Argus Posted May 31, 2015 Report Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) You don't care about the legal definition? I don't know that I could properly describe the depths of my contempt for the legal 'profession', especially the ones who infest politics and come up with dumb, ideologically inspired definitions. If you attempt to destroy particular groups of people, their culture, religion, LAND RIGHTS and existence in law ... That's genocide. No, if you attempt to exterminate them that's genocide. The rest is dross. Using that as a reference both my Scottish and Irish ancestors were the victims of genocide too. The difference is that unlike the REAL victims of genocide, they got through it okay. Edited May 31, 2015 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 31, 2015 Report Posted May 31, 2015 The death rates in the IRS were much higher. . Cite? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted May 31, 2015 Author Report Posted May 31, 2015 deaths-at-canada-s-indian-residential-schools-need-more-study-commission- Justice Murray Sinclair, who heads the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, says the federal government stopped recording the deaths around 1920 after the chief medical officer at Indian Affairs suggested children were dying at an alarming rate. "He was fired," Sinclair says. "The government stopped recording deaths of children in residential schools, we think, probably because the rates were so high." - See more at: http://www.westmanjournal.com/news/deaths-at-canada-s-indian-residential-schools-need-more-study-commission-1.1952969#.dpuf Quote
Argus Posted May 31, 2015 Report Posted May 31, 2015 Justice Murray Sinclair, who heads the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, says the federal government stopped recording the deaths around 1920 after the chief medical officer at Indian Affairs suggested children were dying at an alarming rate. Sinclair is a native himself. I saw him on TV the other night and wasn't exactly impressed with his objectivity. Even today, kids are germ factories. Back a hundred, or even fifty years ago, without modern medicine, to say nothing of modern heating, there were a lot of deaths by disease, and yes, sometimes it was pretty alarming. Even today, the poverty and substance abuse on so many reserves mean that infant mortality rates are far higher than in Canadian society as a whole. Natives suffer worse health outcomes overall than Canadians as a whole. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted May 31, 2015 Author Report Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) Sinclair is a native himself. I saw him on TV the other night and wasn't exactly impressed with his objectivity. Even today, kids are germ factories. Back a hundred, or even fifty years ago, without modern medicine, to say nothing of modern heating, there were a lot of deaths by disease, and yes, sometimes it was pretty alarming. Even today, the poverty and substance abuse on so many reserves mean that infant mortality rates are far higher than in Canadian society as a whole. Natives suffer worse health outcomes overall than Canadians as a whole. Isolation of people with TB was the law in Canada from 1901.Children with TB were never isolated in the 'Indian' Residential Schools, exposing and infecting others. Dr Peter Bryce, Medical Examiner, reported high death rates in the schools and recommended that isolation be implemented, as it was everywhere else in Canada. He was ignored and demoted. After he retired in 1920, he wrote a book about it called 'A National Crime'. "The government stopped recording deaths of children in residential schools, we think, probably because the rates were so high." Duncan Campbell Scott preferred 'the final solution'. It was a popular idea in the 20's & 30's. The extremely high death rates in the IRS were no 'accident', nor were they similar to elsewhere at the time. It was deliberate. . Edited May 31, 2015 by jacee Quote
Argus Posted May 31, 2015 Report Posted May 31, 2015 The extremely high death rates in the IRS were no 'accident', nor were they similar to elsewhere at the time. It was deliberate. There's that insulting and pathetic attempt to compare this to the Holocaust again. I've seen nothing to indicate any attempt at extermination. What the government wanted was to assimilate the natives, which was thought to be in their own best interests. And logically speaking, it was. If natives had been assimilated into Canadian society they'd be way better off today than being kept as living museum relics out in the boonies on 'reservations' where they have no work. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted May 31, 2015 Author Report Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) There's that insulting and pathetic attempt to compare this to the Holocaust again. I've seen nothing to indicate any attempt at extermination. Genocide takes several forms. In this case one of them was failure to implement isolation of children with TB when isolation was the law, against the advice of the medical examiner (who was fired). The high death rates in the schools were 'consistent with government policy': It is readily acknowledged that Indian children lose their natural resistance to illness by habituating so closely in the residential schools and that they die at a much higher rate than in their villages. But this does not justify a change in the policy of this Department which is geared towards a final solution of our Indian Problem." -Duncan Campbell Scott, Head of Indian Affairs (1920) The government stopped keeping records of deaths. What the government wanted was to assimilate the natives, which was thought to be in their own best interests. And logically speaking, it was. If natives had been assimilated into Canadian society they'd be way better off today than being kept as living museum relics out in the boonies on 'reservations' where they have no work. Forced assimilation is genocide.And in this case it was all about attempting to destroy their land and other rights. Edited May 31, 2015 by jacee Quote
Argus Posted June 1, 2015 Report Posted June 1, 2015 Genocide takes several forms. No it doesn't. It might have many aspects, but they all have the same desire, which is the extermination of people. Assimilation is not extermination. Most everyone in Canada today came from some other culture and has assimilated into the Canadian mainstream. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 1, 2015 Report Posted June 1, 2015 This is a reasonably accurate explanation of my feelings on the 'genocide' misuse. The temptation to equate yet another event to genocide further muddies that word’s strength for when it really needs to apply. Popular remembrance of the Holocaust and the massacre of the Armenians would be declining anyway due to the passage of time. But the decline is worsened by the incessant abuse of these events by those whose plight, however bad, is not proportionate to the language that they are invoking.http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/jackson-doughart-call-residential-schools-almost-anything-else-but-dont-call-them-genocide Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted June 1, 2015 Author Report Posted June 1, 2015 100 years of forcible removal of children. "cultural" genocide ... ? Anyway, you disagree with international law. But Canadian law is notably lacking the "forcible removal" clause. . Quote
jacee Posted June 1, 2015 Author Report Posted June 1, 2015 No it doesn't. It might have many aspects, but they all have the same desire, which is the extermination of people. Assimilation is not extermination. Most everyone in Canada today came from some other culture and has assimilated into the Canadian mainstream. By choice. . Quote
Argus Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 100 years of forcible removal of children. How many were removed forceably vs parents who wanted their kids to get an education? How many then returned home? You are using a term which suggests the children were stolen and given to other families to raise and that's simply not the case. You are also ignoring that 2/3rds of natives were educated at local schools. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.