So apparently the country named Canada doesn't work at all.

QuickCall @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:22 am

lily lily:

Well, that's one way of looking at it.

Yes, well, I rarely think of these things, and I don't see any terrorism in Canada, but when I read him saying that Canada had terrorism from Quebec, I just tought I should straigthen the facts. It never happened and is a lie. So I guess he's not a Quebec separatist after all, since he wouldn't say something like that, which wouldn't help his cause.
Maybe he's a young guy who just woke up and said, "Hey! We gotta do something about this problem, before Canada self-destructs", which I also think is a possibility.

DerbyX @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:45 am

$1:

That doesn't prove that he is francophone, or a Quebecer or that he is a separatist.

I'd suggest you review evidentiary laws of science. That may not "prove" it but the evidence clearly indicates it with enough support to base the theory on. Feel free to introduce evidence to invalidate the theory.

$1:

What ??? What terrorist attack FROM Quebec ? Quebec never sent anyone in the rest of Canada to put bombs or kidnap politicians. The FLQ, a very small group of frustrated Quebecers, resisted against an invader, by using violence on federal forces in Quebec. Why can't some understand that invading countries and trying to dominate people brings reactions and problems? The only terrorist attack I've heard of in Canada is when, in 1759 or 60 or so, imediately after the war, the british burned half the houses standing in Canada, and raped women, and stole cattle. That is terrorizing people.

We aren't invading Quebec and you know it. You ignore the fact that Canada was established with them and not imposed on them. In addition I have no doubt they fared better under british rule then we would under french. The FLQ were common murderers & terrorist who used violence to further their cause. No FLQ memebers were killed, in fact the only person killed was Pierre Laporte. You are spouting some very rancid propaganda there when you say they are "fighting invaders". We can just as easily say that when Britain defeated france (yet again) and they seceeded "New france" to us then the french settlers living here became british subjects and failing that they could now be considered invaders. The fact that Britain establish Canada with them at no time makes us an invader. That is just revisionist history at its worst.

$1:

Wrong again, the country called Canada doesnt exist but Quebec.
The national antom was written by two Quebecers (Calixa-Lavalée and Basile Routhier),
the name "Canada" was given by a Frenchman,
the maple leaf is a symbol first used by the french-canadian, before the brit invasion. (Isn't Quebec the biggest producer of maple syrup?).
Actualy, maybe "Le vrai Canada" should separate from the british imperialists, and regain control of this place. Or how about a real confederation, as it was supposed to be in 1867 when we had a deal, which english-canada never respected?

Funny, I seem to think Canada does exist as well as the entire world recognizes us as an independant country. The fact the certain national symbols were done by frenchman does not invalidate us. I suppose in order to be considered "Canadian" it automatically must be done by the english? Your anti-british tirades are a bit misplaced. While it is true that we are a member of the commonwealth and up to a technical point under British law it is only the queen and her powers are mostly symbolic as is her powers in England.

$1:

Ontario (Ottawa and Toronto) already handles everything, even in fields that are supposed to be in provincial jurisdictions, according to the 1982 constitution.

What a load. For a province & city that control everything we see a ton of money leaving and going elsewhere. Those of us who live in Ontario watch everybody say we control everything and yet our money still leaves and we see the politicians do everything to placate everyone else. Why do you think that Dalton Mcguinty is starting to use the same provincial gambit on the feds and that T.O is saying that losing 2+ billion a year just to hear how the rest of Canada hates us is too much.

$1:

You should think about it.
With global warming, the North is gonna be a paradise, and all virgin.

A badly held misconception. The climate is changing to rapidly for that to happen. A great many of the plant species that are used to the warmer weather cannot migrate fast enough to support any northern migrating animal species. Warmer weather does not a paradise make.

$1:

Seriousely, if Quebec separates, the rest is gonna collapse and be annexed by the US. So I guess Quebec has to stay to help english-Canada, and defend it against USA, as they did in the past when the US tried to invade Canada. If it wasn't for the "milice Canadienne", a group of french-canadians who joined forces with the loyalists, the rebels would have won. Think of it as a marriage, the french needs the english for their financial abilities (exploiting others), and the english needs the french, for the good cooking, their artistic abilities, and their scientific abilities. Togheter, Canada is a couple (confederation), and if both are respected and treated as equal, everything goes well, if not, we get what we got...

Far more likely would be the partioning of Quebec which would allow us to retain the people who consider themselves Canadian, all the land & resources we want to and the west will see us rid of the people whom they say we favour way to much and understand that won't be happening anymore. Your little comment that the english are only good for "exploiting" others and the french have all our cooking, artisitc & science???? abilities is just a purely racist and bigotted comment.

$1:

The wife's baggage is packed and standing near the exit door. Twice she almost divorced, "jamais deux sans trois"! I know it's hard to change 250 years of bad habit, so I guess the fight will go on, and the wife will either leave, throw her husband out, or hit him on the head and make sauce with him.

Or, we'll kick the "bitch" out, retain the house & kids, restore harmony within our family and live happily ever after. :lol:

Mustang1 @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:28 am

I don’t care what semantic spin or lexicographical junk one subscribes to, the historical reality is that the FLQ was a terrorist organization (that includes its various splinter cells).

QuickCall @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:46 am

DerbyX DerbyX:

We aren't invading Quebec and you know it.

We? Who is we? Me and you?
I said, Canada was invaded by the british in 1759.
Are you trying to deny that?

DerbyX DerbyX:

You ignore the fact that Canada was established with them and not imposed on them.

That is crap. You must be refering to the 1867 constitution?
It never was respected, just a lie to buy time.
Read your history books and get your facts straight.
Canada existed before that, and YOUR Canada started with a military invasion.

DerbyX DerbyX:

In addition I have no doubt they fared better under british rule then we would under french.

That's possible. We'll never know, will we?

DerbyX DerbyX:

The FLQ were common murderers & terrorist who used violence to further their cause.

I agree that they were murderers and used violence to further their cause.
The british have done the same in 1759. They killed and used violence to further their cause.
But I don't think a terrorist is a common murderer.
And I don't think a resistant his a terrorist.
Were french resistants blowing up trains filled with german armement terrorists?

DerbyX DerbyX:

The fact the certain national symbols were done by frenchman does not invalidate us. I suppose in order to be considered "Canadian" it automatically must be done by the english?

You must be confused, or drunk, or whatever.
Most, if not all, Canadian Symbols are from french-canada, the beaver, maple leaf...etc.
The rest is British symbols, and pathetic attempts at creating new symbols and an identity.

DerbyX DerbyX:

$1:

Ontario (Ottawa and Toronto) already handles everything, even in fields that are supposed to be in provincial jurisdictions, according to the 1982 constitution.

What a load. For a province & city that control everything we see a ton of money leaving and going elsewhere.

Buying people off is a way of controling them. The fact that a lot of money from Ontario goes to P.E.I. just proves my point that Ontario controls the rest, not the other way around. Plus, that money Ontario is giving away, is just a part of the money it stole.

DerbyX DerbyX:

Your little comment that the english are only good for "exploiting" others and the french have all our cooking, artisitc & science???? abilities is just a purely racist and bigotted comment.

It's a little comment on a big truth.
But I understand that it shocks you, since you obviousely don't like to look at reality. Keep thinking Canada was created in 1867, stay in your confortable bubble.
Is that bubble cubic?

DerbyX DerbyX:

Or, we'll kick the "bitch" out, retain the house & kids, restore harmony within our family and live happily ever after. :lol:

Yeah

!
I've seen husbands who had such utopic ideas.
And I know where it lead them.
As I said, keep living in your bubble filled with fairy tales and lies, it must be beautiful in there...

Mustang1 @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:04 pm

The British Goverment didn’t politically proclaim the constitutional entity of Canada in 1867? Really? I’d love to hear how this is somehow erroneous.

QuickCall @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:33 pm

lily lily:

Beavers and maple leaves are French-Canadian?

Yes, the beaver comes from when french settlers did fur commerce with local aborigenes. Canadian maples grow mostly in Quebec and was used as a symbol by the french settlers before the british invasion.
The canadian flag is a compromise. The maple leaf for the "Canadiens" and the color red for england. Take the two vertical red stripes out, and you have a french-canadian flag!
I bet no one here told you that before eh?

QuickCall @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:36 pm

Mustang1 Mustang1:

The British Goverment didn’t politically proclaim the constitutional entity of Canada in 1867? Really? I’d love to hear how this is somehow erroneous.

Yes it did, but Canada already existed long before that.
Do you really think something needs to be proclaimed by the British Government before it can be recognized as existing?
Teenagers often think the world started spinning the day they were born.
English-Canadians often think Canada didn't exist before the British invaded and transformed it a bit.

Mustang1 @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 1:16 pm

QuickCall QuickCall:

[
Do you really think something needs to be proclaimed by the British Government before it can be recognized as existing?

As the constitution of Canada? Yep. So did the Confederation delegates – the united colonies would be called officially the Dominion of Canada - that went to London in 1866 to get the constitution passed by the British government. Before that? No Canada, just British Colonies with a shared history, economic goals, vision and political institutions. Want a historical parallel? Look up the 13 Colonies.

Motorcycleboy @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 1:23 pm

QuickCall QuickCall:

[ but when I read him saying that Canada had terrorism from Quebec, I just tought I should straigthen the facts. It never happened and is a lie. .

Terrorism never happened? How do you figure? The kidnapping and murder of Pierre Laporte was what then? Crazy kids on a bit of a lark?

How about the kidnapping of James Cross? The FLQ bombing campaigns of Post Offices and Federal Government offices in the 60's?

DerbyX @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 1:38 pm

$1:

We? Who is we? Me and you?
I said, Canada was invaded by the british in 1759.
Are you trying to deny that?

The British established Canada & confederation. France lost to Britain & seceeded the land. Are you denying that?

$1:

My Canada? What kind of prick are you?

$1:

The British North America Acts 1867–1975 are a series of Acts of the British Parliament dealing with the government of Canada. The first and most important Act of the series was passed in 1867, and created the self-governing Dominion of Canada. Canada and the other British dominions achieved full legislative sovereignty with the passage of the Statute of Westminster 1931, but prior to the Canada Act 1982 the British North America Acts were excluded from the operation of the Statute of Westminster and could only be amended by the British Parliament.

In 1982 Canada patriated its constitution and entrenched within it the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, through the Constitution Act, 1982. By the Canada Act 1982, the British Parliament, acting at the request and with the consent of Canada, enacted the Constitution Act 1982, which established a procedure for the amendment of the Canadian constitution by the Canadian Parliament. The British North America Acts 1867–1975 are generally named Constitution Acts in Canada, and together with the Constitution Act 1982 are now collectively known as the Constitution Acts 1867–1982, though they remain named as they originally were in the United Kingdom. These and other Acts form the Constitution of Canada.

Are you saying there has been no establishment of Canada as a self-governing nation?

$1:

Oh the poor french. I suppose napolean was liberating all the places he attacked. Why don't you bother mentioning all the native people that the french murdered or displaced? You paint them as the victims of english aggression because you see history in your own rlittle way eh?

Quebec is not resisting invaders and you know it. BTW, my quebec relatives may take offence at your implications. How about the natives saying they have been invaded because they are the only ones with the right to say that or do you disagree? Your facts are little more then biased opinion.

$1:

So what if loads of Canadian symbols are from french origins. I see your little pattern. You seem to be attampting to show how "everything" Canadian is actually "french" eh? The design of the Canadian flag was based on a design of the Royal Military College. Red & White are tradition english colours and since maple tree's were here loong before people were and are in abundance its a logical symbol. Around the world people associate the maple leaf with Canada.

$1:

Stole from who? Ourselves? You see the equalization payments as "buying votes" eh? I think not. It costs them votes in Alberta. I see it as investing in the ROC. You just want to blame Ontario for everything eh?

$1:

My bubble beats your little overcoat of biased lies. Quebec is all great & fabulous and all the english are just these poor pathetic cultureless greedy bastards eh? :roll:

You = fuckwit.

$1:

I've seen husbands who had such utopic ideas.
And I know where it lead them.
As I said, keep living in your bubble filled with fairy tales and lies, it must be beautiful in there...

Your little revisionist history showa only your own small-minded bigottry. On yer bike.

DerbyX @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 1:44 pm

Quickcall,

Your just putting your own little spin that Britain cruely invaded the peaceful french settlers and forced them into a country that they never really joined. Since then Canada has adopted all these "french" only symbols as theirs and every great in Canada is actually french in origin and, oh yes only Quebec has culture and honour as they gloriously fight against the english invaders.

http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/progs ... ndex_e.cfm

A look at our symbols.

I bet the clouds are all shaped like fleur de lys's in your little world eh?

DerbyX @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 2:22 pm

$1:

On December 31, 1857, Queen Victoria was asked to choose a common capital for Canada East and Canada West (modern Quebec and Ontario) and chose Ottawa. There are old folk tales about how she made the choice: that she did so by sticking her hatpin on a map roughly halfway between Toronto and Montreal, or that she liked watercolours she had seen of the area. While such stories have no historical basis, they do illustrate how arbitrary the choice of Ottawa seemed to people. While Ottawa is now a major metropolis and Canada's fourth largest city, at the time it was only a small logging town in the hinterland, far away from the colony's main cities, Quebec City and Montreal in Canada East, and Kingston, and Toronto in Canada West. In fact, the Queen's advisors had her pick Ottawa for two important reasons: first, it was the only settlement of any significant size located right on the border of Canada East and Canada West (and is still on the Quebec/Ontario border today), so it was a clever compromise between the two colonies and their French and English populations; second, the War of 1812 had shown how vulnerable the major cities were to American attack, since they were all located very close to the border. Ottawa's position in the back country made it more defensible, while still allowing easy transportation via the Ottawa River to Canada East and the Rideau Canal to Canada West. Two other considerations were that Ottawa was at a point nearly exactly midway between Toronto and Quebec City (about 500 km as the crow flies) and that the small size of the town made it less likely that politically motivated mobs could go on a rampage and destroy government buildings, as had been the case in the previous Canadian capitals.

From wikipedia

I don't think Ottawa being made capital over montreal is a driving cause of separatism. Ottawa was clearly chosen with both french & english in mind. In fact a good deal of our history is about compromise between them. I see the majority of Canada's problems today is because people are more intent on laying blame then working it out.

QuickCall @ Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:41 pm

lily lily:

QuickCall QuickCall:

The canadian flag is a compromise. The maple leaf for the "Canadiens" and the color red for england. Take the two vertical red stripes out, and you have a french-canadian flag!

And if you take the vertical red and blue stripes out of the French flag, you're left with............
I bet no one anywhere told you that before eh? :wink:

Yes, as I said, you get a french(white)-Canadian(maple leaf) flag.
The red stripes are just to satisfy those imperialists who want to claim loud and clear that THEY control the land, from sea to sea.

Thank you for pointing that out, but I didn't think it had to be mentioned.

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 19 Next

Board index » Politics » Canadian Politics