[fleur-de-lys]

[QUOTE]the Le Republique du Quebec[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> <br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/eek.gif' alt='Eek!'> La République du Québec<br />

[michou]

[QUOTE BY= fleur-de-lys] [QUOTE]the Le Republique du Quebec[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> <br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/eek.gif' alt='Eek!'> La République du Québec<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Qu'est-ce qui te surprends dans cette appellation Fleur-de-Lys ? <br /> Une république est tout simplement un terme pour désigner une nation ou un pays qui est régit par une constitution avec un président à la tête de l'état et dont les citoyens ont la primauté du pouvoir décisionnel (vs une monarchie par exemple).

[fleur-de-lys]

Je sais bien, ce n'est pas ce qui me surprend. C'est qu'il a dit " the Le Republique du Quebec".

[Marcarc]

I quite agree that that is the best way to go since a constitution is something concrete for people to vote on. There would still have to be a referendum vote of course, to say otherwise is as silly as wanting to include Labrador and Ontario. You've been smoking a little too much of that prime quebec ganga methinks, virtually nobody is suggesting Quebec separate without a referendum and with expanded borders. The constitution is a very real political agenda and would clear up a lot of confusion for everybody if one were available.

[_747]

Ireland has demonstrated why Canada's golden document the statue of westminister which created Canada as a self governoring dominion is a sham. That statue has never been abided by. The fact is The monarch became mute when King George??? abdicated the thrown in the 1930s. This put all the power in the hands of the British Parliament. One has to wonder what documents surrounding this abdication have not been made public. This is the point when the monarchy became a lame-duck and nothing but a figurehead.<br /> <br /> Fact, Ireland constructed a constitution in 1937 and held a DIRECT (no parliaments, no government!!!) referendum to the people. The constitution was accepted by the people of Ireland. 1948 Ireland was established as a republic of Ireland!! Read the Statue of Westminister, did Ireland follow this statue?? How about South Africa?? Canada's golden document is not worth the paper it is printed on.<br /> <br /> The fact is Ireland was partitioned, that is how Northern Ireland came about. In 1999, the Irish Republican Army agreed to cease hostility partly because Northen Ireland can be United to Ireland upon a successful Referendum of Northern Ireland!!! Think about that! Once Northern Ireland holds a successful referendum it will acceded to Ireland, that is fact!<br /> <br /> Quebec to was partitioned at one time to create Ontario and Labrador. Like the Irish, the Quebecois have claim to Ontario and Labrador. The writing is already on the wall, the Canadian Government and the politicians that strangle Canada with their lies and deceit is no longer relevant. Ireland has established the path to a Republic. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'> <br /> <br /> Construct a constitution and hold a referendum of the people. Upon success, sovereignty can be established. Any Constitution Quebec creates must also include the sovereignty over Ontario and Labrador. No different than Irelands claim to Northern Ireland. If Ontario and Labrador wants to re-unite with Le republique du Quebec this option will be enshrined in the Constitution of Quebec.<br /> <br /> The fact is, the train is already barrelling down the track and there is nothing Canada, the governments, or the politicians can do about. If that is what the people of Quebec want, that is what they will get. Quebec has been going about Sovereingty ass backwards. If Quebec is serious it is time to Construct a Constitution and put it for a vote before the people.<br /> <br /> Say hello to, Le Republique du Quebec <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[Aldebaran]

When is the next referendum?<br /> Does anyone know? <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[Brother Jonathan]

[QUOTE by _747]</b> Ireland has demonstrated why Canada’s golden document the statute of westminister which created Canada as a self governing dominion is a sham. … Fact, Ireland constructed a constitution in 1937 and held a DIRECT (no parliaments, no government!!!) referendum to the people. The constitution was accepted by the people of Ireland. 1948 Ireland was established as a republic of Ireland!! Read the Statute of Westminister, did Ireland follow this statute??<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>Your review of the steps to Irish independence is incomplete. The first step was the War of Independence; this was followed by the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921, which made Ireland a dominion, on par with contemporary Canada, Australia, &c.; it was styled the Irish Free State. The signing of the treaty was followed shortly by the (26 county) Irish Civil War. Note that Ireland had a written constitution <i>at this time</i>. It was subsequently replaced with the 1937 Constitution by referendum, and all changes to the Irish Constitution since then have required approval by referendum.</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> [The abdication of Edward VIII.] is the point when the monarchy became a lame-duck and nothing but a figurehead.<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>That was finalised a generation earlier, with the Parliament Act of 1911. George V.’s threat to create hundreds of additional peers was sufficient for the House of Lords to vote themselves out of being an equal chamber to the House of Commons — that in turn made the monarch practically toothless. Note that that dwindling of the monarch’s power took two centuries, though.</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> Any Constitution Quebec creates must also include the sovereignty over Ontario and Labrador. No different than Ireland’s claim to Northern Ireland.<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>Why stop there? According to <a href="http://www2.marianopolis.edu/quebechistory/maps/1774.jpg">the 1774 boundaries of Québec</a>, the following areas should also be claimed within Québec’s sovereignty:</p><ul><br /> <li>Michigan</li><br /> <li>Ohio</li><br /> <li>Indiana</li><br /> <li>Illinois</li><br /> <li>Wisconsin</li><br /> <li>portions of western Pennsylvania and eastern Minnesota</li><br /> </ul><p>There is also <a href="http://www.sunysb.edu/libmap/Lery.htm">a 1748 map that shows seigneuries granted on Lake Champlain</a>, so those parts of New York and Vermont ought to be claimed as well, no?</p><br />

[_747]

No point in a referedum until they construct a constitution. Through the 1776 Independance those areas became American Territories. You are confusing the Quebec Act with CANADA!! Noevelle France was Canada, Acadia, and Lousiana. Canada was Quebec, Ontario and Labrador. Not those areas you are talking about. Canada was became Quebec in the Quebec Act as did those territories you mentioned. Because technically modern day Quebec is Canada, the notion would be to restore the geography of the Original Canada. When Quebec constructs a constitution, whatever those areas are, like Ireland, those areas are to be put in the Constitution as land belonging to Quebec. You left out in 1801 Ireland was stripped of its government and put into the same government construct as Britain. Didn't that happen to Quebec in 1937?? Ireland' story is very similar in some aspects to that of Quebec, except they are now a republic and Quebec is doing what exactly??. Construct a constitution and put it for a vote!! <br />

[Marcarc]

A lot of things happen in history, likewise in the thirteenth and fourteenth century Canada was ruled by natives, will we go back to that? I'd vote yes because they were far more democratic and egalitarian but I"m not holding my breath.<br /> <br /> Likewise the island of Ireland is now composed of two sovereignties, with England holding the north and borders that are always in dispute. That's the reality. I don't know about Labrador, because I am not clear about the holding of titles that Newfoundland has, perhaps we'll see a war between Quebec and Newfoundland some day. But to be brutally honest I don't know of anybody who is seriously suggesting that Ontario, with its economic engines and the capital of Canada, would become part of Quebec. The BQ and PQ state no such thing and the last referenda certainly make no mention of it, and while Quebec sovereignty is easily imaginable, the idea that its borders will include Ontario seems somewhat delusional no matter what historical argument is touted out.

[_747]

Marcarc, we are not in 13th or 14th century, and yes alot has happened.The world will take the weight of the population at face value. Quebec's population is 7 million. 3.500000000001 million people vote to accept the constitution it will be declared valid. If Britain/England could not hold onto Ireland after they constructed a constitution and through a referendum of the people the constitution was embraced, what makes modern Canada more potent than Britain?? There is no force that will keep Quebec in Canada after a successful Referendum. However, Like Ireland Quebec (the original Canada) was partitioned to create Ontario and Labrador. These areas belong to Quebec. Will these areas be reunited with Quebec?? Because there is a significant French population throughout Northern Ontario, this could itself foster a reunification force. Ireland is an excellent case study and an example for what Quebec needs to do to reach republic status. Like Quebec Ireland was partitioned which resulted in Ireland and Northern Ireland. However, upon a successful Referendum in Northern Ireland, Northern Ireland will be Reunited with Ireland. How do you think the people of Britain feel about the drive to hold those referendums?? I am sure no different than how Canada feels towards Quebec's perpetual pursuit of referendums. <br /> <br /> Here's the Zinger. The people of Ireland held this referendum of their own volition. That means the Quebec Government is irrelavent. That means the Federal Government is irrelanvent. All that is required is for the PEOPLE to construct a constitution and put this constitution before the PEOPLE for a vote. No Parti Quebecois, No Bloc Quebecois, No Quebec Government, just a drive and a construct of those poeple who are out to see Quebec realize sovereingty. Although Ireland achieved a successful referendum in 1937, it took until 1948 for Ireland to be recognized as a Republic. What happened over that time to make Ireland a Republic?? What happened was worldwide Recognition. A domino effect took place. Country after Country began recognizing Ireland as a soverein Nation. Like Ireland, Quebec must construct a constitution and put it before the people for a vote and let the world begin recognizing Quebec as a sovereign Nation. Build it and they will come.<br /> <br /> When Ireland constructed its constitution in 1937, it claimed sovereingty over Northern Ireland. When Quebec creates such a constitution sovereignty must be claimed over Ontario and Labrador. Whether in time like Northern Ireland, Ontario and Labrador is re-united with Quebec would be a referendum Question towards the people of Labrador and Ontario. Would there be success in such referendums?? Who knows, but I am most certain that Quebec can acheive a numerical victory in a Constitution referendum. The fact is, a referendum can be held today, tommorrow, next week, next year. There is no need to hold a controlling party in the Quebec legislature to bring about this referendum. Ireland Proved this fact!! <br /> <br /> Construct a constitution, a lets have a vote! <br /> <br /> vive le republique du Quebec <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[Marcarc]

As I've said, so far as I've read anywhere YOU are the only person claiming that Labrador and Ontario must be part of a sovereign Quebec. If you can find any organization that has over 100 people in it who is claiming likewise that would be interesting. If you think that northern ontarians would want to join Quebec I think you would be sadly mistaken, like the acadians as a group northern ontarians are very much against Quebec sovereignty. <br /> <br /> Since it's agreed that its not the 13th or 14th century we can also determine that it's not the 17th, 18th or 19th, even 20th century. Quebec has current established borders, and some even claim that native areas and english speaking areas should be able to remain as part of Canada. <br /> <br /> As far as Ireland goes, for borders it is obviously more straightforward as there are clear borders for an inevitable Ireland, although I spent three months there last year and saw little move toward unifying northern Ireland. That's definitely only one interpretation that Ireland became established because of international recognition, as I've posted elsewhere the mohawks have had their own international passport and european embassies for fifteen years but it isn't getting them any closer to their own nation here at home.<br /> <br /> It is unfortunate that so many canadians have been so brainwashed by the propaganda, in fact the maritimes are staunch federal supporters even though over a hundred years of federalism has screwed them over, and continues to do so. From what I've seen Quebec federalism 'may' be far less centralist (depending who you ask) which means if people could get beyond it, they'd realize that Quebec federalism may be far more preferable. Of course we can't discount that the chief support for federalism is simply because they are the only ones with any money, and who wants to trust provincial politicians?

[_747]

So there is no current movement in Northern Ireland to reunite Northern Ireland with Ireland. However, in 1999 to bring peace with the IRA, it was agreed that if Northern Ireland should attain a victory in a referendum to reunite with Ireland, so be it. Would Britain be happy with this possible outcome?? Not likely. Think about it!! If the almighty britain can't keep Northern Ireland apart of Britain, how is it that Canada can Keep Quebec and its former territories against its will?? Does Canada possess some unique power that is grandeur than Britain or the United States?? <br /> <br /> Whatever lands that was Canada/Quebec should be documented in the Constitution to be constructed. Sovereignty is to be claimed over those lands (like Ireland did to Northern Ireland). When Quebec separates it will take what it takes, and come back for the remainder at a later date. Is there a will for Quebec Sovereignty??? Absolutely!<br /> <br /> Three million people spoke to that fact in 1995. The Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois have put the cart before the horse and made a blunder of Sovereignty. To put the horse before the cart, a constitution must be constructed and then put for a vote. Once accepted by %50.0001 the world can be put one notice to acknowledge Quebec Sovereignty. You can be sure France will recognize Quebec, Germany likely, Spain likely, possibly Italy, the United States likely. For the World not treat Quebec as it treated Ireland's move to a Republic would be hypocrisy. As for your Native grievances, I suggest you watch Geronimo with Gene Hackman, and investigate how the British and the Australians viewed the indigenous people of Australia. I empathize with your grievances but in the 21st century the world is in a new dynamic.<br /> <br /> Quebec's first priority should be to construct a constitution ASAP. Put it out to the world academia for approval. Once there is approval bring the constitution before the people for a vote. If Accepted by the people, wait for the domino affect to take hold. Country after Country to begin recognizing the Sovereignty of Quebec. Build it, the world come along side.

[Brother Jonathan]

[QUOTE by _747]</b> You are confusing the Quebec Act with CANADA!! Nouvelle France was Canada, Acadia, and Louisiana. Canada was Quebec, Ontario and Labrador. Not those areas you are talking about. Canada became Quebec in the Quebec Act as did those territories you mentioned.<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>Fair enough — I’ll accept that argument for the 1774 Québec boundaries. However, the 1748 seigneuries on Lake Champlain were exclusively under French claim (among the European powers — <i>de facto</i> control was held by the Iroquois Confederacy). If subsequent American occupation were enough to cancel modern Québec’s historic claim to them, then why shouldn’t subsequent modern Canadian occupation be enough to cancel modern Québec’s historic claims to Ontario and Labrador?</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> When Quebec constructs a constitution, whatever those areas are, like Ireland, those areas are to be put in the Constitution as land belonging to Quebec.<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>The 1937 Irish constitution distinguished between the Irish nation and the Irish state. Article 2. claimed the island of Ireland, its islands, and territorial seas as Irish national territory, while Article 3. recognised that the Irish state didn’t include all of the Irish national territory. Personally, I have no problem with Québec making a similar distinction in an analogous constitution; as you stated before, reïntegration of Québec with Ontario and Labrador would be determined by future votes of Ontarians and, uh, Labradoritos <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'>.</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> You left out in 1801 Ireland was stripped of its government and put into the same government construct as Britain. Didn’t that happen to Quebec in 1937??<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>I left out all previous Irish history because I didn’t think it relevant to the particular point that you were drawing between 20th century Ireland and 21st century Québec. The Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in the 12th century started that Irish ball rolling…</p><br /> <p>I’m not familiar with what happened to Québec in 1937. Would you provide further details?</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> How do you think the people of Britain feel about the drive to hold those referendums [in Northern Ireland]??<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>That depends on the particular Briton. Unionists in Northern Ireland would find it appalling. Nationalists there would look forward to it. I’d guess that the typical Englishman wouldn’t be too concerned with the results one way or the other, except for the effect that it might have on Scots and Welsh nationalists.</p><br /> <br /> [QUOTE by _747]</b> The people of Ireland held this referendum of their own volition. That means the Quebec Government is irrelevant. That means the Federal Government is irrelevant. All that is required is for the PEOPLE to construct a constitution and put this constitution before the PEOPLE for a vote. No Parti Quebecois, no Bloc Quebecois, no Quebec government, just a drive and a construct of those people who are out to see Quebec realize sovereignty.<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> <p>I looked a little more into the 1937 process in Ireland, and here’s what I found:</p><ul><br /> <li>1st May 1937: de Valera publishes the draft constitution</li><br /> <li>2nd June 1937: Oireachtas [Irish parliament] enacts the Plebiscite (Draft Constitution) Act, which makes binding referenda possible</li><br /> <li>14th June 1937: Dáil Éireann [“Assembly of Ireland”, analogous to House of Commons] approves the draft constitution</li><br /> <li>1st July 1937: Irish people vote on constitution</li><br /> <li>29th December 1937: new constitution takes effect</li></ul><br /> <p>Article 46. of <a href="http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/publications/297.htm">the Irish constitution</a> requires that acts to change the constitution must be initiated in the Dáil as a bill, and passed by both houses of the Oireachtas, before being submitted to referendum.</p><br /> <p>Perhaps the best first step would be getting an analogue to the Plebiscite Act passed — preferably by both the Québec government and the Canadian government?</p>

[Marcarc]

We can remain on the fringe and argue about hypotheticals all day, what Quebec 'will do' is based on the BQ and PQ policies, not what any individual Quebecer thinks. If people want to believe that at some point Quebec is going to 'take over' Ontario and Labrador, that's their business.<br /> <br /> For Ireland, as I said, we've seen little movement towards a referendum, and since loyalist protestants make up the majority there it is somewhat doubtful that the referendum would be any different than the 1973 referendum which had 60% voted in favour of staying british. That could well change, of course, and I have doubts at this point whether Britain would even care. Politically England benefits little from northern Ireland so I suspect that like Canada they'd acquiesce to separatist demands, if the NI voted for it.

[_747]

[QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] <br /> <p>Fair enough — I’ll accept that argument for the 1774 Québec boundaries. However, the 1748 seigneuries on Lake Champlain were exclusively under French claim (among the European powers — <i>de facto</i> control was held by the Iroquois Confederacy). If subsequent American occupation were enough to cancel modern Québec’s historic claim to them, then why shouldn’t subsequent modern Canadian occupation be enough to cancel modern Québec’s historic claims to Ontario and Labrador?</p> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> What changed?? The Quebecois/Canadians were defeated on the plains of Abraham in 1759 by the BRITISH MONARCH. 1776 The United States moves towards independence and France and Spain is persuaded to help to regain everything lost in the Seven year war (Canada/Quebec). The United States ventures on a 4 year campaign to conquer Canada. The United States was not strong enough to fulfill this pursuit, so France was heading up its own campaign, but for whatever reason this did not get off the ground. France was interested in regaining Canada, not those lands that became the United States or what Napoleon sold to the United States. Brother Jonathon we are talking about Canada that was established in 1604 and existed as Canada until 1759 when it fell under British Occupation. Twenty years later there was a significant effort to break Canada (Quebec) from British Occupation. That did not happen. Now the British Monarch is irrelevant and the voice of the Quebecois will reign suppreme. Construct a constitution and put for a vote in Quebec.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] <br /> <p>The 1937 Irish constitution distinguished between the Irish nation and the Irish state. Article 2. claimed the island of Ireland, its islands, and territorial seas as Irish national territory, while Article 3. recognised that the Irish state didn’t include all of the Irish national territory. Personally, I have no problem with Québec making a similar distinction in an analogous constitution; as you stated before, reïntegration of Québec with Ontario and Labrador would be determined by future votes of Ontarians and, uh, Labradoritos <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/wink.gif' alt='Wink'>.</p>[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> It does not mean it will happen, but it could be included to accomodate this possibility in the future.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] <p>I left out all previous Irish history because I didn’t think it relevant to the particular point that you were drawing between 20th century Ireland and 21st century Québec. The Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in the 12th century started that Irish ball rolling…</p><br /> <p>I’m not familiar with what happened to Québec in 1937. Would you provide further details?</p> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I meant 1837, There was a rebellion in Quebec to establish independance. This rebellion was squashed. To punish Quebec its government was stripped and the people of Quebec fell under the same Government as upper canada. This led to the creation of Canada in 1867. In 1801 Ireland was also stripped of its Government. <br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] <p>That depends on the particular Briton. Unionists in Northern Ireland would find it appalling. Nationalists there would look forward to it. I’d guess that the typical Englishman wouldn’t be too concerned with the results one way or the other, except for the effect that it might have on Scots and Welsh nationalists.</p> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> It appears the almighty Britain is in the same situation with Northern Ireland as Canada is with Quebec. I am baffled how Canada believes it is somehow superior to Britain with respect to maliciously holding Quebec against its will upon a successful referendum.<br /> <br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan]<br /> <p>I looked a little more into the 1937 process in Ireland, and here’s what I found:</p><ul><br /> <li>1st May 1937: de Valera publishes the draft constitution</li><br /> <li>2nd June 1937: Oireachtas [Irish parliament] enacts the Plebiscite (Draft Constitution) Act, which makes binding referenda possible</li><br /> <li>14th June 1937: Dáil Éireann [“Assembly of Ireland”, analogous to House of Commons] approves the draft constitution</li><br /> <li>1st July 1937: Irish people vote on constitution</li><br /> <li>29th December 1937: new constitution takes effect</li></ul><br /> <p>Article 46. of <a href="http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/publications/297.htm">the Irish constitution</a> requires that acts to change the constitution must be initiated in the Dáil as a bill, and passed by both houses of the Oireachtas, before being submitted to referendum.</p><br /> <p>Perhaps the best first step would be getting an analogue to the Plebiscite Act passed — preferably by both the Québec government and the Canadian government?</p>[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I can see it happening in the Quebec legislature, where it really matters. Ireland didn't have Britain pass this kind of legislation so why should Quebec do this??<br /> <br />