`  == Andy/Homey's assertions ==  ``There has been an attempt by the MLC and to some extent by the Department of Canadian Heritage to rebrand the monarchy and remove any reference to it being at all British.``  Nobody, including the MLC or Canadian Heritage, has been attempting to cover up any ``Britishness`` associated with the Monarchy  this is part of Andy's conspiracy theory that I alluded to earlier.  What Andy/Homey is attempting to do with his out of context Rouleau quotes is deny that the Crown/Monarchy is an institution shared equally by all 16 Commonwealth Realms.  What the MLC, and perhaps Canadian Heritage, promotes as Canadian is only the Crown in Right of Canada  the Crown as it operates within the legal jurisdiction of Canada. ``and legally it is not at all incorrect to refer to the Crown in Canada as the ``British Crown``.  Calling the Crown ``British`` for historical purposes, or due to the lack of a modern terminology for the shared Crown, is a matter of semantics, and does not affect constitutional reality that the ``British Crown`` as shared is not the same thing as the Crown within the legal jurisdiction of the UK. ``Gbambino's unique belief that something can only be in context if the entire document from which it is taken is included.`` Complete ignorance of my earlier statement: ``You've admitted you specifically chose those quotations because out of their context they support your POV and 'original research'. You've conveniently omitted those (and deleted those) that don't because they provide more information and create a clearer picture about what Rouleau's point was  and it actually goes against what you're trying to assert.``  Context does not necessarily mean the entire document, it means enough of the document to get the proper point across.  Pieces chosen by a strongly biased individual do not constitute proper context. ``he discusses everything *but* the actual content of the bullet point in contention.`` Ignoring your actions earlier and elsewhere does not provide you with justification. ``Peter Grey seems to concede that the quote is relevent.`` Unfounded. ``I suspect he does not want the quote there simply because he feels the reference to the ``British Crown`` is contrary to the view promoted by Canadian monarchists even though it is perfectly correct (as he, himself, has conceded elsewhere when he stated that in Canadian law there is no such term as ``Canadian Crown`` or ``Crown of Canada).``  What Peter asserted was that the ``British Crown`` as shared by the Realms is not the same thing as the Crown within the jurisdiction of the UK government.  This is accepted by Canadian monarchists as reality, but is not their creation!  As well, there is no such legal term as ``Canadian Crown,`` but the words ``Crown in Right of Canada`` and ``Crown of Canada`` are included in legal documents. (And Andy, it’s ‘’relevant‘’, not relevant – only mentioning that as vocabulary and spelling seem to be a sensitive topic for you.)  `