Caledonia problem didnt arise overnight

[Who's Doing What?]

You're the one in denial, because you are not going to remove 25 million people from what you imagine is "your" land.

[geoffrey]

Under the guise of racism they wittingly seek to commit genocide on the country's indigenous people. They accuse us of thinking we're more superior then they when all the while they are of the opinion that we must conform to their standards. They discuss how easily their laws can be changed at their whim yet, rather than standing up to that government and demanding the imposed tax under the war measures act be abolished they complain that we don't pay taxes. They object to centuries old agreements between our governments that are recognized and affirmed within their modern constitution but, don't seem to mind the agreements with governments of other nations they pour money into. They accuse us of breaking the law while they disregard them. They seek to chastise us for standing up to their government when they don't have the courage to.

If you think that free education, free health care, and tax free income on reserves is genocide, then I believe you've insulted every oppressed person in the world.

It's a filthy disgusting lie to blame Canadians for the state of affairs of your people. We gave everything, it's all be squandered. Indian Affairs has a budget that could afford to give each Indian $10,000 a year. Yet poverty still exists. How is this even possible?

You should have two choices, and we need a government that has the determination to stand through with this. Become independant, and shoulder your portion of the national debt and get no further aid. Or, become equal to Canadians.

I can't believe you think your being ethnically cleansed. I can tell you Hitler never gave the Jews free school or health care. Who has ever tried to remove your race from Canada? Be realistic, your lies and hyperbole are as insulting as ridiculous.

[Riverwind]

I've already won this argument the minute your forefathers made agreements with mine!

No one other than a few self-aborbed native rights activists believe that agreements made hundreds of years ago are enforceable today if enforcing those agreements would cause undue hardship to millions of people.

The legal profession has a reputation for being filled in unethical greedy people because they are people who believe in enforcing the _law_ no matter how unfair the _law_ might be. The average person understands that making something legal does not make it right. You can continue to claim that the _law_ is more important than any ethical, moral or human concerns, however, don't be surprised is people view you as unethical opportunists that deserve nothing.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon! Riverwind,

That is an assinine position.

The law says Peter Whitmore served his time and was free to go, even though every psychologist and prison guard that ever met him siad he was a 100% risk to offend. Not only did the law state he was free to go, he did not have to report to anyone and was free to go anywhere in the country without tabs.

Your morality didn't save the two boys he attacked and molested, one of whom he kidnapped and held against his will. Your false -cheap-labour conservative evangelism never stopped gay marriage, or abortion. The liberal government invented adscam and suck the public teet of millions of dollars and funneled them in to liberal party hack's pockets.

The law and people who make the law are immoral and inequitible. Your mythical morality ahs no place in the business world, the justice system or the government. You should rethink your position unless you prefer delusion over reality......come to think of I believe you do!

O:nen

[Riverwind]

The law says Peter Whitmore served his time and was free to go, even though every psychologist and prison guard that ever met him said he was a 100% risk to offend. Not only did the law state he was free to go, he did not have to report to anyone and was free to go anywhere in the country without tabs.

You are making my argument for me - my position is this guy should have been kept in jail no matter what his legal rights were and that the gov't should change the constitution if that is barrier to doing what is right. Which is exactly the same position I take on native claims.

IOW - claiming something is legal is no defence.

The law and people who make the law are immoral and inequitable. Your mythical morality has no place in the business world, the justice system or the government.

Back in the 80s some British Columbia coal companies signed agreements with Japanese companies to sell coal at a fixed price. The price of coal dropped significantly and the Japanese companies demanded that the contract be re-negotiated. The coal companies felt they were getting screwed but they had no choice since they had no way to force the Japanese companies to buy their coal. Business contracts are renegotiated all of the time and in many cases the company with more financial resources wins over the company with a better legal position. If you take the position that the Grand River grant was just a 'business' deal then you better be prepared to get screwed by a partner with more financial resources because, as you say, morality has no place in the business world.

If you want to make the claim that Six Nations is morally entitled to the land then you must be prepared to accept that people who own the land now are morally entitled to keep it and the only thing Six Nations can ask for is monetary compensation.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon! Riverwind,

You still have it backwards.

If a man steals a car and sells it to another, the other is not morally entitled to keep once he becomes aware it is stolen, even though he has fixed the engine, spruced up the inside and put on new tires. It is immoral to profit benefit from ANY crime.

Your legal argument is exhausts and now your moral argument fails the test as well.

What else do you want to try?

