[A-List] even Uber-Federalists think the Globe went too far, but not the Globe

["Jim Yarker" <sjy_estrien@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[The Globe refuses to apologize - as does its paid hack - and chooses 
instead to run a dissimulating editorial which admits there's no evidence 
for her slimy core assertions whatsoever, and then goes on to repeat the 
Globe's previous colonialist assertions about Québec's language laws.  (when 
caught dead to rights, change the subject, in order to hide one's 
motives...).  To twist the knife some more, the Globe elected to publish 
Québec Premier Charest's statement rightly deploring Wong's imbecilic 
article as a simple Joe Blow letter to the editor rather than treating the 
statement as a communication from a head of government.   The Globe has 
ignored both Premier Charest's and the Canadian House of Commons' 
denunciations and demands for an apology.  The Gazette regrets Wong's excess 
and then goes on to use the "confusion through profusion"  technique, 
deploring other groups exploiting tragedies whom it doesn't identify.  No 
surprise since Wong is copying from the time-honoured "Rhodesian" template 
of the Harper-endorsing Gazette itself, for whom she once worked.  Wong has 
turned down an invitation to appear on Québec's most watched talk show to 
defend her "thesis", and has refused to return calls to Le Devoir, Québec's 
paper of record and the journal of its national intelligentsia, thus showing 
the limits of brave journalistic probing of social questions when they 
threaten to spill beyond safe, linguistically captive, like-thinking, parti 
pris audiences. Perhaps the last word should go to the Société St-Jean 
Baptiste who pointed out that the mentality of Ms. Wong's article is a 
product of her English-only education in the period prior to Bill 101, and 
how Bill 101 (La charte de langue française) by putting an end to the 
linguistic apartheid which prevailed previously, accomplished something 
useful. ]

----


Narrow-minded analysis
Jean Charest
The Globe and Mail - mercredi 20 septembre 2006




Last Wednesday, Montreal was the site of a tragic event that has deeply 
troubled all Quebeckers. On Monday, students courageously returned to Dawson 
College in the hope that their hospitalized schoolmates would soon join 
them. We share their pain and sadness.
The recent events at Dawson College seem to defy all logic. These events 
have brought back painful memories for all of us in Quebec, as well as for 
people in the United States, France, Ireland, Russia and all other nations 
who have experienced similar tragedies in recent years. This tragedy is 
certainly reminiscent of the shootings that took place in downtown Toronto 
on Dec. 26, 2005.
In this kind of situation, anyone who ventures to put forward explanations 
or comparisons at the very least risks making a fool of himself. Jan Wong 
has certainly discredited herself with her gamble.
I was shocked and disappointed by the narrow-minded analysis published on 
Saturday, Sept. 16 (?Get Under The Desk?), in which Ms. Wong sought to 
identify the affirmation of French culture in Quebec as the deeper cause of 
the Dawson College shootings and the killings at École Polytechnique in 
1989.
Quebeckers make up less than 3 per cent of the North American population. 
Over the centuries, through the vicissitudes of history, we have managed to 
preserve our language and culture and, in so doing, cherished the highest 
democratic ideals. Every year, we welcome tens of thousands of individuals 
from the four corners of the Earth, people who contribute to building a free 
society in Quebec, a society that is proud of its difference.
Our common language - far from a blemish on our city, as Ms. Wong 
incorrectly asserts - represents a vital part of Montreal?s cosmopolitan 
character and is what makes Quebec unique in North America.
Because we speak French, because we are proud of our language, and because 
it is the first instrument of our freedom, we have reached out across 
oceans, built ties with the other nations, in particular with the global 
French-speaking community, and thereby contributed to Canadian diversity.
Ms. Wong?s article is a disgrace. It betrays an ignorance of Canadian values 
and a profound misunderstanding of Quebec. She should have the decency to 
apologize to all Quebeckers.

