Saguenay Mayor Leads Idiot Parade in Religious Debate

While most Anglos chuckle at the famous 'Code of Ethics' (a list of instructions for immigrants to abide by) created by the town council of the tiny hick town of Hérouxville (population 1,300, where nary an immigrant can be found,) the xenophobia can perhaps be forgiven and explained away as a product of small town ignorance and fear. An aging population, secure and proud in it's Catholic heritage and fearful of change, making a desperate attempt to keep foreign 'barbarians' from wreaking change on their idyllic town.
The town and the principle promoter of the "Code," André Drouin, have been the butt of many a joke and have been lampooned mercilessly on television these last three years. 
But lately the pendulum is swinging back and many Quebeckers are coming around to the idea that immigrants must be 'controlled' and so André Drouin is making a comeback, much to the consternation of some, much to the delight of others.

Mr. Drouin's strategy, which is shared by other like thinkers, is to declare the State 'Secular' or as they say in French - 'laïc' . The theory being, that the government and it's institutions should be officially neutral and take no stance for or against religion, nor promote any particular belief. 
This philosophy is being advanced by a rainbow coalition of groups that are as politically diverse as can be imagined, with orthodox Christians teaming up with devout atheists.

The secular state would bar employees from wearing religious jewellery or garb while dispensing government services and would interdict the public from doing the same, while attending school  or otherwise receiving certain government services.

The policy would not only bar veils but the very benign hijad,(a scarf worn by some observant Muslims) and the 'kippa' (a small skullcap worn by observant Jews) and the turban and kirpan worn by some Sihks. 

The government and it's subsidiaries would also be barred from offering any sort of accommodation to those asking for exceptional treatment based on religious preferences (example; a female asking to be treated by a female doctor only, in a hospital.)

While the policy has a veneer of fairness, with all religions ostensibly treated equally, it is far from the case. Christians no longer wear large ostentatious crosses or religious robes and need no accommodations because society is ordered to Christian standards. So while the rules apply equally to all, they only affect non-Christian orthodox citizens.

Very clever, but not foolproof.
All is fair, until one asks Mr Drouin and friends to limit their Christian symbolism and customs in society. That is going too far.....

Therein lies the fatal flaw in Quebec's quest for a secular state. It isn't a secular state that is being described, it is a secular "Christian" state that is being proposed.


Mr Drouin is  a pipsqueak, but he is no longer alone in describing a society that outwardly bans all religion in public, but maintains the Catholic nature of Quebec society.

***************

Up in the backwaters of the Lac Saint Jean region, two hours north of Quebec City, via a miserable and dangerous highway, sits the isolated and frozen city of Saguenay. Like many outlying districts, the region is largely divorced from the distant melting pot that is the metropolitan region of Montreal.
The separation between the two regions goes beyond distance, the cultural chasm is glaringly wide.
The Saguenéens remain incredulous to the fact that Montreal has, according to them, evolved into a virtual Tower of Babel, where immigrant hoards have infected native Quebeckers, with unwelcome customs, tradition, dress and religious practices, altering and abasing the very fabric of Quebec society.

To say that there isn't much ethnic diversity in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region is to understate the obvious. Aside from a few Anglos who serve at the Canadian Air Force Base in Bagotville or who work at the aluminum company, the region is about as White, Catholic and French as can be, with 96% of the people identifying themselves as Francophone Catholics and 3% identifying themselves as having no religion. 

The city of Saguenay is no Herouxville,  after amalgamating the towns of Chicoutimi, La Baie and Jonquiere back in 2002, the population rose to close to 150,000 people.

That being said, less than 300 residents are black and the city boasts a measly 150 Baptists, Anglicans, United Church and  Pentecostals, each. As for the Jewish presence in the region, Jews are fond of describing an area where few Jews live as an area where "You couldn't raise a Minyan." (Judaism requires a quorum (minyan) of 10 Jewish males to perform religious services.)
There are 42 Catholic Churches in Saguenay and no other religion maintains an official house of worship.
The community is so lily White and Christian that it's hard to believe that the city's 125 Muslims are the object of close scrutiny by a nervous Catholic majority, who are starting to rumble that measures should be enacted to protect the region from those disruptive influences seen in Montreal.

