No human remains found 2 years after claims of ‘mass graves’ in Canada

[ken_sylvania]

That is when I doubled down about what I see as the real problem here - even with all your excuse-making about how it's all these click-bait sloppy journalists at fault, even they didn't claim mass graves at "many, many schools."

Excuse making? The real problem? This is what feels so gotcha to me. You seem to be assuming bad faith.

There were apparently individual graves at many many schools, and mass graves were more rare. You could have asked me, say, "so you no longer believe there were mass graves at many many schools?"

Why isn't it a "real problem" when the article in the OP says researchers are claiming there are mass graves when the researchers aren't saying that?

And why isn't the "real problem" the children who were taken away from their parents and forcibly reeducated, then disappeared?

Dude, I was talking about the "real problem" with your response, not trying to define the biggest problem in the world.

I never accused you of making anything up - I asked you where you got the idea that there were mass graves at many, many schools, and yes I asked you whether you made it up because in your explanation about sources, etc you pretty much explain how you might have gotten the idea that there were mass graves at two or three schools. I asked a question - I did not make an accusation.

You say "mass graves were more rare." What exactly do you mean by that?

I'll reword my question and ask again - Do you now no longer believe there is any credible evidence of any mass graves at any schools?

[Bootstrap]

So what are the tribal leaders and residential school survivors saying about violence against churches? And what is the Catholic Church saying? Let's start with an article from the Vatican website:

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/world/new ... anada.html

Indigenous leaders have spoken out against the attacks on churches. “Destroying property will not help us build the peaceful, better and accepting Canada we all want and need,” said Assembly of First Nations Chief Perry Bellegard. He added, “I believe in processes that unite rather than divide. Violence must be replaced by turning to ceremony and all that our old people taught us about peaceful co-existence and mutual respect. Thoughtful dialogue, not destruction, is the way through this.”

In a statement earlier this month, the Archdiocese likewise emphasized the importance of dialogue: “The right path forward is one of reconciliation, dialogue, and atonement with Indigenous people and in following the way they would lead us in that process,” the statement said.

[Bootstrap]

Here are a few more sources to look at for responses from residential school survivors and tribal leaders:

'Quit burning down churches': Indigenous minister pleads for an end to the church fires

‘We do not destroy people’s places of worship’: Residential school survivors condemn attacks on churches

‘It’s a criminal act’: Prominent B.C. Interior Indigenous leader condemns church fires

Indigenous leaders condemn recent vandalism of churches in Canada

Churches are burning. This First Nations grand chief wants to provide security for others: ‘These are potential evidence sites’

Here's one that's not well worded, I'm hoping she would also have been against a Catholic church burning, but that's not clear form her quote:

Overnight fires at 2 Anglican churches in B.C. deemed suspicious

"Anyone who would have done that did wrong because it wasn't a Catholic Church, it was an Anglican Church and there's nothing but good memories in that church for our community," she said.

She said members of the Gitwangak First Nation helped build the church.

Here's a Twitter statement from the local chief on the Morinville fire:



Here's a statement on the Chopoka Church fire:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57626410

Lower Similkameen Indian Band Chief Keith Crow told public broadcaster CBC he had received a call early in the morning saying that the Chopaka Church was on fire. It had burned to the ground by the time he arrived half an hour later.

"I'm angry," the chief told CBC. "I don't see any positive coming from this and it's going to be tough."

[Bootstrap]

Do you now no longer believe there is any credible evidence of any mass graves at any schools?

I think most of the evidence of graves involves individual graves. There does seem to be some evidence of at least one mass grave, associated with pandemics.

In general, these graves simply haven't been excavated yet. We will know more when we know more.

[Falco Knotwise]

Agreed, I think there's plenty of historical evidence to show just that. It wasn't ALL terrible - Pop Warner and Jim Thorpe seemed to have really gotten a lot out of the Carlisle School for example. It wasn't all good though either and it was definitely started with the intent purpose of educating the Indian out of the man.

I am not sure how representative his pedagogical philosophy was for everyone at the time. First of all, Henry R. Pratt was American, not Canadian, and he said he took his pedagogical inspiration from the Puritans. I doubt his pedagogical principles were shared by Catholics, Mennonites, and all sorts of others involved in the schools.

Also, he was genuinely concerned to see minorities learn and advance rather than languish in prisons. (His first schools were in prisons for Indians the army put him in charge of.) He was also opposed to segregation on the same principles and was the first to use the word ‘racism’. He probably was looked upon favorably by the progressives and, for his time, he probably was one.

[mike]

Why was there arson and violence?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton ... -1.7055838

Fourteen fires took place on reserves and First Nations and 13 were in small or rural towns.

