Some people are so touchy!
I wrote that the students should considered themselves lucky that it was a mellow attack compare to what could happen in China or the way the minorities used to be Treated in the Loyalist City?
I received a lot of feedback and I didn’t even send the email out yet.
So? I stand by my views on this issue!
Remember this one?
or visit this website-
target="_blank">Charles
Blog
I still say that racism is very much alive in the Loyalist City.
As a matter of fact, I was talking to someone about this very issue in Saint John a few weeks ago.
Of course, it’s not like the old days when the Acadians and the Blacks were often attack!
In those days? Many Acadians were force to change their French Family name to English. Such as LeBlanc to White!!!
But racism it’s still going on today.
Go read my complaint to the Human Rights Commission!????
target="_blank">Charles
Blog
Of course, the Irvings have the backing of those racist members of the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission so we can we do?
Yes, maybe you can cover the issue of racism but it’s very much alive.
As for human rights in China? We know there’s no such rights in the peoples Republic!!!
Did you know that any website sites has to be register through the Government of China?
Thank God that we don’t have to follow this practice here in New Brunswick because I don’t believe this blog site would be accepted!
Did you know that many bloggers are jailed in China?
This blogger defence rest!!!
258 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 258 of 258You're bang on. More NB issues are discussed here than in just about any NB media outlet. I'll cut media some slack because it's summer, vacations, slow news, etc. But there's been more balanced discussion here than I've seen in any media for a long time. We're not so different, my friend. We just see things differently.
I agree with vivnewbrunswick's views. Racism is well and alive. Spinks complains that others have called him names but he has been constantly maligning the name of Anita Sharma and she probably does not know it. It is not fair to her.
It is also sad that he maligned the good name of natives. He has been smearing their reputation. That does smack of racism.
What you against natives, Spinks? It did not work out? You drove them nuts and they told you off.
Do not worry about not telling me about the source from CBC because you have none.
When have I said anything derogatory against natives? As far as CBC sources, believe whatever you want. I don't believe you that you have some contact up there that knows me although I'll agree I'm sure they think I'm full of it. They don't like to hear another side either (kind of like this blog). However there's a wise saying that says if there's 5 people and they all agree, 4 are redundant.
By the way, aren't you the same writer that keeps slamming the Premier's name. I find your statement just a wee bit hypocritical.
I just don't think Sharma's the right person to anchor a major supper hour newscast. Their decline in ratings seems to back that up. In addition based on the information from my source, neither did the CBC but they hired her for other reasons. Maybe she'll grow into it and take the station to #1. She can prove me wrong. CBC is hardly going to do a story on it's own hiring practices and neither is anyone else since they do the same thing. Doesn't seem fair but that's IMHO.
Let us face it that you have no source from CBC. You just make things up as you go along. I do not malign anyone and hardly ever say anything which is not already in the news and public knowledge.
The only thing I said which is not news is that what CBC thinks of you. Now you are admiting it when you say:
"although I'll agree I'm sure they think I'm full of it."
So there you verified yourself.
Vivnewbrunswick you are a gentleman. You give reasons and facts. Too bad Spinks is not interested in facts and reasons. He just wants to smear the reputation of Anita as an anchor person because she is a minority and a woman. Then he attacks natives. Usually those who are not in a position to fight back. Which is cowardly behaviour. Will he repeat those assertions in front of Anita Sherma? I doubt it very much.
You can give million answers to his outlandish questions and he will pretent to have not understood and he will tell you that his question was not answered. He just keeps going. So far I have not heard a single rational argument from him.
His reasons are convoluted. His sources are top secerets.Someone told someone and that someoned told someone and that someone told Spinks that people are hired on the basis of colour hence reverse discrimination. A typical argument from a bigot who do not want minorities to get jobs.
“I can tell you that in two years living and working in China I have never heard of, let alone experienced, any sort of harassment or abuse directed at me or any other foreigner living and/or working there.” This was in a letter to editor in Telegraph Journal that how well Canadians and other foreigners are treated in China.
The writer also laments the behaviour of miscreants who harassed the Chinese students. But Spinks (the authority on the issue?) thinks it was not a big deal. Kids were just having fun and CBC blew it out of proportion. What kind of hole Spinks lives in as his perspective on these things is so damn narrow.
Hmmm. Touchy subject. I think my criticism of how the native First Nations operate have been misinterpreted as racism and for that I can honestly apologize if it's been misinterpreted as such. I don't see the problem with questioning how something doesn't appear to work well but we can agree to disagree. On the Miss Sharma issue, you are right, if I can't back up my assertions regarding the hiring process which obviously I can't on a blog without getting someone in trouble or fired, it doesn't belong and I was obviously overzealous. I will remove those specific references. I still maintain that if you are delivering 0.008% of the audience, you're not the right one for the job, no matter who you work for. Many other problems at CBC but when your boat's in trouble the anchor's ususally the first thing you throw overboard. You folks think CBC's worth the money. Many agree with you. I disagree, many agree with me, although most are unsure why. My argument is it's irrelevant to most Canadians. The proof is that if it was relevant more would watch.
This is a major breakthrough that Spinks apologized about Ms. Sharma. It was totally unfair that her competence was being questioned when she has no idea it is being done. We should be careful making allegations which cannot be backed up. Hear say never makes good argument and could be libelous in this case.
Also in this global village if we want to be part of the world community we have to open up our horizons.
I can understand fully vivnewbrunsick's example of his wife. It makes sense and it is only human to get upset.
Other side of it is that there was a time that Chinese and women were denied police jobs because of height restrictions. A person's competence did not matter. Thank God we overcame that ignorance. As time goes by we will overcome other ignorances too and we all have our blind spots.
Tons of libelous statement on this site. I'd love to see you defend Bernard Lord with the same zeal. Anyway I still question Ms. Sharma's qualifications as an anchor of a major newscast. You're one of 6000 who enjoy it. Do so while it's still on the air.
I'm guessing you're referring to ATV. While beset with it's own problems, generally the 6pm news does a good job of delivering NB news, usually better than CBC. There is a complaint in Nova Scotia that ATV is too new Brunswick, the reverse complaint is here. Outside of summer when they're at peak staff, you'll be surprised at the NB content. Global does a decent job too. They tell people stories which CBC used to do but now chooses to just cover news conferences. Probably one of their other problems in attracting viewers.
Spinks read your 4:37 comments and read your previous ones and see if you have said anything new other than continue maligning Anita Sharma. That you are doing after apologizing for the same. Would you get anymore inconsistent?
What if people say that you are totally incompetent what you do? How would you react to that? How do we know that you are competent whatever you do?
Why Spinks is harping about Bernard Lord?? Do not worry about him. Bernard Lord is the Premier of this province. First he is fully capable of defending himself. He is a very smart guy. Second he has army of lawyers at the Department of Justice. What Bernard Lord has to do with CBC issue in this case. It is CBC and Anita Sharma's presense there which is eating up Spinks.
Then it is natives who are bothering him and make racist remarks towards him. Then there are other minorities who are taking away jobs from Spinks.May be ATV will hire him.
Let us keep things in perspective.
Hmmm. My point once again has been lost in rhetoric. After 200+ posts, we've really been all over the map, haven't we. My opinion isn't respected here. I understand that, due to the type of people who tend to post on this site. Liberals generally don't want to appreciate that there may be other views. I appreciate my Vive friend. He/she has added something to the debate with well though out comments. I respect that even if I don't wholeheartedley agree.
I do not have a clue spink what your point is. That is the sad irony of it all.
As far as vivnewbrunswick is concerned he comes across as a learned person. Everytime he posts something he adds something. sorry same cannot be said about you.
I'm sure Vive is learned and agree that he brings some good points. As for my points, you don't want to listen to someone who disagrees with you and clearly nothing I say will convince you otherwise.
Vive, I like your idea but debating with a couple of guys on a blog and starting a scientific study which would take months or more are two different things. Frankly I don't have the time and will have to work on what exists. I think it's still possible to have an opinion and debate issues without doing a UNB type study every time and will continue to contribute to this site. At least Charles isn't being insulted by bloggers anymore. They have a new target.
"Frankly I don't have the time" That is new one that Spinks has no time. He can be on the net 24/7 but for a study no time. Those are the inconsistencies which are interesting about Spinks.
Sorry Vive all you are going to get is opinions few hundered times repeated over. What they mean, do not have the slightest clue.
This letter in Gleaner may be of interest to Spinks. Dan Innis makes compelling case:
=======
Treaties didn't sign away all resources in Canada
I would like to offer comment on the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision on Indians and Crown land wood. For any Euro-Canadian court to pass fair, unbiased and just judgment on Canadian natural resources it must begin from the standpoint of the land that now is known as Canada is the homeland of the Beothuk, Maliseet, Haida, etc. It must also take into account that our homeland was acquired by Euro-Canadian sthrough genocide, deceit, religion and theft.
How many Canadians today would trust a treaty that is written in a strange language with no opportunity to acquire appropriate translation and are forced to sign that treaty under duress at the point of a gun?
Another thing which must be taken into consideration is the fact that those treaties between our people and the transplanted Europeans did not sign away any land or resources. They were simply treaties of peace and friendship. All that these latest rulings affirm is the Euro-Canadian arrogance and racist mind set of "white is right" and "might is right."
The reason Euro-Canadians are now pushing for so-called modern treaties is so all of the things (land and resources) that their forefathers neglected to include within the old treaties can now be included so as to make the theft of our homeland look legitimate and legal. For any self-respecting modern day Indian to fall for that bit of deception is dumber than how Euro-Canadians already think of us.
One final but crucial point. That being the Euro-Canadian concept of their rule of law. This rule of law is something that Euro-Canadians speak highly of in terms of the origins of civil government and society and at its heart is third party adjudication when disputes arise between two parties. Without third party adjudication the rule of law is a hoax and will be seen as a hoax.
Since the Euro-Canadian act of genocide was incomplete there are a few of us who are still here, and because the signed treaties did not sign away any of our land or resources. We still have the outstanding issue of jurisdiction.
All along the white man's law, under the rule of law principal, has said that because the Indians were here first, and are humans, until territory has been purchased from them by the newcomers that the Indians have territorial jurisdiction. As has been previously mentioned our homeland was never purchased by the newcomers.
Dan Ennis Tobique, N.B.
Mr. Ennis probably writes more letters to the edirot than any other native in N.B. He's considered a bit of a maverick even among his own people and I've never been clear on what it would take to make him happy. I suspect if 3 trillion dollars was offerede, he'd want 4 and so on. What's the price on injustices done in the past? I don't think anyone knows.
You have serious problem in comprehending things other than your own blinkers and what you see. Mr. Innis makes lot of sense. You did not suffer genocide, natives did. So it is easy for you to say all that stuff and hold your narrow-minded views.
Interesting theory Vive, but lots of discussions over the years have taken place. What's a real discussion and again what's a real workable solution short of throwing exorbiant amounts of money which doesn't exist without taxing the population to the poorhouse.
Intriguing and you have a good point. I think part of the problem is there are so many different native organizations, MAAIW is one that comes to mind and they've never really spoken with once clear voice because of course there are hundreds of independent First Nations. Then you add in that if one group does sign a deal, people within the group buck it and want more on top of it. Big Hole Tract in 1995 on the Miramichi would be one example. It boils down to this, there's a whole bunch of different opinions out there among natives as to what they want and just like non-natives (the municipalities issue is probably the closest example I can think of) there doesn't seem to be that magic solution. That's part of the reason I raised the question, what's sufficient for the most people possible. Racism might play part of it but I suspect the bigger problem is a lack of understanding of what the solution is. I sure don't have it or I'd be a millionaire lawyer.
How many cents lawyer are you then?
Before we get onto worrying about native demands we should keep in mind that our own government had a Royal Commission on Aboriginals which had a series of recommendations which are gathering dust on a shelf.
That 12:46 AM post makes lot of sense. There is a lot of lip service but no action on the part of governments.
I've observed several different native negotiations for various things first hand and I just don't see a solution. I think you can satisfy some of the First Nations and then others will want more and then the first ones you settled with will want more again. It doesn't mean you stop trying but negotiations are just that, give and take. Given what I've observed there seems to be little room for give. It's usually all or nothing. Former NB Indians Assn. Chief Roger Augustine was an exception and saw how negotiation could move things forward and the First Nation he was Chief of - Eel Ground, is to this day one of the better off in N.B. I have tremendous respect for the man which is why I do get defensive when I'm called racist and hate natives because I simply have criticism or questions some people don't want asked. Although Vive, since you've added your name, you've been nothing but respectful.
St. Mary's First Nation has done some phenomenol work as well by creating business and jobs in the community. So many are grumbling instead and waiting for something to drop out of the sky such as the comments by Mr. Anonymous earlier about trillions and that every non-native should start paying rent and back-rent. I'm not familiar enough with First Nations outside of N.B. to offer comment.
No not a negotiator, an observer. There just never seemed to be much room for negotiation. That's why I can't agree with the propaganda comment. I am certain there are those who are willing to give and take, I've just never witnessed it and considering so little has been settled in hundreds of years, that would seem to be the way it's going. I have little doubt governments are to blame too and on certain issues aren't willing to move either, but it is a two way street. Both have to be willing to move significantly and I just haven't seen it. Again, I've been very impressed with native leaders who want to continue the negotiations but are also willing to create better lives for their people within the confines of what currently exists instead of waiting for whatever to take place. There are far too few of those leaders.
I think that trillion of dollars thingy, Spinks, someone was just pulling your leg as you were making outlandish statements about natives and on the issue of racism. In final analysis we are all humans and there is a basic human goodness in all of us. It depends which part of the person you appeal, good or bad.
If certain issues were not solved for centures that does not mean that there is no solution. As was said before governments (Federal ,Provincial and to certain extent municipal) pay lot of lip service to buy time and push things under the rug. When there is sincerity on the part of governments there may be a backthrough. Also natives have to get their act together otherwise divide and conquer tactics of whiteman will continue.
I'm not sure what was outlandish but I'll chalk it up to point of view and that it's a sensitive issue so things can be perceived as such. I agree if First Nations want to make serious progress, unity is required with a common plan of goals and objectives. Can't say I agree with the the statement "divide and conquer tactics of whiteman", although you may not have meant it the way it sounds. I don't think every white person is looking for that although I'm sure a few are. I still think statements like that are racist because it's categorizing everyone the same because of their skin colour, it just happens to be white, but I know I'm alone on this thread about that one.
Sincereity would be a major step but given the current Minister Andy Scott's track record on say one thing and do another, I don't think it will happen with this minister.
I said 'whiteman' on purpose to draw you out that how quickly you will react to that and how sensitivity works when it is directed at the person himself/herself. Yes it is wrong to generalize and I am glad you recognize that. If you met a few natives then you cannot generalize that particular encounter to the whole first nation - such as that they are racist or other attributes you assigned to them.
The "divide and conquer" have been tactics of those who are in power and those who control. In colonial times those tactics were used successfully and still that approach is being used by powerful nations of the world against weaker nations. I will go so far as to say that U.S is using those tactics in Iraq as those fellows are killing each other more so than fighting occupying forces.
'Divide and conquer' is reference to the government in control. I hope we are on the same wavelength now.
Sure. I'm really not offended and never have been by terms such as whitey. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find s white person who was. The point was that there is a double-standard on such terms. I don't think every native is racist, nor do I think every white person is racist, but racism is alive and well on First Nations just as much as it is in the north end of Saint Joh or anywhere else. In other words, two wrongs don't make a right.
Here is another fact of life we must recognize. A dominant group in a society does not suffer from racism as much because minorities know if they push their luck too much there will swift consequences. Unfortunately opposite is not true. Here in Canada, natives and minorities (as word applies they are not dominant) suffer the brunt of racism. However, in the long run the whole society suffers. Dominant group has to set an example to have more livable and peaceful society. In Canada we have a long way to go to achieve that livability and peace. You will be wrong to say that natives are racist therefore we are equal. Not at all.
I will give you an example. Rich can ignore the poor for a long time but poor and hungry sooner or latter will break into the rich man’s house because they do not have food, TV or microwave and money. To say that let us ignore the problem because rich man has his own hardships to deal with and poor do not work hard and are lazy. That approach in the long run helps no one. There are many factors in play here. That is why governments have programs to get people in the job market and reduce the poverty. Hey you cannot eliminate the poverty completely but you cannot ignore it either. Same goes for racism.
Interesting point of view. Obviously I don't totally buy into it, because if a white person is racially attacked in say, China, he's the minority but let's be honest I don't think it would be reported as racially motivated even if it was. However you have sold me on the fact natives for example aren't really equal in many respects. I'm still of the view racism is unacceptable no matter who you are and to whom, and there is no excuse no matter what the people of one race have done to another but you've given me an understanding about why some natives may feel that way and feel justified.
"...but you've given me an understanding about why some natives may feel that way and feel justified." That is very encouraging to hear. You have come long way my friend since your early posts.
Someone posted earlier that how well they were treated in China. I have never heard any racial attacks in China. The people, that I know, who have traveled to China have nothing but praises for Chinese society and its people. Now we are not talking about governments and its agencies we are talking about society in general.
Yes there are anti-American sentiments in China and elsewhere for totally different reasons. It has nothing to do with race. If you are an American and black or native and you are known to be American then there may be a problem. Race does not matter. My experience is that as soon as you show maple leaf and that you are Canadian people's attitude changes.
A dominant group has a responsibility to treat minorities well if we want a peaceful society or if we want to be known as a civilized society. We have more resources to do so then most nations in the world.
Natives have received short end of the stick for centuries. There is that built up anger.
Let me come at you from another perspective. Statistics show that crime rate is higher amongst poor than rich. You know why? Not that poor are criminal minded. Poor kids have suffered growing up and there is that built up anger. There is considerable literature in sociology which reveals that frustrated youth from poverty stricken environment retaliate against the society. As a society we have to understand that anger before we start laying the total blame on the poor. More understanding there is fewer problems there will be.
If you want to understand the world then travel the world if you have not done so already.
I hear what you're saying. I'm simply more of the mind that the individual still has a choice on which direction they want to take their lives. Lots of poor people have overcome the adversity and anger and made a difference in their lives and often in many others. Aboriginals the same thing. That's why I have so much respect for those who try and not as much for ones, who for lack of a better term simply "whine" about their lot in life. There was a great story on 60 minutes 15-20 years ago about a black woman in Chicago or N.Y. who worked with ghetto kids and told her students to stop wallowing in self-pity and make a difference in their own life. The when life gives you lemons make lemonade adage. 95% of her kids went on to college in an area where almost none did. That story always stuck with me as I went through a similar situtaion as a youngster (except for the black part, obviously). Tougher for poor, minorities, etc. no doubt but not impossible.
It's interesting this discussion started with my criticism of CBC for trying to create a story about a second attack on Chinese students. I stand by it when even the Chinese student interviewed told the reporter she had no way of knowing that particular attack was racism although the first one definately was. Too often stories are created and not reported on. I've witnessed native disputes drag out for days or weeks solely because of media manipulation (most often CBC was the culprit thus the target of my disgust). Anyway I digress and we have covered the gamut. You've given me a different point of view to ponder. I hope I've done the same for you.
Our critics are our friends;
they show us our faults."
-Benjamin Franklin
Native: We are our own nation not part of yours, we want our own system of governance, we want our freedom.
Colonizer: You aren't being reasonable, here, we will give you access to some of the land under our guidelines, we will provide some investment and money to sustain and educate you.
Native: We are our own nation not part of yours, we want our own system of governance, we want our freedom.
Colonizer: You aren't being reasonable, we'll give you some more money, we'll let you handle your own books (sometimes), we'll give investment when you come up with a business plan.
Native: We are our own nation not part of yours, we want our own system of governance, we want our freedom.
Colonizer: You aren't being reasonable. Just because our supreme court SAID you could manage your own affairs doesn't mean you can. You might get irresponsible with the environment (unlike us) and damage it. We'll train some of you and get you some equipment.
Native: We are our own nation not part of yours, we want our own system of governance, we want our freedom.
Colonizer: Clearly you simply can't be reasonable, we are doing our best but we simply can't let you be 'free'.
Remember, at Burnt Church the natives came up with their OWN fisheries management program which was studied by Fisheries officials and recognized as being very sound. It was SENIOR fishery officials-who know NOTHING about fisheries who called in the police and made the whole issue unsustainable and resulted in the violence.
I see Spinks is still around with his misguided and misleading views. Sloganist style such as poor can pull themselves out of poverty. His examples are exceptions and not the rule. Some from poor can make it but not the majority. Do not blame the poor. The hurdles are simply too many and that is when society and government's role comes in. Take an enlightened approach.
Chinese students: All attacks on them were racially motivated. It is odd to assume that someone threw stuff and Chinese students happened to be in the way everytime.
CBC: the best news. The least biased media outlet compared to all others. Thank God we have CBC.
Natives: They were wronged for centuries and continue to be wronged.
5.3% of the allowable cut seems fair. The aboriginal population in NB is 1 to 1.5%, I believe although I stand to be corrected. Seems reasonable. We do have to all live together no matter what transgressions were made in the past. Probably an argument for a bit of a higher percentage given the high unemployment on First Nations but I wouldn't suspect much more.
I'm going to copied all these messages of the issue of the Natives and pasted them in a new blog! Touchy issue!!!! I'll titles it- THE ISSUE OF THE NATIVES IN CANADA!!!
Actually, the same arugment has been used to keep atlantic canada as canada's version of the south. There's hardly any people so they should only get representation for numbers they have, and investment for the numbers they have.
So no need to fund Lepreau, after all, there's hardly any people, but we can pay for Toyota to build a new plant in Ontario.
A better suggestion for fairness would be, "why dont' we give them MORE investment and measure by their standard of living?" Once they are out of poverty and doing well, then we can worry about equality. It works for natives AND canada.
12:51. Wow, fair and realistic. Give me the petition. I'll sign. Great idea. Most don't want to consider baby steps but clearly after hundreds of years of hard feelings both ways and arguably both ways equally justified in their own right, in their own mind at the very least, I doubt there's any other way.
THERE!!!! THERE'S A BLOG ABOUT THE NATIVES BUT IF YOU WISH TO CONTINUE DEBATING IN THIS BLOG? GO AHEAD,,,,,
"The one with the whip ALWAYS assumes they are being fair, its when you try to walk a mile in their shoes that the colonial mindset finally departs."
Vive that sums it up. You are so right. Indeed our friend has blinders own. His myopic vision is a typical of an oppressor’s point of view. He needs lot of enlightening which he is not ready to accept. Not yet at least. You are asking him to walk a mile but unfortunately he has not taken even baby steps yet in that direction. It is sad that people still hold those kinds of views in 21st century, people who consider themselves educated. Any problem just blame it on the victim. Such a cop out.
No blame at all. You may be mistaking the VLT thread which went on far longer than needed. There is without question natives were wronged in the past often brutally and continue to be wronged on many levels. I want to state unequivocally that I believe Natives deserve a special status far different than anyone else because the native people settled Turtle Island long before Europeans. I'm simply impressed by those from any walk of life who have said "I don't care what my state of life is, I'm going to make a difference." Not everyone's cup of tea but history has proven those are the types of leaders who are needed to raise their people up. If the focus is always on the past, there is no moving ahead. No blinders, simply a different perspective, perhaps you'll recognize that at some point my friend. I'm probably similar to most Canadians. If there's not an understanding where they're coming from, there's no hope of fixing things. I've learned great things from you folks and could use comments like closed-minded because you don't see things my way. Instead I choose to try to look at the issue from your point of view and look at that perspective.
Spinks you keep saying that let us forget about past. How can we? First with natives it is not only past but present also, as injustices continue.
Second ,would you forget about Hitler Germany where Hitler butchered millions of Jews, other minorities and disabled? No we cannot. We have to constantly remind ourselves of those atrocities and we must make sure it is does not happen again. Unfortunately our memories are short.
What happened to natives was genocide and we cannot push that under the rug and must do everything that that does not happen again and we must minimize the current injustices prior to more violent eruptions. When there is violence no one wins.
Never said forget the past. If we ignore history we're doomed to repeat it. Simply don't dwell on the past and be all consumed by it. We all still need to live in the here and now. If every energy is focused on making repatriation what do we accomplish for the kids of today? I'm still not sure what's fair for seizing someone's land hundreds of years ago. How do you even put a price tag on that? These are my musings. A few answers are coming forwrad and they're appreciated.
You are becoming more sensitive to the issues as you go along. That is very good and appreciated.
People have a tendency to blame the victim. For example if a woman is raped some will say she was dressed provotively and asked for it. Others might say: what was she doing at such a locatin at such a time of the night. It is so easy to do that. Thank God there is less of that of now.
Likewise there is a similar tendency towards natives and minorities. It is encouraging that your point of view has improved considerably.
If you have read my comments and not skimmed them along the way you'll notice my POV is the same as before. Unfortunately what's happened in my quest for answers and discussion, is an instant resentment from some of the bloggers here because I've raised questions that may not be politically correct. That's what is so wonderful about Charles site. It is the epitome of free speech and I don't think anyone should true to censor anyone else which happens far too frequently on many of the threads. One exception, the insults should be eliminated throughout the site. It's rude and shows little class.
Who insulted you? Not sure what you mean by that. You may have your opinions but no one has agreed with them so far. Does that tell you something? Someone called your opinions insult to intelligence.
Freedom of speech ends when it tramples on someone else's freedom and rights.
(If this post appears many times,it is because there is a problem with posting.)
But it always tramples on someone's else freedoms and rights when taken to the 'nth degree because just about anything can offend someone else. That's my point. Political correctness in society has been taken to the extreme so far that it's just ridiculous.
I agree, very few have agreed with me ON THIS SITE. That really tells me more about those who visit the site. Mostly those with a liberal ideology and outlook on life visit this particular site. I could find a more conservative site and debate issues with people who agree with me but what's the point of that? Neither of us learn anything and this thread would be a lot shorter if everyone was going "YES, you're right and the whole world thinks that way". Kind of a skewed outlook. Better to interact with those who have a different point of view because much more is learned.
I have not visited this blog for a while now. Did not realize that discussion was still going on? Spinks still has not come up with anything new.
Spinks if you are conservative and supporter of Bernard Lord then he must be worried. I do not think even he will agree with your opinions. You will then call him being political correct.
Actually I voted Liberal last provincial election. I'm referring to ideologies not political parties.
You must have some special ideology because it does not fit any mold, conservative or liberal.
Clearly you're not familiar with the two. The NB Public Library has some excellent resources...oh wait...that's someone's cheap shot at me again instead of trying to stick to the issues. I almost though there was a discussion happening. My mistake.
What discussion??
Exactement, mon(ma) ami(e).
Hallucinations heureuses!!
Post a Comment