CFN – On Saturday, at his sprawling Maple Ponds Equestrian Centre in Williamstown, human rights activist Howard Galganov and his wife Anne hosted a bbq lunch, rally and fundraiser. About 100 invited guests from places such as Cornwall and area, Ottawa, Toronto, Timmins, Montreal, and further afield, enjoyed the burgers, sausages, salads and desserts over conversation. They also received an update on the battle for freedom of expression in Canada.
Galganov rallied the troops with his words: “This campaign has become invigorated … we’re no longer playing defence; we’re playing offence. We’re not going to wait for yet another law to come and take away our rights … We have choices in life and they’re simple. It’s fight or flight. … Don’t allow anyone to ever tell you that you’re a racist or a bigot or anti-French because you’re standing up for your rights to be a majority. … We are 96% of the population and it’s time that we behaved like 96% of the (Ontario) population.”
Galganov was quick to point out that he’s not advocating any kind of a witch hunt and that this isn’t a battle between English and French. He reiterated his previous promise never to support a discriminatory Bill 101 type of law here in Ontario. Identifying the source of the issue, Galganov pointed out that: “There is a small group of Franco activists who are going to do whatever they can to usurp our rights.” It has been noted that, in Cornwall, La Société pour la Promotion du Bilinguisme has been going door to door advising business people of their “obligations under the law.”
He addressed the topic of the recent court ruling in Ontario’s Russell Township and outlined a plan of action to counter it. A group of French language activists in Ontario’s Russell Township (a community of 15,000 near Ottawa) was unsatisfied that only 70% of local commercial establishments displayed bilingual signs (in unilingual English Ontario), so they lobbied municipal Council to force the issue. Amid great controversy, Council passed a by-law by a vote of 3-2, which requires all new exterior commercial signs to be English/French bilingual, with the size and style of lettering being identical in both languages. Seeing this as an unnecessary infringement, two area residents challenged the bylaw. The owner of a radiator repair shop, Jean-Serge Brisson is fully bilingual, but chose to erect a sign that displayed the business name in English and its services in French. Howard Galganov, a bilingual Anglophone had posted a sign only in English. In 2010 the Superior Court of Justice ruled against both men. Subsequently the Court of Appeal ruled that the bylaw does indeed violate citizens’ Charter rights to freedom of expression. Quoting the Supreme Court of Canada, the Appeal court stated that: “Freedom consists in an absence of compulsion.” Incredibly the Appeal court went on to say that the violation was reasonable and justified.
Galganov Dot Com Inc and the Ottawa based Canadians for Language Fairness have joined forces to spearhead a Supreme Court challenge to the Ontario Court of Appeal decision which permits the violation of Non-Francophone Charter rights. The challenge will be on the basis that, by forcing people to use the language of others, the ruling violates section 2b of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which was created to guarantee freedom of expression.
Other planned activities include a campaign whereby full colour glossy brochures are being delivered to businesses in small town Ontario, educating them on the extent to which minority French language rights have trampled on the rights of those functioning in another language in Ontario and possibly soon in the rest of Canada. Here’s a snapshot from the brochure which invites others to join in funding the court battle.
Guests included some members of the allied language rights groups: Canadians for Language Fairness and the local Language Fairness for All as well as some politicians and political candidates. Many “ordinary folk” came out to show their support as well.
Bryan McGillis, Mayor of South Stormont, was in attendance. He agreed to explore the legal implications closely, and may opt to seek the support of his Council to pass a resolution guaranteeing that South Stormont will never introduce a bylaw that takes away from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Further, should South Stormont pass such a bylaw, McGillis will table a motion that the municipality propose to other municipalities that they adopt a similar stance.
The video clip below is included as part of a DVD package which is being promoted by Canadians for Language Fairness as a “how we got into this mess” brief explanation.
Being a gracious host, as part of the gathering Galganov invited guests to enjoy five miles of groomed trails including a picnic area in the pines. Some even got to view it aboard his Kubota and wagons – a ride which rivals many a midway, but cannot be purchased at any price!
I’m sure happy that Howard Galganov and Jean-Serge Brisson have decided to take this issue to the Supreme Court of Canada, as I’m sure it wasn’t an easy decision and also an expensive one ! It should rightly be up to the business owners as to what language to have on their signs; to be in English, French or whatever; with the economy being the way it is nowadays, why should the business have to worry about the extra needless expense on having everything being “bilingual”. It should be “their” choice, not the small group of Franco Activists.
Excellent coverage once more Don, Russell county had no legal right to pass such a law that force people to put up bilingual signs. Ontario is not a bilingual province nor is Quebec
Donations to help Howard fight this can still be made at http://www.galganov.com
– have they reimbursed the 280 thousand for that frivolous lawsuit.
– they were both proven wrong by the courts..what they can’t take no for an answer??
-the courts even said that mr galganov had no business there.. il n’avait pas qualité d’âgir.
– That signs is deceiving. Of course you can print in english in Ontario.
– Hey don, are you a member of languagefairyness ? Why promote such hatred of the french language ?
If the situation were reversed and the French were claiming discrimination then the money to support them would be coming out of the woodwork.
Pat, firstly, the lawsuit was not frivolous. Forcing the French language on the English community is wrong, and you should know that. Would you accept that treatment in Kaybec?
Secondly: They were not proven wrong. Read the ruling. IT DOES infringe on freedom of expression according to the court. But the court used a notwithstanding clause you Francophone are all too familiar with.
Thirdly: Galganov, as a private citizen, had as much right as any English Canadian to protest. Would you prefer he protested in Quebec? HE DID to no avail. Your own John Mary Nadeau is doing the same in NB.
Fourthly, “that signs”
Fourthly, “that signs is deceiving” makes no sense.
Thanks for cutting me off.
Fourthly, if you mean the sign makers are deceiving us, that is not true. You can print in English in Ontario, but NOT only in English if that is your choice. So you are in favour of taking away freedom of choice, like you do in Kaybec?
Finally, you misspelled “fairness” but that is understandable as I do not believe there is a French word for it.
We promote hatred of anglophobes and extortionists such as yourself, who promote French first, last and always regardless of numbers and use English Canada’s money to do so.
Glad to clear that up for you.
Yes dear friends, putting up a sign that simply says, “GENERAL STORE” is ILLEGAL in Russell Township!! Thanks to our government and French radicals, this has been imposed on us. NOT ANY MORE!!!! We are not going to take it. The people are going to stand up and the Supreme Court must do what is right and reverse its decision. It is against our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is against the 96% English majority!!!! Stand up now people before it is too late. All business owners will be forced to take down their signs and put up new ones for 4%.
Hello Patrick Boucher…the Court challenge is not frivolous…he is standing up for OUR rights. I suggest you read Lou’s response or the Court ruling.
The Courts have ruled that, in Ontario, an English or French business is now mandated to have bilingual signage. Your (French) rights have been taken away, as much as our (English) rights.
Even in Quebec, their racists and discriminatory language laws have stripped not only the English minority of their rights but the French majority, as well.
The English majority DOES deserve to be represented in Canada. Our (English) language, rights, culture, heritage and symbols should be celebrated and promoted, as least equally, as your (French) minority…if not more!
On what other planet or civilization would a minority linguistic population be allowed to usurp the rights, language, culture and freedoms of the clear majority??? How and why would the French minority be surprised by this fight? Are you really trying to tell us, with a straight face, that if the shoe was on the other foot you would lie down and roll over? Not bloody likely, am sure as clearly demonstrated by the stance of the French minority against the majority of their fellow Canadians!
Canada is a democracy and should be restored to majority (English) rule instead of being minority (French) governed.
Patrick Boucher, no one is promoting any hatred for the French language ! – Obviously, you can’t read English properly. It’s “Freedom of Expression” that we’re talking about here and that is for everyone . . .
“This determination to maintain a French culture in North America WAS BORN OF DEFEAT”
Enough said… watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sxeQpGasEME
It say’s IT ALL…
–
Oh, and HEY… P. Boucher … WAKE UP and pay attention will you. Class in in session…
HELLO… ???? WAKE UP… Yes you… And you too Stella and the rest of you…
As my wonderfully late great brother would say, “Time to listen up and let the “facts” sink in.
I know, it must be difficult. Especially when you are on the losing end of those “facts”
but, time to sit up straight in your chair and pay attention …
–
FACT: The only side of this “insane situation” (ah hem, the MINORITY SIDE) that openly
promotes hatred or COMPLETE “intolerance” is the French side. Just simply read BILL 101.
Can you honestly not see how the idea of blatantly outlawing the English language
within the “province of Quebec” which (BTW still resides inside a country called Canada)
is COMPLETELY asinine ? Especially while at the same time the same people outlawing
the English language are “demanding” that the French language be given extra weight and power throughout the rest of the country ?
–
C’mon now, I have read your posts and I can see you have some semblance of intelligence.
–
Well, at least enough to know that you MUST be able to admit that there is something wrong with that kind of logic… right ?
–
Thus, I rest my case… So, gum on the tip of the nose and to the back of the class you go.
–
PS: For those who are interested in more info. While watching the “War of Words”
60 minutes video above, if you right click on your mouse and select
“copy video URL” then past that URL into a new internet explorer or firefox browser web page you will get to my YouTube page.
You will then see (right under the video that is playing) the highlighted word edudyorlik.
If you click on that it will show you my page with all the other video’s.
Or, just type edudyorlik into a Google search and the YouTube link is the same page.
Happy watching… 🙂
Oh, and remember, the only thing the “other (minority) side” of this situation have going for them is that they yell just a little bit louder.
So, it’s our turn to raise our cumulative voices and take a stand.
Loud and proud… yeaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh Baby… Yeahhhhhhhhhhh…
Colleen, regarding your question, I believe you will find an example in South Africa. This is no less Apartheid than that situation was. Amazing how we fought against it when it was blacks against whites but not when its Francophones against Anglophones. Racism and discrimination (language apartheid) is alive and well in Canada and supported by the Patrick Bouchers of our country and their Anglophobic cohorts (hello to you John Mary Nadeau and Pauline Marois to name but two; sorry to ignore you, NDPQ leader and citizen of France Tom Mulcair) in Parliament and politics!
Yes, over 30 yrs of French immersion and our children who have graduated from college and university are denied government jobs , jobs in nursing, and many other jobs that require them to write a French exam. I have seen too many of our children leaving to go to the U.S or out west because it’s not about merit and ability; it’s how well you write or speak French and if you’re really French that’s a plus for them. And trillions of dollars have been spent to Francosize Anglos and it’s not working.
Ok lou,
– so i mistakenly added an S.. big woop, I made a spelling mistake. LOL (hi Stella). Thing of it is, you knew I made a typo, and thought It would help your argument by stating it..sorry to say for you..it didnt.
– just stating a fact. M Galganov was in no way affected by the russell sign law, directly or indirectly .. so why was he there ? Just to stir the pot. A Quebecer has no business taking the Russell township to court for something that doesn’t affect him. Just waiting for him to cut a check.. 140 thousand…come on howard pay up.
-languagefairyness complains for nothing…their head honcho and her right hand man complain about bilingualism and they are both bilingual, although they chose not to speak french.. They promote hatred by passing signs that encourage a boycott of french stores…. and mr galganov even goes as far as passing out pamphlets that tell you how to exterminate the french language in eastern ontario.
– nope, not french first…just as long as its available… good enough for me.
and where numbers warrant, the guarantee of service in french..wether it be by sign or by an individual.
Lou could you please provide the link that says the russell township used the notwithstanding clause to institute the sign law. Or is it the Mme Métivier that used it to give the russell township vindication. ? You might be right..i’m just asking for proof.
Patrick Boucher:
Supreme Court proved your Francophone judge Metivier wrong. She is consistently wrong when dealing with anglo-franco language rights, which makes you wonder: is she intentionally biased?
Patrick Boucher, your argument does not hold water for the simple reason that the court was in violation of the Candian Constitution. Besides you have every right as a Metis (Canadien) to move to Kebec and live there where JOUAL (French patois) is the Official Language. What Galganov and Brission were fighting for was their Constitutional Rights, which are not FRIVILOUS as you had the temerity to treat so lightly. Now please pack you bags and move to KEBECKISTAN, because I was forced to do so a long time ago. “Je me souviens” (I remember). It would be pleasure to see you headed towards Kebec. Because you evidently believe in TYRANNY over DEMOCRACY.
Anyone have a slogan tshirt printer in the family?
2B or not 2B, I choose 2B!
I just love how La Société pour la Promotion du Bilinguisme president is an advisor with L’Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario, but does not pressure them into having a bilingual website. L’Assemblée is a big user of taxpayer dollars, and if a group is funded by tax money, is that not something La Société should be striving for?
Real costs of OB;check out this link from Sun News!!!
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1395422849001
Annual Direct Costs of Bilingualism
Federal 1.5B
ON $623M(spends 12x that of Qc-is this not reasonable accommodation??)
NB $85M
QC $50M
AB $33M
BC $23M
MB $16M
SK $9.65M
Total Costs $2.4B/YR
$85 from each Canadian man, woman & child
Source:Fraser Institute
I firmly believe that the 50 million that Quebec receives in OLA funding is reimbursed to Quebec taxpayers via “additional Federal Transfer Payments”. This means that English Canadians could be “footing the bill” for everything.
Freedom of expression and representation by population – 2 issues that Franco rights groups disagree with, both of which should be practiced by a democracy.
MOST just societies would not have a problem with the both of these statements ,and would gladly enforce as just in their societies! Why not in Canada?
Do Franco Canadians not believe just societies? Or is it not in their interests?
Patrick, check the Ontario Appeals Court site
http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2012/2012ONCA0410.pdf
http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2012/2012ONCA0409.pdf
Don’t complain about language fairness people being able to speak French but are not, Air Canada and other court documents can say the shoe is on the other foot more often than not.
Galganov stired the pot in QC and is trying to do the same here… Ughhhh enough of the language issues here.. Worse than in QC
Thank you, Don Smith, for such a well written article that inspired so many positive comments. The reason why Galganov/Brisson lost the case is not because their complaint had no merit but because our courts are filled with activist judges who were appointed by the Liberal government in power for most of the last 45 years. These judges stay there for life so it’s going to take a long time for the Conservative government to replace them. The OLA, if implemented according to the original intent to provide service in the language of choice “where numbers warrant” would not have been a problem. In the hands of French-language zealots who are determined to over-turn the victory on the Plains of Abraham, the policy was corrupted and extended beyond is original mandate with the addition of the clause “the right to work in the language of choice”. This necessitated all management positions to be mandated bilingual (usually a French-speaker) and has led to an over-representation of French-speakers in the public service because, we all know that French-speaking management will favour French-speaking subordinates. We are in the process of finding out who put that clause into the Act because, Lowell Green on the CFRA show last Friday, looked at all the various versions of the OLA and couldn’t find the clause in any of the updated versions. My source is that it was Lucienne Robillard using the instrument known as “Order in Council” to insert that clause, without going through debate in Parliament to do so. If the OCOL ever passes on that information, I will be sure to let you know, Don.
OMG they are coming out of the woodwork today. Thinking the radical activist will soon be able to pay his legal fees……..LMAO He’s no fool and can easily fool the fools……**s**
Yep fabricate stories and throw numbers around, even if it doesn’t make sense………some will believe you….LOL
Thinking we are due for another protest
Stella ,
Not to worry, many protests are being planned – coming to a government institution near you!
****smile****
Pat & Stella with their usual lies, propaganda & verbal diarrhea!
Kim Lian Khoo – You amaze me with your knowledge. Keep up the good work. We need people like you.
Kim Lowell Greene does not support official bilingualism. You’d have much more chances of smelling a fart in a windstorm then have Mr Greene agree with the O.L.A. Its no secret that cfra is a conservative station, and they don’t support francophone rights.
ex: Unilingual judges, Unilingual ¨vérificateur général¨
THese posts regurgitate so much of the language fairness association message, its kinda scary. I hope not all of you are fool by their lies and fabrication.
@Zigzagzoo
I agree well informed .
Thanks Kim
Until you have lost your great job, ( I did ) not because you didn’t speak French, but because you aren’t French, will you ever begin to realise that bilingualsim is only a means to an end.
That end folks is French domination of Canada. Look around and observe what is happening; if it hasn’t touched you yet, it won’t be long before it will.
I once asked a Francophone what “Je me souviens” meant. His response was, “Remember the Plains of Abraham, well it’s our turn now”.
It’s war without arms but armed by a Judicial system that seemingly can twist the law without penance or retribution, and silently supported by the Federal government.
Remember Pakenham, Russell, Cornwall, and not the least Quebec.
ROFLMAO!!!! this is really too funny……..
Well mariah…….thinking many of you have been put to the test, (even by adm of this site) about having proof to back what was being posted……but I guess you don’t remember that. **s** OH OK…….it’s understandable…….LOL
Richard,
DENY,DENY,DENY …….plug your ears so you don’t hear…
That’s how it works, I didn’t hear it so it doesn’t happen.
BY the way CBC is so left NDP/LIEBERALS their religion is BILINGUALISM!
But not for the remaining 97% in Ontario and 83% in Canada!
The fallacy of mandatory bilingualism lies in it’s purported aim, namely to have more Anglos speaking French. It’s not about Anglos speaking French. It’s about POWER.
If at midnight a Fairy waved a wand and everyone in Canada
could speak French and English what would the Francophones do then? What language do you think the people would speak in the morning? Think about it.
Patrick Boucher August 13, 2012 at 12:16 pm: “…and where numbers warrant, the guarantee of service in french..wether it be by sign or by an individual.”
Where numbers warrant. Doesn’t that refer to federal government services?
When Russell Township or the City of Ottawa or the Province of Ontario pay for my business operating expenses and when they assume the risk that I take running a business, then they will have the right to dictate how I operate my business. Until then, BUTT OUT!
Ken you’re not making John Baird jokes now are you? 🙂
making a joke about someones sexual orientation admin is not funny!!
A language can be legislated but a culture cannot be legislated.
Are we heading the same way as the Wallooons in Belgium or the Basque in Spain? What ridiculous nonsense.
Language Police checking Canada’s 10 top airports to see if the minority French language is being ignored. Really, is this Canada or is it a repeat of Germany in the 1930s?
Dot Davies
Mr.Smith,
Even far away I was able to read your article about Cornwall and the language disagreement, as well as Galganov’s BBQ. I appreciate that you took the time to write a lengthy article on the issue.
The issue is not learning a language, but the government’s way of enforcing French. Living under the 1969 Language Act, English is not a part of the $7 billion annual program, so clearly demonstrated by the later day Francophone Graham Fraser. Anyway, thank you. The Czar, Fraser, does not come WEST to tell the immigrants of some 162 languages to learn ENGLISH. Instead he is sending spies to the predominantly private corporations at airports to hear if French is well served.
Regards,
Suan H. Booiman, British Columbia
Whew! Where do I begin after reading both the article itself and all the comments that have been posted up to this point? At least one thing is certain: there is no shortage of preposterousness on the part of those English speakers who cry discrimination and protest against some so-called violations of their rights here.
First of all, let me make some calculation. OK, one hundred guests times twenty-five dollars make… two thousand five hundred dollars. Considering that a bun may cost, say, fifty cents, and a sausage or a piece of ground beef may cost one dollar, each hot dog or hamburger would have cost one dollar and fifty cents. If each person took an average of two (thus, $1.50 x 200), the cost of food alone must have been at least three hundred dollars. Add to that the tents, the barbecue racks, the mustard, the mayonnaise, the ketchup, etc., Howie would be lucky to be ahead much more than one thousand eight hundred dollars. Pretty good.
Of course, I am not really making what I have just said an actual argument. I have read a few recent entries on his blog, and, thus, I am aware that even he realises that such an event would not be enough to help him pay his legal fees and win his cause.
However, now that I have seen his writing, I am convinced more than ever that Galganov will never be happy. Not even if all governments – municipal, provincial, federal – become clearly conservative. Not even if every legislative measure that concretely helps bilingualism or, more specifically, French-speaking communities in the country is abolished. Not even if the size of the government is reduced as much as it could possibly be. By Jove! He might be capable of throwing a tantrum just because too many noodles happen to be to the left in his bowl of Alphaghetti. 😀 He says that he does not want to start a witch-hunt, but I do not believe him. In fact he already started it four years ago when he launched a campaign for the boycotting of ‘‘French-owned’’ shops in the Township of Russell in the wake of its passing the bylaw that he keeps on attacking. He must regularly worship Joseph McCarthy on his grave…
There are many more things that I could say but I really do not want to forget to make a crucial point here. As I understand it, freedom of expression is for private citizens, artists, students, philosophers, militants, politicians; it is not for entrepreneurs, whose main or sole purpose is to make a profit. Normally business owners simply comply with the laws as they are in the municipality, the province or state and the country where they have set shop; if these laws become too difficult to deal with to their liking, they simply make a business decision, which may consist of leaving said town, province or state, or country. However there is always a market and, therefore, there will always be a good reason to do business in that place.
I am glad that Galganov has said that his undertaking is in no way anti-French. Judging by the fact that he frequently calls the entire Franco-Ontarian community ethnocentric and excessively privileged in so many words in other texts and much of his discourse, one might think that he is a Francophobe. Wow! Thanks for clearing this matter up for us, Howie! XD
EXTREMELY well said Ken …
“Until you have lost your great job, ( I did ) not because you didn’t speak French, but because you aren’t French, will you ever begin to realize that bilingualism is only a means to and end.”
–
This brings to mind a few quotes that many may have probably heard but are well worth repeating.
–
One being…
“”First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
–
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
–
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
–
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
–
The other is from the book Bilingual Today – French Tomorrow by: J.V. Andrews (a MUST read) which speaks of a gent named Kim Abbott who, in a restaurant overlooking the plains of Abraham was told by his Quebec host:
–
“You won the battle, Mr. Abbott, but you lost the war. Your mistake was to give us our language and our religion. I can assure you that when WE HAVE THE POWER we will not make that same mistake.”
–
All of this to say, the majority English of this country SHOULD BE VERY careful with their level of apathy and complacency as it can come back to bite them if they aren’t.
–
The French are playing for KEEPS (Bill 101 etc. etc. etc) while the English are meandering around within a false sense of dominance having been conned into believing these small French enclaves throughout the rest of Canada could not grow or amount to anything meaningful.
–
However, we MUST remember… Even cancer starts with ONE SINGLE MALIGNANT CELL which left unchecked will gradually and slowly grow to where
it takes over THE WHOLE BODY / COUNTRY … TIME NOW to SPEAK UP…
–
http://youtu.be/981IaOhQGvw
Elitist sovereignist manipulators, understand this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOqk_q4NLLI
We’re NOT going to take it anymore!
Blue Fox. it is very rich for a staunch Francophone to say someone from a different group “will never be happy”.
We just want to help a few Francophones, then help the bilingual, then let them work in the language of their choice, then be managed in the language of their choice, then only hire “bilingual”, does any of that sound somewhat familier?
Entrepreneurs are citizens of Canada, and as such, enjoy the same rights and freedoms. A local government can try, but should not, try to infringe or remove any rights. Just as failure should not be an option, entrepreneurs and citizens should not be compelled to move because government infringes on a right. What kind of thinking is that?
If you do not like something, you stay and fight through legal channels, protests and reminding people of the problem(s).
Fox, any idea how many products are not being sold in Quebec or Canada because of excessive marketing, trade barriers or labeling costs?
Any business owner should be able to market their store in the language of their choice.
Some of us here (Stella, Patrick) are mistaken the using of a language for what is communicated in that language.
What’s wrong with French only or English only or German only or Russian only signs?
Now, if offensive language was written on those signs I could see the problem as being a hate crime. But you cannot argue that the ‘choosing’ of displaying/non-displaying of a language is offensive!
I’m not going into Chinatown expecting to order filet mignon!
Le Renard Bleu…….bonjour!!
What galganov did, other then fooling them into donating, he taught them a few new words that they had never heard of before nor knew the meaning until they met up with him. EX: ethnocentric…..suddenly everyone and their dog is using this word. I would bet many that use it still do not know the meaning……..LMAO
How anyone can support a radical activist, whose ideals and attitude made him lose an election (big time) speaks volumes about the man himself and what he stands for. Trouble maker!!!
Hello Le Renard bleu…wow, thank you for posting because you have very aptly demonstrated exactly why the English are “up in arms”. Notice that you have no ethical problem with the disfranchisement, of your fellow English brethren. Furthermore, the sediments you expressed will only serve to further inflame the movement against Official Bilingualism in Canada.
The pendulum has certainly swung overwhelmingly, in favour of the French, in Canada. This will ultimately result in a massive backlash, from the English majority of Canada. At that point, the French minority will be the disfranchised ones! Am sure, you and your ilk, will reap what you have so richly sown.
As to complaining about Howard:…”throwing a tantrum…”. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
Totally agree with Howard’s stance on supporting the businesses that reflect the language of your choice. My choice is to support my fellow Englishmen and THEIR establishments. My choice and preference, is for service in English only. Am not interested bilingual or French services but ENGLISH service! If, the French wish they can do the same, in reverse in their French establishments. Although, am fairly certain that the universal language of money will ultimately win:)
Encourage everyone to put their monies where their politics, lie. Support and patronize English businesses, only. Simply make a business decision, refuse/decline to support or finance Quebec businesses for all: merchandise, goods, services and exports. In “eco speak”, that is simply shopping locally!
Am fairly sure that the English businesses will not only survive but prosper and grow. Afterall, a business should cater to it’s targeted market, in order to be successful and prosperous.
By the way, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression rights applies equally to all. It certainly doesn’t specially exclude businesses or their owners.
For example, I completely and totally disagree with your post but I stand behind your right to your own opinion.
@ stella they voted radical activists before look at Trudeau !
Colleen, people can shop where they want of course, and over the last week going through Martintown Ontario, I chose not to shop at the corner store by the Mill. The reason is very petty but they have the blue & white fleur de lys flying. If it was the Ontario Francophone green & white, and in the correct flying order with Canada & Ontario, I may have gone in.