CANADAS THEFT, GENOCIDE and DEATH by LEGISLATURE and U.N.

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

And The TWO ROW WAMPUM

The Canadian government acknowledges the Two Row and the Covenant Chain in public demonstrations however, they deny it on paper as though no such treaties have ever existed with the British Crown.

During our research within the past 5 years, it is obvious to us as Canadians that the Two Row Treaties among the Nations have existed since time immemorial. So it is only common sense that the Haudenosaunee given their Great Law teachings and prophecies, would have had incorporated it with all who came across their path and especially with the new comers.
So no matter how much the Canadian Government denies the Two Row Treatys existence, common sense dictates otherwise. Furthermore, the Two Row also validates why the Haudenosaunee have always maintained that they were allies to the Crown and were not to be placed under the Indian act which makes perfect sense in regards to their many claims over these issues in establishing and maintaining their Sovereignty.

Stephen Harper is Dismantling Canadian Sovereignty for Globalism! Stephen Harper at a news conference in Toronto during the G20 summit in 2011 said during that interview about our Countrys loss of Sovereignty : - " I know some people don't like it. It is a loss of national sovereignty, but it is reality." - "As I constantly remind Canadians, there isnt really a Canadian economy anymore. It is a global economy. NOTE: One of the reasons we no longer have a Canadian economy is largely due to the privatization of our natural resources to foreign companies.

Let the lies, deceit and illusions begin! But first What is Global Governance?
--- According to the United Nations GLOBAL GOVERNANCE is: Governance is not governmentit is the framework of rules, institutions and practices that set limits on the behaviour of individuals, organizations and companies.

In todays integrating world there is clear need for global governance for the good of society, economy and environment.
And a form of global governance is indeed emerging but the imbalances in the process are cause for concern.

This is where the trap is cast through the United Nations; as the Globalization - New world order Plan was the ultimate goal in the creation of the United Nations!

The United Nations pg. 34 http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_1999_EN.pdf

UN GLOBALIZATION STRATEGY PROBLEM, REACTION, SOLUTION is their MOTO

Mind control and manipulation of the masses at its best.

1.

Create the problem 2. Get a reaction

3. Offer the solution

Careful what you wish for or you may get more than you bargained for!

Why should the Two Row Wampum Treaty be important to all Peoples of North America now that Globalization is in effect? Although there are many reasons why the Two Row Wampum should be important to everyone, two of the most important reasons are due to the facts that our sovereignty as an independent country is undergoing an assault as well as the final extermination of the true Allodial Title Sovereignty of the Original Peoples of Turtle Island within both Canada and the United States under the guise of globalization. Effects of Globalization: 1. Canadas loss of Sovereignty as a country 2. Loss of Indigenous Allodial Title Sovereignty

The Two Row Wampum can help stop globalization, enforce decolonization and reset the path of all peoples within Canada.

These same problems are happening world wide However here in Canada, we can stop the Canadian Government of its legislated First Nations assimilation process, their rape of the natural resources, including the stopping of Globalization in its track if we are wise enough to see through the lies and deceit of our Government and the United Nations by enforcing the implementation of a Two Row Wampum Living Constitution.

The bottom Line is that we as Canadian citizens and the Indigenous First Nations in Canada have two choices : 1. 2. ACCEPT the U.N. One World Government - GLOBALIZATION or ; To Decolonize Canada together within the Two Row Wampum Treaty by creating a new Canadian and First Nations Two Row Wampum Living Constitution within a true direct democracy as it was intended through the Great Law - White Roots of Peace.

The Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPPA)

Either way, we need to decolonize the system or accept the U.N. Corporate Globalization which is leaving all Canadian citizens and First Nations with no power, no say in this country. A great example: The Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPPA) 31 yr. contract Canadians can now be sued if we interfere with Chinas ability to generate funds for its investors.

How did the Canadian MPs past and present steal Canada from the Original Peoples, lied to and manipulated them and Canadians for centuries? ... Frank J. Tough explains it well.

