Remiel Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Extermination means dead bodies. So does genocide. Cultural extinguishment would be a far superior term for what we mean by destroying culture. Also, forced sterilization is not like those other things at all. Forced sterilization is definitely treading on genocide territory. As in, not merely awful, but actually completely effed up. An assimilated person can still have children and their children can have children and so on. Apparently being assimilated makes them worth less as human beings, at least one could easily draw that conclusion from the way activists talk about these things, but their lot is orders of magnitude better than those than have forcibly sterilized. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 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. And the VAST majority of these deaths resulted from tuberculosis which was a highly infectious disease that accounted for many deaths worldwide. Quote
jacee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 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. They've just barely begun counting how many children died. . Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 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. You're dead right. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 They've just barely begun counting how many children died. . Let me guess...it will soon be 100% of the children died from residential schools even though only 30% went? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 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. It was indeed, of the cultural type. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) Let me guess...it will soon be 100% of the children died from residential schools even though only 30% went? Apparently math is not your strong suit. Of course 100% of the kids in residential school didnt die. But it is reported about 6000 of them did. Is that more understandable for you rather than those complicated percentage calculations... Edited June 3, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
poochy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 They've just barely begun counting how many children died. . O surely, and im sure that the number will quickly climb from 4 out of 100 to 100 out of 100, which in the case of children kept captive by people with the intent to exterminate is something you might expect, or, your narrative is complete and utter nonsense as it almost always is. Canada intended to exterminate native people, starting with their children, took all of them into custody, while only actually getting a third of them, and tried to kill them all, while only killing 4 out of every 100. The worst part about this is how wrong it was without it needing to be turned into a holocaust-genocide equivalent. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Apparently math is not your strong suit. I guess sarcasm is not yours Quote
poochy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 It was indeed, of the cultural type. Nope, there is no truth for you that you yourself cannot make up. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Nope, there is no truth for you that you yourself cannot make up. It would see there is no relevant evidence of truth you cannot deny. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 I guess sarcasm is not yours Much better at math. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Much better at math. Let's test that. If mandatory attendence means all must go then what percentage of kids would that equal? Quote
jacee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) Let me guess...it will soon be 100% of the children died from residential schools even though only 30% went?Estimates are 25-50%, based on last available data in 1907. The feds stopped collecting info about deaths after that ... because the high death rates were in accordance with government policy. (See DC Scott cited earlier.)Your estimates of enrolments were interesting, and pretty much the same as mine. So the number of children who died will likely be eventually found to be far more than anyone can imagine now. . Edited June 3, 2015 by jacee Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Let's test that. If mandatory attendence means all must go then what percentage of kids would that equal? Im sure that is simple enough you can figure it out yourself. Take it slow. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Your estimates of enrolments were interesting, and pretty much the same as mine. . No....no.....you were adamant that attendance was mandatory which means all kids went through when the reality is only 30% went through Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Im sure that is simple enough you can figure it out yourself. Take it slow. Can't do it....hey? Doesn't surprise me Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Can't do it....hey? Doesn't surprise me Simple math, take it slow. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Simple math, take it slow. You've been asked a question....step up and answer or move on Quote
poochy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 Simple math, take it slow. You're cornered, everyone else is stupid. Yea, seen it before. Quote
poochy Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) It would see there is no relevant evidence of truth you cannot deny. My turn, Im rubber, you're glue, etc. Edited June 3, 2015 by poochy Quote
Je suis Omar Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 No, it isnt genocide. It is more than wrong enough without you diminishing the meaning of that word. You also don't understand how language works, Poochy. Murder is murder whether you have one or ten. But your, not just you, biggest mistake is how y'all are ignoring the wider implications of what genocide actually encompasses. Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 You're cornered, everyone else is stupid. Yea, seen it before. Don't worry....this guy also thinks humans don't produce CO2 when then breathe. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 You've been asked a question....step up and answer or move on And what exactly was that question. Quote
jacee Posted June 3, 2015 Report Posted June 3, 2015 No....no.....you were adamant that attendance was mandatory which means all kids went through when the reality is only 30% went through I based my estimates on enrolment reported by the church: Anglican (25% of the schools) 100,000 enroled United (10% of the schools) no report Catholic (65% of the schools) no report So somewhere north of 300,000. Quote
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.