Monday, August 15, 2011

Lawyer promotes Language Agenda On Client's Back

A couple of months ago, I was watching the local news and caught a story concerning a certain criminal trial. (For obvious reasons I won't mention which) A young lawyer (someone I know) was escorting his client out of the criminal court and as they made their way down the hall, they were pursued by reporters, asking for an on-air statement or interview. The lawyer waved them off and ushered his client into the safety of the elevator as quickly as he could. When I met him next, I asked him why he was so camera shy, after all, as a young lawyer embarking on a career, some face time on television would certainly have a salutary effect on his career.

"What about the client?" he replied. "Was it in the client's best interest? It's the policy of our law firm not to comment on the proceedings while the trial is unfolding, or in the sentencing phase."

Good answer.

I never thought of it that way and it's good to see that integrity still exists, especially among criminal lawyers who we generally hold in disdain.

With this in mind, watching Maitre Stephane Handfield use the press to attack the Immigration and Refugee Board over language issues, got me wondering whether Mr. Handfield is doing his client justice or is he just promoting himself and his language agenda on the back of someone trying desperately to land a spot in Canada.

Mr. Handfield is a lawyer who has been vociferous in his denunciation of the IRBC over the perceived language discrimination that he believes exists in the Montreal office. He is also a bit of a showboater, a lawyer who likes to argue his cases before the media. That being said, notwithstanding his efforts before the camera, his latest client Dany Villanueva lost the latest round in his deportation hearing.
Not to worry, Mr. Handfield has promised a final appeal, thus insuring his miscreant client many more moons in Canada and for Maitre Handfield, many more television interviews.

Mr. Handfield is also an avowed French language militant. In an opinion piece that he penned in La Presse last November, he made a litany of accusations against the board;
"...In recent years, it becomes increasingly difficult to obtain services in French before the IRB. Examples include: refusal to get a hearing in French, refusal to forward documentation in French, Commissioners (makers) unilingually English, communications in English, the inability to obtain interpreter services in French...
....Moreover, how can we explain that a person who arrives at the Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau airport, who speaks neither French nor English and who is processed by a French-speaking immigration agent, has his immigration file completed in English! In these circumstances, it is not surprising that 50% of the decisions made by the IRB in Montréal in 2009 were in English." LINK{Fr}
Some of his complaints may be valid and worth investigating, but it is his math that has me questioning his integrity (among other things.)
Mr Handfield claims that 50% of the decisions in Montreal are handled in English, as a result of those speaking no English or French, having half their case treated in English, representing  prime face evidence that French is not being respected. 
But perhaps the 50% figure is attributed to the fact that of those who do speak English or French, the vast majority speak English as opposed to French and as such it is normal that more cases are heard in English. 
Perhaps the number of immigrants seeking status (who don't speak English or French) is very low and statistically less important, I don't know. Neither does he. He offers us no real insight other  than faulty conclusions based on selective data and coloured opinions.

It's like doing a survey in the Fairview Shopping Mall in the west island of Montreal (in the decidedly English suburb of Pointe-Claire) to gauge what percentage of clerks serve customers in English or French and then concluding that French is not being respected because over fifty percent of the conversations are in English. Anybody see the problem?

As a language militant, Mr. Handfield is prone to suffer from the same statistical disease that Pierre Curzi and other French militants employ to falsely sell the idea that the sky is falling on the French language. 

And so Mr. Handfield, with his newly-minted statistics, leaps to a self-serving conclusion, with the honesty and panache of a Three Card Monte card shark.
"No wonder several newcomers prefer sticking to Anglo-Saxon culture rather than to a French-speaking culture. They note from their arrival that it is in English that everything takes place in Quebec."
All this serves to underline Mr. Handfield's politics, an opinion which he has every right to militate for.
But is Maitre Handfield promoting his personal language agenda at the expense of a client?

Here's that story.

