached the place safely, but while he was looking down into the hollow tree a blast of hot air came up and nearly burned out his eyes. He managed to fly home as best he could, but it was a long time before he could see well, and his eyes are red to this day. The the Hooting Owl (Uguku [OO-goo-koo]) and the Horned Owl (Tskili [Skee-lee]) went, but by the time they got to the hollow tree, the fire was burning so fiercely the the smoke nearly blinded them, and the ashes carried up by the wind made white rings about their eyes. They had come home again without the fire, but with all the rubbing they were never able to get rid of the white rings. Now no more of the birds would venture, and so the little Uksuhi (Ook- soo-hee)snake, the black racer, said he would go through the water and bring back some fire. He swam across to the island and crawled through the grass to the tree, and went in by a small hole at the bottom. The smoke and heat were too much for him, too, and after dodging about blindly over the hot ashes until he was almost on fire himself he managed by good luck get out again at the same hole, but his body had been scorched black, and he has ever since had the habit of darting and doubling back on his track as if trying to escape from close quarters. He came back, and the great black snake, Gule'gi (Goo-lay-kee), "The Climber," offered to go for fire. He swam over to the island and climbed up the tree on the outside, as the blacksnake always does, but when he put his head down into the hole the smoke choked him so that he fell into the burning stump, and before he could climb out again he was as black as the Uksu'hi. Now they held another council, for still there was no fire, and the world was cold, but birds, snakes, and four footed animals, all had some excuse for not going, because they were all afraid to venture near the burning sycamore, until at last Kanane'ski Amai'yehi (Kah-nah-nay Ah-eye-yay-hee [the Water Spider]) said she would go. This is not the water spider that looks like a mosquito, but other one, with black downy hair and red stripes on her body. She can run on top of the water or dive to the bottom, so there would be no trouble to get over to the island, but the question was, How could she bring back the fire? "I'll manage that," said the Water Spider; so she spun a thread from her body and wove it into a tusti (toos-tee) bowl, which she fastened on her back. Then she crossed over to the island and through the grass to where the fire was still burning. She put one little coal of fire into her bowl, and came back with it, and ever since we have had fire, and the Water Spider still keeps her tusti bowl. That is how fire came to the People. Hope you all enjoyed the story. Aho! We are All Related! -=Standing Bear=- --------- "RE: Indian Claims Commission" --------- From: Frosty Deere (frosty.deere@f502.n167.z1.fidonet.org) Date: Sep-13-94 10:52:00 Subj: Indian Claims Commission FidoNet Indian Affairs Conference Flying Dust First Nations Community Session To Get Underway. ======================================================================== Press Release Ottawa, August 29th, 1994. The Indian Claims Commission is conducting an inquiry into the Flying Dust Nation's specific claim which was rejected by the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs. The community sessions will be held August 29 and 30 at the First Nation's Administration Complex building. The Flying Dust Nation is located near Meadow Lake Saskatchewan. Commission Co-Chairs Dan Bellgrade, Jim Prentice and Commissioner Roger Augustine are conducting the inquiry. They will be in the community to hear oral histories relating to the loss of traditional hunting and trapping lands due to the establishment of the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range during the 1950s. The Commission has already conducted inquires into five other First Nations claim relating to the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range, and last year submitted a report regarding Cold Lake First Nations and Canoe Lake Cree Nation. The federal government has not yet formally responded to the Commission's recommendations. "We are interested in hearing presentation from Elders and members of the Flying Dust Nation on the impact the Weapons range has had on the community," said Co-Chair Dean Bellegarde. The Indian Claims Commission is a Royal Commission established under Part I of the Inquires Act by Government of Canada, in consultation with First Nations Chiefs across the country. The Commission's mandate, in part is to inquire into and report upon the government's rejection of the specific land claims. For further information contact Cathy