Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

The World Events Thread


RUPERTKBD
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, Sean Monahan said:

Paraphrasing here, but something along the lines of “people don’t acknowledge the good that the residential schools did for the indigenous population”. Also referred to them as allegations being propagated by the media (again paraphrasing).

 

I think the majority of Catholics would condemn statements like his but I still think there needs to be something said by the Vatican re: the matter. 

Deflection at it's finest. Ridiculous and inconsiderate. No wonder why we're seeing churches burn if $&!# like that is being said. What a dumb thing to say.

 

Good doesn't take away from the bad and vise-versa. You take the good, the bad and the ugly. View them as separate things and not a means of deflection.

 

The church/pope should condemn this sort of line of thinking IMO. It makes them look horrendously bad. It would set a good example if the pope condemn this and it is what a good leader would do in this sort of situation.

 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Just putting it out there (ie. not saying that what I'm about to suggest is fact), but has anyone considered this might be a "false-flag" situation, where "records" could be conveniently burned, and therefore forever lost and "no longer available"?

 

Mind you, razing someone's place of worship is not the act of a civilized society - but then again, Christians have been doing that to others they've encountered in the course of their millenia of history, in the name of salvaging souls and protecting their faith.

'Struth....you might even say that the perpetrators are on a bit of a "Crusade".....

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Again, with respect, I think you're dramatically understating the situation.

 

When you say "has done some stuff", bear in mind that what you're referring to amounts to kidnapping thousands of children, submitting them to physical and psychological abuse for years and presiding over a number of deaths that shows a criminal level of neglect....

 

Nobody is asking for the arrest of current Archbishops, or the abolition of the Catholic church. What they would like to see is an acknowledgement of the mistakes that were made by the institutions that were responsible for those mistakes. They would also like to see the church apologize...

 

Instead, we attempts to downplay the situation. We even see some lament the fact that they get no recognition for the "good" that was done.

 

This first step in fixing a problem is admitting that one exists in the first place. I see little evidence to suggest that the Catholic Church has done so....

 

I am not trying to. In stating some stuff I didn't mean to undermine anything any group has done or faced. I stated experiences I have heard from people close to me and stated a story that falls in line with those sort of descriptions of what those children went through that you made. If you go to that thread and read what I said you wouldn't think I would purposely try to understate anything, it is fairly graphic.

 

Right after I said "some stuff" that I stated this

 

50 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Almost every group/race/country/religion has done some stuff in the past. I think every one of them should acknowledge every event in the past regardless. These sort of mistakes made are teaching moments that should never be forgotten so they we don't repeat these sort of events. We live and learn. The perspective we give to future generations will serve to create a better tomorrow.

 

I am just going more in-depth than just saying institutions/groups and what not then go more into the specifics like the peoples of these institutions/groups. I differentiate past from present, people then to people now and ask myself how to we go about this knowing that society as a whole is different than it was then. It's all very grey to me about what could be done.

 

I don't see the significance in an apology compared to acknowledgement/recognition since the people who should be apologizing, as well as face punishment, are already dead. To me it would be an ineffective apology, kind of similar to an empty apology. If it were me I wouldn't feel like I was apologized to properly

 

I feel acknowledgement and recognition is definitely the way to go and if the church isn't then yeah they need to be called out. I wonder what else could be done other than that and an apology for people who want that.

 

 

I am asking myself a lot of questions in regards to this so it might be hard to get a read of me. I am not really one-way or another. I apologize for any misunderstanding that could come from this.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I am not trying to. In stating some stuff I didn't mean to undermine anything any group has done or faced. I stated experiences I have heard from people close to me and stated a story that falls in line with those sort of descriptions of what those children went through that you made. If you go to that thread and read what I said you wouldn't think I would purposely try to understate anything, it is fairly graphic.

 

Right after I said "some stuff" that I stated this

 

 

I am just going more in-depth than just saying institutions/groups and what not then go more into the specifics like the peoples of these institutions/groups. I differentiate past from present, people then to people now and ask myself how to we go about this knowing that society as a whole is different than it was then. It's all very grey to me about what could be done.

 

I don't see the significance in an apology compared to acknowledgement/recognition since the people who should be apologizing, as well as face punishment, are already dead. To me it would be an ineffective apology, kind of similar to an empty apology. If it were me I wouldn't feel like I was apologized to properly

 

I feel acknowledgement and recognition is definitely the way to go and if the church isn't then yeah they need to be called out. I wonder what else could be done other than that and an apology for people who want that.

 

 

I am asking myself a lot of questions in regards to this so it might be hard to get a read of me. I am not really one-way or another. I apologize for any misunderstanding that could come from this.

Since recognition is one of the key things we've been advocating, we have no disagreement there. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be any official level of recognition from the Church or the RCMP.

 

As far as an apology goes, you're welcome to your opinion, but personally, I'd defer to the First Nations themselves on that front. I believe that an apology would go a long way towards beginning the healing process. Perhaps I'll ask my mother in law who was a resident of Lejac and get back to you on that?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lejac_Residential_School

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Since recognition is one of the key things we've been advocating, we have no disagreement there. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be any official level of recognition from the Church or the RCMP.

 

As far as an apology goes, you're welcome to your opinion, but personally, I'd defer to the First Nations themselves on that front. I believe that an apology would go a long way towards beginning the healing process. Perhaps I'll ask my mother in law who was a resident of Lejac and get back to you on that?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lejac_Residential_School

  This meant the world to our first nations people.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_to_Australia's_Indigenous_peoples

 

We still have a long way to go.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Since recognition is one of the key things we've been advocating, we have no disagreement there. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be any official level of recognition from the Church or the RCMP.

 

As far as an apology goes, you're welcome to your opinion, but personally, I'd defer to the First Nations themselves on that front. I believe that an apology would go a long way towards beginning the healing process. Perhaps I'll ask my mother in law who was a resident of Lejac and get back to you on that?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lejac_Residential_School

If it is a similar circumstance of past affecting present then that sort of perspective might help me on that. I just don't feel like it would be a real apology but I am not gonna try to tell anyone who's the victim in this sort of situation how to think. I just have a feeling of how I would react in this sort of circumstance but I also feel that you never know till you know. At a mental crossroads.

 

My father is an immigrant from Trinidad. There's history of slavery there and in my family. Maybe if I look of Trinidad's past I could find something to relate and gain a better sort of perspective on similar circumstances.

 

If the Church isn't recognizing the actions of their past people then yeah they need to be called out. They also need to condemn anyone who's using deflection tactics like that pastor from Ontario.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Again, with respect, I think you're dramatically understating the situation.

 

When you say "has done some stuff", bear in mind that what you're referring to amounts to kidnapping thousands of children, submitting them to physical and psychological abuse for years and presiding over a number of deaths that shows a criminal level of neglect....

 

Nobody is asking for the arrest of current Archbishops, or the abolition of the Catholic church. What they would like to see is an acknowledgement of the mistakes that were made by the institutions that were responsible for those mistakes. They would also like to see the church apologize...

 

Instead, we attempts to downplay the situation. We even see some lament the fact that they get no recognition for the "good" that was done.

 

This first step in fixing a problem is admitting that one exists in the first place. I see little evidence to suggest that the Catholic Church has done so....

 

In fairness, in regards to the Kamloops tragedy, Vancouver Archbishop Miller did make an apology:

 

***************************************************************************************************************************************

 

Vancouver Archbishop J. Michael Miller has issued a formal apology to First Nations in the wake of preliminary findings from a radar survey of the former Kamloops Indian Residential school that indicated that as many as 215 children could be buried on the site.

 

"I am writing to express my deep apology and profound condolences to the families and communities that have been devastated by this horrific news," Miller said in a statement Wednesday.

 

"Each time new evidence of a tragedy is revealed, or another victim comes forward, countless wounds are reopened, and I know that you experience renewed suffering."

In the statement, Miller said he reflected on an earlier apology he made in 2013 before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which he described as "words to which I remain committed and accountable."

 

He also said the archdiocese is committed to providing the archives and records related to all residential schools and urged other Catholic and government organizations to do the same.

 

He said the archdiocese has already provided records related to the former residential school in Kamloops to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and promised they would remain available for review.

 

Full story at:

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-archbishop-apologizes-indigenous-community-1.6051150

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two years ago the local Chief made the decision to remove the abandoned Catholic Church from reserve land. I believe the building dated back to 1896. There was a residential school in Cranbrook. Some kids I knew went there. 
 

As far as the church being removed. Initial reaction was negative but people thought it was a decision left to the reserve. The Chief did a good job of explaining the negative thoughts around the church and school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't find the Bill Cosby thread. So putting this here....................

 

Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction overturned by court

By MARYCLAIRE DALE17 minutes ago
 
 
FILE - In this April 26, 2018 file photo, actor and comedian Bill Cosby departs the courthouse after he was found guilty in his sexual assault retrial, at the Montgomery County Courthouse in Norristown, Pa. Pennsylvania’s highest court has overturned comedian Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction. The court said Wednesday that they found an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)
 

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Pennsylvania’s highest court overturned Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction Wednesday after finding an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case.

 

Cosby has served more than two years of a three- to 10-year sentence at a state prison near Philadelphia. He had vowed to serve all 10 years rather than acknowledge any remorse over the 2004 encounter with accuser Andrea Constand.

 

He was charged in late 2015, when a prosecutor armed with newly unsealed evidence — Cosby’s damaging deposition from her lawsuit — arrested him days before the 12-year statute of limitations expired.

 

The court said that District Attorney Kevin Steele, who made the decision to arrest Cosby, was obligated to stand by his predecessor’s promise not to charge Cosby when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in Constand’s civil suit. There was no evidence that promise was ever put in writing.

Justice David Wecht, writing for a split court, said Cosby had relied on the former prosecutor’s decision not to charge him when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in the Constand’s civil suit.

 

They said that overturning the conviction, and barring any further prosecution, “is the only remedy that comports with society’s reasonable expectations of its elected prosecutors and our criminal justice system.”

 

The 83-year-old Cosby, who was once beloved as “America’s Dad,” was convicted of drugging and molesting the Temple University employee at his suburban estate.

 

The trial judge had allowed just one other accuser to testify at Cosby’s first trial, when the jury deadlocked. However, he then allowed five other accusers to testify at the retrial about their experiences with Cosby in the 1980s.

 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that testimony tainted the trial, even though a lower appeals court had found it appropriate to show a signature pattern of drugging and molesting women.

 

Cosby was the first celebrity tried and convicted in the #MeToo era, so the reversal could make prosecutors wary of calling other accusers in similar cases. The law on prior bad act testimony varies by state, though, and the ruling only holds sway in Pennsylvania.

 

The justices voiced concern not just about sex assault cases, but what they saw as the judiciary’s increasing tendency to allow testimony that crosses the line into character attacks. The law allows the testimony only in limited cases, including to show a crime pattern so specific it serves to identify the perpetrator.

 

In New York, the judge presiding over last year’s trial of movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose case had sparked the explosion of the #MeToo movement in 2017, let four other accusers testify. Weinstein was convicted and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He is now facing separate charges in California.

 

In Cosby’s case, one of his appellate lawyers said prosecutors put on vague evidence about the uncharged conduct, including Cosby’s own recollections in his deposition about giving women alcohol or quaaludes before sexual encounters.

 

“The presumption of innocence just didn’t exist for him,” Jennifer Bonjean, the lawyer, argued to the court in December.

 

In May, Cosby was denied paroled after refusing to participate in sex offender programs during his nearly three years in state prison. He has long said he would resist the treatment programs and refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing even if it means serving the full 10-year sentence.

 

This is the first year he was eligible for parole under the three- to 10-year sentence handed down after his 2018 conviction.

Cosby spokesperson Andrew Wyatt called the parole board decision “appalling.”

 

Prosecutors said Cosby repeatedly used his fame and “family man” persona to manipulate young women, holding himself out as a mentor before betraying them.

 

Cosby, a groundbreaking Black actor who grew up in public housing in Philadelphia, made a fortune estimated at $400 million during his 50 years in the entertainment industry. His trademark clean comedy and homespun wisdom fueled popular TV shows, books and standup acts.

 

He fell from favor in his later years as he lectured the Black community about family values, but was attempting a comeback when he was arrested.

 

“There was a built-in level of trust because of his status in the entertainment industry and because he held himself out as a public moralist,” Assistant District Attorney Adrienne Jappe, of suburban Montgomery County, argued to the justices.

 

Cosby had invited Constand to an estate he owns in Pennsylvania the night she said he drugged and sexually assaulted her.

 

Constand, a former professional basketball player who worked at his alma mater, went to police a year later. The other accusers knew Cosby through the entertainment industry and did not go to police.

 

The AP does not typically identify sexual assault victims without their permission, which Constand has granted.

Edited by nuckin_futz
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

Couldn't find the Bill Cosby thread. So putting this here....................

 

Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction overturned by court

By MARYCLAIRE DALE17 minutes ago
 
 
FILE - In this April 26, 2018 file photo, actor and comedian Bill Cosby departs the courthouse after he was found guilty in his sexual assault retrial, at the Montgomery County Courthouse in Norristown, Pa. Pennsylvania’s highest court has overturned comedian Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction. The court said Wednesday that they found an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)
 

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Pennsylvania’s highest court overturned Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction Wednesday after finding an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case.

 

Cosby has served more than two years of a three- to 10-year sentence at a state prison near Philadelphia. He had vowed to serve all 10 years rather than acknowledge any remorse over the 2004 encounter with accuser Andrea Constand.

 

He was charged in late 2015, when a prosecutor armed with newly unsealed evidence — Cosby’s damaging deposition from her lawsuit — arrested him days before the 12-year statute of limitations expired.

 

The court said that District Attorney Kevin Steele, who made the decision to arrest Cosby, was obligated to stand by his predecessor’s promise not to charge Cosby when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in Constand’s civil suit. There was no evidence that promise was ever put in writing.

Justice David Wecht, writing for a split court, said Cosby had relied on the former prosecutor’s decision not to charge him when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in the Constand’s civil suit.

 

They said that overturning the conviction, and barring any further prosecution, “is the only remedy that comports with society’s reasonable expectations of its elected prosecutors and our criminal justice system.”

 

The 83-year-old Cosby, who was once beloved as “America’s Dad,” was convicted of drugging and molesting the Temple University employee at his suburban estate.

 

The trial judge had allowed just one other accuser to testify at Cosby’s first trial, when the jury deadlocked. However, he then allowed five other accusers to testify at the retrial about their experiences with Cosby in the 1980s.

 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that testimony tainted the trial, even though a lower appeals court had found it appropriate to show a signature pattern of drugging and molesting women.

 

Cosby was the first celebrity tried and convicted in the #MeToo era, so the reversal could make prosecutors wary of calling other accusers in similar cases. The law on prior bad act testimony varies by state, though, and the ruling only holds sway in Pennsylvania.

 

The justices voiced concern not just about sex assault cases, but what they saw as the judiciary’s increasing tendency to allow testimony that crosses the line into character attacks. The law allows the testimony only in limited cases, including to show a crime pattern so specific it serves to identify the perpetrator.

 

In New York, the judge presiding over last year’s trial of movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose case had sparked the explosion of the #MeToo movement in 2017, let four other accusers testify. Weinstein was convicted and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He is now facing separate charges in California.

