An Open Letter to the Centre for Human Rights Research, University of Manitoba

From Independent journalist Michelle Stirling

Image by Sinusoidal Music

This open letter originally appeared on Michelle Stirling’s Medium profile.

Nov. 16, 2023

Centre for Human Rights Research

442 Robson Hall,

University of Manitoba,

Winnipeg, MB,

R3T 2N2, Canada

ATTN: Dr. Adele Perry, Director

Dear Dr. Perry,

RE: Debunking the “Mass Grave Hoax”: A Report on Media Coverage and Residential School Denialism in Canada — a report issued by your centre

On Oct. 11, 2023, your Centre for Human Rights Research issued the above-named report by Reid Gerbrandt and Sean Carleton.

I have reviewed the report and find it to be exceptionally flawed. I have written this rebuttal which includes a number of other essays of mine and one by independent researcher, Nina Green, on the topic of Indian Residential Schools: Confronting Indian Residential School Confabulation and Media Irresponsibility: Responding to Gerbrandt and Carleton’s “Debunking the Mass Grave Hoax.” My work is independent. I declare no Conflicts of Interest.

Confronting Indian Residential School Confabulation and Media Irresponsibility

Gerbrandt and Carleton claim that mainstream media made a simple kind of reporting error in misstating the alleged graves found at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School as “mass graves” — which suggests some kind of genocidal murders took place — but that such errors were quickly corrected. They claim that “…factual errors by journalists and media outlets are not uncommon, especially in the rush to report on a developing story outside of a reporter’s area of expertise.”

The authors then cherry-picked a few such examples to prove their point. They then go on to denigrate people like me who challenge these outrageous and unproven claims of “mass graves” or the invocation of genocide.

One need only read the work of historian Robert Carney, father of the more famous Mark Carney, to realize that the story of residential schools in Canada has been skewed by “settler historians” and “presentism.”

Carney wrote of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People’s report of 1996:

“The fact is that in addition to providing basic schooling and training related to local resource use, they served Native communities in other ways. It would have been fair to acknowledge that many traditional boarding schools, in some cases well into the twentieth century, took in sick, dying, abandoned, orphaned, physically and mentally handicapped children, from newborns to late adolescents, as well as adults who asked for refuge and other forms of assistance.”

The Catholic Church and its thousands of devoted staff employed at these schools, who worked tirelessly for pennies for over the course of 113 years, as did Christians of other denominations, were sheltering and rescuing Indigenous children from destitution, dysfunctional families, and taking in thousands of orphans. Residential schools were originally intended strictly for education and approved as such by Treaty Chiefs who had toured the east and seen the Mohawk Institute.

By default, residential schools were also used as the only child welfare placements for Status Indian children facing destitution or harm until effectively the 1960s when provinces were authorized to enter reserves and apprehend children at risk.

https://searchprovincialarchives.alberta.ca/indian-residential-school-administration-handbook-principals-workshop-a-research-in-religious-education-among-blood-indians

Off reserve there were children’s aid societies and government services for the mainstream population starting in the late 19th century; they did not have access to reserves.

In addition to the sacred work of saving orphans or destitute children from harm, these residential schools also provided education. Most Indigenous parents voluntarily enrolled their children by written requests for admission, hoping to offer them a brighter future. The outcome is that Indian Residential Schools yielded thousands of well-known Indigenous Canadians who have lived full, rich lives, thanks to learning to read, write, do math and to operate in contemporary society, skills that were not part of the hunter-gatherer world. The evidence of success is found in the many skilled Indigenous people that populate all echelons of Canadian society today, from retail to trades to academia, the sciences, arts and politics.

Ironically, only one third of the Status Indian population of children ever attended Indian Residential Schools, or just one sixth of the total Indigenous population of Canada. Therefore, statistically speaking, residential schools cannot be the fundamental cause of the many trials and tribulations suffered by today’s Indigenous communities.

I ask you to withdraw the Gerbrandt-Carleton report due to its many flaws, and due to the fact that its principal purpose appears to be to silence people like me who offer competing narratives that are firmly grounded in historical fact and evidence. I believe that my independent report, with contributions from independent researcher Nina Green, offers deep and reasoned analysis of Gerbrandt and Carleton’s discourse to show why they are wrong.

You have an obligation, in my opinion, to produce material that is in keeping with human rights legislation that supports Freedom of Speech and inquiry, and in keeping with the stated values of the University of Manitoba:

Academic Freedom • Accountability • Collegiality • Equity and Inclusion • Excellence • Innovation • Integrity • Respect • Sustainability

Academic freedom must also incorporate excellence, integrity, respect and accountability. Issuing a flawed report that calls people “deniers” and supports the Kimberly Murray demand that people like me be silenced by criminalizing “residential school denialism” does not meet those parameters.

I am carrying forward the history that I learned under the supervision of Dr. Hugh Dempsey, Potai’na, who was then the curator of the Glenbow Museum. It is unworthy of your academic centre for human rights to denigrate people by name-calling, bullying or advocating for criminal sanctions to silence them.

All Canadians fund universities through direct taxation and through the subsidies to university and museum charitable donations, which diminish the tax pool. Tax payers have a right to expect qualitative and respectful work from a tax funded centre, in a tax funded university, along with your tax funded partner organizations like the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

Sincerely,

Michelle Stirling

Alberta

~~~~

Michelle Stirling is a former member of the Canadian Association of Journalists. She researched, wrote, and co-produced historical shows about Southern Alberta under the supervision of Dr. Hugh Dempsey, then curator of the Glenbow Museum. She also researched and co-wrote a documentary on genocide; the factual content so dark the producer decided not to release it.

___

Thanks for reading. For more from this author, read Guatemalan Forensic Team Have a Conflict of Interest and Must Not Work On Canadian Soil

Also, for more evidence of the ideological indoctrination in Canadian education, read Yes, schools are indoctrinating kids! And also, Yes, The University is an Indoctrination Camp!

There are now two ways to support Woke Watch Canada through donations:

1) By subscribing to the paid version of the Woke Watch Canada Newsletter for - $7 Cdn/month or $50 Cdn/year

2) By making a contribution to the Investigating Wokeism In Canada Initiative, which raises the funds necessary to maintain and expand Woke Watch Canada’s research and investigation into Dysfunctional Canadian School Boards, Education, Indigenous Issues, Free Speech, and other areas of Illiberal Subversion and the Canadian Culture Wars.