# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's the Real Story - Audio Visual Presentation - by Daniel and Nav

# data[].attributes.body
At a solidarity action organized by Indigenous and non-Indigenous allies with Wet'suwet'en Peoples after a court injunction is imposed by the RCMP on land defenders at port blockades (Feb, 2020):

“We are challenging the injunction because we recognize that the injunction violates our civil liberties, our right to assembly and our right to free speech. We are also challenging the injunction because we do not follow colonial Canadian law. We follow indigenous sovereign law, which means we follow the leadership of the hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en Nation and as long as the heredity chiefs stand strong, we stand strong with them.”

-       Natalie Knight,  Indigenous land defender (Feb 12th, 2020).

# data[].attributes.headline
Why we chose this speech to present the Wet'suwet'en story?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why we chose this speech to present the Wet'suwet'en story?

# data[].attributes.body
As we were digging into media around the Wet'suwet'en controversy in north western "BC" we came across so much media and this particular speech by the premier John Horgan offered a several great moments for us to interject with commentary and facts that help tell the other story of what is going on behind Horgan's words.

"Although we have shown the danger of one story, we have also shown that multiple stories exist and that a solution to this has to be one that recognizes Wet’suwet’en title to their lands. Ambiguous language in the media, political jargon, and contradicting  colonial laws grants our colonial government more power and at the end of the day, Indigenous Laws are given less precedence. However, the Wet’suwete’en remind Canada that colonialism has failed because Indigenous Peoples still exist, and so have their traditions, languages and cultures. In fact, the Wet’suwet’en Peoples’ traditional forms of governance have managed to survive the era of residential schools, 60's scoop, Potlatch bans, and ongoing systemic oppression. As educators, we must teach our students the critical thinking skills necessary so that they can identify and evaluate the dangers of single sided stories on their own, acknowledge their privilege as settler and avoid choosing the path of ignorance."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It may seem like another lifetime now, but it's only been two months since Indigenous youth occupied the BC Legislature in solidarity with Wet'suwet'en land defenders. Theirs was among the most visible of hundreds of actions across Canada in response to the arrests of dozens of people for enforcing hereditary chiefs' eviction of pipeline workers.

Even with a deadly virus shutting down communities, Coastal GasLink is still under construction. Unable to gather at blockades or rallies to support the Wet'suwet'en, we're finding creative ways to get their message out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Yintah to the Youth: Wet'suwet'en Sovereignty & Solidarity - Recording

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It may seem like another lifetime now, but it's only been two months since Indigenous youth occupied the BC Legislature in solidarity with Wet'suwet'en land defenders. Theirs was among the most visible of hundreds of actions across Canada in response to the arrests of dozens of people for enforcing hereditary chiefs' eviction of pipeline workers.

# data[].attributes.body
Climate Convergence Solidarity action with Wet'suwet'en Peoples in Commercial Drive area (Feb 2020)

# data[].attributes.headline
"The rule of law applies in British Columbia"

# data[].attributes.subject
"The rule of law applies in British Columbia"

# data[].attributes.body
BC may very well be not following the rule of law in relation to Indigenous title. The rule of Canadian law and the government's interpretations of law is not acting with good faith within the legality laid out around Indigenous title in Delgamuukw and the Canadian Constitution.

--Wet'suwet'en title is not extinguished as was shown in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia 1997. http://www.bctreaty.ca/sites/default/files/delgamuukw.pdf

--Canadian Constitution section 35.1 affirms “The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/the-delgamuukw-decision-putting-the-wetsuweten-conflict-in-perspective/

--BC has made the commitment to implempent UNDRIP which ensures that “the honour of the crown must involve the free, prior, and informed consent of the Indigenous Peoples”. In other words UNDRIP “is a mechanism for recognizing the self-determination of Indigenous Peoples” so that they can live with their own legal traditions within Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Tq7Mnlavqs
--Finally RCMP was not following the law as laid out in Canada's Constitution when they instituted check points and searches and tried to limit access to Wet'suwet'en territories.

https://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Correspondence-CRCC-Chairperson-2020-02-13-Highlighted.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
Court Injunction against land defenders at port blockades. In front of the Supreme Court of British Columbia (Feb 2020):

“John Horgan and Justin Trudeau have been saying that we are a nation of the rule of law and the rule of law must be followed. If my Nisga’a grandmothers, grandfathers, aunties and uncles, had followed the rule of law, we wouldn’t know where Nisga’a is. If we followed the rule of law, we wouldn’t have any of our language left. If we followed the rule of law, we wouldn’t know what a potlatch was. If we followed the rule of law, we wouldn’t know what unceeded territory is.”

-       Herb Varley, local Indigenous land defender (Feb 12th, 2020).

# data[].attributes.body
At a Wet'suwet'en solidarity action in Vancouver (Feb 2020)

# data[].attributes.headline
"Armed Peace Officers" and "British Columbians"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Armed Peace Officers" and "British Columbians"

# data[].attributes.body
Horgan describes RCMP as "armed peace officers confronting British Columbians and their associates and their friends"

In this statement he glazes over the permission for lethal force and in the 2019 action and were instructed to “use as much violence toward the gate as you want” ahead of the operation to remove a roadblock which had been erected by Wet’suwet’en people to control access to their territories and stop construction of the proposed 670km. Are the RCMP really officers of peace with this kind of intention towards the land defenders? Are they peace officers or government agents with the right to kill?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/20/canada-indigenous-land-defenders-police-documents

The RCMP was not just keeping the peace. They were given special permission by the government of BC on a provincial emergency to access more funding and redeploy officers. The BC government tried to deny their involvement in directing the police (which they didn't, they just gave them more resources for an emergency and said go for it), but their declaration of a provincial emergency was brought to light in a recent BCCLA letter. This is how they were able to over police the Wet'suwet'en with their illegal exclusion zones and checkpoints.

https://bccla.org/news/2020/03/release-wetsuweten-bccla-and-ubcic-release-explosive-letter-revealing-bc-solicitor-general-authorizing-rcmp-deployment-contradicting-public-statements/?fbclid=IwAR0H9wySorgYZl046n8iGFlRrEFOsub57BwkWWS740uoy2iS70BG51L3OPo

When Horgan refers to the land defenders as British Columbians, he is erasing their indigenous identity. If this is a conflict between BCers then the underlying problems of stolen land and Indingenous rights (human rights) are made invisible.

# data[].attributes.headline
"All permits are in place for this project to proceed"

# data[].attributes.subject
"All permits are in place for this project to proceed"

# data[].attributes.body
- The Unis'to'ten website claims that "Coastal GasLink (TC Energy) does not have the Environmental Assessment Permit to operate in Dark House Territory."

https://unistoten.camp/eao-permit/
An excerpt from the letter sent to the Environmental  Assessment Office on behalf of the Dark House's legal Team:

"Last week, the RCMP commenced enforcement action pursuant to the BC Supreme Court’s December 31, 2019 injunction order. The enforcement action took place following repeated public statements by your government indicating that all permits for the project are in place.

As you are aware, these statements are inaccurate. The Environmental Assessment Office has yet to make a decision to accept Coastal GasLink’s Certificate E14-03 Condition 1 Report #2 in respect of the Morice River Technical Boundary Area. In the absence of a decision on the Report, substantial portions of work on the project cannot proceed.

The Technical Boundary Area is within Dark House territory and subject to Wet’suwet’en title and rights. It also includes the Unist’ot’en Healing Centre. Coastal GasLink’s draft Report fails to consider or address how the project will affect the Healing Centre or Dark House’s ability to provide land-based healing practices to individuals experiencing the effects of intergenerational trauma and colonization."

# data[].attributes.headline
"20 Indigenous Communities along the pipeline route are in support of the pipeline. I encourage people who are against this project to talk to Indigenous peoples in support of the project."

# data[].attributes.subject
"20 Indigenous Communities along the pipeline route are in support of the pipeline. I encourage people who are against this project to talk to Indigenous peoples in support of the project."

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/coastal-gaslink-pipeline-lng-canada-1.5436837

This article is written from the colonizer’s perspectives.

However, it is a valuable source because it illustrates how the media fails to distinguish the historical difference between hereditary, and the colonially imposed elected chief governance (which muddles the publics view about this issue) ; it removes attention away from the real reasons why Wet’suwet’en are standing up to Canada (which is fighting for their basic human rights) and even raises concerns about the reasons why a majority of elected chiefs support this project. For example, why is the pipeline the only source of major viable income for Indigenous communities living in poverty? Why can’t the provincial or federal governments provide other choices for economic support? Seems like the governments keep Indigenous Peoples in poverty so that they can benefit and profit from  industry.

Crystal Smith, Elected Chief member of Haisla First Nations:

"For too many centuries our First Nation communities haven't had a solution as to how we are going to end the poverty and the suicide rates, not having hope for the future and staying with the status quo...whether you are elected or hereditary, we have a responsibility to our people to improve the quality of life for our members, regardless of where they reside...and I believe the solution is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for our people."

Freda Huson, spokesperson for the Un’istot’en Camp:

"Where are the documents that the hereditary chiefs gave up their responsibility for their lands to band councils? Do they have that? Does it show our hereditary chiefs signed a treaty giving that responsibility to the province or the federal government,"

This article fails to make a thorough distinction between hereditary and elected band membership. The Indian Act of 1876  banned traditional hereditary leadership in 1928 and replaced it with an elected chief and band council. “Electoral system are the a result of the section 74 of the Indian Act, imposed upon First Nations by Canada. It was designed to eradicate the hereditary system and create something more recognizable for the western ‘government (http://www.firstnationsdrum.com/2019/02/the-complicated-history-of-hereditary-chiefs-and-elected-councils/)

False Media:

https://www.straight.com/news/1358561/flurry-pro-pipeline-indigenous-voices-show-twitter-feeds-just-royal-dutch-shell-faces

Title of the article: “flurry of pro-pipeline indigenous voices show up on twitter feeds just as royal dutch shell faces financial predicament”

Helen Michelle of Skin Tyee Nation claims to be a hereditary chief… however she “was an elected chief who had signed deals with Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.”

