‘Is Canada Coming Unravelled?’

Most Canadians are blissfully unaware that many aboriginal leaders are attempting to create separate, independent ‘nations’ {countries} within the borders of Canada — ‘nations’ that would ignore Canadian law while still being subsidized by the Canadian people: 

“The proposed citizenship law forms a central component of a broader initiative which seeks to develop a self-governing Anishinabek ‘Nation’.”

Canadian aboriginals as a “third order of government” — Federal, Provincial and aboriginal — was rejected for inclusion in the 1982 Constitution, rejected in the five federal-provincial conferences held on this topic, and rejected by the Canadian people in the 1992 Charlottetown Referendum. The continued insistence on this by aboriginal leadership shows absolutely no respect for the wishes of the Canadian people, and the decisions of the Canadian democracy. 

“‘First Nations’ in Ontario are encoding their traditional ‘citizenship laws’ to fight back against the “genocidal” policies of the ‘Indian Act’, says the Grand Chief of the Anishinabek ‘Nation’.

“‘E-dbendaagzijig’, which means ‘those who belong’ {!} in Ojibwe, is a draft ‘citizenship law’ for 39 Anishinabek ‘First Nations’, representing {claiming to represent} approximately 60,000 people in Ontario.

“The recent ‘Daniels’ decision from the Supreme Court of Canada on the rights of Metis and non-status Indians continues to muddy the waters of ‘First Nations’ citizenship {?}, Anishinabek ‘Nation’ Grand Chief Patrick Madahbee said.

“It’s up to our people to decide who has lineage to our {former} territory”{?} he said. “We know who our people are.”

“The draft citizenship law recognizes a ‘citizen’ as anyone who can trace their lineage, through at least one parent, to a ‘First Nation’ within {what was formerly} Anishinabek territory.

“Madahbee said distinctions between status and non-status are part of the “genocide” inherent in the ‘Indian Act’ and that ‘First Nations’ leaders are prepared to take responsibility for Anishinabek citizens who live off-reserve {?}.

“The government has been very skillful at divide and conquer tactics”, he said. “Our chiefs have been saying, particularly in the {former} Anishinabek territory, when we talk about ‘E-dbendaagzijig’, ‘those who belong’, we say we are responsible for ‘our people’, no matter where they live.”

“Mahdabee said it’s important to change the terminology from ‘Band membership’ in ‘First Nations’, to ‘citizenship’.

“You can be a member of the ‘Kiwanis Club’ or the ‘Rotary Club’”, he said. “You are a citizen of a ‘nation’. It elevates it.” {You’re damned right it does…}

“Band membership rules under the Indian Act have left a ‘First Nation’ in central Ontario in a dire situation, Madahbee said.

“As of 2013, the ‘Mississaugas of Scugog Island ‘First Nation’ did not have anyone eligible to be registered as a status Indian, he said.

“This Indian Act is ‘genocide’”, Madahbee said.”

–‘We know who our people are,’ Ontario ‘First Nations’ draft ‘citizenship law’,
Jody Porter, CBC News, Apr 20, 2016

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/anishinabek-nation-citizenship-law-1.3543057 assholes-600‘Undermining Canada’ 

“What do they have to teach us? We’ve been around for thousands and thousands of years… History didn’t begin when those guys got lost trying to find a new world. We weren’t lost, they were lost…
They have nothing to tell us of how to run our communities…”

The federal Government — ‘Liberal’, at the time — started offering “self-government” to Indian bands in the 1990s, deliberately and undemocratically defying the Canadian people, who had VOTED DOWN the concept as part of the ‘Charlottetown Referendum’. The current government has continued down this path, allowing bands “self-government” as an alternative to the Indian Act.

The problem with this approach is that the Indian leadership regard “self-government” and constitutions as steps along the path to independence and nationhood. The government is playing with fire, and Canada’s future is at stake…  

” ‘First Nations’ communities across the country are adopting constitutions that…allow their communities to build ‘culturally-appropriate’ institutions of self-government…

“Mississauga ‘First Nation’ (M’FN’), a small band in northern Ontario, is one of the most recent communities to ratify a community-based constitution… Nipissing ‘First Nation’ — another band in northern Ontario {that also surrendered its sovereignty via treaty} — ratified the first constitution in Ontario, and there are reports that 31 ‘First Nation’ communities in Ontario are drafting constitutions.

