kengs333

The thing that gets me is that if there was an attempt at genocide, then why weren't the thousands and thousands of books and other printed material about Indians surpressed and burned by the Canadian government? Isn't it the government that forced the Indians to read and write so that they would be able to read all of these books and write there own? Hardly what I would call an attempt at genocide. My background constitutes the third largest ethnic group in Canada, yet I don't see my a TV channel or two specifically for us, nor do I see billions of dollars coming our way to fund educational and cultural initiatives so that we can restore our own heritage in this country. I don't recall our story ever being given special treatment in any of the history books while I was in school, even though our contribution was much more significant than what Six Nations has had to offer. But I guess true to nature, instead of making a stink about it, most of us would prefer to not live in the past and rather get on with our lives. Canada is a great country and we recognize how good we have it. We would prefer to receive the treatment we believe we deserve not based on our race, but what we accomplish and contribute to Canada.

I would hardly call you "opposition" "controversial," it's more like the expected pile of malarky that eminates from Six Nations. So you think my support is "irrelevant"--oh well. I suppose that means there was another reason for your hysterics, then? And if you don't care what people here think in general, and you post inflammitory rhetoric, outright lies, etc., and that impression is passed on by them to others and so on and so forth, until the point somewhere down the line nobody cares, and Six Nations is dealt with the way that they've always claimed they would be dealt with? Don't tell me you consider yourself one of these "great spirits"?

I don't know what polls you're talking about, but I doubt you'll enlighten me, so I don't care. Whatever the case, support largely comes from radical left wing groups, communists, anarchists and the like, some real nutbars, and maybe some moderate do-gooders who don't live nearby. But I think it says a lot when the local Conservative candidate has a sharp increase in support during the last election. One thing's for sure, you've lost some support here recently, haven't you? Hopefully that will give you something to think about.

Nicholas Sarkozy?

Yup, saga is one of her half-dozen or so known aliases. It's interesting how the discussion is delving into the issue of citizenship. I don't recall that being raised here, which I guess is a good thing because it would have gotten mighty nasty.

Well, are my eyes deceiving me, or can we finally discuss these issues in a more reasoned manner? Sadly, I think race-based thinking is something that all people in all cultures and societies on this planet use. And naturally, with Canada having been a predominantly European country for some time, this was going to have a significant impact on those who were not. But I can't think of many countried where such an effort has been made to understand ethnicity and the effects of racism, and in the last 50 years much has changed. In terms of First Nations in Canada, I think much has been done to make amends for what happened in the past; but in some circles this change in tune has been viewed as a situation that can be exploited and hence we get things like the situation in Caledonia. Unfortunately, this, along with the conduct of some of the more strident members of Six Nations--in all honesty in most cases I have heard "racist" language being used by people of the Six Nations side of the barricade--has I think done much to undermine the First Nation's image, and I truly think that there are many Canadians who have less sympathy for these people than there was several years ago. You can definitely count me among them.

What's the point of dredging up another Indian thread when we got enough already?

If anything, Six Nations should be the most successful of them all, given where it is situated; but like you say, there still seem to be some people who living in the past and are deluding others with their nonsense.

No, they created the reserve system when they realized that the initial belief that Indians would naturally want to adopt a better way of life and become good Christians wasn't going to happen, and something had to be done to protect them from people who would take advantage of them. Genocide, you say? Well, if they really wanted to accomplish that they could hve long ago. Fact of the matter is that had the government not stepped in, there probably wouldn't be all that many Indians left. There certainly wouldn't be a Six Nations, that's for sure, the way the chiefs were selling of to fuel their addictions...

To bad our ability to have childhoods that are fun come at such a cost for the rest of the world, for how else can we have the materialistic, consumeristic society that allows parents to fill their houses with cheap plastic toys by not exploiting the rest of the world. I don't think that there is a rule out there that says childhood should be fun; it should be a time when one learns to be a functional, moral, responsible person. But it definitely should be a time of innocence. Things like this happen because people are not taught to be moral; and this is the result of many things, which, were I Rue, I'd be happy to continue rambling on about for another 3,000 words or so, but there's only so much of this kind of stuff that I can stomach. The world is an inherantly evil place, and it is so because people choose to make it so.

Every forum I've ever been on it's against forum rules to intentionally alter another person's post in a response to misrepresent or distort the poster's opinion. So add that to the multitude of other violations you've perpetrated here.

...

...

That's because of the "intellectual" environment that you opperate in. Your perception of the world has become so skewed that you can't view anything from a non-racial perspective. ALL of your posts seem to do with Indians vs. European Canadians. In that respect I think you are no more healthy than Nazis were in their opinions of Jews.

Anybody have any stats on how much garbage--I mean, just the material kind--that Six Nations produces and where this all ends up?

The Bible and Indian oral history are two totally different things.

...

...

...

Ummm, no. This is an issue that they are forcing, and it's by no means about being "left alone" but stifling all criticisms so that they can openly flaunt and force their lifestyle on others. Christians don't condemn sinners; sinners condemn themselves. Inherent to Christianity is the ability for the sinner and non-believer to repent and turn one's back on their sinful past--no matter how bad. People who advocate a sinful lifestyle offer no such hope. Which is why gays are so adament (and hysterical) about notion that people can leave the gay lifestyle--it undermines their agenda.

Kevin's looking pretty European to me, and moreover, he professes to be a Christian. Strange how despite her revulsion towards both of these characteristcs, she's such a staunch advocate of Kevin's "euro-myths".

The primary reason why palisades are built is for defence. Smaller villages also would have had stores of food which also would have needed protection, so if palisades were constructed for protecting foodstores, then they should have had them as well; yet you claim they didn't. Moreover, if villages sometimes didn't have palisades, that could easily mean that during that period, there was no external threat. Villages tended to be occupied for short periods of time, c. 10 to 15 years at the most. There are descriptions of palisades being quite tall and would have required logs somewhat thicker than one or two inches. Moreover the Iroquois sometimes built two or three layers and surrounded their villages with moats--rather extreme for keeping out a few deer (deer, incidently, are easily spooked, so a few sentries would do the trick) or the odd bear (which would quickly have been attacked by the resident "warriors," no doubt). Besides, archeological evidence shows that the biggest pest in Indian villages would have been rodents, which, incidently, were consumed in large quantities. Building walls around a village is a strange way of dealing with mice. Lastly, let's cut the personal attack crap--it seems as though you just can't make a post without including some sort of pointed remark about me or my supposedly Germanic ancestors. You should try reading something about the Germanic invasions of Europe. You'll notice that there's a slight gap between the extinction of the Neanderthals and arrival of the Germanic peoples.

Posit, it still doesn't make sense; how can a more advanced society get conquered by a less advanced society that for the first several centuries was considerably outnumbered? Why was the more advanced society willing to barter luxury goods for a few scraps of metal, a few beads or trinkets? I could go on and on, but I'm not interested in getting involved in a petty flame war with you. The difference between advanced and primitive when it comes to societies is definite and indesputable. People such as yourself can't stand the fact that because of this "your side" was on the latter side of the equation, and therefore have go around playing semantics. Face it, Europeans were more advanced; that's just the way it was, and in many cases still is.

Paul was a homophobe, now, was he? Jesus preached love and forgiveness, but he also preached that sin was wrong and that people who continued to live in sin, refuse him as saviour, and go against the word of God would not attain eternal life.

Let's see some proof.