Rebuttal 2 (Refuting Geoff Leo-the 5th Estate on Buffy Sainte Marie). Selecting the Information. The Omission of Key Elements & the Art of Manufacturing Deception with Half-Truth.
The Omission of Key Elements is Deception
This is part of my answer to the documentary released October 23 of 2023 by CBC-the 5th Estate on Buffy Sainte Marie. I had to divide my “answer” into smaller parts, for it ended up to be far too long that what I have expected (and far much work too); while considering the gravity of the situation from the reactions one can read on social medias, I feel I have a duty to help people reflect on such a content since I am well trained in text analysis, in the study of language, cinema, an much more.
The Selection of Information. Basic Knowledge
In the video presented on this substack Page, Dr. Jocelyne Pauchard exposed in a nutshell one of the principles taught in the fields of Text Analysis in Communication and in Literature), basically the “selection principle”. The selection principles states that every speaker (or writer) makes a selection among all the information available; he chooses to keep some information, to brought it “in” the conversation, and to ignore other pieces of information; those are facts and ideas which are “excluded” from the conversation, not mentioned in a written text or in a film or a video.
The pieces of information selected are the building blocks of a text. Hence, the building blocks of a text are the Facts Ideas translated in Words that one has chosen to include in her/his Discourse…
As a result, no matter the building blocks you are choosing, as soon as you are writing or speaking, you are building a message which conveys a specific meaning. This does not mean that the meaning conveyed is accurate, or even legitimate. Consequently, some issues may rise as a result of poor research or a lack of ethic.
Personal responsibility in the selection process
If the speaker can choose the building blocks s/he wants to include ij his discourse, there is some limits to it. When you are talking about a person, you cannot spread lies. The ethic is a mandatory part not to downplay. You cannot display freely a derogatory image of someone. Lies are untrue ideas which can be spread by asserting something that is not true or by hiding something which contradicts what you are saying or suggesting. In other words, when some information is available that you choose to ignore, you are responsible for the wrong deduction that will be made as a result of your choice.
When you speak or write, you are spreading some meaning, and therefore you are putting some consequences in motion. Lesson “Need-to-know # 1” also teach that the facts and ideas which are Part of the Scene that one choose to Ignore are as relevant to understand a Discourse as those that have been brought in. In the video, two testimonies from 2006 have been ignored by Geoff Leo/the 5th Estate documentary. Without those two omissions, nobody would have believed the story spread for the gullibility of the mass by Geoff Leo-the 5th Estate.
Some Examples/Some Key Omissions
Let’s start with 2 key elements which have been ignored by Geoff-Leo, CBC the 5th Estate.
In a documentary broadcasted in 2006 by FNX (First Nations Experience, Los Angeles), we can hear the biographer Blair Stonechild speaking about the involvement of Buffy Sainte Marie, her search for her indigenous family since the early sixties (Buffy was in her early twenties). This information have been deliberately ignored by Geoff Leo.
We also learn from Debbie Piapot, grand-daughter of chief Piapot, that Aymon and Clara Piapot went in Craven to search for Buffy’s Birth Certificate, and that no record was found.
Those two excerpt shows that Buffy was involved in the search of her indigenous roots since the beginning of the sixties (Buffy was in her twenties), long before the governmental and public organizations started rewarding the work and talent of indigenous people through various programs.
It is the first piece of information which is contradicting the Buffy’s accusers that she was nothing but opportunistic. On the contrary, it is showing her dedication and true involvement toward the Piapot community. That Geoff Leo has decided to ignore those testimonies is dishonest and has led to the destruction of Buffy’s reputation.
More examples: Buffy’s involvement since 1965
The video present some excerpt of Buffy Sainte Marie speaking in the media for the cause of the Indians, at a time when there was no benefit at all to do so. It also shows how she manage to have some 36 Indians hired to play the Indians roles in a production where she have been asked to play the lead role. “No Indians, no Buffy” is a quote to remember from that event. Buffy was not only a talkative person, she was really involved in the cause of Indigenous people and she was ready to loose the role she has been offered…
In addition, lesson from the Canadian History shows that this derogative narrative about Buffy Sainte Marie is contradicted by the history, as there was no benefit to be an indigenous people before 1970.
