Friday, 29 June 2007

In Other News The Sun Rose and Set As Predicted

Shooting suspects flee Canada

Police working with Jamaican authorities to extradite the pair
Jun 28, 2007 04:30 AM
Betsy Powell
Crime Reporter

Two Canadian-born suspects wanted by Toronto police on first-degree murder charges have fled the country and are believed to be hiding in Jamaica, police said yesterday.

Police have issued warrants for Anthony Grant, 21, known as T.J., of Brampton, and Devon Vivian, 20, of Toronto, for killing 19-year-old Jose Hierro Saez during a drive-by shooting in Rexdale on a sunny Saturday afternoon earlier this month. They're also wanted for four counts of attempted murder.

Read it all here.

You know you're a liberal if you dare not speak the obvious: most of the violent crime in Toronto is committed by black males. And invariably there always seems to be a Jamaica connection.

Jamaica is a small Caribbean island. It is also a failed state and it would be wise for Canada to stop all Jamaican immigration. We don't need them and the social benefits are apparent. I do not believe in a non-discriminatory, color blind immigration system. It is our country and we do not have to allow in anybody who walks of a plane or does well on a score card. If a particular group of people continuously misbehave then stop bringing them in.

Jamaica has a population of around 2.6 million. Canada is home to about 211,000 Jamaicans, about 5-6% of Jamaica’s total population, who mostly live in Toronto. Guess who is responsible for most of the gun crime in Toronto? Jamaica has one of the highest murder rates in the world, ranking third after South Africa and Brazil. In recent years Jamaica has observed a surge in gun violence. I love this line from this article:

"Some observers associate the surge of violence with the large numbers of Jamaican criminals deported back to the island each year from the United States, Britain and Canada. Last year, the United States alone returned 1,196 criminals.”

One of the many social ills plaguing the black community in Toronto is the cultural phenomenon of single black mothers with children by different fathers (I have seen this first hand). Many children are growing up never knowing a father to discipline them when they misbehave. This is considered one factor leading to the anti-social and oftentimes criminal behaviour of many black youths. Guess which country excels in women giving birth to offspring by different men?

Given that these appear to be cultural norms of that tiny island nation what do you expect from them when you bring them here? Most Jamaicans do not engage in gun violence in Toronto and it is unfair to make that impression but this is a case where a few bad apples spoil the bunch. Besides, if absentee fathers and single mothers are a root of criminal activity and a sizeable portion of Jamaicans in Canada engage in this practice then this is worthy or our consideration. I don’t know how Jamaicans get into Canada but for the sake of our society we need to stop it

Thursday, 28 June 2007

Give Foreign Corporations Canadian Citizenship and there, No More Worries

Buyout fears 'misguided'

Domestic companies more pursuer than prey on the global acquisitions front, according to data compiled by the Investment Industry Association of Canada
Jun 26, 2007 04:30 AM
Rita Trichur

Calls to protect Canadian companies from foreign takeovers are "misguided" because corporate Canada actually did more shopping abroad last year than foreigners did here, says the head of the Investment Industry Association of Canada.

President and chief executive Ian Russell said new data released by the association yesterday suggest that Canadians' collective hand-wringing over the so-called "hollowing out" of the country's corporate landscape by foreigners has been overblown.

"We are seeing a lot more of Canadian companies acquiring foreign companies than the other way around," said Russell, who will be delivering a speech on the topic today at The Economic Club of Toronto.

Read the whole article here.

There has been some talk of late about the "hollowing out" of the Canadian economy. This refers to the high degree of foreign ownership of the Canadian economy. This particular article argues that such claims are "overblown." I hope he's right but if foreign ownership of the Canadian economy is something to be concerned about then why isn't the foreign make-up of Canadian society not? It's the same thing. What's the difference if half of the Canadian economy is in the control of foreign interests and half of Toronto is inhabited by immigrants? If being Canadian is nothing more than just being a citizen then just gives these corporations Canadian citizenship and then there is nothing to worry about. Right? After all, aren't corporations considered citizens under the law?

