Sir Paul McCartney to play on Quebec City's Plains of Abraham

Leafless · July 18, 2008

"Monarchy is a great thing... no it's the source of our problems... don't you dare speak ill of the Monarchy"
"You're French... No you're Canadian... No you're French"

Who the hell are you quoting, gear box?

Besides any constitutional confusion can be traced back to the federal government themselves by allowing MINORITY French culture to rule and dominate Canadian politics.

The failure of Canada's dysfunctional federal government to rid Quebec from confederation boggles the mind.

Leafless · July 18, 2008

Oh no what have we here.

Sir Paul to 'Quebeckians': Smoke 'the pipes of peace'
"Quebeckians" should smoke "the pipes of peace," Sir Paul McCartney proclaimed yesterday, after nationalists criticized the decision to invite the former Beatle to celebrate Quebec City's 400th anniversary.

Hey Paul you are forgetting that language sensitivities are Quebec's livelyhood.

Smoking the pipes of peace isn't part of their 'Charter of the French Language'.

The Quebec painter Luc Archambault launched a protest petition, but yesterday, Sir Paul responded: "Come on Quebeckians [Quebeckers], love me, baby."

Ha-ha-ha-ha.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...National/Music/

AngusThermopyle · July 18, 2008

adding he is not opposed to Sir Paul's concert itself, but believes Quebec artists should be given the same amount of attention.

Maybe Quebec artists would get the same degree of attention if they exhibited the same degree of talent and significance.

This is just another example of the seemingly never ending stream of whining that emanates from that Province, and they wonder why so many Canadians consider them to be nothing more than a bunch of wankers.

M.Dancer · July 18, 2008

Maybe Quebec artists would get the same degree of attention if they exhibited the same degree of talent and significance.

Celine was busy andl Langlois was born in Ontario....

Personally I find McCartney to be vapid and his lyrics drivel. I could off the top of my head think of a 1/2 dozen acts from Quebec I would rather see than Billy Shears....

AngusThermopyle · July 18, 2008

Personally I find McCartney to be vapid and his lyrics drivel. I could off the top of my head think of a 1/2 dozen acts from Quebec I would rather see than Billy Shears....

I find some McCartney to be rather bland, but he has done some very good work as well. The main point is his significance, he wields a huge amount of influence, definitely unmatched by any artist from Quebec. For this dick to even suggest that the same degree of attention be paid to Quebecois artists merely illustrates his delusional world view.

Please don't mention the horse faced woman to me, I simply can not stand the insipid pap she peddles as music.

g_bambino · July 18, 2008

I believe Whites posses the ability and perseverance to achieve important linked objectives.
Name me an advanced country/race that has achieved the same level of success as the White race.

The trick is to initially develop a society that harbours all the objectives of a successful society.

No one has developed this type of society other than the White race who then educated and shared their success with the less fortunate.

Anyone with half a brain can learn anything that is taught and this is proven at the expense of the White race.

I repeat myself: interesting, when one considers what "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race" defines.

g_bambino · July 18, 2008

So you are saying the U.K. is a fully sovereign country?

Yes.

Jamaica, like Canada is a slave to the Queen.

No.

You appear to have never heard of this important document.

g_bambino · July 18, 2008

Don't kid yourself.
Quebecers love the Queen as it gives PM's the power of a king.

To-day due to the abuse of federal power, relating to cultural and immigration concerns, I would like to see Canada a republic so Canadians would have more control on what the feds can do.

Fist off, the Queen is a person, not an "it." Secondly, you've zero evidence that a republic would allow the populace more "control" on what the federal government does. You're just pouting because it's too hard for you to get what you personally want.

g_bambino · July 18, 2008

The Queen is loved so much in Quebec she hasn't been invited to visit there since the 1976 Olympics.

She's been to Quebec a number of times since 1976; she goes to Hull almost every time she's in Canada. However, I know that's barely into Quebec, so I'll point out that she toured the province in 1987, and the provincial government wanted her in Quebec City for the 400th anniversary celebrations.

CANADIEN · July 18, 2008

Does anyone else see the magnificent irony inherent in these quotes?

Brownie points to you. I will be the first one to admit that my knowledge of my second language (English)occasionnally fails me, at that I am typo-prone, although yourself would readily admit that the biggest irony is when someone (leafless, namely) wants to impose a language he is unable to read or write. And it's his first language.

CANADIEN · July 18, 2008

Who the hell are you quoting, gear box?
Besides any constitutional confusion can be traced back to the federal government themselves by allowing MINORITY French culture to rule and dominate Canadian politics.

The failure of Canada's dysfunctional federal government to rid Quebec from confederation boggles the mind.

It was not an word by word quote, but you have spoken in favour of the Monarchy, then against it. And you have said that I am French, then admitted to the FACT I am Canadian, then said again that I am French.

But I can understand why you can hardly remember some of the drivel you write. I would not want to remember it either if I was its author.

Edited July 18, 2008 by CANADIEN

CANADIEN · July 18, 2008

Oh no what have we here.
Hey Paul you are forgetting that language sensitivities are Quebec's livelyhood.

Smoking the pipes of peace isn't part of their 'Charter of the French Language'.

Ha-ha-ha-ha.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...National/Music/

Sir Paul wants to love Quebec City people, not hate them. Must make you mad.

CANADIEN · July 18, 2008

Maybe Quebec artists would get the same degree of attention if they exhibited the same degree of talent and significance.
This is just another example of the seemingly never ending stream of whining that emanates from that Province, and they wonder why so many Canadians consider them to be nothing more than a bunch of wankers.

So let me check your rules of debate. You can whine about Quebecers, spit on them, call them wankers, say that Quebec artists have no talent. but nobody is allowed to state the FACT that such statements put together prove that you, personnally, are a little hateful man who should get a life.

Edited July 18, 2008 by CANADIEN

CANADIEN · July 18, 2008

She's been to Quebec a number of times since 1976; she goes to Hull almost every time she's in Canada. However, I know that's barely into Quebec, so I'll point out that she toured the province in 1987, and the provincial government wanted her in Quebec City for the 400th anniversary celebrations.

I will stand corrected, She went through four Quebec towns in 1987. According to the official list of Royal visits, that was the only time (except a visit to the Museum of Civilizations) she step foot in Quebec beetween 1976 and 2002. I am not awarw of any visit to Quebec since.

And the Quebec government did indeed invite the Queen this year. The federal government did not extend an invitation as well. They know that while most people in Quebec wouldn't care, there would enough bozos around to cause trouble.

Leafless · July 18, 2008

Sir Paul wants to love Quebec City people, not hate them. Must make you mad.

The only thing that makes me mad is that this concert is FREE, courtesy of the Canadian tax payer.

Thats the only time Quebekians go to a concert.

Don't worry Sir Paul will soon realize that in Quebec, especially one being from England 'Can't buy me love'.

Leafless · July 18, 2008

It was not an word by word quote, but you have spoken in favour of the Monarchy, then against it. And you have said that I am French, then admitted to the FACT I am Canadian, then said again that I am French.
But I can understand why you can hardly remember some of the drivel you write. I would not want to remember it either if i was it's author.

Debate properly smart ass and use quotes rather than doctor what was said in your favour.

Edited July 18, 2008 by Leafless

Leafless · July 18, 2008

Yes.

I would say not quite or almost as Scotland has the fundamental political right to determine their own constitutional future.

3.3 The Union created by these Acts did not remove from the people of Scotland their fundamental political right to determine their own constitutional future. The Republic of Ireland and the countries of the former British Empire chose to move to independence from similar constitutional arrangements. The people of Scotland remain sovereign and have the same right to choose the form of their own government as the peoples of other nations that have secured independence after periods of union with, or in, other states.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/08/13103747/5

No.
You appear to have never heard of this important document.

I told you not to come back with the Magna Carta and you did.

Leafless · July 18, 2008

Fist off, the Queen is a person, not an "it."

You should have had the manners to ask what 'it' meant rather than come back in your usual self-rightous, pompous manner.

"It" was in referece to Canada as a constitutional monarchy/parliamentry democracy. Just a bad edit.

Secondly, you've zero evidence that a republic would allow the populace more "control" on what the federal government does. You're just pouting because it's too hard for you to get what you personally want.

And you have zero evidence saying what you are saying.

Certainly I would like to see more democratic initiatives offered to the citizens of Canada. Who wouldn't unless you are a communist or from Quebec.

Anyways, Canada is not far off as a country run by a totalitarian government.

A republic is a state or country that is not led by a hereditary monarch,[1][2] but in which the people (or at least a part of its people)[3] have impact on its government.[4][5] The word originates from the Latin term res publica, which translates as "public thing" or "public matter".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

CANADIEN · July 19, 2008

The Queen and our primary constitution has failed Canada and has allowed corrupt treasonous government to rule the land, by agreeing to the repatriation of the constitution.

After all your postings praising British institutions including the Monarchy...

It is clear you do not understand the scope of the problem that exist especially in Eastern Canada as the French currently have not yet gained that kind linguistic foothold in your neck of the woods.

Okay have it your way.
That is Canadians who make it their business to destroy this country on the basis of their holy French culture.

I rest my case about the fact you keep contradicting yourself. :lol:

g_bambino · July 19, 2008

I would say not quite or almost as Scotland has the fundamental political right to determine their own constitutional future.

Not as long as the Act of Union is still in force.

I told you not to come back with the Magna Carta and you did.

Yes, I did, because you seemed to have forgotten about its existence. Did you not want me to point to it because it gets in the way of your fantastical beliefs?

You should have had the manners to ask what 'it' meant rather than come back in your usual self-rightous, pompous manner.
"It" was in referece to Canada as a constitutional monarchy/parliamentry democracy. Just a bad edit.

You said: "Quebecers love the Queen as it gives PM's the power of a king." You're right, though; I must be pompous for not having automatically assumed that you used the English language poorly. I'll know in future to not take anything you say as written, as you will ascribe some other meaning to it later on, as benefits you at that particular moment.

And you have zero evidence saying what you are saying.

I have zero evidence that you have zero evidence? Okay, then; care to prove me wrong? Tell us all, with supporting evidence, how a republic will allow the populace more "control" on what the federal government does.

Certainly I would like to see more democratic initiatives offered to the citizens of Canada. Who wouldn't unless you are a communist or from Quebec.

Communists from New Brunswick? I don't know. But I can say that you don't need a president in order to have more democratic initiatives. You're presently free to initiate whatever initiative you want, even with that Anglo-hating, anti-traditional Queen allowing those frogs the run of the place.

Anyways, Canada is not far off as a country run by a totalitarian government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

So, in order to illustrate how totalitarian the Canadian government is you link to an article on republican government, even after having said that a republican government in Canada would make the government more in control of the populace. Uh hun...

Oops, but wait! Silly me, I was forgetting my manners again! I should ask what you mean by "Canada," "country," and "totalitarian government." Surely you must mean something other than what anyone else would take from the particular string of words you put together in order to communicate your ideas.

Edited July 19, 2008 by g_bambino

CANADIEN · July 19, 2008

You should have had the manners to ask what 'it' meant rather than come back in your usual self-rightous, pompous manner.
"It" was in referece to Canada as a constitutional monarchy/parliamentry democracy. Just a bad edit.

And you have zero evidence saying what you are saying.

Certainly I would like to see more democratic initiatives offered to the citizens of Canada. Who wouldn't unless you are a communist or from Quebec.

Anyways, Canada is not far off as a country run by a totalitarian government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

From Wikipedia

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a concept used to describe political systems where a state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life. The term is usually applied to Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany or communist states, such as Stalinist Russia, Democratic Kampuchea, Vietnam, China, Cuba and North Korea. Totalitarian regimes or movements maintain themselves in political power by means of an official all-embracing ideology and propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that controls the state, personality cults, central state-controlled economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror tactics.

Yep, this must be Canada... in an alternate reality :lol: :lol: :lol:

AngusThermopyle · July 19, 2008

but nobody is allowed to state the FACT that such statements put together prove that you, personnally, are a little hateful man who should get a life.

Now thats better than your last attempt.

However...instead of saying "are a little hatefull man" you should try"a hatefull little man". Its just better sentence structure, you did mention that you are University educated didn't you? What on earth are they teaching now days when university graduates don't even know how to speak and write English correctly? You must be from Quebec I guess.

This is just too easy, gotta love it when you get a rube who is so readily baited.

Edited July 19, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

CANADIEN · July 19, 2008

It's just better sentence structure

CANADIEN · July 19, 2008

Now thats better than your last attempt.
However...instead of saying "are a little hatefull man" you should try"a hatefull little man". Its just better sentence structure, you did mention that you are University educated didn't you? What on earth are they teaching now days when university graduates don't even know how to speak and write English correctly? You must be from Quebec I guess.

This is just too easy, gotta love it when you get a rube who is so readily baited.

Baited, moi? Nope. Just recognizing a low-life when I see one. And I'm an Ontarian. But of course, my first language is French, so in your mind than means I'm from Quebec anyway.

Now, do you have something to contribute other than displays of hatred? Besides sharing the opinion of half of the planet about Célllline Dion I mean. :lol:

Edited July 19, 2008 by CANADIEN

AngusThermopyle · July 19, 2008

Baited, moi? Nope. Just recognizing a low-life when I see one. And I'm an Ontarian. But of course, my first language is French, so in your mind than means I'm from Quebec anyway.
Now, do you have something to contribute other than displays of hatred? Besides sharing the opinion of half of the planet about Célllline Dion I mean.

Now look at that will you! All of a sudden you know what people think! Amazing!

You were doing so well for a little while, you were almost posting in legible fashon and then you start talking about Celine and lapse into gibberish again. What I find hard to understand is the fact that you criticize others for their grammer and sentence structure whilst posting a garbled mess of your own. Please tell me that you didn't attend University because if you actually did it merely afirms the supposition that you can attend and receive a degree while being an imbecile.