Canadian Immigration Reform Blog

Who Needs Diplomacy When You Have Colonies And Diaspora's?: Immigration's Crippling Effects On Canada's Foreign Policy.

2012-01-25T18:06:00.000-05:00

Here's a story that I think hints at a problem that mass immigration has created for Canada and will get worse in the future. The problem is foreign governments using their sizeable Canadian colonies to exert pressure on Ottawa to influence policies - both public and foreign - so that they are favourable to them even if it is not in Canada's interests.

In the linked story we learn of Iranian-Canadians (which are just Iranians with the legal right to carry a Canadian passport) "caught in the crossfire" of Canada's sanctions against Iran.

Canada’s sanctions against Iran were meant to stop Tehran’s ability to build nuclear weapons, but they are also having a devastating impact on Canada’s large Iranian diaspora, community leaders say.
Now there are talks underway between the foreign ministry and the federal immigration department to address the effects that a devalued Iranian currency and a ban on financial transactions are having on Iranian-Canadians.
It’s a frustrated community — in some cases desperate — that has been waylaid by the squeeze on their homeland. Many say the problems could have been avoided if Ottawa had consulted them before pressing ahead with the sanctions.

I didn't know Ottawa needed to consult them first before deciding on how to deal with a foreign regime such as Iran but this is what I'm getting at. How is Ottawa supposed to effect a viable independent foreign policy if it is distracted by the concerns of the members of a particular nation's Canadian colony? What is stopping a country with a sizeable Canadian colony, like China for instance, of using that colony to pressure Ottawa through voting power, political organizations, and protests to influence public and foreign policy to be favourable to Chinese interests?

It can also be socially disruptive as the populations of quarrelling nations who reside in Canada and call themselves "Canadians" compete for Ottawa's attention and bicker with each other.

Am I questioning immigrant loyalty to Canada. This answer is yes. For the most part, at least.

Many immigrants today think they can be loyal to two masters. This is our fault because it is encouraged through official multiculturalism and dual citizenship. Others see Canada as nothing more than a place to squat, get rich, and shop in a mall; it is a place of entitlements and social programs; Canada means very little to them beyond that. Immigrant loyalty to Canada, in my opinion, is lacking nowadays and is superficial at best, only expressed when the camera is on and the microphone is hot and if there is something to lose by saying otherwise. I blame Canada for this. When you make little demands of immigrants, incessantly pander to them, fill their heads with Marxist ideology of victimhood, and accommodate them at the drop of a hat what kind of attitude are you to you expect?

The crippling of Canadian foreign policy is another way mass immigration is undermining Canadian sovereignty and it is a talking point that is rarely raised simply because, I think, it is one that is not readily obvious. But it is potentially problematic and it needs to be raised for the sake of further discussion and for the sake Canadian independence.

Oh Look! The Chinese Are Defrauding Canada's Immigration System Again!

2012-01-18T22:55:00.001-05:00

Must Be Wednesday.

New federal immigration rules passed in 2008 to make the system more streamlined and "responsive" to Canadian economic needs were exploited by Chinese fraudsters, according to newly released internal documents.

{...}

Bill C-50, passed in 2008 under former minister Diane Finley, was intended to let the government set priorities in its selection of economic immigrants to ensure emphasis on particular skilled workers needed by Canadian businesses.

Studies found many applicants misrepresented their education and exaggerated their experience.

{...}

One study of skilled worker applicants from Hong Kong under the AEO program during 2008-10 found only 22 per cent had genuine jobs in Canada and many had "very low" English-speaking skills.

"There are serious problems with the validity of job offers" in the AEO category, wrote the authors of the analysis.

An analysis by the Canadian government's anti-fraud unit in Beijing, meanwhile, found that between late 2008 and early 2010, more than one in five applicants (22 per cent) misrepresented their own employment records.

The greatest abusers were supposed "financial auditors and accountants," as 42 per cent of them were lying about their credentials and were in many cases merely cashiers or bookkeepers.

Another above-average category was financial managers, with 27 per cent of applications being fraudulent.

