This has been somewhat known for a while now but this definitely sheds a light on what lies we face and how surreptitiously they are woven.
I want to share this here for the above reason, as well as to shed light on the idea that these stories are manufactured to generate hate of certain groups by lying about them.
Why do people do this, as in this case? Control over a narrative. A way to vilianise and demonise certain people.
Remember to keeps your wits about you. people lie all the time and big organisations/companies/corporations lie all the time, plus they're better at it due to the increased brain power that can come with hundreds - or thousands - of employees.
It all but admits it in the article: white guilt. That's all you need to control White people. Commonly afflicts American liberals, but it appears to be the norm for Canadian people.
It was an excuse to perpetuate a Red Terror in Canada.
It's not an accident that at least 64 churches were burned with the full throated support of Civil Rights organizations and the Mainstream Media.
And I'm not being hyperbolic. Civil Rights leaders advocated for burning churches, and the mainstream media intentionally hid the faces of wanted arson suspects.
Nobody fell for this, everyone who "fell" for it got exactly what they wanted.
If a mass grave of 200 Indian children truly existed, wouldn't the tribal leaders want to bring up the bones so that could be paid the respect they deserve?
The answer is obviously yes, but they know they won't find any mass graves, and so the only way to keep the grift going is to stall on that issue. I imagine when pressed they'll claim it would be a desecration to disturb the grave site.
Moral panic is right. It's all bullshit. I have no doubt there were occasional beatings and probably some molesting just like you've always found throughout the teaching profession for all of history, but mass murdering 200 children?? It's patently absurd.
What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
The people who are in it are in it for the reasons I stated. The people who are Useful Idiots to the people who are in it are just repeating what they are told.
So we going to get that massive payout back from the natives? No? Go after the people who 'perfectly understandably' burned down churches? No? Just gonna ask "why do you still care about this?" when it get's brought up? YES!
If you look up the bio of the woman who did the radar scans that started all this, her bio says
Dr. Beaulieu’s research in modern conflict anthropology is diverse but what ties it all together is her interest in applying an anthropological lens to the contemporary past in an effort to bring to light the stories of, and give voice to, the disenfranchised groups that have been overlooked in the historical record.
This has been somewhat known for a while now but this definitely sheds a light on what lies we face and how surreptitiously they are woven.
I want to share this here for the above reason, as well as to shed light on the idea that these stories are manufactured to generate hate of certain groups by lying about them.
Why do people do this, as in this case? Control over a narrative. A way to vilianise and demonise certain people.
Remember to keeps your wits about you. people lie all the time and big organisations/companies/corporations lie all the time, plus they're better at it due to the increased brain power that can come with hundreds - or thousands - of employees.
It's sad that people fell for this.
It all but admits it in the article: white guilt. That's all you need to control White people. Commonly afflicts American liberals, but it appears to be the norm for Canadian people.
Nobody fell for this.
It was an excuse to perpetuate a Red Terror in Canada.
It's not an accident that at least 64 churches were burned with the full throated support of Civil Rights organizations and the Mainstream Media.
And I'm not being hyperbolic. Civil Rights leaders advocated for burning churches, and the mainstream media intentionally hid the faces of wanted arson suspects.
Nobody fell for this, everyone who "fell" for it got exactly what they wanted.
If a mass grave of 200 Indian children truly existed, wouldn't the tribal leaders want to bring up the bones so that could be paid the respect they deserve?
The answer is obviously yes, but they know they won't find any mass graves, and so the only way to keep the grift going is to stall on that issue. I imagine when pressed they'll claim it would be a desecration to disturb the grave site.
Moral panic is right. It's all bullshit. I have no doubt there were occasional beatings and probably some molesting just like you've always found throughout the teaching profession for all of history, but mass murdering 200 children?? It's patently absurd.
What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
It's not a moral panic. It's a Red Terror.
You don't burn 64 churches with the support of the media and civil rights organizations in a "moral panic".
It can be both. People are in it for different reasons.
The people who are in it are in it for the reasons I stated. The people who are Useful Idiots to the people who are in it are just repeating what they are told.
So we going to get that massive payout back from the natives? No? Go after the people who 'perfectly understandably' burned down churches? No? Just gonna ask "why do you still care about this?" when it get's brought up? YES!
If you look up the bio of the woman who did the radar scans that started all this, her bio says
Tells you all you need to know.