The Black Rod

The origin of the Usher of the Black Rod goes back to early fourteenth century England . Today, with no royal duties to perform, the Usher knocks on the doors of the House of Commons with the Black Rod at the start of Parliament to summon the members. The rod is a symbol for the authority of debate in the upper house. We of The Black Rod have adopted the symbol to knock some sense and the right questions into the heads of Legislators, pundits, and other opinion makers.

Name:
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

We are citizen journalists in Winnipeg. When not breaking exclusive stories, we analyze news coverage by the mainstream media and highlight bias, ignorance, incompetence, flawed logic, missed angles and, where warranted, good work. We serve as the only overall news monitors in the province of Manitoba. We do the same with politicians (who require even more monitoring.) EMAIL: black_rod_usher@yahoo.com

Friday, November 18, 2016

The Craig McDougall inquest is being deliberately botched. What are they hiding?


Is the inquest into the police shooting death of Craig McDougall being deliberately botched?
By all the evidence, the answer is "Hell, yeah."

And if that's the case, the obvious question is 'why?'

The obvious answer is because they're hiding something. Something big. Hiding something important that they don't want the public to find out.

A week and a half into the inquest, we know next to nothing about what happened that early morning Aug. 8, 2008, when a policeman pumped three bullets into McDougall within two minutes of arriving at 788 Simcoe Street.  He fired four shots but one missed and, wouldn't you know it, went who knows where?  

Oh, and in those two minutes or less, someone shot two taser rounds at McDougall, one of which stuck in his stomach and should have left him quivering helplessly on the ground.  Or it did and we don't know.

The inquest has called a bunch of witnesses, none of whom saw the shooting, and most of whom weren't even there when it happened.

The shooter, Curtis Beyak, who should have been the first witness to testify, is scheduled to give his account on Monday, November 21. 

 Guess what else is happening on Monday, November, 21.  

The Throne Speech!

So the most important witness at the inquest has been scheduled to appear on the one day when virtually the entire press corp will be diverted to another story, and even if some reporter shows up, his or her story will be given the least space and attention as possible.

Coincidence?

Not when you realize that the parade of useless witnesses to date is obviously intended to dilute press interest in the inquest until no reporters or at most, the bored CBC reporter alone, attends.

This simply fits the pattern of cover-up that's carpetted the shooting from day one.

The alleged investigation of the death of Craig McDougall at the hands of police took TWO YEARS AND THREE MONTHS to complete and be sent to the Ontario Provincial Police for review,  and then only after the chief medical examiner sent two emails to provincial officials, a year apart, asking "where's the report?" 

The OPP then took more than another year (14 months to be exact) to send it back. Maybe they're slow readers in Ontario.

The Manitoba government then sat on it for two more months before passing it over to the Manitoba Prosecution Service, emphasis on the word Prosecution.

They were worried about something in the report, so they sent it to an "outside counsel", name unknown, to advise them whether charges could be supported. That lawyer said there wasn't enough evidence to get a conviction, so that's what they informed McDougall's family and the medical examiner, who had by then been waiting more than FOUR YEARS to call an inquest that's mandatory whenever someone is killed by police.

Guess what? It took another eight months before the inquest was called, and almost EIGHT YEARS to the day that McDougall was shot for its scheduled start. And then it was delayed another three months for good measure.

How can a mandatory inquest be sidetracked for eight years? Only with a lot of help from a lot of inside sources.

So, what have we learned from the inquest so far?

Start with the incredible double standard in how police treat cops who shoot Indians and Indians who manage to avoid being shot by cops.

 The officer who shot McDougall and two others who were present were whisked to the police station where they were comforted and soothed to reduce any trauma they might experience.

 Instead of being asked to immediately write down what happened while it was fresh in their minds, they were instead advised they had the, ahem, right to speak to trauma councillors and their union rep first, and to take as much time as they wanted before telling what transpired the morning they confronted McDougall. 

