CANADIEN

Are you claiming you know what I desire? Whatever. Please let me know when you have something to say about the topic at hand. I mean, beyond not being able to make the difference between French and Canadian and holding a grudge because I didn't like one of your postings.

Leafless has now "decided" that I am seeking to destroy English-speaking culture because I hate it. He will never get it. Whatever.

Yet of another of saying "the Aboriginals Cartier met emitted sounds, they didn't have words".Whatever.

Less we forget that Quebec is not part of Canada. And of course we shall not mention that little thing about attempts at FORCED assimilation of French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec.

Yep

Apart from the French, they all emit sounds, they don't speak.

Hear Hear

The fact Cartier and others after him wrote down the words the Aboriginals said is not documenting a language, because as we all know Aboriginals are like crows, unable to form words and therefore have a language, written or not. Whatever. Like the Aboriginals didn't have words, and the French and Aboriginals are not of the same species. Whatever.

More than 200000 people were on the Plains, including many from the U.S. I am sure those were not aware they were supporting racist language policies during an un-Canadian celebration... err I mean helping humiliate Quebecers by attending a show by a British artist... whatever.

When I meet someone trying to do that, I'll ask him/her.

The federal government cannot prevent the use of the notwithstanding clause by provincial legislatures. Period. The Government of Canada has a responsibility to protect the fundamental rights of ALL Canadians. Sadly, it is limited in what it can do about provincial government initiatives.. And since Quebec's language laws are, to use your own words, racist, that would make those policies racist. Make up your mind. Go say that to the Franco-Ontarians, the New-Brunswick Acadians, the Franco-Manitobans, the Ojibwe, the Cree, the Dene, the Tinglit, the Inuit... Mind you, they won't say propagated, they'll say IMPOSED. I am a Canadian, and I see no reason to move. And you can do nothing about that, or the fact I have rights as a Canadian and I exercise them.

It can't, and you haven't provided anything that says otherwise. As usual, you don't get it. It is not all you are advocating. Remember? The only official language of commerce... Your own words. And all know you mean doing the upmost to limit, even prohibit, use of kanguages other than English.

Yeah right.

The guy mocked you and you fell in the hole, revealing your true thinking in the process.

Don't blame me for the fact you insult logic in such a way that you become just plain laughable. As for the debate, you lost it the moment you started it, even beofre anyone here responded to your non-sense.. You do not even remember saying the courts made them remove it? No wonder that you are clueless, you can't remember what you said. Which should serve as you warning to you of what would await YOUR dream of a similar law. And we all know YOU want something even worse than those laws.

Go ahead... dig your own hole deeper and deeper. Whatever.

They just shouldn't be allowed to use it in commerce, unless it's English, right? Yeah right. Whatever.

Make up your mind. You claim "personal attack" everytime someone attacks YOUR racist language policy. Yet, chaos is exactly what you promote.

They do, as much as Quebec language laws you want to imitate while changing the world French to English in them then make them even worse.

:lol: :lol: Whatever. Once again, you prove your outstanding lack of knowledge. Again, Parliamentary Library Contrary to what you claim, what the Quebec legislaature did was to INVOKE, not withdraw its use of, the notwithstanding clause in response to a Supreme Court judgement. You will also note that, as I said, the notwithstanding clause would be need to protect YOUR pile of m*nure.

Considering that riots are a well established French political tradition, it could be argued that this how young Muslim immigrants choose to integrate. Now, the French government is perfectly free to push the notion of securalism to the point of banning virtually any display of religious identity (not that I agree with them), but would they apply the same criteria to evangelical Christian immigrants who demonstrated every Saturday morning on the Cahmps-Elysées that France is gonna be destroyed by God's wrath? After all, extreme secularism should apply in an uniform fashion.

So now people can not even decide which Canadian language they can use to express their Canadian identity? :lol: Languages have authority? Whatever. We all know that for you the Charter should be reduced to 10 words... Leafless' language, culture, religion, sexual orientation good, everything else forbidden. And you obviously do not know what you're talking about (as usual). The very reason why Premiers of provinces other than Quebec wanted the notwithstanding clause in the Constitution is that it can be used to protect laws from being struck down by the courts, or override court decisions, for as long as it is invoked for that particular law. The courts do NOT get to review the law after five years (unless the clause is not invoked again); nobody can ask or direct a law unless the clause is not renewed. Feel free to show the exact text of the clause in the Constitution that supports your non-sense. You won't, because you can't. And btw, I wouldn't diss the notwinthstanding clause too fast if I were you. That could be the only way you could protect your pile of m*nure if it became law - not that has a chance of ever happening, mind you.

Interestingly, some opiiinion polls that American Muslims are no more likely to feel Muslims first and Americans second that evengelical Christians are to feel Christians first and American second. Or to think that violence that kills civilians can sometimes be justified.

I am no big fan of the burqa... but how another person dresses isss not of my business. And between that and clothing so short you can almost figure the typing font used for the label on the underwear...

I always find it interesting those who scream "our culture is superior" the loudest are the first to reject some of the pillars of western societies when it suits their prejudice: - freedom of expression - freedom to choose how to live one's life - presumption of innocence - fair trials - freedom of religion - fundamental rights