"My father's uncle is Wilfred Vincent O'Neil who was killed by the FLQ! It's too bad what happen back then as our family still misses him yet today! "
Posted by Crystal O'Neil (Gaspesie,QC) Jan.05/11 The War Measures Act- 40 Years Later
It's been forty years since the deadly FLQ attacks took place, but for the families of those murdered, time doesn't erase the pain of having lost a loved one. For those who suffered through injuries and amputations, the reality of those barbaric acts linger. The FLQ perpetrated over 170 acts of violence which resulted in eight deaths and a multitude of injured.
Sgt. Wilfred V. O'Neil, was the first fatal casualty of the FLQ reign of terror. A night watchman at the Canadian Army Recruiting Centre in Montreal, he was killed in January 1963, when he tried to remove 10 sticks of dynamite from a container.
"In February 1969 - the FLQ set off a powerful bomb that ripped through the Montreal Stock Exchange causing massive destruction and seriously injuring twenty-seven people." Link
"The FLQ sent a bomb to a Quebec shoe manufacturer, to show their solidarity with the union. Therese Morin, 64, the secretary to the general manager was killed when it exploded in the office May 5, 1965. She had just returned from lunch .....
.....On April 19, 1964, some of the FLQ raided a gun shop in Montreal for weapons. They murdered store manager Leslie MacWilliams, 56.
....Sgt. Major Walter Leja, 42, had both hands blown off as he was trying to defuse the last of three FLQ bombs in a mailbox in the Westmount region of Montreal. The bombers were just warming up." LINK
Today these deaths are largely forgotten and even Quebec schools make sure to gloss over the FLQ.
It's little wonder, as the author of the actual book used to teach history has characterized the death of Pierre Laporte at the hands of the terrorists 'accidental' and that the other deaths were 'collateral damage.' LINK
In Quebec, especially among young francophones, the FLQ is nothing more than folklore, it's barbaric image successfully rehabilitated by sympathetic journalists who have contributed to a historical makeover par excellence.
A review of the French press will reveal that the word 'terrorist' is never used to describe the members of the FLQ, with the sanitized term of 'Felkist,' (FLQer) much preferred.
The political revisionism is reminiscent of Stalinist apologists who created the myth for decades that 'Uncle Joe' was a swell guy.
The success of the campaign to rehabilitate the reputation of the FLQ is underlined by the welcoming arms that accepted the terrorists back into mainstream Quebec society, where many of the terrorists have worked for unions, government and as esteemed journalists, their terrorist past, never much of an issue.
Many will say that it is fit and proper that those who commit crimes be re-integrated back into society once the offender has paid his debt.
But the fact remains that the FLQ terrorists were treated rather lightly, with some receiving nothing more than a slap on the wrist or a couple of years in the pen. The largest sentence served was but eleven years, and the majority of the terrorists never apologized to the families of the victims, nor expressed any remorse whatsoever.
Many went back to a life of activism and in the case of Rhéal Mathieu, a return to terrorism itself, when he was convicted of involvement in the firebombing of a Second Cup coffee shop in 2001. LINK
Mr. Mathieu remains a prolific and honoured contributor to vigile.net as well as convicted FLQ terrorist Pierre Schneider who also writes for the militant website and who signs his articles with this beauty (proud member of the 1st FLQ-1963)
 |
| Click to see article |
So it was with utter disgust that I witnessed the forces of order move at light speed in reaction to a complaint by the Parti Quebecois against Colonel James Angus Brown over 'terrorist threats' over his blog posts at Parkavenuegazette.com.
Think I'm joking?
Read an account here of the pursuit of an Internet hate-monger from Toronto that has taken years to prosecute. LINK
So the poor colonel is a threat to society.... Hmmmm
In a recent post on vigile.net, convicted terrorist Rhéal Mathieu reprinted a hate letter which was sent to homes in Westmount threatening all sorts of hell in the case of partition, including the burning of Westmount Square. LINK
Did the police pick up Mathieu or force him to remove the offending article?
When a twice convicted terrorist makes a threat, shouldn't the police take it seriously?
Colonel James Angus Brown a terrorist? Hardly....
Only in Quebec can real terrorists be labelled harmless and the bombastic as terrorists.
It's a question of what language the threatener speaks.
Dude, you're on fire this week!!!
ReplyDeleteKeep them coming!
Mississauga Guy said...
ReplyDeleteAs Jason stated above another good post. The only dry one this week was the anti-Zionist Iranian doctor of the Plateau who shall remain nameless (because I'm hoping Quebec society will forget HIM before too long!)
I think Canada as a whole takes far too much of the crime committed in this country far too complacently, but Quebec is the most complacent of them all--by far!
Karla Homolka is living freely and easily in Quebec because Ontarians would like to see her either in jail, or in the lake! That she was a participant and perpetrator in the brutal murders of three young women, including her own flesh and blood, her sister, doesn't seem to stick in the craw of Quebecers. Her punishment certainly didn't fit her crimes!
Let's face it, Germany would like to forget the Holocaust ever took place, but it won't be because of the impact it had on the entire world, and certainly the Jewish population of the world, rightfully, will not let it be forgotten.
What happened in Quebec stayed in Quebec so it didn't impact the world stage like Germany did, although I figure it made world news; nevertheless, the world I'm sure forgot the news the very next day anyway, except in Canada.
The great René Lévesque was driving drunk when he killed a supposed vagrant, and after a few days it was completely covered up and forgotten. That's how fast Quebec society seems to forget the criminal justice system when it's convenient to do so.
"That's how fast Quebec society seems to forget the criminal justice system when it's convenient to do so."
ReplyDeleteOf course they would. Every government elected in this province since the late seventies has maintained criminal legislation and a terrorist stance toward all other Canadians. Whether in Quebec or not, be it by bomb, gun or threat of separation, the official representation of this province has been a reflection of a society and its majority as racist, intolerant, xenophobic and criminal, all mired in a gross misrepresentation of history to justify their means.
Even those among us that would vote for the so called federal party of Quebec would fight the imposition of a fair linguistic system and suddenly turn into staunch pquistes, or worse.
Good post and an important topic to draw attention to.
ReplyDeleteOver the last 40 years or more in Quebec, we have learned that for the Franco majority and their nationalist politicians, the ends justify the means. Supposedly representing the persecuted Quebecois, the ultimate goal of the nationalists is to expunge the occupying Anglophone presence to effectively reverse the outcome of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. To accomplish this, the nationalists have successfully characterized their fight as a righteous and desperate struggle for survival. Schooled from infancy to fear and mistrust the inferior and malevolent Anglosphere, the worried and concerned Quebecois assume the role of perpetual victims and are primed to impose more and more draconian laws on the offending ‘others’ to ensure their own peace of mind and safety. As long as the nationalist reinforce the fear and loathing, and as long as the Quebecois feel sufficiently threatened, they will be always be skittish, unpredictable, and willing to do whatever it takes to protect their children’s future and feel safe. The nationalist know that this type of social engineering usually works, because the masses tend to believe the so called authorities, and the individual tends to follow the masses. In this sickly distorted environment, terrorists are freedom fighters, and oppressors are heroes.
@InFlames 1:00 PM:
ReplyDeleteSo how do propose we get over this affliction?
"So how do propose we get over this affliction?"
ReplyDeleteCessation from the province of Quebec for the ethnic and anglophone communities. The island and westward can become part of Ontario and oficially bilingual. Without us, there is no longer a target for all the hate. Maybe this will lead to wisdom and understanding in the future, or it might increase the bitterness. At least it won't generate any more generations of minority victims who function as pinatas for the Franco-first horde.
Okay. And how would that work constitutionally?
ReplyDeleteA boundary change requires an okay from the legislature of each of the provinces affected as well as from Parliament (section 43(a) of that infamous 1982 constitution document talks about borders, 43(b) about modifying bilingualism status). I don't see even a Quebec Liberal government giving a nod to this idea under the present circumstances. But maybe you can succeed in this assignment where I can't.
Use soft skills and hard skills to solve this problem. Show all your work. Emotional wishlists inconsistent with established Canadian and Quebec legal principles will receive no credit. You have until the next referendum on "sovereignty". Good luck.
Apparatchik asked:
ReplyDelete‘So how do propose we get over this affliction?’
I wish I knew for sure. I’m a little pessimistic about this matter, so I tend to think there is no solution anymore, because it’s too late. Nonetheless, I believe it would take another 40 years of deprogramming society to achieve any change. The Quebec government would have to repeal the present language laws and promote bilingualism as the way forward, and that’s not going to happen. They would have to stop revising history and teaching the victim mentality to school children, and that’s not going to happen. Quebecois society would have to stop lending credence to the radical nationalists by no longer letting them act as proxy spoke persons for the majority. That not likely to happen either because for the most part the nationalist do speak for the majority. Basically, the thinking and mood in Quebec regarding the English language and the ROC would have to fundamentally change. How can that happen? Who can say?
I think Ano @ January 7, 2011 2:20 PM has the right idea, maybe the only realistic idea, and that is cessation. We all just go our own way. We are a hopelessly dysfunctional lot at this point. We cannot be caring and nurturing friends anymore, if ever. The divide between us is too great; the willingness to change and bridge that divide is too feeble. I think we need to divide the pie so to speak, the Anglos and Allos take the small western slice and the Quebecois take the big eastern slice. But that will never happen either (without a hostile confrontation) because the Quebecois deny that they are actually the stewards of Canadian territory and do not have the right to expropriate the land for their own nationalistic purposes. The nationalist Quebecois inexplicably claim that Canada is divisible but Quebec is not. I know from experience few people understand this argument except those that make it. It makes no sense to anyone else.
In short, no matter which way I look for alternatives, I see friction and rivalry. If there is a way get over this affliction, it has not presented itself yet. To get over this societal affliction, people must admit they have a problem. How likely is that when some of us believe we have big, big problems, and the rest believe all is good?
Mississauga Guy to the postings following my last one...
ReplyDeleteThe damage is done and is irrepairable. I put a two-part posting responding to occasional contributor, Hugo S., in the next of Editor's commentary, so that should suffice for an answer. It MAY include separation, it MAY incluse partition. Read the next posting about the shoe store boycott (again--sigh!) and look at what I wrote to Hugo. Actually, I have three contributions to that commentary at this time.
The next time, this is what will happen. Why? because revolutions half way done are not worth it. Even Cocteau said it.
ReplyDelete-----------------------------------------
SO QUEBEC SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE
A COUNTRY WITHOUT ANY RESERVE:
When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.
We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.
etc... etc... someone smart will write the rest... nobody here understand what I am talking about....
When there are revolutions, people get hurt !Look at the soldiers in the middle east who fired friendly soldiers !
ReplyDeleteThe honeymoon with you English Canada is over,
LETS FIRE !
Yes bunch of cowards ! you talk about the French in their back, and you try to divide them among themselves.: that's the English for you.
The Che Guevara of Quebec is still asleep. But when he will awake get ready! In the meantime English Canadians are simply coward, spit on the French, going back to their "comfortable trenches in Montreal" using the same people like forensic rapists to make a living.
Someone is bound to understand what insurrection means. To understand the source of this myth, one must reflect on the culural roots of Che's odyssey, which originate several thousand year before he was born.
Too complicated for you at the moment, you can say outrageous things about this, but you don't have any style, essence or class. you will always be the "crackers" of the north.
> someone smart will write the rest... nobody here understand what I am talking about....
ReplyDeleteThose two statements might be mutually exclusive.
Many of us recognize the U.S. Declaration of Independence when we see it. At the same time, many of us don’t think that one (even very early) example of a British colony separating from the mother country under circumstances specific to their time and place and also VERY different from ours is a rigorous enough attempt at honestly and intellectually justifying the aspirations of Quebec separatists.
So yes, I can find, copy, and paste the rest, but I still don’t see how this isn’t apples and oranges...
The Federal government has not imposed additional taxes, nor has it treated Quebec unfairly. Quebec nationalists have for generations opposed centralizing Federal tendencies because they rightfully argue that such tendencies run counter to the spirit of a federation, which Canada purports to be. At the same time, Quebec nationalists’ true motivations for demanding additional powers has little if anything to do with an honest interpretation of our country’s constitutional framework. The nationalists have rationalized that if they can’t achieve full independence, they will accept being a quasi self-governing entity within Canada. This is unfortunate for two reasons because it robs Quebecers and all Canadians of the chance at an honest dialog about how Canada, both as a concept and as a reality, can continue to grow and prosper.
Here’s a slightly more relevant comparison with the U.S. for you. The real conflict here isn’t so much about being part of a country you aren’t passionate about. It’s about your inability to reconcile your simultaneous role as a majority and a minority, and appreciate what our true responsibilities are as francophones, and how to harmonize those responsibilities as positive roles at local, provincial, and federal levels. Having not done our homework on that front, we’re failing each subsequent class.
Many founding fathers had slaves, although abolitionism did gain some currency in the ensuing decades. The issue of states’ rights and the unique Southern way of life was used as a constitutional argument in 19th-century America in an attempt to legitimate and justify slavery. The Civil War was a major byproduct. The states that seceded had something like 3/10 of the population and 1/10 of the industry of the entire country at the time. Trouble was, while their aspirations were militarily defeated and they all eventually rejoined the union, much of the worldview that led to the War persisted, and was now infused with resentment, all this in a period amusingly referred to as the “Reconstruction”. The South’s largely agrarian model was devastated, and their economy followed suit. Not long afterward were enacted the infamous Jim Crow laws whose objective was to disenfranchise blacks, who the defeated whites saw as the source of all their problems. It took nearly a century for the systematic repression of basic Civil Rights in such varied forms as of extreme ostracism, forced segregation, lynching, and other arbitrary, extrajudicial, singular or collective punishment to finally boil over into a Civil Rights struggle. The true challenge of properly integrating majorities and minorities as well as their ways of life continues to this day. The red-state/blue-state divide, the KKK, the Black Panthers, and even groups operating above the radar like certain Southern neoconservatives and the current Tea Party, all stand as witnesses to the dangers of homogeneity and the potential repercussions of refusing to overcome the past, challenge, and change the way a society thinks.
At the risk of being repetitive, you haven't proven how Quebec should be allowed to secede without reservation (whatever that means, functionally). I'm interested to hear your well-founded argument(s) (et en français si le coeur vous en dit).
L'argent n'est pas un dénominateur commun pour une division de peuples. C'est une conséquence.
ReplyDeleteLe Québec ne devrait PAS SE RETIRER, au contraire, ce sont les Anglophones qui refusent la nation française et leur culture. Vous êtes un régulier sur ce site, alors ne jouez pas à la Vierge offensée. Pourquoi empêcher un peuple de vivre comme il le désire ? Si vous êtiez un francophone accepteriez-vous vos propositions incultes ?
(a) pensez-vous que si cette situation se produisait en europe il n'y aurait pas de guerre ? Je pense à l'Alsace qui est finalement devenue française ?
Different situation than this one and from the 13 colonies, but it could be compared to some extent, as far as RIGHTS ARE CONCERNED.
(b) Les acquis de la révolution tranquille semblaient bien fragiles au milieu des années soixante.
Puis les premiers ministres des provinces anglaises et les émissaires du Gouvernement fédéral concoctèrent le Canada de mémoire.
La loi constitutionnelle fut établie sur une rouerie, cela ne sera jamais assez dit, concluant plus de vingt ans de tentatives du Gouvernement fédéral de museler le Québec. Le pacte entre les deux nations venait d'être déchiré. Les Québécois se font constamment duper.
OUI, LE QUEBEC SE FAIT CONSTAMMENT DUPER. La révolution totale devra se produire.
(c)Durant des décennies, LEURS représentants ont tout tenté afin d'amener le reste du Canada à reconnaître ce qui saute aux yeux de tout voyageur un tant soit peu objectif: les Québécois forment un peuple. ILS NE COMPRENNENT un mantra que les Anglophones canadiens ne comprennent JAMAIS ! (SO STOP BEING CYNICAL ABOUT WELL FOUNDED ARGUMENTS, BECAUSE YOURS ARE NOT valid at all, not at all.)
Les dangers de louisianisation du Québec SONT seront inéluctables si le Québec ne devient pas officiellement plus puissant. Est-ce l'avenir que nous voulons réserver à nos enfants ?Non. Il est temps de se séparer en adoptant une Déclaration des droits civils et des droits de l'homme en règle.
Pour le faire il faudrait commencer par :
Eliminer et refuser l'égide et le système britannique et sa représentation par un monarche britannique au Québec (Acte du Québec 1774 n'a pas été entièrement respecté);
Eliminer la participation du Québec dans l'Acte de l'Amerique du Nord Britannique et la remplacer par:
La Déclaration des droits de la Nation Québécoise;
Ontario, bilingual, excuse me ?
ReplyDeleteHellooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Le Québec ne devrait PAS SE RETIRER, au contraire, ce sont les Anglophones qui refusent la nation française et leur culture.
