Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Alex Cheng

Political indoctrination in public schools?

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, taxme said:

In my day going to school meant learning how to read, write, and do arithmetic, learn about the history of Canada, and geography. Today, it seems to be more about teaching children all about the environment, gay/transgender rights, multiculturalism, sex education, and the joys diversity. They are taught that Canadian traditions and cultures are not all that important anymore but the cultures, traditions and heritage of others is. The education of today is a joke.

As an example the Ontario liberal party has decided that there should not be any reference to calling people a mom or dad but just be called partners. I guess the reason for that is that gay couples won't be introduced as dad and dad or mom and mom anymore, and there by hide the fact that some kids may have two partners of the same sex. The poor kids of today are being so brainwashed with liberal brainless propaganda bull like what I mentioned above that it is a wonder that more parents don't take their children out of public schools. They are institutions for liberalism foolishness. 

Some of the stuff goes too far, but alot of Canadians were being heavily sheltered and taught a false history.  Your history you were being taught was a stone cold lie.  Period.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

You just don't like that I don't take your conspiracy theories seriously.

This illustrates just how dishonest you and all your sidekicks have been. The science is not mine. And it is science that describes the impossibility of the US government story being true. If you actually knew how much NIST lied, baldfaced lied, you wouldn't be so sure of yourself. But you folks are terrified to address those things, clinging as you are to a hope and a prayer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hot enough said:

If you go to university, Alex, you shouldn't be taken in by such juvenile blather. Not to mention the nutty website name. 

The first sentence is false. The standard definition of "spirit" is, 1:  an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms [M-W] 

The standard definition of "spiritual" is, 

1:  of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit [M-W]

But it doesn't matter whether the definition is first or last, the intent is a person's sense of worth, a person's feelings, a person's inner sense of being and while it can have a religious connotation, it most often does not. Animals too, have a sense of spirit and it varies. This most assuredly has nothing to do with religion because, quite frankly, animals are not as stupid as humans.

No it doesn't.https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/spiritual
It does include religion in definition 2. Website says standard definition relates to supernatural and religious element. This is true.
The first sentence says " There is 2 more subjects of indoctrination but they are relatively minor and benign." What is untrue? I think you need to read more carefully :huh: 

 

 

Edited by Alex Cheng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, hot enough said:

Quite the opposite. The education you received was a joke. It was all a long series of fabrications. In English, definitely Canadian history - forgetting to mention a genocide isn't a little deal. The Canadian traditions and cultures couldn't have been very important because they were white race centric lies. 

God bless the Caucasian race. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hernanday said:

Some of the stuff goes too far, but alot of Canadians were being heavily sheltered and taught a false history.  Your history you were being taught was a stone cold lie.  Period.

It was way better than the crap being fed to our children and grandchildren today. What? Learning about history,geography,arithmetic,learning how to read and write was all just a stone cold lie? I will take the history that I was taught about in my school days rather than the liberal communist multicultural crap of today that is being taught to our children and grandchildren. Yes indeed the stuff being taught in schools today has gone to far. Liberalism needs to be removed from the education system that is being taught today. Time to get back to common sense and logic, and dump liberal emotional foolishness. Hey, works for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No it doesn't.https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/spiritual 
It does include religion in definition 2. Website says standard definition relates to supernatural and religious element. This is true.

Read your own source, Alex. 


 

Quote

The first sentence says " There is 2 more subjects of indoctrination but they are relatively minor and benign." What is untrue? I think you need to read more carefully

The "first sentence" of what? says ...

As a university student you have to make your sources and how you are tying them to your arguments much clearer than you have here. Don't think for a moment that you can use the "adults" here as shining examples of intellectual probity. Many of them are perfect examples of how the education system has so badly failed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, taxme said:

learning how to read and write was all just a stone cold lie?

Pretty much, yup. 

Quote

I will take the history that I was taught about in my school days

You are of the opinion that leaving out a genocide, the war crimes, the support for terrorism constitutes a good history program. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, taxme said:

It was way better than the crap being fed to our children and grandchildren today. What? Learning about history,geography,arithmetic,learning how to read and write was all just a stone cold lie? I will take the history that I was taught about in my school days rather than the liberal communist multicultural crap of today that is being taught to our children and grandchildren. Yes indeed the stuff being taught in schools today has gone to far. Liberalism needs to be removed from the education system that is being taught today. Time to get back to common sense and logic, and dump liberal emotional foolishness. Hey, works for me. 

Your history, and geography was based in lies, your math was not too bad but alot of it was full of lies, your books were all based on pc lies to make british people feel good.  Liberalism is common sense and logic, it is conservatism which is based on an illogical desire to cling onto a fabled past that never existed.

 

This is a good example of how your geography was phony.  You were taught a fake map to make Europeans feel good by showing their countries 8 times larger on the map than they truly were.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-tuesday-edition-1.4034374/a-whole-new-world-why-boston-public-schools-are-adopting-a-different-map-1.4034379

 

Fake pc map you oldies were taught

129602879.jpg

 

Real accurate map

peters.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, hot enough said:

Quite the opposite. The education you received was a joke. It was all a long series of fabrications. In English, definitely Canadian history - forgetting to mention a genocide isn't a little deal. The Canadian traditions and cultures couldn't have been very important because they were white race centric lies. 

What genocide are you speaking of?  What lies?  Please expound on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hot enough said:

Read your own source, Alex. 


 

The "first sentence" of what? says ...

As a university student you have to make your sources and how you are tying them to your arguments much clearer than you have here. Don't think for a moment that you can use the "adults" here as shining examples of intellectual probity. Many of them are perfect examples of how the education system has so badly failed. 

Why don't you talk to dog? Animals are not as stupid as human right? You are not so smart stop telling people how to think.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blackbird said:

What genocide are you speaking of?  What lies?  Please expound on that.

Remember when they taught us in school to sing "1 little 2 little 3 Canadians weeeee love thee"?  I have friends the same age as me who were being loved raped in the residential schools the government forced them to go to.

Anyway, there's one lie.

I guess the fact we weren't outright genocidal is supposed to minimize just how godawful we were to the point that we were practically like Hobbits we were so benign. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Alex Cheng said:

Why don't you talk to dog? Animals are not as stupid as human right? You are not so smart stop telling people how to think.

Just thinking would be fine, Alex. As you move thru your university career you will learn how to think, at least marginally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hot enough said:

Just thinking would be fine, Alex. As you move thru your university career you will learn how to think, at least marginally. 

hahahaha :rolleyes: you are so stupid. Maybe I talk to fish! HAHAHAHAHAHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I guess the fact we weren't outright genocidal is supposed to minimize just how godawful we were to the point that we were practically like Hobbits we were so benign. 

The following is a dandy example of the political indoctrination students in Canada and the US receive. Lies by gigantic omission!

Genocide doesn't have to be a quick, massive slaughter. Everybody within the group doesn't have to be killed. That Canada and the US fought the internationally accepted definition of genocide for so long and hard illustrates the ruling politicians of the day knew what the US and Canada had done.

 

Quote

 

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article 4

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2017 at 6:44 PM, Bonam said:

The problem is that no one agrees on what facts are anymore

Sane people do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you people know, "Alternative facts" is an actual thing.  Alternative doesn't mean opposite and it doesn't mean "lie" - it means "other possibilities".  Just because some idiots who are paid to look good on TV want to make fun of a woman who has an extraordinary track record in education and who has a law degree, won't or shouldn't change that.

Alternative facts are things we (on this forum) discuss every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Alternative facts are ridiculous.

Like Sasquatches, chem-trails and transubstantiation. 

I just don't think some people are bright enough to understand the term...^and now I know for sure^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2017 at 7:23 PM, hot enough said:

The following is a dandy example of the political indoctrination students in Canada and the US receive. Lies by gigantic omission!

Genocide doesn't have to be a quick, massive slaughter. Everybody within the group doesn't have to be killed. That Canada and the US fought the internationally accepted definition of genocide for so long and hard illustrates the ruling politicians of the day knew what the US and Canada had done.