Foreign ownership of a national economy is colonization. Group settlement in a foreign land is colonization and considering the demographic and settlement trends in Canada that is exactly what is going on. Traditional Canadians are being replaced and are losing their country. Actually it’s not really lost when you give it away so freely. Some countries went to war to preserve what Canadians are so willingly surrendering.

By the way, out of all of the industrialized nations Canada is the most foreign owned. Just thought you'd like to know.

After Centuries of History the British No Longer Know Who They Are Anymore


Immigration, not Blair, changed face of Britain

Jun 26, 2007 04:30 AM
Antonia Maioni

London–The end of this month will see two important changes in British life: July 1 marks the official start of a smoke-free Britain in all public places, while tomorrow will mark the official end of Tony Blair's tenure as prime minister. In both cases, we are witnessing the end of an era.

These changes are minor, however, compared with the problems of immigration and cultural integration that Britain faces, which question the very core of what it means to be British.

Today, assessing the Blair era is on everyone's mind.

On foreign policy, his legacy will forever be haunted by Iraq. Domestically, Blair presided over a period of strong economic growth, and he can be credited with considerable achievements in specific policy areas, such as reform of the National Health System.

The Blair legacy will dominate the next election campaign led by his successor, Gordon Brown, but so too will another important issue: immigration.

Like the NHS, everyone in Britain has an opinion on immigration, and most remain unsatisfied. While the Tories went down to inglorious defeat on the issue in the 2005 election, it remains a lightning rod for all kinds of concerns, from the price of housing to the cost of translating street signs.

The Blair decade coincided with the influx of more than 2 million foreigners into Britain, from waves of much-needed Russian and East European workers, to asylum seekers, to illegal migrants. Current estimates are that 300,000 new residents arrive each year.

This great migration is changing the social fabric of Britain, just as post-colonial immigration from South Asia and the Caribbean did after 1945.


Like Canada, Britain is coming to terms with the effects of rapid immigration and the challenges of multiculturalism. It is also soul-searching for a sense of national identity.

Read the whole article here.

Immigration is changing the face of Britain just like it is here in Canada. And, like Canada, the British do not know who they are anymore even though they have centuries of history and culture behind them. This is due to multiculturalism and mass immigration. Multiculturalism compels any society not to form a coherent identity for to do so may exclude “minority” identities. Thus confusion emerges and unnecessary national soul searching arises.

Why do the British have to redefine themselves? Shouldn't immigrants to Britain redefine themselves so as to fit into the "social fabric" of British society? Why must the British surrender any sense of a national character and their history so that those who willingly choose to move to Britain can preserve theirs? This doesn't seem right to me. Moving to Britain, or to Canada for that matter, has its benefits but it also has its costs but it seems nowadays, particularly in Canada, the host population is being asked to bear as much of the costs as possible. Culture just happens to be one of those costs. Instead of saying "this is British" or "that is Canadian" an immigrant can now say that his or her foreign culture is just as British or Canadian as a culturally ethnic Britain or Canadian. This is ridiculous and an attack on our cultural identity.

If an immigrant surrenders his or her culture when they move to Britain or Canada then an immigrant willingly does so. By virtue of them moving to our countries they are saying with their feet that the benefits of our societies outweigh that cost. And, of course, the immigrant is invited to join us and be British or Canadian. If that cost is too much then, please, don’t move here.

There Are Limits to Multiculturalism

Female circumcision persists in Egypt

Despite slight decline in rate of procedure, most girls undergo genital mutilation before teens

Jun 25, 2007 04:30 AM
Oakland Ross
Middle East Bureau

CAIRO–Her name is Riham Sheble, she is a few weeks shy of her 30th birthday, and she is among the few women in her country who will speak publicly about something that was done to her as a child.

It's the same rite performed upon almost all young girls in Egypt.

"I was 7," says Sheble, "and I was circumcised."

These are not words you often hear in this country, where powerful taboos still surround the cutting away of women's sexual organs when they are still children. The custom is all but universal.

In 2005, 96 per cent of Egyptian women between the ages of 15 and 49 who had ever been married reported that they had been circumcised when young.

Gradually, however, the prevalence of female circumcision – now more commonly known as female genital mutilation – seems to be declining, at least in Egypt.