Mr. Handfield, not one to ever shy away from a camera, has been complaining that French rights are being denied to him and his client, a Cuban businessman seeking to remain in Canada, in a case before that very same Immigration and Refugee Board.
The Cuban businessman arrived in Canada and proceeded to ask for landed status. Speaking much more English than French, the case proceeded in English. For whatever reason, the claimant then changed lawyers midstream and hired  Mr. Handfield, who demanded that the whole process be changed to French and that all the previous documents related to the trial also be translated.
In an article in La Presse a reporter Vincent Larouche, erroneously reports that  when Mr. Hanfield took over the case, his request to have the hearing changed to French was refused.
"...But soon enough he (the client) changed lawyers to Maitre Stéphane Handfield, a specialist in immigration law who requested that the process be changed to French, which he was denied. Link{FR}
I don't know if the reporter failed to do his homework or tried to alter the facts to suit his slant on the story, but that is just not true. This false version is circulating in the French media, even in the main stream.

 Mr. Handfield readily admits that he was allowed to proceed in French, but the Commission balked at translating what documents had already been accumulated in English, reasoning that it would delay the affair unreasonably. 

That's the whole big deal. According to  Mr. Handfield;
"We managed to get the hearings to take place in French, but we were denied our request that the 57-page document be translated into French" LINK{FR} 
And so enter the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste and chief blowhard Mario Beaulieu who helped turn a translation issue into a federal case.
Maitre Handfield took part in a demonstration, organized by the SSJB, which protested the 'lamentable' and 'unacceptable' burden put upon Mr. Handfield and his client, all because the document wasn't translated.
Listening to Mario Beaulieu it was the injustice of the century!

Of course, as one could well expect, our ever-sympathetic Office of the Commissioner of the Official Languages sided with Mr. Handfield and ordered the document translated.

And so  Mr. Handfield and Mario Beaulieu landed a great language victory!

But was it a big win for the client?

Immigration hearings are highly subjective.
A good story presented by a sympathetic appellant is much more likely to succeed, given the wide latitude that adjudicators wield.
Let's hope that those ruling on the case are more generous than you or I, otherwise the client will be on the next flight to Cuba. After all, can any good come from attacking those who hold your client's future in their hands?
It's like insulting the bouncer at the door of a night club you're trying to get in.....not the best plan!
Using a client for one's own purpose is reprehensible, lawyers are sworn to put client's interests above all else, except the law.
The question remains. Was the client's best interest served by escalating the case from a simple immigration affair into a language confrontation?

Does the SSJB and Maitre Stephane Handfield really care about the client or are they promoting their own selfish agenda on his back?
By the way, the client's name is Leonardo Javier Bolanos Blanco, if anybody really cares. 

25 comments:

  1. Whining, moaning, bitching on a daily basis. Constantly.

    How is it possible that such a great country like Canada allows this "kébékuo' theater" on a daily basis? Should Canada clamp down on it?

    The message is clear: if you want to be an active part of this world, study English.

    WESTALLOPHONE++

    ReplyDelete
  2. What would you think about a lawyer who frequently and publicly challenges the constitutionality of Bill 101 despite a very low success rate? Do you think he would be putting his clients' interests first, or would it be more accurate to say that he is wasting his clients' money in order to promote himself?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "What would you think about a lawyer who frequently and publicly challenges the constitutionality of Bill 101 despite a very low success rate?"

    Très bon point John!Mais malheureusement plusieurs éléments de la loi 101 ont été anéantis par ces avocats sans scrupule,même si quelques-uns s'y sont casser les dents.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @ John Themon,

    "What would you think about a lawyer who frequently and publicly challenges the constitutionality of Bill 101..."

    There is a key difference. Practically every challenge to Bill 101 has been made by lawyers representing clients who had a specific complaint against 101. It is not the same as a lawyer making language an issue when the case at hand has nothing to do with it, i.e. an immigration case.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What are these anti-English language Nazis really up to? Well the proof is all around people, just open your eyes and your mind.

    Lies, lies and more lies. These people have PhDs in lying, spin, propaganda, and BS…You can’t believe a thing coming from there big mouths period. This is the mindset of the metis (they are not French, that is a complete lie, they are a mixed breed, a metis). They are pure scum of the earth.

    The simple facts are as more francophone’s get hired for all government positions less and less English speakers are working for their own governments across the country. Don’t believe me; Go check the stats for yourself. Francophone’s are over-represented in all levels of government including hospitals, law, policing...etc. No fairness, no representation by population. They call it bilingualism, yet the term is never defined on purpose and believe me it doesn’t mean fluency in 2 languages in Canada, at least to the French it doesn’t. No political party will speak for the English speaking majority in this province and country. Practical bilingualism, where numbers warrant… is never defined on purpose. In Ontario, NB it now means segregation. The French (they are actually metis, a mixed race, not french) are demanding French only facilities all over the province, not bilingual, French only. $ Bilingualism is really nothing more then a hiring quota for francophone’s and that is a fact…just ask yourself, why are francophone’s over-represented in all government jobs and how come more and more positions are being designated bilingual all the time? And just as important, how come they are NOT fluently bilingual? Some can barely speak English!

    Go learn our proud, real BNA and UEL history. These were the builders of our country since 1763, not this phony, revisionist lie, spin, nonsense, this bilingual, multicultural,2 founding nations, linguistic duality lie, spin, propaganda that we’ve been living with since Trudeau and Kebec (original spelling) forced this upon the nation. We’ve been part of the British Empire since 1763 and officially and English speaking country for over 200 years, again just the facts...We were never a bilingual country. This is one big expensive lie/fraud that’s been going on for over 5 decades now. Yes 5 decades of changing our history, changing the names of towns, bodies of water…, street names… all over the country, not just Kebec any more. They are revising, falsifying our real BNA, UEL history. Wake up people!

    So while Quebec bans the English language (bill 22, bill 178, bill 101…), wipes out its real BNA, UEL history, while ethnic language cleansing is going on in Quebec, the rest of the country is forced to fund whatever the French (metis) demand. This is going on in every province. Go check.

    See what’s really going on? What are they really up to? - “First Quebec, then we take over the rest of the country, one step at a time…through bilingualism…” PT, “How to take over a country through bilingualism…” SD. How? First comes the right to communicate with gov't in a minority language (ie French),then comes bilingualism, then comes the right to work in the language of choice(ie French), then comes a bilingual boss,(ie French) then comes a exclusively French department and on it goes until its all French. Its happening all over the country, Ontario, New Brunswick… Go check the stats for yourself.

    What the country truly needs to understand is that these policies, these bilingual laws were forced upon the country by a man who hated, who despised our proud and real BNA, UEL history, dating back to 1763. This man was an anti-English language bigot. We were never a bilingual country.

    Until someone repeals the charter and everything connected to it, such as the bilingual, multicultural BS…things will only get worse and this country will continue its slide into government corruption, greed, fraud, money laundering…

    Time is ticking.

    See what’s really going in Canada? ALL these lying scum bag politicians are allowing the lies to continue…

    Where do we turn?

    ReplyDelete
  6. If it turned out that Brent Tyler was also an opportunist seeking publicity, would that excuse Handfield?

    Also, where Tyler challenges the status quo, Handfield seeks to uphold it. That's a big difference. Tyler can't count on the kind of publicity that the opportunist Handfield will likely get, especially in Quebec. In Quebec, Tyler can expect to get his house pelted with eggs (or worse), whereas Handfield can expect bouquets of roses.

    So apples and oranges. Again.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ Press 9 for bs,

    "Mais malheureusement plusieurs éléments de la loi 101 ont été anéantis par ces avocats sans scrupule"

    The entire law should have been scrapped. The only people without scruples are the fascist politicians in Quebec who passed 101 and who still support it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To Anonymous at 12:15 PM,

    I am a federalist and I detest what Quebec nationalists have done, but I'm getting rather tired of seeing the same comment in virtually every thread of this blog. Can't you come up with something new to say?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Looks as if that book from the past, Bilingual today, French tomorrow is starting to catch on!

    ReplyDelete
  10. If people only knew what these racist scum bags were up to.See below...

    “Bilingualism is a sign of progress in the rest of Canada. But I don’t want bilingualism in Quebec”.

    Gilles Duceppe.

    "Quebec can make French the only official language in spite of the

    Constitution". Pierre Trudeau, 1967.

    “I see Quebec as a bubble, linguistically insular and sociologically robust in a sea of English…. They are Quebecers first. Canada is an essential partner, but it is outside the bubble. Quebecers, influenced by their opinion leaders, think, behave, and evolve differently in response to religion, gender relations, the economy, the world, politics and just about everything else. Quebec will not separate…It would cost too much…. Canada must come to terms with the political implications of a reality that so strongly shapes its character.” Marcel Cote, President Secor Inc. Montreal

    “The question is not whether we have the means to become an independent country. Yes, we have them. The real question – Is it in our own interest? What would be best for Quebec?” Jean Charest, Premier of Quebec

    “Quebecers have always known how to push a bit further each day without going too far. What the ideologues criticize as an inability to make up their minds is really the central characteristic of our genius, the secret of our survival as a nation. Those who love Quebec should be proud of this sage ambivalence.” Andre Pratte La Presse.

    “As soon as you recognize Quebec as a nation you must recognize that you will then be confronted with the following question:- why should the Quebec nation be satisfied with the status of province of another nation, rather than one that is equal to yours and all the other nations?” Bernard Landry

    "There is no way two ethnic groups in one country can be made equal

    before the law....and to say it is possible is to sow the seeds of

    destruction".

    Pierre Trudeau, 1966.

    “We must have recognition that Quebecers form a francophone nation in America, not a bilingual nation” Gilles Duceppe. Leader of the Bloc Quebecois

    “The Liberal Party of Canada supports without any conditions the recognition of Quebec as a Nation.” Denis Coderre Liberal Member of Parliament.



    “The recognition of Quebec as a nation is a way for us to occupy the place that is owed us in Canada and elsewhere in the world.” Jean Charest, Quebec Premier

    " ....Given these facts, should French-speaking people concentrate their
    efforts on Quebec. or take the whole of Canada as their base? In my
    opinion, they should do both; and for the purpose they could find no
    better instrument than federalism", Pierre Trudeau, Page 31 "Federalism"
    (1968).

    "My roll as Secretary of State of Canada is first and foremost to ensure that my French compatriots in Canada feel with deep conviction, as I do, that this is their country and that it reflects their image". "I too had some difficult years as a politician; I'm still having them, in fact, because everything we undertake and everything we are doing to make Canada a French state is part of a venture I have shared for many years with a number of people". "You know the idea, the challenge, the ambition of making Canada a French country both inside and outside Quebec -- an idea some people consider a bit crazy, is something a little beyond the ordinary imagination". - Serge Joyal, Secretary of State - Page 2 'ENOUGH' by J.V. Andrew. – Serge Joyal - Now in the Senate.

    “ Bill 101 is a brilliant piece of legislation" - Stéphane Dion, Federal Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (2001), President of the Queen's Privy Council and newly appointed watchdog over official bilingualism (2001)

    ReplyDelete
  11. #2

    "I cannot swear it but I think we were thinking to ourselves,... we are a small group, Trudeau, Pelletier, Marchand, Lalonde, Chrétien, myself and a few people in the civil service, say 50 all told…we were bringing off a revolution. We held the key posts. We were making the civil service bilingual (French), kicking and screaming all the time". Jean-Luc Pepin, Minister of Industry, 1970.

    "Canada is going to be a French speaking nation from coast to coast and any body opposed to this is opposed to the best interest of Canada". Leo Cadieux, speaking to French National Assembly, 1973.

    "The Canadian government is engaged in a task of spreading the French

    language across the length and breadth of the country". Jules Lege,

    l968

    "Bilingualism in truth was nothing less than a social revolution…no one in Ottawa in the later 1960's let on that a massive change was about to happen… Trudeau knew this all along. He lied about it as a necessary means to an end". Richard Gwyn in his book the Northern Magnus.

    "We are never entirely satisfied and we want to promote (Force, $$$) bilingualism (French) even more than we do now" Lucienne Robillard, President of the Treasury Board, 2001.

    Dr. Jim Pankiw, Canadian Alliance MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, stood up in the house of commons on April 6th, 2001 and asked the liberal government the following questions,

    Question: "Mr. Speaker, Treasury Board statistics confirm that for every increase in the number of federal public service jobs designated bilingual, there is a corresponding decrease in the participation rate of Anglophones in the public service. I should like to know what steps the government is prepared to take to end the systematic discrimination against English speaking Canadians with respect to hiring and promotions".

    Response: "Mr. Speaker, this is probably the most insulting question I have ever heard in the House of Commons" Don Boudria, Liberal house leader.

    Question # 2 "Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's application of forced bilingualism is costly, discriminatory and a source of national divisiveness and disunity. Notwithstanding, I ask the Justice Minister why she intervenes on behalf of Ontario Francophones but does not request intervener status to protect Anglophones in Québec. She is prepared to defend the interests of French speaking people in Ontario but she is not prepared to defend the rights of English speaking people in Québec. Why the double standard?"

    Response from Lucienne Robillard: No answer of course…why?

    "Quebec can make French the only official language in spite of the
    Constitution". Pierre Trudeau, 1967.

    "There will be no retreat in Quebec on the French language policy".
    P.M.
    Brian Mulroney, Dec. 12th, 1986.

    "The government of Canada has no right to promote English in Quebec".
    Gil Remillard, Minister for Inter-Governmental Affairs, 1988.

    "The Canadian community must invest, for the defence and better

    appreciation of the French language, as much time, energy, and money as

    are required to prevent the country from breaking up" - Pierre Trudeau,

    Page 32, "Federalism" (1968) also quoted in Farewell The Peaceful

    Kingdom by Joe Armstrong.

    "Bilingualism is unthinkable for Quebec". Robert Bourassa, 1988.

    "Language legislation is utterly insane and is designed to encourage
    bigotry. There is no precedence anywhere for unity being enhanced
    through a policy of two official languages". Peter Worthington,
    Financial Post, July 1988.

    "From one ocean to the other, Canada is presenting a bilingual image

    that is stronger than ever, while in Quebec, for the first time since

    1760, the official language is exclusively French. If one sticks to the

    image, not only is Quebec sovereign, but it has succeeded in partially

    annexing Canada". - Christian Dufour (1990) - Page 64, Lament for a

    Notion by Scott Reid.

    ReplyDelete
  12. #3

    "Anyone with a pea for a brain knows that our Canadian federal
    government is today firmly under French Canadian control". J.V. Andrew,
    Ret. Lieut. Cmdr.
    Navy, in his book 'ENOUGH' (Published 1988)

    "Make no mistake. Canada is not a bilingual country. In fact it is less bilingual today than it has ever been." Stephen Harper

    "After all, enforced national bilingualism in this country isn't mere

    policy. It has attained the status of a religion. It's a dogma which one is

    supposed to accept without question." Stephen Harper

    "As a religion, bilingualism is the god that failed. It has led to no

    fairness, produced no unity, and cost Canadian taxpayers untold millions." Stephen Harper

    Actually Prime Minister Harper you are wrong, it has cost this country untold Billions...

    Wake up people. These scum bags are doing what they said they would do...wake up!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. #2

    "I cannot swear it but I think we were thinking to ourselves,... we are a small group, Trudeau, Pelletier, Marchand, Lalonde, Chrétien, myself and a few people in the civil service, say 50 all told…we were bringing off a revolution. We held the key posts. We were making the civil service bilingual (French), kicking and screaming all the time". Jean-Luc Pepin, Minister of Industry, 1970.

    "Canada is going to be a French speaking nation from coast to coast and any body opposed to this is opposed to the best interest of Canada". Leo Cadieux, speaking to French National Assembly, 1973.

    "The Canadian government is engaged in a task of spreading the French

    language across the length and breadth of the country". Jules Lege,

    l968

    "Bilingualism in truth was nothing less than a social revolution…no one in Ottawa in the later 1960's let on that a massive change was about to happen… Trudeau knew this all along. He lied about it as a necessary means to an end". Richard Gwyn in his book the Northern Magnus.

    "We are never entirely satisfied and we want to promote (Force, $$$) bilingualism (French) even more than we do now" Lucienne Robillard, President of the Treasury Board, 2001.

    Dr. Jim Pankiw, Canadian Alliance MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, stood up in the house of commons on April 6th, 2001 and asked the liberal government the following questions,

    Question: "Mr. Speaker, Treasury Board statistics confirm that for every increase in the number of federal public service jobs designated bilingual, there is a corresponding decrease in the participation rate of Anglophones in the public service. I should like to know what steps the government is prepared to take to end the systematic discrimination against English speaking Canadians with respect to hiring and promotions".

    Response: "Mr. Speaker, this is probably the most insulting question I have ever heard in the House of Commons" Don Boudria, Liberal house leader.

    Question # 2 "Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's application of forced bilingualism is costly, discriminatory and a source of national divisiveness and disunity. Notwithstanding, I ask the Justice Minister why she intervenes on behalf of Ontario Francophones but does not request intervener status to protect Anglophones in Québec. She is prepared to defend the interests of French speaking people in Ontario but she is not prepared to defend the rights of English speaking people in Québec. Why the double standard?"

    Response from Lucienne Robillard: No answer of course…why?

    "Quebec can make French the only official language in spite of the
    Constitution". Pierre Trudeau, 1967.

    "There will be no retreat in Quebec on the French language policy".
    P.M.
    Brian Mulroney, Dec. 12th, 1986.

    "The government of Canada has no right to promote English in Quebec".
    Gil Remillard, Minister for Inter-Governmental Affairs, 1988.

    "The Canadian community must invest, for the defence and better

    appreciation of the French language, as much time, energy, and money as

    are required to prevent the country from breaking up" - Pierre Trudeau,

    Page 32, "Federalism" (1968) also quoted in Farewell The Peaceful

    Kingdom by Joe Armstrong.

    "Bilingualism is unthinkable for Quebec". Robert Bourassa, 1988.

    "Language legislation is utterly insane and is designed to encourage
    bigotry. There is no precedence anywhere for unity being enhanced
    through a policy of two official languages". Peter Worthington,
    Financial Post, July 1988.

    "From one ocean to the other, Canada is presenting a bilingual image

    that is stronger than ever, while in Quebec, for the first time since

    1760, the official language is exclusively French. If one sticks to the

    image, not only is Quebec sovereign, but it has succeeded in partially

    annexing Canada". - Christian Dufour (1990) - Page 64, Lament for a

    Notion by Scott Reid.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous 2:46

    You should try this:

    http://www.protectcovers.com/

    ReplyDelete
  15. #2

    "I cannot swear it but I think we were thinking to ourselves,... we are a small group, Trudeau, Pelletier, Marchand, Lalonde, Chrétien, myself and a few people in the civil service, say 50 all told…we were bringing off a revolution. We held the key posts. We were making the civil service bilingual (French), kicking and screaming all the time". Jean-Luc Pepin, Minister of Industry, 1970.

    "Canada is going to be a French speaking nation from coast to coast and any body opposed to this is opposed to the best interest of Canada". Leo Cadieux, speaking to French National Assembly, 1973.

    "The Canadian government is engaged in a task of spreading the French

    language across the length and breadth of the country". Jules Lege,

    l968

    "Bilingualism in truth was nothing less than a social revolution…no one in Ottawa in the later 1960's let on that a massive change was about to happen… Trudeau knew this all along. He lied about it as a necessary means to an end". Richard Gwyn in his book the Northern Magnus.

    "We are never entirely satisfied and we want to promote (Force, $$$) bilingualism (French) even more than we do now" Lucienne Robillard, President of the Treasury Board, 2001.

    Dr. Jim Pankiw, Canadian Alliance MP for Saskatoon-Humboldt, stood up in the house of commons on April 6th, 2001 and asked the liberal government the following questions,

    Question: "Mr. Speaker, Treasury Board statistics confirm that for every increase in the number of federal public service jobs designated bilingual, there is a corresponding decrease in the participation rate of Anglophones in the public service. I should like to know what steps the government is prepared to take to end the systematic discrimination against English speaking Canadians with respect to hiring and promotions".

    Response: "Mr. Speaker, this is probably the most insulting question I have ever heard in the House of Commons" Don Boudria, Liberal house leader.

    Question # 2 "Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's application of forced bilingualism is costly, discriminatory and a source of national divisiveness and disunity. Notwithstanding, I ask the Justice Minister why she intervenes on behalf of Ontario Francophones but does not request intervener status to protect Anglophones in Québec. She is prepared to defend the interests of French speaking people in Ontario but she is not prepared to defend the rights of English speaking people in Québec. Why the double standard?"

    Response from Lucienne Robillard: No answer of course…why?

    "Quebec can make French the only official language in spite of the
    Constitution". Pierre Trudeau, 1967.

    "There will be no retreat in Quebec on the French language policy".
    P.M.
    Brian Mulroney, Dec. 12th, 1986.

    "The government of Canada has no right to promote English in Quebec".
    Gil Remillard, Minister for Inter-Governmental Affairs, 1988.

    "The Canadian community must invest, for the defence and better

    appreciation of the French language, as much time, energy, and money as

    are required to prevent the country from breaking up" - Pierre Trudeau,

    Page 32, "Federalism" (1968) also quoted in Farewell The Peaceful

    Kingdom by Joe Armstrong.

    "Bilingualism is unthinkable for Quebec". Robert Bourassa, 1988.

    "Language legislation is utterly insane and is designed to encourage
    bigotry. There is no precedence anywhere for unity being enhanced
    through a policy of two official languages". Peter Worthington,
    Financial Post, July 1988.

    "From one ocean to the other, Canada is presenting a bilingual image

    that is stronger than ever, while in Quebec, for the first time since

    1760, the official language is exclusively French. If one sticks to the

    image, not only is Quebec sovereign, but it has succeeded in partially

    annexing Canada". - Christian Dufour (1990) - Page 64, Lament for a

    Notion by Scott Reid.

    ReplyDelete
  16. English Canadians are like the US democrates .. Gutless pussies... if English Canada had balls, they call Quebec's bluff,, Parition it into three. Western Quebec including Montreal , Northern Quebec and let the Rat pukes have the rest "a postage stamp"... If not by negotiation then by force...

    ReplyDelete
  17. If demographics is destiny, les Quebecois will become an historical anecdote in a few generations. Half of Quebecois men are Gay and the other half don't want kids. Doesn't bode well for them at all. Quebec will need to open the immigration flood gates or else this province will be a province of ghost towns with giant churches.

    ReplyDelete
  18. @Anonymous 9:00 et 5:44 PM

    Parlez-moi d'une pensée progressiste.Encore deux macaques créationnistes de l'alberta.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Du chialage, du bitchage, et du populisme. Si c’est ce que ça lui prend pour décrocher une belle job cossue à Radio-Can tout comme GiGilles, why not? Me semble que de nos jours, tout ce qu'il faut et tout ce qui compte c’est une grosse gueule anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "...c’est une grosse gueule anyway."

    En connaissez-vous beaucoup des avocats a petites bouches?

    ReplyDelete
  21. donc la forme devrait l'emporter sur le fond? Pas un argument tellement convaincant. Que l'on parle de Handfield, de Duceppe, de Frulla, de Curzi, de Dumont...

    Un témoignage écrasant de l'idiotie du peuple, peu importe nos tendances politiques.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "donc la forme devrait l'emporter sur le fond?"

    Jamais supposé une telle ineptie.Les avocats sont payé pour avoir de grandes gueules.Les politiciens,c'est une autres histoire.Vous avez oublié Layton dans votre liste,serait-ce parceque dans son cas,ce sont les médias qui ont fait le travail?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Tout à fait. Voilà un autre populiste dont la tour d'ivoire s'écroulera bientôt.

    Pour ce qui est d'avocats payés pour leurs grandes gueules... c'est vrai que le stéréotype veut bien qu'un avocat ait une grande gueule. Mais rappelons qu'il est possible d'être brillant sans forcément être bruyant.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "Mais rappelons qu'il est possible d'être brillant sans forcément être bruyant."

    Ce sont les médias qui font du bruit,pas de média,le silence.

    "c'est vrai que le stéréotype veut bien qu'un avocat ait une grande gueule"...

    ...Et qu'un photographe ne soit pas aveugle :)

    ReplyDelete
  25. its nice.
    "But remember that you can be brilliant without necessarily being loud."

    great blog and nice efforts. keep it up!

    ReplyDelete