jennie

Various laws and covenants apply to Indigenous people as well. This declaration just gathers all the relevant clauses and puts them in one place in relation to Indigenous Peoples. What Harper is doing is undermining the vote so no one in the world gets a declaration. That just seems petty and nasty to me. What does it really matter, so why make a big stink? I will be delighted if there are more new treaties too. It is a very slow process

Argus, you have just made one of the best arguments possible for bringing all schools under provincial jurisdiction ... to provide public accountability for delivery of mandated provincial programs, teaching standards, avenues for redress of grievances, etc. Teaching religion should not include teaching hatred. I agree. I believe a respectful 'Comparative Religions' program should be mandatory.

The Catholic boards and schools are part of the 'public' system now in a sense ... public funding, provincial curriculum, teacher qualifications, facility standards, etc. There are no changes needed there, I don't think. Just other faith-based schools need to be brought in.

Well, I am in favour as long as it is new money.

That is only one of the five genocidal acts. (See UN Convention posted above.)

How does the money put into the country balance with the money taken out of the country and the cost of environmental cleaup? That is my question. You have answered only one part of it. I am curious whether anyone has this information.

There has been no investigation of that in Canada. That process is just beginning. I expect they will withhold judgment until all the evidence is in. Perhaps you should consider that approach too. The children were made wards of the state, or in some cases the school principal. They were forcibly removed from their family and their culture and placed in a foreign culture, denied their language and spirituality, etc. It was clearly a program of destruction of their culture and replacement with the dominant culture, which is the key element of genocide. They were also terrorized into submission. All of this evidence is yet to be produced 'officially', of course, which is why it is not productive to try to prejudge the outcome at this point.

They hardly need it since they sill hold the power in the world. Those different circumstances are perhaps the issue, aren't they? Inequalities that the Declaration hopes to address. I am not sure what your last statement means at all, but I think I am offended ... not sure though ... do you want to expand on the relationship between broken treaties and "hatred". It escapes me entirely ... but I think I am offended ... not sure though ... .

Yes, I do hope that will help with the backlog of specific claims once it is operational - next year, perhaps? It remains to be seen whether it will be truly independent of politics, though, and whether the funding allocation will allow for speeding up claims. However, there are many large, comprehensive claims as well, and these are the ones where there are blockades against development, etc. not approved by the Nation. These are the ones where the government has made no progress and is making no progress. The number of blockades and immediate concerns across the country shows the discontent that has existed for a long time, and I see no strategy proposed for those confrontations about uses of land in dispute. The government should, by law, be consulting about those land uses, but it is not.

The issue I have with this is that there is no reason at all for Harper to say refuse: As said above, there is nothing in the Declaration that is not already in effect. Treaties ... refer to our historical agreements with Indigenous Nations, all of which have been broken.

Oh I am ... but I tend to turn off my hearing when any politician speaks. It's too much of a soap opera. Is he suggesting taking the money out of the current public system to fund the new schools under the 'umbrella'? I would only support it if it is totally NEW money in equal per student funding as these are NEW students. (NO funding for religious materials, except mandatory provincial 'Comparative Religions' curriculum.) Vouchers ... NOT. That is money out of the current system spread more thinly. Tory better not make the same misstep Mike Harris did ... he believed Tom Long's twisted propaganda ... played well in speeches ... but it was a twist of words and the money wasn't there as it said ... ... and then ... backtrack backtrack. McGuinty is holding down the status quo then, I gather.

I just saw it. Rather dramatic, shutting the Gardiner down to detonate the explosives. The guy must have said who he was after and why, but the one intended victim didn't seem to know why he would be targeted. Maybe he butted in on the guy in line at the grocery store during the full moooooonnnn ... or something like that ... Married the girl he'd been stalking ... ... installed his toilet wrong and it flushed counterclockwise so when Al went through the looking glass he ended up in Portugal instead of China I think it's those kind of "reasons" ... the kind the police are quite sure are not terrorism because they are just friggen loonie .. perhaps.

I don't believe ANYbody in or potentially in a position of power is truly serious about the environment anyway. Interesting ... I agree of course, about keeping our word ... ... but who is keeping Canada's 'word' on current treaties? no one of course ... so why would it matter now? Even if it does ... What will we gain? ... What are we gaining by an anti-Canada demonstration in New York city at the UN ? Has there ever been an anti-Canada demonstration before? I know it is said somewhere that there are NO NEW RIGHTS in the Declaration ... It is simply statement of existing rights of Indigenous Peoples in the UN covenants and laws. That is why I think Harper is being an ass, frankly. There is nothing there not already in International laws and covenants, and for that matter in Canadian law too. That is why I find it funny ... pathetically political I am sure ... but I don't know quite how it is supposed to work for him ... the 'tough-guy I will break the law-guy' ? Is that the Stephen we know and love? What about the kittycats? no offense ... I make fun of all politicians (Does Dion have kittens? ... Only when you're "not fair" ... oh my bad ... lol ... and Jack Layton has a pit bull ... nuf said ... ) ... I just think Harper's grandstanding, that's all ... likely for the corporations ... who knows why politicians do what they do... either way, the declaration seems to be not binding ... the laws exist ... and I have never heard of politicians honouring their word beyond what the lawyer told them was their minimum legal obligation.

