Monday, 21 February 2011

New Book, Some Blogs, And A Society.

A book titled The Perils of Diversity: Immigration and Human Nature by Byron M. Roth seems to be worth checking out. From the book description we read:

Byron M. Roth argues that the current debate over immigration policy is unlikely to produce a satisfying outcome since it takes place uninformed by the science of evolutionary psychology. He thoroughly reviews theory and research indicating that the success of any policy of mass immigration will be profoundly constrained by fundamental features of human nature. Prominent among those features is a natural bias toward one s own kind and a certain wariness of others, making harmony in multi-ethnic societies problematic at best. The problems for such societies are compounded when groups differ in ability and temperament in non-trivial ways. The author explores the history of immigration to the United States prior to World War II and contrasts it with post-war immigration in the West. The evidence marshaled makes clear that the earlier immigration experience of the United States is so different from current patterns that it cannot provide a useful template for understanding and assessing those patterns. In addition, Roth addresses the disturbingly undemocratic nature of the regime of mass immigration imposed by authorities on the citizens of all western nations in defiance of their clearly expressed wishes. He shows that the chasm between elite views and public opinion is so deep that current policies can only be maintained by an increasingly totalitarian suppression of dissent that undermines the very foundations of western democracy.

I don't give much credence to evolutionary psychology and, for me, this may undermine much of the thrust of the book but some observations of his I do share. They are 1) that current immigration patterns are incomparable to immigration patterns of the past since the world of today is not the world of yesteryear, 2) that immigration is being undemocratically imposed on the citizens of western nations, 3) that elite opinion operates in defiance of the majority, and 4) "that current policies can only be maintained by an increasingly totalitarian suppression of dissent".

Two blogs are also worth bookmarking. One is Blazing Car Fur. The other is called The Dominion of Canada. Both address sundry topics of a political nature from a conservative perspective which occasionally include immigration matters.

Lastly, there's the Canadian Culture and Integration Society. I don't know how active they are but they appear to be a grassroots lobby group pushing for immigration reforms that the Conservative Party of Canada should be perusing if they were not just conservative in name only.

Canada's Dysfunctional Refugee System And How It Came To Be.

Here is a worthwhile read written by James Bisette of the Centre for Immigration Policy Reform. It's an analysis of Canada's refugee system and it provides an overview of the steps that were taken that created the most lax and abused refugee system in the world.

Sunday, 20 February 2011

Selling Out Canada: Jason Kenney: An Introduction.

I find it so achingly obvious that Canada's immigration system is more about immigrant/ethnic vote pandering than it is about anything else that to even argue otherwise should illicit laughter. If more proof is needed then the Toronto Star has this to offer.

Jason Kenney hardly looks dangerous. He jokes about dropping a few pounds and there’s a cherubic quality to him. On stage at a Canada Immigration Centre in Etobicoke, he throws himself into a speech, bobbing on his toes for emphasis.

It’s a big crowd for a Sunday afternoon in February. Some 400 people, from China, India and the Philippines (among other nations), are jammed into a small auditorium to hear the immigration minister laud his government’s record. The mood is festive; everyone crowds in for photos. Shouting above the din, William Yue leans over to say: “Nice man. He’s a very nice man.”

When I read the "among other nations" part, placed in parentheses no less, I laughed. What other nations could there be aside from India, China, and the Philippines, three countries over represented in the immigration system? It seems that all the journalist could see were immigrants from either of those three countries and had to assume other nations were represented because they had to have been, right? Or is Canada being unreasonably flooded with immigrants from India, China, and the Philippines at the expense of everywhere else?
If Prime Minister Stephen Harper wins his majority in the next election, he owes a debt to Kenney. The MP for Calgary Southeast has become a fixture at dragon boat races, Ukrainian folk dances, Macedonian dinners and Diwali celebrations. He pops up everywhere, tweeting as he goes and earning the nickname (courtesy of erstwhile colleague Rahim Jaffer) “the minister for curry in a hurry.”

His role is to get new Canadians — whom he believes are already Conservative-minded — “tuned into our frequency.” And there are more than anecdotal signs his strategy is working. In one study, McGill University political scientist Elisabeth Gidengil and four colleagues showed an erosion of visible minority support for the Liberals began after the 2000 election. “In fact, minority voters were almost as likely to vote Conservative in 2008 as they were Liberal,” says the study, “The Anatomy of a Liberal Defeat.”

These days, Kenney, 42, practically bunks in the GTA, where Conservatives hope to pick up crucial seats. Liberal Andrew Kania squeaked through in Brampton West by only 231 votes in 2008, while Ruby Dhalla took Brampton-Springdale by 773. Conservatives conclude Liberal ridings won by two or three thousand votes may be winnable, and figure there’s a shot at knocking off Paul Szabo in Mississauga South, Ken Dryden in York-Centre and Joe Volpe in Eglinton-Lawrence.

A Conservative campaign insider suggests the gold standard is the 1995 sweep of the 905 by former Conservative premier Mike Harris. Half of the 82 ridings he took were in the GTA. They study the belt of former Harris seats that ring pre-amalgamation Toronto — in Scarborough, Willowdale and Etobicoke — and dream about the federal tide turning blue again. They see portents in some of Mayor Rob Ford’s geographic breakthroughs.

Jason Kenney is the most recognizable face of the Conservative party in Toronto next to Stephen Harper. He is also the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism. Toronto is 50% immigrant and 50% "minority-majority". Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area are represented by 45 federal seats in the House of Commons out of 308 seats with more seats to come in the future due to immigrant driven population growth. Do the math.

Despite that loyalty he is tagged by political insiders as the front-runner to replace Harper. Super-ambitious, goes the gossip, willing to sell his mother for the job. Kenney deflects the question. “I’m completely absorbed in my current responsibilities,” he says, adding: “He (Harper) has my full support as long as he continues to serve as our leader.”

So there you have it. I have heard about Jason Kenney's rumoured ambitions to become Prime Minister during an appearance on the Michael Coren show (who, despite his pretensions to being a hard hitting and investigative journalist was anything but to Mr. Kenney). I think the rumours are true.

That being the case why would Jason Kenney make himself vulnerable to attacks of being anti-immigrant by doing what is right for the nation and cut immigration targets like every other immigrant receiving country in the world has the current sense to do? This could jeopardize his chances at leading the Conservative party and thus become Prime Minister of Canada. Not challenging the Singh decision and allowing over half a million foreigners into the country, including a record number of permanent residents, during a deep recession, with not hint at changing course has everything to do with Jason Kenney's political ambitions and little to do with the welfare of the nation. It seems his mother isn't the only thing he's willing to sell out to "get the job".

What this is more indicative of, and worrisome, is how powerful an influence non-Canadians have in shaping Canada's immigration system and demographic future. This is just as threatening to Canada's sovereignty as any border deal is with the U.S. because it politically undermines our ability to enforce our borders against a foreign intrusion due to the domestic presence of a foreign born lobby group.

Though Canadians are increasingly becoming uncomfortable with immigration now that they are starting to wake up to its consequences (I hope), it's the status-quo with all of Canada's governing parties. With elitist contempt they ignore the concerns of those they allegedly represent choosing instead to indoctrinate the electoral rabble on the dubious benefits of mass-immigration and its discredited partner in crime, multiculturalism. This, while pandering to kingmaker immigrant and ethnic block votes in the nation's cities. Politically this is the best strategy if a party wishes to form a majority government. This is why there is little differences among each party's immigration platforms leaving no democratic option for those of us who seek an opposing alternative. For us there are vague hate crime laws, Orwellian named human rights commissions, punitive fines, and jail terms if need be because you cannot have the kind of society that Canada is maddeningly pursuing without some form of autocracy, policing, and restrictions on our freedoms.

At the end of the day it's not about nation building at all. It's about forming the next government no matter what is at stake.

Thursday, 17 February 2011

TB, Homeless Shelters, And Immigrants.

It's being reported that "growing proportion of TB cases in Toronto homeless shelters are among immigrants".

Almost one in five homeless people with tuberculosis in Canada's largest city died within 12 months of being diagnosed, a 10-year study has found.

"That's quite significant — it's in the order of about three to four times higher than what we expect to see with someone who had TB," Dr. Kamran Khan, leader of the study, and a doctor at St. Michael's Hospital, said in an interview.

The study published Wednesday in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases identified 91 homeless people with active TB in Toronto from 1998 to 2007.

