# data[].attributes.body
One thing that I found in our article was that it said that the government was deliberately going against the Bill 41, but in reality, they are only using a convenient loophole.
One other problem is that there is internal conflict between whether band councils or hereditary chiefs should be that so-called "governing body" stated in the bill, and if combined, who would be in charge of what?
Since the pipelines are still needed to run modern society, the government really needs to find a way to build them, but without going through Indigenous traditional territories -- there also needs to be a way to give back the land to the communities, since legally (by Canadian law) it still does not belong to them, so the government does still own the land: this causes conflict between the laws granting free access to Indigenous communities and the fact that the land still actually belongs to the government.
I agree with the statement that there is a severe lack of communication between the Indigenous communities and the Canadian government, because on one side, peaceful protests are being met with violence and important issues are being ignored, but on the other hand, there is not much successful compromise of both side in order to adapt to the way the two different sides run things.
How do we run one country while taking all different laws into consideration? What if they conflict, and more importantly, how do we compromise the most fundamental foundations to ensure maximum benefits on all sides?
If everyone just did their part and acted responsibly for themselves on the matter of climate change, there would be a huge improvement...
Equity is difficult to achieve in the western world, mainly because money and individual achievement are valued to highly. This causes an extremely competitive, unforgiving environment where it is practically impossible to succeed without personal gain.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel as though the Indigenous People and the government don't have a good relationship and continue to have that flawed relationship because of a lack of effort to change things. Lack of understanding, ignorance, and greed seem to be the key factors as to why reconciliation is still stalled. The lack of communication and lack of acknowledgment of cultural relativism between the government and the Indigenous People's is shocking. Before anything is done, both sides need to take responsibility for what they have done and more importantly what they need to do now.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it’s important to identify biases and know that the things people post or what newspapers put out might not have the full picture present. For example this article put out by The Star does not accurately display what is happening in this BC pipeline conflict. Or they might undermine the things they have to say, like “Horgan said Indigenous Peoples in B.C. have used courts to successfully assert their tights and titles, but in “this instance the courts have confirmed that the project can proceed and will proceed””. They have just barely mentioned the very important fact that this is the Indigenous land and it is their land to control but then goes in with a quote to make the blatant wrong doing seem more legit and qualified.

# data[].attributes.body
The empty words of the government are infuriating. They say they care about indigenous people but only do the bare minimum-if even that- to give indigenous people the rights and respect that they deserve. I am glad that the media is catching wind of the way indigenous communities are treated in Canada, because if people weren’t standing up for indigenous equality on a global level right now, I expect the treatment would be much worse. The media is the only thing holding these corporations and the government accountable right now.

# data[].attributes.body
Our group read Coastal GasLink's response to Unist'ot'en's actions. It was about Dark House's (Unist'ot'en) decision to request that the terms of the Access Agreement/Interlocutory Injunction continue to be followed. Later though, they intended to terminate it. Their of course very biased article that followed suite portrayed Dark House as being in the wrong and them in the right. For example, on January 5th they found trees on the road and stated that it was unclear the reason for the trees were on the road. However, they heavily implied that it was placed by Dark House to prevent their crews from accessing the work areas where they stated it was a clear violation of the Interlocutory Injunction. Also, I found it hard to believe that apparently the Coastal GasLink repeatedly requested meetings with Dark House but the requests were ignored or rejected. In addition, Coastal GasLink said "We respect the rights of others to peacefully and lawfully express their point of view, as long as their activities do not disrupt or jeopardize the safety of the public, our employees and contractors, or protestors themselves.". This last clause seems like a cheap excuse that they could use to not allow any of Dark House's activities as they could claim all of their activities are disruptive or jeopardizing. Furthermore, they claim that their project will benefit the public interest, the First Nations, local communities, BC and Canada according to the COURT's view. I find it hard to believe that the COURT would know whether it benefits the FIRST NATIONS or not more than the FIRST NATIONS themselves.

"relationship at the end of a barrel gun"

What is/should be the solution?