O:nen

[Okwaho]

Under the guise of racism they wittingly seek to commit genocide on the country's indigenous people. They accuse us of thinking we're more superior then they when all the while they are of the opinion that we must conform to their standards. They discuss how easily their laws can be changed at their whim yet, rather than standing up to that government and demanding the imposed tax under the war measures act be abolished they complain that we don't pay taxes. They object to centuries old agreements between our governments that are recognized and affirmed within their modern constitution but, don't seem to mind the agreements with governments of other nations they pour money into. They accuse us of breaking the law while they disregard them. They seek to chastise us for standing up to their government when they don't have the courage to.

If you think that free education, free health care, and tax free income on reserves is genocide, then I believe you've insulted every oppressed person in the world.

It's a filthy disgusting lie to blame Canadians for the state of affairs of your people. We gave everything, it's all be squandered. Indian Affairs has a budget that could afford to give each Indian $10,000 a year. Yet poverty still exists. How is this even possible?

You should have two choices, and we need a government that has the determination to stand through with this. Become independant, and shoulder your portion of the national debt and get no further aid. Or, become equal to Canadians.

I can't believe you think your being ethnically cleansed. I can tell you Hitler never gave the Jews free school or health care. Who has ever tried to remove your race from Canada? Be realistic, your lies and hyperbole are as insulting as ridiculous.

There you go taking things out of context again.

Here is what constitutes genocide under the criminal code.

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

You and the others feel that we should give up our lands and way of life and be "Canadians." 318. (2) ( of your Criminal Code says it's an act of genocide.

[Who's Doing What?]

Under the guise of racism they wittingly seek to commit genocide on the country's indigenous people. They accuse us of thinking we're more superior then they when all the while they are of the opinion that we must conform to their standards. They discuss how easily their laws can be changed at their whim yet, rather than standing up to that government and demanding the imposed tax under the war measures act be abolished they complain that we don't pay taxes. They object to centuries old agreements between our governments that are recognized and affirmed within their modern constitution but, don't seem to mind the agreements with governments of other nations they pour money into. They accuse us of breaking the law while they disregard them. They seek to chastise us for standing up to their government when they don't have the courage to.

If you think that free education, free health care, and tax free income on reserves is genocide, then I believe you've insulted every oppressed person in the world.

It's a filthy disgusting lie to blame Canadians for the state of affairs of your people. We gave everything, it's all be squandered. Indian Affairs has a budget that could afford to give each Indian $10,000 a year. Yet poverty still exists. How is this even possible?

You should have two choices, and we need a government that has the determination to stand through with this. Become independant, and shoulder your portion of the national debt and get no further aid. Or, become equal to Canadians.

I can't believe you think your being ethnically cleansed. I can tell you Hitler never gave the Jews free school or health care. Who has ever tried to remove your race from Canada? Be realistic, your lies and hyperbole are as insulting as ridiculous.

There you go taking things out of context again.

Here is what constitutes genocide under the criminal code.

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

You and the others feel that we should give up our lands and way of life and be "Canadians." 318. (2) ( of your Criminal Code says it's an act of genocide.

Free money, tax exemptions, and free land is Genicide?

Some one had better tell the tutsi's and hutu's they're doing it wrong.

This is genocide for those of you ignorant of it. You cheapen it's meaning by drawing a comparison to it.

Between April and June 1994, an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the space of 100 days.

Link

[Okwaho]

Under the guise of racism they wittingly seek to commit genocide on the country's indigenous people. They accuse us of thinking we're more superior then they when all the while they are of the opinion that we must conform to their standards. They discuss how easily their laws can be changed at their whim yet, rather than standing up to that government and demanding the imposed tax under the war measures act be abolished they complain that we don't pay taxes. They object to centuries old agreements between our governments that are recognized and affirmed within their modern constitution but, don't seem to mind the agreements with governments of other nations they pour money into. They accuse us of breaking the law while they disregard them. They seek to chastise us for standing up to their government when they don't have the courage to.

If you think that free education, free health care, and tax free income on reserves is genocide, then I believe you've insulted every oppressed person in the world.

It's a filthy disgusting lie to blame Canadians for the state of affairs of your people. We gave everything, it's all be squandered. Indian Affairs has a budget that could afford to give each Indian $10,000 a year. Yet poverty still exists. How is this even possible?

You should have two choices, and we need a government that has the determination to stand through with this. Become independant, and shoulder your portion of the national debt and get no further aid. Or, become equal to Canadians.

I can't believe you think your being ethnically cleansed. I can tell you Hitler never gave the Jews free school or health care. Who has ever tried to remove your race from Canada? Be realistic, your lies and hyperbole are as insulting as ridiculous.

There you go taking things out of context again.

