Talk:Gustafsen Lake standoff

Untitled

More Info Could anyone please provide me with links to unbias pages with more information on the incident? I'm surprised to find out about an incident like this happening in Canada and would like to know more. User: HistoryKiwi

Unbiased pages on Canadian stand-offs are hard to come by. The issue is too divisive to promote objectivity and the cover-up was too effective to promote accuracy in analysis of the event.

Note my addition of the Peter Montague quote. This is the same guy who, after getting out of the Force, got the RCMP to "investigate" a rival casino by having BCTV cameras show up on the Premier's porch and accuse of him of a bunch of stuff he was later acquitted for (i.e. it was a trumped-up charge). Similarly looking-back writing of things like the Solidarity Crisis and Oka is very obscured because of the disinformation released during those events, and that it's still used as "cites" by people, including in Wikipedia. For the Seton Portage arrests/violence, the only accurate - half-accurate - reportage was in the Seattle papers. Try the Yellowknife Mine Strike/bombing, too, or the Emery bust. Point is, it's a dicey game taking on the Empire of Untruth because then they mark you down in their little book and the smear campaign can be turned in your direction, be you a big fish or a small one. But if you're a Member (for US/other readers, that's what Mounties like to call each other, shoot a 19 year old kid in the back of the head for drinking a beer in public and you won't even get a manslaughter charge, or even an investigation (that poor kid Josh in Houston BC, can't remember his last name). The Cram affair particularly stinks (see link below); and both he and Clarke were forced onto medication before being allowed to plead guilty for contempt of court and recant their allegations of judicial corruption/rigging. The details of the Bristow case I could conceivable be jailed for rememberingin public (two reporters did a lot of time in jail for that one). I can tell you the historians who can't be trusted on these matter are those who think the media are valid primary sources; but they're also (as professors) conscious of their position in whatever school or whatever they're at, and not likely to make waves unless being radical is their thing; in which case they're easily discredited/smeared.

What's been occurring to me lately is that the Wikipedia Talk pages are forming an interesting alternative media for British Columbia and Canada; an opportunity for public historiography, with consensual results; and when the edits can be clearly seen - and reverted - it's makes it a lot harder for smear-mongers to maintain their smear. One step short of libel, that is, of course.Skookum1 14:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Having been in attendance at the Gustafsen Lake trial and researched the issue extensively I would say this page is the most accurate representation I've come across so far, although some of the details are a bit off and a lot of pertinent background is missing. There isn't much information available and what little exists in reputable publications is hopelessly entangled with the blatant falsehoods and misrepresentation in the media. For more background, the Royal_Proclamation_of_1763 is affirmed in the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms and guarantees native tribes the right to self-government on unceded territory. Most of British Columbia was unceded territory at the time of the attempted eviction ('stand-off' is a misrepresentation of the situation, imo).

another title for this page is needed, but what? "Standoff" is a media-hype word; "crisis" is one of those words that are a bit alarmist for head-to-the-ground Canadians; so what else to call it?Skookum1 14:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

This archivehas a lot of information available but I haven't reviewed it for bias or accuracy. Good luck.

Unbiased accounts are indeed hard to come by. This article is proof of that. The Web is flooded with rhetoric.

The Natives occupiers did not have (and still don't have) the support of the local Native government[1]. They were making up the rules as they went along. This seriously undercuts the "legaleze" behind Wolverine's claims. This is not a story of Natives vs. the big bad government. It is a story about Wolverine against the everyone who disagreed with him.

Most native nations contain large sectors of their population who do not support the "Indian Act governments" of the band and tribal councils; I can't remember if Wolverine himself was Secwepemc or he was, that he was from any of the local bands (Williams Lake, Dog Creek, High Bar, Canim Lake, Clinton/Whispering Pines, Bonaparte - High Bar is not part of either of the Secwepemc Tribal Councils btw; he may have been from the Adams Lake Band I think, it's been a long time); the issue of unceded sovereignty is sometimes held by band councils nonetheless, usually those outside the treaty process (e.g. those in the Lillooet Tribal Council of the St'at'imc); nonetheless the unceded sovereignty argument is not the exclusive jurisdiction of the local government but is a shared belief/tenet of individual natives. Unlike white people doing the tug-the-forelock thing, native people quite often do not listen to their "elected leaders" (esp. because the "democratic" mechanisms selecting them are creations of the white Overpower).Skookum1 07:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Also omitted is the fact that several agreements and treaties had been reached since 1762 and the local Natives were pretty happy with the process. They opposed the Wolverine group because it jeapordized the progress they'd already made[2].

