12 Comments

I think Kimberley Murray has just constructed “the bridge too far” for Canadians. A 20 year, indigenous activist led, multi-billion dollar search through graveyards for graves that were not properly tended. That seems to be just about the most useless use of taxpayer money yet thought up. Oh, and reparations, determined by “indigenous digital sovereignty” (“facts” they make up) to boot. Sorry, Kimberley, you might now have to get a real job. You have been dining out on the misplaced guilt and shame of gullible Canadians for too long.

Expand full comment

And yet we have 340-odd members of Canadian parliament who will unanimously(!) endorse whatever lies Murray tells as long as it continues to seem politically expedient.

Expand full comment

It would be obvious that those 340 endorsing this crime against Canada would place us along side of China, Russia and Germany! Communism at its finest!

Expand full comment

Even now? the appalling endorsement of Gazan's "genocide" motion notwithstanding, would the opposition members endorse this ridiculous report, do you think?

Expand full comment

I spoke to my MP about this, to explain why, after supporting his successful campaign in the 2021 election, I had stoped donating to the Conservative Party for their later unanimous consent to the genocide resolution. It had led, of course, to the private member’s bill to criminalize res school “denialism” and the Government’s own on-Line harms bill, both of which are still on the Commons order paper. The explanation I got was that politics is the art of the possible. The party can decide it wants to stay in principled opposition forever by getting tarred as the racist party, or it can keep its eye on the prize which is to gain power to maybe do some good. This is unfortunately perfectly true.

Will the Conservatives vote against endorsement of Murray's report, if the Commons is even asked to? Dunno. It depends on how the tide is running in the country. We here think that indigenous sacralization has maybe jumped the shark, or that it tried for a bridge too far, but the Conservatives might not want to be seen as pandering to this increasingly popular sentiment. The elites including the schools are still all indigenous all the time as part of their general post-modernist Marxist indoctrination. Indigenous propaganda is useful to them even when they know it isn’t true. And everyone is afraid of riling up the indigenous hot heads, who are not necessarily under the control of their largely self-appointed leaders and spokesmen who get interviewed so fawningly by the CBC.

Expand full comment
22 hrs ago·edited 22 hrs ago

Good question. So far as I can see it will continue to be a matter of what seems politically expedient. Does/Will this report actually change anything in that regard?

Expand full comment

the water is getting almost to boiling point for the frog, I would say. I intend to send Ms. Sterling's article to all CCP candidates on Vancouver island, for what it's worth. not sure what else can be done. Any ideas are welcome.

Expand full comment

I have sent detailed well reasoned letters to politicians and have never even received acknowledgment from them. Hard truth is they hardly read anything and just follow direction from the lead lemming.

Expand full comment

Thank you Michelle. Well reasoned. I was trained in British handcrafts and teaching. On coming to Canada I taught in Grouard, Northers Alberta before going to the U of Alberta for a Physical Education Degree and Masters. I was fully integrated into the Grouard community at large. At the end of my year I took unclaimed craft work and entered it into the Klondike exhibition where each piece was awarded first place. My Masters thesis was ' The traditional snow shoe construction of the swampy Cree " for which I visited indigenous sites of SS. construction. There is now a detailed record of this classic mode of historical travel. The Thesis was met with considerable enthusiasm by the ethnologists at the museum of Man in Ottawa. At a later date National Indigenous XC skiers based in Inuvik in the TEST program in transit to the races in the East, would contact me in Edmonton and i would board them overnight before relaying them to the International airport near Leduc. Both these examples show how an ordinary Canadian citizen would do what is a normal response to a normal situation I am appalled at the machinations taking place at our National level with never a reasoned question of explanation for events related to facts. Where are the alleged missing students? When the truth breaks out it will be catastrophic for Canadas internal relations and it will take many years to live down our disgrace brought about with our inability to be able to conduct a reasoned national debate .I am taking my local Anglican church to task with a modicum of success, although hyperbolic academic excesses will probably never be recognised. Work from absolute facts and do not let up. They cannot be disputed with, and you come from an unarguable strong place. Time will tell, the powers that be are slowly being backed into a corner of their own making. Is this a point which is being recognised when the Canadin people are increasingly rejecting the present Government? Ben ,A cancelled Town Crier.

Expand full comment
22 hrs ago·edited 21 hrs ago

Am I confused, or is Stirling?

"Ms. Murray has built a case for creating a new legal framework to investigate a crime of genocide with no named victims." But more to the point, nota bene(!), there are no named perpetrators!

"She advocates for criminalizing the historical assessments of people like me because I am asking these uncomfortable questions." Right, and in itself that's absurd and outrageous; but nonetheless perhaps consistent with the already entrenched principles of Canadian law, whereby courts, at the expense of historians (i.e., any private individual who is free to read, think, associate, and express him/herself in accordance with his/her convictions), have been granted power to adjudicate what will count as legally permissible historical narratives. So the fundamental problem isn't with Murray; it's with Canadian law.

"There is nothing hateful in my desire to excavate the truth." But then again -- sorry! -- it is 'hateful,' legally speaking, if that's how the courts choose to interpret the term, since the courts have indeed been granted the power so to do if they see fit! (A point which is bizarre, but inescapable.)

"The criminal allegations against Canadians are serious and yet they are being tried in the court of public opinion, and media, not in a court of law. This is a serious breach of our fundamental rights." But in the absence of any named perpetrators/defendants, there are in fact no such criminal allegations. There is just Murray's generally defamatory libel. And it's not a libel against Canadians or Roman Catholics per se; it's against unnamed people who happened to be Canadians or Roman Catholics. (And even in a quasi-legal sense, it can't be called a libel at all, because the authorities representing Canada and the Church -- including the mealy-mouthed half-truth telling Indigenous Catholic priest Father Cristino Bouvette -- have admitted (albeit falsely!) their own guilt, i.e., the truth of the allegedly libelous accusations -- which if true, are not libelous! Oy! What a mess!) And the court of public opinion, i.e., an open forum where free speech is protected, is exactly where such defamatory allegations should be addressed, not in a court of law. The adjudication of historical questions by the courts is so obviously open to overreach and abuse that it should be rejected altogether. It cannot possibly be in the public interest. With due respect to Stirling, it is a serious misapprehension of our fundamental rights and the right ordering of those rights to think otherwise.

Expand full comment

Questioning the TRUTH IS NOT DENIALISM ITS CALLED JUSTICE. Without JUSTICE ITS CALLD ANARCHY! This is not my Canada nor that of my ancestors!

Expand full comment

Thank you Michelle for taking the time to write such a well reasoned letter confronting what can only be described as a crime of treason against reason. Unfortunately stupidity is not a crime and in politics it is considered an asset and if it was, our prisons could never accommodate the multitude of felons.

"Ninety-nine percent of the people in the world are fools and the rest of us are in great danger of contagion." ~ Thornton Wilder

Expand full comment