OftenWrong

"Indigenous Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett said Tuesday the government would "absolutely not" appeal the ruling, but would push to settle on monetary compensation out of court."

If the immigrants have a life and a job, they don't need to think about committing crime. I don't think the correlation is with immigration per se, but with poverty. And that has been understood in the past, the kind of immigrants we want to bring in to Canada are the ones who have enough education and skill to make something out of themselves with minimal government support.

No it was not flat out false. History is true. However the information you gave is quite a bit before this event which took place in 1960, not the days of Sir John A which was around 100 years earlier. It's too bad they were unable to find a way to help the Indians assimilate way back then, and still have not up to this day.

Somehow the idea of asking permission to remove a child does not work well. Children's Aid does not ask the parents permission, it's a moot point. But they should have handled the whole episode completely differently, yes. So there should be blame and something done to compensate. Throwing them a few bucks didn't help much. The fact that it was not contested by this government is certainly no surprise...

I'm sure the ones that we've accepted into our homelands for their own safety are very grateful. They are having a swell time, a great life, and cranberry sauce. Those living in other countries must learn to raise their own turkeys.

Thanks for that. I don't see how it would have ensured they maintain their cultural identity under the care of their adoptive parents. Also if I understand it correctly it implies the fault lay in taking the kids without consulting the Indian bands. That seems like two separate issues, whereas earlier you stated the problem wasn't due to the children being removed:

I wonder how it would have been done otherwise, since the whole point of it was to remove them from the reserves. Most of them were too young to have established their aboriginal identity.

Hint: the post you've responded to is dated 2003.

Without democracy you must have absolute trust in your leadership. We do not trust our leadership with that kind of total power. Democracy is constantly threatened by the elite who see it as a barrier to achieving power and wealth, but in principle it does put a limit on the power of government. It is imperfect but there is no better alternative.

Well it's a weird question but if previous US political leaders are war criminals, and some could well be, they deserve prosecution. But that will not happen because doing so empowers our enemies, who are also very likely war criminals. I have never heard any suggestion how to solve this problem that wouldn't unbalance the power structure and create another world war. My acceptance of the status quo does not imply it has my support.

Well now hockey is not about politics, as you know. But hockey can transcend the barriers of otherness that give rise to xenophobia. The USSR has a team and sure, we hated those guys in the early days when our teams played off against one another. But as hockey players they play very well and have earned a lot of respect among Canadian fans, and now Russian players are common in the NHL. This illustrates that sport is a means to finding common ground and achieving understanding among disparate peoples.

Hockey, like many team sports promotes camaraderie, a feeling of unity with your teammates. It also promotes attitudes of tolerance and fairness, understanding "adversary" vs. "enemy", so that you begin to see that even the other team is like you. The idea of winning without harming. Congratulating the winner, respecting the loser. Encouraging those who are not doing well, rather than condemning. These are just a few aspects of hockey culture which have shaped traditional Canadian values.

And if what I said about the root causes is true, it is disingenuous to suggest things would improve if we simply stood down and apologized. All that would happen is, if we pass the sephulcer of power to them, they would hammer us and everyone else just as much, and probably more. Every page in the history of humanity is war, war, war. Everywhere in the world, in every culture. Anyway drifting now.

You're saying we deserve to be attacked because we are allies and friends of the US. I can't agree with that. First of all there are Muslim nations that are our allies too, and not just Saudi Arabia. They are fighting terrorism in their countries as well,much more than we are. As you know that is where Muslims are killing each other in big numbers. When people from Canada see what is taking place in those countries, I mean violence as well as barbarism, it gives rise to Islamophobia, yes. You suspect too much. I was talking about my own experience as a child, long before 911. Muslims have been despised by some folks for as long as I can remember. People frequently used names like "Paki", "Raghead" or whatever. Apologies for the pejoratives but it's a discussion. This cultural attitude which already existed in the 60's does not stem from any particular event that I can think of. I doubt what happened in Iran affected our cultural attitudes towards Muslims at that time. It already existed and has roots in European culture going back centuries. It is not just events alone that shape attitudes like bigotry. It is also a profound sense of "otherness" that gives rise to xenophobia. Humans are fearful creatures, perhaps rightly so. Even among Christian nations there is considerable bigotry, if you speak a different language, sing different songs and drink different drinks. Yeah except we are not the only cause. Plenty of nasty and cruel places out there to go around. ISIS is creating refugees in Syria. I know, I know, "we created ISIS". But then, Great Britain created us, and they were Anglo-Saxons, and we were all cavemen once... I think the difference between our views is that you give Muslims a pass on their violence while calling us out on ours. My view is more complicated than that. The root causes- greed, power, are universal among men.

