HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Legalized Discrimination in Quebec
From: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 15:01:19 PST
Distribution: can
Organization: Robert Smits

bcrock@happy.nuts.almanac.bc.ca (Brad Crockett) writes:

> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
> 
> > The Human Right is the Right to Education which is not at all as the
> > right to choose the language of education.  And this right to choose
> > just can not exist with the right to migrate because a lot of migration
> > involves a change of local language.
> 
> He's right - the two contradict each other!
> 

He's only partly right. While it's true that the right to education is 
not the same as the right to education in the language of one's choice, 
that is not the issue which has been debated here. 

The issue is not whether or not an immigrant should expect education 
services in the language of his choice, but whether or not the state has 
the right to deny some citizens rights it extends to other citizens.

For example, Steve Potter is denied the right to educate his children in 
English, even though publicly funded English language education is 
available where he lives, that it is provided for other Canadian citizens 
who live in or have moved to Quebec from other provinces, and that he and 
his children are English speaking.

Since English IS, despite the allegations of Denis et al, one of the two 
official languages of Canada, in which Quebec is still a part of, there 
is no valid reason the Quebec government should continue to do this. 

All the discussions about what should occur to immigrants to Quebec are 
beside the point when you're discussing a Canadian CITIZEN, who should 
not be discriminated against because of his/her country of origin. 


emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca  (Robert Smits, Ladysmith B.C.)

The Vital Precept

One vital precept isn't taught
sufficiently imperiously:
that other people didn't ought
to take themselves too seriously   - Piet Hein
Xref: sparky can.politics:10855 can.general:6042 soc.culture.canada:9447
From: craig@cattnts.canada.ncr.com (Craig Campbell)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Legalized Discrimination in Quebec
Date: 16 Dec 92 14:21:24 GMT
Organization: AT&T / NCR Canada Ltd., Toronto, Canada

In article <BzBnDI.3qw@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:

>The right way of writting Lynne is Line or Lyne.  A taste of englicization?

The correct way of 'writting' anyone's name, is as they would have it written.
Since Lynne is the roommate, it is likely that the poster spelt the name 
correctly.

This is just being respectful and coureous.  It has nothing to do with 
language biases.

>What about this one?  In a report about NB, a few years ago, they shown
>a panel in English only for a store in a francophone communauty.
>The head office of the company has decided not to advertise in French,
>even in a store was deserving a 100% French-speaking town.  How would
>you deal with this one?  Boycotting the store?  Boycott is a sign of
>fight and war.  Writting letters?  Having a law?  What would YOU do????

I wouldn't worry about it.  It was a 'head office' decision.  It was not
something the government should be involved in.  I certainly don't get
my shorts in a knot every time I see an Italian, or Oriental only sign.
(If I have the time, I usually go exploring to see what they have.)

If these are examples of the worst of your problems, you should be
thanking your favourite deity.

>-- 
>  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
> /   \   Ge'ne'alogiste des familles : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
>J   __>  Un Que'bec renouvele' dans une Ame'rique renove'e
>\_.-===  Ope'rateur de "Racines du Que'bec" (514) 922-9636 BBS/Genealogie

Merry Christmas,

craig
-- 
Craig Campbell		|	These opinions are entirely the result of a 
Systems Engineer	|	small butterfly crashing into the far side
NCR Canada,		|	of the planet.  Chaos Rules.
an AT&T Company		|	I speak for no one, except, possibly, myself.
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: do we really need the
From: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 20:21:50 PST
Distribution: can
Organization: Robert Smits

"robert radford" <robert.radford@canrem.com> writes:

>  AP>  No, we do not need the monarchy. They are not just an anachronism,
>  AP>  they are a parasitic anachronism.
> 
> It's always amusing to see die-hard republicans. Lacking any understanding 
> of their own culture, they identify with U.S. television and define 
> everything in American terms e.g. the U.S. has a flag, we need a flag; the 
> U.S. doesn't have a monarchy, we need to drop our monarchy.
> 
> Whether we need a monarchy or not, it is our own and one of the few things 
> that distinguishes us. Or do you just watch the Simpsons?
> 


It's hardly necessary to have a monarchy to distinguish us from the 
yanks. Nor does everyone who favours a republic identify with the U.S.A. 
There are lots of republican examples without them, although it would be 
silly not to learn from them both good and bad experiences with that form 
of government.

Instead of being blindly pro-U.S.A. many of us favour a more egalitarian 
system, and resent having a foreign monarch involved in our government. 
(She's BRITISH - not Canadian!)


emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca  (Robert Smits, Ladysmith B.C.)

