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. *yawn*

    Thanks for the reminder that hungry ran away. Inquiring minds are turning blue in anticipation. Unless one of you two would like to field this one.

    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?

  2. Just like everything else “they” do bella. It’s only applicable when it benefits “them.”

    IE: They’re the first ones to get in your face and say, “Canada is a bilingual “country” when “THEY” want service in French.

    But, as we are VERY aware… That only applies when the French powers that be want service in French OUTSIDE the “province” of Quebec (you know EVERYWHERE in the “country” of CANADA) but when English fathers (as just one example) want service from the Ambulance attendant in English in this bilingual “country” we hear, there is no requirement for Ambulance attendants
    in the province of Quebec to speak anything other than French in this “bilingual country.”
    http://youtu.be/u3t72RUYAls?t=1m52s

  3. We missed you yorlik……**smile**

  4. edudyorlik September 29, 2013 at 8:16 pm

    “Just like everything else “they” do bella. It’s only applicable when it benefits “them.””

    Applicability is something we share and have in common. Because your STORY about the Quebec Ambulance Paramedic that only speaks FRENCH suits and benefits your needs.
    Unfortunately like most of your epistemic-rhetoric it is one sided and unrealistic.

    I have stated before that my father’s mother tongue is FRENCH. My father lives in ONTARIO. I have had many Ambulance Paramedics that did not speak FRENCH. Leaving my father unable to communicate. This happens in Ontario. Does he not have the Right to be served in FRENCH? Why is there English only speaking Paramedics in Ontario?

    IT IS THE SAME. The Charter that guarantees French Services in Ontario is not respected and the FRENCH SPEAKING LINGUISTIC MINORITY OF ONTARIO is unfairly treated.

    Of course you will claim it’s not the same. Languages are not equal or some crazy analogy that justifies your one sided unrealistic epistemic-rhetoric.

    When you start defending French linguistic minorities living outside QUEBEC with as much zeal and belief that you do about English rights in Quebec then your argument may gain some credibility. Until then you are showing bias and resentment against FRENCH RIGHTS.

    French Canadians living in an English Province have EQUAL Rights that should be defended with as much zeal as English minority Rights in QUEBEC.

  5. Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote, “I have stated before that my father’s mother tongue is FRENCH. My father lives in ONTARIO. I have had many Ambulance Paramedics that did not speak FRENCH. Leaving my father unable to communicate. This happens in Ontario. Does he not have the Right to be served in FRENCH? Why is there English only speaking Paramedics in Ontario?”

    I HAVE TOLD YOU ALREADY MR Hungry for lies. THESE TWO THINGS ARE SIMPLY NOT COMPARABLE.

    French is a regional language and has only survived because of the good nature of the very people that conquered this land in 1759.

    So, your father (or anyone living in Canada for that matter) must know the common language of the country they are in — Canada —

    You know, like this concept, only WITH ENGLISH and in the rest of Canada
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rpJbxjT564&hd=1

    French has only attained “the status” that it has OUTSIDE the province of Quebec because of the the good nature of the English to begin with.

    And this “good nature” has been taken advantage of now to the point where people like you are now trying to insinuate that it has the same status which English “SHOULD HAVE” in Quebec

    and saying this like,

    “My father lives in ONTARIO, does he not have the Right to be served in FRENCH?”

    NOT THE SAME THING.
    You know the song..
    http://youtu.be/ueZ6tvqhk8U?t=18s
    “One of these things is NOT like the others which one is different, do you know?”

    And until Quebec signs on the dotted line and becomes it’s own country and begins to fend for itself it’s citizens have a duty to treat the Canadians living there in the common language of this country which in case you are not aware IS ENGLISH.

    We can “MAYBE ” then compare what is now only a provincial language to a language that is the common language of a COUNTRY.

    PLEASE get this straight as it is very annoying to have to repeat myself about this issue. THESE THINGS ARE NOT COMPARABLE AT ALL.

    Though these languages may very well BOTH be wonderful languages in their own right, I WILL NOT entertain the idea and play your game by comparing these two languages on the same footing throughout all of Canada.

    THEY ARE — NOT EQUAL in that sense in this country —

    And though there is a push to accommodate the French language outside by forcing everyone to be bilingual, we CAN ALL CLEARLY SEE how the reverse is happening inside of the province of Quebec where they are forcing EVERYONE to be French ONLY.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hKXw24la-8&hd=1
    Ambulance attendants included. It’s all right there in their Bill 101 charter.

    ———————–
    BILL 101— section 45 and 46

    “45. An employer is prohibited from dismissing, laying off, demoting or transferring a member of his staff for the sole reason that he is exclusively French-speaking or that he has insufficient knowledge of a particular language other than French, or because he has demanded that a right arising from the provisions of this chapter be respected.

    A staff member not subject to a collective agreement who believes he has been aggrieved by an action that is prohibited by the first paragraph may exercise a remedy before the Commission des relations du travail established by the Labour Code (chapter C-27). The provisions applicable to a remedy relating to the exercise by an employee of a right arising out of the Code apply, with the necessary modifications.

    A staff member subject to a collective agreement who believes he has been so aggrieved may submit the grievance for arbitration if the association representing the staff member fails to do so. Section 17 of the Labour Code applies to the arbitration of the grievance, with the necessary modifications.

    1977, c. 5, s. 45; 1997, c. 24, s. 2; 2000, c. 57, s. 7; 2001, c. 26, s. 83.

    AND

    46. An employer is prohibited from making the obtaining of an employment or office dependent upon the knowledge or a specific level of knowledge of a language other than the official language, unless the nature of the duties requires such knowledge.
    ————————–

    AND THIS… “unless the nature of the duties requires such knowledge.”

    Is not clearly defined and thus left WIDE open to interpretation. And if there is something the French powers that e are good at that is interpreting things in THEIR FAVOR.

    So, taken to it’s intent means someone could be working for Macdonalds in the province of Quebec and DOWNRIGHT REFUSE to speak to the English customers in English and not a damn thing could be legally done about it.

    This is where this kind of despicable treatment towards English in their own country (in the province of Quebec) comes from.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUkNVjM4Gc&hd=1

  6. edudyorlik September 30, 2013 at 1:57 pm

    Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote
    edudyorlik (AKA: Lives for Rants) wrote,

    ” NOT THE SAME THING.
    You know the song..”

    Hungry for the Truth had already written.

    Of course you will claim it’s not the same. Languages are not equal or some crazy analogy that justifies your one sided unrealistic epistemic-rhetoric.

    It is the same all the same in the real world. Not your YOU TUBE WORLD. There is an equal very comparative argument in facts.

    Your warped sense of reality is building unfounded stories to APPLY to your enlarged sense of ENTITLEMENT.

  7. Dang it Stella! Look what you’ve done!
    @ edudyorlik. Are you suggesting that Francophones can be served in French in Ontario restaurants, including MacDonalds? Too funny!

  8. HFTT, I believe your father would have rights to the AVAILABLE services. Many areas try to provide services in French just like some businesses, but there are not enough English/French speakers to cover all of the jobs.
    Almost half of Quebec can speak English and just over 97% of Ontario can speak English. Seems to me that there are English folks who would like work too.Thanks for letting some of us work, for now

    HFTT “.The Charter that guarantees French Services in Ontario is not respected and the FRENCH SPEAKING LINGUISTIC MINORITY OF ONTARIO is unfairly treated.”

    How many times could I type OMG before the keyboard explodes?
    It may not be respected for complete domination standards, see reasons why above, but there are way more French services than is actually needed.

  9. Eric September 30, 2013 at 2:52 pm

    “HFTT, I believe your father would have rights to the AVAILABLE services.”

    The point that I’m refuting is made by EDUDYORLIK. His repeated argument is A FRENCH PARAMEDIC that does not speak English in Quebec.

    Many Ambulance Paramedics in this region do not speak FRENCH.
    “Many areas try to provide services in French just like some businesses, but there are not enough English/French speakers to cover all of the jobs.”

    Why does the same argument not stand for Quebec?

    “Almost half of Quebec can speak English and just over 97% of Ontario can speak English. Seems to me that there are English folks who would like work too.”

    If you argue fairness on numbers than I suggest you get them right.

    597, 267 In Quebec speak English (Stats Can 2011)
    601, 245 In Ontario speak French ( Stats Can 2011)

    Why then if it’s numbers that warrants services should Ontario’s minority language Rights be different than Quebec’s minority language Rights.

    If you argue on numbers.

    “Seems to me that there are English folks who would like work too. Thanks for letting some of us work, for now”

    You keep blaming the LAW…..It’s not the Law that creates discrimination. I have said it over and over again Change the measuring stick and you will have fairness. Then what would you blame?

    “How many times could I type OMG before the keyboard explodes?
    It may not be respected for complete domination standards, see reasons why above, but there are way more French services than is actually needed.”

    If that is you argument which does not stand up than Quebec is French dominated and then the same applies. Because the domination standard is French. See reasons above.

  10. Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote “It is the same all the same in the real world. Not your YOU TUBE WORLD.”
    Your warped sense of reality is building unfounded stories to APPLY to your enlarged sense of ENTITLEMENT.”

    Speaking of a sense of entitlement
    If what you say here is based in reality Hungry for lies then why don’t you refute the videos on a claims for claim basis.

    You cannot and that is why instead of doing so you make passing remarks about them and never deal with SPECIFICS.

    For example. The nice English lady on the bus. You can refute it’s validity all day long but no one will believe YOU because too many people have experienced EXACTLY that same debasing treatment in the province of Quebec themselves.

    Or the clip of the dude on the street yelling at the visitor to Montreal “You’re F*&^INFG British. Francais Francais

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCK04SzPvUs

    or the Priest who was flat out told he could not get service in French and then he called to complain even those who were supposed to be the lookouts for this kind of A-hole behavior told him they would not serve him in English. And it goes on and on and on…

    You even dismiss a video clip of a high ranking politician ACTUALLY SAYING THAT STUDY AFTER STUDY show and prove there is systemic discrimination against minorities which he further say’s is not a personal opinion but from their own government reports.

    NOT ONE WORD of acknowledgement about anything. It’s all just deny deny or ignore and move on to something else when someone has you against the ropes with facts.

    You act as if this is NOT happening.

    You then act like French is on equal basis in this country when you damn well know the FACTS that the French were a defeated clan and French signed a proclamation which handed over ALL of Canada to the British. This means that ANYTHING from that point forward was graciously given to the French.
    The facts are what you seem to steer clear of. You and the agitator clan use doublespeak on a constant basis to “try” to CONFUSE the issue but most everyone can see right through your lame statements like “the English minority are the best treated minority in this country.” This appears so on the surface but is just a play on on words and a play on historical circumstance but has ZERO truth or fact associated with such an odd statement.
    Then your agitator clan say things like this country was peaceful and now you are trying to break it up with ZERO sense of the FACT that it is the French who tried twice now to leave Canada and separate and it is VERY obviously the French who are not accommodating in the province of Quebec. It’s al French ONLY there while demanding bilingualism everywhere else.

    It’s all smoke and mirrors with you folks.

    NOTHING MORE

  11. Hey Eric. I invite you to order a meal anywhere in any restaurant in or around Brockville in any language you choose. You’ll be SOL if you don’t speak English. Life is tough, for sure. Now, how about those $50.000/each Franco flags all over Ottawa? Still waiting for you to tell us where they are.

  12. on September 30, 2013 at 2:35 pm Furtz wrote.
    @ edudyorlik. Are you suggesting that Francophones can be served in French in Ontario restaurants, including MacDonalds?”

    No, i am not suggesting that at all. Further more they shouldn’t have to be either. PERIOD.

    This all began with a desire by the Englishto be accommodating and provide service in French to the French in Federal government. What the hell happened to that idea, and that idea ONLY?

    Oh yes, i know what happened …

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvyifj557p8
    http://youtu.be/3kNcFyBofC4?t=18s

  13. I am so grateful that the English gave the French so much.

    yorlik wrote: You then act like French is on equal basis in this country

    Why shouldn’t we be on equal basis in this country? Don’t be giving me the BS that you guys saved the French. Aren’t we all Canadians first.

    Your statement clearly indicates you should be treated better. Guess what? It doesn’t work that way in the real world. We are one nation….one country, that has TWO OFFICIAL LANGUAGES. Get used to it.

  14. Edudyorlik September 30, 2013 at 6:26 pm

    Edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT) wrote, “Speaking of a sense of entitlement If what you say here is based in reality Hungry for lies then why don’t you refute the videos on a claims for claim basis.”

    Your argument is so distorted Ranter, by your personal interpretation of rules, Laws and regulations. And further distorts itself with your fabricated ones and the use of your faulted ANALAGY and disrespect of EQUAL RIGHT.

    SHOW where in the FSLA or The Canadian Languages Act does it say that FRENCH/ENGLISH languages are not EQUAL.

    In CANADA FRENCH/ENGLISH BILINGULISM is recognized by LAW as the two official languages of our COUNTRY.

    In your warped sense of ENTITLEMENT that fuels your argument in your make believe world.

    Your disagreement with the official Languages Laws of Canada does not make them any less LAW and applicable. Your argument is based on your personal DISAGREEMENT not FACTUAL LAW. Your 1700’s example is lame at best.

    You are grand standing on non existing Laws. YOU TUBE is not LAW. You use as LAW. It’s just one sided unrealistic epistemic-rhetoric that has no credibility.

    THE LAWS OF CANADA SAY EQUAL YOU SAY OTHERWISE.

    You conveniently disrespect the existence of The Canadian Languages Act and the FSLA that require the availability of FRENCH SERVICES in the 25 designated regions.

    THIS IS THE LAW as it written. It is not open to interpretation. It is CLEAR. FRENCH/ENGLISH are EQUAL by LAW.

  15. Hungry, why do you refuse to back up your words? I did not make them up, why will you not answer for your bold statements? I have provided the post, time/date, and a direct quote, as you always request, so really there is no excuse to ignore me besides hubris.

    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?

  16. Once again Hungry for lies. You do not refute any particular example. Just blanket statements.

    And if “ENGLISH/French are so EQUAL by LAW” (as you claim) in ALL of Canada then explain why i cannot have a sign in the province of Quebec that has “equal” lettering. Or, explain why Quebec is an officially unilingual province which considers the English language — the main language of the country they reside in —

    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBc5gzuHbKI&hd=1

    to be an insult to them.

    Naw, the only place English and French are “equal” Lives for lies is inside your head. Right behind those rose colored glasses you prance around wearing.

    Oh wait, that’s right, i get it now. That’s it… English and French ARE equal, that’s right.

    That would be — EVERYWHERE ELSE — BUT in Quebec where French is dominant. Just like they want it to be throughout Canada — DOMINANT —

    You and your ilk are never happy. Always want more and more and more. Give em an inch they’ll take a foot (mile).
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvyifj557p8&hd=1

    While the Anglophones were granting the use of French on the stamps and “granting the use of” French on the money and “granting the use of” French in the parliament it sure wasn’t a sense of being grateful and appreciative that was coming from the French for all the English were trying to do to work together and be accommodating.

    Oh no, not to the French. No no. To them it was a sense of ha ha, look they are giving us everything we desire so let’s soak them for more and more.
    What does Quebec want? More and mroe…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kNcFyBofC4&feature=youtu.be&t=18s&hd=1
    Yup, i am familiar with THAT TYPE, your type.

    and really, if you think about it, the fact that IT WAS the Anglophones that “let” French be on the stamps and “let” French be on the money, and “let” the French be on all packaging in this country it is pretty darn clear who was IN CHARGE and who was gracious enough to do all of this isn’t it?

    What did the French do with that graciousness? They took advantage of course. As they always do. Like a leach, they SUCK everything they can get out of the host.

    Something to be proud of eh Hungry. To be honest i would rather be on the side of nobility the side that that made the attempt to work together and tried to keep this country together while the French were the ones trying to — on two occasions — tear it apart.

    Rather than being on the side that simply abused practically every nice generous deed and gesture that was bestowed upon them.

    And yes, there “may” be wording in our system that was put there as yet another attempt to be fair but, that too can be altered and changed.

    One thing the Anglophones have to their advantage, and that is numbers. You see, they are a funny bunch those Anglo’s. They will give and give and give while at the same time taking the abuse but then, once they have had enough…

    On that note i would like to wish you a “we’ve had it up to here” kinda day eh 🙂

  17. edudyorlik September 30, 2013 at 10:34 pm

    “And if “ENGLISH/French are so EQUAL by LAW” (as you claim)”

    I do not claim. I have cited FACTUAL LAWS.

    Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
    Official Languages of Canada

    16. (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.

    “in ALL of Canada then explain why i cannot have a sign in the province of Quebec that has “equal” lettering.”

    Quebec Historical FACTS answers your question.

    “Or, explain why Quebec is an officially unilingual province which considers the English language — the main language of the country they reside in — ”

    Because English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights.

    “That would be — EVERYWHERE ELSE — BUT in Quebec where French is dominant. Just like they want it to be throughout Canada — DOMINANT — ”

    What would you have FRENCH CANADIANS DO learn ENGLISH.?

    “You and your ilk are never happy. Always want more and more and more. Give em an inch they’ll take a foot (mile).”

    REPEAT AND REPEAT AND REPEAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN……

  18. edudyorlik September 30, 2013 at 10:34 pm

    “While the Anglophones were granting the use of French on the stamps and “granting the use of” French on the money and “granting the use of” French in the parliament it sure wasn’t a sense of being grateful and appreciative that was coming from the French for all the English were trying to do to work together and be accommodating.”

    Your above comments confirm your warped sense of ENTITLEMENT and disrespect for the CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. of MY COUNTRY.

    “One thing the Anglophones have to their advantage, and that is numbers. You see, they are a funny bunch those Anglo’s. They will give and give and give while at the same time taking the abuse but then, once they have had enough… ”

    NUMERS….THE MAJORITY. SHOULD that give you the RIGHT to disrespect and again seek to DOMINATE the French Canadians. Your attitude and comment read like an ADVOCATE of ETHNIC GENOCIDE. Although you do not use the WORDS the essence of your message is CLEAR. It leads to one possible conclusion of your intent and that is the spewing of HATE and DISRESPECTFUL propaganda.

    Franco’s are a funny bunch. They will take and take the abuse but when they have had enough, they do something to protect themselves from further ENGLISH DOMINANCE of their RIGHTS as FRENCH CANADIANS.

    The Laws in Quebec exist and serve as corrective and preventive measure from historical facts. A history that you deny and rewrite and interpret to suit your one sided unrealistic epistemic-rhetoric
    that has no credibility.

  19. Hungry for truth (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote, “NUMERS….THE MAJORITY. SHOULD that give you the RIGHT to disrespect and again seek to DOMINATE”

    the English Canadians in their own country in the province of Quebec

    — THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE TAKING THE RIGHT TO disrespect and DOMINANT — ANYONE — are the French in Quebec. AND they are doing this as part of a province NOT as a country.

    AND THAT demonstrates — how warped YOU ARE — that you don’t see what you are trying to thrust upon the ROC is exactly what ypour own group are doing right now.

  20. hftt wrote, “Franco’s are a funny bunch. They will take and take the abuse but when they have had enough, they do something to protect themselves from further ENGLISH DOMINANCE of their RIGHTS as FRENCH CANADIANS.”

    Uhm err, what part of “a defeated clan” don’t you understand?

    hftt (AKA lives for lies) wrote,
    “The Laws in Quebec exist and serve as corrective and preventive measure from historical facts. A history that you deny and rewrite and interpret to suit your one sided unrealistic epistemic-rhetoric that has no credibility.”

    Turning things like prejudice and xenophobia into what you call “laws” hungry, DOES NOT MAKE THEM RIGHT or JUST no matter what excuses you “try” to use to justify them.

    Besides,
    If you bet your buddy a thousand dollars you could run faster than he could then it turned around and outran you and beat you.

    Would you then come back to him several years later demand your thousand dollars back with the excuse that enough time has past now since he BEAT YOU fair and square?

    Add to that little scenario that your buddy has been nice and kind and has been giving you back 50 dollars every year since as a kind gesture. So, now would you still demand it back?

    Yeah, that’s what i thought… No kind gesture goes unpunished.

    The “take advantage” gene in built right in there.

    The French were defeated, done deal at which point they were at the mercy of the victors — period. So now, with the victors having shown mercy and kindness and so on, you wish to come back hundreds of years later and prove your arrogance.

    Not to worry. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED

    In the late70’s when Quebec voted in the PQ government who then installed BILL 101 which was — and still is — THEEE most unconstitutional piece of legislation (what you and your ilk erroneously call corrective and preventive measure) every enacted in the free world.

    WHAT’S WORSE… Is that my federal government aided and abetted in this atrocity under the leadership of the wolf in sheeps clothing — P.E.T — and the good kind Anglophone majority people of Canada — out of an oversensitive sense of long forgone guilt — actually let it happen.

    The majority is beginning to see through the fog now and the arrogance and sense of entitlement of the defeated clan is shining through.

  21. Furtz, “Now, how about those $50.000/each Franco flags all over Ottawa? Still waiting for you to tell us where they are.”

    Feel free to look that up, since I did not type that amount. I could see that being close to a total per year for the Francophone Monument projects + French school boards + OPP and other government groups that fly them. At least 2 maybe 3 per year per site would almost make a full time Nurse position.

    Furtz “I invite you to order a meal anywhere in any restaurant in or around Brockville in any language you choose. You’ll be SOL if you don’t speak English. Life is tough, for sure.”

    I doubt very many people visit Brockville restaurants expecting any other language English, BUT, most private business people want your money and will try, from my experience. You still do not understand it is government that is causing these issues.

  22. HFTT, your comment on asking me to get the numbers right is short sighted. You need to ADD English speakers WITH Eng/Fr bilingual because that is the number who can speak English. Unless of course, the people who claim to be bilingual are not truthful.

    HFTT “You keep blaming the LAW…..It’s not the Law that creates discrimination. I have said it over and over again Change the measuring stick and you will have fairness. Then what would you blame?”

    Of course it is people who put in the law and people who go beyond what is necessary on interpretation, but the government does not want to touch anything for fear of losing votes. “work in and be managed in the language of your choice” enforces bilingual people get preferential treatment in hiring?

  23. Too funny! Kilroy says that Francophones have a gene that prevents them from accepting their inferior status in Canadian society. “The “take advantage” gene in built right in there.” he says. So, Kilroy believes that people of French descent are all born with a genetic flaw that makes them less than desirable citizens. Do I detect the stink of blatant racism in Kilroy’s asinine argument? Defective genes you say. Really?

  24. Not quite Furtz, the phrase was…

    The “take advantage” gene in built right in there.

    But, if that’s not correct then you explain how it is that a defeated clan can come back to the poker game a few hundred years later and demand their money back which they lost. Sounds pretty unfair to me.

    Matter of fact, the way the French are acting right now, one would think they had won the damn war in 1759. What’s up with that?

    little arrogance mixed in with a sense of entitlement perhaps?

  25. hftt (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote
    “16. (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges — as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.” —

    Funny how “”equality” is henceforth extended from — as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.” — to in all areas.

    As it would seem that — You — and the French powers that be seem to act as if this applies IN ALL areas aspects of the Canadian realm.

    It was ONLY INTENDED TO BE “as to their use in all institutions of the parliament and government of Canada.”

    That’s it, that’s all.

    NOT — Air Canada
    NOT — OC Transpo
    NOT — every hospital
    NOT — all police forces
    NOT — the upper echelons of the military
    etc etc etc…

    but, somehow they have parlayed all these things into what was originally ONLY “the institutions of the parliament and government.”

    NICE !!!

  26. Carry on Kilroy. We’re hanging on every word. Or maybe not… but carry on anyway.

  27. Hungry!

    Hungry!!

    HUNGRY!!!!!

    Did you misplace my post again?

    Why the reluctance to stand behind your words?

    Must I post my query again, or will you acknowledge your error made in frustration? Or perhaps it wasn’t an error. That’s cool too. Just recognize it either way and we can all move on.

    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?

  28. Eric October 1, 2013 at 1:17 pm
    “HFTT, your comment on asking me to get the numbers right is short sighted. You need to ADD English speakers WITH Eng/Fr bilingual because that is the number who can speak English. Unless of course, the people who claim to be bilingual are not truthful.”

    No that is not correct. Why would I ADD?

    The CENSUS question is what is your MOTHER TONGUE.

    French Canadian that can communicate in ENGLISH does make their mother tongue ENGLISH.

    And equally for English Canadian that can communicate in French does not make their mother tongue ENGLISH.

    Quebec 597, 267 Declare English as their MOTHER TONGUE (Stats Can 2011)

    Ontario 601, 245 Declare French as their MOTHER TONGUE (Stats Can 2011)

  29. Eric October 1, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    HFTT “You keep blaming the LAW…..It’s not the Law that creates discrimination. I have said it over and over again Change the measuring stick and you will have fairness. Then what would you blame?”

    Eric wrote; “Of course it is people who put in the law and people who go beyond what is necessary on interpretation,”

    Has the problem of an unrealistic faulty measurement been brought up to the concerned authorities? Some in this forum have posted affirmatively QUOTING Meilleur as saying “GOING BEYOND”

    “but the government does not want to touch anything for fear of losing votes.”

    Do you have a written confirmation from any level of government that they do not want to do any thing? Or is it just an assumption on your part.

    “work in and be managed in the language of your choice”
    enforces bilingual people get preferential treatment in hiring?”

    The faulty measuring stick that evaluates the unreasonable and unrealistic need for BILINGUAL STAFF is what creates the unfair practices. FIX the faulty evaluation measurement and the
    unfairness will be gone. IT IS THAT SIMPLE!!!!

  30. edudyorlik October 1, 2013 at 11:53 am

    edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT) wrote,

    “Uhm err, what part of “a defeated clan” don’t you understand?”

    What I do understand is your comment makes the point. You are completely oblivious and disrespectful to CANADA’S LAWS and EQUAL RIGHTS.

    “Turning things like prejudice and xenophobia into what you call “laws” hungry, DOES NOT MAKE THEM RIGHT or JUST no matter what excuses you “try” to use to justify them.”

    It is not I that calls them “LAWS.” The Canadian Government calls them CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Given the battles for Linguistic Rights in Quebec they are justified and are not xenophobic. That part of history that you continue to deny and twist is good motivation for the existence of these laws.

    “Would you then come back to him several years later demand your thousand dollars back with the excuse that enough time has past now since he BEAT YOU fair and square?”

    Another example of your one sided epistemic rhetoric and disrespect towards FRENCH CANADIANS and the Laws of MY COUNTRY that embodies your incredible attack.

  31. edudyorlikOctober 1, 2013 at 11:53 am

    edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT) wrote,

    “Yeah, that’s what i thought… No kind gesture goes unpunished.”

    Historical punishments and facts are being corrected and further risk of abuse is eliminated.

    “The “take advantage” gene in built right in there.”

    Who is looking to take advantage. The MAJORITY’S sense of Superior ENTITLEMENT is very obvious in your distortion of HISTORY that leads to your very prejudicial comments.

    “The French were defeated, done deal at which point they were at the mercy of the victors — period.”

    They lost the battle for the LAND. They did not loose their RIGHT to Identify themselves and their culture as “FRENCH CANADIENS.” Nor did they loose the use of their “MOTHER TONGUE.”

    Which was recognized numerous times by the Parliament of Great Britain after the BATTLE.

    Quebec Act (1774)

    The Quebec Act of 1774 was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britainsetting procedures of governance in the Province of Quebec. Among other components, this act restored the use of the French civil law which is still used today. The purpose of this Act was to secure the allegiance of the “French Canadiens” with unrest growing in the American colonies to the south.

  32. edudyorlikOctober 1, 2013 at 11:53 am

    edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT) wrote,

    “So now, with the victors having shown mercy and kindness and so on, you wish to come back hundreds of years later and prove your arrogance.”

    The arrogance is from you. You omit certain important historical FACTS from your claim. And do not ACCEPT that FRENCH CANADIANS have had to FIGHT for their RIGHTS. NO one gave them EQUAL RIGHT. They BATTLED for it. But distorting the facts is habitual and expected from someone that spews as much hateful and disrespectful epistemic-rhetoric against EQUAL RIGHTS.

    “The majority is beginning to see through the fog now and the arrogance and sense of entitlement of the defeated clan is shining through.”

    If as you say “The majority is beginning to see through the fog now.” Quebecers are far ahead and have already seen the SUPERIOR ARROGANCE and DOMINATION of the “the good kind Anglophone majority people of Canada” through the fog.

    It was not the FRENCH CANADIEN that was lead by a certain good kind ANGLOPHONE “RADICAL JACK.” The GOOD KIND LORD DURHAM that demonstrated a SUPERIOR SENSE of arrogance and ENTITLEMENT when his recommendation included ASSIMULATION of the FRENCH CANADIANS.

    AND that sense of ARROGANCE and ENTITLEMENT is still being ADVOCATED by the likes of you and your LIKE MINDED “GOOD and KIND ANGLOPHONE MAJORITY.”

  33. October 2, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    edudyorlikOctober 1, 2013 at 11:53 am
    edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT) wrote,

    “The French were defeated, done deal at which point they were at the mercy of the victors — period.”

    HFTT (AKA Lives for lies wrote, “They lost the battle for the LAND.”

    That’s VERY TRUE Hungry (Lives for lies) THEY DID LOOSE the battle for the land.

    Thus, “the land” they are on RIGHT NOW is British land.

    They did not loose their RIGHT to Identify themselves and their culture as “FRENCH CANADIENS.” Nor did they loose the use of their “MOTHER TONGUE.”

    That, once gain, is VERY TRUE Hungry (Lives for lies)

    These rights “to Identify themselves and their culture as “FRENCH CANADIENS.””
    Were not hindered in any way by the victorious British. As a matter of fact (though you seem to adamantly refuse to give credit where credit is due) many of the British nobles (Lord Dorcester for one) and those British patriots mentioned in this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj9b1SyHpys&hd=1
    who fought along side the French to secure the use of the French language and a state of equality for the French with the English in that area in the province of Quebec.

    You know, just like the federal government is doing today by forcing the 17.5% MAJORITY Anglophone Canadians to learn French just to appease and accommodate the tiny French minority.

    And, is there ANY appreciation for these kind acts? ANY AT ALL?

    NOPE, not one bit of appreciation of sense of “being a team.” Oh no.
    It’s quite the opposite actually…

    Unless you consider the outlawing of the English language in the province of Quebec “appreciation” or if you consider the ongoing changing of history to obliterate anything to do with the English language and the English culture —

    (as highlighted in this clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZwHOVPCLIw&hd=1 which btw is very informative. You actually could learn something but, be defiant if you please it’s no skin off my *ss)

    — to be “appreciation.”

    Naw, it’s pretty obvious. The French want EVERYTHING to be THEIR WAY and show zero acceptance for anything other than the French language and the French culture.

    Rooted in fear of the loss of their languagte and culture this all falls into the classic meaning of the term
    Xenophobia… which is the irrational or unreasoned fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.[1][2] It comes from the Greek words ξένος (xenos), meaning “stranger,” “foreigner,” and φόβος (phobos), meaning “fear.”[3] http://youtu.be/6AIg11uJw94?t=1m56s

    So while yes, the English did indeed do things like
    “recognize the french language and culture numerous times by the Parliament of Great Britain after the BATTLE.”
    AND…
    Quebec Act (1774)

    The Quebec Act of 1774 was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain setting procedures of governance in the Province of Quebec. Among other components, this act restored the use of the French civil law which is still used today.”
    as you pointed out …

    The French also showed how thankful they are and re-paid that generosity and sense of fairness (NOT !!) with their own brand of what i like to call BEING FU**^%^ ASS H(&o&LES.
    You know, sort of the same type of attitude you show here by blaming the English and claiming all kinds of rights that you and your clan ONLY HAVE BECAUSE of the British and the English in the first place. And calling canada “YOUR COUNTRY”
    Once again, likely to do with a genetic sense false deserving 😉 (slipped that in for you Furtzie)

    Ah, if only the French had won the battle eh Lives for lies?. We wouldn’t t be dealing with any of this. We’d all be on a constant diet of ragu (which i love btw) and poutine and there CERTAINLY would be (as in the Province of Quebec right now) a healthy disrespect for, along with ZERO tolerance for the English language and the English culture IN ALL OF CANADA right now, THAT’S FOR SURE.

    And on that note, i would like to wish you a “DREAM ON” kind of day eh 🙂

  34. ON October 1, 2013 at 10:38 am Hungry for the Truth

    (AKA: Lives for lies) wrote,

    “16. (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges — as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government

    OH AND i was correct eh… According to your quote above,

    the so called “equality” of English and French IN CANADA

    was ONLY INTENDED TO BE …

    “as to their use in all institutions of the parliament and government of Canada.”

    Hey but… Here’s to wishing you a “just making sure we got that straight” kind of day eh 🙂

  35. THIS LINE in my previous post SHOULD HAVE OBVIOUSLY READ as follows…

    You know, just like the federal government is doing today by forcing the MAJORITY Anglophone Canadians to learn French just to appease and accommodate that tiny 17.5% French —

    (at best — which includes the skewed province of Quebec numbers — )

    — minority

  36. Did I misquote hungry? Can anyone explain why he refuses to acknowledge me?
    Do my posts only show up on my screen?

  37. Why is it that he is still permitted to spew his indignant garbage, while not support his own ramblings with no balls to back them up?

  38. Continue le beau travail.

    Nothing like reading well researched gov. articles that state the true facts………thank-you HFTT

  39. HFTT,

    You’re allowing yourself to stray too far from your work. How is the project coming along with the approach to fair hiring practices at the CCH?

    Are they going to issue a Press Release soon?

  40. Hungry for the Truth….
    October 1, 2013 at 10:38 am

    edudyorlik said “in ALL of Canada then explain why i cannot have a sign in the province of Quebec that has “equal” lettering.”

    your reply was “Quebec Historical FACTS answers your question.”

    So how does Quebec’s historical facts answer that question ,well Ontario is historically English so why have bilingual anything ?

    “What would you have FRENCH CANADIANS DO learn ENGLISH.?”

    No that is wrong to you but English Canadians must learn French for opportunities in their own government!

    Hungry for the Truth….
    October 1, 2013 at 10:41 am

    “NUMERS….THE MAJORITY. SHOULD that give you the RIGHT to disrespect and again seek to DOMINATE the French Canadians.”

    No should it give the right for Quebec to disrespect and to seek to DOMINATE ITS MINORITIES!

    “The Laws in Quebec exist and serve as corrective and preventive measure from historical facts.”

    So by this statement you agree those Quebec laws -that directly infringe on human rights such as bill14 and charter of values is OK TO SERVE CORRECTIVE AND PREVENTIVE MEASURES……you really are of the pure laine mentality and ethnocentric.

    Yet more of hungry’s written Diarrhea -stop writing and lets see that action with the hospital that you clain to be working on !

    Hungry for the Truth….
    October 2, 2013 at 12:24 pm

    Given the battles for Linguistic Rights in Quebec they are justified and are not xenophobic. That part of history that you continue to deny and twist is good motivation for the existence of these laws.

    Why limit one of the official languages of the country ,Quebec is Xenophobic and the PQ”s stance with language rights and it attempt at cultural domination with the charter of values has really waken up Canadians and internationally to realize where the bigotry and xenophobic society is .

    How many times have I heard Quebecers and french people refer to Alberta as rednecks …hahhahah yup right they pale in comparison to quebec’s stance on immigrants ,Albertan’s are a far more open excepting society.

    Has the problem of an unrealistic faulty measurement been brought up to the concerned authorities? Some in this forum have posted affirmatively QUOTING Meilleur as saying “GOING BEYOND”

    Yes it has after Meilleur admitted this ,3000 signatures were in front of provincial government …guess what the blame game went on and blame was put on the hospital …..nothing further for the government to do: EVEN WHEN THE HOSPITAL IS A GOVERNMENT ENTITY !
    BASICALLY THEY WIPED THEIR HANDS CLEAN HOPING THIS SENSITIVE ISSUE COULD BE BURIED ,BUT WAIT ANOTHER ELECTION IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER!

    Bella ,Hungry refuses to address you as he has been proven wrong again ,wrong oh so many times it rather pathetic ,but then his pure laine views comes right through and ethnocentric values in backing Quebecs laws that are considered human rights violations…..but even some German people blindly backed Hitler and was obedient like Hungry!

  41. HFTT ” The faulty measuring stick that evaluates the unreasonable and unrealistic need for BILINGUAL STAFF is what creates the unfair practices. FIX the faulty evaluation measurement and the
    unfairness will be gone. IT IS THAT SIMPLE!!!!”

    I like this idea HFTT, Tell me, where do I start?

  42. @ bella. It could be that your asinine comments are not worthy of a reply. Apart from vitriol and insults, what have you contributed to the conversation?
    @ Hungry. Why are you arguing with these six fools? What you are doing is a variation of “feeding the trolls”. These clowns would soon disappear into their secret bunkers if they were ignored.
    @ Kilroy. No Frills has a special on aluminum foil this week. For $4.99 you can make enough beanies for all your friends.
    @ Cory. Still anxiously waiting for your next angst ridden letter. Is it writers block that’s holding you back, or are you just cruising the roads looking for more offensive flags and such to whine about?
    @ Highlander. You are hilarious! Carry on.

  43. Cory Cameron October 2, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    Cory,

    You have allowed yourself to stray to far from your objective.

    If I felt for on second that you where sincere in your question I would be happy to inform you. However I doubt that is the case.

    So let me ask you HOW is your LFA CLAN work coming along any PRESS RELEASES FROM this big FALL MEETING?

    Do tell….AFTER 3 and half years you should have a few PRESS RELEASES coming soon?

  44. Oh furtzy, do you not remember how it went when I tried to have a serious conversation? I was called an idiot, edited to suit the nay sayers, and once again ignored. Why would I put myself out there for that abuse again?

    Now hungry on the other hand speaks as an authority on EVERYTHING he speaks on. But when he is questioned he plays dumb, or butt hurt, or insults anyone who dares.

    I would not make such a bold statement as hungry thought would slide by. Either he is too important to be aware of what he says, or he is too much of a baby to admit that he is wrong yet again.

    Just to remind you of his foolishness, I’ll post it again. Maybe the 10th time will be the charm! *s*

    ~

    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?

  45. stellabystarlight October 2, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    Allo! Ma Claire de Lune. Ca fait longtemps que j’tai parler.
    Merci pour l’encouragement et j’ai l’intention te continuer.
    C’est vrai quand tu dit qu’elle est folle tanante et fatigante celle la. Tu s’ais qui j’ veut dire?

    Ils s’ont toute en maudit parce’qu’ils ne gagne pas la bataille.

    Time to shake the tree and see what falls. So far true colours
    have fallen. Te parler en francais ca sa vas les faire “jazer” comme qu’ons dit.

    A bientot….revient plus souvent….!!

  46. Edudyorlik October 1, 2013 at 5:29 pm

    edudyorlik (AKA: LIVES TO RANT ) wrote,

    “Funny how “”equality” is henceforth extended from — as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.” – to in all areas.”

    “As it would seem that — You — and the French powers that be seem to act as if this applies IN ALL areas aspects of the Canadian realm.”

    “It was ONLY INTENDED TO BE “as to their use in all institutions of the parliament and government of Canada.””

    That’s it, that’s all.
    NOT — Air Canada YES FEDERAL $$$$$$ + required
    languages++ obligations.

    NOT — OC Transpo YES FEDERAL $$$$$ + Canadian Fuel Credit + FLSA obligations

    NOT — every hospital YES FEDERAL$ institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada. section 23 of the Charter.

    NOT — all police forces FEDERAL $$$$$ + Provincial Language Regulations and obligations.

    NOT — the upper echelons of the military FEDERAL $$$$$institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada. etc etc etc… $$$$$$$

    These are CONSIDERED institutions or DEPT. of the Parliament and government of Canada.

    If you ever included a FACT in your posts I’m sure many would fall over.

    AGAIN IF YOU DID NOT TWIST THE TRUTH OUT OF EVERYTHING YOUR POSTS MAY HAVE SOME CREDIBILITY.

    THIS IS THE FACTS. as they are.

    A FACT from The Canada Languages Act.

    Section 3
    The Act applies to federal institutions—that is to say, offices, Crown corporations (VIA Rail and Canada Post) and federal departments such as Health and Transportation…etc… In addition, certain organizations, such as Air Canada and NAV CANADA, retained their language obligations after they were privatized.

    THIS IS THE FACTS. NOT AS YOU SAY IT IS……

Leave a Reply