CANADIEN

Jupiter told you that in the Bible, right?

You got me. I have no excuse for thinking something I actualy DO NOT think. Oh BTW, I love the way you ignored half of what I was saying. Remind me of the way some say "it was an important event" in one posting and "it was just a battle" in the next.

They should not, and you know that's my opinion on the topic. Now, why should French-speaking Canadians have to endure bigotry when they exercise their normal rights to federal government services in French? Indeed. Let's keep that in mind next time some municipalities in BC try to force the use of English on business signs.

I wonder what is the English translation of "cultural period". Does not change the fact that what Hitler intended and implemented was genocide.

And it is the battle that resulted in the French colony getting other roeign control, nothing less. Because the attitude of the Orangist movement is still alive in this country today. But when people point out that it was a major event that change the course of their society, and that they would rather forget it, the answer is "it was just a battle, get over it".

Or course. As long as the Frenchies understood that once they stepped outside of Quebec they and their Canadian language had second-class status.

And of course, Iam a whiner for pointing out to the stupidity of such a comment.

The line about reminding the sovereignists about who won the battle looks pretty clear to me. As the two others, and that detritus of a Post editorial, no need for separatists to do anything to get that kind of answer. The simple continuous existence of French language is enough for some to demonstrate their frustration that French-speaking Canadians are now their equals. Note that I said some, not all. But there is no doubt in my mind the Post is in this case continuing its "fine" tradition of strident, arrogant and unjournalistic attacks - it started years ago when Dianne Francis was wiritng things like "they can speak English anyway" about French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec. I have said in the past, and I will make clear again, that the separatist movement is misguided, and that some in particular need to get a life. But those who whine "kick Quebec out" are equaly misguided. If their frustration is justified, so is the frustration of those who after 200 centuries of being treated as second class citizens had enough of Canada (and I don't think either is justified). And those who scream "bloody murder" about a bunch of would be historians re-enacting an old battle are not that much worse, threats of violence aside, than those who whine about French on their cereal boxes or it being spoken in goivernment offices.

The program Hitler had in mind and executed is not called cultural dominance. It's called genocide. The same way it can easily be argued that 1+1 = 3. You don't get it. Now THAT'S cultural dominance. And as you suggested earlier. Feel free to bring the topic back to the issue of hatred towards Jews.

Did I say anyone here said I should take it? Nope, although Argus seem to have a problem with me not taking it. You read my postings on this and other threads, and you tell me.

Some of the gems I saw a few days back on the Globe and Mail and CTV Websites, and elsewhere: "Maybe it is time that La Belle Province fall off of our wonderful Canadian map." "Perhaps the separatists need to be reminded of the outcome of that battle?" "It's time to end official bilingualism". Far from me to claim they represent anything but the opinion of a few people, but that opinion exists nonetheless and I do not have to, nor will I, take it.

Yes really. You will notice that I have not said, nor as anyone claimed, that any English-speaking Canadians have threatened violence. But there are some, here and elsewhere, who have made it clear that they want to use the whole episode to remind the "Frogs" that they are the boss and kick them out if necessary. Feel free to lower yourself by ignoring or siding with them if that suits you. And yes, I have enough of it. And the hypocrisy of those who complain about Quebec's language laws then whine there's too much French. And the morons who call people names, insult them, threatened they have the audacity of speaking French in public. The unsophisticated and uneducated idiots. And spare yourself the embarassement of wiriting "that's what Quebcers do too". First, what I wrote is also what I think of any imbecile who goes nuts every time they see English on a business sign. Second, it would only show your hypocrisy.

Now that I think about it, paeanoid is an apt decription for the National Post.

I wouldn't have guessed. And I believe in Santa Claus... I know from experience that most of time it reverts back to one thing...The fact that French-speaking Canadians speak French. This coming the the chief islamophobe anti-immigrant poster on this site, who advocates a return to slavery. :lol: My feeling about you exactly. And who claim to say the contrary. Certainly not me. Nor would I tell you how to view it. So don't go tell others how they are supposed to view it.

Except that now the Post has made it clear that they think Quebecers has to be reminded of who is the boss.

And I am fed up eith the "you shall view the past as we see it, or else" and the "we are the boss and don't you forget it" BS.

Nobody here is talking about anyone having to feel guilty about an event that took place 250 years ago. If anything, there is an expectation by some that Quebecers should feel ashamed for not viewing the past the way other Canadians see it. I for one am not a big fan of using the past as a way to play the victim, but how they view their past is their business.

The problem with the position examplified by the National Post is not that its proponents want the re-enactment to go ahead, but the reason why they want it to proceed. It is one thing to say "it's just a re-enectment" or "that battle was 250 years a go, get over it:, It's quite different when a newspaper editorial wants the re-enectment to go ahead as a way to remind people of who is the boss.

I have been one who, from the startm had said the re-enactment should be viewed by everyone as what it was, an occasion for week-end would be historians to play soldiers. The accusations that the whole thing was yet an other attempt by the "big bad Anglo government in Ottawa" to humiliate Quebecers are non-sense. And it would be nice if the fixation on the Conquest was put on the back burner. And then, there are things like that National Post piece of trash of an editorial. What a better reminder that there are people who view events such as re-eneacting the Battle of the Plains of Abraham as a way of reminding Quebecers of "who is the boss". Then of course, some of those same people will tell opponents of the re-enectment to mature while showing they themselves don't have the maturity necessary to go above good 'ole francophobia. While they say :it's just a re-enactment of a battle from long ago, get over it", people like the Post editorialists act like hard-core Orangists on the eve a new parade season. How Qyebecers and French-speaking Canadians see the past is their own business, and they do not need lessons on that from those who, through their bigoted words and actions, are doing their outmost to prove the "the Anglos still try to dominate us" crowd right.

Good riddance. From the start, his handling of the whole thing, in particular the way he was selling the event, was dismal.

Brcause we, the Canadian people, through our elected represetatives, have not seen fit to abolish it. I wished it was abolished, but I don't particularly care about who signs on the laws. And what's your problem with that, apart from your disappointment that the Queen signed on the Constitutional Act, 1982? And on top of that, she can speak French...

You have a problem with parliamentary democracy. Oh surprise.

Actually, the Constitution clearly tates that each provincial legislature can pass laws modifying the province's internal constitution (with limits). And most people would admit that the act you quoted is not quite constitutional in nature. :lol: Are you trying to compete with whowhere as to who will write the most stupid statement on this thread. Says a lot about him that even that sentence of yours does not come close to his ranting.

You got something almost right... The Canadian Parliament is comprised of the House of Commons, the Senate and the Crown. Which in Canada does NOT include the British Parliament. And I am sick and tired of seeing the Leafs win the Cup year after year. To each his/her own delusion. Considering this is pretty much what we already (apart from the removal of the Crown and getting rid of the notwhitstanding clause), there is no need for a Constutitional Assembly. The bit about other reforms though... why don't you just spell it out; it would start with No French, no non-white immigration, no First Nations and no human rights.

Leafs fans... prejudice against them is justified on the basis of their lack of knowledge of real hockey.