While the Government of Canada enforced attempts of assimilation and cultural genocide such as: - Gradual Civilization Act of 1857 and the Gradual Enfranchisement Act of 1869 and in 1876, these acts were consolidated as the Indian Act. Quote: "The great aim of our legislation has been to do away with the tribal system and assimilate the Indian people in all respects with the other inhabitants of the Dominion as speedily as they are fit to change. - John A Macdonald, 1887

Judy Sackaney v. CRA Duncan Campbell Scott, Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, 1920 Quote: Our object is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic, and there is no Indian question, and no Indian department. 1. Establishing Nationwide Indian Residential Schools 2. the process of relocating Indians on a reserve, and the sole purpose of that effect is to get rid of the Indians forcing us to carry your forms of identification 3. attempting to frame the land claims process in such a way as to try to extinguish our land and treaty rights and even to try to turn Nations into nothing more than tribes, we continue to exist as a separate Nations outside of Canada. And finally there is the question of morality, both within Canada and on the International stage by creating a regulation such as the Indian Act, an act respecting Indians , which it does not respect for who I am, evolving with the changes of time. The Indian Act is the most racial and discriminating act of its kind in the world. -

THE FORGOTTEN CONSTITUTION: THE NATURAL RESOURCES TRANSFER AGREEMENTS AND INDIAN LIVELIHOOD RIGHTS, CA. 1925-1933 By FRANK J. TOUGH

FYI : This act is 3 pages long Not found in the BNA Acts and statutes 1867-1962

Natural Resources Transfer Agreement - NRTA A provision for Indian hunting, fishing, and trapping rights stemming from the 1930 transfer of natural resources from the Dominion of Canada to the Provinces of Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan has been an enduring legal controversy. Most recently, in R. v. Blais,(3) the supreme Court of Canada had to contend with a Mtis hunting right defense based on the assertion that the Mtis were Indians for the purpose of para. 12 of the Manitoba Natural Resources Agreement. (4) The Court dismissed the appeal and, most interestingly, repeatedly held that the analysis of the right "must be anchored' in the historical context of the provision (5) Not only has the legal system not encountered a grounded historical analysis in respect of the effect of the Natural Resources Transfer Agreement" on treaty rights, but how the requirement of developing an historical analysis will prove to be something of a task to those trained to find meaning by restricting context .

The wording of this paragraph of the NRTA is often cited by courts and legal academic literature mechanically and completely without historical depth when addressing treaty rights in the Prairie Provinces:

12. [13] In order to secure to the Indians of the Province the continuance of the supply of game and fish for their support and subsistence. Canada agrees that the laws respecting game, in force in the Province from time to time shall apply to the Indians within the boundaries thereof, provided, however, that the said Indians shall have the right, which the Province hereby assures to them, of hunting, trapping and fishing game and fish for food at all seasons of the year on all unoccupied Crown lands and on any other lands to which the said Indians may have a right of access. (7)

Considerable efforts have gone into explaining what this provision really means and what sort of legal protection it affords, largely unaided by the records that created the provision in the first place. However, until Blais, little or no consideration had been given to the plain and simple meaning of the words "Indians of the Province." As this article will demonstrate, some rather sophisticated legal reasoning has been constructed upon historically inaccurate conjectures. The definition that was recently "adopted" in Blais conflicts with the courts earlier interpretations of the right. Today, the NRTA is largely remembered because of treaty rights litigation. In point of fact, in 1930, Indian livelihood was only one issue involved in the transfer of vast lands with natural resources and the compensation to the provinces from the federal government for the loss of enjoyment of those lands and resources. The Preamble to the Alberta Agreement scheduled with the Alberta Natural Resources Act, 1930 identified the purpose: "And Whereas it is desirable that the Province should be placed in a position of equality with the other provinces of Confederation with respect to the administration and control of its natural resources. (8)

Primary historical research reveals that serious consideration was given to protecting several Indian interests involved in the transfer and that the records of negotiations indicate that the wording of the paragraph that would become the Indian livelihood right was not a static concept. While the transfer of resources entailed a wide range of trusts and obligations concerning resource use and land tenure, the general constitutional protection for these rights indicates a process that is very relevant to contemporary Aboriginal rights. It should be stated at the outset that the Indian livelihood provision of the NRTA is a constitutional right; it nevertheless has been given a series of meanings by the courts. The final wording of para, 12 is intricate and complex, but since it arose from a process that amended the Constitution, it provides some sort of constitutional protection for Indian livelihood. Thus, in the Prairie Provinces, the legacy of expressed constitutional protection for the concept of Indian rights does not begin, as is often assumed, in 1982.

Not only have the Indian livelihood rights of the NRTA been interpreted legally without the benefit of considering the records that document the. intentions of the drafters or the historical political context in which this amendment to the BNA Act" developed; also become snarled with the prairie Indian treaties. (10) The pre-existing treaty livelihood rights are thought to have been altered by the NRTA.

As a consequence, several unsound assumptions have been made about this aspect of our constitution which not only lack empirical support, but are also largely contradicted by historical evidence.
Another common operative assumption, held especially by advocates, is that are no archival records concerning the NRTA or that such records cannot inform the courts of what the drafters of this major constitutional amendment were considering when dealing with Indian interests in the land

Enquiry into the surrounding circumstances in which the BNA Act was amended in 1930 has lagged far behind the understandings that courts have given para. 12. Devoid of historical facts, efforts to link treaty hunting, trapping, and fishing rights with para. 12 of the NRTA becoming increasingly convoluted and, with each subsequent decision, further removed from the actual processes that devised a constitutionally protected Indian livelihood right. Such criticisms are tempered by the fact that lawyers and judges are handicapped by the absence of published historical literature .on the political developments that shaped the transfer of resources. (11) Given that over several decades, prime ministers and premiers, cabinet ministers, senior officials all seemed to have expended as much energy at working out this transfer the of lands and resources as did the "Fathers of Confederation" at fashioning the original BNA Act in 1867, (12) the absence of serious academic analysis of the Constitution Act, 1930 points to a major deficiency in our national history (13) Similarly, surveys of Aboriginal rights offer few insights on the NRTA.

In Native Law, Jack Woodward provided a clear explanation of aspects of the hunting provision by reviewing jurisprudence on such issues as the failure of provincial governments to limit the agreement and the right of access.

The key as to how the Canadian Government stole Canadas unoccupied lands from the Original Peoples of Canada is within this text:
Woodward succinctly explained the Court's interpretation of para. 12 of the NRTA as entailing a treaty right: The agreements effectively merged and consolidated the treaty rights of Indians in the area and restricted the power of provinces to regulate the Indians' right to hunt for food. This brought about two important differences in the rights themselves. Under the treaties, hunting rights were general: under the agreements, hunting has been restricted to hunting for food. Under treaties, hunting rights were restricted to the tract of the land surrendered by the treaty: under the agreements hunting rights were expanded to the whole area of the prairie provinces. (14)

As Woodward and others have reported, courts have created the view that the drafters of the NRTA intended to merge and consolidate treaty hunting rights in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. According to this analysis, the right to hunt has been extended beyond specific treaty territory boundaries. Specifically, the view that the NRTA was intended to merge and consolidate treaty rights was extended by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Horseman. (15) In the Court's judgment, original commercial treaty rights had been exchanged for larger subsistence hunting rights by means of a substantial quid pro quo. This finding was confirmed in R. v. Badger. (16) Intellectual deference to these decisions has meant that the deliberate modification in 1929 of a treaty is-regarded as an historical fact.

FRANK J. TOUGH

So while these things have happened, special attention also needs to be given to the years 1919 - 1935 as these were the most crucial years of the Coup DEtat committed against the First Nations in Canada and to the Canadian peoples. It was during these times that the Imperial Crown was removed from Canadian Law jurisdiction and turned into the Crown Corporation of Canada. A new constitution should have been agreed upon by everyone in Canada. Canadians and the First Nations should have been at the tables along with the Imperial Crown and our Government officials. However, this was denied and hidden from all and so, the Canadian Government Illusion begins

DNA - Research Conclusion:

Given this information and other considerations and of the constant evidence of corruption within our parliament for the last two centuries, it is of my opinion and conclusion which is so blatantly obvious to anyone researching deep enough to see that; the theft of native lands in Canada was also done by extending hunting and fishing treaty rights to Indians within the entire province instead of only being within the surrendered territories. (The unoccupied lands in each province across Canada were already the Indians land to begin with to do as they pleased and not just to fish and hunt.) Thus, making these illegal changes gives the impression/assumption to the common person that the Indians gave away all of their lands and only have their reserve lands and only have hunting and fishing rights off reserve. Common sense dictates that the thefts of native lands were stolen by ways of making changes to legislation over and over and re-writing the texts by changing words here and there, to have everyone eventually believe that the Indians had agreed to surrender the lands in all of the provinces and only kept their hunting and fishing rights in exchange for education and healthcare among a few other things depending on their treaty negotiations.

It is also obvious that the intention of the Indians was to keep their hunting and fishing rights within the surrendered lands to the crown as they believed and have always maintained to this day that they have never surrendered all lands within their traditional territories across Canada other than those lands they have surrendered to the Crown conditional upon their keeping their hunting and fishing rights upon those lands. All other unoccupied lands were always the intent that it was to remain theirs within treaty negotiations. As Canadian citizens, it is up to us to take responsibility to make the Canadian government and the courts accountable to the atrocities done to our First Nations Peoples in our names. We must further assist in educating the Canadian population to the real truths of our history and to supply the remedy so that all Canadians and First nations peoples can finally right the wrongs of the Canadian Government and of our pitiful justice system.

As conscious Canadians, we should and must support a complete First Nation Political Decolonization and to also decolonize ourselves and our system from the colonial, paternal fraudulent relationship with the Crown Corporation of Canada who have continuously mislead us and the FN before it is too late given that our past and present politicians have and are negotiating away Canadas and the First Nations Sovereignty and all of our RIGHTS in exchange for GLOBALIZATION through the United Nations World Governance A.K.A. The New World Order (NWO.) by their own words. NL

As a Canadian Citizen, I am ashamed of this Countrys history and politicians and what we as Canadians have allowed to happen to the true indigenous peoples of North America, Turtle Island. The Original Peoples of this land. This is why many of us believe that given our Governments corruption, we must educate the peoples of Canada; enforce referendums, remove through direct democracy final decision making authority in all levels of Canadian Governance, and to finally politically decolonize this corrupted system and of ourselves by working alongside the First Nations of Canada within the framework and honor of the TWO ROW WAMPUM TREATY that Canada leadership has always refused to respect. Together, we can create a new Canadian constitution with an indigenous vision perhaps named: The TWO ROW WAMPUM LIVING CONSTITUTION for all to live by and honor and to further help stop an out of control globalization scheme and theft of the planets natural resources.

REMEDY SOLUTION 1. First Nations International Political Decolonization Proclamation Removal of Paternal relationship with the Crown of Canada 2. First Nations Decolonization referendums Canadian citizen (colonies) Decolonization referendums - Governance and Constitution rebuilding 3. Joining together in complete partnership with First Nations to create a new TWO ROW WAMPUM Living Constitution

STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION

So what will we as Peoples of Canada do? Accept U.N. Globalization, the loss of indigenous and national sovereignty, and to be dictated to by corporations and loose access to our natural resources or Stand up side by side with the Indigenous nations to stop Globalization and create a new Canada that we can all be proud of? Thank you for your time. For more information, please visit our Decolonize North America website.

CONTACT : Nicole Lebrasseur Tel: 519-774-0850 www.decolonizenorthamerica.org Email: info@decolonizenorthamerica.org

decolonizeus@ youtube

FRANK J. TOUGH