Sunday, August 28, 2011

Ndp Guilty of Fraud over Layton Illness

The continued silence over the circumstances of Jack Layton illness confirms that what we were told at the news conference announcing his departure was not exactly the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, actually far from it.

When Jack told us he was taking time off to combat his illness and would be returning in September, he was misleading us. The truth was that he was going off to die. Very sad, but true.
Talk of returning was utter balderdash, a complete misrepresentation.

To all you Laytonites who have deified Jack in death, I don't care how many outraged comments I get.
Call me insensitive, a rat, a miserable SOB, it won't stop me from telling the truth, Layton lied and the Ndp deceived Canadians, from coast to coast.

This post is not intended to denigrate Jack Layton's memory.
Not many people facing a terminal illness decide to take a round the world cruise, embark on a journey of discovery or a quest to complete a bucket list.
Most just want to continue their lives as is, go to work and hope for a miracle. 
That Jack Layton deceived Canada about his illness is understandable and forgivable, he did what you or I would probably do in the circumstances. It is human nature.

But Jack's illness and prognosis was  known by the powers that be in the Ndp party and they should be held accountable for not disclosing the truth. Even if Jack wanted to continue as if he wasn't gravely ill, the party had an obligation to tell the truth.
His former top aide, Anne McGrath, let part of the deception slip;
"From the moment he received the bad news from cancer tests in mid-July, McGrath says, Layton began scripting in intricate detail how his death and funeral should play out, planning how he could cushion the blow to his beloved party and motivate New Democrats to carry on his work." LINK
And so, at the same time that Ndp media types were ghost-writing helping Jack craft his 'Letter to Canadians' to be published posthumously, the Ndp web site was promoting the fiction that Jack would be back.

I pulled this screen-shot off that website, because I knew then, that I'd be writing this column now, and would be calling them out for their callous and insensitive exploitation of Jack's illness.

Exploitation at its worst.
It's amazing what you can get away with, when the Press refuses to do its job.

After Jack's death, journalist after journalist wrote that looking at Jack during the news conference, they were convinced that he was dying, yet not one dared to put pen to paper at the time, or even ask for details or a clarification.
Why?
Since when is politeness, fawning and deferential treatment part of the Press' mandate in covering our politicians?

While I was one of the very few to say what everyone thought, I was lambasted as being insensitive and cruel.
It was a case of political correctness gone wild, to the point that the country collectively decided to allow Mr. Layton and more importantly the Ndp to live out a fantasy in public, with nobody brave enough to call out the liars.

Last week Apple Computer announced the departure of Steve Jobs, who as most know has been suffering from cancer for quite a while now. There was no talk of him returning to work at a later date, the implication not lost on anyone.
The stock price fell by 7% in response. Had Apple intimated that he might be  back, perhaps the stock wouldn't have fallen, but the company dared not tell the lie, there would have been legal implications.

Last week there was also speculation that Sydney Crosby wasn't doing as well as expected in his recovery from a concussion and perhaps he won't be ready to start the season. Speculation was also made that his team wasn't disclosing that fact in order not to hurt ticket sales.
I have no idea if that is true, (I hope not) but if so, I'm sure you'll agree that it is patently dishonest of the team to misrepresent the facts.

The Ndp needs to come clean. Stonewalling is unacceptable. Now that Jack is gone, there is no more issues of privacy and not disclosing the nature of his illness only confirms our worst assumptions.

The Ndp is perpetrating a massive cover up and fraud over the circumstances of Jack Layton's illness.

From the beginning, the party mapped out a strategy that can best be described as making lemonade when presented with lemons, the lemons being Layton's unfortunate medical situation.

When things calm down, demands will be made for full disclosure. Questions are already being asked in the French press. Accusations are flying in vigile.net and the Ndp will have to face the music sooner or later

Many Layton supporters will say that all this doesn't matter, that the circumstances as to who knew what and when they knew it, are irrelevant and if the Ndp and Layton did indeed misrepresent his illness, it isn't a big deal.

Sorry, it is a big deal.

If Jack had been diagnosed with a serious second cancer before last May, 2nd's election, he and the Ndp are guilty of perpetrating an unpardonable fraud on Canadians. Given what we can piece together, it is likely he and the party did exactly that.

Had Jack not led the last election campaign for the Ndp, there would be many more Bloc and Liberal members in the current Parliament.
If you're a supporter of the Ndp perhaps you don't see the harm, but if you are a Liberal or a Bloc supporter, the  deception is galling.

For all those of you staring angrily at the screen, muttering about how evil I am to write this post, remember that it is me calling for the truth to come out, whatever it is, and it is you advocating  a continued cover up.

When I wrote my post after the famous Jack Layton news conference entitled  Did Jack Layton Lie?
I was subjected to scores of nasty comments and emails, yet that post became the all-time most read piece that I ever wrote and continues to get hundreds of hits every single day.

Canadians want the truth.
Canadians deserve the truth, whatever it is, whatever the fallout.