ReplyDeleteD’abord, qu’est-ce que ça veut dire « refuser la nation française et [sa] culture » ? Est-ce que ça fait référence au fait de s’opposer à la séparation du Québec du Canada? Est-ce que ça veut dire s’opposer à un statut particulier pour le Québec car ceci mettrait en jeu l’égalité de toutes les provinces du pays? Ou est-ce bien une critique de ces anglos qui jusqu’aux années 1970 n’ont vu aucune utilité à comprendre l’autre solitude car elle était tellement renfermée sur elle-même et peu productive qu’ils ont fini par estimer ça ne valait pas la peine?
De plus, une analyse éclairée ferait en sorte soit que l’on pointe du doigt soit les deux communautés en même temps ou bien aucune des deux.
Les anglophones ont peut être mal avalé la pilule contre-révolutionnaire qui leur a été servie suite à la révolution tranquille. C’est peut-être compréhensible quand on pense au rôle économique et culturel qu’ils occupaient jusqu’à tout récemment. C’est vrai que ces Rhodésiens de Westmount n’ont peut-être pas fait tout ce qu’ils auraient pu faire pour s’intégrer comme il faut avec la nation canadienne française. Mais il faudrait également critiquer les canadiens-français qui ont préféré se soumettre au joug du catholicisme et de la langue française plutôt que d’apprendre à conjuguer une riche culture ancestrale et le savoir-faire économique des nouveaux maîtres du continent (et, qu’on se l’avoue, du monde).
On n’a pas tout fait pour bien s’intégrer à la culture anglo-américaine qui nous entoure non plus. Depuis la conquête, nos dirigeants religieux et politiques ont misé sur une mentalité d’assiégés pour asseoir leur propre pouvoir sur nos ancêtre et ainsi exploiter ces aspects culturels et historiques qui nous sont propres à leurs fins. Nos politiciens et militants nationalistes se contentent de nous traumatiser afin de renforcer cette peur sur une base régulière. Le résultat, c’est du monde comme vous qui croyez vraiment à des différences profondes alors que d’autres comme moi n’y voient qu’une exagération expresse et délibérée afin de promouvoir un projet qui nous serait néfaste. Il y a bon nombre de québécois comme moi qui se méfient de ce projet qui créerait un ghetto (pour ne pas dire parc d’attractions) tellement et inutilement protectionniste de chaque poussière de notre quotidien désignée suffisamment « québécoise » que nous serions dévasté au plan concurrentiel.
On ne me justifiera pas ce projet de « souveraineté » tout simplement parce que certains y songent. Faire flotter mon drapeau aux nations unies et participer aux olympiques sous une bannière qu’on ne partage pas avec nos anciens oppresseurs ne m’intéresse aucunement. Il faudra faire plus pour me convaincre.
> Vous êtes un régulier sur ce site, alors ne jouez pas à la Vierge offensée. Pourquoi empêcher un peuple de vivre comme il le désire ?
Vous êtes québécois et jouissez pleinement de vos droits humains, civils, et culturels, alors ne jouez pas à votre tour à la Vierge offensée. Nous vivons très bien au Québec – mieux qu’ailleurs au Canada, dirais-je – et je considère que l’élan (pour ne pas dire orgueil périmé) qui démange certains (politiciens) nationalistes est déplacé compte tenu des circonstances actuelles.
Ne devrait pas avoir comme effet d’entrainer tout un peuple vers l’effondrement.
(1)
The government of Ontario is de facto bilingual, and offers all services in French despite the fact that Francophones comprise less than 4% of the population. The city of Ottawa is officially bilingual, even though Francophones form only 14% of its population. Ontario is far more bilingual than Quebec.
ReplyDelete> Si vous êtiez un francophone accepteriez-vous vos propositions incultes ?
ReplyDeleteD’abord ce n’est pas un cas hypothétique car je suis très fier d’être francophone.
Je crois également que la langue que parle un individu témoigne du temps et lieu qui lui sont propres et que partager plus qu’une culture est la marque d’un individu cultivé. Être à l’aise dans deux ou trois cultures ne signale pour moi aucunement un manque de loyauté. Si dans le siècle prochain la Chine, dont l’influence et la culture rivaliserait celle des États-Unis nous occupait, je me dépêcherais à m’immerger dans la langue et mentalité chinoise, afin de pouvoir participer pleinement à la culture de la Sinosphère. L’opportunité de l’avenir vaut plus que tenir en vie chaque élément de mes coutumes ancestrales.
Je dois manger avant de pouvoir parler, ce qui fait que je ne vois aucun mal à partager (« troquer », diraient certains détracteurs) une partie de notre pureté de sang, de langue, de terre, et d’indépendance pour le bien de tous. Je suis la preuve vivante qu’un peuple établi ici depuis 400 ans n’a rien à craindre à se fondre au méchant conquérant (qui est là depuis 250 ans) et d’autres nouveaux venus depuis moins d’un siècle. J’ai été formellement éduqué en quatre langues (dont le français et l’anglais). Le tout sans difficulté ni crainte de « perdre » ce qui nous est cher.
Deux civilisations ayant pourtant une histoire si intimement liée ne devraient pas se concurrencer; elles devraient plutôt se compléter. Nulle part ailleurs sur le continent d’Amérique qu’au Québec ne pourrait-on songer à l’idée de bâtir un pont durable entre ces deux communautés. Il est regrettable qu’on gaspille toutes nos énergies à mettre en relief ces riens qui nous différencient et non pas ce qui nous unit, le tout pour « corriger » des injustices au plan des droits humains qui, à bien y penser, ont été réglées voilà déjà quelques décennies.
> pensez-vous que si cette situation se produisait en europe il n'y aurait pas de guerre ? Je pense à l'Alsace qui est finalement devenue française ?
Et moi je pense à Bruxelles qui au cours du dernier siècle et demi s’est transformée de ville flamande en ville majoritairement francophone.
Cherchez-vous à faire couler du sang afin de venger nos humiliations passées? Je surveille attentivement ce qui se passe en Belgique, en Catalogne, au Pays Basque, et en Corse. Je constate avec dédain les interventions colonisatrices israéliennes en Cisjordanie car ces colonies nuisent au meilleur intérêt des deux peuples.
Je me méfie de ceux qui s’écrient « vive la différence » seulement parce que différence(s) il y a. Je crois en l’union de peuples, même anciens ennemis jurés. Quand deux peuples se croisent, je préfère une culture hybride et non pas que l’une l’emporte entièrement sur l’autre. Il est tout aussi inutile de jouer sur des (dés)équilibres démographiques qui tôt ou tard devront se solder par la coopération entre deux peuples devenus partenaires.
(2)
> Different situation than this one and from the 13 colonies, but it could be compared to some extent, as far as RIGHTS ARE CONCERNED.
ReplyDeleteWhich rights exactly? The real problem the American colonies had was that after 1760, Britain instated a growing series of taxes on them in an effort to repay the debts that Britain had accumulated during the Seven Years’ War (devinez contre qui). The American colonists believed that they shouldn’t be (heavily) taxed by London without the right to have a say in Parliament. Alas, the “no taxation without representation” argument about “rights” can’t be compared to any extent with the thirteen colonies, because Quebec is taxed and represented in Ottawa. It is Quebecers who foolishly elect members of a party, which (barring a coalition) will never have a chance to form the government . As you’ve probably guessed by now, I’m a fan of “change from within” because I think most revolutions are too theatrical and dramatic and ultimately fail.
I’m sure I can guess where you stand, but I for one would prefer that my province focus on electing the government, and not the opposition.
> Les acquis de la révolution tranquille semblaient bien fragiles au milieu des années soixante.
Une certaine fermentation d’idées s’est faite au sein des communautés anglophones aussi. Bien qu’ils préfèrent s’exprimer en anglais (tout comme la plupart des francophones se sentent plus à l’aise en français), bon nombre d’anglophones québécois et d’immigrants ne voient aucune difficulté à vivre dans une province à forte majorité francophone. Ce qui les fait chicote, c’est que les moyens de contrôle employés aux fins de cette sauvegarde sont tyranniques en ce sens où cette protection passe actuellement par la prise d’assaut de leur liberté de choix par ces « défenseurs » culturels. Et lorsque ces non francophones, ici comme ailleurs, comprennent que le modèle québécois actuel qui a pour but (légitime, même) d’assurer la survie du français carbure au rabaissement et à la castration de l’anglais – majoritaire et nettement dominant au pays, sur le continent, et dans les échanges internationaux – ils se posent tout naturellement des questions sur la pertinence de s’y conformer volontiers.
> Puis les premiers ministres des provinces anglaises et les émissaires du Gouvernement fédéral concoctèrent le Canada de mémoire.
Hein? Le Canada (qui inclut le Québec) n’aurait jamais vu le jour dans les années 1860 si les pères fondateurs (une liste qui inclut plusieurs Bas-Canadiens) n’avaient pas promu l’idée d’une union des territoires britanniques en Amérique du Nord. Ce « Canada » devait servir d’abord et avant tout à unir économiquement et militairement tous ces territoires, en plus d’écarter les ambitions expansionnistes des américains. On a préféré une organisation dualiste et non moniste spécifiquement pour convenir aux réalités des Canadiens-Français. Le Québec d’aujourd’hui n’aurait jamais pu songer à avoir une Révolution Tranquille trois générations plus tard sans cela.
> La loi constitutionnelle fut établie sur une rouerie, cela ne sera jamais assez dit, concluant plus de vingt ans de tentatives du Gouvernement fédéral de museler le Québec. Le pacte entre les deux nations venait d'être déchiré. Les Québécois se font constamment duper.
OUI, LE QUEBEC SE FAIT CONSTAMMENT DUPER. La révolution totale devra se produire.
Pourquoi ce crescendo théâtral? Croyez-vous normal qu’un pays officiellement indépendant depuis 1931 ait à obtenir, pour chacune des lois qu’il adopte, l’assentiment du Parlement à Londres en 1935? En 1960? En 1971? En 1980?
(3)
> Durant des décennies, LEURS représentants ont tout tenté afin d'amener le reste du Canada à reconnaître ce qui saute aux yeux de tout voyageur un tant soit peu objectif: les Québécois forment un peuple.
ReplyDeleteLe danger, ce n’est pas d’admettre ce qui est clair et évident. C’est qu’à partir du moment où l’on parle d’un pays uni et ayant deux cultures fondatrices mais qui inclut un peuple distinct qu’on codifie d’abord comme étant tout résidant canadien-français au Québec mais pas ailleurs nécessairement… ça risque d’être boiteux pas mal en plus d’agir comme pente glissante. Imaginez un instant si dans la constitution d’un Québec indépendant, on reconnaissait comme distincte la langue et culture distincte des italiens de Saint-Léonard ou bien des haïtiens de Saint-Michel. Si ceux-ci cherchaient une quelconque autonomie, devrait-on la leur accorder? On semble avoir déjà assez de misère à codifier notre relation avec la « communauté historique anglophone » (qui pourtant vit toujours). Il est facile de revendiquer plein de choses. Plus difficile savoir où tracer la ligne et comment codifier des choses pour ne pas menacer la stabilité de l’état plus tard. Qu’auriez-vous proposé?
> SO STOP BEING CYNICAL ABOUT WELL FOUNDED ARGUMENTS, BECAUSE YOURS ARE NOT valid at all, not at all.
Are you asking me to abandon all attempts at logic and just blindly and emotionally submit to your camp’s project because half my ancestors were humiliated by conquest? It’s a shame I’m even being asked not to think so hard about what your romantic dream implies for my future and bottom line. But I guess taking complete leave of one’s senses is the only way your camp will ever win at any argument on this topic. Maybe that and extortion.
Care to tell me where and how my looking for well-founded is bad? By the way, I’m not cynical about well-founded arguments, I’m actually LOOKING for them. Nothing so far.
Your camp hasn’t proposed anything better than what we’ve already got (stability, international trade, established legal, diplomatic, and business relationships), and it risks losing us a lot of what we already have (transfer payments, cheap university, cheap daycare). I am personally well off and can afford to live anywhere on this continent and even overseas because I make it a personal goal to be fluent not just in languages but I cultures. I’m afraid of losing my stability far more than even my immigrant ancestors’ language. Still, I choose to stay here and pay for the luxuries of high taxation, to continue living in French – which I value very highly (and not because I’m francophone and am attached to it), and for brats like you to continue thinking they’re special.
Better the devil I know. The least YOU could say is merci.
(4)
> Les dangers de louisianisation du Québec SONT seront inéluctables si le Québec ne devient pas officiellement plus puissant. Est-ce l'avenir que nous voulons réserver à nos enfants ?Non. Il est temps de se séparer en adoptant une Déclaration des droits civils et des droits de l'homme en règle.
ReplyDeleteDemeurer peu ou pas fonctionnels dans la langue de la majorité du continent représente pour les francophones un aussi grand obstacle à notre intégration sur ce continent que pour ces immigrants qui n’apprennent pas notre langue lorsqu’ils s’installent chez nous. Il est grand temps qu’on accepte avec maturité et à bras ouverts notre histoire anglaise, quoique pénible, et qu’on apprenne enfin à transiger avec cet ennemi. Il nous faudra faire cela qu’on devienne indépendant ou non.
> Eliminer et refuser l'égide et le système britannique et sa représentation par un monarche britannique au Québec (Acte du Québec 1774 n'a pas été entièrement respecté);
L’acte de Québec de 1774, s’il avait été entièrement respecté, nous aurait assimilé en peu de temps. Faudrait remercier le gouverneur anglo-irlandais Dorchester (en rebaptisant son boulevard en l’honneur de René Lévesque) qui se souvenait des effets de l’occupation anglaise en Irlande un siècle plus tôt et qui cherchait à éviter que ça se répète ici...
> Eliminer la participation du Québec dans l'Acte de l'Amerique du Nord Britannique et la remplacer par:
La Déclaration des droits de la Nation Québécoise;
T’en fumes du bon. Ces « déclarations » incessantes à valeur romantique ne valent absolument rien dans le cadre constitutionnel actuel. Prends un cours ou deux de droit constitutionnel puis reviens me voir.
(5)
Papineau dit'' Dans Impossible Nation (The Mercury Press), un essai récent (à traduire absolument!), le correspondant culturel du Globe and Mail au Québec, Ray Conlogue, interprète ainsi l'utilisation grandissante au Canada du stéréotype du Québec fasciste: «L'idée de base est de convaincre la minorité qu'elle est inapte à s'autogouverner. On commence par insinuer qu'elle n'en a pas la compétence économique. Si cela ne fonctionne pas, on l'accuse de quelque chose de beaucoup plus grave: l'incompétence morale.»
ReplyDeleteDéjà, en 1960, l'historien américain Mason Wade remarquait comment, devant le nationalisme québécois, le Canada anglais avait le réflexe de soulever le spectre d'un «Canada français fondamentalement fasciste, totalitaire et autoritaire, sans véritable instinct pour la démocratie nord-américaine». Ce stéréotype est bien ancré dans la culture politique canadienne.
Irving Abella montre dans son livre comment Mackenzie King, premier ministre du Canada de 1935 à 1948, invoquait l'opinion canadienne-française pour justifier devant les étrangers la fermeture du Canada aux réfugiés juifs. Or, son journal personnel révèle qu'il était tout simplement antisémite lui-même, opposé à l'immigration juive, et qu'il vouait à Hitler ainsi qu'à Mussolini une admiration qu'on ne rencontre chez aucun chef nationaliste québécois...''http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~fgingras/doc/quebec1930-45.html
Well Anonymous, 9-5:50pm let us converse about the present, shall we? The loss of $47BN at the Caisse de Defauts in 2008, followed by the placing of Sabia there to 'begin' managing Risk, is not proof enough of how diversity beats out the ethno-nationalists methodology like yours every time?
ReplyDeleteIn QC, it is Gouvernmama who makes decisions more often than not, that is why the ADQ and Droitistes are on the rise...
Comment expliques-tu que les partisans du OUI craignent qu'on leur parle des vrai de vrais détails et de logistique, comme notre part de la dette du Canada et de notre territoire?
ReplyDeletePour moi comme pour bon nombre de québécois, même nationalistes, l'important c'est pouvoir compter sur une situation future qui procure mieux que ce qu'on a actuellement.
Le camp du OUI ne nous encourage pas sur le dossier.
Trouvez moi des vrais problèmes tangibles dans ma vie quotidienne et expliquez moi comment votre projet va pouvoir pallier à ces problèmes, faute de quoi vous perderez votre ennième référendum.
Foutez-nous la paix. Ou bien allez vous faire foutre.
Ah Ah Ah AH
ReplyDeleteComme vous etes des anglais heureux chez nous.
Les Canadiens de votre espece sont minables et inacceptables. Travaillez, au moins vous payez votre part de citoyen. Mais un jour vous vous encore congédier, vos loyers augmenteront et nous serons heureux de vous évincer du Québec.
Vous êtes assez mal placé pour proférer de telles menaces. Vous ne réussissez même pas sans nous. Fatigant pas mal.
