As Canadians watch events unfold down south regarding the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement and overall discussions about race, they pay lip service to these topics without looking inward. So here I am to point out the obvious.
Let’s begin with mass murder.
We begin with the First Nations people and Jeffrey Amherst. Amherst was a British Army officer who fought to conquer New France and was the first British Governor General of the territories (later Canada).
Smallpox was an infectious disease brought to the New World by European conquerors; since Indigenous people had not previously been exposed they were decimated by the disease when it spread in their communities. This applies from Canada on down to South America and everyone knows this.
Fewer know that Amherst tried to deliberately infect the Indigenous with small pox (clearly showing he knew the disease was deadly among them; no “herd immunity”) as one of many ways in which to “reduce them”.
This has been known for some time by authors and historians (see: Atlas of the North American Indian, 1985 & The Conspiracy of Pontiac and the Indian War after the Conquest of Canada; 1886).
Francis Parkman, the historian who wrote The Conspiracy of Pontiac quotes in his book:
“Could it not be contrived to send the Small Pox among those disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them.”Vol. II, p.39 (6th edition)
Amherst’s attempts to kill via small pox have been known for quite some time among Indigenous people (and apparently a few others), but was denied at large by “polite white society” as some type of urban myth.
Researchers had to go and and find evidence of the letters and writings in microfilm. (The papers had been microfilmed as part of the British Manuscripts Project in the 1940s.) The research was done on a promise to Floyd Red Crow Westerman of the Dakota Nation who wanted to uncover legitimate evidence of the crime.
The quote from the book has not yet been found in microfilm, but others have:
P.S. You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians by means of Blankets, as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your Scheme for Hunting them Down by Dogs could take Effect, but England is at too great a Distance to think of that at present.Microfilm reel 34/41, item 114. (Letter image)
This quote was a response from his subordinate lieutenant colonel Henry Bouquet:
“P.S. I will try to inocculate [sic] the Indians by means of Blankets that may fall in their hands, taking care however not to get the disease myself. As it is pity to oppose good men against them..”Microfilm reel 34/40, item 305. (Letter image)
The letters clearly prove a conspiracy among at least some in the British Army to use biological warfare to assist in reducing or exterminating Indigenous nations.
The most basic definition of genocide:
“the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.”
Now it could be argued Amherst and his co-conspirators were referring to specific tribes they were in conflict with. However, it shows little concern for Indigenous peoples as a whole, when the disease could easily spread between tribes, killing them off while Europeans remained less exposed.
Murder through biological warfare had been known for some time, yet most liked to insist there was “no proof”, or that intent hadn’t been there – it was an accident later attributed to ill intention.
The fact letters have been found after hundreds of years and describe the will to murder through smallpox is astonishing, when you take into account the time elapsed, the poor system for correspondence, the storage of the letters and so on. If this small trace exists and these men had the hubris to put their designs to paper, one can only guess at the actual attitudes and behavior of the time.
And even if you remain unconvinced about Amherst, we move on to a more recent time with more damning record evidence.
Most Canadians now know that many children in the residential schools died of tuberculosis. But they wave off the idea these children were intentionally killed, and again describe the incident as accidental or perhaps a bit of ‘well-intentioned’ neglect.
A national journalist attempting to be the “voice of reason” against allegations of murder, wrote this:
“There were front-page stories a century ago, too. In 1897, senior Indian Affairs officials started blowing the whistle on the cavernous, shoddily-built, creaking institutions, pointing out that you couldn’t have built more efficient incubation vectors for contagious disease, and for mass death, if you tried.
Back then, P.H. Bryce, the Indian department’s chief medical officer, conducted a study of 1,500 children interned in 15 different Indian residential schools across Canada. He found that one in four of the children never made it out alive. A separate study of the Kuper Island school found that four of every 10 children sent there over a 25-year period never survived to graduate.
This is sufficiently damning. It is not necessary to assert, as Annett does, that infectious diseases were deliberately employed as part of a plot to “cull” Canada’s aboriginal population. Everybody knows what happened. It is no secret, and is not even a secret that there are mass graves.”The Tyee: Truth and Native Abuse, 2008
Even while defending the Canadian government on public record, this journalist admits that senior Indian Affairs officials were publicly blowing the whistle: “you couldn’t have built more efficient incubation vectors for contagious disease, and for mass death, if you tried.“
He also admits the children were dying en masse; that the issue had been studied and was known in government, nothing was done, and it’s no secret currently there are “mass graves”. (The cognitive dissonance is stunning.)
Conditions were such that officials felt the need to “whistle blow”, which subsequently is damning evidence against the Canadian public – many of whom were aware as well.
Imagine this scenario: the Chinese come and take over Canada; they place all the children in mandatory “re-education” schools and COVID-19 mutates into a deadly strain which children begin to catch. In the schools, the children begin dying at an alarming rate: from a quarter of students to half or more. The Canadian government begs the Chinese to allow the children to stay home since the schools are killing them. Yet the Chinese refuse, claiming ‘education’ precedes the need for safety since the disease is commonplace.
Is this not the willful murder of children? The Canadian government still clings to the narrative it tried to help ‘civilize a savage people’, and in doing so ‘accidentally’ killed off a large amount through incompetence or at worst, neglect.
But if you know you are killing children – is it not murder? If you know half the children will die by attending school and you keep them there, is it not murder? When the chief medical officer for Indian Affairs says the conditions are encouraging disease spread and will kill children – and you sit by indifferently – is it not murder? Of course when you know the outcome there can be no excuses.
They didn’t need to put their deeds onto paper like Jeffrey Amherst, they didn’t need to specify in writing – their deeds speak for themselves when taken into context.
If my coworker wanted to put a hit out on his wife and hired a hit man, and I did nothing, I would still be culpable because I knew the outcome and took no action.
Dr. Bryce, an employee of the Canadian government and Indian Affairs, wrote a book called The Story of A National Crime. It was not called the National Mistake or the National Accident – he called it a CRIME.
Crime: “an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law.“
Duncan Campbell Scott, superintendent of Indian Affairs, brushed off years of Dr. Bryce’s warnings, reports, studies and ultimately his book.
“It is readily acknowledged that Indian children lose their natural resistance to illness by habituating so closely in the residential schools, and that they die at a much higher rate than in their villages. But this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards a final solution of our Indian Problem.”Department of Indian Affairs Superintendent D.C. Scott to B.C. Indian Agent-General Major D. McKay, DIA Archives, RG 1-Series 12 April 1910
Before I listen to anything the government has to say about the United States and its past, history, or issues, I would like to have the following:
An acknowledgement that Canada’s Governor General Jeffrey Amherst attempted to kill off Indigenous nations with small pox in order to obtain and keep Canadian land.
Acknowledgement of the innocent Indigenous girl slaves “who worked as household help and served as concubines for the French. They were often hardly ten years old. Their average age at death was 17 years.”
An acknowledgement that Canada’s chief medical officer in the 1900s wrote a book claiming the government of Canada was committing a crime.
Acknowledgement that the Canadian government participated in the willful murder of children through both action and omission, ultimately knowing the outcome but pursuing their agenda despite the cost of life.
An acknowledgement by the Canadian government that it continues to protect the abusers of children in residential schools, and puts money before the pursuit of justice.
An acknowledgement by the Canadian government that by protecting the perpetrators of child abuse, and by not admitting to past crimes of murder, it has attempted to protect itself from financial litigation and legal accountability.
Perhaps then I will care about your thoughts on America.
I understand what the journalist is trying to convey: that this was not some diabolical scheme etched in the halls of power on par with the Wannsee conference.
There is no need to assert “that infectious diseases were deliberately employed as part of a plot to “cull” Canada’s aboriginal population.” When you are killing children and know your actions are killing them, but it does not “justify a change in policy” I would argue that is indeed “culling the population”. These children were in the schools and dying because they were not white. One can speak of Canada’s “polite, quiet” way of killing the Indigenous, and levels of intent, but the outcome and facts remain the same: the government chose to kill children to fulfill its agenda.
CULLING according to the Cambridge dictionary:
When people cull animals, they kill them, especially the weaker members of a particular group of them, in order to reduce or limit their number.