 They eventually showed up three days later to give unsworn statements.

By sharp contrast, Craig McDougall's father, Brian McDougall, was tackled as he tried to get to his dying son to comfort him. His face was ground into the dirt by a police officer, his knee crushing Brian McDougall's neck until he was handcuffed and hauled to a police cruiser car. 

He, too, was driven to the police station where he was put in a locked room and the handcuffs were removed---after 45 minutes.

Nobody comforted him or worried about his trauma at seeing his son's last moments alive
He wasn't given the option of coming back another day to give a statement. He was locked up for hours, then questioned right then and there, and hours later a videotaped statement was taken.  

His son was pronounced dead less than 90 minutes after being shot, but that information was withheld from his father until  Brian McDougall had been in custody for six-and-a-half hours. 

Robert Bell, now retired, then a sergeant and  head of the homicide unit, was in charge of the investigation of the shooting.   He was questioned about the treatment given to Brian McDougall and other witnesses. 

"Had they asked to leave, certainly, they would be (allowed). They’re not under arrest," Bell said.

A gargantuan falsehood.  

The idea that someone in a locked interview room could somehow just say he was leaving and might be back is so preposterous that it destroys any credibility that Bell might have.  Which is damning, since it was Bell who determined the shooting of Craig McDougall was justified.

 If he's prepared to lie about something so obviously false, what else is he prepared to lie about?

Almost two weeks into the inquest and we know so little, other than how far police will go to twist the truth.   The family of Craig McDougall hired a private detective, Bob Norton, a former RCMP inspector, to do his own report into the shooting. 

 Here, scalped from an APTN story of May 5, 2015, are excerpts of Norton's investigation:

- McDougall lived at 788 Simcoe St. with his dad Brian McDougall.

- Brian returned home from a local bar at about 2:30 a.m.

- People were having a few beers and about 45 minutes later an argument breaks outs forcing Brian to tell everyone to leave.

- He also tells Craig to leave and not come home until he’s sober.

- Craig is then seen in the lane behind the residence upset and arguing with people. One witness recalled Craig saying he wanted to kill himself.

- Shortly after three females leave the back lane and Craig follows them onto Notre Dame Avenue. They allege he assaults them, pulling one of the females to the ground. Witnesses said he was yelling and screaming but didn’t know why.

- The girls flag down a truck and the driver calls 911.

- Craig returns home, shirtless, talking on his cellphone. He was calling his girlfriend.

- The three females tell police Craig assaulted them and give officers his home address. 

- While on the phone with his girlfriend police then show up at the house at about 5 a.m. and the girlfriend hears a female officer say “drop the knife”. Then she hears a male officer yell “drop the damn knife”. 
- She then hears four gunshots followed by a voice saying “man down, man down.”

- Craig’s brother Johnny McDougall is at the house too and remembered seeing six officers outside and recalled hearing an officer say “He’s got a weapon. Put that knife down.”

- Johnny saw two officers with their guns drawn. It’s dark out with the scene lit only by a street light across the street.

- He said Craig took a few steps towards police then they started shooting and he fell on his back. He said police were on the sidewalk and Craig was in the yard. Between them was a four-foot fence.

- Police then handcuffed Brian, who was trying to get to his son. They also handcuff Johnny and a woman. 
- An ambulance doesn’t arrive within the 20 minutes following the shots and until police took Brian, Johnny and the woman away for questioning.

A total of five witnesses told Norton they never saw Craig with a knife in the period leading up to the shooting.

It’s not known where Craig would have gotten the knife because he never entered the house and it was too big to fit in a pocket.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, September 15, 2016

Searching for Christine Wood. Will Winnipeg Police feel the heat?


The Winnipeg Police force has managed to stay under the radar of the national news organizations for over three weeks now, but once their luck runs out the results will be incendiary.

How Winnipeg police conduct a missing persons investigation into the disappearance of Christine Wood will become the test case for the recently announced Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women Inquiry. 


