HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:35 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 28,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post


I don't recognize Latin America at all in your comment - with some exceptions, indigenous peoples are at the very bottom of the social heirarchy of these countries. The "mestizo" culture that has evolved in many LatAm countries recognizes (sometimes reluctantly at the individual level) the aboriginal component of its identity but is in general assimilated into the mainstream national culture, which considers itself "Western" if not "European". That would be in contrast to Canada's recent recognition of the Metis as a First Nation.
Well, from a sociological or socio-cultural perspective a number Latin American countries are truly hybrid "new societies" integrating both European and indigenous cultures. (Even if individual outcomes for aboriginals themselves are not particularly good.)

Whereas the anglophone new world countries are more lock, stock and barrel importations of European ways, with only a tiny bit of indigenous input beyond "decoration".

Francophone Canada IMO differs from the anglo model, though obviously we're not Ecuador or even Mexico.

But still...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATLGkQr3vxc



__________________
Va où il y a des livres. - Robert Sabatier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 6:30 PM
Guy Incognito Guy Incognito is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Just last week a good friend of mine went to the official opening of this exhibition in Gatineau: http://www.mosaicanada.ca/

And one of the speakers was an aboriginal leader who went into a long rant about this being "our land and not yours", "you are guests here", "white people this and white people that".

So there is definitely something going on.
Imagine if we all agreed to drop the labels?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 7:46 PM
rousseau's Avatar
rousseau rousseau is online now
Registered Drug User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 4,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Perhaps not but in the leadership they've obviously spread the word recently that a more aggressive militancy is the way to go.

I am hearing a lot about it in my entourage. Living where I do I have lots of friends who are public servants - both at INAC and in other departments who deal with aboriginal issues. These days when the feds approach indigenous communities with (what the feds think is) good news they are received with lots of defiance and hostility.

Just last week a good friend of mine went to the official opening of this exhibition in Gatineau: http://www.mosaicanada.ca/

And one of the speakers was an aboriginal leader who went into a long rant about this being "our land and not yours", "you are guests here", "white people this and white people that".

So there is definitely something going on.
I'm genuinely curious what these spokespersons would say at an event in Brampton or Markham. Would they rant about "white people" to a room full of non-white people whose ancestors very clearly had nothing to do with how North America was settled?

Among other subjects, my dad taught First Nations history to a lot of First Nations kids at high schools in the Six Nations area over several decades. He's not First Nations (nor am I). He knows the history inside and out, and while he's been a progressive/social justice person since the 1960s, he doesn't go to the ridiculous polemical extremes that people in the current climate do when he talks about it.

I suspect that my father's life's work would not go over very well with a lot of these bloviating activists. Perhaps it was a form of "cultural appropriation" on his part? I don't think he ever wore a headdress...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 7:49 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
I'm genuinely curious what these spokespersons would say at an event in Brampton or Markham. Would they rant about "white people" to a room full of non-white people whose ancestors very clearly had nothing to do with how North America was settled?

Among other subjects, my dad taught First Nations history to a lot of First Nations kids at high schools in the Six Nations area over several decades. He's not First Nations (nor am I). He knows the history inside and out, and while he's been a progressive/social justice person since the 1960s, he doesn't go to the ridiculous polemical extremes that people in the current climate do when he talks about it.

I suspect that my father's life's work would not go over very well with a lot of these bloviating activists. Perhaps it was a form of "cultural appropriation" on his part? I don't think he ever wore a headdress...
"Settlers" works as the generic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 7:57 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 28,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
"Settlers" works as the generic.
Correct. Although those types of areas don't seem to be targeted for aboriginal activism.
__________________
Va où il y a des livres. - Robert Sabatier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 8:12 PM
VANRIDERFAN VANRIDERFAN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
"Settlers" works as the generic.
I would have been comfortable with the term "Settler" to describe my family (mom's side settled in the Red River Valley directly from the Russian Empire around 1871, dad's side came to Westman from the Georgian Bay (via Scotland 1840's) area of Ontario in 1910) but the term seems to be loaded with sneering venom by the advocates of indigenous rights that it has turned me off from it.

