Friday, 28 December 2007

Canada's Banks, like the Toronto Star, promote mass immigration for selfish reasons, care more about profits than people.

A business's loyalty is first and foremost to itself and its survival. All other concerns come secondary. When a business is publicly traded like Canada's banking institutions and newspapers, such as the Toronto Star, we then must excuse impartiality when these corporations speak of immigration. Mass immigration is the continued injection of consumers into the domestic Canadian market. The Toronto Star, and other newspapers, are more dependent on this than the banks are since Canada's banks have the potential to tap overseas markets by offering banking services to foreign populations. To read more about the foreign interests of Canadian Banks you can read it here in the National Post.

The following story can be read in it's entirety here at The Toronto Star.

Banking on immigrants

Lenders are in hot pursuit of the booming population of new Canadians
Dec 28, 2007 04:30 AM
RITA TRICHUR
BUSINESS REPORTER


Bank of Montreal snagged new immigrant Jun Yuan as a client even before the Chinese shipping agent set foot in Canada.

[...]

What really sold him on BMO was positive word of mouth and an information seminar the bank held in Shanghai – a primer on life in Canada. Basic banking, it seems, was just part of the agenda.

From what I can surmise from these two paragraphs is that Canada's banks seem to be acting more like government consulates and immigration agencies via the old time "slide shows" and banks second. They are enticing immigrants to come to Canada by selling them on the benefits of a Canadian life first and then the benefits of using their particular bank when in Canada. Thus, Canada's banks are using Canada as they're prime selling point and not what services they can provide.

"When I decided to immigrate to Canada, I knew nothing about what to do after landing," Yuan said. "This lecture is very helpful."

He was also impressed with the bank's ability to set up his account and transfer his savings to a branch in the heart of Toronto's Chinatown even before he boarded a plane for Canada.

"I didn't need to carry the money with me," Yuan said.

After arriving, BMO activated his account and gave him a reference so he could secure an apartment in Scarborough. Immigrant settlement services are the latest twist to Canada's retail banking war.

Roger Heng, managing director and BMO's country head for China, said prospective clients pepper his staff with a wide range of queries about Canada – most of which have nothing to do with banking.

Further evidence to suggest that Canada's banks act primarily as immigration consultation agencies for potential immigrants to field questions about immigrating to Canada. This allows the banks the opportunity to establish a relationship with potential clients when, and if, they arrive in Canada.

Faced with an aging population and a ban on big-bank mergers, Canadian lenders are falling all over themselves to court and poach new-immigrant clients as they represent a rare source of growth for their mainstay personal and commercial operations.

"Really, the primary growth in the Canadian population is going to be fuelled by immigrants. And we're not just talking about the general population, but our workforce as well," said Rania Llewellyn, Scotiabank's vice-president of multicultural banking. "Obviously, that is a huge opportunity for the banks to tap into that market."

There's a "vice president of multicultural banking" now? Now that's funny!!! Sadly it's not really a joke. There really is a "vice president of multicultural banking".

Statistics Canada does not track how much money new immigrants bring to Canada annually, but one 2005 estimate by Royal Bank of Canada pegged the potential new-immigrant banking market at about $3 billion a year.

Immigrants also remove a similar amount from the Canadian economy in the form of remittances sent back home. Unfortunately I cannot find the reference but I did read it in The Toronto Star and the amount of money removed from the Canadian economy by immigrants far exceeds the amount Ottawa doles out in the form of foreign aid.

With China and India the top source countries, banks are in hot pursuit of those Asian-born arrivals.

The concerns of Canada's banking institutions about mass immigration is focused squarely on how they can extract money from immigrants. They are businesses so we shouldn't expect less. Immigrants take out loans, use credits cards and amass debt, they buy homes and therefore need mortgages. They send money back to their homelands and need services for that. And by using these banks they will also be paying the user fees we Canadians have come to accept and adore. Therefore we should never expect to see anything less than a glowing report from the banks about the virtues and necessities of mass immigration no matter how false and misleading they may be.

My problem is that while the banks selfishly pursue profits they are actively promoting a policy that is akin to colonization. Their behaviour is helping to change Canada in irrevocable ways; ways that most Canadians do not agree with. They continue to influence the maintenance of Canada's dangerously high immigration levels and they promote the raising of those levels because it is in their interests to do so. Even if immigration is hurting the Canadian economy and creating social disruptions Canada's banks will continue to promote unfettered mass immigration so long as it is profitable. A business's loyalty is to itself.

For a related story read here for a story about Western Union and how immigration saved it from bankruptcy.

Saturday, 22 December 2007

Canada's population now over 33 million while the collective IQ of Canada's environmentalists remains at 0.

That's right folks. Canada is a nation of over 33 million as of October 1, 2007. You can read about here at The Toronto Star.

The federal agency estimated Canada's population at 33,091,200 on Oct. 1, up 115,200 from July 1.

The population increased 0.35 per cent during the third quarter, the strongest growth rate since the third quarter of 2001.

[...]

Immigration remained strong during the third quarter, with about 71,600 newcomers, the second highest quarterly level since 1971.

Net international migration accounted for two-thirds of the country's population increase.


In related news Canada's stupid environmentalists hide head in sand.

Officially Canada receives around 250,000 - 260,000 immigrants per year, the highest immigration intake for any country in the world. If we include illegal immigration to that number - failed refugee claimants who are not deported, those who enter on a visitor's Visa who have no intention of leaving, smuggled individuals, etc. - then we can reasonably concluded that Canada's immigration intake is, unofficially but realistically, around 300,000 a year if not more. This places it close to the Liberal Party's desired immigration target of 1% of the population a year. Why 1% of the population, this is never reasonably explained outside of the usual rhetoric repeated ad nauseaum nor has it ever been reasonably explained why Canada needs a quarter of a million immigrants each year in the first place. Go and look for a reasonable explanation because you will not find it anywhere and the reasons given can be satisfied with a dramatically lowered number.

Since around 300,000 people enter Canada each year, we are introducing 1.5 million people into the country every five years. Southern Ontario, particularly around Toronto and the surrounding area, can expect population increases of over 1 million people every ten years. Ontario has a current population of around 12.8 million. Almost half of Ontario's population, around 5.5 million, lives in Toronto and the GTA (Greater Toronto Area) combined. Were a child born today in Toronto and if Canada's current immigration targets and immigrant settlement patterns remain unchanged then this child can expect to see an additional 7 to 8 million people added to the southern Ontario region by the time he or she dies at a ripe age of 80. Ontario's population will explode to over 20 million people and the GTA's population will balloon to Ontario's current total population of around 13 million people.

How and where will we house these 13 million people without destroying existing farmland and green spaces is not clear and Canada's environmentalists offer no real solutions. A reader to this blog wrote:

The common denominator is the act of putting new homes on agricultural and natural land that we should be protecting for future generations of Canadians. If we want continual economic growth, then the powers that be will make sure that our immigration patterns guarantee a healthy workforce and tax base. There is a lot of momentum behind that philosophy, so rather than trying to tackle that beast, environmentalists are advocating for realistic change: increasing densities in urban areas, and the development of urban plans which consider ecological carrying capacities.


First, note this reader's remarkable faith in "the powers that be". Second, note this reader's refusal to address the root of the problem - mass immigration - by writing "so rather than trying to tackle that beast, environmentalists are advocating for realistic change: increasing densities in urban areas, and the development of urban plans which consider ecological carrying capacities." Note the environmentalist's "buzz words" in use here. "Increasing densities in urban areas" and "ecological carrying capacities". But as for that realistic change how do you plane to stuff 13 million people into the already highly dense urban areas such as St. James Town withouth turning Toronto into what Daniel Stoffman called the Sao Paulo of the Norht? Do environmentalists even know what "ecological carrying capacity" even means or do they assume to know what it means? Is it even feasible?

Look bozo's, realistic change is to demand a decrease in Canada's immigration intake. This is the most cost effective means that will deliver the most immediate results in protecting Canada's natural heritage. If you somehow do not see a relationship between the importation of 1.5 million people into Canada over a five year period and the erasure of Canadian farmland and green spaces then you really are stupid. Get a brain and while you're at it get spine as well. Morons.

Wednesday, 19 December 2007

Skilled immigrants are driving cabs because there are no jobs for them.

Of course no one in Canada wants to consider this truth about mass immigration. It's so much easier to claim that systemic discrimination is the cause of it though there is little proof to suggest this. Accusations of systemic discrimination are oftentimes made by members of minority groups seeking victimhood status so as to gain an advantage in a competitive job market. It is also made to direct debate away from the fact that we are importing immigrants for which there are no jobs for them here.

The following article can be found at the National Post.

More immigrants than jobs

Martin Collacott, National Post Published: Monday, February 05, 2007

In recent years, newcomers to Canada have brought with them a greater level of education, on average, than previous immigrant cohorts. Yet according to Statistics Canada figures released on Jan. 30, their economic performance remains far below that of the Canadian-born population. Why are today's highly qualified immigrants doing so poorly? The answer is obvious: We simply don't need the services of many of the skilled people coming to Canada. The jobs they hoped to find here do not exist.

