[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

Maybe not to you...

Yep (you want to compare Canadian historical understanding? Really?) AND historians evidently as it hardly ranks up there with 1812, Vimy Ridge, the Statute of Westminster, WWII (and liberating the Netherlands is a defining moment) or any other slew of nation-building events. It's not insignificant, nor should it be forgotten, but it's not a "Defining" moment. Check a general Canadian history book - most don't even include it.

[Brenda]

The Dutch history books do.

Maybe you could quit your arrogance, and just let everyone have his opinion, instead of resorting to insults the moment you don't agree, or maybe just don't care.

I take it this should all be historically important to YOU. That it is not mentioned in history books says more about Canadian history books than about history itself.

[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

The Dutch history books do.

And yet the thread is titled, "CANADA'S Defining Moments".

$1:

Maybe you could quit your arrogance, and just let everyone have his opinion, instead of resorting to insults the moment you don't agree, or maybe just don't care.

Being correct isn't "arrogant" nor is it my duty to dance around your intellectual insecurities. Oh...and when you call someone "arrogant" it's an insult. And when you chastise others for doing an alleged similar act, that makes you a hypocrite. That's not an opinion.

$1:

I take it this should all be historically important to YOU. That it is not mentioned in history books says more about Canadian history books than about history itself.

Nope. Historians agree - it's not a "defining" moment. End of story. It might be significant. It might be a nice gesture that does belong in the historical record, but it's in no way shape or form a "defining" moment.

Instead of lecturing to me about Canadian history, why not learn about it BEFORE presuming to have a grip on it? That, really, is the true definition of arrogance.

[Brenda]

Calling someone arrogant is not an insult. In your case, it's just stating a fact.

[Brenda]

$1:

And yet the thread is titled, "CANADA'S Defining Moments".

So the fact that and how Canada is mentioned in other country's history(books) is not defining Canada. Ok. I get the point.

$1:

Nope. Historians agree

Hmm. Ok. Just quote the history books and kill the tread.

[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

Calling someone arrogant is not an insult. In your case, it's just stating a fact.

Yeah it is...nice try. Shuffle on, hypocrite

[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

So the fact that and how Canada is mentioned in other country's history(books) is not defining Canada. Ok. I get the point.

It's not a defining moment in Canada's history. You're wrong. Move on.

$1:

Hmm. Ok. Just quote the history books and kill the tread.

Don't need to - anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of this nation's past knows that.

Next time, read the thread's title, ask for clarification if you don't understand it, post something of relevance and learn to accept your intellectual shortcomings on the subject.

Don't like it? Ignore it.

Back to the Canada's "DEFINING" moments:

1837 Rebellions
Laurier's Election
King-Byng Affair
Quiet Revolution

(and whether there in Dutch history books is immaterial )

[Brenda]

So, Mr. Arrogance, what about women's right to vote in 1919? Would "historians" consider that a "defining moment"?

[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

So, Mr. Arrogance, what about women's right to vote in 1919? Would "historians" consider that a "defining moment"?

Yes, Ms Ignorance, historians would consider that a defining moment, but they'd also cite the Military Voters act as well and the later Famous 5 JCPC Persons Case as defining moments in Canada's history. Look them up. Learn something.

[Brenda]

That's Mrs. Ignorance to you

[Mustang1]

Brenda Brenda:

That's Mrs. Ignorance to you

Who cares? It's still Ignorance.

[Brenda]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

Brenda Brenda:

That's Mrs. Ignorance to you

Who cares? It's still Ignorance.

Who cares?

[2Cdo]

Brenda Brenda:

That it is not mentioned in history books says more about Canadian history books than about history itself.

Wow, another dig at Canada.

[Brenda]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Brenda Brenda:

That it is not mentioned in history books says more about Canadian history books than about history itself.

Wow, another dig at Canada.

Nope, not at all. Something that was very important to someone else (something that Canada did FOR someone else) should be recognized as being important.

[2Cdo]

Brenda Brenda:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Brenda Brenda:

That it is not mentioned in history books says more about Canadian history books than about history itself.

Wow, another dig at Canada.

Nope, not at all. Something that was very important to someone else (something that Canada did FOR someone else) should be recognized as being important.

Important to the Dutch people but not a DEFINING moment for Canada, contrary to what YOU may think.