Here is what constitutes genocide under the criminal code.

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

( deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

You and the others feel that we should give up our lands and way of life and be "Canadians." 318. (2) ( of your Criminal Code says it's an act of genocide.

Free money, tax exemptions, and free land is Genicide?

Some one had better tell the tutsi's and hutu's they're doing it wrong.

This is genocide for those of you ignorant of it. You cheapen it's meaning by drawing a comparison to it.

Between April and June 1994, an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the space of 100 days.

Link

Don't blame me it's from your Criminal Code. The agenda you wish and seek to impose on us consistent with deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

[Riverwind]

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

The term 'phycsical destruction' is not defined in the code. Physical destruction means killing or some other physical duress to anyone who is not interested in creating self-serving propoganda. Replacing one way of life with another equally valid way of life is not physical destruction.

[Who's Doing What?]

Don't blame me it's from your Criminal Code. The agenda you wish and seek to impose on us consistent with deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

It may be "my" Criminal code but you are completely misinterpreting it.

You are making a mockery of all the true victims of genocide, and I seriously hope it comes home to haunt you.

[geoffrey]

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

The term 'phycsical destruction' is not defined in the code. Physical destruction means killing or some other physical duress to anyone who is not interested in creating self-serving propoganda. Replacing one way of life with another equally valid way of life is not physical destruction.

No one is suggesting killing the Indians. Just making them accept our ways of life, or if they refuse to, then to get off our welfare system.

You can't have it both ways, that's all I'm here to state. If you want self-governance, be prepared to pay for it from your pocket (and take your portion of the national debt too). If you want government support, follow it's laws and not burn down bridges or tear up highways at the command of council leadership.

Are you with us or not?

[yam]

Your concluding question resembling Bush says it all really desite its comical nature. However, i think you will find that Mohawk self autonomy is the primary key of all that is going on in caladonia.

[Okwaho]

Don't blame me it's from your Criminal Code. The agenda you wish and seek to impose on us consistent with deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

It may be "my" Criminal code but you are completely misinterpreting it.

You are making a mockery of all the true victims of genocide, and I seriously hope it comes home to haunt you.

The genocide section of your Criminal Code comes from directly from the International Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article II which states:

Article 2

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;

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

© 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.

Article 2 ( © and (e) does not mean you have to cause death! And clearly defines what constitutes genocide. Canada became a signatory on November, 28, 1949. You might also want to pay close attention to Article 3 as well!

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

( Conspiracy to commit genocide;

© Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

I know, I know...here it is! http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

[Who's Doing What?]

Don't blame me it's from your Criminal Code. The agenda you wish and seek to impose on us consistent with deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

It may be "my" Criminal code but you are completely misinterpreting it.

You are making a mockery of all the true victims of genocide, and I seriously hope it comes home to haunt you.

The genocide section of your Criminal Code comes from directly from the International Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article II which states:

Article 2

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;

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

© 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.

Article 2 ( © and (e) does not mean you have to cause death! And clearly defines what constitutes genocide. Canada became a signatory on November, 28, 1949. You might also want to pay close attention to Article 3 as well!

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

( Conspiracy to commit genocide;

© Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

I know, I know...here it is! http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

Go Talk to a Tutsi or a Hutu, about Genocide.

You are cheapening the tragedy of their deaths, with your lame comparison.

[Riverwind]

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

Once again - the government of Canada has never done anything to bring about the 'physical destruction' of natives.

Here is some analysis on what the convention on genocide means http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gendef.htm

The critical element is the presence of an "intent to destroy", which can be either "in whole or in part", groups defined in terms of nationality, ethnicity, race or religion. Thus, the imposition of restrictions during the nineteen-sixties and seventies on reproduction in India, through forced sterilization in many instances, or the continuing restrictions in China, do not constitute genocidal policies as the intent is to restrict the size of groups, not to destroy existing groups in whole or in part.

No Canadian gov't policy has ever had the 'intent to destroy'. Even the residential schools fiasco started with the intent to help natives succeed and prosper in Canadian society.

Members of all these groups were processed in extermination camps, were subjected to serious bodily and mental harm, and had conditions inflicted upon them intended to bring about their physical destruction, including starvation in ghettoes, and had measures applied to them intended to prevent births within the group (sterilization).

It is pretty clear that physical destruction means killing or indirectly causing death - 'changing a way of life' is _not_ genocide.

Another source http://www.stnews.org/News-2933.htm

“Genocide” therefore describes the full range of organized violence specifically targeted at civilian populations, including those which are often called by a range of other names — the many other “-cide” terms that have proliferated in recent decades, such as “ethnocide,” “gendercide,” “politicide” and so on.