There were no treaties reached anywhere in BC outside Vancouver Island and the Peace River Block/Peace drainage; this is excepting the Snyder Treaties of 1858, which (being achieved by an American irregular) were considered illegitimate by the colonial government and are no longer extant (presumably destroyed at Douglas' orders so as to prevent their use as a pretext by American annexationists). Other agreements made were between the band council (the Indian Act government) and were not fully supported by the Secwepemc people, many of whom do not regard the band councils as legitimate to any process because they are creations of the legal system which overrode their traditional rights/ways; citing Sun Peaks is a non sequitur as it's far away on the other side of the Bonaparte Plateau and the North Thompson River; in the same way as you suggest that other treaties since 1763 are relevant; they are not. The Government Reserve that had existed until 1976 in this area was illegally allocated by the Miniwac regime; the GR had been mutually set aside in the 19th Century as collateral against eventual settlement of land claims; it was at this time that Lyall James, until then a Montanan with close links to the Bill Bennett Socreds, obtained the political payback in the form of the ranchlands in the area of Gustafsen Lake.....Skookum1 07:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The account given here doesn't provide an accurate impression of the dialogue during the standoff, which reads pretty much like the hostage negotiations that go on in any similar situation. Any citizen of European ancestry who occupied any land and demanded to meet with the Queen[3] would be wisked away to the loony bin. I think the only unfortunate outcome of this matter is that Wolverine did not get the benefit of being treated like a regular crazy person.

As elsewhere on this page, these are pretty sweeping value judgments to be made by someone who doesn't sign their posts (Quill?). The direct relationship with the Crown is a common theme in all native political and historical agendas, and underlies the longstanding debacle (still shared by some peoples, as with the St'at'imc) that they should not have two proxy governments to negotiate with (Victoria and Ottawa) as their relationships established by Gov. Douglas - and personally affirmed by Lord Dufferin and the Marquis of Lorne later - are still held to be, or supposed to be, valid, even though whites and white rhetoricians such as yourself like to sweep them under the rug; or choose to remain ignorant of them. Or contemptuous; either way the hostages here were the sundancers, who had been attacked by James' cowboys, including James himself.Skookum1 07:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The other poster replying here (below) evidently feels the same way as I do. And I'm not even native. I'm just informed, and not an apologist for the violence of the state against an ethnic and religious minority, which is what the sundancers were/are.Skookum1 07:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

---

The "native government" of which you refer to is the one set-up and run by the canadian government, so therefore there support is of course going to go with the colonizers. As for your "claims" about our status as Independent Sovereign Nations not existing, i point out that ONLY NATIONS can make treaties.

Also your myth about the "land agreements" concerning our territory smacks of lies and misinformation regarding the true nature and status of the issue. NO treaties have been signed with ANY of the Native Nations on the west coast (and no the Nisga'a are no longer a Nation they threw that away for a few trinkets). ONLY the citizens of the Native Nations can make or reject any land agreement, "agreements" IMPOSED by a foreign government have no legal and moral status in International law and under the law of the Native Nation in question. Please learn your facts before you make uninformed decisions. --RedMan11 11:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Largest police operation in Canadian history

Not quite. Oka was much, much bigger[4]. " Some 2,500 regular and reserve troops from the 34th and 35th Canadian Brigade Groups and the 5th Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group were put on notice and, on the morning of 20 August, 33 troops of the Quebec-based Royal 22e Regiment, the 'Van Doos', led by Major Alain Tremblay took three barricades and arrived at the final blockade leading to the disputed area" 02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)Chillyfinger 02:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't this contribute to the military size rather than the police size? Macho Philipovich 05:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Oka was a military operation, Gustafsen Lake was a police operation, i.e. RCMP, not Canadian Forces. Sure, Oka began as a police operation, but it was a military operation in the end. The army was not involved at Gustafsen Lake, which was a chance to the RCMP to test out its military-style equipment (hhte opening lines of their charter, remember, is that they are a "paramilitary force"....the rest of the sentence defining that is even more interesting....) and military formations and tactics. The subtext for anyone who's studied the history of warfare is that the setting of this event was a perfect dry-run of the kind of terrain the RCMP would be faced with in the event of a general Indian uprising, triggered by something like the Oka Crisis. You don't think they weren't/aren't considering the logistics of something like that, i.e. full-scale bush war? Don't be so innocent.....Skookum1 18:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe the security operations for the G8 Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta was touted at the time as the largest police operation. It was the first G-8 summit after 9/11, the first antiglobalization protest after the one in Genoa where a protester was killed, and is located in the middle of the wilderness. If true, this makes Gustafsen Lake the largest as of 1995, but not the record holder. Possibly RCMP pension fund management is also a contender. >;) bobanny 18:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The 77,000 rounds fired remark seems pretty absurd. The only figure I see anywhere is 7,000. Firing 77,000 rounds will probibibly hit more then one person.

In fact only citation for any facts at all in this article comes from the tyree a, magazine that does not attempt to hide its bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.237.165.98 (talk) 21:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Bruce Clarke?

I can't believe Bruce Clarke isn't mentioned in this, not even once. Looks pretty threadbare and controlled; surprised there's not more meat here, and political discussion. but of course we're excellent at forgetting difficult business like this around here, aren't we? Coverage of Lyle James' harrassment techniques - ropes, horses, gunfire, whooping cowboys screaming "red niggers" and more; of course it might help to add that Lyle James was from Montana, and bought his lease at Gusftafsen Lake when that area was taken out of the Government Reserve in 1976 by the Bennett II Regime; James was of course one of the main mobilizers and backers of the party in the Cariboo during the '75 election; tolerant, wise, broad-minded, accepting, like all our good immigrants who have abandoned the hatreds and customs of their former country to embrace Canadian diversity :-| Of course, whether the James ranch cowboys were worse than the RCMP is a relative line of discussion. So why isn't this here? Or is all this TRUTH some kind of POV problem for people who don't want to hear it?Skookum1 07:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Put it in, please. I tried to expand on the article, but I've run out of resources. Bruce Clark should definitely be mentioned. -- TheMightyQuill 09:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Scary stuff, and I don't have the resources either; no copies at hand of Terminal City and other rags that were carrying the truth (as opposed to what the Vancouver Sun and Province were carrying) are; this, as with the Oka Crisis, Grant Bristow and other RCMP/Mulroney imbroglios have all been manipulated and distorted by the mainstream media, and thoroughly "scrubbed". What scares me, as scaring goes, is what was done to Clarke for speaking his mind/the truth; same with Jack Cram who deserves an article as well http://sisis.nativeweb.org/clark/cram.html. Clarke I'll try and find something on, though.Skookum1 14:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Is there any offical proof of the landmine(s) being used? I find it very hard to believe the RCMP or the Army would use mines against Canadian citizens. I've also only been able to find it on these 'Indy media' pages that are usually extremely biast. -- DougMcDill 12:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The Army might not, but the RCMP did; we all saw the TV broadcast footage of the blown-up vehicle (being blown, not afterwards). And if they didn't put the landmines there, who did? Lyall James?Skookum1 18:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The RCMP used dogs to chase down children who escaped from residential schools. The RCMP, OPP QPP, all policing forces of Canada have, for over 200 years, been permitted ... mandated really to treat aboriginals as individual criminals and lethal gangs. I have no trouble believing they tried out their land mines at all. I'm amazed that it got reported! (I wouldn't rule out the cowboys, though.) However, I think a corner in aboriginal and police personal relations was turned by Six Nations. The Clan Mothers and women linked arms and walked the OPP off the land. Saved everybody's ass, really. The OPP and RCMP now have to abide by a Supreme Court ruling that land claims protestors are to be treated "differently" - i.e., respectfully. Canada is so far behind in processing land claims that it's Canada that's in default here, and they expect to be treated civilly, and in accordance with what they know is the law.

2006

Splitting the Sky should also get a mention here. I landed here because his article is an orphan. For now, I'll link it under 'See also.' I'm also going to removed the disputed neutrality tag. It might still be the case, but this talk page makes it impossible to pinpoint what is disputed because there are a lot of unsigned and undated comments. It looks fairly neutral, albeit stubby, to me. bobanny 18:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Aboriginal RCMP member who was negotiating

I remember reading a report about ten years ago of an aboriginal RCMP constable who was initially handling this incident before it was taken out of his hands and escalated by his superiors. Does anybody have any references for this? -RM

Information removed as NPOV

• Eight land mines were also used, at the same time as the Canadian government was campaigning internationally against the use of land mines.

• • I reinserted the bit about the land mines, without the ref to the anti-landmines treaty which though true is presented in a POV fashion. The reporting of the use of landmines is not POV. Censorship of factual events, though, IS.Skookum1 04:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • The landmine statement is unsourced, and therefore should be removed. Drakkenfyre (talk) 03:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't have access to Vancouver Sun/Vancouver Province archives, but even they (paid liars and hucksters though they be) reported on the land mines, although they left it ambiguous as to whose they were. I'll see if any of hte online sources mention the events, which included a land mine exploding under a vehicle; these are well-known events for people who were adults in BC at the time; it's really irritating to have someone refuse to believe they happened simply because the web record may have been "washed".....Skookum1 (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• "There is no point in more meetings, I will not negotiate with renegades. There is only one issue here: law and order. There will be no deals, no talk about land ownership. It is not about land. They can give themselves up to the police for protection or face the consequences. The police will use whatever force is necessary to dislodge them." Ujjal Dosanjh, British Columbia Attorney General

• • This is not POV but factual and part of the story of the crisis and should be reinserted. Skookum1 04:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• "Smear campaigns are our specialty.", Peter Montague, RCMP and Chief Media Relations Officer for BC Solicitor-General 1

• • This is a VERY famous quote from the crisis, even reported int eh VAncouer Sun, and is not POV content, but factual.Skookum1 04:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

And whoever you were that posted the above, please identify yourself with a sig ~~~~

Oh, it was you, Quill (I just looked at the history). I dispute that the above removals were NPOV; they were part of the story of the crisis and should not be omitted, other than the POV mention of the anti-landmines treaty; it could be included in the article that alternative media nad at least one politician (Svend Robinson IIRC) DID criticize the govenrment for the violation of the treaty principles. Or is including Svend's opinion in the same category as including Montague's boast about smear campaigns? They're all part of the story of the political crisis surrounding the standoff, hushed up though it was; or is anything outside the standoff itself POV to you? If only you were as strict on certain other topics....Skookum1 04:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't remove it, and would agree with you that it belongs it the article. I saw someone else remove it, but I couldn't find sources for the information. I just posted it here so the information wouldn't get lost, and hopefully someone could source it properly. I guess I should have explained that. Anyway, welcome back. I hope you had a good vacation. I have a bunch of questions to ask you, so I'll do that when I have time over the next couple days. - TheMightyQuill 22:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly a vacation; somewhere between a pilgrimage and an odyssey....I'll only be around for a little while (as in days); the Montague bit was even in the Vancouver Sun, and has been oft-repeated since; what its particular date is I'm not certain; Dossanjh's also.Skookum1 03:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Montague also deserves an article, also in relation to the Casinogate affair in which he was not-quite-indirectly involved (as a partner in one of the competing casinos to the Admiral's).Skookum1 03:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Lyall James

Some Natives chose to remain at Gustafsen Lake and continue to hold annual sun dances in defiance of threats of eviction by Lyall James, and to assert indigenous rights to the land.

The Vancouver alternative magazine Terminal City had detailed coverage of the confrontation described here as "threats of eviction by Lyall James". To whit, he and his cowboys, many also from Montana (as was James himself originally), rode in one the sundance campsite snapping bullwhips, firing guns into the air, and screaming "red niggers". I don't have a copy of know the date of the article, but I remember it all too well; similar copy appeared IIRC in The Georgia Straight. I suppose you'd consider this POV content as well?? Skookum1 04:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, re edit history note, we all forget to sign stuff sometimes; I was so busy signing each paragraph in the section above I forgot to do it for this one, which I'd written first.....what's yer verdict on the bits on Montague's and Dossanjh's statements - was that you that pulled them, or one of the two SPAs? IMO other comments like those from Bruce Clarke and Svend R. (see above) are parts of the story; as with Ledgegate/the Basi-Virk Trial, here in Wiki as BC Legislature Raids, there's more to the story than the standoff itself, namely the controversy swirling around it, and the media coverage (or lack thereof). IMO they're all part of the story. I haven't been "in the pit" this last while and won't have time to wage battle over all this stuff, esp. the Ledgegate thing which is still breaking news (haven't checked, but I think the full Sale-of-BC-Rail docs have now been released - ??). Gustfasen Lake, like Oka and other similar events, are places where the willingness of some in Canada to censor/rewrite public affairs can be put to a stop by Wikipedians; if we all dig in, that is. Would help to have a payroll behind me, as some SPAs might/seem to...but being on a payroll presumes an agenda, i.e. other than the agenda of truth. What's still shocking to me about this article is what's NOT in it....guess I'll look up Terminal City's website, if they have one, and see if they can source the dates of the reportage mentioned above.Skookum1 03:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

re SPAs on this page

Both User:Chillyfinger and User:Fiddleronvermouth are SPAs, as we might guess from their non-signing of their posts; they have ONLY "contributed" to this discussion and nowhere else in Wikipedia. Evidently flack artists, like on so many other controversy-pages.Skookum1 19:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

James Pitawanakwat should be separate article

The section on him should be branched off, plus the refs, to a separate bio article, as he's a different topic with other adventures than Gustafsen Lake. Maybe Wolverine, too, and others; even Lyall James could use a separate bio, maybe, but n this case it seems an entirely different topic-branch.Skookum1 (talk) 16:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Quick Question

Looking at the article I see it noted that the RCMP fired a large volume of rounds during the course of this siege and one of the native protesters was charged with using a firearm against an RCMP officer so presumably there was some number of bullets fired by the protesters as well.

What I am curious of is 'how' shots came to be fired? The article doesn't seem to detail any of these events where shots were fired either by RCMP or Native protestors and again I would presume that one side was firing at the other for some reason unless the RCMP were getting in target practice while they were out there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.184.18.186 (talk) 05:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gustafsen Lake standoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091208132049/http://webmaps.gov.bc.ca/imf5/imf.jsp?site=olc to http://webmaps.gov.bc.ca/imf5/imf.jsp?site=olc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC)