- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Should the Gov Gen not be the best representation of a Canadian, with an impecable past? Im sorry but IMHO the fact that FLQ involvement was even brought up tells me where theres smoke, theres fire.
edadian said:It is just separatists causing trouble. It would be best avoid stirring up controversy because it gives into the separatists aim to discredit a popular federalist Quebec.
I wasn't aware that it was, honestly.I think the PMO stifling her ability to speak out has contributed to this media frenzy...
I agree, but, if one was a card carring member previously in the "sovereigntist movement" within Quebec, would you not care about the rational behind there about-face on the issue?I do expect her (and him) as the appointed Governor General of Canada to renounced any and all sympathies towards Quebec sovereigntists who are intent on breaking up this country.
Blakey said:Well, its not inconsequential in my opinion, if there isn't anything to hide...let the people of both countries know, Canada and Quebec.I wasn't aware that it was, honestly.I agree, but, if one was a card carring member previously in the "sovereigntist movement" within Quebec, would you not care about the rational behind there about-face on the issue?
What it all boils down to, at least for me, is what was the motivating factor('s) (if they did vote for sovereignty) that they had this miraculous 180 degree in there thinking?
I agree, but, if one was a card carring member previously in the "sovereigntist movement" within Quebec, would you not care about the rational behind there about-face on the issue?
Gunner said:I agree with Michael, how Jean and her husband voted in 1995 is moot at this point. We have all done stupid things in our past..
Well, let's use another example. There's pretty good evidence that the current president of Iran was one of the hostage takers in the 1979 crisis at the US embasy in Tehran. Would you say that his past is also irelevant? Would you trust him enough to allow Iran to research nuclear technology for "peaceful purpuses"?
48Highlander said:Well, let's use another example. There's pretty good evidence that the current president of Iran was one of the hostage takers in the 1979 crisis at the US embasy in Tehran. Would you say that his past is also irelevant? Would you trust him enough to allow Iran to research nuclear technology for "peaceful purpuses"?
48Highlander said:Well, let's use another example. There's pretty good evidence that the current president of Iran was one of the hostage takers in the 1979 crisis at the US embasy in Tehran. Would you say that his past is also irelevant? Would you trust him enough to allow Iran to research nuclear technology for "peaceful purpuses"?
Gunner,The issue is not whether she is a card carrying member of the FLQ, BQ, or PQ
Either way, it's all the same in my eyes, let us know where you (GG/ husband) stand on the issue, and dispel any false accusations that may have been leveled against you. Failing to refute such claims will inevitably lead to speculation, thus the need for a public address...if one was a "card carring member" previously in the sovereigntist movement within Quebec,
Michael Dorosh said:Gunner is right about talking Iran in another thread, but you do provide an interesting example that I think is an acceptable parallel. Is his past irrelevant? I think it shows where his loyalties lay at some time in the past. It wouldn't make him more or less likely to build nuclear bombs, taken on its own.
Do we think the Governor General is likely to dissolve Parliament and ...well, what, exactly? Ratify a motion to seperate? Even if she was a seperatist, what influence could she exercise in order to achieve that goal? I don't know which is why I ask.
Ex-Dragoon said:I think the difference there is hostage taking is a crimminal whereas being a separatist in Canada is not.
Using another extreme example, if as you say here resume was a thousand times better than say...Don Cherry's resume, I would still pick Don Cherry. I (as well most Canadians) at least know Don Cherry, he's very opinionated, loud mouthed, and pulls no punches, sometimes it's the devil you know rather than the devil you don't know...If her resume was a thousand times better than any other person who was considered for this position, then yeah, ok, let's ignore her past views about seperation and see how she does.
Blakey said:at least know Don Cherry, he's very opinionated, loud mouthed, and pulls no punches,
Michael Dorosh said:Exactly the traits you want for a senior diplomat who travels abroad to represent the country....
Granted, some have argued that is not the G-G's mandate, but I think the position has evolved to include that.
Can you honestly see Cherry giving a eulogy half as eloquent as the one Adrienne Clarkson delivered for the Unkown Soldier? Or greeting foreign dignitaries (especially Europeans, given his views on European hockey players)? Or having any appeal whatsoever in Quebec?
What is it you think a Governor General does, incidentally?
Read the above quote... :Using another extreme example,
Maybe represent the country without any untoward bias??? I dunno call me crazy...What is it you think a Governor General does, incidentally?