Talk:André Laurendeau

Constitutional Law 101:

Quebec is not a "minority in Canada". Quebec is a "constitutional unit" under which the French Canadians in Quebec are supposed to be THE MAJORITY in control of their own exclusive Legislature. Confederation was done in 1867 -- that is, a "quasi-federal" system -- precisely to PREVENT the French Canadians, and every other Founding People of Canada, from BEING a "minority" in terms of self-government and the LAW. Confederation provides MAJORITY status to each Founding People through its own exclusive legislature; and JOINT governance of all of Canada through the Parliament. People who don't understand basic constitutional law, notably historians, politicians, and most contributors to Wikipedia, allow themselves to regurgitate absolute tripe and nonsense about things such as the STATUS OF FRENCH CANADIANS IN QUEBEC, absurdly proclaiming them a "minority" when they are no such thing!

EVERY Founding People of Canada, taken against the backdrop of ALL other Canadians, is a "minority", in population terms. BUT, taken as a group within the Province founded by their ancestors, and under their OWN LEGISLATURE so that no one Province can MAKE LAW or POLICY in any other Province -- they are NOT A "MINORITY", they are a LEGAL MAJORITY.

Mass immigration, however, which is illegal and unconstitutional in Canada PRECISELY because it is intended to overthrow the EXCLUSIVE MAJORITY LEGISLATURES of the Founding Peoples in their respective Provinces, will have to be stopped soon, before Confederation is obliterated.

Logic 101:

Wikipedia said:

"Laurendeau questioned the validity of the charges of maltreatment against Jewish peoples in Germany. He also described Jewish peoples' ability to make their political weight felt as a cohesive unit.[5] While claiming not to be anti-Semitic throughout their political career, Jeune-Canada's message of hatred was debated openly in the newspaper Le Devoir..."

Please be advised: questioning the veracity of allegations is not "spreading hatred". Disagreeing with other people is not "spreading hatred" -- even if the people you disagree with are Jews. Disagreeing with other people does not make one "anti-Greek" if the people one disagrees with happen to be Greek, therefore, obviously, disagreeing with Jews does not make one an "anti" Semite, although Jews frequently use the defamatory epithet of "anti-semite" to silence critics of their own well documented mistreatment of Palestinians, for example. In conclusion, unless you can produce actual statements of clear "hatred" from "Jeune-Canada", I would suggest you avoid flat-out nonsense about "messages of hatred" JUST because the issue happens to concern JEWS.

For example, here is a VIDEO to help clarify:

Former Israeli Minister Says Jews Calling People Antisemites is a TRICK

Israel can do anything it likes to the Palestinians, as long as Jews raise the "Holocaust" and label their critics "Antisemites", says former Israeli Minister, Shulamit Aloni. (Short clip, fair use).

TRANSCRIPT:

Democracy Now: Often, when there is dissent expressed in The United States against policies of the Israeli government, people here are called antisemitic. What is your response to that as an Israeli?

Shulamit Aloni: Well, it's a trick. We always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticizing Israel, then we bring out the Holocaust.

When in this country [USA] people are criticizing Israel, then they are antisemitic.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=3098672083925&set=vb.1777851356&type=3&theater

In conclusion, one might even say that using the label of "anti-semitism" and raising the "holocaust" to silence critics of the abuse one is heaping on others, such as Palestinians, is actually the real spreading of "hate".

Yes, I know there's an EDIT conflict. There's a mindless BIGOT trying to CENSOR me because the word "JEWS" appears in this comment, and it is absolutely a criminal forbidden act to use the word JEWS at any time without prior written permission of the JEWS concerned, i.e., our planetary Lords and Masters.

Comments in this Wikipedia article on Maurice Duplessis:

These are obviously all derived from the positions taken by Laurendeau in Le Devoir and in his work elsewhere. In fact, Laurendeau was a radical leftist, a pro-Soviet, who, according to Quebec historian, Robert Rumilly, abused his position at Le Devoir to spread lies about Mr. Duplessis in an effort to destroy his reputation with the electorate, and oust his government. According to Rumilly, who was an eye-witness to events, Laurendeau and his colleagues infiltrated respectable French-Canadian nationalist publications and hijacked their pages to serve communist propaganda. I suggest you read the "other" side of the story before putting a freeze on this page, because the information is tantamount to a CLICHE, since it all comes from the mouth of the man who is described by it, i.e., Laurendeau, and from the mouths of his friends of similar leftist proclivity.

Rumilly wrote in French; but at least there are now a couple of chapters online in English from his 1956 book "The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada", in which Rumilly documents that Laurendeau and a tightly knit ring of others in his entourage, are part of a communist infiltration of Canada. I encourage anyone bilingual to read the whole French book. Here are a couple of English chapters:

http://nosnowinmoscow.com/communism/excerptthe-leftist-infiltration-in-french-canada-1956by-robert-rumilly/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.226.93 (talk) 03:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)