Meanwhile, In Canada: The racistest conspiracy

[DoomYoshi]

The mainstream side of the story:
http://globalnews.ca/news/907817/40-arrested-police-vehicles-burned-as-rcmp-clash-with-nb-shale-gas-protesters/
Since that initial coverage, global news has taken a more balanced approach, but almost all the articles since have still had the classic picture of burning cars.

Here is the native side of the story:


Here is the hippy side of the story:
http://earthfirstjournal.org/newswire/2013/10/17/update-full-invasion-force-arrives-at-mikmaq-blockade/

Unfortunately, if you want the other side of media coverage, one needs to travel to England (discounting the Amateur Photographers Try News channel).
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/21/new-brunswick-fracking-protests

The image of burning police cars played endlessly on the evening news. Television and talk radio blared out reports of "clashes" between police and indigenous protestors. Last Thursday in New Brunswick near the Elsipogtog First Nation, we were told the government had enforced an injunction against a blockade of a US shale gas company. There was nothing about the roots of a conflict years in the making. An appeal to the stereotype of indigenous violence was enough: once again, the natives were breaking the law; the police had to be sent in. Catching the headlines, Canadian could shake their heads and turn away their gaze.

But smoke and flames from police cars can only hide the truth for so long. The exact chronology is not yet settled, but this much is clear: on Thursday morning someone in government sanctioned the Canadian police to invade a peaceful protest site like an army. In a dawn raid, snipers crawled through the forest, putting children and elders in their cross-hairs. Police carried assault rifles and snarling dogs, and sprayed tear gas and shot rubber-type bullets. The result was predictable: shocked and enraged people, a day ending in chaos.

Of course, the truth is:


In a small community, where everyone knows everyone, did they really think something like this wouldn`t be reported?

--------------------------------------------------

and just because everyone loves these kinds of images:


To finish off, if you like petitions:

http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/tell-the-rcmp-don-t-violently-intervene-in-peaceful-first-nations-protests?source=facebook-share-button&time=1382096785

---------------------------------

I am not anti-fracking. I don`t even care that much about treaty rights, although they are a major complex in this country, that I should know more about.

This is about Crown land, which is jointly shared by the Queen and the Canadian people, being handed over to Texan millionaires. f*ck Texan millionaires. That land is better used for camping. Only 97% of the land in Canada is allowed for camping. Let`s make it 100.

[BigBallinStalin]

Why stop at 100? Why not push beyond the limit?

Dream big, DY. Dream big.

[thegreekdog]

DAMN YOU FREE MARKET! DAMN YOU!

[mrswdk]

What is so exceptional about this police response?

[DoomYoshi]

What is so exceptional about this police response?

700 arrived. There are only 1400 police officers in New Brunswick.

They used an Armored Personnel Carrier. Google apc canada and nothing will come up. We don`t even have APCs.

The judge who gave the injunction against the protests subsequently ruled against the motion to continue that injunction - it was never his intention to involve a tenth-scale military campaign.

[mrswdk]

Maybe the police (correctly) anticipated a violent response when trying to break up a hostile, illegal blockade of legitimate business activity and wanted to be prepared. And maybe if a small task force had been sent they would have been ignored; the protestors' continued presence was already displaying contempt for the justice system.

Petitions and lawful protest are okay. Using force to impose your will on society (e.g. by blockading) is not.

[DoomYoshi]

Maybe the police (correctly) anticipated a violent response when trying to break up a hostile, illegal blockade of legitimate business activity and wanted to be prepared. And maybe if a small task force had been sent they would have been ignored; the protestors' continued presence was already displaying contempt for the justice system.

Petitions and lawful protest are okay. Using force to impose your will on society (e.g. by blockading) is not.

According to UN declaration, it is okay.

“indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as-well as the manifestations of their science, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts.
They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions.”

According to New Brunswick law, the protest is now a legal protest (as long as they keep a lane open for emergency vehicles).
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/judge-lifts-injunction-against-shale-gas-protests-in-new-brunswick-1.1506003

According to the Canadian Constitution, and the treaty of 1761 those lands are still technically unceded.

The road that travels through belongs to them.

More importantly, it doesn`t really go anywhere. it`s not as if they are inconveniencing society, just the developers.

It`s funny how you call blockading "using force to impose your will" but have nothing to say about sending in APCs against women and children.

[BigBallinStalin]

Well, they do inconvenience the people who work there. If I was a politician, I would mention the jobs, families, children and so forth of those honest workers who are being hampered.

That UN declaration isn't rooted in property rights for those natives--in other words, it's not like they can legitimately run into someone's land and prevent them from producing. If the UN Declaration had some clause about the right of Gypsies to invade other people's lands to setup camp, then I'd admit defeat on this one, but it doesn't say that.

I skimmed through one article on this. Why are they protesting exactly? "Environmental reasons" or whatever, but what exactly does that mean?

[DoomYoshi]

They are protesting the Fracking explorations, which may lead to fracking.

[DoomYoshi]

Well, they do inconvenience the people who work there. If I was a politician, I would mention the jobs, families, children and so forth of those honest workers who are being hampered.

That UN declaration isn't rooted in property rights for those natives--in other words, it's not like they can legitimately run into someone's land and prevent them from producing. If the UN Declaration had some clause about the right of Gypsies to invade other people's lands to setup camp, then I'd admit defeat on this one, but it doesn't say that.

Yea, that`s a great idea. The workers still get paid.

It is rooted in cultural rights, and the culture of North American indians is road-blocking.

[BigBallinStalin]

Well, they do inconvenience the people who work there. If I was a politician, I would mention the jobs, families, children and so forth of those honest workers who are being hampered.

That UN declaration isn't rooted in property rights for those natives--in other words, it's not like they can legitimately run into someone's land and prevent them from producing. If the UN Declaration had some clause about the right of Gypsies to invade other people's lands to setup camp, then I'd admit defeat on this one, but it doesn't say that.

Yea, that`s a great idea. The workers still get paid.

It is rooted in cultural rights, and the culture of North American indians is road-blocking.