It's a lack of substance that leads to posts like this. We can play the game where I explain why things are the way they are, and you use buzzwords like racism and bigotry to lead up to an epicly false conclusion:
Not only did you use the right wing buzzword 'entitlement' twice in one sentence, you accused me of wanting free stuff. That's quite the grand presumption. Once again, it's a lack of substance and heavy reliance on right wing sensationalism that makes your postings so easy to pick apart. Let's focus on me wanting handouts (lol)
I grew up in the woods, on welfare, to an abusive step father. I couldn't go to school for 1/3rd of my childhood, and eventually had to work full time at 15 years old. Armed with my powerful grade 9 education I somehow make 60% more than the average Canadian telling people what to do all day in a downtown office working for a software company. I'm 28 years old. I honestly get paid to travel around North America to meet with executives 2-3 months per year and 7 people report to me. I've never once been on the system, and hope I never will be. I've never been on EI, welfare, or whatever other programs exist. I've never once received anything for being aboriginal other than my federal migratory bird stamp, which lets me hunt geese for $10.00 instead of $17.00, but I had to pay about $130.00 to get my status card.
Considering how your post bounces around so much and doesn't really focus, I'm going to have to decipher yours the same way.
Ok? So I'm French and Native American but saying white man makes me a bigot? I used the term white man because I had to find a term that covered the people who came to North America from Europe and didn't want to list all their nationalities. How can I be a bigot if I'm white and native and called europeans 'white men', either way, you got the buzzword in there.
This would have been a good sensationalist quote had you spelled discrimination correctly. Considering how the entire attack is based on that word, I shouldn't even have to respond, but I will!
Discrimination is everywhere, we rely on it to keep our society from being crazy. You cannot have a PAL until you're a certain age, and you can't get certain jobs without degrees. That's discrimination, but the good type. I don't mean to take your words out of context, or put words in your mouth, like you did with my post so my best guess is that you mean Canada puts natives ahead of everyone and it's not fair in a society where we're supposed to be equals, and everyone but aboriginals are discriminated against. You could look at it that way, but you'd be wrong. The correct way to see this would be as everyone being equal but some people have extra protections. Do I support this system? I never said I did, I explained why it's the way it is. I recall explaining how this protection system should allow natives to become more western, which is probably the fastest way to abolish this imbalance altogether.
No, it's not because of the courts, it's for the reasons that I pointed out right after I made my statement. I don't understand how you'd ask why I think something when I spell it out so plainly.
I think you're referring to the Blackfoot 'buffalo jump' in Alberta. I'll respond to this, you want to know how it was more correct in a wildlife conservation aspect? It was done for almost 6000 years. The animals were processed nearby and consumed, not poached for currency. This way of life came to an end when white people were introduced into the mix, therefore it was pretty sustainable. What I find funny is how white people decimated the harvestable surplus in North America and blame the natives for poaching all the time. It's pretty much the same argument here like we do against the anti's, facts trump sensationalism. So some natives drove buffalo off a cliff, in 3000 BC the white people were probably doing equally nasty things to animals.
I think a 90% population wipe by sickness and persecution is comparable to events in Europe. People were also displaced, moved onto reserves, and had their kids taken from them if they survived. They were called heathens and were convinced to fight in constant wars. To think that some people would be reverse racist or even passively aggressive to these people is downright disrespectful. To even consider 'some death and destruction' to be less evil than 'a lot' is pretty twisted as well.
Your attempts to smear me are a failure. I asked you point blank if discrimination wasnt acceptable in the past, why is it suddenly acceptable now. Instead of replying you attempt to divert and attack.
Your missing the point, because you chose to be ignorant. Bad things happened to aboriginals, of that there is no doubt. Guess what bad things happened to Jews, Cathars, Chineese, Russians, Africans... the list is endless. Contrary to what you seem to eschew you dont hold the rights to claim worlds biggest victim.
Your stats that 90% of aboriginals were wiped out is factually in error. You could possibly claim 90% death rate if you factored in indigineous people from the Amazon basin into your argument. But the fatality rate from disease exposure and other sundries although high was lower than 90%
Once again you gloss over the Gladue decision. I take it you are not familiar with this cornerstone of the Canadian judiciary system. Any aboriginal in court is entitled to have protection under the Gladue ruling for any and all crimes. It essentially says, the aboriginal can not be held to the same level of culpability for his/her crime because aboriginals were discriminated against in the past. Therefore the criminal is in essence the true victim and no matter how heinous the crime will be sentenced based on a reduced level of liability and responsibility.
Gladue herself was drunk when she stabbed her boyfriend to death in Vancouver or Victoria I beleive. She didnt live on a reservation and wasnt a victim of anything other than drunkeness and being an evil murderer. She didnt even invoke this defence at her trial. ON appeal it was determined that because she was an aboriginal essentially she wasnt really liable for chasing down her boyfriend and carving him up with a butcher knife. Not because she was a victim of racism and abuse, it was shown she was not....no it was because other aboriginals in the past were abused and as such she was racially related to those in the past who were abused...therefore it was legislated that anytime an aboriginal is about to be sentenced no matter what the crime a judge must use the Gladue ruling to give a lesser sentence by taking into account that aboriginals in the past were discriminated against...
You are clueles if you think this is ok and not racist bigotry. Its no different than a bunch of hicks in Alabama lynching some black guy and getting a suspended sentence..because hey the black guy shouldnt have looked at the white woman like that. Therefor do to racist policy in the judiciary the white lynchers are held to a lower standard of culpability because its not thier fault because they were white. Seems wrong when you put that way. Substitute the words white for aboriginal and its still wrong...or maybe you dont think so?
Judicial sentences that are preordained for lesser culpability do soley to race.
But hey I spelled discrimination wrong, so therefore my arguement has no merit and I should be derided as a fool. I suppose this is because with your user name of rocket surgery you are highly educated. Did you enter school based on merit or do to race? Were you afforded chances other Canadians had because of your skills and achievements or because your a Metis?
See where I am going with this? Race based legislation or affirmative action PC type practices mean that anything you achieve in your life...is always suspect. You suceed and some say no its because he got an unfair bump. The libs feel you must have this bump because to the leftist, Metis and aboriginals are incapable of success without being afforded free bumps and lower criteria for success.
Yet you still champion this bs system? You can spew whatever nonsense you want, but if you support two tiered system based on race, your nothing but a bigoted racist.
I myself, poor spelling included would happily treat you as an equal and fellow citizen and would demand nor expect more of you than any other citizen. This makes me a grammatically challenged idealist who believes in a level playing field, not like yourself who focus soley on the race of the person he is having the arguement with.
You just cant wrap your head around the idea that people other than whites when engaged in discrimination do so because they are bigots and racists can you...
some good arguments going on here.
. Never ever threw away any Pike, we were just eating/taking more than just the flesh. 
