Fauxcahontas

I knew about Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond’s “status” at least 15 years ago. It was an open secret within Saskatchewan media and political circles.

Earlier this week, CBC reported that details of Prof. Turpel-Lafond’s where she grew up and her academic accomplishments are inconsistent with publicly available documents, casting doubt on her ancestry.

The CBC report cited dozens of media reports that stated that Prof. Turpel-Lafond was born and/or raised on the Norway House Cree Nation in Manitoba, while public records and yearbooks suggest she was born and went to school in Niagara Falls.

In her statement, she did not state where she grew up. She wrote that “there may be occasions when public statements about me may have been incorrect. I can only be accountable for confirming the qualifications that I provide to my employers and clients are correct, which I do. … My credentials have been vetted at the highest levels of our country.”

The CBC report is by Geoff Leo, who had have known for at least as long as I have. Why now? is the question.

26 Replies to “Fauxcahontas”

  1. “My credentials have been vetted at the highest levels of our country.”

    Which means diddly.

  2. It’s not how she was born or raised, it’s how she/xi/it/ver/zit identifies.

    Or so “they” would have us believe. Trans ideology means, in one respect, the end of racial/sexual quotas. Or would if they’ll ever try to live by their own standards.

  3. The comments about colonialism from the historian deeper in the CBC link may be explanatory.

    Members of the “diversity and inclusion” left, elevated to positions of power through identity promotion within the institutions, are now exercising that power by evicting their original benefactors.

    1. Well, cancel culture DOES depend on having something older to supplant.

      That doesn’t negate the other posts on this topic noting that if we’re told that we must respect/honour the pronouns and mental illnesses of others then it’s logical that they want us to honour the made-up references, experiences, and qualifications too.

      I can’t wait for the first case of someone who identifies as an ambulance getting run down in a crowded intersection, and the driver of the pickup getting charged with “interfering with an emergency vehicle” because the “ambulance” was shouting WEE OHH WEE OHH WEE OHH. What will the courts do with that one?

    2. The backlash against the false “mass graves” accusations has been severe, more so than most previous Indian grifts. I’m wondering if this isn’t part of a larger campaign to make native DNA unassailable when it comes to any claims whatsoever – “it doesn’t matter what your white man’s GPR says, we know it in our chromosomes!”

      With the Minnesota med school oaths of loyalty coming at the same time, it all seems of a piece.

  4. In comparison Danielle Smith is in part a descendant of the native somebody.
    Nobody will know, she is not broadcasting that fact, lets it be as it may.
    That of course is of no help since she is rather conservative.

    1. She fooled me once about being conservative. She said the right things then, and stabbed us in the back. She’s saying the right things now. Did she have a trip-to-Damascas moment, or is she fleecing her stupid followers again by saying what the hicks want? Only time will tell.

      1. Of course, that remains to be seen.
        In order for her to keep up, it would be useful to make an effort of support.
        If she gets the hint that nobody is supporting what she is saying now, she will change her tune. Why not if there is no support?
        It is neither here or there what she has done.
        Supported the punishment when she lost her seat in High River.
        On the radio after a lot of prodding, she admitted her shortcoming and possibly apologized for it.
        Apologies are not accepted here though let’s see what comes.
        If she falters on the bombardment that’s coming her way now, she will be a lost cause.
        Sent her an advice, don’t never comment on what you did not say, only repeat what you said.
        Right now, she should not apologize, as much as the socialist/fascist hordes and specially media masturbators want her to, for there is nothing to apologize for.

        1. It is neither here or there what she has done. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you. If she doesn’t receive feedback, and heads in the wrong direction, that tells me it was a mistake to vote for her because she doesn’t look at the world like we do but is only an opportunist. But I’ll support you if you continue to insist that, this time, the cheque IS in the mail. And that, this time, you won’t end up with a mouthful of… enough said.

  5. Someone up the food chain doesn’t like her and I suspect CBC is carrying water for the hater. Hell – even I read bits and pieces of her dubious pedigree some time ago and I’m just Joe Schlub from Ontario but I filed it in my So What Else is New? folder so the timing of this CBC expose’ is a little weird.

  6. What does this say about the due diligence done by all those universities willing to drape her with honorary degrees?

  7. “In a statement earlier this week, the University of British Columbia backed Prof. Turpel-Lafond, saying Indigenous identity was not a criterion for the positions she has held at UBC. ”

    not as part of the “criteria” but I’d bet dollars to donuts that it was considered for DIE purposes…

  8. “I recall my grandfather frequently saying ‘that’s the Native in him’ when he would do something that no one seemed to understand,…

    Hmmmmmm…did he now. I don’t know how old your grandpa is or was but no one I grew up around in the 50’s or 60’s used the term “native”.
    Unless you were being polite in which case you should’ve said “that’s the indigenous peoples in him…”
    Yeah I know, kinda takes away the zing.

  9. L – Why now ? My best guess is, as a children’s advocate, she knows what a girl is and what
    a boy is, including can define the adult versions thereof. If she opposes the ‘butchery’, as
    Prof. Jordan Peterson so aptly describes it, of trans-gender hormones/surgery and sterilization
    of children and teens, too young to comprehend the implications of misanthropic nihilism.

    That would explain the why now question. It is the Cult. Marxist, identity politics du jour.

  10. The whole problem is our lying eyes. Almost all the important Indians leadership looks whiter than I do. This lady looks not a bit Indian. How about a rule that says you can’t cry and tell sad stories of abuse unless you at least look Indian. Mixed race can fight the Indian/colonist battle internally and leave the rest of us out of it. My old farmer father looked like an Indian with his brown shoe leather face but was 100% German.

  11. Funny.
    Nobody ever pretends to be white.
    There must not be any incentives to be white.
    That stands in stark contrast to what I’ve been told for the last 30 years.
    Apparently, as a white male, I’ve never earned anything and it was all given to me and yet I don’t see anyone from Peguis quietly pretending that they’re not from Peguis. They don’t seem to have too much trouble applying for and receiving grants for nearly everything under the sun from advanced education to buying a business.
    Where are all the grants for being white?

  12. Remember that poor sad-sack who pretended he was an army vet at a Remembrance Day service in Ottawa a few years back? He had gained nothing by his childish pretense yet ended up with public humiliation and a criminal record.

    Now, tell me, what do you figure will happen to Princess Coppertone?

Navigation