HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Monument to de Gaulle
Date: 24 Jul 92 11:52:26 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article <1992Jul23.160526.1822@pandora.matrox.com> thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
|Recently, a monument to Charles de Gaulle was unveiled in
|Montreal with some fanfare.
|
|This was a substitute for renaming Sherbrooke Street after
|the famous former French President, an idea promoted by
|La Societe St-Jean Baptiste.
|
|M. de Gaulle is famous in Quebec because he pronounced from
|the balcony of Montreal City Hall, "Vive le Quebec _libre_!",
|during a state visit in 1967.
|
|The fact that de Gaulle is a hero to separatists is
|interesting, because in all respects other than the merely
|convenient, his act was contemptible.
|
|Here is a man who as "leader" of the French resistance against
|the Germans, benefitted from the generous and courageous
|assistance of Canada -- despite resistance from Quebecers --
|including the sacrifice of thousands of young Canadian 
|soldiers.  This man had the gall (forgive the pun) to
|come over here, and interfere uninvited in the internal
|affairs of Canada, in an extremely ignorant and disruptive
|manner, by saying something he never bothered to justify,
|even in his memoirs.  The bad taste is very strong.
|

He did say "Vive le Quebec libre!". This was stupid and
arrogant.

He also said that the reaction to his visit was 
comparable to the liberation of France form the
NAZI's. When Pearson was rejecting De Gaulles
interference in Canada's constitutional affairs,
he particularly brought this up for the same reason
that you did. 

There are thousands of Canadiansi buried in European
graves who died to save the world from the
monstrous evil of National Socialism. Their memories
were besmerched by the ravings of an aged egotist
with an inflated desire to prove his "grandeur".

Recently a poster in this place again took it as
his task to discredit this sacrifice by writing
that the English in Canada regard themselves as the
"Master Race"

De Gaulle's ignorance, arrogance and intolerance 
have been inherited. There should be a street
named after De Gaulle. It should bear a plaque
acknowleging the support of thise promoting it.
It should also bear a plaque showing De Gaulles
words on the "liberation" and Canada.

This should no be forgotten. The people who
are promoting De Gaulle's view should not be
allowed to forget what they are promoting
and what that makes them. 

|And now we have erected a monument to this man!
|
|Instead of naming Sherbrooke Street after him, I suggest
|we move the new monument beside the bust of John F. Kennedy
|on "President Kennedy Street," and rename the latter,
|"Boulevard of Obnoxious-Foreign-President Infatuation."
|There are over 200,000 Canadian soldiers buried on French soil.


-- 
i.sinature
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Subject: Re: God Save your Queen
Reply-To: dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Distribution: can
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:19:28 GMT

In article <12388@audetf>, audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
|> In article (Thomas Hood) writes:
|> >If Quebecers hope to remain within the Commonwealth after
|> >separation, then it will be prudent for them to show
|> >respect for Her Majesty.
|> 
|> A statement like this puzzles me. How can anyone be so ignorant about
|> life outside your little british sphere? The Quebecois, the natives
|> and the non-british-descendent canadians all couldn't care less about
|> the Queen of England (and don't give me that Queen of Canada stuff: it
|> doesn't work). Furthermore, the "Queen" is for a lot of people the
|> "desuet" symbol of a PAST british imperialism over the a large part of
|> the world. Also, from what I can read on this newsgroup, a lot of
|> "british-canadian pure-wool :-)" have outgrown their need for a Queen.
|> For me, it remain a symbol past domination of one part of Canada over
|> the other.
|> 
|> And why show respect? I'd respect her more if she didn't pretend to be
|> the Queen of my country.

Common courtesy.  Respect for human life.  Or maybe just enough intelligence
to realize that she leads the Commonwealth and that if you insult her you
insult the Commonwealth, and people generally don't associate with those
who insult them.  I can understand wanting you're own country, but to go
around insulting everyone that your economic life depends on is just plain
stupid.

BTW, if you want to talk about the past you may recall that it was the Monarchy
of England that gave the people of Quebec their freedom after they lost the
war.  You have the language rights and the claim to self government because
a former Queen gave them to you.  They could have expelled all of the French
from their soil if they wanted to.  They showed some respect for you, can't you
show some respect for them?

Considering that you show almost no respect for anyone on Internet I'm not
surprised that you would show no respect for the Queen.

Don
My brain, my thoughts, my words.
"Pick up the receiver, I'll make you a believer." - Depeche Mode
From: clamen@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: God Save your Queen
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Jul28.184857.23551@bnr.ca> <Bs5LIu.3uq@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>
	<1992Jul29.172700.19146@bnr.ca>
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:46:36 GMT
X-Posted-From: byron.sp.cs.cmu.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Jul29.172700.19146@bnr.ca> dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton) writes:

   In article <Bs5LIu.3uq@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
   |> In article <1992Jul28.184857.23551@bnr.ca> dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton) writes:
   |> >
   |> >The French lost the war.  All of Quebec was signed to over to Britian, not
   |> >some of it, all of it.  France unconditionaly surrendered.  Yes, they tried
   |> >to expell them, which was a scummy thing to do, but they also afterwards,
   |> >granted self governing rights to Quebec.  You have the freedom to choose
   |> >because of the British Monarchy, and are not a subjegated people because
   |> >of it (Quebec culture would be dead by now if that was the case).  If you
   |> >don't like the idea, that is your problem.
   |> >
   |> >Don
   |> 
   |> Still some bullsh*ting about the right of the conqueror.

   I suggest you talk to someone from Croatia, or Palastine, or
   Mongolia, or...  about the rights of the conqueror.  Very few
   countries are granted self governing rights by the conqueror.  This
   shows respect.  I see no reason why the receiving individuals can
   not at least do that in return.

   This is a major point that bugs a lot of non-Quebecers.  We try to
   accomodate by acknowledging your distinct society and you threaten
   seperation and show _NO_ respect for our institutions.

   No wonder we have no constitutional deal!  With this type of
   attitude we will never have one and might as well build the fences
   now.  I can only hope that the majority of Quebecers are not this
   assinine.

I think this in unfair.  If Quebec separates, it will be done in a
completely democratic manner.  Quebec still has a British-style
government (although they have junked the upper house), with a
Government of the Day, an Official Opposition, an apolitical (and
mostly invisible) head of state.  Quebec sovereignists sit in the
Canadian Parliament, observing its rules and customs.

--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 268 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USA
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Bilingualism at universities (was Re: Bla, bla)
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:21:51 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article steve@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (no) writes:
>Oui, la genie est une exemple d'un faculte principalement anglophone, mais 
>si on voyait la faculte des sciences politiques?  La quatrieme annee est 
>entierement en francais (une amie anglophone m'a dit)

Donc, ce n'est pas bilingue en Science Po non plus...

>Et en passant, c'est "Universite d'/University of Ottawa", et toute 
>affichage est en francais premierement, puis en anglais.

Sauf que notre T-shirt de la Faculte de Genie disait "University of/d'
Ottawa".

>Chaque membre du personnel que j'ai rencontre est francophone.
Evidemment, pour trouver du personnel bilingue c'est plus facile.

D'apres moi une universite bilingue ca ne veut pas dire que certains
programme sont en francais et d'autres en anglais. Ca veut dire que
tous les programmes sont complets dans les deux langues.

-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
                                      Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steven C. Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Monument to de Gaulle
Date: 24 Jul 92 01:18:28 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 450


 I meant M. Robichaud, not M. Bouchard.

 My apologoies Benoit.


 Actually, maybe it would apply M. L. Bouchard just as well, 
 I don't know :-)
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Education
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:15:27 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
-Percentage is a totally irrelevent criterion: the important numerical
-value is the size of the client-base within commuting distance.  The
-Constitution stipulates: where NUMBERS warrant.  Quebec is a rather
-populous place (as Canadian regions go).  There are more anglophone
-Quebecers than there are anglophone Newfoundlanders, and the Quebec
-anglos are concentrated in a smaller area.  There are economically
-practical English-language schools in Newfoundland -- there can be
-economically practical English-language schools in parts of Quebec.
-(The non-economically practical ones have been closing.  I've read
-some stories about the death of anglophone communities in the Gaspe'
-and parts of the Townships.)  Similarly, there are French-language
-schools in Amos -- there can be French-language schools in Edmonton or
-Vancouver or Toronto.

I don't think education is a matter of supply/demand. It's not just
economy, and it is more fundammental than that. BTW, they are death of
not only english communities in the Gaspe peninsula. The region has an
unemployment rate of more than 30% in some regions.

-However, a major chunk of the Belgian population lives in bilingual
-Brussels.

Brussel is situated in the flemish part of Belgium and is the ONLY
officially bilingual city in the country. And this reflects history:
the wallon (french) took economic and political control of the
country, so they "invaded" the capital. Now, the city is bilingual.
Situation has changed now since the flemish now control most of the
economy.

-There are bilingual cantons in Switzerland.  Bilingual services are
-available there.

Not officially, and it's not more bilingual than Quebec. It's driven
by demand. You are more likely to find service in english in the
french or german part of Sitzerland than you are to find service in
Italian or Romanche (the other two official languages). There is no
law that requires the provision of services and schooling in all parts
of Switzerland.

-I maintain that Canada was not really officially bilingual until 1969.
-French has been been a legitimate language in Parliament since July 1,
-1867, but guarantees of French-language services and education ("where
-numbers warrant") were not present back then.  (How else would the
-anti-French legislation have been accepted?)

And I maintain that official bilinguism doesn't change anything in the
actual situation, and that the "were number warrants" only protects
the anglophone minority in Quebec, and fails terribly to protect the
disapearing french communities outside Quebec.

-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
                                      Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.politics,can.followup
Subject: Re: Bill 178
Date: 25 Jul 92 15:16:20 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <BABY.92Jul24110856@watson.info.polymtl.ca> baby@info.polymtl.ca (Philippe Grant) writes:
>In article <920723278@veietto.uucp> fveillet@veietto.uucp (Francois Veillette) writes:
>
>>     . This made a hole in the law and the Bill 178 patches it.
>>
>
>You are quite right.  The Supreme Court of Canada has deemed the law
>unconstitutionnal, but our constituion allows a province to invoque the
>infamous "notwithstanding clause" which allows a province to disregard a
>Supreme Court decision for 5 years (I'm not sure if it's 4 or 5 years).  I
>think it is very dangerous for provinces to have such power since it could
>allow an entry port for a dictatoship.  It may seem far fetched for now,

This is to impeach dictatorship that there is a 5 year period.  Within
5 years, the provincial governement _must_ be renewed, then if the NWC
is used to extend this for another 5 years, it is because there is
something wrong in either the system or in the original Court decision.
BTW, Court decision is supposed to use the law as a base, not to do the
laws (they are not legislative).  Also, because someday, the opposition
will be the government, some laws against every body won't survive.

>but it is not known what state the country will be like in 5, 10, 15, 50
>years...  Just imagine, a province decides to close down a newspaper,
>arrest journalists, silence free speech.

From the next sentence, it is obvious this is a joke.  Perhaps like
the possibility of a dictatorship based on the NWC? 
>
>More down to earth, it is clear that the notwithstanding clause is simply
>an escape hatch for boneless politicians (read Bourassa) who have no clue
>about what to do about anything.  Don't think I support Muldoon or
>Parizeau.  Just remember that if he wants to, Bourassa can renew the
>notwithstanding clause for another term, practically nullifying the word of
>our highest court.  I say, if you don't wanna play by the rules, go play
>somewhere else and leave us alone (read: seperate and be done with it
>damnit!).
>
>--
>Philippe Grant                     |
>Etudiant, Genie Informatique       | If it ain't broke,
>Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal    | DON'T FIX IT!!!
>baby@info.polymtl.ca               | Including this signature!


-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Barthelemy Jarret (1471) -> Andre Jarret, sieur de Beauregard (1665)
\_.-===   -> Denis Beauregard (1992)                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: the new constitutiona
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Distribution: can
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:03:04 GMT

stephanie.fysh@canrem.com ("stephanie fysh") writes:
>JR>I don't understand why it should be OK for Quebec to suspend Charter
>JR>guaranteed rights in the name of cultural preservation, but not the other
>JR>provinces. For example, why should it be fine for Quebec to pass a sign law
>JR>in order create a French exterior in Quebec, yet BC could not do so in
>JR>order to create an English exterior in the face of serious Asian
>JR>immigration? Does BC's culture not deserve the same considerations as
>JR>Quebec's?
>
>All Quebec has to do is to invoke the notwithstanding clause.  *Any*
>province can do this under the current Constitutional provisions.

Yes, but one purpose of the DSC, according to Bourassa, is to make it
possible for Quebec to pass laws like 178 *without* needing the NWC. This
would, in effect, make it "OK" for Quebec to pass laws that CSQ would
rightly at least have its wrist slapped for passing. 

[BTW, Stephanie omitted the part of the article where I say I am playing
devil's advocate. I am *not* advocating a sign law for BC as it would
appear above.]
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson
From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: "F/E" versus "Bienvenue/Welcome"
Date: 26 Jul 92 17:07:51 GMT
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto

In article <BrwHuF.ox@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>
	beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:

>Je suis passe dans le quartier chinois de Montreal hier.  Il y avait plein
>d'affiches bilingues chinois-francais, ceci au neon et tres propre
>(c'est-a-dire tres recent).  Donc, il y a d'un cote la loi, et de l'autre
>son application.

Obviously. The Chinese aren't seen as the oppressors, so they're being
cut some slack. I haven't heard of Action-Quebec sending in reports of
complaints about Chinese signs to the OLF.

>Mais, c'est quand un tel affichage est fait uniquement
>dans le but de denigrer les francophones qui veulent se donner un pays,
>dans le but d'etre arrogant, c'est inacceptable.

I see. And you, in your great and vast wisdom, can tell just from the word
"hardware" on the front of a store, whether or not that word is designed
to denigrate you, or just tell  a shopper what the store sells.  Yes, the
word "hardware" or "delicatessan", or "Realtor" on a sign can be immense
tools of arrogance and oppression, eh?

I can understand that if you wish to badly interpret the word
"hardware" on a sign, that you may find this offensive, and that even
a large number of francophone nationalists find this offensive. That
does not justify the banning of this expression.

>C'est jouer avec les
>sentiments tout en rejetant le nationalisme

If an anglo in Quebec wishes to reject the sentiments of Quebec
nationalism by putting up a sign, that should not be illegal in a
society that still believes itself to be open and democratic. For
this is not just a matter of "putting on a french face", this is a
matter of restricting political expression.

As always, when logic and common sense fails, it's so convenient to resort
to moaning all the damage done to this fragile francophone ego. If your
feelings about nationalism can't survive signs on the street, your
committment to the cause is questionable.

-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
   Said Captain Jean-Luc Picard to the tailor at his machine: "Make it sew!"
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: marc@meadow.uucp (Marc Riehm)
Subject: Re: Natural Law Party
Reply-To: marc@meadow.UUCP (Marc Riehm)
Organization: Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 11:48:28 GMT

In article <1992Jul19.135749.215@imax.imax.com> dave@imax.imax.com (Dave Martindale) writes:
>In article <KRAWCHUK.92Jul15130008@phecda.cs.sfu.ca> krawchuk@cs.sfu.ca writes:
>>
>>I just saw a poster of the "Natural Law Party of Canada". 
>>It looked fairly interesting, and I guess they have some 
>>sort of conference happening at UBC on Saturday that is 
>>open to the public. 
>>
>>Anyway, I am curious whether these people are just a 
>>bunch of crackpots. Two clues attesting to this were 
>>the phrases:
>>	"Supreme Political Science"
>>and 	"Constitution of the Universe".
>>The rest of the poster looked reasonable to me.
>
>I visited Britain last spring just before their election.  The Natural Law
>Party there was led by the founder of Transcendental Meditation, whose
>name I can't spell.  Their platform statement was basically that if
>everyone meditated, there would be little or no disease, thus solving
>the National Health cost explosion, there would be no need to collect
>taxes, etc.  News photos sometimes showed his followers practicing
>"yogic flying" - which appears to be hopping while your legs are
>folded in the Lotus position.
>
>Yes, I'd regard them as crackpots, at least in the political realm.
>The scary thing was that they had a candidate in *every* riding
>in that election.

Someone with big bucks must be funding these people.  You hear more and more
about the Maharishi all the time.  For the past two years (at least), they
have put a double-page spread, full of all kinds of psuedo-scientific
mysticism, into the Globe and Mail.  And there is talk about them building
a huge Transcendental Meditation theme park near Niagara Falls.

They don't seem to be very threatening -- more amusing than anything else.
But _definitely_ not to be taken seriously in politics!
-- 
Marc Riehm      Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
                2000 Argentia Road, Plaza 2, Suite 300
                Mississauga, Ont.   L5N 1V8
marc@meadow.UUCP