----

Globe and Mail defends piece on Dawson shootings
Last Updated: Thursday, September 21, 2006 | 4:42 PM ET
CBC News
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Quebec Premier Jean Charest are rebuking a 
Globe and Mail writer who wrote a recent article that suggested Quebec's 
francophone culture may have contributed to the Dawson College shootings.
The feature, written by Jan Wong and published in the Sept. 16 edition of 
the paper, described what happened inside Dawson College the day Kimveer 
Gill walked in and opened fire on students, killing one woman and injuring 
19 other people.
Wong wrote that a possible explanation could be found in the fact that Gill, 
like gunman Marc Lépine, who killed 14 women at l'École Polytechnique in 
1989, were people of foreign background, not "pure laine" Quebecers, and 
their anti-social behaviour stemmed from their disaffection with Quebec 
society and its reluctance to welcome outsiders.
"What many outsiders don't realize is how alienating the decades-long 
linguistic struggle has been in the once-cosmopolitan city," Wong wrote in 
the two-page feature.
In a letter to the Globe and Mail published Thursday, Harper acknowledged 
that while Wong has a right to her point of view, her argument is "patently 
absurd and without foundation," and shows prejudice in blaming a whole 
society for the actions of one individual.
The Dawson shootings, like the Polytechnique massacre, were the evil actions 
of "one unstable person," wrote Harper. "These actions deserve our 
unqualified moral condemnation, not an excuse for printing prejudices masked 
in the language of social theory."
Charest also critical
Harper's criticism echoed the outrage expressed by Quebec Premier Jean 
Charest in a letter to the editor published in Wednesday's edition of the 
Globe and Mail. Charest called Wong's analysis "narrow-minded" and 
disgraceful. The article "betrays an ignorance of Canadian values and a 
profound misunderstanding of Quebec," Charest wrote.
"We have managed to preserve our language and culture and, in so doing, 
cherished the highest democratic ideals ?. Because we speak French, because 
we are proud of our language, and because it is the first instrument of our 
freedom, we have reached out across oceans, built ties with the other 
nations, in particular with the global French-speaking community, and 
thereby contributed to Canadian diversity."
Charest went on to say, "In this kind of situation, anyone who ventures to 
put forward explanations or comparisons at the very least risks making a 
fool of himself. Jan Wong has certainly discredited herself with her 
gamble."
Wong's argument is outrageous, said André Pratte, an editorial columnist 
with Montreal newspaper La Presse. "When she says it's acceptable in Quebec 
to value racial purity, I mean, that is nonsense," Pratte said.
The seasoned Globe and Mail writer had little to say in response to the 
shower of criticism generated by her article. When CBC Montreal contacted 
Wong for her comment, she said she does not want to get involved in a public 
debate.
Globe and Mail responds
In Thursday's edition of the paper, an editorial addresses the "small 
uproar" created by Wong's provocative statements. The editorial asserts that 
an argument could be made about the effect of Quebec's longstanding debate 
over language law, and the "politics of exclusion" have had on the 
"marginalization and perhaps alienation of non-francophone Quebecers."
But the paper admitted there's no cause and effect that could explain school 
shootings in Quebec.
"Did such marginalization in any way contribute to the violence at 
Montreal's Dawson College last week, or at the École Polytechnique in 1989? 
No such evidence exists."
And while it's easy to understand the "outraged reactions" to Wong's 
assertations, given recent events in Quebec, the editorial concludes by 
reaffirming the need to "ask hard questions and explore uncomfortable 
avenues."
----
Harper takes newspaper columnist to task for column about Quebec
           shootings
           ALEXANDER PANETTA
           OTTAWA (CP) - Stephen Harper has lambasted a newspaper columnist 
who
           linked last week's Montreal school shootings to Quebecers' 
allegedly
           harsh treatment of immigrants.
           In a letter to the Globe and Mail on Wednesday, the prime 
minister
           called columnist Jan Wong's argument prejudiced, absurd,
           irresponsible and without foundation. "While the writer is 
entitled
           to her point of view, the argument is patently absurd and 
without
           foundation," Harper wrote.
           "It is not only grossly irresponsible on her part, it is also
           completely prejudiced to lay blame on Quebec society in this
           manner."
           The House of Commons also condemned the piece by Wong and, in a
           motion supported by all political parties, demanded an apology 
from
           the newspaper.
           Quebec Premier Jean Charest earlier sent his own letter of 
complaint
           about the article, which ran in the newspaper's Saturday 
edition.
           Harper said all Quebecers were horrified by last week's events, 
in
           which gunman Kimveer Gill blasted his way into Dawson College,
           killing one student and wounding 20 others.
           "These actions deserve our unqualified moral condemnation, not 
an
           excuse for printing prejudices masked in the language of social
           theory," Harper wrote.
           Charest's letter called Wong's suggestion a "disgrace."
           In the controversial story, Wong said Montrealers wondered why 
their
           city had seen three school shootings in 17 years - 1989, 1993 
and
           last week.
           She noted that none of the shooters - Marc Lepine (whose birth 
name
           was Gamil Gharbi), Valery Fabrikant, or Gill - were old-stock
           francophones. Wong then appeared to offer an explanation.
           "What many outsiders don't realize is how alienating the
           decades-long linguistic struggle has been in the 
once-cosmopolitan
           city," she wrote.
           "It hasn't just taken a toll on long-time anglophones, it's 
affected
           immigrants, too. To be sure, the shootings in all three cases 
were
           carried out by mentally disturbed individuals. But what is also 
true
           is that in all three cases, the perpetrator was not pure laine, 
the
           argot for a 'pure' francophone.
           "Elsewhere, to talk of racial 'purity' is repugnant. Not in 
Quebec."