It is important to emphasize that while widely different groups are targeted because of their particular identities and affiliations, what the victims generally have in common is that they are civilians. The irrationality of genocide is that it applies the logic of violence, conventionally applied to armed enemies in war, to largely unarmed civilian populations who cannot be enemies in a military sense.

Again we are clearly talking about serious forms of violance intended to destroy lives. None of which has happened to natives since confederation.

[jdobbin]

New Violence in Caledonia

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/07082006/2/nati...lares-aain.html

[Okwaho]

You guys are really too much!!!

You try to cram your opinionated rhetoric down our throats and demand that we back ourselves up with facts. Every time we do refute your argument with evidence you go in to your denial of definition trip. No matter how much you don’t want the laws to mean what they do, it’s not going to change the facts.

I find it interesting how you constantly whine about law and law enforcement and the second it doesn’t work in your favor you want to disregard it.

What a bunch of imbeciles!!!

[Riverwind]

You try to cram your opinionated rhetoric down our throats and demand that we back ourselves up with facts. Every time we do refute your argument with evidence you go in to your denial of definition trip. No matter how much you don’t want the laws to mean what they do, it’s not going to change the facts.

Hey, clueless. You have done nothing but cut and paste the text of the genocide law a couple times and repeated your ridiculous interpretation of the law (as if people will believe more the second time around). I linked to two different sources that refute your interpretations and the only response you can come up with is an accusation of denial? You are not fooling anyone. You are living in a bubble where you and your buddies swap stories about how you are victims of the big bad white man and talk about how you are going to get your revenge for all of the injustices that were done by people long dead to people long dead.

I can see from the way you talk that you are trying to convince yourself that anyone who dares to oppose your world view must be a racist, an idiot or simply uninformed. That way you can declare victory and go back to your bubble where you will tell your buddies what a great job you've done standing up for native rights against the barbarians. Unfortunately, reality is a lot more complicated and many people that oppose your views are not racists, idiots or uninformed. Maybe someday you will understand that and learn to moderate your views and learn that compromise is the only way to find a solution to these issues. The path that you are on now will only lead to violence and more hardship your your people.

[deirdrie]

You try to cram your opinionated rhetoric down our throats and demand that we back ourselves up with facts. Every time we do refute your argument with evidence you go in to your denial of definition trip. No matter how much you don’t want the laws to mean what they do, it’s not going to change the facts.

Hey, clueless. You have done nothing but cut and paste the text of the genocide law a couple times and repeated your ridiculous interpretation of the law (as if people will believe more the second time around). I linked to two different sources that refute your interpretations and the only response you can come up with is an accusation of denial? You are not fooling anyone. You are living in a bubble where you and your buddies swap stories about how you are victims of the big bad white man and talk about how you are going to get your revenge for all of the injustices that were done by people long dead to people long dead.

I can see from the way you talk that you are trying to convince yourself that anyone who dares to oppose your world view must be a racist, an idiot or simply uninformed. That way you can declare victory and go back to your bubble where you will tell your buddies what a great job you've done standing up for native rights against the barbarians. Unfortunately, reality is a lot more complicated and many people that oppose your views are not racists, idiots or uninformed. Maybe someday you will understand that and learn to moderate your views and learn that compromise is the only way to find a solution to these issues. The path that you are on now will only lead to violence and more hardship your your people.

[Okwaho]

You try to cram your opinionated rhetoric down our throats and demand that we back ourselves up with facts. Every time we do refute your argument with evidence you go in to your denial of definition trip. No matter how much you don’t want the laws to mean what they do, it’s not going to change the facts.

Hey, clueless. You have done nothing but cut and paste the text of the genocide law a couple times and repeated your ridiculous interpretation of the law (as if people will believe more the second time around). I linked to two different sources that refute your interpretations and the only response you can come up with is an accusation of denial? You are not fooling anyone. You are living in a bubble where you and your buddies swap stories about how you are victims of the big bad white man and talk about how you are going to get your revenge for all of the injustices that were done by people long dead to people long dead.

Your links don't refute jack@#$%! They focus on one of the definitions contained in the articles that constitute genocide. My interpretation? It's written in plain english that anyone can see except you few. At least you've acknowledged the injustice anyway!

I can see from the way you talk that you are trying to convince yourself that anyone who dares to oppose your world view must be a racist, an idiot or simply uninformed. That way you can declare victory and go back to your bubble where you will tell your buddies what a great job you've done standing up for native rights against the barbarians. Unfortunately, reality is a lot more complicated and many people that oppose your views are not racists, idiots or uninformed. Maybe someday you will understand that and learn to moderate your views and learn that compromise is the only way to find a solution to these issues. The path that you are on now will only lead to violence and more hardship your your people.

