Je suis Omar

Or, at least as important, the legalities. Where in Sam hell has everybody got to?

You're focusing on things that you don't fully understand, S, and ignoring what actually matters, the legal definition and its not too too complicated provisions. It's all at the link below. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24578-truth-and-reconciliation/page-11 Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide: 1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and 2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide." As is mentioned further on in the notes, "in whole or in part", is very very important. As you start to go thru these definitions you will see clearly that every section, or almost every section, describes what Canada and Canadians did to First Nations peoples.

Historical context isn't remotely a defence for genocide, murder, rape, sexual assault, any crime.

But a real old fashioned one. A real carpenter has power nailers, impact screw drivers, screws and speed squares. Be there or be square, S.

Which isn't at all difficult with the full and complete definition, complete with explanatory notes just a few posts prior.

The actual definition is just a couple of posts above this one of yours, Smallc. Genocide covers the worst of the worst and (possibly) the worst Canada has done. We hope. There's still Korea, Vietnam, ... .

I was aware of who 'he' was, but thank you all the same, Dre.

I put this, the internationally accepted definition of genocide, here to provide some focus:

Yes, I do. First, what you have done, above, is against forum rules. But I don't want any action taken against you. Next, can you say something without twisting the facts? You are a couple sources short of a load. Who is 'he'?

Good dog!!! The "Can you post anything without twisting the facts?" is especially good.

Tim, for dog's sakes, you have to look at the accepted definition of "that term" that you can't even bring yourself to voice. And you have the gall to accuse others of fabricating, of creating a false narrative. Un******believable!

Jaysus, Wilber, tell the others to stop trying to obfuscate the issue! The issue is genocide as defined by international law.

How is an impossibility just a curiosity, Michael? It was impossible for there to be molten steel or molten iron there and yet there was! There was also vaporized lead, another impossibility and molten molybdenum, even a greater "impossibility"! There was eutectic molten steel, yet another impossibility. All these impossibilities and it doesn't raise your level of curiosity even a smidgen? And how would you looking into matter? Except as an individual capable of following a line of reason. You said: "I am not qualified to debunk scientific assertions, so I rely on trusted institutions to do so - keeping in mind that sometimes they are wrong, and even more often the assertions are not well founded." How can you suggest that NIST is a trusted institution when it was an arm of the Bush-Cheney Department of Commerce? Are you familiar with, "conflict of interest" and "justice must not only be done, it must appear to be done"? How can you suggest that NIST is a trusted institution when John Gross so blatantly lied when asked about the molten metal found at the WTC sites? His entire demeanour was that of a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

Will it allow the brain dead a better game of thrones experience?

That is the term, among others, that has seen folks hung by the neck until breath no longer flowed, Wilber. We rule of law people ought not to be dealing with this in such a cavalier fashion.

OR So you don't think there's any chance that a 65 year old man suddenly deciding he wants to be a conservative could involve some mental illness? Do you ever think there's cases that involve mental illness? Does anybody that has or will ever decide to be conservative ever have the possibility of making that decision out of mental illness? OR So you don't think there's any chance that a 65 year old man suddenly deciding he wants to be a homosexual could involve some mental illness? Do you ever think there's cases that involve mental illness? Does anybody that has or will ever decide to be homosexual ever have the possibility of making that decision out of mental illness? OR So you don't think there's any chance that a 65 year old man suddenly deciding he wants to be president of the USA could involve some mental illness? Do you ever think there's cases that involve mental illness? Does anybody that has or will ever decide to be the president ever have the possibility of making that decision out of mental illness?

You keep saying this with the same forcefulness of Argus. With all due respect, stamping your feet doesn't help your position. Bring forth the international legal definition of genocide and locate therein the portion which allows forced assimilation as an excuse for you to avoid a noose.

You really have to get yourself up to speed on the vocabulary that you wish to discuss, Tim.Measure your notion against the actual international definition of genocide and see how it stands up.

Everyone’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s really an easy way: Stop participating in it. -- Noam Chomsky

No, it most assuredly isn't your fault, Tim. After all, it's not your analogy. The remainder is more full of holes than a target at a redneck barbeque.

Do you believe, Smallc, that a genocide has to be both unique and comparable to the Holocaust to be considered a genocide? Or does just one of those things you describe make an event a genocide?

Okay, now I know that you don't understand 'feudal lords', but it was a nice try. You keep pounding away on it like you did with your conspiracy memes.

I think you are confused as to the meaning of 'feudal lords', Tim. Though there seems to be some plumping for a new genocide - I've personally run across more than a few who are so inclined, I just don't think that'll fly.

I've noticed that, DD, but it sure as hell ain't me. It's the truth that freaks you out.

"A Pentagon official denied in an interview with The Globe and Mail that he was ever waterboarded." My good god, the G&M quotes a pentagon "official"!! How Kafquesque can this get?