In addition, The Gidimt'en Checkpoint Twitter account argues that “the Skin Tyee band is not located anywhere near the pipeline route. The band's government is based near François Lake west of Prince George.”

Seems like a anti-Indigenous tactic: the media and the government is trying to look bad, and also lesson the public’s solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en Peoples.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Producers of natural gas have a climate action plan that will meet targets in 2030, 2040 and 2050 and still see vast economic activity"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Producers of natural gas have a climate action plan that will meet targets in 2030, 2040 and 2050 and still see vast economic activity"

# data[].attributes.body
The Myth of Economic Benefit and Green-ness of Natural Gas:

1) It worsens climate change

--"A recent peer-reviewed study by the David Suzuki Foundation and St. Francis Xavier University found methane emissions from B.C.’s oil and gas industry are two-and-a-half times higher than reported"

https://thenarwhal.ca/6-awkward-realities-behind-b-c-s-big-lng-giveaway/

--Although it emits 50% CO2 compared to coal in the air, it produces more methane at a much quicker rate.

2) Natural gas infrastructure endangers local communities such as residents,  lands, waters and wildlife

--“Fracking can contaminate groundwater supplies if it’s not done properly”

https://climaterealityproject.org/blog/3-big-myths-about-natural-gas-and-our-climate

--For people living along the route "Residents have raised concerns about compressor stations that would be installed along the route, sometimes only 25 kilometers from their communities or properties. Compressor stations are a concern to nearby residents due to the potential for air and noise pollution."

--And at the transfer station, "The facility will emit atmospheric emissions, such as sulphur dioxide, mono-nitrogen oxides, greenhouse gases, fugitive hydrocarbons, and particulate matter. Due to the constrained Kitimat/Terrace airshed, this has local residents concerned."

http://lnginnorthernbc.ca/index.php/proposed-projects/lng-canada-gas-and-coastal-gaslink-pipeline

3) Its really expensive and a waste of money

-- Economically, “gas demand in Asia is indeed growing, but the future for LNG there is not rosy. Over 80% of Asian LNG demand derives from four countries – Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan, with China’s demand the only one not currently decreasing – a consequence of mild winters but also LNG import prices, a general regional economic slowdown and some other factors.”

--This article also cites huge deals between China and Russia for natural gas that is driving down the price on the market.
https://watershedsentinel.ca/articles/8-myths-about-lng/

--The possible economic benefits at home “that $23 billion in annual “new government revenues” from LNG Canada will be spread out over 40 years. That breaks down to roughly $500 million per year.

The B.C. budget this year was about $50 billion, meaning the increase in revenues will be equivalent to about one per cent of the B.C. budget each year.”
https://thenarwhal.ca/6-awkward-realities-behind-b-c-s-big-lng-giveaway/

With the possible economic benefit from LNG working out to about only 1% of the province's budget per year, is this really worth trampling on Indigenous rights and damaging sensitive ecosystems that support life on earth?

The government is deep in bed with liquified natural gas in Canada to the point of offering "LNG Canada and other companies tax reprieves and exemptions and a cheaper electricity rate than the previous B.C. Liberal government extended to the industry."

http://lnginnorthernbc.ca/index.php/newsroom/ndp-offers-tax-breaks-subsidies-to-attract-bcs-single-largest-carbon-poll

# data[].attributes.headline
"The courts have consistently . . . sided with Indigenous Peoples when their rights and their title have been abused by governments or by industry"

# data[].attributes.subject
"The courts have consistently . . . sided with Indigenous Peoples when their rights and their title have been abused by governments or by industry"

# data[].attributes.body
This is very misleading. What about court injunctions?
--A study by the Yellow Head Institute found that “corporations succeeded in 76 per cent of injunctions filed against First Nations, while First Nations were denied in 81 per cent of injunctions against corporations.”
--And they say that “the data shows that the court system is skewed toward seeing value and harm in economic terms opposed to Indigenous people asserting their rights and their laws.”
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/11/08/features/courts-deny-most-first-nations-injunctions
--The courts almost always rule in favour of corporations for these short term injunctions. That is why they are used. They resolve nothing in the long term. When Indigneous people have taken the BC or Federal government to court over title it can go either way. Even in Delgamuukw, the court didn't rule in the Wet'suwet'en people's favour. They acknowledged that title exists, but did not go into where.
--Think about the fact that the court almost always rules in favour of First Nations groups. Even if that is true, what does that say about the actions of the Canadian state in the past?