Nationalist group throwing gas on the fire

- September 6th, 2012

Marois attempt

Exactly what we didn’t need:

La Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste (SSJB) de Montréal accuse les médias anglophones d’avoir instauré un climat de peur «déclencheur» de l’attentat contre le rassemblement du Parti québécois mardi soir, une sortie aussitôt dénoncée par la communauté anglophone.

L’organisation vouée à la défense du français et de la souveraineté a lancé aujourd’hui un «appel à la modération» aux médias anglophones à la suite de la fusillade ayant fait un mort et un blessé.

«L’attentat politique survenu au rassemblement du Parti Québécois le 4 septembre dernier est un acte isolé de folie, mais il a eu néanmoins un déclencheur socio-politique», écrit la SSJB. En entrevue, son président, Mario Beaulieu, affirme que les médias anglophones «doivent porter la responsabilité de ce climat de peur qui est propice à l’arrivée de ces gens là», en référence au tireur, Richard Henry Bain.

My translation:

The Societe St-Jean-Baptiste de Montreal blames English-speaking media of fostering a climate of fear that “triggered” Tuesday night’s shooting at the Parti Quebecois rally, an accusation the English-speaking community immediately rejected.

The SSJB, which devotes itself to the defense of the French language as well as sovereignty today invited English-speaking media to be more moderate, following the shooting that killed one and injured another.

“The political attempt at the Parti Quebecois rally on September 4 is an isolated act of folly, but it nevertheless had a socio-economic trigger,” writes the SSJB. In an interview, its president, Mario Beaulieu, says English-speaking media “must bear the responsibility for this climate of fear that nurtures such individuals,” referring to the alleged shooter, Richard Henry Bain.

 

Categories: Quebec

Subscribe to the post

1 comment

  1. Pure Laine says:

    Mario Beaulieu also clearly pointed at blogs and online forums, such as the National Post’s and the Globe and Mail’s, for providing a platform on exacerbated and completely unacceptable reader input on language issues. Will these publications provide their readers the opportunity to react to Mr. Beaulieu’s statement? That would certainly be interesting.

Comments are closed.