Read the whole article here.

Reading this in the left of centre Toronto Star gives the impression that female genital mutilation, or female circumcision is intolerable, and it is, but the article says that this is a centuries old practice. This has been going on in Egypt long before the Americas were discovered and Canada was founded. We may not agree with female circumcision yet who are we to say otherwise if we believe in multiculturalism let alone allow the equally barbaric and equally unnecessary male version of it? If cultures are to be held in equal esteem then how can Canada stop anyone from practicing it here yet we do. In fact it is now grounds for asylum in Canada. This has obviously opened up our refugee system to further abuse (i.e. lying) but that is not the point I wish to make here. It is obvious from this article that there are limits to multiculturalism. You cannot walk into a Chinese restaurant in Canada and order dog as your meal because Canadians would not hear of it but a truly multicultural society would allow it.

Canada is not truly multicultural and it never should be. In fact multiculturalism is a mistake and it should be abolished as a source of national identity. Multiculturalism is a confused and chaotic state and it fosters social disorder because cultures compete to emerge dominant and establish some sense of order. So far this is not a problem in Canada but you can see the symptoms of it already chiefly Canada's inability to forge a real sense of self. Multiculturalism is an attack on Canadian identity and it should be stopped.

Tuesday, 26 June 2007

Only A Racist Would Cut Immigration In A Poor Economic Climate

Ontario getting poorer, while N.L. shines: economists

Last Updated: Friday, June 22, 2007 | 2:39 PM NT
CBC News

Ontario's economy will face more sub-par growth this year, while Newfoundland and Labrador's will grab the top spot, according to two major banks' provincial forecasts released Friday.

Ontario's real GDP will grow by just 1.8 per cent this year, BMO Capital Markets says in its forecast. It's the weakest growth prediction in the country.
RBC Economics GDP Outlook (% growth)
Province 2006 2007 2008
N.L. 2.8 7.5 0.5
P.E.I. 2.0 1.9 1.7
N.S. 1.1 2.4 2.3
N.B. 2.6 2.5 2.6
Que. 1.7 2.1 2.6
Ont. 1.9 1.9 2.7
Man. 3.3 3.0 3.2
Sask. 0.4 4.0 3.6
Alta. 6.8 4.6 4.0
B.C. 3.6 3.2 3.3
Canada 2.8 2.6 2.9
Source: RBC Economics

RBC Economics lowered its growth estimate for Ontario's economy to 1.9 per cent in 2007 — tied with P.E.I.

Both forecasts cite the strong Canadian dollar as an ongoing challenge for the province. BMO Capital Markets also blames higher energy prices (because Ontario is a major importer of energy) and weak U.S. auto sales (affecting the Ontario-centred auto industry).

RBC economists also cite a weak U.S. housing market and a "crushing corporate tax burden" that are pressuring Ontario's manufacturing sector.

RBC predicts Ontario's economy won't recover until 2009, when the auto industry is expected to rebound with the opening of new assembly plants.

Read it all here.

Canada accepts too many immigrants to begin with. We accept around 250,000 to 260,000 a year, refugees included. Most of these immigrants do not enter the country as skilled labour but mostly as sponsored relatives or as abusers of the investor class or refugee system. We import more immigrants per capita then any other industrialized nation and give away our citizenship like prizes in cereal boxes.

Canada didn't always accept this many. Believe it or not, our immigration system actually served the interests of the nation at one time. We took in immigrants in accordance with economic need. Now we just take in immigrants regardless of the situation. Prior to the mid 1980s Canada accepted less than 150,000 per year. The Liberal party is the traditional party of choice for most immigrants yet under the leadership of Trudeau the Liberal party decreased immigrant numbers because it was economically sound. Then along came the PC government under the inept leadership of Brian Mulroney and he decided that Canada needs more immigrants and so, poof, he upped it by 100,000. No real reason behind this decision of course. He just thought Canada needed more immigrants. Because of settlement and immigrant voting patterns the Conservatives cannot get elected in the Canada's three major cities. Now that’s what I call leadership.