55 comments:

  1. personally, when I saw him at the conference, I thought "pancreatic cancer" and "he isn't going to live long". You didn't need any medical knowledge to see that. You could tell by the sallow skin and thin face that he was not long for this world.

    Whatever banner was put out there....well...who cares. He was dying and if the public believed he wasn't - it wasn't the NDP's fault....

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is no doubt in my mind that Jack knew that his time was near. However, what did you expect him to do in the press conference? Admit it outright that he was going to die? Maybe he should have just resigned permanently, citing his health. Making a promise that he would return in September was crossing the line and not really necessary.

    As for during the campaign, I do not see anything illegal about what he did. It is the flaw of the system. Since the system did not require any disclosure about candidates' health, he did not disclose his. Unethical? Borderline. Illegal? Certainly not. He did as the rules mandated.

    Now, my comment is on his funeral. Right off the bat, I do not think that Mr. Layton and his family deserve a state funeral. I do not think that he did well enough deed for the country to be entitled to one. The only thing I can think about is that he was the sitting Leader of the Opposition. Since there was never Leader of the Opposition passed away while in office, maybe this one sets the precedent.

    The other thing I want to comment is the funeral itself. It was truly an appeasement to the NDP's voter base, namely Quebec. For an event that was held in Toronto for an anglophone having a Toronto-based anglophone family, it decidedly had significant French influence. From the singing of the Quebec-version of the bilingual "O Canada" to the eulogies from NDP officials fully in French.

    When Pierre Trudeau died, did his funeral have as much English portion as French in Layton's funeral?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ah, my bad. I did not read the Winnipeg Free Press article first. Turned out that the funeral WAS politicized on purpose. And it was what he wanted. Well, what can I say? I will not vote for him anymore?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was hoping to be the first respondent to this blog, but someone somehow managed to make a comment dated 4 days before the posting date. NOW THAT'S DECEPTION!

    Anyway, Editor, I couldn't have written it better, and I'm a damn good writer if I may say so myself. I'm usually modest, too, but not this time.

    I think what you wrote was tame compared to what Howard Galganov wrote on his August 24th piece entitled "I'm Sick and Tired of the Bull..." Take a look at his commentary at http://www.galganov.com/editorials/8-24-2011/the-media/im-sick-and-tired-of-the-bull/

    A lot of people didn't and still don't know Jack and Livvie at one time were living in subsidized housing, depriving a family who really needed the space to live on limited means. Jack and Livvie made an exceptional combined income as Toronto city counsellors, plus generous perqs that the current mayor, Rob Ford, is cutting away at...finally.

    Layton and his minions, including students, single mothers living in Ontario representing Quebec that can't speak French, and other assorted bodies that had no business being elected, won on a suck-and-blow campaign. It has been said you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the time. As I wrote in your last anti-Jack blog last week, it's only too bad Jack didn't recover if for no other reason than to face the music the party will face because of the suck-and-blow-at-the-same-time campaign. Quebec especially was grasping at the loose straws because the empty-headed morons who kept voting BQ saw what the BQ couldn't do for them. It only took those numbnuts 20 years to figure it out. The Liberals? What, and vote for Iggy, whose nose was so high in the air it could practically touch Pluto? His own constituents put him in his place...at long last!

    There was no way in freakin' hell leftist Quebec was going to vote Conservative, especially when its leader never lived a day of his life in Quebec. Layton was born in Quebec, albeit in the très WASPy town of Hudson. I guess that was good enough, coupled with his less-than-fluent, but folksy French.

    Interestingly, the Liberal caucus met over the weekend and they're already figuring the NDP will fall flat on its face leading to the resurrection of their fortunes. They've put three lousy leaders in a row at the helm, and that's what got them to this low ebb in the first place.

    One thing for sure: When Parliament resumes business in three weeks, it won't be quite a cake walk for Harper despite there being only two interim opposition leaders (screw the BQ and its remnants) because the emerging leaders in the NDP and Liberal will start to flex their muscles over the heads of their interim leaders. Nonetheless, Layton's suck-and-blow-at-the-same-time campaign will blow up in their faces, and that's as inevitable as the sun rising tomorrow and tomorrow after that!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear editor, the argument in your post is wrong, but not evil. You made up facts to support your assertion that Jack Layton knew he was going to die when he gave his July news conference.

    First of all, unless you are a personal friend of Jack Layton's apparently loose lipped oncologist you obviously have no idea whatsoever about any of the medical advice and test results that he received up to the date of his news conference. And even if he had been told that he had only a 5 or 10 percent chance to survive this latest bout with cancer surely that is enough for any normal person with hope and courage to say to himself, and then to the public, that "I intend to fight this and I will survive." Layton behaved in character. He was determined to be one of the group who would survive, whatever advise he received. Wouldn't you do the same rather than just giving up?

    And then after huffing and puffing in indignation about a fraud and a massive cover up (all of which is pure rubbish - incorrect assumptions = incorrect analysis) you make the absurd suggestion that there is no issue of privacy "now that Jack is gone". More rubbish. You clearly don't understand anything about the confidentiality of medical records. Where did you get the wacky idea that just because someone dies their medical records are no longer confidential?

    Regardless, who cares ? Only people who either didn't like Jack Layton, or don't like the NDP, or have some other axe to grind - such as Mr. Sauga, above, or the absurd Jacques Noel who comments frequently on the Vigile.net blog. Jacques has come to the same conclusions that you reached about a "cover up", on equally parlous "evidence" (i.e. pure speculation) and is telling the vigilistes that they should hold on to their touques because the scandal of the NDP cover up will be as big as the sponsorship scandal etc. Oh, really?

    Honestly, dear editor, I had fond hopes that you were a cut above the conspiracy theorists and fanatasists who inhabit Vigile. I will give you a by on this one because you are obviously blinded by some irrational prejudice against Layton and his party. But you are being watched...

    ReplyDelete
  6. So...you're outraged that a politician and a political party was deceptive, misleading, and perhaps lied outright to the electorate? They're politicians, for God's sake, what else would you expect? It's not limited to the NDP. Each and every election campaign is filled with gross exagerations, half-truths and outright lies. This is just business as usual. The shock is if/when they ever come clean about anything. I get a lot more wound up about broken campaign promises than I do about this issue.
    "Canadians want the truth.
    Canadians deserve the truth, whatever it is, whatever the fallout." Ideally, this would be true but sadly we rarely seem to care enough at election time to force them all to be honest with us.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have held back on any condemnation of Jack Layton until after his funeral, but I think it was rather slimy of him to push for the application of Bill 101 to jobs in Quebec under federal jurisdiction. It wouldn't have been a problem if it was just about extending the rights of Francophones, but Bill 101 also restricts the options and freedoms of minorities within Quebec. Jack Layton grew up as an Anglophone in Hudson, QC, and he sold out his own community.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So long, get lost...one thing I do know is he is dead and he will be rotting in hell for a long time, right bedside Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Trudeau….For those who do believe in heaven and hell - Hell is for people who lie, who cheat, who manipulate, and who will say and do anything for power... You fooled many Jacko, yes indeed, but not everyone. Rot in hell scum bag, rot in hell.

    Just like they destroyed the liberal party, the old conservative party…these racist, bioted, pro bill 101 clowns, anti-English language Nazis from Kebec will destroy the NDP as well. I love it; this will be fun to watch. Stay in Kebec scum bags, and keep that dreadful language with you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @2:34 PM

    Vous semblez rongé par le mépris et la hargne.
    D'après vos critères d'admission en enfer,il ne reste que bien peu de candidats pour le paradis.

    Que Dieu vous blesse!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Re Anonymous 2:34
    You're quite the charmer. I suspect Hell is also for people who are filled with hate.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sandy McTire said:

    "But you are being watched..."

    How very Orwellian of you. You would probably fit right in as a language policeman at the Office quebecois de la langue francais.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "...policeman at the Office quebecois de la langue francais."

    Nous n'aurions pas besoins d'agents de surveillance pour vous ramener a l'ordre,si vous étiez plus respectueux de nos lois.

    Bande de petits délinquants.

    Je crois que nous devrons sévir d'avantage afin de décourager les récidivistes.Faites-donc comme les Vermontois et francisez-donc vos commerces.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Regardez-donc ceci:

    http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110829/mtl_signs_110829/20110829/?hub=MontrealHome

    ReplyDelete
  14. > Faites-donc comme les Vermontois et francisez-donc vos commerces.

    Précision: les Vermontois rendent BILINGUES leurs commerces, chose que la Gestapo de la langue Québécoise, étayée par trois décennies de politique "unilinguisatrice", ne laisserait jamais voir le jour au Québec.

    Je suis toujours abasourdi de voir comment le bilinguisme dans des juridictions à majorité anglophone, c'est bien, alors que la même politique dans des endroits à majorité francophone, c'est scandaleux, honteux, voire une idée à fuir comme la peste. HYPOCRISIE! J'ACCUSE!

    Ce qui est bon pour minou est bon pour pitou, me semblerait-il...

    > Nous n'aurions pas besoins d'agents de surveillance pour vous ramener a l'ordre,si vous étiez plus respectueux de nos lois.

    Francophones intégristes, cessez donc de soutenir des politiques de petitesse, reconnaissez le droit égal des langues des deux peuples fondateurs, et peut être auriez vous de vrais partenaires et non pas d'opposants perpétuels. Vous vous croyez bornés; nous, nous sommes bilingues et fiers de l'être, et c'est bien nous qui faisons et ferons rayonner notre province malgré vous.

    > Bande de petits délinquants.

    Vous êtes certain de votre coup? Un peu malvenu, je dirais.

    > Regardez-donc ceci:

    J'ai vu. Et j'en ai honte. Imaginons un instant une réalité hypothétique réciproque. Si Lafleur tenait à ouvrir des succursales en Ontario, devrait-il y avoir une loi la forçant à se rebaptiser "The Flower"? Omer DeSerres deviendrait "Homer Greenhouse", et Le Château "The Castle". De l'unilinguisme forcé là ou il y avait liberté d'affichage il y a guère une génération n'est pas signe de progrès, mais de recul. C'est signe d’ingérence, d'intolérance, et d'humiliation contre-productive, surtout si l'objectif est de bâtir une société où tous soutiennent l'épanouissement du français. Et "épanouissement" ne va pas jusqu'à rejoindre "monopole". La tolérance mutuelle passe par reconnaissance mutuelle.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Ce qui est bon pour minou est bon pour pitou, me semblerait-il..."

    Pas quand le pitou est 25 fois plus gros que le minou.

    ReplyDelete
  16. > Pas quand le pitou est 25 fois plus gros que le minou.

    À ce moment là, minou ferait bien de s'allier avec pitou, et non pas de le faire chier. Surtout si pitou est véritablement à l'image du gros méchant dobermann véhiculée par les magiciens d'Oz nationalistes.

    Chose certaine, on ne suscite pas le respect de nos compatriotes en les humiliant inutilement, ni en cherchant à les assimiler (ni à réduire leurs effectifs).

    Miaou. Pensez-y.

    Liberté (d'expression)
    Egalité (linguistique)
    Fraternité (sociétale)

    ReplyDelete
  17. "...et c'est bien nous qui faisons et ferons rayonner notre province malgré vous."

    Merci!Nous apprécions votre générosité qui n'a d'égale que votre grandeur d'âme...MDR!*

    *Mort De Rire

    ReplyDelete
  18. Il n'y a pas de quoi. / You're welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "...on ne suscite pas le respect de nos compatriotes en les humiliant inutilement, ni en cherchant à les assimiler"

    Vous feriez mieux de faire circuler vos bonnes paroles chez vos amis canadiens.Les victimes d'assimilation ici,c'est nous,pas les canadiens.A moins que vous ne vouliez refaire l'histoire.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Ne vous inquiétez pas; je dis en anglais ce que je dis en français. La compréhension passe par la communication. Et la communication passe par la liberté d'expression. Et il n'y a ni liberté d'expression, ni compréhension là où on réglemente artificiellement les paramètres de la communication.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Dans le fond, je trouve regrettable que les nationalistes Québécois se croient en droit d'imposer à tous les Québécois une adhérence et assimilation forcées qui ressemble étrangement à ce que ces premiers n'auraient jamais eux-mêmes accepté de se faire imposer (que ce soit réellement ou de façon appréhendée) il n'y a pas si longtemps par les méchants anglais.

    Ça ne donne pas vraiment envie de voter OUI, en tout cas. Et ça ne donne pas envie dese joindre aux purs et durs non plus. Protéger et promouvoir le français, je veux bien. Mais pas au point de dénigrer à l'anglais le respect qui lui revient en tant que langue importante de notre pays, de notre histoire, de nos voisins, et des échanges commerciaux.

    En matière d'affichage, français obligatoire, langue(s) additionnelle(s) au choix. En matière d'apprentissage, minimum français/anglais couramment, langues additionnelles au choix.

    J'apprécierais une réponse honnête qui n'est pas teintée de revendications historiques, de rhétorique nationaliste, ni de crainte d'assimilation.

    Pour vous guider, voici un peu ma mise en situation. Moi je vis ici et maintenant. Ce serait bien si mes arrière petits-enfants parlent autant de langues que moi (dont très fièrement le français), et peut être encore d'autres langues en plus. Mais si les choses devaient se passer autrement (et là c'est peut être mon côté immigrant qui intervient), ce qui m'importe le plus, c'est qu'ils connaissent le bonheur et le succès, où qu'ils soient, peu importe leur attaches ethniques, linguistiques, politiques, et nationales. J'aimerais qu'ils s'identifient d'abord par leur propre sens de l'éthique et que leur loyauté soit d'abord envers eux-mêmes.

    Langue, couleur, allégeance politique, préférences culinaires, tout le reste peut bien suivre.

    Ma notion d'édification nationale Québécoise et Canadienne se fonde sur l'idée de deux peuples venus mâter des indiens (et s'entremâter), suivi de vagues d'immigration de je m'en foutistes qui ne pensaient et qui ne pensent pas à s'emmêler à des chicanes ethnolinguistiques.

    Serais-je trop ouvert?

    ReplyDelete
  22. @ Apparatchik

    Your problem is you haven't a clue what Nationalism really is.

    You seem to require Enlightenment-style ideals out of what is a quintessentially modern form of tribalism (albeit a sophisticatedly articulated one). Yes, Apparatchik, people the world over actually want and need to believe in the accumulated mythical and legendary retelling of their own bovine droppings.

    From whole nations descending from mythical animals to others constantly victimized and oppressed to others believing it was their destiny to spread to all continents, all of them accept(ed) a retelling of a story that often plays fast and loose with reality.

    Quebec's nationalist story has been articulated, reaffirmed, and endorsed by the very people it was fashioned to serve. A sufficient number people believe this orthodoxy, and that's quite sufficient for its purpose.

    The people want to be sold fears of assimilation, tales of heroic resistance to said assimilation, and reassurance that they will emerge triumphant. Who are you to speak of equality and harmony to a population that will have none of it?

    Attempting to intellectually challenge Quebec's nationalism (at the very least, in its current form) is on the order of railing against a young America for its endorsement of slavery.

    You've clearly demonstrated that you're a misfit both in time and place. If you are truly bilingual, you'll spend less time denouncing what you perceive to be linguistic injustice and more time silently dominating those who aren't.

    ReplyDelete
  23. ...to Sandy McTire: I have neither an axe to grind nor am I hateful. Layton was misleading the public with his health, and that's that.

    The Americans are one up on us with respect to prospective candidates having to fully disclose life-threatening health issues should they exist. Since we don't have such regulations on health issues like the Americans, then JL didn't break any regulations, but then again, omission of telling the truth does not mean one isn't lying.

    Sadly, you have established a track record of jumping to conclusions.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @Jaws

    Exellente analyse et bon esprit de synthèse.Bravo!

    ReplyDelete
  25. I am personally very grateful towards Jack Layton for what he and his team did for the province of Quebec.
    I'm sure many people won't agree, but I think the last federal elections served as a message - both within Quebec and outside of Quebec. And I'm certain that wouldn't have been possible without a politician with the charisma that Jack Layton had.

    I think it shows that people are starting to realize that we've gotta forget our own little selfish ideas and conflicts and move forward with the rest of the country.

    Of course the few remaining separatists are even more upset, so we're hearing from them more now, but you'll notice that things on their end aren't going too well... which is a good thing.

    You can take comfort in the fact that the biggest racists are getting further and further away from their goal of a french-nazi-quebec, and most of them will be dead soon, buried in a united Canada. Parizeau probably already has his plot reserved in an english-jewish cemetary.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "people the world over actually want and need to believe in the accumulated mythical and legendary retelling of their own bovine droppings."

    This is true, and it is very unfortunate.

    But what does it have to do with Apparatchik's not understanding it, or his speaking against it? Einstein once said: "Nationalism is an infantile disease, it's the measles of mankind". Who you have gone up to him and said: "Mr.Einstein, you don't know anything about nationalism, and you're a misfit in time in place, so just keep quiet."?

    I agree that nationalism is a potent force (has anyone been to the US shortly after 9/11?), but for those who haven't been infected with this bug, it is perfectly acceptable to speak against it, attack it, and ridicule it.


    "I don't care for flags, anthems, 'support the troops' ribbons. That stuff for weak people" - George Carlin.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Attempting to intellectually challenge Quebec's nationalism (at the very least, in its current form) is on the order of railing against a young America for its endorsement of slavery."

    So what does that mean? That it's good to rail against Quebec nationalism because it's equivalent of railing against slavery? Or it's pointless to rail against Quebec nationalism, because like slavery, it won't go away unless we there is a bloody war?

    ---------

    "A sufficient number people believe this orthodoxy, and that's quite sufficient for its purpose."

    A number of people do believe it. Sufficiently many to carry this thing forward. But again, does that mean we should just put up, because allegedly it's such a powerful force?

    I think it's to the contrary. I think that contrary to American nationalism (which has the most powerful military in the world behind it and is a force to reckon with, and even be afraid of), Quebec nationalism is rather fragile and can't even sustain itself through an independent economically prosperous state.
    I therefore think that the more people that speak against it, the more isolated Quebec nationalism might get, and the more it might retreat into the most rural corners of this province, where it can exist without infringing on the good people of Montreal who have their lives to live.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "(which has the most powerful military in the world behind it and is a force to reckon with, and even be afraid of)"

    Et sont incapables de gagner une seule guerre?Même contre des armées pratiquement démunies?Quelle force de frappe!Encore faudrait-il frapper au bon endroit.Même les républicains commencent a en avoir marre de cette armée surfinancée qui ne donne aucun résultat.

    Meilleure chance la prochaine fois adski.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "Of course the few remaining separatists are even more upset"

    Toujours entre 40% et 60% selon les gaffes des fédérastes.

    ReplyDelete
  30. @adski

    Mr.Einstein,George Carlin ? Vos références sont minables et ne tiennent pas la route.Selon vous ,seul le nationalisme américain est valable.

    Pourquoi vous limitez-vous ainsi adski?
    De plus,que faites-vous donc au Québec?

    Serez-vous encore ici dans 10 ans a répèter vos inepties?

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Press9:

    haha, quelle réponse typique.
    Ouais j'avais oublié votre référendum de 1995, "volé" par les ethniques et l'argent...

    Là tu vas surement me sortir le scandale des commandites.. Parce que bien sûr, du côté du "Oui", c'était honnête à 100%! Des québécois crosseurs?? Impossible! C'est juste les méchants anglais qui font ça.

    Peu importe le résultat, vous n'allez jamais accepter une défaite. Ça sera toujours "à la prochaine fois!" ou "on s'est fait volé!".
    Il y a même des politiciens qui ont commencé à suggérer de limiter le droit de vote, afin d'avoir un résultat qui leur est favorable.
    As-tu bien lu? LIMITER LE DROIT DE VOTE DES CITOYENS. J'imagine que tu es d'accord avec ça...

    De toute façon, tu n'as qu'à regarder les résultats de la dernière élection fédérale.
    Au Québec:
    Bloc - 4 Sièges
    NPD - 58 Sièges
    En pourcentage:
    Bloc: 6.3%
    NPD: 79.3%

    Où sont vos 40 à 60% de souverainistes? Ils ont tous voté pour un parti fédéraliste??

    1995, c'est assez loin. Avec tous les changements qu'on a vu depuis, surtout au niveau de la communication et de l'information, les gens plus instruits s'ouvrent au monde de plus en plus.
    Les Jean-Guys qui habitent les fonds de rangs du Québec se sentent menacés par tout ceci, bien sûr...

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Mr.Einstein,George Carlin ? Vos références sont minables et ne tiennent pas la route."

    You do know who Albert Einstein was, don't you? I know that in all likelihood you never went to college or university, but Einstein should have been covered in high school. Although judging by the standards of Quebec public education, maybe not.

    ReplyDelete
  33. @adski

    Aux dernières nouvelles,Albert Einstein n'a jamais été un sociologue et encore moins un politologue.Chacun sa spécialité adski.

    "you never went to college or university..."

    Ça sent le manque d'argument.Même si c'était le cas,les diplômes n'ont rien a voir avec l'intelligence et surtout pas avec le jugement.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "Ouais j'avais oublié votre référendum de 1995..."

    Ben oui,J'ai plutôt limpression que vous êtes un de ces fédérastes qui a chié dans son froc le soir du référendum.Je suis pas mal certain que vous faites encore des cauchemars a ce sujet.

    Avec ce que M.Legault (le souverainiste) a ajouté a son programme concernant la langue et la culture,vous n'êtes pas au bout de vos peines,croyez-moi.C'est quand les prochaines élections déja? ;)

    Bloc - 4 Sièges
    NPD - 58 Sièges

    Qu'est-ce que cela signifie exactement?Absolument rien!Les partis partent et reviennent mais le mouvement souverainiste reste et est a jamais ancré au Québec et dans chacun des Québécois,sauf peut-être les Evis Gratton comme vous :)

    ReplyDelete
  35. Einstein was a brilliant man, but was not an expert on sociological matters. Carlin just struck me as a bit of a hippie. He's brilliant and hilarious, but a comedian he remains.

    Nationalism is being sold as a disease, when in reality it can be a beautiful thing. If you aren't proud of your culture then your culture ceases to exist. Nationalism is only a disease when it becomes hostile a la Nazi. If a culture is restricted to celebrations and values amidst common peoples on a common land as opposed to spreading by force onto other peoples, nationalism can be a healthy thing. It's what makes us different from one another. People who advocate celebrating diversity and also condemn nationalism seems a bit contradictory to me. Being proud of something and wanting to defend it doesn't necessarily mean you hate all other cultures or nations.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Jason, you're confusing nationalism with patriotism.

    Nationalism is always bad.

    "By 'nationalism'... I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."

    - George Orwell, Notes on Nationalism

    (I hope Orwell is good enough for you)

    ReplyDelete
  37. "People who advocate celebrating diversity and also condemn nationalism seems a bit contradictory to me."

    First of all, that's no contradiction. Diversity is antithetical to nationalism. When celebrating diversity, you don't celebrate multiple nationalisms. You celebrate the existence of many cultures.

    Secondly, I advocate neither diversity nor lack of diversity. If there is diversity (as in Montreal which is a multi-ethnic metropolis), then that's what it is. If there is no diversity (as in for example Trois Rivieres), then that's what it is. Diversity/no diversity are absolutely neutral concepts to me, neither to be promoted or decried. They are just a fact of a given environment.

    What I'm advocating against, however, is a kind of social engineering in the name of someone else's attachment to his/her language and culture. This kind of attachment is great and commendable if it is kept to oneself. It is however dreadful if it is imposed on others.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "...By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people..."

    Est-ce dire que le patriotisme n'a jamais été au coeur des arguments promotionnels de l'armée américaine au cours du dernier siècle?Quel était l'argument central utilisé afin d'enrôler les individus pour les motiver a prendre les armes?

    Seriez-vous sous l'effet de substances illicites adski?

    ReplyDelete
  39. "(as in for example Trois Rivieres)"

    Pourquoi ne citer vous pas Mississauga en exemple?
    Ou encore Springfield?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "This kind of attachment is great and commendable if it is kept to oneself. It is however dreadful if it is imposed on others."

    Bref,vous voulez vivre au Québec mais en évitant les contacts avec la culture Québécoise.Vous prônez en quelque sorte une forme de laicité culturelle.Montréal est au Québec...Stupidos!

    Vous avez dit trou du cul,s'cusez...Douchebag?

    ReplyDelete
  41. "Montréal est au Québec..."

    Big deal. Quebec is part of Canada and North America.

    Montreal is a bilingual and multicultural city and therefore is quite different from the boondocks of rural French Quebec.

    "Vous avez dit trou du cul,s'cusez...Douchebag?"

    I see that you are talking to yourself again, Press 9.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged"

    Agreed. But...

    Nationalism is a political ideology that involves a strong identification of a group of individuals with a political entity defined in national terms, i.e. a nation. In the 'modernist' image of the nation, it is nationalism that creates national identity.

    Doesn't imply seeking power to me. Seems to be based around having a national identity. It CAN include feelings of superiority but not necessarily.

    "social engineering in the name of someone else's attachment to his/her language and culture. This kind of attachment is great and commendable if it is kept to oneself. It is however dreadful if it is imposed on others"

    We had an established traditional English and French culture (granted it overtook the natives but it was established for over 300 years nonetheless). Isn't it social engineering that the population never asked for that lead us to where we are today (mass immigration + multiculturalism)?

    ReplyDelete
  43. "Montreal is a bilingual and multicultural city"

    Montreal is multicultural because it was socially engineered that way. Quebecois (or all Canadians for that matter) didn't choose to have a multicultural city.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "Doesn't imply seeking power to me."

    Oh yes, Jason. Nationalism and power are inextricable. And if not power, then at least prestige.

    Listen to Quebec nationalists and you'll quickly realize that they're not interested in just preserving their language, amongst themselves or in their own circles. They want their language and culture to be revered (for revered, they use a euphemism "respected").

    I listened to a speech by Biz (of Loco Locass) the other day, and it was obvious how nostalgic he was for the times when France, on its "civilizing mission", conquered most of the American continent. How Des Moines, Iowa, was really the city of "des moins" (Monks) belonging to New France.

    These people are all about power and privilege. The "protection" theme is just a cover that they put out.

    ReplyDelete
  45. "vous voulez vivre au Québec mais en évitant les contacts avec la culture Québécoise"

    Of course. What I'm asking, though, is for that culture not to come to me. Let me explore it on my own, to the extent that I deem sufficient.

    What do I mean "coming to me"? I mean the mixing of culture/language with politics. and since politics is about power and coercion, it essentially means imposing of culture and language on the citizens.

    Examples? I won't bring out the heavy guns like Curzi, Beaudoin, Landry, Harel, and their ideas. Instead, check out the political platform of the "moderate" Francois Legault, announced yesterday. A lot in it pertains to culture and language.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "Einstein was a brilliant man, but was not an expert on sociological matters."

    Einstein may not have been a political scientist or a sociologist but he was probably the greatest genuis in history. His opinions on subjects outside his specialty of physics should be considered.

    Nationalism is the scourge of mankind and may quite possibly lead to the extinction of our species.

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Isn't it social engineering that the population never asked for that lead us to where we are today (mass immigration + multiculturalism)? "

    In a very indirect way, maybe. In a sense that if you drown your country in immigrants, you can reasonably expect your culture to be overrun.

    As for the policy of "multiculturalism", it's all bs, because there can't be any policy on it. If you bring over loads of immigrants, it is natural that you will have lots of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is not something that you can turn on and off or regulate. The only thing you can do it is to cut it by stopping immigration. If you don't stop it, you will have multiculturalism.

    As for whether people "asked" for it or not, of course they didn't. When do governments listen to their people? Governments do what they want, and only once every 4 years you get something called an "election", which is essentially a charade in which you choose between douchebag A and douchebag B, the same douchbags that you were choosing 4 years before that.

    ReplyDelete
  48. @ Jason the Montreal Anglo:

    "Montreal is multicultural because it was socially engineered that way. Quebecois (or all Canadians for that matter) didn't choose to have a multicultural city."

    Montreal was multicultural long before it became the official policy of the federal government. The flag of the city of Montreal has symbols representing the French, Irish, Scottish and English cultures that built the city. I suppose a variety of white cultures is acceptable to you but visible minorities are not. To hell with those brown, black and yellow buggers, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  49. I meant to say "Of coarse not", not "Of course", in response to Press 9.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "I listened to a speech by Biz (of Loco Locass) the other day..."

    Vous êtes vraiment nul en matière de références adski.Aimeriez-vous que j'associe tous les anglos avec galaganov le magnifique ?

    ReplyDelete
  51. "Qu'est-ce que cela signifie exactement?Absolument rien!Les partis partent et reviennent mais le mouvement souverainiste reste et est a jamais ancré au Québec et dans chacun des Québécois,sauf peut-être les Evis Gratton comme vous :) "

    Moi ça ne me dérange pas, tu peux continuer à rêver et à espérer, personne ne va te l'empêcher.
    Mais on aimerait pouvoir conserver nos droits et libertés, même s'ils n'ont aucune importance pour vous.

    Et finalement, ta référence à Elvis Gratton (écrit par un des plus grands racistes de la province) ne fait que confirmer mon point... Le mouvement séparatiste (d'aujourd'hui) n'est qu'un mouvement de raciste.

    On appelle ça la souveraineté pour être "politically correct", mais en fait on veut se débarrasser de tout ce qui est différent.

    Lâche pas, tu vas les avoir les maudits anglais!

    ReplyDelete
  52. "If you don't stop it, you will have multiculturalism."

    C'est exactement ce que François Legault et son parti nous propose.Intégrons ceux qui sont déja ici,avant d'ouvrir les vannes de façon irréfléchie.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Lâche pas, tu vas les avoir les maudits anglais!

    Le jour ou le Québec sera la deuxième Louisianne d'amérique,vous rirez moins Elvis...Quoique selon vos propos vous serez probablement heureux d'assister a votre propre extinction.

    En passant: Les "Happy Knees protector" sont en solde chez "Pneus canadiens".

    ReplyDelete
  54. @ Mr Sauga - YO! just read your 4:21 am post. You should try and get some sleep. But check again, I did not say you were "hateful". Where did that come from ? And I am puzzled about why you would suggest that old Sandy is jumping to conclusions. That is more or less why I have objected to our dear editor's post about NDP "fraud". First he made up some facts about Layton's medical history and then he alleged FRAUD. That is what I would call jumping to conclusions. And then you leaped on the bandwagon - "...I couldn't have written it better" [sic]. So when it comes to jumpin'... you should look in the mirror.

    And by the way, since we are talking, someone pointed out to me in an exchange on an earlier post that you speak French and work in a call centre etc. I had stated that I suspected you did not speak French ( as a possible explanation for your frequently expressed prejudices against francophones and Quebec ) I am delighted to know that you understand the other official language. Now we will have to try and figure out another reason for the rote prejudice which seems to animate so many of your posts. I also got a kick out of your assumption in an eralier post that I was born in the 1970's or 1980's as a rationale for my point of view. And you also informed us that you remember the "old Montreal". Well, speaking of jumping to conclusions, guess again Mr Sauga - I regret to advise that old Sandy's true age begins with a 6. In fact, I suspect that I am older than you, Mr Sauga. So please forgive me in advance if I have to correct you, again, about what's really happening in Quebec. You see, I have lived it...man and boy. You have to learn to respect your elders.

    And for all you bilingual folks who are debating nationalism, you might find some value in Jerry Muller's article on "The Enduring Power of Ethnic Nationalism " in the March 2008 edition of Foreign Affairs. Jerry points out that sometimes its good, sometimes its bad - a little bit like Quebec, and this blog. There is no black and white, dear friends - only gray. A bientot

    ReplyDelete
  55. @Jason the anglo,

    Multicultural society was a fact even before the non-western and northern european immigration of the 60s and 70s.

    There were the natives in Canada who had no say in their colonization. They had no medical and financial requirements on their colonizers. Then you had slaves, mostly blacks though not as numerous as in the United states who had no choice in their forced emmigration. Then you had east indians, chinese and japanese that came to canada well over a hundred years ago. Arabs and jews arrived alongside non western european caucasion immigration from eastern europe, they were lucky that they had features to look white enough to pass through immigration. The Jews were openly hated in much of Canada.

    Who the "white" population of the time were happy to have as social second class citizens. Once the they started making some economic evolution they slapped immigration restrictions on them. These discriminatory immigration policies were loosened in the 1960s and early 70s.

    There was a multiracial and multicultural society in Canada since the beginning. Just that it was favoured for one culture of the other. Just like how the Quebecois have made second class citizens of all the non Quebecois in Quebec. They would do more if the Kangaroo Supreme court of Canada didn't stop some of their chauvanistic laws.

    So Jason the anglo is a typical hypocrite. He wants to have the rights for anglos. Though he doesn't want to aknowledge that it was significant non"white"immigrants that kept the English community from dying out and that through sheer numbers kept Quebec from winning a referendum.

    At times he is very aplogetic and submissive to his Quebecois chauvanist overlords.

    Anyway Jason, the days of Keep Canaada "White" over. The demographic bridge has already been crossed. Visible minorities will be a very large part of the population even if you cut immigration completely tommorow. The visible minorities are even younger and their kids will be elected leaders tommorow and might just open the doors for immigration out of revenge for dealing with hypocrites like yourself and the Quebecois chauvanists

    ReplyDelete