Winnipeg will be the stand-in for all police departments across Canada in similar investigations. And so far, the example is not good.

Here's where we would normally give the background to the case. The known facts.  Except that the "known facts" in the disappearance of Christine Wood keep changing from week to week. And the police have been no help in keeping the public informed. In fact, they're partly responsible for the confusion.


Nevertheless, here's what we know culled from various news accounts.


* 21-year-old Christine Wood was in Winnipeg with her parents to accompany a relative who had a medical appointment. They were staying at the Comfort Inn, Sargent Avenue and Berry Street. 


* On Friday, Aug. 19, she was getting ready to go out in the evening. Her parents left her at the hotel as they went to a nearby store.  When they came back, about 9:30 p.m., their daughter was gone.  


* The next day, when she hadn't returned, they became concerned, given that they were all supposed to fly home to the Oxford House reserve on Sunday, Aug. 21.

* The Woods called the police for help. They were told that Christine was an adult, she could come and go as she pleased, and what did they expect the poice to do?  The answer is not surprising, given that up to 5000 people are reported missing to Winnipeg police every year.


Still, a week after Christine Wood was last seen by her parents, the police issued a missing person alert --- which could hardly have been skimpier. It had her picture, a brief description of her and what she might be wearing, And the alert said she was last seen in downtown Winnipeg.


Now this was about as useless as you can imagine. Police were asking if anyone could remember seeing  a cute young woman a week earlier. 


Well,  yeah, maybe. Somewhere downtown.  Where?  

The official description of "downtown" extends from the University of Winnipeg east to the Forks and north to Higgins and Main.

That would be bad enough, but a week after that,  the Canadian Centre for Child Protection issued a news release saying Christine Wood was last seen in the Polo Park area. 


That's nowhere near "downtown." So why did the police say she was seen downtown?

Was it a ruse to trick a suspect? If it was, was the family told?  Because if the police issued false information deliberately, they've done immense damage to the trust relationship between the authorities and a grieving family and the police and the greater public. And once destroyed, trust never returns.


So where was Christine Wood last seen?  Is there no hotel security camera footage of her leaving her hotel room, in the hotel lobby, walking into the hotel parking lot?  


How did she get to Polo Park? By bus? By cab?  The mall would have been closed by the time she left the hotel, so where in the "area" was she seen? With anybody? 

These are just natural questions. Has the police department satisfied the family with answers? Will they, as is their habit, release video of her sometime in the future long after it would be of any help jogging anyone's memory?

One news story mentioned that her husband joined her in Winnipeg two days after she and her parents arrived.  There's been no further mention of the husband. 


She obviously wasn't going out with him that Friday night? She didn't tell her parents she was meeting him somewhere. Her parents have been the public voices calling for help in finding her.  Where is he? The spouse is always the prime suspect in a disappearance. Does he have a big police target on his back?

The public alert states "Police are concerned for WOOD’s well-being..." Is that simply because she hasn't been heard from? Or do police have information they're holding back, which seems more likely.  The police department always knows more than it tells. Do they know something sinister about her disappearance?


What do we know about her?  The Canadian Centre for Child Protection has provided more detail than the police department. 


It said Christine is “familiar with Winnipeg, having attended the University of Winnipeg this past year. Christine ... is known to frequent the Osborne Village."  So she's no stranger to the city. But her acquaintances are another matter.

Her mother says she immediately reached out to Christine's friends on social media to find out if they had heard from Christine. But nobody responded to her frantic pleas.  Now that's suspicious.


The M&M Inquiry can't reopen old cases, but it could put the spotlight on an ongoing case, with the Winnipeg Police smack dab in the middle.

Labels: ,

Thursday, September 01, 2016

The Canadian Museum for Human Rights enters death spiral, fueled by debt


Can supporters of The Canadian Museum for Human Rights handle the truth? 