Ontario receives around 40% of all immigrants to this country, more so than any other province, and this is costing Ontarians. Tax dollars are being misspent to support a dysfunctional and bureaucratic system instead of being used to stimulate economic growth. I would not be surprised if mass immigration is one of the major factors contributing to Ontario’s poor economic outlook.

Monday, 25 June 2007

Dutch Wake Up To Reality, Realise That There Are Limits To "Freedoms"

Changing Patterns in Social Fabric Test Netherlands' Liberal Identity

By Molly Moore
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, June 23, 2007; Page A12

AMSTERDAM -- For years, W.B. Kranendonk was a lone ranger in Dutch politics -- the editor of an orthodox Christian newspaper in a nation that has legalized prostitution, euthanasia, abortion and same-sex marriage and allows the personal use of marijuana.

Today, with an orthodox Christian political party in the government for the first time, and with immigration anxieties fueling a national search for identity, the country that has been the world's most socially liberal political laboratory is rethinking its anything-goes policies.

And suddenly, Kranendonk no longer seems so all alone.

"People in high political circles are saying it can't be good to have a society so liberal that everything is allowed," said Kranendonk, editor of Reformist Daily and an increasingly influential voice that resonates in the shifting mainstream of Dutch public opinion. "People are saying we should have values; people are asking for more and more rules in society."

Read the whole article here.

Liberal permissive societies are confused and chaotic ones. They either lack or have been stripped of clear social demarcations that allows individuals to identify with the general group and develop a sense of belonging. I know that there are a few rebellious types who do not, or refuse to, identify with the greater group but that is their choice. A society cannot function by catering to ever whim, fetish, and fancy of each and every individual even if they confusingly say that their human rights are being denied.

Liberal permissivism has attacked Dutch identity to such an extent that they no longer know who they are anymore. And if the Dutch don't know who they are then what are they to expect from immigrants to their country? The lack or loss of a national identity creates a void that many individuals will fill by exploiting their ancestral roots, sometimes to stereotypical extremes. The Netherlands have imported a sizeable Muslim population that constitutes about 6% of the total population (about 1 million out of 16 million) with heavy concentrations in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. The Muslim community is characteristically insular in the Netherlands, as it is here in Canada, with many unable to speak the native Dutch language even after years of residing in the country. But why should they bother? If the Dutch have deemphasized their national character to a state of little importance to favour one of greater social allowances then where is the incentive for Muslims to become Dutch?

The problem is the same here in Canada. Mass immigration and multiculturalism has attacked the Canadian identity so much that we do not know who we are anymore. We moved from under the British wing, to the American wing, and just when we were about to fly on our own multiculturalism clipped our wings. It has created a confused and uncertain national character that one can be born in the Punjab, speak only Punjabi, dress like they do in the Punjab, and carry Indian citizenship yet still be called a Canadian. This says that the Canadian really doesn’t exist and has never existed. What an insult!

This latest development in the Netherlands is good news to me. It means that there is hope for Canada yet.

Sunday, 24 June 2007

The Toronto Star and It's Pro Urban Sprawl and Anti-Environment Agenda

It's back

Actually, sprawl never really went away. Despite the ambitious plan Queen's Park issued last year, experts say development is as unchecked as ever

Jun 23, 2007 04:30 AM

Peter Gorrie
Environment Reporter

"Talking about controlling urban sprawl get governments elected. Doing something about it gets them unelected."

Tony Coombes, Neptis Foundation

Which brings us to Places to Grow.

The strategy, announced by Queen's Park a year ago, is the latest attempt to curb rampant and destructive development in the Toronto region.

Several times in the past half-century, municipal governments or the province have proposed visionary plans. The result: A relentless march of subdivisions, malls and asphalt across what is now known as the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

Will the outcome be any different this time?

Not likely, according to a new report: "We are in the presence of a yawning gap between ... reality and planning goals," states Pierre Filion, a planning expert at the University of Waterloo.

What's happening on the ground is completely at odds with what's needed, Filion says in the report, commissioned by Neptis – which conducts and publishes research on urban regions.

Places to Growcalls for concentration, while the real world is shaped by powerful centrifugal forces – land speculation and development –¸and producing worse sprawl than ever. The heart of the government's scheme is the creation of 25 "urban growth centres" to handle the region's projected population growth by 4 million over the next 25 years. These would be relatively small pockets of dense development, with homes, stores and offices mixed together – like smaller versions of downtown Toronto.

That's generally the goal of planners: A place set up so people can use public transit, a bicycle or their legs to get from home to where they work, shop, eat or play. That means: small houses and lots, with many high-rises; compact retail and office development; interesting, safe and lively pedestrian routes; frequent and reliable public transit.

Create a bunch of these centres, or nodes, throughout the Horseshoe, and link them with densely developed transit corridors and, the plan assumes, good things happen: Precious farmland and natural areas are saved; congestion eases; greenhouse gas emissions drop; perhaps most important, people lead better, less stressed, lives.

Read the whole article here.

Don't be fooled by the Toronto Star's "pro-green" reporting of late because they are not serious about it. The Toronto Star talks a good game when it comes to environmental concerns but the paper refuses to address the greatest threat to Canada's green spaces especially those of the southern Ontario region: mass immigration.

Southern Ontario is home to some of the richest farmland in all of Canada and you do not have to travel very far north from Toronto to see the first sightings of the Canadian Shield. Here is a picture of it care of wiki. Note the blue area. That is the Canadian Shield and, according to wiki, it "is a large shield covered by a thin layer of soil that forms the nucleus of the North American craton. It has a deep, common, joined bedrock region in eastern and central Canada and stretches North from the Great Lakes to the Arctic Ocean, covering half the country." To put it bluntly it is mostly rock and not very good for farming.

One of the arguments for mass immigration is that Canada is a large uninhabited land mass and therefore it has lots of room to accommodate large influxes of people but the environmental argument speaks otherwise. This argument, obviously, ignores the portion of Canada that is uninhabitable. Like Australia, Canada may be a large and uninhabited land mass but few areas of it are accommodating to human life. The Canadian Shield and the Artic Tundra, which is considered a desert, occupy a sizeable chunk of the Canadian geography and are not very well suited to human activity like the outback of Australia. Few areas are agreeable to human existence and these areas are environmentally fragile, rich farmland. Canada cannot accommodate large influxes of people without some detrimental effect to its environment. Roughly 40-50% of all immigrants to Canada settle in the southern Ontario region and urban sprawl is the result of it. Tracts of farm land have been paved over and are now lost forever so that we can accommodate a mass influx of people many of whom should not be here. More cars are on the road in Toronto and southern Ontario increasing traffic congestion, grid locks, and idling cars thus depositing more pollutants in the air for southern Ontarians to breath. Trees are a good combatant for pollution yet it seems we here in Canada prefer multiculturalism and mass immigration to cleaner air.

The Oak Ridges Moraine is "a landform unique to southern Ontario." It is located directly above Toronto and within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and it will be destroyed unless urban sprawl is placed under control. The Ontario government has dedicated tracts of land in the moraine for protection but the whole moraine should be protected. Land developers and speculators bank on mass immigration and this is pushing sprawl further and further north into the moraine and towards the Canadian Shield thus destroying the natural heritage of this country that we currently enjoy but will be denied to future generations of Canadians. Where is the justice in advancing the rights of an imported people and bankrolling the lifestyles of land developers at the expense of the rights of unborn generations of Canadians to enjoy the natural beauty that is Canada?

You cannot be serious about protecting the natural beauty of Canada without addressing the effects of mass immigration on the environment. You cannot rapidly import masses of people into the country and expect to protect the environment at the same time. The most immediate and cost effective way to protect Canada's environment is to reduce our immigration intake.

The above Toronto Star piece is typical of the paper. It presents superficial solutions to distract its readers from considering the roots of the problem. The Star’s solutions to protect the environment are to promote ineffective legislation (which takes time and money), fantasy land development schemes such as the ones cited in the above article (which take time and money and have no guarantees of being effective), and to influence the behaviour of the public to reduce waste and car use that is inevitably negated, if at all successfully practiced, because a greater number of people have been imported into the region thus bringing us back to square one. Never does the Toronto Star ever suggest that maybe less immigrant numbers might be the most cost effective way and have the most immediate and positive effect on the environment because the Toronto Star, as a business, has no interest in decreasing its potential future reader numbers. The Toronto Star, like most businesses, is more interested in the bottom line than it is in the environment.