Ditto on that one! That's exactly what you're saying to us only in your view. The difference is your the one that keeps using the word "racist" and stretching the definition of the word to encompass your nonsense.

[Riverwind]

Your links don't refute jack@#$%! They focus on one of the definitions contained in the articles that constitute genocide. My interpretation? It's written in plain english that anyone can see except you few. At least you've acknowledged the injustice anyway!

Plain english? The term "physical destruction" could only mean physical harm as far as the overwhelming majority of English speakers are concerned. The commentaries on genocide I linked to confirm that my interpretation is consistent with what others have written on the subject. You can insist that the sky is green but that does not mean anyone will believe you.

Ditto on that one! That's exactly what you're saying to us only in your view. The difference is your the one that keeps using the word "racist" and stretching the definition of the word to encompass your nonsense.

What other word would describe a person that insists that 500,000 people should be either evicted from their homes or forced to submit to gov't that taxes them but does not allow them the vote? I know you made the claim that anyone can become a citizen of Six Nations but we both know that citizenship rules can be manipulated to ensure that very few of those 500,000 people ever get the vote. Claiming that they could vote in theory means nothing - just the like the fact that people in the former USSR could vote in theory but in practice they had no rights.

If you really believe in democratic rights for everyone regardless of ethnic background then you should make it clear that you would be perfectly happy to live in a Six Nations state where all of the economic decisions were made by the non-native majority. If you are not willing to make a statement like that then it is reasonable to conclude that you don't believe that everyone should have a right to vote.

[yam]

Don't blame me it's from your Criminal Code. The agenda you wish and seek to impose on us consistent with deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

For those of you that may misinterpret the deffinition due to Who's Doing What?s comprehension disability it refers to destroying the way of life NOT life itself! If you read (2) (a) it refers to killing or taking of life!

It may be "my" Criminal code but you are completely misinterpreting it.

You are making a mockery of all the true victims of genocide, and I seriously hope it comes home to haunt you.

The genocide section of your Criminal Code comes from directly from the International Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article II which states:

Article 2

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;

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

© 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.

Article 2 ( © and (e) does not mean you have to cause death! And clearly defines what constitutes genocide. Canada became a signatory on November, 28, 1949. You might also want to pay close attention to Article 3 as well!

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

( Conspiracy to commit genocide;

© Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

I know, I know...here it is! http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

Go Talk to a Tutsi or a Hutu, about Genocide.

You are cheapening the tragedy of their deaths, with your lame comparison.

NOPE.

(im non-native by the way)

Naturally, academics have made distinctions between the forms of genocide - obviously academics from Rwanda.

In your cushioned opinion, you can call a particular form of genocide "cheap". But what we are speaking of is genocide and intentions, excuses for doing it - not weighing up the methods of genocide . . .

Rather, the people of rwanda would be the first to identify the subtleties of North American first world genocidal practices. A form of genocide which has been practiced all over the world. Rwanda used the "cheap" quick fix mechanism - of genocide and were well aware of the difference needless to say.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

From Wikipedia - Genocide

"The term "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin (1900–1959), a Polish Jewish legal scholar, in 1943, from the roots genos (Greek for family, tribe or race) and -cide (Latin - occidere or cideo - to massacre).

Lemkin said about the definition of genocide in its original adoption for international law at the Geneva Conventions:

Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."[1]

From Wikipedia - Cultural Genocide

"Cultural genocide is a term used to describe the deliberate destruction of the cultural heritage of a people or nation for political or military reasons."

"Article 7 of the "United Nations draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples" (26 August 1994) defines "Cultural genocide" (emphasis added)[1]:

Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for:

(a ) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;

(b ) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;

(c ) Any form of population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;

(d ) Any form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative or other measures;

(e ) Any form of propaganda directed against them."

Accordingly, Canada is still engaged in the genocide of Onkwehon:we with its apartheid system and Indian Act controls.

O:nen

[yam]

Indeed!

And pretty rigorously too.

Yet what still amazes me is that in order for genocide to occur (here) is, it implicitly relies on public misinformation. It makes one wonder who is worse. The government or its citizens. The latter are surely as responsible for holding their government to his/her responsibility. As for the government it can in turn rely on its citizens for their lack of an enquiring mind (let alone critical thoght). We are not speaking of having to read volumes and volumes of history. Rather, simply to examine the 'way' things are presented.