According to the latest data presented by Statistics Canada, during their first year here, newcomers are, on average, 3.5 times more likely than native-born Canadians to fall into the low-income category. While their situation improves somewhat after the first year in Canada, a disproportionate share (2.5 times the share for those born in Canada) remain in a "chronic" state of low income.

Canadians may find this hard to understand given all we hear about the shortage of skilled labour in Canada. Yet immigration is an effective means of dealing with labour shortages only in rare cases.

Alan Green, emeritus professor of economics at Queen's University and one of Canada's most distinguished specialists on the economics of immigration, has pointed out that while Canada did not have the educational infrastructure in place to meet all of our skilled-labour needs back in the 1960s, when we launched programs to attract skilled immigrants to Canada, these educational facilities now exist. We should, therefore, be able to meet our skills needs from within Canada's existing population.

Excuse me! You mean put Canadians first! How unCanadian of you.

What is unfortunate about the current situation is that tens of thousands of well-educated and experienced newcomers are being enticed to come to Canada in the expectation that they can improve their lot, when in fact many of them have little chance of finding employment in their fields of specialization.

This is what I mean when I say the Canada's mass immigration policy hurts immigrants as well. It's not just Canadians who are being sold a bill of goods. However, this situation is not new. This has been going on for a long time now and horror stories do circulate abroad about professional immigrants driving cabs and delivering pizzas. Yet they still line up to come to Canada for some bizarre reason to the extent that we now have a back log numbering at 850,000 applications.

While governments and immigration advocates continue to tell us about the economic benefits we get from the high influx of newcomers, some recent analyses tell a different story. In a September, 2005 study, for example, former economics professor Herbert Grubel calculated that, given the poor economic performance of immigrants in recent decades, the cost to Canadian taxpayers amounted to tens of billions of dollars per year. Our high immigration levels may have a negative economic impact in other ways as well. Canada's failure to keep pace with countries such as the United States in productivity growth could be linked to the ease with which immigration has made it possible for Canadian employers to substitute cheap labour for investments in capital and new technology.

I recall reading a Maclean's magazine article that compared Canada's current economic boom to other industrialized nations. The article argued that our economic performance is not faring as well as we are told in relation to the Spanish, Australian, and German economies, among others. I haven't been able to find it on the web so that I can link to it because I wanted to blog about it. However, we are told that we need all these immigrants because our booming economy demands it yet Canada's economy, though doing well, is not doing as well to warrant 260,000 immigrants a year. It seems immigrants are being imported the to fill the unfilled positions at fast food restaurants, hotels, retail stores and other low income jobs. These are the jobs that overwhelmingly constitute the "job boom" and "skills shortage".

Tuesday, 18 December 2007

Wouldn't it be nice if Ottawa were as honest as Britain is with immigration?

Britain is worth paying attention to when it comes to immigration issues. Like Canada, Britain practices an "open door" immigration policy and has been attracting the same immigrants as Canada has. What make Britain more interesting that it is an Island nation around the size of Newfoundland and Labrador playing host to 60 million people. Thus the effects of mass immigration is more concentrated and exposed to a greater portion of the population.

This article is from the Daily Mail.

Government finally admits: Immigration IS placing huge strain on Britain

By JAMES SLACK
Last updated at 11:08am on 17th October 2007


Immigrants are placing a huge strain on public services, Labour finally admitted.

Crime is up, schools are struggling to cope with Eastern European children, community tensions are rising, health services are coming under enormous pressure and house prices are being driven up, the Government said.

The situation is the same in Toronto and the surrounding area however instead of Eastern European children in the school system it is Middle Eastern, South Asian, South American, African, and South East Asian children and all places in between.

The findings, based on a survey of public sector workers, are the first published by ministers after ten years of an 'open door' immigration policy.

[...]

Those questioned for the survey said busy A&E departments in the East of England, North Lincolnshire and Southampton were being used in place of doctors' surgeries. HIV and TB were singled out as diseases specifically linked to immigration.

The situation is the same here in Canada. TB is on the rise because of poorly screened immigrants. We are also importing HIV infected individuals unnecessarily. For the sake of ethnic bloc votes the Canadian government is putting the health of Canadians in danger.

Workers in the North West, South West and Scotland all warned of increased 'community tensions' in areas unused to large- scale immigration.

Critics have accused the Government of giving no thought to the strain being placed on schools and hospitals, as ministers focussed solely on boosting the economy with cheap workers from overseas.

[...]

A Home Office study found that migrants helped to grow the economy by £6billion last year. But experts said this did not mean they had boosted GDP per head, a crucial measure.

This last paragraph is quite telling. Though it may be true that immigrants helped to grow the British economy by £6billion it fails to consider the costs of funding an immigration policy. The article does provide a cost break down of servicing Britain's immigration policy. The cost breakdown given is thus: Local authority race relations - £3.1m; Higher education race relations - £6.7m; Commission for racial equality - £32m; Translation costs - £100m; Ethnic minority awards scheme - £169m; Security - £174m; English lessons for immigrants - £280m; Cost of treating immigrants with HIV - £330m; Border controls - £690m; Money sent home by foreign workers - £1.4bn; Asylum support and processing - £1.6bn; Cost of immigrant crimes - £4bn; Total Cost - £8.8bn. In other words Britain's immigration policy runs at a loss of £2.8bn a year!

Ottawa does not publish the costs of servicing Canada's immigration scheme but if Britain's is any guide then we can imagine why. Ask you MP if he or she knows the costs and they couldn't tell you. Nobody really knows but some estimates put that figure around the $4 billion mark a year. Since Britain's costs are similar to Canada's we can draw from those figures and reasonably estimate that Canada's immigration policy costs Canadian tax payers around $10 billion a year if not higher. If you think those numbers are too high bear in mind that Canada has the highest immigrant intake in the entire world. We are continuously told about the economic benefits of mass immigration but little of the costs. If these estimates are close to the actual costs then any alleged economic benefits immigration provides is eaten up by servicing immigration. To be more clear, there are no economic benefits to Canada's current immigration policy. We are not investing in Canada's economic prosperity. We are mostly funding the replacement of the host population with a foreign one.

Imagine the amount of tax dollars funneled to service a policy of dubious economic benefits that could have been spent to provide better health care, lower tuition costs, retraining for laid off workers, training for unskilled workers, job skills services to help the poor and homeless, pensions for the retired, farmers, etc.

Britain's honesty about immigration is sorely lacking here in Canada. As a tax payer it is your right to know how Ottawa spends the tax dollars you send to it. We should demand better financial transparency with out immigration system.

Monday, 17 December 2007

If these Globe and Mail poll results are accurate they illustrate that elite opinion is out of touch with a majority of Canadians

Here are two similar polls found at the Globe and Mail.

One poll can be found here.

The question asked:

In your view, has Canada's multiculturalism policy proved successful?

Of the responses 37% responded in the affirmative and 63% in the negative.

The other poll, similar in nature, can be found here.

It states:

In Canada as a whole, multiculturalism is:

Of the responses 73% consider multiculturalism "a failed policy of the past" and 27% consider multiculturalism "an indispensable part of our future".

I am cautious about polls especially online polls however I wouldn't be surprised if these figures accurately reflect the attitudes of most Canadians. In conversation I have found that many Canadians disapprove of multiculturalism and what it is doing to the Canadian society and identity. But they won't go on record to say that because they are scared into silence for fear of being called a racist when what they really are is patriotic. They prefer to foster a unique Canadian identity that is recognizable the world over. Multiculturalism doesn't do that. Multiculturalism means nothing to us if you think about it. It's only important to immigrant groups and other ethnic groups looking for official approval in their refusal to assimilate and snub Canadian identity all the while claim to be as Canadian as maple syrup, hockey and butter tarts. It is a policy that was imposed onto Canadians without discussion or consultation and is still forced fed to us today.

We are told that multiculturalism is the Canadian identity but how original is that? London is multicultural. Paris is multicultural. So is Singapore, Sydney, and New York. The United States talks about being multicultural and so does Britain and France. India is multicultural as is Belgium, Malaysia, Denmark and Switzerland to varying degrees. You see multiculturalism is not an original identity at all and it is definitely not uniquely Canadian but you wouldn't know that by reading The Toronto Star or by watching the CBC. Multiculturalism is an incoherent mish mash of this and that, bereft of focus and direction condemning those unfortunate enough to be trapped within it to cultural relativism and cultural segregation because commonalities are displaced to favour diversity and difference. This is not a national identity worthy of cultivation.

But more to the point, if these figures are accurate - and I imagine that they are - it means elite opinion harboured in Toronto newspapers and the CBC are out of touch with the rest of the country. It also means these people are not doing their jobs. Decades of multicultural propaganda and Canadians are still not sold on multicultural snake oil. I guess they need to up the ante. You know, shame Canadians more with lectures on tolerance and accommodation and how we are not tolerant and accommodating enough; increase the witch hunting efforts with more dubious accusations of racism; remind us ad nauseum that we are a "nation of immigrants" though 80% of us were born in the country; harass dissenters and critics with Human Rights Commissions replete with fines, cease and desist orders, complemented by the financial strain associated with defending one's self while the accuser suffers nothing at all. If that fails you can rely on good ol' Hate Crime laws that are so open to interpretation that the Bible classifies as hate literature. In Canada you accept multiculturalism or else!