It has its own culture. There's nothing finer than going for a skate with some pals, then hit the locker room for a shower and a beer. You should lace up the skates and come out sometime little fella. It might change your perspective on things.

Isn't that a light chicken gravy?

Sounds deeelish... enjoy.

If you look into it you will find that the situation on reserves was totally desperate. Their rationale for removing the children from reserves was to save them from slow death by starvation and disease. Schools were run in a manner that was considered typical in those days. White children were also beaten with objects, eg. the "strap". Kids were abused physically, mentally, and sometimes sexually. However that does not mean that school was like a prison or torture chamber. Video footage shows children playing, smiling, laughing, wearing ribbons and doing things we would call quite normal. Anyway what I heard this morning was a number of natives speaking out, saying no amount of compensation can ever help them. This is not about money, and they are not satisfied. They talk about wanting "healing". In that case, this money has been completely wasted. The government just took a wad of cash and threw it at them in the hopes the issue can be put to rest, but it's clear it won't be. A useless Liberal solution. Mindlessness. Reactionary. That 800 Mill could have done a lot of good if it had been used for something else.

Your question is too broad to be answered succinctly. It depends on the circumstances, and such matters are never simple. Secondly I'm not aware of Canada employing any puppet dictators. If you give specific examples I might try to answer, but then it needs a new thread because it is not on topic. So basically your obtuse question cannot be answered. -> You figure Islamophobia just happens in some sort of narrow confined space all on its own with nothing else at all going on around or before it? I know it already existed in Canada way back in the 60's and 70's. What you are implying if I read between the lines in your post (lots of room there...) is that everything has cause and effect, we did bad things to them and now it's their turn. I don't think Canada has done much of anything. Canada provides financial aid to those regions where people live in poverty without education or health care. I think that's the most significant part of our history in relation to the Middle East. I am in favour of an approach that helps refugees, but not by bringing everyone here. If possible keep them living in their homelands. United Nations should establish safe zones for refugees in places like Syria. You conflate by connecting dots between my criticism of specific barbarous cultural practices and Islamophobia.

I am only against those aspects of it that directly conflict with our culture, and I have been very clear about that. So it is actually you that is conflating what I have said. Maybe you should try discussing the issues a bit more, rather than attacking a forum member based on your misunderstanding.

Well that's what I was talking about earlier when I mentioned it. This whole discussion has been about females. And I don't want to talk anymore, I need to go to sleep.

I don't consider the hijab a big deal. Different. But I doubt that fundamentalists would just let it slide, if given their way they want to establish an separate Islamic society within Canada, closed communities that are run by sharia law, with their own enforcement.

My quote below which you take issue with: I underlined the part you are ignoring, with your one eye. Do you defend Muslim culture? Because treating women as chattle is part of it.

Well for example people lost jobs for saying things. The guy who yelled "F her right in the ..." into the female news reporters microphone on a live feed outside the baseball stadium. He lost his job the next day, even though he was not representing his company in any way. Thing is word quickly gets out who you are, and businesses don't want to see their corporate image tarnished because of an employee's irresponsible behaviour. I'm not totally comfortable with this idea but I understand why it happens, it if things get too out of hand.

Don't tell me what I "seem" please. Quote me if necessary, but do not second guess me. Please. I am concerned about her, and her children as well. I don't have answers to all the problems you brought up, which only further illustrate the depth of their misogynistic culture. Doing nothing doesn't sit well with me either. In any case if this problem were easily solved it would already have been done. We are not going to come up with a perfect solution in a forum discussion, but discussing it is at least a first step.