Radio – Giesbrecht on Kamloops Unmarked Graves Claim

Brian Giesbrecht is interviewed on Richard Syrett’s Toronto radio show on… about the Kamloops unmarked graves claim. Listen:   May 16, 2024. (12 minutes)  

Brian Giesbrecht is interviewed on Richard Syrett’s Toronto radio show on… about the Kamloops unmarked graves claim.

Listen:

 

May 16, 2024. (12 minutes)

 

Featured News

MORE NEWS

Court Ruling On Indigenous Title Threatens Private Property Rights

Court Ruling On Indigenous Title Threatens Private Property Rights

Joseph Quesnel examines the growing conflict between Indigenous rights and private property ownership. Using the 2024 dispute between the Chippewas of Saugeen First Nation and the Town of South Bruce Peninsula as a case study, he warns that governments and Indigenous groups must collaborate before court cases escalate. Quesnel calls for universal rules on land ownership to prevent confusion and proposes constitutionalizing property rights to secure fair resolution. Click to read more on how this legal battle could reshape Canada’s property landscape.

CBC Helped Drive The Kamloops Narrative, And Still Won’t Come Clean

CBC Helped Drive The Kamloops Narrative, And Still Won’t Come Clean

The CBC helped fuel a national reckoning in 2021 with unverified claims of children’s remains at Kamloops—and still hasn’t owned up, argues Marco Navarro Genie. The public broadcaster’s credibility is on the line, from misleading headlines to ombudsman complaints and backstage media access. If truth matters in reconciliation, Navarro-Genie says, CBC must fess up or risk further eroding trust in Canada’s institutions.

UBC’s Land Acknowledgments Are Political Declarations, Not Legal Facts

UBC’s Land Acknowledgments Are Political Declarations, Not Legal Facts

UBC faces a lawsuit from professors and a PhD graduate claiming the university’s land acknowledgments and EDI mandates violate its legal duty to remain non political. Senior Fellow Hymie Rubenstein highlights how UBC’s declarations of “unceded” land go beyond symbolism, implying legal conclusions that Canadian courts have not affirmed. The case questions whether universities can impose political orthodoxy without breaching legal neutrality.