If the threat of assimilation is so great then why do Muslims immigrate to the West at all?

Oh right, that whole "Islam will dominate the world" thing.

I present a link to a National Post article concerning the death of Aqsa Parvez. I do not care to concern myself with this honor killing and use it as a bat to beat on the head of Islam, there are lots of blogs doing that already, but I do wish to address the issue of Muslim immigration.

The questions I have are if Islamic religious devotion is so important to these people then why do they immigrate to Canada in the first place? Why entertain the risk of losing your children to assimilation, an apparent crime punishable by death in the case of Aqsa Parvez? Is Muslim immigration sincere immigration or is it more of a missionary effort to bring Islam to the West and thus throughout the world? Given the behaviour and the views of some Muslims, both extremists and so called moderates, I can't help shake the feeling that Muslims are not that interested in introducing Canada to Islam but in bringing Islam to Canada.

Why would Muslims leave countries governed by Sharia law and come to Canada and work to get Sharia law recognized? Why do they concern themselves so much with transforming Canadian society so it is more agreeable with Islamic practices and beliefs? Why the concerted effort to build so many mosques across the country and in places that do not seem to warrant them, such as Newmarket Ontario, when the Islamic community is not well know for its affluence? Where is the money coming from? If it is so much easier to be pious and devout in a society ruled by Islam then why move to a society where one's piety and religious devotion will be challenged?

These are some questions Canadians should be asking themselves because Islam is not only a religion but it is also a political force with the potential to transform Canadian society into one totally unrecognizable to Canadians let alone feel comfortable living in. According to the latest census Middle Eastern immigration now out paces European immigration. When we speak of Middle Eastern immigration we have to understand it as Muslim immigration. Islam is one of the fastest growing religions in North America and that's because we are importing it. Muslims also report the highest birth rates in Canada hovering around 2.1 in relation to the national average of 1.5. To the point Muslim are out breeding the rest of Canadians which includes most immigrants groups as well.

I do not want to give the impression that Islam is something to fear but there are elements within Islam that should be. Most Muslims are like everybody else. They just want stable employment so that they can support themselves and their families. However it only takes a few to be a terrible nuisance on society and Muslim communities have this terrible knack for producing these people, these extremists, whether they are trying to or not. It's just a reality that Muslims and the West have to come to terms with.

So the ultimate question is are we, as Canadians, comfortable in allowing the transformation of our society, in part or in whole, into an Islamic one? If the answer is yes then do what most Canadians do even when they want to do something: nothing. If no then debate on Muslim immigration should be encouraged. We may need to place quotas on Muslim immigration so that Muslims do not exceed a certain percentage of the population or perhaps a moratorium on Muslim immigration altogether. The point of these suggestions is to allow Muslim immigration but deny them any means to transform Canadian society into an Islamic one and introduce Islamic beliefs into our legal and political systems. Some may be appalled by these suggestions but you have to understand that once Canadian society is changed it is hard to change it back once it is gone. And if you are quite content living in an Islamic society then there are a number of countries you can move to. May I suggest Saudi Arabia.

Sunday, 16 December 2007

Canada's Environmentalists just don't get it: It's mass immigration stupids!!!

These two articles appeared in the same edition as the one that glowingly reported on the increase of Canada's immigrant population. They are both from The Toronto Star.

The first one:

The battle for Simcoe County

Dec 05, 2007 04:30 AM
Ian Urquhart


The government "will take strong action to protect Lake Simcoe's water quality for future generations."

It was just one line in the last week's throne speech at Queen's Park, but it may herald the toughest fight that the newly elected Liberal government will face over the next four years.

The battleground is Simcoe County, a vast area between Georgian Bay and Lake Simcoe, north of the Greater Toronto Area and south of Muskoka.

This is more commonly known as "cottage country" and it provides a much needed escape to nature for many southern Ontarians.

As predicted by environmentalists, developers have leapfrogged the Greenbelt on the northern fringes of the GTA and targeted southern Simcoe County as the next frontier for their subdivisions. Pressures are being felt in towns like Alliston, Innisfil, Clearview, and Bradford West Gwillimbury.

The government says it has anticipated this pressure and, under the Places to Grow Act, has imposed a ceiling of 667,000 (up from 420,000 today) on the population of Simcoe County and its two biggest centres, Barrie and Orillia, over the next quarter-century.

The environmentalists say even 667,000 people are too many for Lake Simcoe to sustain, given that the lake is already acutely stressed.

But according to Mark Aitken, Simcoe's chief administrative officer, there are enough development projects in the pipeline to accommodate up to 1.2 million people in the county.

The second one:

Halt new highways, activists demand

Watchdog's position on Greenbelt expansion also bothers sprawl foes
Dec 05, 2007 04:30 AM
Peter Gorrie
ENVIRONMENT REPORTER


Environmental Commissioner Gordon Miller delighted greens yesterday by calling for measures to curb urban sprawl in southern Ontario and protect the boreal forest in the far north.

Note that Gordon Miller was attacked by The Toronto Star in an editorial because he linked the degradation of the quality of life for southern Ontarians to rapid population growth fueled by mass immigration.

But many advocates were disappointed the tough language in Miller's annual report, Reconciling Our Priorities, wasn't backed by strong recommendations in at least two key areas:

The commissioner warned that the province's "car culture" and highway expansions are fuelling congestion, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and sprawl, and said a growth strategy for southern Ontario should "avert any further plans for new highways and/or highway expansion projects."

But he said every expressway already proposed, including several through the Greenbelt, should go ahead. "They are all too far down the pipe to be stopped," Miller told a Queen's Park news conference.

He also rejected expanding the 720,000-hectare Greenbelt into Simcoe County, where developers are assembling large tracts of land for subdivisions as well as business and retail centres, with projected populations far beyond what the growth plan would allow.

[...]

Miller's response on highways was disappointing, said Janet May of the Ontario Smart Growth Network. "If the province is truly serious about protecting our rapidly dwindling agricultural lands and green space ... spending scarce public money on highways to sprawl will stop immediately."

"I disagree they're too far along," said Natalie Helferty of Ontario Nature.

"There's still time to stop them if there's political will," said NDP environment critic Peter Tabuns. "Miller makes excellent arguments about sprawl. If you do curb it, you don't need all the highways."

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Transportation said preliminary construction has begun on the northern extension of Highway 404 to Ravenshoe Rd. Some contracts have been awarded.

If you consider yourself an environmentalist and you are reading this then read it well: IT'S MASS IMMIGRATION YOU MORON!!!

Mass immigration is ruining southern Ontario. How do you expect to protect Canada's natural beauty famous the world over without addressing the immigration problem? Who do you think drives cars? Who buys houses? Think you idiot!!! Your cowardice at being silenced by accusations of racism results in the loss of Canada green spaces forever. Get a spine!!!

It seems many on the left, such as Toronto Star journalists, want their cake and eat it too. They want to protect the environment but support increasing mass immigration as though one does not have an effect on the other. You cannot do that. We should be protecting the rights of future generations of Canadians to enjoy Canada's natural beauty. Why should the rights of individuals not born on this soil take precedence over that? When do Canada and Canadians come first?

As Canada's foreign born component increased so did it's number of gangs in Peel.

Related? Maybe. Canada's immigration system is so inadequate that the proper screening of criminals is almost impossible. If we lowered our immigration intake then we will free up resources to weed out the bad and let in the good. But since Canada's immigration system is purely a numbers game and a means to entice ethnic voters I don't expect anything to happen anytime soon. It's only Canada after all. Why do anything?

From The Toronto Star.

More gangs found in Peel, police say

Dec 05, 2007 04:30 AM
Michele Henry
Staff Reporter


The number of gangs in Peel Region has exploded in the last four years, growing to 110 from 39 in 2003, with a per-capita gang membership approaching that of Toronto's.

More than 1,000 proven gang members – up from around 625 four years ago – live in Mississauga and Brampton, which has a combined population of about 1.1 million people, police say. Toronto has 3,500 gang members – roughly 130 gangs – with a population of more than 2.5 million.

[...]

Media glorification of the gang lifestyle, recruiting via the Internet and a growing population in Peel also account for some of the increase, police say. But over the last few years gang members have been fleeing the big city for municipalities in the 905, said Toronto police Det. Sgt. Doug Quan of the Guns and Gangs Task Force.

What's funny about this is that this article can be found in the same edition - the Wed. December 5, 2007 edition - that also reported on the increased addition of immigrants to Canada's population, all 1.1 million of them. What is not funny is that it appears criminals are following immigrants to areas outside of Toronto. This is infuriating. The smug, self congratulatory moral superiority of elite opinion is protecting a system that allows criminals into Canada with relative ease. They seem to think what's good for Toronto is good for all of Canada. The over populating, over developing, increasingly less Canadian, increasing congestion, increasing criminal activity that is Toronto should be exported to areas outside the city. Many Canadians move away from Toronto to seek refuge from these things but mass immigration threatens that refuge.

Where are Canadians supposed to go? Should you be so surprised when Canadians outside of Toronto look down on immigration and what immigrants represent? Should acts of "overt racism" be of any surprise? Understand, now, why much of Canada hates Toronto?