# data[].attributes.body
-hypocrisy of Provincial Government, made elections promises against the pipeline but is not following through
-geographical disconnect
-lack of consent from the First Nations
-This is a blatant violation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
-Many laws are historically biased
-Why is the validity of First Nations Hereditary chiefs and governance still being questioned?
-How do you get people to care and help with issues that don't directly affect them?
-What is true reconciliation? How can we move forward together? How do we build a relationship based on mutual respect? How do we build a relationship of trust?
-contrast between biased articles and facts
-How will this affect the future? What kind of precedent are we setting both nationally and internationally? If Canada ignores the Wet'suwet"en people and builds the pipeline than we are saying that it's okay to continue to ignore Indigenous peoples and to violate their land. On the other hand, if Canada and Costal GasLink leave Wet'suwet"en territory then they are setting a positive precedent and will start creating a better relationship and building that foundation of mutual respect and trust.
-How can we used technology to spread messages and improve dialogue?
-How can we take action and speak up? How do the decisions that we make in our everyday life affect large scale issues? How do our voting choices affect the future?
-The impact of capitalism and consumerism is vast and has huge impacts on our environment and global citizens. We need to value relationships, culture, knowledge, life, happiness etc as much as we value iPhones, sports cars, big houses, and monetary wealth.
-EQUALITY VS EQUITY
-systematic oppression
-How can we make systematic changes to ensure that every voice is valued and every person has the chance to "succeed"
-the effects of stigma and bias

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible to meet in the middle where each party will be satisfied and feel their voice was heard?

# data[].attributes.body
Lineage to land or monetary value. What is important?

# data[].attributes.body
Indigenous rights are not respected, as they should be, the Wet’suwet’in peoples did not give permission for the pipeline to be built on their land. It saddens me that their rights to defend the land are being violated. These people are not criminals for defending what their ancestors have owned for many years before settlers arrived. Action should be taken to mend relations with these people, not take detrimental action to build a pipeline. As our article says “it’s 2020 — the era of bystanding is long gone” Mr. Horgan should not be betraying his promise of reconciliation.

How can a relationship be created between two opposing parties? It all starts with communication, finding a common thread to connect and repair what was broken as soon as settlers arrived. Hopefully one day, a relationship can be forged, consensually from both sides. What can be done?

# data[].attributes.body
biased reports in favour of the companies versus the indigenous peoples that will not consent.
convenience versus what should be “right”
relationships between media and indigenous peoples that are potrayed as difficult criminals, versus the potrayal of the RCMP and police whose actions are being tamed and unrecognized as violent, etc.
Uninformed and late/ projects arent given proper discussion - indigenous consent is an afterthought
BC government not recognizing the UN declaration for indigenous peoples that allow the indigenous peoples to determine their political status and must give full free and informed consent to projects on their lands.
“Not your problem, until it is.”
Saying and publicizing something, then actions say something different.
Reconciliation is a two(or more) side attempt to reconcile for past offences. Who should make the first step, and who has the confidence to do so? Is it right for the indigenous people to wait for an attempt at reconciliation or should they push for reconciliation?

# data[].attributes.body
- BC's government seems to be siding with Coastal GasLink in this issue, as this is where the money is coming from.  John Horgan is allowing these restrictions and injustices because of prior commitments that he has made, and now the relationship between BC's government and first nations communities are being weakened.
- Does Trudeaus government have the jurisdiction to step in and intervene in the issue or is it completely up to the provincial government to do that?
- How can a compromise be made that honours the rights of indigenous people and is beneficial for canada?  How has such a compromise still not been made in the decades of Canadas history?
- Shouldn't the band councils who are elected by the people represent the will of their communities?
- The entire world is becoming increasingly more divided. Canada needs to be sure that all peoples are respected and treated in the way they deserve to prevent further polarization in this country.

# data[].attributes.body
government's/RCMP's imposition of required access of supporters to Wetsuweten territories is just like indigenous people requiring a pass to leave the reserve.

How can ANYONE have a conversation at the end of the  barrel  of a gun?

What does "consultation" actually mean?  Implicit in the definition "consultation" is the concept of dialogue/ discussion, not one side telling the other what will occur.  Are these "consultations" available to the public?
"Free and informed consent"  will be implemented once the job is done...

Is consensus and a shared  world view  possible?

# data[].attributes.body
The relationship between the Indigenous groups in the area and the BC government has been seriously undermined. The two groups are trying to reach common ground, but with neither group willing to negotiate.
The arrest of 14 indigenous protestors has furthered the rapid destruction of this relationship. Neither party feels that they can trust the other to respect what goal they are trying to reach. I think that the BC government does acknowledge that the land belongs to the Wet'Suwet'en people, however whenever resources or opportunity arises, the land is considered federal property.
Article highlighted how issues have been in existence throughout history, and as said in the video, "150 years and nothing has changed".
Who is responsible for building a trustworthy and respectable relationship?
Article proudly stated that BC is the first Canadian province to pass legislation to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
Why has it taken so long?
Are other provinces in Canada struggling more with building relationships between Indigenous peoples and the government and other companies?

