BS: Nation with-in Nation

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 11:18 PM

One of these days Shane your alter ego is going to come to realize that not only is one of his other personalities is a f*&king monkey, but the other one is a f*&king asshole ... then you and Chongo are history!

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 11:13 PM

There is another flippin' nation to consider here, eh? And that is the Hard Rock Nation, baby! That includes all us righteous dudes who play or lissen to Heavy Metal and Hard Rock music! We are a NATION, man, know'm sayin'? Our nation is exeemplified in all its flippin' glory in movies like "Tenacious D and the Pick of Destiny" which is out now and I suggest you go and flippin' see it RIGHT NOW. But get stoned first. It helps. That is a flippin' Nation, man.

These flippin' frogs in Quebec been moanin' and groanin' at our expense WAY too long. If Don Cherry was Prime Minister...which he oughta be...He would put a stop to it QUICK, lemme tell ya. They would all have to, like, either SHUT UP or move back to flippin' France!

"If ya can't beat 'em in the alleyway, ya can't beat 'em on the ice!" That's what Don Cherry says, and he is my idle, eh?

- Shane

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 11:08 PM

I agree menyself ... but does anyone??

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 11:06 PM

Notice that Chong didn't seem to have any suggestion as to what would have been a better course to take to deal with the political situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 11:01 PM

Well at least the majority of our elected representatives from all parties seem to agree with Harper.

from the CBC

I dunno, I just dunno.

Chong had a good point

... "Chong had said he would abstain from voting because the motion "implies the recognition of ethnicity.

"I do not believe in an ethnic nationalism. I believe in a civic nationalism."

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 10:43 PM

What would suggest Harper should have done in the circumstances?

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 10:41 PM

Agreed, Obie. It was a stupid political move on Harper's part.

I think most people consider Canada a Country with people from many Nations.

The First Nations people must be given the option of:

1. Staying
2. Going
3. Becoming their own territory and taking their land with them.

Harper just threw everyone a big red herring. I wonder what he's really up to? Maybe he doesn't want anyone to focus on the fact that Canadian forces are in big trouble in Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 10:34 PM

Okay, everybody, take a valium. You're getting yourselves all worked up over a tempest in a teapot ...

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Obie
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 09:18 PM

Well Cape Breton is indeed a nation! We have a great leader in General John Cabot Trail and if we have to revert to terrorism we will blow up The Causeway. That should seperate us from youse! :-}
A more serious point to ponder though is:
If the first nations in Quebec want to remain in Canada along with their territory should they be allowed to do so? The seperatists say no, that Quebec is indivisable at the same time they claim Canada is divisable. They expect special status as a founding nation, but would not grant the same right to the nation that they found already on those shores.
There is an old expression that you can't spit and swallow ( suck and blow) at the same time.
Before there can be any truly democratic determination we need to answer such questions, but there will never be any political agreement between those who are playing the game.
There are many pressing issues in our country and our planet, but the damn fools that we elect ignore them to fight over nonsense. It is truly a pity and a disgrace!

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 08:53 PM

Fair point, dianavan. I am thinking specifically of what I have come to know as the Metis Nation.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 08:52 PM

Seems to be quite a difference of opinion about the meaning of the term 'nation'.

Some say Canada is a country and not a Nation. Others say Canada is a country of many Nations. Some say Nation and Country is the same thing.

Does a Nation have to have geographical boundaries or can it refer to a cultural group?

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 08:34 PM

ROFLMAO

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: gnu
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 08:10 PM

I am just fuckin Cheech for Chong, man!!!!

Really... come on you asshole separtistes... let's get it on. We are gonna trim you bastards to about a 100km strip on the north side of the Seaway and then not let you near it. You'll be so landlocked you won't even get fresh carrots from the Eastern Townships. Ungava? Prince Rupert's Land? New Quebec? Ere ye fuckin jokin?

Parizeau said there would be consequences if Quebec's borders were to be redrawn. Well, "Je Me Souviens" aussi, asshole. When Pierre sent the Canuck army in....

Oops, sorry. I try to stay away from these political discussions. just got me going for a minute there. My bad. carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 07:53 PM

Caught a little bit of Cross-Country Check-up (national call-in show) yesterday. Young fellow phoned in from Lac St.-Jean, a traditional separatist stronghold. Said it is only the "baby-boomers" who are still interested in the sovereignty cause. Said, "It's all we used to hear about in school; the teachers were always talking about separatism ... " Went on to say in so many words that the younger generation(s) are much more interested in the world outside their borders - including English Canada; sounded more in-tune with the Trudeau-ite "citizen-of-the-world" philosophy.

You could hear the refief in (host) Rex Murphy's voice. But having lived in Quebec, I've seen how quickly feelings can change on this issue. All it will take is a TV camera catching some old bigot abusing the fleur-de-lys to turn the whole situation on its head ...

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: bobad
Date: 27 Nov 06 - 06:36 PM

"Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong quit his post Monday over a controversial government motion that recognizes Quebecois as a nation within a united Canada.

Chong, who also held the minister of sport portfolio, said he simply couldn't support the motion and therefore had to resign.

"I believe in this great country of ours and I believe in one nation, undivided, called Canada," he told a news conference."

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=00ca0fdf-1d31-49a7-8d9d-0eafb9edd3fc&k=71300&p=2

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 10:54 AM

I think that there are not many in Canada who would wish to part of America . Not for any anti american reason but because they would wish to remain Canada. It would be interesting how the rest of the country would respond to Atlantic Canada if it become geographically separated from the rest of the nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 09:08 AM

Quebec....je nes ses pas

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 01:26 AM

Oh, so that's your game, is it, buster? This is one ape you ain't gonna turn into a monkey.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 12:35 AM

He did ... that no good insensitive digit.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 12:23 AM

Not you, pal. Number 6 called me a monkey.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 12:22 AM

BTW ... that Guest above was me.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Nov 06 - 12:20 AM

Chongo ... It certainly would be an insult to call an individual a "monkey" .... I certainly would be an insult. I can't dispute that.

Did I call someone a monkey???

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 07:32 PM

It would be an insult to most individuals to call them a "monkey", Number 6. But in your case...maybe not. Go climb a tree!

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 07:21 PM

Gotta be thankful for small blessings!

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: pdq
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 07:16 PM

"...I'm the absolute dullest bulb in the drawer..."

Probably better than being "the sharpest knife in the light socket".

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 06:27 PM

Okay, maybe I'm the absolute dullest bulb in the drawer - Guest, what is your point? Can you just say it slowly and clearly so a dim-bulb such as myself can understand? I've got no idea what your view is on any of the issues under discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 06:01 PM

"........ sorta like the marriage, and the fearful party says ok, and arrives at the idea of an open marriage hoping that will make the unhappy party stay in the union. Just ain't gonna work..."

Why do you say 'just ain't goona work" ?

How could anybody know that? Besides history provides evidence to the contrary, the ROI and UK get along far better now that ever they did under the enforced union of Ireland and Great Britain.

Like I sez above, dude, it's far better to make a voluntary union then to have to shove it down folks throats with the butt of a rifle.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Peace
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 04:50 PM

Secede ici goes into the ground la.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:58 PM

One of these days Chongo your alter ego is going to realize his other personality is a f*&king monkey ... then your history!

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:56 PM

It's "secede", not "succeed", you gimp.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:50 PM

"lead to disintegration and possible incorporation into the US"

This kind rhetoric is the fear factor put to us Canadians by the politicians. Politically ballyhoo.

Really, does one think that Canadians will allow themselves to be absorbed by the U.S. if Quebec does succeed from Canada? I certainly don't think the U.S. will gobble us up by force.

Guest regarding your point "Today, the same thing is happening in southern US states, a majority speak Spanish." ... this I feel will more than likely be a serious issue the U.S. will deal with in some years time ... particularly with Souther California and New Mexico. I would be surprised if it does not become an issue.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:49 PM

If all the apes and monkeys in the Greater Chicago area and in other major metropolitan centers in the USA like New York, Los Angeles, and Washington ever get the idea to separate and form their own nations, THEN you are gonna see the shit hit the fan. Forget about Quebec. I am talkin' full-scale insurrection here. No one can stop us once we get goin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:42 PM

"grounds for seperation? "

I should clarify myself with that one Guest ... "grounds for separation" is for whatever the reason decreed by the (majority) populace of Quebec who want to separate. I can't provide an answer to that question ... if you are not a Quebecois, if you don't live in the province you can only interpret the reason from what you read. I can only try to understand the reason and accept it, if it is the passionate will of the Quebecers themselves.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:15 PM

possible incorporation into the US

Which bits of Canada would be likely to go for that? And which bits would do a Quebec rather than accept it?

And would the idea be too popular in the States?

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 03:08 PM

I personally would hate to see separation, since I think that would lead to disintegration and possible incorporation into the US. I think we all benefit from the existing states of things.

I have to second the sentiments of Big Mick. I've been fortunate enough to drive across Canada and fly across Canada, and listen to the CBC and spend time in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and Vancouver BC (and one town so fine I may hide there someday). I don't know enough about Canadian politics to understand whether declaring Quebec a 'nation' is a valid attempt to maintain her within the Canadian confederacy, or whether it is a precursor to separation. I think I am ahead of most yanks in that I at least know that Canada HAS politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 02:45 PM

"So, why do you think Quebec thinks it has grounds for seperation? "

I never said they had grounds for separation ... I'm just saying if the majority of the people of Quebec want to succeed ... and they have been debating and working this for a long, long time ... well, what can ya do ... bet let 'em .... accept it, and for the rest of Canada and Quebec work together as separate nations.

As I mentioned previously ... it's like a marriage that doesn't click ... they have gone to therapy, counciling, ... one party fears the breakup, the other party is unhappy and wants to break away, the fearful party has pampered to the unhappy party by giving, and giving but the unhappy party still is not happy, and still want to break away. It's best they breakup and get on with their lives. This new nation within a nation does not make sense ... sorta like the marriage, and the fearful party says ok, and arrives at the idea of an open marriage hoping that will make the unhappy party stay in the union. Just ain't gonna work.

But who knows, maybe the Quebecois will suddenly wake up some morning and they all realize they want to stay and be part of Canada ... would be nice, but impropable ... somewhere up the road this issue will have to be dealt with.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:52 PM

I may not be the sharpest bulb in the drawer, but I have no idea what Guest is talking about ... Anyone care to explain?

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:24 PM

"Gee sorefingers, not only do you know nothing about Canada but you seem to know precious little about the difference between nationalism and republicanism. I am astounded by your ignorance of Canada and am equally astounded by your unashamedlly expressing it in a public forum. The situations are not at all comparable.

If the majority of the population of Quebec (in all earnest) want to seperate and form a nation of their own, I say let them. It is their democratic will and right. Canada should leave it be. If the desire and fortitude of the people Canada exists, the nation of Canada will succeed. Life will go on.

biLL:"

At least you are consistent! A minority in 6 counties of Ireland, or Oirland, in the 1900s, expressed their desire to NOT be in the independent nation. The rest, as they say, is history.

So, why do you think Quebec thinks it has grounds for seperation?

Hmmmm..

Well

They are not a majority in the captive country, neither were the N Iron Orangies, they are not the same ethnicity as their captors, neither were the N Iron Orangies, all, both Orangies and Quebecois, were prepared for violence if necessary.

Today, the same thing is happening in southern US states, a majority speak Spanish...... because because because thats why .....

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:11 PM

It's not good intentions and tolerance that are destroying Canada, Guest, it's unscrupulous political parties who will toady up to any special interest group in order to get a few more votes, and who rule by "divide-and-conquer" tactics.

Political parties are the problem, and they are causing this sort of trouble in many places, not just in Canada.

I have friends in Trinidad...which is basically a tripartite culture...Christian/Muslim/Hindu. It's also split racially between East Indians, Blacks, and Whites. Now, the people there tell me that the 3 religions and 3 races normally get along fine together and are indeed very frienly to one another...except around the time of election campaigns! When an election campaign is on, all kinds of trouble starts between the communities, and that trouble is fomented by the politicians. The politicians raise all kinds of troublesome issues in their attempts to discredit and attack their opponents and create controversy that will motivate people to get out and vote for them and against their opponents. This results in unusual levels of violence, kidnappings, scandal-mongering, hatred, and every sort of damaging thing, and it is entirely and unnecessarily created by the politicians for their own selfish reasons.

The same is true in Canada, but to a much lesser extent. Thankfully!

Politics is the problem, not tolerance.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:04 PM

Then why aren't the scots, the irish, the english, the chinese, the lebanese, the arabs, the Indians, the Pakistanis and so on a nation, not to mention Cape Breton eh ?

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: bobad
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:02 PM

Harper's proposal is to recognize the "Quebeçois" as opposed to "Quebec" as a nation, an important distinction. It implies a recognition of nationality and not state. From what I've been reading this includes all Quebeçois, no matter where they may reside in Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:00 PM

Harper did not create this problem. Somewhere in our not to distant past we decided that evryone could be a hyphenated Canadian. Or that you could be a Canadian but a citizen of one or two other countries as well. So now we have loads of people who wish to be known as something other than Canadian except of course when it comes to free medical services, education, pensions, rfreedom of religion, speech and association, social services, subsidies and rescue from the other countries they are citizens of. This is a country being destoyed by good intentions and tolerant people..go figure.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 12:52 PM

We shall see...

If Harper digs his own political grave (and I'm sure he will, in time) that's okay with me. I don't trust him one bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 12:47 PM

Well, its a done deal.

"...there would be VERY serious trouble right away between the French and the Native Canadians, who would claim huge portions of the province and would oppose rule by a Quebec national government! I'm talking about trouble that could go as far as open warfare between the Natives and the Quebec government." - Littlehawk

It remains to be seen how Native Canadians in Quebec will react. I agree with Littlehawk; when its all over, Quebec may be a very tiny nation within a nation. I would rather negotiate with the nation of Canada than the nation of Quebec when it comes to land claims and/or issues of discrimination.

This could backfire on Harper. I don't think its up to him to determine the fate of so many Native Canadians. He basically threw them away. Duceppe is a fool for taking them on.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: number 6
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 10:05 AM

Why worry about Atlantic Canada ... it has been pretty well put on the back burner by the power provinces Ontario and Alberta since confederation.

Never-the-less .... it would be sad day indeed if Quebec does succeed and become a soverign nation, fragmenting a country that I am proud to be a citizen of ... but this haggling has been going on for years ... and if it happens we should be prepared and accepting of it. Look on the brighter side, maybe it will unify us as Canadians even more.

Hell, Atlantic Canada has an awful lot to offer to the world. Maybe something like this would be a kick in the butt get things going to capitalize on what we have. Case in point Iceland's succession from Denmark.   

Cultures, and countries of the world have been changing, evolving through history. Life goes on. People will persevere. Quebec's and Canada's issues is like a marriage, with 2 distinct personalities that in some ways just don't click. If a breakup occurs, maybe it is for the best. Do it amicably is the best route to go.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 09:33 AM

As someone who lives in the "true eat", Atlantic Canada, I have to say that Quebec leaving Canada would be a disaster for us as it would cut us off geographically from the rest of Canada. We would live in country divided by the presence of a forgien country in the middle of Canada. Perhaps those who use England and Scotland as an example would feel diffently if Scotland were located in the Middle of England.
   As a Canadian I am sick to death of this constant wrangling over Quebec. Maybe the rest of us should have a referendum to decide if we want this foolishness to continue or just give them what they want and be done with it.
    Then I don't know what would happen here in Atlantic Canada. But let's get this resolved.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Nov 06 - 01:12 AM

I think this is just the Liberal and Conservative parties screwing around (as usual) with their eyes on the next election, both trying to curry favour with the Quebec voters. As such, they will try to outdo each other with insincere rhetoric to make it sound like they love the French minority more than their opposition does.

It's so tiresome...

The Liberals sense that the tide is turning in their direction again, and they will have a new party leader soon. The Conservatives are worried about that, so they figure they'll say some nice things to the Quebecois and pick up some votes.

Same old deal. Both those parties are willing to prostitute themselves indefinitely for the Quebec and Ontario vote...any way they can...because it is Quebec and Ontario which are key to winning an election in Canada. And Quebec is unique, because the Quebecois tend to vote as a bloc for some reason. That has historically most often favoured the Liberals, but the Conservatives are not above playing the same game. Actually, they have to play it...if they hope to stay in power very long.

It's silly.

Be that as it may, Canada is a wonderful country and I'm delighted to be here!

Dianavan is absolutely right that if Quebec were to separate there would be VERY serious trouble right away between the French and the Native Canadians, who would claim huge portions of the province and would oppose rule by a Quebec national government! I'm talking about trouble that could go as far as open warfare between the Natives and the Quebec government. No joke.

I doubt that it will happen, though. Like I said, the Conservatives and Liberals are doing what they always do...angling for votes.

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,the ghost of P.E.Trudeau
Date: 24 Nov 06 - 10:32 PM

And here's to you Monsieur de Gaulle

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: GUEST,the ghost of Charles de Gaulle
Date: 24 Nov 06 - 10:11 PM

Vive le Québec libre!

Subject: RE: BS: Nation with-in Nation
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Nov 06 - 06:07 PM

Today the Bloc Quebecois leader said he would accept the motion on a 'nation within a nation.'
"Down the road, he said, the motion might help Quebec gain international recognition after a sovereinity referendum. The declaration might also be a springboard to demand new power."
"What's important is that the nation is recognized and it is on that basis that we will demand the government be accountable because it must mean something," Duceppe told reporters on Ottawa."" Les Pereaux, Canadian Press.