Article View: mtl.general
Article #1071Re: Separatists' words - listen to their plan....
From: johnf
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00
56 lines
3768 bytes
3768 bytes
Steve Juneau (sjuneau@bnr.ca) wrote:
: johnf@fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca wrote:
: Did they lied more or less that the other side?
Since I was using the point to demonstrate a reason why the arguments
were not necessarily based on fact, the extent to which either side lied
is irrelevant to my point. The fact is, if one side is lying to prove
it's position, the last thing they want is facts that could expose them
as liers to get in the way.
: : lied to the voters of Quebec, provided a very vaguely worded question for
: A lot of people say that the Oui people were brain washed,
: are non educated, or other things like that and those same
: people say that the question was vaguely worded.
Perhaps the words 'vaguely worded' are not the best way to explain what I
percieve. Now I've only seen the question in English translation. And
what I saw in the question had some very nasty implications. As I
understand the question, it went something along the lines of "Do you
support separatism *if a deal cannot be negotiated with the rest of
Canada.*" (my emphasis). Answer this question. What are the
implications if one of the parties, read Quebec, were negotiating in bad
faith with the negotiators having no intention of ever actually reaching
an agreement? In the scenario, the question, by implication, becomes "Do
you support separatism?" Why? Because in the bad faith negotiation
scenario no deal will ever be reached. I believe this is the card the PQ
had up its sleeve. And I'm not sure that implication was ever explained
to Quebecers. There is the 'vagueness' to the question. If both parties
were to negotiate in good faith, then the question stands as read. If
the PQ entered into negotiations in bad faith, then the question
Quebecers were voting on was not the one on the ballot.
: : the folks to vote on, and allegedly tried to rig the balloting process in
: That's not proven yet.
allege - verb, transitive. affirm, especially without proof. Hence
Alleged, Allegedly.
As you can see by my wording, I didn't say it was proven. If it is
proven, then I can quite happily drop the word allegedly from the above
sentence.
--
John Fleming email: johnf@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
Edmonton, AB, T5J 3S2
-The world was all before them, where to chose
Thir place of rest, and Providence thir guide:
They hand in hand with wand'ring steps and slow,
Through *Eden* took thir solitary way.
John Milton (Paradise Lost, Book XII)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<48u4cj$l5s@news.sas.ab.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<DICE17.70F@freenet.carleton.ca> <48rceq$gqj@news.sas.ab.ca> <48tb3t$57g@bmtlh10.bnr.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f504b,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gidf504b,public X-Google-Thread: fc3d0,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc3d0,public X-Google-Thread: 112f74,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gid112f74,public X-Google-Thread: 1046d3,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gid1046d3,public X-Google-Thread: 100c8e,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gid100c8e,public X-Google-Thread: 114af9,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gid114af9,public X-Google-Thread: 106cdd,f18c2375f249a3c2 X-Google-Attributes: gid106cdd,public From: johnf@fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca () Subject: Re: Separatists' words - listen to their plan.... Date: 1995/11/22 Message-ID: <48u4cj$l5s@news.sas.ab.ca> X-Deja-AN: 119860561 references: <DICE17.70F@freenet.carleton.ca> <48rceq$gqj@news.sas.ab.ca> <48tb3t$57g@bmtlh10.bnr.ca> followup-to: mtl.general,qc.general,ont.general,bc.general,ab.general,can.general,soc.culture.canada organization: Edmonton Freenet, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada newsgroups: mtl.general,qc.general,ont.general,bc.general,ab.general,can.general,soc.culture.canada