If you think this attitude is a bit of an over reaction, listen to the idiocy spouted by the Mayor of the city, Jean Tremblay. Every third family in Lac St. Jean seems to be named Tremblay and perhaps his moronic pronouncements can be explained by some form of inbreeding, otherwise it's hard to fathom the nonsense which he espouses.
Remember, Mr. Tremblay is not mayor of some hick town like Herouxville, the city of Saguenay  is the 22nd largest city in Canada.

Mr Tremblay, a devout Catholic went before a parliamentary committee pleading that the veil be banned everywhere except in personal residences.

When asked if his position supporting a secular state in any way conflicts with his habit of reciting Christian prayers before city council meetings, he used some nifty logic to support his position.
"If there was no prayer, it would be the atheists imposing their will on the majority and that wouldn't be fair." At any rate he continued, "everybody likes the prayer and nobody objects." When asked if he'd accept it if a Muslim was to roll out a carpet and pray alongside, he was unequivocal. "It would be too much of a show, but if we were all Muslims, it would be different."

Some other pearls of wisdom from the good mayor;

"Catholics are not superior to atheists, but  I prefer Catholics, and wish that  everyone would be Catholic..."

"We should accept some religious customs, but not others and certainly not just in public buildings"

And so in Saguenay, Christmas trees and other decorations including manger scenes shall be erected on city property and street lamps will be decorated with Christmas lights. All paid for by the city and erected by city workers.

In the city of Montreal almost a million dollars in public money will be spent on refurbishing the giant
crucifix on Mont-Royal and all of this in a perfectly secular society!

Here's a translation of a letter written to Quebec City's LeSoleil newspaper and is indicative of the twisted logic that is surfacing in the religion debate.

"If we are to assume that the laws should reflect the will of the people, one wonders why seculars seek to impose their ill-timed views so ardently.

What people want is secular Catholicism. That is to say, that all symbols of the Catholic religion are to be maintained everywhere, but symbols of other religions not be allowed to spread.

This is the will of  people which must be respected. It need not be reformed, corrected, clarified by the condescending elite. The good people want to maintain the visibility of the Catholic religion exclusively, even if it displeases the minorities who must conform to the will of the founding people." Réjean Labrie, Québec

And so is born the oxymoronic term "CATHOLIC SECULARISM" a term I can only define as a society that is officially religiously neutral,  EXCEPT that the Catholic heritage is to be respected and nurtured to the exclusion of other religions.

Hmmm...... 

The logic employed by Quebeckers to argue for more than their fair share in Canada has always confounded Anglophones in the rest of Canada.

So too is the argument for a CATHOLIC SECULAR state.
It makes perfect sense to Quebeckers but defies all logic to others.

French vs. English Volume 12

'Fat Cats' Rile Journalist

A Ottawa sportswriter accuses the newest entry into Intercounty Baseball League, a semiprofessional Ontario  baseball called the 'FAT CATS 'of acting contemptuously towards Ottawa Francophones by giving the team a unilingual English name.

Militants celebrate historic victory over  KFC PFK

The Réseau de résistance du Québécois (RRQ) is  claiming victory  over Bay Street and  Colonel Sanders. (notwithstanding that he's been dead for quite a while now.) The militant organization has a history of intimidation by hinting at violence. In a letter addressed to the owners of two Gatineau restaurants, the RRQ demanded that English be removed from any signage in the stores, as well as the removal of a "Help Wanted" sign in English. The letter starts off by invoking the spirit of Camille Laurin, father of the infamous Bill 101

"Your KFC restaurants in Gatineau, on Boulevard St-Joseph Boulevard Greber, have bilingual signs which is contrary to the spirit and letter of the Charter of the French language....

...The RRQ refuses the occupation of Quebec by the neocolonial power in Ottawa and the owners of Bay Street, including yourself...."

 As to the bilingual "Help Wanted sign;

".... by advertising in English that you are recruiting staff, you indicate that you plan to hire people who speak English but not French."

The owners of the two restaurants removed the offending words to much back-slapping and joy over the RRQ. A great victory!!!

St. Lazare stiffs English School Board

"A war of words has erupted over land deals for schools off the western tip of the island that has the Lester B. Pearson School Board suggesting the city of Vaudreuil-Dorion acted in bad faith.

Lester B. Pearson School Board chairman Marcus Tabachnick says when they were looking for land in Vaudreuil-Dorion for a new school, they had asked about the site at Jean Beliveau and Cité des Jeunes. They were told it wasn't available. Flash forward to early last month when that same land was being offered to the French-language Trois Lacs school board."  more at CJAD

Sun Setting on Quebec City
I don't know why some designer proposed this logo for Quebec City entitled "Québec - Capitale française d'Amérique" 
It's a view of the Chateau Frontenac facing the West, where the sun is  clearly depicted as setting.

I'm not sure if the idea of the sun setting on the French Capital of North America is the message that the artists intended. Link 

 

Multiculturalism vs. Interculturaism

I must say, I never heard of the term Interculturalism, but apparently it has become a big topic of conversation amongst the 'you know whos.' We all are aware that French language militants are vehemently opposed to the concept of multiculturalism, where all cultures are valued and promoted equally. This longtime Canadian concept is considered poison in Quebec, where the 'melting pot' theory, where all newcomers are assimilated into the common culture is considered the only politically correct option. Interculturalism is a term now being bandied about and is explained as;

People having the right to maintain an affiliation with one's ethnic group and the right for cultural and religious differences to be displayed in the public domain. However, the entire society must adhere to the same constitution of fundamental rights and obligations, with no exception. Wikipedia

Hmmm...  Just so you know, language militants are dead set against this concept too.....
P.S.  Who has time to think about this stuff??

En nombre de Padre, de Hijo y de espiritu santo.

The diocese of Montreal is no longer able to provide enough Priests for its churches, even considering that church attendance has collapsed to the point that only about 6% of Francophone Catholics attend church weekly. The Church is graduating less than 2 priests on average per year, a calamitous decline that even out paces fading church attendance.
It won't be long before the church will be forced to recruit from abroad, South America in all likelihood.  Spanish lessons anyone?

Anglos squeezed out of Cegep

It seems that demand is so heavy to get into English Cegeps that the selection criteria has been raised considerably.
The increase in applications to English CEGEPs this fall is double the hike at French CEGEPs and schools are becoming more selective. With 18% of the student body Francophone and 25% Allophone, Anglophone students are finding it harder to get in because of increased competition.

"Everybody in the group of English colleges is very, very concerned about how do we ensure that we maximize access to education for kids that have graduated from the English system," said Gilbert Héroux, the director general of Vanier College. Gazette

Coming Soon--More Supreme Court Bashing

It seems that a group of parents in Drummondville who are opposed the the teaching of the Ethics & Religion course in Quebec public schools are going to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada to overturn decisions handed down in the same matter by the Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Appeals Court.
Both courts agreed with the government that it was within their right to make the course in religious diversity mandatory for all students.
For the Supreme Court it will be another no-win situation. If the Supremos decide that the Quebec courts were right, parents will hold the "English" court responsible and will likely demonstrate against a foreign court that dictates over religious instruction in Quebec.
If the Court overturns the decision, other groups will take to the streets as well, blaming the Court for denying the will of the Quebec judicial system.

Now Premiere Charest has announced that he will appeal the decision by the federal government to create a national agency to regulate stock markets all the way to the Supreme Court.. For Mr. Charest, it is a win/win situation, regardless of the outcome. A win would please nationalists and a loss would please nationalists, as well. Huh?

Are Quebeckers/Francophones over or under-represented in the NHL?

It's hard to believe, but on one single web page on vigile.net (a nationalist/separatist web site) both arguments are made.
Yup... The top half of the page features an article by Louis Fournier, called "A strong contingent of 91 players from Quebec and Francophones outside Quebec" which details how well Quebeckers and Francophones are doing in the NHL.

"This number (91) represents a high percentage of 11% of the 800 players who participated....NHL"

"15% of the 100 best scorers in the league this season are players from Quebec and Francophones"

Immediately after this article, sharing the page, is an invitation to a  review of Bob Sirois' "Le Quebec mis en échec"a book that details how Quebeckers and Francophones are systematically discriminated against by the NHL.

"The figures  support  the sensitive issue of discrimination against Quebec hockey players "

Yup, I promise you it's true. Go over and check it out. vigile.net

Earl Jones Update

Not much has been said about Earl Jones' stay in prison and I haven't read anything in the newspapers, so I thought I'd give everybody a little update, based on information I've developed from a source who knows.

First of all, Earl is out of the infirmary, where he spent a good two months. Diagnosis- Cancer. What type and how deadly? Don't know, but he seems to be on the mend.

He's currently an inmate in a prison in St. Anne des Plaines, a MINIMUM SECURITY facility. The prison houses about 165 prisoners who sleep in two large dorms (like army barracks) but eight get to live in apartments. Guess where Earl is living? Yup, in an apartment! He scored one of the eight places in a condo like apartment.
In fact, he is already leaving the prison for escorted shopping trips, buying food which he can cook up in his own digs.

Tough gig, eh!

Here's a definition from corrections Canada as to what constitutes a minimum security prison.

• The institution perimeter is defined but usually there are no walls or fences. There are no armed correctional officers, no towers, no razor wire or electronic surveillance equipment.
• Restrictions on movement, association and privileges are minimal. Inmates are non-violent and pose very limited risk to the safety of the community. Many are on work-release programs that allow them to hold jobs during the day.
• Inmates show the desire and ability to get along responsibly with fellow inmates with little or no supervision.

What Fun!!!!!! Need a vacation?

Sounds a lot better than the rooming house where Earl was living before being sent to jail.

He is likely to be released some 18 months from now, right before next Christmas, serving out less than one-sixth of his sentence.Yup......

In the meantime he continues to collect his  social security check, but his lawyers are grabbing it up for the fees he ran up during trial.

Earl Jones stole about $50 million dollars from about 150 clients.

Broken down by numbers, it means that for each individual client bilked by Earl, (each of which being robbed of an average of $300,000,)  he will spend approximately four days in jail.

Canadian justice at its best!

Today I am a Muslim

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

-Pastor Martin Niemöller

Decades ago, when the thoroughly loathsome Dr. Camille Laurin proposed a law making French the 'official' language of Quebec, via the infamous Bill 101, the then separatist Premier René Levesque was uncomfortable with the basic notion of limiting the rights of certain Quebeckers.

Among sovereignists and nationalists, he was just about the only one that held that view, with the general consensus among French language militants was that the end justified the means.

Back then, civil libertarians were rightly shocked and many postulated that it was the thin edge of the wedge. After all, if the government could force you to speak a certain language, could it not force you to follow a certain religion?

This argument annoyed French militants to no end and was panned as utterly alarmist and unrealistic.

Well....never is a long time. In fact,.... never is now.

Bill 94 is a proposed Quebec law banning the wearing of a burqa or niqib while receiving or dispensing any public service in Quebec.

Many who oppose the veil, do so based on the so-called 'security issue' and claim that their position in no way reflects anti-Muslim sentiment. Others who oppose the veil, are not so circumspect and publicly oppose the veil based on its perceived anti-feminist symbolism.

On both accounts fair-minded citizens should vehemently oppose the law.

First off, let me say that like most Quebeckers, I have a particular dislike for the veil. In fact I find the whole outfit, top to bottom, veil included, a bit creepy, to say the least.

That being said, I also dislike curry and find heavy metal music particularly loathsome. But I don't think I'd ever consider calling for a ban of AC/DC concerts or the closure of Indian restaurants. The old adage of "To each, his own" still rings true with me and I hope it does with you, as well.

Those who argue that the veil is a security issue, do so in order justify their prejudice through a logical and politically acceptable argument, but it is really just an excuse. There are less than two dozen women wearing the veil in Quebec and none has demonstrated any particular danger to society. None have robbed any banks and none have kidnapped and eaten little children. Security is really a smokescreen for racism.

Two weeks ago,  I witnessed a riot in downtown Montreal where individuals hoodlums wore scarves to hide their identities whilst rioting and looting stores on Ste. Catherine Street. Each year anarchists hold a parade where they create mayhem and destruction while hiding their identity by way of masks and scarves. Many have called for a ban on such face coverings, but as of today, there is no law being proposed or debated to ban face-covering during the riots. There is however Bill 94, a law banning the benign wearing of veils by Muslims.
 .

So which is more dangerous, a punk, covering his face while smashing windows and looting, or a Muslim women wearing a veil, walking peacefully down the street pushing a baby stroller?
Security issue? My eye!

As for the other major argument people use to call for a ban on the veil, the fact that they are offended by the anti-female message that the veil represents, all I can say is, too bad for you.

How on earth, is somebody's political or moral opinion in any way relevant to what someone else believes in or the clothes that they wear?

Are we really ready to tell people what they may or may not wear based on whether it goes against generally held opinions?

Personally I am offended by many things;

I dislike teen aged boys that wear their jeans so low that their underwear is displayed.

I dislike people who wear Che Guevara T-shirts or other anarchist crap.

I'm offended by women who wear lo-rise pants and flaunt their thongs.

I am offended by obese men who attend public swimming pools wearing Speedos.

I'm offended by nose rings and florescent hair.

I scoff at people who believe in UFOs

I think people who believe that there was no moon landing are idiots.

I'm sure that there are plenty of things that you don't like or things that you don't believe in. Should we ban them all?

When I was a teen, most adults hated long hair on boys, tie-dyed T-shirts, the Beatles and bell-bottom jeans.

SO WHAT!!!!!!!!!!

To bad for you if someone else's personal display of their faith, their political beliefs or their fashion taste offends you.

Has the numbing affect of Bill 101, so eroded our concept of personal freedom that we are really ready to ban someone's clothing because it offends the political or moral belief of the majority?

Have we sunk so low?

It's hard to like the veil, but it shouldn't be hard to accept, not if you believe in freedom.

Nobody should be forced to wear a veil and nobody should be forced not to wear one.

People are free to believe in abortion and people are free to be against it.
People are free to believe in sovereignty or in Canada.
People are free to wear boxers or briefs.
People are free to tattoo a Nazi swastika on their butt.

People are free to believe that the veil is a symbol of oppression and people are free to believe it is a sign of piety.

Freedom is tenuous and fragile and it is always under attack by forces who want to enforce a particular agenda.

In Quebec there is a political force led by ultra nationalists and separatists who wish to impose French language supremacy coupled with a leftist, anti-religious agenda. That's okay, it's their right.

What's not okay is imposing it on us all.

It's incumbent on us all to defend our own freedom, but more importantly to defend the freedom of those with whom we don't agree, otherwise we fail as citizens.

It's easy to be against the veil, it's a lot harder to defend it on principle. If we don't, it's just the beginning of more interdictions.

Already there are calls to ban other religious regalia in the public service, however minor.

I'm not a religious person and don't care much about crucifixes, hijabs, niqabs and Jewish Stars, but as Pastor  Niemöller reminds us all, I really ought to give a damn.

Villanueva Gang Demonstrate the Folly of Public Inquiries

In light of the recent disturbing revelations concerning the Quebec construction industry's infiltration of the political process and the exploitation of the bidding process in relation to public construction contracts, it's normal that citizens across the province of Quebec are demanding that the Provincial government launch a public inquiry.

The veil of secrecy into the dealings between construction industry moguls, politicians and the political parties, who are alleged to have colluded in the approval of overpriced construction projects favouring a select few companies, is overpoweringly frustrating to an angry public who have just about had enough with corruption.

Off to the side, stubbornly resisting the onslaught is Premier Charest, secure in the knowledge that any such inquiry would be the coup de grace for his government, regardless of the revelations. Between two cups of poison, he's going with the slower acting potion. Who can blame him?

Those who remember back to the last inquiry concerning the construction industry, held some 35 years ago, hope that a new inquiry will be as successful in exposing the dirty secrets of collusion, bid-rigging, intimidation and payoffs that the commission uncovered back then. 

For those too young to remember, the Cliche Commission, empanelled by the then Premier, Robert Bourassa, was the height of theatre, with thugs like Andre 'Dédé' Desjardins exposed and the machinations of a thoroughly corrupt and violent industry laid bare.

 Back then, witnesses were ill-prepared to face the inquisition and many were poorly represented or had no counsel at all. Most were bewildered by the process and most folded, doing various versions of mea culpas.
Those of us who hope to see a replay of those proceedings in a new construction industry inquiry, will be sadly disappointed. One only has to look at recent examples of public inquiries to understand that the once mighty weapon has been reduced to a pathetic exercise in futility.

Today witnesses come prepared and well-briefed in what to say and how to act. They have lawyers upon lawyers, all paid for with public money. Witnesses go through hours upon hours of preparation and finally when all else fails, bold-faced lies or denials are offered without any fear of sanction or penalty. When the grilling gets tough, lawyers often jump up to interrupt proceedings to take the heat off their clients.

Did we really need an inquiry to remind us that Brian Mulroney is dishonest? The facts were stipulated by all, even by Mulroney himself, who admitted that he took an under the table cash payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars and hid the money from the tax man. He neither deposited the cash in the bank, nor did he add the income to his tax declaration. Several years after the fact, when he felt threatened that the affair would become public knowledge, he ran to the tax authorities to confess and pay up, in exchange for confidentiality.
If he had done what he did in the USA, he'd be sharing a cell with Conrad Black.

What did the Oliphant Inquiry add? Stubborn, prepared and well coached, Mulroney brazened it out. Not since O J Simpson's trial did we see such a magnificent performance of legal of fact-twisting and  manoeuvring. So good was Mulroney on the stand, that in the end, most felt like apologizing to him for the inconvenience.
The Inquiry cost the public MILLIONS of dollars with Mulroney's lawyers pocketing close to 2 million dollars in fees, all paid for by us. I can't think of a more galling scenario.


Even the famous Gomery Commission which examined the famous Sponsorship Scandal was really unnecessary as all the main players were already under indictment and already negotiating plea agreements.

The ongoing Inquiry held to determine the circumstances surrounding the death of Fredy Villanueva is a sad reminder of how farcical these type of proceedings have become.

The Inquiry was called, not to determine the facts, but rather to take the heat off the politicians in light of the rioting following the shooting.

The Inquiry was called to ostensibly determine the truth behind the shooting. Did police shoot the suspects because they were attacked or did they shoot the suspects because they were incompetent?
While the police can hardly be trusted, choosing between their version of the facts and those of a bunch of low-life thieving punks is a no-brainer. I'll go with Door Number One, if you please.

Listening to the patently dishonest testimony of the various thugs was hilarious, except for the fact that we the public, are shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for their lawyers.

Bold faced lie after bold faced lie was accepted at face value with nobody held accountable for their perjurous testimony. When caught in a direct contradiction between his testimony and his own sworn affidavit, one of the 'witness'' shrugged his shoulders. What's the big deal?...... Arghh!!!!!!

If dumb, uneducated gangsters can confound an Inquiry with nothing more than legal-aid lawyers, think about those slick and experienced businessmen with unlimited resources and an army of shysters at their disposal?

Make no mistake about it, Quebec is thoroughly corrupt, from top to bottom, but a public inquiry won't make a dent in the problem because it will be as useful as the Oliphant Inquiry or the Inquest in the Villanueva shooting.

At any rate, an inquiry into the construction industry is much too limited in scope, corruption doesn't just involve a few Italian construction companies.

Corruption is EVERYWHERE, it's part of Quebec culture.  

From the insignificant under the table payment for a haircut by your grandmother, to the organized price-fixing of dairy products by a powerful producer group, price-fixing, gouging, work for nothing, tax evasion, welfare fraud, cigarette and alcohol fraud, political kickbacks, illegal campaign financing, special favours, etc. etc. is all part of the Quebec culture.
What can you say when the ex-Lieutenant-Governor of the province is likely going on trial for allegedly double billing both the Federal and Provincial government for the same personal expenses to the tune of 700k.  

Too many of us want an inquiry into the construction industry so that we can scapegoat the Italians.
That way we won't have to face the reality of corruption, which is unremitting, relentless, omnipresent and cuts across all classes.

To face that elephant in the room, we'll need a lot more than an Inquiry.