HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque)
Subject: Re: NDP Nazis (was Re: Reform)
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:55:29 GMT

In article <LABACH.92Nov23120119@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>, labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:
> In article <1992Nov22.202155.25456@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>
> tony@nexus.yorku.ca (Anthony Wallis) writes: 

>> The "Conservative" (full name "Progressive Conservative" - whatever
>> that means) party, and the other two mainline parties, named the
>> "Liberals" and the "New Social Democratic Activist Party" (NSDAP),

This is a GOOD cheap shot. For years the NDP has been advertising itself
as the "people's" party. It is a completely phoney tag that they put on
their posters to make people think they really care.

Deep down, the NDP wants to replace the existing economic relationship
of so-called rich and poor with an even MORE over-legislated country where
the state controls all the levers and the people have nothing.

If you want to tear down the system of masters and slaves, dump the NDP and
propose the tearing down of legislation against free speech, small business,
excessive taxation, duplication of federal power, and the craven power
seeking party cronies in Ottawa (of ALL 3 parties, plus of course Uncle
Preston). Social activism that involves levels of government is ultimately
a waste of money (has all those $billions REALLY helped Atlantic Canada).

> An asinine and misleading cheap shot.  If you don't like the NDP, feel
> free to insult us for being RadLesbianPeacenikCommiePinkos, but calling
> us Nazis is entirely unreasonable.

No. This is the ultimate sign of truth for the party. They want to LEAD 
people down the garden path of (moderated) socialist ideology instead of
telling government to get of ALL the people's backs (no matter HOW unpopular
it is... that's right, tell the churches to f**k off when they oppose Sunday
shopping). And they use the same populist rhetoric that good old Goebbles
fed Germans (we CARE for the people, yes we do).

> - terry -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "It is our duty to attack unsparingly the miserable system which would
>  make all civilization end in a society of rich and poor, of slaves and
>  slave-owners."
>  - William Morris

100% agreed. Tear down state-protected capitalism and replace it with free
enterprise. Tear down state-supported socialism and replace it with the
good will of real people. When both these systems go (Canada is a mixed
system - half state capitalism, half state socialism) then there will no
longer be rich and poor, slaves and slave owners.
Canada will be at long last free!

-- 

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


"Urk..urk..."
"Apologies accepted, Captian Nida", Darth Vader
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: craigen@ace.acadiau.ca (DOUGLAS CRAIGEN)
Subject: Re: Moving this discussion to "cultural aspects:
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:49:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.181828.10046@cc.umontreal.ca> coady@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Coady Michael) writes:
>From: coady@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Coady Michael)
>Subject: Moving this discussion to "cultural aspects:
>Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:18:28 GMT
>	Given all the charming discussion that has been brought about
>by Laurence Godfrey's depictions of Canada, I suggest that the 
>discussion be moved into an area that is more in line with the name
>of this group, soc.culture.canada.  To wit, let's all enjoy some of
>that fine old Canadian tradition, Laurence Godfrey-light bulb jokes.
>
>For example, how many Laurence Godfreys does it take to change a 
>	light bulb?
>
>Answer: Only one, but 28,000,000 people are required to shoulder the
>	blame for the bulb's having gone out in the first place.
>
>Other contributions are welcome.
>
>Mike Coady
>COADY@ERE.UMONTREAL.CA
>
ok,  how about this
Answer: Laurence Godfrey doesn't change light bulbs, he believes it is 
        better to curse the darkness than to light a candle.
Xref: sparky can.politics:9734 soc.culture.canada:8556
From: coady@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Coady Michael)
Subject: Moving this discussion to "cultural aspects:
Organization: Universite de Montreal
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:18:28 GMT

	Given all the charming discussion that has been brought about
by Laurence Godfrey's depictions of Canada, I suggest that the 
discussion be moved into an area that is more in line with the name
of this group, soc.culture.canada.  To wit, let's all enjoy some of
that fine old Canadian tradition, Laurence Godfrey-light bulb jokes.

For example, how many Laurence Godfreys does it take to change a 
	light bulb?

Answer: Only one, but 28,000,000 people are required to shoulder the
	blame for the bulb's having gone out in the first place.

Other contributions are welcome.

Mike Coady
COADY@ERE.UMONTREAL.CA

Newsgroups: can.politics
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: FTA:  Abrogate?  Public debate 21 November
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 08:52:34 GMT

In article <722133781snx@dale.CAM.ORG> dale@dale.CAM.ORG (Dale Wharton) writes:
>
>                            Annual meeting of the Council of Canadians
>                     20-22 November 1992, National Arts Centre, Ottawa
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>.
>       HEATED DEBATE open to public--Saturday, November 21, 11:30-1:00
>.
>                    The Free Trade Agreement--abrogate or renegotiate?
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                     
                     Or LEAVE IT ALONE ?


>   Invited debaters:
>.
>   DAVE BARRETT     New Democratic Party trade critic (accepted)
>.
>   ROY McLAREN      Liberal Party trade critic (tentative/substitute?)
>.
>   MICHAEL WILSON   International Trade Minister (needs encouragement)


I think John Crispo would be better suited to putting Barret in his place.
He's not exactly likeable, but would be sharp enough to cut through the
muddle-headed crap advocated by the whole Council of Canadians, Bob & Audrey
crowd.


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Subject: Re: ANGLO WHINERS and so-called persecution
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:36:35 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1057

From article <1992Nov18.001254.1@uwovax.uwo.ca>, by 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque):
>      The edited article below is reprinted from the TORONTO STAR, Nov 17, 1992,
> and is written by the best English language reporter in Quebec today, Robert
> Mackenzie. I feel it speaks for itself (some portions emphasized by this
> reader). WARNING: This is a fairly long article, but worth reading!
> 
> 
>              "OPPRESSED" ANGLOS WHINE TOO LOUDLY
> 
>      When I arived in Montreal as in immigrant 36 years ago,
> [.....]
>

No doubt, since he arrived 36 years ago, (i.e before 26th august, 1977) he
would have had no problem placing his kids in English school if he chose
to do so. I wonder what might have happened to his grandchildren. (?)
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui)
Subject: Re: Reform Party vs Quebec (was Reform Party)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 04:13:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov24.010702.1886@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>John LaRocque (4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca) wrote:
>>Deep down they [the RP] want
>>what the other parties want but have failed to achieve with bilingualism...
>>the restoration of the English language as the domininant economic and cultural
>>language of Quebec and the dominance of the Quebec anglophone community.
>
>Can you substantiate this charge? Can you quote Manning or senior RP
>officials saying something along these lines. Or, can you point to RP
>policy as explained in their policy book to support this contention. If
>not, it seems to me that we are left with an *opinion* that is based on
>nothing more than gut feeling.

Jim, you're really a blind follower. Sit back, and consider tearing
up your party card. Yeltsin did, with a flourish too, and look where
he is now. You can do it too, and you may end up like Yeltsin too.

The Reform policy of leaving support for the french language up to the
provinces means that support for the french language in schools and the
public service will simply stop in all provinces except Quebec and
Ontario, and maybe in a small pocket in New Brunswick. Why? Because
support for the french language in the public sector and in education
is largely brought about by the large Quebec vote at the federal
level.  Not a majority, of course, but enough pull to make the feds
realize that the francophone Canadians are Real People too, and _all_
francophone Canadians, no matter what province they are in, are also
Real People, and should be entitled to services and education in the
french language where numbers warrent. Leaving this public policy
decision to the provincial level means that in most cases the
francophones will be so outnumbered in most votes (far far less than
24%) that their voices will be forever drowned out. RP talkes about
central Canadian domination, yet they advocate language majority
domination to the _exclusion_ of the minority language speakers. The
tactic is an old one: divide and conquer. Even Hill & Knowlton doesn't
charge its customers anything to give out that piece of advice.
-- 
Michael MY Hui  ~{~}  myhui@bnr.ca  Ottawa Canada
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca (Pierre Lahaie)
Subject: Deception
Reply-To: plahaie@gel.ulaval.ca
Organization: Dept. Genie Electrique, Universite Laval
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:40:39 GMT

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.

Il est malheureux que le Canada qui semble vouloir faire la promotion de la paix 
dans le monde comporte certains citoyens peu enclins a tolerer les differences,
la justice et la liberte d'expression a l'interieur de ses frontieres.  Ceci semble
etre quelque chose "la liberte d'expression est bonne pour moi, mais les autres 
n'en ont pas besoin lorsqu'ils veulent me critiquer".  Cet etat de chose va a 
l'encontre des droits de l'homme et des droits individuels.  La liberte de dire 
ce que l'on pense possede une limite et cette limite s'approche lorsque des menaces 
et des discours haineux sont proferes et lances.

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


Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Americans on English schools in Quebec (Was: Quebec)
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:05:04 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <BxxBE9.BCA@ireq.hydro.qc.ca> beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard) writes:
>In article <13533@grayt> grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray) writes:
>>Now here is another example for the "Thank You Mr. Clark" file.
>>This person is a perfect example (as if we needed another after
>>Beauregard and Schuck) of someone living in ignorant certainty.
>
>Selective list?  I don't feel as an ignorant certain, but I feel
>that you often are.

I freely admit to ignorance about many things. I freely admit to partial
knowledge of fewer things. I will not admit to certainty.

Certainty is direct indicator of error. You were certian that the dreaded
English exploited the helpless French in Canada before Confederation. When your
error was pointed out to you, did it change your view? No it only
seemed to confirm you in your myth of oppression.

Now this completely apropos of the topic being discussed. Regional isolation of
groups as proposed by Clark in his "Community of Communities" proposal will
foster ignorance. Myths such as the absence of French schooling in CSQ or
the exploitation of BC by a fictional Central Canada will 
spring up. Out of these myths will spring certainty. Certainty breeds 
intolerance.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-- 
i.sinature
Xref: sparky can.politics:9931 soc.culture.canada:8781
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Canadian solutions (was Re: Virginie's TV violence petition)
Followup-To: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: 23 Nov 92 20:03:50 GMT

Socrates (kpicott@alias.com) wrote:
>In <1992Nov20.174736.2104@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson) writes:
>
>>I would agree with Denis, and I don't see a problem with restricting
>>violent TV shows to certain hours (e.g. after 10pm). I consider it quite
>>ludicrous that nudity on TV is a no-no, while murder is A-OK. 
>
>Just out of curiousity; given that you consider this ludicrous, why do you
>not support relaxing the restrictions on nudity, rather than tightening the
>restrictions on violence?  I'll even grant the necessity of adding some sort
>of warning to the beginning of all TV shows that used to fail under the
>restrictions.

Where's the petition? North American TV is bizarre in its attitude to
nudity and I would happily support measures to change the current
situation. I am more concerned about violence than sex because the former
has the potential to severely disrupt my life if it is aimed at me,
whereas the latter, well no need to go into details .....

>Is this a typical Canadian attitude?  If there is a problem we demand the
>government-who-protects-us-all step in and hide it from us?  

I do not agree that limiting violence to, say, after 10pm is hiding the
problem. A relevant analogy would be movies whose rating requires
accompanyment by an adult.

BTW, I consider myself to be quite individualist leaning, but when it
comes to non-adults, which is really what we are talking about here, I do
think that somewhat different standards can be applied.
 
>If so, is this
>attitude the cause of our current economic problems, or the reason that it
>rates as such a great country to live in?

Good question. I suspect that it depends on the issue. So perhaps the
answer is yes & yes.
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Subject: Re: Quebec
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:48:47 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2822

From article <BxvutJ.3tp@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, by beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard):
> 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.
> 

Thank you for the clarification, Denis, I agree with you.

An expression I recall from my childhood(!):-
"People who live in glass houses should not throw stones!"

>>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.  
> 

I have no problem with Denis' comments here, viewed from his perspective.

Living in Quebec is a marvellous way to have one's children learn French
as a second language and become fluently bilingual (even if it isn't the
same language as used in France - but then neither is Canadian or American
English the same as used in England :-) ).

> 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.
> 

Merci! :-)

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Virginie's TV violence petition
Date: 20 Nov 92 16:03:32 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1178

From article <1992Nov19.105641.1@uwovax.uwo.ca>, by 4224_5201@uwovax.uwo.ca (John LaRocque):
>      Have any of you guys seen the petition from a little girl named
> Virginie[?]

Yes, I signed it.

Does anybody want the text posted?

>      According to her petition (which apparantly 1 million morons signed),
> tv is responsible for North American violence. Her elder sister was the
> victim of a violent crime, and according to Virginie, TV is responsible.
> Bullshit!
> 
> [Waffle deleted.]
>

Am I a moron because I believe there is too much gratuitous violence
on TV - and I believe studies that have linked it to violence in
society to one degree or another?

I'd like to see less stylised violence and commercialism in kid's
cartoons too.

I would also like to see domestic gun ownership banned too!

I'd also like to see permanent world peace.

Am I dreaming? :-)

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.politics
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Reform Party
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: 23 Nov 92 05:13:38 GMT

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.
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson
From: chris@mks.com (Chris Retterath)
Subject: Re: Anyone want to buy a used country?
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:09:51 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.132220.21720@bmerh85.bnr.ca> viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca writes:
>With the latest report on trapnsportation costs and user pay, the government

It was a Royal Commission recommendation, not the government. Geesh.
The rest of this article was equally silly.. this is an important issue
we can discuss, but try get some facts right next time, okay?

>What's the solution?  The bottom line seems to be that this country is living 
>beyond its means.  To be blunt, we frankly cannot afford to be a country.  The
>only solution seems to be to sell off our assets so - anyone want to buy a slightly
>used country?

We have expected so much and bitched so loudly at every cut, that we can't
affort new spending. A country that, after a 30 year experiment with
socialized medicine, with the costs spiralling out of control, decides
it should be part of the constitution 'so noone will be able to take it away'.
No wonder we're in trouble.

>Harold Henriksen                    Bell-Northern Research
>email: viking@bmerh694.bnr.ca       Ottawa,Ontario,Canada 
>
>Pillaging and plundering were more fun than programming!
	So who did you rape and murder and steal from?

	Chris Retterath
	MKS Inc



Newsgroups: can.politics