Last edited by VANRIDERFAN; Jul 7, 2017 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2017, 9:35 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is offline
you go on ahead
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Parkdale, Toronto
Posts: 7,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by rousseau View Post

I suspect that my father's life's work would not go over very well with a lot of these bloviating activists. Perhaps it was a form of "cultural appropriation" on his part? I don't think he ever wore a headdress...

It probably depends on the activist. Most would certainly be fine as long as it was from an academic standpoint and not through a lens of appropriation. Which it doesn't sound like at all from what you wrote.

Of course some people will be outraged about anything. They probably would have been then too, except it's much easier to voice that nowadays, for a number of reasons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 12:34 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
I would have been comfortable with the term "Settler" to describe my family (mom's side settled in the Red River Valley directly from the Russian Empire around 1871, dad's side came to Westman from the Georgian Bay (via Scotland 1840's) area of Ontario in 1910) but the term seems to be loaded with sneering venom by the advocates of indigenous rights that it has turned me off from it.
It would be hard not to attribute sub-text to the "settler" tag (I don't like it myself), but "sneering venom" goes much too far.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 2:56 AM
VANRIDERFAN VANRIDERFAN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
It would be hard not to attribute sub-text to the "settler" tag (I don't like it myself), but "sneering venom" goes much too far.
Yes it does. Especially when it comes from non indigenous Canadians.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 3:51 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Because it's 2015.
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 37,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Very good post, but I had a question and a comment on the above bits.

Do I take it that you reject the idea of First Nations communities as "sovereign", who can deal with the Government of Canada on a "nation to nation" basis, as the PM espouses? I would have thought that at least some segments of the indigenous community would have problems with that. If one does not recognize a First Nation as "sovereign", it would seem to call into question the status of any "treaties" that they have entered into, although that's academic as the courts have repeatedly upheld their validity.
I don't disagree with their sovereignty (I've argued many times for them to hold more sovereignty over the land), but I believe that they can better exercise their sovereignty if they were less fractured. If instead of having ~90 First Nations in Northern Ontario, we had a dozen of them with 90 communities between them, they would hold more political weight and be on at least a less uneven footing when it comes time to negotiate with the government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Perhaps not but in the leadership they've obviously spread the word recently that a more aggressive militancy is the way to go.

I am hearing a lot about it in my entourage. Living where I do I have lots of friends who are public servants - both at INAC and in other departments who deal with aboriginal issues. These days when the feds approach indigenous communities with (what the feds think is) good news they are received with lots of defiance and hostility.
That's because the things First Nations communities are asking for and the things INAC is giving them are not the same things. If INAC were giving them money for education, housing, and mental health and additions programmes, they'd probably be met with better reception. But there is also a lot of resistance to literally anything the government might suggest, simply because after 150 years of government suggesting things, they don't feel that their situation has improved very much.

The hostility is largely a symptom of frustration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
There has been and still is a lot of tragedy in indigenous communities all over the new world, but sad to say most of it in terms of violence comes from aboriginal people inflicting it on themselves or on other aboriginal people.
Yes, and colonized people have a term for this: lateral violence. It's a problem that affects colonized peoples, a result of having their traditional social structures taken down by colonizers, and it's made worse when the affected people are segregated from society or when society is hostile toward them.

Most of Thunder Bay's crime, for example, is lateral violence involving indigenous people who are descendent from residential school survivors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
"White" (sic) people by and large don't go out and physically harm indigenous people in Canada. Or at least, the direct physical harm inflicted by "white" people (Robert Pickton, those SQ cops in Val-d'Or, etc.) is just a tiny fraction compared to what goes on intra-muros in the communities themselves.

