Truth and Reconciliation... Legitimacy

[TimG]

The UNs, (for one), language is quite clear that killing is NOT required to be deemed genocide.

Once again, you are making crap up:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a Killing members of the group;

b Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

c Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

d Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

e Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The definition of "serious mental harm" is extremely ambiguous and had no useful definition in a world where people claim they are 'traumatized' because of news stories. The context from the paragraph matters: genocide is about intentional killing. Without intentional killing as part of the picture there can be no genocide. Edited June 14, 2015 by TimG

[On Guard for Thee]

Once again, you are making crap up:

The definition of "serious mental harm" is extremely ambiguous and had no useful definition in a world where people claim they are 'traumatized' because of news stories. The context from the paragraph matters: genocide is about intentional killing. Without intentional killing as part of the picture there can be no genocide.

You did read section (e.) of your post I trust

[TimG]

You did read section (e.) of your post I trust

No reasonable person can claim that compulsory attendance at residential schools by a minority of kids for part of the year constitute a 'forceable transfer of children' for the purpose of genocide. Especially, when the kids only ended up in these schools when regular schools were not available. Edited June 14, 2015 by TimG

[On Guard for Thee]

No reasonable person can claim that compulsory attendance at residential schools by a minority of kids for part of the year constitute a 'forceable transfer of children' for the purpose of genocide. Especially, when the kids only ended up in these schools when regular schools were not available.

You had better inform the UN then.

[Smallc]

You had better inform the UN then.

Since they never called it genocide I don't see why.

[jbg]

No reasonable person can claim that compulsory attendance at residential schools by a minority of kids for part of the year constitute a 'forceable transfer of children' for the purpose of genocide. Especially, when the kids only ended up in these schools when regular schools were not available.

You had better inform the UN then.

The U.N. is a hopelessly corrupt and anti-Western organization.

[On Guard for Thee]

Since they never called it genocide I don't see why.

As dre has already pointed out, the fact has been pointed out many times here. Cant be bothered to do it again.

[On Guard for Thee]

The U.N. is a hopelessly corrupt and anti-Western organization.

Perhaps. But Canada is hardly an anti western organization, and we refer to the same description as stated in international law to define genocide.

[poochy]

A point thats already been brought up 50 times within the first few dozen pages of this topic.

A point that disregards the original meaning of the word, and twists it into something else that it wasn't supposed to mean, which is wrong, as are you for believing in it's new, twisted meaning. Wrong.

Edited June 14, 2015 by poochy

[poochy]

You had better inform the UN then.

The UN runs on the same broken ideologies you subscribe to, making it worthless.

[On Guard for Thee]

The UN runs on the same broken ideologies you subscribe to, making it worthless.

As I pointed out, on this issue, Canada runs on the same ideology. Does that make Canada worthless too then...

[poochy]

I've heard this situation referred to as culturicide recently, maybe that's what it should be, a new word to describe this horrible situation. But, that wont be allowed to happen, because the real goal here is to inflate the seriousness of what happened while reducing the seriousness of what the word was first coined to describe.

[jacee]

It is not the "truth". Truth is based on facts that are objectively true. This is opinion. It is changing the meaning of a word in order to advance a political cause. That is pure propaganda.

It is truth according to the internationally accepted definition of genocide contained in the UN Convention on Genocide which is also international law.

It is referred to as "cultural" genocide by the TRC to soften it a bit and clarify the methods used.

.

[jacee]

Once again, you are making crap up:

The definition of "serious mental harm" is extremely ambiguous and had no useful definition in a world where people claim they are 'traumatized' because of news stories. The context from the paragraph matters: genocide is about intentional killing. Without intentional killing as part of the picture there can be no genocide.

Do you not comprehend "any" of the following acts means that any one of those acts is genocide?

.

[jacee]

No reasonable person can claim that compulsory attendance at residential schools by a minority of kids for part of the year constitute a 'forceable transfer of children' for the purpose of genocide. Especially, when the kids only ended up in these schools when regular schools were not available.

You had better inform the UN then.

Since they never called it genocide I don't see why.

The UN is involved.

Specifically, the International Centre for Transitional Justice with the Director for the Americas monitoring the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Here's what he had to say as the Commission was starting up a few years ago:

As The Globe and Mail has reported, bodies of aboriginal children lie in unmarked graves across Canada, on the grounds of residential schools where the federal government sought for more than a century to extinguish aboriginal culture. Although the Truth and Reconciliation Commission investigating these schools has hit a roadblock, it remains the best chance the schools' survivors have to tell their stories - and the best chance Canada has to face its past.

...

The truth commission will reveal disturbing facts and debunk myths ...

-Truth commissions need to be objective in order to clarify complex facts. At the same time, they do not aspire to be courts of law, and usually make an effort to dignify the experiences, perceptions and suffering of victims.

-Reconciliation cannot be imposed on a society. The most a commission can do is clarify past events and amplify the voices of people who have been stigmatized or silenced. Reconstructing facts without euphemism and restoring the dignity of victims are first steps toward national reconciliation, but they are only the beginning.

Thanks to the Canadian commission, federal researchers are working to identify the thousands of aboriginal children who vanished from the residential schools; many of the children are thought to be in the anonymous graves at the school sites. It is their memory that Canada should honour as it presses forward with its historic truth commission, and works to achieve a healthier, more united country.

http://grannyrantson.blogspot.ca/2008/11/commentary-give-truth-chance-canada.html

To reiterate what Justice Sinclair said, the work of identifying the children who died in the schools has barely begun (due to lack of funding and lack of cooperation), and already 6,000 children have been identified.

Those who insist that genocide can only be a physical genocide may yet see that evidence emerge as well.

.

Edited June 14, 2015 by jacee

[Canada_First]

I'm sure some of them are lying, as they did before to get part of the settlement. I'm sure others are being truthful, though.

Oh, I don't disagree with you. I'm sure some are telling the truth. But how do we know which are lying and which aren't? How do we know which to pay when it comes down to money? Right now the FN are trying to get the govt to admit it's guilty. Once that happens they will start suing the gov't. IMO. Right now it's about getting the gov't and churches to admit wrong doing knowingly. Establishing an admission of guilt. Then they'll go for money.

[jacee]

A point that disregards the original meaning of the word, and twists it into something else that it wasn't supposed to mean, which is wrong, as are you for believing in it's new, twisted meaning. Wrong.

The "new" meaning of genocide as you call it ... is from 1948,

The United Nations Convention on the Crime and Punishment of Genocide.

.

[jacee]

Oh, I don't disagree with you. I'm sure some are telling the truth. But how do we know which are lying and which aren't? How do we know which to pay when it comes down to money? Right now the FN are trying to get the govt to admit it's guilty. Once that happens they will start suing the gov't. IMO. Right now it's about getting the gov't and churches to admit wrong doing knowingly. Establishing an admission of guilt. Then they'll go for money.

Omigod such ignorance!

They already sued the government, class action suits, that resulted in the settlements and the Truth Commission.

The adjudicators have already completed that process of making decisions about validity of claims.

Have you read nothing about that process?

Why don't you inform yourself before maligning a process that you know nothing about.

Unfortunately, because the police have not released their records, some applicants were called liars who were telling the truth.

.

Edited June 14, 2015 by jacee

[Canada_First]

There were criminal charges in some cases - which would imply proof. Are you arguing that these abuses did NOT happen ? If so, I'm going to make a new thread for you and anybody who shares that viewpoint.

" in SOME cases". That sums it up rather nicely wouldn't you say? No, I am not arguing that they did not happen. I am merely taking the other side of the argument because no one seems to be. I'd like to look at all possible angles.

[jacee]

I've heard this situation referred to as culturicide recently, maybe that's what it should be, a new word to describe this horrible situation. But, that wont be allowed to happen, because the real goal here is to inflate the seriousness of what happened while reducing the seriousness of what the word was first coined to describe.

How would you define "culturicide"?

.

[Canada_First]

Omigod such ignorance!

They already sued the government, class action suits, that resulted in the settlements and the Truth Commission.

The adjudicators have already completed that process of making decisions about validity of claims.

Have you read nothing about that process?

Why don't you inform yourself before maligning a process that you know nothing about.

Unfortunately, because the police have not released their records, some applicants were called liars who were telling the truth.

.

I'm not calling anyone liars. Even people who have been convicted of rape have been released and records expunged after the fact. We cannot simply believe whatever anyone says just because they said it. That's no more truthful than me stating things without cites. Posters here ask everyone on this cites for proof yet you refuse to ask for proof from these FN people...Why?

Is it so hard to believe that SOME people would lie in order to jump on the bandwagon and collect their pound of flesh?

Edited June 14, 2015 by Canada_First

[Smallc]

How would you define "culturicide"?

.

The destruction of its culture through the forced assimilation of its people.

[jacee]

I'm not calling anyone liars. Even people who have been convicted of rape have been released and records expunged after the fact. We cannot simply believe whatever anyone says just because they said it. That's no more truthful than me stating things without cites. Posters here ask everyone on this cites for proof yet you refuse to ask for proof from these FN people...Why?

Is it so hard to believe that SOME people would lie in order to jump on the bandwagon and collect their pound of flesh?

I suggest you read up on the Independent Assessment Process for the Indian Residential Schools before concluding that anybody 'refused to ask for proof'.

You are making harsh judgements from a position of ignorance.

.

[jacee]

jacee, on 14 Jun 2015 - 5:32 PM, said:

How would you define "culturicide"?

The destruction of its culture through the forced assimilation of its people.

What are the methods of "forced assimilation"?

.

[Canada_First]

I suggest you read up on the Independent Assessment Process for the Indian Residential Schools before concluding that anybody 'refused to ask for proof'.

You are making harsh judgements from a position of ignorance.

.

Not making any judgements. Simply asking questions. I think it's beneficial to ask questions to important questions and not just side with a minority group because one may feel bad for them. Or some sort of guilt to to what someone of the same race may have done a hundred years ago.