Ex-First Nations head acquitted in hate trial

[stignasty]

Seriously, can this board sink any lower than this thread?

[CANADIEN]

Genocide is eliminating a cultural period via extreme aggression.

I wonder what is the English translation of "cultural period". Does not change the fact that what Hitler intended and implemented was genocide.

[guyser]

Genocide is eliminating a cultural period via extreme aggression.

So, they only killed the 'cultural period?" Did it last 4 days and they are all bitchy and mean?

Aggressive Trudeau was also guilty of cultural imperialism by artificially injecting the culture of a minority language into the majority English language.

You could of course show us where he 'injected ' it could you not?

I had lots of needles as a youngster, you know asthma and all, but I dont ever remember getting injected with a minority language . I can ask my doc if he did should you wish.

I get IT every night.

Is what you get 'every night' this?

http://www.myarthritismanager.com/aaMED001.htm

[guyser]

Seriously, can this board sink any lower than this thread?

a certain 'de-nuded plant' will keep on trying, so yes I guess it will.

[Leafless]

Seriously, can this board sink any lower than this thread?

Yes, but is only made worse by posters like you who cannot face the reality that dominance over other cultures is a recognized fact of life.

Get over it and accept it.

[Oleg Bach]

So what if the doinky old Chieftan noticed that there were a lot of badly behaved Jews causing confusion in our institutions - well I could say the same thing and be branded an anti- This man bought into the whole Protocols of what ever...which is a dead and mythical document...If a Jew behaves badly - why not say - that Jew is a jerk - or that Catholic is a pediphile power sucking parasite - or that Musslim is a hater with murder on his mind...or that black gang banger is a coward because he carries a gun and is a fatherless idot and a hetro- f*g) .....no one group should have the privledge of a protective cloak when they commit nastyness. Leave the poor chief alone - no his fault he only understool but HALF of what was going on - as for the old anglo buisness elite - I have only praise for these guys - if underlings want be henchmen so be it ---- Just like the release of black gangster who commit crimes of violence --- RELEASE THEM SO THEY CAN KILL EACH OTHER AND BE GONE ----It is up to them - behave or die by your own hand..

[Griz]

So what if the doinky old Chieftan noticed that there were a lot of badly behaved Jews causing confusion in our institutions - well I could say the same thing and be branded an anti- This man bought into the whole Protocols of what ever...which is a dead and mythical document...If a Jew behaves badly - why not say - that Jew is a jerk - or that Catholic is a pediphile power sucking parasite - or that Musslim is a hater with murder on his mind...or that black gang banger is a coward because he carries a gun and is a fatherless idot and a hetro- f*g) .....no one group should have the privledge of a protective cloak when they commit nastyness. Leave the poor chief alone - no his fault he only understool but HALF of what was going on - as for the old anglo buisness elite - I have only praise for these guys - if underlings want be henchmen so be it ---- Just like the release of black gangster who commit crimes of violence --- RELEASE THEM SO THEY CAN KILL EACH OTHER AND BE GONE ----It is up to them - behave or die by your own hand..

Go have more vodka Oleg

[charter.rights]

Go have more vodka Oleg

Actually, those are the rantings of an "Aqua Velva" man.....

[Leafless]

You could of course show us where he 'injected ' it could you not?

Very briefly and relating to cultural imperialism.

Cultural injection # 1:

Closed every door possible to conventional immigration from British Isles and Western Europe and based new immigration policy on human rights agenda. This resulted in large numbers of ethnic immigrants who further created more minority groups in Canada all being thankful and under the control of the Liberal government resulting in votes for the Liberals.

The switch to ethnic immigration was never asked for by Canadian citizens nor was immigration based on human rights legislation.

Cultural injection # 2:

The Official Language Policy of 1969:

Especially created to make Canada's English/French population bilingual which failed miserably besides costing an estimated $17-billion every year to maintain with an estimated cost of around a trillion dollars since it's introduction.

This language policy resulted in a high level of animosity between English/French since it was seen by many as nothing more than a affirmative action plan to create French employment thus forcing English speaking Canadians to be excluded from jobs.

Cultural injection # 3:

The Multicultural Policy of Canada 1971:

Changed the traditional way immigrants were absorbed into the system by allowing them to learn the language and allowing immigrants to adapt to the ways of Canadians.

