Man in bathrobe attempts to shoot Quebecois Premier - Polidicks

[QUOTE=thisispain;37556275]Florence, what do the Quebecois have to gain from gaining sovereignty?[/QUOTE] Right now Québec has basically no effect on Canadian politics and since we're more left-winged it would liberate us from the Conservatives. And it's also a matter of identity, people want it because they feel so different from the rest of the Canada that they really want to separate from it. It's funny because I see a lot of Canadians being all like "If they separate then it will be a good riddance!".

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37556322]For people who enjoy firearms as a hobby it is. Thankfully it seems like the media is keeping its cool and as far as I've seen haven't talked about guns at all, just the incident itself. Which is how it should be.[/QUOTE] wait a minute people enjoy guns as a hobby? well we can't possibly have gun control then, i mean can you imagine what would happen if somebody's hobby was taken away from them? that's worse than death imo.

[QUOTE=Cl0cK;37556981]Right now Québec has basically no effect on Canadian politics and since we're more left-winged it would liberate us from the Conservatives. And it's also a matter of identity, people want it because they feel so different from the rest of the Canada that they really want to separate from it. It's funny because I see a lot of Canadians being all like "If they separate then it will be a good riddance!".[/QUOTE] So you don't get your way in federal election so you want to rage quit the country?

Didn't that guy have like a tank with a picture of Mickey Mouse on it? [QUOTE=Aman VII;37557144]So you don't get your way in federal election so you want to rage quit the country?[/QUOTE] Yes, I'd love to rage quit the country to get more socially progressive political parties that has any chances to win.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557120]wait a minute people enjoy guns as a hobby? well we can't possibly have gun control then, i mean can you imagine what would happen if somebody's hobby was taken away from them? that's worse than death imo.[/QUOTE] I can go on but I'd rather not derail the thread into a gun control debate with someone who has precedent of being retarded.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37557161]I can go on but I'd rather not derail the thread into a gun control debate with someone who has precedent of being retarded.[/QUOTE] but i agree with you! i mean if you really weigh the positives and the negatives, people being shot to death is bad but i mean its definitely not as bad as you not having an expensive hobby on the weekends

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557167]but i agree with you! i mean if you really weigh the positives and the negatives, people being shot to death is bad but i mean its definitely not as bad as you not having an expensive hobby on the weekends[/QUOTE] God damnit you've unleashed the beast. [B]edit:[/B] actually fuck it, no I'm not even gonna respond to you cause I know its going to end up with a page of just you and me going back and forth

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557167]but i agree with you! i mean if you really weigh the positives and the negatives, people being shot to death is bad but i mean its definitely not as bad as you not having an expensive hobby on the weekends[/QUOTE] Any nutjobs can find guns and kill people with it. There's still a gun registry in Québec so I don't even see why people want to start that debate really. Sure guns are bad though, I agree but it's pointless to argue on this.

[QUOTE=Cl0cK;37557150]Didn't that guy have like a tank with a picture of Mickey Mouse on it? Yes, I'd love to rage quit the country to get more socially progressive political parties that has any chances to win.[/QUOTE] Okay so you are disenfranchised with Canada on a federal level and feel like it doesn't suit your political ideas along with a large portion of Quebec, I get that. But how is trying to form your own country going to fix this? Quebec yearly guzzles down federal handouts, how in hell is the new country Quebec supposed to sustain itself?

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37557206]God damnit you've unleashed the beast. [B]edit:[/B] actually fuck it, no I'm not even gonna respond to you cause I know its going to end up with a page of just you and me going back and forth[/QUOTE] in the last gun debate thread i posted countless examples of gun control curbing overall violence in america, which was completely ignored in favor of "but criminals will still have weapons". apparently the concept of decreasing the supply of weaponry and making their acquisition more difficult completely eludes you because you have this fanatical idea that even with tighter regulation on the sale and trade of firearms, the possible confiscation of firearms and an overall non-firearm-friendly environment in the country, the only people that will be affected are you and your local shooting range. the real question should be why do you need a literal killing machine in the first place, not why SHOULDNT you. im not asking for an all out gun ban, i'm asking for common sense regulation and the outlawing of weapons and accessories that are unnecessarily adept at killing people without any justification further than "but it looks cool and is fun to shoot!" [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] here in arizona i can go to the gun show and buy an AK variant without showing ID or filling out any paperwork. totally legal and don't bother saying "no you cant!" because i've watched it happen in front of me plenty of times. i think that should raise a few fucking red flags [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] the worst part about the gun nut shit is that your guys' main concern is "b-but my hobby.. my precious hobby..". if there was even a remote fucking chance that some gun control laws would help relieve violent crime in the united states, it quickly outweighs the benefit of you having a hobby