 

In Cosby’s case, one of his appellate lawyers said prosecutors put on vague evidence about the uncharged conduct, including Cosby’s own recollections in his deposition about giving women alcohol or quaaludes before sexual encounters.

 

“The presumption of innocence just didn’t exist for him,” Jennifer Bonjean, the lawyer, argued to the court in December.

 

In May, Cosby was denied paroled after refusing to participate in sex offender programs during his nearly three years in state prison. He has long said he would resist the treatment programs and refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing even if it means serving the full 10-year sentence.

 

This is the first year he was eligible for parole under the three- to 10-year sentence handed down after his 2018 conviction.

Cosby spokesperson Andrew Wyatt called the parole board decision “appalling.”

 

Prosecutors said Cosby repeatedly used his fame and “family man” persona to manipulate young women, holding himself out as a mentor before betraying them.

 

Cosby, a groundbreaking Black actor who grew up in public housing in Philadelphia, made a fortune estimated at $400 million during his 50 years in the entertainment industry. His trademark clean comedy and homespun wisdom fueled popular TV shows, books and standup acts.

 

He fell from favor in his later years as he lectured the Black community about family values, but was attempting a comeback when he was arrested.

 

“There was a built-in level of trust because of his status in the entertainment industry and because he held himself out as a public moralist,” Assistant District Attorney Adrienne Jappe, of suburban Montgomery County, argued to the justices.

 

Cosby had invited Constand to an estate he owns in Pennsylvania the night she said he drugged and sexually assaulted her.

 

Constand, a former professional basketball player who worked at his alma mater, went to police a year later. The other accusers knew Cosby through the entertainment industry and did not go to police.

 

The AP does not typically identify sexual assault victims without their permission, which Constand has granted.

Just saw this....

 

That previous prosecutor has a lot to answer for....

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

Couldn't find the Bill Cosby thread. So putting this here....................

 

Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction overturned by court

By MARYCLAIRE DALE17 minutes ago
 
 
FILE - In this April 26, 2018 file photo, actor and comedian Bill Cosby departs the courthouse after he was found guilty in his sexual assault retrial, at the Montgomery County Courthouse in Norristown, Pa. Pennsylvania’s highest court has overturned comedian Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction. The court said Wednesday that they found an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)
 

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Pennsylvania’s highest court overturned Bill Cosby’s sex assault conviction Wednesday after finding an agreement with a previous prosecutor prevented him from being charged in the case.

 

Cosby has served more than two years of a three- to 10-year sentence at a state prison near Philadelphia. He had vowed to serve all 10 years rather than acknowledge any remorse over the 2004 encounter with accuser Andrea Constand.

 

He was charged in late 2015, when a prosecutor armed with newly unsealed evidence — Cosby’s damaging deposition from her lawsuit — arrested him days before the 12-year statute of limitations expired.

 

The court said that District Attorney Kevin Steele, who made the decision to arrest Cosby, was obligated to stand by his predecessor’s promise not to charge Cosby when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in Constand’s civil suit. There was no evidence that promise was ever put in writing.

Justice David Wecht, writing for a split court, said Cosby had relied on the former prosecutor’s decision not to charge him when he later gave potentially incriminating testimony in the Constand’s civil suit.

 

They said that overturning the conviction, and barring any further prosecution, “is the only remedy that comports with society’s reasonable expectations of its elected prosecutors and our criminal justice system.”

 

The 83-year-old Cosby, who was once beloved as “America’s Dad,” was convicted of drugging and molesting the Temple University employee at his suburban estate.

 

The trial judge had allowed just one other accuser to testify at Cosby’s first trial, when the jury deadlocked. However, he then allowed five other accusers to testify at the retrial about their experiences with Cosby in the 1980s.

 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that testimony tainted the trial, even though a lower appeals court had found it appropriate to show a signature pattern of drugging and molesting women.

