Leafless

We didn't create anything. We are controlled under a parliamentary democracy. We have no choice but to change the system. Corrupt government at all levels and big business are allowing Canada to deteriorate to unacceptable levels. Their interest is making money with little concern for social conditions.

geoffrey In saying that you throw out the window our Constitution, our history and the main reason for pride in the country regarding Canadian nationalism. In fact it can also be said without Britain and the Queen it is highly improbable that Canada would even exist in it's present form or name and for that matter neither would the U.S.A. This means of course you wouldn't be here either saying what your saying.

So your saying Canada mooched the country off of Britain and that's all there is to it or the natives already being here with France who simply stumbled across and found it. In your opinion, when DID the Queen have anything to do with our country??

There are several Liberals who have supported Israel's position. Anita Neville is another. I don't think there is a Liberal out there supporting Hezbollah. I have no idea what the NDP's stand is because they have taken the summer off. Gosh, Senator Jerry Grafstein a long time Liberal organizer and influential party member says he doesn't know where the Liberals stand on the Mid- East crisis because their split. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Pag...orce_login=true Further more the Federal Liberals have been supporting Hezbollah for years because it had placated certain interest groups for political support. It's only recently after 20 years as a terrorist organization that the Liberals banned Hezbollah in Canada. See terrorist section in link below: http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/chambus...n019_1440-E.htm

They are also a regional one. No sense conflating the Shiite Hizbullah with the global, militant ideology of, say, Al Qaeda. How do you figure that or do you have proof of that? Is the goal of ALL radical Muslims is to kill all Jews, Christians, Americans and anyone that does not happen to be Muslim?

No. You can speculate about all kinds of stuff-for example, that the Holocaust did not happen-but don't be surprised if people take umbrage. Surley, you are not making an analogy that justifies the Holocaust and Gibson's unknown inner thoghts or motovations as being on the same level? If Gibson mouthed off thats not my fault nor did he explain why he said what he said outside of offering an apology. We have every right to explore the reason's as to why he said what he did or discount it as trivial or whatever. That right is called free speech and we are in the moral section. For anyone to feel offended PROOF is required to express outrage directed at others. In this case there is no proof to support Mr. Gibson. Mr. Gibson's reason's are unknown for saying what he said making him a legitimate target for speculation.

Alan Baker Israel's envoy to Canada has denounced the Federal Liberals, Block Quebecois and other Quebec politicians for taking part in a pro-Lebanese rally in Montreal and aligning themselves in which he describes as "incited" Muslims who have taken over Canadian streets. "Were seeing the leaders of opposition parties marching in Montreal under Hezbollah flags--Hezbollah which is a terrorist organization that has been outlawed by Canadian law." I agree with Alan Baker. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...9e17&k=3702

A lesson for you and the rest of the forumites. The real problem Newbie is many minorties who frequent these forums with a personal agenda, this one included.

I think there hasn't been much dispute about that in the last five years. The only question is whether, in the process of killing them, we should bomb whole neighbourhoods and kill more children than terrorists. Would you suggest we send ground forces in without an air campaign first? This is not a normal war. The Hezbollah in Lebanon is the only single large military organized terrorist operation. What we are up against is not a normal war invoving coutries throughout the world. I don't know of any way to control world wide diabolic guerrilla warfare outside of destroying the source.

Is there a law against speculating? Mel Gibson appears to be intelligent and neither I nor Rue or anyone else can probe Gibson's inner mind. It should appear fairly obvious for an intelligent person to speak such damming words even when drunk indicates an interior motive. Anything is possible and that is what we are discussing. Individuals with personal sensitivities in certain areas they know they are sensitive should not take part in discussions that might rattle their intellect and cause them to fly off the handle.

Exactly, who wants to read 20 or more old post to ensure it wasn't said before. Anyway times change so do events making the old post obsolete with like what Betsy says including new and different views.

Your missing the point. As a hollywood celebrity perhaps he was tring to establish a Jewish hate precedent amoung hollywood celebrities. The hollywood entertainment industry harbours a lot of jews. To say what Mel gibson said could be seen to entice an open revolt against a constituted authority (jews) in hollywood. This is serious. Your answer however is blatantly anti-semitic and disparaging whether you intended it as a joke or not. Your response necessarily feeds into this myth and stereotype that Jews own and ominate Hollywood which is utter and absolute b.s. and whether you intended this innocently or are trying to be smarmy its repulsive. Jews like Gays, Blacks, Latinoes, Women, and every other ethnic, sexual, and religious group are represented in Hollywood and whether his remarks insult Jews or insult anyone else, that is what they are being taken to task for. No one is trying to establish a Jewish hate precedent among Hollywood celebrities, there is no Zionist offensive going on in Hollywood and no there is no Jewish conspiracy as much as you would like to infer it. His comments showed hatred, ignorance, and a mind that stereotypes with gros generalizations. His excuse is alcohol, what is yours? Jews run Hollywood!!! http://www.eonline.com/Features/Specials/Jews/

Why don't you get over it? Any conflict or war between countries there will always be civilian casualties. You should thankful it is not worse than it is regarding civilian casualties.

Wrong guess. An independent Quebec is more along my line -- but I suppose that would be too logical particularly in this thread. But in the meantime you consider it o.k. to lick the tail of a statist. Don't you guys have any principle's.

A traitor is a person who refuses to bow down and lick a statist's tail. I gather your not a federalist. Perhaps Cuba is more along your line.

Should a Canadian loyal to Canada only consume beer made in Canada???? How ridiculous can this line of reasoning get??? Most Canadians in the ROC are loyal to Canada as a country but are not nearly as nationalistic in a provincial way as Quebecers are to their province many of who consider Quebec a country. This is why many Quebecers do buy only Quebec manufactured items as it supports Quebec nationalism. Other provinces in Canada don't consider their province a country and are not preturbed by buying goods made anywhere in Canada or the world. But pertaining to loyality to ones country, it is always better to purchase Canadian made manufactured or grown produce or goods to support Canadian workers if possible.

I am not implying that at all. You state that somebody in Quebec should consume products made in Quebec. That is racist because it imposes something upon a person based on their demographics -- not on their personal merits. Not only is it racist but worse: it is highly ridiculous. Does EVERYTHING that you consume come from where you live??? You never consume imports???? Even if you did consume imports, what is wrong with consuming imports?? He have to! What I am saying pertaining to Quebec that they are a very nationalistic province and are 'protectionist' of the products produced in Quebec. Normally, maybe some Quebecers are not even aware that when they buy products there as many products produced in Quebec on the shelfs of stores as possible. Quebec does not like to IMPORT good from other provinces. A lot of Quebecers support this notion and buy only made in Quebec products. If you are not aware of this then you must be unfamiliar with the ways of Quebecers or new to the province. What do think Quebec nationalism is applied to only politics???

What does morality have to do with loyalty to Canada? Loyalty to any country has nothing to do with morality -- it is just a personal preference. Just like favorite colors and your birthday, there is no morality involved. You are not accepting to the standards of the majority based on human behavior within a civilized country with a Constitution. Then you tell me what the definition of a traitor is????

Yes. You brought up the issue of morality. I see them as both the same on the scale of morality. I want to hear your explanation of morality as it pertains to nationality. I gave it to you in the preceeding post pertaining to nationlism NOT nationality. Morals differentuates between good and bad. It is the second definiton of 'moral' and that is: " concerned with accepted rules and standards of human behavior" in this case 'human behavior in a country'. When applied to nationalism one could ask is it moral for a province to separate. The normal response as it is not part of the Constitution would be 'no it would be unmoral'. In other words 'yes it would be bad to 'separate'.

Why should I (or any non-racist) care? Most of what I consume on a daily basis is the product of slave labor and human rights abuse in third world countries under conditions that nobody can even imagine. Why would I feel compassion or responsibility for an affluent and luxurious industry like beer? ---- What is moral about Canadian federalism that makes Quebec separation immoral??????????? What does racist have to do with anything of course if your implying that Quebecers who support Quebec nationalism are racist by definiton since they will consume only Quebec products by nature. If you are a Quebecer loyal to Quebec nationalism by all rights you would or should be drinking a brew made in Quebec. You ask what is moral about Canadian federalism that makes Quebec separation immoral? Well in this case when you speak of morals we are talking about conforming to accepted standards on a NATIONAL level pertaining to the country of CANADA. Quebec being one of ten provinces and to consider or promote separatism is directly showing treachery and disloyality to the country of Canada therefore making Quebec no longer accepting Canadian standards relating to national unity and therefore would be or is unmoral.

No. Not in my opinion. Then you are contributing to and advocating separatism. Hope you enjoy your 'BLEUE' and hope you know it's brewed London,Ontario land of the Anglais.

I think it is good for Quebec nationalism. Does this mean it's unmoral?

Article: Ottawa Citizen, Tues. August 8, 2006, Pg.A1 Title: "Labatt 'Bleue' sales pitch taps Quebeckers pride" This article is basically devoted to Labatt Blue Quebec beer drinking nationalist. It uses the slogan "Proud to be Blue" and has different messages for different 'regions' in Quebec. The ads in Gatineau Quebec, across the river from Ottawa, Ontario use the slogan "L'Outaouais, le bon bord de la riviere" which translates loosely " The Outaouais region. The right side of the river." This is meant to suggest (I don't know how) "Quebecers are better party animals than their neighbors in Ontario." This is supposed to be tongue and cheek advertising says the article but I think this also carries a political message. It should be noted that that the Labatt Blue label in the ROC carries a maple leaf while the Quebec version carries a symbol similar to the 'Fleur de Lise'. Is this type of advertising good for national unity or does it in fact contribute and further promotes Quebec nationalism? What do you think?

I don't think the cost argument is legitimate - we would have to pay for a head of state no matter what. It's not a cost argument, it's a why bother argument. She has nothing to do with our country anymore, why do we still have her as our leader? Holding onto the past for the sake of holding onto the past is rather silly no? The Queen has every right to be part of Canada and Canadian history and has played the pivotal role in maintaining the independence of Canada in North America. Canada emerged as that part of North America (English and French) which wished to remain a monarchical society. The monarchy has since provided Canada with a distinct identity grom the United States and is the philosphical basis ( the state as the family) for the social differences that have evovled between what were essential the same people two and a quarter centuries ago ( i.e. Crown corporations, public broadcasting, social welfare and health schemes, appointed judicary, peace, order and good government, multiculturalism etc.). Canada to-day is an Independent Constitutional Monarchy and I would like to see all you republican supporters find a way in this devisive country to select a president and how would power be protected so it would not be abused. The 'Plains of Abraham' have a direct and important place in Canadian history and not to be forgotten.

Perhaps the Conservatives will arrest him. Where are Canada's anti-hate laws and why are they not being applied as the proof is on national televison. If no charges are laid against the organizers of this demonstration then it can be said Quebec is encouraging a potential Arab/Jew upheaval on Canadian soil.