Canadian Patriots League
Dr Caleb @ Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:49 am
mikailus mikailus:
How can you understand yourself and defend an institution that's so utterly irrational, anti-democratic, parasitic, posh, elitist, and useless with a bloody past, and attacking my arguments with et tu's?
"Argument--a series of statements made to confirm or prop up a conclusion."
I'm sorry, I must have missed your alleged 'arguments'. All I've seen are . . . well, nearly all the common logical mistakes on this page:
http://skeptically.org/logicalthreads/id13.html
You may want to study this (after you get through Black's Law, and Distribution of power in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms).
http://www.criticalthinking.org/article ... hought.cfm
CdnNationalist @ Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:51 am
mikailus mikailus:
Queen Victoria was also the Empress of India, a title made by the British Parliament... it's still doesn't mean India was a seperate nation.
Monarchists are all deluded into thinking there's even a difference. The monarchy is the bloodiest, most tyrannical, oppressive, lavish form of government ever. Queen of Canada is merely a title, and monarchs can carry many titles. Why you're defending a fascist institution I cannot understand.
It also doesn't matter what words the Americans use. As long as what the organization is and represents is Canadian, and the British monarchy is NOT Canadian.
Stop trying to confuse people, as though they're stupid. Why should we even have a monarch and if she's the Queen of Canada, why would she need a representative? And why is the British Monarch also the "Queen of Canada". You'd be arguing the same bullshit if we gave the King of Tailand the title of "King of Canada", which is really only a title.
Monarchists are all deluded into thinking there's even a difference. The monarchy is the bloodiest, most tyrannical, oppressive, lavish form of government ever. Queen of Canada is merely a title, and monarchs can carry many titles. Why you're defending a fascist institution I cannot understand.
It also doesn't matter what words the Americans use. As long as what the organization is and represents is Canadian, and the British monarchy is NOT Canadian.
Stop trying to confuse people, as though they're stupid. Why should we even have a monarch and if she's the Queen of Canada, why would she need a representative? And why is the British Monarch also the "Queen of Canada". You'd be arguing the same bullshit if we gave the King of Tailand the title of "King of Canada", which is really only a title.
It does matter what name you use. When I first saw your post I automatically associated the term with Americans. I am not American. Patriots is an American term. I am a Canadian Nationalist not an American Patriot. Also you don't have to be on the far left to be a nationalist. You can be left middle or right, (I am in the middle) as long as you are for a Sovereign Canada that does not have Vichy Canadians who would sell it out like some of the current politicians in Ottawa. Everyone has different views but saying your extreme left will exclude others. This is a divide and conquer method. All nationalists/patriots have to be united.
Brent Swain @ Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:30 pm
Closer ties with Britain was what saved us from closer ties with the US, a far greater threat to Canadian sovereignty. I'd rather see closer ties with Britain, without sucking up to the monarchist parasites, altho that may be less useful, now that Britain has become Uncle Sam's poodle.