To prove my point I recall the instance when Ontario Environment Commissioner, Gordon Miller, released an annual report in 2005 in which he cited rapid population growth fuelled primarily by mass immigration threatened the environment and the quality of life for southern Ontarians. The Toronto Star attacked him in an editorial and essentially said that population growth is coming whether you like it or not. In another editorial, about a year later, the Toronto Star hypocritically attacked Durham region council for not acting to protect green spaces it slated to pave over to deal with population growth. When it comes to the environment the Star editorial staff doesn't know whether it is coming or going but that’s not the point. It wants to appear to be environmentally conscious while promoting the mass importation of future readers by ensuring that Canadian attitudes are soft on mass immigration via the steady promotion of discredited assumptions and immigrant puff pieces. To accommodate these people the Canadian natural landscape is altered forever and the environment is destroyed but what does the Star care? After years of stagnant stock prices the environment is a small price the Star is willing to pay to make its share holders happy. A business is a business after all.

Oh No! Not Another Blog!

Yes, another blog but this one is actually necessary if I do say so myself.

The immigration debate in Canada is one sided. Those who oppose Canada's current immigration and refugee system, with the attendant multiculturalism rhetoric that goes with it, have been successfully silenced by those on both the left and the right of the political spectrum with ad-homonym accusations of racism and xenophobia. Rarely are the issues sincerely discussed up here in the Great White North even though the issues are of severe importance to the future of this great nation of ours. Critics such as myself are forced to retreat to the anonymity and democratic atmosphere of the internet so that our voices may be heard and exercise our often denied human right of freedom of speech without fear of being painted as villainous racists and xenophobes worthy of front row seats before a human rights tribunal and a tax payer funded vacation in one of Canada's many fine correctional institutions. Our concerns are real and our voices deserve to be heard. Instead we are ignored and marginalized by the media and our government who both work in concert to promote a corrupt and dysfunctional immigration and multiculturalism policy in Canada that many Canadians are increasingly growing weary of.

I am a patriot. I love Canada and I am opposed to anything that I think that is harming my country and my countrymen. I support an immigration policy for Canada. I just do not support the one my country has adopted. What was once sound and reasonable has devolved into an industry that benefits the few at the expense of the many. Canadian and immigrant are being hurt by it alike and it has to stop.

Canada accepts too many immigrants of whom most of them do not meet the basic requirements to enter via Canada's points system. Only about 25% of Canada's immigrants fall under the skilled category. The sponsored relatives of these immigrants make up a significant portion of Canada's immigration intake. These are largely the aged parents of both spouses who will eventually be a burden on Canada's already overburdened health care system as well as the unskilled relatives who otherwise could not enter the country as skilled labour. This has helped create the doctor shortage that Canada is now experiencing. Some Canadians are being denied basic medical services because of this and this is not right. Fake refugees, and there are more than you think, make up another portion of Canada's immigrant intake. Most refugees to Canada are not refugees. They are frauds and Canadians are paying the costs. The investor class is another and this has been subject to abuse and exposed as a fraud as well. The investor class is essentially a way an immigrant can buy Canadian citizenship a wholesale prices minus the job creation it was intended to produce. But it does import voters for the Liberal party which explains why the abuse has been allowed to continue.

I can write more but I will save it for later posts. I don't care to maintain a blog. I assume it will take up some of my time and life is too short to waste it in front of a computer monitor. Besides, who is going to read any of this anyway? But this issue is important to me and I see that little to nothing is being done to reverse or correct the wrongs that are being inflicted upon Canada and Canadians by this country's immigration and refugee system. This system is corrupt and it is being supported by discredited assumptions. These lies need to be exposed because our politicians, the CBC, Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, and other media outlets refuse to provide a balanced discussion on immigration. Canadian culture and identity, the livelihoods and quality of life of Canadians, our public spaces, and the natural beauty that is Canada, are being threatened by mass immigration. Enough is enough!