Sir Bandelot

It's possible to have a parliamentary democracy, without a Monarch... One can have both President and Prime Minister, and still have the same system of governance in every other respect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_democracy

That is sheer fantasy, to believe that the process is invalid without their approval. WHat should Canada do if they ever decide to exercise their "Authority"? Is that how this democracy works? No, of course not. Their authority is merely figurative, ceremonial at best. To drop the Monarhcy we just need to remove the ceremonial part.

They wanted a violent response, and preferably on camera. You're right, they got what they wanted. Thats the way the media works- whatever is sensational gets the attention. And they used the media for their advantage. They threw eggs, which is not dangerous but still illegal. ANd they attacked the police, protesters punching, pushing and shoving. This was not intended to be a peaceful protest. The past few decades have shown that peaceful protest is increasingly ineffective, the system has learned to ignore it. It even puts it in a nice box (such as, the designated protest zones at the olympics).

So we can change the oath, so what. Thats the easy part. Whats the hard part?

What if it would be good for the country- the French would accept Canada more if it got rid of the Monarchy. Such Heresy, I know... but just for example

Thats right, but what if it's true, what if Quebecers are against the war. Because I believe statistics show it to be the case. Canwest News Service Monday, Oct. 26, 2009 Residents in Quebec voiced the most opposition to the Canadian mission in the war-torn country, with 68% of those polled in the online survey saying they were against sending troops to Afghanistan. http://www.nationalpost.com/m/story.html?id=2143861

But they are doing exactly what you said people should do in another thread, Army Guy. So which is it, go out and protest against the war for real, or sit on the couch with the remote, and not give a damn. I'm saying, look here, they are doing it. These people are taking up their cause, and trying to say it LOUDLY... not, pacifist.

Not quite. How about- "Quebec is against the war in Afghanistan," said Bourgeois, a member of the pro-independence Reseau de Resistance du Quebecois. "And now it's our chance to pass that message to Prince Charles and many people across Canada." And thats what they did. For that they got media attention, and a beating.

Sorry if I insist on having real, functional government, for my tax dollar. Give us Bread, not Circuses.

The real maudlin show is these two "highnesses" touring the country, with anglophones genuflecting at their feet. But I guess thats just my opinion. I never really was much for parades, either...

Ok, Mr. Canada... Next User ID please

Argus "has more eyes than you", indeed, Argus is full of eyes, round about...

Well it shows that at least Quebecers have a political conscience. But, does it represent the attitudes of many, or is it just a fringe group. I know some people like the royalty, but clearly others don't. And now they may be using this to rally their separatist cause. It's like a thorn in they eye, of the frenchman. So is it time to lose the Monarchy?

Prince Charles' arrival at Mtl regiment delayed because of egg-flying protest Updated: Tue Nov. 10 2009 6:50:52 PM The Canadian Press MONTREAL Prince Charles' visit to a military regiment was marred by scores of slogan-chanting supporters of Quebec independence who blasted the British monarchy and pelted soldiers with eggs Tuesday. Chanting a variety of slogans including the famous independence call, "Le Quebec au Quebecois," about 200 demonstrators intially blocked the prince's path into a event where he was to salute members of a historic regiment. Shield- and baton-wielding riot police eventually moved into the crowd, shoving it back hundreds of ... Patrick Bourgeois, one of the protesters, said the British monarchy has exploited people all over world and that Quebec is no exception. The symbol of the monarchy has been reviled by many French-Canadians for centuries, and Bourgeois and others said members of the Royal Family had no business being in Quebec. Bourgeois also linked the prince's visit with the military mission in Afghanistan which features British and Canadian soldiers. "Quebec is against the war in Afghanistan," said Bourgeois, a member of the pro-independence Reseau de Resistance du Quebecois. "And now it's our chance to pass that message to Prince Charles and many people across Canada." http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20091110/450_riot_police.jpg http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20091110/mtl_royal_riot_091110/20091110?hub=Montreal --- It was on TV. Those Montrealers, they have a great sense of humour...

If we are to call a people "bad" based on the numbers they've killed in a war, Stalin murdered ten times more than Hitler. The US... don't even do body counts no more.

Just like you suffer from no sense of humour, at all.

Thats what the headlines implied. I read the story in detail, and it appears that he contacted the Imam of a certain mosque, and it as the same mosque that some of the 9/11 terrorists went to. But the authorities claimed that he appeared to be doing "research", presumably related to Islam. The article states that "authorities were satisfied" that there was no terrorist related communications going on with the Imam at the time. I think there should be a thorough investigation, and hopefully this won't become too politicized an event, so that they don't end up burying the truth whatever it is. If you want to respect the dead, tone down the rhetoric.

We don't have to wait any longer.

Well I know people who are of German descent, and they bear absolutely no responsibility for what some idiots did in the 1930's. Not all Germans agreed with the war, many were against it such as my friends family. They had to hide from the bombs, just like civilians in other countries did, when the german bombers came there... Since Germany became a dictatorship under Adolph Hitler, who had the army and police under his command. It was a police state. Ordinary Germans who opposed the war were silenced, or imprisoned.

Please see link- http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=15310&view=findpost&p=480758

I don't understand why you folks are getting so worked up over this thread. I give my input without attacking you. Ad-hominem attacks on me will not tolerated.

I see the New Content button has been added and it works well for me now. Thank you to the Admin staff!

That may sadly be true. What is clear right now is that we really know nothing, and are arguing about what we know.

If you wish to be treated with respect, as I expect you would, my advice is to try and show more respect to others yourself. You have accused a few now that they are liars, but people can simply be "mistaken". There is a difference. None of us has a monopoly on the truth, and it's easy in this age of information to be misled, despite what you may think of yourself. It seemed to me earlier that Pliny agreed with you on most points, but you attacked him ad-hominem, which I thought was kind of unfair. His response proves I was right, he did agree with you, largely. It's easy for us to misunderstand each other, in these rambling posts. So best to chill out a little, before you start telling us who can/ cannot be in a discussion...

We are not doing enough to help all soldiers deal with their experience in a war. The number of suicides and mental illness is quite high now, and still on the rise- as I alluded earlier in this thread.