The White Book of 1969 - Trudeau Pierre Eliot.
The White Book of 1969 was a document introduced by Jean Chrétien, then Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, and Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister of Canada) in 1969. Its aim was to "abolish Indian" status and all previous legal documents, in an effort to assimilate "Indians" into Canadian society.
Reactions to the 1969 White Book.
The book prompted many unfavourable reactions. It sparked a wave of activism, academic work and court decisions.
In November 1969, a conference held in British Columbia brought together over 140 bands. The Union of BC Indian Chiefs and the Brown Book (A Declaration of Indian Rights: The BC Indian Position Paper) were created, asserting aboriginal title to lands and advocating self-determination for aboriginal peoples.
In 1970, Harold Cardinal and the Indian Association of Alberta published the Red Book (Citizens Plus), a document advocating treaty rights and aboriginal entitlement to land, public services and self-determination.
Similar documents were created across Canada, by organizations in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Eastern Canada.
Denounced "coast to coast", the White Book (Law about the Indians) was dropped a year later. It was 1970. Pierre Elliott Trudeau officially called off The White Book.
Pay attention to the dates
1969, release of the book.
1970, the project is abandoned.
since 1965, Buffy Sainte Marie had been openly defending native rights on the air (at least 5 years before).
Her dedication to the cause and to the Piapot community began when there was no incentive to do so, other than the motivation that would come from finding one's roots and recognizing oneself in these people.
It's ridiculous and dishonest to associate Buffy Sainte Marie with the Pretendians, or to say that she benefited from services and advantages that were not available in 1970. A look at the timeline, and a little logic, please!
Singer-Rapper Samian wonders
In this interview for the Télé-Journal of Quebec, Samian rightly says, I quote (and translate):
" At the time when this great lady was defending the rights of the First Nations, it was a time when you could buy an little Indian child for 500 dollars. How can anyone dare to tarnish an image like that?”Samian is 100% right.
At the time Buffy was defending the rights of the First Nations, Pierre Eliot Trudeau was defending the idea (in his "White Paper" published in 1969) of stripping all Indians of their Indian status.
How comes this piece of evidence has been ignored by Geoff-Leo-CBC-The 5th Estate? How comes Tallbear & Teillet are not considering the timeline and those very public events ?
Considering all those facts and the chronology, it is clearly ridiculous and totally unfounded to suggest that Buffy Sainte Marie is a Pretendians, a made-up story which is dismantle by those Public Events.
A made-up Story which has NO GROUND at all...
The philosophical point (Analysis)
1) Introduction
Altered facts have led to altered thinking.
From a judiciary point of view, one may wonder: are they testing a new way of getting things done?
From a societal point of view, history teaches us that totalitarian societies organize, in their first phase, the elimination of thinkers, banishing them from the public sphere and from the collective memory.
The destruction of statues and the cancellation of historical figures is always the negation of the values that they represent. To demolish Buffy is to negate the values she represented.
2) Thoughts to Consider
The destruction of national monuments of artistic or philosophical significance never happens by chance. In 2023, the world is in the wake of the Covid crisis. Is this other fabricated crisis a manifestation of a "house-cleaning" aimed at eliminating from the public sphere everything that the leading figures in the world of society no longer want to keep, everything they want us to get rid of?
We are in a new kind of war. Weapons ave changed appearance and nature. Forgetting and ignorance, and the manipulation of perceptions, are powerful weapons.
We are not forcing you, they say; we are using conviction to make you accept New Ideas and Imposed Lifestyles, and we are legislating to speed up the success of an enterprise that the vast majority do not want.
The banishment of figures who once inspired ethical values and behaviour is part of a process in which forgetting and rejecting are two sides of the same coin, the rejection being all the more effective as it results from a process put into action by the person himself. Provoking disgust or repulsion is far more effective than banning.
Operation Mockingbirds.
Orwell tells us that who controls the present controls the past, and who controls the past controls the future. In an Orwellian world, facts do not matter.
Timestamps of the video
Need to know # 1 (some Basics) 01:23
Two Omissions (2 Testimonies) 07:58
More Omissions to Remember 16:36
The Historical Point 26:58
The Philosophical Point 31:55
Special Announcement 37:08
My Credentials & Final Words 37:35
The End 40:01