If Brampton is Canada for Indian immigrants then Canada is an Indian colony

Calling it a "community" is just a euphemism when colony is more apt. This is from The Toronto Star.

`For Indians, Brampton is Canada'

Dec 05, 2007 04:30 AM
Noor Javed
Staff Reporter


In the summer of 2006, Babita Sharma and her 2-year-old son left their home in Punjab, India, to start a new life in Canada. But their destination was not Toronto. Instead, Sharma landed in Brampton, where she joined her husband.

"He didn't even think of Toronto when he came here to look for a job," said Sharma. "Brampton has everything we need – the community, the stores, and it's affordable for us."

It seems a disproportionate amount of South Asian immigrants are from the Punjab which invariably means Sikh immigration. Because of this Canada is now home to one of the largest gatherings of Sikhs outside of India. According to the 2001 census there were 278,000 people in Canada identifying themselves as Sikhs. The number is undoubtedly higher now probably over 300,000. This is in comparison to the 336,000 Sikhs in Britain and a mere 100,000 living in the United States giving Canada the highest concentration of Sikhs per capita outside of India. A projected 443,600 Sikhs will be residing in Canada in 2017, according to wiki.

Sikhs are a minority in South Asia at an estimated 20 million in India alone - a country of over a billion inhabitants - but constitute the largest South Asian ethnic group in Canada. There are more Hindus in Canada but Hinduism is not a monolithic ethnic group, boasting adherents from several countries aside from India though Indian immigrants do compose most of those numbers. Sikhs are almost exclusively Punjabi.

It's a move and a choice that many Indians immigrating to the GTA are making, according to the new census data released yesterday. In 2006, India surpassed China as the number one source of immigrants settling in Toronto. About 77,800 immigrants came from India, and 17.4 per cent settled in the Toronto metropolitan area. The number of foreign-born residents in Brampton grew by 59 per cent between 2001 and 2006, according to the latest census data.

"For Indians, Brampton is Canada," said Ahmed Iqbal, the executive director of Brampton Multicultural Community Centre, which serves 11,000 immigrants a year, the majority from India. "They have heard about it and they know that it is a place where people `look like us,'" he said.

Note how he can express that sentiment and escape any accusations of racism yet if you are white you better run for the hills.

If they choose Brampton because it is a place where people "look like us" then why did they leave India where everyone looks like them? This says a lot about Indian immigration. They prefer to live and work among their own but care to enjoy all the benefits of living in a country such as Canada. They don't really care about Canada but care more about what they can get out of living in Canada. They want to live in India among Indians but they also want to enjoy the social achievements of western countries, something India still has a long way of achieving if it can do it at all. Thus, in parasite like fashion they colonize parts of Canada like Indian immigrants - primarily of Punjabi origin - are doing to Brampton.

However they don't seem to realize or care that someone was already living where they settled. They don't seem to care that the cultural and ethnic transformations they bring to a community or region displaces the host population, making them strangers in their own land. But this is advantageous to them because it makes the colonization of the area all the more complete. Who wants to deal with "the natives" anyway? I don't want my kids socializing with people other than their own. They might fill their heads with crazy ideas like assimilating into Canadian society and we didn't move to Canada to become Canadian. Who does?

Saturday, 15 December 2007

Why The Toronto Star is pro mass immigration (hint: it's about money).

The article is about Western Union but it reveals the attitude of some within the business community toward immigration. The entire article can be read here.

Saved by the surge in immigration

Sending money home for today's armies of migrants revitalizes iconic Western Union
Dec 05, 2007 04:30 AM

Jason DeParle
NEW YORK TIMES


WASHINGTON–To glimpse how migration is changing the world, consider Western Union, a fixture of American lore that went bankrupt selling telegrams at the dawn of the Internet age but now earns nearly $1 billion a year helping migrants across the globe send money home.

Migration is so central to Western Union that forecasts of border movements drive the company's stock. Its researchers outpace the U.S. Census Bureau in tracking migrant locations. Long synonymous with Morse code, the Colorado-based company now hails migrants as "heroes" and once tried to oust a congressman because of his push for tougher immigration laws.

[...]

Last year, migrants from poor countries sent home $300 billion, nearly three times the world's foreign aid budgets combined.

Western Union's dominance casts it in a host of unlikely new roles: as a force in development economics, a player in U.S. immigration debates and a target of contrasting attacks.

Its unparalleled reach gives millions of migrants a safe way to transmit money, and may even increase the amounts sent. But critics have long complained about its fees, which can run from about 4 per cent to 20 per cent or more. And the company's lobbying for immigrant-friendly laws has raised the ire of border protectors.

After settling a damaging lawsuit that accused it of hiding large fees, Western Union set out a few years ago to recast its image, portraying itself as the migrants' trusted friend. It has spent more than $1 billion on marketing, selectively cut prices and charged into U.S. politics, donating to immigrants' rights groups and advocating a path to legalization for illegal immigrants.

[...]

The company sponsors hundreds of festivals, concerts and sporting events, from cricket matches for Indians in Dubai to sack races for Jamaicans in Queens, N.Y.

[...]

The Western Union agent in Panama, catering to many illegal immigrants from Colombia and elsewhere, put three lawyers on retainer and started a radio call-in show. The lawyers answered questions and scheduled free appointments to get callers legalized.


The Toronto Star is a business first and foremost. If lowering immigration levels were to increase share holder value then the Star staff would be under market and thus editorial pressure to advocate lower immigration levels. But that's not how it is. Newspapers generate most of their revenue from selling reader numbers to advertisers. A newspaper boasts of the number and quality of its readers to potential advertisers desiring to sell them advertising space in between news content.

Part of the price of a newspaper, most of it in fact, is subsidized by revenue generated by advertising dollars. A newspaper cannot survive solely on the price a of newspaper alone. Therefore the greater the population base a newspaper serves the greater the potential for amassing a larger reader base to sell to advertisers and therefore the greater the potential for increased profits and share value.

Advertisements in The Toronto Star also tell us much. Banks, Car Ads, Real Estate, and advertisements for business schools figure regularly on the pages of The Toronto Star. These advertisers benefit from mass immigration and rapid population growth. Real Estate developers need to sell houses to generate a continuous income flow, banks benefit from the increases in issuing mortgages, car dealers need to sell cars, and schools need to generate demand for their courses to command high tuitions. In the meantime farmland is destroyed, green spaces are erased, commute times and distances increase due to increase in cars on the road with a related increase in pollution and waste, and one's academic ambitions are sometimes dashed due to an artificial increase in demand. This doesn't benefit most Canadians however but it does benefit select segments of the business community as well as the colonial, and material, aspirations of immigrant groups.

I highly doubt the socially conscious image of The Toronto Star is true though I do believe the opinions of the writing staff are sincere. After all, they were hired for that reason: to give The Toronto Star a socially conscious image. It doesn't cost The Toronto Star anything to promote mass immigration. Such costs are externalized to the rest of society that has to deal with the attendant problems - financially, culturally, socially - that mass immigration and rapid population growth bring to a country or region. However, the paper stands to reap rewards.

The progressive and social activist image of the Star, defender of human rights and protector of the environment, is all image. It portrays itself as a defender of the environment yet it attacked Gord Miller, Ontario Environment Commissioner, because he accurately linked the decline in the standard of living for southern Ontarians to rapid population growth fulled by mass immigration. This is hypocritical but it is also self serving. The Star cannot allow a decline in mass immigration numbers for fear of stagnant share prices and losses in potential revenue generated by advertisement. It doesn't care about the views of Canadians concerned about what mass immigration is doing to their country. The Star is a business and like any business there is but one ultimate concern: money.

Toronto District School Borad Survey of 2006 is like looking into a crystal ball and seeing the future.

Ethnic mix of Toronto Schools

Grades 7-8

31% White
21% South Asian
16% East Asian
15% Black
6% Mixed
5% Middle Eastern
4% South East Asian
2% Latin American
.3% Aboriginal

Grade 9-12

33% White
20% East Asian
19% South Asian
12% Black
5% Mixed
5% Middle Eastern
3% South East Asian
2% Latin American
.3% Aboriginal

Teachers

77% White
17% Other Minorities
5% Black
.9 Aboriginal

This is from the Toronto District School Board, 2006 surveys and I think the numbers are prophetic. I think that will be the racial makeup of a future Toronto provided no change is made in Canada's immigration system. Whites will become a minority at roughly one third the population.

Here are some related numbers:

49.97% of the residents of the city of Toronto are foreign born.
47.2% of the residents of the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area are foreign born.

Where did all the Canadians go? Is it a desired goal to make Canadians of European ancestry just another minority group in Toronto and Canada as a whole? What is accomplished by doing so?

Canada is the most foreign owned, foreign populated country in the G8.

One in five people foreign-born stats reveal as Canada struggles with overt racism

Gregory Bonnell, THE CANADIAN PRESS


OTTAWA - One-in-five people in Canada is foreign-born according to census numbers released Tuesday, an immigration surge unprecedented in a quarter-of-a-century and one that comes as the country grapples with acts of overt racism that fly in the face of Canada's reputation for tolerance.

The "overt racism" mentioned here, whatever is meant by that, is an over statement. Canadians are continuously insulted with accusations of racism no matter what it is we do. But any kind of racism in Canada shouldn't be surprising when we have an immigration policy more akin to government complicity in the colonization of its own citizens by foreign nations. Denied any avenue of protest, be it in the media of government, then acts of "overt racism" should be expected as citizens take their anger and frustrations out on immigrants when those most deserving of scorn are the nation's politicians, our moral superiors in the media, and those in the immigration industry whose livelihood is dependent on the legal trafficking of people and the sale of Canadian citizenship at rock bottom prices.

The only recourse available to many Canadians to escape the multicultural madness that is Toronto is to move away. That's why many immigrants may get the cold shoulder treatment and the cut-eye when outside of Toronto. It's not that Canadians have anything against the immigrant but they have a problem with what that immigrant represents: neo-colonialism or reverse colonialism. They do not want the town where they now reside to endure what has happened to Toronto. That's why they left Toronto in the first place. They want to live in Canada, not some multicultural wonderland so they may try to make the immigrant feel unwelcome and out of place and hopefully leave. If Canadians wanted to live in India they'd move to Mumbai.

While the "neo-racism" that infects society through subtle, systemic practices has largely been the focus of anti-racism crusaders, recent reports of assaults against Asian fisherman in Ontario and open anti-Muslim sentiment in Quebec have become the subject of inquiries and commissions.

What this writer calls "neo-racism", and trying to make himself look smart in the process, is actually a backlash that immigration and multiculturalism fosters. And the subtle racism that he talks about is quite prevalent in immigrant communities expressed towards those of the host population and other immigrants as well.

Canada garners kudos from around the world for laws promising equality for all, but experts say the true test of a tolerant nation is in day-to-day living.

The fact that he wrote that exposes the bias of the writer and the kind of article you're reading. Any article that says things to the effect that "Canada is a model to the world, we set than standard by which others pass or fail, and all the eyes of the world are on us" should be taken with a grain of salt and should be considered propaganda, not news.

Canada garnering "kudos from around the world" is what journalists, politicians, and immigrant groups who want to keep Canadian attitudes soft regarding the colonization of their country generally say. There is nothing to really prove that "Canada garners kudos from around the world". To think that policy makers and national populations the world over think of Canada when discussing domestic policy is narcissistic and self-congratulating. Canadians need to understand that NO ONE THINKS OF CANADA AS MUCH AS WE TELL OURSELVES THAT THEY DO. How often do you think of Chad let alone know where that country is? How about New Zealand or Chile? The truth of the matter is that we don't think of those countries often if at all. Should we expect to believe that the good people of New Zealand stop and ask themselves "how do they do things in Canada?" If you do then you I bet you also read the Toronto Star.

If you think that the plane loads of immigrants who chose Canada is evidence that Canada is doing something right then you should understand something: Canadian citizenship is one of the best deals in town. It is one of the easiest to obtain in the industrialized world with some of the fewest strings attached and it allows access to one of the most generous social programs in the world. It's a bargain and it says a lot about the immigrants this country receives. If Canada has had to continuously cheapen its citizenship requirements to attract immigrants then what kind of immigrants are coming here let alone say about Canada? Here is something to ponder: the vast majority of immigrants come from the third world and what's worse, living in Somalia or enduring six months of a Canadian winter? Canada also recognizes dual citizenship so it's not like you've totally left your country is it?

The latest census figures show that 19.8 per cent of the population in 2006 was foreign born, the highest proportion since 1931 and up 13.6 per cent from five years earlier. By contrast, the entire Canadian population grew only 3.3 per cent in the same period.

Almost two-thirds of the nation's foreign-born population resided in Canada's three biggest cities: Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.

The highest percentage of newcomers to Canada were from China (14 per cent), followed by India (11.6), the Philippines (7) and Pakistan (5.2). For the first time, the proportion of foreign-born immigrants from Asian and Middle Eastern countries (41 per cent) outstripped those of European heritage (37).

"The newcomers who came between 2001 and 2006, we have about 1.1 million of them, and they added to Canada's diverse population because they report coming from about over 200 countries," said Statistics Canada analyst Tina Chui.

"When you look at that, Canada is like a world within a country."

An aging population and the declining birth rate has Canada on track to becoming fully dependent on immigration for population growth by around 2030, Statistics Canada data suggests.

Among Western nations, only Australia had a higher percentage of foreign-born residents (22.2 per cent) than Canada in 2006. The United States had 12.5 per cent foreign-born.

The whole article can be read here

So Australia, of all Western nations, has a higher percentage of its population born abroad but I will not be surprised to learn one day that Canada has the highest percentage of foreign born residents. But of the G8 nations Canada has the highest percentage.

Here is a pertinent quote from wiki concerning foreign ownership:

Some estimates state that more than 50% of the petroleum and gas industry and more than 50% of all manufacturing in Canada is foreign-owned and foreign-controlled. In no foreign country does Canadian investment play a dominant role. Canada's largest foreign investment, which is in the US, gives Canadians control over only a minute portion of the US economy, in contrast to the very large fraction of the Canadian economy that is controlled by American interests.

Of note is that Canada's largest companies by value, and largest employers, tend to be foreign owned in a way that is more typical of a developing nation than a G-8 member. The best example is the automotive sector, one of Canada's most important industries. It is dominated by American, German, and Japanese giants. Although this situation is not unique to Canada in the global context, it is unique among G-8 nations, and many other relatively small nations also have national automotive companies such as Sweden's Saab or South Korea's Kia and Hyundai.

The high foreign ownership content of Canada's economy has attracted some concern from The Toronto Star and other leading journals. If the foreign ownership of Canada's economy warrants concern then why doesn't the foreign occupation of Canada's public spaces attract equal concern. What's the difference? Is this nation building or the surrendering of state? What will be said if Canada's population was 25% foreign born? What if it reaches 30%? Or 50%? How about 60%? How high is too high? Will it still be Canada? When will Ottawa put Canada and Canadians first?

Wednesday, 12 December 2007

500,000 pour into Britain but 200,000 leave. Is this immigration or population replacement?

I don't know how accurate this story is but if it is true then Britain is becoming less British by the day.

This story is from the Daily Mail.

Half a million migrants pour into Britain in a year, but 200,000 leave

By STEVE DOUGHTY
Last updated at 00:27am on 16th November 2007


Half a million foreigners came to live and work in Britain last year as immigration hit new records, official figures showed.

Nearly a quarter of a million said they came for jobs and more than 150,000 more arrived as students.

At the same time, an unprecedented total of more than 200,000 Britons left to live abroad.

The breakdown from the Government's Office for National Statistics shows that the number of foreigners coming to live in Britain went up by nearly ten per cent in a year.

Fewer than one in five were from Eastern European countries. They were outnumbered by migrants from Commonwealth countries in the Indian sub-continent and Africa.

It's a similar demographic shift here in Canada expect it happens to be South Asian and Chinese immigration greatly outnumbering immigrants from traditional European sources. If this trend continues indefinitely the South Asian and Chinese communities will eventually outnumber Canada's traditional host and founding European population effectively making Canada a colony of both China and India. A similar fate awaits Britain if nothing is done. Call it "The Empire Strikes Back" character of immigration when the colonizer becomes the colonized.

The unprecedented wave of foreign citizens came as a record number of British people joined the exodus for new lives elsewhere. For the first time ever, more than 200,000 British citizens left the country in a single year. Some 207,000 turned their backs on the UK, more than half the total of 400,000 people heading overseas.

Most of the Britons went to Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain or the U.S.

Not Canada? Aw, how come? Is it the weather? I can't help but feel slighted.

Opposition politicians and critics of large-scale migration said the Government had failed to get a grip on the borders and ignored the impact on schools, housing, health and neighbourhoods.

Same thing here in Canada. The real costs of mass immigration, the financial costs plus the costs of housing; language services, stress on health care, and other social services; loss of green spaces and farm land; increase in population density, road congestion, commute times and the attendant increase in pollution levels; garbage problems, etc. has never been tallies nor has it been discussed. It's taboo and when these issues to arise individually no one ever makes the connection to mass immigration. It's like increasing road congestion and mass immigration are not related.

Tory spokesman Damian Green said: "Immigration is still running at unsustainably high levels. This is the direct result of the Government's 'open door' approach which has totally failed to consider the impact on public services, housing and community cohesion."

Same can be said here in Canada. It's unfortunate that such criticism is never given in the first place. At least some British politicians are brave enough to confront the issue head on and call it for what it is: a problem. It's democratic. Here in Canada we should be so deserving. Our politicians are too cowardly to address this issue with real honesty and concern. Our political parties are more concerned about getting elected than they are with governing and responsible leadership. It's a sad testament to the strength of the "ethnic vote" and the "first past the post" electoral system.

This isn't nation building it's colonization. It's population replacement.

Tuesday, 11 December 2007

Sikhs in Vancouver obstruct Canadian immigration laws. Foil attempt to deport failed Sikh refugee claimant.

Canadian immigration laws are not real laws. That's why Sikhs in Vancouver have no qualms obstructing the enforcement of those laws. In fact Indo-Canadians are notorious abusers of Canadian immigration laws, from fake refugee claims, fraudulent wedding arrangements, chain after chain of sponsored relatives, falsified credentials and males posing as nannies. And we cannot forget the Singh decision.