Since the introduction of this policy it allowed immigrant cultures to be seen as equal to the Canadian culture and if pursued immigrant cultural demands could be or would be accommodated by government via financial grants or cultural promotion.

Many Canadians see this as a form of apartheid or a Canadian style dictatorship.

Cultural injection # 4:

The Charter of rights and Freedoms:

Fought for freedoms altered to government dictated freedoms and rights controlled by judges and government dictating the conditions of our freedoms.

Canadians previously had no problem with federal and provincial Bill of Rights but NOT enshrined in the Constitution of Canada.

Edited February 28, 2009 by Leafless

[CANADIEN]

Very briefly and relating to cultural imperialism.

Cultural injection # 1:

Closed every door possible to conventional immigration from British Isles and Western Europe and based new immigration policy on human rights agenda. This resulted in large numbers of ethnic immigrants who further created more minority groups in Canada all being thankful and under the control of the Liberal government resulting in votes for the Liberals.

The switch to ethnic immigration was never asked for by Canadian citizens nor was immigration based on human rights legislation.

Cultural injection # 2:

The Official Language Policy of 1969:

Especially created to make Canada's English/French population bilingual which failed miserably besides costing an estimated $17-billion every year to maintain with an estimated cost of around a trillion dollars since it's introduction.

This language policy resulted in a high level of animosity between English/French since it was seen by many as nothing more than a affirmative action plan to create French employment thus forcing English speaking Canadians to be excluded from jobs.

Cultural injection # 3:

The Multicultural Policy of Canada 1971:

Changed the traditional way immigrants were absorbed into the system by allowing them to learn the language and allowing immigrants to adapt to the ways of Canadians.

Since the introduction of this policy it allowed immigrant cultures to be seen as equal to the Canadian culture and if pursued immigrant cultural demands could be or would be accommodated by government via financial grants or cultural promotion.

Many Canadians see this as a form of apartheid or a Canadian style dictatorship.

Cultural injection # 4:

The Charter of rights and Freedoms:

Fought for freedoms altered to government dictated freedoms and rights controlled by judges and government dictating the conditions of our freedoms.

Canadians previously had no problem with federal and provincial Bill of Rights but NOT enshrined in the Constitution of Canada.

Thanks for confirming that (1) "cultural injection" is a term in the leafless-ish language, not the English language; (2) you hate the idea of human rights, and (3) you are clueless.

Now back to the topic of the First Nation leader found not-guilty of inciting hatred. He did not break the law, but he still a low-life.

[Leafless]

Thanks for confirming that (1) "cultural injection" is a term in the leafless-ish language, not the English language

Now, now.

Cultural injection means:

artificially injecting the culture or language of one culture into another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_imperialism

(2) you hate the idea of human rights,

I have always supported federal and provincial Bill of Rights.

But I don't support them being enshrined in the Constitution and dictated by corrupt, envious, jealous politicians and interpreted by judges who both mimic the actions of tin pot dictators.

and (3) you are clueless.

Ha-ha-ha.

Not nearly as clueless as you are.

[CANADIEN]

I have always supported federal and provincial Bill of Rights.

But I don't support them being enshrined in the Constitution and dictated by corrupt, envious, jealous politicians and interpreted by judges who both mimic the actions of tin pot dictators.

English translation: human rights legislation is OK as long as it is toothless and can easily be overturned.

Not nearly as clueless as you are.

:lol:

Now, anything to say about the topic of the thread, or you feel (for once) that you have made enough of a fool of yourself when you repeated the c*ap you found on some anti-semitic garbage site?

Edited February 28, 2009 by CANADIEN

[g_bambino]

Canadians previously had no problem with federal and provincial Bill of Rights but NOT enshrined in the Constitution of Canada.

Er, Canada's entire constitutional system is built on a bill of rights: the Magna Carta. Jeez, you should remove the letters "l-e-a-f" from your handle and replace them with "c-l-u-e".

[Leafless]

English translation: human rights legislation is OK as long as it is toothless and can easily be overturned.

English translation: human rights legislation falling into the hands and used by traitor DICTATORS like Quebec's Trudeau.

