[Beren]

I couldn't agree more. It's not news if Israel is not mentioned.

Mentioning his relationship with Israel puts Trudeau's 'genocide' comment in context, which you shouldn't consider an outrage if you'd actually meant to open a news thread about Trudeau and his comment in Today's News.

But no, this thread is rather supposed to be a place for a possibly infinite prestige debate about genocide in general that leads nowhere, which shouldn't be a surprise as, unlike being ironic, possibly infinite prestige debates leading nowhere are exactly your thing.

But what would make this a news thread about Trudeau and his comment more than blatantly pointing out his hypocrisy does? Should we rather discuss the synonyms for 'genocide' and pick a choice? Wait, it would belong to Opinion Polls then.

[B0ycey]

I have no idea why you think this would only affect Trudeau.

Why wouldn't it? He voiced an opinion, used a term and things are being investigated. If Trudeau or Canada has violated international law they will be punished. Although they themselves don't dictate punishment and Trudeaus opinions are just that FYI.

As far as I'm concerned he has just acknowledged an incident. Personally I think he was an idiot for using the term as it just gives fuel to his enemies and puts Canada a step behind everyone else when condemning human rights violations. But he decided to say it and he alone will suffer the consequences.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Mentioning his relationship with Israel puts Trudeau's 'genocide' comment in context, which you shouldn't consider an outrage if you'd actually meant to open a news thread about Trudeau and his comment in Today's News.

But no, this thread is rather supposed to be a place for a possibly infinite prestige debate about genocide in general that leads nowhere, which shouldn't be a surprise as, unlike being ironic, possibly infinite prestige debates leading nowhere are exactly your thing.

But what would make this a news thread about Trudeau and his comment more than blatantly pointing out his hypocrisy does? Should we rather discuss the synonyms for 'genocide' and pick a choice? Wait, it would belong to Opinion Polls then.

Could you elaborate on your thoughts about where and what I should post? I fear that you keep your posts too brief because you don't realise how valuable your insights are and I've always been so desperate for your approval.

[Beren]

Could you elaborate on your thoughts about where and what I should post?

Maybe you, as a moderator especially, shouldn't be outraged if people consider threads opened in Today's News as news threads with a topic or topics closely related to the thread title and post in them accordingly.

[Pants-of-dog]

The report found that Canada's treatment of the indigenous population belongs in the same category as the Holocaust .

Yes, the report says they are in the same category, but the report does not claim that the Canadian genocide is the same as the Holocaust.

For example, the report makes a clear distinction between commission and omission.

It says that maintaining the status quo in Canada is akin to the Holocaust.

And in some ways it is. In both cases, people of a specific ethnic minority will or would be killed as a result of a deliberate government policy if the situation does not change.

All people of European heritage carry the stain of original sin. We desperately need to be rescued by progressive baptism.

That implies that the original sin occurred in the past and we are (irrationally) passing the guilt on to modern people.

This is not the case. It is the people right now who are ignoring the problem and letting the governments get away with it.

----------------

As I said in #15011467, this is plain absurd, even for Harper's case. Even @Kaiserschmarrn admits that she's not explicitly asking anybody to go to jail.

That is because K does not believe any crime has actually taken place.

And this is what I mean when I say that western leaders can commit crimes against humanity and get away with it, because westerners refuse to hold them accountable.

Even when we have evidence, like now.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Maybe you, as a moderator especially, shouldn't be outraged if people consider threads opened in Today's News as news threads with a topic or topics closely related to the thread title and post accordingly.

Even when you just repeat yourself I find your posts fascinating. And you make it appear so effortless.

Why wouldn't it? He voiced an opinion, used a term and things are being investigated. If Trudeau or Canada has violated international law they will be punished. Although they themselves don't dictate punishment and Trudeaus opinions are just that FYI.

As far as I'm concerned he has just acknowledged an incident. Personally I think he was an idiot for using the term as it just gives fuel to his enemies and puts Canada a step behind everyone else when condemning human rights violations. But he decided to say it and he alone will suffer the consequences.

You point out yourself how this affects Canada.

In the unlikely event that individuals are charged, I don't see why Trudeau would be the only one, e.g. there are previous governments and there could be people other than Trudeau in his government who might have been involved.

Yes, the report says they are in the same category, but the report does not claim that the Canadian genocide is the same as the Holocaust. For example, the report makes a clear distinction between commission and omission.

No two genocides are the same, so this doesn't seem relevant.

And in some ways it is. In both cases, people of a specific ethnic minority will or would be killed as a result of a deliberate government policy if the situation does not change.

Sorry, the two are worlds apart.

That implies that the original sin occurred in the past and we are (irrationally) passing the guilt on to modern people. This is not the case. It is the people right now who are ignoring the problem and letting the governments get away with it.

We are born with it.

[Beren]

Even when you just repeat yourself I find your posts fascinating. And you make it appear so effortless.

Have I repeated myself enough for you to understand my point or is this just the lamest possibly infinite prestige debate leading nowhere in which I've ever managed to engage with you?

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Have I repeated myself enough for you to understand my point or is this just the lamest possibly infinite prestige debate leading nowhere in which I've ever managed to engage with you?

The only flaw you seem to have is that you are too modest. It's impossible for a debate to be lame if you are involved in it.

[Beren]

The only flaw you seem to have is that you are too modest. It's impossible for a debate to be lame if you are involved in it.

It's actually possible if you're involved too.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

It's actually possible if you're involved too.

I think it's really important that you explain your point to me over and over.

[Beren]

I think it's really important that you explain your point to me over and over.

In my opinion your prestige is the most important thing for you and you could keep infinitely responding beyond any reasonable limit to defend it. Having the last word must be especially crucial.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

In my opinion prestige is the most important thing for you and you could keep infinitely responding beyond any reasonable limit to defend it. Having the last word must be especially crucial.

I'm so impressed that you would never try to have the last word. It was an honour to be repeatedly informed about your opinions and feelings.

[Beren]

I'm so impressed that you would never try to have the last word.

Believe it or not I usually don't have the last word, maybe because I only keep debating as long as it's fun or necessary and not as long as it's possible.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Believe it or not I usually don't have the last word, maybe because I only keep debating as long as it's fun or necessary and not as long as it's possible.

You are making an exception for me? Amazing!

[Beren]

You are making an exception for me? Amazing!

No. Why would I?

[Kaiserschmarrn]

No. Why would I?

To explain to me in more detail why you never try to have the last word?

[Beren]

To explain to me in more detail why you never try to have the last word?

I'm not trying to have the last word. Do you want to have the last word? Just post 'Last word' then.

[Pants-of-dog]

No two genocides are the same, so this doesn't seem relevant.

Since the report clearly distinguishes between the particular type of genocide that Canada is perpetrating and other genocides, we need not worry about “a new word for what happened in the Holocaust” nor does this make “a mockery of the genocide charge if this conclusion stands”. Nor should we worry that “this will invariably lead to a lack of legitimacy and credibility with respect to the law and the decisions based on it in large parts of western countries as well”.

Sorry, the two are worlds apart.

In many ways yes, but they are identical in that in both cases, people of a specific ethnic minority will or would be killed as a result of a deliberate government policy if the situation does not change.

[ness31]

@Pants-of-dog

I’m not sure what it is about your tone, line of questioning and general smugness that bothers me so I think you may be a bit defensive. I’m sorry if you think the subject is being belittled. Unfortunately, it’s obvious to all and sundry that the actual term “genocide” was not the way to go.

Now if you can’t discern or refuse to discern the difference between a crime against humanity and “genocide” then I can’t help you. I can’t force you to use your powers of reasoning. Not only for definitions sake, but for the cause in general. What idiot pulls out the word genocide unless you want to bury this issue? And stop blaming Western leaders for being indifferent.

Furthermore, if you can’t tell a non Canadian how many of the commissioners were Indigenous or what the Indigenous consensus is instead of directing me to google then I think you’re just rude. It’s a discussion forum

I’m very sorry for the Indigenous women and children of Canada. They are being done a disservice. But who cares for platitudes, right?

[ness31]

And, just to throw another spanner in the works for the high and mighty of this thread, in my experience, no one can injure and literally ‘cut off’ an indigenous group with quite as much ruthlessness and precision than another indigenous group.

Don’t ask for a google source, cos I don’t have one!