# data[].attributes.body
-Are there similar cases to Delgamukw elsewhere in BC?
-Do some nations only have band council, not hereditary chiefs?
-John Horgan is committed to building Coastal Gaslink, yet against Transmountain--picking and choosing projects to support based on where his voters are....

# data[].attributes.body
The article my group read about Premier Horgan was biased against Indigenous demonstrators. In the article from The Star, the indigenous peoples defending their territory are referred to as occupiers. The language used clearly shows the bias of the reporter and the lack of regard and respect shown to demonstrators. The article also refers to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which states that governments mush have “free and informed consent” from Indigenous groups prior to beginning and approving construction on their land. According to the provincial government, this declaration does not matter.

# data[].attributes.body
The issue of who "owns" land and who can use it is an age old problem. If the two laws of two peoples are conflicting, it is better to negotiate than have to one law imposed on the other peoples. Why should one set of laws be more significant? In this case, due to a history of mistrust and violence, it is even more important for the Canadian government to make efforts in reconciliation.

# data[].attributes.body
-indigenous communities didn’t give permission for pipelines and they have continuously said no but the Canadian government doesn’t seem to care and will go along anyway

-I think only having one group or person in charge is ineffective and won’t help or please everybody. We need a combination of communities and cultures so people can try to understand each other and build relationships and understandings.

-the government and indigenous communities will never build trust with each other if the Canadian government keeps on with their violence and forceful actions towards indigenous peoples land.

-Media is very biased and against First Nations and will frequently make indigenous peoples look like they’re in the wrong.

-I’ve noticed that indigenous people usually try to communicate with the government respectfully and calmly but the government retaliates with violence (ex. military being sent into the villages), and when the indigenous communities react with anger and protest, they are demonized and made to look like the villains; even if the government was first to act with disrespect.

# data[].attributes.body
- trees that fell on the service road, dark house was blamed and it was a “clear violation” although dark house was only protecting what was theirs
- no consent was given so why is it still happening?
- Canadian government - not being respectful of the indigenous people and only acknowledging the indigenous governing bodies that they have selected to interact with.
- putting check points on land that belongs to the indigenous people without consulting them.
- the RCMP is restricting access of the indigenous people to their own land
- “Any relationship when you’re not looking down the barrel of the gun is a better relationship.” Horgan
- bias shown in articles, language is being used to make the RCMP seem less criminal than the indigenous people.
- The letter from the hereditary chiefs is straight forward and we don’t see the real opinions as often and our views are so often obstructed by the media and the biases.
- 14 people arrested ... one was for assaulting a police officer, but how many police officers assaulted them? And no consequence?
- hypocrisy - running the pipeline through places that bc voters won’t care about
- UN declaration stating that you need the consent of everyone involved but it was ignored so easily
- if the government followed the indigenous rights, what would happen?
- “were only looking forward”
- what is true reconciliation? Who is responsible for rebuilding the relationship? I believe that it’s up to both sides but what happens when the indigenous people have been doing that for the longest time and being patient for so many years? At some point when do the “colonialists” have to take responsibility and make more of an effort.
- what needs to happen to repair these relations? It comes from there roots, the history and context and needing to stop ignoring it and start reconciling.
- what are the choices that I will make that affect this and other situations?
- Am I now able to make change and disrupt the systems in place?
- what will it take for me to find my voice? Have I found it already? I stand up for things I believe in today and when they come to me, but will I go seek out things to make better? How am I going to embody what I do believe in so strongly?
- In an ideal world what is the situation and what are the solutions?
- When will respect be present in everything that we do? From the acceptance of hereditary systems and the building of relations and communication between different people.
- Rural areas vs. Big cities - where do the resources come from? And what happens when we need to go back to the land.
- is it not clear yet that we have so blatantly wronged the aboriginal community? Because it really seems we are stupid and don’t realize it because we - as a country, as a world - continue to do wrong by them exemplified clearly here by the pipeline and by our government promising them justice and then pushing them aside.
- Maya said that our decisions on voting day should represent our core beliefs and what we have been educated on, I strongly agree with that.
- “awareness is the first step”
- I hope that our generation is the key to making amends and fixing current problems

