Dumbfounded
During a recent trip home to Cape Breton, I was stunned to learn of the government's decision to permit hundreds of acres of wetlands, forests and picturesque landscape to be strip mined for - of all things - low-grade, high-sulphur coal. I was dumbfounded to realize that in an area rich with tourism- development potential, the government would literally permit its destruction. I look forward to one day returning to the area and spending my retirement dollars where I grew up. However, if the government doesn't reverse its plan to "strip" Cape Breton, I fear what might remain.Has the government given careful consideration to the economic impact of their decision to allow strip mining? Surely, any benefits cannot exceed the ruinous impact to local business, tourism and the environment. In an area so rich with beachfronts, fossils and wetland attractions, the tourism, economic and natural-energy potential is limitless.Why doesn't local government strive to become a regional leader in tourism and the development of sustainable energies, instead of strip-mined coal? What is their true motivation in allowing strip mining? It's time for the government to stand for something - or fall for anything.
Raylene MacLeod
Calgary
[My comment: People in the government of Nova Scotia profit from the destruction of Cape Breton Island ecosystems and communities. People on the island have been given a Bantu education (a la apartheid South Africa), and any alternatives to government-managed education and health care have been knocked down. Cape Bretoners are being rendered insensitive to the real ecological needs of their communities - according to the malicious and profiteering plans of the mainland government. My own community is being destroyed by a open surface gravel mine. The mine is located where there once was a grove of pine trees that was a place of solace for my grandfather. We've been here seven generations, but the level of ecological destruction is now almost unbearable. Cape Bretoners need to be able to make decisions to protect their ecosystems, if we are to have any kind of future at all.]
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Friday, September 14, 2007
UN Declaration of Indigenous Rights
[I found this in my inbox this morning. I think many people in Canada will agree with this message. The Government of Canada behaved immorally, and did not represent me, when they voted "no" to the UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights.]
As Chief of Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation I agree that not voting for and not signing the UN Declaration of Indigenous Rights has embarrassed Canada internationally. But the reality is that in Canada violations of human rights have been happening under successive governments despite the fact that Canada is a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In 1982, the Right to Property was taken out of the original draft of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because the Trudeau Government understood that including the Right to Property as a Charter Right would have significantly increased the onus on the courts to recognize the property rights of the original owners of the land, the indigenous people. A right to property in Canadian domestic law would therefore put in jeopardy the continued theft of the resources from the original owners.
Canada and the United States are two of the wealthiest countries in the world and it is no secret that the resource wealth was stolen from the indigenous people of North America with extreme prejudice. Canada and the United States have a combined land mass of over 7.5 million square miles. It is no wonder that the governments of both these countries would vote against the international justice of recognizing indigenous people as a people with inherent rights.
If the Liberal Party of Canada wants real justice and are not just playing party politics, the introduction in parliament of an amendment to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to include the right to property would go a long way to finally recognize the interational obligation that Canada has to support in domestic law, article 17 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Until that is done, the reality is that the 3 million barrels of oil produced by Canada each and every day, is still stolen from indigenous people. More than 60 different metals and minerals mined in Canada produces wealth, but without any legal recognition of royalties or any payment of royalties for the original owners of the resources.
In Canada, the indigenous people are still at the 63rd level of the United Nations international living index while at the same time Canadians enjoy being the ninth richest country in the world with a Gross Domestic Product of over one trillion US dollars per year. We, as the indigenous people of these lands, are not surprised by the vote, just disappointed by the continued international reputation of Canada and the United States as being bastions of human rights.
- Chief Terrance Nelson
As Chief of Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation I agree that not voting for and not signing the UN Declaration of Indigenous Rights has embarrassed Canada internationally. But the reality is that in Canada violations of human rights have been happening under successive governments despite the fact that Canada is a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In 1982, the Right to Property was taken out of the original draft of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because the Trudeau Government understood that including the Right to Property as a Charter Right would have significantly increased the onus on the courts to recognize the property rights of the original owners of the land, the indigenous people. A right to property in Canadian domestic law would therefore put in jeopardy the continued theft of the resources from the original owners.
Canada and the United States are two of the wealthiest countries in the world and it is no secret that the resource wealth was stolen from the indigenous people of North America with extreme prejudice. Canada and the United States have a combined land mass of over 7.5 million square miles. It is no wonder that the governments of both these countries would vote against the international justice of recognizing indigenous people as a people with inherent rights.
If the Liberal Party of Canada wants real justice and are not just playing party politics, the introduction in parliament of an amendment to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to include the right to property would go a long way to finally recognize the interational obligation that Canada has to support in domestic law, article 17 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Until that is done, the reality is that the 3 million barrels of oil produced by Canada each and every day, is still stolen from indigenous people. More than 60 different metals and minerals mined in Canada produces wealth, but without any legal recognition of royalties or any payment of royalties for the original owners of the resources.
In Canada, the indigenous people are still at the 63rd level of the United Nations international living index while at the same time Canadians enjoy being the ninth richest country in the world with a Gross Domestic Product of over one trillion US dollars per year. We, as the indigenous people of these lands, are not surprised by the vote, just disappointed by the continued international reputation of Canada and the United States as being bastions of human rights.
- Chief Terrance Nelson
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
GM Watch
The GM Watch website was recently forced offline for nearly a week as a result of legal threats over this article calling for an award winning scientific paper to be retracted:
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8216
GM Watch's response to AgBioView's attack: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8228, http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8240
Biotech Canada SLAPP Scandal: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BiotechCanadaSLAPPScandal.php
Canada attacks Ireland's policy on GM crops: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/morris/index.php
... and furthermore: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8236
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8216
GM Watch's response to AgBioView's attack: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8228, http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8240
Biotech Canada SLAPP Scandal: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/BiotechCanadaSLAPPScandal.php
Canada attacks Ireland's policy on GM crops: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/morris/index.php
... and furthermore: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8236
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Mayor John Morgan
Cape Breton Regional Municipality
320 Esplanade
Sydney NS B1P 7B9
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Dear Mayor Morgan,
We live in the Community of Upper Leitches Creek, near a quarry mined by Alva Construction. Just about everybody in the community has said “no” to Alva’s activity, via letters, a petition, and a partial blockade. It is undemocratic for the government to allow the operation to continue. That said, Alva’s trucks were on the road before 7 a. m. today, again. These trucks break the speed limit, sometimes with double loads of rock (which although not illegal is certainly unsafe on a poorly maintained road, with blind crests, the shoulder washed out by heavy rain, etc.). Furthermore, they often drive on the wrong side (or middle) of the road. Young children live on this road, and we implore you to consider their safety.
320 Esplanade
Sydney NS B1P 7B9
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Dear Mayor Morgan,
We live in the Community of Upper Leitches Creek, near a quarry mined by Alva Construction. Just about everybody in the community has said “no” to Alva’s activity, via letters, a petition, and a partial blockade. It is undemocratic for the government to allow the operation to continue. That said, Alva’s trucks were on the road before 7 a. m. today, again. These trucks break the speed limit, sometimes with double loads of rock (which although not illegal is certainly unsafe on a poorly maintained road, with blind crests, the shoulder washed out by heavy rain, etc.). Furthermore, they often drive on the wrong side (or middle) of the road. Young children live on this road, and we implore you to consider their safety.
Upper Leitches Creek used to be an idyllic forest retreat. That peace has been robbed from us. The joy of walking along the road, encountering wildlife, fishing, etc., have all been robbed from us. The mined land used to be a beautiful forest. There used to be a grove of enormous old pine trees that our forefathers and members of this community treasured. But the whole ecosystem has been totally erased! The profiteering brutality that Alva shows this land ought to be illegal. If Cape Breton Island is to have a future at all, we have to take care of the land upon which we depend.
Our family owns another piece of land, more than 80 ha, next to the quarry, and we would appreciate access to any record of regulatory control. Is the Department of Environment and Labour monitoring the effects on the streams in this area? The residents of Upper Leitches Creek are gravely concerned for the safety of their water supply. Has there been any ongoing environmental standard for this operation? Why do we pay for government departments that do nothing more than rubber-stamp the destructive exploitation of Cape Breton?
If you care at all about the principle of democracy, and if you believe that our community needs a healthy environment, then by all means start taking effective action on behalf of Upper Leitches Creek.
Sincerely,
[guess who]
cc:
David M. Morse, 8994 Commercial St., New Minas NS B4N 3E2
Esmond Marshall, 127 Beach Road, Eskasoni NS B1W 1A5
Gary Lunn, 207 Confederation Building, Ottawa ON K1A 0A6
John Baird, Environment Canada, Ottawa ON K1A 0H3
Keith Bain, 1551 Old Route 5, Big Bras D’Or NS B1X 1B5
Mark Eyking, 383 Confedeation Bldg., Ottawa ON K1A 0A6
Monday, August 27, 2007
letter just sent to Cape Breton Post
[N.B. I do not subscribe to state sponsored tokenistic multiculturalism. Nevertheless...]
Dear Editor,
I was disappointed to find “Multiculturalism’s war on education” by Elan Journo in your paper. It is appalling to express such a mixture of unbridled racism, bigotry, xenophobia, and sexism. These are not characteristics typical of the Cape Breton Post.
“Western culture,” as expressed by Journo, is not culture. The monocultural economic entity is a predator of society and culture. Those of us in the shadow of the monoculture all have unique histories, languages, origins, music, etc. We do not share a homogenous culture. Furthermore, human societies are similar to other parts of the ecosystem, where diversity is essential for stability and survival, particularly during times of crisis.
Journo misuses the word “they,” painting whole cities, civilizations, and religions with a broad brush: equating scholars with slave traders, etc. These people were different individuals, who shared nothing in common besides the time of their mortal existence.
Journo subscribes to the tired defense of monocultural agriculture, which purports that American-style monoculture yields more than Indian-style traditional polyculture. That argument is blatantly untrue (and if you want sources, by all means contact me). Furthermore, it is based upon the untrue premise that the world needs a greater volume of food. However, the farmers of the world produce far more than enough food for everybody. Unfortunately, food is made unavailable to people by the enactment of unfair economic policies.
American-based globalized capitalist imperialism, i.e., the monoculture, is destroying the planet and extinguishing species at a rate not seen since the extinction of the dinosaurs.It is wonderful and necessary for children to be educated with respect to diversity and inclusion. People in Canada should retain the effort to be tolerant, and place value in the respect and appreciation of other people’s cultures.
Dear Editor,
I was disappointed to find “Multiculturalism’s war on education” by Elan Journo in your paper. It is appalling to express such a mixture of unbridled racism, bigotry, xenophobia, and sexism. These are not characteristics typical of the Cape Breton Post.
“Western culture,” as expressed by Journo, is not culture. The monocultural economic entity is a predator of society and culture. Those of us in the shadow of the monoculture all have unique histories, languages, origins, music, etc. We do not share a homogenous culture. Furthermore, human societies are similar to other parts of the ecosystem, where diversity is essential for stability and survival, particularly during times of crisis.
Journo misuses the word “they,” painting whole cities, civilizations, and religions with a broad brush: equating scholars with slave traders, etc. These people were different individuals, who shared nothing in common besides the time of their mortal existence.
Journo subscribes to the tired defense of monocultural agriculture, which purports that American-style monoculture yields more than Indian-style traditional polyculture. That argument is blatantly untrue (and if you want sources, by all means contact me). Furthermore, it is based upon the untrue premise that the world needs a greater volume of food. However, the farmers of the world produce far more than enough food for everybody. Unfortunately, food is made unavailable to people by the enactment of unfair economic policies.
American-based globalized capitalist imperialism, i.e., the monoculture, is destroying the planet and extinguishing species at a rate not seen since the extinction of the dinosaurs.It is wonderful and necessary for children to be educated with respect to diversity and inclusion. People in Canada should retain the effort to be tolerant, and place value in the respect and appreciation of other people’s cultures.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Re: the provocateurs at SPP protest
I am delighted by the nerve of David Coles. He unmasked the police agents provocateurs at the anti-SPP protest.
http://ottawa.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/5315.shtml
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/national/070822/n082290A.html
I have witnessed provocateurs at other protests in the past. It takes a honest middle-aged man to communicate this message to the older population in Canada. Canadians never would believe the younger activists, who have been the target of this injustice for many years.
This unmasking could become part of a new tactic. However, we must take care not to unmask our more militant allies!
http://ottawa.indymedia.org/en/2007/08/5315.shtml
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/national/070822/n082290A.html
I have witnessed provocateurs at other protests in the past. It takes a honest middle-aged man to communicate this message to the older population in Canada. Canadians never would believe the younger activists, who have been the target of this injustice for many years.
This unmasking could become part of a new tactic. However, we must take care not to unmask our more militant allies!
Monday, August 20, 2007
email fired off to Harper regarding the SPP
Dear Prime Minister Harper,
I oppose the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) because the SPP meetings could result in the watering-down of human rights and environmental protections (such as they are) in Canada. I am particularly concerned by the deregulation of pesticides and food-related innovations, and by the possible development of polluting and land-destroying natural resource industries.
Do you need me to remind you that it is your job to defend the people and the land from such predatory exploitation?
The community in which I live is not surviving the current economic climate of rubber stamped environmental assessments, non-unionized workers, and unaccountable natural resource industries that do not pay the community for damage to our properties and roads. You must take the bull by the horns, and do not sell us out to profiteers!
Do you need to be reminded that the desires of the SPP attendees do not represent the desires of the majority of people in Canada? Please give priority to democracy, human rights, and land conservation.
I look forward to receiving your immediate and positive reply.
I oppose the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) because the SPP meetings could result in the watering-down of human rights and environmental protections (such as they are) in Canada. I am particularly concerned by the deregulation of pesticides and food-related innovations, and by the possible development of polluting and land-destroying natural resource industries.
Do you need me to remind you that it is your job to defend the people and the land from such predatory exploitation?
The community in which I live is not surviving the current economic climate of rubber stamped environmental assessments, non-unionized workers, and unaccountable natural resource industries that do not pay the community for damage to our properties and roads. You must take the bull by the horns, and do not sell us out to profiteers!
Do you need to be reminded that the desires of the SPP attendees do not represent the desires of the majority of people in Canada? Please give priority to democracy, human rights, and land conservation.
I look forward to receiving your immediate and positive reply.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)