Obviously the power imbalance you refer to and other forms of injustice do play huge roles in creating the conditions that make aboriginal people hurt *themselves* way more than other groups in our society do.
While lateral violence is the most common form of violence, it's the racially motivated crimes that fan the flames of that fire. Every time an incident like you've described happens, it reinforces to indigenous people that they've been victimized for decades, whether they want to feel that way or not. It isn't necessarily hateful actions either: some residential schools survivors suffered after receiving compensation cheques from the government several years ago, since the reason for the cheque they received brought back memories of the abuses they suffered. Something that was meant as a gesture of good faith, while it helped most, still hurt many people. There are a lot of catch-22s in this debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
BTW, I sincerely hope you don't think I am anti-indigenous.
I don't know you well, I know you better than to think that about you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
If we discussed what is needed in terms of investment and autonomy for indigenous Canadians regarding education, health care, infrastructure, accommodation, culture, etc., you'd probably find we're in agreement on almost everything.
I believe that most Canadians agree with us. The problem is, it's not something most Canadians are particularly passionate about. Similar to how it's most likely that most Canadians think famine in Africa is a crisis that needs to be solved but they're not protesting the government to do anything about it.

Ontario is kind of changing that by giving the far north it's own seat (or two) in the legislature, but that's still not going to make this a serious election issue or party platform.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Oh, I am not saying I don't understand the reaction.

It's just a very noticeable change, and quite different from the attitude even when the less "aboriginal-friendly" Harpercons were in power, vs. the Trudeau Liberals who are way more conciliatory and obviously looking to make amends.
Indigenous people knew not to expect much from Harper. (Even though if you look back to 2007 I argued on this very forum that he could be the one whole solved a lot of the problems indigenous people had—not would, but could.)

But Trudeau? It's 2015! He's different.

Indigenous people feel let down by Trudeau. It isn't exactly right of them to do so (since most of the government is still the same as when Harper was in power; it's half a million employees, it can't turn on a dime) but a lot of them expected things to change almost instantly after October 19th, 2015. He says nice words but his actions don't match them, and he's proven that he is just as able to break a promise as Harper and Chretien before him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by begratto View Post
Maybe, but in this case we're talking about the well-meaning great-grandson of the abusive husband.

Should he be held responsible for things that happened generations ago?
This is a common misconception people have about how indigenous people view the government.

Canada's federal government turned 150 years old last week. That's the great-grandfather you're talking about. He's still alive and well. Changed a little, but still there. And in the eyes of many indigenous people in this country, if Canada's federal government turns 250 in 2117, that great-grandfather will turn 250 too.

There is no great-grandson. The lifespan of countries is far greater than a single generation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
Imagine if we all agreed to drop the labels?
We won't. Culture is a cornerstone of our identities. Even those of us who think we have "no" culture as Canadians (despite no less than 54 "Great Canadian" threads) still use dozens of labels to identify each other. If everyone were the same, life would be pretty boring. Proof? One of the largest festivals in my city is basically just a convention hall filled with booths where people and organizations show off the food and dance of their ancestors. Society needs labels, even if they sometimes get in the way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
I'm genuinely curious what these spokespersons would say at an event in Brampton or Markham. Would they rant about "white people" to a room full of non-white people whose ancestors very clearly had nothing to do with how North America was settled?
As far as I can tell, this argument doesn't leave the confines of white vs. native. I do know that a lot of people from their home countries, particularly stateless people like Palestinians, Kurds and Tibetans, sympathize with Canada's indigenous communities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
I would have been comfortable with the term "Settler" to describe my family (mom's side settled in the Red River Valley directly from the Russian Empire around 1871, dad's side came to Westman from the Georgian Bay (via Scotland 1840's) area of Ontario in 1910) but the term seems to be loaded with sneering venom by the advocates of indigenous rights that it has turned me off from it.
That's why they've changed it to "settler-colonialist".

I think we need to find a way to accept that it was wrong and commit to making things right, without getting so offended at the accusation that we give up and allow the problems to continue. If someone calling you a settler is going to make you give up on the issue then you're not very committed to it. I've been called racist and settler by native people but that doesn't change my commitment to advocate for them. We see this in the gay community a lot: straight people saying shit like "we let you get married and you call us cishets?? We're not supporting you anymore!" and it's both sad and funny at the same time. As if the commitments you've made to an issue that affects your friends can be undone by a single word or tone of voice that they use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
Yes it does. Especially when it comes from non indigenous Canadians.
There are a few people in my city's social media scene who say and do some pretty bizarre things, including openly "admitting" to being racist simply because they're white men living in North America. The irony of their arguments against settler colonialism is that they have a habit of speaking over and calling down indigenous people who disagree with them, perpetuating the problem of white men ordering natives around. But they're the kind of men who will have "moniyaw" tattooed on their forehead and put "Social Justice Warrior" on their resume because they're that proud of their opinions, no matter how fucked up they look while they do it.

