More absurdity from the spoiled brats

Group wants apology from Charles for cultural genocide

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

Last Updated: 30th October 2009, 12:09pm

• Email Story
• Print
• Size A A A
• Report Typo
• Share:
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Stumble Upon
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Feed Me
  • Yahoo
  • Simpy
  • Squidoo
  • Spurl
  • Blogmarks
  • Netvouz
  • Scuttle
  • Sitejot
  +

MONTREAL — A Quebec sovereignty group is sending Prince Charles a letter, asking him to apologize for the cultural genocide of francophones in North America.

The Societe St-Jean Baptiste says the heir to the British throne will only be welcome in Quebec during his Canadian tour if he atones for the alleged sins by the British after their conquest of North America.

The Societe’s Montreal chapter trots out a laundry list of grievances in an open letter to the Prince, which was released to the media and published on the group’s website.

Among them are the deportations of the Acadiens in 1755, the establishment of an English-language majority in Canada with the Act of Union in 1840, and the patriation of the Canadian Constitution in 1982 without Quebec’s consent.

While other separatists have warned Charles to stay away, the Societe says he and his wife will be welcomed in Quebec with open arms.

But that’s only if he makes the apology.

Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles are to visit Canada next week.

My thoughts:

This is utterly non-sensical. Apologize? Are you nuts? Here's a clue..the alleged victims of this so called "genocide" are DEAD. So are all their grandchildren. Tell me, Mr/Ms. Seperatist...are you, right now, being faced with a cultural genocide? No? Then shut up.

As for the alleged British perpetrators, they are all DEAD. So are all their grandchildren. Now...I want to make this perfectly clear. HRH Prince Charles had NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to do with an event that happened almost two hundred years ago. Get it?

Can you believe this?

This is just outrageous...

He's A High Risk Violent Offender CJOB News Team reporting 10/28/2009 In conjunction with the Manitoba Integrated High Risk Sex Offender Unit... police agencies are warning us about a man released Wednesday from the Headingley Correctional Institution. 44-year old Kenneth Erdley Ross has a long history of violent criminal offences including aggravated assault and sexual assault. Ross refused to participate in any form of treatment while incarcerated. He's considered a high risk violent offender. Ross is 5-11, 163 pounds with green eyes and grey hair. He has scars on his thumbs and forehead. Now, my thoughts: Some would say..."Well.. his time is up. He has to be released". What the hell is wrong with this country anyway? I'll tell you what "criminal" is.....It's the idea that someone, somewhere, thought this animal, who REFUSED treatment, should be released back into our neighbourhoods. My blood boils at the thought that is thing is loose on the streets, ready to violently assault another helpless human being. So much for the "IN-justice" system doing it's job! But woe be to the person who DARES to effectively defend themselves from such a depraved individual! You'd be arrested and detained for....get this....the interest of public safety! Makes me want to vomit. Wasn't it one of Pierre Trudeau's justice ministers that said something to the effect: The justice system is more interested in "rehabilitating" the offender than it is in public safely? Tell me this, how you "rehabilitate" a violent animal that does NOT want to be "rehabilitated"? According to the politicians, it's easy. You just release this disease back into society so that it can prey again! If you ask me, it's people that allow this kind of thing to happen that are the REAL threat to public safety and they should be accorded the appropriate treatment. In the meantime, all I can say is: "Dude...DON'T show up in MY neighbourhood!

Spoiled brat separatists dishonour Van doos

Naomi Lakritz, Calgary Herald

Published: Sunday, October 25, 2009

Les enfants terribles in Quebec are at it again. The Supreme Court of Canada has shot down a regressive, and repressive, language law in Quebec and the separatists have retaliated by muttering about sovereignty.

The law, known as Bill 104, prevented children who attended English private schools not subsidized by the government from qualifying for admission to English public schools. Immigrant parents whose children, under the province's Bill 101, were supposed to attend French schools instead were using the unsubsidized schools as a way of circumventing the law, since their kids would then be eligible to attend English public schools if most of their schooling had been in English.

It was completely lost on the irate sovereigntists that the judges' unanimous decision, which found Bill 104 in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was written by Justice Louis LeBel, who is a Quebecer.

First off the block and foaming at the mouth was Parti Quebecois leader Pauline Marois, who introduced an emergency motion in the Quebec legislature denouncing the court's decision. The court rules that your law violates human rights, and you denounce the decision, thus showing you favour human rights violations over the law of the land? What would you be, then, if you got into power, some tinpot tyranny unworthy of the title "democracy"?

Marois was followed closely by Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe, who said: "It's the Supreme Court of another nation --the Canadian nation. We need to draw lessons from this. For as long as we belong to Canada, there will always be situations like this." Could someone please explain what this man is doing sitting in Canada's Parliament if he considers Canada to be another nation?Why not find some other nation whose government you could sit in, Gilles? Will any old nation do? How about the U.S.? Would that work? Go to Washington and take a seat in Congress. It would make about as much sense as having your members warm the backbenches in Ottawa. Go--and good riddance to you and your party. If you don't love Canada, you have no business taking a seat in its Parliament, and you never did.

Another nation, indeed. But certainly one whose federal funding, including transfer payments from other provinces, you are quite happy to accept. Not to mention a nation whose money you like using, whose postal service suits you just fine, whose investments are always welcome and whose military keeps you safe. And shame on Marois, Duceppe and Mario Beaulieu, head of the St. Jean Baptiste Society, who said "it is unacceptable that the future of French in Quebec should be at the mercy of federal institutions controlled by English Canada, like the Supreme Court." Why shame on them? Because the Royal 22nd Regiment from Quebec, the Van Doos, are at this moment fighting in Afghanistan. They're fighting for Canada, and a number of them have lost their lives over there.

Shame on all those who are sitting comfortably at home in Quebec, mouthing vile separatist sentiments, while these soldiers are losing their lives proudly representing what the separatist contingent from their home province dismisses as "another nation."

When the highest court in the land rules that a provincial law has violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the natural reaction should be to move to make amends, not to denounce the court. Nor is calling the Supreme Court an institution controlled by English Canada anything less than a cheap shot, and an inaccurate one. Four of the nine justices are Quebecers. Besides LeBel, the others include Ian Binnie, Morris Fish and Marie Deschamps. Another justice, Louise Charron, is a francophone from Ontario. English Canada would almost seem to be under-represented if the roster of judges is viewed a different way.

If there is no sense of shame among the separatists at the judgment that the provincial law represents a breach of human rights, one has to wonder just what sort of lawless society they would be presiding over were petulant Quebec ever to separate from Canada and acquire its longed-for nationhood.

It's truly tragic that what the hardline Quebec politicians have failed to understand all these years is that there is no need to fight over language.

Why should one language be pitted against another language when the goal should be to ensure that all children growing up there are fluently bilingual, so that they can have the best of both worlds and enjoy all the opportunities for personal enrichment and future career success that speaking two languages fluently can give them? Nobody appears to be thinking of the children in any of this. That would require quite the paradigm shift. And as long as the separatists prefer the strife they can generate with their spoiled-brat status, such a transformation will never happen.

nlakritz@theherald. canwest.coM

© Calgary Herald 2009

From the Calgary Herald

http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/columnists/story.html?id=94e6c8b6-f725-4358-a54c-be7c6cac2279

The audacity of some people.

More lunacy from the anemic Veg-heads

The lunacy is endless...

From a newspaper "down under" called "The Australian"..

Well..here we go again folks, with another self appointed, hypocrital idiot that thinks he knows better than us what's better for us.

Quote: Lord Stern said: "Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world's resources. A vegetarian diet is better."

Who does this turkey think he is? Who is he to decide what is better for us? Hell, the guy's an economist for God's sake! He is about as qualified to speak on the so-called "Global warming" as I am to speak about breast feeding a baby. Looks like Lord Stern took a page right out of David Suzuki's propaganda manual.

Quote: Lord Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank and now I. G. Patel Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, warned that British taxpayers would need to contribute about pounds 3 billion a year by 2015 to help poor countries to cope with the inevitable impact of climate change.

Add to this, Lord Stern is so convinced that his stance is correct that he does NOT even follow his own inane babblings...I quote The Australian: Lord Stern, who said that he was not a strict vegetarian himself, was speaking on the eve of an all-parliamentary debate on climate change. His remarks provoked anger from the meat industry.

So here we have it folks..another classic case of a coke bottle Liberal attempting to force an agenda he KNOWS is not correct onto others...yet not willing to live by the very principles he wishes to use to dictate to others. I ask you, good people, what does this stink of?

But is does not end here.....

...enter the mad woman...Su Taylor..spokesperson for the Vegitarian Society..

She, of course, welcomed Stern's remarks. I quote The Australian again: Su Taylor, a spokeswoman for the Vegetarian Society, welcomed Lord Stern's remarks. "What we choose to eat is one of the biggest factors in our personal impact on the environment," she said. "Meat uses up a lot of resources and a vegetarian diet consumes a lot less land and water. One of the best things you can do about climate change is reduce the amount of meat in your diet."

You'll notice, right off the bat, she does NOT quote one single, verifiable source to back up her absurd claim. I think, very likely, the two of the biggest sources of greenhouse gases are the gaping orfices located directly under Lord Stern's and Su Taylor's noses!

"One of the best things you can do about "climate change" (urban myth) is to reduce the amount of meat in your diet".....

Stick your fear mongering veg head agenda up your backside and set fire to it, Su!

Now...on to my steak dinner!! :-)