# data[].attributes.body
-The coastal gas link response was clearly biased and portrayed the First Nations communities as  violent, unreasonable and problematic to a project that had already been "approved".
- How can the BC supreme court grant access to land and generalize how it will benefit the public without communication between the First Nations communities on the land?
- On this issue, is it hard to write about the situation without bias?
- "Lack of respect"
- By the government disregarding the consent of the Wet'suwet'en people, this clearly demonstrates the ignorance of the government to  these communities and the beliefs that they can overrule the indigenous communities.
-Where is the middle on this issue, how can we negotiate the building of a pipeline? Building could happen or it could not, how do we compromise?
-"historically biased laws" and need for reformation
- These efforts of pipeline company's are empty, they say that they want to respect these communities and want the opportunity to talk about compromise, yet continue to highlight they were already granted access by the BC government.

# data[].attributes.body
Companies forcibly start building their projects without any mutual consent which shows how they dominate and view themselves as superior. In our article, the Coastal GasLink pipeline company set up check points and restricted indigenous people on their own land, even without any consent they already go ahead and do whatever they want.
It seems as the government and Supreme Courts of Canada always want to hide these issues or not find a real solution. The court acknowledge that the Wet'suwet'en still have title to their lands but nothing has been resolved. So even if they know what they are doing is illegal and wrong, they blatantly push it aside.
A big problem is the biasness in articles because this is how people learn about indigenous problems. Although  media helps spread awareness it is important to be careful about what sources they come from.
It is terrible how band council members have to agree to anything the government wants because they need funding.

# data[].attributes.body
The Coastal GasLink trespassed on unceded Wet’suwet’en territory and never received consent. Yet they decided to bulldoze through their territory by force. The Coastal GasLink had police come and help them get through to the land. This made me think what would the Indigenous people do to protect their land? Call the police? No, they cannot because the police are the ones there against them. So that means the Indigenous People are the only ones who can stand up for themselves and protect their land. Yet the police aren’t even letting them protect their territory’s.
All the Coast GasLink has done is destroy their lands. Coastal GasLink should leave and abide by the eviction notice because they have no consent to be there.

# data[].attributes.body
Wet'suwet'en peoples are losing hope that their rights will be listened to; Coastal GasLink losing patience for the Indigenous peoples peaceful actions/resistance. Also wanted to mention that we notice a lot of (perhaps accidental or unintentional) bias in the writing. Author described violence that broke out when RCMP arrived, but failed to mention that violence was fault of RCMP.

How do we find balance between these governing bodies? How do we get the Canadian, colonization-based government to acknowledge and respect Indigenous ways of governance?

Nadya acknowledged the amount of bias that was featured in her article, pointing out how even subtle word choices can perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Where was the article from?

Sydney's primary sources allow people elsewhere to experience and understand the experience of Wet'suwet'en people. As Amanda shared with our group, the press's presence is crucial to ensuring confrontations are respectful.

It's so disheartening that Indigenous groups must contract non-government archaeologists as our own government's services can no longer be trusted. I wish this wasn't the first time that I was hearing this.

UN Human Rights Council and its Declaration of Indigenous Rights is being completely ignored. We must have an understanding of consent that is encompassing of everyone, not just band council.

The empty efforts made by TransCanada, GasLink, John Horgan's manipulation of Bill 41 are just that: empty efforts. These efforts are all about optics, about these companies positioning themselves in a way that makes them look considerate without actually having to consider Indigenous peoples.

Indigenous people have been trying to be civil and understanding for centuries. They do not OWE IT to Canadian colonizers to educate them. Reparations should be at the responsibility of the Canadian Government.

# data[].attributes.body
All companies are trying to build a pipeline but the First Nations are saying no it’s our ancestral land and you can’t do this. Now the project is going underway even though no indigenous person has given approval to them to use their land. These companies are fully exploiting their land.

“Any relationship that your not looking down the barrel of a gun is a better relationship” -Hereditary Chief. I highly agree with this statement and also believe it takes a big person to make a statement like this, after being treated so poorly for so many years.

I agree that the wet’suwet’en should have been informed on the artifacts being found and had opportunity to properly preserve them with their traditional knowledge on proper preservation. Who knows how many countless, priceless artifacts were destroyed in the hands of unknowledged people

# data[].attributes.body
coastal gaslink response:
-portraying themselves as in the right
-justify their actions with excuses
-mentioned benefits for the indigenous people but with no concrete examples
-demonizes the actions of the indigenous people
-offering funding to different communities in exchange for permission is used as a bribe
-