Leafless

They stole the route to Canada from British and John Cabot who was here first. Besides France never really populated the country sufficiently to defend it properly but were more interested in fish and fur exports back to France.

Language evolves naturally and the majority language in Canada by choice (free choice), is English and is the international language of the world. http://www.answers.com/topic/english-language The federal government has no mandate to make this country bilingual as it does not have the legal power to do that, as language is controlled by the provinces. So what your saying about this is the price you pay for being Canadian to make this country bilingual is BS. It should be remembered it was the Liberals that included a high content of Quebec MP'S that spearheaded 'official multiculturalism' and the creation of the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms'. What the federal government has done though was create discriminatory policies in an effort to overly promote French in the federal public service by making it 'officially bilingual'. It has also stepped out of its federal bounds into provincial territory in an effort to promote French with incentives to cities. But strangely it has made no effort to encourage 'official bilingualism' in Quebec. IMO and the opinion of many others this represents an unwarranted attack on the English language as French in Canada is not a commercial language on the same level as English, that engulfs all of Canada, but is a regional language mainly spoken in Quebec but even at that, not by its entire population. Quebec itself is not a country but simply a province and has NOTHING to offer English speaking Canadians as an incentive to move to Quebec, learn French and become part of Quebec. In fact Quebec goes out of its way in the way of protectionism concerning employment NOT to accommodate foreigners (non-Quebecers). But it has no problem pouring into the English province of Ontario to take jobs that DON'T have the same level of stringent draconian job protection policies that Quebec has.

Quebec was allowed to keep their language and religion pertaining to and within their OWN PROVINCE but even at that, originally not on an 'official basis' pertaining to language. But that has since changed as Quebec declared itself 'officially unilingual French' with it's own 'Charter of the French Language' better known as Bill-101. You know as well as I do there is no law in Canada restricting the use of languages spoken for private use and of course none governing freedom of religion. But relating to a provinces 'unilingual official French language' like Quebec, it should be there sole responsibility to provide for all aspects of that language within their province. But most Canadians know Quebec cannot do this without the help of Canadian taxpayers. This brings us back to why the charter should be re-ratified or scrapped as federal parties desperate for votes could capitalize on fulfilling Quebec's financial deficit for more funds by the expansion of Quebec rights to direct more funding or jobs to support their culture. This has been done in the federal public service (under exaggerated requirements for bilingualism) where as francophone's are grossly over represented in the federal public service such as in the Ottawa area where Quebec francophone's flood over to Ottawa every day and go home at night to support the Quebec economy. Quebec also controls federal government pensions and staffing in Quebec. BTW- Any member has the right to comment in any area in Canadian politics if he or she chooses to do so. If you know of any legitimate restrictions set out by this site administration to Americans participating on this site , please inform us.

History is history and France and Canada's natives were a conquered people. There are treaties such as Treaty 7, and France relinquished all rights to Canada. Quebec was left with rights dictated by confederation language, religion and civil law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_7 Quebec has more powers than any province in Canada and for you to say "Quebec has no say" is utter nonsense. If Quebec did so much for Canada why is it they are incapable of providing employment for their own culture and have to depend on equalization payments for its survival? Would it not be better to assimilate to encourage prosperity in their own province?

So what are you saying some Canadians are more Canadian than others? My grandmother immigrated from Germany into Canada in 1876. The rest is history.

I'm for justice yet against fairness. As I mentioned, the best solution in my opinion would be for Ottawa to become a city-state, but alas because of the seperatists that is not preferable, so we live in a compermise. Gatineau is in Québec, a French-language province. Ottawa is in Ontario, officially English-speaking and unoficially bilingual, going by quotas. Why should the municipality of Gatineau be expected to go beyond provincial expectations? Ottawa is complying with Ontarian expectations, and likewise Gatineau is complying with Québec's expectations. Ottawa is an 'officially bilingual municipality' (despite any kind of referendum concerning city of Ottawa residents) and the city of Gatineau Quebec is not. There is NO comprise concerning any kind of bilingualism policy ANYWHERE in Quebec. But Ottawa, Ontario is not recognized provincially as being officially bilingual despite constant badgering from francophone groups. Federal demographics see Ottawa-Gatineau linked as a federal state which is totally undemocratic with the population of Ottawa, Ontario, seen as willing accomplice, which is so far from the truth since again there has never been any type of referendum to justify this federal link.

Draconian? Who are you to say it's so terrible that bilingualism is evil? Why is Canada predominantly English-speaking? Thank Uncle Sam for that... the English language was shoved down your throat. I am not saying bilingualism is evil. I am saying bilingualism pursued by the federal government is a harsh political measure, when the reality is French for all practical purposes is a not a commercial language of Canada. If the federal government is trying to satisfy Quebec's political-cultural image as being 'distinct' it should do so utilizing the proper political process which it did not have much luck with in the past, rather than pursue and implement fraudulent measures.

What legitimate document exist outside of course the Charter, states that the founding nations have legitimate claim to Canada? Founding nations of course, is a political invention and was NEVER ratified by CANADIANS. But the sad reality of life is that 'life is NOT fair' and never has been.

"Never in the history of Canadian politics have we seen such blackmail, such threats," Boisclair told supporters during a Sunday night campaign stop. Boisclair suggested Charest and Harper have a tacit agreement to protect each other against a potential sovereigntist victory in the election. "Every time Ottawa harms Quebec, he (Charest) keeps quiet, trying not to harm his own interests, especially to avoid harming his friend, Mr. Harper," Boisclair said. "Mr. Harper and Mr. Charest are intimately tied. They are setting us up, they're putting one past us in order to save their skins." http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...0c0f3c3&k=64607 -------------------------------------------------------- This is getting downright nasty. Is Mr. Bosclair simply a clone of Rene Levesque or is Mr. Harper indeed interfering in Quebec politics?

The PQ and First Nations ALL ALONG had the same rights as any other Canadian, WITHOUT being included AGAIN in the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms'. If you fail to see the connection for an undemocratic minority 'power grab' played out by a co-operating federal government, then I to feel you are well suited to be included in the ranks of 'DUMB ASS CANADIANS' who would never be able to distinguish the difference between a 'cup and a coup'.

Of course they should, they were democratically elected by a majority government. The Charter of Rights have never been a issue for the majority of Canadians either. What majority are you talking about? A majority government does NOT MEAN 50 + 1. Beside the federal government is responsible for running the business of the country and should not include altering or amending our constitution without Canadians who make up the country of Canada. Most Canadians are asses when it comes to our constitution and proves the politicians of this country are not enlightening Canadians to what the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' really means in the way of a major democratic deficit concerning the majority of Canadians and also a huge financial deficit. So, the bottom line is a certain federal party has spearheaded a campaign to defraud citizens of Canada.

What democratic rights does it override? All Canadians INITIALLY are granted the basically same democratic rights by government, the same as our original "Bill of Rights". http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-...I//en/?noCookie All Canadians are equal in that regard and basically that's all that should have been included in the Charter. The federal government abuses democratic rights of Canadians by including separate categories of extra privileges pertaining to minorities. By minorities we are primarily talking Quebec and Aboriginal minorities that are specifically detailed in the Charter, under "Official Languages" Section 16-22, Minority Language Educational Rights, Section 35, Rights of Aboriginal Peoples. These sections have the capability of enforcing and implementing further rights for Quebec and Aboriginals, depending on interpretation of Charter Rights, Section 23, Enforcement, Section 24-31, Section 32-34, Application of Charter, Section 36-Equalization and Regional disparities.

Section 1. "Guarantees of rights and Freedoms" applied to various sections of the Charter depending on interpretation of various sections of the charter, is improperly defined and open for abuse and worst of all overrides democratic rights which is given a back seat to charter rights. Section 3. "Democratic Rights" also have NO real definition in Canada relating to Canadians 'forming laws of the land' or being part of the process concerning 'constitutional laws, such as the Charter itself. Canada never fought pertaining to its constitution claiming this country,but was given the Canadian constitution by Britain. Therefore ALL Canadians should be part of the legal process concerning ANY CONSTITIONAL CHANGE as the federal government should have no right to do this unilaterally without the citizens of Canada. Trudeau and the Liberals thought they had exclusive right to our constitution (and took that right) after they repatriated it from Britain. Section 15. "Equality Rights is open to abuse when bounced off of other rights. Section 16. "Official Languages"is subject to abuse and improper interpretation. But the whole problem with the Charter is "Minority Rights" is integrated with basic Charter rights which it feeds off of it. IOW the Charter is designed primarily for minorities rather than ALL Canadians which could be seen as a fraudulent document. This creates a huge democratic deficit as their are numerous other ways to attend to the requirement of minorities with the creation of a very complicated document (without safe guards) to attack existing rights of Canadian citizens.

If there is such a thing I'm wondering why not. Wouldn't it be something like the European Common Market? Lets wait until the 'holes' start developing in the European Union and watch as Europe possibly falls apart. I don't think Americans or Canadians want porous borders or a loss of sovereignty outside of the super elite. http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom63.htm

For Charter rights to be limited, the limits must meet three requirements: 1.-They must be reasonable in a free and democratic society. 2.-They must be 'prescribed by law'. 3.-They must be demonstrably justified. How can Charter laws even be applicable in a 'free and democratic society' without including input from Canadian citizens. The pure nature of the Charter itself is undemocratic. Or how can Charter rights be be demonstrably justified when there is no written legislation or control devise such as with the case of bilingualism in the federal public service which is proving to be an employment haven for francophone's while grossly discriminating against users of the common commercial language of Canada, English. The Charter could be seen as totally fraudulent and works directly against democracy. Which begs the question: '.'How can any political party accept the terms and conditions of this draconian document and actually participate in this fraudulent undemocratic political process?' http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Cons...ts_and_Freedoms

If this is the final stage of social engineering, why is it political parties continue to play this corrupt game, when it is obvious there is no chance in hell to win on a more democratic platform that serves the interest of Canadians at large? Political parties cannot continue to sell out to minorities.

That more than likely, would be the end result. Especially when Section 27 reads: "This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canada." This gives the federal government of the day a tremendous amount of power (with the distinct possibility of abuse) to manipulate favourable cultural preferences in favour of further bolstering status of minorities that could actually exceed the status of the majority. This could equate to the same outcome as a civil war but without a single shot being fired in favour of minorities with the primary minority being Quebec.

Money on the table says you will never see the Conservatives with a majority government with a PM from outside Quebec. That's how wrapped up it is!

Here is an article of interest why we must take Canada back: http://takingcanadaback.ca/betrayed.php

"ABC News: Being a religious and political symbol, do you think that what happened is an infringement and a violation of Iraqi sovereignty? Al-Hakim: No doubt about that — when there is no sanctity to any Iraqi figure, and when a U.S. soldier on the ground is allowed to treat everyone the way they like regardless of controls or limitations. This humiliation lasted 11 hours, and then I was told, "Go; the matter is over." http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/IraqCoverage/sto...=2901692&page=1 --------------------------------------------------------------- When are these Iraq Shiites going to learn Iraq IS a police state, under U.S control, until law and order is restored. Iraq sovereignty currently is temporally suspended.

Actually Canada is promoting that concept by importing millions of immigrants from warm countries. In their own country these people use little natural resources to maintain their existence. Coming to Canada this all changes and now these immigrants represent an additional problem concerning utilizing and using resources responsible for global warming. Sometimes I think our politicians are just plain nuts and are totally uncaring about Canada's future.

It would be foolish to suggest earth was created to accommodate man as the evidence suggest, it wasn't. Over population and the effects of a polluted globe go hand in hand. But saying this, it should be the responsibility of countries do do their part to help combat this problem and a plan such as Kyoto that somehow puts itself in the ludicrous position to blame and penalize certain countries is certainly not the route to take. http://www.sierraclub.org/population/repor...obalwarming.asp

The original charter mandate has been so greatly exceeded that it has established, what can be best described as single party rule. In other words the liberals pursual of socialistic ideologies, involving the charter, has turned or transformed Canada into a country that is next to state controlled. The stacking of the Senate, federal courts and charter interpretations have made it impossible for other political parties primarily the traditional Conservatives to implement changes beneficial to the country to deal with important issues. Has the time come to re-ratify our charter before it is to late and allow immature rule to destroy the country?

If your political lefty ideologies comprise of 'freedom for all' with no restrictions, those are not my ideologies and that is where the problem lies. Lefties have a habit of trying to force a response through taunting, a direct form of intimidation to their ludicrous anti-western, anti-capitalist post. If I choose not to respond to a post, there should be no reason for lefties to try to capitalize on that fact or to further pursue a response. The difference between right and left political ideologies is immense and growing at an alarming rate, in countries like Canada due to totally undemocratic political maneuvering by lefty, primarily, Liberal socialist.

Ladies and germs, I give you: Leafless and Jerry. And you are the head honcho left wing, anti-American, anti-Western, mouthy pro- Islamic propagandist, made possible by charter rights and freedoms.