Unilingual Francophones don’t speak English. Shocking, but true.

The first French-language debate between Montreal Mayor Gérald Tremblay and challenger Louise Harel took place this morning. (According to La Presse‘s preliminary report, it was “very animated”—as all municipal leaders’ debates have been known to be.) There won’t be an English-language sequel, though. Harel announced earlier this week she’d be passing up the opportunity to express herself in la langue de Mordecai for the perfectly ridiculous reason she doesn’t speak it.

Cue the necessary outrage:

“There’s an obligation for the candidates running for mayor to address the different communities that make up Montreal,” said Marvin Rotrand of rival Union Montreal, incumbent Mayor Gérald Tremblay’s party. [...] “This is indicative of an attitude toward anglophones in general – almost as if we’re second-class voters. I mean, she’s written us off, basically.”

And the equally predictable outrage over the outrage (in this case, from the professionally-outraged Richard Martineau):

It’s not up to elected officials nor mayoral candidates to make efforts to be understood by Anglophones: It’s Anglophones who should be integrating into the majority! It’s up to them to get a move on it! The burden of integration is on THEIR SHOULDERS!

All this over a debate that would otherwise have been ignored by the vast majority of Montrealers and amounts to little more than an electoral booby-trap for Harel. Sure, it’d be ideal for Harel to be perfectly bilingual, but she isn’t—and won’t be come November, when Montrealers have to decide whether or not that fact makes her unsuitable for the mayor’s job. In the meantime, the mere option of electing a unilingual Francophone is enough to get everyone competing, once again, to officialize their status as members of “North America’s Most Aggrieved Linguistic Minority.”

It’s a cliché, but plus ça change…




Browse

Unilingual Francophones don’t speak English. Shocking, but true.

  1. Maybe I'm generalizing here, but it seems like Quebec politics consists almost entirely of manipulation, sleight of hand, fake grievances,and phony outrages. This applies to politics at the federal, provincial and municipal levels.

    Where's the substance?

  2. "It's not up to elected officials nor mayoral candidates to make efforts to be understood by Anglophones: It's Anglophones who should be integrating into the majority! It's up to them to get a move on it! The burden of integration is on THEIR SHOULDERS!"

    I agree. You're Canadian – learn to speak English.

    • Anon

      Can you sing The Nation Anthem in its original version? Hint: Canucks wrote it.

      • Or better yet, the term Canadian entered popular vocabulary as a reference to the francophones living in New France…

        Though I dread the thought of separation, I always thought it funny if Québec ever separated, the new entity of Canada (assuming it would be the ''ROC'') would bear a borrowed (see hijacked) name, would have, as a national anthem, a song specifically written to commemorate the folks that they are not, etc… !

      • Amazing as it my seem, I'm bilingual. I probably know about as much of the English words as I do the French ones.

        The point, as Lord Kitchener's Own picked up, is that persons who are linguistic minorities within one group ought to be careful when telling linguistic minorities within another group that they should assimilate into the majority group.

        • Anon, I really fail to see how ''You're Canadian – learn to speak English'' illustrates Lord Kitchener's Own (and your apparent) point. Twas a dumb statement, plain and simple (just a notch classier than the more common and clichéd ''speak white'' many of us have gotten to know).

          Add to that, by definition, it can go the other way: You're Canadian – learn to speak French (the country is bilingual, perhaps not of all of its people but the fact remains)! If you and I can learn both languages, I should very well expect that our leading politicians (inluding mayor of Montréal) can do the same. To not make that effort is to be a poor Canadian (to which Harel has demonstrated time and again she is).

          • Well no Hab, it can't go the same way. Martineau's statement is predicated on the idea that linguistic minorities have an obligation to integrate linguistically. The majority of Canadians are English speaking. "You're Canadian – learn to speak French" doesn't work because French speakers are a minority in Canada. This is not complicated.

            I don't care whether a given politician is fluently bilingual, and I'm certainly not going to label them a poor Canadian if they aren't, but I agree that anyone with aspirations to lead a country (or city) with a significant linguistic minority is well advised, if for no other reason than getting votes, to learn the language.

          • Well no Hab, it can't go the same way. Martineau's statement is predicated on the idea that linguistic minorities have an obligation to integrate linguistically. The majority of Canadians are English speaking. "You're Canadian – learn to speak French" doesn't work because French speakers are a minority in Canada. This is not complicated.

            I don't care whether a given politician is fluently bilingual, and I'm certainly not going to label them a poor Canadian if they aren't, but I agree that anyone with aspirations to lead a country (or city) with a significant linguistic minority is well advised, if for no other reason than getting votes, to learn the language.

          • Respectfully, no Anon, Martineau's statement is predicated on the fact that, (shamefully) as of January 1st, 2002, Ville de Montréal is a unilingual city (as per its charter) and, as such, is under no obligation to its anglophone population. The hyperbole boils down to the onus falling on that minority. Crass and Draconian (or if you prefer, in french, Martineauesque) as it may be, it stands.

            Anglophone Montrealers have been reduced to the life of a francophone in Toronto (who can't seem to catch his mayoral debates in french neither – but, sarcastically, I bet that that Torontonian bore his burden and can follow the debate in english). How about Winnipeg? Are they having bilingual debates?

            Anglophone Canada likes to complain about bilingualism, ad nauseam…
            We are not a bilingual country, the ROC is English, etc… Don't I know it! It's been made clear to me all my life.
            We may not be bilingual but our Country is, that's it. That's what P.E.T. shoved down our throats… I can buy stamps in Qualicum Bay and demand the transaction be done in French but a 75 yr old francophone Windsorite (never having lived anywhere else) could go his whole life never being able to handle his municipal affairs in French.

            It cuts both ways…

    • So because we live in Canada, a predominantly english speaking country, she should learn how to speak english like the majority of the population? Didn't you just legitimize Richard Martineau's claim that the burden on integration is on the minority, i.e. in this case, anglophones living in Québec ?

  3. This is funny beyond belief. Then again, if I were an anglophone Montrealer, I'd prefer to get a new mayor. The old one has been involved in, or tolerated, mafia infiltration in public works contracts, etc. Sorry, if given the choice between corruption and unilingualism, I'd take the French-only candidate as mayor.

  4. They are aggrieved. There porfolios have shown very little growth this quarter.

  5. Is it that hard to just get a translator for the mayoral debate? I mean, Montreal's not exactly short of bilingual people…

    • One was offered. Harel still balked.

  6. I love it when pundits in Quebec argue that minority groups within their borders need to hurry on up and assimilate into the majority.

    It's HILARIOUS!

    How do you suppose Martineau would feel about a unilingual English Prime Minister of Canada? Somehow I doubt his argument would be "It's not up to federal officials to be understood by Quebeckers. It's Quebeckers who should be integrating into the majority! It's up to them to get a move on it! The burden of integration is on THEIR SHOULDERS!"

    • Lord: You do know some of our past prime ministers were unilingual, do you?

      Anyhow, that quote was brilliant:

      "In the meantime, the mere option of electing a unilingual Francophone is enough to get everyone competing, once again, to officialize their status as members of “North America's Most Aggrieved Linguistic Minority.”"

  7. Her english is about as good as Dion's english. Dion went into two Federal debates, and toured the country. What's her problem?

    Is it genuine fear of being confused speaking and listening to a language you're not used to, or racism and disregard for non-francophones?

    From MEF:

    "La lutte de Westmount contre les fusions municipales dans l'île de
    Montréal trahit un «vieux relent de colonialisme» et un projet de «villes ethniques», affirme la ministre des Affaires municipales et de la Métropole, Louise Harel."

    I think I know the answer.

    • Her English is not as good as Dion's. You are mistaking the strength of an accent with the degree of understanding. She is clearly reading from notes, and not speaking spontaneously. Dion was never great on the fly but has pretty good understanding of English. His problem is that he has hearing problems, coupled with a campaign team that appears to have told him to be really angry and petulant but never to change his facial expression. Dion has written peer-reviewed academic articles in English and is very articulate when he doesn't have to worry about sticking to his script.

      eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okrDhYklPT0

    • Where did you get that ? Mme Harel's English is worse than Elisabeth May's French, which is non-existent. Dion obviously learn't English later in life but can make himself understood beyond ordering a "cheeseburger" at McDonald's, something mme Harel would have great difficulty doing without pointing .

  8. To a certain extent, I can agree with you on the inanity of pundits (though, I don't limit such criticism to just those in Québec)…

    However, let's get one thing perfectly clear. Outside of Québec, for francophones, the burden HAS ALWAYS been on them to ''integrate'' (whatever that means), even where they have been far longer than anyone else (that isn't aboriginal). AND HOW!

