🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <fawzi-2009961316340001@news1.vir.com>, fawzi@vir.com (Fawzi) wrote:

>In article (Dans l�article) <51s4h0$noq@hendrix.postino.com>,
>danny@hendrix.postino.com (Danny Aldham) wrote (�crivait)�:
>
>> X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
>> 
>> S.Pickell (software_answers@cyberspc.mb.ca) wrote:
>> : Nothing has eluded me , you wish to destroy the country I love.
>> : The same country that my father went to war for, and then after years
>> : of herrific pain from his wounds he eventually died for.
>> : You Sir must be a simpleton to think that the rest of Canada would
>> : sit quietly by while you did your deed.
>> : Not bloody likely !
>> 
>> For economic & emotional reasons, war is a real possibility. Quebec 
>> politicians have made noises about abdicating their responsibility to
>> assume their share of Canada's national debt. If that amount is $125 billion,
>> it would cripple the tax-payers in the rest of Canada. Wars have been fought
>> over much smaller sums.
>
>I don't know where you get your news, but Quebec said it would be
>economicaly responsible.
>La caisse de d�p�t was getting ready on referendum night to inject
>billions to help support the dollar in case of a Yes win.
>And it would be completely illogical for a newly formed state economicaly
>"joined to the hip" with another, to make the economy of its closest
>partner collapse.
>So the statement you made is simply stupid, and what is even more stupid
>is that:
> 1- You believe your statement
> 2- You make a stupid statement implying a call for war based on such a
>stupid premice...
> 3- Your IQ must be at least over 13 to get in the army, so you wouldn't
>qualify anyway.

Fawzi,

You are as prone to selective memory as you accuse others.

Initially Bouchard and the PQ claimed that they would honour their share
of the national debt in the event of separation. Then they started to
hedge on the promise by attaching conditions. In short, they are acting as
blackmailers - we'll assume our debt if you don't interfere in the process
of separation and stop talking about partitioning Quebec. Some deal!

More radical elements with in the PQ have even expressed their belief and
support for the idea of repudiating the debt. The basis of the argument is
that the debt was accumulated under a Federal system that they never
wanted to be part of. 

This has been well reported in the Globe and Mail, the Gazette, and Le
Devoir. It was also broadcast on The National.

Furthermore, you accuse the Anglais of using scare tactics and threats of
violence as if it were our exclusive domain. Hmmm. I really don't think
so.

The former FLQ member, Rose, was an ardent and vocal supporter of the OUI
forces in the referendum. He openly advocated taking up arms to expel
Anglos and "allophones". Look at all of the anti-Anglo grafitti cropping
up through out Montreal and other Quebec communities. It is certainly much
more prevalent and widespread than any anti-French or anti-PQ grafitti.

I know about this. I visit friends in Montreal and Vaudreil on a regular
basis. I also have family living near Sutton in the Eastern Townships. If
they even so much as fly a Canadian flag they become the targets of
vicious vandalism and harrassment, yet people are free to fly Quebec flag
proudly without fear.

What about the language police pulling Passover products off the shelves
of grocery stores despite an earlier agreement that they were exempt? Was
this intended to be a flexing of political muscle? Or was it intended to
punish a group that is well known to be opposed to separation? 

I certainly have not heard of any similar anti-French harrassment aimed at
francophone communities in other parts of Canada.

I see the latest wave of Quebec nationalism promoted by the PQ as being
vastly different than when Levesque was alive. Levesque could be trusted.
He talked responsibly about separation and its realities. He was honest. I
think that many English-Canadians trusted him and respected him. He was a
good leader although many would not agree with his objectives. 

However, Rene had his shot at separation with the first referendum and
failed. Rather than fight an honest fight, I think that many PQ supporters
decided to resort to thugery, disinformation, intimidation, and outright
lying. they belive the ends justify the means. This has led to an
increased perception of the PQ as a modern day Nazi party (remember
Parizeau's remark about money and ethnics?).

Although Bouchard may have the potential to be a fine leader, he is
severely hampered by the dominance of the radical elements within the PQ.
Language and signs are dominating the political agenda at a time when the
economy is in critical condition. He lacks control over his party and is
unable to quell the radicals, or win their cooperation. This is a recipe
for disaster.

So please don't give me your shit about anglos being the worst
perpetrators in this struggle. the PQ have proven themselves to be masters
at each and every turn!

Regards,

Paul