Talk:Gustafsen Lake Standoff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More Info Could anyone please provide me with links to unbias pages with more information on the incident? I'm surprised to find out about an incident like this happening in Canada and would like to know more. User: HistoryKiwi

Unbiased pages on Canadian stand-offs are hard to come by. The issue is too divisive to promote objectivity and the cover-up was too effective to promote accuracy in analysis of the event.

Note my addition of the Peter Montague quote. This is the same guy who, after getting out of the Force, got the RCMP to "investigate" a rival casino by having BCTV cameras show up on the Premier's porch and accuse of him of a bunch of stuff he was later acquitted for (i.e. it was a trumped-up charge). Similarly looking-back writing of things like the Solidarity Crisis and Oka is very obscured because of the disinformation released during those events, and that it's still used as "cites" by people, including in Wikipedia. For the Seton Portage arrests/violence, the only accurate - half-accurate - reportage was in the Seattle papers. Try the Yellowknife Mine Strike/bombing, too, or the Emery bust. Point is, it's a dicey game taking on the Empire of Untruth because then they mark you down in their little book and the smear campaign can be turned in your direction, be you a big fish or a small one. But if you're a Member (for US/other readers, that's what Mounties like to call each other, shoot a 19 year old kid in the back of the head for drinking a beer in public and you won't even get a manslaughter charge, or even an investigation (that poor kid Josh in Houston BC, can't remember his last name). The Cram affair particularly stinks (see link below); and both he and Clarke were forced onto medication before being allowed to plead guilty for contempt of court and recant their allegations of judicial corruption/rigging. The details of the Bristow case I could conceivable be jailed for rememberingin public (two reporters did a lot of time in jail for that one). I can tell you the historians who can't be trusted on these matter are those who think the media are valid primary sources; but they're also (as professors) conscious of their position in whatever school or whatever they're at, and not likely to make waves unless being radical is their thing; in which case they're easily discredited/smeared.

What's been occurring to me lately is that the Wikipedia Talk pages are forming an interesting alternative media for British Columbia and Canada; an opportunity for public historiography, with consensual results; and when the edits can be clearly seen - and reverted - it's makes it a lot harder for smear-mongers to maintain their smear. One step short of libel, that is, of course.Skookum1 14:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Having been in attendance at the Gustafsen Lake trial and researched the issue extensively I would say this page is the most accurate representation I've come across so far, although some of the details are a bit off and a lot of pertinent background is missing. There isn't much information available and what little exists in reputable publications is hopelessly entangled with the blatant falsehoods and misrepresentation in the media. For more background, the Royal_Proclamation_of_1763 is affirmed in the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms and guarantees native tribes the right to self-government on unceded territory. Most of British Columbia was unceded territory at the time of the attempted eviction ('stand-off' is a misrepresentation of the situation, imo).

another title for this page is needed, but what? "Standoff" is a media-hype word; "crisis" is one of those words that are a bit alarmist for head-to-the-ground Canadians; so what else to call it?Skookum1 14:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

This archivehas a lot of information available but I haven't reviewed it for bias or accuracy. Good luck.

Unbiased accounts are indeed hard to come by. This article is proof of that. The Web is flooded with rhetoric.

The Natives occupiers did not have (and still don't have) the support of the local Native government[1]. They were making up the rules as they went along. This seriously undercuts the "legaleze" behind Wolverine's claims. This is not a story of Natives vs. the big bad government. It is a story about Wolverine against the everyone who disagreed with him.

Also omitted is the fact that several agreements and treaties had been reached since 1762 and the local Natives were pretty happy with the process. They opposed the Wolverine group because it jeapordized the progress they'd already made[2].

The account given here doesn't provide an accurate impression of the dialogue during the standoff, which reads pretty much like the hostage negotiations that go on in any similar situation. Any citizen of European ancestry who occupied any land and demanded to meet with the Queen[3] would be wisked away to the loony bin. I think the only unfortunate outcome of this matter is that Wolverine did not get the benefit of being treated like a regular crazy person.

---

The "native government" of which you refer to is the one set-up and run by the canadian government, so therefore there support is of course going to go with the colonizers. As for your "claims" about our status as Independent Sovereign Nations not existing, i point out that ONLY NATIONS can make treaties.