 

Cosby was the first celebrity tried and convicted in the #MeToo era, so the reversal could make prosecutors wary of calling other accusers in similar cases. The law on prior bad act testimony varies by state, though, and the ruling only holds sway in Pennsylvania.

 

The justices voiced concern not just about sex assault cases, but what they saw as the judiciary’s increasing tendency to allow testimony that crosses the line into character attacks. The law allows the testimony only in limited cases, including to show a crime pattern so specific it serves to identify the perpetrator.

 

In New York, the judge presiding over last year’s trial of movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose case had sparked the explosion of the #MeToo movement in 2017, let four other accusers testify. Weinstein was convicted and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He is now facing separate charges in California.

 

In Cosby’s case, one of his appellate lawyers said prosecutors put on vague evidence about the uncharged conduct, including Cosby’s own recollections in his deposition about giving women alcohol or quaaludes before sexual encounters.

 

“The presumption of innocence just didn’t exist for him,” Jennifer Bonjean, the lawyer, argued to the court in December.

 

In May, Cosby was denied paroled after refusing to participate in sex offender programs during his nearly three years in state prison. He has long said he would resist the treatment programs and refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing even if it means serving the full 10-year sentence.

 

This is the first year he was eligible for parole under the three- to 10-year sentence handed down after his 2018 conviction.

Cosby spokesperson Andrew Wyatt called the parole board decision “appalling.”

 

Prosecutors said Cosby repeatedly used his fame and “family man” persona to manipulate young women, holding himself out as a mentor before betraying them.

 

Cosby, a groundbreaking Black actor who grew up in public housing in Philadelphia, made a fortune estimated at $400 million during his 50 years in the entertainment industry. His trademark clean comedy and homespun wisdom fueled popular TV shows, books and standup acts.

 

He fell from favor in his later years as he lectured the Black community about family values, but was attempting a comeback when he was arrested.

 

“There was a built-in level of trust because of his status in the entertainment industry and because he held himself out as a public moralist,” Assistant District Attorney Adrienne Jappe, of suburban Montgomery County, argued to the justices.

 

Cosby had invited Constand to an estate he owns in Pennsylvania the night she said he drugged and sexually assaulted her.

 

Constand, a former professional basketball player who worked at his alma mater, went to police a year later. The other accusers knew Cosby through the entertainment industry and did not go to police.

 

The AP does not typically identify sexual assault victims without their permission, which Constand has granted.

I am speechless.......gobsmacked and haven't stopped "WHAT THE ABSOLUTE &^@#" ing since this news broke just awhile ago.

 

What's next...Harvey Weinstein walks?
 
OJ gets a pardon?
 

Epstein gets resurrected from the dead and goes home to sex traffic young girls some more?

From this CTV article, linked below, this paragraph stands out particularly....

 

" But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said Wednesday that District Attorney Kevin Steele, who made the decision to arrest Cosby, was obligated to stand by his predecessor's promise not to charge Cosby, though there was no evidence that promise was ever put in writing.
 
Those last 12 bolded words....are you fecking kidding me?????
 
So can just anyone make up some bull$&!# 'but he said' and walk out of prison after sexually assaulting women or is that only for the very rich who can afford fancy lawyers?
 
 
 
Edited by Cerridwen
Forgot link
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So PM JT has spoken about church burnings in Canada and said that is “not a way to go”

Regardless of thoughts that people have about the Catholic Church and residential school history and recent mass grave discoveries.

 

To be completely honest, I find his statement kind of milquetoast.

When single mosque got torched in 2015 in Ontario, JT was “deeply disturbed”

Purely speculation on my part but if synagogue got burned down, I don’t see him saying the same thing.

 


https://globalnews.ca/news/7992990/church-fires-canada-condemned/

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CBH1926 said:

So PM JT has spoken about church burnings in Canada and said that is “not a way to go”

Regardless of thoughts that people have about the Catholic Church and residential school history and recent mass grave discoveries.

