CANADIEN

Oh yes, your wealth of knowledge. There was no francophone in Canada before Trudeau. And your lifestyle and tradition is being destroyed because someone three blocks from you has a mother tongue other than English, goes to a synagugue or a Buddhist temple, and prefers soccer to Maple Leaf hockey (proving by doing so he knows a bad team when he sees one ).

Duh, her job is to determine the need for delivery of Ontario provincial government services in French. Once again, no there is no link between the new definition and the infamous e-mail. None.

Yeah right, the number of people whom the federal government consider to be Francophones (that is, STILL, the number of people whose first language is French and who still understand it) has jsut crossed the threshold determined in the Official Lnaguage Act and regulation for the provision of services in French, so it is a fictional community because some people in that location MAY have lied in the census as to whether or not they understand English. Excuse me while I laugh.

What StatsCan says on its Website and what it said to the Ottawa Citizen was misrepresented. And a newspaper as a esposponsibility not to misrepresent what people say. Period. If YOU did your homework, you would know that the purpose of the e-mail was to give the impression that a substantial number of Francophones cannot speak English.. And I did not say you claimed people were encouraged to lie about what language they speak at home (the point of the new definition). That being said, you keep trying to establish a link between th new definition and the e-mail, when none exist.

You manage to get something right. There was never a Naxi plan to perpetrate genocide against the Hungarians. But then, the Hungarians are not Slavs, and were not occpupying Germany's so-called "living space".

You mean after Germans disguidsed as Poles staged a mock attack pn German soil, right? As for Dantzig, it is a known fact that it was only an excuse for Htiler. His intent was the destruction of Poland. But hey, keep trying to portray poor Adolf as a misunderstood peace-loving bening individual.

I have not said one thing about who was better, or who was worse, unlike what you claim in your usual intellectually dishonest fashion. And I am not interested in checking whther horse manure (stalin, Mao, Pol Pot) is more or less disgusting than elephant dung (Hitler and Co.) I am responding to your denial of historically known fact, such as the Nazi's intent to commit against Eastern Slav populations what can only be termed as genocide. And the absurd notion that Hitler had nothing to do with the genocide of the European Jews.

But reading what they write is so ever entertaining.

Only the idiot or the pro-Nazi would buy that line. Ever heard of the meeting he;d by Hitler at the Chancellery on December 12, 1941? In his personal notes on the meeting, Goebbels states that Hitler had said the Jews should be exterminated. Notes from Himmler indicate that, aix days later, he had a meeting with the Furious (err I mean the Fuhrer) about extermination of the Jews. Ever heard of Generalplan Ost? No copy of the document itself have survived, but enough is known about it to know what the nazis inteded to do with Slav populations in the East: - forced Germanization (up to 50% in some cases) - elimination of local elite, cultural institutions, educational facilities - mass deportations - enslavement of the remaining population - denial of medical services, interdiction to marry (useful tools to prevent a population from renewing itself) - forced starvation If it looks like a genocide and walks like a genocide...

Considering what the Nazis did to the Jews, the Romas, what they were planning to do to Slavs, separation and non-intervention is not what policy they intended if they ever reclaimed colonies in Africa. More like enslavement, working the populations to death and then eliminating the surplus population, The only thing that would have savec the local population was that massive German immigration to Africa was (unlike Poland or Russia) pretty much a no-no.

Including the conquest of all of Eastern Europe to the Urul, the enslavement and eventual expulsion (or extermination) of Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, etc., etc., etc. And Stalin and Mao were peace-loving teddybears what the Nazis wanted was not security, but world domination and genocide. Unless of course one believes that being non-Aryan is threatening in and by itself... Oops, I fogot, you do.

Thank you so much for curing me of my ignorance. I always that that Great Britain declared war AFTER Hitler's Germany invaded Poland.

Only genocide of the Jews, followed by genocide of the Skavs, then genocide... then genocide... Which Hitler made clear was his intent, which he started implementing the moment a war HE wanted gave him the opportunity to start. And all that would have been fine and dandy by you.

Apparently, Stats Can itself. And people who do not appreciate the bad journalism and borderline lying job by the Ottawa citizen. Interesting, by the way, how "StatsCan said it clearly! StatsCan said it clearly!" becomes "Who cares what StatsCan said". Interesting as in laughable that is. To paraphrase what I said before, the real issue is not the fact that some people lied on the census form. It is not whether or not an e-mail being sent then redistributed constitutes a group effort, or a conspiracy, a plot or whatever. It is the fact that people are putting words in other people's mouth and misrepresenting facts, likely in order to further a francophobic agenda. Indeed, the new definition of Francophone adopteD by the Ontario government in 2009 goes beyond mother-tongue, so I stand corrected. That being said,the point I was making was the fact that funding or provision of service is dependant on the number of Francophones (no matter how they are defined, I would add), rather that the number of people Francophones unable to speak English (the point some people were lying about) . Was not mentioning the new Ontario definition, was not not linking the new definition to the "Census-Gate" (nice ring to it, eh?), was not saying anything on whether or not it was linked. (btw, neither the federal government nor any other provincial government has adopted the Ontario definition) So, YOU are the one who first mentioned the new Ontario definition. And you are the one who insists on trying to establish a link between that new definition and the infamous e-mail. Unfortunately (for you that is), the link does not exist, because of these FACTS: - the new definition was adopted in 2009, THREE YEARS after the 2006 census - most importantly, the new definitions includes people whose first language is neither English or french but use French at home. On the other hand, the infamous e-mail was NOT suggesting that people lie on whether or not they understand French, but on whether or not they can speak English as well as French. The general census form (the abridged version we all get) asks people what is the language they learned first and they still speak at home; clearly, the e-mail was not suggesting that people whose first languageis French lie about it. On the longer form, people are also asked what official language(s) they can speak; THAT'S the question the e-mail suggested people answer to falsely. To paraphrase, the e-mail was not saying "If your first language is Spanish or Mandarin and you don't understand a word of what I am wiritng because it's in French, please indicate on the census form that you use French at home" but "Even if you understand and speak English fluently, say you don't". Or, to correct your paraphrase: "if we can trick Stats Canada into thinking that Francophones here here in Stittsville cannot understand a word of English, we can keep our French-speaking post-master at the post office!"

Except when the Ottawa Citizen is misleading people by leading them to believe StatsCan used that type of language. Except to those who get what they read, which as usual excludes you. The new definition is NOT what the Citizen allege it is. The only thing here that is stupid and ludicrous is the contention that we don't need to define what a Francophone is on the ground that the majority of the poplation in Ontario is Anglophone. What's next, we do not need to define what an Anglophone is in Quebec? except when you make a fool of yourself because some Canadians have a CANADIAN mother tongue different than yours and KNOW they do need to lose it to be Canadians. So assimilated significant numbers continue to exercise their RIGHT as CANADIAN to communicate with the government in their CANADIAN language and to send their kids to French language school. The one who needs to lear the definition of "assimilate" and understand it is YOU. Don't worry, like everything you talk about,most people do not expect that to happen anytime soon.

Claim to show me where and how they are clearly making that claim, in the following? Unless I am losing my French (LOL), the fartest the spokesperson for StsCan goes is talking a possible influence of an anonymous e-mail. Not the same as an organized effot. And whether or not StatsCan uses the wor conspiracy is clearly not irrelevant when the Ottawa Citizens claims they did. Guess what, I knew that from the start. But hey, YOU brought that change in definition in the thread. Not me. ************** The issue is not whether or not some idiot sent an e-mail suggesting that people lie on the census. It was done. It is not whether or not some people did lie on the census (a POSSIBILITY, according to StatsCan) = all kinds of people provide all kind of innacurate information for all kind of reasons. The issue is that some will resurect an old non-story (the warning by StatsCan about a POSSIBLE innacuracy dates from 2007, and did not raise any eyebrow that I can recall), put in the mouth of StatsCan's spokespersons words they did not use, say StatsCan is making claims it is not making. This playing loose with what other people are saying in what looks like an effort to stir the linguistic pot is the issue, not the alleged (and most likely non-existant) conspiracy.

StatsCan says that there was a conspiracy - or mmore exactly the Ottawa Citizen claims that StatsCan says there was a conspiracy, because StatsCan's spokepersons says that they never used that word. And the Ontario Government adopts a new definition of Francophones*. so, there WAS a conspiracy and at least part of the Ontario government was in it, right? Not only it is laughable, but the Citizen did not even bother to get its facts straight. From the Ontario Office of Francophone Affairs. Different from "it can be anyone whose mother tongue is neither English nor French, but who at least understands French" and "it will include some people who may not be able to speak French." As for the claim that StasCan opposes the new definition, let's compare that with: http://www.ofa.gov.on.ca/en/news-090604-faq.html I would be tempted to use the word conspiracy here, but the innacuracies peddled (either on purpose or not) by the Citizen does not amount to that. Barely bad journalism, possibly fuelled by well-kown francophobia. Back to yawning. *I do not agree with the new definition, on tehnical grounds. That being said, knowing the number of people whose mother tongue is neither English or French but speaks French (if outside Quebec) or English (in Quebec) at home is important when determining when and how services in the minority language are to be delivered.

Not according to statsCan, whose representatives have denied that they used words such as conspiracy, or lie when approached by the Ottawa Citizen, http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/atlantique/2010/05/31/005-article-recensement.shtml When StatsCan says that they did not use the words the Ottawa Citizen, well-known for its francophobic stance, attribute them. I'll trust StatsCan. Especially when their Website notice does not include the words conspiracy, and lie. As I said before, a moron writing an e-mail and some people actually acting on it does not make a conspiracy. Barely a reason for a yawn.

The one thing that is certainly not surprising at all is that some people would actually believe there was a big conspiracy in French-speaking communities to lie about how many people among them are able to speak English as well as French. "it was done for the money" goes the claim. Thge only problem with this is that the provision of services or funding to minority-language organization is based on the mother-tongue spoken "it's because they want to be viewed as being hard-done-by"... Funny, having lesws people who are also able to speak English would contradict the image, not enhence it. Now, to some facts... Some moron send an anonymous message full of disinformation ("lie, we'll get more money") to a few thousand e-mail addresses shortly before the census. And said e-mail was most likely just ignored by about everybody who received it. Not what i call a "big consporacy to lie". Equally interesting is the fact that StatsCan denies using the words "lie" or "conspiracy" when talking to the Ottawa Citizen. In fac, all that they say is hat an anonymous e-mail may have influenced some responses, but that they cannot say why the results are SLIGHTLY different from the past two censuses Now, excuse me while I yawn at the whole thing.

Last time i checked, the 1995 referendum was not a pan-Canadian one.

In the Supreme Court of canada, this means our two national and official languages.

Actually, we're talking about 9 judges

There is nothing fair in a situation where one group gets funding and others do not, which is what is happening in Ontario. Those who want schools outside of the public system can pay for them themselves.

I approve of the new government policy. But to claim that the previous policy was forcing abortions is not only untrue, it's also either ignorant or dishonest. You pick. And no matter what one thinks of the new policy, it is unacceptable that anybody in a position of power says to opponent of the policy that shut up or else. If she wasn't speaking on behalf of the government, then the Government should distance itself from her. If she was speaking on behalf of the government, then we have yet another sign of a trend of government inolerence towards contrary opinions.

Good. Pay for it yourself.