raz395

Yes, clearly priests don't accept homosexuality, or the homosexual Catholics would be able to live in peace. However, it is pedophilia, which is unrelated, where the Catholic Church really seem to 'shine'. :angry: I don't know how anyone who has listened to the news in the last 10 years or more can have any respect at all for the Catholic Church, the way it conducts itself to protect itself at the expense of innocent children. It is a thoroughly sick and perverted institution, imo, and it bothers me a lot that Catholic people don't stand up and walk out! The guilt trips the Catholic church teaches people have nothing to do with 'sin' but only to do with the power and control of the church over the people. In the context of this topic ... residential schools ... the other churches are no better, though they have at least acknowledged that children did die there. The Catholic church continues to lie to protect itself. Apparently there is no sin in lying, cheating, stealing land, abusing and murdering kids ... but only in talking about it.

Dave General had to retract that, Riverwind. He also lost the election. I was on the site a lot last year. There is no safer place in the universe. Except for a racist pig like McHale. I see his followers are here. What is it about mapleleafweb that attracts the white supremacists?

So we are agreed an impartial investigation is necessary, because that is the only issue really. You are INCREDIBLY naive. The churches brought Christianity to the 'savages' so the churches could take possession of their land, sell it and make a bundle of money, which they have. So have governments and corporations, and EVERY CANADIAN who benefits from our healthy economy. The only people who never benefited from Indigenous land were the titleholders themselves. They did want to kill them and they did. Watch the film, if you have the courage, because you certainly need an education in these aspects of your own history. That is now changing, and about time.

Fromm is guilty of plain old fashioned defamation. Not a political issue at all. I agree that in a civil society one needs to build bonds. However, I have a sneaking suspicion I would find it easier to forge a bond with anyone from any culture except you, given your white superiority complex and narrow-minded thinking. Multiculturalism is a success from my perspective, because we have learned that the things that allow people to forge those bonds have nothing to do with what culture they come from.

My point is simply that the issues are important, and unclear enough to warrant a full and impartial investigation, especially since this has been called for by the families of children who died in the schools. I see no reason to deny a public hearing on these issues.

Who knows what their motivations were. It is quite possible there is a murderer among them. Each situation requires its own investigation. It is the matter of "intent" that must be addressed. I see, of course, that the government policy was assimilation. Assimilation by choice is not genocide, perhaps, but how does one evaluate whether free choice was provided? I think that is the issue in terms of the distinction. When assimilation becomes a policy, can it any longer be a 'free choice'? I don't think so. It appears that mandatory attendance at the residential schools was a large part of the policy, and such attendance was a death sentence for half of them, by DC Scott's own report. DC Scott found this not a reason to change the policy of the Department. It appears that deliberate exposure was rampant in the schools as well, for half a century, well beyond the time when methods to contain opoutbreaks were known and used elsewhere, and in spite of Dr. Bryce's exhortations of school and Ministry staff to implement these. At what point does deliberate negligence become mass murder? It also appears, from the film, that involuntarily sterilization of Indigenous leaders (funded by the government) was part of the 'program'. I can't see how that is 'free choice' nor how it is consistent with 'assimilation'. It is extermination. Also, Dr. Bryce's decades long campaign suggests reason for concern. Inaction is 'intent' if it is deliberate. Dr. Bryce's belief, from his observations of the inaction from the government and the churches was that it was "deliberate". The information certainly suggests a need for a full and impartial investigation, which is all that Kevin Annett is asking for. I certainly agree. The United Church also voiced that need, and I believe the Anglican Church has also expressed concern about the issue of the children who died in the schools. I don't see how anyone could deny the need for an investigation of criminal intent. It is pretty clear.

You are not off the hook on that, Bill: It is your responsibility as a citizen in a democracy to inform yourself of the facts, and NOT to promote or use stereotypes to make blanket judgments about people. Your ignorance is not an excuse for aggressive opinions that are damaging to people. That is not acceptable in our society. EVERYONE is responsible for verifying their facts and for avoiding misjudging people. The point is the Band is not interested in leasing the land any longer. What the government may have led people to believe may be different than the truth the Band told the government. And the point is you are promoting negative stereotypes with no evidence. You are a classic victim of systemic propaganda: You believe that crap. Grow up kid. Your argument seems to be that the actions of Six Nations will make it difficult for them to "do business" with the non-native community. It is really a bit of a non-argument, isn't it, since they are trying to get non-native businesses off their land. It is also already proven wrong, of course, by the number of developers who do choose to do business with them, and the local residents who appreciate their help in stopping the toxic dumping. And the Ontario Minister of Aboriginal Affairs says: "This isn't just about a constitutional and moral duty," Bryant said. "It's in our overall economic self-interest to better that relationship."

This 2004 book presents an interesting perspective: The role of accounting in 'holocausts'. Accounting and the holocausts of modernity Author(s): Dean Neu, Cameron Graham Journal: Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal ISSN: 0951-3574 Year: 2004 Volume: 17 Issue: 4 Page: 578 - 603 DOI: 10.1108/09513570410554560 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Abstract: The current study explores the ambiguity of accounting technique in the context of a historical study of the Canadian Indian Department under the direction of Deputy Superintendent D.C. Scott at the beginning of the 20th century. Starting from the work of Bauman and his commentators, we argue that modernity viewed as a set of practices and thought patterns, facilitates bureaucratic constructions of the “Indian problem” In turn, this cultural milieu and bureaucratic construction operated as an ideological circle, encouraging the use of accounting techniques of governance that permitted both the distancing of bureaucrats from indigenous peoples and the downplaying of other vantage points. However, as our analysis highlights, numerical re-presentations also provided the tools and rhetorical spaces for challenges to government policy. 'protected' from our own history. This topic is more disturbing all the time.

This is an interesting comment. Can you expand on this? we have to understand how people who believed they were helping natives ended up running schools that caused so much harm." I am curious about HOW you think this came about, whether by accident or policy. You mentioned "underfunding" which is a matter of policy. Can you be clearer about how this may have happened? Another issue ... considering previous posters requests for comparable stats for deaths among Indians and the general population ... in Dr. Bryce's very interesting 1922 book "The Story of a National Crime, Being An Appeal for Justice to the Indians of Canada, The Wards of the Nations, Our Allies in the Revolutionary War, Our Brothers-in-Arms in the Great War", one finds: The memorandum prepared by the writer in 1918 further showed that the city of Hamilton with a population greater than the total Indian population had reduced the death rate from tuberculosis in the same period, from 1904 to 1917, by nearly 75 per cent, having in 1916 actually only 68 deaths. The memorandum further states, "If a similar method had been introduced amongst the bands on the health-giving uplands of Alberta, much might have been done to prevent such a splendid race of warriors as the Blackfeet from decreasing from 842 in 1904 to 726 in 191,6, or, allowing for natural increase, an actual loss of 40 per cent, since they should have numbered at least 1,011." And Thus we find a sum of only $10.000 has been annually placed in the estimates to control tuberculosis amongst 105,000 Indians scattered over Canada in over 300 bands, while the City of Ottawa, with about the same population and having three general hospitals spent thereon $342,860.54 in 1919 of which $33,364.70 is devoted to tuberculous patients alone. The many difficulties of our problem amongst the Indians have been frequently pointed out, but the means to cope with these have also been made plain. It can only be said that any cruder or weaker arguments by a Prime Minister holding the position of responsibility to these treaty wards of Canada could hardly be conceived... The degree and extent of this criminal disregard for the treaty pledges to guard the welfare of the Indian wards of the nation may be guaged from the facts once more brought out at the meeting of the National Tuberculosis Association at its annual meeting held in Ottawa on March 17th, 1922. The superintendent of the Qu'Appelle Sanatorium, Sask., gave there the results of a special study of 1575 children of school age in which advantage was taken of the most modern scientific methods. Of these 175 were Indian children, and it is very remarkable that the fact given that some 93 per cent, of these showed evidence of tuberculous infection coincides completely with the work done by Dr. Lafferty and the writer in the Alberta Indian schools in 1909. It is indeed pitiable that during the thirteen years since then this trail of disease and death has gone on almost unchecked by any serious efforts on the part of the Department of Indian Affairs, placed by the B. N. A. Act especially in charge of our Indian population, and that a Provincial Tuberculosis Commission now considers it to be its duty to publish the facts regarding these children living within its own Province.