In addition to the higher-than-usual death rate for the infectious disease, which can be spread through droplets released through a cough or sneeze, the study found that a growing proportion of tuberculosis cases in the homeless shelters — 40 per cent — are among immigrants. They hail from around the globe, Khan said, including locations in Latin America, Africa, Southeast Asia and Europe.

"It's significant because we know that highly drug-resistant forms of TB — and these are infections that can be life-threatening and typically take years to treat — are far more common in other parts of the world than they are in Canada," said Khan.

There are two things to take away from this.

The first one is the obvious one. It's apparent that immigrants have brought drug resistant forms of TB into the country and are walking free among the population, particularly Toronto, Canada's largest city. The fact that they were able to enter the country while hosting the infection proves that Canada's screening process is ineffective thus putting the health of Canadians in jeopardy.

The second thing to consider is that immigrants are visiting homeless shelters. Why is that?

Tuesday, 15 February 2011

Booming Economy = More Immigrants. Recessionary Economy = Record Number Of Immigrants. Does That Make Sense?

So I'm sure you heard the news already. With almost utter contempt for working Canadians and the unemployed Jason Kenney announced that Canada "welcomed" a record number of immigrants to Canada, some 280,636 permanent residents, during a recessionary period as if that is something to boast about. Here is the press release.
“While other Western countries cut back on immigration during the recession, our government kept legal immigration levels high.

How about that. The trend is to not only condemn multiculturalism for the failure that it is but to reduce immigration levels. Not so for Canada. I guess it's because we know better. Of course we do. We're Canadians, we always know better.

Canada’s post-recession economy demands a high level of economic immigration to keep our economy strong,” said Minister Kenney. “In 2010, we welcomed the highest number of permanent residents in the past 50 years to support Canada’s economic recovery while taking action to maintain the integrity of Canada’s immigration system with the introduction of the Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada’s Immigration System Act.”

Can you believe this nonsense? Jason Kenney really must think we Canadians are stupid. Think about it. When the Canadian economy was booming we were told Canada needed high levels of immigration to fuel it. Now during a recessionary slowdown we need record levels of immigration to "to support Canada’s economic recovery". Does that make sense to you? Not only did we have excessive immigration quotas to begin with, Canada maintained those high levels during an economic downturn and accepted even more into the country. The lunatics truly are in charge of the asylum.

Here is Adrian MacNair in the National Post.

According to their numbers, they also welcomed 182,322 temporary foreign workers and 96,147 foreign students, a 29 per cent increase from the final Liberal year in office. Added to that number was 7,265 refugees and 4,833 sponsored refugees, also a 63 per cent increase from 2005. That’s a total of 571,203 temporary or permanent new residents every year, or 1.6 per cent of our existing population. I can only guess this is some kind of attempt to out-Liberal the Liberal party.

Which is surprising, since Canada has long held the record for the largest per capita increase to immigration in the world. Yet the current Conservative government is made up of elements of the Reform Party, who once said 250,000 new Canadians a year was too much, and should be reduced to 150,000.

MacNair also tackles the government's attempt to bring integrity back to Canada's joke of a refugee system.

First of all, there’s no such clear message. It’s widely known Canada is an “easy mark”, and not at all difficult to smuggle people into. Nor are the penalties for such crimes very severe. Nor would the current bill being presented as a tough on-smuggling legislation do anything to stop another boat of Tamils.

Bill C-49 provides very limited powers for the government, and doesn’t mitigate any of the costs Canadians are bothered with in the first place. The recent MV Sun Sea incident has been revealed to have cost us $25 million, and the new bill would only serve to increase such costs if a new boat arrived.

In other words Bill C-49 is window dressing to a mess of a refugee system concocted to placate the angry masses while pandering to special interest groups attached to the immigration industry. It makes it look like the government is doing something when in effect it isn't doing anything at all. But Jason Kenney has no intention of revoking the Singh decision making it clear he has no interest in fixing the problem.

To fully understand the government's motives in this you have to acknowledge that the immigration and refugee system have more to do with corralling immigrant block votes while importing new ones. Let's be clear here. Canada did not "welcome" 280,636 immigrants in 2010. The Conservative party imported 280,636 potential future Conservative party supporters.