There are native people who disagree with what I'm saying, or what they're saying. There are native people who vote Conservative. There are native people who want reserves abolished (though I've never met one that actually supports assimilation). There was a fairly racist woman running in Thunder Bay's municipal election in 2014 who had a very vocal native man campaign for her at several events because he opposed the Indian Act and the concept of Indian Status, though if it was for the same reason as her, that's unclear. I think he just felt the ends satisfied the means. I didn't like her and vocally opposed her but sometimes I think maybe things would be different if she were elected, since the issue would have been more in our face since native people were essentially the only thing she ever talked about.

Name calling doesn't help but be grateful that the name calling from indigenous people isn't attached to the violence that name calling towards indigenous people is attached to. It's one thing to be called "settler", it's another to be afraid to send your kids to high school because half a dozen kids have died while attending it in the past decade.
__________________
Toronto & HamiltonThunder Bayother photos | my geofiction | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 4:49 AM
shreddog shreddog is offline
Beer me Captain
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a Van down by the river
Posts: 3,788
Names and reminders

With the Federal government renaming the "Langevin" block (PMO's office) and Calgary renaming the Langevin bridge to recognize the role played by Hector-Louis Langevin and Residential schools and show sensitivity, should we continue the pattern and perhaps extend it to rename more geographical ( Queen Charlottes >> Haidi Gwai) and perhaps municipal names?

I'm very curious to see what happens with Ryerson University since many feel that Egerton Ryerson's role** wrt Residential schools was equal to Langevin's.


From Wiki:
"Egerton Ryerson is recognized as a key architect in the design of the Canadian Indian residential school system."
__________________
It really is later than you think!

Do something about your future.

Last edited by shreddog; Jul 10, 2017 at 5:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 12:26 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by shreddog View Post
With the Federal government renaming the "Langevin" block (PMO's office) and Calgary renaming the Langevin bridge to recognize the role played by Hector-Louis Langevin and Residential schools and show sensitivity, should we continue the pattern and perhaps extend it to rename more geographical ( Queen Charlottes >> Haidi Gwai) and perhaps municipal names?

I'm very curious to see what happens with Ryerson University since many feel that Egerton Ryerson's role** wrt Residential schools was equal to Langevin's.


From Wiki:
"Egerton Ryerson is recognized as a key architect in the design of the Canadian Indian residential school system."
Given that Ryerson's involvement with residential schools established by the GofC seems to have been somewhere between slim and nil (according to some), it seems like overreach to me. I'm also concerned that we may be starting to "whitewash" (so to speak) the history of residential schools rather than recognizing it as a part of our history. I saw one op ed in the media this weekend that suggested that Sir John A. is the real culprit in the matter of residential schools. Where does that take us, one wonders?

Last edited by kwoldtimer; Jul 10, 2017 at 12:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 1:13 PM
shreddog shreddog is offline
Beer me Captain
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a Van down by the river
Posts: 3,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
... I'm also concerned that we may be starting to "whitewash" (so to speak) the history of residential schools rather than recognizing it as a part of our history. I saw one op ed in the media this weekend that suggested that Sir John A. is the real culprit in the matter of residential schools. Where does that take us, one wonders?
Here is the link to that Op-Ed (John A. Macdonald was the real architect of residential schools)

I agree that there is a certain degree of white washing involved, however there is also a certain amount of truth to recognizing things that should be made right. Fixing some key geographical names (like Haidi Gwai) does make sense to me, but with the trend to address historical figures it does get murky.
__________________
It really is later than you think!