 

 

And now there is a genocide going on against white people all over the world. That should make all the bleeding heart multicult liberals happy as hell, eh? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, taxme said:

And now there is a genocide going on against white people all over the world. That should make all the bleeding heart multicult liberals happy as hell, eh? 

Thank you for your indirect admission that the US and Canada had a program of genocide against Native Americans and First Nations peoples.

Please, you are making a [unspeakable word] of yourself, taxme. Let's use total numbers killed by western terrorism versus "radical Islam" terrorism. It is not even anywhere close to being equal. The total numbers killed from illegal invasions, aka war crimes and the time frame that western terrorism has been going on versus "radical Islam" is also highly disproportionate. 

If we were really to check, deeply, we would likely find out that many or most of these "radical Islam" attacks were false flags, just like Operation Gladio. US lies have a long and storied history. 

You never showed up in the threads that showed, scientifically, that the US official 911story was and is a fable. Why are all you open, honest, nothing is off the table Platos so afraid of actually discussing the real issues? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, taxme said:

And now there is a genocide going on against white people all over the world. That should make all the bleeding heart multicult liberals happy as hell, eh? 

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group; [Check, done by Canada and the USA]

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; [Check, done by Canada and the USA]

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; [Check, done by Canada and the USA]

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [Check, done by Canada and the USA]

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. [Check, done by Canada and the USA]

Is there any better example of the political indoctrination that has gone on in western schools, UK, USA, Canada, Australia, NZ, [the latter two can be added to the [Check, done by Canada and the USA]]  ... than these genocides being hidden at all education levels right up to the highest university levels?

How much better than the Nazis are we?

Edited by hot enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

I just don't think some people are bright enough to understand the term...^and now I know for sure^

Which term though?

 

Quote

 

"Alternative facts" is a phrase used by U.S. Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway during a Meet the Press interview on January 22, 2017, in which she defended White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer's false statement about the attendance at Donald Trump's inauguration as President of the United States. When pressed during the interview with Chuck Todd to explain why Spicer "utter[ed] a provable falsehood", Conway stated that Spicer was giving "alternative facts". Todd responded, "Look, alternative facts are not facts. They're falsehoods."

Wiki.

 

 

 

Quote

 

Alternative facts is a term in law to describe inconsistent sets of facts put forth by the same party in a court given that there is plausible evidence to support both alternatives.[1][2] The term is also used to describe competing facts for the two sides of the case.

Wiki.

 

 

Are you suggesting Conway was referring to the legal use of the term? Chuck Todd gave her every opportunity to clear up the ambiguity.

You seem to think you're at least as bright as Conway so perhaps you could enlighten us.

Good luck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Which term though?

 

 

 

 

Are you suggesting Conway was referring to the legal use of the term? Chuck Todd gave her every opportunity to clear up the ambiguity.

You seem to think you're at least as bright as Conway so perhaps you could enlighten us.

Good luck.

 

Well thanks, I think maybe I should enlighten you.  You clearly think that a site like Wikipedia, who absolutely anyone can write whatever they want, is good sage information, but I'll try to explain things for the slow minded using an example;

OK, During the OJ Simpson trial, the prosecution argued that OJ's motive was that he was controlling and a spousal abuser, and therefore was a prime candidate for murder, the defence argued that this fact meant nothing - both sides gave "alternate facts".  The prosecution argued that some 80% of abused women who end up murdered, are murdered by their mate.  The defense argued that only 1 out of 250,000 cases of spousal abuse ends in a death - and won the case because (they argued) spousal abuse does not equate to murder.

So, what do we have?  Fact one: 80% of abused women who end up dead are killed by their mate - Wow, that's really high!

                                      Fact two: 1 in 250,000 abused women end up killed - Well, that's not a very high number at all!

You see, facts can mean different things and when the term "alternative facts" is applied, it's a way of looking at the facts from a different perspective.  We do it on this forum all the time, and the media is using it to a tee to try and bring down Trump.

Here's another one: One in 10,000 (or something like that) dates ends in rape, therefore men aren't actually mad stalking rapists.  Feminists will use the alternative fact that 68% of rapes happen during a date - and therefore men are good for nothing rapists.

Edited by Hal 9000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...