With a caption “Freda Huson (middle) was arrested alongside two other matriarchs, Brenda Michell (top right) and Dr. Karla Tait (bottom left) on unceded land earlier this year. (Illustration: Stefanie Wong)“
My first thoughts were just how young can kids be before they are called matriarchs, then again I admit they are no longer kids, but now ambitions but young adults, hardly people that have acquired wisdom by age or have earned that level of respect as elders do. They are not even leaders in their own Wet’suwet’en community.
So much for fact checking by a major circulation, Karla Tait is not qualified to practice in Canada, so publishing the her name with the prefix of Dr. is misrepresentation of the facts. The degree she acquired was obtained by going to some not so prestigious American collage that caters to aboriginal degrees. The bottom line is she is not really a doctor, adding that to her name is a false attribution.
Not to forget Karla Tait works for Northern Health as Regional Manager, Mental Wellness at First Nations Health Authority and not as a doctor. Karla Tait awarded herself as a doctor at the Unistoten Camp $400,000 in provincial government money. To date nobody has disclosed if the taxpayers money was returned to Northern Health.
See Unist’ot’en Healing Center has no doctor – Dr. Karla Tait is not qualified
Gloria George (Chief Smogelgem) and Theresa Tait-Day (Chief W’ihaliy’te) are the true leaders whom have launched human rights complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and BC Human Rights Commission against the federal and provincial ministers alleging gender discrimination. These three are the women who should be honored by Chatelaine.
The real award should go to Rita George Introducing Gulaxkan (The Bear That Sleeps All Winter Long) also known as Rita George as well as Molly Wickham gets correction from a highly respected Wet’suwet’en “Gidimt’en” matriarch. – Pt.1 and Gloria George Introducing “Smogelgem” of the Sun House Theresa Tait Day Theresa Tait Day, Hereditary W’ihaliy’te speaks out
The above links give you a good insights as to why we feel they should be the ones awarded, not some young adults mostly to lazy to work for a living, thus the career as professional protestors.
The Chatelaine was completely remiss in disclosing that it was these three women who fought for women’s rights and the advancement of women in the Wet’suwet’en society when they had been ostracized by male chiefs, who stripped women of their titles and replaced them with men. What the hell is the matter with Chatelaine? The three women that Chatelaine chose stood behind the stripping of female chiefs in order to hand the position over to male chiefs. John Ridsdale was the primary chief behind all this illegal theft of title, and these three protestors backed him up, and visa versa. The Chatelaine made fools of themselves promoting women who do NOT stand up for women rights, but rather a “you scratch my back and I scratch yours”, a dirty under the table system.
See WET’SUWET’EN FEMALE LEADERS DEMAND VOICE, CHALLENGE ACTIONS
The Chatelaine owe the Wet’suwet’en Nation an apology, however it also exposes another issue, they know less about First Nations than they really should , and it was never about honoring First Nations but rather rewarding some of them for the real agenda, namely trying to stop industry in Canada. Once again using (abusing) First Nations for their own secret agenda.
I suggest if you still use a wood stove, use a copy to start a fire in the morning.
"Now you know the rest of the story"
brought to you by
In the event we are using copyrighted material, we are doing so within the parameters of the Fair Dealing exception of the Canadian Copyright Act.
See our Copyright Notice
What’s even worse is that the author of this disgraceful work of fiction that Chatalein published is Aboriginal herself.
Shes also an anti resource activist that has writen many stories for the Narwhal and others like it.
In this post you are using an illustration whose rights are owned by Chatelaine/St. Joseph Communications, without permission or credit. I respectfully ask that you remove it. Thank you.
Incorrect, we are using a legal embedded image, and if you took the time to read the article, the first sentence has the credits.
“Strictly speaking, embedding only increases the visibility of the original. This circumstance has led to the conclusion that embedding is in accordance with copyright laws and is therefore allowed. Even without permission. Embedded images are used in exactly the same way as purchased images.”
Whats the matter dont like the truth being told?
Why should they when others have used it as well.