* $80 million in debt with no hope of paying it off
* begging the federal government to raise its $21.7 million annual allowance by at least 50 percent  to buy more time
a report that seems to indicate the museum's fundraising arm can't collect $24 million, or almost one in four of the $151 million dollars the Friends of the CMHR boasts it has raised.

Last week the CMHR announced what should have been good news ---it settled its tax bill with the City of Winnipeg.  The museum owed $2.7 million  for this year's property taxes, much much less than the $5-to-$8 million they expected their taxes to be.

The federal government, which is ultimately on the hook for what's called "payments in lieu of taxes" for federal institutions like museums, paid the $2.7 million plus arrears of $6.7 million. It then put the total - $9.4M - on the CMHR's tab.

The museum is already $70 million in debt for the emergency funding they needed to open in 2014, two years late. The CMHR was flat broke and didn't have enough money to finish building the facility and paying for exhibits. 

The federal government "advanced" $35 million (interest free) with the alleged expectation that the government could get the money back by eventually reducing the annual funding it gives to the museum until they were even. 

Everybody knows that's camouflage and will never happen but everyone is pretending that's a real plan.

The museum also needed a loan of $35 million to meet its costs. The loan, from sources never identified, went to the Friends of the CMHR which doled it out to the museum while managing to keep secret the donors and terms.  But a loan carries interest cost.

Add the $9.4 million plus $70 million plus interest and you're touching $80 million in the red.  And that's not counting $10 million in operating funds  that the federal government let the museum spend on construction instead. It's never been made clear whether that $10 million has to be repaid or if the federal government just boosted their "contribution" to the cost of the museum by that amount.

The CMHR says it has squirreled away a few million dollars to pay part of the city tax tab. As for the rest, well...

The museum wants---needs---the federal government to swallow most of it. The deal is for the CMHR to have its annual funding reduced starting in 2018 to pay off the federal "advance."  But given that the CMHR is spending every nickel of the $21.7 million its receiving each year, that is impossible.  In fact, the museum wants more money, not less each and every year in the future.

Apart from getting the federal government to forgive the $35 million advance in $7 million increments, the museum wants  the city taxes paid, starting at $3 million  (including frontage fee) and rising per year. Oh, and it needs $3 million or so to replace the entire computer system, which has a useful life expectancy of only three years that's up, uh, next year.

Anyone who still thinks the Friends of the CMHR is supposed to cover these expenses by its fundraising is in for a sick surprise.

Charity Intelligence Canada is a charity watchdog. Its latest report on the Friends of the CMHR has some unsettling details.  

The Friends, which is a registered charity, spends 43 percent of its revenues on administrative costs and 18 percent of donations on fundraising costs.  Given that "revenues" is made up of donations plus interest, which last year was negative one thousand dollars, in reality 61 percent of the money donated to Friends goes to overhead.

And then there's this paragraph in the Ci report:
Note: Ci Charity Intelligence has used the restated 2014 financial statements in the charity’s F2015 audited financial statements. Ci has adjusted amortization and allowance for doubtful pledges receivable and gifts to the museum affecting expenses by ($4m) in F2016, by ($18.4m) in F2015, and by ($14.1m) in F2014. 
Given that the paragraph is written in a foreign language, auditorese, its hard to say what it really means.

Does it mean the museum has been counting money on its books that can't be collected?

There's been a $24 million writedown involving "doubtful pledges receivable" but it that just an accounting adjustment or a complete breakdown of fundraising?

Nevertheless, it does suggest why the CMHR's corporate reports for the past three years running have not been made public, and why no 2015-2016 annual report is MIA.

Labels: ,

Monday, July 25, 2016

Thanks for nothing, Devon "Mack Daddy" Clunis


Last week's release of the annual report on crime and disorder in the city put a lot of things in  a new perspective---starting with the surprise retirement of the police chief and ending with an abrasive member of the police board getting the hook.


Back in March, Police Chief Devon Clunis made a stunning announcement---he was quitting.  Only 52, he was retiring after 29 years as a cop. He had been in the top job barely 3 l/2 years, though, which is why people were so surprised he was anxious to leave. 
 
Anxious to leave. That's a polite way to say bolting for the exit.  

Clunis made a big noise when he was hired as police chief.  He was literally going to change the culture of policing, he declared.  Fighting crime was so yesterday, he sneered. He was going to mobilize entire communities, heal social ills, and --- wait for it --- eliminate the root causes of crime.

Well, he changed the mission statement, which is on Page One of the crime report next to his picture:

Our Mission: Build safe and healthy
communities across Winnipeg through
excellence in law enforcement and
leadership in crime prevention through
social development.

'Mission Accomplished,' Clunis said when leaving. Before leaving, actually, because his last day was July 7, two weeks before he would have had to sign the annual report card on the work of the Winnipeg Police Service---which carried a mark of F for Failure.

Total reported crimes up 7 percent. 
Break-ins up 19 percent. 
Violent crime up 6 percent. 
Robberies alone up 9 percent. 
There were even 339 assaults on police officers, almost one a day, up 25 percent from 2014.

Violent crimes by youth were up 7 percent; property crimes, 12 percent.

Winnipeg has relinquished the poisonous title of Murder Capital of Canada to Regina but carries the equally disgraceful title of Violent Crime Capital of the country. Given that most murders are not random and violent crime often is, it isn't much of a welcome change. The violent crime severity index for Winnipeg, which measures both the number and seriousness of offences, increased by five per cent in 2015.

Police spokesmen made pathetic attempts to amerliorate the damning police stats, starting with 'crime is up in cities across the country.'

NEWS FLASH:    We don't live in other cities!

Unless you're saying crime spreads from province to province like the swine flu virus then crime rates in other cities are NO EXCUSE.

The 2015 crime stats did not hatch the day before the annual report was released. They had circulated within police and government circles for weeks.  Chief Clunis knew what the stats said when he announced his retirement.  And new Premier Brian Pallister knew what they said when he replaced two NDP appointees on the Winnipeg police board with two of his own.

The Winnipeg press dutifully followed the NDP political narrative in reporting the police board changes, concentrating on the removal of Leslie Spillett
Spillett, you were told, was an aboriginal representative on the board and was being removed because, well, you know. (Hint, the Conservatives are racists.)
The only thing wrong with all those stories is the facts. Spillett is and was never an aboriginal representative except in her own mind. She was a representative of the Manitoba New Democratic Party as their appointee.  

She has never been elected by native people to represent native people in Winnipeg in any capacity. She is identified as an "aboriginal activist", which is not a real job since you need no skills, no training, no employer, and no followers, just a loud voice.


Angeline Ramkissoon, a retired inner-city school principal, was the other NDP appointee on the police board who was replaced. Her attitude to race based representation is diametrically opposite to Spillett's. The Winnipeg Free Press interviewed her, to the detriment of Leslie Spillett:


"Ramkissoon, who is of South Asian descent, came to Canada in 1967 from Trinidad, but says that’s not why she was appointed to the police board.
"Yes, I came from an ethnic background, but that was not my focus. I saw myself as an administrator before I saw myself as a minority..."


She not only had a real job (which made her a role model to other immigrants) but she refused to be pigeon-holed as an ethnic anything.

The lame press failed to do any research into what Spillett brought to the police board table

If they had, they would have easily turned up this 2012 interview with Winnipeg-based Geez magazine.
In an article headlined Do We Need The Cops, Spillett reveals her attitude towards the police. 


"In Canada the police have historically been part of the project of cultural genocide, she said." 


"She sees the western system of policing as culturally alien to an indigenous view." 


"The police are only one part of a colonial system designed to condition superiority and inferiority complexes into different segments of the population." 


"A few days of diversity training for cops won't do the trick, said Spillett. "If you have cancer, one chemo doesn't do the job." 


Remember, Leslie Spillett wasn't bringing this attitude to the Winnipeg police board as a representative of the Inner City, or the aboriginal residents of the city. 

She was representing the New Democratic Party of Manitoba.  Any wonder why she was shown the door.


The police board is currently searching for a new police chief.  

Unfortunately, they're not looking for a crime fighter. They want another social worker. 


The official ad for the job states that the "Chief of Police has a key and critical role in crime prevention through social development, community building, prevention strategies and proactive policing." 


"...the ideal Chief of Police will be a community-focused change agent..." 


"He or she will be cognizant of the structural barriers affecting many communities and therefore will support initiatives that will empower marginalized people and groups such as Indigenous people and newcomers." 


Oh, if you're waiting for something about experience with crime fighting, you can stop now. There's not a word.

Labels: , , ,

Thanks for nothing, Devon "Mack Daddy" Clunis


Last week's release of the annual report on crime and disorder in the city put a lot of things in  a new perspective---starting with the surprise retirement of the police chief and ending with an abrasive member of the police board getting the hook.

Back in March, Police Chief Devon Clunis made a stunning announcement---he was quitting.  Only 52, he was retiring after 29 years as a cop. He had been in the top job barely 3 l/2 years, though, which is why people were so surprised he was anxious to leave. 

Anxious to leave. That's a polite way to say bolting for the exit.  

Clunis made a big noise when he was hired as police chief.  He was literally going to change the culture of policing, he declared.  Fighting crime was so yesterday, he sneered. He was going to mobilize entire communities, heal social ills, and --- wait for it --- eliminate the root causes of crime.

Well, he changed the mission statement, which is on Page One of the crime report next to his picture:

Our Mission: Build safe and healthy
communities across Winnipeg through
excellence in law enforcement and
leadership in crime prevention through
social development.

'Mission Accomplished,' Clunis said when leaving. Before leaving, actually, because his last day was July 7, two weeks before he would have had to sign the annual report card on the work of the Winnipeg Police Service---which carried a mark of F for Failure.

Total reported crimes up 7 percent. 
Break-ins up 19 percent. 
Violent crime up 6 percent. 
Robberies alone up 9 percent. 
There were even 339 assaults on police officers, almost one a day, up 25 percent from 2014.

Violent crimes by youth were up 7 percent; property crimes, 12 percent.

Winnipeg has relinquished the poisonous title of Murder Capital of Canada to Regina but carries the equally disgraceful title of Violent Crime Capital of the country. Given that most murders are not random and violent crime often is, it isn't much of a welcome change. The violent crime severity index for Winnipeg, which measures both the number and seriousness of offences, increased by five per cent in 2015.

Police spokesmen made pathetic attempts to amerliorate the damning police stats, starting with 'crime is up in cities across the country.'

NEWS FLASH:    We don't live in other cities!

Unless you're saying crime spreads from province to province like the swine flu virus then crime rates in other cities are NO EXCUSE.

The 2015 crime stats did not hatch the day before the annual report was released. They had circulated within police and government circles for weeks.  Chief Clunis knew what the stats said when he announced his retirement.  And new Premier Brian Pallister knew what they said when he replaced two NDP appointees on the Winnipeg police board with two of his own.

The Winnipeg press dutifully followed the NDP political narrative in reporting the police board changes, concentrating on the removal of Leslie Spillett

Spillett, you were told, was an aboriginal representative on the board and was being removed because, well, you know. (Hint, the Conservatives are racists.)

The only thing wrong with all those stories is the facts. Spillett is and was never an aboriginal representative except in her own mind. She was a representative of the Manitoba New Democratic Party as their appointee. 

She has never been elected by native people to represent native people in Winnipeg in any capacity. She is identified as an "aboriginal activist", which is not a real job since you need no skills, no training, no employer, and no followers, just a loud voice.

