Quebec group requests French citizenship

[Leafless]

Canada ceased to be a British colony in 1931, eight years before World War II.

What does this have to do with the British who WON Canada?

[CANADIEN]

Wrong again! The Statute of Westminster ended the ability of the British parliament to legislate for Canada, unless at Canada's request. That means Canada was legislatively severed from the mother country, which, by all definitions, meant the end of colonial status (though the country was already a Dominion prior to 1931, which accorded it special placement in the Empire). By 1939, Mackenzie King had the King and Queen in Canada, accepting the credentials of the US ambassador, granting Royal Assent to bills in the Senate, reviewing the troops as Commander-in-Chief, and visiting the United States, to demonstrate the country's new status as an independednt kingdom.

Actually, the Governor-General accepts foreign ambassadors' credentials, grants Royal Assents and acts as Commandor-in-Chief. If Mackenzie King did those things, he was acting beyond his role, and any laws assented by him would have been invalid.

[g_bambino]

Actually, the Governor-General accepts foreign ambassadors' credentials, grants Royal Assents and acts as Commandor-in-Chief. If Mackenzie King did those things, he was acting beyond his role, and any laws assented by him would have been invalid.

No, that's not the case. The Governor General only does these things on behalf of the monarch; there's nothing to state that the sovereign is barred from performing these duties. In fact, the position of Commander-in-Chief is constitutionally vested in the sovereign, the GG just holds the title. I'm also quite sure that George VI didn't sneak into the Senate to grant Royal Assent when nobody was looking; it was a state affair.

[Leafless]

Wow, Canadien, you're absolutely right! Whoie is as ignorant of facts as Leafless!

Your just to dumb to be able to differentiate opinions.

And to that I say:

God save your Queen,

Flush her in the toilet and pull the chain,

God, save the Queen.

[whowhere]

If you hate Canada so much, do yourself and all of us a favour and go.

I'd be tempted to suggest an animal as your mascot, but I don't feel like unsulting the donkey.

It is obvious you hate Canada! You attempt to delude and distort the reality of Canada with your delusions. You want to revise history to your delusions but you are trumped by the documented records of the United States and pre 1759 maps and other information relating to Canada.

You should learn to just accept the facts.

[CANADIEN]

No, that's not the case. The Governor General only does these things on behalf of the monarch; there's nothing to state that the sovereign is barred from performing these duties. In fact, the position of Commander-in-Chief is constitutionally vested in the sovereign, the GG just holds the title. I'm also quite sure that George VI didn't sneak into the Senate to grant Royal Assent when nobody was looking; it was a state affair.

My apologies, I actually misread your post and took it as meaning Mackenzie King was reviewing the troops etc., when you correctly stated the King did those things. Still, the PM could not have done them himself.

[whowhere]

No, that's not the case. The Governor General only does these things on behalf of the monarch; there's nothing to state that the sovereign is barred from performing these duties. In fact, the position of Commander-in-Chief is constitutionally vested in the sovereign, the GG just holds the title. I'm also quite sure that George VI didn't sneak into the Senate to grant Royal Assent when nobody was looking; it was a state affair.

The Governor General is technically the head of state in Canada. Canada being the weasel it is, found an informal way to run the Country. We elect people in each area; if these people are members of a party, the party with the most seats, gets to form the Cabinet to run Canada. The role of the Prime Minister is not specifically dealt with but through pass practices, Canada operates how it operates.

Canada broke away from British control through subtle changes and world forces. Canada is not exactly free because of some great act making it free. The fact is, the Queen is still involved in the appointing of the Governor General. The Queen is still, technically the head of state. What is technically accurate and what is done in practice is two different things.

[CANADIEN]

Your just to dumb to be able to differentiate opinions.

And to that I say:

God save your Queen,

Flush her in the toilet and pull the chain,

God, save the Queen.

Actually, he is quite able to differentiate your dumb opinions from whowhere's.

Interesting btw, how you keep praising the value of British institutions then insult the Queen.

I may not be a Monarchist but until further notice she is the Head of State of my country, Canada. You insult her in that fashion, you insult Canada. GET OUT OF CANADA.

[seabee]

God bless the Queen.

Dieu blesse la Reine.

Whatever....

[M.Dancer]

quote your source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popul...Canada_by_years

I think you might have been the only person here who needed proof you don't know what you babble about.

[M.Dancer]

Fact is, Canada is a word derived and created by the French, period.

I have to ask, does being painfully stupid hurt?

Ca·nadi·an (k-nd-n) adj. & n.

Word History: Linguistically, mountains can be made out of molehills, so to speak: words denoting a small thing can, over time, come to denote something much larger. This is the case with Canada, now the name of the second-largest country in the world but having a much humbler origin. Apparently its history starts with the word kanata, which in Huron (an Iroquoian language of eastern Canada) meant "village." Jacques Cartier, the early French explorer, picked up the word and used it to refer to the land around his settlement, now part of Quebec City. By the 18th century it referred to all of New France, which extended from the St. Lawrence River to the Great Lakes and down into what is now the American Midwest. In 1759, the British conquered New France and used the name Quebec for the colony north of the St. Lawrence River, and Canada for the rest of the territory. Eventually, as the territory increased in size and the present arrangement of the provinces developed, Canada applied to all the land north of the United States and east of Alaska.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Canada

[whowhere]

I have to ask, does being painfully stupid hurt?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Canada

hahaha, you so funny and intelligent to. How did this forum get so blessed with your wit and wisdom.

I see how you roll duncer you are another British history revisionists. Add Canadien to your friend list while you are at it.

[whowhere]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popul...Canada_by_years

I think you might have been the only person here who needed proof you don't know what you babble about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About

Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world. Since its creation in 2001,

Dictionary.com

propaganda - Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause

Wikipedia is about as realiable as mapleleafweb.com for your knowledge. READ SOME BOOKS, ok dumcer?

[CANADIEN]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About

Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world. Since its creation in 2001,

Dictionary.com

propaganda - Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause

Wikipedia is about as realiable as mapleleafweb.com for your knowledge. READ SOME BOOKS, ok dumcer?

Excellant idea, which I invite you to follow.

Go to your local library, and arrange to get Jacques Cartier's Voyages to Canada, in the original text. A re-edition was done by Lux, of Montreal, in 2000 (ISBN 2-922494-22-9). In that re-edition, the relation of Cartier's second expedition starts on page 55; it includes a glossary of Aboriginal terms, starting on page 122. The ninth entry on page 126 reads, and I quote:

Ils appellent une ville Canada

You are of course welcome to provide proof this is a forgery, or that the writer of the Relation lied, by providing either a book reference or a Web site. You won't , because you can't.

Edited July 20, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popul...Canada_by_years

I think you might have been the only person here who needed proof you don't know what you babble about.

Shame on you, you did not mention that they took information from the Statistics Canada web site. It has to be a lie.

[Oleg Bach]

Shame on you, you did not mention that they took information from the Statistics Canada web site. It has to be a lie.

Stats Canada will report that crime is down- mean while there was a tripple murder here yesterday - and from what I understand - stats are like polls. Who ever controls them controls the minds of sheeple.

[g_bambino]

My apologies, I actually misread your post and took it as meaning Mackenzie King was reviewing the troops etc., when you correctly stated the King did those things. Still, the PM could not have done them himself.

Oh! I see. Heh.. well, no, the PM cannot grant Royal Assent, accept ambassadors, etc.

The Governor General is technically the head of state in Canada. Canada being the weasel it is, found an informal way to run the Country. We elect people in each area; if these people are members of a party, the party with the most seats, gets to form the Cabinet to run Canada. The role of the Prime Minister is not specifically dealt with but through pass practices, Canada operates how it operates.

Canada broke away from British control through subtle changes and world forces. Canada is not exactly free because of some great act making it free. The fact is, the Queen is still involved in the appointing of the Governor General. The Queen is still, technically the head of state. What is technically accurate and what is done in practice is two different things.

That depends on your definition of head of state, which isn't a legal term in Canada; all constitutional power is vested in the monarch, but the Governor General exercises almost all of it in her stead. That the Queen is sovereign (let's avoid "head of state," then) doesn't mean the UK has any control over Canada; not since the Statute of Westminster, and certainly not since the Queen enacted the Constittion Act, 1982. EIIR is Queen of Canada in a completely separate way to her being Queen of the UK (or of New Zeanald, Tuvalu, St. Kitts, etc.). As well as appointing the GG, only the Queen can give permission to add extra seats to the Senate, issue Letters Patent, and create new Canadian honours. In all these and other Canadian matters she must follow the advice of her Canadian ministers only, who are chosen in the manner you accurately described above.

Edited July 20, 2008 by g_bambino

[Oleg Bach]

That depends on your definition of head of state, which isn't a legal term in Canada; all constitutional power is vested in the monarch, but the Governor General exercises almost all of it in her stead. That the Queen is sovereign (let's avoid "head of state," then) doesn't mean the UK has any control over Canada; not since the Statute of Westminster, of which you're already aware. EIIR is Queen of Canada in a completely separate way to her being Queen of the UK (or of New Zeanald, Tuvalu, St. Kitts, etc.). As well as appointing the GG, only the Queen can give permission to add extra seats to the Senate, issue Letters Patent, and create new Canadian honours. In all these and other Canadian matters she must follow the advice of her Canadian ministers only, who are chosen in the manner you accurately described above.

The old Queens Council guys are still breathing and still of great influence. ...maybe these clever lawyers can draft up a nice document similar to the order of canada. You know...the great honour that went to Morgantaler because some rigistrar who hates men runs the Supreme Court - I guess the old QCs never took into account that some woman that they appoint were not women - but strange men in the bodies of women...eeeech! - The Queen has entrusted the appointment of Judges and Senators etc...with the old guard..and they are failing...maybe they are old or maybe they just were not very good at ruling the colony to begin with? Oh well!

[whowhere]

Ils appellent une ville Canada

When you bring forward an aboriginal alphabet let me know and we will then attribute a word to them. I see french words but I don't see any aboriginal words. You, yourself stated the aboriginals had no alphabet, so how is it possible they have words upon which cartier could make notes about. The best he could do was use his interpretation of what he heard with his French pronunciation and spelling skills (taught to him by France!). The word you are talking about is kanata, not Canada. Why are you quoting a French source. If you are going to be a British Revisionist you better find more sources to back up your delusions.

[CANADIEN]

Please someone, tell me he's trolling. Nobody can be that brainless.,

When you bring forward an aboriginal alphabet let me know and we will then attribute a word to them. I see french words but I don't see any aboriginal words. You, yourself stated the aboriginals had no alphabet, so how is it possible they have words upon which cartier could make notes about.

You don't need an alphabet, or any kind of writing system, to have a language. And as any person with a Grade 5 education could tell you, languages are made up of WORDS.

The best he could do was use his interpretation of what he heard (...)

And what did he hear? WORDS

(..)with his French pronunciation and spelling skills (taught to him by France!).

He indeed wrote down, using his alphabet, the WORD he had heard (and misheard) which is exactly what I and every people who understand the facts are saying. Only in your mind does the fact he wrote down a word from a First nation language mean that the word is not of First Nations origin.

The word you are talking about is kanata (...)

See, they people of Stadacone had words after all

(...) not Canada.

So why did Cartier write it was Canada?

Why are you quoting a French source.

Because it proves the facts, and my point. .

You will not produce sources contradicting the facts I have written, because you can't.

[seabee]

QUOTE

(...) not Canada. So why did Cartier write it was Canada?

One very possible hypothesis is that when Cartier heard the word, it was aboard his sail-ship. Under the force of the wind, the masts are creaking a lot, and he might very easily have misunderstood the exact pronounciation of the word because of the ambiant noise.

[blueblood]

Check your calendar. We're in 2008.

And once again, I am a Canadian, not a Frenchie. If you are too blinded bt prejudice to understand that, pack your little schoolyard bully act and leave the 21th century for Jurassic Park.

Yes it is 2008, we have many freedoms including the freedom of mobility. I like it in Canada, and I have the right to stay here. The Quebecers get the same rights, if living in one of the best countries in the world isn't good enough for them, I'm not forcing them to stay, they can hop on a plane and emmigrate without fear of being jailed.

And speaking of 2008, there is that little matter of bill 101 to take care of. Telling me its 2008 and defending that kind of nonsense is flat out hypocrisy.

In the 1700s the brits won, deal with it.

[CANADIEN]

One very possible hypothesis is that when Cartier heard the word, it was aboard his sail-ship. Under the force of the wind, the masts are creaking a lot, and he might very easily have misunderstood the exact pronounciation of the word because of the ambiant noise.

There might be a number of reasons. The essential point is that Cartier heard a word that ended with the sound ta, and wrote it down with the final sound da.

[CANADIEN]

Yes it is 2008, we have many freedoms including the freedom of mobility. I like it in Canada, and I have the right to stay here. The Quebecers get the same rights, if living in one of the best countries in the world isn't good enough for them, I'm not forcing them to stay, they can hop on a plane and emmigrate without fear of being jailed.

And speaking of 2008, there is that little matter of bill 101 to take care of. Telling me its 2008 and defending that kind of nonsense is flat out hypocrisy.

In the 1700s the brits won, deal with it.

And pray tell, how am I defending Bill 101? By calling it again and again a pile of m*nure?

The 18th century was three centuries ago, deal with it.

[whowhere]

Please someone, tell me he's trolling. Nobody can be that brainless.,

You don't need an alphabet, or any kind of writing system, to have a language. And as any person with a Grade 5 education could tell you, languages are made up of WORDS.

And what did he hear? WORDS

He indeed wrote down, using his alphabet, the WORD he had heard (and misheard) which is exactly what I and every people who understand the facts are saying. Only in your mind does the fact he wrote down a word from a First nation language mean that the word is not of First Nations origin.

See, they people of Stadacone had words after all

So why did Cartier write it was Canada?

Because it proves the facts, and my point. .

You will not produce sources contradicting the facts I have written, because you can't.

You are an idiot.

There is song sung at Birthdays, you may have heard it, it goes something like Happy Birthday to ... Happy Birthday to .... etc etc. This song first appeared in a book in the 30's. A company bought the rights to this book. Now, everytime a company uses this song in a commercial capacity such as a movie they have to pay a royalty of something like $10,000 to the owner of this book.

Comprehend that reality, moron? Under copyright laws the word belongs to Cartier. Under Devine/Cosmic/God's law the word is a creation of Cartier's soul using pronunciation and spelling skills taught to him by his mother Country: France. To a heathen mind such as yourself you will have difficulty comprehending Religious Forces. I bring in Religion because that goes to mind of jacque Cartier acting on behalf of the king of France. A king who ruled by divine right by the decree of the vatican/pope. That was Europe before the rise of the United States.

You are certainly some form of Troll to say the least.