August1991

My sympathies were never with the violent Chechens. The Russians, over the years, have given the Chechens ample opportunity to assume their sovereignty. Even the most radical Quebec separatist would have been happy with what was offered. Other republics in Russia have accepted and benefited from such terms.Ultimately though, certain western values are worth defending. The following is not evidence of that. The Guardian The journalist presents the Chechen view as truth; they are underdogs who have no means to defend themselves except by slaughtering innocent children. And there is nothing at all even suggesting the context of this conflict. What is it about the Left? Why does the Left insist on seeing "small countries" as victims and "big countries" as evil perpetrators? There is a kneejerk defence of the downtrodden without ever a thought that the downtrodden might be wrong, or manipulative. That's not objective thought; it's superstition.

Jerusalem Post There needs to be some genuine, soul-searching amongst intelligent Muslims, and certainly not the kind that confuses pride and childish frustration with the West. This thread got off track but I thought I'd resurrect it with this article.

Not in French, caesar, her name is spelled Élisabeth. Noblesse oblige, I guess.Cdn Dept Natl Defence

You sit here in Canada and draw conclusions about how millions of Russians perceive these events. Such is punditry.You seem to have drawn your ideas from events of 25 years ago. If you want to believe in the competence of some, go ahead. The kind of terrorism we are facing now is of a different order. To my knowledge, flying airplanes into buildings is something new. Mass hostage takings in which children are randomly shot or denied water are new. Even the so-called elite SAS could not have dealt with this any better. Those seem like good questions eureka, but don't fall into moral relativism. The values of the west - freedom of thought and the right to criticize - are worth defending.Don't, for two seconds, stop and say "We bombed Dresden but then they bombed Coventry." Nobody should bomb anyone, true. But our values are worth defending.

Are you part of the Red Scare now ceemes? Otherwise, keep your voice down.

They are all people, right? They all voluntarily work together collectively in this thing called a corporation. If you do not want to deal with a corporation, don't. Nobody will force you. The burden of all taxes must fall on a person. And you might be surprised to learn who pays corporate taxes. That is false. Our trade with the US has grown faster in the past 15 years than our trade with other countries, and indeed trade with ourselves. The FTA have reduced artificial barriers between people in the two countries. This has been to the benefit of individual Canadians and individual Americans.If you want to be anti-American and not deal with them, then that is your choice. But I don't see why you should hinder me if I choose to deal with an American.

Wayne, you speak of "Corporations" as if they were extra-terrestrial beings. To my knowledge, corporations are composed entirely of people. There are managers, shareholders and employees who together form a corporation. We can't tax a corporation. We must tax people. I'll also add that all relations with the people in a corporation are voluntary. Nobody forces anybody to buy a Big Mac, Nike shoes or Microsoft Windows. Nobody is forced to buy shares in these firms. Nobody is forced to work for them. As to free trade, the Internet is a wonderful invention that makes it easier to communicate. Why would anyone want to deliberately impose an artifical barrier between two people - making it difficult for the two to deal with one another? The posters to this thread seem to want to do exactly that. They want to make it difficult for Canadians and Americans to deal with one another. Why?

I got your point, ceemes. Did you get mine?You seem to blame the Russian authorities for the nature of this attack. As you say, "they use the blunt hammer approach". You don't get it. These people took over a school with over a thousand people, mostly children. They provided no food nor drink. These terrorists were not disgruntled postal workers. Sorry, the SWAT psy-trained negotiators don't work in such a situation. The Russians were not dealing with anything civilized. I suppose you would say that Stalingrad was destroyed in the Second World War because the Russians took a heavy-handed approach to military affairs.

Burns, please just place a good quote and not the whole article. You are infringing copyright. Also, what is your opinion of the piece? Why did you post it here?

Do you have any knowledge of Hindi and Mandarin? You speak of language as if you can buy it in a box in a supermarket.Learning a language is not easy. Anglophones have a chance of learning and retaining a European language. French, Spanish, Portuguese and German are ideal. These languages - French and Spanish in particular - come with a large body of literature, cinema and music. MS has crazy ideas sometimes. But I see the value of children getting an obligatory hour a day of French. I think French immersion should be available on a voluntary basis. In effect, this is what we do now in Canada. Bear in mind, this approach to language education is new (about 20 years or so). I suspect that Canada has never had so many people who can manage so well in another language.And no, I don't think I'm off topic. If I knew some magic method to make people tolerant, believe me, I would happily write a book about it. I don't mean that learning a language necessarily makes one tolerant. It does mean that one has an understanding of a different way of seeing life. You've heard the expression , "Travel broadens the mind." That's what I mean. Argus, do you want to remain "Canadian" at least while you and your children are alive? That is, do you want to ensure that there is a place in the world called "Canada" with its own peculiar way of doing things?Well, that is no different than wanting to preserve your language. Argus, it is easy to say with bravado that you don't care what happens to your descendants. But you cannot imagine that your great-grandchildren will have to struggle in life because they speak Mandarin with attrocious accents. What you have written is just dumb. You don't know Canada's history.Argus, I sense throughout your post a basic "anti-Quebec" sentiment. I have always been astonished by English Canada. While English-Canadians are quick to describe Americans for being loud-mouthed, ignorant people who seem to think they own the world, English-Canadians don't seem to understand that they behave the same way in Canada. A majority is typically ignorant of minority ways. White Americans know little of black Americans. Americans know little about Canadians. English Canadians know little about French Canadians. Men know little about women. In general, a majority feels that the minorities are always complaining. "What is it they want now?" I am not off topic. I still believe that if an English-speaking Canadian learns functional French, he or she becomes a little more understanding about the world, and in particular what it's like to be a member of a minority. Do you think an American can ever understand what it's like to be a Canadian on this continent?

I will pause from your nonsense to say that I too would prefer to live in an ideal world of an insane hijacker, upset with a contract and demotion, who enters a building with a gun or two.The fire fighters who died in those buildings in NYC, did you see that? Have you been to NYC? Have you seen the hole that was left? Are you clueless? We didn't provoke them. We did nothing wrong. We are all like those firemen on the World Trade stairway. We are all like those people on the Madrid trains. We are all like the children in that Russian school. How have you explained this to kids in Canada you know? Now, what should we do?

You are mistaken, and wrong. I don't know if you are Canadian, but you are very naive about life.

Reading your post makes me feel good to be "Canadian" again. Thanks Idealist!The CBC is NPR, financed heavily by the Canadian Federal Government. The same whackos get free rein, but on taxpayer money. Radio-Canada? Une autre histoire. In Canada, we get NPR in two languages everywhere! Is all this a good thing? Interesting talk and no ads. No requests for donations. Imagine if American blacks had their own cable/radio channel. I like CBC, but it drives me nuts. Radio-Canada is maybe normal. (Detestable Europe parachuted here.) Canadians get a chance to listen/see this across the country. Go figure.

Let me think about your post in general.But you are right about one point. Landry, Parizeau, Johnson, Bouchard, Bourassa, Marois have all sent kids to English/international school. True?

This case touches me personally. I don't know what to think exactly. As a poster to this forum, I suspect that Canadians are smug about this. "I'm OK but these other places have trouble." Extreme smugness? "The rich in these places have caused these problems." One CBC report I heard? "The Russians have provoked these terrorists to kill these children. The Russians have been despicable in Chechnya." My honest concern? I know well the metro station in Moscow where the woman killed herself, along with others. I phoned and was relieved. My colleagues in Quebec are clueless.

If I understand, it is worse. The child is in French immersion but in an English school commission. The State wants to put the child into a French school system.eureka, what power should the State have over children? Should children living in BC have the right to study in Arabic, and learn the Koran? Should children in Quebec have the right to study in English? Should children in Canada have the right to learn the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag? I don't know. What restriction should the State impose? What right should we all defend? You seem upset that a child can't enrol in an English majority school. (The child will learn English, by the way.) You raise a good question eureka.

Let me lower the temperature. French Canada understands the facts, extremely well. You are right. But many Canadians don't live near Quebec, as you note. So, that's not a good reason to learn French. I agree. Japanese? Chinese? Russian? Korean?Are you clueless? Let me explain. Children in BC should learn a second (or third) language. Why? Because learning another language means opening a different box to existence. The issue is not "leading language". The issue is thinking outside the box, but in a way that does not discourage. It's hard to learn Japanese, mathematics, Chinese or Korean. Spanish and French are easier, and even useful. French is spoken in Canada and it has Les Misérables. Ever read it? Germinal, know it? In the original? Try it. IME, English Canadians do well speaking French in front of Americans, and Japanese. Try it.

Thelonius Monk says it well: Greg, you want our opinion? God gave you a mouth, use it. Ask. Opinion.... The dialog box is dumb. Ask our opinion, and we'll PM you or post. You wanna know what guests think? They're not gonna say. Be serious.

I sincerely apologize for my sarcasm, the lowest form of humour. My error. Sorry.The government needs money. How to get it? I suggest that taxes creating the least foolishness are the best. For the government, taxes which raise the most revenue with the least hassle are the best. Same idea. Estate taxes (inheritance taxes) do not meet that criteria. The government gets little and people go into contortions. Lesson? The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Contribute greatly to the economy? Since when do little bits of paper contribute to the economy? This is mindless gibberish, typical of Leftist thinking. You are confusing money and wealth, symbol and reality. Think, for Godsakes think of the consequences.You know that when you die, everything you have accumulated in life will go to the State. So, first everyone gives it to the kids (or a charity) before they die. (Think of the consequences of that for old people.) So, the State figures a way to stop that - and collect all the dough. So, why bother accumulating anything? Just enough to live on and nothing more! After all, the State is going to take it anyway. (Now think of the consequences of that!) Thank God your suggestion flies in the face of the human genome! The State taxes us now in a variety of ways: income tax, sales taxes, pension premiums, property taxes, capital gain taxes, EI, health premiums, corporate taxes. The State forces us to buy things (air bags) whether we want to or not. So, why not impose an estate tax (inheritance tax) too? No one likes to pay taxes and indeed, everyone would prefer to avoid them. It's the crazy things people will do to avoid a tax that determine whether a tax is good or not. An estate tax is an invitation to absolute foolishness. It's not a good tax.

She was no sacrificial lamb. She was a suicidal lemming.The best account of the 1993 campaign is the short description in Crosbie's "No Holds Barred". Campbell brought her boyfriend on the campaign bus and then the two canoodled. She showed up late or unprepared for events. The PCs chose her because they thought she would be a deus ex machina. Instead, she was a flake. Under the glare of media attention, this became obvious and the PCs tanked. Remember Jerry Brown, Governor Moonbeam? How about Howard Dean? Both might sound articulate in a half hour interview too. I agree with MH. Canadian federal politics are driven at the moment by regionalism. There is a streak of anti-Americanism in Canada's urban centres.

To be perfectly honest, I paid little to no attention to these two conventions. I heard radio snippets of speeches. It is obvious however that there were thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of protesters in NYC. I didn't hear about any protesters in Boston. (Were there any?) Conclusion? The anti-Bush, Leftist Dems comprise people who want to make a lot of noise. The pro-Bush, Right Wing Republicans are quiet. Why? Are Dems younger and more boisterous? Are Republicans old-fogeys? In any case, I'd have to say that the Right Wing is more respectful. Here's another question: Who would get the better hearing and more respect? One lone right wing person in a crowd of leftists or one lone leftist in a crowd of right wingers. The Left innately considers that the Right is the "dominant ideology" and hence the Left must use whatever means are necessary to make its opinions heard. The Right smugly considers the Left to be wrong-headed. I'm inclined to view left wingers as more shrill, less polite and too often intolerant. The Left has the proselytizers natural desire to spread the word of "socialism" (or "democratic socialism" or whatever). They are crusaders.

It is hard to imagine a country where children do not study a second or third language. Even in the US, children study a second language. Learning another language opens a different view of the universe and ultimately makes one more tolerant. This past summer, many Canadian kids spent time abroad or in Canada in various language exchange programs. These are memories and anecdotes the kids will remember their whole lives. In Europe and Asia, it is common to meet people who speak three or more languages. And the fluency level is often very good. About 75% of Dutch and Swedes speak English and a high percentage speak German as well. What second or third language to learn? Japanese and Chinese are difficult languages for a westerner. French and Spanish at least have some points in common with English. In addition, French is used in Canada. I doubt whether English Canadians learning French will make a big difference in any future referendum (although Parizeau often refers to that weekend in Montreal in 1995...) However, if English Canadians had an appreciation of the situation of the French language in North America, the federalist case in Quebec might be made easier. No one is afraid to take a bus in Montreal because of bulky kids. The whole pie? What possible pie are you talking about? You don't have to go back to 1760. Canadian history since 1760 is largely a series of efforts to assimilate the French speaking minority. These were not successful. Are they a number yet?

IMHO, those are good answers, MH. The "traditional" difference between the two countries is that the US has a "violent" past - revolution, civil war whereas Canada has a "peaceful" past - negotiated independence from the UK, "peace, order and good government". I would add that Canada's population is about 50% Catholic (not all practicing) whereas the US population is about 20% Catholic. In addition, the black population in the United States creates a unique minority with a unique history.

But corporations just want to make profits. If there's money to be made in broadcasting demos or interviewing participants, the corporations will do it.Maybe the problem is that the demonstrators are no longer newsworthy.