“The constitutional development process…started in the 1980’s… The constitution leaves parts of the Indian Act in force UNTIL THOSE SECTIONS ARE REPLACED WITH COMMUNITY LAWS AND TRADITIONS…

“Some community members were hesitant… Some worried there might be chaos after ratification. That risk was eliminated by ensuring ALL CANADIAN LAWS REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL REPLACED OR MODIFIED BY MISSISSAUGA LAW…

“Another ‘First Nation’ had the legitimacy of its constitution challenged in court. In a case involving the ‘Wikwemikong Reserve…a judge ruled that…the court has no business addressing (this challenge) in the court…
{Even if it conflicts with Canadian law?}

“Some legal scholars, however, are concerned about these constitutions. Darren O’Toole, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said that…if governments do not recognize these constitutions, there could be a problem with enforcement of the law {!}. Business uncertainty over jurisdictions could also create problems with investment decisions, he said, because one is unsure who is legislating…”

–‘First Nations’ developing new tool for self-governance’,
Joseph Quesnel, Troy Media, May 25, 2015  {CAPS added}


IMAGE: Mac Baren

“Mississauga ‘First Nation’ Chief Reg Niganobe said parts of the ‘Indian Act’ will stay in place until M’FN’ displaces them WITH THEIR OWN LAWS, CUSTOMS AND TRADITIONS. 

“Then, there are laws that don’t need to be replaced because they are fine the way they are. They are Canadian law and they would just be adopted by us.”

{But they’ll decide just which Canadian laws they use???}

“The constitution could eventually lead to having their own judicial system and courts, he said.

“That’s one of the many goals.”

” ‘Union of Ontario Indians’ (UOI) Grand Chief Pat Mahdabee said UOI has to get out of the Indian Act registration system, which even decides on ‘First Nation’ citizenship.

“We’re being complicate {sic} in our own ‘genocide’. We’re contributing to the elimination of our own people by continuing to abide by that Indian Act legislation.


“That’s why we have to PASS OUR OWN CITIZENSHIP LAWS because we know who belongs to our communities, we know our lineage and who our relatives are.” … 

{Back to the ‘blood’ definition of citizenship…}

“He said the UOI is promoting a one-parent rule. Many countries have a one-parent rule, including Canada. It says if one parent is a citizen of the country, the children are also citizens. In this case, it would be if one parent is a member of a particular reserve, the children would also be members.

“It would be very hard for them to say ‘You don’t have legitimate standing here,’ by us trying to implement our own citizenship law.

“This is crucial”, Mahdabee emphasized.

“Mahdabee said ‘First Nations’ have to exercise their ‘jurisdiction’ in a number of fields, including child care…

“He explained that ‘First Nations’ also have a ‘right’ to have their own world view, and don’t need the federal or provincial governments telling them how to live.

“What do they have to teach us? We’ve been around for thousands and thousands of years…


“History didn’t begin when those guys got lost trying to find a new world. We weren’t lost, they were lost.


“They have nothing to tell us of how to run our communities. Your world view, your values, your common sense, your Anishinabe way of thinking, that’s what this is all about. That’s the essence of what a constitution can do in your community. It’s your value system. It’s your ideas on how you want to run the community…


“Now, all this stuff is coming back. We never really lost it.”

–‘Mississauga ‘First Nation’ ratifies its constitution’,
KEVIN McSHEFFREY, Elliott Lake Standard, April 22, 2015
{CAPS added}

http://www.elliotlakestandard.ca/2015/04/23/mississauga-first-nation-ratifies-its-constitution  GlenClark-1998-03-10From B.C.:
“A constitution is an important part of self-government. A constitution is a document that describes the rules for a K’ómoks government under treaty…

“A constitution will be THE HIGHEST FORM OF LAW on K’ómoks lands once the treaty comes into effect. Everything K’ómoks does under treaty must be consistent with the constitution.
{Shouldn’t it be the other way around?}

“There are many parts to a constitution, and each constitution is unique. However, ‘First Nation’ Constitutions have many things in common. They describe each ‘Nation’s values, the rights and
responsibilities of members, the structure of government, and how to manage money, land and resources. They also describe how disputes will be resolved in government and between members…

“It’s important to remember even though K’ómoks will be self-governing, ‘K’ómoks ‘First Nations’ members will continue to have the protection of the ‘Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’.”
{CAPS added}

http://www.comoxband.ca/  firstnations-constitution“Thirty-one ‘First Nations’ communities are DRAFTING CONSTITUTIONS in Ontario, including a few close to Sudbury, following the lead of the Nipissing ‘First Nation’.

“The chief of the Atikameksheng ‘First Nation’ in Sudbury said his community is planning to vote on a constitution … Steve Miller said he doesn’t think it’s going to come into conflict with existing Canadian laws.

“We’re sending a true statement and a true document of who we are as a people”, he said. “I see no conflict. I think they can live right along each other.” 

{The segregationist ‘Separate But Equal’…}

” ‘FIRST NATIONS’ SEE THESE CONSTITUTIONS AS A FIRST STEP TO SELF-GOVERNMENT, but there are still questions about whether these documents will be recognized by the federal government.

“A lawyer with the ‘Union of Ontario Indians’ said he’s been waiting to hear since the Nipissing constitution passed.

“No, I haven’t heard anything official from Ontario or Canada”, Fred Bellefeuille said…

“The federal and provincial governments won’t comment on the validity of the Nipissing ‘First Nation’ constitution.

“However, in a statement, the federal department of Aboriginal Affairs said these constitutions are part of the work required to reach self-government agreements.

“Atikameksheng’s Chief Miller said his community’s document is in its final draft. HIS COMMUNITY HAS NOT CONSULTED WITH THE FEDERAL OR PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT about the document. 
{So,’consultation’ between ‘nations’ turns out to be a one-way street. What if there are conflicts with Canadian law?}

{Then they have nothing to do with Canada…}


“It may not be written on paper, black and white, but we did have laws of the land.”

{The key word being “did”. Now, there is Canadian law…}

–‘First Nations’ constitutions won’t clash with current laws, chief says’,
CBC News, Jan 23, 2014  {CAPS added}


Nipissing ‘First Nation’ joins ‘Idle No More’
Nipissing ‘First Nation’ joins ‘Idle No More’

“The Nipissing ‘First Nation’ has passed a constitution that’s believed to be the only ‘First Nations’ constitution in Ontario.

“But there are questions about what this document actually does for the community.

“The constitution was passed by the Nipissing ‘First Nation’ with a vote of 319 to 56. Chief Marianna Couchie said the vote count was “empowering”…

“Despite Couchie’s optimism, it’s not entirely clear what power this constitution will have.

“She said the Nipissing constitution gives them the right to determine members and set up laws.

“According to Darren O’Toole at the University of Ottawa, there is legal debate about whether the Canadian constitution gives ‘First Nations’ the right to do something like this.

“It’s up in the air right now, but some claim it allows for a form of self-government”, O’Toole said.

“O’Toole said this issue is bound to come up a lot…

“Many other Ontario ‘First Nations’, such as Atikameksheng and Wanapitae, are expected to be writing their own constitutions, as well…

“But O’Toole said it is likely these documents will spark legal battles, if they come into conflict with the Indian Act or other Canadian laws.

“It would be a very interesting court case, to be honest.”

–‘Nipissing ‘First Nation’ passes first Ontario Aboriginal constitution’,
CBC News, Jan 21, 2014



From ‘Anishinabek News’:
“The benefits of a constitution are:
• Declares jurisdiction over matters within the ‘First Nation’ territory’
• Defines the sources of power and authority…”


IMAGE: Justin Tang / Canadian Press
IMAGE: Justin Tang / Canadian Press


‘Bill S-212 — ‘First Nations’ Self-Government Recognition Act’

“An Act providing for the recognition of self-governing ‘First Nations’ of Canada”

“This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September, 2013.

DEAD, as of March 26, 2013
(This bill did NOT become law.)

This is from the published bill…

“This enactment provides for a process for a ‘First Nation’ to become a recognized ‘First Nation’ that is self-governing under its constitution.

“The ‘First Nation’ is recognized as self-governing upon the approval of a proposal for self-government by the members of the ‘First Nation’ in a referendum or in any other manner agreed on by the ‘First Nation’ and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

“Among other things, a recognized ‘First Nation’ has the exclusive power to legislate in specified fields and the power to legislate in other fields with respect to its citizens and with respect to its ‘First Nation’ lands and persons on those lands.”


Composite image - Getty-Shutterstock
Composite image – Getty-Shutterstock

“To an alarming degree, as most recently demonstrated by the ‘Keewatin’ case, Canada is going back to the pre-treaties era…which will have very negative consequences for all Canadians, ‘Indians’ and ‘non-Indians’ alike, in the years to come.

“Before the enactment of the ‘Constitution Act 1982’…there was no such thing as “aboriginal law”, as there is now… Jurisprudence emanating from the various Royal Proclamation and Indian Act issues that had arisen during the first century or so of Canada’s existence, while recognizing and affirming the legal rights that had been conceptualized and then granted to Indians, benignly and unconsciously assumed and supported ultimate Crown sovereignty.

“During this long period, this jurisprudence stayed relatively harmonious with the ever-changing Canadian social and political zeitgeist — one of the continuous and primary characteristics of which was, certainly beginning after World War Two, the constant and gradual dissolution of legal and social barriers amongst Canadians in general and, with respect to Indians, the weakening of all those ancient prejudices and barriers that for centuries, had falsely implied that they and non-Indian Canadians were fundamentally different and ill-fated to permanently live legally and physically apart from one another.

“Unfortunately for the best interests of Canada and all Canadians, including our Indian citizens, that continuum towards harmony has been broken. New and unprecedented legal barriers to Canadian economic progress and social unity have recently been created by our higher courts, which are already causing harmful economic effects and serious divisiveness between Indian and non-Indian Canadians. Legally, socially and politically, we’re going backwards.

“Economically, an indirect form of expropriation has occurred — a court-ordered massive transfer of economic wealth and legal power from Crowns and ‘non-Indian’ Canadians, individual and corporate, to relatively tiny Indian bands — and a downloading of responsibility for improving the material circumstances of Indians from governments to corporations wanting to do business on either Crown lands or on their own private rural or wilderness lands.

“Section 35 of the ‘Constitution Act, 1982’, states:

1. The Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.

2. In this Act “Aboriginal peoples of Canada” includes the Indian, Inuit and Metis peoples of Canada.

“The politicians who, ALMOST AS AN AFTERTHOUGHT, added section 35 to the Constitution Act, thereby unwittingly created the legal basis for highly activist courts in the Indian rights litigation explosion that ensued after 1982, and almost completely destroyed the Crown sovereignty-legislative supremacy constitutional model that had enabled Canada, up until that time…to so thrive and prosper on all fronts — economic, social and political.

“Over the past twenty years, jurisprudence emanating from Canada’s higher courts has interpreted section 35 in such an ahistorical, overly-romantic, revisionist, activist way — HAS READ INTO IT SO MUCH THAT IS NOT THERE AND WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE THERE; has created so many new rights for Indians that even they never knew they had or expected to be handed — that the ability of Canada’s federal and provincial governments…to solely embody ultimate political power and authority in the country and to legislate and govern in all Canadians’ best interests, has been seriously eroded.

“As well, Canada’s higher courts have stacked the deck in favour of the right and ability of these relatively tiny Indian bands, with virtually no checks on them, to pursue their own economic interests at the expense of our already stressed and pressed-upon government treasuries — of otherwise lawfully-operating corporations of ‘non-Indian’ Canadians — and of the Canadian general welfare as a whole. The new constitutional model this new jurisprudence has created is one that has, as stated, created serious social divisions and economic perils in the country, which can only get worse as the consequences of it become clearer with time.

“The federal and provincial Crowns in Canada, as the result of these court decisions — and, more shockingly, the inexplicably craven and anemic response to them by our politicians, senior bureaucrats and law enforcement officials — are becoming slowly but surely legally emasculated in the face of ever more aggressive, well-financed (often by the Crowns themselves) and well-organized legal, economic and vigilante attacks (illegal roadblocks and occupations) being made by Indian band leaderships against their fellow Canadians.

“Reconciliation”, the professed high value supposedly now governing relations between Indians and non-Indians in Canada, and a word one reads in all these recent court decisions — a word used by the courts in a very odd, unusual and counter-intuitive way but understood by ordinary Canadians only in its plain and ordinary meaning — is being more and more rendered impossible by these court decisions and the emergent effects of them.

“The Gambler’s inspiring grass-analogy vision — comparing us all to harmoniously intermingling grasses on one boundless plain: “…there is no difference…” — has been junked. The vision of Canada as a unified “community of destiny”…a vision long possessed by ordinary Canadians, has been replaced by our elites with a meaner, more pinched and prosaic vision of Canada as a mere race-based community of economic and legal stakeholders — indeed, separate communities of racial origin, or, as Amartya Sen describes it — a community characterized by “plural monoculturism”…”

Peter Best
{CAPS added}

See also:
‘Appeasing Racial Nationalists’ (Melanson) {Nov. 10, 2015}:
Post also at: 




ONE NATION ONE LAW CANADA (Facebook–broader politics)

Twitter – Daily News (follow us)

Twitter – Featured Stories (follow us)

1NATION1LAW (follow us)
Website – Daily News
ERBL inc. Canada News

Website – Featured Stories

mail to:  endracebasedlawpetition@gmail.com

Thank you from ERBL inc. Canada

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.