"Employment fraud is an issue on certain profiles of C-50 applications," stated a summary of the report that considered applications for workers headed primarily to Ontario.

"A more thorough verification pro-cess is required."

Another 2010 study of applicants from Taiwan found that of 31 AEO applicants, the vast majority headed for B.C., only five - or 16 per cent of the total - took jobs with the employers that made the offers.

So is this another provincial nominee program going bust largely due to fraud that always seems to involve the Chinese in a kind of "where there's smoke there's fire" sort of way? And if you're finding a few then there's probably a lot more you're not seeing. Am I insinuating that Asian immigration fraud is rampant? Why yes! Yes, I am.

Our consulates in the whole of Asia are routinely subject to fraud yet we continue to entertain Asian immigration as if nothing is happening and as if Asian immigration has brought any real benefits to the country and Canadians. If the consulates are understaffed which allows this fraud to happen then perhaps closing a few should be in the works starting with the ones in Chandigarh, Punjab, India and in Hong Kong and then let's go from there. It's not like we need all this immigration from Asia anyway.

Accommodation Is Not Assimilation: Eradicating The Canadian Identity One Human Rights Complaint At A Time.

2012-01-15T20:08:00.000-05:00

When westerners go to eastern countries with the expectation that the natives would allow and adapt to our cultural practices, it was usually proceeded by a military conquest and came in the form of imperialism and colonialism that the "progressives" in our society despise. Yet they are enthusiastic supporters of a reverse form of cultural imperialism that lets foreigners come to Canada and expect the majority culture to change to accommodate the minority.

Well said.

Uniting The Left And The Right: The Working Class As A Common Enemy.

2012-01-12T19:33:00.000-05:00

Blogger BlazingCatFur has a video interview of Peter Brimelow by Michael Coren on SunTV news. If you haven't watched it already you can view it here.

If you don't know who Peter Brimelow is you can read his bio here but he happens to be the founder of VDARE.com.

In the interview he mentions some things that help explain the psychology (psychosis?) of the pro mass-immigration movement.

The obvious one is the assault on the living standards and culture of the working classes. Now, I should point out that he doesn't mention the cultural angle but it's one that I'll raise here because the assault on the working class is an attack from two fronts: the left and the right.

On the right we have the owners of capital. Immigration is, and always has been, an attack on the incomes of the working class. The most obvious historical example of this is the importation of cheap Asian labour, primarily Chinese labour, into North America in the construction of the national rail roads. This ever increasing supply of cheap and willing labour creates a downward pressure on wages resulting in the flow of capital upwards and concentrating it into fewer hands. And today it's the middle classes that are feeling its effects as their numbers are eroding under the weight of record household debt, stagnant incomes, an uncertain economic future, and a growing income gap between the rich and poor that is more pronounced than it was during the Great Depression. Immigration isn't solely to blame for this but it sure as hell isn't helping.

From the left the working class is being attacked on the cultural front. Working class culture is inherently conservative and thus are hated by the "progressives" for it because they stand as an obstacle to their agenda of refashioning Canada in their image. Immigration, primarily non-white immigration from the developing world, effectively neutralizes working class Canadian culture through the sustenance, promotion, and expansion of the multicultural program. By saying Canada is a multicultural country is to dismiss the existence of a dominant "mainstream" culture. And by dominant I mean the majority. And the will of the majority is what we call democracy. And if that majority, or a large portion of it, happens to be working class and conservative then things don't bode well for those with a "progressive" agenda. So you say Canada is a multicultural country; which is to say that there is no dominant mainstream culture; which is a clever way the "progressive" left get around that nasty thing we call popular will (i.e. democracy) and thus gives them license to change the country to how they see fit.

It's a divide and conquer strategy since immigrants typically flood into working class neighbourhoods because housing is more affordable. As a result the voting power of the conservative working class in those neighbourhoods is pacified and the electoral riding shifts left. Or at least it's supposed to because the last election proved that it's not a guaranteed outcome and the left may have in fact miscalculated and taken the immigrant/ethnic vote for granted.

