Jason Kenney - Unite the right in Alberta

[Accountability Now]

What was stated that is not a factual statement? Comparing quotation of Kenney to mandate statements of supremacists, stating it looks like he is trying to gather their vote, stating that smallc's opinion, which he confirms, of native reserves is similar to the statements made by Kenney. What was libel there?

Ah...another person who did actually read the quotation/tweet that Kenney said! The only thing factual correct is the comments Jason Kenney made. Aboriginals at one point settled in this land. Their descendants have been here since. Kenney asked to honour ALL of those people. NOW...you have a conspiracy theorist claiming that this FACTUAL statement is tied to white supremacy without any basis what so ever.

She went as far as saying the following:

I do know his policy position is a white supremacist position.

That is absolutely untrue and she has provided ZERO back up to suggest otherwise. Myself and various other members on this thread have indicated as such.

For your convenience, the definition of libel:

a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.

Now you asked what was factually incorrect about her statement....how about everything. You can't just go and make loose connections based on far reaching accusations that one is a white supremacist based on how YOU interpret a statement. That is why they have libel laws.

[jacee]

Why? Because you can be sued for libel/defamation for the baseless claims you are making.

Put simply ... the linguistic evidence does not support the 'Bering ice bridge' theory:

how-linguists-are-pulling-apart-bering-strait-theory

This strident demand for proof while ignoring the evidence is abnormal in science and reflects the fact that originally the Bering Strait Theory was not a scientific theory at all, but a dogma.

... a "dogma" (and a purpose) that is evident in Jason Kenney's (and white supremacists') commentary.

And evident in threats designed to prevent people from presenting real evidence.

It is refusal to accept science and insistence on political dogma.

Because the real evidence does not allow you to dismiss Indigenous Peoples as just "settlers" like us, does not allow you to justify 'white' supremacy over their land.

The linguistic evidence supports their claim that they've been in North America "since time immemorial'.

So go ahead ... sue me!

?

[Note to mods: This is not off topic. It is the logical conclusion of explaining why Jason Kenney's Aboriginal Day comment was unacceptable political dogma.]

.

Edited June 26, 2016 by jacee

[jacee]

Yes it's a question of values, we all want the same thing.

But that's just it, we're already are....on a pale blue dot.

Yes ... and the ponds are getting smaller.

And we are pond-savers and pond-wreckers ... oh my!

?

[Accountability Now]

Put simply ... the linguistic evidence does not support the 'Bering ice bridge' theory:

You are putting forth suggestions made in blogs and trying to pass it off as science. Some food for thought....

http://www.newsweek.com/perfectly-preserved-12000-year-old-skeleton-proves-bering-strait-theory-251234

This study appeared in the journal Science.

New research on one of the oldest and most complete American skeletons reveals further proof that all Native Americans descended from Siberian migrants who crossed a land bridge to North America thousands of years ago, a team of scientists announced Thursday.

And a study from Nature:

A study published this past February in Nature appeared to put that debate to rest. Scientists had sequenced the genome of a 12,600-year-old infant whose damaged bones were discovered by a construction crew in Montana in 1968. Dubbed the Anzick Boy, after the owner of the property where he was found, his genes were one-third Eurasian and two-thirds East Asian—a genetic makeup much like that of modern Native Americans. What’s more, he was lying among artifacts that clearly belonged to a group of Clovis people.

So...lets see...studies coming from peer reviewed, scientific journals versus your blogs. Yup....good try.

But hey...lets play this out....what you are really saying is that because Kenney believes in the Bering Strait theory and that Aboriginals came from Asia/Siberia which is without a doubt the most popular and scientific backed theory, you now claim that he is a white supremacist. I know you struggle with your assertions but don't you even think that is a ridiculous and absolutely weak stretch to make.

You know...I remember David Duke using the word 'simply' once....and so did you....that must make you a White Supremicist!!!!! AAAAAHHHHHHH.

So go ahead ... sue me!

[Note to mods: This is not off topic. It is the logical conclusion of explaining why Jason Kenney's Aboriginal Day comment was unacceptable political dogma.]

I won't sue you. Jason Kenney might...or the Conservative government as it is those people that you are making baseless claims against.

Of course its the moderators that you just appealed to that may have concern with your defamation since they won't be worried about thread drift when a libel lawsuit happens on their site.

Good luck with that.

[jacee]

You can't just go and make loose connections based on far reaching accusations that one is a white supremacist based on how YOU interpret a statement. That is why they have libel laws.

I said:

"I do know his policy position is a white supremacist position."

I made no claim that he is formally affiliated with a group, but an ideology.

So ... sue me! ?

.

Edited June 26, 2016 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

I said:

"I do know his policy position is a white supremacist position."

So ... sue me!

.

And that would be defamation. I trust you will have a good conversation with the moderators on this one.

[jacee]

Accountability Now:

Read the article on linguistic analysis.

Migration was likely the other way.

.

Edited June 26, 2016 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

Accountability Now:

Did you read the article on linguistic analysis?

.

Yes...you mean the article from INDIAN COUNTRY TODAY? And you think an article summarizing some past attempts at disproving the theory match up against current, peer reviewed articles that took me two seconds to find?

Again....even if your fringe, extreme belief turned out to be true, then how does that make Jason Kenney a white supremacist? The vast majority of scientists who agree with the Bering Strait theory.....are they white supremacists? I'm guessing a number of these Bearing Strait scientists are of non-white origin too. Are they white supremacists?

I could care less if you want to take the fringe extreme viewpoint on where aboriginal people came from but to assert that someone is a white supremacists because they believe in the popularly held, scientifically backed belief is pure and utter insanity. More pointedly....its defamation.

[jacee]

And that would be defamation.

I trust you will have a good conversation with the moderators on this one.

Ah yes ... attempted suppression of thought by threats and attempted intimidation.

The tools of propaganda ... not science.

Read the article.

Ps: There is no "Conservative government".

Edited June 26, 2016 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

Ah yes ... attempted suppression of thought by threats and attempted intimidation.

The tools of propaganda ... not science.

Intimidation.....hell no. I am giving you advice....trying to help you out here because clearly you need it. If you wish to continue spewing ignorance and defaming popular, political figures with baseless statements then I would suggest you prepare for a discussion with the moderators.

Take my advice or leave it. I really don't care.

[?Impact]

Read the article on linguistic analysis.

Migration was likely the other way.

.

While an interesting theory, it does not address how the languages survived the ice age when the fossil evidence of that alleged civilization was wiped out by the receding glacier. If there was a massive migration southward during the ice age, and remigration northward after then can you explain how these diverse groups did not meet up and meld with each other?

[jacee]

Intimidation.....hell no. I am giving you advice....trying to help you out here because clearly you need it. If you wish to continue spewing ignorance and defaming popular, political figures with baseless statements then I would suggest you prepare for a discussion with the moderators.

Take my advice or leave it. I really don't care.

Nor do I.

.

Edited June 26, 2016 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

I made no claim that he is formally affiliated with a group, but an ideology.

Still defamation.

That's like saying I don't believe in equal rights for non-whites but since I don't belong to a racist group then I am not a racist.

[Accountability Now]

Because the real evidence does not allow you to dismiss Indigenous Peoples as just "settlers" like us, does not allow you to justify 'white' supremacy over their land.

The Indigenous are settlers as proven by science but that's not what justifies my rights to this land. What justifies my rights is when they ceded, surrendered and basically gave up the land.

[jacee]

While an interesting theory, it does not address how the languages survived the ice age when the fossil evidence of that alleged civilization was wiped out by the receding glacier. If there was a massive migration southward during the ice age, and remigration northward after then can you explain how these diverse groups did not meet up and meld with each other?

America is a big place.

I'm not an expert. I'm sure if you do your own research with an open mind, you can find some information relevant to that.

I find this statement fascinating:

...today it is generally accepted that there are 150 different language stocks in the Americas. To give some perspective to this diversity, there are more language stocks in the Americas than in the rest of the world combined.

[jacee]

The Indigenous are settlers as proven by science but that's not what justifies my rights to this land. What justifies my rights is when they ceded, surrendered and basically gave up the land.

That's not the legal reality.

That's just your delusional dogma.

.

[jacee]

Still defamation.

Let's see ... you are threatening that someone else may sue me for defamation.

Oooo ... I'm really afraid! ??

.

[Accountability Now]

Let's see ... you are threatening that someone else may sue me for defamation.

Oooo ... I'm really afraid!

.

Nope...just making you aware of your actions. Like I said, the moderators won't like you drawing such attention to their site....please google Free Dominion forum if you don't believe me.

[Accountability Now]

That's not the legal reality.

That's just your delusional dogma.

.

LMFAO....not legal reality???? Its in the very treaties that you make a belaboured point to say are in fact legal realities.

You really don't have a handle on any of this do you?

[?Impact]

America is a big place.

Yes, it is a big place but migration routes generally are not. They generally follow natural features like mountain ranges and rivers. We should also expect to find fossil records of those diverse civilizations in the south where they would have resided for many centuries during the ice age. Depending on how far south they migrated, the central Americas are not very big.

[jacee]

Yes, it is a big place but migration routes generally are not. They generally follow natural features like mountain ranges and rivers. We should also expect to find fossil records of those diverse civilizations in the south where they would have resided for many centuries during the ice age. Depending on how far south they migrated, the central Americas are not very big.

Ancient America (North, Central, South) is a really interesting topic to pursue further ... in another thread.

Want to start one?

.

[Charles Anthony]

Ancient America (North, Central, South) is a really interesting topic to pursue further ... in another thread.

Want to start one?

.

Done.

Theories of Indigenous Origin in the Americas

[Smallc]

Done.

Theories of Indigenous Origin in the Americas

Thanks - I meant to link that.

[cybercoma]

Anyway, what Kenney said is absolutely correct. Aboriginal people were the first to settle this land. There's nothing controversial about it.

Surely you can see that this is a dog whistle. If aboriginal peoples "settled" this land, then their "settlement" is just the same as European settlement colonization. He's inviting the inference to be made that they just couldn't hack it. This of course ignores the fact that colonization is not the same thing as settlement.

[Accountability Now]

This of course ignores the fact that colonization is not the same thing as settlement.

100% agreed.