Now, anything to say about the topic of the thread, or you feel (for once) that you have made enough of a fool of yourself when you repeated the c*ap you found on some anti-semitic garbage site?

I didn't repeat any crap as it was posted to let anyone who reads it be the judge.

The root of the problem is 'human nature' and the quest for dominance utilizing aggression.

This is of course unlike the artificial dominance demonstrated by Quebec's Trudeau and his Charter based on cultural imperialism.

Edited March 1, 2009 by Leafless

[charter.rights]

English translation: human rights legislation falling into the hands and used by traitor DICTATORS like Quebec's Trudeau.

I didn't repeat any crap as it was posted to let anyone who reads it be the judge.

The root of the problem is 'human nature' and the quest for dominance utilizing aggression.

This is of course unlike the artificial dominance demonstrated by Quebec's Trudeau and his Charter based on cultural imperialism.

No. The root of the problem is British colonial mythology that deludes you into thinking that your "pureness" somehow have more rights than anyone else to be in Canada. Chances are if you family came here after 1820 you are an immigrant. If they came before 1820 then you are either aboriginal, Metis or descended from immigrants.

[Leafless]

Er, Canada's entire constitutional system is built on a bill of rights: the Magna Carta. Jeez, you should remove the letters "l-e-a-f" from your handle and replace them with "c-l-u-e".

If you know anything about the Magna Carta issued by King John on the field of Runnymede in 1215 AD, then YOU KNOW it was the begining of the limitation of the power of the King TO RULE as he saw fit and the foundation of our laws and rights.

You also must surely know that the extensive rights outlined in the Magna caused generation after generation of all classes of people to fight to secure their rights by reference to the Magna Carta. It took many revolts, wars ( civil, religious and otherwise) to accomplish our rights history.

It seems you prefer returning to the pre-Maga Carta days and are sleeping in the same 'power like a King Trudeau bed' as CANADIEN.

You two clueless idiots deserve each other.

[Leafless]

No. The root of the problem is British colonial mythology that deludes you into thinking that your "pureness" somehow have more rights than anyone else to be in Canada. Chances are if you family came here after 1820 you are an immigrant. If they came before 1820 then you are either aboriginal, Metis or descended from immigrants.

Another Trudeau fanatic living in fantasy land by way of a Charter that should be scrapped.

[charter.rights]

Another Trudeau fanatic living in fantasy land by way of a Charter that should be scrapped.

Another "clue"less pontificator trying to replace delusion with reality.

[g_bambino]

You two clueless idiots deserve each other.

Uh huh. Though you're right about my full understanding of the Magna Carta and its implications, it's irrelevant to the point that you stated you were against the constitutional entrenchment of rights, when, all along, you've been living under a constitution built on a document that was itself a bill of rights. You thus contradict yourself, for it is without the Magna Carta that we'd be living under the kind of absolute rule you say prime ministers presently give us.

[Leafless]

Uh huh. Though you're right about my full understanding of the Magna Carta and its implications, it's irrelevant to the point that you stated you were against the constitutional entrenchment of rights, when, all along, you've been living under a constitution built on a document that was itself a bill of rights.

You mean 'was a bill of rights' relating to the previous federal 'Bill of Rights'.

The constitution Act 1982 otherwise known as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a unilaterally federally-judicial altered document that does not serve or support the interest or will of the majority but caters to the ideologies under the guise of rights to ethnic groups, Quebec, special interest groups, Aboriginals that has created a dysfunctional society.

You thus contradict yourself, for it is without the Magna Carta that we'd be living under the kind of absolute rule you say prime ministers presently give us.

The Constitution relating to rights is not a document meant for federal government politicians to unilaterally alter, discriminate or abuse against the rights of the will of the majority citizens of Canada under any circumstances. This of course includes the fanatical politician created official multicultural policy and official languages policy.

It is obvious the earned rights and will of majority of Canadians means nothing and the power of the king prevails.

[g_bambino]

You mean 'was a bill of rights' relating to the previous federal 'Bill of Rights'.

As usual, you completely dodge the point in favour of yet more vitriolic rambling. You said you could not tolerate constiutionally entrenched rights. You, however, have lived your entire life (I presume) under a constitution that not only includes, but grew from a bill of rights. By your argument, then, all constitutional development from 1215 on should be discared, and we should return to the absolute rule of kings. Yet, at the same time, you complain about how prime ministers apparantly rule like absolute kings!

As with the matter of your thinking Canada is still governed by the British parliament via our monarch, I suspect that here too you won't admit your error. And, as long as you refuse to do so, rational discussion can never take place. Your kooky mouth frothings can be amusing sometimes, though.

[Leafless]

You said you could not tolerate constiutionally entrenched rights.

I am in favour of totally scrapping the corrupt, discriminatory Charter for reasons I have previously posted.

You, however, have lived your entire life (I presume) under a constitution that not only includes, but grew from a bill of rights.

So have all other Canadians, within that time frame, who have grew up with (not constitutionally enshrined) federal and provincial bill of rights prior to the corrupt Charter. Amazing isn't it.

By your argument, then, all constitutional development from 1215 on should be discared and we should return to the absolute rule of kings.

We had no role in British constitutional development.

We inherited the rights granted to all British imperial subjects by the constitutionally-limited monarchy of Queen Victoria, the individual rights that Britons had won after 600 years of political & military battle.

But lets face it most of our Charter rights are derived from the U.N.'s Declaration of Human Rights which is only a guide and is not compulsary.

Politicians have suckered Canadians in using rights from this human rights guide to achieve their own personal cultural goals and political agenda AKA social engineering.

This certainly is not a very friendly thing to do to law abiding Canadians who have developed their own majority culture and traditions. In fact I would say this is a criminal action against law abiding Canadians.

Yet, at the same time, you complain about how prime ministers apparantly rule like absolute kings!

I am not complaining, I am stating a FACT.

As with the matter of your thinking Canada is still governed by the British parliament via our monarch,

All I was suggesting is the Monarchy still has a role in Canadian politics. Why drag other threads into this one. You are confusing enough as it is.

In fact relating to what I previously posted I am in favor of abolishing the Monarchy. Read it.

Your kooky mouth frothings can be amusing sometimes, though.

And a lot less kooky than you favouring the current corrupt Charter of Rights and Freedoms dictated by politicians who rule like a king.

[Oleg Bach]

Collective kingship is rule by committee...and committees are still mob rule - no matter how refined - conspiratorial mob rule at that! I would rather see one benevolent king than 20 idealogs attempting to agree to disagree.

[charter.rights]

We inherited the rights granted to all British imperial subjects by the constitutionally-limited monarchy of Queen Victoria, the individual rights that Britons had won after 600 years of political & military battle.

But lets face it most of our Charter rights are derived from the U.N.'s Declaration of Human Rights which is only a guide and is not compulsary.

Make up your mind. Either you are saying that we inherited our rights from the monarchy, or we derived them from the UN. Although neither is correct.

Our rights are developed mainly form our aboriginal peoples -the circle of inclusiveness and the egalitarian society they modeled on early contact and our ancestors adapted to. Peace, harmony and good government was essentially derived from them as a hybrid of that understanding that inclusiveness was necessary in a struggling society. Nothing of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms mirrors the Magna Carta, or British / European societal concepts. While the UN does provide some similar entrenchments it is more likely derived from input by us as well as other aboriginal styled societies who favour the same concepts and ideologies. It revloves around the concepts of inclusiveness, peace and harmony.

The Magna Carta and Monarchy are essentially based on specific laws and practices that reinforced the right of the Church and the Monarchy over the commoner. It protects the Monarchy and more over protects assets from seizure far more than it protects the individual.

Our Charter is more more broad and less defined than any other western state. It is loose specifically so that we as a society can refine the meanings and challenge the rigidity that is often found in other similar documents. While it does leave certain uncertainity, it definitely threatens the myths of those who so often despise it.

Edited March 3, 2009 by charter.rights

[jbg]

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/591647

Does David Ahenakew have a point:

Food for thought:

"The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany"

http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptori...es/jdecwar.html

Despite the fact that this "Declaration" is mindless drivel, as a Jew and as a free man I defend Ahenakaw's right to spout mindless garbage. Democracy is not a system for cowards; it is built for people who argue the merits of their position in the sunshine. Ridiculous ideas are exposed for what they are; good ideas are built upon and benefit everybody.

That Ahenekaw was prosecuted is a travesty.