I believe it was the Conservative government's very intention to exceed immigration quotas for 2010 as a means to show how immigrant friendly they are and defeat the anti-immigrant label the opposition parties have assigned it. This is their second consecutive minority government and they have an eye on a majority next election. They made gains last election and captured immigrant heavy riding Missaussauga-Erindale from the Liberals and almost seized Sikh majority riding Brampton-Springdale from Ruby Dhalla. They have momentum amongst immigrant votes and they are not going to let an ill-timed and unanticipated recession and the loss of Canadian jobs spoil it. While other governments the world over have the decency to cut back on immigration during hard times, it's politics as usual here in Canada.

So how do Canadians feel about this? Well if this CBC online poll is any indication, Canadians are saying enough is enough.

It does seem the government is listening. It does have plans to reduce immigration next year albeit by a mere 5% all to come out of the family reunification class. The CBC has it here along with the expected parade of immigrants with raging senses of entitlement. The Toronto Star has it here.
A day after Canada reported a record number of newcomers received last year, internal government documents reveal that Ottawa is planning to reduce its annual quota for parents and grandparents joining their families here.

At a news conference in Ottawa Monday, New Democrat immigration critic Olivia Chow said information obtained under an Access to Information request shows the federal government will further reduce the targets for such sponsorships from 15,300 in 2010 to 11,000.

[...]

However, in response to an earlier appeal by the Chinese Canadian community, Ottawa has decided to increase the quota for sponsorship of parents and grandparents in the Beijing visa office from 1,000 in 2010 to 2,650 in 2011, at the expense of other countries.

I guess some immigrants are more equal than others. If Jason Kenney actually bothered to get to know Canada's Chinese population he'd realize that they want to import their aged relatives to capitalize on Canada's health care system as they minimize their tax responsibilities by drawing an overseas income. He should of told them to get stuffed but votes are to be had. I'm sure the Sikh community will be unaffected as well.

I have to admit I was taken aback by the news. I thought the Conservatives would at least hold immigration quotas steady, not shovel more unnecessary and unwanted people into the country. What disgusts me is how reckless the immigration system is being used by the political class with no appreciation of its long-term consequences. But when fleeting short-term political careers are at stake you tend to look no further than the next election.

Sunday, 13 February 2011

Standing Up For Canada: Christian Heritage Party Of Canada Calls For Moratorium On Muslim Immigration, Stricter Eligibility For All.

Yesterday, CHP Canada released its immigration policy which includes a greater investment in our refugee and immigration system and tighter controls on eligibility for immigration. More significantly, CHP Canada is calling for a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries.

“It is naive to think that all cultures are compatible with Canadian values.”
said Mike Schouten, CHP candidate for South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale, “Take the freedom of conscience, the freedom to practice, or not practice, the religion of our choice as an example.

[...]

“Canada is under no obligation”, Schouten continues, “to allow everyone to become a Canadian citizen or to live in Canada. Until such time as the Islamic faith community in Canada sets aside those elements of their religion and worldview that are contrary to Canadian law and values, the government must end immigration from those countries in which Islamic values dominate the culture and law. Further, it must be a condition of citizenship that applicants renounce and abandon all practices and traditions that are contrary to Canadian law and traditions.”

source

Here is the full text o the media release. I happen to agree with this part:
Despite the protestations of some Muslims, it is a fact that immigration and migration have been inherent forms of jihad since Islam’s inception, designed to make Islam the dominant force in countries that are currently non-Islamic.

I oftentimes fail to tell if Muslims are immigrants or missionaries arriving as a vanguard for the delivery of Canada to Islam.

It is projected that 6.6% of the Canadian population will be Muslim by 2030 provided current immigration and demographic trends are allowed to continue. This is a tripling of its present size. Now, this wouldn't be so alarming if it weren't for the fact that Islam is also a political system with its own framework of jurisprudence alongside it being a religion. With Islam there is no such thing as a separation of church and state.

We have already seen one attempt to implement Sharia law into Ontario's legal system and there are numerous instances of were Muslims have sought, and won, accommodations for their religious sensibilities. In effect they are creating a parallel Islamic society within Canada and that's what some of them want. And this is being accomplished one concession at a time.

What's disconcerting is that it is the so-called moderates, the law abiding Muslims, who are making "creeping Sharia" possible and by doing so enable the extremists. In this Michael Coren column we read:

While the vast majority of Muslims in Canada are good citizens, when a survey was taken within the Islamic community about the so-called Toronto 18 Islamic terrorists, more than 10% of respondents supported their actions. Let’s be conservative and say that 50,000 people believed terrorist attacks and the murder of Canadians was appropriate. Something I’d rather like CSIS to be aware of.

