Kamloops residential school 'graves' could have been septic pipes all along

[CdnFox]

I don't have it handy but there was a report and study that I read that attempted to take a look at the number of reported deaths of first nations children to tuberculosis Over the times when it was out of control.

Long story short they discovered that the first nations children died at an average rate of about three times what the rest of the population's children died at, which was exactly the same as the first nation reserves children who hadn't been sent to school and in fact about the same rate as first nations adults.

In other words there was no evidence that children and first nations residential schools died at any rate faster than first nations children's anywhere else. They died in about exactly the same rate and part of the reason for that is that in the early part of the 20th century nutrition and cleanliness and hygiene was not understood as much as it is today anywhere in Canada.

And yes, the children died at a higher rate than other races did, but that was true of all First Nations people everywhere. For whatever reason tuberculosis, like many diseases and illnesses, seems to affect the First Nations people more readily

I see today that once again the first nations advocates are attempting in the senate to include "residential school denial" in the new hate speech laws being considered by the federal gov't

[West]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sure. Which is why I find it odd that they haven't. And yet they have proposed that anybody who speaks out against it should be treated as a criminal and that law should be passed supporting that. This is where I begin to have a problem

We don't know that. As I mentioned earlier I would expect it because residential schools were also churches for the most part and with the tuberculosis crisis tens of thousands of children died across the country and it would be weird if none ever died there and were buried there. But at the end of the day it's entirely possible that no children are buried there

I don't really feel like that's a bigger issue. If that legitimately was the issue they would start digging, they would find remains, and we would be able to determine likely causes of death. But what we do know with certainty is that there were many many children who were reported dead at the schools and somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of all of the deaths were due to tuberculosis.

Tuberculosis was killing children all across the country and including my own family who lost children to tuberculosis in those days. And it is worse noting that first nations people for whatever reason are vastly more susceptible to tuberculosis than other races. Even today they contract tuberculosis at a rate 40 times higher than other groups

Of the remaining children who died from something other than tuberculosis, the vast majority died from influenza.

The remaining handful died from accident, other illnesses, etc. But at the time all of the deaths were recorded, it's not like children died and nobody wrote anything down.

It's a sad fact that the records regarding this as well as many other records were purged by the government to save space some time ago and it is truly unfortunate that these kids and many other people by the way were buried with simple wooden crosses that of course rotted away over time. But that doesn't indicate anything nefarious

There is really no reason or evidence whatsoever to suggest that these children came to an end that was in any way shape or form unlawful or inappropriate. If there were any such cases they were extremely rare

That never happened to the first nations. I understand that that's the narrative but the reality is that is absolutely not what happened

The vast majority of the time the first nations attendance at residential schools was optional. They're only a handful of decades where it wasn't the case and by the way it was the liberals that brought that in. Initially under John a attendance was completely optional

The parents absolutely had access to the schools. In addition the children were allowed and even encouraged to return home for the summers. They did not live at the school year round unless the parents wanted them to stay or they had no family.

Any of the residential schools openly encouraged local bands to visit and share with the children. In fact the residential school closest to where I live was famous for inviting the elders of neighboring bands to come regularly to talk with the kids about their culture and teach them cultural issues. By the way when I grew up and attended Elementary School First Nation studies was taught by the local first nations chief.

Further mandatory attendance at school was inflicted upon more than just the first nations. And there was huge outcry and even minor riots from other groups including my own family who found their children forced to attend schools and learning the language and history and customs of the English rather than their own schools.

Sorry to burst your bubble but the world is not the way that the first nations advocates with a political agenda today portray it

 

It never did the way that you say. Sorry

So basically no different than boarding schools or what was common in Europe at that time. 

The hidden agenda is mass liberalism and woke ideology being used to brainwash kids into Marxism. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, West said:

So basically no different than boarding schools or what was common in Europe at that time. 

The hidden agenda is mass liberalism and woke ideology being used to brainwash kids into Marxism. 

Funny enough a very good friend grew up in Quebec at an orphanage about 80 years ago and has said frequently when he reads about the accounts of residential schools that it is remarkably similar to his experiences in the christian orphanages. While he was never sexually mistreated his descriptions of the living conditions and punishments and discipline etc as well as the lack of preparation for practical things in life are identical.

It's worth noting That the reason the government went with christian schools was that because the christian face have been operating schools in Canada for 300 years at that point, and the government felt it would be considerably cheaper to make use of that existing infrastructure rather than build new facilities and that it would mean reserve as there were so many and it wouldn't teach them about how to survive in "british" culture should they choose to live off the reserves. 

