ROCeries habituelles

Welcome to English speakers willing to discuss politics with Quebeckers.

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Ven Oct 31, 2008 1:51 pm

Dans le texte ci-haut, Barbara Kay applaudi la nouvelle et dit des choses positives ..

Hérouxville for me was the little boy in the fable who pointed out that the emperor was naked. The "emperor" is our obsession with making other cultural groups feel welcome and at home with their God and customs at the expense of our own pride in and wish to further our Judeo-Christian values. The emperor is also our reluctance - or at least amongst those of us who live amidst "diversity" - to express our discomfort for fear of "offending" the Other.


They aren't racists. Are they xenophobic? Yes, a little, but not in a bad way. A bad way would be to accord others fewer entitlements than those of the host culture (it's called dhimmitude in Islam-ruled countries). To demand that other cultures not have more entitlements isn't racist. In fact it's good for everybody.


As an ironic postmodern "hommage," Quebec's new "values declaration" should be called the Cutural Clarity Act. For it too is responding to an existential crisis, and embodies a lesson in civilizational self-preservation that all Canadians need to learn.


.. il faut reconnaître ses bons coups aussi.
Polémix

Vous n'êtes pas contre l'hypocrisie, vous n'êtes pas contre la corruption et vous n'êtes pas contre la mafia : Vous êtes contre la souveraineté !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mar Nov 04, 2008 10:30 am

http://media.www.mcgilltribune.com/medi ... age2.shtml

EDITORIAL: Stop accomodating xenophobic politics

Issue date: 11/4/08 Section: Opinion

There's something rotten in the province of Quebec. Last Wednesday, the Charest government announced that all new immigrants to the province must sign a pledge to "respect the common values of Quebecois society." It's a seemingly harmless statement, but the new policy reflects a disturbing trend in provincial politics.

In and of themselves, the pledges are innocuous. The "common values" referred to-including gender equality, the rule of law, and the separation of church and state-are already well established in Canada. The pledges are largely a reiteration of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In practical terms, they're just another piece of superfluous paperwork in the immigration process.

But the impetus behind the pledges is far more sinister. In recent years, "reasonable accommodation" has been a hot topic in Quebec politics. The term refers to the interpretation of the Charter of Rights, and the extent to which the practices of ethnic and cultural minorities must be accommodated in Canadian society. In Quebec, the debate over reasonable accommodation has revolved around the assimilation of immigrants. It hit a fever pitch last year when Parti Québecois leader Pauline Marois tabled a bill requiring language tests for participation in provincial politics.

The new immigration pledges are just the latest flare-up in this old (and tired) debate. And it's a debate that, in practical terms, is totally irrelevant to the vast majority of Quebeckers.

So why is everyone talking about it? Because the reasonable accommodation debate is every demagogue's wet dream. It's an opportunity to dress up xenophobia in the lexicon of liberalism and democracy. And the abundance of reasonable accommodation issues over the last two years-hijabs, Hérouxville, and the Bouchard-Taylor commission-shows that xenophobia springs eternal. Stirring up vague and unwarranted fears of "unreasonable" immigrants has been a key strategy for the PQ, the ADQ, and-if the new pledges are any indication-the Liberals.

In the country with the highest per capita immigration rate in the world, and where multiculturalism is an official policy, it's dispiriting to know that people still fear "foreigners." It's even worse that reasonable accommodation will be a central issue in yet another provincial election. There's no shortage of real issues, with broad implications, that need to be debated in Quebec. But instead of discussing how to best manage the economy, protect the environment, or work with another Harper minority, Quebec's three major parties will once again pander to anti-immigrant sentiment.

It's time to condemn politicians who rely on xenophobic rhetoric. Montreal-where most immigrants to Quebec will end up-is a perfect example of the power of diversity. The city's flag features English, French, Irish, and Scottish emblems. They're a reminder that Quebec has never been homogenous, and has benefited tremendously from a diverse influx of immigrants-none of whom signed pledges when they arrived.

Wow, for a xenophobic society, Quebec is still funding anglo institutions like McGill!
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Mar Nov 04, 2008 12:37 pm

Xenophobic editorial (, another one).
Polémix

Vous n'êtes pas contre l'hypocrisie, vous n'êtes pas contre la corruption et vous n'êtes pas contre la mafia : Vous êtes contre la souveraineté !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Jeu Nov 06, 2008 10:58 am

Language rights
The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, November 06, 2008

Canada's low birthrate makes this country increasingly dependent on immigration, so it's hard to see how it's in anyone's interest to discourage newcomers, as Quebec seems intent on doing with a bizarre proposal to make immigrants pledge allegiance to the French language.

Quebec and other jurisdictions have a right to insist that immigrants learn about the values of their new home, but forcing immigrants to sign a declaration promising to learn French? What business is it of government what language its citizens speak in social and commercial settings?

It may well be that an immigrant who can't be bothered to speak French will have a tough time finding employment or even getting a date in Quebec -- and that's fine. If there's a natural pressure to learn French, then people living in Quebec should do so. But this is entirely different from government regulation of free expression, which is what the new policy essentially amounts to.

Besides, the proposed pledge that immigrants would be forced to make is unenforceable. When politicians start producing unenforceable laws or regulations, it's a sure sign that they are engaging in gimmickry. In this case, the language declaration is a stunt to appeal to Quebec nationalists.

There is a competitive market for highly trained immigrants -- for doctors, engineers and the like. Forcing immigrants to make silly and meaningless declarations won't help position the province as an enticing destination. It's bad enough that Montreal and Quebec City have long, cold winters.




© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

Le quotidien de la ville d'Ottawa n'a rien d'autre à commenter en page éditoriale que de basher sur le Québec?
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Jeu Nov 06, 2008 11:52 am

Delenda a écrit:Le quotidien de la ville d'Ottawa n'a rien d'autre à commenter en page éditoriale que de basher sur le Québec?

Hihi :)

Tout va tellement bien là-bas. Ils vont avoir la péréquation, les jeunes musulmans nés chez-eux veulent arracher la tete au PM et les Sénateurs ont perdu trois matches de suite.
Polémix

Vous n'êtes pas contre l'hypocrisie, vous n'êtes pas contre la corruption et vous n'êtes pas contre la mafia : Vous êtes contre la souveraineté !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Ven Nov 07, 2008 9:32 am

Oh la la, quel sens poussé de l'analyse! A moins que ce soit la haine qui aveugle à ce point

We should get Quebec off welfare
The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Friday, November 07, 2008
Re: Ontario officially a 'have-not,' to get $337M in equalization, Nov. 4.

What a joke the equalization payments are. In its new have-not status, Ontario will get around $26 per person while Quebec gets $1,038 per person. This wouldn't be so bad, if Quebec wasn't the author of its own misfortunes.

Before Bill 101, Quebec was a thriving province and Montreal was a world-class city. Since the introduction of Bill 101, companies have deserted the province like rats from a sinking ship, and few businesses want to open up in the province.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has told Ontario to lower corporate taxes in order to attract business. Why hasn't he told Quebec to ditch their language law in order to attract business?

If any province is the recipient of equalization payments for any period of time, the federal government should insist that they take steps to address the problem. If they fail to do so, they should be disqualified from any future equalization payments.

Premier Dalton McGuinty shouldn't be complaining to the federal government about transfer payments, Mr. McGuinty should be ragging on Premier Jean Charest to get off this welfare. After all, that is where most of the fiscal imbalance that Ontario suffers goes.

Doug McGoldrick,

Ottawa
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Ven Nov 07, 2008 11:42 am

Il faut toujours rappeler au peuple (anglo et ethno) combien les french frogs sont des tarés racistes, touts les prétextes sont bons.

Bien sûr, s'attaquer aux Québécois en particulier est un geste raciste en lui-même mais, ça, c'est justifié pour sauver le kayneda anglo-impérialiste.

.

En passant, on ne parle pas du déplacement de l'économie continentale vers l'ouest durant les années 1960 et 1970, dans ce texte. On ne dit pas que New-York était pratiquement en faillite il y a vingt-cinq ans. Et on oublie de mentionner l'ouverture de la Voie Maritime du St-Laurent vers la fin des années 1950 qui a permit à l'Ontario d'avoir accès aux eaux internationales sans avoir besoin de passer par Montréal.

Il me semble que ça concorde mieux avec les faits que la loi 101 de 1977.
Dernière édition par Polémix le Ven Nov 07, 2008 4:02 pm, édité 1 fois.
Polémix

Vous n'êtes pas contre l'hypocrisie, vous n'êtes pas contre la corruption et vous n'êtes pas contre la mafia : Vous êtes contre la souveraineté !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede NickD » Ven Nov 07, 2008 12:08 pm

Politics in English


:pouce:
Avatar de l’utilisateur
NickD
Ministre
 
Messages: 3508
Inscription: Sam Fév 04, 2006 3:31 pm
Localisation: Québec, Québec, Canada

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede El Kabong » Ven Nov 07, 2008 3:46 pm


Existe-t-il un libéral pour dénoncer le racisme anti-Québec dans tout le Canada?

NON.

Et plusieurs au Québec font encore confiance à cette pègre hypocrite.
:euhhh:
La démocratie néo-libérale?
C'est la tyrannie de la minorité cachée sous le manteau de la majorité!
Avatar de l’utilisateur
El Kabong
Ministre
 
Messages: 4584
Inscription: Mar Oct 30, 2007 3:43 pm
Localisation: Pointe St-Charles Beach

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Ven Nov 07, 2008 4:03 pm

Nick Dion a écrit:
Politics in English


:pouce:

Vous avez jamais vu de textes en anglais sans traduction dans le reste du forum ?
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Jeu Nov 27, 2008 10:30 am

Quebec's existential crisis takes priority again
George Abraham, Citizen Special

Published: Thursday, November 27, 2008
Ottawa Citizen

With economic storm clouds gathering and a recession on the horizon, it's hard to fathom why politicians in the province of Quebec are fighting an election largely over the issue of immigration. One gets the impression there is an existential crisis at stake, judging by the rhetoric in the run up to the Dec. 8 vote.

On the eve of the election call, the Charest government announced that beginning Jan. 1, 2009, all new immigrants will need to sign a declaration affirming their loyalty to Quebec's "shared values." This was a sure indication that immigration would be a top-of-mind ballot question. It's as if the expensive Bouchard-Taylor commission did not happen, and no lessons were learned from its report on "reasonable accommodation." The province continues to walk the road from Hérouxville.

For the idea of imposing this code of conduct on new immigrants owes much to the blueprint unveiled by the town of Hérouxville last year. Among other things, the town proscribed "killing women by stoning or burning them alive in public places, burning them with acid, excising them, infibulating them or treating them as slaves." Although the proposed province-wide code uses none of this graphic language -- using instead the benign rubric of "men and women have equal rights" -- one wonders about the practical value of such a declaration.

In announcing the plan, Immigration Minister Yolande James was quoted as saying, "Quebecers have said yes to immigration, but they said yes to immigration on the condition that these immigrants integrate into our society." She also conceded that there is little the provincial government can do if immigrants violate the abstract "shared values" declaration. Who is to define "shared values"? That is the quintessential and timeless Canadian question that has defied description even by this country's best philosophers.

Beyond these germane questions, Quebecers must weigh the circumstances surrounding the announcement and the message it will be sending to prospective immigrants. It is an accepted fact that immigrants are among the earliest victims of a recession. As an OECD study confirmed earlier this month, "immigrants, especially new arrivals, are often among the hardest hit in economic downturns, as many have low-skilled jobs or work in cyclical sectors, such as construction. Given the likely rise in unemployment in many OECD countries, the report urges governments to continue investing in policies to boost the job prospects of immigrants to help their long-term integration."

Mathieu Laberge, an economist at the Montreal Economic Institute, has said in the just-published Reconquering Canada: Quebec federalists speak up for change, that Quebec is among the provinces that are losing residents to other parts of Canada as part of a westward economic shift. Elsewhere, the book's editor, André Pratte, says, "If Quebec's population is not growing as fast as that of the western provinces, that is not Ottawa's fault. Nothing is stopping us from having more children. Nothing is stopping us from accepting more immigrants: the immigration agreement signed with the federal government ... even allows us five percentage points more immigrants than our population should permit."

There is, of course, another distinction that makes immigration to Quebec a different experience when compared to the rest of the country, helping to explain some of the recent angst. As Michael Adams said in his book Unlikely Utopia (2007), there is a distinct and stronger sense of "us" -- or "nous" -- in la belle province than there is in the rest of Canada. Seventy per cent of the province's population can trace their lineage going back three generations in Quebec, compared to just 20 per cent in English Canada. "There is simply no sense of a core people in English Canada any more," he wrote.

The current stump speeches over immigration, though, are not just focused on telling immigrants to "be like us," but also invoke the "revenge of the cradle" to correct the province's declining population. Quebec has been experiencing a minor baby boom, with a fertility rate of 1.6 babies per woman, but this still remains far below the needed replacement level. A small town, St-Lin-Laurentides, may have set the pace 20 years ago by announcing a series of small incentives to encourage couples to have more children, including a $500 reward for a third baby.

St-Lin-Laurentides' baby steps have led to the Charest government making yet another demography-related promise in the middle of an election campaign. It has announced additional incentives for couples who need in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment to help conceive children, offering to cover the cost of two procedures by treating infertility as an insurable medical condition.

At a broader level, whatever approaches the province adopts post-Dec. 8, it must be true to the vision of its founder, Samuel de Champlain. As David Fischer narrates in his just-released Champlain's Dream, the explorer had "envisioned a new world as a place where people of different cultures could live together in amity and concord."

The road to Quebec's future may yet pass through St-Lin-Laurentides, rather than Hérouxville.

George Abraham is a columnist for the Canadian Immigrant magazine.
:con:



© The Ottawa Citizen 2008
previous page 1 2
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mer Déc 03, 2008 6:59 pm

Oh, elle va gagner sa paye cette semaine, l'Inexcellence de Carnaval! :lolol:


Brian Peckford letter to Michaelle Jean: Coalition is 'outside the constitution of this country'
Posted: December 03, 2008, 4:15 PM by Kelly McParland

Her Excellency
the Right Honourable Michaelle Jean
Governor General of Canada
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K14 0A1


You Excellency:


As a former first minister of a Province of this country, a participant in the formulation of the 1982 Constitution, and as a Privy Councillor, I feel that it is my duty to provide you with my views on the present political crisis facing our country. You will understand , I trust, that I will be making this communication public.

You have received letters from the Leader of the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party indicating that they are in a position to form a coalition government since they contend that the majority of members of the House of Commons have lost confidence in the present minority Government. Of course, this would have to be demonstrated on a vote in the House.

The coalition was careful to produce a document ( An Accord on a Co-operative Government to Address the Present Economic Crisis) creating a coalition government having as signatories just the Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party. However, there is a further document ( A policy Accord to address the Present Economic Crisis) that is signed by The Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, the Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Leader of le Bloc Quebecois. And the Leader of Le Bloc Quebecois has publicly on Television given his support to the Coalition. Le Bloc Quebecois is, de facto, a part of the Government being proposed. This is further legitimized by the Bloc's statement that it will not support any non confidence motions in the House of Commons for the period of its agreement.

Now, the Leader of the Bloc Quebecois and his party do not believe in the continuation of this country as presently constituted. So it is a contradiction in terms to have a Government of this country whose very existence depends on people who do not believe in this country.

I would submit, therefore, that the coalition proposal is outside the constitution of this country. Our constitution is based on the Country as it presently exists. Given that you are to consider your options in light of the Constitution, the Coalition proposal does not qualify for consideration.

I contend that there is no provision in writing or convention which permits consideration of a proposal which sees the formation of a Government of this country which is dependent for its existence upon those who do not support the country as it presently exists.

Some will argue that because there are Bloc Quebecois members in the House this precludes my argument from being valid. I would argue that two wrongs don't make a right . Secondly, I would argue that it is one thing to be a member of the House, it is quite another to be a part of the Government. The elevation of the issue to the level of Governing the country simply means that we now must confront the bizarre nature of how we have conducted ourselves---outside the constitution-- and that it is time to be consistent with it.

The other potential matters of proroguing the House or an election are matters that come within the Constitution and I am sure, with your advisors, the appropriate decisions will be made.


Honourable A. Brian Peckford P. C.
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Polémix » Mer Déc 03, 2008 9:27 pm

Le chat sort du sac : Un Québécois qui ne pense pas comme les anglos est un un citoyen inférieur et ses représentants n'ont pas les mêmes pouvoir que ceux des anglos de ce pays.

Capiche !?
Polémix

Vous n'êtes pas contre l'hypocrisie, vous n'êtes pas contre la corruption et vous n'êtes pas contre la mafia : Vous êtes contre la souveraineté !
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Polémix
Ministre
 
Messages: 8778
Inscription: Lun Juin 25, 2007 10:33 pm
Localisation: Lanaudière

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Ven Déc 05, 2008 12:01 pm

Unique hereditary disorder found in Quebec families
Flawed gene passed down through the generations
By Sheryl Ubelacker, THE CANADIAN PRESS

Edmonton Sun:

Alors les Québécois seraient génétiquement tarés...j'imagine les anti-Québec ce matin en train de baver de haine en lisant cette nouvelle insignifiante, qui n'est même pas une nouvelle)

TORONTO — Researchers have identified a novel genetic disorder that affects a small number of Quebec families and pinpointed the mutated gene that can cause the disabling disease in their children.

Dubbed MEDNIK after its collection of varied symptoms, the genetic disease has been found so far in five families in the province, with eight of their members affected. (so it is indeed a small number. 5 families. Wow. )

“Many of the patients died before the age of two,” said Dr. Patrick Cossette, a neurologist and geneticist at the University of Montreal. “We still have some patients that are alive and they can live beyond 10 years old, but they are severely impaired.”

Cossette, principal investigator of the research group that named the condition and isolated its genetic underpinnings, said MEDNIK is extremely rare. It has been traced back through genealogical records to a French colonist who settled in eastern Quebec in the 1600s. (So say it out loud please: Quebec is an in-bred society! )

The disorder is considered one of the founder-effect genetic diseases, so called because they have been passed down through the generations from founding populations in a specific geographic area.

MEDNIK is an acronym of the symptoms: mental retardation; enteropathy (poor food absorption); deafness; peripheral neuropathy (a problem with nerve and muscle connections); ichthyosis (dry scaly skin); and keratodermia (horn-like skin growths).

“They have severe developmental delay,” Cossette said of children born with the syndrome. “They have severe feeding problems because of bad absorption of the food and they have severe skin lesions. And on top of it they are deaf.”

“They cannot walk, for example, because they are too weak. And they have bad muscular tone, so they are not strong enough to walk.”

At first, the researchers thought the disease afflicting some members of the families was an atypical form of keratodermia. But when they submitted their study for publication to the Public Library of Science, the journal editor and experts reviewing the paper decided that what the researchers were describing was a “distinct entity.” (So in our distinct society request, do you suggest we include MEDNICK?)

The study is published in this week’s edition of PLoS Genetics.

“So we found the specific gene for this entity, but eventually this can have implications not only for the families in Quebec, but maybe the disease will be recognized elsewhere in the world and maybe even more easily recognized in the province of Quebec, as well,” said Cossette.

“There are probably many cases that aren’t being diagnosed as such.” (like the whole francophone population, come on, admit it...)

Julie Leclerc-Michaud of Saint-Jerome, Que., just north of Montreal, has three children. Her eldest, Etienne, was born with MEDNIK and is mentally and physically disabled.

Etienne, 14, is deaf, cannot walk, is incontinent and has extensive skin problems. He is unable to eat many foods because of poor digestion and has significant developmental problems, she said in a phone interview.

“His mental age is approximately one, two years of age. He’s severely handicapped.”

Cossette said both parents must carry the genetic mutation for the syndrome to occur in their offspring. There is a one in four chance that a child will get copies of the gene from both parents and be born with the disorder.

While there is no treatment for the condition, isolation of the flawed gene means doctors will be able to test family members to see if they are carriers and to provide prenatal testing to determine if a fetus is affected.

Leclerc-Michaud said that even though the discovery will not provide any remedy for their son and others with the disease, it means her younger son and daughter, as well as nieces and nephews, will be able to make family-planning decisions based on genetic testing.

That was not an option available to Leclerc-Michaud, who recalled the fear she felt while pregnant that her other babies could be born with the same condition that afflicted her first child.

“They will know what to expect if they ever become pregnant ... or if they want to have children,” she said of the younger generation. “That’s a big plus already, not to play roulette with their future and a child who would be very ill."
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Ven Déc 05, 2008 12:05 pm

ET LA GÂZETTE QUI EN JOUIT:...attendons leur prochain éditorial qui nous traitera de racistes et de débiles xénophobes


New illness unique to French Canadians: Scientists
Charlie Fidelman, Canwest News Service

Published: Thursday, December 04, 2008
MONTREAL - Canadian researchers have announced the discovery of a new illness called Mednik syndrome, a rare and debilitating genetic disorder unique to French Canadians.

So far only eight people have been identified with the mutation, and half of them died before age two, said neurologist Patrick Cossette of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre's Research Centre.

"It's a severe and debilitating illness," Cossette said, adding that the oldest patient with Mednik is now 15.


Mednik syndrome is attributed to common founders in the French Canadian population of Quebec who emigrated from France in between 1608 and 1759. Gene mutations in a small group such as Quebec’s colonists could multiply easily.

A research team led by Cossette discovered that the syndrome is caused by a newly found mutation in the AP1S1 gene. The
gene is involved in the formation of the central nervous system and other organs.

"Our observations strongly suggest that Mednik syndrome is caused by impaired development of various neural networks, including the spinal chord, the inner ear, and possibly the brain," Cossette said. The finding was published Friday in the online version of Public Library of Science Journal PLoS Genetics.

The AP1S1 gene is responsible for transporting and sorting out proteins within the cells, Cossette explained.

Using genetic mapping and ascending genealogy, the mutation was traced to a group of families in Quebec from the Kamouraska region, in eastern Quebec, who share a common ancestor, Cossette said.

The mutation leads to severe mental retardation, red scaly skin patches, complete deafness, poor absorption of food in the gut and other problems.

Riviere-du-Loup dermatologist Christian Allen Drouin noticed several pediatric patients with skin lesions who also failed to develop normally, Cossette said.

The gene was mapped out at Genome Quebec, which promotes the research and development of genomics in the province. Two copies of the same recessive gene must be inherited to lead to the illness.

"Now that we know the gene, we can determine who is carrying it and avoid new cases of the syndrome," Cossette said, suggesting inhabitants of rural Kamouraska region be screened for the defect.

Researchers also knocked out the AP1S1 gene in zebra fish. In the animal model, the loss of the gene resulted in broad defects including severe motor deficits because the spinal cord was impaired, he said.

The discovery is expected to have implications beyond Mednik.

"It might be one piece of the puzzle in understanding deafness and mental retardation," Cossette said.

The disease is attributed to common founders in the French Canadian population of Quebec who emigrated from France in between 1608 and 1759.

Gene mutations in a small group such as Quebec's colonists could multiply easily.

Mednik is the latest of several "founder effect" disorders, including Tay-Sachs, identified among French Canadians.

Neuroscientists Eva and Fred Andermann of the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, who were not involved in this study but have identified other recessive mutations in Quebec, said Cossette's discovery will be useful in identifying the mutation carriers.

"It's an interesting and unusual disorder," Fred Andermann said. "Advances in molecular biology has led to the identification of a lot of these disorders which were previously not recognized as entities, or were often mistaken as cerebral palsy or neonatal injuries."




© The Montreal Gazette 2008
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede El Kabong » Ven Déc 05, 2008 3:35 pm

Vivement la "solution finale" pour régler le cas des francophones de ce pays...

Eh! Peuple-à-genoux! N'oublie pas de voter pour la mafia lundi!
La démocratie néo-libérale?
C'est la tyrannie de la minorité cachée sous le manteau de la majorité!
Avatar de l’utilisateur
El Kabong
Ministre
 
Messages: 4584
Inscription: Mar Oct 30, 2007 3:43 pm
Localisation: Pointe St-Charles Beach

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mer Déc 10, 2008 10:42 am

The shoe is on Charest's foot


LYSIANE GAGNON

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

December 10, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST

This is poetic justice at its most ironic.

During the last federal election, Quebec Premier Jean Charest's jabs at Prime Minister Stephen Harper robbed Mr. Harper of the seats he had counted on to win a majority. On Monday, thanks to Mr. Harper's jabs at the Bloc Québécois, Mr. Charest was robbed of the large majority he had been hoping for.

The provincial returns came as a shock to those - including major polling firms - who had predicted Mr. Charest would sail into comfortable majority territory. Instead, what the Liberal Party got was a slim majority of 66 seats, only three over the threshold of 63. No wonder the Parti Québécois militants were euphoric on election night: Not only did the PQ, under the leadership of Pauline Marois, regain its former status as Official Opposition, it did much better than party veterans expected.

Of course, there might have been other reasons for the Quebec Liberal Party's tight victory. Some people have yet to forgive Mr. Charest for having called what they thought was an unnecessary election. Also, Monday was the coldest day of the season and the voter turnout - at 57 per cent - was the lowest in the province's history. Interestingly, this low turnout would normally have helped the Liberals since the most dutiful voters are older citizens, who traditionally vote Liberal. This time, however, PQ sympathizers went to the polls in droves, in all likelihood because of what they saw as "Quebec bashing" on the part of Mr. Harper and "English Canada."

During the weeklong psychodrama that followed the creation of the Liberal-NDP coalition, the Prime Minister's defence was to attack the coalition for having secured the support of the Bloc's "separatists." Actually, Mr. Harper was correct in saying a party determined to separate Quebec from Canada should not be part of a Canadian government. (And while the Bloc was not technically part of the coalition, this coalition couldn't have been born without the Bloc's collaboration in wanting to overthrow the government and wouldn't have been able to survive without its continuous support.)

But many Quebeckers have a totally different view of the Bloc. The Bloc presents itself as the defender of "Quebec's interests" rather than as the champion of sovereignty, and so Quebeckers see it as a regular party that makes them feel secure, a comfort zone in the alien environment of federal politics. It's their "home team," in other words.

Meanwhile, Mr. Harper was careful to note that while the Bloc MPs have been duly elected and have "every legitimate right" to be in Parliament, their agenda is such that no Canadian government should be in "a position to be beholden to the Bloc."

These distinctions, of course, were completely lost in the turmoil of the bizarre scenario that was unfolding. Mr. Harper's comments - as well as those coming from English Canada's bloggers and talk-radio shows - were amplified and distorted and, needless to say, gleefully exploited by the sovereigntist forces. :roll: As usual, the Conservatives' tiny and rather inarticulate group of Quebec MPs was unable to counter the wave of anger. Mr. Harper was accused of showing contempt for the Bloc and for those who had voted for it. The fact the Prime Minister used, in English, the word "separatist," was seen as a provocation, since the sovereigntists have succeeded over the years in imposing the softer "sovereigntist" synonym.

By the end of the week, the prevailing impression was that not only the Bloc, but Quebec as a whole, had been attacked. And three separate polls showed Quebec was the only province where a majority favoured the coalition.

Yet again, the typical reflex of an embattled minority that feels humiliated (whether objectively true or not) emerged, with the predictable outcome of helping the Parti Québécois.
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mer Déc 10, 2008 10:47 am

Harper can't win a war with Quebec

Michael Behiels, Special to The Windsor Star
Published: Wednesday, December 10, 2008

If Prime Minister Stephen Harper has his way, the national unity debate will now trump the economic recession. This is not what the last election was all about. It was, and still is, about "the economy, stupid." But Mr. Harper's decision to turn his back on Quebec will create a very real and very dangerous national unity crisis.

Prime Minister Harper and his finance minister opted to ignore the economic realities confronting millions of Canadians. They boasted time and time again that the Canadian economy was just fine. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty reconfirmed this questionable assessment of Canada's deteriorating economy in his very misleading and politically loaded fiscal update.

Mr. Harper's mistakes brought upon his government the non-confidence vote he faced in the House. He avoided it by proroguing Parliament.

Prime Minister Harper's response to the emergence of a formal coalition between the leader of the Official Opposition, Stephane Dion, and the leader of the NDP, Jack Layton is very telling but also incredibly disturbing because of its ramifications for Canadian unity.

When it became clear that the Liberal-NDP coalition had obtained a commitment from the leader of the Bloc Québécois that Bloc MPs would support the coalition on all legislative matters pertaining to the economy, Mr. Harper pounced on the opportunity to save his government. Mr. Harper, wrapping himself in the Canadian flag, is going to war against Quebec and Gilles Duceppe's Bloc MPs who denied him the majority he so badly wanted when he called a snap election early this fall.

After making several very expensive attempts to obtain the votes of "les Quebecois et Quebecoises" in rural and suburban Quebec, Mr. Harper was extremely disappointed when he failed to gain any additional seats in Quebec. He believes that it was primarily "les Quebecois et Quebecoises" who denied him his rightly deserved majority.

Following their post-mortem of the election results, many prominent conservative commentators, including Tom Flanagan and Norman Spector, began to make arguments to the effect that the Conservative party should just ignore Quebec. Mr. Harper should seek to obtain a majority in the rest of Canada, namely in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. This strategy is now unfolding before our eyes.

Tom Flanagan, Mr. Harper's long-time friend and adviser, argued that the Conservative party should focus its time and funds on what he called the fourth sister, the ethnocultural communities who are present in large numbers in every one of Canada's major metropolitan regions. Mr. Flanagan concluded that the Conservative party can and will win in the next election a sufficient number of seats in these heavily ethnocultural community ridings that would more than offset any seat losses in Quebec.

Along the same lines, Norman Spector has recommended publicly that the Harper government get on with democratic reform by granting Ontario all 21 more seats that its population warrants, rather than just 10 it was last offered. If Mr. Harper could win most or all of the additional seats that Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia would get he could win a majority government without any seats from Quebec. In Mr. Spector's view this would force Quebecers to "see supporting the Bloc as the cul-de-sac it truly is."

Mr. Harper is gambling big time if he believes that going to war against the Bloc will hasten its demise. Just the opposite will happen. And so his only option is to obtain his majority without, if necessary, any seats from Quebec.

Pierre Trudeau went to political war against the Quebecois separatists in 1968 and pursued his campaign relentlessly until he defeated Rene Levesque in the referendum of May 1980. Trudeau then obtained the Constitution Act, 1982 with its Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He then defended these formidable developments when he helped defeat the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords.

Pierre Trudeau was able to sustain his prolonged war against the separatists because he had the backing of a large majority of Quebecers, francophone, anglophone, and allophone. Trudeau's political war was never against "les Quebecois et Quebecois but against the Quebecois political class whose members promoted the secession of Quebec.

Unfortunately, as the results of the recent election demonstrated, Mr. Harper has very little political support in Quebec. The vast majority of "les Québécois et Québécoises" do not trust him or his government. They see an overly ideological government heavily dominated by former Harrisite Conservatives from Ontario and Reformers from Alberta.

Recent polls show that Quebecers are overwhelmingly in favour of the Liberal-NDP coalition. They also are comfortable with the fact that Gilles Duceppe's Bloc MPs will support the coalition and its economic program for at least 18 months.

Mr. Harper needs to reconsider his decision to go to war against Quebec. If he does not, there will be a very serious and very real national unity crisis. The explosive combination of a real national unity crisis and an ongoing major recession has the potential of fracturing the fragile bonds of Confederation.

- Michael D. Behiels is the University Research Chair in Canadian Federalism and Constitutional Studies at the University of Ottawa. This column first appeared in the Ottawa Citizen.




© The Windsor Star 2008
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mer Déc 10, 2008 10:50 am

Canada anticipates departure of Quebec

Chad Groening - OneNewsNow - 12/9/2008 7:30:00 AM

A Canadian pro-family leader says sooner rather than later, English-speaking Canada may just have to say "au revoir" to Quebec, which continues to be dominated by a political party whose only goal is separation from the rest of the country.

Brian Rushfeldt, the executive director of the Canada Family Action Coalition, admits concern about the recent attempt by three liberal Canadian political parties to oust Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whose Conservative Party strengthened its minority position in October's federal elections.

Harper avoided a no-confidence vote last week when Canada's governor general allowed him to dissolve Parliament and prevent a takeover by the rogue coalition that includes the party Bloc Quebecois, which has had the stated goal of independence for the French-speaking province. Rushfeldt wonders if maybe it is time to grant them their wish.

"People are starting to question, 'Is Quebec of any value to Canada?' And that's been asked a little bit," he explains. "I think they're starting to be asked even more seriously now because we see that they are taking huge amounts of revenues from the rest of Canada, producing little or nothing for us."

But Rushfeldt believes such a move could cause a serious constitutional crisis in Canada. "Quebec, when they threatened separation a number of years ago, said: 'If we decide to separate, the constitution doesn't apply to us anyway, so you guys can say whatever you want but we're out of here,'" he adds. "If there was sufficient momentum to cause Quebec to separate, it may turn into a bit of a civil war."

Even though he hopes it does not come to that, Rushfeldt notes there clearly remains division between Quebec and the rest of Canada.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Defa ... ?id=346150
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Ven Déc 12, 2008 10:01 am

Allan Fotheringham:
Still colonials after all these years
National Post
Posted: December 11, 2008, 6:00

How can an entire country miss the issue? In the mess that was Ottawa last week, reporters were running in circles, heavyweight broadcasters in exhaustion were mangling their diction, newscasts were stretched to hours instead of minutes. All because a desperate prime minister, after more than two hours of arguing, got permission to kill Parliament (and that is the proper word) for two months, from a person whose only qualifications for holding the office are being female and speaking French.(and being black)

The finest newspaper in the world, The New York Times, had its Ottawa correspondent begin his second paragraph on the crisis with the explanation that Stephen Harper “acted after getting the approval of Governor-General Michaëlle Jean, who represents Queen Elizabeth II as the nation’s head of state.” There it is for the poor, ignorant rest-of-the-world, who will now know that it isn’t even a Canadian citizen who is the final proprietor of the sanctity of Parliament, but a messenger who is responsible to a queen who lives in a castle across a large ocean.

Both the fans of the humbled and panicky Harper and fans of the scrambled-egg coalition of Liberals and NDP, supported by the Quebec separatists, waved banners and defiant posters in rallies across Canada on the weekend. Where were the rallies of ordinary intelligent Canadians who are so ashamed that in 2008 we still can’t cut the strings to Mummy England?
In the 1980s, this scribbler’s employer, Southam News, shipped me to Washington for five years to cover the White House, then occupied by Ronald Reagan and the elder Bush. I determined that one thing I would attempt over the term was to get away from the incestuous cabal of politicians, lobbyists and journalists that populated the capital and travel to the 50 states to get the feelings of ordinary Americans.


I made it to 48 and found throughout that Americans, wherever I went, could not take Canada seriously because, well, the feeling was that it had never grown up. Here was the United States -- a nation, then No. 1 in the world, that had fought a war of independence to rid itself of the Brit colonials, and its nearest neighbour to the north still could not declare itself entirely independent.

Nothing has changed. Our G8 and G20 partners still -- justifiably -- regard us as somewhat awkward junior relatives who cannot stand completely alone and persist with this embarrassing connection to a foreign country far away. Last week a European commentator speaking about our constitutional crisis told his listeners that Canada was “a banana republic with snowflakes.” Too true. (sauf pour le Québec qui a tenté de briser le lien à 2 reprises)


Good Queen Bess, a fine woman, is now headed for 85 and is showing it. Twenty years ago, there were at least five visits of some of the Royals to Canada each year. Today that has shrunk to almost zero. Perhaps even Buck House is giving us the hint.


Queen Elizabeth recognizes she cannot give up the post because she remembers the past. That would be her selfish uncle, the Prince of Wales, who fled the throne to hook up with the much-married Wallis Simpson -- and spent the rest of his life wandering the globe as a lost, confused exile. Edward’s abdication forced her shy father, who didn’t want the job, to become king, a task that killed him and therefore ruined the youth of a 25-year-old bride who had to accept a heavy crown.


She knows she cannot just toss the monarchy to someone else (the Queen Mum lasted until 101, remember) and unless the puerile powers-that-be in Ottawa cut the trans-Atlantic cord, this country will once again become the laughing-stock of the world when, upon her death, we are made to accept Prince Charles as King of Canada. One shudders. No, one weeps.


Michaëlle Jean is a decent person, but her background in public broadcasting was no match for the bullying last week of the desperate Harper. Let us hope that after Jan. 26 she will tell him that his fate will be decided by the 308 MPs elected by the voters of Canada.


The Times’ Ottawa man, Ian Austen, is a solid reporter who has allowed that he has trouble getting Canadian political stories into his paper and that American readers seem to prefer tales of the births of cute polar bear babies.


The story now is not polar bear pups. The story is the puppet.
National Post
drfoth@sympatico.ca
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Re: ROCeries habituelles

Messagede Delenda » Mer Déc 17, 2008 11:15 am

Barbara Kay: Raelians, witches and Christians -- in Quebec there is no difference

Posted: December 17, 2008, 8:00 AM by Kelly McParland

Barbara Kay, Full Comment

An often-quoted Jesuit maxim boasts, “Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man.”

Only seven? Amateurs! Since September all Quebec students from primary school entry to high school graduation, whether enrolled in public or non-funded private schools, must attend Quebec’s new Ethics and Religious Culture course (ERC). And teachers, regardless of their beliefs, must teach it.

Jonathan Gagné, a courageous teenager at the Joseph-Hermas-Leclerc secondary school in Granby, Que., has just been suspended, and will likely be expelled, for boycotting ERC. He is a hero to thousands of angry, mainly Catholic, Quebecers who consider compulsory submission to ERC a violation of their human rights.

The ERC curricula are mandated to introduce students to Quebec’s rich diversity of religious tenets and “facilitate the spiritual development of students so as to promote self-fulfilment.” Since when does the state “facilitate” spiritual self-fulfilment? To parents who take religion seriously, this is a chilling intrusion into what all democratically inspired charters of rights designate as a parental realm of authority.

ERC was adopted by virtual fiat, its mission to instill “normative pluralism” in students. “Normative pluralism” is gussied-up moral relativism, the ideology asserting there is no absolute right or wrong and that there are as many “truths” as there are whims. There were no public consultations.

The program is predicated on the worst possible educational model for young children: the philosopher Hegel’s “pedagogy of conflict.” As one of the founders of the ECR course, put it, students “must learn to shake up a too-solid identity” and experience “divergence and dissonance” through “le questionnement.”


ERC is to the grasp of authentic religion and spirituality as Esperanto to the comprehension of Spanish and English — both are useless adornments, artificial rather than organic constructs. Worse, they may deflect forever the desire to acquire meaningful knowledge.

Reading ERC manuals and activity books, one finds a superficial mishmash of trendy theoretical platitudes whose cumulative effect will be to convince children that belief is fungible, and that all religions — including pagan animism and cults — are equally “true.” The curriculum is strewn with politically correct material that openly subverts Judeo-Christian values. In many of the manuals, ideology and religion are conflated. Social engineering is revealed as the heart of the ECR program; in the most recently published activity book, for example, Christianity is given 12 pages, feminism gets 27 pages.


No religious leaders are solicited for their views in this text, but Françoise David, the radical-feminist leader of the Marxist party Québec Solidaire is “interviewed.” Beside a large picture of Mme. David, benignly smiling, face upwardly tilted in the old Sovietic mode, the question is posed: “What would you say to those adolescents who don’t feel concerned about feminism?” David replies: “[Adolescents] need a feminist analysis in their life.”


Paganism and cults are offered equal status with Christianity. Witches “are women like any other in daily life;” “Technologically [the Raelians] are 25,000 years in advance of us.” And considering that of the 80,000 ethnic aboriginals in Quebec only 700 self-identify with aboriginal spirituality (the vast majority of ethnic aboriginals are Christian), aboriginal spirituality (falsely equated with environmentalism) is accorded hugely disproportionate space and reverence.

In this ERC monoculture, only similarities between religions are permitted, to further the jolly illusion that all religions are merely variations on a single theme of brotherly love.


Take for a subtle example ERC’s gloss on the Golden Rule -- Christianity’s “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” Judaism’s “Love thy neighbour as thyself” and Islam’s “None of you is really a believer if he does not wish for his brother what he wishes for himself.” All are posited in the ERC text as the same acknowledgement of the common humanity of all God’s children.


But in fact, there is a deep interpretive chasm between Christianity’s “others” and Judaism’s “neighbour” -- both of which refer to all people -- and Islam’s “brother,” which refers only to fellow Muslims. Here is “divergence and dissonance” truly worthy of “le questionnement.” But encouraging real critical thinking is precisely what the ERC course employs duplicity to avoid.


On the surface, the ERC curricula present an innocent, even uplifting multicultural picture. But their subliminal agenda is pernicious: to short-circuit authentic spiritual development by banalizing normative religions in order to bind children’s loyalty to Quebec’s state religion of left-wing, heritage-averse ideology.


Quebec is veering into creepy Orwellian political territory here. I wish Jonathan Gagné and his family the moral sustenance -- and the public support -- to peacefully resist the state’s coercion to the bitter end. They should know that they are fighting not only for themselves, but for all Quebec citizens’ freedom of conscience. Which is to say democracy itself, and nothing less.

National Post
bkay@videotron.ca
" Le mot «méprisant» ne suffit pas pour décrire ce que j'ai rencontré jusqu'à date" - Thomas Mulcair, à propos de Dion
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Delenda
Ministre
 
Messages: 8383
Inscription: Ven Oct 22, 2004 11:41 am

Précédente

Retourner vers Politics in English

Qui est en ligne

Utilisateurs parcourant ce forum: Aucun utilisateur enregistré et 0 invités