No way!
Was the 1969 White Paper on Indian Affairs written by the SAME Jean Chretien that later (by default) became our Prime Minister? It can't be. I won't believe it. It just seems so farfetched that Chretien would attach his name to something so logical.
All these conditions of the Indians are the product of history and have nothing to do with their abilities and capacities. Indian relations with other Canadians began with special treatment by government and society, and special treatment has been the rule since Europeans first settled in Canada. Special treatment has made of the Indians a community disadvantaged and apart.
Obviously, the course of history must be changed.
To be an Indian must be to be free - free to develop Indian cultures in an environment of legal, social and economic equality with other Canadians.
Anyways, to read more about how Chretien's (alleged) position and Tom Flanagan's position (Flanagan is supposedly Harper's "brain" just like Karl Rove is supposedly Bush's "brain" - apparently no conservative politicians can be intelligent on their own) and how they're essentially the same, go here.
All these conditions of the Indians are the product of history and have nothing to do with their abilities and capacities. Indian relations with other Canadians began with special treatment by government and society, and special treatment has been the rule since Europeans first settled in Canada. Special treatment has made of the Indians a community disadvantaged and apart.
Obviously, the course of history must be changed.
To be an Indian must be to be free - free to develop Indian cultures in an environment of legal, social and economic equality with other Canadians.
Anyways, to read more about how Chretien's (alleged) position and Tom Flanagan's position (Flanagan is supposedly Harper's "brain" just like Karl Rove is supposedly Bush's "brain" - apparently no conservative politicians can be intelligent on their own) and how they're essentially the same, go here.
posted by Japnaam Singh at
12:19 PM
2 Comments:
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Kee Fateh
This doesn't have to do with this particular blog rather something that caught my eye while reading it. I noticed you have the link to AKJ.ORG crossed out. I don't understand what the point of this is. If you no longer want to associate yourself with that site, why not just remove it completely instead of making it public?
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Kee Fateh
Why would I cross it out? I clearly want my dissatisfaction with their site to be public? No? By the way, I've outlined my reasons to be dissatisfied with their site a couple of posts down.
Post a Comment
<< Home