CANADIEN

Considering this is what we have, this shows AGAIN how clueless you are.

I forgot... it's federal subsidies that got the Acadians through the Deportation. Thanks for reminding me that I am not Canadian and do not pay taxes. :lol:

Nice statistics.

Bagdad Bob was merely over-optimistic.

Hear Hear

whowhere belongs to his own one-person group, and language, ethnicity or location have nothing to do with what it is.

The sentencing circles were, if I remember well a link by someone else, first recommend by white judges who felt that they knew little about the First Nations communities they had to deal with, and wanted a way to get the community involved. As an advisory mechanism, and for dealing with minor crimes, I think this is a model worth expanding beyond First Nation communities. Having the culprit sit in front members of his/her own community and have them tell him/hher what type of punishment or comoensation should be handed can, when it's well done, have a deeper impact than a decision rendered by a judge.

Right you are on the fact that France's strategy was centered on the Continent. At the same time, fact is Great Britain's main weapon was its Navy; during that war it effectively dominated the seas. Whowhere got one sentence right. It's so rare, let's not get that away from him.

You are right, for once. Too bad the rest of the posting is your typical non-sense.

Here's a novel concept. Let the First Nations decide themselves what they want their future to be.

Sentencing circles are a mechanism designed to involve community input in sentencing of criminals. It is clear that in this case the circle missed the boat by recommending that the man be set free.. But we have had judges in the past making the same kind of mistake. And juries. And Crown Attorneys. The fact that the wrong recommendation was made in this case is not sufficient reason to throw out the concept.

Speaking of improperly structured sentences... I will readily admit that I am the King of typos (in French too). I will also admit that my sentences structures sometimes betray that English is not my first language. Not that I have any problem with people knowing that I am a Francophone. BTW, what's YOUR excuse for the way you butcher your own language?

The opinions your express are insulting indeed. And not just to Quebecers or any French-speaking Canadians. Because their country is CANADA. You shall never get it.

I'm an Ontarian. Fiscal transfers to Quebec is not what helped us survive forced unilingual schools. No more that it helped the Acadians survive the Deportation. Besides, let's not fool ourselves shall way. After your expressed wih that the language issue would have been solved 250 years ago, yoou don't expect me to believe money is the primary factor behind that wish, do you?

Not getting it, as usual. The argument by Peter F., and some sovereignist (which I clearly disagree with), is that commemoration of the Battle is used TODAY, in 2009, to insult Quebecers. Not the battle, its commemoration.

Different indeed. What Wilber wrote was clear enough that nobody was left wondering what he meant. Unlike what you wrote. :lol: Learn to write.

Good for you if your treashold is higher than mine.. In my book, any threat of physicla violence for political motives is a terror tactic.

Too bad that the damn Frenchies still refuse to draw proper conclusion and insit on not assimillating, right?

Care to translate into something that makes sense in the English language, please?

Interesting that the "opening" of the West through fur trade routes by Englsih-speaking merchants in Montreal was done using FRENCH-Canadian coureurs-des-bos as manpowers, on routes they had had used before the Conquest, and that had been used by the First Nations before them.

I'lll let the French deal with their own business. I am a French-speaking CANADIAN. Yet a number of U.S. States have declared English to be their official language, and there is movement to make it the country's official language. I wonder what is th\ge threat English is facing... BTW, you've heard about residential schools and their American and Austtralian equivalents, have you. On how French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec have been denied the right to be educated in their CANADIAN language until the 1970's and 1980;s. As for the U.K....The British government imposed the English language in Ireland, Wales, Scotland, through methods that make Quebec's language laws look timid in comparison (and my opinion on Quebec language laws is well known). If, as I suspecy, what you want is a Canada where there is no status for the french language, please di yiurself a favour and do not hide behind Quebec langauge laws that stop short of what you want to do.

People who "do not have to work" (either because they're on welfare, or because they're retired, hor rich and idle) copulate all day -- you could back that one up with statistics?

Still being around 250 years later is not what I would call a failure. Whining against equality of right, as some do, IS a sign of failure.

Facts and logic are poisonous to you, oh surprise. It is my pleasure to know that long after both you and I are gone French will still be an official language of Canada, those First Nations cultures that haeve not gone over the point of non-return will be flourishing, and that peayers for the well-being of our great CANADA will be offered in mosques every Friday, ***** Which brings me to one of the topics of the original posting... The issue of an employer requesting its female employees to wear certain clothing as a security measure. Freedom of religion, including the freedom to live in a manner conform to the tenets fo that religion, is an essential right in this country. Essential, but not absolute. Workplace safety if all emplyees is also an important principle. In this case, the requirement by the employer is a resonable one, that does not infringe on the religious freedom of the employees. The employees are free to not li and they have every right to protest it using the mechanisms offered by the law. That does not mean they shoud win and, on this very specific issue, they shouldn't.

So now we have a victory for the terror tactics of people who see history as a tool to play the victims. Too bad for them, but I plan to celebrate on September 13, 1759. Yes CELEBRATE... the fact that French-speaking cultures and their language are still alive in my country, on this continent 250 years later. Those sovereignists who would rather keep scratching old wounds so they can say "see, we're still bleeding" should look at how healthy the body actually is. No surprise, the demands have not stopped. Now, they should not be any commemoration of any kind in Quebec this year. No exhibit, no tours, no historians' conference. And of course, management of the Plains should now be turned over to a Quebec provincial agency. Good thing there's St.-Jean=Baptiste Day and they need the Plains for the show; otherwise they would demand that the whole park be turned into a giant parking lot - what a better to erase memory. **** On a related nnte. I have seen on other sites, the (unsurprising) display of the "let's licl Quebec out", "Canada belongs to us, not the French", "they should be grateful that we did not just deport them", "we won, you lose and don't you forget it" garbage. Apart from the threat to violence, that's not better than the "people playing war on the Plains of Abraham is humiliating" whining. At least, I did not get that type of crap on this thread.