1/4 of Quebec's yearly revenue is the federal government just handing them money and the costs in billions is continuously rising. To be fair the federal support to other provinces is also rising but Quebec still has the 2nd highest "upkeep" costs with Ontario leading shortly ahead. But, 26% of Quebec's revenue is federal money while only 16% of Ontario's is.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37557301]Okay so you are disenfranchised with Canada on a federal level and feel like it doesn't suit your political ideas along with a large portion of Quebec, I get that. But how is trying to form your own country going to fix this? Quebec yearly guzzles down federal handouts, how in hell is the new country Quebec supposed to sustain itself?[/QUOTE] The Quebec province is actually 3 times the size of France, and Rich with natural resources such as wood and minerals, Also the country develloped an expertise in hydroelectricity, with our gouverment owned electric compagny selling a good part of its excess to the US and the rest of Canada. Its also makes 23% of Canada's total population.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557314]in the last gun debate thread i posted countless examples of gun control curbing overall violence in america, which was completely ignored in favor of "but criminals will still have weapons". apparently the concept of decreasing the supply of weaponry and making their acquisition more difficult completely eludes you because you have this fanatical idea that even with tighter regulation on the sale and trade of firearms, the possible confiscation of firearms and an overall non-firearm-friendly environment in the country, the only people that will be affected are you and your local shooting range. the real question should be why do you need a literal killing machine in the first place, not why SHOULDNT you. im not asking for an all out gun ban, i'm asking for common sense regulation and the outlawing of weapons and accessories that are unnecessarily adept at killing people without any justification further than "but it looks cool and is fun to shoot!" [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] here in arizona i can go to the gun show and buy an AK variant without showing ID or filling out any paperwork. totally legal and don't bother saying "no you cant!" because i've watched it happen in front of me plenty of times. i think that should raise a few fucking red flags [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] the worst part about the gun nut shit is that your guys' main concern is "b-but my hobby.. my precious hobby..". if there was even a remote fucking chance that some gun control laws would help relieve violent crime in the united states, it quickly outweighs the benefit of you having a hobby[/QUOTE] I'll give you the courtesy of replying before I ignore list you. There is no evidence -lets reiterate-[I] no evidence[/I] gun control correlates to a decrease in crime. Remember that Federal Assault Weapons Ban that lasted 10 years? Literally did fucking nothing other than annoy legal gun owners and hurt the gun manufacturers economically. Hell you live in Arizona of all places you should know this. States with less gun control have less crime overall. I'm not saying this is directly related but at the very least it shows gun control does not curb crime. Yearly it seems people are becoming more and more aware that gun control really doesn't solve anything and it's nice to see that people are waking up but as you prove by posting there are still enclaves of misinformed people who are terrified of firearms. [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sirias;37557406]The Quebec province is actually 3 times the size of France, and Rich with natural resources such as wood and minerals, Also the contry develloped an expertise in hydroelectricity, with our gouverment owned electric compagny selling a good part of its excess to the US and the rest of Canada. Its also has the heaviest taxes in Canada.[/QUOTE] I fail to see how having the heaviest taxes is a good thing. I'll give you the energy production and lumber industry though.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37557417]I'll give you the courtesy of replying before I ignore list you. There is no evidence -lets reiterate-[I] no evidence[/I] gun control correlates to a decrease in crime. Remember that Federal Assault Weapons Ban that lasted 10 years? Literally did fucking nothing other than annoy legal gun owners and hurt the gun manufacturers economically. Hell you live in Arizona of all places you should know this. States with less gun control have less crime overall. I'm not saying this is directly related but at the very least it shows gun control does not curb crime. Yearly it seems people are becoming more and more aware that gun control really doesn't solve anything and it's nice to see that people are waking up but as you prove by posting there are still enclaves of misinformed people who are terrified of firearms.[/QUOTE] [url]http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2003/08/11/0811/[/url] im not terrified of firearms lol i shoot regularly, i just have this strange notion that people's lives are worth more than my hobby

Yea that was silly on my part, taxes are one of the reasons some quebecers wants to seperate from Canada

[QUOTE=Florence;37556004]Oh boi, here we go... Since your vision seems to have been shaped by the raging ideologues at the Gazette and other intellectual frauds that dissert on matters they barely understand relating to Quebec, I don't think citing books (FRENCH BOOKS THE HORROR!) will help you. I could probably engage in ad hominem attacks against "English Canada" and make a convincing case that Canada has no historical or moral authority over Quebec. and that at worst, its press has engaged in slanderous behavior for decades. I could do that Calling Marois a bigot, or calling the PQ bigots, seems to be the new trend. Well, not really, the PQ since its foundatin has been the victim I read the English papers in Quebec and it seems to be a common theme. However, when you read the French press, it never comes up. In fact her views are deemed perfectly acceptable within a democratic society and calling her a bigot would earn snickers and mockery even for centre-right and moderate right-wing Francophone federalists. The "evidence" presented as proof of her bigotry is mockable and often relies on ad hominem attacks on her policies and incomprehension of socio-political context particular to Quebec. And, of course, the good old double standard that comes into play. Let us be clear: Quebec and Canada are culturally different. We speak different languages, we have a different (although shared) history, we have different politics that Canada as seen in the previous federal election and the massive anti-Harper vote. In short, we have a different way of looking at things. Everything separates us as a people whether you want to believe it or not. I speak as a perfectly bilingual Quebecer, a sovereignist, a lover of cultures, and most of all, a citizen of the world. Believe me when I say I have no respect for bigots of any kind. Marois and the PQ are not bigots -- and I say this not as her little soldier since, politically, I find her and her party rather dull and predictable. My sympathies go to the further left-wing sovereigntist parties Quebec Solidaire and Option Nationale. Another note for people unfamiliar with Quebec politics: federalist parties, who wish to not separate from Canada, are right-wing, with the sovereignist parties being centre-left (PQ) and left-wing (QS, ON). Let me go over this point by point: 1) Racist? Hate to remind you, but they are many immigrants who are part of the PQ and that ran as candidates. Or are you saying Anglo-Saxons are now a race? [b]Hey, I have a black friend that allows me to say bad things about black people. The PQ make it fairly obvious they hate anyone who doesn't speak French to the point of nearly prohibiting them from not speaking French. Fairly racist to me.[/b] 2) Wrong, she isn't making an exception here. She wants to ban overt religious symbols; if you have a necklace with a Crescent moon for example, that's fine. The cross of the Quebec Parliament will stay as a "cultural symbol" (well, it is) -- and mainly because Catholics around and in Quebec City if we removed it. Quebecers just shrugged because we don't have high regards for the Roman Catholic Chruch in general and have an apathy towards those subjects. Bonus: The main representative of the policy of Secularism for the PQ is Djemila Benhabib (who sadly wasn't elected), an immigrant of Algerian descent, a militant secularist, an Atheist and an activist against the brutality of fundamentalist Islam. [b]Militant secularist? I'm not sure that's even a term, unless she wants to violently oppress overt displays of religion. And laicism borders on oppressing religion, as it bans any outward, public display of religion, which I remind you is unconstitutional.[/b] 3) Yes, so? French is the only recognized language of Quebec, yet today there are many places in Montreal where you go into the store and they go "Sorry, I don't speak French." To think someone can never learn one ounce of French in a province where it is the official language gets our knickers in a twist. We sort of expect people we welcome into our society to show us respect -- maybe that's a French quirk, if you will. The "ban" is a measure to get people to learn French (and we offer many courses as part of our immersion programs). [b]Federally, the COUNTRY recognizes two official languages, and as such Quebec is required to provide federal services in both languages. Prohibiting an English speaker from even lobbying or meeting with the government, when English is one of the country's two official languages, is again unconstitutional. I can understand not being eligible to run, but not eligible to contact, ridiculous.[/b] References: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_the_French_Language[/url] [url]http://www.immigration-quebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/french-language/learning-quebec/index.html[/url] 4) She backed away from the measure, mainly because of criticism from sovereignist themselves -- and hysterical reactions from the unilingual Anglophone press who had fun with Godwin's law -- but never did she get labeled a racist, xenophobe, bigot, etc. The problem she wanted to target was the fact that in Montreal, there are many city council representatives who can't even interact with their citizens because they don't know the OFFICIAL, MAJORITY LANGUAGE OF THE PROVINCE. [b]And the OFFICIAL, MAJORITY LANGUAGE of the country is English, as stipulated in the constitution anyone who speaks at least one of the two official languages is eligible for public office. How would you feel if the federal government mandated knowing English to run for a seat as an MP, because most of the rest of the country speaks only English? That's how anglophones feel in Quebec.[/b] 5) Again, am I supposed to feel appalled? From kindergarten to high school, French is the language of tuition (with some exceptions, see the wiki article). However we've seen that French is then neglected and unlearned by Anglophones who immediately jump to English Cegeps and who won't bother with French anymore since they can live without it in Montreal and its surroundings (where the majority of Anglos live in Quebec; you won't see one in Beauce!). Not to mention their friends and social circles which won't be conversing in French, that's for sure. We feel that for Anglophones to fully intergrate into our society, this extra step is needed to have solid roots for bilingualism for the historical Anglophone community. [b]They do that because they recognize they'll never get anywhere in life outside of Quebec in North America because Quebec is an island of a different language. That, and knowing more than one language opens tons of opportunities, notably in the job field. Many French Quebecois were saying they use an English CEGEP to perfect their English to help them communicate with the rest of the continent. We don't ban people who didn't learn French in Ontario from attending an all-French or French-Immersion school, and I'm sure if we tried people would be put in arms, but apparently language suppression is okay in Quebec.[/b] 6) So? She supported the students against a 75% hike on tuition fees that was given out by a mafia-affiliated government who has one of the worst track records in Quebec history regarding economic responsibility. Yet they were asking students to pay up when they let their friends have tax cuts. We have the lowest tuition fees in North America and that's a great achievement. We believe in progressive policies as a people. Don't say that her supporting the students was a negative -- at least she wasn't an ideologue like Charest who never conceded anything in the negotiations with the students and never admitted to any wrong in his handling of the crisis. Good for Marois that she has cancelled the hike like a responsible stateswoman should. [b]She supports an unsustainable system that's going to drive the economy of the province into horrid debt, and a bunch of entitles brats can't bother to get a minimum-wage job to be able to pay the minimalist price tuition would still be at. I have no sympathy for those protesters, and foresee the low tuition fees being raised eventually anyways once even the PQ realize finally that they're unsustainable.[/b] Reference: [url]www.liberaux.net[/url] 8) Les criss de ceparatisssss grr grr 7) Okay now you're just being silly. Discriminate against the Natives? You mean how the Quebec government actively teaches them their ancestral language unlike many parts in Canada? [b]And yet most of them learn English so they can deal with most of Quebec and all of the rest of the country, rather than learning Inuktitut, French, and English. They'd be suppressing the voice of the natives in the legislature by barring anyone who doesn't speak French from lobbying/communicating with the government, and ruining the reserves economically by forcing them to learn French rather than English, then barring them from being able to learn English at all.[/b] 9) SECOND CLASS CITIZEN WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK? Okay, I admit it, we love the Nazis and shit. You caught us red-handed bro. Sieg Pauline! [img]http://i.imgur.com/j9Cs2.png[/img] Pleasantries aside, I would like to tell our non-Canadian viewers a little joke. Canadians talking about Quebec is like a Republican talking about women: they think they know it all, but they don't know jack shit. [b]And Quebec is like the spoiled child of the country, already gets more than it deserves yet still isn't satisfied. I don't think you realize that the country of Quebec would be bankrupt within a year.[/b] I will finish with the words of the greatest politician Quebec will ever know: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6niMyWFJza4[/media][/QUOTE] GREATEST POLITICIAN? AHAHAHAHAHAHA, that idiot shat all over the rights and freedoms of anyone not French in that province and caused a mass exodus of businesses out of the increasingly hostile environment in Montreal and into Toronto, something that'll happen AGAIN with Marois in power, again fucking your economy over. After Levesque was dead, most of Quebec quickly realized how horrid of a tyrant he really was. I don't think you realize entirely that much of your "progressive programs" are funded by taxes from Alberta oil and "Equalization payments" handed out by the federal government, money you wouldn't have without the rest of the country. I think that fairly quickly after all your money dried up you'd realize how much you relied on the rest of the country to keep you as spoiled as you are, and you'd quickly see all your great "progressive programs" axed in an attempt to balance your budget, and you'd be struggling to find trade partners for what little you have to trade meaning your economy would absolutely tank, as would your quality of living. Quebec will be a net loser in separation; immigrants will ignore it like the plague, as would businesses, due to the hostile laws, especially surrounding language and likely religion as well, it would lose its main source of income; the rest of the country giving it money, and you'd see mass emigration of businesses and people from the province right before separation. The population would plummet, jobs would plummet, revenues would plummet, and no amount of taxes would be able to make up for it without either axing social programs or declaring bankruptcy, because not only would you still have your provincial debt to deal with, but you'd also be strapped with your portion of the national debt, you'd need to raise and fund your own army, create and back your own currency. I don't think you realize what's involved with making a country in this day and age, especially since you'd be left completely hung out to dry just to prove a point, that you need Canada. Separatism is not economically viable for Quebec, and given how much the rest of the country attempts to accommodate French and how much money the government gives you to help you preserve your "distinct culture," it's not socially necessary either, separatists create fake differences and arguing points to try and contrast the rest of the country to Quebec and paint the federal government as hating and ignoring Quebec culture, it's false. And if the rest of the country hates Quebec, it's not our fault, you did something to piss us off, and in my honest opinion, that something was act like a spoiled baby, you already receive more for your culture than any other province, yet you're still not satisfied, and the rest of the country takes notice. And unfortunately Cl0ck, [quote]Yes, I'd love to rage quit the country to get more socially progressive political parties that has any chances to win. [/quote] They'd be the ones who'd bankrupt a country of Quebec. Not to mention, [QUOTE=Aman VII;37556114]The French lost the colonial war. Great Britain took over the land.[/QUOTE] That gives the federal government the jurisdiction AND authority to govern Quebec, not to mention it VOLUNTARILY joined confederation, because back then they recognized something separatists seem to ignore when they claim Canada hated their culture so much, without Canada there would be no Quebec culture, Quebec and the Maritimes would have been absorbed into the "manifest destiny" that exists south of the border and become Louisiana North, whose culture would be nothing more than a novelty and where the idea of separatism would be considered domestic terrorism in modern America. Without Canada, you'd just be the 51st State in the union, and all your "culture preservation" laws would be unconstitutional (the only reason they're not right now, because they actually are, is thanks to the "notwithstanding clause" in the charter), meaning you wouldn't be able to defend your culture, likely because by now there wouldn't be any of it left. But hey, keep hating the government who's been helping you preserve and advocate your culture by providing the financial means to do so and ignore the fact that American imperialism would have swallowed you whole and annihilated you without us. And you wonder why the rest of the country hates separatists...

[QUOTE=Cl0cK;37556981]Right now Québec has basically no effect on Canadian politics[/quote] What about that 1/4 of parliament that is reserved for Quebec? I understand what you mean in the sense that Quebec can be marginalized in our political discourse and while it is a damn shame, it happens, thanks to the system we use. But to say Quebec has "basically no effect" is wrong. If you line up for MPs, chances are one will be from Quebec. Quebecois MPs are what built the NDP last election and what keep it going today, and there's a decent chance the NDP will take power in 2015, provided the Bloq doesn't surge back into the spotlight. Bear in mind, I'm not Quebecois, I can't truly claim to understand the issues of Quebec, I can only analyze them to the best of my ability from the outside. [quote=Cl0ck]and since we're more left-winged it would liberate us from the Conservatives.[/quote] According to the results of the 2011 election, Newfoundland is generally more left-wing then the rest of the country, should they separate? Or maybe PEI? Having a populace that does not share the political alignment of other parts of the country does not in any way provide justification or cause for separation. It's just different ways of thinking and placing value on different things. [quote=Cl0ck]And it's also a matter of identity, people want it because they feel so different from the rest of the Canada that they really want to separate from it.[/quote] Yeah I'm not Quebecois so I can't comment on public sentiment regarding the feeling of inclusion in Canada but I can say that you guys are one of the cornerstones of our culture and society, from my point of view at least. [quote=Cl0ck]It's funny because I see a lot of Canadians being all like "If they separate then it will be a good riddance!".[/QUOTE] What Canadians? Saying "A lot" means nothing. I personally know nobody who says "Good riddance" in regards to Quebec. Anybody who does is a complete moron. Quebec is one our most important provinces, economically and culturally. Quebec is part of the Canadian identity. Yeah, there are people who say "Fuck them" when separatism comes up, but oh well, that's their opinion, and fuck 'em for it. I for one would be immensely saddened to see on of our greatest provinces leave our beautiful country. The issues of Quebec are endlessly fascinating to me, since I am English Canadian and only have an outsiders perspective on the sentiment in Quebec. I just wish that we could all live in harmony as one people, as Canadians. But hey, maybe the differences between English and French just are too great to reconcile. Maybe a sovereign Quebec is truly the best option for all parties. There's only one way to be certain.

the Quebec debate is confusing and has too many subtleties, let's do the gun debate that one is easy

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557314]in the last gun debate thread i posted countless examples of gun control curbing overall violence in america, which was completely ignored in favor of "but criminals will still have weapons". apparently the concept of decreasing the supply of weaponry and making their acquisition more difficult completely eludes you because you have this fanatical idea that even with tighter regulation on the sale and trade of firearms, the possible confiscation of firearms and an overall non-firearm-friendly environment in the country, the only people that will be affected are you and your local shooting range. the real question should be why do you need a literal killing machine in the first place, not why SHOULDNT you. im not asking for an all out gun ban, i'm asking for common sense regulation and the outlawing of weapons and accessories that are unnecessarily adept at killing people without any justification further than "but it looks cool and is fun to shoot!" [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] here in arizona i can go to the gun show and buy an AK variant without showing ID or filling out any paperwork. totally legal and don't bother saying "no you cant!" because i've watched it happen in front of me plenty of times. i think that should raise a few fucking red flags [editline]6th September 2012[/editline] the worst part about the gun nut shit is that your guys' main concern is "b-but my hobby.. my precious hobby..". if there was even a remote fucking chance that some gun control laws would help relieve violent crime in the united states, it quickly outweighs the benefit of you having a hobby[/QUOTE] I was going to reply to this nonsense, but fuck it. Get the fuck out of the thread if all you're going to do is derail it into a gun control debate.

hey cool your jets canadians are supposed to be polite

[QUOTE=thisispain;37558041]hey cool your jets canadians are supposed to be polite[/QUOTE] Not when we get riled up, usually about hockey or our fellow Canadians or Don Cherry.

[QUOTE=thisispain;37558041]hey cool your jets canadians are supposed to be polite[/QUOTE] Sorry, due to the theft of all that maple syrup I haven't been able to get my government ration of glorious maple tree juice yet, and the lack thereof makes me testy.

actually i just thought of a reason why a Quebec state might not be a good idea the United States hardly considers francophone's human, a French-Canadian state would be considered an instant enemy by the US

[QUOTE=thisispain;37556421]the unbiased voice of reason yes gundevil please do go on[/QUOTE] Oh I'm sorry I'm not allowed to voice my opinion on matters? My bad. At least I actually can understand the topic at hand and debate it. Do you happen to know anything about Quebec or the history around the separatist movements because it all boils down to when the British won and the French lost and the British took control. Also if you want to post a bunch of my comments paste a link to the threads and read what they are all replies to.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;37557513][url]http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2003/08/11/0811/[/url] im not terrified of firearms lol i shoot regularly, i just have this strange notion that people's lives are worth more than my hobby[/QUOTE] liberty is more important than a false sense of security [editline]5th September 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;37558110]actually i just thought of a reason why a Quebec state might not be a good idea the United States hardly considers francophone's human, a French-Canadian state would be considered an instant enemy by the US[/QUOTE] I don't know about where you're from but there's no issues even remotely like that here

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;37557926] Beautiful wall of text [/QUOTE] [img]http://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/emot-canada.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=thisispain;37558041]hey cool your jets canadians are supposed to be polite[/QUOTE] Welcome to the twilight zone.

[t]http://i.imgur.com/emehw.jpg[/t] What kind of idiot cop carries a weapon like that? The magazine should be removed and the weapon cleared, not being carried along loaded. "ew im canadian icky gun"

[QUOTE=Aman VII;37556254]I don't understand what you are trying to say. You said you could make a convincing case that Canada has no historical authority over Quebec when, at least I feel it is pretty blatant that they have. How is flat out conquering the land and owning it not considered authority over it? No comment on the "moral authority" since that shit is subjective to begin with.[/QUOTE] By historical authority, I meant that from the War of Conquest, we have been punted around, humiliated, marginalized, slaughtered, suppressed, and have been treated like that petulant redheaded stepchild no one likes. We didn't even sign the Constitution of Canada itself and every time we opened up the Constitutional issue we were still spat on and rolled in the dirt, then told we are the unreasonable ones. After all this, Canadians that don't know a ounce of French, who haven't even set foot here or even know anything in depth about the history and politics of Quebec, and with the historical perspective of the victors in this fight come and tell me I'm a xenophobe, that I'm a bigot, that I hate English, that I'm a scummy nationalist who holds sympathies with Adolf Hitler... I can't accept. I tend to hold some self-respect for myself and the people who I live with on a daily basis. I respect myself too much to accept slander and lies about my birthplace, my family, my teachers, my idols, my politicians, etc. As for moral authority, I could cite many historical books that show that Canada has been not very kind to us from the Conquest and to now, such as Le Livre noir du Canada Anglais I, II, III, which paints a rather grim moral authority for Canada when it comes to Quebec, especially the typical "Quebec Bashing" accusations of antisemitism, hate of Aboriginals, racism, etc. I will mention a very determining moment in the history of Quebec and tensions between Anglo and Franco ethnic groups by citing a classic: the Burning of the Parliament in Montreal following the Patriote Rebellions and the rape, pillage and slaughter committed by fanatic militiamen during it. The Rebellion Losses Bill wanted to give reparations to the victims. Do you know why then was Parliament burned down when it was brought up? Maybe our good friends at the Gazette can help us out. [quote= Montreal Gazette, "Extra" of April 25, 1849]When Lord Elgin – he no longer deserves the name of Excellency – made his appearance on the street to retire from the Council Chamber, he was received by the crowd with hisses, hootings, and groans. He was pelted with rotten eggs; he and his aide-de-camps were splashed with the savory liquor; and the whole carriage covered with the nasty contents of the eggs and with mud. When the eggs were exhausted stones were made use of to salute the departing carriage, and he was driven off at a rapid gallop amidst the hootings and curses of his countrymen. The End has begun. Anglo-Saxons! you must live for the future. Your blood and race will now be supreme, if true to yourselves. You will be English "at the expense of not being British." To whom and what, is your allegiance now? Answer each man for himself. The puppet in the pageant must be recalled, or driven away by the universal contempt of the people. In the language of William the Fourth, "Canada is lost, and given away." A Mass Meeting will be held on the Place d'Armes this evening at 8 o'clock. Anglo-Saxons to the struggle, now is your time.[/quote] In the burning, we lost one of the great libraries of that time, a collection of Upper and Lower Canada collections. One Canadian historian I can't recall the name of lamented that such an act could only be rivaled by the destruction of the Library of Alexandria. The Gazette has never issued an apology. If you want to have an conversation about specific subjects regarding Quebec and history, I can oblige. War Measures Act, the Mercantile English class and its oppression and humiliation of French workers during the early 20th century, the constitutional question, the role of the Catholic Church in Quebec, and so on. [QUOTE=thisispain;37556275]Florence, what do the Quebecois have to gain from gaining sovereignty?[/QUOTE] When speaking of economics and separation, Canadians tend to repeat myths and fabrications to scare us with the usual boogeymen: You're in Greek levels of debt! You would lose the equalization payments! What about your currency?! THINK OF THE CHILDREN! ANARCHY EVERYWHERE! I'm sure that you have no idea what this means when you're not Canadian. This is simply scaremongering since federalists have lost the argument that Canada can better manage the culture aspect of Quebec -- even the right-wing federalist parties of Quebec are aware that Canada is entirely clueless about us regarding the subject. Even Charest knows, as I remember reading something he wrote when he went around Canada to talk about Quebec (can't remember about what exactly, it was before he was PM in Quebec, maybe during his days at the Progressive Conservative Party at the federal level). He was stunned about the things he heard about Quebec and felt that such ignorance about the province was a determent to Canadian Unity. So the threat of economic turmoil is the main argument against sovereignty. In fact, if we were to separate, our debt would be about the same or less that the average OECD if we factor in our federal assets and the type of debt which we have. Equalization payments is a laughably stupid argument federalist use to either call us welfare queens who leech off Canada or that if we separate we will be ruined without "their money". Again, mythology. We get less out of equalization payments that we put in, and we would be better of to just keep our money in taxes and do what we damn please with it. The currency question is a non-issue: Canada would beg us to keep using Canadian money because if we changed currencies suddenly, that would mean about 25% of Canada's monetary supply is up for sale on the international markets in one fell swoop. Now that would be economic turmoil for you, and hard. Our economy as a country would be strong and would be more or less comparable to a country like South Korea. In case that some reactionary creditors sell our debt on the markets because they fear separation, we currently have the economic tools to buy up that debt sold at a reduced price on the market and, well, literally reduce the debt that way. We also wouldn't have to file two tax reports for federal and provincial taxes and we would save money on costs of bureaucracy. Quebec would also have much more economic tools and would be able to negoticate its own free trade agreements with the world according to its needs and not Canada's. We would have a voice on the world stage and have a seat at the UN like all of the world's sovereign nations. Quebec as a nation are pacifists -- we had the biggest demonstrations against the Iraq war in Montreal that in any city in the world. We hate violence, and when Harper killed the gun registry, we were all disgusted, left and right wing, to the point Charest fought to keep the gun registry data and pretty much no one with political power opposed the move in Quebec. When we see a majority conservative government in Canada that was elected even when we went all-in with the NDP, we feel powerless. Harper for us is a disaster: a denier of global warming, against social progress, a homophobic dirtbag who views gays not worthy of marriage and recognition of love, someone who would gladly limit or outright ban abortion if Canada was as misogynistic as he is, and most of all, he is someone who is an enemy of science with his creationist world view and his antagonism with basic ecology. When we see that this hoodlum is what Canada has to give us, someone who models himself after a war criminal like George Bush, we don't recognize ourselves in that. The Canada which we saw as progressive and pacifist force in the world despite our quarrels, now lets these kinds of guys in with a supreme majority -- and no matter how massively we vote against it, he gets in? Politically, we have every reason to want out of the confederation since Canada has betrayed our most fundamental values, and then Harper goes around the world to represent Canada and be a obstructionist dickwad. And since we are part of Canada, he also represents us, and that's shameful. To quote one Michael Ignatieff, speaking about Quebec and our friends the Scots, "It's a kind of way station — you stop there for a while. But I think the logic, eventually, is independence. Full independence." Or how about Justin Trudeau, son of our "beloved" Pierre, "I always say, if at a certain point I thought that Canada was really the Canada of Stephen Harper - that we were going against abortion, and we were going against gay marriage and we were going backwards in 10,000 different ways - maybe I would think about wanting to make Quebec a country." I could proceed to take on the hysterics in this thread -- who undoubtedly read thrash articles in The Globe and Mail, The Financial Post, The Gazette, and other reactionary publications Mordeclai Richeler would be proud of -- but I have no time to waste with what Levesque called "Rhodesians", those who only live to bash and hate Quebec, who just hate us because we're still here and that Durham's legacy has failed. The irrational hate that burns in your soul is the same which burned Canada's own Parliament all these years ago. Sincerely, go fuck yourselves :) Fun fact: The word Province comes from the Latin Provincia that means "beaten country" and Pro Victis which means "for the beaten".

i asked a very simply question and i get a BIG political essay in response, even if it is concise and to the point... well know i understand the rationale, but what's the reasoning? lots of states have large diverse cultures that can disagree a lot with each other, Belgium being a good example. what makes Quebec different that it simply cannot feel a part of Canada?