In this CTV news report more "Canadians" are "turning to violent Jihad".
The Mountie in charge of investigating terrorist threats says he's alarmed at the growing number of Canadians adopting violent jihad.

[...]

"We have some in Pakistan, we see some in Somalia, we see them in Afghanistan," he said.

RCMP believe that two-dozen Canadians have trained at camps in Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan (the same country where the Times Square bomber is believed to have sought instruction in terrorist tactics). They suspect that several Canadians hold leadership roles in al Qaeda-linked groups.

[...]

But Michaud is also concerned about the threat of Islamic extremists unleashing terror on Canadian soil, particularly if those trained at terrorist camps overseas return to Canada.

We have experienced increasing cases of radicalized "home grown" Muslims in the west and Canada is no exception. These are domestically born Muslim men and women who show little affinity with their country of birth and in extreme cases hold it with outright contempt. This is because diaspora communities tend to be more chauvinistic than in their countries of origin. To illustrate, a Pakistani Muslim born in Canada may visit relatives in Pakistan and be aghast with disgust to find that he or she is more Muslim than his or her relatives and, surprisingly, a large segment of Pakistani society. This phenomenon is not unique to Muslims but can be found in all cultural groups in Canada. The scary part is that when Muslims become radicalized people sometimes die. And as you increase the size of that population the greater you increase the potential for radicals. The more Muslims you have the more likely you will have extremists.

It is true that the majority of Muslims have no intention of hurting or killing anyone. It is absurd to think that. They, like the rest of us, just want to work and live a dignified life. The vast majority truly are law abiding however it is not against the law to apply political pressure to have Sharia legally recognized. It is not against the law to pressure organizations and institutions to pander to Islamic sensibilities. It is not against the law to use the machinations of the political system to exert on Islamic influence onto the rest of the country. It is not against the law to create and live in a parallel Islamic society within Canada. It is not against the law to form the majority population and democratically announce that Canada is an Islamic state. Besides, even though the majority are law abiding it doesn't negate the potential danger of hosting a Muslim population.

If Canada insists on hosting and importing an ever increasing Muslim population then these are things we need to seriously consider. We need to dispel the romance of the immigration mythos that dominates the discussion and look at immigration realistically because it is taking this country in directions I doubt very much the majority of Canadians approve of.

Saturday, 12 February 2011

Judges And Lawyers Undermine Canada's Immigration Process (and in turn our national sovereignty).

Jason Kenney spoke some frank words at the University of Western Ontario's law faculty regarding the indulgences of judges and lawyers working in the immigration system. The Toronto Star reports on it here.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney is lashing out at the judicial system, accusing judges and lawyers of undermining Canada’s immigration process by indulging spurious refugee cases.

In the text of a speech to the law faculty at the University of Western Ontario in London, Kenney says Federal Court judges are too often second-guessing legitimate policy decisions, working against the reforms legislators have made to improve the system.

“If we can’t find a way to reduce the interminable process by which immigration cases creep through the courts, slouching from appeal to appeal, the changes will be of little use and the progress we have made will be for nought,” Kenney said.

[...]

“We need the judiciary to understand the spirit of what we are trying to do,” he said.

“There are serious criminals we have been trying to remove who have been able to delay their deportation through repetitive appeals for almost 20 years.”

Hmm, twenty years. Do you think he is talking about this guy?

The blog Blazing Cat Fur, a blog I recommend you bookmark and visit often, has more details here including Jason Kenney's speech.

It's clear that when judges and lawyers get involved with the lawmaking process they will guide it to give themselves more power and work. Canada's immigration and refugee determination systems (they're pretty much the same thing) are proof positive of that.

In related news the 500 Tamil "refugees" from Sri Lanka that gate-crashed Canada's western shore last year have so far cost us $25 million dollars. ImmigrationWatchCanada comments on it here.

If all of these "refugees" actually paid $45,000 each, the gross haul by the smugglers for this little venture is around $21 million. The cost to Canadian taxpayers - at the Federal level only - is $25 million dollars or just over a dollar for every taxpayer (so far). Who knows what Provincial Governments are spending on welfare and health care costs for people who should never have been allowed to stay in Canada in the first place.

So, this benefits Canada and Canadians how exactly? The gifts of hosting the largest Sri Lankan Tamil population outside of Sri Lanka never stop coming.

Thursday, 10 February 2011

Canada Is Becoming A Nation Of Colonies: Why Immigrants Today Are Not The Immigrants Of Yesteryear.

Here is an article, written by a Sikh, that illustrates for us why immigrants today cannot be compared to immigrants of generations past.

These people have the right to keep their head buried in the sand, but the fact remains Canada is now a multiracial, multi-ethnic society of disparate, segregated communities.

[...]

In the long run, there is very little possibility that Canada, with its much smaller population but proportionately higher immigration, will ever become a melting pot like the United States where the English majority subsumed other major immigrant groups -- Germans, Irish, Scots and others -- into itself (read the mainstream) over a period of time.

Amidst all this, it is ridiculous when politicians describe multiculturalism as a celebration of this country’s diversity. They hop from a Chinese festival to a Pakistani enclave party and call it a celebration of diversity. But has anyone seen one ethnic group join another to celebrate this diversity?

When there is little social and economic interaction among various ethnic enclaves, what is there to celebrate about this so-called multiculturalism? It is pure segregation.

Some people could argue immigrant groups start assimilating into the mainstream only after their second or third generations. Yes, it happened in the case of earlier immigrants who came from the same ethnic and religious stock and got completely cut off from their ancestral lands.

But it has not happened with later immigrants who came from many different races and religions and are today wired 24-hours-a-day to their native lands thanks to the communication revolution. How much interaction do you see between the Chinese and the Indians, though both groups have been here for about a century?

I have been mulling in my mind for some time and intended to blog about some of the points he addresses in the article.

One of them is the farce that is multiculturalism. The ethnic festivals that are held in Toronto year round are typically visited by the members of the particular ethnic group that is hosting it. They are often joined by the presence of a few bored locals and some Toronto residents (almost all white) who go to these festivals the way some people bar hop on a Saturday night. But you do not see much cultural mingling among the many colonies that are carving up the city like gangland turfs.

The most important point is that we cannot compare the immigrants of today to the first European settlers who founded the nation. Those first settlers were of a stock that had little to lose by coming to a hostile uncultivated and unsettled land. They did so as a way of laying a foundation for their lives and in turn laid the foundations of a nation. They came from nothing to arrive at a land of unrealized potential. When they left their native lands they realized that they may never see it again. They settled into societies built by the British and French settlers who arrived before them and, because they were almost culturally cut off from their homelands, assimilated.

In 2011 immigrants settle in an industrialized, first world host society complemented by a social safety net that grants them access to the internet, satellite communication technology, cable television, and affordable air travel. This allows them to live a kind of satellite existence in Canada where they can be in constant contact with their home countries and can frequently visit them if they wish. Canada then becomes just a postal code and their "ethnic-enclaves" become a kind of urban sprawl expansion of the country from whence they came. Earlier immigrants didn't have these luxuries. When they left their countries they left them for good. Today's immigrants only leave their countries in body.

It is erroneous to include modern immigration into the grand immigration narrative as if immigration today is no different from the past because it excludes the modern world as context. For many immigrants coming to Canada doesn't necessarily mean leaving the old country behind. The effect this is having on Canada is that it is turning the country into a nation of colonies. This is not nation building but nation fragmentation.

Accommodation Is Not Integration: Muslim Immigrants To Winnipeg Want Their Children Excused From Compulsory Co-Ed Phys-Ed And Music.

If this is a problem for Muslims why do they immigrate here at all.

A dozen Muslim families, who recently arrived in Canada, have told the Louis Riel School Division they want their children excused from compulsory elementary school music and co-ed physical education programs for religious and cultural reasons.

"This is one of our realities in Manitoba now, as a result of immigration,"
said superintendent Terry Borys.

"We were faced with some families who were really adamant about this. Music was not part of the cultural reality," he said.

[...}

The families accept physical education, as long as the boys and girls have separate classes, but do not want their kids exposed to singing or playing musical instruments Borys said.

The division has suggested kids could do a writing project to satisfy the music requirements of the arts curriculum, he said.

However, a local Muslim leader says there is no reason for little kids to be held out of music or phys-ed classes on religious and cultural grounds.

This kind of behaviour makes me think that some, perhaps many, Muslim immigrants are more akin to missionaries than immigrants, providing a vanguard for the inevitable delivery of Canada to Islam. And by the looks of things they've got momentum on their side as the Muslim population in Canada is expected to triple by 2030 to comprise 6.6% of the national total.

I don't see much value in Muslim immigration and a lot of this has to do with the way many of them act in the west. Considering cultural differences there are many people the world over who are better suited to Canada than Muslims. I don't see why we bother. Frankly, I think it is out of fear that the government doesn't take steps to curtail Muslim immigration even though I can guarantee the majority of the population would approve if it did so.

There are plenty of people ready to say that Muslims integrate will into Canadian society but what is that based on? Having a job and paying taxes? In this country we have set our expectations so low for what we consider "integrated" that to go any lower would mean that all one has to do to be considered a Canadian is to be in the country and breath the air.

The reality is we don't integrate our immigrants. We accommodate them and accommodation is not integration.

Saturday, 5 February 2011

Accommodation Is Not Integration: David Cameron Says Multiculturalism Has Failed.

Speaking in Munich current U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron made the pronouncement that multiculturalism as domestic policy has failed. This is significant because he is the second head of a European state to publicly denounce multiculturalism while still holding office. The other was German Chancellor Angela Merkel. This is tantamount to Stephen Harper saying multiculturalism is a failure.

It is clear his conclusion was influenced by the U.K.'s experience with its unassimilated Muslim community but you can't promote a policy where it is multiculturalism for some, assimilation for others. You can't expect Muslims to fully assimilate while other imported cultures are given no bounds. Multiculturalism is an all or nothing proposition; it's either that or a "melting pot" approach and those societies that have dabbled in multiculturalism find themselves drifting to favour its opposite, including Canadians.

Multiculturalism is chaotic and it destroys any sense of a national character. It is fraudulent and vacuous as a national identity because it is incoherent. Every society that embraces it succumbs to an existential crisis because multiculturalism continuously challenges any coherent social identity by incessantly questioning it. In effect the citizens are confused about who they are as a people.

What this means for Canadians is that the Canadian does not exist for he cannot exist. Were the Canadian to exist then that means that there is something to assimilate into, a culture to preserve and promote, a line between "us" and "the other". But Canadian style multiculturalism cannot survive if that is to be so the Canadian cannot exist. Such is the paradox: to be a Canadian is not to be Canadian. That being the case Canada should scrap multiculturalism. In practical terms it is meaningless to the majority of the population anyways so most wouldn't know if it was abandoned.

Friday, 4 February 2011

Little Hope For Jobless In 2011.

If that is the case then what do we need 260,000 immigrants for?

A slower-growing economy is offering little hope to Canada’s 1.4 million unemployed, economists told Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in talks in advance of the March budget.

Unemployment, now standing at 7.6 per cent, will average a slightly higher 7.7-per cent through 2011, according to the average forecast of the dozen economists who met with Flaherty.

Speaking with reporters afterwards, Flaherty said the analysts “anticipate resistance to the unemployment rate coming down.

“This is true also in the United States. A lot of employers have been hesitant to rehire because of their perception of risk in the economy,” he said.

Over on the ImmigrationWatchCanada forum we are introduced to this story. Though it is about funding cuts to immigration services it offers this interesting tid-bit:
The cuts will disproportionately affect Toronto, where the unemployment rate for new immigrants rose from 13 per cent to 20 per cent over the past year, said Liberal MP Gerard Kennedy.

The forum contributor makes the following observation:
Just a minute. The unemployment rate for immigrants should be 0% since quotas are supposed to reflect labour shortages in Canada. If the rate is 20%, then our quotas are at least 20% too high and should be immediately cut to bring the immigrant unemployment rate down to where it should be - 0%.

The fact that cuts are not being made means that the economic argument for immigration is a fraud to cover up the real reason - to import and buy votes.

Agreed. Maintaining high immigration quotas during an economic downturn makes it obvious that immigration is not about population growth or satisfying labour shortfalls. It's about pandering to ethnic bloc votes in Canada's major urban centers. Were it not so then why is Jason Kenney, Canada's Minister for Immigration and Multiculturalism, the most recognizable face of the Conservative party in Toronto next to Stephen Harper?