Russell by-law spat sparks bilingual study

[g_bambino]

The use of the term "Nazi" always sidetracks and cheapens discussions. It's Godwin's law (link) at work. Generally I confine the use of the term "Nazi" to such policies as Einsatzgruppen, gas chambers, and inevitably fatal "medical experiments".

Quite right. The word is employed by the likes of leafless specficially as for its ability to enduce emotions hopefully strong enough to distract the listener from the otherwise vacuum of substance in the overall statement. I do wonder, though, if leafless has been fooled by his own tactic.

[CANADIEN]

Quite right. The word is employed by the likes of leafless specficially as for its ability to enduce emotions hopefully strong enough to distract the listener from the otherwise vacuum of substance in the overall statement. I do wonder, though, if leafless has been fooled by his own tactic.

I disagree. Like with all his other inventive interpretations of the English language, Leafless does believe 100% this is an appropriate use of the word.

[CANADIEN]

I see your point but couldn't that be seen in pari materia with Trudeau's efforts to appease Quebec? Both failed and did a lot of damage in the process. Ditto Chretien's ministrations.

Interesting that for his efforts to "appease Quebec" Trudeau is still viewed today by the separatists as the greatest ennemy their cause ever had. Even the naming of an airport after him was seens as an insult to Quebec.

I shook my head and now have the same thinking. Maybe alogical explanation would help rather than your saying as you always do that you explained it elsewhere.

Still smarting because I pointed up that if you want to know my opinion on Quebec laws all you have to do is actually bother to read the thread? Frankly.

Now, as for Chavez. Well... I've not written a thing about the guy, but it is very well know that he is a paranoid-delusional rabid anti-American who once tried to cease power in a coup, has attempted to manipule elections and referendums to give himself near aboslute power, and who will rant for days at ends on about anything under the Sun.

As for Trudeau, nothing or the sort. Mind you, I think it would be fair to say he wasn't a big fan of the US Governments, but then he had to contend with Nixon and Carter... the criminal and the boy scout.

Edited November 29, 2010 by CANADIEN

[Leafless]

as everybody else on this thread, inlcuding people with no love lost for official bilingualism, has made abundently clear, you have no clue what the word Nazi really mean.

Word Web definition of Nazi:

"Relating to or consistent with or typical of the ideology and practice of Nazism or the Nazis"

Nazism:

"A form of socialism featuring racism and expansionism and obedience to a strong leader"

Correction... you won't because you can't.

I did.

Actually, it is to YOU to prove your absurdist claims. I for one have been waiting for almost three years for what could amount to even a shadow of a proof.

You are blind to facts.

BTW, I thought you didn't care about culture.

I don't care about culture, but it seems the feds and people like you do care about the culture of a previous foreign enemy of Britain. So in turn I have to defend the rights of the majority culture of Canada that mostly all English speaking Canadians take for granted and normally could not even take the time to talk about it.

[Leafless]

The use of the term "Nazi" always sidetracks and cheapens discussions. It's Godwin's law (link) at work. Generally I confine the use of the term "Nazi" to such policies as Einsatzgruppen, gas chambers, and inevitably fatal "medical experiments".

Why don't you move out of the past. Ancient history is done and over.

Any reference I made To Nazi or Nazism is the dictionary definition and has nothing to do with genocide or your ancient history or Godwin's law.

[Leafless]

Not bloody likely...

Then it is clear you supported a traitorous government.

I just don't buy your paranoid,and quite idiotic,theory that Pierre Trudeau was some Leftist dictator in waiting....

Then I will make it simple for you.

Trudeau was a traitor who worked for the province of Quebec, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

[Leafless]

Firstly, the laws were voted on by democratically elected representatives in parliament. So, you can drop the "imposed" and "totalitarianism" bullshit.

ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES-bullshit! You are making it ABUNDANTLY clear democracy ends at the ballot box in Canada. We are no better off in Canada politically than the people in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan they have to contend with the Taliban. In Canada we have to contend with the political disruptive antics of Quebec and a federal government that caters to Quebecs extreme forever ongoing cultural fantasies at the expense of the English speaking majority of Canada.

Firstly- the language laws were imposed, as no one should have the right in a free and democratic society to implement laws of this nature without a national referendum. These language laws were well thought out by Trudeau who very well knew what the end result would be.

Secondly-Those language laws laws were NOT implemented all at the same time and no one at that time had any idea what the end result would be at a later date, outside of Trudeau that is.

Secondly, English Canadians are not a race. You can quit twisting the word "race", as well.

I gave you the definition of race and you continue to deny it. What are you a freaking dummy?

No, what you mean is: you don't want to get into specific clauses. Why? Because you know there's nothing in any of the laws you call "Nazi-type" to justify your hyperbolic frothing about them being akin to what came out of the Office of the Führer und Reichskanzler.

There is nothing to get into.

Official Languages and Official Bilingualism ARE of the 'JUST SOCIETY' type, SOCIALIATIC LANGUGE LAWS that have been also CONSTITUTIONALIZED again WITHOUT the consent of Canadians by way of a national referendum.

[Leafless]

Interesting that for his efforts to "appease Quebec" Trudeau is still viewed today by the separatists as the greatest ennemy their cause ever had. Even the naming of an airport after him was seens as an insult to Quebec.

What Quebec wants is nothing short of being a official independent French nation-state in North America, otherwise known as a country.

To bad the federal government does not have the fortitude to tell them once and for all.....

[CANADIEN]

Word Web definition of Nazi:

"Relating to or consistent with or typical of the ideology and practice of Nazism or the Nazis"

Nazism:

"A form of socialism featuring racism and expansionism and obedience to a strong leader"

As usual, you quote a definition while misusing it. Funny.

I did.

You have quoted specific sections of the Officla Languages Act to ahem "prove" it's Nazi-like? After saying that you don't need to do it? Yeah right.

You are blind to facts.

Indeed, I must be blind to facts, since I still do hope one day you will have a clue.

I don't care about culture, but it seems the feds and people like you do care about the culture of a previous foreign enemy of Britain. So in turn I have to defend the rights of the majority culture of Canada that mostly all English speaking Canadians take for granted and normally could not even take the time to talk about it.

It seems like that to you, indeed. But then, those who have a clue know that the culture we are talking about is a CANADIAN culture.

Speaking of the culture of a former enemy of Great Britain, how about your liking of the American culture? Not that I have a problem wih it, mind you.

Edited November 29, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

Why don't you move out of the past. Ancient history is done and over.

Good idea that you should apply to yourself. This is 2010 and the days when French-speaking Canadians were half-citizens are history.

[CANADIEN]

Then it is clear you supported a traitorous government.

Let me get it straight... Jack is not french, therefore he supports a government that you (wrongly) consider traitorous.

Then I will make it simple for you.

Trudeau was a traitor who worked for the province of Quebec, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

Simple indeed, and simplistic. And false. Why don't YOU try to prove your claim? After three years, I am still waiting for anything that would look like the beginning of a shadow of a hint as a proof.

Edited November 29, 2010 by CANADIEN

[g_bambino]

ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES-bullshit!

Please provide proof that the Members of the 28th and 33rd Parliaments weren't elected. (And perhaps also all the MPs in between and since, given that none of them have sought to repeal this supposedly horrendous legislation.)

Firstly- the language laws were imposed, as no one should have the right in a free and democratic society to implement laws of this nature without a national referendum. These language laws were well thought out by Trudeau who very well knew what the end result would be.

Official Languages and Official Bilingualism ARE of the 'JUST SOCIETY' type, SOCIALIATIC LANGUGE LAWS that have been also CONSTITUTIONALIZED again WITHOUT the consent of Canadians by way of a national referendum.

It's already been made clear to you that bilingualism has been official in Canadian government since at least the surrender of Quebec to the British in the late 18th century and has been in the constitution since 1867.

The Official Languages Act was initially put to parliament by Trudeau, yes, in 1968. It was, however, never a part of the constitution and (hence, without need for invocation of the amending formula) substantially changed in 1988 when the prime minister was... Wait for it... The Progressive Conservative Brian Mulroney.

Regardless, by "laws of this nature" you clearly mean "laws I don't like." Well, I'm sorry to deliver to you this upsetting news, but, our democracy doesn't revolve around your ass.

I gave you the definition of race and you continue to deny it.

In no way does the definition of race apply to a group of people who's only common trait in their first language.

[g_bambino]

And what about those is it, exactly, that leads you to call them "Nazi-type language policies"? Specific clauses from the law or official policy guidelines are what I'm looking for here.

I don't have to get into specific clauses...

Correction... you won't because you can't.

I did.

[CANADIEN]

ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES-bullshit! You are making it ABUNDANTLY clear democracy ends at the ballot box in Canada. We are no better off in Canada politically than the people in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan they have to contend with the Taliban. In Canada we have to contend with the political disruptive antics of Quebec and a federal government that caters to Quebecs extreme forever ongoing cultural fantasies at the expense of the English speaking majority of Canada.

Don't tell us that. Go tell that to Afghani women who have been beaten by the Taliban for daring to seek an education for themselves and their daughters. Go say that to the civilians who have lost loved one in a terror attack, or caught in the crossfire between NATO troops and Taliban TERRORISTS. Go say that to those who have run in elections over there in the hope of contributing to a better future, only to have their hopes dashed by electoral fraud. And don't even think of weaseling your way out with something like "but I am just talking about the Taliban politically". Just consider yourself lucky that about everybody on this thread knows you have no clue on what you're talking about. :angry: :angry: :angry:

There is nothing to get into.

Because there is nothing there. Otherwise, you would be happy to do your usual trick, namely take a part of, let's say the Official Languages Act, quote it in full, then claiming it says something it doesn't actually said. That you won't even try this time is telling.

Edited November 29, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

What Quebec wants is nothing short of being a official independent French nation-state in North America, otherwise known as a country.

No doubt there are some in Quebec who want that, but well most Quebecers don't want it.

To bad the federal government does not have the fortitude to tell them once and for all.....

this, perhaps?

Quebec should no longer even be part of confederation

Which would make Quebec into... a country. Contradicting yourself once again.

[CANADIEN]

In no way does the definition of race apply to a group of people who's only common trait in their first language.

bambino, bambino, bambino... When will you ever learn? You keep acting like if the language Leafless uses was actually English.

[jbg]

Interesting that for his efforts to "appease Quebec" Trudeau is still viewed today by the separatists as the greatest ennemy their cause ever had. Even the naming of an airport after him was seens as an insult to Quebec.

Maybe Trudeau was the kind of person who could be hated by anyone. He was very polarizing, and did not focus on mainstream concerns, only elite concerns. Frankly, ditto Mulroney.

Still smarting because I pointed up that if you want to know my opinion on Quebec laws all you have to do is actually bother to read the thread? Frankly.

Your opinion is not clear. If I've missed them please link me to the one(s) that best express your views, other than to complain about other provinces' lack of hospitality for French.

Now, as for Chavez. Well... I've not written a thing about the guy, but it is very well know that he is a paranoid-delusional rabid anti-American who once tried to cease power in a coup, has attempted to manipule elections and referendums to give himself near aboslute power, and who will rant for days at ends on about anything under the Sun.

As for Trudeau, nothing or the sort. Mind you, I think it would be fair to say he wasn't a big fan of the US Governments, but then he had to contend with Nixon and Carter... the criminal and the boy scout.

Maybe Trudeau could be called the "thinking man's Chavez", much as the James Buckley, William F. Buckley and Irving Kristol were called the "thinking mans' conservatives". He did centralize much that was provincial in jurisdiction and did aggrandize to Ottawa much power that belonged either to the provinces or the people. Thus my comparison.

[jbg]

The use of the term "Nazi" always sidetracks and cheapens discussions. It's Godwin's law (link) at work. Generally I confine the use of the term "Nazi" to such policies as Einsatzgruppen, gas chambers, and inevitably fatal "medical experiments".

Why don't you move out of the past. Ancient history is done and over.

Any reference I made To Nazi or Nazism is the dictionary definition and has nothing to do with genocide or your ancient history or Godwin's law.

Here is your "dictionary definition".

Word Web definition of Nazi:

"Relating to or consistent with or typical of the ideology and practice of Nazism or the Nazis"

Nazism:

"A form of socialism featuring racism and expansionism and obedience to a strong leader"

How does this not relate to "genocide" or "Godwin's law". And frankly I am puzzled by your reference to my "ancient history" unless you are simply narrow-minded and bigoted.

[jbg]

Firstly, the laws were voted on by democratically elected representatives in parliament. So, you can drop the "imposed" and "totalitarianism" bullshit. Secondly, English Canadians are not a race. You can quit twisting the word "race", as well.

With a whipped vote in a majority government. Darn close to undemocratic and if so totally a tyranny of the majority, with no regard for the rights of others.

[g_bambino]

With a whipped vote in a majority government. Darn close to undemocratic and if so totally a tyranny of the majority, with no regard for the rights of others.

Except for those spelled out in the Bill of Rights and set out by convention.

The Official Languages Act is just an Act of Parliament like any other; if the House of Commons that voted on it originally was dominated by one party, then, that's what Canadian voters asked for in the election of 1968. The Act, even after the addition to the constitution of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it's reworking in 1988, has never been deemed contrary to anyone's rights.

[CANADIEN]

Your opinion is not clear. If I've missed them (...)

It's because you won't bother actually reading what is being posted on this thread. But no need to cry foul anymore, because here specific things I have said about Quebec's language laws SINCE you started demanding that I express an opinion that was already there for all to see.

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

As I said before, and you would know it if you took the time to actually read the thread, the place of English in Quebec's provincial legislation and services should be equal to that of French in Ontario`s provincial legislation and services.

We all know you loathe and envy Quebec's language laws yet view them as a model as to how things should be. I view them as a model to be scrapped.

Is it clear enough for you? If not, I have five more pages of the same I will be happy to post, all from this thread.

Edited November 30, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

With a whipped vote in a majority government. Darn close to undemocratic and if so totally a tyranny of the majority, with no regard for the rights of others.

Nice description of Westminster-style systems of Government.

Speaking of tyranny of the majority, I think you are confusing the Official Languages Act with Jim-Crow type laws that used to be the glory of the South (and yes, I know, some Canadian laws were not much better).

Feel free to indicate whose rights have been violated by the federal Official Languages Act.

Edited November 30, 2010 by CANADIEN

[Jack Weber]

Then it is clear you supported a traitorous government.

Then I will make it simple for you.

Trudeau was a traitor who worked for the province of Quebec, unless of course you can prove otherwise.

Erm...Yeah....

[jbg]

Except for those spelled out in the Bill of Rights and set out by convention.

Except that the "Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms" states that "(t)he Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society" (link) which in turn can be any exaction by a voting majority in Parliament, whether whipped or otherwise.

The Official Languages Act is just an Act of Parliament like any other; if the House of Commons that voted on it originally was dominated by one party, then, that's what Canadian voters asked for in the election of 1968. The Act, even after the addition to the constitution of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it's reworking in 1988, has never been deemed contrary to anyone's rights.

Except for these provisions of the OLA built into the Charter:

Official languages of Canada (link)

16. (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.

Official languages of New Brunswick

(2) English and French are the official languages of New Brunswick and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the legislature and government of New Brunswick.

Advancement of status and use

(3) Nothing in this Charter limits the authority of Parliament or a legislature to advance the equality of status or use of English and French.

English and French linguistic communities in New Brunswick

16.1 (1) The English linguistic community and the French linguistic community in New Brunswick have equality of status and equal rights and privileges, including the right to distinct educational institutions and such distinct cultural institutions as are necessary for the preservation and promotion of those communities.

Role of the legislature and government of New Brunswick

(2) The role of the legislature and government of New Brunswick to preserve and promote the status, rights and privileges referred to in subsection (1) is affirmed.(85)

Proceedings of Parliament

17. (1) Everyone has the right to use English or French in any debates and other proceedings of Parliament.(86)

Proceedings of New Brunswick legislature

(2) Everyone has the right to use English or French in any debates and other proceedings of the legislature of New Brunswick.(87)

Parliamentary statutes and records

18. (1) The statutes, records and journals of Parliament shall be printed and published in English and French and both language versions are equally authoritative.(88)

New Brunswick statutes and records

(2) The statutes, records and journals of the legislature of New Brunswick shall be prin­ted and published in English and French and both language versions are equally authoritative.(89)

Proceedings in courts established by Parliament

19. (1) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court established by Parliament(90)

Proceedings in New Brunswick courts

(2) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court of New Brunswick.(91)

Communications by public with federal institutions

20. (1) Any member of the public in Canada has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, any head or central office of an institution of the Parliament or government of Canada in English or French, and has the same right with respect to any other office of any such institution where

(a) there is a significant demand for communications with and services from that office in such language; or

( due to the nature of the office, it is reasonable that communications with and services from that office be available in both English and French.

Communications by public with New Brunswick institutions

(2) Any member of the public in New Brunswick has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, any office of an institution of the legislature or government of New Brunswick in English or French.

Continuation of existing constitutional provisions

21. Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any right, privilege or obligation with respect to the English and French languages, or either of them, that exists or is continued by virtue of any other provision of the Constitution of Canada.(92)

Rights and privileges preserved

22. Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any legal or customary right or privilege acquired or enjoyed either before or after the coming into force of this Charter with respect to any language that is not English or French.

[jbg]

It's because you won't bother actually reading what is being posted on this thread. But no need to cry foul anymore, because here specific things I have said about Quebec's language laws SINCE you started demanding that I express an opinion that was already there for all to see.

*********************

Is it clear enough for you? If not, I have five more pages of the same I will be happy to post, all from this thread.

Thanks.

I know you posted this before but you are certainly better at searching for your own posts, since you'd be able to remember a key word, than I am.

I still find the idea of "the place of English in Quebec's provincial legislation and services (being) equal to that of French in Ontario`s provincial legislation and services" to be somewhat fatuous, since English-speakers are (or at least historically have been) a far larger minority in Quebec than (non-transient) French speakers are in Ontario. I exclude from the equation people in Ottawa purely for governmental purposes. Also it is not primarily the provision of provincial services I am taking aim at. It is the various education and sign laws that are more serious.