Previous  1 ... 31  32  33  34  35  36  37 ... 40  Next

I don't recall on which thread the comment was made. Maybe it was on this one but considering the length of it...<br /> <br /> Gaulois wrote a few days ago that Canadians did not realize how big an impact the Gomery scandal was having in Québec. Either gaulois is very perceptive about Québec, even while standing on the other coast, or he is well connected in the province or maybe it is just his Québécois roots speaking to him. He is absolutely right and all of Sébastien's posts were an excellent example of this change occurring in Québec. <br /> <br /> In Sébastien's own words, he didn't even consider himself a true sovereignist until a few months ago. <br /> Sébastien has done a good thing in coming to this site and warn Canadians about what is to come. After a decade of slumbering since the last referendum, there are thousands more like him across Québec who are awakening to the benefits of sovereignty. <br /> <br /> I've visited sovereignists forums yesterday and they are busy busy, not just chatting but truly organizing by using the net to connect just as Sébastien is doing. Once more, Québécers seem to be one step ahead of Canadians.<br /> So you're right Calumny. Chatter on the net has little purpose except to prepare the way for real actions. Talking and expressing one's views are an important part of the process but it is not enough. Québécers have figured it out and most importantly, our younger generation proved it when they went on strike and took a stand on every street corner across the province. <br /> I am not Québec and Calumny is not Canada but when we speak on the behalf of our respective nations, we act as representatives of them. You are not a coward Calumny, Canada is. <br /> Canadians were cowards and hypocrits when they sent in their "love-in" people in Montreal.<br /> Canada has demonstrated to us all how little consideration it has for Québec's aspirations when after the last referendum, it did nothing to extend a hand to Québécers who had voted yes and all those who had voted no out of fear. Instead, Canadians placed their faith in a crooked government and allowed it to sort it out on their behalf. <br /> <br /> Québec is presently in the first stages of becoming a hotbed of activism. A new revolution is afoot. From what I read, see and hear in the medias, in the streets and from discussions with friends and strangers, this time around we have a full 3-4 year window to educate all of our citizens that the time has come. It won't be hard to do. Many like Sébastien have jumped on board. Similar to Sébastien's conversation with a maghreb emigrant, I have had similar conversations in the past few days with Italian, Costa rican and El Salvadorian immigrants. They too feel they belong in Québec and not in Canada. We have made a place for them and they are willing to participate fully in making this nation their own. Calumny, you were wondering in another thread if there was any difference between between multiculturalism assimilation and pluralism integration. Yes there are differences and this is it. Québécers are blending in the new immigrants not only into their own nation but mixing their own blood with them.<br /> This new nation of Québec will be a light for all those who haven't figured out how to deal with globalization yet. <br /> <br /> On a final note in a very long post (for me at least <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'>), I apologize to Calumny if he took any of this personnally. Calumny, you should know by now how I like to pull people out of their comfort zones and throw them on a loop. If any of my comments created any discomfort, just imagine what many Canadians will feel like the day after a winning referendum. Prepare for it.

   

Page 25<br /> You have done it!<br /> <br /> My next Mr. Canada, Mlle Québec and Ms. USA blogue is brewing again. That was the title of the next episode.

   

[QUOTE BY= Calumny]<br /> If Quebec sovereignty means separation from Canada, I disagree the Vive in its current form is the appropriate venue for discussion of this matter with committed Quebec sovereignists who see this as being the only possibility. Where exactly is the possibility for productive discussion, at least in terms of information that hasn't previously be shared on Vive?[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> [QUOTE by=_707]All Sébastien has done since he started posting here is give us an image of this new movement now rising in Québec. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> <br /> As discussed many pages ago, for Vive Members to actively debate the myths of Quebec-as-a-Nation, they need the facts and opinions of those pushing this agenda. Sebastien has provided a few new insights into what is going on in Quebec with this regard, but still ignores the facts that disagree with his newfound beliefs.<br /> <br /> Also as discussed a few pages ago (by me) this thread is in danger of being closed because of a total lack of discussion. At least the civility has returned, but if the thread does not progress, it gets closed. <br /> <br /> Sorry Michou, I and many others value your contributions on Vive, but don't take it personally if this threads suddenly becomes locked. It's nothing personal, just that his thread has reached the end of a long life, that may or may not have added to our understanding of how Quebecers feel about issues in one of Canada's great provinces.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]The administrators have not allowed anything. It is members who have kept the thread alive. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> No, quite the opposite. If I had left it to my personal views, this thread and any like it never would have existed on Vive.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]Well, yeah the administrators have the lock key. Obviously they haven't used it, so any claim of Quebec sovereignists being 'shut up' seems without base.<br /> <br /> The 'members' who for the most part have 'kept this thread alive' for whatever reason have done so only by posting the same 'information' over and over again. <br /> <br /> I'm sorry, but I don't see a lot of what has been posted here recently of being in the nature of an attempt to establish a good faith conversation. Most objective people would, I believe, see it as baiting, nothing more. If you can't, or won 't see this, fine.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I agree with Calumny 100% here. This thread, while being mostly for informational purposes, has been nothing but fodder for the Anti-Canada movement. I left it for my own purposes, but when the members are attacked and berated, and when the discussion is merely a 'cut and paste' of previous posts in the same thread, then it had lived it life and should die an honourable death.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]In my view, the purpose of Vive is not to allow a forum for the same olds to be continuously nattering back and forth at one another. It should be to draw in those from the 'silent majority' who you need to buy into your 'program' if you ever hope to see any success.<br /> <br /> Many of these folks won't stay long if all they find are venomous diatribes or discussions going nowhere. So yeah, to my mind Vive does need to project a certain image to meet its goals. If that image doesn't meet your needs, it's unfortunate.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Most of what has been posted over the last 10 pages is just a re-hash of Delenda Carthago's posts of the first 10 pages, with some badly interpreted International law thrown in. Nothing really new.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]A good faith attempt to discuss any issue is not accompanied by threats or commentary concerning turkeys, etc. <br /> <br /> I'm not going into this further with you because if you choose to blind yourself to the obvious, that's your choice.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Exactally. _707, you have proven that you don't want a discussion, and you admit that all you want is a place to vent and procreate your agenda. Well, that stops now. Your choice, discuss things civilly, or get banned.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Many sovereignists here (me included) speak from our hearts about what we are doing about it.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> As do the Federalists here. No need for the childish comments.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]I don't know exactly where many Vive contributors are speaking from. From the Quebec sovereignist perspective, if you can read through all the Quebec sovereignist posts in this thread and honestly tell me they are all simply sincere expressions of the heart with no other agenda in mind, fine.<br /> <br /> But sorry. At this particular point in time that hasn't happened, so I don't feel obliged accept what some seem driven to present as a fait accompli. A Quebec sovereignist 'victory' is possible only if they convince the ROC to buy into it. I know this could be argued by the Quebec sovereignist side however, it is the reality.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Well said.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE by=_707]<br /> I agree. Leave Québécers alone when the next referendum comes around, let us vote in peace and accept the results without a peep.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> And the same goes for the ROC, when the referendum accepting or refusing Quebec's succession from Canada. And for Quebec Soverigntists as well, if the vote is not in your favour.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]747, the definition of obfuscate is 'make obscure or unclear'. As with painting, you have no need for others to obfuscate your sorry cut and paste job attempts to build some sort of logical legal argument. Don't confuse being ignored with being taken seriously and having presented an 'argument' worth discussing.<br /> <br /> If someone claimed snow was created by fire, most people would see it as ludicrous. However, to respond to the contention and prove it wrong takes a significant amount of time, so most will choose to ignore it. That doesn't mean they accept it, just that they can't be bothered putting the time into discussing it.<br /> <br /> But, you already know this.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Exactally. both Calumny and I have taken time to break down agruments and show how they are incorrect. And what was the response? More posting of the exact same flawed arguments. Well, time for that to stop _707. Post something new, or don't post at all.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Calumny]sebastian, ... had you posted your comments once or twice, I would have believed you were acting in good faith. I don't think you are.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Sebastien points out that recent Legier polls show the Quebec Separatists holding between 42% to 51% margin for Quebec Separation. What they are ignoring is a 75% population in Quebec who don't want another referendum - and if you look at the wording of the question - they don't want another referendum *ever*. <br /> <br /> So holding another referendum in 2 years will simply result in many more Federalists being created.<br /> <br /> <br /> I'll be watching this thread with great interest. It should progress, not regress. It may or may not suddenly become locked, depending on it's progress.<br />

   

I'm sorry to see there are still so many of you here who have probably never set foot in Québec yet ascertain without question that you know what is going on there and know what Québécers are about and what they want.<br /> <br /> If you recall Dr C. this thread was left open or reopened as a gesture of goodwill on the administrators' part after you censored and shut down all the other threads pertaining to Québec. It had nothing to do with wanting to discuss Québec at all. You want to keep the province under lock and key and yes, vivelecanada is a good representative of that jailed-in option you propose to continue for us few Québec members at vive and for all Québécers in general.<br /> <br /> If none of you were able to read between the lines of Sébastien's post, then it will be up for you to find out soon and by other means. But I CAN read between the lines of Dr C's previous post and I know he is only trying, in a nice way, to tell me my time is up at vive. Just wished you had asked up front like I requested. <br /> Canadian politics will only be a re-hash of the old stuff until some of you finally figure out how to stand up and speak in a clear manner without all the polite words to cover your real intentions. As Sébastien wrote...so sorry, Canada. <br /> <br />

   

Could we finally lock the thread now? We hit page 26!

   

Go ahead lock it.<br /> <br /> Dr Caleb you misquoated me. Those quotes are michou or someone else. As I stated I am about establishing the truth of Quebec not the illusion of Canada. <br /> <br /> Really to culminate this thread. Quebec Better of Without Canada <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/exclaim.gif' alt='Exclaimation'> <br /> <br /> vivelequebec <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/cool.gif' alt='Cool'>

   

I think the sovereigntists are reading too much of what people say here into 'wishful thinking' scenarios. No doubt for a sovereigntist it is a comfort to think that the ROC 'has it in' for Quebec, are cowards for organizing a genuine attempt at conciliation and are generally pleased as punch as to how their own government acts when it acts against Quebec. <br /> <br /> I am definitely one of the more vocal proponents of Quebec activism, and separatism in general here. I also have no doubt about what impact this is having in Quebec, even though I must say I would have been pleased as punch if so much money were being poured into New Brunswick-whether crooked or not (in modern capitalism I'm pretty convinced that ALL money is crooked somehow<img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'> <br /> <br /> Quebec as a separate nation would be culturally distinct, but economically similar if it wants to survive in the modern world, which is just what I'd love to see. Perhaps some of that money that now goes into Quebec can go into the maritimes. I am from New Brunswick so I see more benefits than most canadians, for example Quebecers are allowed to work in New Brunswick and bid on government contracts, yet the reverse is not true. As 'border cities' tend to see added benefits to 'international traffic' this would be a boon to Campbellton and Edmunston, two depressed areas of the province. If Quebec were to adopt the american dollar or european euro then New Brunswick would also benefit as it is a popular tourist destination. There is little fear of acadians or New Brunswick capitulating to a separate Quebec, I have many acadian friends and read much of acadian literature and for some reason I haven't had time to get into they genuinely seem to despise Quebecers. A minister from Quebec came to Fredericton and a group organized just to go and tell him where to go. <br /> <br /> As for the comments about the sovereignty organizations online I'd love to have some links, since Canada is very poor for providing such information, there are those of us who love Quebec activism, even when we don't think the grassroots will benefit (but who knows?) My french isn't great but I can read it, and that's all I'd want to do since I'm not entitled to comment on it. But please, let's have some links!<br /> <br /> As a final note though I think that's the utmost in INcivility to call the 'love in' before the Quebec referendum an act of cowardice and some other derogatory term, I forget what. I was at university in New Brunswick at the time and it was STUDENTS who organized most of these, NOT the government. I wasn't among them and I'm always somewhat embarassed at my lifelong acts of political inactivity. But I did talk with many people and I can definitely say that the 'let Quebec separate' was a small group, probably similar to those who made the 'wagon burner' comments about natives I mentioned in my other thread. For most it genuinely was a 'love in', almost literally because I hear it turned into quite a party.<br /> <br /> Canadians are notoriously apolitical, and of course in Quebec the powers that be want YOU to see the ROC in that way, just make sure you aren't as big a sucker for separatist propaganda as many in the ROC are.

   

[QUOTE BY= michou] <br /> If you recall Dr C. this thread was left open or reopened as a gesture of goodwill on the administrators' part after you censored and shut down all the other threads pertaining to Québec. It had nothing to do with wanting to discuss Québec at all. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> No, Michou. I believe your memory fails you. <b>I</b> locked those other threads because they were getting out of hand. <b>I</b> re-opened this thread as a gesture of goodwill, with the example of the other threads left locked to demonstrate that I as a moderator will not tolerate the name calling and dick waving that comes from discussing separatism on a soverenty site. I never once 'censored' anything. All posts were left intact, for all to behold.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= michou] <br /> But I CAN read between the lines of Dr C's previous post and I know he is only trying, in a nice way, to tell me my time is up at vive. Just wished you had asked up front like I requested. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Wrong again. There is no 'between the lines'. I meant every word I've said, as I said them. No hidden message is implied. I do enjoy reading your posts, because you actually debate, and try to understand. I specified you in my comments because I did not want you to get the wrong impression if I felt in nessecary to shut down this thread, as I have in the past, because you voiced concern that doing so would be an attempt to 'silence' the separatist voice. It wouldn't be.<br /> <br /> As a moderator, I can ban a user account from this site. The user will see "You Are BANNED" when they tried to load ViveLeCanada home page. I have no reason to ban you, for you have always been a rational voice amongst the din, and there is no need to shut down an entire thread just to 'silence' one person with whom I enjoy debating, and ocassionally enjoy a good poke in the ribs from.<br /> <br /> Your 'time' at Vive is the same as length as every one elses, stick to the rules in the FAQ, and you may come here as often as you wish. and I will look foreward to it. <br />

   

[QUOTE BY= _747] <br /> Dr Caleb you misquoated me. Those quotes are michou or someone else. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Sorry. I was pulling them from Calumny's post, and they didn't specify whom he was quoting.<br /> <br /> After 26 pages we still haven't answered the basic question - Why Quebec would be better off separate from Canada, and would Canada gain anything by it or be lesser without it.<br /> <br /> What we have uncovered is the people pushing separatism still haven't got their facts correct, or ignore them, as they have for time immemorial. Or they just ignore the questions completely.<br /> <br /> How about, we concentrate on what is best for both, and why . . . or is that too much to ask?<br />

   

I think my last post mentioned several ways that New Brunswick would benefit from separation, others can certainly be added. I'm not sure what facts are being ignored as I haven't bothered reading this whole thread. There are certainly concrete reasons why Quebec would/should/could separate, and if you've learned anything from the americans use of international law-well, anything goes. So there certainly aren't any reasons Quebec COULDN"T separate.<br /> <br /> I would have liked to have seen the last referendum ignite canadians desire for politics, but it seemed to have the reverse. Likewise, a separating Quebec, or at least a potentially separating Quebec could really ignite Canadians into deciding what kind of country they want to live in. So the process can definitely be a positive thing, we certainly know from history that the lack of it is a negative thing. <br /> <br /> Also, it could ignite a rivalry into creating the 'better country', but there really has been little of that in regards to the US, so that may be too much to hope for. However, in direct democracy if Quebecers COULD push for more democracy-not a given but there's certainly more of a chance than current conditions and the desires of english areas and natives areas and rural areas could definitely force them into a looser confederation than Canada. If such a thing occurred then perhaps the rest of Canada would wake up, as BC is starting to (maybe), that more democracy is a good thing. Who knows? We do know the status quo that the federal government sinks to when it isn't faced with protest (though sometimes when it is too)

   

I think Quebec would start to trust Canada if the Supreme Court stops trying to impose English in Quebec. Canada and so-called Canadians alike accept Quebec's language laws. So-called Canadians should focus more on their own provinces to establish accountabity rather than cry if Quebec is perceived to be getting more than other provinces. Once the Gomery commission is finished with the Liberals, I would like him to focus on where the Consevatives squandered the $500 Billion they added to the National Debt.<br /> <br /> The war being waged on Quebec is Canada's to lose <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'> Sovereigntists/Separatists have a legitimate right to exist as long as Canada and so-called Canadians refuse to respect Quebec and continue to impose themselves on Quebec. This rudeness stems back into the 60's. Forty years later Canada still insists on maintaining this attitude. There will be no apologies coming from Quebec <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/mrgreen.gif' alt='Mr. Green'><br /> <br /> <br />

   

Separation Anxiety<br /> <br /> by keith barker <br /> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> I nearly spilled my coffee one morning back in September when I stumbled across a shocking headline. "Alarm on Canada has Washington watchin'," it read. Omigod! Washington is watching us! There's a congressional sub-committee meeting to discuss Canadian unity! They are suggesting an affiliation half-way between treaty and statehood for parts of Canada and the U.S. in the event of separation! Have we been squabbling too loudly around Quebec? Has the big bad elephant to the south been roused by our incessant squeaks? The Americans are coming! The Americans are coming. <br /> <br /> Startled out of my half-sleep state, I then realized with a smile that I had only been reading an article in the Province. <br /> <br /> A nearly identical article, also distributed by Canadian Press, was featured in the Sun the same morning, though under the much less alarmist headline: "U.S. Congress to study balkanized Canada Scenario." The article reported that a congressional sub-committee on hemispheric affairs was scheduled to meet on September 25th, after a certain congressman from California became aware of an American academic paper concerning the contingencies of Quebec separation. The paper is concerned specifically with the possibility of continued political fragmentation inside and around Quebec following a Quebec secession and suggests that American politicians should prepare themselves for such developments. The paper was written by professor Charles F. Doran in the September/October issue of the American- published Foreign Affairs magazine. <br /> <br /> Two days after the Sun and Province ran the article, there was an apology in the Sun for "erroneous reporting." Doran's paper was misrepresented on several points. The Sun reported, for example, that Doran suggested that Washington act as "peacemaker, adjudicator, rule-maker, and police officer" for the remaining political entities if Canada should break up. What Doran actually writes in his paper is essentially the same, though it is written in somewhat less confrontational language. Doran writes that "Washington must be prepared for all contingencies. Fragmentation of Canada, depending on its nature and extent, would transfer some of the cost of administration from Ottawa to Washington. Washington increasingly would take on the jobs of peacemaker, adjudicator, rule-maker, and police officer. These are not roles that the United States should seek. Nor are they responsibilities Washington would necessarily be able to carry out better than any of the Canadian provinces or the Canadian federal government.". <br /> <br /> The congressional meeting on the 25th sparked by Doran's paper came and went. There was a very sparse turn-out and nothing has yet resulted from the discussions. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> So with all the yellow journalism, bad headlines, and inconsequential meetings of U.S. congressmen and academics aside, Doran's paper, entitled "Will Canada Unravel?" is left to be contemplated. <br /> <br /> Charles F. Doran is a professor of international relations at the Pauls H. Nitze school of advanced international studies, at The Johns Hopkins University. In his paper he states that "Ever-louder rumblings north of the border should not be dismissed as another Canadian non-event. Potentially, they portend much greater consequences for American interests than many nationalist break-ups around the world. From the perspective of the United States, the right question is: What would follow separation? This deeper question contemplates a Canada that may not only split into two parts-Quebec and the rest of Canada-but that may continue to fragment." <br /> <br /> Doran points out that even Ottawa has recently stated that if Quebec separated, Anglophone Montreal would have an incentive to secede and indeed would secede. He also cites the Ottawa River Valley and the Eastern Townships region as English enclaves capable of creating separate city-states of their own. Of course, the Maritimes would be geographically cut off from Canada, and there would be no Quebec to maintain a balance of power with Ontario. As a result, those in the West may well feel increasingly alienated. <br /> <br /> Ultimately, Doran's concern is with the very slight possibility that North America could unravel. He writes that "the United States must take the possibility seriously enough to draw up plans for a form of supranational affiliation with the remnants of Canada." <br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/96-3/issue7/canfeature.html">continued here</a><br /> <br /> I know this is an old article but this is the reason I don't want Quebec to separate. As selfish as that is. I don't blame them for wanting to leave, the way this Country seems to be headed. But without them, I think Canada will be far worse off than people imagine.

   

[QUOTE BY= FootPrints] Separation Anxiety<br /> <br /> by keith barker <br /> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /> <br /> Doran points out that even Ottawa has recently stated that if Quebec separated, Anglophone Montreal would have an incentive to secede and indeed would secede. He also cites the Ottawa River Valley and the Eastern Townships region as English enclaves capable of creating separate city-states of their own. Of course, the Maritimes would be geographically cut off from Canada, and there would be no Quebec to maintain a balance of power with Ontario. As a result, those in the West may well feel increasingly alienated. <br /> <br /> Ultimately, Doran's concern is with the very slight possibility that North America could unravel. He writes that "the United States must take the possibility seriously enough to draw up plans for a form of supranational affiliation with the remnants of Canada."<br /> <br /> I know this is an old article but this is the reason I don't want Quebec to separate. As selfish as that is. I don't blame them for wanting to leave, the way this Country seems to be headed. But without them, I think Canada will be far worse off than people imagine.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Who cares what Ottawa says about anglo Montreal or partition ???<br /> If it tries to do that we are calling on the international court, UN, USA, France...<br /> So that they can see how hypocrit is the federal government<br /> STOP MAKING THREATS ON QUÉBEC FOOTPRINTS<br /> <br /> Just get out of Québec<br /> Canada is a beautiful place... but without Québec<br /> Don't you have enough of our scandal and corruption<br /> Let us deal with it on our own<br /> <br /> Québec would stay in Canada if was recognized but canadian politicians continue to block any demand of Québec...<br /> Even Jean Charest says that... do you realize<br /> You don't liste to Québec's demands<br /> No wonder we want to get out of the Confederation<br /> That Confederation wasn't think like that in the first place<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />

   

For one, those Anglophones that many are concerned about in montreal are the troublemakers that initiated Quebec's discontent in the first place. They are the ones that set up shop in the 70's to unravel quebec but Quebec in turn established the Language Laws. The Federal Government sides with these anglos and tries to pull a fast one on Quebec and the world by unilaterally and singlehandedly constructing an illegal constitution in 1982. Canada in turn is trying to use this illegal constitution as an authority to continue to impose English on Quebec. Canada is guilty of Crimes, there is no doubt. Canada obviously is not repentent because they continue to impose themselve on Quebec and see no wrong in this behavior. <br /> <br /> Footprint it is no surprise the United States at various levels is aware of Quebec. This article is to outdated for any relevance. From a bigger perspective, the United States wants Alberta's oil, so a divided Canada would be one step closer to getting that oil <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'> <br /> <br /> <br /> The <b>Cause</b> is Distinct Society/Sovreignty by Association. Canada refuses this pursuit, so the <b>Effect</b> is another referendum on separation or a challege of the validity of the 1982 constitution before the International Court.<br />

   

Thanks for the response 747. I won't even pretend to know many issues that face Quebec. But now more than ever, I think they have our attention. I have read articles about it, and there is no denying the fact that they have been threatened, and there were attempts to ruin their culture by business, education and government. I understand why they want to separate. <br /> <br /> I read the senate meetings and debates on-line. And I think if anyone has the balls (can I say that?) to make changes in Canada it is through the politians in Quebec. The French came here a long time ago, they helped shape Canada and they have the right to perserve and fight for their culture. I'd like to see more pressure for change, not separation. That's just my opinion.<br /> <br /> Sebastien, I don't know why you say I am threatening Quebec. But I am just as entitled to my opinion as you are. You say Quebec does not get the recognition it deserves.You have an ear on this site, and maybe if you can help us understand more about this, in a non-argumentative way, you could gather more support outside of Quebec. If putting pressure on the Government to recognize this would help, I would do so in a second.

   

Previous  1 ... 31  32  33  34  35  36  37 ... 40  Next