Also your myth about the "land agreements" concerning our territory smacks of lies and misinformation regarding the true nature and status of the issue. NO treaties have been signed with ANY of the Native Nations on the west coast (and no the Nisga'a are no longer a Nation they threw that away for a few trinkets). ONLY the citizens of the Native Nations can make or reject any land agreement, "agreements" IMPOSED by a foreign government have no legal and moral status in International law and under the law of the Native Nation in question. Please learn your facts before you make uninformed decisions. --RedMan11 11:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Largest police operation in Canadian history

Not quite. Oka was much, much bigger[4]. " Some 2,500 regular and reserve troops from the 34th and 35th Canadian Brigade Groups and the 5th Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group were put on notice and, on the morning of 20 August, 33 troops of the Quebec-based Royal 22e Regiment, the 'Van Doos', led by Major Alain Tremblay took three barricades and arrived at the final blockade leading to the disputed area" 02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)Chillyfinger 02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't this contribute to the military size rather than the police size? Macho Philipovich 05:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Oka was a military operation, Gustafsen Lake was a police operation, i.e. RCMP, not Canadian Forces. Sure, Oka began as a police operation, but it was a military operation in the end. The army was not involved at Gustafsen Lake, which was a chance to the RCMP to test out its military-style equipment (hhte opening lines of their charter, remember, is that they are a "paramilitary force"....the rest of the sentence defining that is even more interesting....) and military formations and tactics. The subtext for anyone who's studied the history of warfare is that the setting of this event was a perfect dry-run of the kind of terrain the RCMP would be faced with in the event of a general Indian uprising, triggered by something like the Oka Crisis. You don't think they weren't/aren't considering the logistics of something like that, i.e. full-scale bush war? Don't be so innocent.....Skookum1 18:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bruce Clarke?

I can't believe Bruce Clarke isn't mentioned in this, not even once. Looks pretty threadbare and controlled; surprised there's not more meat here, and political discussion. but of course we're excellent at forgetting difficult business like this around here, aren't we? Coverage of Lyle James' harrassment techniques - ropes, horses, gunfire, whooping cowboys screaming "red niggers" and more; of course it might help to add that Lyle James was from Montana, and bought his lease at Gusftafsen Lake when that area was taken out of the Government Reserve in 1976 by the Bennett II Regime; James was of course one of the main mobilizers and backers of the party in the Cariboo during the '75 election; tolerant, wise, broad-minded, accepting, like all our good immigrants who have abandoned the hatreds and customs of their former country to embrace Canadian diversity :-| Of course, whether the James ranch cowboys were worse than the RCMP is a relative line of discussion. So why isn't this here? Or is all this TRUTH some kind of POV problem for people who don't want to hear it?Skookum1 07:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Put it in, please. I tried to expand on the article, but I've run out of resources. Bruce Clark should definitely be mentioned. -- TheMightyQuill 09:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Scary stuff, and I don't have the resources either; no copies at hand of Terminal City and other rags that were carrying the truth (as opposed to what the Vancouver Sun and Province were carrying) are; this, as with the Oka Crisis, Grant Bristow and other RCMP/Mulroney imbroglios have all been manipulated and distorted by the mainstream media, and thoroughly "scrubbed". What scares me, as scaring goes, is what was done to Clarke for speaking his mind/the truth; same with Jack Cram who deserves an article as well http://sisis.nativeweb.org/clark/cram.html. Clarke I'll try and find something on, though.Skookum1 14:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Is there any offical proof of the landmine(s) being used? I find it very hard to believe the RCMP or the Army would use mines against Canadian citizens. I've also only been able to find it on these 'Indy media' pages that are usually extremely biast. -- DougMcDill 12:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The Army might not, but the RCMP did; we all saw the TV broadcast footage of the blown-up vehicle (being blown, not afterwards). And if they didn't put the landmines there, who did? Lyall James?Skookum1 18:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The RCMP used dogs to chase down children who escaped from residential schools. The RCMP, OPP QPP, all policing forces of Canada have, for over 200 years, been permitted ... mandated really to treat aboriginals as individual criminals and lethal gangs. I have no trouble believing they tried out their land mines at all. I'm amazed that it got reported! (I wouldn't rule out the cowboys, though.) However, I think a corner in aboriginal and police personal relations was turned by Six Nations. The Clan Mothers and women linked arms and walked the OPP off the land. Saved everybody's ass, really. The OPP and RCMP now have to abide by a Supreme Court ruling that land claims protestors are to be treated "differently" - i.e., respectfully. Canada is so far behind in processing land claims that it's Canada that's in default here, and they expect to be treated civilly, and in accordance with what they know is the law.

2006

[edit] Aboriginal RCMP member who was negotiating

I remember reading a report about ten years ago of an aboriginal RCMP constable who was initially handling this incident before it was taken out of his hands and escalated by his superiors. Does anybody have any references for this? -RM