Angeline Ramkissoon, a retired inner-city school principal, was the other NDP appointee on the police board who was replaced. Her attitude to race based representation is diametrically opposite to Spillett's. The Winnipeg Free Press interviewed her, to the detriment of Leslie Spillett:

"Ramkissoon, who is of South Asian descent, came to Canada in 1967 from Trinidad, but says that’s not why she was appointed to the police board.
"Yes, I came from an ethnic background, but that was not my focus. I saw myself as an administrator before I saw myself as a minority..."

She not only had a real job (which made her a role model to other immigrants) but she refused to be pigeon-holed as an ethnic anything.

The lame press failed to do any research into what Spillett brought to the police board table

If they had, they would have easily turned up this 2012 interview with Winnipeg-based Geez magazine.
In an article headlined Do We Need The Cops, Spillett reveals her attitude towards the police.
"In Canada the police have historically been part of the project of cultural genocide, she said."
"She sees the western system of policing as culturally alien to an indigenous view."
"The police are only one part of a colonial system designed to condition superiority and inferiority complexes into different segments of the population."
"A few days of diversity training for cops won't do the trick, said Spillett. "If you have cancer, one chemo doesn't do the job."
Remember, Leslie Spillett wasn't bringing this attitude to the Winnipeg police board as a representative of the Inner City, or the aboriginal residents of the city. She was representing the New Democratic Party of Manitoba.  Any wonder why she was shown the door.
The police board is currently searching for a new police chief.  

Unfortunately, they're not looking for a crime fighter. They want another social worker.
The official ad for the job states that the "Chief of Police has a key and critical role in crime prevention through social development, community building, prevention strategies and proactive policing."
"...the ideal Chief of Police will be a community-focused change agent..."
"He or she will be cognizant of the structural barriers affecting many communities and therefore will support initiatives that will empower marginalized people and groups such as Indigenous people and newcomers."
Oh, if you're waiting for something about experience with crime fighting, you can stop now. There's not a word.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

White doctors freak out pregnant aboriginals, says NDP MLA Nahanni Fontaine



A leopard can't change its spots and the NDP's Nahanni Fontaine can't change her bias against white people.

We got another taste of her advocacy for aboriginal apartheid in Hansard's official account of debate in the Legislature last week.


Fontaine, the NDP's parachute candidate in St. John's riding, was promoting the need for native midwives and doulas for pregnant "indigenous women" in  northern Manitoba (what about the rest of the expectant mothers? - ed.) when she --- oh, so casually --- started talking about how traumatic it was for these women to be in the care of  ... 


White medical professionals. 

"And so, as the minister knows, you know, indigenous women have to come to the south to have their babies. Often, they come without any supports. They are immersed in white space."


For people unfamiliar with the latest racial nomenclature, she explained:


"And so, you know, for women that are here alone, and that are immersed in white space, with white nurses, white doctors, it can be incredibly alienating and impact on the delivery of their baby."


Fontaine is no stranger to overt bias against whites.  


She was neck-deep in the controversy around Deputy Premier Eric Robinson's secret email to her demonstrating his contempt for "do-good white people". 

Their email exchange, which the NDP government tried to hide from exposure through the province's Freedom of Information Act, led to Robinson's declaration that he was allowed to be prejudiced against whites because of how they treated him in the past. 

That went over so well with voters that they threw Robinson out of office in the October election.


Fontaine also once promoted the boycott of white businesses, a history she refused to discuss when on her own campaign trail.


There's no word on whether the NDP's other star aboriginal candidate, Wab Kinew, supports aboriginal apartheid as he hasn't said anything on the issue one way or another. Neither has NDP interim leader Flor Marcilino, although she may just be confused.


Under apartheid in South Africa, Filipinos sometimes were and sometimes weren't considered "honorary whites" along with Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans.


But Wikipedia says South Africans of Filipino descent were classified as "black."

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to conceive.

Labels: , , , , ,