I just like to cut to the chase. I beg your pardon? Me? Revenge for what? The potato famine? The clearances? Russian revolution? Roma persecution? ... etcetcetc ... get the picture? (wrong assumption there, np) What is the government's purpose for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission then? (Sorry ... will look it up later unless you know ...) It is not a court of justice though, true. I wonder how the church and school staff see it? They have sent in a lot of information, personal accounts that they did not have to send, etc. The first evidence to be collected, of course, is that from the government's own records, and the churches records ... and the clergy/staff submissions, and I understand (from tv) that they have been overwhelmed by the amount of information coming from the churches. That's ... nice to know, I think. Good start, anyway. True, given the above info ... where I am is downtown Canada ... our home on Native land. ... where treaties have not been honoured. yikes Just like we usually do ... we vote ... they do nothing ... we pay the money ... we vote ... ... they do nothing ... we pay more money ... the government ... I mean ... jk ... just a little joke but I run out of icons...

In your opinion of course. I will wait for the evidence myself. This is the relevant definition ... already posted previously, btw. There is no mention of 'cultural genocide', though I think it was perhaps discussed at one time, but it isn't used. ("Native" activist? me? lolol) http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm UN convention on genocide ... Article 2 In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; ( Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Criminal Code of Canada ... 318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. (2) In this section, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely (a) killing members of the group; or ( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction. (3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General. (4) In this section, "identifiable group" means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin. [R.S. c.11 (1st Supp.), s.1.] ........................................................................ What happened to the natives in Canada was not genocide. ?? (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

There will be heat now, heat later ... makes no matter ... the laws are the laws and that is where the heat comes from, not from a Declaration (which is not a Treaty like Kyoto). The Canadian government could not POSSIBLY look any 'badder' than it does right now!! In front of the whole world, no less, not just at home! Your argument 'holds no water'. There is only one explanation for Harper's grandstanding on this issue ... I just haven't figured out yet what it could possibly be! Does he want to look like Mr. Magnanimous when he finally caves? Do you think that is it? I am sure it is political ...

I read that there is an International Tribunal on Genocide in Canada. You poo-poo it without providing any backup, links, etc. Topic ended, I guess, but your opinion not supported by anything as yet. My opinion is that documented evidence is always useful, so I don't see the harm. At the same time there is Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I heard the Commissioner Bob Watts speak on TV and he said they are turning records over to the RCMP. That may be a late change, as was the current investigation into deaths of children in the schools, he said. I didn't mean to hit a nerve. These are very emotional issues for some, I realize that. I am sure we will all be relieved to have truth, difficult though the process may be. We hardly have much to complain about, not being the ones who had to go through it. If they can go through it we can certainly hear them out and face the truth.

My understanding is that the declaration itself is not legally binding. It is not a question of "setting an example". The issue is that Canada is actively undermining the vote on the Declaration by refusing to sign AND by convincing other human rights violators to do the same. It is not simply a question of whether Canada chooses to sign on or not ... Canada is actively blocking the entire Declaration for all nations. Is that acceptable, when in fact it is a ceremonial document only anyway? That's what I don't get, and that was my original question ... Why is Harper making us look so bad when it is of no consequence? Seems to me he has his ideology glasses on instead of his mantle of governance, imo. Just seems a bit foolish. As you say, it makes no difference.

What information can you point me to that I can read up on it? What about the T&R Commission and its mandate, etc.?

I am a bit confused ... is it Tory or McGuinty proposing this? I do wonder about the cost too ... not sure how many students are involved at all, in fact. Another issue would be standardizing everything from book budgets to facility standards, etc. Sometimes harmonizing costs are high, especially teachers' salaries perhaps. I wonder how it would work if you offered it on a phase in basis ... eg, the province pick up some things like implementing its curriculum in those schools, providing program materials and resources, etc., and then other things as time goes on (buildings, etc.)

His name is published right here. There is no secret about this one ... man wants to off 3 people for personal reasons ... and he uses explosives instead of a gun, etc. The fact that he is Lebanese and used explosives to commit crimes does not automatically make him a terrorist. Give your head a shake, mikedavid. Kinda went off on a rant waaaay out there ... Hey ... has anybody else heard that the "17" were possibly led on by police ... agents provocateurs? I heard that said as if it was tru, but I haven't heard any more ... ?

It has always been racist, geoffrey. This is simply a rebalancing to where the laws should have come together ... the existing laws of this land and its people upon our arrival, and the laws we brought with us. These need to be better balanced to clarify the real relations and stop the racism both ways. You have made an astute observation there about nations with aboriginal people ... I am not sure that is entirely true, but ... it bears checking out.

Since the issue is before the General Assembly, the publ;ic question is ... what is the point of not signing if it makes no difference to Canada but does perhaps make a difference to others? And what is the point of Canada trying to sink the whole thing by aligning other nations against it? If is is a legal non-issue, why is Harper exposing us to world ridicule and scrutiny this way? I don't know these answers. If it is effectively toothless, why is he making such a big deal about it? I think the objection is that lilywhiteCanada is aligning itself with and encouraging such countries. It says a lot about Canada, is the message, I think ... the ugly underbelly part ... exposed on the international stage. Perception IS reality ... and I think Canada's cover is blown on this one. This is not what the world expects to see from Canada. The world has delusions about us we might not want to puncture

I am interested in your perspective on that ... why would an initiative like that have "nothing" to contribute? Isn't that up to us to judge once we hear it? And also what about the T&R Commission?

Well, street crime is always a legitimate concern, reason to fear. Not sure about the connection you are making to settlements, though. bit of a stretttttttcccchhhhh perhaps?