ReplyDelete"because half my ancestors were humiliated by conquest"
ReplyDeleteThis perception is part of the problem. The French may have been defeated here and in Europe, leading to the loss of North American territories but it does not translate into conquest. The only conquered and humiliated people on this continent were the First Nations. Not to mention that this same era of Francophones had no problems humiliating the nations they set their boots on when they marched across Europe in the attempt to set themselves up as the continental hegemony.
The French and English contended for this land, but neither were established long enough at the time to claim anything more than an attempt to consolidate their gains. If you're going to reach back into history to carry this defeat with you as an identifying badge to the present, then any immigrant residing in Quebec for a couple of generations should carry the humiliation of 101 two hundred years into the future and be met with understanding when they start planting their bombs in retaliation for historical ills.
The argument that the French deserve some sort of 'founding' nation status is an anachronistic, Eurocentric dinosaur. This continent was already 'found' long before the English and the French arrived. There is no going back to repeat the process and remake this into part of the French Empire.
I would save my sentiments of defeat and humiliation for a capitulated nation in WW2 and a collaborating Vichy government that turned on its minorities and led them to German slaughter. You can even save some of that humiliation for the treatment of minorities in this province.
Part of the argument on the Francophone side is the willingness to expropriate the experience of subjugated native peoples around the world and pawn it off as their own. The reality is that among other nations, the French were very active in their own colonization and subjugation.
@Anonymous 10:55
ReplyDeleteI agree almost entirely with your read of the situation. The cult of self-victimization, no matter where it’s propagated, ultimately works not to affirm a people’s resolve, but rather to its detriment.
For the record, I don’t carry a chip on my shoulder and the point of my comment was to illustrate just that. I wasn’t defeated. I wasn’t expropriated. And I certainly won’t be passed over for a promotion because I can’t speak English or French. Some call me an opportunist, others a sellout, and others call me a whore. I'm happy enough taking the average and sprinkling some survival powder for flavor.
To thine own self be true.
Totally agree with your argument about First Nations and Vichy France. In order to understand to whom any parcel of land belongs to, you always need to look at the title deed. And then work backwards through time until you can find no more such deeds. You’ll eventually find the guy who first stole it. Wiser people than me have said this long before I did. It also helps to look in the mirror every now and then.
At the same time, I don’t think it’s realistic or helpful to expect the French Canadians’ descendants to just pack up, fold up, bend over, and disappear. Our continued existence here is in part due to our ancestors’ isolation and stubbornness to cling to their colonial and precolonial ways, and in the face of multiple efforts at assimilating us. This has had a profound effect on our psyche and I think the only way to reverse it, if any, is to somehow expunge that period from our memory. Of course, our narrative, much like other people that have been through worse, will not easily allow us to forget. And this is where I break with my nationalist compatriots: it’s important to appreciate our history, but it’s equally important and healthy and necessary to move on. Until we consciously accept that we’re not endangered and that there are worse things than our great grandchildren being monolingual Hindi speakers, for example, we won’t make much progress. Protectionism is a natural human reflex, after all.
Look at all those U.S. states that have passed English-only laws in recent years…
Look at the fear-based politics in the wake of this ridiculous “War on Terror”…
Political demagoguery is still the second oldest and most enduring profession, it seems. Maybe folks don’t want the politicians to exhort us toward improvement. Could it be that as a species, we haven’t truly evolved much past fire and brimstone?
De Anon français à anon français:
ReplyDeleteLes anglophones ont une riposte rectiligne et souvent répétitive. En bref ceux de ce site sont des malfaiteurs et des usurpateurs de système.
Ils sont là tentant à diviser les uns et ne critiquer LES AUTRES que le pays que nous avons fonder.
Oui, nous détruire, c'est ce qu'ils espère avec leur chiffrier, les vieux scandales, et ils ne comprennent pas la Révolution française qui s'est faite aussi avec toute cette panoplie d'événements qu'ils s'amusent à décrire, pour la "première fois" sans ne rien comprendre.
Eventuellement, ces gens-là trouveront chaussures à leur pied, et plus tard ils se trouveront au chômage, et ils blâmeront aussi les Québécois. Nous sommes pris avec des Anglophones incompétents qui veulent la mort de la langue française et la mort de notre patrimoine. Ce sont des tyrans.
La nation Québécoise se fait harasser par des anglophones de mauvaise souche depuis longtemps ce site est encore un bûcher pour eux.
Alors si ceux qui en valent la peine se plaignent, qu'ils regardent la pensée de la vilainie, ceux de leurs compatriotes qui ne demandent que de subjuguer, d'écraser, asservir, assujettir, captiver, charmer, conquérir, courber, dominer, dompter, enchanter, enchaîner, envahir, envoûter, gagner, imposer, mettre sous le joug, opprimer, réduire, s'emparer de la nation du Québec.
LES TYRANS ANGLOPHONES NE TRIOMPHERONT PAS.
De nombreux visiteurs d’Amérique du Nord et d’Europe viennent au Québec retrouver les ramifications, anciennes ou récentes, de leur arbre généalogique. L’occasion rêvée pour des retrouvailles chaleureuses et des découvertes parfois surprenantes!
ReplyDeleteJe suis un visiteur au Canada, et je ne m'imaginais pas que les anglophones profanaient et haranguaient les Français et les Québécois d'une telle façon.
Vous ne devriez pas rester dans leur territoire et les profaner à la fin ! Sortez du Québec, bande de bons à rien.
ON A BRULE LE PARLEMENT A MONTREAL
ReplyDeleteLe parlement du "Canada uni" a été brûlé parce que les Canadians vivant à Montréal ont été offusqués parce que des patriotes ont eu des compensations parce que leurs fermes ont été endommagées par les soldats et mercenaires anglais...
Même Globesnki, un mercenaire Polonais, s'est interposé entre les Patriotes et les "Canadians pour éviter qu'il y ait plus d'exécution sommaires (Voir les mémoires de ce Globenski.
(...)
<>
Comment maîtriser le grand jeu à cette époque-là puisque la représentation des Québécois d'alors étaient en plus petit nombre.
Le Haut-Canada ayant une masse critique de députés Canadian à 100% et le Bas-canada lui de son nombre de sièges devait enlever le nombre de sièges des canadians et des loyalistes.
La démonstration que le nombre de vote des Québécois d'alors était inférieur à celui des anglais.
Pour contrôler une assemblée il faut 50%+un et c'était les canadians qui l'avaient!!!!
De plus, que la chambre haute pouvait refuser le projet de loi. Et même s'il passait aux deux chambres le gouverneur général (représentant alors Victoria de Saxe-Cobourg) pouvait invalider la loi.
Qui avait le droit de vote dans ce temps-là : propriétaire foncier, homme, de plus de 21 ans. Est-ce qu'il y avait beaucoup de Québécois correspondant à ce critère ?
La liste électorale était préparée par le Canadian, il fallait voter à main levée et passer le seuil d'un bureau de vote sous la surveillance de "gros bras"armés. Le scrutin pouvait s'écouler sur un mois...
Un parlement qui a été bâti par l'occupant et n'étant pas le symbole de la démocratie mais de la suprématie condescendante (le mépris condescendant du vainqueur). De plus, une institution conséquence des propos de Durham d'assimiler des êtres inférieurs qui n'avaient pas d'histoire.
J'ai assez de notion d'histoire pour ne pas banaliser les monuments historiques tel le monument des patriotes. N'avons-nous pas à subir la Colonne Nelson (empire britannique), la statue de Victoria de Saxe-cobourg, le monument aux "Canadian de Montreal" qui se sont battus pour la guerre des Boers, Rue Amherst, Dorchester, McGill...
La rectitude aurait été de détruire nous même ce parlement qui était le symbole d'une duperie !!
LES ANGLOPHONES AU CANADA QUI METTENT LES PIEDS AU QUEBEC SONT POUR LA PLUPART DES TYRANS.
Ceci nous ramène bien au titre initial de l'article, en effet, qui sont les vrais terroristres?
ReplyDeleteIls croient que c'est nous, bien
entendu, les pauvres cons.
La solution sera la séparation et ce n'est pas les gens de ce site qui en décidera.
Vive le Québec libre !
Je ne vous ai pas donné l'autorisation de me tutoyer. L'ARNQ n'est que pour arnaquer les Québécois. Laissons le travail aux gens qui sont
ReplyDeleteplus sérieux que vous en discuter, vouslez-vous ?
Vous ne comprenez pas le mot droit, droit par la nature, droits acquis, propriété intellectuelle. Si vous vous êtes assis dans une classe de droit constitutionnel, vous avez fait l'école buissionnère lors des courts de philosophie aussi. Les profs sont aussi des "vendus" lorsqu'ils enseignent la constitution au Canada.
"L'autogouvernement ne leur revient pas", en voilà des théories, or vous êtes un "francophone" élu si je ne m'abuse. Car vous êtes là depuis un bon nombre d'année.
ReplyDeleteCependant vous avez un irrespect pour préserver le patrimoine qui m'est cher et qui ne vous appartient pas vraiment.... car vous défendez la cause de l'anglophonie, et de la fichue confédération qui n'est qu'un contrat ingrat pour les Québécois.
Allons, racontez ces histoires à d'autres... faites vous examiner !
PS: You said I should see a shrink on another site, you are already on a couch !
My diagnosis: CONTROL FREAK with an allergy to caps who are usually in French where you live !
"The government of Ontario is de facto bilingual, and offers all services in French despite the fact that Francophones comprise less than 4% of the population. Ontario is far more bilingual than Quebec."
ReplyDeleteI regret to say this is completely bull shit, pure and simple bull shit. This is what you read, yes, but this is not what is happening.
NOT AT ALL.
People in Ontario barely speak French. The hate they have after they learn this language is so great, it is an ignominy to the human race!
This is what you don't get.
The English of Ontario disdaign all of the French. The people who have the low jobs and bilingual are from New Brunswick and it is barely understandable from another French speaker outside New Brunswick.
IN KINGSTON HOSPITAL: THERE ARE HUGE SIGNS, BILINGUAL SIGNS.
If you ask something in French they refer
you to the mental unit.
They laugh at us !
There are more people becoming ill from the
bad treatments from the anglos in Ontario they you could believe.
This is the result of the Trudeau etc.... the dream of that playboy who drove his wife nuts.
> Les anglophones ont une riposte rectiligne et souvent répétitive. En bref ceux de ce site sont des malfaiteurs et des usurpateurs de système.
ReplyDeleteQuelle généralisation. Il y en a qui ne font pas de sens, tout comme toi. Une réponse qui commence à A et se termine à Z me semble tout à fait acceptable. Si plus de gens raisonnaient, on se rendrait compte de la banalité de ce conflit.
> Ils sont là tentant à diviser les uns et ne critiquer LES AUTRES que le pays que nous avons fonder.
On a fondé un pays. Ce pays s’appelle le Canada. Pour le meilleur ou pour le pire il nous incombe de l’améliorer à chaque jour.
> Oui, nous détruire, c'est ce qu'ils espère avec leur chiffrier, les vieux scandales, et ils ne comprennent pas la Révolution française qui s'est faite aussi avec toute cette panoplie d'événements qu'ils s'amusent à décrire, pour la "première fois" sans ne rien comprendre.
Le problème c’est qu’on n’a pas vécu les suites de la révolution française au Canada sous régime français. Étiez-vous présent dans l’univers parallèle dans lequel on n’avait pas perdu en 1759 et 1760 pour dire avec certitude ce qu’aurait été la position de la 1re république par rapport à nous ? Moi non plus.
> Eventuellement, ces gens-là trouveront chaussures à leur pied, et plus tard ils se trouveront au chômage, et ils blâmeront aussi les Québécois. Nous sommes pris avec des Anglophones incompétents qui veulent la mort de la langue française et la mort de notre patrimoine. Ce sont des tyrans.
Comment ça? Les commentaires des intervenants sur ce site laissent entendre que le Canada anglais est tanné de nos mélodrames. Moi ça me surprend qu’ils aient enduré le discours nationaliste pendant aussi longtemps. On peut facilement être fier d’être francophone sans avoir à militer ou rêver à un projet mal foutu et ma conçu.
> La nation Québécoise se fait harasser par des anglophones de mauvaise souche depuis longtemps ce site est encore un bûcher pour eux.
Une phrase complète ?
> Alors si ceux qui en valent la peine se plaignent, qu'ils regardent la pensée de la vilainie, ceux de leurs compatriotes qui ne demandent que de subjuguer, d'écraser, asservir, assujettir, captiver, charmer, conquérir, courber, dominer, dompter, enchanter, enchaîner, envahir, envoûter, gagner, imposer, mettre sous le joug, opprimer, réduire, s'emparer de la nation du Québec.
Se sert d’un dictionnaire de synonymes : A+
> LES TYRANS ANGLOPHONES NE TRIOMPHERONT PAS.
ReplyDeleteDes tyrans il y en a de toutes les sortes et couleurs. Faudrait s’unir contre tout ce qui se manifeste contre nos meilleurs intérêts. Nos meilleurs intérêts ne consistent pas nécessairement à voir flotter notre drapeau aux nations unies.
> Je suis un visiteur au Canada, et je ne m'imaginais pas que les anglophones profanaient et haranguaient les Français et les Québécois d'une telle façon.
Si on vient chez vous on retrouve ceux qui avalent mal la chute de l’empire français. On retrouve aussi d’autres nombrilistes qui croient que le soleil gravite autour de la France.
> Vous ne devriez pas rester dans leur territoire et les profaner à la fin ! Sortez du Québec, bande de bons à rien.
Vous êtes en visite pendant combien de temps encore ?
> La démonstration que le nombre de vote des Québécois d'alors était inférieur à celui des anglais.
Il me semble que vous faites tout dans votre possible pour faire oublier qu’on a été les perdants dans cette guerre coloniale. Même indépendants on aurait un continent avec lequel on devra concurrencer. Cessez votre guéguerre revancharde et arrêtez de chercher à nous mettre tous dans le pétrin.
> Pour contrôler une assemblée il faut 50%+un et c'était les canadians qui l'avaient!!!!
OK et que faites vous de ces immigrants venus de Grande-Bretagne qui tôt ou tard allaient nous dépasser ?
> De plus, que la chambre haute pouvait refuser le projet de loi. Et même s'il passait aux deux chambres le gouverneur général (représentant alors Victoria de Saxe-Cobourg) pouvait invalider la loi.
Nos premiers pas avec un gouvernement responsable. Que se passait-il à pareille époque en Allemagne ? en France ? en Italie ? dans l’empire Ottoman ?
> La rectitude aurait été de détruire nous même ce parlement qui était le symbole d'une duperie !!
On aurait pendu plus de monde au pied du courant, ça c’est certain.
> LES ANGLOPHONES AU CANADA QUI METTENT LES PIEDS AU QUEBEC SONT POUR LA PLUPART DES TYRANS.
Un fait ou une opinion ?
I believe you don't read our rationales. We have to constantly rephrase and repeat. Perhaps if you want to become more serious, then we will comment. In the meantime you have given me the opportunity to become more and more assured of the independence of Quebec.If you have become a recent francophone good for you. But they (my people) will recognize a treator in you.
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it, people like you don’t have any “rationales”. You run on resentment and hate, all while pretending to speak of a better future. You want genteel ethnic cleansing to make up for your inferiority complex. You want to stick it to the anglos because our mother country (France) decided it was more lucrative to keep its sugar cane trade in the Caribbean than protect us and the few acres of snow it had in Canada and literally gave us to the English who ran us like the colony we were.
ReplyDeleteTHAT’s what happened. Your obsession with keeping alive the language of our negligent mother country makes no sense emotionally or logically. Your obsession with preventing more of us francophones from fully participating in the current English-dominant world by preventing our immersion and fluency in the language is tantamount to censorship. This thing we call cultural protectionism is a crime against all francophones because “French first” isn’t the rule anywhere else but here. Forcing immigrants fight our longstanding battles is equally cowardly.
Instead of exclusively teaching pride in our language’s rich heritage and expressiveness, you approach it as some kind of divine self-contained communication system that’s about to take over the world. No language deserves that kind of devotion or reverence. Not even English.
You never psychologically accepted the fact that the only reason our culture still exists is because we weren't completely decimated by the English overlords who took us over. Even today they have 9 other provinces whose growing ambivalence about our temper tantrum stands as a testament to our misguided strategies. They think we’re crazy not because they’re jealous. They think we’re crazy because we’re not seeing the forest for the trees.
Now you've settled on a toxic mix of virtual reality and fantasy to justify your pipe dream. I am a proud francophone and don’t want any part of it. I realize we’re something like 2% of this continent, but I think that if we focused on what was really important to us, that we could be the envy and not the laughing stock of North America.
I don't care about living in either a French-only, bilingual, or English-only theme park because no matter who's in charge, I'll have to pay up the ying yang. That’s what I get for being successful. There’s always moving to the U.S., but like many Canadians, I’m too socially liberal to appreciate what I perceive to be some very backward attitudes about key social issues.
You can't pretend you live in a fait accompli called the State of Quebec any more than the Westmount Rhodesians you so despise who think they're living in a different time and place.
Get real. It's 2011 and for better or worse, America runs the world, and international exchanges are done in English. We can keep our language and culture alive. Look at the Jews - by many account perpetually persecuted and also victimized - who’ve kept Hebrew alive for like 5000 years (and without their own country for most of it). They also had the common sense to learn and use the dominant languages that surrounded them.
Maybe that’s something we can be inspired from.
"You" have set a bad example which errors are bombarded sporadically on the site of physical destructions, murderers and abuse of power, firing, job loss etc... towards the French, since the English have taken over. Nothing but aggravation will come out of this site.
ReplyDeleteThe editor is not going to win an award as a peace keeper. Why ? Nobody is going on the right track. WHY? The track is going one way, except the road to freedom, like the blacks wanted.
Our modern society is responding to their own freedom. We have one life to live and if we want to live it in French, because another language as an adstrat wants to become suprstrat you will see more laws like Bill 101. It is legitimate and it is legal. Please please go see a lawyer they charge XXX an hour. THey will tell you I am right, and I am not a charity. My patience has its limitation.
The French NATION wants to run themselves within their own kind. They don't need English, Spanish nor Inuits to do so. Your kind prouved to be unreliable. ( I am not saying you personnally). Like everyone else (Look at Suedan) we don't want you as another kind of TONTON MACOUTE of French America.
You are saying you don't mind French only, but you are tired to put up with us and endure our "ying yang". Oppression is the center of Montreal at this moment. I doubt the English any English will live in peace surrounded with the quibbling which exists in Quebec.
This is what you cannot aspire to: The culture of the French, because even bilingual you are not culturally adapted. I am not blaming you as a person. It happens to the French becoming bilingual as well. This is a little more profound to explain. Please drop the pourcentage, French people don't talk with figures important principles, Je suis, donc j'existe....
Try that one.
Nothing will change. You will change slowly and will accept in the end to live elswhere another part of the lovely country CANADA has become.
Yes, Canada has become an awful country.
Your view is an American view. Start again your rationale.
ReplyDeleteNo, "we" didn't keep Hebrew alive, they did it. Your tone enjoys lording, is extremely dominaring and unpleasant to Francophones.
ReplyDeleteWho about the pot calling the kettle black:The Quebeckers allow you and tolerate you, after all you can make a living without being French born.
My advise to you : don't push your luck baby.
À Apparatchik: ''L’acte de Québec de 1774, s’il avait été entièrement respecté, nous aurait assimilé en peu de temps. Faudrait remercier le gouverneur anglo-irlandais Dorchester (en rebaptisant son boulevard en l’honneur de René Lévesque) qui se souvenait des effets de l’occupation anglaise en Irlande un siècle plus tôt et qui cherchait à éviter que ça se répète ici...'' N'importe quoi, les Britanniques voulaient surtout que les Français ne décident pas de se joindre aux Treize colonies car la plupart étant retournés en Angleterre, les britanniques n'auraient pas tenus le coup... Révisionniste !!
ReplyDeleteYour energy spent on what I think is terrible. You are wrong. I exchange in English with you but
ReplyDeleteyour bullshitting is exhaustive. NO RESPECT. so please go live where the other language will be yours.
The anglophones in Quebec have the mind of a sieve.... nobody remembers the murders, the job loss, the fired, the killing from the anglos...
ReplyDeleteof course, their mind is not the French mind.
You wonder apart from pourcentage what are they
able to grasp.
> "You" have set a bad example which errors are bombarded sporadically on the site of physical destructions, murderers and abuse of power, firing, job loss etc... towards the French, since the English have taken over
ReplyDeleteFrench and English have been going at it since at least the Battle of Hastings. Are you going to compile an inventory of each skirmish and conflict since then? All you’ll have is a long list and gray hair.
> The editor is not going to win an award as a peace keeper. Why ? Nobody is going on the right track. WHY? The track is going one way, except the road to freedom, like the blacks wanted.
I think the Editor isn’t looking to win an award, but rather manages a blog where he discusses his point of view about the state of our political situation and attempts to moderate a forum according to his own rules. I’m personally a bit hurt by the opinions expressed by many anglo federalists on this site, but I also understand how they can be fed up with a lot of the crap people like you pretend is the unanimous position of all of us. This being said, I’m still optimistic for a mature outcome that resembles my utopic vision more than anyone else’s here.
> We have one life to live and if we want to live it in French, [...] adstrat [...] suprstrat you will see more laws like Bill 101.
I have no problem expressing myself in English and in French. You’ve seen that for yourself. I just wish everyone else shared my views on language so that they could stop having useless arguments about the relative supremacy of one people or another and just succeed in our own lives. We are fortunate to have inherited two rich traditions but some of us are too stupid to exploit them for our own greater glory.
Laws that restrict rather than promote openness are bound to fail and eventually go the way of the dinosaurs. For all your passionate talk of Quebec political “freedom”, you fail to grasp all the subtleties, facets, and perhaps equally important varieties of freedom that exist. That includes the cultural and linguistic exposure and freedom your gang’s positions have robbed francophone Quebecers of for the last 40 years.
Prohibition failed. Segregation failed. Anti-miscegenation laws failed. Forced state religion failed. Slavery failed. The Inquisition failed. Doing everything we can to protect everything about a “way of life” just because our ancestors did it by forcing everyone to do things are way is disingenuous and runs counter to both our supposed passion for “freedom”.
It’s incomprehensible to me how you would sooner prevent a completely “de souche” Quebecer from becoming perfectly bilingual than allow him to assert his existence by denying others the right to theirs.
> Please please go see a lawyer they charge XXX an hour.
Je ne toucherais même pas à celle-là…
> My patience has its limitation.
ReplyDeleteYou’re not the only one. But I’m extraordinarily patient and am not a fan of violence.
> The French NATION wants to run themselves within their own kind.
That ship sailed centuries ago, literally. For all your talk of the precariousness of our language’s survival, you are completely unable to realize the even more precarious situation that your kind of stubbornness threatens to put us into. Surely a few centuries on the back burner has taught us to make better value judgments than that.
> Your kind prouved to be unreliable. ( I am not saying you personnally).
How does that make any sense? Dude, I’m Montreal born and raised. And I’ve had the best of three worlds. You don’t belong here more than I do. You don’t make the rules alone.
> Like everyone else (Look at Suedan) we don't want you as another kind of TONTON MACOUTE of French America.
It has never been my intention to inflict, threaten, or cause any kind of violence to anyone. So your reference to Tonton Macoute and the Janjawid, just like all your other comparisons, is not at all à propos.
> You are saying you don't mind French only, but you are tired to put up with us and endure our "ying yang".
Yes. By the way, to pay up the ying yang is my polite reference to human anatomy to speak of the ridiculously high taxes I pay. And yes, I want to live in French and am crazy enough to remain in the high tax bracket I’m in to continue doing so. Why? Because I love this province and this country and I believe that the former belongs in the latter. I don’t even have a problem with us living exclusively in French. My only problem is forcefully legislating it.
> Oppression is the center of Montreal at this moment.
Quit using words like oppression. They insult the people around the world who really are.
Darfuris are oppressed. We in Montreal aren’t.
> I doubt the English any English will live in peace surrounded with the quibbling which exists in Quebec.
The ones who wanted to leave have already left. Those that remain are either complete suckers for punishment or really don’t hate French nearly as much as you like to pretend they do.
> This is what you cannot aspire to: The culture of the French, because even bilingual you are not culturally adapted.
I’m tri-culturally adapted. Watch what you say.
> This is what you cannot aspire to: The culture of the French, because even bilingual you are not culturally adapted.
ReplyDeleteI’m tri-culturally adapted. And unlike some people, very well adjusted. Careful what you say.
> I am not blaming you as a person.
Could have fooled me! Maybe you aren’t , but I can’t help but think from the tenor of your postings that you harbor a severe hatred for what I’m advocating because I’ve seen the other side of the coin and far from being scared by it, I’ve embraced it. The reason I’m taking you on is to attempt to make you realize that you can be both (or all three) at the same time and not “lose” anything. Cultural fluency doesn’t dilute opportunities; it multiplies them. That’s what you seem to be unable to see.
> It happens to the French becoming bilingual as well.
Yes. I feel a certain connectedness to a perfectly bilingual speaker whose origins I can’t immediately identify. Like me, they’ve either worked hard to become that way or have taken full advantage of their privileged circumstances to achieve the same result. Either way, they’ve tried and succeeded. They’re not scared of assimilation either. And that encourages me far more than shock headlines like “Montréal s’anglicise”.
> Please drop the pourcentage, French people don't talk with figures important principles, Je suis, donc j'existe....
Yes and as for me, je pense, donc je suis. Functionally, we need to manipulate both ideas AND facts to arrive at useful conclusions. Garbage in, garbage out. If what I’m feeding into my hypothesis is factually inaccurate, how do you ever want to arrive at a serious conclusion?
> Nothing will change.
Change is permanent. Otherwise we stagnate. My job is to live my life. Let the historians and anthropologists study in a century or two what language I spoke and the food I ate.
> You will change slowly and will accept in the end to live elswhere another part of the lovely country CANADA has become.
I can and have lived elsewhere. Even though I came back, YOU are mentally stuck in a backward and intolerant fantasy world no matter where you’ll ever live. I would pity you if I didn’t think you were so far gone. But it’s clear your purpose isn’t to challenge yourself by trying to argue the positions of your adversaries. You seem content to sputter simplistic dogmas of hate, intolerance, ethnic cleansing, and a few (quite poorly) chosen historical references.
What you stand for amounts to failure.
> Your view is an American view. Start again your rationale.
ReplyDeleteMy view is a Montreal, Quebec, Canadian, and North American view that is small-l liberal and wide open to the world. I see no reason to trade that in for a discredited, self-victimizing, self-weakening position that depicts our people as perpetually insecure basket cases and which hurts our chances at competing in the world.
> No, "we" didn't keep Hebrew alive, they did it.
I never said French-Canadians kept Hebrew alive. My point was that we can be inspired from an often persecuted minority to not forget who we are and still retain strong bonds to our origins.
> Who about the pot calling the kettle black:The Quebeckers allow you and tolerate you, after all you can make a living without being French born.
I AM French-Canadian born. I DO speak French. And I do very well in life.
> My advise to you : don't push your luck baby.
My advice to you: don’t push yours.
You don’t speak for the majority, or even for a plurality. Quit trying to give yourself and your supremacist movement airs of legitimacy. A lot of us francophones know you’re in it for your own pathetic personal glory and we won’t take your crap in defense of countless straw man arguments we all know to be fake.
> les Britanniques voulaient surtout que les Français ne décident pas de se joindre aux Treize colonies car la plupart étant retournés en Angleterre, les britanniques n'auraient pas tenus le coup... Révisionniste !!
Et tu penses vraiment que si les canadiens-français s’étaient joints aux treize colonies que les américains auraient toléré que les serviteurs se comportent comme des maitres? Moi en tout cas je ne penserais pas.
> Your energy spent on what I think is terrible. You are wrong.
Likewise. By the way, why do you make it sound like I inject cute bunnies with poison?
> I exchange in English with you but your bullshitting is exhaustive.
ReplyDeleteTiring you out, am I? T’es pas mal fatigant toi aussi. What some call rigor, people like you who can’t follow even the simplest line of reasoning call bullshit. I know I’m right and that you’re frustrated at being completely unable to counter any of my points and stay on topic, English OR French. You lose argument after argument and desperately and disparately try to up the ante. Just take a timeout already and think about what you’re really advocating and whether it’s really in your best interest and the interest of all francophone Quebecers. You just might be surprised at what you come up with once you let even a little reason prevail.
> NO RESPECT.
You’re kidding me. A franco-supremacist fundamentalist is telling me I have no respect?!?!?
Nobody else on this blog is willing to waste their time on you because they think you’re a raving lunatic and not worth it. I can take you head on because I challenged myself about this conflict long and hard before I came to have the opinions I have.
> please go live where the other language will be yours.
Don’t presume to tell me or anyone else where to live. I happily live in both English and French. This is my home. These are my city, province, and country. Supremacist fundamentalists like you aren’t the only ones who are allowed to exist.
> The anglophones in Quebec have the mind of a sieve […] of course, their mind is not the French mind.
A lot of wrong has been done by both sides. Every people has its trash. But let’s also try not to insult the great French and English minds that made and make both cultures great.
"You lose argument after argument"..
ReplyDeleteSo you are trying the "reconventionnelle" tactic hey! people are phoning me to discuss your lack of good jugment, your written insults, your plastering, your perturbed mind.
Well, if you represent the English population we are better without you !
Au revoir,
JE ME SOUVIENS !
"JE ME SOUVIENS"
ReplyDeleteApparently Quebecers can only remember when they are faced with a daily reminder to do so on every vehicle on the road (although most of us are not quite sure what they're remembering exactly, and judging by what passes for history here, it could be anything really), and they can only maintain their culture and language by forcibly being led to do this through draconian, fascist, racist legislation.
Of course, for all this quebecois greatness to be achieved and remembered, someone has to pay for it. Thank you Canadian tax payers for funding North Americas very own version of Apartheid light and suspending the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms, setting a precedent for it to be repeated at any province of your choice.
Anon 12:22 PM: "people are phoning me to discuss your lack of good jugment, your written insults, your plastering, your perturbed mind."
ReplyDeleteWhen all these people phone you, do you say: "Bonjour, Napoleon à l'appareil" when you pick up?
> So you are trying the "reconventionnelle" tactic
ReplyDeleteActually I’m not arguing by changing the subject. I’ve responded to and demonstrated how all of YOUR warped pretentions are actually non-arguments.
> hey! people are phoning me […]
Would that be the Louis Préfontaine Identity Crisis Hotline?
> […] to discuss your lack of good jugment, your written insults, your plastering, your perturbed mind.
I’m glad you boys have found something to keep busy with while the grown-ups try to get some work done.
> if you represent the English population we are better without you !
I represent ME. Francophone, Anglophone, and Allophone. I wasn’t asking for your validation. I don’t need it. You don’t have a monopoly on what it means to be a good Quebecer and an open-minded human being and you never will.
> Au revoir
Bon débarras.
> JE ME SOUVIENS !
...de?
"Bonjour, Napoleon à l'appareil"
ReplyDeleteNapoleon was an ethnic minority himself. He was of Italian descent.
JE ME SOUVIENS:
ReplyDeleteGET A LOAD OF THAT:
(1) Je me souviens la devise du Royal 22e Régiment.
(2) La devise du Québec est récupérée par des citoyens, les « défusionnistes », qui posent le slogan « Je me souviendrai des fusions forcées ! » pour protester contre l’annexion forcée de certaines municipalités à un chef-lieu régional PAR LES ANGLAIS.-
-Les crimes des anglophones ne sont pas oubliés.
Le parlement de Montréal brûlé par les Anglais.
Les Acadiens massacrés et déportés.
Les Patriotes français (17 médecins et plusieurs fermiers tués pour avoir eu l'idée de rester FRANCAIS)
you don't belive me, take a peek on the NET. There are a lot of other interpretation to suit people like you, sensitive to their barbaric sense of invasion.
"Le parlement de Montréal brûlé par les Anglais.
ReplyDeleteLes Acadiens massacrés et déportés.
Les Patriotes français (17 médecins et plusieurs fermiers tués pour avoir eu l'idée de rester FRANCAIS)"
The Parlament was burned as a response, not an instigation. The Acadiens had many opportunities to declare loyalty to the throne. The Patriotes rebelled and were dealt with as every rebellion has been dealt with throughout history: force.
It's beautifully stereotypically separatist of you to present one side of every story.
You suck at life
You know what I remember?
- Quebec becoming officially French
- 101
- Unique status
- Tolerated open racism towards anglos
You've gotten everything you've asked for. Quit your bitching.
you should repent, as we all know you refuse to repent, YOU ARE TERRORIST WHICH WILL BE VANISHED
ReplyDeleteIN THE FUTURE.
THERE WILL BE A PRICE ON YOUR HEADS, the
rest of Canada will have to pay for.
You won't quit your racism, your intolerance, nor your sadism.
IF GENOCIDE IS AN ANSWER TO BECOME ENGLISH
ReplyDeleteWHO ARE THE REAL TERRORIST HERE FUCKER!
"IF GENOCIDE IS AN ANSWER TO BECOME ENGLISH
ReplyDeleteWHO ARE THE REAL TERRORIST HERE FUCKER! "
Don't get off your meds. You obviously need them.
Nobody is asking you to not be French. This province would be a bland place without the blend of cultures and languages we all speak. But, in preserving your right to your culture and language, the same courtesy should be extended to others. The truth is that French will never disappear in Quebec, even if it does become bilingual.
You don't care about protecting your language, obviously. What you seem more interested in is voicing your intolerance, bigotry and threats through the shield of supposed protectionism. The whitewash does not work any longer. It died out after the second referendum you lost.
It's a hypocritical public offering that only hides the willingness of Quebecers of your sort to threaten and coerce the minorities in the province to either leave or remain subservient.
I'm happy to see you post here. Finally, Canadians can get a flavour of life as a Canadian in Quebec.