Well that isn't my opinion at all.

In your opinion.

Oh pshaw! Duncan Campbell Scott knew exactly what he was doing. While a few officials and churchmen rejected Bryce's findings and attacked him as a "medical faddist",164 most had to agree with him,165 and no less an authority than Scott asserted that, system-wide, "fifty per cent of the children who passed through these schools did not live to benefit from the education which they had received therein."166 (In 1913) Not only was this, in the words of Saturday Night, "a situation disgraceful to the country",167 but in the opinion of S.H. Blake, QC, who assisted in negotiations for the 1911 contracts, because the department had done nothing over the decades "to obviate the preventable causes of death, [it] brings itself within unpleasant nearness to the charge of manslaughter."168 The churches too bore responsibility for what Bryce characterized, in a pamphlet published in 1922, as a "national crime",169 but the department had a special responsibility. In the order in council of 1892 and in the 1911 contracts, it had taken to itself the authority to set standards and had instituted a regulation requiring that prospective students receive a health certificate signed by a doctor. This check, which would supposedly prevent tubercular children being taken into the schools, was — like so many other regulations relating to care of the children, such as those regarding clothes, food and discipline — implemented carelessly by the department and ignored by many school and departmental officials. Such laxity even continued, Scott admitted, in the decades after Bryce's report.170 Indeed, in those decades, almost nothing was done about tuberculosis in the schools, so that Bryce's charge that "this trail of disease and death has gone on almost unchecked by any serious efforts on the part of the Department of Indian Affairs",171 was sorrowfully correct. The department did not even launch a full investigation of the system. Again the explanation for this persistent carelessness was, in part, the government's refusal to fund the schools adequately to carry out a program of renovations to improve health conditions, which senior officials themselves proposed, or to undertake special measures, recommended by health authorities, to intervene in the case of sick children.172 In a number of instances it did implement, because it was relatively cheap, a radical course of action — mass surgery, performed on school tables, to remove teeth, tonsils and adenoids, believed to be the frequent seats of infection.173 Not surprisingly, conditions did not improve; schools in 1940 were still not being maintained "in a reasonable state",174 and the few reports extant on the health of the children, which are scattered and sketchy (for the department never set up a procedure to monitor health) point to the continuation of alarmingly high rates of infection.175 The dramatic tuberculosis story, which chronicles what Bryce suggested was the government's "criminal disregard" for the "welfare of the Indian wards of the nation",176 cannot be allowed to distract attention from the fact that the care of the children in almost every other area was also tragically substandard. Throughout the history of the system many children were, as the principal of St. George's testified in 1922, "ill-fed and ill-clothed and turned out into the cold to work", trapped and "unhappy with a feeling of slavery existing in their minds" and with no escape but in "thought".177 - 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; - Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; - Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. It does look like a very ... complete picture.

Well as I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not as clear as you paint it ... and it is clear that you are attempting to 'paint it' rather than consider the evidence. "It appears to be an opinion piece?" Judge without even looking? Reject reports of human personal experience as ... opinion? And you are overly insistent that this just can't be true. Well perhaps in your world, but sheesh... Can those of us who are interested at least discuss the evidence here on the board in public? This is civilized discourse, after all?

You are entitled to your opinion, though it would be interesting to hear your response to the information in the film directly, rather than demanding my impressions of it to dump on. sheesh! Obviously what I think about it is not the critical factor: it is the information itself that is critical to YOUR understanding. knock yerself out fella!

I beg pardon? No that's not what I said at all. Good grief, you have a strong denial-wish there fella! I said a death rate that high cannot be natural - i.e, must have been deliberately engineered I think. I mean ... come on ... the kids died at 10x the rate of their families, and the families died at the highest rates ever recorded? 10x the highest recorded 'natural' ... is not an accident, not with the other evidence presented.