 

To be completely honest, I find his statement kind of milquetoast.

When single mosque got torched in 2015 in Ontario, JT was “deeply disturbed”

Purely speculation on my part but if synagogue got burned down, I don’t see him saying the same thing.

 


https://globalnews.ca/news/7992990/church-fires-canada-condemned/


While I think there are differences in that the mosque/synagogue analogy in that they are meant to inspire terror whereas the Catholic Church burnings are happening in anger, I still agree with you that this requires much stronger language from the PM. People are going to get killed soon if this keeps up. I’m not trying to relate the terrible situation happening in Lytton right now as I don’t know the cause of this fire but imagine if one of these church burnings leads to a massive wildfire in these hot and dry conditions. I understand the hurt and anger but cooler heads need to prevail.

 

 

 

 

75326183-0396-42DB-AA06-C0BE76CD4D8F.jpeg

  • Sad 1
  • Burr 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, statues of Queens Victoria and Elizabeth II were vandalized and toppled in Winnipeg yesterday. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/queen-victoria-statue-winnipeg-reactions-1.6087938

 

Quote

 

Winnipeg police Chief Danny Smyth says officers are investigating after the head of a Queen Victoria statue at the Manitoba Legislature was removed and thrown in the Assiniboine River.

The statue was further vandalized after a crowd pulled it and a smaller statue of Queen Elizabeth down at the end of the Every Child Matters walk on July 1.

 

Smyth says the rally was largely peaceful and the vast majority of those in the crowd weren't involved.

"I'm disappointed. I know the intent of all the organizers involved was to have a peaceful demonstration, a show of solidarity ... for the lost children of the residential schools. I don't think anyone expected that to occur," he said in a news conference on Friday.

Police didn't intervene when the statues were being toppled by a small group of people so as not to incite the crowd, Smyth said.

"We will be investigating this to determine who was involved in this," he said.

The investigation will include reviewing security footage, he said.

The walk on Canada Day was held to protest the country's treatment of Indigenous people under the colonial system — and in particular the system that forced children to leave their families and attend residential schools, where abuse was common and many died.

The statue of Victoria, first unveiled in 1904, was left covered with a Canadian flag, and the words "We were children" were written on it in black marker, referencing children who died in residential schools.

Sometime between Thursday afternoon and Friday morning, the head of the Victoria statue was taken off and dumped in the river.

Smyth said a 51-year-old man was arrested on site and charged with mischief for allegedly damaging a vehicle in the area and assaulting a peace office, although police don't believe he was involved in pulling down the statues.

CBC News journalists saw police shock a man with a stun gun before he was arrested, while some onlookers lobbed objects at officers and yelled profanities.

The crowd was largely peaceful before the arrest, but police had to push a throng back to take the man into custody.

Premier Brian Pallister had a scathing rebuke for those who took down the statue, calling it "a major setback" for reconciliation in a statement on Friday.

"The actions by individuals to vandalize public property at the Manitoba Legislative Building July 1 are unacceptable. They are a major setback for those who are working toward real reconciliation and do nothing to advance this important goal," he said.

"Those who commit acts of violence will be pursued actively in the courts. All leaders in Manitoba must strongly condemn acts of violence and vandalism, and at the same time, we must come together to meaningfully advance reconciliation."

The chief of Pimicikamak Cree Nation in northern Manitoba called for understanding after the crowd spray-painted and pulled down the statue on Thursday.

Members of Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak (MKO) said while they don't condone violence, they understand the reasons why the statues were pulled down, as well as the tensions that arose between people attending the rally and police.

"I will not condemn the people, as they are hurt mentally and emotionally, because the truth that came out is hurtful and damaging," said Chief David Monias of Pimicikamak in an MKO news release on Friday.

"Destruction of material things is nothing compared to the deliberate destruction of life and culture.... Material things are replaceable, but lives aren't."

 

I'm not sure how helpful this is....I totally get the anger, but in this case, I wonder if it's being directed in the right direction? :unsure:

 

 

Predictably, the Brits aren't happy: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57693683

 

Quote

 

The British government condemned the toppling of the two statues.

"We obviously condemn any defacing of statues of the Queen," a spokesman said.

"Our thoughts," the spokesman added, "are with Canada's indigenous community following these tragic discoveries and we follow these issues closely and continue to engage with the government of Canada with indigenous matters."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Apparently, statues of Queens Victoria and Elizabeth II were vandalized and toppled in Winnipeg yesterday. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/queen-victoria-statue-winnipeg-reactions-1.6087938

 

I'm not sure how helpful this is....I totally get the anger, but in this case, I wonder if it's being directed in the right direction? :unsure:

 

 

Predictably, the Brits aren't happy: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57693683

 

 

I think it's laughable (in a sad kind of way) that the DoJ in HK is using "sedition" as the main thrust to lock up pro-democracy activists, when the law as it stands in HK pertains to the Crown as receiver of the ill-intent - and there has been no insult to the Crown through the actions of those being locked up (the ccp or its puppet government in HK are not the Crown as the law defines).

 

Whereas these actions would definitely fall within the exact definition of sedition, should the Crown and her Minister of Justice here choose to exercise our law.  (I'm not saying they should, rather I'm just providing a comparsion of the bull$&!#tery in HK by them using colonial era anti-sedition law to pursue the pro-democracy activists and put them in jail.)

 

It's complicated, and one could almost argue that QEII is probably not the right monarch's statue to target, as by all accounts, she is a somewhat progressive monarch, who has if anything chosen to relinquish colonial title upon the Empire and has let her former colonies choose their own direction and govern themselves.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

I think it's laughable (in a sad kind of way) that the DoJ in HK is using "sedition" as the main thrust to lock up pro-democracy activists, when the law as it stands in HK pertains to the Crown as receiver of the ill-intent - and there has been no insult to the Crown through the actions of those being locked up (the ccp or its puppet government in HK are not the Crown as the law defines).

 

Whereas these actions would definitely fall within the exact definition of sedition, should the Crown and her Minister of Justice here choose to exercise our law.  (I'm not saying they should, rather I'm just providing a comparsion of the bull$&!#tery in HK by them using colonial era anti-sedition law to pursue the pro-democracy activists and put them in jail.)

 

It's complicated, and one could almost argue that QEII is probably not the right monarch's statue to target, as by all accounts, she is a somewhat progressive monarch, who has if anything chosen to relinquish colonial title upon the Empire and has let her former colonies choose their own direction and govern themselves.

This is pretty much what I was thinking.

 

The Residential School System is a purely Canadian initiative....the Brits, AFAIK, had nothing to do with it....

 

As I said before, I understand the anger and the need to strike out at the institutions of power, but I worry that this might lead down the road to where the US is now with BLM. Protesters with a legitimate cause become labeled as vandals instead of peaceful protesters and the actions that caused the protests in the first place start to become overshadowed by the actions of a few overzealous demonstrators.

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

This is pretty much what I was thinking.

 

The Residential School System is a purely Canadian initiative....the Brits, AFAIK, had nothing to do with it....

 

As I said before, I understand the anger and the need to strike out at the institutions of power, but I worry that this might lead down the road to where the US is now with BLM. Protesters with a legitimate cause become labeled as vandals instead of peaceful protesters and the actions that caused the protests in the first place start to become overshadowed by the actions of a few overzealous demonstrators.

Over here in Aus we have 2 " stolen" generations.

One gets lots of press as it should.

First nations kids were taken from their families for a few reasons,one in particular that was really heinous was the effort to breed them out.

 

The second stolen generation which is not really acknowledged and one I am part of is 250,000 kids that were "farmed" out by the Catholic church mostly because they considered their mothers,in many cases teenagers,unfit to be mother's.

This was sanctioned by the state which also had a white only policy for Australia.

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...