Ontario

The Ontario government recently approved a motion that the term "Israeli Apartheid" should not be used.

The motion passed with unanimous support from the Ontario Tory's, Liberals and NDP.

Speaking to the Toronto Sun Conservative MPP Peter Shurman stated that "I want to be clear about what it is I’m trying to do. I want the name changed. It’s that simple. It’s just wrong."

And why is it wrong for Shurman? What stunning and well thought out rational did Shurman use to back up his condemnation of the words "Israeli Apartheid"?

Does he dispute that there are similarities between the Bantustan system in South Africa and the territory allotments to Palestinians? Did he challenge the claim that there are two different laws that exist in Israel, one for Israelis and another for Palestinians? Why did he and the entire Legislature choose to target the the term "Israeli Apartheid"?

“My problem is the name,” he said. “Israeli Apartheid Week is not dialogue, it’s a monologue. The name is hateful, it is odious and that’s not how things should be in my Ontario. It’s a term that frankly I’m sick of hearing. Get rid of this word apartheid.”

Two things.

One, Shurman never said that the term was not accurate in describing the system. Which makes sense given many South Africans and Israelis themselves use this terms to describe the treatment of Palestinians.

Two, replace the word "Israeli" with "South African" in Shurman's quote and it makes about as much sense as it would have in the 1980's.

Kichesipirini Algonquin First Nation Applauds AFN Bravado in Asserting Inherent Rights

December 13, 2009

Leadership of the Kichesipirini Algonquin First Nation were very encouraged by the emerging consensus amongst First Nation representatives to have independent access to educational and legal advise that would assist them in furthering their inherent and inalienable rights as the descendents of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada.

Representatives of the Kichesipirini community were particularly impressed with this heightened resolve amongst Canada’s Indigenous Peoples since the Kichesipirini has been using its unique position as still sovereign and traditional government not having signed a Treaty or come under domestic policy to actively promoting these very rights at the international level on behalf of Indigenous Peoples supporting emerging Canadian nationality and full independence.

Relying on the numerous conflicts of interests and historical misinformation entrenched within the existing land claim negotiations process the Kichesipirini community has been refusing all inducements to corruption, collusion or forced collaboration consistent with the existing policy, insisting instead that there need be developed appropriate third party adjunction at the international level for negotiation if there is to be certainty and the perception of justice.

To further such necessary institutional developments the Kichesipirini has used its inherent title and jurisdiction to responsibly present a caution against certain held property advertised for sale within unceded territory for the establishment of The Pimadiziwin Centre, a proposed Kichesipirini Kichi Sibi Anishnabe Community Centre and Independent Institute of International Indigenous Justice Studies.

The Dialogue Denied Us

The leadership of the Kichesipirini Algonquin First Nation continue final edits on document that raises serious questions concerning chronic public exposures to dangerous environmental contaminants and that such ongoing deliberate exposure is directly associated with ongoing government and industry refusal to recognize Kichesipirini as a verifiable historical Algonquin nation, and our continued assertions of the legal and moral right to exercise our inherent and inalienable traditional governance role.

The Kichesipirini Algonquin First Nation became very concerned about possible hidden agendas associated with the blatant refusal to address Kichesipirini assertions in connection with land claim negotiations. Of particular concern is the reliance on flawed "negotiations" as a means to circumvent the law to resolve Aboriginal claims consistent with the legal requirements of purposeful fact-finding processes and adherence to historical truth as is required with litigated land claims.

Such circumventions of the legal process denied Kichesipirini their rightful role as protectors and responsible government.

Kichesipirini community members suspected that the many irregularities, especially the allocating of public monies and certain inflated responsibilities and jurisdictions regarding the Algonquin Nations particular relationship with the Manhattan Project and nuclear industry to Aboriginal communities that did not possess such authority, to be indicative of a systemic refusal to genuinely inform the public about the issues, thereby blocking all chances to actual accountability and examination of the facts, and that such demographic manipulations were probably indicative of some larger issues.