From The Toronto Star.

Protesters foil bid to deport paralyzed man in B.C.

Supporters at airport block border services

Dec 11, 2007 04:30 AM
Petti Fong
Western Canada Bureau Chief


Vancouver–The rocky path to deportation for a failed refugee claimant who is paralyzed and unable to speak hit another roadblock yesterday at the airport where he was to board a flight back to India.

Nearly 1,000 supporters with placards tried to block the entrance to the international departures area to protest Laibar Singh's 2:30 p.m. flight from Vancouver.

Border services officials said they didn't want to wade into the crowd to escort Singh to his Cathay Pacific flight.

RCMP Cpl. Nycki Basra said there was no violence and no disruptions.

Singh, 48, who suffered an aneurysm last year, was ordered removed yesterday after his appeals to stay on humanitarian grounds were rejected by Citizenship and Immigration. The widower arrived in Canada in 2003 with a forged passport and worked as a labourer to support his four children who remain in India.

After being detained for being in Canada illegally, he sought sanctuary last July at a Sikh temple.

[...]

If deported back to India, Singh will not receive adequate medical attention, said one of his supporters, Harsha Walia.

"People are very angry that they still plan to remove him."

If these Sikhs had any sincere respect for Canada then they would not behave this way. Laibar Singh arrived in Canada illegally on a forged passport and stayed here illegally. Why would the Sikh community wish to aid and abet Laibar Singh's illegal activity? By doing so they are condoning his behaviour. Instead of taking a responsible role and show their respect for Canadian laws Sikhs chose to circle the wagons and protect one of their own. Their loyalty is on full display here. They are loyal to Canada so far as it satisfies their needs but their loyalty to their people in India is much stronger to the point that they are willing to obstruct our legal system to help them.

Laibar Singh is paralyzed and cannot talk. He will be a burden on the health care system. The Sikh temple in Abbotsford B.C. says it will suffer his medical expenses if he is allowed to stay but talk is cheap. I doubt very much they will fulfill that commitment once citizenship is granted to him. The disintegration of family sponsorship arrangements is common enough for me to say that.

These Sikhs seem to think Canada has no right to control its borders and that every Sikh should be allowed to come here without obstruction and colonize it. It seems once you set foot here then you are entitled to everything. If this is how Sikhs regard Canada and our legal system then we should reconsider Sikh immigration to this country. Why should we let Laibar Singh, or any Sikh for that matter, stay here let alone come to Canada at all?

You're a Canadian citizen now. Be grateful of that fact and be loyal to this country and its laws. Respect the Canadian people since you chose to immigrate here. If you don't want to do that then you don't deserve to be here or call yourself a Canadian.

See also:
Deport Laibar Singh now!

Someone call the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The Toronto Star publishes a piece by Joey Slinger that may be considered a "hate crime."

I don't actually mean that by the way but The Toronto Star published a piece by Joey Slinger that can be considered "hate speech" if we change the ethnicity of his target of satire. I'll show you what I mean.

No love please, we're Canadian

Dec 11, 2007 04:30 AM
Joey Slinger


Statistics Canada has confirmed what our eyes have long been telling us – Canada's family background is changing. In and around Toronto, English is the mother tongue for scarcely more than half the population. The tide of immigration approaches full flood.

Of the obstacles facing these immigrants, finding a civilized job and earning a reasonable income are relatively minor. Their greatest challenge, as thousands upon thousands like them have discovered before, is reflected in the feeling they all share when they arrive: that Canada is a cold country.

This has nothing to do with the climate in a meteorological sense.

At least that climate warms up occasionally.

It has everything to do with the climate in an emotional sense.

The emotional climate they encounter is still under a thousand metres of ice, frozen solid along with the carcasses of woolly mammoths.

English Canadians are a cold people.

[...]

It's because English Canadians have no word for love.

They have 26 words for money, but none for love.


[...]

On the other hand, English Canadians are extremely good at expressing lust. They have about as many words for lust as for money. And when it comes to lusting for money they can go on and on. There is no shutting them up.

First off we know which English Canadians he is talking about. It's implicit. He means those boring monolingual white English speaking Canadians. You know, the ancestors of the founding peoples of this country who nowadays do not get much respect anymore. The fist, second, third generation Canadians of European immigrants who fully assimilated into the Canadian cultural landscape and made Canada what it is today, and what many others feel the need to erase or at least annex. He is not talking about the children and descendants of non-European immigrants. These people, for the most part, are still an immigrant people having the majority of the members of their respective communities/colonies born over seas. For instance about 3/4 of all South Asians were born outside of Canada.

Secondly, if we replace "English Canadian" with any other ethnicity we will now have something that can be considered "hate speech". For instance replace "English Canadian" with Jew. Let's try it with a couple of paragraphs.

Jews are a cold people.

It's because Jews have no word for love.

They have 26 words for money, but none for love.

On the other hand, Jews are extremely good at expressing lust. They have about as many words for lust as for money. And when it comes to lusting for money they can go on and on. There is no shutting them up.

Instead of Jews how about Chinese?

On the other hand, Chinese are extremely good at expressing lust. They have about as many words for lust as for money. And when it comes to lusting for money they can go on and on. There is no shutting them up.


Offended? You should be. Why shouldn't English Canadians be offended at what Slinger wrote? Is it "hate speech"? Were it of anyone else aside from English (and white) Canadians than it would be but in Canada there are two kinds of accepted racism: anti-white-Canadianism and anti-Americanism. Speak ill of any other ethnic group, be it justified criticism or poorly executed satire, and you can expect the Ontario Human Rights Commission knocking at your door.

If some Muslim law students can file a complaint against MaCleans magazine over a Mark Styn article about Islamic expansionism then why not lodge a complaint against the Toronto Star and Joey Slinger over this? That would be sweet wouldn't it? To see a left leaning newspaper attacked by a comrade institution that it has defended from time to time? The irony is so rich. You can expect Toronto Star editorials castigating the HRC for over extending its mandate to ensue, the kind of editorials that are M.I.A. when the HRC goes after acceptable targets.

But we're not that small a people. We understand satire, not matter how unfunny and witless it is. We value freedom of speech and dissent. And we allow self criticism. We may not like it but we tolerate it. The funny thing is many immigrants to this country just don't get this. They expect that they should be tolerated but never to return it. They may criticize and give offense but they are never to be criticized and offended.

Slinger finishes his article with this:

Learn English as a second language? By all means. But hang on to your first. You'll find it essential in certain matters that leave English Canadians trembling and silent.

Is he promoting foreign language supremacy? I get it now. Joey Slinger is a foreign language supremacist! HATE CRIME, HATE CRIME! That cements it. I'm calling the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

By the way can anybody tell me why Joey Slinger has a column in the first place? He and Rosi Dimano. I know he's supposed to be funny and satirical but the weather forecast says more about society than he has and is even funnier about it. But the Toronto Star is a left leaning newspaper and it needs to distract it's readers with non-issues written by witless and unfunny columnists. It's just the Sunshine girl for middle class pseudo-intellectuals.

Saturday, 8 December 2007

A death knell for bilingualism? The advent of multilingualism?

Language is a key component of national identity and community. What is to become of Canada when English and French, the languages of the founding people of this country, are no longer the only officially recognized languages? How can a coherent national identity exist let alone bear the pressures that a multilingual state brings? Canada already has a linguistic divide and it almost tore the country apart and it still has the potential to do so. What good is it to encourages the growth and use of other languages in this country?

This is from The Toronto Star.

Lost in translation in the City of Babel

The Toronto area is proudly multilingual. But more than 145 languages can pose problems in our hospitals and courts, which too often rely on unqualified interpreters

Dec 08, 2007 04:30 AM
Lynda Hurst
feature writer


Note the presumptuous use of the word "proudly" as in "the Toronto area is proudly multilingual". First of all Lynda Hurst doesn't know that. In fact nobody can really say that. Any evidence is purely anecdotal. The fact is that the Toronto area is multilingual and nothing more. When a journalist starts using loaded words like "proudly" or phrases like "Canada is an example to the world" as if all the world governments look to Canada for leadership it should tip you off that the article is biased and you will be lectured to. If the Toronto area is "proudly" multilingual and you live in the Toronto area then you should be proud of this fact too. If not then there are many avenues of reeducation for you to follow for your multicultural indoctrination you white trash, racist, English/French only speaking, unCanadian scum of the land.

Linguistically, Toronto is less the tower than the entire city of Babel.

More than 145 languages are spoken here, and 100,000 new immigrants, more than 40 per cent with little or no English, add more dialects and regional variations to the mix every year.

But in all the discussion about multiculturalism in recent decades, the ramifications of multilingualism seem to have fallen off the table – if, that is, they were ever on it.


By now you should be able to see where this piece is going. Even though it concentrates on the lack of qualified interpretors working in such public sector services as health care and law the subtext is that Canada is not meeting the linguistic demands mass immigration is placing upon it. It's Canada's fault yet again but when is it never? Responsibility is removed from the individual immigrant to learn our language and it is shifted to Canadians who are expected to dole out more tax payer dollars to accommodate immigrants who haven't bothered themselves to learn English or French.

Nowhere are the GTA's linguistic demographics more pronounced than in Peel Region's Brampton courthouse. It's the most multilingual in Canada, using more interpreters than any other, by far.

At Brampton, almost 5,000 cases a year require interpreting into Punjabi alone. But dozens of other tongues – from Cantonese, Kurdish, Spanish and Polish to Somali, Tamil and Urdu – are spoken by the witnesses and defendants who process through its courtrooms.

Section 14 of the Charter guarantees them the assistance of an interpreter, but getting one fully capable of doing the job is a hit-or-miss affair.

The chaotic situation had been an open secret in legal circles for years when Superior Court Justice Casey Hill publicly exposed it in November 2005. After conducting his own inquiry, Hill blasted Brampton's routine use of unqualified and unskilled legal interpreters, people who'd either failed or never taken the Attorney-General's accreditation test, a supposed requirement for employment.

[...]

Two years on, has the Brampton situation improved?

Not so anyone has noticed.


See what I mean?

With the focus still overwhelmingly on French-English bilingualism, the demands of multilingualism get set aside, says Janczur. According to Ottawa, newcomers should speak either official language. The fact is, she adds, the primary immigrant, likely the husband, will, but the rest of his family will not.

"The attitude seems to be, `They should learn English.' Yes, of course. But that doesn't happen right away."

Diana Abraham, a former citizenship ministry program consultant, says that "something has to be done before something drastic happens." As the Supreme Court has deemed competent interpretation a constitutional right, at least in court, she thinks it should be added to Ontario's Human Rights Code.

[...]

Despite the province's radically changed immigration patterns, the multiple-language problem hasn't been met by Queen's Park, says Abraham: "Now we're seeing the consequences. It's a big challenge for Ontario."


What we are seeing are the baby steps towards a multilingual state. The problem with that, as I said at the start, is that language is a key component of communal identity. That's why many immigrants want their children, and their children's children and so on to learn their native language along with English or French. It's about preserving cultural identity through language. Will Canada exist if many languages are competing with each other for cultural dominance? Is it good to see British Columbia divided between Cantonese and Punjabi speakers as the once dominant English language is reduced to minority status - like it is in Vancouver - as other English speakers move away? How is that a good thing? How can national affairs be conducted when offense is easily made when English or French is slighted - or at least perceived to be - and anger erupts?

And the costs. How much more money is Canada to spend on programs it can easily avoid if language was as stressed as we are told it is? How much more money must Canadians spend to compliment an immigration program that estimates suggest costs Canadians over $2 billion dollars a year to service? How much of that money can be recuperated if we reduced immigration numbers and put greater emphasis on language skills? How much of that money can go into health care, pensions, and education? Why is so much money being invested into a program (immigration) of which the alleged benefits are grossly exaggerated and suspect?

How is making the interpretation of English or French into one's native language a human right going to avoid further demands that the expectation to learn English or French is a violation of one's human rights?

The satirical irony of all this, but not not surprising, is that Pierre Trudeau's leftist dogma gave us bilingualism and multiculturalism. It appears that the latter is going to eat the former and it won't stop there. Before you know it English, French, and whites will become minorities in Canada and they will no longer be the perpetrators of discrimination and racism but receivers of it; logging complaints against those who were logging complaints against them many generations ago with the same institutions that were often criticized for restricting free speech and attacking Canadian cultural rights (Human Rights Commissions, the Charter). Now that is irony and exemplary of the lefts "do but don't think things through" way of thinking.

Call me alarmist but I am just exercising what so many on the left, and the right but mostly the left, sorely lack: foresight. Just hope their will be a Lynda Hurst in the future to advocate for the rights of the minority white English or French speaking populations of Canada.

Hotline for "nippertipping" complaints closes after one month of operation and only 30 calls

From The Toronto Star.

`Tipping' victims fear reporting it, activist says

Hotline for hate crime against Asians closes after logging 30 calls

Dec 08, 2007 04:30 AM
Robyn Doolittle
Staff Reporter


A hotline set up by the Ontario Human Rights Commission for victims of lakeside assaults logged only about 30 calls, even though there are believed to be dozens more victims, officials say.

"I know, definitely, people who phoned into Chinese language call-in radio shows with reports. They emailed the host, Simon Li. And those people never called us," said lawyer Avvy Go, director of the Metro Toronto Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic, which operated the hotline.

"Over the last couple of shows he (Li) was giving his audience an earful: `Why aren't you guys calling the hotline?'" Go said. "People are afraid to come forward.

[...]

"Even with my clients, I come across it," Go added.

"They feel in a way, by questioning the authorities, it's like saying they've failed you."

The hotline, which closed this week after a month, was the first phase of an inquiry launched by the Ontario Human Rights Commission early last month. There was also an online survey available at the commission's website.

In total, commissioner Barbara Hall says "less than 100" messages were logged in total.


What really bothers me about this is that this appears to be a "white bogeyman" witch hunt in Salem like fashion. It also seems to be another exercise in painting minority groups as the perpetual victims, babes in the woods who did nothing wrong. All they wanted to do was relax and do some fishing even thought some local testimony suggests these Asian fishermen were doing more than that.

What is even more irksome about this is that it appears Avvy Go and Simon Li are disappointed that more complaints were not logged and more finger pointing wasn't made to reaffirm their biases that much of Canada is racist towards Asians. I guess 30 calls and less than 100 complaints are not good enough for them. How many do they want? How many is enough?

I have blogged on this before and I will restate it here: there is more to this than the black and white picture of white racist bogeymen and poor innocent Asian victim. It is possible, likely even, that many of these Asian fishermen were acting like, well, jerks. They were likely fishing illegally and engaged in poaching activities. What this hot-line did, and Avvy Go as well, is shift legal attention away from the illegal behaviour of the Asian fishermen and onto the the uncivilized behaviour of some locals leaving the Asian fishermen unmolested to continue to do what caused all of this in the first place.

Next week, the commission will release a preliminary report that will contain victim testimonials, possible recommendations and a timeline for the next stage of the inquiry.


I doubt this inquiry will contain any testimonies from the locals regarding the activities of the Asian fishermen and I doubt any investigation into these fishermen will happen either. This whole inquiry is one sided and because of it this whole thing is a mockery of justice. It just reinforces victimhood status for Asians who have done more than their fair share of criminal activity in this country, some of it with deadly consequences, seized control of the illegal drug trade as well as abuse Canadian citizenship laws and Canadian hospitality yet Avvy Go, Susan Eng, and the OHRC think hunting down some people who pushed Asians into the water is a good use of our police resources. God help this country.

Until a full inquiry is made I refuse to believe that mere racism is at the root of all this.

Thursday, 6 December 2007

2002 study reveals that only 20% of Chinese immigrants intend to stay after obtaining citizenship

I don't know how accurate that figure is but here is what the study said:

Like many other studies, our research findings provide a troubling message about the experiences of Chinese immigrants in Canada, and have serious implications for shared ideals of citizenship, social inclusion, and integration that Canada has aimed to achieve through its reformed immigration program. The inability to succeed in economic participation makes immigrants feel disadvantaged and excluded, and may negatively affect their confidence about the merits of remaining in Canada to fulfill their immigration dream and commitment. An internet survey conducted in 2002 of recent Chinese immigrants by the Toronto-based North Chinese Community of Canada found that only 20 per cent of the 1,345 participants indicated they would remain in Canada after obtaining Canadian citizenship(World Journal January 10, 2003).

Here is the link to the study.

Like I said, I am not too certain on how reliable that figure of 20% is. It seems too low but if it is true then I wouldn't be surprised. I blogged about a Maclean's magazine article about the Asian diaspora jumping HMCS Canada for the golden shores of China. The article was quite revealing. It exposed the abuse of Canadian citizenship laws by Asian immigrants who really didn't have much of an intention of staying in Canada. It also revealed the relatively low opinion Asian immigrants have of Canada. Canadian citizenship was just an insurance plan to them and a place to offload the costs of educating their kids and caring for their aged parents while they work and pay taxes over seas. An estimated 200,000 "Canadians" live in Hong Kong. On a related note an estimated 50,000 "Canadians" were living in Lebanon at a single time. Combined that's 250,000 "Canadians" living over seas.

I recall reading one article about an immigrant Chinese nurse. She said she planned to stay in Canada after she obtained citizenship instead of going back to China like so many of her other expatriates. This is abuse yet nothing is done about it and it is in fact rewarded as we hand out citizenship to passerby like coupons. There is no political will and no public outcry. I personally find it infuriating.

According to a recent StatsCan study 20% of the Canadian population was not born in the country. How much of that population do not live in the country but claim Canadian citizenship? What is Canada to them? It happens to be my country and it's the only one I have.

Wednesday, 5 December 2007

Asians arrested in anti-counterfeiting operation (surprise, surprise)

Business still brisk on black market

8 arrested, $10 million in designer fakes seized, but lots of knock-offs still on Toronto market

Dec 04, 2007 04:30 AM
Joanna Smith
Staff Reporter


Toronto police seized $10 million worth of designer knock-offs this weekend, but fake goods were still easy to find in Chinatown yesterday.

And consumers who value style over substance are happy to buy them.

With Armani shirts, Louis Vuitton luggage and other luxurious-looking items on display at a downtown police station yesterday, one could be forgiven for thinking the officers were staging an haute couture show.

But the fancy loot came from "Project Chameleon," a seven-month investigation into counterfeit luxury items that netted police a multimillion-dollar knock-off haul imported from mainland China. They also made eight arrests.

Toronto police Insp. Mario Di Tommaso had a stern warning for shopkeepers who sell counterfeit items.

"If we find out that they are knowingly breaking the law, we will enforce the law to the best of our ability," he said at a news conference yesterday. "So, to those merchants that are out there selling these items that are counterfeit: Think twice."


I'll believe those words when I see it in action. Go anywhere in Toronto or the surrounding area where there is a high concentration of Chinese immigrants and you will without question find counterfeit merchandise for sale even if you are not looking for it. It's just there and in your face. It is what Asian's do: they sell counterfeit goods and in broad daylight. They don't even try to hide it. I have seen them "hot wiring" the old Playstation consoles so that they may play pirated games. The Asia Pacific mall, a mall catering to an Asian clientèle, is a den of counterfeit goods for sale. If the police were serious about a crack down they would target these outlets but I am certain they are hesitant for fear of being accused of racial profiling. That's why I think his words are just an idle threat.

It's Asian culture.

The whole article can be found here care of The Toronto Star.

Sunday, 2 December 2007

Canada is losing control of its borders. A Federal court judge moves to erase STCA . (It's the Singh decision all over again).

From the Globe and Mail.

Third-party asylum repugnant to Charter, federal court rules

By UNNATI GANDHI AND COLIN FREEZE
Friday, November 30, 2007 Page A1


Citing the example of Maher Arar, a Federal Court judge ruled yesterday that Canada must reconsider a reciprocal refugee-processing agreement with the United States because Washington flouts conventions meant to safeguard immigrants against torture in their homelands.

Experts say the effect of the ruling may ultimately be that Canada will have to process thousands more refugee claimants each year, now that the continued existence of the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), passed in 2004, is in question.

Mr. Justice Michael Phelan wrote that the U.S. does not comply with international refugee conventions and that the Canadian government, in entering into the agreement, "acted unreasonably" in concluding that it did.

[...]

The STCA requires refugee claimants to seek protection in the first country they reach, and has allowed Canada to automatically send refugee claimants at the border back to the United States, from where they are usually detained or deported.

[...]

"By removing the Safe Third, we can reasonably expect to see a new significant inflow of refugee claimants to Canada from the United States. The door will soon be open ... [because] the Federal Court decision has made it virtually impossible for the Safe Third Country Agreement to continue to exist," said Richard Kurland, a Vancouver lawyer and immigration policy consultant.


We get more information from The Toronto Star.

The reasoning issued yesterday, which will essentially nullify the agreement with a final court order expected early next year, is a huge victory for refugee advocates, including the Canadian Council for Refugees, Canadian Council of Churches, Amnesty International and John Doe, a failed Colombian refugee claimant in the U.S., who brought the declaration application to the court.

So we have an unelected, unaccountable judge rule against a law, that was legislated by Canada's elected officials, and challenged by a non-Canadian citizen (a Colombian). Who runs this country?

This is reminiscent of the notorious Singh decision of 1986 when six Guyanese Sikhs selfishly challenged Canada's refugee laws. This decision literally opened the flood gates to abuse and Canada effectively lost control of its borders as it extended Charter rights and protection to anyone, citizen or not, who has one foot on Canadian soil. The STCA was a modest attempt to restore some sovereignty but apparently some people have a problem with that.

The STCA was implemented to curb what is called "asylum shopping". This is a practice where potential immigrants posing a fake refugees shop around for the best deal and Canada is at the top of the list. Most refugees to this country are not real refugees. They are mostly queue jumping economic migrants who know an easy mark when they see one. Canada is world renowned for its lax refugee laws, relaxed citizenship requirements, and poor record of deportations with a generous social welfare state to top it off. Canada has broadened the definition of a refugee to such a comical extent that every advanced democratic country in the world would fair no better than the United States did in this ruling. It's a joke really.

Justice Michael Phelan made a misinformed ruling but apparently the man is no stranger to that. According to this blogger, and using the Toronto Sun as source, Mr. Phelan advised Federal Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day to reconsider a decision to reject Than Soe's refugee claim. In 1989 Than Soe hijacked a Taiwanese airliner carrying 80 passengers with a fake bomb to bring attention to the regime in Burma. The Taiwanese government pardoned Than Soe and granted him amnesty. Than Soe arrived in Canada as a "refugee" after the United States denied him entry to study at the University of Indiana with a full scholarship. Why would Mr. Phelan advise Stockwell Day to reconsider Than Soe's refugee claim when he is clearly not a refugee?

I think there is more to this than meets the eye. Allowing myself to speculate I think this ruling has more to do with America bashing than with Constitutional guarantees. Whatever the reasons are it's the Canadian who is going to pay for it financially and socially but then again what else is new? And who cares, right?

Any guesses on who the "perps" are?

Six Arrested In "Massive" Ecstasy Bust

Saturday December 1, 2007
CityNews.ca Staff


Police are hunting for a seventh suspect after a massive drug raid early Friday.

After receiving a tip about an alleged drug lab at 5 Bibury Gate, near Warden and Steeles, police in protective gear raided a home around 10am seizing 25 kilograms of Ecstasy, making it the biggest narcotics bust in York Region's history.

Area residents greeted the news with a mixture of shock and shoulder-shrugging fatalism.

"There are a lot of busts happening in Markham so it's not too surprising," one said.

"Actually it was the nicest house in the neighbourhood. We didn't see anything suspicious," another remarked.

Six people have been arrested and the cargo and chemicals carted out. Like many of these kinds of cases, the house was located in a quiet residential neighbourhood, potentially exposing those in the vicinity to explosive danger.


This one is care of Toronto based CityNews and CP24.

One third of Markham residents are of Asian origin, mostly Chinese. Those charged and arrested in recent ecstasy busts in Toronto and the surrounding area are Asian. The report does not give the names of the suspects but you can do the math.

Sadly, there is some truth to racial profiling. If it looks like a duck...

Saturday, 1 December 2007

If Muslims are this easily offended...

... then may Allah help us. The story is from The Toronto Star.

`Kill her by firing squad!' protesters chant

Thousands in Khartoum demand execution of U.K. teacher convicted of insulting Islam

Dec 01, 2007 04:30 AM
MOHAMED OSMAN
Associated Press


KHARTOUM–Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and swords and beating drums, burned pictures of a British teacher yesterday and demanded her execution for insulting Islam by letting her students name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Sudan's Islamic government, which has long whipped up anti-Western, Muslim hard-line sentiment at home, was balancing between fuelling outrage over the case and containing it.

The government does not want to seriously damage ties with Britain, but the show of anger underlines its stance that Sudanese oppose Western interference, lawyers and political foes said.

Many in the protesting crowd shouted: "Kill her! Kill her by firing squad!''

Gillian Gibbons was sentenced Thursday to 15 days in jail and deportation for insulting Islam with the naming of the teddy bear, which was part of a class project for her 7-year-old students.

She escaped harsher punishment that could have included up to 40 lashes, six months in prison and a fine. Her time in jail since her arrest Sunday counts toward the sentence.


This over reaction by Muslims, which is sadly typical, was triggered by a British teacher who named a teddy bear Muhammad, as the article points out. What is missing in this piece but has been reported before is that the British teacher did so at the request of her students. The children overwhelmingly agreed that the bear should be named after the most popular student in the class and this student's name happened to be Muhammad, a very common name for Muslim boys in honour of the founder of Islam.

The rational mind of any civilized people would realize that she meant no harm but apparently these Muslims do not care with some calling for her death where a simple apology and a renaming of the bear would suffice. This is a simple case of misunderstanding.

What are the implications for Canada? Well, we import these people. More to the point, we import this kind of behaviour and introduce it into Canadian society. I do not wish to generalize here by castigating all Muslims by the outrageous behaviour of their fellow adherents but the fact of the matter is that too many of them do think and behave in like fashion to those calling for the British teacher's death in Khartoum. I will say that most Muslims do not behave this way but most Muslims do not have to. All you need is a few. How large must the Muslim population in Canada be for similar protests to occur here and against Canadian citizens? How can we criticize Islam in Canada like Christianity often is - to the point of unwarranted juvenile mockery I might add - when the threat of riots in the streets and calls for death are festering below the surface? How can we keep Islamic expansionism in Canadian society, schools, and law and in federal and provincial governance in check when we are afraid to do anything about it for fear of violence? Like I said, not all Muslims behave in anti-social ways - though their incessant pleas for accommodation begs to differ - but all you need is a few.

This is not "Little Mosque on the Prairie" folks; a CBC produced show that is so out of touch with reality, that is so fake, that it is figuratively the reverse image of the bomb belt wearing suicide bomber in Gaza; two images on the opposite and extreme ends of the scale of generalizations that they are both generalizing, propagandistic, and insulting. "Little Mosque" is multicultural propaganda at work and in service to the state religion, funded by the Canadian tax payer for his and her indoctrination.