Compton, Director of Communications at ( 613 ) 943-1607. ronald.deere@igloo.magicnet.com FIDO 1:167/502 NativeNet 90:167/502 --- SLMAIL v4.0 (#1349) Origin: Igloo Station (514) 632-5556 (1:167/502) --------- "RE: Poem: Moon Dreaming Thunder" --------- Date: 14 Sep 1994 22:09:36 -0500 From: turtle@aicap.s21.com (Turtle Heart) Subj: Moon Dreaming Thunder Newsgroup: alt.native You can't play with people people on their ponies you can't play with rivers rivers running in the sun they have reasons all their own there are drums drums and dreams on both sides of the mountain singing in a place you know singing in a place you have never been my heart is wrapped in skin Tobacco Indian ______________________________________________________ Turtle Heart turtle@soft21.s21.com (Ahnishinabeg) American Indian Computer Art Project BBS 619-374-2100 PO Box 111 Johannesburg CA 93528-0111 Land of Kaw-ii-su ancestor: Land of Light Land of Kaw-ii-su ancestor: Land of Light --------- "RE: Verse: Hawai'ian Book of Days" --------- Date: 94/09/16 23:38 From: Kepola (dfsanders@genie.geis.com) Subj: A HAWAI'IAN BOOK OF DAYS, week of September 18-24 GE Electronic Mail A HAWAI'IAN BOOK OF DAYS, week of September 25-October 1 KEPEKEMAPA (September) (Mahoe-hope) 25 I have known you before in another life, in another dream of reality. 26 A symphony of birds sings together in the trees just before sunset. 27 Conquer fear; do not let fear conquer you. 28 If you never try, ... you will never succeed. 29 Creativity is the key to success in every endeavor. 30 We are only blind if we will not see; only deaf if we will not hear. OKAKOPA (October) (Ikuwa) October was the last month of the Kau season, which ran from May through October. The most important holiday of the Hawaiian year was the Makahiki, which began in late October or early November, when the Pleiades or Makali'i stars first appeared in the night sky, and lasted for four months. During this time there was no fighting, for the Makahiki was a festival honoring Lono, who was, among other things, a god of peace and of the harvest. It was celebrated by prayers and offerings to the gods, followed by feasting, games, songs and dancing. 1 Lono, grant us the rains to make our crops grow, the sunlight to make them ripen, and the strength for us to harvest your bounty. (c) Copyright 1991 by D. F. Sanders Me ke aloha i ka nani, ... Moe'uhanekeanuenue (With love and beauty, ... Rainbow Dream) --------- "RE: Conferences and Powwows - offline" --------- Date: Thu, 22 September 94 08:00 -0500 From: Janet Smith (Evening Star) (jans@genie.geis.com) Subj: Upcoming conferences and powwows not previously posted to Mailing Lists NATCHAT or NATIVE-L GE Electronic Mail =POWWOWS= From: G.ASHMAN@genie.geis.com [Judge]-[Glen] Oct. 14-16 Soquee Indian Cultural Festival & Powwow Rain or shine Clarkesville, Georgia at the Habersham County Fairgrounds INFO: 706-754-8326. Native Americans from across America will demonstrate crafts, dance and share stories and legends. This is the second year of this event. Games Blowguns Rivercane Baskets Shell Carving Stone Carving Flint Knapping Pottery Masks Oak/honeysuckle baskets Arrow making Encampment Patchwork Gourd Crafts Hide Tanning Dancing Flute music There is a sheltered area at the fairgrounds in case of rain. ======================================================================= From: Terry King Subject: Logo Contest Meegwetch1 Logo Contest The Chippewas of Nawash First Nations Literacy Program are seeking submissions for the creation of a unique Logo that will create more visibility to our program. REQUIREMENTS The winning logo will be in four colours The winning logo will include the theme of Ken-Dass-Win Communications which is: KTAAMGWENDAAGWAD KENDASSWIN & WENAAMJIGEDAA WAAZHI KENDAASYING Translation: Knowledge is Power and Knowledge is choices. All submissions will be reviewed by the Literacy Committee and the winning Logo will be awarded $650.00. Please send your submissions to Terry King Ken-Dass-Win Communications Chippewas of Nawash First Nations R. R. # 5, Wiarton, Ontario Canada N0H 2T0 For more information, please contact Terry King- Program Co-ordinator at (519)534-5092 DEADLINE FOR ENTRIES: NOVEMBER 19, 1994 4:00 P.M. ======================================================================= From: K.NEWMAN9@genie.geis.com October 1 & 2 Indian Summer Festival 10:00a.m.