CANADIEN

Right now, I am saying it to the guy who would deny me my identity as a Canadian. That would be YOU. I know there's dysfunction and corrupt behaviour. respect for the rights of Canadians is not a sign of it, on the contrary.

See, you can get facts once in a while. Yep, equal status is bias. But well, you got one fact right earlier... Now, would I say or think there should not be public services in English in Ottawa? :lol: Now, if you think that the closing of the Grace Hospital means that health services in English in Ottawa are insufficient, feel free to show how.

Didn't know it. Mind you, when it's a poll or an attempt to sell me something, the call doesn't last long enough for anyone to ask that type of question. :lol:

Yep. they were no doubt shown a video, and medical information, etc., etc., given two hours to think about it, consult a lawyer, signed a release form stating they were volunteering. :lol: Here's how it happens. The guy is dragged into a room, tied up, told "Talk", refuses, has a cloth or a bag placed over his mouth and nose, and water is poured. They volunteer all right.

It's Canada. Time you realize it.

The hospitals in ottawa existed BEFORE Mike Harris. :lol: I don't see how the fact that all Ottawa hospitals are affiliated to the one University providing medical training in Ottawa is relevant, but who cares. As for Grace Hospital: are you arguing that there is no sufficient health services in English in Ottawa? Now, to what will no doubt surprise you, but not those who know me... If it had been me, the Ottawa Hospital and the Queensway-Carleton hospital would be primarilly English-speaking. The existence of the Montford Hospital is sufficient for most of the health needs of Ottawa's French-language population, and besides the concentration of service there would result in a better service.

I have heard both. The last one who tried the "Speak Canadian", as a joke mind you, had his ears rining for three weeks.

The basic reasoning of any person should be. I'll decide what second language(s) I want to learn, but I won't whine about the doors my choice may close.

How a language is more pervasive than another, or more easily it is (or is not) to learn, is IRRELEVANT. So is where in Canada (or anywhere else for that matter), a government employee is from. Unless you can prove me otherwise, the senior positions you are talking about are occupied by CANADIANS. Period. Of course, I fully expect you to claim that your point is only about how mkany postitions should require English and french and whether it should be at all level. YOUR problem is that I do not buy Florida swampland. I wonder: what would be the reaction if I said: "if language skills are not important, I suppose there would be no problem with an unilingual francophone rising the ranks to become Deputy Minister".

Two years ago, the small Quebec village of Hérouxville made news with a "Code of conduct" for immigrants. Inspired by this, let me propose a code of conduct for me and other "Frenchmen" who are passing through provinces other than Quebec. In no particular order: 1. There is one Canadian language, English. There is one true Canadian culture, and it is English (and includes American idol, Britney Spears, etc., etc.) 2. If someone says you're French, don't take it as meaning you are not Canadian, even when that's the exact meaning of the person saying it. 3. Your country is Canada. Unless you want equal status for English and French, in which case your country is Quebec only. 4. You're from Quebec. Your ancestors may have been deported with the other Acadians, or you may own a eight-geneation farm not too far from Windsor, but you are still from Quebec. 5. You can use your language any time and anywhere. But anyone who has a problem with it is entireloy justified in letting you know in as rude and threatening fashion as they want to. 6. You shall receive equal access to government services. In English. Except in the cases where someeee of us decide that a favour should be done to you. 7. Your taxes can be used to found French schools, as long as you pay extra. 8. If you seek a job in the federal government, know that in most cases what language(s) yo9u can use is irrelevant, as long as it is English. 9. You have the same rights as any other Canadians, in English. 10. The Charter of Rights is a bad, bad, bad thing.

Less we forget... Federal government services in both our national languages , and access to education in either of thse two languages is preferential treatment for those who speak one of them.... Strike one. Equal status for French and English equates dominence of French... Strike two, The requirement that a number of positions be held by people who can speak and write French AND[/b] English is in fact a requirement that they can speal French, and who cares about English. Strike three. A great career awaits you at Yuk!Yuk!

So that's a "I don't write a list of garbage dump so I can quote their names 10 years later". The problem is that the only thing you accept as truth are those that feed your hostility towards equall rights for French-speaking Canadians.

Rather a brick than a piece of garbage. Of course, if only I stood and applauded when people tell me I am not Canadian, that my language is not Canadian enough, that I should not expect government services in that language, that I should go back to a place I am not from, that the English language (of all things) is threatned in Ontario, that the Charter of Rights is wrongs beause it protects rights, etc., etc., etc. If you believe that Leafless' position would change if only people stopped treating it like the cr*p and the joke it is, I now have TWO pieces of swampland in Florida to sell to you.

YOUR problem, like the problem with everything you write on the poor, immigrants, gays, etc., is that people can and do read what you write. Yes, if only we "the French" knew our place and stayed there. Interesting, isn't it, that I know dozens upon dozens of English-speaking Ontarians who have been to Quebec and only had good things to say about their experience, while I know more than a few people who have been harassed, insulted, threatened in public or private for daring to speak French outside Quebec.

Only an imbecile would call that "volunteering'. End of story.

Geez, when my ancestors were getting off the ship in Quebec city or Port Royal in the 17th century, they look for the custom officers who were suppoed to remind them they had just landed in a British posession... and they looked, and they looked, and they looked. Or maybe they only arrived after 1760. :lol:

The issue, the sole issue, is the stupidity of your statement. That you say "oh, but if Bush said it was legal, then people who are subjected to it necessarily volunteer for it" makes it even more stupid. :lol: :lol:

The issue is not the "legality" or lack thereof of the actions, but the stupidity of your statement. dig enough, and you'll find that the Vietnamese probably had a law making torture of war prisioners legal. The political opponents to the nazi regime who were sent to Dachau were sent there under German law, and their treatment was "legal". They must have volunteered for it by refusing to obey the regime. Same with Stalin's, Mao's, Pol Pot's victims, among others. All volunteered for it by not doing, not saying or not being what they were told. If you had any shred of common sense, you'd back down before sugmitting yourself to more ridicule. You won't.

A woman is getting rape. she told to shut up, or she will die. She screams, she's killed, she volunteered to die. A bank clerk is told to give the money or being shot at. He refuses, he ends in the hospital for three weeks. He volunteered for it. John McCain was beaten when he first refused to "confess" to being a war criminal. He volunteered for the beatings. How many other examples of how inredibly stupid your statement was are needed?

The talk show host volunteered. As for your claim that a prisoner, who is told "talk or else" and says no has actually volunteered for torture. I have read some fairly stupid stuff on this site. This is on the top 3.

Cooperate and you will not be submitted to a form of physical handling that; - causes your senses to make you believe you are drowning - can cause extreme pain - can cause lung damage - can cause brain damage It IS torture, no matter how you put it.

Indeed.

The stupidity is in actually believing this is just semantics. Those who think that French is not a Canadian language like English is, that French-speaking Canadians should be treated like second class citizens without their rights as Canadians, who wants Quebec out, and who believe that French-speakers outside Quebec are all from Quebec, and that they belong only im Quebec, those people who would tell you in public "speak Canadian" - these people are not engaging iin a semantic exercise. And neither do I.

The answer is simple. I was NOT trying to make it look like you were saying something that makes sense, since nobody would believe that in the first place. I was borrowing your sentence structure to site a fact - you know, that kind of thing that you keep ignoring? Like in this latest gem of yours. You have of course the stats that "proves" that the majority of the students enrolled in the French-language medical school aaat the University of Ottawa are from Quebec? Or is it, as usual, nothing more than the same old and frankly ridiculous argument "if they speak french, they're from Quebec". Next proof of your misunderstanding of what you write or post: the fact that your quote is actually from the BMO aside, there is certainly nothing there that indicates that a preference is given to students from Quebec, quite the contrary. And then we have this: A complete and factual sentence would have include "because until not that long ago there was no way French-speaking Ontarians could receive medical training in French in Ontario. The more of them can receive that training in their own language in Ontario, the less hospitals like Montford will need to rely on doctors from Quebec". And then we have the "best" of the lot. A recent study of the Fraser Institute (and their methodology was not that great imo, estimated the TOTAL "cost" of official bilingualism by ALL governments to be 1.8 billion dollars a year... and one third of it would be from the Government of Ontario alone? More than the federal government, more than the New Brunswick government? I'd love to see your methodology, would make for a great laugh fest. In real English, we woulkd be talking about 21r organizations and agencies designated to provide services in French. But the real fact of the matter is - like it or not, now that french-speaking Ontarians know it is not against the law to obtain provincial services in French,there will be more and more places where they are available. Sorry for you, but that kind of things happen when the rights of the individual are respected.

Especially when the 17% are all Canadians. As are the remaining 83% of course.