So it was the same experience that children sent to boarding school had, children sent to orphanages had, and children sent to residential schools would have had. And as I previously mentioned immigrants were forced to send their children to government schools where they weren't allowed to use their original language etc as well.

[Michael Hardner]

20 minutes ago, West said:

Only after the church arsons and the politicians who stoked hate crimes against Christians are put in prison

Hate crimes are illegal, and they should be persecuted but I suspect "stoking" is very subjective in this context.

Church arsons are being investigated - 12 charged, 6 from indigenous communities, 1 conviction so far.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hate crimes are illegal, and they should be persecuted but I suspect "stoking" is very subjective in this context.

Church arsons are being investigated - 12 charged, 6 from indigenous communities, 1 conviction so far.

One conviction for hundreds of churches burned. I don't think they're being investigated terribly hard

[West]

31 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Funny enough a very good friend grew up in Quebec at an orphanage about 80 years ago and has said frequently when he reads about the accounts of residential schools that it is remarkably similar to his experiences in the christian orphanages. While he was never sexually mistreated his descriptions of the living conditions and punishments and discipline etc as well as the lack of preparation for practical things in life are identical.

It's worth noting That the reason the government went with christian schools was that because the christian face have been operating schools in Canada for 300 years at that point, and the government felt it would be considerably cheaper to make use of that existing infrastructure rather than build new facilities and that it would mean reserve as there were so many and it wouldn't teach them about how to survive in "british" culture should they choose to live off the reserves. 

So it was the same experience that children sent to boarding school had, children sent to orphanages had, and children sent to residential schools would have had. And as I previously mentioned immigrants were forced to send their children to government schools where they weren't allowed to use their original language etc as well.

And you probably get some creepy people applying currently to schools or government funded social services programs. 

You can argue what was is best practice. I just think it's sleazy to use propaganda to do it tho

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hate crimes are illegal, and they should be persecuted but I suspect "stoking" is very subjective in this context.

Church arsons are being investigated - 12 charged, 6 from indigenous communities, 1 conviction so far.

What about Trudeau posing and issuing vague insinuations that the Catholic Church in Kamloops was involved in genocide?

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, West said:

And you probably get some creepy people applying currently to schools or government funded social services programs. 

You can argue what was is best practice. I just think it's sleazy to use propaganda to do it tho

Well of course you do, look at the problem we've had with kids hockey in Canada with regards to abuse. Or like I said our educational facilities. Or modern churches where we still have problems with priests.

Human predators haven't changed. You don't get a whole hell of a lot of evolution in just a couple hundred years

Some things have changed, we have a much much better understanding of nutrition now than they ever did. We can treat tuberculosis although it is difficult. As much easier so it's much easier for children to attend schools or be home studied thanks to the internet without having to be resident at the school. The level of scrutiny and reporting is higher, and if a child is abused their ability to have someone to report to is increased

But even today it is still natural that a predator or a predatory personality is going to seek out those opportunities which give the best hunting grounds. That includes schools, sports coaching, community services and groups, and other similar occupations. The vast majority of people that go into those things do so for altruistic reasons or reasons that are socially acceptable but you are going to get a handful of abusers and there's no stopping that.

But somehow if a white kid is abused by a hockey coach for years it's expected that he'll pull himself up by his bootstraps and get on with life and recover where is it a first nations person's grandfather was abused that person is considered crippled for life and excused for any crimes they may commit.

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, West said:

 What about Trudeau posing and issuing vague insinuations that the Catholic Church in Kamloops was involved in genocide?

Condemnable for sure but highly doubt you could action it legally.  As they say, it's dealt with in the political arena.  Unfortunately Trudeau's popularity continues to soar and he's expected to win another majority government next time so the political repercussions aren't working with him ... 🤔

[West]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Condemnable for sure but highly doubt you could action it legally.  As they say, it's dealt with in the political arena.  Unfortunately Trudeau's popularity continues to soar and he's expected to win another majority government next time so the political repercussions aren't working with him ... 🤔

Certainly could be. These politicians appear to be defrauding the public. Alot of tax dollars, alot of crowd funding initiatives going to the natives over lies. Which is fraud. And inciting hate crimes in the process by blaming Christians for crimes they did not commit. 

They are trying to cover their tracks now by making it illegal to question the official narrative. 

Of course we have a weak judiciary in canada who also reinforces the narrative 

Edited Friday at 07:17 PM by West

[Michael Hardner]

46 minutes ago, West said:

1. Certainly could be. These politicians appear to be defrauding the public. Alot of tax dollars, alot of crowd funding initiatives going to the natives over lies. Which is fraud. And inciting hate crimes in the process by blaming Christians for crimes they did not commit. 

 

1. I suggest you petition the crown on this one.  Be sure to seek me out if you need a signature on a petition.
 

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Quoting @August1991 for the umpteenth time: we get along.

Not lefties and righties. We're a lot more like these guys.

[Moonlight Graham]

My dad got the switch from a nun when he was a kid.  He moved his hand and she whacked herself.  Miserable old spinster...

[John Stone]

22 hours ago, CdnFox said:

That's your opinion. And I'm not saying it's accurate or inaccurate, but history tends to be interpreted differently depending on the Observer.

The left for example has made many attempts to rewrite history.  The 1619 project for example. 

But that's not really relevant.  The issue at hand is whether or not people today have a right to anger and outrage on a personal level over events that happened almost 2 centuries ago. 

Sure. So is white history. In fact so is european history as it lead up to the colonization and to a degree asian history as that's where the first nations people originated. 

But none of that means that someone living in america today has any right to be mad on any kind of personal level about what happened to someone 200 years ago. 

Soooort of kind of.  What lead to civil war was the question of who gets to make the laws and whether the states were run by the federal gov't.  Slavery was the largest (but not only) irritant in that process. But it would be revisionist history to say that the war was all about slavery.  

Why? Neither has anything to do with slavery. 

uhhhhhh........why? They have absolutely nothing to do with 'slavery'.  I mean....  sure the first nations kept slaves and traded women like chattel but i feel that's moving off topic.  We were discussing slavery in the states, not among the first nations. 

Complete and 100 percent utter bullshit.  Remember  they were DEMANDED by the first nations under treaty. And initially they were the cheapest and easiest way to appease that first nations demand which the king insisted on as part of founding canada as a nation. They were also completely voluntary (until a lib gov't much later changed that).  

they were in no way shape or form cultural genocide. Again that's revisionist history let's put forward by people with an agenda and ignores the truth and well documented sources of the day.

The crown and the new country of Canada both wanted to make sure that first nations people had the skills to live in the modern age but they in no way shape or form moved to wipe out first nations themselves or their culture. Their goal, as misguided as it was, was to create people who knew how to behave in modern society but still had their own culture and nation And therefore could choose to live in whatever world they wanted

It was a fool's idea, but they had no way of knowing that at the time. It's crystal clear if you read the Hansard of the day and the comments by Johnny in their entirety that it was not their goal and first nations culture and if it was they would have had no problem doing so

And again none of this has anything to do with slavery

Sure. A lot of people get rich selling the religion of the victim. They're not going to give that up anytime soon

There is no question that the 'big scoops' removed children, in huge numbers, from their indigenous, northern families and relocated them south to so-called, Indian Residential Schools - mandated by the Fed Government and honed / operated largely by the church. The last Indian Residential School was shuttered in 1997?  There is also no question that the intent was cultural genocide. 

 

The US Civil War was caused by disputes over slavery ...... and by extension State's rights pertaining to same. 

As far as slavery in the U.S. is concerned u seem to overlook the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and of course, Jim Crow. 

Trump is a racist ........ too many examples - the case of the 'Central Park Five' always comes to mind  for some reason tho. 

History, warts and all, needs to be taught ........... should the holocaust be forgotten? 

The pitfall is to avoid national flagellation and  making it divisive for political gain ...........ala, Trump, Pentagon Pete? 

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, John Stone said:

There is no question that the 'big scoops' removed children, in huge numbers, from their indigenous, northern families and relocated them south to so-called, Indian Residential Schools

The scoops happened because the people of the day felt the first nations couldn't care for their children in those cases. And they were right. The first nations have not done a very good job of managing their own communities.

I'm the first to admit that removing the children and putting them in better homes was not the correct answer  Even if it seemed expedient.  But it certainly wasn't an attempt at genocide.  And the schools in the 60's and late 70's weren't bad places  In fact trudeau ( the first one) was still building more of them. 

And by that time in history, the church was no longer in charge. That happened in 1969 officially, and even before then, the churches had been largely pushed aside, and the government had full scrutiny and control over the facilities.  And while there were individual abuses the same as there is in the school system today the vast majority of the problems and abuse have been brought to a halt

28 minutes ago, John Stone said:

The US Civil War was caused by disputes over slavery ...... and by extension State's rights pertaining to same. 

No that is an extremely common popular refrain that the left uses today. But slavery was one of the irritants, the real issue was self-determination. Who gets to make the laws and who has  to respect the laws. I will remind you that even after the war a number of slave owning states that did not participate in the conflict kept their slaves for the better part of a decade afterwards.

The southern states believed that the states should have equal power under confederation and this was in fact a major issue when confederation took place and these states had received assurances that they wouldn't suddenly become the holden to a central authority.

Now that Central Authority wanted control. One of the largest areas where that manifested itself was in regards to slaves but the war was not about slavery. The war was about control

Biden was a racist. Obama was a horrible racist. None of that's relevant

The problem is not that history shouldn't be taught, the problem is people like you seem to enjoy rewriting history to fit a current narrative. " America was built on slavery!"  No, it wasn't, less than 5 percent of people owned slaves and they only had a major impact in the south's agricultural success. That's not nothing, but they sure as hell didn't build america.  Etc etc. 

34 minutes ago, John Stone said:

The pitfall is to avoid national flagellation and  making it divisive for political gain

VOTER ID IS JIM CROW!!!!! MIT ROMNEY WILL PUT YOU ALL BACK IN CHAINS!!!  IF I HAD A SON HE"D LOOK LIKE TRAVON MARTIN!"  

But you were fine with that? Can only think of republican examples?

LOL it's not that i disagree with your statement it's just that you're so stunningly one sided and bias that it's hard to take you seriously. 

The challenge is that there will always be people who grab these issues and turn them into a career opportunity. And there will always be those who enjoy being professionally offended on behalf of someone else. I mean this kind of crap goes back to the crusades

Just don't buy into it. The first nations were definitely mishandled and there were elements about the residential school system that Were bad. But it was not genocide, nor was it the horror show that many first nations now like to try and present. It wasn't the mass slaughter of innocent children. Wasn't inflicted upon the first nations, it literally was out there request.

So if you want to look at the bad things and have an honest discussion about them, sure. Honestly the medical experiments are still in my mind the most absolutely insane and shocking thing about the whole program and yet it's the thing that never gets talked about, but whatever. We can discuss what happened

But that's not what that side wants to do. They want to attribute malice where malice is non-existent. They want to be victims we're victimhood isn't appropriate. And they want that victimization to last for at least another 100 years or more.

 

[John Stone]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

The scoops happened because the people of the day felt the first nations couldn't care for their children in those cases. And they were right. The first nations have not done a very good job of managing their own communities.

I'm the first to admit that removing the children and putting them in better homes was not the correct answer  Even if it seemed expedient.  But it certainly wasn't an attempt at genocide.  And the schools in the 60's and late 70's weren't bad places  In fact trudeau ( the first one) was still building more of them. 

And by that time in history, the church was no longer in charge. That happened in 1969 officially, and even before then, the churches had been largely pushed aside, and the government had full scrutiny and control over the facilities.  And while there were individual abuses the same as there is in the school system today the vast majority of the problems and abuse have been brought to a halt

No that is an extremely common popular refrain that the left uses today. But slavery was one of the irritants, the real issue was self-determination. Who gets to make the laws and who has  to respect the laws. I will remind you that even after the war a number of slave owning states that did not participate in the conflict kept their slaves for the better part of a decade afterwards.

The southern states believed that the states should have equal power under confederation and this was in fact a major issue when confederation took place and these states had received assurances that they wouldn't suddenly become the holden to a central authority.

Now that Central Authority wanted control. One of the largest areas where that manifested itself was in regards to slaves but the war was not about slavery. The war was about control

Biden was a racist. Obama was a horrible racist. None of that's relevant

The problem is not that history shouldn't be taught, the problem is people like you seem to enjoy rewriting history to fit a current narrative. " America was built on slavery!"  No, it wasn't, less than 5 percent of people owned slaves and they only had a major impact in the south's agricultural success. That's not nothing, but they sure as hell didn't build america.  Etc etc. 

VOTER ID IS JIM CROW!!!!! MIT ROMNEY WILL PUT YOU ALL BACK IN CHAINS!!!  IF I HAD A SON HE"D LOOK LIKE TRAVON MARTIN!"  

But you were fine with that? Can only think of republican examples?

LOL it's not that i disagree with your statement it's just that you're so stunningly one sided and bias that it's hard to take you seriously. 

The challenge is that there will always be people who grab these issues and turn them into a career opportunity. And there will always be those who enjoy being professionally offended on behalf of someone else. I mean this kind of crap goes back to the crusades

Just don't buy into it. The first nations were definitely mishandled and there were elements about the residential school system that Were bad. But it was not genocide, nor was it the horror show that many first nations now like to try and present. It wasn't the mass slaughter of innocent children. Wasn't inflicted upon the first nations, it literally was out there request.

So if you want to look at the bad things and have an honest discussion about them, sure. Honestly the medical experiments are still in my mind the most absolutely insane and shocking thing about the whole program and yet it's the thing that never gets talked about, but whatever. We can discuss what happened

But that's not what that side wants to do. They want to attribute malice where malice is non-existent. They want to be victims we're victimhood isn't appropriate. And they want that victimization to last for at least another 100 years or more.

 

I like to help but I wouldn't know where to begin and   this is not a tutoring session. 

Seriously dude, I think ur allergic to history. 

I suspect u still believe the Nazi were ideological left? 😅

[John Johnston]

11 minutes ago, John Stone said:

I like to help but I wouldn't know where to begin and   this is not a tutoring session. 

Seriously dude, I think ur allergic to history. 

I suspect u still believe the Nazi were ideological left? 😅

 Well said. 

[Michael Hardner]

Cultural genocide is the systematic destruction of a group's culture, religion, language, and identity. It is an assimilation process driven by a dominant group against a minority or indigenous population

[Michael Hardner]

I added that for reference. 

...

Is teaching first Nations about Western Health practices, English language, lgbtq+ plus acceptance, or Christianity cultural genocide? 

Is it worth our time to debate the meanings of these words over and over again versus offering to understand and provide positive healing? 

I'm not sure of any of these answers.. 

 

If a tribe used the wrong language to describe what they found, so be it. They were wrong. 

What are they looking for? 

Probably dignified burial for their people I would guess.

 

Edited Saturday at 03:13 PM by Michael Hardner

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Cultural genocide is the systematic destruction of a group's culture, religion, language, and identity. It is an assimilation process driven by a dominant group against a minority or indigenous population

Cultural genocide is a propagandist term invented by those who wished to make a situation sound more dire and horrible than it actually was. The term has no basis in reality, it is yet another example of the left Co-opting language to make an emotional appeal.

It is childish.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I added that for reference. 

...

Is teaching first Nations about Western Health practices, English language, lgbtq+ plus acceptance, or Christianity cultural genocide? 

Is it worth our time to debate the meanings of these words over and over again versus offering to understand and provide positive healing? 

I'm not sure of any of these answers.. 

 

If a tribe used the wrong language to describe what they found, so be it. They were wrong. 

What are they looking for? 

Probably dignified burial for their people I would guess.

 

Again you misunderstand. The vast majority of this issue these days is not the issue itself but the money and power that comes with keeping the issue alive and emotionally charged.

It was never any genocide, there was never even an attempt. Again the records are pretty crystal clear that the first nations opportunities for their children. The challenge was in the execution and there is much to complain about but it's: Into a near religion. Which is why even this very weak arguments were being made in the senate that anyone who dares question this should be labeled a residential school denier and subject to jail time. I kid you not. They want it to be hate speech

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, CdnFox said:

Cultural genocide is a propagandist term invented by those who wished to make a situation sound more dire and horrible than it actually was. The term has no basis in reality, it is yet another example of the left Co-opting language to make an emotional appeal.

It is childish.

The habit of words changing in usage because one meeting happens over another is a natural process. 

That said, without agreeing with your vilification of the agents, I agree with the general gist of your post here: the meaning of genocide was added to, and then it caused the overall meaning to become murky and objectively unclear 

This in turn would allow a propagandist to use it to evoke shock, when it might mean something very different from what's perceived. 

 

And to add, this is used by politics users of all stripes.  For example, they use the term forced labor differently for things produced from China and the USA. 

But I agree with your main point. 

That said, forcing people to abandon their culture is wrong. And this includes forcing Christian churches to allow gay people to marry. 

 

[John Stone]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Cultural genocide is a propagandist term invented by those who wished to make a situation sound more dire and horrible than it actually was. The term has no basis in reality, it is yet another example of the left Co-opting language to make an emotional appeal.

It is childish.

🙄

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, John Stone said:

🙄

awww muffin   go have your cookie and your nap, you'll feel better .

[John Stone]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

awww muffin   go have your cookie and your nap, you'll feel better .

.............. that's all I  need, doubt it would cure ur problem tho. 😅

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, John Stone said:

.............. that's all I  need, doubt it would cure ur problem tho. 😅

It will while you're napping. I won't have to put up with your childish nonsense for that entire time 😂😂😂😂

I'll try shipping you off to your grandparents for a few weeks after that if I need more  of a break  

Edited Saturday at 03:30 PM by CdnFox