Support your fellow Canadians. We should buy lousy Canadian novels 
instead of importing lousy American novels. - Johnny Wayne
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Subject: Re: No Senate Elections
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:46:06 GMT

In article <BzBME7.EnD@mach1.wlu.ca>, scooper6@mach1.wlu.ca (stephen cooper 9209 U) writes:

> No, not at all.  Albertans rejected the Accord which would have allowed
> elections.  What would Albertans say if Mulroney gave Quebec 25% guarantee
> anyway, "even though Quebecers voted no on the deal".

That is SO arrogant an attitude. Are you suggesting that only with that
repugnant half-assed report called the Charlottetown Consensus could
Canadians get an elected Senate, or for that matter - a 25% guarantee.
(which in my opinion is a FEDERALIST blackmail of Quebec. "Vote for this 
guarantee and you will never need vote for a sovereign Quebec".) ?

I'm proud that I voted NO on October 26, along with millions of other
Quebecois and Canadians. I denounce your post-mortem eulogy of the 
accord and that it was the "last chance" for an elected Senate or
, if you mention it, aboriginal self-government or interprovincial
free trade. To believe that a piece of paper could be the only chance
any of these things could be achieved is truly a Mulroneyism.

(dump the Senate, and HoC NOW   !!! They are all vipers)

> -- 
> Steve Cooper      |  Internet:  scooper6@mach1.wlu.ca
> Waterloo, Ontario |  If you actually think I speak for Wilfrid Laurier
> Canada!!          |  University, well... I don't even want to think about it.
-- 

John P. LaRocque
skywalker@uwo.ca
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario


"Urk..urk..."
"Apology accepted, Captain Needa", Darth Vader
Newsgroups: can.politics
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 11:58:04 EST
From: Andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
 <8NmVVB2w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca>

In article <8NmVVB2w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca>, yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca
(Dave Shariff Yadallee) says:
>
>sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>
>- >
>-
>- I'd like to volunteer to head up the "Dave for Kingg" campaign.
>-
>- C'mon Dave, try it - you'll like it!
>-
>  No doubt you would love to be Quuen of all Britons!
>
>Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
> (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
>God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!

Moses Invests but only Buddah pays Dividends!!!!


>Happy Christmas and Merry New Year to One and All - John Lennon
Xref: sparky can.politics:10655 can.general:5902 soc.culture.canada:9307
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Legalized Discrimination in Quebec
From: emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 92 19:43:40 PST
Distribution: can
Organization: Robert Smits

beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:

> 
> In every places in the world, newcomers have less rights that persons
> already in place.  In every kind of society, this is true.  A new
> lawyer, a new doctor, a new engineer, a new religious, each have to
> follow the rules of the congregation/school/court house etc. where 
> s/he gets in.  In no place does a newcomer _more_ rights than someone
> already there.  In absolutely no place.
> 

Yes, but you're skating around the question, Denis. It's true that an 
immigrant, for example, can't vote. Once he becomes a citizen, however, 
we allocate him/her the same rights as every other citizen.

The education laws in Quebec not only deny english schooling to people 
newly immigrated, who are not yet citizens of Canada, but they deny them 
to people who ARE citizens of Canada. You have yet to give us a single 
supportable, rational reason why this is necessary, your paranoia about 
the English notwithstanding.

Quebec law discriminates against Canadian citizens on the basis of their 
origin, and that is not acceptable in a free and democratic country.

emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca  (Robert Smits, Ladysmith B.C.)

The Vital Precept

One vital precept isn't taught
sufficiently imperiously:
that other people didn't ought
to take themselves too seriously   - Piet Hein
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: marky@engin.umich.edu (Mark Anthony Young)
Subject: Re: No Senate Elections
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 12:45:37 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: can

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
>Jeez, what a spiteful little snot Mulroney is.  Accepting Alberta's elected
>senator was fine when he wanted Alberta's support for his constitutional
>deal, but now that Alberta didn't support him, accepting the Alberta voter's
>choice isn't acceptable anymore.  He sounds like a little brat who's taking
>his ball home because the goalie blocked his shot at the goal.
>
>Is the new insistence on the old senate selection system the political
>version of "work to rule"?
>
I haven't seen the National since they moved it to 9pm :-(.  What's up?