-5:00p.m. each day Iroquois Dancers Iroquois Smoke Dance Competition Traditional Pow Wow Dancers Native American Foods & Crafts Children's Activities Guided Trail Walks Storytelling Ganondagan State Historic Site 1488 Victor-Holcomb Rd. Victor, New York Admission: $ 4.00 Adults $ 2.00 Children and Senior Citizens (716) 742-1690 ========================================================================== From: Jon Tukman 1994 Native American Writers Forum Oct. 3-9 The fourth annual Native American Writers Forum will take place in Telluride October 3-9. As it was last year, the Forum will be split between educational workshops for Native High School students, and a literary conference. Attending writers to date are: Barney Bush (Shawnee), Lance Henson (S. Cheyenne), Jeanetta Calhoun (Delaware), Mark Trahant, Simon Ortiz (Acoma Pueblo), Fred Bigjim (Inupiat Eskimo), Rex Lee Jim (Navajo), Elizabeth Woody (Warm Springs/Wasco/Navajo - tentative), Luci Tapahonso (Navajo - tentative), and Roberta Hill Whiteman (Wisconsin Oneida). The format of the Forum is as follows: The writers arrive Sunday, Oct. 2. Monday the 3rd and Tuesday the 4th are private sessions for writers only. Fifty Native high school students from throughout the Southwest arrive Tues. eve. the 4th and the students will be participating in intensive workshops with the writers all day Wed., Thurs., and Fri. AM. The Telluride Institute is sponsoring student participation by funding food, lodging and travel, and all of the student slots are currently filled. These workshops are a unique opportunity for Native students to interact closely with accomplished Native writers outside of a school setting. Fri. eve Oct. 7 through Sun. AM Oct. 9 is a literary conference, which is open to the public. The weekend consists of a series of high energy readings and stimulating panel discussions on some of the pivotal issues facing Native authors and Native literature. Panels in the past have included Native Literature's place in American education, Native American Literature and the environment, and Native authors' and artists' roles in the battle against cultural appropriation. This year for the first time, we plan to provide an on-line component to this conference. We will be hosting on-line sessions among writers and students in remote locations, and also will be posting summaries of the panel discussions on this mailing list. Registration includes all Forum events Fri.-Sun. and includes supper Friday and Saturday nights as well. For more information, or if anyone out there has input on how they would like to see the on-line sessions structured, please call Mary Beth Mueller or me at (303) 728-4402, or respond to jtukman@csn.org. Sincerely, Jon Tukman =================================================================== From _News from Indian Country_ Sept 29-Oct 2 Shiprock Navajo Fair, Shiprock, NM Info: 505-368-5106 Sept 30-Oct 2 2nd Iwasil Celebration. Seattle, WA Info: 206-343-3111 Sept 30-Oct 2 Indian Trail, Indian Trail, NC Info: 704-331-4818 Sept 30-Oct 2 4th Intertribal Powwow, Louisville, KY Info: 502-955-7965 Sept 30-Oct 2 Wolf Moon, Lucerne Valley, CA Info: 619-248-7818 (evenings) Oct 1-2 Wind, Rain and Fire, Monterey, IN Info: 219-542-4780 Oct 1-2 Coastal Bend Council Intertribal, Corpus Christi, TX Info: 512-883-9980 Oct 1-2 Dighton Intertribal, Dighton, MA Info: 401-941-5889 or 508-669-5008 ================================================================== From _The Spike_ Oct 1-November 27 Iroquois and Algonquian Contribution to United States Culture, at the Museum of the Hudson, Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY. Storytellers and artists from various New York tribes. Info: 914-534-7781 Oct 1-2 Powwow in the Park, Flushing, NY Info: 718-459-5692 Sept 30-Oct 2 12th Annual Cherokee of Georgia Tribal Council Fall Powwow, St. George, GA Info: 904-275-2953 Sept 30-Oct 2 Sobriety Ride for Medically Fragile Children Jasper, GA Info: 404-735-6275 Oct 1-2 1st Annual Ball Ground Heritage Days Festival Ball Ground, GA Info: 404-735-4197 Oct 1-2 22nd Lumbee Powwow at the Pembroke, Pembroke NC Info: 910-521-8602 Oct 1-2 13th Annual Middle Tennessee Powwow, Lebanon, TN Info: 615-444-4899 (evenings) Sept 30-Oct 1 Day of the Wolf, 4th Intertribal Powwow Shepherdsville, KY Info: 800-526-2068 ================================================================== Send notices of forthcoming powwows, conferences and gatherings to: jans@genie.geis.com gars@netcom.com ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ all items below this line have already been distributed by our brother, Jay Brummett, via the NATIVE-L or NATCHAT mailing lists. --------- "RE: Conferences and Powwows - online" --------- Date: Thu, 22 September 94 08:00 -0500 From: Janet Smith (Evening Star) (jans@genie.geis.com) Subj: Upcoming conferences and powwows already posted to Mailing Lists NATCHAT or NATIVE-L = Powwows and Gatherings From the Internet listserv groups = Original Sender: Troy Mailing List: NATIVE-L (native-l@gnosys.svle.ma.us) Sept 24-25 43rd Annual Chickahominy Fall Festival & Pow-wow Where: Chickahominy Tribal Grounds, Charles City, VA Grand Entry at 12 noon Sat. & 1:00pm Sun Host Drum: Falling Water, Bruington, VA Guest Drums: Whahunsunacock, King William, VA Stoney Creek, North Carolina Head Dancers: Male: Maurice Proctor, Piscataway Female: Natalie Proctor, Piscataway Color Guard: Vevita of Northern VA. Arena Dir.: Max Little, Seminole For hotel stay, contact the Best Western Airport Inn at (804) 222-2780 ask for Chickahominy Pow-wow rates. $36.00 per night For more info: call (804) 966-7043 or (804) 829-2186 ====================================================================== Original Sender: EIRP News Mailing List: NATIVE-L The Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation cordially invites you the the Ceremonial Ground-Breaking Ceremony of the Gaming Project Date: Saturday, September 17, 1994 Place: At the Gaming Site on the Reservation Oakville, WA Time: 11:00 A.M. Luncheon Will Follow in the Tribal Hall For more information contact the Tribal Office at: 206/273-5911 206/273-5914 FAX or contact the EIRP Communications Office at: 206/273-6414 pablob@coopext.cahe.wsu.edu ========================================================================== information provided courtesy of the EIRP Telecommunication Project ========================================================================== Original Sender: John Berry 301-443-5988 FAX 301-443-6385 Mailing List: NATIVE-L THIRD ANNUAL HEALING GLOBAL WOUNDS POW WOW, Washington, D.C. FRI, Sept. 30 SAT, Oct. 1 Grand Entry Grand Entry Noon - On the Mall, Noon - On the Mall, 15th & Constitution Ave, NW 15th & Constitution Ave, NW 7pm - Mellon Auditorium, 7pm - Mellon Auditorium, 14th & Constitution Ave, NW 14th & Constitution Ave, NW MUSIC - DANCING - FOOD - CRAFTS NO Alcohol, Drugs, Weapons or Attitudes All Drums & Dancers Welcome Open to the Public No Admission Fee - In Conjunction With - "ONE MIND, ONE VOICE, ONE HEART, ONE PRAYER" 2nd Annual Candlelight & Prayer Vigil for FUTURE GENERATIONS For more information contact: Native Youth Alliance (202)234-8631 ========================================================================== Original Sender: vms.ucc.okstate.edu!JHAR Mailing List: NATIVE-L (native-l@gnosys.svle.ma.us) The 1994 N I E A Native American and Alaska Native Media Festival is a forum bringing together Indian Educators, students and outstanding media products currently being produced for the educational market. During the 25th Annual National Indian Education Association Convention in St. Paul, MN, convention participants will be able to view winning entries of the video competition and other videos on request. This is an excellent opportunity for media producers and students to receive publicity and acknowledgment for their accomplishments and creativity. I urge all interested parties to enter the competition and let the educators know what is available from their own Native People. DEADLINE FOR ENTRIES: 5:00 p.m. Sept. 30, 1994 MAIL TO: Jeff Harjo (Oklahoma Seminole) Media Festival Chairman Oklahoma State University 307 Life Sciences East Stillwater, Ok. 74078 or call: 405 744-6639 --------- "RE: Innu to Boycott Environmental Assessment Hearings" --------- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 15:06:51 -0400 From: Orion.YorkU.CA!es051322 (Larry Innes) Subj: Innu to Boycott Environmental Assessment Hearings Mailing List: NATIVE-L (native-l@gnosys.svle.ma.us) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 15 September/94 "Innu to Boycott Environmental Hearings Because of Unfair Process" Sheshatshiu, LABRADOR - "The process is so unfair that we cannot participate in the Federal Environmental Assessment Panel hearings on military low-level flight training", announced Daniel Ashini, Director of Innu Rights and Environment. "Military low-level flight training over our communities and hunting grounds threatens our way of life, our rights as Innu people and the environment itself". "We cannot participate", declared Ashini, "because the Panel is denying our right to cross-examine Department of National Defence (DND) consultants on their evidence. As well, many Innu, especially the elders who really know what is happening to the caribou herds and other wildlife as a result of the military training, will be deep in the country as they always are at this time of year. Surely the Panel knows this-or at least they should." According to Ashini and Innu legal advisors, the time allotted to the hearings, even with assurances of "flexibility" from the Panel, is far too short for proper discussion of the evidence of environmental impacts from thousands of low-level sorties or effects on Innu rights. Full translation into Innu-aimun is not being provided at the hearings. The Innu retained environmental and technical experts who identified 130 deficiencies in the Department of National Defence Environmental Impact Statement on military low-level flight training. Although acknowledging that there were inadequacies in the DND report, the Panel decided to proceed to public hearings, ignoring advice from some of its own technical advisors about the need for additional information. The Innu are particularly worried that the Environmental Assessment Panel has backtracked from its original insistence that the military study and assess the impact of low-level flight training, new bombing ranges and increased flights on aboriginal rights and land rights negotiations. The Panel has also refused to require the Department of National Defence to justify the low-level flight training program. "Many Canadians have experienced the noise of low-flying military aircraft at airshows, but how many people could live with it several times a day for months on end?", asked Ashini. "Low-level military flight training is driving us off our land, and prejudicing our land rights negotiations. It is wrong for the government to allow this to continue before our rights have been implemented." The Department of National Defence was slow to produce the revised Environmental Impact Statement, but is now pressuring the Panel to accelerate the hearings process so that negotiations with European military commands and governments to renew and expand the training agreement can begin in the new year. The proposed new "Multinational Memorandum of Understanding" (MMOU) will be negotiated with the governments of Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, all of whom train over the Innu homeland. Canada is also actively recruiting a fourth country, either Italy or Belgium, to join the training program. Under the proposed MMOU, the number of low-level military flights will more than double from the current 6000-7000 sorties per 7-month training season to a new high of 15000. A second bombing range of over 1000 square kilometers is to be carved out of one of the largest remaining aboriginal homelands in North America. The Innu Nation, the Counsel des Atikamekw-Montagnais (CAM), and the Naskapi Band of Quebec have all agreed to boycott the hearings. Innu leaders and community members from Quebec and Labrador are meeting in Sheshatshiu this weekend to plan their next response to the hearing process, which begins in Goose Bay on Monday. FOR MORE INFORMATION: DANIEL ASHINI (709) 497-8398 --------------------- Support the Innu decision to boycott the EIS hearings on military low-level flight training. Send letters to FEARO (and to Environment Minister Shelia Copps telling them you support the Innu. FEARO Attn: Jim Clark, Panel Manager, Military Flight Training EIS 13th Floor, Fontaine Building Hull, PQ K1A 0H3 (819) 997-1000 (819) 994-1469 (fax) Shelia Copps Minister of the Environment Terrace de la Chaudiere 28th Floor 10 Wellington St. Hull, PQ K1A 0H3 (819) 997-1441 (819) 953-3457 (fax) --------------------- =\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/= Larry Innes internet: es051322@orion.yorku.ca Environmental Advisor Innu Nation phone: (709) 497-8398 PO Box 119 fax: (709) 497-8396 Sheshatshiu, Nitassinan via Canada A0P 1M0 =\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/=\/= --------- "RE: Lakota Declaration" --------- Date: Sun, 18 Sep 1994 20:28:00 EDT From: infi.net!jsd (Dick Shovel, Ltd.) Subj: Lakota Declaration Mailing List: NATIVE-L (native-l@gnosys.svle.ma.us) On July 14, 1991 the Lakota Confederacy of the Black Hills (Lakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapahoe) made a "Declaration of Sovereignty" based on jurisdictional grounds which terminated the "colonial occupation and interests of the territory defined as 'permanent indian territory'" in the 1851 and 1868 Treaties of Fort Laramie. In the Fort Laramie Treaty of April 29, 1868 it was pledged by Wasichu that the "Great Sioux Reservation, including the Black Hills, would be 'set apart for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation of the Indians named herein...it established the Great Sioux Reservation, a tract of land [comprising most of South Dakota west of the Missouri River] in addition to certain reservations already existing east of the Missouri. The United States 'solemnly agree[d]' that no unauthorized persons 'shall ever be permitted to pass over, settle upon, or reside in [this] territory." Yeah, right! But there was gold in the Black Hills. So the Army went in under Custer, Son of the