Canadian Identity: un-American

[g_bambino]

Too late now...you opened up this can of worms all by your damn self.

No, I didn't ask you to stick around and be an ass; you did that all by your damn self because you're too immature to either keep quiet or say "I don't know" to a question you don't know the answer to.

[bush_cheney2004]

Oh look..."Canadian Identity" has its own Wiki for one stop shopping, with those pesky Americans (" I hate those bastards") all over it:

The issue of Canadian identity remains under scrutiny, perhaps more than the identity of the people of any other modern nation.[5] Journalist Andrew Cohen wrote in 2007: "The Canadian Identity, as it has come to be known, is as elusive as the Sasquatch and Ogopogo. It has animated--and frustrated--generations of statesmen, historians, writers, artists, philosophers, and the National Film Board...Canada resists easy definition."[6] In true Canadian fashion, however, even the search for an identity has become itself an object for self-criticism.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_identity#The_United_States_and_the_Canadian_Identity

Edited December 4, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Smallc]

keep squirming BC.

[whowhere]

Yeah, we really should start voting our presidents in....wait.

And ours is simply a figment of your imaginary imagination.

And other countries are better at it still. What's your point?

Canada gives automatic citizenship? Since when?

Actually, the average American doesn't make more than the average Canadian anymore. The average Joe Canadian, leaving out outliers of very poor and very rich, actually makes more and has for quite some time. We also carry less debt and have a better asset to debt ratio....oh, and we save more and spend less.

But we didn't want to....so there.

You have said nothing and is a waste of time stating the contrast. In anycase You forgot to mention the 2 trillion dollars in printed money given to china for their treasury bills. You forget to mention the US has 90 percent of the world's military assets. You forget to mention the US has no Federal Sales Tax and the GDP is Largest GDP in the world. I can go on on...

[jbg]

So the Statute of Westminster is now Canadian law, and has already been amended by Canada so that its version differs from the one in Britain. That means Canada is... gasp! Independent! Even if the UK revokes or amends its Statute of Westminster! I'll give you a moment to get over the shock.

But how could that be? Canada does not belong to Canada, remember?

[whowhere]

You found the original British version. Congratulations.

Now, let's look at the result of constitutional evolution over the last 60 years:

So the Statute of Westminster is now Canadian law, and has already been amended by Canada so that its version differs from the one in Britain. That means Canada is... gasp! Independent! Even if the UK revokes or amends its Statute of Westminster! I'll give you a moment to get over the shock.

You are an idiot. What part of...

7

.

Saving for British North America Acts and application of the Act to Canada. — (1) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to apply to the repeal, amendment or alteration of the British North America Acts 1867 to 1930 or any order, rule or regulation made thereunder.

What part of that do you not understand?

Matthew 15 (King James Version)

16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

20 These are the things which defile a man

You really should stop your lying.

[whowhere]

Too late now...you opened up this can of worms all by your damn self.

Grown ups should know better....American or Canadian.

The contrast of United States/Canada: The US has their constution, democracy, judiciary in order. Canada doesn't. Because of this the US is expansionary, Canada is contractionary and has to rely on selling Canada out for bread crumbs. Take all of this, if the US were a person, they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth and went onto amass wealth. Canada was kicked out of the home and is rebellous and ungrateful. Canada has restorted to schemes, scams, and lies to further itself. Canadians of this sort have no interest in doing what is right and necessary to be prosperous.

[g_bambino]

What part of that do you not understand?

None of it. What part of

Act Affected: Statute of Westminster, 1931, 22 Geo. V, c. 4 (U.K.); Amendment: (a) section 4 is repealed, and (subsection 7(1) is repealed

S.17, Schedule to the

Constitution Act 1982

don't you understand? You do realise you quoted section 7(1), right?

[+]

Edited December 4, 2009 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

But how could that be? Canada does not belong to Canada, remember?

Oh yea, I forgot! I do recall his other pearl of wisdom, though: the British queen is the Queen of Britain. Genious!

[whowhere]

None of it. What part of

don't you understand? You do realise you quoted section 7(1), right?

[+]

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1081723

I suggest you study the Statue of westminister. It is obvious you are dim and you are of poor character. In any case present the facts to support your dementia. The Statue of Westminister did nothing other than allow Canada's parliament to finalize its laws past in parliament. Before the Statue of westminister, laws passed in Canada had to be stamped by the UK parliament. The Statue of Westminister Eliminated this step, however the GG who represents the queen still has to ascent all of Canada's legislation. The statue of westminister states Canada is still bound by the British North America Act and nothing in that statue does anything in repeal any of that.

You are obviously suffering from mental challenges because this is all in clear English. Maybe English is not your first language? Perhaps you should get some tutoring to help you understand.

[whowhere]

(3) The powers conferred by this Act upon the Parliament of Canada or upon the legislatures of the Provinces shall be restricted to the enactment of laws in relation to matters within the competence of the Parliament of Canada or of any of the legislatures of the Provinces respectively.

It is my opinion Canada breached Section 7-3 of the Statue of Westminister in their 1947 Canadian Citizneship Act and overstepped their legal authority.

Here's another UK Government Link, UK Border Agency..

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/othernationality/britishsubjects/

And all citizens of Commonwealth countries were British subjects until January 1983

Canada is a commonwealth Country. If we are to take this at face value, those of Canada were british subjects until 1983 and not 1947. Canada's parliament acted beyond its authority with its 1947 Citizenship legislation.

Canada is subject to the BNA act.

Canada is subject to the Statue of westminister.

Canada also has to understand Queen Elizabeths father abdicted the throne

ab·di·cate (bd-kt)

To relinquish (power or responsibility) formally.

To relinquish formally a high office or responsibility

Once this happen power transferred to the UK parliament and the process of replacing the Monarch was initiated. England has a long history and Monarchs have been deposed and replaced when they are no longer of high Character and sound mind. Queen Elizabeths judgement is certainly flawed and the UK is likely being kind to her. All her actions Can be challenged and scrutinized by the UK and gauged against English Common Law, the British North America Act, the Statue of Westminister, and all other Legislation of the UK to establish whether the Queen overstepped and was out of step in her actions. If it is determined she acted beyond her station any all of her actions as Queen will be null and void. So once she is gone be sure there will be a new day in the UK and the gloves will be off and the fight will move to the International Court where Canada can justify its legitamacy and what it has done since 1982 in the name of democracy. I am sure the court will be keen to hear the rational of how Canada became more democratic when Canada's corrupt parlimanent increased Canada's population from 20 million to 34 million through immigration. Doing this only served the interests of the Liberals and the Conservatives and allowed them to run Canada as Conrad Black ran Hollinger with no way to stop them. Perhaps when this day comes those responsible for these sell out policies will get some jail time but not likely.

The noose is slowly tightening and Canada's party will come to an end.

Buy into your demetia.

[g_bambino]

You are obviously suffering from mental challenges because this is all in clear English.

Embarassed that you were wrong yet again?

[g_bambino]

Queen Elizabeths father abdicted the throne

Good lord! Talk about dementia!

[whowhere]

Embarassed that you were wrong yet again?

Wrong that you are mentally challenged and you should get some English Tutoring; I don't think so.

Edited December 4, 2009 by whowhere

[g_bambino]

I don't think.

Indeed.

[jbg]

Wrong that you are mentally challenged and you should get some English Tutoring; I don't think so.

You misspelled abdicated (spelled as abdicted) and dementia in same post.

[Melanie_]

You misspelled abdicated (spelled as abdicted) and dementia in same post.

Yes, but the real pearl in this post was the "Statue of Westminister".

And Whowhere, Queen Elizabeth's father did not abdicate the throne. Her uncle, Edward VIII, abdicated, which elevated her father, George VI, to the throne.

[whowhere]

You misspelled abdicated (spelled as abdicted) and dementia in same post.

Yeah, I am care-less in my spelling and structure. Whatever, it's my point to the senseless like bambinco that matters.

[whowhere]

Yes, but the real pearl in this post was the "Statue of Westminister".

And Whowhere, Queen Elizabeth's father did not abdicate the throne. Her uncle, Edward VIII, abdicated, which elevated her father, George VI, to the throne.

Nonetheless, the throne was abdicated and clueless wonder was lucky to be queen for all the blunders of morality and logic she's made. The irony of the posters on this thread is they believe the monarch is a death do us part - forever relationship. Not so, Monarchs have been deposed and replaced in Englands history. Not only that, Monarchs were a product of the UK people and parliment; not the UK people and parliament a product of the monarch. Something, the dullards on this thread have to bear in mind when digesting the BNA act and the Statue of westminister.

[Melanie_]

Nonetheless, the throne was abdicated and clueless wonder was lucky to be queen for all the blunders of morality and logic she's made. The irony of the posters on this thread is they believe the monarch is a death do us part - forever relationship. Not so, Monarchs have been deposed and replaced in Englands history. Not only that, Monarchs were a product of the UK people and parliment; not the UK people and parliament a product of the monarch. Something, the dullards on this thread have to bear in mind when digesting the BNA act and the Statue of westminister.

Actually, parliament is a product of the monarchy, rather than the reverse as you have stated here. England's parliament came about as a result of the Magna Carta, in King John's time, as a way for the barons to have input into the decisions made by the king. History of England's parliament

I'm not particularly tied to the idea of the monarchy in Canada, but if you are going to advocate getting rid of it, you really should do your homework first.

[g_bambino]

if you are going to advocate getting rid of it, you really should do your homework first.

Oh, you don't know how much homework he has to do. He believes the word "Canada" is copyrighted by France, with the only Canadians to ever fight in a war being those who participated in the American Revolution against the Queen, no Canadians having fought in WWII or Korea because they weren't citizens until 1955, even though Britain conscripted Canadians to fight in WWII because the Canadian constitution still lies in the parliament at Westminster and can be revoked by the Queen at the command of the British parliament, which is one and the same with the Canadian parliament, leaving Canadians still as subjects of the British government, including the Newfoundlanders who were forced to join Canada by the Queen when she was still a 23 year old princess. And if you don't believe any of this, you're a victim of brainwashing!

[whowhere]

Actually, parliament is a product of the monarchy, rather than the reverse as you have stated here. England's parliament came about as a result of the Magna Carta, in King John's time, as a way for the barons to have input into the decisions made by the king. History of England's parliament

I'm not particularly tied to the idea of the monarchy in Canada, but if you are going to advocate getting rid of it, you really should do your homework first.

I am not saying get rid of it, I am saying Canadians should choose and elect the Governor General who is the Monarch's representive. At the moment the unelected Prime Minister chooses the GG and without consideration the Queen signs off on this. If the queen has no interest in the GG then she should allow the Canadian people to choose the GG. Whether Canadians choose the GG or the PM it makes no difference to the status quo of the current monarch. I would rather directly vote for a GG to ensure parliament is acting accordingly then have a weasel PM who is PM because his party makes up the minority of seats and governs for their own interests.

[whowhere]

Oh, you don't know how much homework he has to do. He believes the word "Canada" is copyrighted by France, with the only Canadians to ever fight in a war being those who participated in the American Revolution against the Queen, no Canadians having fought in WWII or Korea because they weren't citizens until 1955, even though Britain conscripted Canadians to fight in WWII because the Canadian constitution still lies in the parliament at Westminster and can be revoked by the Queen at the command of the British parliament, which is one and the same with the Canadian parliament, leaving Canadians still as subjects of the British government, including the Newfoundlanders who were forced to join Canada by the Queen when she was still a 23 year old princess. And if you don't believe any of this, you're a victim of brainwashing!

Good of you to take notes.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The GG needs to go, along with the Senate and the concept of the Queen being our sovereign. We need to elect the PM, have fixed election dates, recall legislation and term limits to office. We also need citizen initiatives and a citizen ratified constitution. All that just to modernize our political system.

[Smallc]

Why do all of those things need to change? We have what is most certainly one of the best countries in the world. Why would we want to seriously change the things that have brought us to here? Why would we want to change what is probably the most stable government system in the entire world in favour of something that some people think is more 'fair' and 'democratic'?