Topic: Ex-serviceman risks eviction by flying Canadian flag on balcony

[FlyingDutchman]

Not when they are tattered back past the maple leaf.

Alot of tlc, a proper storage (if they have sentimenal value), or a proper disposal.

[E.R. Campbell]

More, albeit a nonsensical more, on this, from a columnist whose views I normally respect, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/lysiane-gagnon/the-pms-overzealous-glorification-of-the-flag-is-a-joke/article2187025/

The PM's overzealous glorification of the flag is a joke

LYSIANE GAGNON
From Monday's Globe and Mail

Published Monday, Oct. 03, 2011

Two years in jail for preventing someone from displaying a Canadian flag? This is too silly for words. “A wacky solution to a non-existent problem,” wrote La Presse columnist Yves Boisvert.

As if there weren’t more pressing issues to deal with, the Harper government is going to war against apartment buildings that forbid residents from flying small Canadian flags on their windows or balconies. I live in a condo where we’re not allowed to encumber our windows with posters, commercial signs, banners or flags of any kind, whether it’s a Maple Leaf, a fleur-de-lys or the emblem of Saudi Arabia. If this bill is passed, the amiable manager and elected administrators of my building would be liable to a fine or even risk a jail sentence.

Forget the earnest English-Canadian tourists who affix Maple Leaves to their backpack to avoid being taken for Americans. Showing off your country’s flag when you’re safely at home has a political meaning. It is often a sign of intense nationalism, which usually appeals to extreme-right parties in most developed countries (an exception is the United States, where many homeowners flaunt the Stars and Stripes on their lawn). Even in France, where the famous tricolore is cherished, the national flag is not displayed on private residences, even on July 14, the national holiday.

In Quebec, it is quite unusual to see flags exhibited on a balcony or a lawn outside election or referendum campaigns, and then they are political statements: a fleur-de-lys means that the resident is a sovereigntist; a Maple Leaf means he’s a die-hard federalist. But most people, especially in the cities, are discreet about their political allegiances.

The monarchist bent of the Harper government is even more intolerable than its overzealous veneration of the national flag. From now on, all Canadian embassies will be forced to welcome the visitors with a huge portrait of the Queen – a misrepresentation of modern Canada, where the British monarchy is nothing but a mere symbol.

Worse, two brightly coloured landscapes of Alfred Pellan, one of Quebec’s foremost 20th-century artists (ironically, he was a committed federalist), were removed from the Foreign Affairs headquarters in Ottawa and replaced by a picture of the Queen.

One painting was called Canada West and the other Canada East. Weren’t they a more appropriate representation of Canada than the stuffy old British lady? Isn’t it enough that the Queen appears on each of our $20 bills?

Seen from Quebec, the “royalization” of Canada so actively pursued by the Harper government looks like something from Mars. According to Le Devoir, the British crown might eventually be inscribed in the inside pages of our future electronic passports. Foreign Affairs and Passport Canada officials have refused to confirm the information but if this happens, it would be an intolerable insult to all citizens who are not of British origin (and they now form the majority in Canada).

Has the Harper government decided to make francophone citizens feel like strangers in their own country? French Canadians are not actively hostile to the Crown. They are indifferent. Rare are those who call for an alternative formula for choosing a head of state, for the simple reason that people have more important problems to deal with and that the transition to another system would be even more divisive than the painful constitutional squabbles of the 1980s and 1990s. But what French Canadians don’t want is to see more symbols of a history they don’t share forced on them.

First: allow me to repeat "I am not a fervent monarchist but I feel that so long as we are a monarchy we should not be ashamed to show our royal symbols. If we want republican symbols then let's become a republic ..."

Second: this is part of the process I mention regularly - it is necessary to "govern without Québec ~ not against Québec, just without either pandering to it or depending upon it for electoral success." This policy will be problematical in Québec but it is a "winner" almost everywhere else sp no one, at least no one who matters, gives a damn about Québec's republican anti-English sensitivities.

[George Wallace]

More, albeit a nonsensical more, on this, from a columnist whose views I normally respect, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

In Quebec, it is quite unusual to see flags exhibited on a balcony or a lawn outside election or referendum campaigns, and then they are political statements: a fleur-de-lys means that the resident is a sovereigntist; a Maple Leaf means he’s a die-hard federalist. But most people, especially in the cities, are discreet about their political allegiances.

Makes me wonder if this journalist has ever been to Quebec.  I have seen the Fleur-de-lys flown on all sorts of private residences in Quebec.  Quite a multitude, in fact.  Some in CFB Gagetown may even remember seeing members of 5 eme Bde show up wearing it on their uniforms in the past.   

[Jungle]

I have seen the Fleur-de-lys flown on all sorts of private residences in Quebec.  Quite a multitude, in fact.

Actually, it depends on the time of the year; in june/july, it is common. The rest of the year, not as much.

There is a perception, for some people here, that flying a flag represents a political statement: if you fly the Québec flag, you are a separatist; if you fly the Canadian flag, you are a federalist.

[recceguy]

Actually, it depends on the time of the year; in june/july, it is common. The rest of the year, not as much.

There is a perception, for some people here, that flying a flag represents a political statement: if you fly the Québec flag, you are a separatist; if you fly the Canadian flag, you are a federalist.

I fly it because I'm a Canadian.

[Jim Seggie]

I fly it because I'm a Canadian.

And to honour the over 100,000 people who have died in the service of this nation.....

We Will Remember Them

[ObedientiaZelum]

Showing off your country’s flag when you’re safely at home has a political meaning. It is often a sign of intense nationalism, which usually appeals to extreme-right parties in most developed countries

So THATS why soldiers coffins have flags drapped over them, they're making a political statement. Got it.

[Jimmy_D]

I wonder what those members families of 5 eme Bde wearing Fleur-de-lys on their shoulder (when they came to gagetown) if they were the ones who ended up in a pine box. Would their families dispute that they were sepratists and question why their casket was covered in Canadian Flag?

[Jungle]

I fly it because I'm a Canadian.

So do I.

[Jungle]

I wonder what those members families of 5 eme Bde wearing Fleur-de-lys on their shoulder (when they came to gagetown) if they were the ones who ended up in a pine box. Would their families dispute that they were sepratists and question why their casket was covered in Canadian Flag?

Some caskets were not covered with the Canadian Flag; they were covered with the CF Flag.

[E.R. Campbell]

It is a mistake to think that one cannot be a good Québecer, even a nationalist Québecer, and not be a good Canadian, too.

Anecdotal evidence: I have a friend, not too strong a word, who is great believer in French Canada, as an idea and a reality. She is a good Québecer and a strong Canadian who has served her country, at home and abroad, for many years. She has no patience for separatism because she believe:

1. Québec is better, not just better off, as part of Canada than it could or would be as an independent nation. (My, personal, experience is that the more Québecers have travelled the world the more Canadian they are, too.)

2. Separation is a dream and most of the dreamers do not understand the harsh realities that the process of separating would bring forth. She knows that the process of getting there, to independence, would divide and destroy Québec before it could recreate itself as a new nation.

But she is no fan of Canada as constructed and governed. She wants a better country - one in which (probably fewer) provinces have much more independence; one in which Québec can be as French as it can manage even though Canada does not even pretend to be a bilingual country, although it would be, by virtue of Québec's strength within Canada, really bicultural.

I vaguely recall she and I developing a model like that (five (?) provinces with a weaker national government, with minimal overlaps in areas of responsibility) on a beery long weekend, at a cottage party that was dominated by separatists, but with a good many Canadians for whom sovereignty is a red flag. She and I developed our position in order to point out the logical weaknesses of both the separatist and Canadian positions. My recollection is that we carried the day - but there was so much booze (and other distractions) that I cannot be sure.

The point is: a fleur de lis does not equal a separatist any more than sporting a maple leaf makes one a Canadian.

[Bluebulldog]

I live in ON, but have a camp in Northern QC. It's actually funny how many folks up there fly the Fleur de Lis (Sp?). No one with the exception of government buildings flies the Canadian Flag.

I have one on my property, and my wifes Uncle who lives up the lake does as well ( He's a retired CPO1). The neighbors are quite respectful, but it does make one wonder why a person can't be proud of their country, and their province at the same time.

[E.R. Campbell]

I live in ON, but have a camp in Northern QC. It's actually funny how many folks up there fly the Fleur de Lis (Sp?). No one with the exception of government buildings flies the Canadian Flag.

I have one on my property, and my wifes Uncle who lives up the lake does as well ( He's a retired CPO1). The neighbors are quite respectful, but it does make one wonder why a person can't be proud of their country, and their province at the same time.

It is a mistake to think that one cannot be a good Québecer, even a nationalist Québecer, and not be a good Canadian, too.

Anecdotal evidence: I have a friend, not too strong a word, who is great believer in French Canada, as an idea and a reality. She is a good Québecer and a strong Canadian who has served her country, at home and abroad, for many years. She has no patience for separatism because she believe:

1. Québec is better, not just better off, as part of Canada than it could or would be as an independent nation. (My, personal, experience is that the more Québecers have travelled the world the more Canadian they are, too.)

2. Separation is a dream and most of the dreamers do not understand the harsh realities that the process of separating would bring forth. She knows that the process of getting there, to independence, would divide and destroy Québec before it could recreate itself as a new nation.

But she is no fan of Canada as constructed and governed. She wants a better country - one in which (probably fewer) provinces have much more independence; one in which Québec can be as French as it can manage even though Canada does not even pretend to be a bilingual country, although it would be, by virtue of Québec's strength within Canada, really bicultural.

I vaguely recall she and I developing a model like that (five (?) provinces with a weaker national government, with minimal overlaps in areas of responsibility) on a beery long weekend, at a cottage party that was dominated by separatists, but with a good many Canadians for whom sovereignty is a red flag. She and I developed our position in order to point out the logical weaknesses of both the separatist and Canadian positions. My recollection is that we carried the day - but there was so much booze (and other distractions) that I cannot be sure.

The point is: a fleur de lis does not equal a separatist any more than sporting a maple leaf makes one a Canadian.

[Jungle]

It is a mistake to think that one cannot be a good Québecer, even a nationalist Québecer, and not be a good Canadian, too.

Anecdotal evidence: I have a friend, not too strong a word, who is great believer in French Canada, as an idea and a reality. She is a good Québecer and a strong Canadian who has served her country, at home and abroad, for many years. She has no patience for separatism because she believe:

1. Québec is better, not just better off, as part of Canada than it could or would be as an independent nation. (My, personal, experience is that the more Québecers have travelled the world the more Canadian they are, too.)

2. Separation is a dream and most of the dreamers do not understand the harsh realities that the process of separating would bring forth. She knows that the process of getting there, to independence, would divide and destroy Québec before it could recreate itself as a new nation.

But she is no fan of Canada as constructed and governed. She wants a better country - one in which (probably fewer) provinces have much more independence; one in which Québec can be as French as it can manage even though Canada does not even pretend to be a bilingual country, although it would be, by virtue of Québec's strength within Canada, really bicultural.

I vaguely recall she and I developing a model like that (five (?) provinces with a weaker national government, with minimal overlaps in areas of responsibility) on a beery long weekend, at a cottage party that was dominated by separatists, but with a good many Canadians for whom sovereignty is a red flag. She and I developed our position in order to point out the logical weaknesses of both the separatist and Canadian positions. My recollection is that we carried the day - but there was so much booze (and other distractions) that I cannot be sure.

The point is: a fleur de lis does not equal a separatist any more than sporting a maple leaf makes one a Canadian.

I agree with most of the points above. So do most Québécois I know, even some former separatists...  Many would also like to see a Canadian as head of state, but that is another debate.

[Infanteer]

There isn't really a point in getting wrapped up in flags - go to BC and see how many folks fly the Provincial flag there.  One can be proud of one's province and a good Canadian (as others have already indicated).

[ArmyVern]

I wonder what those members families of 5 eme Bde wearing Fleur-de-lys on their shoulder (when they came to gagetown) if they were the ones who ended up in a pine box. Would their families dispute that they were sepratists and question why their casket was covered in Canadian Flag?

Many mbrs of 5e Bdge wore the Fleur-de-lis on their uniform over here instead of the Maple Leaf (that was fun trying to sort out and deal with  ), BUT many anglo CF mbrs from outside of QC who fell here were also carried with the CF flag rather than the Maple Leaf.

[milnews.ca]

Not really an update to the story, but kinda fits the topic.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2011/09/20110927-211338.html

OTTAWA -- Flying the Canadian flag is sacrosanct. At least it will be if a new law is passed.
The Conservatives will unfurl a private member's bill on Parliament Hill Wednesday that would make it illegal to prevent anyone from displaying the maple leaf in a proper manner.

"The Canadian flag represents the principles of freedom, democracy, courage and justice," reads a portion of the proposed law. "The Canadian flag represents the pride in our great nation and support for those who have sacrificed their lives for it."

The latest:  the law, even if passed, would not apply on Parliament hill.

The Maple Leaf may be forever, but it isn't for everyone.

A proposed new Conservative law that enforces Canadians' right to fly the flag won't apply to MPs on Parliament Hill, Heritage Minister James Moore said Wednesday.

A private member's bill, backed by Moore, would make it illegal to stop someone from displaying the Maple Leaf.

The bill addresses a minor irritant that primarily involves condominium owners and apartment dwellers, where signed contracts may forbid hanging items such as flags, flower baskets and satellite dishes outside the building.

Condo boards and building owners, on penalty of jail time, would no longer be able to enforce such rules against nationalist flag-wavers if the legislation is passed.

But what's good for the Canadian goose is not necessarily good for the parliamentary gander, Moore said when asked about rules forbidding MPs from having a flag in the window of their parliamentary offices.

"It's a consensus that all parties will operate on a standard within the parliamentary precinct and MPs can choose to -- obviously have a responsibility to -- abide by the rules that we mutually agree to," Moore said following a Conservative caucus meeting.

Asked specifically if the proposed law will apply to MPs, Moore said "No."

"Members of Parliament voluntarily agree to the Board of Internal Economy consensus on how we should operate on the Hill. We choose to do that ourselves."....

The Canadian Press, via CTV.ca, 6 Oct 11

[E.R. Campbell]

Without going into details about the scope and punishments, etc, this is not, in principle, a bad law.

Nobody, no individual person, should be forced or even expected to fly a flag, and special organizations, like parliament, can make their won rules, but, no one, no person, should be forbidden to fly the flag - again accepting that parliament can make its own rules.

[PMedMoe]

Moore said when asked about rules forbidding MPs from having a flag in the window of their parliamentary offices.

If it's an actual flag, then it should be displayed properly, not hung in a window like a curtain.  JMHO.

[milnews.ca]

A bump to show it's not JUST happening here in Canada....

A 70-year-old veteran has been threatened with eviction if he continues to hang his large, Army-issued U.S. flag on an outside wall of the government-subsized senior housing complex where he lives in Springfield.

Edward Zivica, who served in the U.S. Navy’s Submarine Service from 1960 to 1967, was one of the first tenants to move into the downtown Aster apartment complex, which is managed by St. Vincent de Paul of Lane County, when it opened in 2009. Since then, he’s had several clashes with the complex’s management over what he says is simply his desire to show his patriotism.

St. Vincent de Paul says it’s simply trying to enforce tenant rules.

Shortly after his arrival, Zivica began hanging his flag on the outside wall of the complex’s community room near the building’s main entrance on Memorial Day, Presidents Day and Veterans Day, among others.

Zivica said that, for the first year, no one complained about his practice. Terry McDonald, executive director of St. Vincent de Paul of Lane County, disagreed, stating that property managers spoke to Zivica “many times” about it. The landlord-tenant agreements at Aster prohibit tenants from hanging anything on exterior walls, McDonald said, as is the case with many apartment rental agreements.

McDonald also said the complex installed a flagpole and a spotlight in response to several tenants requesting a flag of some kind.

But Zivica wasn’t satisfied with Aster’s offering.

“What they put up was a thin plastic pole with a small flag and no lanyard to hoist (it),” he wrote in a recent letter to various media outlets, Veterans Services of Lane County, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio and U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden.

Zivica said he continued to hang his own flag after that on the outside wall of the community room, despite a June 10 letter from the complex asking him to stop.

“The flag we have provided is sufficient to express recognition of various holidays and events,” that letter reads.

But Zivica contended on Wednesday that the flag and pole put up by management is “flimsy and cheesy-looking,” adding, “The flag is less than a year old and it’s already faded to orange.”

Things came to a head on Oct. 27 when Zivica put up the flag for Navy Day and was promptly served by St. Vincent de Paul with an eviction notice.

According to the notice, Zivica has until Nov. 15 — four days after Veterans Day — to write a compliance notice that he will no longer attach “any items to the outside of the building without written permission” or face eviction by the end of the month ....

Eugene Register-Guard, 3 Nov 11