The latter french massacres you describe are fully attributed to bourgeois government, who, by essence, are not french, but of anglo-saxon obedience.

Only people of anglo-saxon obedience believe that money is more important than anything else.

> "They come here, expecting to go live in the US in the next few months
> [they seldom do, americans are extremely racist and do not want filipinos]"

This is simply ridiculous. While I am in many ways sympathetic to the sovereignist philosophy, I am an American of Asian Indian descent.

I  just watched Peter Sellers in “The Party” (other article) and your statement could only bring back that fond memory… Sorry, could not resist.

I have never experienced anything CLOSE to the racism I did in Quebec, even in Texas, Georgia or Tennessee.

Oh yeah? How about the US immigration laws that automatically assume that everyone who shows at the doorstep wants to immigrate illegally? The way it works (no 4th amendment protection at the border), you essentially have to **PROVE**  that you don’t intend to break the law when you show up.
White  people from Canada are not very often annoyed at the border, but how about people who are not white and not from Canada?

Stop being stupid and saying "Americans are extremely racist" when you are part of a movement (again, NO problem with the philosophy, just the backwards racists who people the movement) that REGULARLY uses tests of "pure laine" or "Quebecois de souche

Ouate de phoque? Who tests for “soucheness”??? Raymond Villeneuve???

(my ass, you guys were imperialists in your own right for much of your history, own up to it) to equate with being Quebecois.

Unlike Britain, France’s very survival  did not depend on the plundering of the natural ressources that  have been long depleted in Britain. France had a colonial empire only because it was fashionable at a time, so it only pursued it half-assedly. The only time when it  was pursued  more studiously was when the bourgeois had  manged to subvert France during the industrial revolution. But again, France was hardly dependent on it’s empire so it still pursued it half-assedly (compared to the red coats). Best proof of it  is that after world war II, when both France and Britain had their empires stripped for them,  Britain was completely broke, destitute and bankrupt that it had to impose strict  exchange controls for more than 20 years after the war, whereas France saw more than 30 solid continuous years of constant, unprecedented economic growth. Like is it’s empire actually stunted it’s Economy.
So, no, we, the french  were globally  much better imperialists than the red coats.

Stop denigrating a country that is VASTLY more diverse and accepting of immigrants as RACIST before you get your own house in order.

It’s very easy to look “more diverse” when you’re more than  40  times bigger.

When there comes a day I can walk down the streets in tough parts of Quebec City with my color skin and see a group of nationalist white boys with shaved heads and feel SAFE, then start throwing stones at glass houses...

There are no “though parts” in Québec. They are  all equally limp and  listen to garbage radio.
Besides that, I’d like to know  where you get your shit, because it’s  reall good stuff.

And don't pull the language shit on me...I speak fluent Quebecois French with a STRONG accent, so strong that in France I occasionally struggled accent-wise

Colour me surprised (pun intended).

Are you serious? FASHIONABLE? They got into more than 3 world wars over being FASHIONABLE? I realize that fashion is important to the French, but you have to be kidding here. Spain was even more bountiful, so I guess the didn't...oh...South America...cheap labor and free stolen gold...I see...

They dumped North America because rich white French nobles were making more money growing sugar on the backs of tortured Native and African slaves in the Caribbean.

They sure as hell didn't give up West Africa without a fight---they massacred les tirailleur senegalais because they didn't want to give up West Africa, they mass murdered vast groups of Southeast Asians to keep their empire intact...they invaded India in Pondicherry to try to seize the whole subcontinent (and by the way, domination of India was far more important to world domination anyway)...not to mention the French Quarter in Shanghai, French Guyana, Lebanon, the war crimes in Algeria, the islands of the South Pacific

As a white Quebecois, you have the Afrikaaner syndrome...if it happens to whitey, it is extra doubleplus bad, but WE never did anything bad to anyone because the ENGLISH did stuff that was 10% as bad to US!!

It's childish thinking.

Now, I am no fan of the Canadian English superiority complex (it is laughable anyway, as an American, when Canadians complain about American domination and turn around and act ten times worse to the French all over their country) but damn you went totally delusional with that comment

Rimouski. And no, I've been there, and you must be kidding. I seriously think that the strip club was the only place English was understood.

Now papers outside of the English department can be written in French and MUST be graded. Most of the hospitals have better patient services in French then English (research is largely English, but that is a reality of science and of having an international faculty).

But no, after doing this, and integrating, they should then be cut off. Sometimes I am glad I moved from Montreal, then I realize that most Western Quebec sovereignists are not such massive ideologues because they understand the realities of a multilingual and multicultural society

Everyone spoke to me in French in Montreal when I was there, except for a few bus drivers who were really interested in practicing their English. And I'm Indian, so tons of people assumed I was anglophone at the outset, but I always spoke in French because my French was usually better than their English.

It helped that I rarely went west of University Street, but I was fluent in French within two years.

I don't know what Montreal you are living in, but in Quebec, unilingual anglophones are the worst paid on average.

This is simply ridiculous. While I am in many ways sympathetic to the sovereignist philosophy, I am an American of Asian Indian descent. I have never experienced anything CLOSE to the racism I did in Quebec, even in Texas, Georgia or Tennessee. Stop being stupid and saying "Americans are extremely racist" when you are part of a movement (again, NO problem with the philosophy, just the backwards racists who people the movement) that REGULARLY uses tests of "pure laine" or "Quebecois de souche (my ass, you guys were imperialists in your own right for much of your history, own up to it) to equate with being Quebecois.

Stop denigrating a country that is VASTLY more diverse and accepting of immigrants as RACIST before you get your own house in order. When there comes a day I can walk down the streets in tough parts of Quebec City with my color skin and see a group of nationalist white boys with shaved heads and feel SAFE, then start throwing stones at glass houses...

And don't pull the language shit on me...I speak fluent Quebecois French with a STRONG accent, so strong that in France I occasionally struggled accent-wise

The UN is a roundtable for totalitarian tin-pot nations ruled by barbarians. Remember they were the ones who put Qaddafi in charge of human rights.

And Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi (???????) is a “terrorist”! But it could be worse, they could have put there our great ally, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud (???? ??????? ???????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????‎), king of Saudi Barbaria…

While I never agree with what Jean says, he's right about UNESCO. Anything UNESCO says is just a suggestion - it has no official powers. You must not forget that UNESCO is an arm of the United Nations - one of the most useless bodies on the face of the Earth. The UN is a roundtable for totalitarian tin-pot nations ruled by barbarians. Remember they were the ones who put Qaddafi in charge of human rights.

Combien de fois est-ce qu’il faut te répéter que la majorité des Anglophones au Québec sont bilingues avant que ça rentre dans ta petite tête. Je vois partout ou t’écris nous ne voulons pas parler ou apprendre le français.

La majorité des anglais au Canada ne veulent pas apprendre le français; ça se voit très bien par leur attitude. Même si tous les anglais du Québec ne seraient pas comme ça, ça n’y changera pas grand-chose. Parce qu’il faut considérer les anglais dans tout le Canada, car ceux du Québec ne se considèrent pas comme québécois (hormis une toute petite minorité).

Ya t-il quelque chose que tu ne comprends pas? J’ai pensé peut-être que si je t’écris dans TA langue que tu comprendras. Nous ne sommes pas ceux ou celles qui veulent que la langue disparaitre, et tes propos sont ridicule. Je pense que tu vis toujours des années 1800. Nous sommes dans l’année 2009 mon homme, il faut s’évoluer un peu pour comprendre des choses.

Oui, justement, en 2009, nous ne devrions pas devoir protéger notre langue contre l’anglicisation des immigrants prônée par les anglais et le gouvernement fédéral. La loi 101 a pratiquement anéanti l’outil principal d’élimination du français (qui est l’anglicisation des immigrants) et 30 ans plus tard, les anglais n’en sont toujours pas revenus, et ils ne cessent de la décrier.

Je pense le point que t&t à essayer de te faire t’as complètement manquer! Il/elle montrait qu’il existe aujourd’hui la discrimination au Québec. Corrige-toi sur le fait que les Anglophones veulent retourner dans le passé, c’est n’est pas juste complètement faux mais ça demontre l’insécurité de ton part.

Qui ne serait pas insécurisé en étant entouré de 50 fois plus de gens qui dans le meilleur des cas se contrefoutent de vous? Parce que c’est notre situation, et seule une vigilance constante permettra de contrer toute tentative de minorisation.
Vous êtes anglaise, vous n’êtes pas menacée, donc vous ne pouvez pas comprendre celà.

De ce qui concerne les écoles françaises au Red Deer, oui, il y en a. En passant, il y en a partout au Canada! Et encore tu perds ta crédibilité.

Ça ne change rien au fait que l’Alberta gueule très fort contre le français.

Et tu as raison, il n’y avait aucun Anglais qui était emprisonner pour parler l’Anglais au Québec mais il y en a bien des commerces qui ont était pénaliser pour avoir l’affichage dans les DEUX langues à la même grandeur.

Un commerce n’est pas humain, donc on ne peut parler de «droits de l’Homme» pour un commerce. Un commerce n’a pas plus le droit d’afficher en anglais que de faire de la publicité mensongère.

Et il y a des Anglophones qui fréquent l’école française qui ont eu des punissions pour parler Anglais dans la cour pendant leurs récréation. Je peux constater que ça n’existe pas dans les écoles Anglaises au Québec, ni à travers le Canada. Si un enfant francophone parle français dans la cour pendant leur récréation il n’y a pas des conséquences.

Une école d’immersion se devra d’avoir des règles plus strictes; les élèves qui s’y trouvent ont accepté de se conformer à ces règles, et si elles demandent une punition pour parler anglais, et bien c’est l’affaire de l’école.

Et pour ce qui est de votre « interesting tid-bit» la cour Suprême à trouver au début la loi 101 était anticonstitutionnel et ils ont fait des concessions, c’est pour ça qu’il reste le droit d’afficher l’anglais dans les commerces mais plus petit que le français. UNESCO peut approuver et c’est ça la démocratie.

Non. La démocratie, ce n’est pas de subjuguer la volonté de tout un peuple sous la botte d’une constitution écrite par un ennemi acharné du Québec; en France, par exemple, la volonté du peuple est explicitement au dessus de la constitution; c’est ainsi que l’élection du président de la République au suffrage universel a pu être adoptée par référendum, même si la notion était à la base anticonstitutionnelle.
C’est ça, la VRAIE démocratie: la volonté du peuple, pas celle d’un bout de papier.

UNESCO à fait des recommandations, ils ne plaindre pas mais le Québec parait pas bien si un moment donné le Québec deviens un pays qui veut un siège à UNESCO.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Il y a des pays bien pires que le Québec en matière des droits de l’Homme qui siègent à l’Unesco.
Vous reprenez le refrain habituel des anglais anti-Québec qui chiâlent contre la loi 101 en disant qu’elle viole les droits de l’Homme, et bien évidemment, vous ne comprenez pas qu’il y a une distinction entre l’homme et son commerce parce que pour vous, le commerce est un élément essentiel de votre culture. Ce n’est pas le cas pour nous; le commerce est un mal nécéssaire qu’il faut encadrer le plus rigoureusement possible, afin d’éviter que le public se fasse fourrer, et le commerçant n’est pas digne de confiance.

De tout façon ces lois, si jamais Québec deviens un pays, serions appliqués au Québec car c’est ça la démocratie et il faut prendre soins des minorités dans un pays libre. Comme Canada le fait avec le Québec.

Oui, le canada prend très bien soin de nous, avec des juges d’immigration qui disent carrément aux immigrants qu’ils doivent parler anglais au Québec (je l’ai personnellement vu — j’aurais bien jeté la juge par la fenêtre, mais j’ai eu peur de frapper quelqu’un avec).

Avant de t’exprimer avec ton cœur. Assurez-vous des faits et de tes arguments.

Je ne fais que ça.

Je suggère que tu sors un peu de ta cave 

Je ne suis pas marié (now, that’s a very deeeeep one).

No, just be concerned about your minorities. I gotta tell you Jean, you could have easily been recruited into Heinrich Himmlers’ outfit in the last war.

Like hell you are. You’re only concerned about them when they are prevented from becoming english.
Whoops, why I am responding to a Godwin® post???

No, just be concerned about your minorities. I gotta tell you Jean, you could have easily been
recruited into Heinrich Himmlers' outfit in the last war.

What social progress. Advancing one ethnic group at the expense of another is blatant discrimination just like your loi 101.

Your vision is so narrow that the blinders are now covering your eyes.

You are so out of touch with reality and tend to contradict yourself many times.

ORLY?
You are grasping at straws. All your arguments are hollow, and are only indicating that you cannot stomach that you are no longer 40 years earlier when the english could bulldoze the french. You only want to go back when the english would not have to learn french.

Also, if you care to see where discrimination in Quebec is here is the UNESCO decision, is this implement in Quebec? I believe in Canada I can send my child to any school of my choice, I know, I did it.

Are there french schools in Red Deer, Alberta?

Not so here in Quebec. We need a liscense.

A “liscence” for what?

As for immigration, Quebec is the only province that controls 95% of their immigration, only refugee applications are handled by the Federal government. That combined with Bill 101, leave absolutely NO DOUBT in my mind the French language is not in danger.
Oh and prior to trying to argue that Canada is in violation of UNESCO’s recommendations, these recommendations are regarding QUEBEC. These decisions are implemented EVERYWHERE ELSE IN CANADA!
“In 1989 the premier of Quebec, Robert Bourassa, boasted that the Quebec government had “suspended fundamental liberties” by outlawing the use of English and other languages except French in most commercial advertising throughout Quebec, and by restricting entry to the English-language public school system in Quebec.

BZZZZT! STOP RIGHT HERE!
The keyword are “commercial advertising throughout Quebec”. This is something brought about by croporations, and croporations are not human and thus cannot be construed by any remote twist of reasonning to enjoy human rights.
I guess that pretty well ends the discussion right there.
Oh, and about education, well, are you implying that french education is less good than english education? If you could prove that, yes, there would be a case of discrimination, so please go ahead, demonstrate that french education is less good than english education.

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

Okay, who has had that right barred? Oh, yes, Ernst Zündel, who got jailed for saying that the shoah was bullshit… Did anyone got jailed for speaking english in Québec?
 

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

So? Where are there restrictions? Let’s recall that “everyone” means all humans, and croporations are **NOT** humans.
 

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) for the respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) for the protection of national security or public order (ordre publique) or of public health or morals.

Ah, here is an interesting tid-bit. Restricting english commercial signs is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech. The supreme court of Canada said so, and the UNESCO can agree too, because it’s for the protection of the national security of the french in Québec.
And no matter how you howl and whine and wail and bitch, it’s not going to change anything. Most people in Québec are perfectly happy with that, and in a democracy, that’s what all counts.
 

Canada did not sign the Convention because education is a provincial jurisdiction and the provinces refused to allow Canada to sign the Convention on their behalf. Nevertheless, as a member of UNESCO, Canada is still bound by the Recommendation.

No. The UNESCO has no jurisdiction over the internal affairs of Canada, much less of Québec. You are still grasping at straws. The UNESCO can howl and bitch and moan, it will change nothing. Now what will the UNESCO do? Send-in the zouaves pontificaux???
 

In Quebec, children of French-speaking parents are prohibited from attending English schools. English-speaking immigrant children are forced into French-language schools. There is no option. The right to attend an English public school in Quebec is hereditary, being passed from parents to their children, and so down the generations, establishing a “blood line” of people raised in Quebec who are eligible to attend English schools in Quebec. This “blood line” excludes all children of French-speaking parents from anywhere in Canada or the rest of the world, and it excludes English-speaking immigrants to Quebec from anywhere else in the world.

If you thought that HEREDITARY privileges disappeared along with FEUDALISM, you were wrong: hereditary privileges live on in the Canadian Province of Quebec.”

Booh Hoo Gaaah. Why do you whine about US being prevented to go to english schools? Because you want the “good french-canadians who know their place in Canada” be able to turn their offspring into english? Why should we be concerned about people who want to become the ennemy? If they want to do so, they are perfectly welcome to go elsewhere in Canada and turn their kids into crumpet-eaters. But not here, and certainly not with our hard-earned tax dollars!!!
If you want to get rid of hereditary privilege, let’s also get rid of the king/queen thing, and of inheritance; whenever someone croaks up, all the estate should go to the State. Why? No? Talk about selective whining!!!
No, in reality, you’re jut one of those intolerant english bigots that do not want anything to do with the french, one of those dinosaurs that normally should have left 30 years ago.
Now, tell us, why should we give any attention to your desires? You certainly are not a desirable citizen because to please you, we would have to go back in time, undoing the tremenduous social progress done in the last half-century.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 19

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) for the respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) for the protection of national security or public order (ordre publique) or of public health or morals.

Article 50

The provisions of the present covenant shall extend to all parts of federal states without any limitations or exceptions.

The UN's decision against Canada
"While the restrictions on outdoor advertising are indeed provided by law, the issue to be addressed is whether they are necessary for the respect of the rights of others. The rights of others could only be the rights of the francophone minority within Canada under article 27 [of the Covenant]. This is the right to use their own language, which is not jeopardized by the freedom of others to advertise in other than the French language. Nor does the Committee have reason to believe that public order would be jeopardized by commercial advertising outdoors in a language other than French... The Committee believes that it is not necessary, in order to protect the vulnerable position in Canada of the francophone group, to prohibit commercial advertising in English. This protection may be achieved in other ways that do not preclude the freedom of expression, in a language of their choice, of those engaged in such fields as trade. For example, the law could have required that advertising be in both French and English. A state may choose one or more official languages, but it may not exclude, outside the sphere of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a certain language. The committee accordingly concludes that there has been a violation of article 19, paragraph 2."

But in Quebec, outdoor billboard advertising and public transit advertising is still prohibited in any language other than French. This violates both article 19(2) of the International Covenant and it also violates article 51, since the restriction applies only to Quebec. No other province restricts the language of commercial advertising. If you thought that freedom of expression was taken for granted in civilized countries you were wrong: free expression is suppressed in the Canadian Province of Quebec.

Access to English-language Education

UNESCO Convention/Recommendation against Discrimination in Education

Canada did not sign the Convention because education is a provincial jurisdiction and the provinces refused to allow Canada to sign the Convention on their behalf. Nevertheless, as a member of UNESCO, Canada is still bound by the Recommendation.

Section I (1)(c) of this convention prohibits discrimination in education:

1. For the purposes of this Recommendation, the term 'discrimination' includes any distinction, exclusion, limitation or preference which, being based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic condition or birth, has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing equality of treatment in education and in particular:

(c) Subject to the provisions of section II of this Recommendation, of establishing or maintaining separate educational systems or institutions for persons or groups of persons;

Section II

When permitted in a State, the following situations shall not be deemed to constitute discrimination, within the meaning of section I of this Recommendation:

(b) The establishment or maintenance, for religious or linguistic reasons, of separate educational systems or institutions offering an education which is in keeping with the wishes of the pupil's parents or legal guardians, if participation in such systems or attendance at such institutions is optional [our italics] and if the education provided conforms to such standards as may be laid down or approved by the competent authorities, in particular for education of the same level;

When these sections are read together, the conclusion is inescapable. In the absence of choice, the establishment or maintenance, for linguistic reasons, of separate educational systems or institutions is discriminatory by definition.

Article 5 of this Covenant guarantees parents the right to establish private and/or religious schools that operate outside the state system.

Here are some paragraphs from Article 5 of this Covenant.

(c) It is essential to recognize the right of members of national minorities to carry on their own educational activities, including the maintenance of schools and, depending on the educational policy of each State, the use and teaching of their own language, provided however:

(i) That this right is not exercised in a manner which prevents the members of these minorities from understanding the culture and language of the community as a whole and from participating in its activities, or which prejudices national sovereignty;

(ii) That the standard of education is not lower than the general standard laid down or approved by the competent authorities; and

(iii) That attendance at such schools is optional.

The law in Quebec

The passages apply to Canada's "national minority" of French Canadians, who comprise perhaps twenty-four percent of the total population. But Quebec's language law violates this treaty.

In Quebec, children of French-speaking parents are prohibited from attending English schools. English-speaking immigrant children are forced into French-language schools. There is no option. The right to attend an English public school in Quebec is hereditary, being passed from parents to their children, and so down the generations, establishing a "blood line" of people raised in Quebec who are eligible to attend English schools in Quebec. This "blood line" excludes all children of French-speaking parents from anywhere in Canada or the rest of the world, and it excludes English-speaking immigrants to Quebec from anywhere else in the world.

If you thought that HEREDITARY privileges disappeared along with FEUDALISM, you were wrong: hereditary privileges live on in the Canadian Province of Quebec."

Remember that Parizeau's wife of many years was a Polish writer. Parizeau has many faults but doesn't hate immigrants.

I remember a Greek friend of mine deliberately voting Yes in the first referendum (1980) simply because she was so sick of the ignorant comments about Québec from her compatriots!

          The english are imperialists
So were the French.

No. The english were forced to have an empire, because their poor little island was soon stripped of ressources, forcing the british to get them overseas.
By comparison, France is a bountiful country, and having a colonial empire was not a question life-or-death. They had an empire, for sure, but it was just for copycat reasons, because it was fashionable. And they surely did not care as much about their empire as the british did; witness how readily they dumped North-America. Those who got North-America eventually got to (kinda) control the world.
And lastly, at the end of World War II, France and Britain were stripped of their empires. Without it’s empire, Britain was completely broke, bankrupt, despondent, while France went on into 30 solid years of unprecedented economic growth (the «trente glorieuses»); meanwhile, Britain had strict currency controls installed for 20 years after the war!

Restricting access to English education,

There is no restriction to english education if you are canadian. If you are or your parents are not of canadian origin, you have no business going to english school.
THIS IS JUST LIKE ANY OTHER GODDAMMED FUCKING NORMAL COUNTRY ON EARTH!!! NO COUNTRY IN THE WORLD ALLOWS PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHING IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE THAN THE MAJORITY'S!!!! WHY THE FUCK IS IT SO GODDAMMED FUCKING HARD FOR YOU BLOKES TO FUCKING UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE FUCKING ACTING LIKE EVERY OTHER GODDAMMED FUCKING SACRAMENT D'HOSTIE DE CALVAIRE DE TABARNAK DE CRISS COUNTRY ON THIS FUCKING PLANET????
WHY THE FUCK RHODESIAN ENGLISH WOULD GODDAMMED BE FUCKING SO SPECIAL SO NOT TO DO LIKE EVERYONE ELSE???
Do you understand now when you are told that you are no different from any run-of-the-mill western redneck???

restricting English communication at work and in business,

The majority of people in Québec are french, so please explain why it is wrong to force a tiny minority to use the language of the majority.

and all the other aspects of Quebec’s language law that encourages the supremacy of French by putting limits on the use of other languages, combined with the enforcement of such laws that tends to be only used against English.

So, if you are supposedly so concerned about the future of french, how are we supposed to protect it against the english (because the largest threat comes from english) without having active measures to ensure that immigrants think that they can live in english in Québec??? You can’t have your cake and eat it. Either you are truly concerned about french and understand that the overwhelming theat of english has to be curbed, or you really are not and only want to go back 40 years when french was definitely going to be eradicated.

What about Lionel-Groulx?

This is outside the scope of this discussion. Lionel-Groulx’s purported “antisemitism” has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere. (Oh, you want to tackle me head on on this? I’m not afraid of doing so — the jews are not untouchable; they’re mean bitches who whine the loudest and they think that they can control everything, but that shall not deter he who has the solid facts behind him —, but I will not redo what I did. So go look elsewhere for what I said about that, read it, and then if you really think  that you have arguments, come back and I’ll tear them to shreds).
 

Sorry, I haven’t figured out how to do the quoting thing yet…

It’s easy: just enclose the to-be-quoted-text with <blockquote> and </blockquote> tags. If you use Firefox, you will find this very helpful.

Jean Naimard, though I can tell you’re pleased to have me on your side of the sovereignty issue, I do take issue, to put it mildly, with your characterization of Americans as “extremely racist” and “scared shitless of Mexicans”.

I knew some would… :) :) :) As it happens, I’ve been hanging around some pretty US right-wingos (in a totally unrelated domain, many people had problems with a given individual on the Internet, and of that bunch of people, I guess I was the only “lefto” - we helped each other out — the one who was the most helpful was the prototypical appalachian hillbilly, but a true southern gentleman), and I had to deal several americans during several heavy-machinery deals so I am more exposed to their views than to mainstream views; hence my perception that americans are scared of latinos.

It doesn’t jive well with your depiction of Québec as tolerant (luckily, I’ve found most Québecers of any linguistic or ethnic stripe to be somewhat less prone to assume I have a white hood in my closet next to my AK-47).

AK-47? Wouldn’t that be a M-16??? :) :) :) :) :)

It’s all right, though; with in-laws from the Middle East, I’ve gotten used to sweeping generalizations about my country of birth. Sigh.

:)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

"Nice job, Iggy. Way to piss off a huge chunk of the country."

Don't know why the reply doesn't appear below the original comment.

Maybe this is related to the use of Firefox and/or Netvibes to read the posts.