Morning Star (a great book by the way), and as a result of his "descriptions of the mineral and timber resources of the Black Hills, and the land's suitability for grazing and cultivation...," the Wasichu masses started chomping at the bit, wanting in. On the one hand Wasichu attempted to enforce the Laramie Treaty, on the other Congress was petitioned to "open up the country for settlement, by extinguishing the treaty rights of Indians." The Army then backed off on trying to keep prospectors out of the Black Hills, in effect giving them the green light to swarm where they had no right to go. An attempt to purchase mining rights was made. The Sioux rejected an offer of an annual rental fee of $400,000 per year or a one time payment of $6 million for absolute relinquishment of the Black Hills. They wanted a minimum of $70 million. Negotiations failed... That the abrogation of the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie was a farce is no secret. As per Federal Indian Law-Cases and Materials, Getches, Wilkinson and Williams, Jr. pp.359-360: A commission "headed by George Maypenny, arrived in the Sioux country in early September [1876] and commenced meetings with the head men of the various tribes...The commissioners brought with them the text of a treaty that had been prepared in advance. The principal provisions of this treaty were that the Sioux should relinquish their rights to the Black Hills and other lands west of the one hundred and third meridian, and their rights to hunt in the unceded territories to the north, in exchange for subsistence rations as long as they would be needed to insure the Sioux survival. In setting out to obtain the tribes' agreement to this treaty, the commissioners ignored the stipulation of the Fort Laramie Treaty that any cession of the lands contained within the Great Sioux Reservation would have to be joined in by three-fourths of the adult males. Instead, the treaty was signed by only 10 percent of the adult male Sioux population. "Congress resolved the impasse [read that as patently illegal act] by enacting the 1876 'agreement' into law as the Act of Feb. 28, 1877. The Act had the effect of abrogating the earlier Fort Laramie Treaty, and of implementing the terms of the Maypenny Commission's 'agreement' with the Sioux leaders. "The passage of the 1877 Act legitimized the settlers' invasion of the Black Hills..." The Lakota Confederacy has charged the United States with treaty fraud and proposed that a treaty based on fraud is invalid. It was also stated that "...Any attempt to supplant the legitimate sovereignty of the Lakota by the absorption of territory without the course of negotiations must be considered as an unlawful premature annexation." So...the Sioux, after the fact, sued Wasichu alleging that the Black Hills were taken without "just compensation." Bad move in my opinion. Bad in the sense that there, probably, could have been no just compensation in the first place. How much of a price do you put on your heart? It might have been better to sue on the ground of theft and procedural violation. Nevertheless, it was established in 1946 by the Indian Claims Commission that the Black Hills were indeed "taken," that the "1877 Act constituted a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution and that the Black Hills had been acquired through unfair and dishonorable dealings," and that the Sioux were entitled to $17.55 million for gold and land taken. [The Homestake Gold Mine in the Black Hills, in operation since the U.S. Army invaded the region and removed the Lakota people, has produced more than a thousand tons of pure gold, worth over $14 billion today.] In 1978, after the inevitable Wasichu appeal, it was "legally" established that the Sioux were entitled to the 17.55 million plus annual interest accrued at 5 percent per year starting in 1877. My understanding as regards any "payment," is that the Sioux have refused to touch such and that it remains in some bank accruing interest. The refusal to have anything to do with dollar compensation did not entirely rest with dissatisfaction at the amount awarded. Prior to the settlement many of the eight Sioux [tribes] recognized that the acceptance of money would forever sever them from "title" to what they had lost. Attorneys were notified that the Sioux wished to have no part in settlement. In a number of instances attorney contracts had expired and the Tribes notified the Court that they were opposed to any monetary settlement. Rather, they wished to have a return of their land. Despite this the Claims Commission settled with a monetary award. Six of the eight Tribes appealed and tried to get their attorneys dismissed from the case. The appeal was denied. A dissenting judge stated that..."Most of these [attorney] contracts have terminated and are no longer in effect. It is inconceivable to me that, with over half the clientele in loud revolt, nominal counsel has the authority to bind these tribes, against their intentions and instructions. Further, the United States as well as the Claims Court had full knowledge, throughout the past years of these proceeding, that most of the principals objected to the negotiations and to the projected settlement." Yet the Court ruled the settlement valid. -- Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light What so proudly we hailed at the twilights last gleaming Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight, O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming? And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air Gave proof thru the night that our flag was still there Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave? On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep, Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes, What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep, As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses? Now it catches the gleam of the mornings first beam, In full glory reflected now shines in the stream: 'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave! And where is the band who so vauntingly swore That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion, A home and a country should leave us no more! Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution. No refuge can save the hireling and slave From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave: And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave Oh! Thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand Between their loved home and the war's desolation! Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us as a nation. Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, And this be our motto: "In God is our trust." And the star-bangled banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave! -- After the 1978 decision the Oglala Sioux Tribe [Nation] sued to reject the award and sought to regain their rights to the Black Hills. The Courts rejected their suit saying that "Congress had provided an exclusive remedy for wrongful taking of Indian lands in passing the Indian Claims Commission Act." Interest continues to accrue. Peace...Jordan --------- "RE: Mary Brave Bird Interview" --------- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 06:38:25 -0600 From: catalina m reyes Subj: Mary Brave Bird Interview Mailing List: NATIVE-L (native-l@gnosys.svle.ma.us) Finally I'm making good on posting transcripts. This first one is with Mary Brave Bird, formerly Mary Crow Dog. The idea was to talk about her books "Lakota Woman" (1991) and "Ohikita Woman" (1993), just republished in paperback. Due to time limitations I had to cut out what little she said about the TNN Special based on "Lakota Woman," which is scheduled to air this Oct. 16th. She said she was on the scene when it was filmed, and she feels it will accurately represent her story -- given there's little you can really include in a couple hours. She also said, I think (I had to recycle the raw interview already) that they couldn't film it on the rez cuz people still find those times, and those events (1973, Wounded Knee II) troubling. This was what we call a tough interview. Meaning, Ms. Brave Bird was not, at least on this day, the talking type. It was hard pull much out of her, particularly about anything germane to or tangential to the books. Of course, she didn't write them, really -- Richard Erdoes did. He came along at least on this part of the book tour (he says he lives in Santa Fe, which is about an hour north of here). He sat politely off to the side during the interview -- a sixty-ish, professorly man with big glasses and a heavy foreign accent. Afterward I asked Mary to sign my copies of her books, and Richard signed them too. In each he drew a picture. One, a buffalo head. On the other flyleaf, a little teepee with a glorified stick figure indian and a fire, I think. "I used to be an artist before I started doing this," he said. Here's the edit of the interview: ----------------------------------------------------- Mary Bave Bird: "Ohikita Woman" Interview Date: Thrs. 15 Sept. 1994 Air Date: Thrs. 15 Sept. 1994, "The KUNM Evening Report" By Catalina Reyes Time: 4:31 ANNOUNCER'S INTRO: You might have heard of Mary Brave Bird under another name: Mary Crow Dog. During the 1970s she was married to Leonard Crow Dog, a healer and American Indian Movement -- or AIM -- activist. And she gained national visibility under that name when her book about those years, "Lakota Woman," won the American Book Award in 1991. This year she's remarried and back on track after years of hardship, and Harpercollins is bringing out new paperback editions of "Lakota Woman" and it's sequel published last year, "Ohitika Woman." Earlier today, she told reporter Catalina Reyes that in the years following the 1973 AIM takeover of Wounded Knee, just surviving was her biggest concern: Mary Brave Bird: It was just really hard for AIM people, for movement people, to really be out there because of the FBI. There was a lot of propaganda against the movement -- the movement was a good thing. There were indians getting killed all the time. Even before, during, and after Wounded Knee, a lot of people died. And a lot of people struggled. So that's what, really -- what I did. I survived. Any way I could. Cata: In the press materials it says that you had a car accident, and that was kind of a turning point? Is that what happened to you? Mary Brave Bird: Yeah. I had a real bad car accident. Cata: When did that happen? Mary Brave Bird: That happened about four years ago. The Indian Health Service at that time -- I was having a lot of pain, I guess chronic pain. I had, like major heart surgery, my ribs were busted, my lung was collapsed. Well, later on -- just, recovering during the months later -- they wouldn't really give me anything. Like, Motrin wouldn't help me. At the hospital they wouldn't give me much medication. So I guess that's where I started drinking [giggles], 'cause I found that if I drank a six pack it would help, I could move around. Cata: So you then encountered your husband, who sort of helped you find another way to deal... Mary Brave Bird: Yeah. He really turned my life around I guess. He really talked to me a lot about my drinking, and about my kids, and about what I was doing to myself. Cata: Are you continuing to work towards some of the issues that you focused on during the '70s when you were involved with AIM? Are you still involved with them? Mary Brave Bird: Oh yes, I'm still involved with -- I represent myself. I don't represent AIM, but I do support AIM and all the issues. I was on the Walk for Justice, which was a walk led by Dennis Banks from Alcatraz to Washington, D.C. And we took different issues with us from different lands -- you know, indian country, where we walked through. Like: indian territories are being targeted for nuclear waste dump sites, and it was a walk for justice for Leonard Peltier. Who we believe is the longest held political prisoner since the Movement occupied Wounded Knee. Cata: Do you feel that as a native woman involved in these issues, that there's been any struggle for you _because_ you're a native woman, in having a voice, and being able to say what you need to say, and being I guess given credibility with the men you're working with? Mary Brave Bird: Well see, that's why I'm, I guess I'm freewheeling it. Because, you know, I'm my own boss; I don't have to answer to -- a man. But there's always been the man thing, within the movement, and it's still there. I guess I don't have enough energy or time for anything like that. We're against tremendous odds, us as nations. And Mother Earth of course. We all realize, I think, the struggles of the peoples and Mother Earth. And there's gonna be a Mothers of All Color caravan for Peltier's freedom, asking for Executive Clemency and freedom for Leonard Peltier, October 25th and 26th of this year. Washington. Cata: He's gonna run out of options unless he gets clemency at this point, right? Mary Brave Bird: Oh yes. I really do believe that Clinton wants to do another term, and I really don't think he really wants to -- you know, rock his world right now politically, by supporting Leonard Peltier. Cata: So it'll take some pressure. Mary Brave Bird: Yeah. Cata: And you're there to put it on. Mary Brave Bird: Oh yes. Women. Women and mothers concerned, for Mother Earth _and_ Peltier. Cata: Thank you very much Mary Brave Bird -- the author with Richard Erdoes of "Lakota Woman" and "Ohitika Woman," both officially republished in paperback yesterday. Tonight in Albuquerque she'll be reading and signing her book at Page One Books from 7 to 9 p.m. And tomorrow in Santa Fe you'll find her at The Ark Books from 5-7 p.m. For KUNM, I'm Catalina Reyes mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm |Catalina Reyes | Onate Hall | internet: | | Public Radio Producer | University of New Mexico | catrey@unm.edu | |KUNM 89.9 FM | Albuquerque, NM 87131 | bitnet: | |(505) 277-8016 | USA | catrey@unmb | mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm