What is Digg?183 Comments
- greyfedora, on 10/12/2007, -3/+52If you're planning to invade Alberta from Quebec, you might be disappointed...
- martalli, on 10/12/2007, -5/+40This is not Quebec secession..If you read the article, the PM explicitly says that Quebec will never be an independent nation.
If it did secede, then the poorer Maritime provinces would be separated from the more prosperous western provinces...and the St. Lawrence seaway could potentially become a area of controversy. Secession is truly unlikely. However, the way CNN (and others maybe) spins this statement, the debate is likely to reopen and put Canada through another few years of constitutional disquiet. - Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -6/+34I see your moron PM and raise you an idiotic President.
- blogger1947, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29martalli: I understood what the article said. The point I attempted to make (unsuccessfully) was that if Quebec DID secede, they would discover within a few years that total secession was a mistake. Precisely because of the St. Lawrence. However, I do thank you for your remarks in clarification.
- wyomingred, on 10/12/2007, -11/+32Quebec SHOULD be a separate nation. Then America will invade them, and use that as the launch point for our eventual invasion of Alberta. Precious precious oil fields...
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -27/+46Our PM is a ***** moron.
- blankartist, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Here's my thoughts. First off, I want to say I'm a Canadian who is proud of our bilingual heritage. I met some of the warmest people when I visited Montreal. But if Quebec ever separated from the rest of Canada, it would be a devastating, fatal mistake for the French culture. Why? Think about.
Who would Quebec conduct business with?
Paris? Do you really think Paris gives a rats ass about Quebec? They share a language, and that's about it.
The United States? To be blunt, the U.S. doesn't give a ***** about French or their heritage. If you're exporting to the U.S., you'll be speaking English. Period.
Canada? I don't think separation will go down to well with the rest of Canada (especially Western Canada). And they sure as hell won't be speaking French.
At the risk of sounding arrogant, the fact is the French Canadian heritage (as it stands) can only exist because of its existence within the larger picture of Canada.
Fortunately, I think the whole separation issue is waning with the younger generation. Is Quebec a nation on its own right? Sure it is. It's no different than our many First Nations. I just don't think it's a legal nation. - sardion2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16they're both slimeballs
- melodramatic2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I'm not sure if the country would be better off, and if the people in Quebec were ever completely serious about separating, then they would be able to try again in another referendum.
The separatist party (called the Bloc) is using the threat of separation to get special privileges and funding from the Federal Government.
For those who will undoubtedly blame Harper and the Conservatives for this by saying that this announcement is giving in and taking the first steps towards causing Quebec to split from Canada, consider that his words were "nation within a united Canada", and the purpose of this statement was to preempt a similar statement to be tabled in Parliament in a few days that would not have included the words "united Canada". Also, keep in mind that this has no effect whatsoever on the status of Quebec in Canada and that most political parties are supporting the statement. - Drealoth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12The separatist movement is a bit of a sham. The only reason that people have said that it's close to 50% of Quebec wants to separate is because they weren't told all of the details. They're asked a question along the lines of "Do you want to be a sovereign nation?" Sounds pretty good, right?
When asked the more accurate question of "Would you separate from Canada if it meant that you (and your family) would lose their RRSP's, would not be included in the North American Free Trade Agreement (which a separate Quebec wouldn't be included in) and would have to create your own currency?" the number is at about 10%, which is the traditional value it has held. - blogger1947, on 10/12/2007, -32/+43Seems to me that the rest of Canada would be better off if they encouraged those soreheads in Quebec to secede. And chances are they'd be begging to be reinstated within a decade.
- jonnyeh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13He didn't call Quebec a nation, he called the Quebecois people a nation within a united Canada. Quebecois is a non-constitutional word that has no real relevance. The Bloc Quebecois (a separatist party) were going to table a motion recognizing Quebec as a nation (not quebecois, and no mention of canada). Quebec is a constitutional term, and that motion could have led to a referendum. I'd say Harper is a genius and defused a very dangerous situation.
- farrellj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Please remember that to US conservatives, the most conservative Canadians are just slightly to the Left...but, in contrast, the network that most American conservatives consider to be a "Bleeding Heart Liberal" bastion is CNN...in Canada, it is considered a Right Wing mouthpiece of the American Government.
I've lived in both countries...and it still confuses me.
ttyl - mousky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11The submission description and the AP article are inaccurate. Harper declared that Quebecers (as in the people) form a nation within Canada. At no point did Harper introduce a motion recognizing the Province of Quebec as a nation within Canada. It is a very important distinction.
Also, what's up with AP referring to the Toronto Star and Toronto Sun as liberal? Does everything in America have to be labelled liberal or conservative? - TheGenericName, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16I hate to defend Harper on *anything*, but he is right: Quebec is a separate nation within the state "Canada".
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9It's just a play on words... it's acknowledging Quebec is a unique culture and unit, but still part of our great country.
I don't necessarily agree with it being considered any more special than the other provinces... I believe in equality. Let's not forget Quebec isn't the only French-speaking province; New Brunswick has a great deal of Acadian descendants and is a bilingual province. - BenSerwa, on 10/12/2007, -19/+27Stephen Harper, what a sad, sad *****.
- arkmtech, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@CBTF: So... what does that make Dubya Bush? ^_^
- MatttK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11This is one of the big reasons why Quebec won't ever separate. Montreal, for example, is not too keen on separation. Also, Quebec entered the federation with much less territory than they have now. Oh yeah and they would owe a ton of money to Canada. Basically, they would be totally screwed.
- iOsiris, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10[Not completely related to the article] The thing that gets me is that, when the Bloc Québécois advocates about Quebec separating from Canada is that they define Quebec as the region+people of Quebec (francophone only). The anglophones in Quebec are misrepresented, if the Bloc did manage to separate Quebec from Canada, they should have no right of forcing people to lose their status to Canada
- martalli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Apparently doesn't know much about Switzerland's history, either. A convential military invasion of Switzerland would be almost impossible. The major mountainpasses are mined, and every man is in the military. Since the initial formation of Switzerland in 1291, I believe that Switzerland has been successfully invaded only once, in 1798 by Napoleon, who had a great deal of difficulty controlling the country and ultimately had to restore Canton government. During much of that time, the Swiss had such a military reputation that they often were hired as mercenaries.
So, I would give the Swiss their due and not trash talk them. - Tweaknews, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Harper is just kissing ass so he will get more votes in Quebec in the upcoming election campaign.
Just a tactic to get more quebecers on his side when their minority government gets the non-confidence motion within the next 12 months. - codplay, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Heh. Where do they get all their money? Alberta's oilfields perhaps? If Quebec manages to sneak away, what about us Albertans? Do we still have to send them lots of money every year? Or do we get to split as well, and get all the money from the oil sands to ourselves?
- MatttK, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11This was a total Quebec vote buying move on his part.
- mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11I guess my main question for you is what has SH done wrong? Its one thing to call a guy a moron, but for what reason? is it because he has done something you disagree with, or just because you have no understanding of the political realm and incorrectly equate SH with GWB?
By the way, the Conservative Party of Canada's platform is far more left wing than the Democratic Party in the U.S's....bet you didn't know that. - mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17Stephen Harper has made some mistakes, but he has been the most real and honest Prime Minister Canada has seen in a long time. At least he isn't Prime Minister just to pad his own pocketbook like every Liberal PM we have had in 15 years.
If standing up for human rights to China, recognizing the cultural uniqueness of Quebec, and getting the underimportant softwood lumber dispute out of the picture so we can concentrate on more important trade issues, and lowering taxes while paying down the debt is being a bad Prime Minister and stealing money from ones citizens, doing nothing to deal with carbon emissions, and creating divisions across the country, and raising taxes to god awful levels is a good PM then yeah I guess Stephen Harper isn't meeting your expectations of a good leader. - tehJR, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7The Toronto sun is aimed at people who read at a 6th grade level.
- sergebeauchamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6sorry buddy, but automatic translators don't do a good job, we can't understand anything ;)
(French is my first language) - MalachiConstant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Though this may give fuel to a divisive debate in la belle province, it is quite overdo for the Canadian government to stop ignoring the fact that Quebec is UNIQUE, like it or not. Just by going there, it is blatantly obvious that the cultural influences give cause for a completely distinct life inside of Canada.
Outside of separation, hockey and ice storms, Quebec gets virtually no coverage in the media in Canada. Who's kidding who? YES, they are unique. YES, they are special. YES, they are a nation, as they are a bubble inside the map. Their television shows are almost completely locally produced (they pretty much have to be, without relying solely on dubbing and subtitles).
Life is different inside Quebec and everyone knows it. How is it not a nation that should be recognized? We can still be partners with Quebec in every way possible, giving them a distinct status, without either side walking all over the other. This doesn't have to be all negative. Maybe it's just time we stop pretending that they don't have a unique way of looking at things, and that the cultural differences are distinct enough to be respected.
This may be something that gets the ball rolling on an issue that otherwise will NEVER be solved. Finally, some action is being made, and I think all Canadians will benefit in the end. There's no reason to get pessimistic, because NOTHING bad has happened yet. Maybe nothing will. Maybe this just finally will settle the handling of an issue that has lasted hundreds of years on this continent. - iggee85, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I think he's saying how pissed he was that the main road between Quebec City and Montreal was closed on a Monday morning. And that this fact is why Quebec will never function as a country...
- xixor, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Quebec contains a tremendous amount of natural resources, including some of the worlds largest nickel deposits (Voisey Bay for example). The St. Lawrence water-way has tremendous economic impacts for *all* of Canada, even the distant West. I think that Quebec, both the land, and the people, are part of what makes Canada great: the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
As for hockey players, since a lot of players already come from the US, Sweden, Finland and other European countries, it will be no different bringing them in from Quebec. The big implication on hockey will be the fact that Canada will no longer be able to field a strong enough combined team to maintain its dominance in Olympics and other international tournaments. - bickdigg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Obviously, you don't know anything about France's history. I assume that your clever statement refers to WWII's beginnings, when the German army (the world's strongest of its time) was not expected to blitz through Netherlands and Belgium to invade France, cutting the front and dividing the french army, with the one on the West side regrouping with the Brits and going in England to organize the "Resistance".
Also you may think that the first ones who landed on June 6th in Normandy were Americans and not British and French? Also that Americans were the true liberators of Europe, when 80% of the work was done by the USSR... (Stalingrad battle?)
Also you may forgot that France freed your country from the British (google La Fayette), and that your army did not win any of the war against 3rd-world countries (Vietnam, Somalia, Irak?)...
Lots of things to learn, dude, turn off Fox News and move your fat ass to a library. - Targo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5RedSaber, you speak as if Quebec were subordinate to English Canada, this may have been the truth forty years ago, but its definitely not the case today. Quebec is not a Canadian colony. I am well aware of what Quebec is like, having lived there myself and still having friends and relatives live there.
If Quebec were to truly want separation, I wouldn't stand in their way. But I would advocate for TRUE secession, not any of this sovereignty association crap that Rene Levesque was peddling back in the early 80's. You can't have your cake and eat it too. As for the 'neverendum' trend, yes if the Parti Quebecois continues to hold a referendum every time it gets in power, I have no doubt that at one point there will be a yes vote...but even a blind squirrel gets a nut once in a while. - mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Quebec also adds a huge amount of cultural diversity to this country which has allowed us to be a leader in progressie thinking. If it weren't for provinces like Quebec and BC, this country would be just another version of the south central U.S.
I would be very upset if Quebec left Canada. They are an integral part of our country. - TheBigDI(K, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4if Quebec Can Seperate from Canada. then Montreal Can seperate from Quebec. ..
just my opinoin. .. Canadian Politics is more Bull S Hit then american politics. it's just canadians politics is more understandable. ... - IHaveIssues, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Emotive,
As an ex-Montrealer who's travelled the province I can assure that they speak French and not Franglais. Acadien is the language that mixes English and French. - ArtificialAnus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7*sighs*
Where's King Jean when you need him? He would have strangled the lot of them.
AA - shoover, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Harper is just kissing ass so he will get more votes in Quebec in the upcoming election campaign."
Woah! A politician, kissing ass for votes. What an utterly novel concept! - aldebaran, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@ emotive
If it wasn't for the Québecois Canada would have a conservative government for eternity. Ontario doesn't have enough liberal voters!!!! - Altesse, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Thanks a lot for this comment, bickdigg.
However, I don't think we can do much against the stupidity and xenophobia of our american fellows, and others. Heck, one of them can't even spell correctly ("Compaired to"...). Hope for him english is not his mother tongue.
The only thing they can do is invading other countries, or bomb them beyond repair, and flee or whine when the going gets tough (think Vietnam, Iraq). I'm so glad when a french-speaking nation bothers them. - dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4As was noted above, the question that was during that referendum wasn't whether they would Secede from Canada. It was ..
"Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?"
Fairly loaded if not ambiguous question. - ukmountie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Xixor,
As much as the Quebecois might like Voisey Bay to be in Quebec it is in Labrador, which is part of Newfoundland and Labrador. As is Churchill Falls, as are the majority of the Iron Ore deposits.
That said you can bet that the first thing an independent Quebec, no longer bound by the Privy Council would do is to claim soverignty over Labrador, - martalli, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4In some way, this would be like calling the states in India separate nations. Sometimes, they have even seemed to operate that way - such as when the Tamil Nadu government was running training camps for the Tamil Tigers. India is an example of a multinational country that is not an empire. In fact, by trying to respect the various nationalities native to the country, they have done well, albeit with considerable fractitious relations at times.
I don't want to carry the analogy between the two countries too far, but I feel it is dicey for the PM to speak in the way he has. Federal law should encourage states to have latitude on cultural issues, but one should be careful about talk which could reopen secession.
Hey, I'm an American, so my views may not really matter, but I do care about Canada anyway! - Nik420, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3aldebaran said - "What the hell are you talking about???? We speak the same french as the French ... Just not the same accent! Try to get out a bit more. Tu serais peut-être un peu moins con!!!"
I beg to differ. I took the Quebec goverment mandated French immersion courses at my local CEGEP, and every instructor there had a special section of their teachings for the differences between Parisian and Quebecois French. This is part of the Quebec government cirriculum, not some wacky Anglo notion
I do agree with you on the accent being different as well. I always tell the difference from listening to how the English word "the" is said. Quebecers pronouce it "dee" while Parisians pronnounce it "zee". I worked at an office where many senior management were from France, and the difference was quite noticable, even to my anglo ears. - Ford_Prefect2nd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3argoff - How short your memory is. I am from Ontario and am completely against Quebec separation, just want to be clear. However it was only a few short years ago that Alberta sucked on the teat of another province and it was perfectly acceptable then. The very small amount of equalization funds Quebec receives is not all from you, much of it comes from Ontario. And I am HAPPY for it. I am glad that my province has enough money to help the less well off in the country. I am a Canadian first and an Ontarian a distant second. If Canadians need money, then they should have it. The hypocrisy of an Albertan bitching about equalization is appalling. Ontario funded your province for years before you found the oil. Additionally Alberta may not be putting money into equalization for very long, you needn't worry. Our sneaky federal government is considering removing non-renewable resource income from monies counting towards equalization. Making Alberta a have not province again and we will be funding you again. Quebec should certainly be treated no better then any other province and our Prime Minister is selling the country for the votes he will gain from Quebec. You don't like that, consider that every riding in your glorious Alberta was blue in the last election. We as a nation need to think of our nation first and our petty provinces last. Viva la Quebec, Viva la uni Canada!
- thebog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4not even a hundred year ago this would amount to treason would it not?
- Sebach, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3RedSaber, don't be so sure that the province of Quebec would keep the entire territory it now has. The Supreme Court of Canada, in the SCC Reference of 1995, has said that it cannot simply be said that it would split along the current borders. This has been repeated in the international community as well. Quebec is claiming the international right of self-determination in claiming a right to unilateral secession (external self-determination). And that right to separate only extends as far as the PEOPLE (nation?), not necessarily the territory. Either way, before the external right can be activated in international law, the right to internal self-determination must be denied first.
Ultimately, one reason why Quebec has enjoyed relatively little international support is because the Quebecois nation are believed (compared to some global examples) to be given a great deal of power for internal self-determination; meaning economic, cultural and linguistic freedom and participation WITHIN Canada. I'm not saying that the Quebecois are not oppressed but compared to some oppressions elsewhere on the globe, it's not as bad.
But if the right to secession is granted to the Quebecois nation, the same right must be considered for the Aboriginal population of Northern Quebec as well who could make similar claims. Quebec might not have any solid LEGAL grounds to deny this right. Not to mention the international principle of effectivity, the actual CONTROL over a territory, instead of a mere political claim. In this regard, the Aboriginal peoples (mostly Cree and Inuit) of the North, where few of us have ever lived, have a strong claim as they make up the VAST majority of the population. It might be one of the greatest historical hypocrisies if one people (Quebecois) separated because they were a unique oppressed peoples, and then turned around and denied that right to another group (Aboriginal peoples), no? - mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6True, it was a political move...nothing more. But he had to do it or else the Bloc would have introduced legislation that would give them the political grounds to hold another referendum. Not an entirely selfish move on Harpers part...a smart political move on his part IMO.
- knickerbocker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Vive le Québec libre !!"
Kinda sad that your 'rallying cry' is a 40-year-old quote from a French president being a *****-disturber in a foreign land for his own chuckles. - knickerbocker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4And he might note that the Vatican is guarded by the Swiss Guard. Poofy uniform notwithstanding, there must've been a good reason for it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 180 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is