Russell by-law spat sparks bilingual study

[g_bambino]

I clearly explained myself. Unlike you, I said everything I had to say.

Yes, you certainly explained yourself all right. If you feel there's more I need to say, then you'd first have to respond to my last post on the topic, which you have not done, as of yet.

Don't quote a July 9/08 post as if it was the latest post in this thread with guyser having the last reply because it was not.

Well, if you look again, carefully, I hope (though not much) you'll see that I quoted the July 9 posts as though you had the last reply. You know... in front means first, at the back means last.. right? But whether or not it was the last, first, or forty-third post, you still singled out his words "All whites are good and perfect...." and commended him for them.

[CANADIEN]

You just said, again that Quebec language laws are a pile of horse manure and now you want to continue associating your screen name 'CANADIEN' relating to the Quebecois and Quebec nationalistic ideologies.

:lol: :lol: Whatever.

When the Supreme Court of Canada found Quebec's original sign laws unconstitutional Quebec quickly withdrew the Notwithstanding clause.

So contrary to what you say it seems Canadian courts have ruled forcing Quebec to withdraw the Notwithstanding clause.

Once again, you prove your outstanding lack of knowledge.

Again, Parliamentary Library

Quebec resorted to the notwithstanding clause after the Supreme Court of Canada, in the Ford and Devine cases on the language of commercial signs, ruled that an outright prohibition of the use of languages other than French was an unreasonable limitation on the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Charter. The Quebec government thereupon introduced an amendment to the language law that would maintain unilingual French signs outside premises while permitting the use of bilingual signs inside. To ensure that the amendment would not become the object of another legal challenge, the amending legislation invoked the legislative override authority of section 33 and the similar provision in the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. This marked the first time that the override had been used in direct response to a Supreme Court of Canada decision, rather than in anticipation of litigation. [note by me: that was in 1988]

In 1993, when the notwithstanding clause reached the end of its five-year life, the Quebec National Assembly lifted the ban on English language signs and amended the law to require only that French be “markedly predominant.”(27) The amended legislation was not protected by a notwithstanding clause.

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.

[Leafless]

:lol: :lol: Whatever.

Lol, I see you are playing both sides of the coin again.

Typical, very typical.

It seems this is your normal way of trying to win debates with personal insults and childlike French comedy.

Once again, you prove your outstanding lack of knowledge.

You are plain nuts.

Parliamentary Library[/url]

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.

They invoked it initially but like I said, the Bourassa government withdrew or removed it.

The Bourassa government subsequently amended the law and removed the override provision

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdngover...thstanding.html

And why did they remove it?

In 1993, after the law was criticized by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the Bourassa government rewrote the law and the notwithstanding clause was removed.

But you know almost everyone in Canada knows Quebec STILL racially discriminates but it appears national federal political parties do not have the desire and NONE will suggest forcing Quebec to stop racially discriminating against English speaking Canadians.

This leaves English speaking Canadians constitutionally unprotected from the antics of a single province.

[CANADIEN]

Lol, I see you are playing both sides of the coin again.

Typical, very typical.

It seems this is your normal way of trying to win debates with personal insults and childlike French comedy.

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..

They invoked it initially but like I said, the Bourassa government withdrew or removed it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdngover...thstanding.html

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.

And why did they remove it?

In 1993, after the law was criticized by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the Bourassa government rewrote the law and the notwithstanding clause was removed.

Which should serve as you warning to you of what would await YOUR dream of a similar law.

But you know almost everyone in Canada knows Quebec STILL racially discriminates but it appears national federal political parties do not have the desire and NONE will suggest forcing Quebec to stop racially discriminating against English speaking Canadians.

And we all know YOU want something even worse than those laws.

Edited July 26, 2008 by CANADIEN

[Leafless]

Yes, you certainly explained yourself all right. If you feel there's more I need to say, then you'd first have to respond to my last post on the topic, which you have not done, as of yet.

Since when is anyone required or forced to answer an assholic question.

You must think this is Russia and you are part of the Russian Gestapo.

Or worst still a Liberal.

Well, if you look again, carefully, I hope (though not much) you'll see that I quoted the July 9 posts as though you had the last reply. You know... in front means first, at the back means last.. right? But whether or not it was the last, first, or forty-third post, you still singled out his words "All whites are good and perfect...." and commended him for them.

So the guy complimented Whites and I agreed.

[CANADIEN]

Since when is anyone required or forced to answer an assholic question.

You must think this is Russia and you are part of the Russian Gestapo.

Or worst still a Liberal.

So the guy complimented Whites and I agreed.

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

[Leafless]

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.

The Supreme Court found sections of Bill-101 unconstitutional.

Quebec then invoked the Notwithstanding clause rather then be FORCED to amend Bill-101.

The Notwithstanding clause can be overridden when it comes to protecting fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, but was not.

If the federal government refuses to stand up for the rights of Canadians...what can be 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.

There is no law preventing a province to establish its majority language as the official language of its province as the province has the legal right to control language.

This is all I am advocating.

How else can provinces fight linguistic abuse of the majority language propagated especially by the federal government or various levels of government in a manner not consistent with the will of the people?

[Leafless]

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

And in turn I mocked him.

BTW-Stop your racist insinuations.

Edited July 26, 2008 by Leafless

[CANADIEN]

And in turn I mocked him.

Yeah right.

[CANADIEN]

The Supreme Court found sections of Bill-101 unconstitutional.

Quebec then invoked the Notwithstanding clause rather then be FORCED to amend Bill-101.

The Notwithstanding clause can be overridden when it comes to protecting fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, but was not.

It can't, and you haven't provided anything that says otherwise. As usual, you don't get it.

There is no law preventing a province to establish its majority language as the official language of its province as the province has the legal right to control language.

This is all I am advocating.

It is not all you are advocating. Remember?

There is not a single Canadian province that has designated the English language as the only official language of commerce. They should do so to protect the de facto status of the English language in majority English speaking provinces.

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.

Edited July 26, 2008 by CANADIEN

[Leafless]

It can't, and you haven't provided anything that says otherwise.

What makes you think the federal government cannot defend majority English speaking Canadians from Nazi type racist policies implemented provincially utilizing the Notwithstanding clause or without using the Notwithstanding clause but nevertheless implements racist language policies?

The point is the federal government of Canada has an obligation to protect the fundamental rights of English speaking Canadians who currently have no similar racist language policies in ANY majority English speaking province.

With the federal government not acting (to protect English speaking Canadians from the detrimental repercussions of racist language policies) only encourages majority English speaking provinces to protect themselves in the same manner as Quebec.

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.

Again, no one is suggesting to ban other languages but simply to designate the existing de-facto English language 'official' to ensure the functionality of the country remains intact and linguistically competent according to the wishes of the large majority of Canadians.

The English language was FREELY chosen by Canadians as the common language of Canada.

The English language was NOT propagated by government.

Why don't you move to a country that specifically utilizes French as the language of the country if you cannot face the fact that the French language FAILED to FREELY propagate itself in Canada.

[g_bambino]

Since when is anyone required or forced to answer an assholic question.

I don't know, but it isn't relevant. I didn't ask a question, I made a statement. You offered no rebuttal.

So the guy complimented Whites and I agreed.

He was mocking you, and he didn't "compliment" Caucasians, he said they were "all good and perfect" [emphasis mine]. You agreed that the Caucasian race is infallible.

[g_bambino]

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.

It is not all you are advocating. Remember?.

Leafless spends so much time back-pedaling it's no wonder he never moves forward. It's always "that's not really what I meant," or "you obviously misread my words, jackass," or a complete revision of the original statement. Too fun!

Edited July 26, 2008 by g_bambino

[Leafless]

He was mocking you, and he didn't "compliment" Caucasians, he said they were "all good and perfect" [emphasis mine]. You agreed that the Caucasian race is infallible.

No, I mocked the smart ass back.

Infallible is defined as incapable of error.

Humans do not posses a faultless thinking process.

So it is an illogical, nonsensical smart ass statement.

[Leafless]

Leafless spends so much time back-pedaling it's no wonder he never moves forward. It's always "that's not really what I meant," or "you obviously misread my words, jackass," or a complete revision of the original statement. Too fun!

Then if you feel that way, you must be a moron to make a reply.

[g_bambino]

No, I mocked the smart ass back.

Uh huh; another back-pedal. If you truly believe you mocked him, then you obviously haven't even started to master the art of sarcasm.

Infallible is defined as incapable of error.

Yes, and perfect would be without error. Good that you're catching on, though.

Humans do not posses a faultless thinking process.

Except for Caucasian humans, it would seem from your statement.

So it is an illogical, nonsensical smart ass statement.

Yours was, yes. But I don't buy for one second that you actually meant it to be such.

Then if you feel that way, you must be a moron to make a reply.

Oh, no! It's far too much fun to see you struggle with your own words! And the smugness with which you deliver your verbal pretzels is just icing on the cake! (Mmmm... pretzels... icing...)

[CANADIEN]

What makes you think the federal government cannot defend majority English speaking Canadians from Nazi type racist policies implemented provincially utilizing the Notwithstanding clause or without using the Notwithstanding clause but nevertheless implements racist language policies?

The federal government cannot prevent the use of the notwithstanding clause by provincial legislatures. Period.

The point is the federal government of Canada has an obligation to protect the fundamental rights of English speaking Canadians who currently have no similar racist language policies in ANY majority English speaking province.

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..

With the federal government not acting (to protect English speaking Canadians from the detrimental repercussions of racist language policies) only encourages majority English speaking provinces to protect themselves in the same manner as Quebec.

And since Quebec's language laws are, to use your own words, racist, that would make those policies racist.

Again, no one is suggesting to ban other languages(...)

There is not a single Canadian province that has designated the English language as the only official language of commerce. They should do so to protect the de facto status of the English language in majority English speaking provinces.

Make up your mind.

The English language was NOT propagated by government.

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.

Why don't you move to a country that specifically utilizes French as the language of the country if you cannot face the fact that the French language FAILED to FREELY propagate itself in Canada.

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.

Edited July 27, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

the French language FAILED to FREELY propagate itself in Canada.

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.

[AngusThermopyle]

revealing your true thinking in the process.

You know what Canadien, you might and very well could be worth talking to if you could just get over your very annoying habit of claiming to know what everyone else is thinking and feeling. I put it to you that you actually don't know shit about what other posters are thinking and are merely projecting your desire upon them.

For instance you've claimed that I hate you and French people, how wrong you are. The truth is that I dislike French people in a general sort of way, if I hated them I very much doubt that I would have married a woman from Quebec. Hate is something I most definitely do not feel towards them. In fact I do not hate anyone or anything. Hate is the most powerfull word in our language and the misuse/free use of this word has caused many problems over a great deal of time. If one understands this simple concept then one realizes how absurd it is to toss the word around so casually.

[CANADIEN]

I put it to you that you actually don't know shit about what other posters are thinking and are merely projecting your desire upon them.

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.

[CANADIEN]

I put it to you that you actually don't know shit about what other posters are thinking and are merely projecting your desire upon them.

Are you claiming you know what I desire? what I think? The same way some claim I hate the English language? 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.

Edited July 30, 2008 by CANADIEN

[Leafless]

It can't, and you haven't provided anything that says otherwise. As usual, you don't get it.

The federal government like Quebecs provincial government can do what it wants, even write up a law that discrimnates against Francophones.

It is not all you are advocating. Remember?

The only official language of commerce... Your own words.

Actually I would like to see the charter scrapped.

All provinces would label themselves 'distinct' and develop their own constitution.

You favour discrimination, lets have discrimination.

And all know you mean doing the upmost to limit, even prohibit, use of kanguages other than English.

Your just being nasty because English Canada has no current language laws applied to Francophones whereas the English could walk into Quebec and do what the Francophones are doing throughout Canada forcing racist language and bilingualism laws.

[Leafless]

The federal government cannot prevent the use of the notwithstanding clause by provincial legislatures. Period.

Certainly not.

But they can invoke their own 'Notwithstanding clause' or implement other ways to prevent blatant discrimination such as plebiscites or referendums to address the issue.

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.

You are out to lunch.

Official languages English and French are only under federal authority and not provincial authority.

So in understanding that fact, you are saying a minority discriminating against a majority is honky dory.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha....and if English Canada takes steps to prevent a minority from discriminating against a majority, you view this as being racist.

Er, no ladies and gentleman English speaking Canadians are required not to 'flinch' while Francophones raid the land stealing jobs under 'fraudulent bilingualism'. This puts unilingual speaking Canadians out of work in their own majority English speaking provinces, but this is okay.

Make up your mind.

Please comprehend the two different statements, one telling it as it is and the other telling what to do about the situation.

o 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.

What law imposes the English language?

Most freely learn it, for personal gain.

I am a Canadian, and I see no reason to move.

Freedom is a beautiful thing, isn't it.

can do nothing about that, or the fact I have rights as a Canadian and I exercise them.

What you have is a predetermined opinion that undemocratically establishes racist language laws and policies.

A referendum is required.

Edited July 30, 2008 by Leafless

[CANADIEN]

The federal government like Quebecs provincial government can do what it wants, even write up a law that discrimnates against Francophones.

For examples, laws that would make English the "sole official language of business", discriminating against those who choose to conduct business in another language.

Actually I would like to see the charter scrapped.

We know, we know.

You favour discrimination (...)

Whatever.

Your just being nasty because English Canada has no current language laws applied to Francophones (...)

And why should I have a problem with the absence of laws denying people their rights?

whereas the English (...)

You mean English, or English-speaking Canadians.

could walk into Quebec and do what the Francophones are doing throughout Canada forcing racist language and bilingualism laws.

We know the drill... Bilingualism is racist, unilingualism is not (as long as it is in English). What a non-sense.

[CANADIEN]

Certainly not.

But they can invoke their own 'Notwithstanding clause' or implement other ways to prevent blatant discrimination such as plebiscites or referendums to address the issue.

You still don't get it, do you? The federal Parliament can use the notwithstanding clause only to protect its own laws. A federal plebiscite or referendum has no effect on provincial laws.

Official languages English and French are only under federal authority and not provincial authority.

So in understanding that fact, you are saying a minority discriminating against a majority is honky dory.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha....and if English Canada takes steps to prevent a minority from discriminating against a majority, you view this as being racist.

Actually, I don't view language issues as being race issues, but since YOU chose discribe them as such, I'm happy to use your terminology.

And, contrary to what you claim, equality of linguistic rights is not discriminatory. Parts of the Constitution that acknowledge French and English as official languages at the federal level and in New Brunswick are not discriminatory. Provincial laws and municipal by-laws that guarantees services in both English and French are not discriminatory.

The only laws in this country that discriminate on language matters are those of the Quebec government, because they make services in English nearly impossible to obtain and they limit the use of languages other than French in commerce and the workplace. Laws similar to those that would make one language "the sole official language of business".

Er, no ladies and gentleman English speaking Canadians are required not to 'flinch' while Francophones raid the land(...)

I didn't know Canadians moving freely within Canada were some kind of foreign invaders. .

Please comprehend the two different statements, one telling it as it is and the other telling what to do about the situation.

Again, no one is suggesting to ban other languages(...)

There is not a single Canadian province that has designated the English language as the only official language of commerce. They should do so to protect the de facto status of the English language in majority English speaking provinces.

I am not the only one who sees you are contradicting yourself.

What law imposes the English language?

Most freely learn it, for personal gain.

From the 1860's to the 1980's, the federal government imposed on First Nations the residential school progams, whose primary objective was to force their children to learn English and abandon their own Canadian languages. Before the educational rights of Canadians were recognized in 1982, most provincial government had at one point or another laws specifically forbidding the use of French as the medium of education in schools in French-speaking communities.

Do you think that was a good thing?

What you have is a predetermined opinion that undemocratically establishes racist language laws and policies.

Apart from changing the "racist language laws and policies" to "language laws and policies that violate the rights of Canadians:, this sentence describes very well what I think of your opinion.

And thanks for confirming that for you I have no rights.

Edited July 30, 2008 by CANADIEN