As for Alberta's elected senator, I wouldn't exactly say that Mulroney thought
it was "just fine".  He insisted that one name did not constitute a list, and
that the Alberta gov't was supposed to send him a list to choose from (under
the Meech Lake agreement).  Alberta sent the list of all candidates together
with a note next to each indicating how many votes they'd got.  Mulroney then
chose one of them--always insisting that he could choose whichever one he 
wanted, tho' he went with the winner anyway.

As part of his price for choosing the winner, Mulroney made Alberta agree not
to elect senators any more.

I suspect that if Mulroney were to start selecting elected senators, that
someone (probably from Ontario or Quebec) would challenge the senate election
law under section 42(1)(b) of the Constitution.  I figure they'd win (since
the wording is quite clear), but others have argued differently (tho' none of
us are actually constitutional lawyers).

...mark young
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.general
From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Subject: Canada vs Quebec
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 04:26:18 GMT

     Quebec vs Canada Round 2001.....

     Every day it's the same crap. English guys complain about discrimination
in Quebec (some very real), the French chaps write back about how things
have been and are worse for the other minority, the English guys get upset
and complain on how the real issues are never dealt with, and the French
guys, with their wounded pride, complain back on how the whole country
misunderstands Quebec. What a stupid country!

     Wouldn't it be nice if Posts like the one on Bourassa vs Human Rights
just died? Quebec is many things, but not the USSR. As for the other half
of the marriage, English Canada's performance has not been outstanding either. 
Clam up or start something intelligent on Quebec. Sending in the Army 
because Joe Blow couldn't legally (but probably does anyway) put up the
words "Sale!" and "Discounts" next to his sign with "Vente!" or "Solde"
should get a life. And as for all the whiners on English education
(this is you Steve)... stop igniting a French vs English race war and
intimidating Quebecers and start talking about the real issues...
no freedom of choice anywhere (including Quebec), on education.
     
     Same group of people, same debate, same garbage day in and day out.
If they are representative of the country at large, then Canada is just
a giant looney bin. Maybe its time to starve the inmates or give them
a little shock treatment. That would be nice for a change......     


John P. LaRocque
vader@uwo.ca
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario


"Urk..urk..."
"Apology accepted, Captain Needa", Darth Vader
Xref: sparky can.politics:10862 soc.culture.british:17683 soc.culture.australian:5170
From: CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
Date: 17 Dec 92 13:55:35 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <1992Dec17.000339.12868@netcom.com> sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>In article <8NmVVB2w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
>>sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>>
>>- I'd like to volunteer to head up the "Dave for Kingg" campaign.
>>-
>>- C'mon Dave, try it - you'll like it!
>>-
>>  No doubt you would love to be Quuen of all Britons!
>>
>
>Oh, Dave, you don't REALLY mean it - do you?   It's too exciting
>to think about.  I've never thought about being a Quuen.
>But Dave, I really wanted *you* to be King.  I have enough to
>do already without having to be fitted for easter egg colo[u]red
>suits and learning to wave properly.  You go ahead, and I'll stay
>over here and cheer you on, 'k?
>
Sue, I'm not sure you've understood Dave's reply.  In his
bashful way, he's trying to propose that you and he get married.
That way you can be King and Quuen together.  It's the stuff of
fairy tales.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
From: bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross)
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Brock University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:05:05 GMT

yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
: Andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
: - I suggest you learn the Queen's English so you can discuss this coherently.
: - As a politics major, I am well aware of the structures involved.
: 
:   Wher have I heard that one before.  My dear fellow, you are addressing a
: Policy Director for Liberal Party Consitutency Associations!

That explains it.

-- 
Brian Ross                          "Welcome to Canada." -- Twin Peaks Movie.
bross@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca            
Xref: sparky can.politics:10794 soc.culture.british:17585 soc.culture.australian:5150
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:42:37 EST
From: Andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
 <3mRTVB2w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> <1992Dec15.193530.3035@netcom.com>
 <1992Dec15.200111.16644@infodev.cam.ac.uk>

In article <1992Dec15.200111.16644@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk
(Guy Barry) says:
>
>In article <1992Dec15.193530.3035@netcom.com> sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
>writes:
>>
>>I'd like to volunteer to head up the "Dave for Kingg" campaign.
>>
>>C'mon Dave, try it - you'll like it!
>
>Yes -- we can have a whole new definition of the King's English!

Could it still be called english?
>
>
>
>
>--
>Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757
>Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
>New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl
>Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 07:18:42 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.233708.27409@cdf.toronto.edu>, g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
> In article <gPBmVB4w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
> >Time and time again, I have proposed a
> >representative government that would be directly responible to God, Queen and
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                                                 ^^^  ^^^^^
> >country on a VERY LARGE SCALE! It is time to consider who our friends are!!
> 
> Judging from the responses your postings on this subject usually get, a
> government accountable to "God" and the Queen would not be representative.

I missed this gem! Tell us Dave, how many votes is God going to get? One
man one vote, one God 750 million votes? That would give us a government
directly resposible [sic] to God and not very much less representative 
than our current electoral system.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: "robert radford" <robert.radford@canrem.com>
Subject: do we really need the
Reply-To: "robert radford" <robert.radford@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: can
Date: 13 Dec 92 15:57:43 EST

 AP>  No, we do not need the monarchy. They are not just an anachronism,
 AP>  they are a parasitic anachronism.

It's always amusing to see die-hard republicans. Lacking any understanding 
of their own culture, they identify with U.S. television and define 
everything in American terms e.g. the U.S. has a flag, we need a flag; the 
U.S. doesn't have a monarchy, we need to drop our monarchy.

Whether we need a monarchy or not, it is our own and one of the few things 
that distinguishes us. Or do you just watch the Simpsons?

---
 * Freddie 1.2 * Genie: R.L.Radford  Compuserve: 76354,535                  Other: Robert.Radford@canrem.com   
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Subject: Re: do we really need (the stupid monarchy thread)
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Distribution: can
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 04:32:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.4112.13523@dosgate>, "robert radford" <robert.radford@canrem.com> writes:
>  2> As a Canadian nationalist who sees no need for the monarchy, I think 
>  2> you are dismissing your opponants with a silly generalisation.
> 
> My "opponents" too.
> 
> ---
>  * Freddie 1.2 * Genie: R.L.Radford  Compuserve: 76354,535                 
>  Other: Robert.Radford@canrem.com   
> --
> Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
> World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

All right, here is a solution. Dump the Brits now. They have proven that
THEIR royal family is not fit to rule a dog house, let alone carry the
mantle of the "great British Commonwealth". Replace their family with
our own. 

(Bishop intones the following words....)
"By the power invested in me by God, I hereby proclaim you, Conrad Black,
King of the Canadian Dominion, lord of the provinces and beloved man
of the people..."

Monarchy lovers, get a life. Canadian nationalists, get a life. What a
stupid thread.

-- 

John P. LaRocque
vader@uwo.ca
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario


"Urk..urk..."
"Apology accepted, Captain Needa", Darth Vader
Xref: sparky can.politics:10949 soc.culture.british:17851 soc.culture.australian:5207
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 06:13:41 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada

sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:

-
-
- <flutter> Oooh, do you think so??

  The scent of Monty python humour

-
- Nah, let's get real.  TPHRH Dave thinks I am chasing him.
- Which I am.  I'm trying to pack him off to BP and get him off the
- continient of North America.  If he plays his cards right he might
- even land Diana.  She might think he's a bit of pompous windbag,
- but if he doesn't whinge about her bulimia I'll bet she might be
- willing to proofread his material.

  Nice try.  I am actually after a Celtie, descendant of Liverpudlian Welsh
  and Edinburghan Scots. She is after all slighter younger than me, younger
  enough and responsible for intro'ing me to the next.
-
- Dave, do you like to go to discos?
-
  Anywher Sarah tells me to go, that is sarah from Whitehall.
-
-
-
-


Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
 (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Happy Christmas and Merry New Year to One and All - John Lennon
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada,talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.australian
Subject: Re: Do we really need the monarchy?
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 06:07:25 MST
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #1, Edmonton, AB, Canada

sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:

- Not only *can* you separate them, there are some very good arguments why
- you *should* separate them.
-
- Simon.
-
- --
-   Simon Patience
-   Open Software Foundation                    Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
-   Research Institute                          FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
-   2 Avenue De Vignate                         Email: sp@gr.osf.org
-   38610 Gieres, France                                       uunet!gr.osf.org!


 I argue  for responible government and the God,Quuen and Country tenets to
come together.
 In short, /i say let all the people under the God-conttolled domain come
together and work together for the each ohters benefit, Not as a hierachy, but
as first among equals.

BTW, all you fanatics trying to draft me for the British throne, I nedd a VERY
GOOD reason for excepting the candidacy otherwise, I will decline.

Dave Shariff Yadallee (B. Sc. (Econ/Math) (U of Alberta 1990) )
 (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca, userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Happy Christmas and Merry New Year to One and All - John Lennon