Letter to the Editor – Cory Cameron of Timmins Ontario on Discrimination – August 26, 2013

LTEDiscrimination

 

Discrimination.  The big D word.   A word most readily used by many though rarely meritable in its’ use.   In our contemporary world of political correctness, discrimination is one of many ‘buzzwords’ that forms a politicians’ lexicon of verbal spaghetti.  Political figures love to throw around the idea that one group of people are often discriminated against by another group of people or even by a nation’s laws.  It is a fantastic vote grabber for those most instrumental in the art of politics.  The truth however, in this day and age, is that rarely are modern-day laws discriminatory in their practice, right?

 

Wrong!

 

Have you ever heard of the concepts of affirmative action or what we like to call employment equity in Canada?  These are concepts that were instituted into Canadian law to help level the playing field for those who have traditionally suffered the ill consequences of discrimination; especially in the job market.  Under the Constitution Act of 1982, containing the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; equity legislation is detailed therein.  The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) is enforced by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and it is this commission that deals with whether or not discrimination has taken place in the workplace.

 

The following details the issue of Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination in Canada: (Belcourt, Bohlander, &  Snell, Managing Human Resources, 5th Canadian Edition, 2008).

 

Race or colour

Religion

Physical or mental disability

Dependence on alcohol or drugs

Age

Sex

Marital status

Family status

Sexual orientation

National or ethnic origin (including linguistic background)

Ancestry of place of origin

Language

Social Condition or origin

Source of income

Assignment, attachment or seizure of pay

Based on association

Political belief

Record of criminal conviction

Pardoned conviction

 

While appearing like a fair and equitable approach to the issue of fairness in hiring practices; employment equity actually creates the framework for unfair hiring criteria – whereby the best qualified person may be the most successful candidate but may not be chosen due to government imposed employment equity legislation.  Case-in-point; consider the possibility of two highly qualified candidates applying for the same government or private sector industry, job.  One candidate, a qualified counselor who, as a child, was raised in the atmosphere of a same sex marriage; understands the very real social challenges faced by his/her same sex parents.  One could surmise that not only is this individual qualified as a counselor; but has the added experience of being raised in a non-traditional family setting, outside of the traditional nuclear family.  The other candidate is also a highly qualified counselor but is a homosexual.  By the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her sexuality and not necessarily for his/her skills.

 

Another scenario if you will.  Imagine an Aboriginal couple fostering a non-Aboriginal child who is raised and immersed in Aboriginal culture.  He/she has a university/college education associated with his/her chosen field; speaks an Aboriginal language, is well-versed in the culture and customs associated with the First Nation and has all the credentials required of someone who could work for a government or non-government Aboriginal organization.  The other candidate also has some or most of these qualifications but has one added qualification.  Their ethnicity or race is of a First Nation.  Once again, by the very definition and reasoning for employment equity, chances are that the successful candidate will be chosen due to his/her ethnicity or race and not necessarily for his/her skills.

 

Sound like rare or improbable cases and scenarios to you?  I can attest that they’re not.  They’re increasingly happening everyday in Canada and Human Resources professionals have had to contend with the issue of unfair hiring criteria that these laws have created since at least 1995 with the Employment Equity Act.

 

If you think at this point that our Canadian employment laws are unfair and unjustified then I have even more bad news for you.  Consider the above information I’ve provided about Employment Equity.  Add to this the increasingly unfair bilingual language requirements as well and you can see where things are headed.  A politically correct society where in the quest for fairness we’ve permitted a very unfair system to flourish unchallenged by the people themselves.  We need to ask ourselves if Canada’s employment and language laws are really a reflection of what we encompass and value as a society or if our various levels of government are attempting through social engineering, to shape and mould the people’s consciousness to the system itself.  In other words, do the people work for the system or should the system work for the people?

 

Ever heard of the concept of a ‘bona fide occupational qualification’?  Believe it or not, this concept currently exists in Canada and it allows for discrimination in hiring!  That’s right folks.  You read that correctly.  In the very ‘Act’, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) whose existence is to prohibit discriminatory hiring practices there exists government-sponsored discriminatory hiring!  As Belcourt et al. reports (2008):

 

The act applies to all federal government departments and agencies, to Crown corporations, and to other businesses and industries under federal jurisdiction, such as banks, airlines, railway companies, and insurance and communications companies.  For those areas not under federal jurisdiction, protection is available under provincial human rights laws.  Provincial laws, although very similar to federal ones, do differ from province to province.  Every province and territory has a human rights act (or code), and each has jurisdiction prohibiting discrimination in the workplace.  The prohibited grounds of discrimination in employment include race, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, physical handicap, and marital status…Employers are permitted to discriminate if employment preferences are based on a bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ) or BFOR (bona fide occupational requirement). A BFOQ is justified if the employer can establish necessity for business operations.  In other words, differential treatment is not discrimination if there is a justifiable reason.  (106)

This sounds an awful lot like Orwell’s, Animal Farm, where Commandment #7 which originally stated that:

 

“All animals are equal”

 

Was eventually changed to,

 

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”

 

Is this the kind of Canada we want to live and work in?  Surely the ideology of an individual’s rights should trump group rights in all respects.  Should it not?  Otherwise, we need to ask ourselves if we truly live in a democracy where all citizens enjoy the same rights and privileges as all others.  As of this writing, the majority of our citizenry cannot work for their civil service or hold the highest office of the land due to nothing more than a lack of knowledge of one of Canada’s minority languages.

 

Please keep in mind that,

 

“All Canadians are equal, but some Canadians are more equal than others”

 

Cory Cameron

Timmins, On

Sunday August 25, 2013

 

(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)

Please click the banner below and subscribe to CFN.  We need 100 subscribers by September 2013 to bring back Seaway Radio!

subscribe to cfn

849 Comments

  1. Hungry for lies (AKA: truth) wrote, “What your VIDEOS prove is you have come to believe them.”

    UHmm err yeah.

    Yes, i do believe my videos, mostly depicting real Canadian news clips, clearly demonstrate…
    that there is systemic discrimination in the province of Quebec.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQHpEAmtbB0

    Yes, i do I believe my videos, mostly depicting real Canadian news clips, clearly demonstrate…
    that the French powers that be have an agenda to wipe out the English language in the province of Quebec by using stringent anti English laws in order to “purify” that province and make it as “pure laine” as they possibly can.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hKXw24la-8

    Yes, I do believe my videos, mostly depicting real Canadian news clips, clearly demonstrate…
    the constant doublespeak of the powers that be within the province of Quebec
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FXHE6AAk1I

    Yes, I do believe my videos, mostly depicting real Canadian news clips, clearly demonstrate…
    how xenophobic the French powers that be generally are
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj9b1SyHpys

    Yes, I do believe my videos, mostly depicting real Canadian news clips, clearly demonstrate…
    how the French powers that be hate the English language and the English culture while at the same time wholeheartedly believing that French should have no restrictions throughout all of Canada.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBc5gzuHbKI
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUkNVjM4Gc

    And ya know what else i believe? I believe that there are — MANY people — that also “believe” the French powers that be are taking advantage of a situation.

    And ALL THESE PEOPLE are now starting to talk about this issue MORE AND MORE AND MORE each and every day. And thus, i believe this gravy train is going to come to an end. The only thing i am NOT sure of is exactly WHEN.

    And on that note, i wish all of us a “let’s hope it sooner than later” kinda of day eh 🙂

  2. Almost time for Cory to unleash another letter. Six hundred comments on this one is pretty good, but they’re getting pretty lame and repetitive.

  3. HFTT,

    “The law does not abolish the use of English it regulates it’s use.”

    And hence the problem! ‘Regulating’ the ‘use’ of a language – whether it is a language of a minority, majority, official language or endangered language.

    HFTT, do you believe Quebec is legitimate in it’s ‘regulating’ the English language.

    “Crazy isn’t it that the French Business Owner could not control the language type in an era that was English dominated in the 60′s and 70′s.”

    It certainly was!

  4. HFTT (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote, I don’t need you to confirm that we are not comparable.
    The readers already know I would never compare myself
    to a CHARACTER of your allure.

    Aww shucks, what a bummer … NOT !!! 🙂

  5. CANADA HAS A BILINGUAL FRAME WORK FRECH – ENGLISH
    EQUALLY LEGALLY RECOGNIZED.

    Ah hem, someone forgot to tell this to — The French powers that be both inside and outside the province of Quebec.

    Can you “get on that” task for ALL of the unilingual Anglophone Canadians in Quebec who are either being told
    “WE DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH HERE in the province of Quebec”
    OR
    You must speak French when speaking to me, as i am an ambulance attendant in the province of Quebec.

    You know, like this ambulance attendant
    http://youtu.be/JjEbOizpWUY?t=56s

    and this bus driver
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUkNVjM4Gc

    and these metro employee’s
    http://youtu.be/JjEbOizpWUY?t=7m24s

    OH WAIT.
    You did say, “CANADA” —
    HAS A BILINGUAL FRAME WORK FRECH – ENGLISH
    EQUALLY LEGALLY RECOGNIZED.

    Yup, that’s what i thought i saw… Canada has a bilingual frame work eh Hungry?

    English (which rightfully should be denoted FIRST to show respect for the MAIN COMMON language of Canada when scripting) and French eh Hungry?

    Equally legally recognized eh ?

    That’s what you said right ? So i guess “legally recognized” means something different in Quebec than it does in EVERY OTHER FREAKIN PART of Canada where the French believe they deserve FRENCH first, French dominant and even French ONLY eh ?

    This is even happening now OUTSIDE the province OF Quebec

    like this example with this university student IN THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiMciGy2vkk

    Once again Hungry for lies (AKA: lives for), i must take this moment to thank you for giving me the opportunity to bring this information to the public so that they can clearly see for themselves that these are REAL PEOPLE (priest, young aspiring newspaper writers, parents with sick children etc etc) that are in these clips. They are NOT actors in some Hollywood movie that were given a script and told what to say.

    And on that note i would like to wish you a very happy “Oliver Stone” kind of day eh 🙂

  6. Highlander September 21, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    Hungry for the Truth…. September 21, 2013 at 3:31 pm

    Not the same at all. Reg 17 was to abolish french in Ontario. IOI has no intent to abolish English. It seeks correct historical injustices by preserving the use of French for the majority. Like Ontario has English as it’s Official language to preserve English for the majority.

    “Tell that to the English Quebecers that feel that the English language is being abolished in Quebec.So oppressing one language is right in the preservation of another…oh how separatist of you !”

    OK I WILL. Dear English Canadians Living in Quebec. Not the same at all. Reg 17 was to abolish french in Ontario. IOI has no intent to abolish English. It seeks correct historical injustices by preserving the use of French for the majority. Like Ontario has English as it’s Official language to preserve English for the majority.”

    “There were tens of thousands of students”

    HftT wrote: The 3000 or so students that protested came from both linguistic representation. You are wright is was tens of thousands. This is a type-O and should have been 30000 or so,
    which is what I thought I typed. My apologies. No Ill intent to deceive.

    Show me where the transfer payments are used for day care. Transfer payments are not the source of payment for this PROVINCIAL SERVICE. More BS.

    SHOW ME. NOT TELL ME. PROVE THAT THE MONEY COMES FROM THE TRANSFER PAYMENTS. More inaccuracies form the{MODERATED FOR NAME CALLING}

  7. Highlander September 21, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    “The Quebec government represents not only french people but the nearly 2 million others of not french herritage.”

    More inaccuracies from the {MODERATED FOR NAME CALLING} 2Million? If they are not French heritage and have voluntarily decided to use Canadian Quebec Immigration Portal to become A CANADIAN citizen they have willingly agreed to the linguistic requirement of Quebec. SO we are back to the 599,230 English Canadians living in Quebec. Vs 6,102,210 French Canadians living in Quebec. (statistic Canada census 2011)

    “Do we call the Ontario government the English government ?”
    YES …..With FACTUAL EVIDENCE OF PRACTICES BASED ON REPRESENTATION BY POPULATION. 8,677, 045 English-speaking Canadian vs 493,295 French-speaking Canadians (Stats Can 2011)

    “But then it goes to prove that you do run on separatist ideologies!”

    Separatist Ideologies? What do you call wanting the separation of CANADA?

    ENGLSIH SEPARATIST IDEOLOFIES?!!!!!

    “We in Ontario have multiple ethnicities and except them willingly withought an attempt to assimilate ,but to melt and be part of and enrichen our society .”

    MORE bs from the{MODERATED FOR NAME CALLING}. WHAT kind of blinders do you use to come up with this bs. Ontario is in no way respectful of its linguistic minority. French have to fight for all their Rights and if it was left up to you would be abolished.

    “Unlike Quebec we do not consider them a PROBLEM!”
    Then why all this crying about DISCRIMINATION against THE ENGLISH RIGHTS.

    {MODERATED FOR NAME CALLING} A VERY ETHNOCENTRIC ONE AT THAT.

  8. I see I’m being ignored again. I wonder why?

    Hungry for the Truth….
    September 21, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    The French people =The French Government. = The same.

    Your equation would lead one to believe that this new fancy Quebec Values Charter that is being put forth by the Quebec government, has the support of all French people. Would you make so bold a statement? Or does the equation only work in certain instances as needed?

  9. Cory Cameron September 22, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    “HFTT, do you believe Quebec is legitimate in it’s ‘regulating’ the English language.”

    Let me answer your question with an example that legitimizes the need to regulate.

    Say you purchase a house in a nice neighbourhood and settle in. After a while you learn from the neighbours that there has been casualties on your street caused by speeding cars. Given the historical events that happened should you as a parent be faulted for trying to get speed limits regulated? You are not wanting to abolish cars just that they respect the speed limits. In an attempt of preventing any further occurrences.

    When in context and respectful of history, Quebec may be allot like a parent that does not want to see any further occurrences. Despite what you may say and have come to believeQuebec is within it’s Right to protect the Rights of it’s French linguistic majority.

    No different than Ontario protects it’ English majority by having English as the Official Language.

    Cory, what is the difference? Quebec having the Charter of Language that officially declares French in the Province of Quebec; or Ontario that Officially opted out of The Canadian Languages Act and declares Ontario’s Official Language as ENGLISH?

  10. It’s been awhile since I last posted some things that make me go hymmmmmmm.

    For instance, those of us such as Howard Galganov, the organizations of LFA, CLF are ‘responding’ to unfair laws such as what are occuring in 4 municipalities in Ontario and the entire Province of Quebec.

    You see, we are not ‘instituting’ any of these laws; nor are we advocating for laws that favour one language over another now are we?

    Can you blame us for wanting to work and live in the language of our choice? I have never faulted Stella and company for them wanting to live and work in the language of their choice? Only I have done so when it impacts me. I no longer want to take on the status of second class citizenship within my own country.

    We are simply advocating for free choice so that any business owner can print/advertise in any language(s) they so choose to.

    Hence, there are those on here such as Stella, HFTT, Furtz and Richard who chastize us on a regular basis for calling out those French powers that be that institute all things French first, French always or French only.

    I reiterate thus. Take down that Fraco-Ontarian flag from the Casselman turnoff and put in it’s place a real, patriotic Canadian flag representing all peoples whom live within this country.

    Canada first.

  11. Hungry for the Truth…. September 22, 2013 at 9:42 am

    “Bilingual sign are only required in the 25 designated areas under the French Language Services Act of Ontario.”

    Oh you forgot to mention that all those 25 area’s are accross Ontario and encompass 90% of the population.

    ***take special note people Francophones represent 4% of the population and 85% of those are along the Ottawa river …why for approx 85,000 pop outside of eastern Ontario must the ENTIRE province be madated bilingual ?
    Wait to be designated thier requires 5% or 3000 people within the region so Toronto is how many millions yet for 3000 people it can be provincially deemed under FLSA ……take about where numbers DO NOT WARRANT……..****

    “The History of Ontario has never been invaded and dominated by the French minority. There is no need to have English protected as it is the de facto language of Ontario.”

    So your view is that bill 101 is eceptable because Quebec was invaded and lost those 260 years ago ,and domination was those independend bussiness people having there own signs in their language of choice?

    YOU HAVE BEEN DRINKING TOO MUCH OF THE SEPARATIST COOL-AID ,BETTER BACK OFF OF THAT NASTY STUFF IT MAKES YOU BLIND TO REALITY…..OH THATS RIGHT YOU ARE LIVES FOR LIES

    Hungry for the Truth…. September 22, 2013 at 9:47 am

    As for that entire CHILDISH post : and you thought yourself better then that and not use ridicule and insults ……………..

    Not to worry there hungry aka lives for lies we here all realize your SEPARATIST beliefs ,BUT OH SO SLY IN TRYING TO MAKE YOURSELF LOOK LIKE A MODERATE!

    FOLKS please refer to his hate spewing post on Aug 30th ,where he blames ALL english speaking people (English ,Irish ,Jewish,Chineese,Italians ,Polish ,and the 200 other cultures that speak english) FOR THE FRENCH WOES IN QUEBEC.

  12. HFTT said “MORE bs from the{MODERATED FOR NAME CALLING}. WHAT kind of blinders do you use to come up with this bs. Ontario is in no way respectful of its linguistic minority. French have to fight for all their Rights and if it was left up to you would be abolished.”

    A billion plus for French schools and preferential hiring is not respectful?

    The intermixing of laws and policy runs deep to help minorities, see the 2009 Ontario government document on purchasing as an example. I don’t know why French would be a “disadvantaged group” but the way some French are pushing towards a path of their own making, no one should be surprised if we see a lid put on the kettle. http://www.doingbusiness.mgs.gov.on.ca/mbs/psb/psb.nsf/Attachments/BPSProcDir-Guidebook-pdf-eng/$FILE/bps_procurement_guidebook-pdf-eng.pdf

    2. Legitimate objectives
    Where it is established that a measure is inconsistent with sub-section 1 – Discriminatory procurement practices,
    that measure is still permissible where it can be demonstrated that:
    • The purpose of the measure is to achieve a legitimate objective;
    • The measure does not operate to impair unduly the access of persons, goods, services or investments of a
    Province that meet that legitimate objective; and
    • The measure is not more trade restrictive than necessary to achieve that legitimate objective.Page 27
    In this Guidebook, “legitimate objective” means one of the following objectives:
    • Public security and safety;
    • Public order;
    • Protection of human, animal or plant life or health;
    • Protection of the environment;
    • Consumer protection;
    • Protection of the health, safety and well-being of workers; or
    • Affirmative action programs for disadvantaged groups.

  13. Hungry for the Truth…. September 22, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    “Other communities and Provinces have Sign by-laws and speak of Language. New Brunswick comes to mind. The By law does not only dictate language but also Style, Height, Images, Colours,
    Placements, Construction, and Use requirements. Why isolate one requirement and demonize it. They are all equally restrictive from your point of view of restricting freedom of expression.”

    You see hungry If the owners choose french that is their right to do so I do not have a problem at all with that ,BUT when a form of government does not allow that choice of bussiness owners is where I do OBJECT as it infringes on freedom of expression.

    “There was a time that the signs in Montreal where English dominated and that French was not visible. But then again like I posted before most would rather erase this reality or blame the Church.”

    Once again a bussiness should have a right to put the language of their choice no matter the language ,to control this is loss of freedom of expression and is akin to socialism where the state controls all.

    CCONTINUE TO BLAME ALL THOSE ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE ,but a loss of language is the fault of the speakers who do not practice it or pass on to the next generation .

    You cannot effectively legislate what comes out of peoples mouths as this is their right to freedom of expression!

    “Crazy isn’t it that the French Business Owner could not control the language type in an era that was English dominated in the 60′s and 70′s”

    Ok there hungry AKA LIVES FOR LIES show us examples of this to prove your hyposis .

    So are you saying that english wouldn’t allow this and you disagree ,yet you agree to bill 101…….see folks whats good for the goose is not for the gander!

    edudyorlik September 22, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    Yup, id say… judging by this last message by Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies)… There ain’t much left in the tank.

    But, you should still at least — try —

    to have a nice “stress free” day eh Hungry Maybe some meds would help…

    Yes there are medications for this ,but being his passive aggresive approach and illusions of grandieur he will need a couple of different ones.

  14. Hungry for the Truth…. September 22, 2013 at 10:49 pm

    “Say you purchase a house in a nice neighbourhood and settle in. After a while you learn from the neighbours that there has been casualties on your street caused by speeding cars. Given the historical events that happened should you as a parent be faulted for trying to get speed limits regulated? You are not wanting to abolish cars just that they respect the speed limits. In an attempt of preventing any further occurrences.”

    Are you compairing speed limits to actual human rights violations such as freedom of expression ,YOUR WARPED by that cool-aid again step way from Stella’s brew it MAKES YOU BLIND TO REALITY!

    Cory Cameron September 23, 2013 at 5:36 am

    I reiterate thus. Take down that Fraco-Ontarian flag from the Casselman turnoff and put in it’s place a real, patriotic Canadian flag representing all peoples whom live within this country.

    Its not likely Cory for its their french roots FIRST before Country ,now should all other cultures that developed Canada have their own flag …..Italian Ontario flag ,Scottish Ontario flag,Irish Ontario flag and the many others AND SPONSERED BY THE GOVERNMENT?

    Is Ontario multicultural or just cultural onclaves as sponsered by the Ontario government for Franco Ontarians ?

    Are not all cultures valued the same in Ontario ,apparently not as we do not see multiple cultures ontario flags out there do we!

    But like the game of RISK flags are planted on dominated land to show dominence of the area.

    Are we not all Canadians first then Ontarians ?

  15. Good Lord, Cory! Do you run the roads looking for signs or flags you find offensive? If you get upset every time you see a French sign or symbol, you must be in a constant state of agitation. According to Wikipedia, Casselman is a small town of about three thousand people where 83% of the population is Francophone. Seriously, I can’t imaging feeling threatened by the sight of a Franco-Ontarian flag in a Franco-Ontarian town.

  16. No furtz a sign may not feel threatening to you, but following a certain pastor from paper to paper seems a little crazy too. But who am I to judge?

  17. Yawn: is this threadbare thread trying to make it into the Guinness Book of Records?

  18. Author

    PJ they did that last year bringing a story over the 1000 comment mark. 🙂

  19. Furtz,

    “According to Wikipedia, Casselman is a small town of about three thousand people where 83% of the population is Francophone.”

    Certainly, I’ll take those stats. So, now that Casselman has a majority French populace, is it the changing demographics that okays the flying of a huge Franco-Ontarian flag?

    Why fly this flag anyways? Why not the Canadian flag; or the Provincial flag, anyhow?

    Why, if not to make a bold statement to all newcomers and current residents that this is a Franco-Community; put the flag there in the first place?

    And who cares if there’s a majority Francophone community, right? What is the purpose of flying that huge flag? It’s so in-your-face to all others of other ethnicities; isn’t it?

    Cory writes now:

    “According to:

    http://spckingston.ca/kcp/snapshots/SPC-Kingston_Community_Profile_Francophone_Population_Snapshot%20Sheet_2009-01-06.pdf

    you will find that Kingston is becoming home to more and more Francophones.”

    The study indicates:

    “In 2006, 38% of French only Francophones moved to Kingston recently (after 2001) compared to only 20% of Anglophones
    in Kingston. Of the French only Francophones who moved to Kingston recently, a majority moved from a province outside of
    Ontario.”

    Hymmmmmm, interesting. I wonder why they moved anyways. I would argue it’s to garner those jobs which have suddenly been labeled as being, ‘bilingual’ and so vast numbers of Quebecers and those residing in Eastern Ontario have moved there to take advantage of unfair hiring policies.

    The study interestingly indicates:

    “Additional studies are needed to determine why Francophones are settling in Kingston and primarily from provinces outside
    of Ontario.”

    Well, let’s skip more unecessary ‘studies’ and come out and draw obvious conclusions from this study.

    They’re there to eat up those government jobs!

    Now, Furtz, where is the large Union flag (you’ll call it a Union Jack although it’s actually only deemed a ‘Union Jack’ when flying from a ship) that flys outside of Kingston on the 401 to characterize the city’s hugely British roots?

    I would argue that the people rooted in old traditional British customs just aren’t of that sort to blatantly advertise their heritage in that way.

    And why not, one may ask?

    Well, because this would be considered offensive to others and they realize that.

    Mark my words, as more and more French ultranationalists move from Quebec and Eastern Ontario further West to inhabit areas like Kingston you will see a huge undertaking to begin flying Franco-Ontario flags.

    Just like what has occured in Casselman.

    And what’s my problem with that?

    The fact that the English and other non-Francophones in this country don’t do the same.

    Cory.

  20. So well said highlander HFTT (AKA: Lives for lies) is indeed presenting an oh so

    CLASSIC
    — passive aggressive approach —

    ON September 23, 2013 at 8:36 am
    Furtz wrote,
    “I can’t imaging feeling threatened by the sight of a Franco-Ontarian flag in a Franco-Ontarian town.”

    Yeah, such a minor thing eh Furtz. But, even the tallest buildings in the world began with one well positioned brick in some northeastern corner. And voila.

    Before you know it. The sun has been blocked out and you can’t see the clear blue sky anymore.

    French has and the French powers that be have “presented itself” in such a way that people have begun to fear it’s appearance in their area.

    WE ALL HAVE SEEN EXAMPLES NOW, and we all know what happens when French becomes a majority.

    (cue the scary music – imagine the Vincent Price narration)
    If you’re not sure what happens when the dark xenophobic horse comes to your area Furtz, just go see what’s going on in la bell province.

    Yes, that’s right. We have a clear picture of the last 40 years of what they have done there as “the dominant force.”

    The French then begin to fear that it’s a dream and it won’t last so within that fear they start passing laws and outlawing other languages and cultures and making it so damn hard for those other languages and culture to survive that they simply just move away …

    Till one day… those who have moved away find that they have only moved to an area that the French now have on their radar. And once again in the small eastern towns of Ontario the push to disenfranchise them and force them to leave is happening ALL OVER again.
    (end scary music and narrative voice)

    WAKE UP… Wake up i say… You are back to reality. A reality that say’s STOP this Frenchification of CANADA NOW BEFORE IT reached a small town near you.

    but, on that note i would like you to share with the rest of us a “fear of — Franco ANYTHING — ” kinda of day eh 🙂

  21. Cory, some people are proud of their heritage and enjoy celebrating it with flags and such. Others, like me, don’t care about that sort of thing. I’m not proud nor ashamed of my British/Irish ancestry…. We all have to come from somewhere. However, I don’t see the point of getting all bent out of shape if others want to celebrate theirs no mater what it is. Life is way to short for me waste time obsessing about BS like that. I mean really… If a flag or a sign by the side of a road can ruin your day, what can I say?

  22. Cory Cameron September 23, 2013 at 5:36 am

    “Hence, there are those on here such as Stella, HFTT, Furtz and Richard who chastize us on a regular basis for calling out those French powers that be that institute all things French first, French always or French only.”

    Hence, I do not chastise you. I question the credibility of your argument. Which is always one sided to fit into your radical agenda. And your constant English first attitude.

    “I reiterate thus. Take down that Fraco-Ontarian flag from the Casselman turnoff and put in it’s place a real, patriotic Canadian flag representing all peoples whom live within this country.”

    The mere Fact that Franco Ontarian’s fly’s an em-blame of their presence and Pride has you demonstrating and flustered. This exuberance of superiority and entitlement over a linguistic
    minority makes my point.

    It becomes obvious that this whole radical argument does not contain any respect for the linguistic minority of Ontario. And further advances claims that Quebec’s linguistic minority is unfairly treated. How would you describe such superior posturing and entitlement in Ontario over French Canadian’s Right to fly a FLAG.

    CANADA is FRENCH + ENGLISH = RIGHTS you may not agree but this is CANADA.
    Is not the laws that create unfairness.

  23. Highlander September 23, 2013 at 8:01 am

    “Ok there hungry AKA LIVES FOR LIES show us examples of this to prove your hyposis .”

    Start with this, American professor Marc Levine wrote in his 1990 a book called The Reconquest of Montreal.

    After that search the internet (History of Quebec 1960’s)

    After that Quebec Libraries. Quebec’s Fight for it’s Linguistic Rights.

    After that Canadian Archives. Quebec in the 60’s

    I never BLAMED any one. IT IS YOUR TWISTING and DENIAL of the historical facts that I recounted that says I did. It’s your twisting of the Facts to have them suit your warped radical
    agenda which is blinding you in denial from the well documented FACTS.

    You have been exposed to a bad case of radical bs and the symptoms of entitlement and superiority is clouding you ability to see the TRUTH.

  24. Cory Cameron September 23, 2013 at 5:36 am
    “It’s been awhile since I last posted some things that make me go hymmmmmmm.”

    That’s because you are not on my side of the keyboard. Because many posts I read leads me hymmmmmmm then with WHAT????

    “You see, we are not ‘instituting’ any of these laws; nor are we advocating for laws that favour one language over another now are we?”

    You are correct you are not advocating for laws that favour one language over another. You are advocating an attack on the principle of DEMOCRACY. Making claim that your Right as a visitor in a Community is SUPERIOR to the right of a Community’s right of SELF GOVERNANCE. And in doing so sticking them with the Legal bill of $240.000.

    “Can you blame us for wanting to work and live in the language of our choice? “

    I can’t blame you. Nor can I blame a Community for wanting to live and work in the languages of their choice?

    “I no longer want to take on the status of second class citizenship within my own country.”

    How do you think French Canadians feel when reading some of the statements made by some in this forum?

  25. Highlander September 23, 2013 at 8:27 am
    Hungry for the Truth…. September 22, 2013 at 10:49 pm

    “Are you compairing speed limits to actual human rights violations such as freedom of expression ,YOUR WARPED by that cool-aid again step way from Stella’s brew it MAKES YOU BLIND TO REALITY!”

    Again inaccuracies and twisted interpretations. My example has nothing to do with SPEED LIMITS. It is a persons RIGHT to have speed limits enforced in order to prevent historical incidents from causing repeated re-occurrences.

    The RIGHT of the person. Not the speed limit. Should the person be faulted for exercising their RIGHT.

    If your argument of “freedom of expression” held any credibility it would include the whole scope of “freedom expression” not only Language.

    You do not seem preoccupied with the other equal restrictions that Sign by laws encompass such as Style, Height, Images, Colours, Placements, Construction, and Use requirements of
    the sign….etc….you choose to isolate the part that suits your RADICAL agenda. You’ve been exposed to a bad case of Radical bs brew, and as a result are blinded to the FACTUAL REALITY.
    You demonstrate an air of superiority and entitlement. You are really Warped.

  26. hahahahaahah oh furtzy, you’re too much!

    some people are proud of their beliefs and enjoy celebrating it with sharing them with folks and such. Others, like me, don’t care about that sort of thing. I’m not proud nor ashamed of my faith …. We all have to believe in something. However, I don’t see the point of getting all bent out of shape if others want to celebrate their religion no mater what it is. Life is way to short for me waste time obsessing about BS like that. I mean really… If a man and his beliefs spewed in a news paper can ruin your day, what can I say?

  27. ON September 23, 2013 at 11:34 am
    Furtz wrote, “We all have to come from somewhere. However, I don’t see the point of getting all bent out of shape if others want to celebrate theirs no mater what it is.

    ———————-

    I mean really… If a flag or a sign by the side of a road can ruin your day, what can I say?”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0VurIwXuM&hd=1

    OK Furtz. Please explain why this “flag” is such a “big deal.”

  28. Furtz September 23, 2013 at 11:34 am

    “However, I don’t see the point of getting all bent out of shape if others want to celebrate theirs no mater what it is. Life is way to short for me waste time obsessing about BS like that.”

    But the 96% of the population is supporting this through taxpayers money ,if it were funded soley by them there would not be an issue !

    ” Life is way to short for me waste time obsessing about BS like that.”
    Well you consider Cory’s letter and the postings as b.s. so why do you wast your time as you say?

    There should be no legislated language laws nor funding to support this as it elevates one culture above others and that simply is not democracy!

    Descisions should be based on the majority needs not the minority wants!

  29. Hungry for the Truth…. September 23, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    Cory said :“Can you blame us for wanting to work and live in the language of our choice? “

    hungry said:I can’t blame you. Nor can I blame a Community for wanting to live and work in the languages of their choice?

    If you agree with what you said hungry ,why not let those community members make the choice and not have council legislate it for them and not giving them a choice?

    Hungry for the Truth…. September 23, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    “You do not seem preoccupied with the other equal restrictions that Sign by laws encompass such as Style, Height, Images, Colours, Placements, Construction, and Use requirements of”

    Of course their are limits set by bylaws and justly so, but there should not have a limit of choice of language(NON OFFENSIVE)be it whatever language ….Understand something here hungry It matters not whatever language the person uses it does matter WHEN THE STATE DICTATES WHICH LANGUAGE TO THOSE PRIVATE BUSSINESS OWNERS!

    WE ARE NOT IN THE USSR BUT AT TIMES IT REALLY FEELS LIKE IT.

  30. ON September 22, 2013 at 10:49 pm Hungry for the Truth (AKA Lives for lies) wrote,
    “Let me answer your question with an example that legitimizes the need to regulate.

    Say you purchase a house in a nice neighbourhood and settle in. After a while you learn from the neighbours that there has been casualties on your street caused by speeding cars. Given the historical events that happened should you as a parent be faulted for trying to get speed limits regulated? You are not wanting to abolish cars just that they respect the speed limits. In an attempt of preventing any further occurrences.”

    ———————-

    Huh??? Legitimize the need to regulate — A language ??? – Actually, not — just — “a language” but theeeeee English language ???

    The language which just happens to be…
    — the common language of the very country within which the “province” of Quebec of which you speak of resides in ??? —

    Ah hem… The “country” that provides — the VERY MEANS of existence to this province ?? —

    Ah hem… That is, — the language you speak of which you say is “ok to regulate” in your example right?

    To quote someone we both know. ARE YOU FOR REAL ???

    Even putting aside, (for a brief moment) how ridiculously absurd and absurdly outlandish your comparison of a “regulating” a language — to — “regulating speeding cars” in a neighborhood actually is …

    You DO REALIZE that you are speaking about regulating THEEEE (English) MAIN COMMON LANGUAGE OF THE COUNTRY OF CANADA which happens to also be the country within which this “province” you are referring to resides in, don’t you??

    A “province” inside the country of Canada, right? You get that, right?

    A province THAT IS NOT a separate country. Capish ?

    Now, if you wish to, we go there and entertain that idea and THAT WOULD BE FINE. But, if we do “go there” then we would have to take EVERYTHING in THAT context and we (ALL CANADIANS THAT IS) WOULD HAVE TO get on the same page with this fantasy that (for now) ONLY resides between your two ears.

    This is NOT TO MENTION – THE FACT that – “the province and French powers that be — which is doing the regulating — are also THE defeated clan in this scenario. PLEASE let’s not forget this HISTORICAL FACT.

    You simply
    — MUST –
    Be aware of how crazy both — your example — and this argument which you present really is, right?

    If you don’t see how crazy your example and this argument are the try this on for size…

    Say you have a war and you beat your opponent and win the right to the land you were warring about.

    Isn’t it then quite noble of you to allow the looser to stay?

    And, after having allowed the looser to live and stay, isn’t then
    quite inappropriate and insulting for the looser to come back years later, make all kinds of demands and claims and try to “regulate” the language of the victor in ANY part of that land within which the rights to such decisions has already been decided?

    And wouldn’t you be quite p’od to see that looser begin to plant its “language related” flags in every part of this “decided” land?

    I would think so.
    ESPECIALLY * Since the victor not only was gracious and noble enough to allow the loser to live and stay but also was

    — THE ONE THAT WAS responsible — for putting in place many of the steps that saw to it that the looser and his/her language could feel welcome and accommodated in the first palce.

    UN_FREAKIN_BELIEVABLE…

    The sheer sense of bombastic audacity is BEYOND any measure.

    and on that note,
    i would like to wish you ” — accepting reality — can be effective if you allow it” kind of day eh 🙂

  31. “I no longer want to take on the status of second class citizenship within my own country.”

    How do you think French Canadians feel when reading some of the statements made by some in this forum?”

    CANADA IS NOT a “French land” it is a British land. It was signed over in a declaration by the leaders of France and ceded to the British.

    Even though the British and later the English were noble and kind and did EVERYTHING possible to try” to be accommodating” to the French and their language and culture and tried to “share” the land as two peoples,

    all the French ever did (and are still doing) was act like it was still their land and at the same time SHOW HOW MUCH THEY DO NOT WANT English as part of that framework.

    There is NO comparison.

    WE MUST separate.
    That is THE ONLY ANSWER NOW. The French want NOTHING TO DO WITH the ENGLISH language, the English people or the English culture

    and — THAT — is what makes being together un-wokable.

  32. @ edudyorlik. I don’t watch your endless youtube vids and seldom read you long-winded posts.
    @ bella. I don’t care what other people believe as far as religion goes. But I do object to hateful bigots using their religion to make the lives of others miserable. I myself am a devout Pastafarian, and all we do is talk like pirates and enjoy our sacred sauces on cooked to perfection noodles. Sometimes we wash it down with well-aged grog.

  33. Highlander September 23, 2013 at 8:01 am

    “You see hungry If the owners choose french that is their right to do so I do not have a problem at all with that ,BUT when a form of government does not allow that choice of bussiness owners is where I do OBJECT as it infringes on freedom of expression.”

    Your argument has no credibility. The same form of government does not allow the choice of location, materials used in fabricating signs, certain images are restricted the depth that one
    must dig, the style of signs are all as equally noted in the by law. You take offence of a one line paragraph that is part of the limitation of your argument of “FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION”

    Should you not be equally defending the graphic artist right to freedom of expression. How about the business owner right to choose the location of his or her sign. Once again isolating one paragraph that suits your Radical agenda and demonizing it. Freedom of expression is freedom of expression.

    “Once again a bussiness should have a right to put the language of their choice no matter the language ,to control this is loss of freedom of expression and is akin to socialism where the state controls all.”

    A typical attitude of a person the uses a dead President to justify his disrespect to the Laws and Rights. Such an attitude is indicative of equal disrespect to historical events.

    “CCONTINUE TO BLAME ALL THOSE ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE ,but a loss of language is the fault of the speakers who do not practice it or pass on to the next generation .”

    You use words and do not understand their implications. That is exactly why there is Laws and Rights that promote the use of French and will ensure it’s survival against radicals that believe
    the French majority of a Province within an English country should not have that Right.

    I never BLAMED any one IT IS YOUR TWISTING and DENYAL of the historical facts that I recounted that is twisting your warped radical agenda is blinding you from the well documented FACTS.

    “You cannot effectively legislate what comes out of peoples mouths as this is their right to freedom of expression!”

    If this stood any credibility one could argue that if you can’t legislate what comes out of peoples mouth then why should we as a society legislate what goes into their mouths.

  34. Highlander September 23, 2013 at 2:42 pm

    “If you agree with what you said hungry ,why not let those community members make the choice and not have council legislate it for them and not giving them a choice?”

    What would you do, have an ELECTED FROM THE PEPOLE CONCIL run a referendum on every decision it makes. The Council is the democratic voice of the Community. That represent the Community. They decide on behalf of the Community.

    “Understand something here hungry It matters not whatever language the person uses it does matter WHEN THE STATE DICTATES WHICH LANGUAGE TO THOSE PRIVATE BUSSINESS OWNERS!”
    The state dictates how much taxes they are going to pay,

    The State dictate where they can place their advertising,

    The State dictates how much advertising is allowed.

    The State dictates the size of the advertising,

    The State dictates where they can smoke,

    The State dictates how long the grass can grow in their yard,

    The state dictates which way their door should open and close,

    The state dictates how many parking spots they need,

    The State dictate how many fire exits they require,
    The State dictates how many employes are required overnight,.

    The State dictates what can be sold side by side in a store,

    The State dictates accounting and reporting procedure,

    The state dictates Incorporation requirements,

    ETC…ETC….ETC….

    As a business Owner I think in the grand scheme of things
    business Owner know that they are subject to meeting
    rules and regulation and that your argument has little to
    no concern to a business OWNER.

    “WE ARE NOT IN THE USSR BUT AT TIMES IT REALLY FEELS LIKE IT. ”

    Your best bet is to find yourself an Island that is not part of Democratic system. Where you can live by your own RULES. No one will expect you to be respectful of others Rights or Laws. Just your OWN.

  35. “The state dictates how much taxes they are going to pay,

    The State dictate where they can place their advertising,

    The State dictates how much advertising is allowed.

    The State dictates the size of the advertising,

    The State dictates where they can smoke,

    The State dictates how long the grass can grow in their yard,

    The state dictates which way their door should open and close,

    The state dictates how many parking spots they need,

    The State dictate how many fire exits they require,
    The State dictates how many employes are required overnight,.

    The State dictates what can be sold side by side in a store,

    The State dictates accounting and reporting procedure,

    The state dictates Incorporation requirements,

    ETC…ETC….ETC….”

    And there’s the crux of the problem we’re all facing. I’m smart and intelligent enough to see that I do not require the state to make all of these decisions for me as a private citizen and taxpayer. And the decisions that the state currently make that affect all of us at times go to such extremes as to be nonsensical in their approach.

    Case-in-point. The sale of alcohol in Ontario being solely regulated to LCBO’s; with exclusions to certain isolated areas such as Ramore, Ontario.

    There is absolutely no logical use in forcing business owners to advertise in English or French. The choice should be the business owners and they alone.

    I don’t condone nor condemn the use of alcohol but did you know…….

    Even in a socialist state such as Cuba……..

    It is legal to have an open bottle of alcohol in a vehicle so long as the driver is not the one consuming it…….

    And many Canadians think they live in a free country?

    A freedom should be practiced so long as it doesn’t impede someone else’s freedom.

    Why would the wearing of a star of David impact somone else? I wouldn’t be forcing someone to wear it? Or a kippah for that matter? Or a Cross? But this wouldn’t be part of the freedoms of a Quebec civil servant under the, ‘Charter of Quebec Values.’

  36. Cory Cameron September 23, 2013 at 4:51 pm

    “And there’s the crux of the problem we’re all facing.”

    You are FACING. I’m resolved and accept my Canada with it’s rules and Laws. I may not agree with all of them but can be mindful and respectful of their existence.

    “I’m smart and intelligent enough to see that I do not require the state to make all of these decisions for me as a private citizen and taxpayer. And the decisions that the state currently make that affect all of us at times go to such extremes as to be nonsensical in their approach.”

    As I have just told your buddy Highlander this may be effective for you as well.

    Your best bet is to find yourself an Island that is not part of Democratic system. Where you can live by your own RULES. No one will expect you to be respectful of others Rights or Laws. Just your OWN.

    Until then, following and respecting rules and laws has nothing to do with smarts and intelligence but every to do with CHARACTER and respect for DEMOCRACY.

  37. cory wrote: Mark my words, as more and more French ultranationalists move from Quebec and Eastern Ontario further West to inhabit areas like Kingston you will see a huge undertaking to begin flying Franco-Ontario flags

    AND????

    highlander wrote: WE ARE NOT IN THE USSR BUT AT TIMES IT REALLY FEELS LIKE IT.

    Folks can you believe this? If that is not going to extremes…….I don’t know what is. The freedom gang would like everyone to believe their BS, but they are not convincing many. With a comment like highlander posted, who would take them seriously or give them any credibility with that nonsense.

    Yep people are coming out of the woodwork in droves to follow this anti French movement. Canada is a terrible country according to these guys.

    Well folks……this article paints a very different and delightful picture of Canada which clearly differs from the freedom gang.

    2012 Gallup World POLL on subjective well being Canada ranked 2nd out of 150 countries.

    We rated our life satisfaction at 7.7 out of 10. The Danes came 1st at 7.8 and the US at 17th.

    stay tuned…keeping it short for the Adm.

  38. Hungry, why won’t you answer me?
    You made a bold statement, and yet when questioned you refuse to acknowledge your own words.

    I will repost again for you, so as to not put too much strain on your memory. I know how shaky it is.

    Hungry for the Truth….
    September 21, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    The French people =The French Government. = The same.

    Your equation would lead one to believe that this new fancy Quebec Values Charter that is being put forth by the Quebec government, has the support of all French people. Would you make so bold a statement? Or does the equation only work in certain instances as needed?

  39. continued….

    In the same year, the UN issued it’s first “World Happiness Report” Canada ranked 5th out of a 156 countries. USA ranked 11th.

    Canada is the 8th most peaceful country in the world.

    Yep………the freedom gang would have you believe that Canada is the worse country on the face of the earth. People are being mistreated and we have no freedoms.

    If it wasn’t so pathetic, it would be funny……….

    CANADA THE LAND OF PEACE AND FREEDOMS
    LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!!!!

  40. @ Stella. You must admit that Cory’s misery and angst does provide entertainment to a few CFN “viewers”.

  41. @FURTZ………I think that has a lot do with Canada coming in 5th in the “Happiness Report” LOL

  42. September 23, 2013 at 3:15 pm Hungry for the Truth (AKA: Lives for lies)
    “wrote, “The same form of government does not allow the choice of location, materials used in fabricating signs, certain images are restricted the depth that one
    must dig, the style of signs are all as equally noted in the by law.”

    Oh c’mon please … LFL. You keep “trying to compare” UNCOMPARIBLE things. The French language of “a province” is NOT comparable to the English language of “a country”

    and

    materials, location, depth to dig, and style of a sign ARE NOT COMPARIBLE to the issue revolving around the language on those signs.

    Please try to use that head of yours for more than just a decorative pointy hat rack.

    HFTT (AKA LIVES FOR LIES) wrote, “Such an attitude is indicative of equal disrespect to historical events.”

    Hummm, speaking of historical events. Since — YOU — raise the issue. What about the HUGE historical even which the French powers that be are always — trying to forget — and push aside. Yes, YOU KNOW IT… The war/battle … 1759

    Remember that one where the your side LOST and then the “mother country” France not only signed a declaration that ceded — ALL OF CANADA — to the British but it abandoned all the defeated French peasants that remained under British rule.

    Try remembering that when you get the itch to attack others for their so called, “disrespect for historical events.”

    HFTT (AKA LIVES FOR LIES) wrote,
    That is exactly why there is Laws and Rights that promote the use of French and will ensure it’s survival against radicals that believe the French majority of a Province within an English country should not have that Right.”

    Yeah LFL but, to force the majority non Francophones to accept this without choice and force that same group to PAY FOR that so called “right” within an Anglophone dominant country (to the tune of billions) is going a tad bit too far.

    And remember to put aside some time to have a “celebrate Canadian history” day eh 🙂

  43. Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote, “The Council is the democratic voice of the Community. That represent the Community. They decide on behalf of the Community.”

    Yeah except that if “the counsel” in some Quebec town or borough decides it wants English only (or even… heaven forbid bilingual) signs and mailings to appease the majority English members or the 45% English people that live among the 45% French of that small town things don’t work out quite the same do they?

    Naw, its the same ol — I do it MY WAY and YOU do it MY WAY too cr@p out of people of your ilk.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udsO_u_DSs8&hd=1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_MG8z_9P6Y&hd=1

  44. IT’S all WRONG not matter how you slices it.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9Z-5CzrKQg&hd=1

    The state NO LONGER dictates how much taxes whites pay compared to non whites

    The State NO LONGER dictate where whites can place their advertising compared to non whites,

    The State NO LONGER dictates how much advertising is allowed for whites compared to non whites

    The State NO LONGER dictates the size of the advertising for whites compared to non whites

    The State NO LONGER dictates that whites can drink, sit, or relieve themselves in a different places than non whites

    The state NO LONGER dictates how many parking spots whites get compared to non whites

    The State NO LONGER dictates whether white goods can be sold next to non white goods in a store

    ————————

    And “the STATE of Quebec” SHOULD ALSO

    NO LONGER

    DICTATE these same issues based on different language either because it’s the same form of discrimination with just a different “descriptor” instead of color it’s language and either way

    IT’S WRONG…

    What is happening in French Quebec is akin to the same cr@p that was dealt with and snuffed out years ago with regard to whites and non whites in the USA.

    Segregated buses for English and French, segregated schools and school buses for English and French and so on.

    It’s all WRONG and it’s all wrong for the same reasons. It pits people against each other.

    It’s time to let the French language and culture live or die on it’s own merits or lack thereof.

    STOP forcing all tax payers to fund this fiasco of hate and discrimination against other cultures and languages in the province of Quebec.

    If the term “language” were exchanged for the term “non whites” in many of the examples regarding laws and so on coming out of that province this kinda of discrimination WOULD NOT be tolerated and would not have been allowed to continue unabated for as long as it has in that province.

  45. Furtz September 23, 2013 at 6:09 pm

    “You must admit that Cory’s misery and angst does provide entertainment to a few CFN “viewers”.”

    There it is folks the reason Furtz is here he finds the misery and angst of what others go through as entertainment ……………………no more need to be said.

  46. Hungry for the Truth…. September 23, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    “A typical attitude of a person the uses a dead President to justify his disrespect to the Laws and Rights. Such an attitude is indicative of equal disrespect to historical events”

    So Justin Trudeau has admitted to breaking the law by smoking pot is he not disrespecting the law ,should he not go to jail or as you say” find yourself an Island that is not part of Democratic system.”

    Highlander wrote:“CCONTINUE TO BLAME ALL THOSE ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE ,but a loss of language is the fault of the speakers who do not practice it or pass on to the next generation .”

    “You use words and do not understand their implications. That is exactly why there is Laws and Rights that promote the use of French and will ensure it’s survival against radicals that believe
    the French majority of a Province within an English country should not have that Right”

    So the answer to ensure the survival of the language is not to teach it to future generations but to legislate it so all those that are not of this herritage must learn to speak it for survival of the language and job opportunities?

    PEOPLE DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE SCREWED UP LOGIC IN THIS ? ONLY IN CANADA EH?
    YUP MINORITY RULES AND MAJORITY DROOLS IN APATHY AND RIGHTS ARE LOST!

  47. CANADA THE LAND

    where decent Anglophone Canadians are discriminated in their own country by a “provincial government” that preaches and teaches its pure laine French citizens that it’s OK to be prejudice against Anglophones
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUkNVjM4Gc&hd=1

    and people of other races
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdZcQClWkIs&hd=1&noredirect=1

    A country which used to be
    OF PEACE AND FREEDOMS

    Until the Quebecois French powers that be decided they WANTED take over and have MORE AND MORE
    http://youtu.be/3kNcFyBofC4?t=17s

    LET’S allowing French puritans go on their own way in a separate Quebec and then we

    can GET IT (Canada)

    BACK THAT WAY!!!!!!

    it was before these Xenophobes began their crusade against everyone who IS NOT FRENCH pure LAINE.

  48. OMG…..this is like a breath of fresh air!!! Finally, peace on earth, goodwill among men. Alleluia!!!

    A meowing cat catches no mice!!!

    Having said that, perhaps the meowing from the other side will slow down some……..let’s keep our fingers crossed.

  49. Now Stella. Let’s not poke the six angry bears while they sleep.

Leave a Reply