National anthem

[Jonny Boy]

That would be the Rampant Lion of Scotland.  And no, the griffin is not on the Union flag, as was stated.

ya i know the griffin is not on the flag but i am wondering what part of the welsh flag is on the union jack?

i guess it could be the white

 

[pronto]

NO part of the welsh flag is on the union flag. White is not the welsh flag either. The Brits thought that because they had conquered parts of wales in the 1600s, they could "assume" Wales was included with the British St. George cross... (heh heh - we showed them!)

Nyuk, Nyuk >

 

[Jonny Boy]

NO part of the welsh flag is on the union flag. White is not the welsh flag either. The Brits thought that because they had conquered parts of wales in the 1600s, they could "assume" Wales was included with the British St. George cross... (heh heh - we showed them!)

Nyuk, Nyuk >

the english thought. the scots have been fighting the english as well for a while. they should of encluded some part of the welsh flag. oh well

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

John, I'm absolutely stunned that you would assign any importance to that. 

My question to you is - so what?

I went to a museum in Calgary here a couple years ago, with a piece of glass from the windshield of one of the Avro Arrows.  It's a historical keepsake. 

The original maple leaf flag would be considered the same thing, and if the Liberal Party is proud of it - guess what, they should be.  It's a great flag, a great uniting symbol, and represents all Canadians - except those too hidebound to embrace it.  Their loss. 

What deeper meaning are you trying to assign to the possession of the original maple leaf flag by the Liberal Party?  Does it have magical powers like the Ark of the Covenant?  Cause I'm not getting your point at all.

I see the flag, particularly the original flag, as symbolic (call me crazy): the point is that if it is the flag of the country it should be in a museum where it is accessible to Canadians (like your windshield piece).  I have real problem accepting the notion that it is a national unifying flag when they (the Liberal Party) created it against vociferous opposition, did it in their own image, and then kept it for themselves.  It just ain't right.

As for the colours of Pearson's design (aside from the fact it was an ugly design in my own personal opinion, your mileage may vary), "The Old Red White And Blue" is a very old term for the flag of the United States - another nation we are trying to distance ourselves from.  The earliest reference I can recall is Daffy Duck singing "Hooray For the Red, White and Blue" in a 1940s vintage cartoon.  So why then would Canada want to adopt that colour combination also?  See also the earlier heraldic reason given for red and white which you make reference to.

Would you feel better if the colours of the flag were Bleu, Blanc et Rouge and we called it the Canadian Tricolour?  I really don't think there was any need to change it: if we were to change it to something more "inclusive", why wouldn't the three colours of our "two founding nations," rather than the two colours bestowed upon the country by one of them?  We also share a common history with the United States: why wouldn't we use the same colours, other than to try to deny our history: I'll leave historical revisionism to the Stalinists, thank you very much.  Did Canadians identify themselves as "not Americans" back then, to the same extent they do now?  Or, after decades of having it drilled into our heads (along with other artifical values), has it become a "Canadian value"?

Canadians then, and now, seem to define themselves by who and what they are not, rather than what they are.  Using the colours of the Union Jack and the Stars and Stripes would seem to be self-defeating in that case.

Funny, I don't ... since the late-60's Canada has been subject to a protracted marketing campaign, the basis of which is that the Liberal Party platform is "da Canadian values" (to quote one author) ... from a business standpoint, I understand it and it makes sense: in more authoritarian states they call it propaganda ... what really irritates me that much of it has been done with taxpayer dollars, both "legally" and (as the Gomery enquiry is exposing) illegally.  I don't accept it, and I find it very sad that so many do (but of course that's the subject of the "Maple Leaf Revolution" thread) ...

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Aw crap - I have just been informed that the Wessex dragon was really a Wyvern. Apparently the diference is two legs versus four!   Who knew? :rage:

Wyvern!  Well, if I had to be wrong, at least I was in good company.  Serves me right for posting on the fly from work.