About half the fires CBC News examined involved Catholic churches, but there were fires at churches for other denominations, including evangelical Christian, United and Anglican.

Most of the fires remain unsolved. Of the 33 major church fires since 2021, just nine have led to arrests. In those where charges have been laid, police say no clear motive has been established.

The rest is speculation, I think.

I guess it's just a mystery wrapped in an enigma.

Or, maybe there is a connection, as the article you posted suggests in its subtitle:

CBC investigation finds steep rise in church fires since reports of potential graves at residential schools

[Bootstrap]

Without knowing more than I do about the situation, I think this has some comparisons to the January 6 violence. People in powerful positions (anyone with a big megaphone: politicians, media, activists) have the ability to say things that are interpreted in ways that beget violence. And then when it does beget violence, those who said those things backtrack and say it is too bad that the violence happened, they didn't intend for that to happen, etc.

Who in Canada has been using the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that we heard on January 6th? Can you show me where I can see that in their own words?

I spent a little time looking. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the Truth and Reconciliation commission. They seem to be pushing for truth and reconciliation. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the survivors or tribal leaders quoted in the articles I pointed to.

I can imagine someone is speaking out like that. But I would like to know who.

[Bootstrap]

Or, maybe there is a connection, as the article you posted suggests in its subtitle:

CBC investigation finds steep rise in church fires since reports of potential graves at residential schools

I think that's plausible speculation. It did happen after that time. So far, though, we haven't found a perpetrator who had that motivation.

But we also know that at least some of the arson was motivated by other things, at least according to this article.

And we saw a rise in violence against Catholic churches in the United States at roughly the same time. With American flags and swastikas. So I'd like to wait for the investigations before jumping to conclusions about their motives. There could be more than one motivation, depending on the perpetrator.

[mike]

Without knowing more than I do about the situation, I think this has some comparisons to the January 6 violence. People in powerful positions (anyone with a big megaphone: politicians, media, activists) have the ability to say things that are interpreted in ways that beget violence. And then when it does beget violence, those who said those things backtrack and say it is too bad that the violence happened, they didn't intend for that to happen, etc.

Who in Canada has been using the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that we heard on January 6th? Can you show me where I can see that in their own words?

I spent a little time looking. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the Truth and Reconciliation commission. They seem to be pushing for truth and reconciliation. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the survivors or tribal leaders quoted in the articles I pointed to.

I can imagine someone is speaking out like that. But I would like to know who.

Look for the people or institutions that proliferated the claim that there were mass graves under Catholic schools in Canada, and you probably will find your answer.

But don't you think that using language like "cultural genocide" could be a possible trigger for violence? See this CBS article for example.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-res ... 023-02-12/

You might argue that they weren't talking about actual genocide, but I think that much of the general public doesn't really get the nuances. You start using rhetoric like that, it isn't much of a jump to actual genocide in some people's minds. That's where the comparison to Trump's rhetoric comes in. It's just ambiguous enough to give him the defense that he wasn't actually calling for an overthrow of the government, but enough that it emboldened some bad actors and a bunch of idiots and buffoons. The news media using words like genocide and mass graves (that's the New York times) is just that same type of language in my view. There's enough of justified anger over the real injustices that occurred to make the inflammatory language a trigger for violence. And yet those outlets can say that they never called for anything like that.

In my opinion, which doesn't really mean a whole lot. I'm just some guy on the internet.

[Bootstrap]

Without knowing more than I do about the situation, I think this has some comparisons to the January 6 violence. People in powerful positions (anyone with a big megaphone: politicians, media, activists) have the ability to say things that are interpreted in ways that beget violence. And then when it does beget violence, those who said those things backtrack and say it is too bad that the violence happened, they didn't intend for that to happen, etc.

Who in Canada has been using the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that we heard on January 6th? Can you show me where I can see that in their own words?

I spent a little time looking. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the Truth and Reconciliation commission. They seem to be pushing for truth and reconciliation. I don't see this kind of rhetoric coming from the survivors or tribal leaders quoted in the articles I pointed to.

I can imagine someone is speaking out like that. But I would like to know who.

Look for the people or institutions that proliferated the claim that there were mass graves under Catholic schools in Canada, and you probably will find your answer.

If you look back in this thread, I researched that. The NY Post used that language. The people it quoted did not. The NY Post linked to another NY Post article that cited an article in The Guardian. The Guardian published a retraction on that article, saying "mass graves" was not accurate. The NY Post doesn't seem to have published a retraction.

So I think I would blame the NY Post and other media for this. The people they refer to don't seem to be making that claim.

Sometimes you do find sensationalism in the media ...