Do something about your future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 1:27 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,943
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by shreddog View Post
Here is the link to that Op-Ed (John A. Macdonald was the real architect of residential schools)

I agree that there is a certain degree of white washing involved, however there is also a certain amount of truth to recognizing things that should be made right. Fixing some key geographical names (like Haidi Gwai) does make sense to me, but with the trend to address historical figures it does get murky.
Well, I'm of the school that would have put a historical plaque on the Langevin Block to explain his role in the creation of residential schools (and why those schools represent one of Canada's "dark chapters") rather than changing the name of the building, but i'm not running the show and I'm not the one that needs to be seen to be trying to address the increasingly insistent expectations of our First Nations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 1:55 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 28,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Well, I'm of the school that would have put a historical plaque on the Langevin Block to explain his role in the creation of residential schools (and why those schools represent one of Canada's "dark chapters") rather than changing the name of the building, but i'm not running the show and I'm not the one that needs to be seen to be trying to address the increasingly insistent expectations of our First Nations.
That's why you and I get along so well!
__________________
Va où il y a des livres. - Robert Sabatier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 1:55 PM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
I saw one op ed in the media this weekend that suggested that Sir John A. is the real culprit in the matter of residential schools. Where does that take us, one wonders?
George Washington owned slaves. Abraham Lincoln used patronage to get the 13th Amendment passed.

Historical figures - however held in high regard for their accomplishments - were ordinary people of their time. In some areas, they have may been great, but in others, they were flawed products of their time.

The job of history is to give the most accurate picture of these people, flaws and all. Did Sir John A. directly or indirectly support the creation of the residential school system? Yeah, probably. I doubt many leaders of the time would have taken an opposing view on the matter.

Does it detract from his other accomplishments? Sort of, but not fatally. The man still had a vision for Canada as a great independent country, which still largely stands today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 1:57 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 28,706
And the ink is barely dry on the road signs that say "Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway" in the west end of Ottawa. The Harperites changed the name to that from "Ottawa River Parkway" towards the end of their last term.
__________________
Va où il y a des livres. - Robert Sabatier
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 2:05 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Well, I'm of the school that would have put a historical plaque on the Langevin Block to explain his role in the creation of residential schools (and why those schools represent one of Canada's "dark chapters") rather than changing the name of the building, but i'm not running the show and I'm not the one that needs to be seen to be trying to address the increasingly insistent expectations of our First Nations.
I don't know how the public is supposed to remember these name changes. So now, it is politically incorrect to refer to the Langevin Block that pretty well every Ottawan knows. I guess we just call it that 'old building' across from Parliament Hill. Better to just forget Langevin's role in history, warts and all.

This is just like when their was objections to the naming of the City Archives building after former mayor Charlotte Whitton. The building was named in somebody else's honour that the vast majority will never remember. So we call it the City Archives Building.

Is it always a good idea to judge people based on current societal standards? All of these people made decisions and had beliefs based on the norms of the day in which they lived. I am sure that many things that we believe in today will be proven to be wrong in 50 or 100 years as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 4:52 PM
Xelebes's Avatar
Xelebes Xelebes is online now
Sawmill Billowtoker
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rockin' in Edmonton
Posts: 12,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
I don't know how the public is supposed to remember these name changes. So now, it is politically incorrect to refer to the Langevin Block that pretty well every Ottawan knows. I guess we just call it that 'old building' across from Parliament Hill. Better to just forget Langevin's role in history, warts and all.

This is just like when their was objections to the naming of the City Archives building after former mayor Charlotte Whitton. The building was named in somebody else's honour that the vast majority will never remember. So we call it the City Archives Building.

Is it always a good idea to judge people based on current societal standards? All of these people made decisions and had beliefs based on the norms of the day in which they lived. I am sure that many things that we believe in today will be proven to be wrong in 50 or 100 years as well.
Part of it is that you are making the rejection of the residential school system as a fad instead of a solid commitment to never repeat. Much like how buildings in Germany would lose buildings named after "Hitler" and "Goebbels" and such. The Germans have committed to never repeat and so they will not permit buildings to be named after the architects of those atrocities.
__________________
The Colour Green
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 2:40 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,943
Were there any doubt left that the MMIW inquiry was in trouble ...

http://www.cbc.ca/news
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:37 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.