           An assistant to Globe and Mail editor-in-chief Edward Greenspon 
said
           there would be no official comment Wednesday from the newspaper, 
but
           there would be an editorial on the issue in Thursday's edition.
           Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe said Wednesday he couldn't
           believe the newspaper hadn't already apologized.
           Quebec federalists were just as indignant as their sovereigntist
           counterparts.
           "The Globe and Mail should be ashamed of publishing such 
garbage,"
           Raymonde Folco, head of the federal Liberals' Quebec caucus, 
told
           the Commons in remarks that drew applause from her peers.
           Liberal MP Denis Coderre - who tabled Wednesday's motion in the
           Commons - called Quebec a "model of integration."
           "There's a sort of trend," he said outside the Commons.
           "There are two or three (journalists) who get carries away in 
their
           analysis, and enough's enough.
           "We're not 'Quebecistan'. We're not a society that ostracizes."
           Coderre was personally mentioned in a recent National Post 
column
           headlined 'The Rise of Quebecistan,' which mentioned his 
appearance
           at a protest condemning the Israeli bombing of Lebanon.
           The column by Barbara Kay, which also drew criticism in the
           province, called "Quebec the most anti-Israel of the provinces, 
and
           therefore the most vulnerable to tolerance for Islamist 
terrorist
           sympathizers."


Today?s Quebec

Editorial - The Globe and Mail - jeudi 21 septembre 2006




In Two Solitudes, his award-winning 1945 novel, Hugh MacLennan explored the 
tensions between two peoples, French and English, in Quebec society. In 
1967, Canada?s Progressive Conservative Party debated the merits of a 
controversial "deux nations" policy that sought to recognize Quebec?s 
distinctiveness within Confederation. Brian Mulroney resurrected the 
distinct society concept in his proposed 1987 Meech Lake constitutional 
amendments, which The Globe and Mail strongly supported. Intermittently, 
tensions have flared over the quest to preserve the French language and 
culture versus the freedom of individuals to express and educate themselves 
in French or English.
Now, a small uproar has arisen over a provocative question raised in a 
staff-written report in this newspaper on Saturday. Did the passionate 
debate over Quebec?s language laws and the politics of exclusion, so 
famously apparent on referendum night in 1995, in any way contribute to the 
marginalization and perhaps alienation of non-francophone Quebeckers ? The 
answer to that is arguable. But did such marginalization in any way 
contribute to the violence at Montreal?s Dawson College last week, or at the 
École Polytechnique in 1989 ? No such evidence exists.
Indeed, the article in question, which was almost entirely devoted to the 
humanity of those exposed to last week?s violence, merely wondered why, in 
three horrific cases of shootings in postsecondary schools in Quebec over 
the past 17 years, the acts had been perpetrated by Quebeckers not fully 
part of the majority. Was there something in the politics of identity that 
further aggravated the obvious marginalization and alienation of the 
shooters ?
When a journalist poses such questions, especially during a period of 
heightened sensitivity, outraged reactions are not unexpected. Hundreds of 
letters to the editor have arrived and no less than the Premier of Quebec 
and the province?s leading editorialist have been given space to take issue 
with the article. In English Canada, unsurprisingly, the response has been 
considerably more muted, although Prime Minister Stephen Harper has weighed 
in with a letter, four days after the article appeared. The strongly held 
view is that the portrayal was an inaccurate depiction of contemporary 
Quebec.
Governor-General Michaëlle Jean, a Haitian immigrant to Quebec, obviously 
feels neither marginalized nor alienated. She stands as a glimmering symbol 
of an optimistic and confident Quebec - one increasingly open to all. She 
recently decried the outmoded mindset of the two solitudes and counselled 
instead that "we learn to see beyond our wounds, beyond our differences." We 
must not, in the process, ever lose sight of the need to ask hard questions 
and explore uncomfortable avenues. By the same token, it would be remiss to 
forget that today?s Quebec is not the Quebec of yesteryear.
----

Nonsense about language

Editorial - The Gazette (Montreal) - mercredi 20 septembre 2006




The chattering classes of Quebec are in high dudgeon this week over some 
idle speculation printed in Saturday?s Globe and Mail. There journalist Jan 
Wong, a former Montrealer, suggested the common thread in three Montreal 
school shootings was ... language !
She linked together last week?s Dawson tragedy, the Polytechnique massacre 
and Valery Fabrikant?s murders this way :
"What many outsiders don?t realize is how alienating the decades-long 
linguistic struggle has been in the once-cosmopolitan city. It hasn?t just 
taken a toll on long-time anglophones, it?s affected immigrants, too. To be 
sure, the shootings in all three cases were carried out by mentally 
disturbed individuals. But what is also true is that in all three cases, the 
perpetrator was not pure laine, the argot for a "pure" francophone. 
Elsewhere, to talk of racial "purity" is repugnant. Not in Quebec."
This utterly unsubstantiated and mysteriously illogical connection, or 
implication of a connection, will leave most Quebecers, of all persuasions, 
scratching their heads.
Almost as absurd was the reaction to her assertion, which was seized upon by 
some nationalists as just the latest proof that "rest of Canada" 
not-so-secretly despises Quebec, and that federalism can?t work. "English 
Canada is too quick to tolerate Quebec-bashing," claimed Bloc MP Maka Kotto.
Even Premier Jean Charest sent a letter to the Globe, calling the article a 
"disgrace."
The last time Quebec got all riled up about the musings of a columnist in a 
Toronto-based paper - Barbara Kay in the National Post, when she referred to 
"Quebecistan" - journalistic veteran Alain Dubuc in La Presse scoffed at her 
term but suggested this is in fact "Nombrilistan" - the navel-gazing capital 
of the world.
Perhaps it?s normal to be a little concerned with what your big neighbour 
thinks of you - "rest of Canada" reacts the same way to any stray negative 
comment in U.S. media.
But it?s tiresome and embarrassing to see various special-interest groups - 
on la question nationale, or on gun control, or any other issue - try to 
make use of a tragedy to score their little points.
--------


?Pure laine? is simply pure nonsense
André Pratte
The Globe and Mail - mercredi 20 septembre 2006




An article in Saturday?s Globe and Mail contained a startling and offensive 
suggestion. Writing of the aftermath of last week?s Dawson College shooting, 
reporter Jan Wong argued that the three shootings that occurred in Montreal 
colleges and universities since 1989 find their source in the 
marginalization of anglophones and immigrants caused by Quebec?s "infamous 
language law."
Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. But the privilege of a pulpit as 
prestigious as The Globe and Mail carries responsibilities. One should, at 
the very least, explain how her opinion was arrived at, what facts it was 
based on. Yet, no basis for the speculation was offered. In each of the 
Polytechnique, Concordia and Dawson shootings, Ms. Wong observed, "the 
perpetrator was not pure laine" and "all of them had been marginalized in a 
society that valued pure laine." Really ?
# Marc Lépine, the 1989 École Polytechnique killer, was the son of an 
Algerian immigrant and a French-Canadian mother. In an explicit letter, and 
to his victims just before he shot them, he explained his horrific act by 
his hatred of feminists. No mention whatsoever of language or race issues. 
All his 14 victims were women.
Valery Fabrikant, who shot four colleagues at Concordia University in 1992, 
was so marginalized by Québec?s Bill 101 that he worked . . . in one of 
Québec?s three English language universities ! His four victims were from 
anglo or immigrant backgrounds. What a strange way to express his supposed 
anger against the pure laine. As for the Dawson College killer, Kimveer Gill 
did not write a word about linguistic issues on his blog, studied all his 
life in English schools and went on to express his frustration . . . in an 
English language college against young people studying in English.
One can obviously disagree with Bill 101. However, the suggestion that it 
was somehow to blame for murders committed by obviously deranged men is 
irresponsible. How does Jan Wong explain the 1999 Taber shooting in Alberta 
? The series of recent handgun murders in Toronto ? Or the numerous similar 
incidents in the United States ? Were the shooters of the Columbine high 
school in 1999 angry at René Lévesque ? Maybe documentary maker Michael 
Moore missed something.
"What many outsiders don?t realize is how alienating the decades-long 
linguistic struggle has been in the once-cosmopolitan city [of Montreal]," 
she writes. It seems to me that Ms. Wong, although herself a Montrealer, is 
the outsider here. What is left of Quebec?s language legislation has been 
approved, [because gutted by judical battering initiated by anglo lobbies - 
jy] and the case of commercial signs even proposed, by Canada?s Supreme 
Court. And Montreal, like all Canadian cities, is more cosmopolitan today 
than it has ever been.
The linguistic struggle Ms. Wong mentions has long been over. [sic] The 
proof is in the huge wave of sympathy expressed by Quebeckers of all origins 
after the shootings. It is also in the fact that all Dawson College students 
interviewed by the media after the tragedy spoke fluent French. [sic]
What concerns me the most about Ms. Wong?s unchecked suggestion is that it 
may serve to perpetuate prejudices. While letters from Globe readers 
criticizing the Wong argument give me heart, separatists in Quebec already 
have started to use the article to bolster their case, deploring the 
insulting perception of Quebec society held by English Canadians. When such 
a suggestion as Jan Wong?s appears in print, federalists like myself are 
hard put to contradict them.
------------



---


Le Québec, cible de prédilection de Wong

La Presse - jeudi 21 septembre 2006




par Mathieu Perreault
Juste avant les élections québécoises de 1998, Jan Wong a affirmé que son 
père de 80 ans, Bill Wong, ne pouvait prendre sa retraite parce qu?il ne 
parvenait pas à vendre son célèbre restaurant à cause de l?hostilité des 
Québécois envers les riches et les membres des communautés culturelles.
Dans un texte sur l?affichage en français chez Eaton, elle comparait Lucien 
Bouchard aux leaders chinois "qui écrasent ceux qui se réclament des droits 
de l?homme". Et pour expliquer en quelques mots où en est rendue la société 
québécoise, elle écrivait qu?une de ses connaissances, un chauffeur de taxi 
montréalais d?origine éthiopienne, ne recevait jamais de pourboire de ses 
clients "séparatistes".
Bref, la chroniqueuse du Globe and Mail a parfois été très dure envers sa 
province natale. Au fil de deux entrevues avec La Presse, elle a exposé 
comment sa vie a influencé ses convictions personnelles et professionnelles.
Jan Wong revient souvent à Montréal, une ville plus "européenne" et "à la 
mode" que Toronto, croit-elle. Son père y habite encore, ainsi que ses 
frères et soeur. Ses deux fils, âgés de 13 et 16 ans, fréquentent un lycée 
français de Toronto.
Loi 101
Et pourtant, elle croit que l?obligation de fréquenter une école française 
prévue par la loi 101 est une erreur. "Je pense sincèrement que chaque 
enfant devrait aller à une école dont la langue n?est pas celle de ses 
parents, explique Mme Wong. Ce qui est important, c?est que les enfants 
aient la liberté de devenir ce qu?ils veulent. La préservation de la 
culture, c?est bon pour les musées."
Pense-t-elle sérieusement que les Ontariens enverraient leurs enfants à 
l?école française si Ottawa les y encourageait ? "Probablement pas, 
reconnaît-elle. Mais justement, le Québec devrait profiter de cette chance 
que l?anglais soit si attrayant."
Les Québécois ont certainement été opprimés pendant longtemps, mais cela ne 
leur donne pas le droit d?opprimer à leur tour, selon Mme Wong. "À l?école, 
la prof de français venait d?Algérie. Quand j?ai travaillé à Expo 67, je ne 
comprenais pas l?accent québécois parce qu?on m?avait enseigné le parisien. 
Maintenant, je comprends pourquoi les Québécois étaient si fâchés. "
Née à Montréal en 1953, elle a fréquenté un high school de 
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce. Elle a totalement ignoré la crise d?Octobre, mais elle 
se souvient d?une peur confuse des boîtes aux lettres. Puis, en 1972, elle 
est l?une des premières étudiantes canadiennes admises dans une université 
chinoise, en pleine Révolution culturelle. "Adolescente, je me suis rebellée 
contre la politique, mes parents, le capitalisme, dit-elle. Je ne pensais 
pas être canadienne, mais plutôt chinoise."
Ses convictions politiques sont alors coulées dans le béton. Dans son livre 
Red China Blues, Jan Wong a admis avoir dénoncé une camarade de dortoir qui 
avait exprimé des doutes sur le maoïsme.
De retour au Canada à la fin des années 70, elle a travaillé à The Gazette à 
Montréal, puis au Boston Globe à Boston et au Wall Street Journal à New 
York, avant de revenir au Canada quand le quotidien financier new-yorkais a 
fermé son bureau à Pékin, faisant ainsi disparaître ses chances de partir 
comme correspondante là-bas pour le WSJ. En 1988, elle réussit finalement à 
s?y rendre à titre de correspondante du Globe and Mail. Durant ce séjour, 
elle couvrira notamment le massacre de Tiananmen.
À son troisième retour au Canada, en 1994, elle est affectée aux arts au 
Globe. Elle inaugure alors sa décapante chronique Lunch With, où elle 
démasque les travers des stars comme Margaret Atwood, John Hurt ou Susanne 
Somers.