HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: beaucham@astro.phy.ulaval.ca (Dominique Beauchamp)
Subject: Re: Deception
Followup-To: beaucham@phy.ulaval.ca
Organization: Universite Laval, Ste-Foy, Qc, Canada
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:23:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.184039.15536@cerberus.ulaval.ca> plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca writes:
>MAUDIT que je suis decu de ce pays qu'est le Canada. Si ce que j'ai lu aujourd'hui
>dans ce groupe (can.politics) est representatif des gens qui l'habitent.  Cela est
>terrible, certains ne peuvent comprendre que le francais doit etre protege et 
>que les quebecois ont peur de se voir assimiler.  Certains proferent des menaces
>advenant l'independance du Quebec, ces menaces ressemblent etrangement aux 
>divers discours de justifications des genocides qui ont eu lieu dans divers 
>endroits du monde en certaines annees ce siecle.
>
[... texte supprime ...]
>
>Je vous prierais s.v.p. dans l'avenir de tenir un discours qui sans meme s'il 
>fait la promotion de vos interets et defend votre facon de voir, fait abstraction
>de toute violence, celle-ci n'etant pas la meilleure facon de promouvoir 
>l'intelligence, le savoir vivre et le respect que chacun est en droit de 
>recevoir s'il met en pratique une certaine diplomatie.  Il est souvent plus
>facile de faire mal stupidement que de defendre intelligemment son point
>de vue.
>
>Le principe est simple et est valide dans toutes les actions que nous posons
>dans notre vie.  Si vous voulez qu'on vous respecte cessez de proferer des 
>stupidite. "If you want to be respected, stop saying stupid things"
>
>Pierre Lahaie
>plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca
>
>

Je te felicite Pierre pour tes propos.  Cela prouve qu'il y a des gens qui savent
vivre en ce bas monde.  J'espere que toutes et tous s'inspireront de ce que tu as
ecrit a l'avenir avant de proferer de "mauvaises paroles".  Je suis probablement
un de ceux a qui le chapeau fait et je le mets!

Dominique Beauchamp
beaucham@phy.ulaval.ca

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Defending Jean Chretien
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 14:29:43 GMT

In article <92326.0022362893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>>Jean Chretien has demonstrated to the country that he hasn't learned the
>>lesson of the referendum...by imposing candidates on ridings without a
>>democratic nomination process...and then quenching dissent through
>>intimidation...
>
>There has in the past, been an attempt to take over the Liberal Party by groups
> such as the Campaign Life Coalition by packing nomination meetings with
>instant Liberals
>

There is no such movement in York Centre where Chretien the dictator has
imposed Art Eggleton, over a long term Liberal who has been a dedicated
party worker for a long time and who has spent a lot of time signing up
legitimate Liberals in the riding.

If it were such a case as a single interest group hijacking the process,
there wouldn't be such an outrage through Metro Toronto in the Eggleton
case.  But this is a case of a parachuted candidate replacing a loyal
local party worker, and a parachuted WASP, instead of a local ethnic
candidate.

Gerald       
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Subject: Re: Quebec
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 23:05:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.124928.13635@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>
>Denis suggested that the lack of "Native" education in other provinces,
>compared to the lack of Cree and Mohawk education in Quebec, makes the
>assertion that racism is rampant in Quebec "irrelevant".
>
>The ROC is doing it, to one degree or another, so we can do it too!
>- so to speak. :-(

I just mean that the situation in Quebec was better.  Now, having Canadians
saying that Quebec is racist (what the original poster said) because
natives are missing something (if 70% of them have education in their
own language the statement is far from accurate) while the situation
in there own province is worse, then, I call this either bullshit or
Quebec bashing or misinformation.  NB  Steve is not the original poster.

>In response to being reminded that 12,000 English children are also denied
>access to their own (existing!) language community schools in Quebec, he
>says that those families came here voluntarily after such rules came into
>existence and complain.
>
>People who think rules are racist or unjust should not complain about them
>if they came here after those rules were established!
>- so to speak. :-(

A Rome, on fait comme les Romains.  Surtout si, comme Steve, on est
justement venu au Quebec PARCE QUE LE QUEBEC permettait a ses
enfants d'avoir une education en francais (puisqu'il avait deja l'ecole
en anglais avant de venir) et qu'il a cru au mythe que le Canada etait
un pays bilingue.  

P.S.  Quelqu'un a-t-il tenu le compte du nombre de fois ou Steve
nous a livre essentiellement le meme message, ou on lui a repondu
essentiellement la meme chose?  Est-ce qu'on peut decerner a Steve
le trophee du record en fait de plus grande redondance dans 
l'utilisation du reseau?  Ou encore, on peut l'appeler Don Quichotte.

-- 
  \_\    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
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Anyone want to buy a used country?
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 05:15:52 GMT

lort@fraser.sfu.ca (Charles Lort) writes:
>gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>>
>>I don't know how bad the traffic tie-ups across the Lions Gate Bridge is, ...
>
>HELLO!!! Where have you been?????   There haven't been any toll booths 
>on the Lions gate Bridge for somewhere between 25 to 30 years.

While I will feel stupid for a few minutes here, please let me say
that some B.C. tourist guides still have it mentioned.  Secondly, I've
not actually driven in Vancouver because I get a lift or take public
transit or a cab because next to toll booths, the second-most hated
thing for me transport-wise is looking for a parking spot.  When in a
major urban area, the first thing that I do is ditch the car and look
for the best transit deal (bulk tokens, day passes, etc.).  As you say,

>lort@sfu.ca	BREATHE EASIER!!  PARK YOUR CAR AND TAKE TRANSIT!!!!


And I'll second that notion.  It takes care of my newspaper reading, I
get there relaxed, see things at ground level (building up a huge wall
against impulse shopping, I might add, seeing all those store-fronts
up close).  I'd say that public transit and bouncing around town on
foot has helped me to know the cities that I've lived in or visited
much more intimately.

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				Jesus Saves!
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Gretzky gets the rebound -
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			he shoots, he scores!
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Hurtig's New Party
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Distribution: can
Date: 21 Nov 92 01:05:07 GMT

Crawford Kilian (Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca) wrote:
>The Globe this morning reports that Mel Hurtig is planning to launch a new
>political party advocating Canadian economic nationalism and an end to free
>trade. Can anyone supply more information on what this party's plans are?
>(Those lacking such information can still supply opinions, I'm sure.)

Hmmm, the Reform Party should siphon off PC votes, and the NoWayFreeTrade
Party should siphon off NDP votes - the Liberals may coast to a majority if
this kind of vote splitting goes on. Perhaps Hurtig is really a Liberal
double agent :-).
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: svanegmo@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond)
Subject: Re: ANGLO WHINERS and so-called persecution
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:16:40 GMT

Quote:
"
      In the 14 years from 1978, when the law took force, to 1991, the
statistical review says that 388 cases ver went to court - and 123 language 
offenders were conviced, an average of less than NINE A YEAR. That didn't
make a headline either.
"

That's 14 too many, for my tastes.  The fact that the number of people wronged by bill 101 is small, does not form a justification for that law's existence.

On the topic of the statistics presented in the article, I was never aware nor
have I cared what the pay ratio between bilingual anglophones and bilingual 
francophones was, and I still don't.  What was the point of all that, anyway?

Steve
From: plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca (Pierre Lahaie)
Subject: Re: Plan S -- Quebec separation
Reply-To: plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca
Organization: Dept. Genie Electrique, Universite Laval
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:39:04 GMT

Negotiations are the best way to solve problems.

Quebec does not feel good inside Canada, that does not imply that we hate
others provinces, it only imply that we need a different structure.

NEGOTIATIONS will be possible if the negotiators of both sides are not of a 
B.J. Schuck kinds

Pierre Lahaie
plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca
  

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Reform Party
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:05:51 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.051305.4747@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>John Paul Morrison (jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca) wrote:
>>In article <aidler.722412657@sanjuan> aidler@sanjuan.UVic.CA (E Alan Idler) writes:
>
>[a number of RP poilicy positions deleted]
>
>>These are excellent principles.
>
>I like a great deal of them as well. That is why I take an interest in the
>goings-on of the RP.
>
>>So why does it feel so icky to support the Reform Party?
>>
>>I want much clearer evidence that the Reform Party is not dragging in
>>a lot of relgious, moralistic, sel-righteous dogma in with its policies.
>>
>>I am not totally convinced that the Reform Party stands for seperating
>>religious and moral issues from the economic and democratic issues.
>
>Perhaps we could put the shoe on the other foot, and you could tell us why
>you think the RP may be guilty of the above? After all, your statements are
>somewhat akin to asking a person if they have stopped beating their spouse
>yet.

Perhaps I'm a victim of all the leftist NDPers who paint them with a 
religious right brush, although I ought to know better than to believe
a word of what an NDPer says.

In any case, the RP's image is their repsonsibility, and they
could do a better job of emphasizing their principles where their principles
concern individual liberty, freedom from state interference in a person's
private life and morality etc. (I'm assuming they DO support that. If not,
it's going to be a tough choice to do what is economically correct,without
sacrificing liberalist social beliefs) 

>-- 
>Jim Robinson
>robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
>{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson
>


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Subject: Re: Quebec
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:49:28 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2107

From article <Bxq4w3.MBA@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, by beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard):
> In article <1992Nov8.104225.6756@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>>From article <Bx9J56.FB8@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, by beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
>>Denis Beauregard writes:-
>>
>>> In article <1992Oct27.140016.13677@bmerh85.bnr.ca> viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca
>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>>And racism is not rampant in Quebec?  Talk to the Cree or Mohawks.
>>> 
>>> Compare the number of Natives being educated in their own language
>>> to that in other provinces and you will find that your remark is
>>> absolutely irrelevant.
>>> 
>>
>>There are about 12,000 English-speaking children in Quebec who are declared
>>"ineligible for instruction in English". Can Denis have forgotten that fact
>>so soon? :-(
>>
> He Steve:  I thought you were supposed to be back to work (-;
> 
> Your phrase should be:
> 
> There are about 12,000 English-speaking children in Quebec whose parents
> voluntarily moved to Quebec since 1976 and these parents, instead of
> accepting rules existing before they migrated, complaint.
> 

Denis suggested that the lack of "Native" education in other provinces,
compared to the lack of Cree and Mohawk education in Quebec, makes the
assertion that racism is rampant in Quebec "irrelevant".

The ROC is doing it, to one degree or another, so we can do it too!
- so to speak. :-(


In response to being reminded that 12,000 English children are also denied
access to their own (existing!) language community schools in Quebec, he
says that those families came here voluntarily after such rules came into
existence and complain.

People who think rules are racist or unjust should not complain about them
if they came here after those rules were established!
- so to speak. :-(

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.politics:9855 soc.culture.canada:8697
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Only in Canada you say ?
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: 20 Nov 92 17:30:12 GMT

Stewart Clamen (clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU) wrote:
>
>Not that the generality of the US consitution does not guarantee
>non-discriminatory treatment of gays and women, while the Canadian
>Charter of Rights does.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not presently explicitly protect
against discriminatory treatment on the basis of sexual orientation.
However, a court (I believe it was an Ontario court) recently made a ruling
along the lines that such discrimination violated Charter equality rights.
And, I believe, the federal government has said that it will accept this
ruling and apply it nationally. [I am a bit fuzzy on the ruling so if
anyone has better info, please jump in]

Personally, I very much believe that sexual orientation *should* be
explicitly Charter protected.  However, I get concerned when the courts
seek to extend rights that were not obviously intended. In my view, the
role of the courts should be to interpret the law (and the constitution),
not write it. Just because I agree with the result of this particular piece
of apparent judicial activism does not mean that I will agree with the
next; and short of resorting to the infamous notwithstanding clause, there
is nothing a government can do about a ruling that seems to exceed the
Charter's mandate.

I am not a lawyer (although we all were in October :-), and it is very
possible that my interpretation of these events is not correct, so if
anyone wishes to correct the above, feel free. [it would just *have* to be
more interesting than whether the Quebecois are being more "oppressive" to
anglos than anglos were to the Quebecois]
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: duquet@astro.phy.ulaval.ca (Jean-Remi Duquet)
Subject: Re: Toronto Sun: another case of paranoia???
Organization: Universite Laval, Ste-Foy, Qc, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:20:26 GMT

In article <BxJ4KM.Eq6@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> tdwebste@sparta.uwaterloo.ca (Timothy D. Webster) writes:
>
>Quebec Separatist are an enemy of Canada. The Bloc Quebecois have as
>their mandate, the separation of Quebec. Therefore they are an enemy of
>Canada. Remember this comic strip did not attack Quebecois ONLY
>Separatist. 
>

Well, there's some overlap and not a small one... Moreover, if you tried
to spare ME with this comment, well you failed.

>Your example does capture a common feeling toward Separatist. Please
>understand this not an attack on the Quebec people or culture. The
>seemingly never ending threat of Quebec separation is like Quebec Separatist
>taking CSQ hostage. 

Obviously you've never been taken hostage. Quebec nationalists didn't even
prevent TROC from building itself a nice constitutional package which didn't
include Quebec. This "hostage" stuff is a misconception arising from the 
fact we don't want to be imposed a Canada that doesn't fit with our view
of what is good for Quebec. The usual argument that Quebecers want to impose
this view to TROC is pure bull. It only crashes when mutually incompatible
options are on the table (ex. central vs decentralised country).

>[stuff deleted]
>But Canadians are proud of their country and HATE Separatist. 
>This does not mean they hate Quebecois or wish to impose there culture
>onto Quebec.
>

Pride is something correct as long as it doesn't blind you. Separation is
not a goal by itself, it's just the result of another national pride just
as Aborigens pride directly leads to self determination. Separatists don't
give a damn about the way Canada behaves as long as it deosn't involve Quebec,
so they're certainly not "ennemies" of the nation. This hatred is a one-way
hate affair, as far as I can judge.	

>-Tim.

Jean-Remi Duquet
Universite Laval
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: duquet@astro.phy.ulaval.ca (Jean-Remi Duquet)
Subject: Re: Toronto Sun: another case of paranoia???
Organization: Universite Laval, Ste-Foy, Qc, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:22:09 GMT

In article <WARKENT.92Nov11132100@ltisun14.epfl.ch> warkent@ltisun14.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne) writes:
>It is usually impossible to judge a comic strip simply
>by the dialogue.  However, have you folks ever heard
>of irony?
>
>Ken Warkentyne - warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
>                 Laboratoire de Teleinformatique, EPFL, Suisse.

Sorry, I didn't have ccess to a scanner so I wasn't able to
send a GIF file on the network :)

But I saw the strip, and as far as I can tell, this was not
irony. The author clearly intended to imply that B.Q. members
may be dangerous, and are generally heinous and violent.

Ironie: (at least in french) a way to laugh at someone by saying
exactly the opposite of what you mean. e.g.: "Yes, Quebec is stronger
than TROC and deserves a spacial status on a base of racial superiority"
would have been ironic.

This was not.

Jean-Remi Duquet
Universite Laval
Xref: sparky can.politics:9853 soc.culture.canada:8692
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:21:22 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Jean Chretien
 <1992Nov16.164827.6284@cerberus.ulaval.ca> <BxuKu3.FMn@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca>
 <BxvIoH.ED@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>

In article <BxvIoH.ED@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>,
svanegmo@mobius09.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond) says:
>
>> Should I vote for
>> the Reform Party? I don't think so!
>
>What reasons do you have why you shouldn't vote for the Reform Party?  I have
>seen comments like this, and have asked this question dozens of times, but
>have
>yet to get a single response.  What is it about the Reform Party's positions
>that you do not like?  Or did you actually believe Audrey McLaughlin when she
>said Preston Manning was Canada's David Duke?

Considering he called the NDP "communist" he probably does.

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: tdwebste@sparta.uwaterloo.ca (Timothy D. Webster)
Subject: Re: Jean Chretien
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:40:42 GMT

In article <92323.2019182893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>In article <BxuKu3.FMn@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca>, tdwebste@sparta.uwaterloo.ca
>(Timothy D. Webster) says:
>>
>>
>>So what magget, I meen muppet do you suggest? I am not going to vote
>>communist (NDP). We have seen what the Tories can do. Should I vote for
>
>If you can call the NDP communist, can I call the Reform Party, Nazis, it's
>the same sort of feeble-minded comment. You forgot the crypto part though:)
>
>>the Reform Party? I don't think so! The Bloc de Quebecios? My neighbours
>>would kill me if they found out. That is if I didn't kill myself first.
>>
>>If Chretien has any good qualities, it is that you can't accuss him of
>>talking out of both sides of his mouth at once. :-)
>>
>>-Tim.


Have you never seen a smilly before? I tried to use lots for humur
impared people like you. 

The NDP are a good example of we don't need now. Just look at Ontario.
Excessively minimum wages prevent many job entry possitions.
Bill 40 will cause a migration of industry from Ontario. This is
particularly the case with just in time manufacturing. If a parts
supplier can not meet its contracted requirements an alternative more
relable source will be found. Bill 40 indorses Unions traditional
adversarial bargaining technics.

Tell me some good "uniquely" NDP polices. Not many eh?

-Tim.
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: duquet@astro.phy.ulaval.ca (Jean-Remi Duquet)
Subject: Re: Quebec
Organization: Universite Laval, Ste-Foy, Qc, Canada
Distribution: can.politics
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:50:11 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.103905.6682@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>From article <1992Nov5.132132.7992@cerberus.ulaval.ca>,
>by beaucham@astro.phy.ulaval.ca
>Dominique Beauchamp writes:-
>
>> Je ne connais pas beaucoup d'anglophones qui ont eu de la difficulte a se
>> faire "servir" en anglais au Quebec.
>
>Je connais "beaucoup d'anglophones qui ont eu de la difficulte" a faire
>eduquer leurs enfants dans les ecoles de leur propre langue au Quebec.
>
Connais-tu seulement quelques francophones hors Quebec qui ont facilement
fait eduquer leurs enfants dans les ecoles de leur propre langue hors-Quebec?

Et pour repondre a ton argument, je connais plusieurs francophones qui ont 
fait quelques annees a l'ecole anglaise, meme a Quebec.
>> 
>> A moins que de vouloir proteger sa langue et sa culture soit raciste...
>>  Pourrait-on m'eclairer la-dessus? s.v.p.
>> 
>
>"de vouloir proteger sa langue et sa culture" ne soit pas du tout raciste.
>
>De nier le droit de faire eduquer ses enfants dans l'ecole publique de
>son choix est un violation des droits et libertes humaines.
>
>De forcer des familles a envoyer leurs enfants aux ecoles francaises quand
>il y a des ecoles anglaises publique disponibles est raciste.
>

Au moins, il y a des ecoles anglaises publiques disponibles...
De plus, sans vouloir te vexer, je ne vois pas en quoi ca peut etre raciste.
Primo, nous sommes de la meme "race" (a supposer que ce mot ait un sens).
Deux, ce reglement s'applique normalement UNIQUEMENT aux familles dont les
parents ne sont pas anglophones. Alors ce n'est certainement pas du "racisme"
envers les anglophones du Quebec.

>  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||

Jean-Remi Duquet


Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada