The Dishonesty of Quebec Separatists

[Mr. Harley]

Wezil, I've never bothered to study the internal history of Canada as closely as many other countries - not enough wars. Could you post, or guide me to some sites, that show this boundary history you're mentioning? I'm VERY interested, and it is highly germane.

[Wezil]

I'll look Shawn (I am technically working today however....). Give me some time.

[Wezil]

Here is one from 1906. As you can see from this date (40 years after Confed) the northern part of Quebec was not yet part of Quebec.

The site has many other resources as well but I haven't the time to scour it.

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/archives/1stedition/historical/page1?l=4&r=2&c=2#map

[Dinner]

Nice map. As I recall Newfoundland was still a British colony, and thus not part of Canada, until after WW2.

[Wezil]

Correct Oerdin. Economic collapse following both World Wars eventually caused Newfoundland to join Confederation. As a matter of fact, the final 'Father of Confederation' died only a few years back (Joey Smallwood - Nfld).

There are many other historical maps there (prior to the link I posted) with lots of interesting data.

[DanS]

What is the current support % for secesssion in Quebec?

[Wezil]

It depends very much on the question asked Dan. The separatists often cloak their true intentions with BS language such as 'Sovereignty Association" and such.

On a clear question of outright independence the number would be considerably less than 50%. On a fuzzy question they were 49.5% in the last neverendum.

[Wezil]

The questions asked (1980 & 1995) and the results:

http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/aia/default.asp?Language=E&Page=consfile&Sub=ReferendaQuestionsandRes

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Joncha, you miss the ponit entirely. Oncle Boris is doing the exact same thing MOST of the Europeans settled on other people's lands do. I sadly include the United States. He sees nothing wrong, and in fact is proud, of "negotiations" with the Cree. So it's okay that a people that own their own land, and have taken a vote noted by other posters here, have to ask PERMISSION of the French speakers in Quebec to do what they wish with their land. White Man's Burden. Paternalism. Or, as I stated before, it's racism.

Seriously, I do have some values of cooperation and peace. The thing is, we are here, the past is done, we have built mines and barrages and railways in the North, and there's no way we will destroy them or transfer their property to the Natives. What we can do, however, is to sign treaties to make the development more fair - give them veto rights on construction projects, grant them a percentage of the profits, etc. Racism? not even close.

The thing is, Natives used their land to fish with spears and hunt with traps. 'Ancestral rights' are limited to this. If they are to 'develop' in the modern way, they have to follow the rules of modern states. Make the rules fair to everyone who has settled the country and everything will be fine.

I am consistant on this. I believe ALL minority peoples should have the right to become independent, as long as they guarantee similiar rights to non-natives remaining in their territory that the natives would have had the remained part of the greater political unit. If the Quebecoius were instead acting like Vaclav Havel (Czechoslovakia - which no longer exists, it's two countries - exactlyl) and trying to "negotiate" with the Cree and other Native Americans to stay in an independent Quebec, while still stating should the negotiations fail we will respect the will of your people to become independent if that's what they want, I would retract my rant and apoligize. I've done it before, to Imran on a name scramble.

That is my stance, so you should retract. If Quebec can get away, the Natives can. There are some limits to this, however: I don't think it makes sense in any way that they stay with Canada instead of Quebec from a legal standpoint. If Quebec guarantees to uphold the exact same treaties as the federal gave them, the Natives would see the federative authority move from Ottawa to Quebec. Fair play, IMO, says: you follow, or you become fully independant, but you don't stay with the former.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui



The English speaking suburb SHARES a culture and history with CANADA. They are not a seperate nation but part of the Canadian one!

As much as Quebec shares culture and history with the French nation. These people definitely form a minority of the Quebecois nation, there is no denying this.

It really isn't. Not in terms of international law anyway.

Well, I've given you my reasons, so you might as well try again and prove me wrong.

Why? Because they won't let a province which controls the federal government to leave that federal union because they are whiny *****es?

And that shows your ignorance of Canadian politics and history. The Quebecois may not have been genocided or enslaved, but they have endured their shares of injustice. Besides, Quebecois PMs have historically been those who used the harshest policies against their province of origin, from Laurier to Chretien, and especially Trudeau. No wonder why the word 'traitor' is used to describe them.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
That is my stance, so you should retract. If Quebec can get away, the Natives can. There are some limits to this, however: I don't think it makes sense in any way that they stay with Canada instead of Quebec from a legal standpoint. If Quebec guarantees to uphold the exact same treaties as the federal gave them, the Natives would see the federative authority move from Ottawa to Quebec. Fair play, IMO, says: you follow, or you become fully independant, but you don't stay with the former.

Why? The Cree might want to stay linked with the people living South of them. They may gain some advantages by doing so.

It then comes down to a choice for them, the Crown with whom they have had a long history and who they know, or Quebec City with whom a member of any minority might have some misgivings. I'm not trying to sling mud, but the GoQ is not renowned as being a champion of minority rights within its jurisdiction.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Why? The Cree might want to stay linked with the people living South of them. They may gain some advantages by doing so.

The English minority is Quebec is more well-off than the French minorities in RoC, so that would be a false perception.

It then comes down to a choice for them, the Crown with whom they have had a long history and who they know, or Quebec City with whom a member of any minority might have some misgivings. I'm not trying to sling mud, but the GoQ is not renowned as being a champion of minority rights within its jurisdiction.

Yeah, that's about it. I hope they are willing to cooperate if the day comes.

[pchang]

I can see it now.

1. Quebec declares independence from Canada and siezes control of all important assets in present day Qeubec.

2. The Cree declare their independence from Quebec and state their wish to rejoin Canada asking that the borders of Quebec be reset to those prior to the formation of the Confederation.

3. Quebec uses force to hold on to Hydo Quebec assets while insisting the Cree give sufficient time to negotiate terms.

4. The Cree appeal to Canada to intervene.

5. Canada invades Quebec.

6. Internal strife and Quebecoise terrorism cause Canada to splinter.

7. Newfoundland asks to become the 51st state of the US.

8. The Cree are exterminated as most of the assets of Hydro Quebec are destroyed.

9. British Columbia asks to become the 52nd state of the US. The rest of Western Canada soon follows suit.

10. Ontario and Quebec finally sue for peace after 10 years of bitter bloodshed.

11. Ontario collapses and asks to join the US.

12. Quebec becomes an impoverished slum and ignored in international politics. In a final irony, even France snubs Quebec.

[Fake Boris]

Dude where's my AK-47?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Wezil
It depends very much on the question asked Dan. The separatists often cloak their true intentions with BS language such as 'Sovereignty Association" and such.

On a clear question of outright independence the number would be considerably less than 50%. On a fuzzy question they were 49.5% in the last neverendum.

Dan, don't listen to him. The people in Quebec perfectly knows what sovereignty means, and don't mind much with the question.

Support right now is at 48%, but that is mainly due to the recent scandals in the federal government and dissatisfaction towards the provinvial federalists. A few months ago it was at 44%.