    As a francophone who was born and raised about 300 KMs south of Kitchener, who's parents are born there as well, and who is multiple generations removed from any ''purelaine'' Québecois, I can personally attest to that burden. Some of that forced integration came via fists, some came in the form of well wishes scratched into cars letting us know of our place in the pecking order. As disheartening to me as it is, I can also attest to many francophones (some quite close to me) having, in your words, gotten a move on it (ie. assimilated). And one last personal note, I also know many (francophone) people across Canada having almost identical personal stories to my own (who knew getting your ass kicked for speaking french was such a common thing!!!!).

    On a historical note, you can dig up a whole lot on just how much francophones (outside of Québec) have endured that burden (i'll just throw Réglement 17 out there to get you started but that's just one of many examples).

    All of this, on all sides of the coin, is a complete betrayal of the forces at play in Confederation (and subsequent conferring of provinces). All of it went down (and came down) to the recognition of this duality and the appreciation of co-existence. We've done nothing (on all sides) but undermine that since.

    The majority will always stoop to the lowest levels to protect their majority status. This we can be sure of, it's been like that since the beginning of time!

  9. Oh, I think many pundits are lame, not just Quebec pundits, but really only a Quebec pundit could argue with a straight face that francophone distinctiveness in Canada must be cherished and protected (as it should be) while Anglophone's in Quebec should quit whining and hurry up and assimilate into the majority already. It's the same kind of logic that concludes that the Quebec nation can secede from Canada, with no claim by Canada over any Quebec land being held as legitimate, while simultaneously arguing that the Cree nation CANNOT secede from an independent Quebec, because Quebec's borders are inviolate.

    Obviously, francophones outside of Quebec have been forced to assimilate into an predominantly English culture. My comment had little to do with any opinion on the propriety of assimilation, just the idiocy of a Quebec pundit claiming that it's about time the linguistic minority in Quebec shut up and assimilate into the majority already. It's really just too rich.

    • I dig the dialogue but, you're a bit all over the place.

      On the point of Québec pundits (your original one, and your latest reiteration of it), it is no more richer or idiot of them than that of Rest of Canada pundits arguing that minority groups (francophones) within their borders need to hurry on up and assimilate into the majority (or, if you prefer, only a ROC pundit could argue with a straight face that anglophone rights in Québec ought to be restored/protected while telling francophone minorities within its realm to ''quit shoving bilingualism/french down their throats''). And those have existed since the very first anglophone presses in Canada and exists to this day (shouts out to the Windsor Star, or, if you prefer, a recent piece in a Calgary newspaper).

      My response to this point is simply that it is expected (re. majority will do what it will do…) and, as such, to be taken with a grain of salt (no different than the physical forced integration – if I were to take that any more serious, I'd be full of revenge today).

      You have, in your reply, introduced the concept of separation to the discussion (no inference of it had been made evident until). You mentioned it as another example of flawed logic. It is only partly flawed.

      The fact of the matter is, Québec, like any other province can legitimately separate from Canada as sure as it could join the Confederation (unlike say, an American State and its Republic). Some certain conditions have been established as per the Clarity Act as to how such a process could unfold. In terms of land claims, Canada (ROC) may have certain grievances but they would be on shaky grounds as per international conventions. It could be expected that Québec would separate keeping its current borders intact (however unfair that may seem). The flawed part of their logic lays in your last contention – the Cree (to name but one). They err in assuming separation would preclude them from internal legitimate land claims and righteous demand of proper nationhood. I'll go one further on that, if Québec ever separated, they'd be in for quite some growing pains in that country, all coming from within their borders.

  10. something the ROC has a tendancy of forgetting in QC the majority is frnacophone . so that is the majority . out in countryside one can function 24/7 in french and not speak a word of english. just because the rest of canada is english what a sad excuse not to make an effort in ROC to not be bilingual. I now"get it" here in QC, concerning making the effort to have the french language flourish.
    as an anglophone, to a certain degree it really does not bother me Harel is french speaking only so far (give her time)
    I would like to see the mayor of Winnepeg make the effort to speak french or ukrainian.
    how about the rest of canada make the effort to speak a second language. I live in mtl and yes sometimes there are some little language sparks once in a while that bug me but come on. if you had to go live in china, you would have to be
    making the effort to speak chinese.

  11. And we wonder why some of our more thickish Anglophone assertions get
    Francophones upset at times.

  12. See what happens when one word of Martineau's quote is changed : …It's not up to elected officials nor mayoral candidates to make efforts to be understood by VOTERS…

    In this day and age speaking English as a second language on this continent is a very useful communication communications skill for those who want to reach out.

    So is it up to politicians to make efforts to be understood by voters?

  13. This string is missing the whole point. A majority in Quebec is unilingual French. However a majority in Montreal, whatever their ethnic background, is bilingual and a substantial minority, one of the highest ratios in the world, speaks 3 or more languages.

    Given this backdrop, Mme Harel was born and grew up in Montreal, yet at 62 years old she still can't function in any other language. Not very representative of the population she wishes to represent. There is no legal or moral argument that would impel her to speak English, but practically speaking, many many francophone Montrealers have called her candidacy unacceptable.

    Having said that, by backing out of the English debate, she did spare us the acute embarrassment of listening to gibberish. Unlike Elisabeth May who obviously does not speak French and who insisted on making herself look silly by participating in the last French debate.

    • Daveyy, I disagree. The vast majority of Québecois are bilingual. In fact, it's a safe bet that a far greater majority of Québecois speak functional English than ROC anglos speak French. You see, that's the burden they have inevitably had to bear since get the first anglophone showed up a couple hundred years ago, sometimes by (wise) choice, sometimes by force and, sometimes, unknowingly. It's a burden that the majority of ROC anglos have demonstrably refused to bear, going as far as outright attacking the linguistic duality of this country and belittling ROC francophones from coast to coast.

      That being said… Who are we kidding here? Who in their right mind would have expected Mme. Harel to partake in an English debate? Even if she was schooled at Oxford and had lived 20 years in Manchester, no good standing member of the PQ would ever partake in an English debate.

      (not to be taken as an endorsment for Mme. Harel — Montréal got screwed in this mayoral election, they get to pick from a corrupt old man and a wacko separatist. What a choice!!!!)

      • Habitant: Actually, the bilingualism rate amongst french-quebeckers seems pretty neatly divided along the line separating Generation X and the Baby Boomers; that is, starting with the X and onward, the rate keeps going up. Don't have the numbers handy tough.

        A bilingual PQ member would certainly partake in an English debate in a race for Mayor of Montréal tough. In a provincial election? Sure. But at the municipal level… You look at the linguistic splits amongst voters in the last polls, and there is just nothing to loose and too much ground to make amongst that portion of the electorate for a candidate to ignore.

        Far too often people associate lingustic splits to the rubicon, when it really is a result of a party's refusal to campaing to that electorate. And I do mean "campaign", not pander or change radically one's position.

        • My impression was that:

          * far more Québécois than ROCians are passively bilingual;
          * far more Québécois than ROCians are actively bilingual;
          * far more Québécois are passively than actively bilingual.

          . . . with the ratios upped substantially in Montreal.

          That said, is it really a generational as opposed to geographic split? Is it normal for a Generation Xer or his younger cousin in, say, Rivière-du-Loup to be even passively, let alone actively, bilingual? I ask in ignorance, though I would be surprised if it were so. And of course there is the class angle: I'd be willing to bet that Québécois university graduates are far more bilingual than the rest of the population.

          I think Habitant is being a bit hard on ROC anglos. All the ROC anglos I know are very keen on promoting French Canadian culture in the ROC and feel it their duty to know at least basic French. Of course I'm not typical, but there is still a strong segment of anglo opinion in the ROC that wishes French Canada well.

          • To a certain extent, I might be a bit hard on ROC anglos. Partly due to the fact that those ROC anglos (whom have nothing but angst towards francophones – or is that just against Trudeau!) are a tad bit more vocal about it then the silent majority. However, you aren't off base… I know many anglophones who recognize and appreciate the duality that has existed since the very start of it all.

            But just to give you an idea of the bs that floats about in this country, have a look at the comment section of this bit: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009

            Senior citizens upset about signing up for a bilingual (as advertised) nursing home, in a region they have lived their whole lives, and not getting the bilingual service they feel they require are being criticized by the general population for ''whinning'', ''shoving language down anglophone throats'', etc… It's not a rare reaction, it's a common reaction.

          • Sadly true; didn't even click on your link, I know it'll put me off dinner.

            The one plea I'd make, as an anglophone of good will, to francophones of good will is that, as you know, we have to put up with the pigheaded bigotry of that type of person in other areas as well — there's just a certain type of person in Canada who's against anything and everything that might require them to show some openmindedness.

          • Agreed, on all points (particularly the one about putting you off dinner – it undoubtedly would have)!

            I wouldn't trade the bigotry francophones (in ROC) face with the bigotry natives face for a second, and so on… As you said, that ''certain type of person'' can be found anywhere. We know this for they are the loudest.

        • Census numbers and statistics aside, I guarantee a 75 yr old Québecois will have far less trouble interacting in english in Canmore than a 75 yr old Albertan interacting in french in Saint-Félicien. As I said, the burden has always been on the francophone's. The prevalent attitude in anglophones in the ROC is ''don't need it, don't have to, waste of time and money…''

          Pierre Turdeau once said ''No doubt, had English-speaking Canadians applied themselves to learning French with a quarter the diligence they have shown in refusing to do so, Canada would have been effectively bilingual long ago. For here is demonstrated one of the laws of nationalism, whereby more energy is consumed in combating disagreeable but irrevocable realities than in contriving some satisfactory compromise.''

          He couldn't have been more honest there… It's a fact. And it could (should) also go both ways (ie. Québecois majority nationalism at the expense of its minorities (and their own irrevocable realities).As for Harel engaging in English debates… I am not of the opinion that she would be right in not participating. However, when told an ardent separatist (and former PQ minister) mayoral candidate will not be participating in an English debate, my only reaction is ''Duh!''.

    • Daveyy, I disagree. The vast majority of Québecois are bilingual. In fact, it's a safe bet that a far greater majority of Québecois speak functional English than ROC anglos speak French. You see, that's the burden they have inevitably had to bear since the first anglophone showed up a couple hundred years ago, sometimes by (wise) choice, sometimes by force and, sometimes, unknowingly. It's a burden that the majority of ROC anglos have demonstrably refused to bear, going as far as outright attacking the linguistic duality of this country and belittling ROC francophones from coast to coast.

      That being said… Who are we kidding here? Who in their right mind would have expected Mme. Harel to partake in an English debate? Even if she was schooled at Oxford and had lived 20 years in Manchester, no good standing member of the PQ would ever partake in an English debate.

      (not to be taken as an endorsment for Mme. Harel — Montréal got screwed in this mayoral election, they get to pick from a corrupt old man and a wacko separatist. What a choice!!!!)

  14. Why is it that no one mentions the allophones living in Montreal. It seems that the majority and the minority conveniently forget the real linguistic make up of Montreal.

    • I think it stems from the fact that there are two public sphere, two public languages in Montréal, English and French.

      It grates the minds of nationalist to admit it, because they see the admission of that fact as a de facto open door to wall-to-wall "bilingualism" which means to them that francophones are the ones who will have to switch to english at the end of the day. And it grates the mind of many anglophones to admit that "allophone" doesn't automagically means "anglophone", which means that there really aren't that many of "them", that is certainly not a third, even less a half of the city.

      It is my understanding that most non-montrealers are mostly tone-deaf to this particular situation.

      This is one of the most entertaining threads I've seen on MacLean's in a long time!

  15. I just found this interesting debate… I don't live in Canada, but I'm interested in what's going on out there and I have friends, both English-speaking and French-speaking natives. Canadians live in a BILINGUAL country, so according to me, both categories should speak both languages! Why has this war between French-speaking and English-speaking Canadians been lasting for such a long time? I feel a certain superiority of the English Canadians over the French Canadians, just because English is more spread in Canada than French. Why is it so? If French-speaking Canadians want to stitck to their birth tongue, where the hell is there a problem?

    • Canada is not a bilingal country, it is a country with two official languages at a federal level only. In reality there are two countries, Quebec and Canada of which one has the legal status of a country the other is a country without legal recognition. I never say that I live in Canada as it is a foreign country to me just like the USA is a foreign country to Canadians. The complaint about anglophone voters being treated as second class voters in Quebec is nothing compared to francophones who are basicly second class citizens in Canada. The sooner that Quebecers realise this and reclaim their souvereignty this will be of benifit to both Quebec and Canada.

        • While this might be very true, there are historical reasons why it is not so with our direct neighbors and those who live with us.
          I stumbled upon this article in an attempt to find something in English explaining how (in what ways and to which extent) the english community has been draining wealth and taking advantage of the francos to serve their interests over everyone else’s interest, but I can’t find anything like it. This is quite alarming. This probably means that barely anyone in the english speaking community in Quebec and Ontario know what’s been happening, so no one really knows why we want to secede.
          So what I meant to say here is that the reason you like us is that you didn’t get to disrespect us and take advantage of us.
          Historically, the English came in as a predator in Nouvelle-France and has decapitated our system, getting rid of our elite and settling down at the top of the pyramid. So we had the mighty and wealthy English at the top of the pyramid, draining all the wealth the francophone peasants created and using it to serve their own interest while maintaining the francophones in an artificial poverty through many subtle means. Examples of those subtle means : Having people pass IQ tests in english to be hired for well paying jobs, which the francos obviously failed, having instructions yelled at them in english, which the francos wouldn’t understand, having people swear an oath to give up on catholicism to be hired by the government, which the anglos had no trouble doing but the francos wouldn’t do. Those are just a few example that over time and over many people, were very effective at keeping the french population poor and helping the english population score better and higher paid jobs, get promotions, etc. thus, draining the wealth.

          If you had the same thing done to you as what francophone had done to them, I’m sure you would want to secede too, especially that it is still going on now. For many geopolitical reasons that are too long to explain, all the wealth that Toronto has should have been in Montreal, had it not been slowly drained over 200 years. I won’t even talk about how Quebec (or Lower Canada) has ended up funding almost ALL the infrastructure that has allowed Ontario and everything west of it to develop and drain the wealth and economic activity away from Montreal. Or about other cheap shots like how they preferred to set the Capital in Ottawa instead of Gatineau because they knew that the new Lower/Upper Canada fusion thing wouldn’t hold and that sooner or later they would have to break it up. Knowing that, they didn’t want all the taxes to go on the now Quebec side, so they set the capital in now Ontario in spite of the fact that it made it more vulnerable to potential American invasions and takeovers. That’s how far they were ready to go to screw us. They have screwed us in many other ways too.

          Right now, if you had to look at the statistics about how much funding is given to anglophone universities (federal funding!), hospitals (federal funding!), schools and school boards in relation to their population, you would see that the same thing is going on and no one is doing anything about it. And the numbers are quite… unbelievable. The English community is probably the minority that receives the best treatment in the entire world… they get better things in many key areas than what the francophones get. You know the project to build a high speed train from Windsor to Quebec? There is talk about dropping the Quebec-Montreal part. YET, money we pay with our taxes will go to fund that train anyway, which will only serve to drain even more wealth away from us and make more of the same type of the following crap happen : Right now, boats carrying merchandise pass Montreal, make their way all the way to Toronto, where containers get unpacked and the merchandise destined to Montreal is sent to Montreal. We pay the extra fees for that. In air travel, someone who wants travel to Europe has to take a plane to go BACK to Toronto to take another plane to go to Europe. It’s not like Dorval couldn’t handle the traffic if it was the other way around. We pay for that. Montreal needs a new bridge. That new bridge will cost everybody their 2 arms and legs because bridges on the St-Lawrence seaway need to be high in order for the boats to be able to pass under them – most boats heading to Toronto. So in essence, we need an expensive bridge so boats can go to Toronto. The federal government wants to finance that bridge by having toll stations on it. Who will pay for that? Quebecers using that bridge.
          The injustice is still going on and I think that the hard feelings toward the anglophones middle/upper class and the Canadian government are much justified. But it’s not about the hard feelings… it’s about the fact that it’s still going on and that it will keep going on until the day we set our foot down and become a country. See the Harper government right now. They can’t give a rat’s ass about Quebec. The only times the federal government really genuinely cared about Quebec is when it threatened to leave. OH NOW they cared. Otherwise, they always played dirty tricks on the francophones and treated them as second class citizen, at least unconsciously.

          And then, on top of all of that, we see that kind of crap : http://nodogsoranglophones.blogspot.ca/2012/05/being-mocked-over-student-strike-tough.html

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *