Tell CN, "Drop your Racist Lawsuit!". Support the Mohawks of Tyendinaga.

PHONE/FAX CAMPAIGN-ALL OF APRIL. April 21 is CN's shareholder's meeting in Calgary. CALL TODAY.

Canadian National Railway is suing Shawn Brant, Jason Maracle, and Tara Green as well as their families and community. CN's lawsuit is a response to a blockade on CN tracks during April 2007, and another lawsuit against Shawn Brant for a blockade on June 29, 2007. Supporters of the ongoing resistance in Tyendinaga are being asked to demonstrate their solidarity by sending letters to CN during this critical court case.

We are holding the phone and fax campaign from April 1st to 31st. We are encouraging supporters to fax or phone because these are more effective ways to pressure CN, but if you interested in sending an email please also BCC indigenoussolidaritymontreal@gmail.com so we can track the campaign.

Please fax letters to CN at : 514-399-5985

Email Robert Noorigan (Vice-President) or Janet Drysdale (Investor Relations) from the link: www.cn.ca

Or call in your dissent at:
514-399-6450
(you will reach the office of Bryan Tucker, the Senior Manager of Public Affairs and Media Relations)
514-708-6450 (Bryan Tucker's cell phone)

For More information and sample letters, please go to ocap.ca/supporttmt

-From: The Tyendinaga Support Committee

-------

In Toronto, The Tyendinaga Support Committee will be distributing flyers to commuters at Union Station throughout the month of April concerning CN Rail's lawsuit against Tyendinaga Mohawks. Come help us out:

Thursday, April 16th - 4 p.m. under the clock tower in Union Station.
Thursday, April 23rd - Same time, same place.
Thursday, April 30th - Same time, same place.

Here's the text of the flyer:

CN RAIL: DROP YOUR RACIST LAWSUIT

• CN Rail is suing Tyendinaga Mohawks Shawn Brant, Jason Maracle, and Tara Green, as well as other community members.

• CN has filed two lawsuits: one is a response to a blockade on CN tracks during April 2007, and the other is against Shawn Brant for a blockade on June 29, 2007. CN has not yet specified the amount in damages they are seeking.

DEFENSE STATEMEMENTS AND COUNTERCLAIMS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED that:

• CN pollutes Tyendinaga lands, creates a nuisance by the noise their operations cause, and scares away game animals.

• Further, the counterclaim alleges that “(CN) and its predecessor railroads have profited from the taking of Aboriginal lands … and from the exploitation of First Nations people in Canada” and that “the expropriation of Aboriginal lands has directly contributed to the impoverishment of First Nations communities.” CN has filed a motion asking the courts to strike much of these counterclaims, which goes to court Apr. 7th

Supporters of the ongoing resistance in Tyendinaga are being asked to demonstrate their solidarity by phoning, faxing or emailing letters to CN during the entire month of April.

-----------

Aboriginal rail blockades justified, serve to raise awareness: lawyer

Canadian Press, April 7th, 2009
link

TORONTO — Severing a crucial rail artery to disrupt passenger and commercial traffic is an extreme tactic, but can be justified as a way to bring attention to the abject poverty plaguing aboriginal communities, a lawyer representing Mohawk protesters told court Tuesday.

Superior Court was hearing motions about a lawsuit CN Rail (TSX:CNR) has launched against protester Shawn Brant and others over two blockades. A group of Tyendinaga Mohawks shut down the busy Toronto-Montreal corridor of the CN Rail line by raising a blockade in eastern Ontario on two occasions, in April and June of 2007.

CN has sued Brant and others for defying a court injunction during the blockades. The protesters have countersued, claiming the rail line disrupts the Mohawks' way of life and that CN profits from the exploitation of aboriginal people and their land.

CN alleges the blockades caused "significant economic damages due to compounded delays in delivery of bulk commodities and goods." The company has not specified the amount in damages it is seeking.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

Blockades are "justifiable forms of resistance" and constitute "an assertion of aboriginal land title and an exercise of the duty to protect the land according to aboriginal law," reads the statement of defence.

Outside court, lawyer Peter Rosenthal questioned why CN is pursuing the action.

"People generally recognize now that the way aboriginal people have been treated in history justifies some unusual protest," Rosenthal said.

"The Ipperwash inquiry spoke to that, and other people are beginning to realize that progressively. Why doesn't CN realize that?"

CN officials declined to comment because of the court proceedings.

The Ipperwash inquiry was held to investigate the death of Dudley George, an aboriginal protester gunned down by a police sniper during a 1995 occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park.

Brant said he believes CN's motive for the lawsuit isn't to recoup its losses, but to send a message to the aboriginal community that there are consequences for their protests. But he said he remains undeterred.

"They can sue me until the cows come home, but it isn't going to stop until the issues of First Nations people are dealt with respectfully, with honour and integrity," Brant said outside court.

It's unfortunate it takes such a disruptive gesture to bring attention to the shameful conditions in First Nations communities, such as boil-water advisories that last for years, he said.

"If I have to go out and shut down the (Highway) 401 or the CN main line in order to have somebody look at our community with some compassion and understand what it's like to live like that for year after year after year," so be it, Brant said.

"It's beyond me why I have to go out and shut down the 401 or the CN main line to have that dealt with."

A court in Belleville, Ont., found Brant guilty in September 2008 of three counts of mischief exceeding $5,000. He had served 57 days of pretrial custody, and was sentenced to time served plus a 90-day conditional sentence and one year of probation.

CN asked the court Tuesday to strike portions from the protesters' statement of defence and counterclaim that the company says are irrelevant to the case, including statements about First Nations
people living in poverty.

Rosenthal argued such statements provide the context in which the blockades were established.

CN lawyer Christopher Bredt also asked the court to strike allegations in the counterclaim about trespassing on aboriginal land as an abuse of process. Bredt said Brant cannot claim personal damages on collective rights.

Bredt also noted Brant was not acting on behalf of the band council, as the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte and Chief Don Maracle had publicly admonished Brant and distanced themselves from his actions.

Justice George Strathy has reserved his decision on the motions.