The Shotgun Blog
« Natives and Property Rights | Main | The Profiteers »
Thursday, November 19, 2009
I Think We've Seen This One Before
Like a bad penny, this guy:
The current PQ leader, Pauline Marois, was asked the other day if she's worried about what Parizeau will have to say in his book, La souveraineté du Québec: Hier, aujourd'hui et demain, which hits stores a week before a PQ national council meeting in Montreal to be attended by péquistes from across Quebec.
"I do not fear Mr. Parizeau's book," Marois told reporters. "It's about sovereignty. We need people to continue to reflect and feed us ideas on sovereignty. I work closely with Mr. Parizeau. We speak regularly and I have a very positive relationship with one of the particularly great leaders of our political party."
Traitors betraying each other. Bleak comfort, yet comfort.
Posted by Richard Anderson on November 19, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Nothing at all traitorous about self determination for all peoples; it's actually a human right as enumerated by your precious UN. It's also basic justice, natural law if you will.
People should not be compelled to be part of a unioin they do not wish to be part of - that's liberty 101 and I'm surprised that I have to explain that to you.
Canada is not a country, Parizeau was right. It is an anachronoism of colonialism. Conceived as a land speculation scheme, barely populated, relatively few move here and stay here, in light of our open immigration policy. A lack of both freedom and order abounds. It's just not a very good country, nor is it practiable to throw together people from across a continent into an arrangement with strangers.
Today, the French Canadians, tomorrow, who knows? Anglo-Canadians have an airtight case to have their own homeland and perhaps Jewish Canadians and Black Canadians will someday too. Why force them to live amongst white people they clearly despise and blame for everything that is wrong in the world? That goes double for the Indians.
Lots of land here in Canada, eh? Think big, my reactionary friend, and update your Bobby Gimby era narrative, it is a tad dated.
Posted by: Self Determination For All | 2009-11-19 9:46:44 AM
SDFA:
If Canada is all that bad, then where are you going to go?
Maybe you could camp out in Parizeau's back yard then.
Hope you can speak French.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-19 2:10:25 PM
SDFA, you cannot have self-determination while depending on others to support you financially, just like the kid who is financially dependent on his parents cannot claim independence.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-11-19 2:37:23 PM
Sorry, boys, SDFA's got it right. It isn't treason to advocate lawful change. And he won't have to go anywhere. Canada will do the going. The people and the country stay right where they are.
You really should figure out what country you live in sometime. This cheap fake Yank shit gets tiresome.
Posted by: ebt | 2009-11-19 2:44:51 PM
ebt, no one stated it is treason to advocate what you call lawful change, in fact nothing is preventing Quebec from separating and paying its own way except the Quebec people.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-11-19 4:22:48 PM
ebt: "You really should figure out what country you live in sometime. This cheap fake Yank shit gets tiresome."
Please explain this otherwise incomprehensible statement for us will you?
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-19 7:54:24 PM
If Quebec wishes to split from Canada, let it. I'm assuming that the rest of Canada will ending the handouts however.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-11-20 5:09:40 AM
Charles,
If Quebec was an island off the east coast, I suspect we would already have seen the back of them, one way or another. The thing is that Quebec is in central Canada. The economic heart of the country is the Windsor to Quebec City corridor. Do you really want to set up a border crossing at the Ottawa river? Particularly given the atavistic socialists that dominate the PQ?
Posted by: Publius | 2009-11-20 7:21:22 AM
It's time to end Quebec's government blackmailing of Canada. Time for one final Referendum. If Quebec decides to leave they can make their own currency, recruit their own army and make their own Olympic team.
Posted by: Doug Gilchrist | 2009-11-20 9:36:05 AM
We had one in 1980 another in 1995. The way I see it, if the Quebec separatists keep on having referendums, eventually they will get their "50 % + 1" majority. Unfortunately, that will be the end of it.
Referendums remind me of games children play. They will play until they win, and then throw the board away. Never mind that close to 50 % of the Quebec voters will have chosen to remain Canadians.
Posted by: Nothing New Under the Sun | 2009-11-20 2:07:09 PM
"Never mind that close to 50 % of the Quebec voters will have chosen to remain Canadians."
Never mind the other half of the population never stop fighting in 300 years for achieving a long due country that represent themselves.
Never mind you're all pretty good at blaming the Libs for the Adscam but you never have the balls to address the shameful goal of it, the anti-democratic aspect of it or the anti-democratic Clarity Act invented by Stephen Harper.
Never mind the fact that Canada is always present on the world’s stage to defend the right of auto-determination of plenty of new states but fails to address the same back home.
Never mind you get all wet each time there's a language issue involving anglos but I never saw any of you mentioning my grand-father was making less based on his ethnicity here in “Nouvelle-France” or the fact he was forbidden to exchange in French with others at his workplace.
None of you is willing to have an honest debate when Québec is the subject and none of you have any credibility addressing issues like freedom and liberties right after you paint indépendantistes as “traitors”.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-21 7:14:27 PM
"Never mind that close to 50 % of the Quebec voters will have chosen to remain Canadians."
Never mind the other half of the population never stop fighting in 300 years for achieving a long due country that represent themselves.
Never mind you're all pretty good at blaming the Libs for the Adscam but you never have the balls to address the shameful goal of it, the anti-democratic aspect of it or the anti-democratic Clarity Act invented by Stephen Harper.
Never mind the fact that Canada is always present on the world’s stage to defend the right of auto-determination of plenty of new states but fails to address the same back home.
Never mind you get all wet each time there's a language issue involving anglos but I never saw any of you mentioning my grand-father was making less based on his ethnicity here in “Nouvelle-France” or the fact he was forbidden to exchange in French with others at his workplace.
None of you is willing to have an honest debate when Québec is the subject and none of you have any credibility addressing issues like freedom and liberties right after you paint indépendantistes as “traitors”.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-21 7:16:27 PM
Marc said: "Never mind you're all pretty good at blaming the Libs for the Adscam but you never have the balls to address the shameful goal of it, the anti-democratic aspect of it or the anti-democratic Clarity Act invented by Stephen Harper."
Mr. Harper was not in office in 1998 when Bill C-20 (the Clarity Act) was first tabled. The sitting PM at that time was a Quebecois and a Liberal. In a June 2003 interview with La Presse, Jean Chretien said that the Clarity Act is one of the things in his political career of which he is most proud.
Marc, you would gain a lot more traction with your arguments on this board for a separate Quebec if you would stop hallucinating and produce some correct facts.
You really should read Bill C-20 one of these days, as it lays the groundwork for the lawful secession of Quebec from Canada. Both Quebec and Canada are nations of laws, therefore a process is required.
Marc said: "Never mind you get all wet each time there's a language issue involving anglos but I never saw any of you mentioning my grand-father was making less based on his ethnicity here in “Nouvelle-France” or the fact he was forbidden to exchange in French with others at his workplace."
Once again you are long on emotion but short on facts. What was your grandfather's occupation? What was his level of education? Did it ever occur to you that there might be a valid reason for the use of a single language in the workplace, such as safety? Air traffic controllers and piloting an aircraft come to mind as two examples, and to be sure there are many more.
My sources tell me that back in the day in Quebec, business owners were pretty good at abusing pretty much everyone, both Anglo and French.
Without more information, it is hard to commiserate with what you are saying here.
Marc said: "None of you is willing to have an honest debate when Québec is the subject and none of you have any credibility addressing issues like freedom and liberties right after you paint indépendantistes as “traitors”."
To be honest, I thought that the use of the word 'traitor' by the original poster was a little too strong perhaps. However, it is his opinion and he is entitled to his point of view, just as you are.
Actually it is you who cannot have an honest debate about Quebec. As soon as someone disagrees with you, you fly into a rage, spew emotinal nonsense ande insult, all without any kind of logical retort or question.
As I have said before Marc, you need to get out and see the world. Maybe then you can see that the demagoguery you follow is weak sauce indeed.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-21 11:51:02 PM
Ed,
A short research on Harper would have provide you with enough information to understand he was a key player in the creation of Bill C-20.
Maybe if you were better equipped before entering a debate, you wouldn't look like the fool you are.
My Grandfather was working on the docks.
No safety issue was at stake and everyone know french was forbidden at work across the province in those days.
Moreover, it dosen't take a genius to know before Lévesque, French speaking Québécois were less paid than any ethnic groups except those from the First Nations.
I have been debating here for more than 4 years and its about the second time I see you around.
I am a bit suprised to see you think you know me that well but at the light of your arguments, you just don't have a clue don't you...?
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-22 4:15:19 AM
Marc said: "A short research on Harper would have provide you with enough information to understand he was a key player in the creation of Bill C-20."
You must be referring to the tenure of Mr. Harper as an officer of the National Citizens Coalition, who as such had the ear of many commentators in the media. He continued to voice his opinions on constitutional matters during this time. It is hard to say what influence he actually had on the contents of Bill C-20, but I would submit it was less than key, and he was certainly not the "inventor" as you have stated. Nice to know you have identified someone who is diametrically opposed to your opinions.
Marc said: "...and everyone know french was forbidden at work across the province in those days. Moreover, it dosen't take a genius to know before Lévesque, French speaking Québécois were less paid than any ethnic groups except those from the First Nations."
I am sure there were many iniquities that needed to be righted in Quebec society at the time. Like most injustices anywhere, they are mostly directed at the people who work with their hands, who are undereducated and poor. In other words, people who are least able to defend themselves.
Thanks for supplying us with a few more details finally.
Marc said: "I am a bit suprised to see you think you know me that well but at the light of your arguments, you just don't have a clue don't you...?"
Marc,
I would not know you to see you, but you are not that hard to tell at all.
I have been observing your style of debate for about a year now, and have finally decided to respond to some of your more ridiculous statements and opinions.
My analysis of your debating style still holds. Drop 90 percent of the emotional content of your posts, and then maybe there can be a discussion.
By the way, I have several clues to spare. Obviously you are in need of more than a few yourself.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-22 10:36:36 AM
“My sources tell me that back in the day in Quebec”
Good for you Ed.
…or should we call you Special Agent Ellison?
Don’t take it too much personal this time Ed but I’ll stick with my original version which is: this federation holds us down and prevents we reach our full potential and development.
Anti-séparatisss like you and Publius can’t access Québec’s Culture directly so you present yourselves with second hand information provided to you with the legendary bias of English Canada while I live and love it; just like my ancestors before me.
Stephen Harper is hunting Québec separatisss since the days he was too poor to buy a complete and he’s now Prime Minister. I don’t feel he’s “opposed to my opinions”...I understand he's a threat with constitutional powers.
Why frequently implied I or Québec separatissss are not open to the world?
Everywhere you go you meet with Quebecers and half the time, they are.
If not, there’s a good chance they become ones while away; just like preeminent others.
Plenty of Québec citizens with foreign backgrounds are as well.
I’ve backpacked the world myself and fraternised with people of every nations.
I agree with most ideas promoted by the Libertarian philosophy.
I like fiscal conservatism even if I’m not an asshole and understand the basis of universal healthcare, among other things.
I don’t differ this much with most here when Freedom is the issue except I can’t really care until it will be applicable to the Country of Québec.
“Nice to know you have identified someone who is diametrically opposed to your opinions.”
How about the two of us Ed?
I don’t see you chasing other bloggers far worst than me on the pretence of having trouble with their emotional side? You’re the one chasing me and at the light of your reactions; you clearly appear to me as someone having trouble with anger management.
I’m sure I’m not the first one to tell you...
But it doesn’t mean we cannot be friends just because you disgracefully think you’re better than me, Asshole.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-22 11:52:24 PM
Marc said: "Don’t take it too much personal this time Ed but I’ll stick with my original version which is: this federation holds us down and prevents we reach our full potential and development."
More dreaming from Marc. This federation pays your way. Canada pays enormous amounts of money to cover your deficits every year. Years of instability have driven a lot of business out of the province. More instability will repeat the process. Your dream requires cash not more dreaming to come to fruition.
Marc said: "Anti-séparatisss like you and Publius can’t access Québec’s Culture directly so you present yourselves with second hand information provided to you with the legendary bias of English Canada while I live and love it; just like my ancestors before me."
Not a special agent at all Marc, although I can't speak for Publius. I first visited Quebec in 1972 as a young man. I have lived and worked in Quebec. My sister married into a Francophone family from Quebec City many years ago, and I am presently hooked up with a girl from Pointe Claire. Many of my friends are expat Quebecers, French and English. In the last year I have been in Quebec for over 6 weeks. Spent any time anywhere else in Canada yourself recently?
Here are a few clues for you in case you haven't picked up on them:
-I am not opposed to the self-determination of the Quebec people to have their own country.
-I am opposed to the blackmail and usury that the politicians of Quebec have visited upon the rest of Canada for far too long.
-I am opposed to any linguistic group in Canada having their civil rights abrogated by another group.
Marc said: "I don’t see you chasing other bloggers far worst than me on the pretence of having trouble with their emotional side? You’re the one chasing me and at the light of your reactions; you clearly appear to me as someone having trouble with anger management.
I’m sure I’m not the first one to tell you..."
The pretext you presume is wrong, buddy. I chase you because your logic is flawed, you are a chauvinist, a racist, and a self-admitted denier of civil rights, and worst of all a hypocrit. You cry piteously at all the wrongs and iniquities visited on you, then you turn around and do the same things you complain about to another group of people and think that is OK.
Oh, and I haven't taken any of your insults personally. I have been called worse by better people than you.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-23 10:26:47 AM
"You cry piteously at all the wrongs and iniquities visited on you, then you turn around and do the same things you complain about to another group of people and think that is OK."
"to another group of people"
eh eh...nice try!
Not "another group" Ed, the only one responsible of all the wrongs done to mine.
Congrats Ed !
With your vast knowledge of Québec's Culture, You might just have qualified for a job as one of those Québec's experts for the National Post!
"I chase you because your logic is flawed, you are a chauvinist, a racist, and a self-admitted denier of civil rights, and worst of all a hypocrit."
When you'll be less busy thinking so highly of yourself Ed, you might have the time to catch up simple concepts like second degree humour, for instance.
"This federation pays your way"
I think we both agree on that as I clearly stated up above.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-24 4:18:37 AM
Marc said: "Not "another group" Ed, the only one responsible of all the wrongs done to mine."
What wrongs are these Marc? Specifically, what has Canada, and/or the Anglos in Quebec, done to you? Once again, you make a claim and supply no information.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-24 8:06:07 AM
You see Ed,
There are people like that who will always refuse to understand regardless the quantity and quality of informations provided to them.
Just to be fair play or to show you I'm not the evil and badly educated man you would like me to be just because I'm a separatisssss, I'll simply say that's because you don't listen carefully.
If you truly become interested one day, an other way for you to learn the obvious would be to learn french and start educating yourself from another but accurate perspective; a thing done by many who now proudly call themselves Québécois and even sometimes, separatissssss.
You could then start educating properly demagogues like Publius who has the nerves to then talk about Freedom.
...but I don't really live inna Technicolor dream and you'll keep being an arrogant personage convinced he has all the answers.
*
"Specifically, what has Canada, and/or the Anglos in Quebec, done to you?"
Well...a son.
How's that for a start?
See...I can't be THAT bad; at least, not until I start hitting him after all English words coming out of his mouth like it's happening in your fairy tales.
Have a nice week, and life Ed.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-24 9:46:04 AM
Marc,
I never said you were evil, merely misguided.
There is nothing wrong with dreaming, but if you want to create something that will last, you need to be sure the foundation is just and fair.
Something for you to contemplate.
Have a good one yourself.
Posted by: Ed Ellison | 2009-11-24 10:00:03 AM
Hi,
You've reach Marc's voicemail.
Please don't feel the need to leave a message.
I am presently dreaming of creating something that will last, something with a foundation that is just and fair. Unfortunately, there are no examples available on this continent so we won't call you back as soon as we can.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-11-24 11:28:40 AM
@Marc
Great rebuttal.... /sarcasm off
Posted by: Nothing New Under the Sun | 2009-11-27 5:58:12 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.