Truth and Reconciliation... Legitimacy

[Smallc]

Is that what you were trying to do....ha ha

You can't understand something without appropriate context - in this case, the historical context.

[jacee]

No one was trying to exterminate the aboriginal population, or even their culture.

It was really their land rights that we tried to exterminate ... which necessitated destroying their culture.

.

[Smallc]

It was really their land rights that we tried to exterminate ... which necessitated destroying their culture.

No it didn't. That doesn't even make any sense.

[On Guard for Thee]

No one was trying to destroy aboriginal people. Culturecide would be more appropriate.

Of course not. They just wanted to give them a nice squeaky white education so they kidnapped them for over 100 years and had their way with them. And if a few die (6000 or so), they just dug a hole. No playgrounds, just burial grounds.

[Smallc]

Of course not. They just wanted to give them a nice squeaky white education so they kidnapped them for over 100 years and had their way with them. And if a few die (6000 or so), they just dug a hole. No playgrounds, just burial grounds.

That sounds a lot like the way my Ukrainian grandmother talked about school. It was even worse for her mother. Historical context, remember?

Edited June 3, 2015 by Smallc

[Je suis Omar]

That sounds a lot like the way my Ukrainian grandmother talked about school. It was even worse for her mother. Historical context, remember?

Historical context isn't remotely a defence for genocide, murder, rape, sexual assault, any crime.

[jacee]

No one was trying to destroy aboriginal people. Culturecide would be more appropriate (if we were doing what we were accused of)

Trying to destroy their culture and force them into ours is destruction of them as peoples ... "as such" ... and it is genocide.

It doesn't necessarily refer to death, though that's one way.

Another way of destroying a particular group is to sterilize them.

Another way is forcibly transferring their children to another group/culture.

The victims of the 'sixties scoop' are also preparing a class action suit I believe.

.

Edited June 3, 2015 by jacee

[On Guard for Thee]

That sounds a lot like the way my Ukrainian grandmother talked about school. It was even worse for her mother. Historical context, remember?

Historical context doesnt ease the facts.

[Je suis Omar]

No one was trying to destroy aboriginal people. Culturecide would be more appropriate (if we were doing what we were accused of)

You're focusing on things that you don't fully understand, S, and ignoring what actually matters, the legal definition and its not too too complicated provisions.

It's all at the link below.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24578-truth-and-reconciliation/page-11

Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide:

1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and

2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide."

As is mentioned further on in the notes, "in whole or in part", is very very important. As you start to go thru these definitions you will see clearly that every section, or almost every section, describes what Canada and Canadians did to First Nations peoples.

[Accountability Now]

Tim, Argus and AccNow don't generally need any information to make up their minds.

Not worth my time.

I just correct their errors in information for the benefit of others reading here.

.

Do you mean like the information I provided on only 30% of native kids actually attending the residential schools? Haven't seen you respond to that one yet.

Nor have I seen you respond to the fact that you guys can blab all you want about the UN definition for genocide and how your wise minds decipher its meaning but yet the UN has not called it genocide even after being asked directly to do so.

Don't worry Jacee...Omar won't come near this one either. I guess it isn't worth your time to be set straight.

[Accountability Now]

It was really their land rights that we tried to exterminate ... which necessitated destroying their culture.

.

They already exterminated those by treaty. remember....cede and surrender all rights.

[Je suis Omar]

Historical context doesnt ease the facts.

Or, at least as important, the legalities.

Where in Sam hell has everybody got to?

[jacee]

Do you mean like the information I provided on only 30% of native kids actually attending the residential schools? Haven't seen you respond to that one yet.

Nor have I seen you respond to the fact that you guys can blab all you want about the UN definition for genocide and how your wise minds decipher its meaning but yet the UN has not called it genocide even after being asked directly to do so.

That's the job of the international court (ICC), not the UN, should they decide to pursue it.

Anaya's not going to meddle in an ongoing Truth Commission.

However, I expect that the Commission's use of the term 'cultural genocide' is intended to avoid the possibility of Indigenous Peoples going to the ICC.

.

[Smallc]

That's the job of the international court (ICC)

A body which can do nothing to the state or country of Canada.

[jacee]

They already exterminated those by treaty. remember....cede and surrender all rights.

Except the right to sustain themselves from the land.

Thus the existence of the duty to consult and accommodate ... the right to a say in development and a share in revenues.

But you know that.

.

[Accountability Now]

That's the job of the international court (ICC), not the UN, should they decide to pursue it.

Anaya's not going to meddle in an ongoing Truth Commission.

However, I expect that the Commission's use of the term 'cultural genocide' is intended to avoid the possibility of Indigenous Peoples going to the ICC.

.

BS. The UN comments on lots of things including everything else aboriginal. Not to mention...why did they go to to Anaya URGING him to call it a genocide if they knew he wouldn't. Utter BS. The UN hasn't and won't call it genocide because it's not.

Btw....no answer on the 30% thing? I guess you're feeling stupid after your 'research' comment?

[jacee]

God it would be nice to have an intelligent discussion with decent Canadians about this important issue.

Instead of these cement headed racists.

.

[Accountability Now]

Except the right to sustain themselves from the land.

Thus the existence of the duty to consult and accommodate ... the right to a say in development and a share in revenues.

But you know that.

.

This is hilarious!!!!! You said the so called genocide was put in place to exterminate land rights. Now you are saying that the treaties didn't exterminate them back then because Of the duty to consult and accommodate.....which has only recently been enforced in the courts...not back when the schools started. Lmfao. When the treaties were signed we didn't have bleeding heart courts to misinterpret deals that were just made and no one could speculate on the intent because the people that signed were still alive. Another fail jacee

[poochy]

The Jews were not exterminated ... anihilated. They are still here.

It is the intent ... an attempt to destroy a particular group ... that defines genocide.

.

You are one of the most dishonest people i have ever come across, you're right, the Germans didn't quite manage to get it done, they only murdered several million Jews, while in Canada children died while in the custody of the church and the government, and that was wrong, but at no time did anyone attempt to murder all native people, or even attempt to systematically murder the children that went to those schools. 4 out of every 100 children died at those schools, what was the death rate outside of them? even if it was 0 out of 100, which at that time was very unlikely, it would still be a very poor attempt at extermination.

[Smallc]

God it would be nice to have an intelligent discussion with decent Canadians about this important issue.

So you're going to leave it to the rest of us, then?

[Accountability Now]

God it would be nice to have an intelligent discussion with decent Canadians about this important issue.

Instead of these cement headed racists.

.

Discussion? By that you mean your copy and paste jobs of the daily rhetoric du jour? I know it bothers you that people actually think for themselves and are able to show you the faults in your so called facts

[poochy]

Perhaps you are more comfortable with ethnocide.

We could debate that, but it wasn't genocide, wouldn't it have be great if you just be honest about it in the first place.

[poochy]

Trying to destroy their culture and force them into ours is destruction of them as peoples ... "as such" ... and it is genocide.

No, it isnt genocide. It is more than wrong enough without you diminishing the meaning of that word.

[poochy]

Do you mean like the information I provided on only 30% of native kids actually attending the residential schools? Haven't seen you respond to that one yet.

Nor have I seen you respond to the fact that you guys can blab all you want about the UN definition for genocide and how your wise minds decipher its meaning but yet the UN has not called it genocide even after being asked directly to do so.

Don't worry Jacee...Omar won't come near this one either. I guess it isn't worth your time to be set straight.

Those facts don't fit the narrative, and once they have decided what their level of outrage should be they will not ever change it. Luckily for an alleged genocide we did a really terribly job of it, or maybe, and not maybe, it wasnt ever that.

[poochy]

God it would be nice to have an intelligent discussion with decent Canadians about this important issue.

Instead of these cement headed racists.

.

lol, ignorance is bliss, here is the proof.