Maybe it's because he chose to focus on the illness rather than the mistreatment, which had been known officially since 1907.
""It is apparent that general ill health from the continued inspiration of an air of increasing foulness is inevitable; but when sometimes consumptive pupils and, very frequently, others with discharging scrofulous glands, are present to add an infective quality to the atmosphere, we have created a situation so dangerous to health that I was often surprised that the results were not even worse than they have been shown statistically to be."
"...it appears that of 1,537 pupils returned from 15 schools which have been in operation on an average of fourteen years, 7 per cent are sick or in poor health and 24 per cent are reported dead" from 'Report on the Indian schools of Manitoba and the Northwest Territories / P.H. Bryce.' June 19, 1907 - https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/aanc-inac/R5-681-1907-eng.pdf
You seem to be having trouble with the definition of "maybe".
As McMurtry says in your link: "If you’re going to say something, you got to back it up.” Sounds like he didn't, because according to the article “Regardless of his intent he left students with the impression some or all of the deaths could be contributed [sic] to ‘natural causes’..." Apparently he can't point to anything he said about inadequate nutrition / clothing and other failures to provide a healthy environment for the children.
There's a certain 'last straw aspect to the story too, isn't there? ""“You made inappropriate sexualized comments to students; you exercised poor judgment by making imprudent comments to a certain student with whom you did not have a positive relationship; you failed to follow COVID-19 protocols,” were some of the other factors the board said it took into consideration in its decision to fire him."
Just informing everyone that I, Tuchodi, it is I, don’t give a fuck about human rights.
I support the Communist regime who forces medical experiments and who mandates injections that have no safety data.
Fuck human rights.
Fuck informed medical consent.
Fuck everyone who wants individual freedom.
Comply with the communist regime, or get fired and go die in a ditch.
Maybe it's because he chose to focus on the illness rather than the mistreatment, which had been known officially since 1907.
""It is apparent that general ill health from the continued inspiration of an air of increasing foulness is inevitable; but when sometimes consumptive pupils and, very frequently, others with discharging scrofulous glands, are present to add an infective quality to the atmosphere, we have created a situation so dangerous to health that I was often surprised that the results were not even worse than they have been shown statistically to be."
"...it appears that of 1,537 pupils returned from 15 schools which have been in operation on an average of fourteen years, 7 per cent are sick or in poor health and 24 per cent are reported dead" from 'Report on the Indian schools of Manitoba and the Northwest Territories / P.H. Bryce.' June 19, 1907 - https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/aanc-inac/R5-681-1907-eng.pdf
Ah so you agree with him being immediately escorted off the premises because “maybe it’s because…”.
But we really don’t know since that’s just a Liberal Party of Canada approved guess.
You seem to be having trouble with the definition of "maybe".
As McMurtry says in your link: "If you’re going to say something, you got to back it up.” Sounds like he didn't, because according to the article “Regardless of his intent he left students with the impression some or all of the deaths could be contributed [sic] to ‘natural causes’..." Apparently he can't point to anything he said about inadequate nutrition / clothing and other failures to provide a healthy environment for the children.
There's a certain 'last straw aspect to the story too, isn't there? ""“You made inappropriate sexualized comments to students; you exercised poor judgment by making imprudent comments to a certain student with whom you did not have a positive relationship; you failed to follow COVID-19 protocols,” were some of the other factors the board said it took into consideration in its decision to fire him."