CANADIEN

If emigration is the sign of a "failed" culture (afavorite argument of the "one immigrant is too many immigrants" crowd), then what was the exact nature of Europe's failure in the 19th century?

There are two practical reasons why capital punishment should be opposed. First, it is not a deterrant. True, somebody who is executed will not kill again, but execution does nothing to prevent the first muder. The only true deterrant for a criminal is knowing he/she will be caught. Second... well, all I need is names: Truscott, Marshall, Morin. Sure, one can argue that these and other were cases where there were no absolute certainty they were guilty. Problem with that argument is that, if we take Truscott as an example, absolute certainty as to his guit at the time he was tried and convicted. Add to that the fact that members of minorities and marginalized groups are more likely to be executed - not from bias, mind you, but because they are less likely to be able to get adequate representation. The risk (and reality) of innocent people being executed is just too high to justify it.

A little under 200000, according to the 2006 census. And French-speaking communities have been there from the beginning of Erupean settlement. Really. And really nothing to do with capital punishment, so care to say anything on the issue?

Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, and John Cruickshank, publisher of the Toronto Star (link)

You're an imbecile

You communist-Nazi-Fascit-racist you. How do you DARE remind Leafless of what he actually said?

Yes. And I have never said there was any official definition of national languages in Canada. You want one, find it and provide it. Indeed, any idiot would "know" that. Thanks for removing any doubt people may have had about you.

Racial discrimination does exists. But equality of linguistic rights is not a discrimination, as you are too clueless to know, KKK wannabe. I didn't know the the French Languages Service Act (which as you should know was adopted UNANYMOUSLY by the Ontario Legislative Assembly) applied outside of Ontario. More seriously, feel free to show the section of the Official Languages Act (federal) that addresses delivery of services by provincial governments. And btw, how do policies such as Ontario's Regulation 17 that BANNED French from public schools for a full generation fit with your claim that Englishwas never imposed? I'll keep asking until you answer.

You forget the part about this being what YOU want to be done in Ontario. I won't recopy all you posted, but will point out a few places where your hypocrisy and cluelessness show. 1) technically, Quebec language laws do not violate federal law or the Charter. Still a pile of m*nure, btw 2) Actually, Quebec laws were changed in the 1990's to allow SOME English, in line with the UN rule. Still not enough, but more, I suspect, that what you mean when you talk about English being the only official language of business. 3) And your position on French schools in Ontario is? 4) Quebec's, "Right to protect the French language" is in reality (...) similar to your "right to protect the English language" 5) This from the man who whines against NB cops who have the audacity to speak French during a break. 6)This from the guy who claim that "English-speaking jobs are being stolen".

Nope, it doesn't. It limits access to English school, but there are still publicly funded English schools in Quebec. And English is taught as a second language in French schools. On the other hand, there were time in other provinces where the teaching in French or of French was banned. Something I suspect you wouldn't mind see again. And I am still waiting for you to try to justify this, especially since this kind a `protection for the english language`is not needed according to you. Never said anything about France being innocent or guilty. Especially since, as you should know full well by now, I am not French, but Canadian. I am still waiting for you to justify past provincial government practices that banned French from public schools.

Why don't YOU post where it says officially that Canada is only one national language, English?

darn another dup... deleted

deleted dup

Only problem (for you) is that it has been demonstrated (to those who have a clue) that the so-called "discrimination" only exists in your prejudiced mind. Clueless again. With the exception of New Brunswick (at it's own request), provincial governments are NOT compelled to provide services in French. Clueless again. Federal services are provided in English in quebec on the same basis as they are provided in French in the rest of the country. Mind you, if you have proof that federal services in Quebec are provided in English only when the English-speaking population is the local majority, give it to the BQ. They have been arguing for years for it to happen. In school. And I though Francophones in this country learned english naturally.

One is murder, the other one is refusing to engage in an illegal act. You DO need better.

No, we will only spread the TRUTH that the man was elected Mayor of Calgary in a democratic election. Now, admit it, if the man's name as Smith you wouldn't get into a frenzy, now would you?

The job of a soldier is more than just obeying orders, especially when he/she believes, and has good reasons to believe, that an order is illegal. For political reasons, noone would have dared bringing the issue of the legality of the Iraq war to the International Court of Justice. Had the issue been brought before the ICJ, the same Bush Government that found a way to make torture "legal" would likely have declared itself not bound by any decision made by the Court. The lack of political will to tackle the issue does not make the war legal, and justifies the decisions made by these soldiers to follow their informed conscience.

The doubts about the legailty of the Iraqi war are based on more than the personal opinion of the soldiers in question. Although the International Court of Justice has nver been asked to rule on the legality of the war, there is no lack of international law experts, such as the Internation Commission of Jurists, who have expressed the opinion that the war was not legal. Even legal opinions received by the British Government before the war questioned its legality. More than enough to justify refusal of orders these soldiers had solid grounds to consider illegal.

No need to be a judge either to know that the legality of the Iraqi was doubtful.

No need to be a judge to know the difference between right and wrong.

Agreed. Trying to pin responsibility forthese horrible crimes on either current or past government is not even cheap politics. It's lunacy.

There is a difference between a soldier who refuses to continue serving when faced with orders (like deploying in Iraq) they consider to be immoral and people who murder abortion providers. If that's the best you can come with, then you don't have much to start with.

Interesting... I just realized that your "English-only allowed" reminds me of a practice called internal passports. People could only live in certain parts of their country... STALIN'S USSR was one of the first countries to perfect it.

Clueless again. French-speaking Canadians who wants to work in the federal public service are subjected to the same language requirements as English-speaking Canadians. English as a second language is taught in French-language schools (actually, more than French as a seconf language in English language school). By YOUR definition, French-speaking Canadians are being forced to learn English through racist language policy. Don't worry, those who have a clue know better. BTW, care to try to explain how the fact that various Canadian provinces have had throughout their histry policies banning French from schools fit with your claim that Francophones were never forced to learn English? You keep dodging that one, so I'll keep asking.

Wrong (as is a tradition with you). The BNA clauses on equal status in federal instutitons says it all.... Federal institutions. Clauses regarding languages in the BNA have to dowith equal status for English and French, as does official bilingualism. Ever heard of the Canada Act, 1982, passed by the Birtish Parliament in 1982? text here Please feel free to read as we marvel again as how clueless you are. You'll notice, by the way, that the act was passed in both English AND French (the first Act passed in French by the British Parliament since the Middle Ages).