In any event what I find sinister is how the "progressive" left infiltrated and co-opted the labour movement to advance their agenda and take it on a course that not only makes the labour movement unrecognisable to the working class but attacks them while at the same time claiming to be their champions. Things like multiculturalism, same sex marriage, and issues affecting the Middle East, among others, have little if anything to do with advocating for fair wages, safe working conditions, exploitation of labour, etc., but they sure do mean a lot to Canada's "progressive" elites. This is why the core support for the NDP, a party allegedly representative of the working class, is found in the hearts of the nation's major urban centres, places where you won't find working class culture at all. Places that do host working class culture tend to vote blue.

Returning to the interview, Peter Brimelow used the term "Hitler's revenge" to describe the psychosis of the pro mass-immigration movement and I think he's right on the mark with it. "Hitler's revenge" is the psychological trauma left in the wake of the genocidal practices of the Nazi regime during WWII that the west overcompensates by going to the opposite extreme. To understand this you have to acknowledge race and that the west is, at least for now, overwhelmingly white. To show that they are nothing like the white supremacist, genocidal Nazi regime that they so vehemently fought to defeat the west threw open its doors to non-white immigration thus inviting their own genocide of sorts, both culturally and racially, by nursing a situation in which they, the white majority, will become minorities in their own countries.

I think both situations are nefarious because both are an attack on a people whether that attack is intentional or not. Balance is needed in the immigration system so that the host population is not threatened with displacement or extinction by an alien force be that force invited or otherwise. Canada is a nation with a history, language(s), and a culture that is preserved in its people. Replace the people and you lose all of that.

The Commodification Of Canadian Citizenship.

2012-01-08T16:29:00.001-05:00

Here's more on the scandals that sank the provincial nominee programs in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and P.E.I.

From the National Post:

The Maritime provinces were among the first to sign on to the federal government’s provincial nominee program, a specialized immigration program aimed at giving provinces more control over attracting the kind of business investors and skilled workers who could fit their economic needs.
For P.E.I., New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, that meant the promise of an influx of wealthy immigrant investors whose deep pockets and international business acumen they believed could kick-start their struggling economies, refresh their shrinking populations and wean their governments off federal transfer payments. In exchange, immigrants got visas to live and work in Canada far faster than they could under similar federal immigration schemes.
But as of last month, immigrant investor programs had collapsed in all three provinces. In September, the federal government demanded the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency investigate P.E.I.’s troubled immigration program. Last month, New Brunswick announced it had called in the RCMP to investigate an immigration program aimed at Chinese investors that it had shut down a year earlier after a flurry of lawsuits. Earlier this year neighbouring Nova Scotia announced it had settled a $30-million class action lawsuit an immigrant investor program that has been shut down since 2006. The province says it has no plans to restart an immigrant investor program anytime soon.

This cuts to the heart of the bankruptcy of the immigrant investor stream revealing it to be nothing more than citizenship for sale. ImmigrationWatchCanada.org sheds more light on this sham of a program here.

There are a few things we should take note of in the wake of the collapse of the provincial nominee programs in the Maritimes.

The first thing is the rampant fraud that was the oil that kept the motor running. In the case of P.E.I, if the allegations hold, it is fraud the leads right to the door of the Premier's office. If you think I am insinuating that whole immigration system is infected with fraud because of what occurred in the Maritimes then you are correct. Recall it happened in three, not one, but three provinces. One time is an isolated incident, two times is a coincidence, but three times establishes a pattern thus exposing a rot in Canada's immigration policy.

We should also note at how little the host populations - the inhabitants of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and P.E.I. - benefited from the program if at all. They certainly did not benefit economically because the so-called "investors" - mostly Chinese nationals looking to acquire Canadian citizenship as an asset by buying it - did not create any real jobs because they mostly created jobs for themselves by opening up small businesses like corner stores, spas, hair saloons, dry-cleaners, motels, and restaurants. These business proposals were getting so ubiquitous that a bidding war erupted for those kinds of establishments. On the cultural front Maritimers were inviting cultural suicide as they faced losing their identity to the rapid influx of an Asian colonizing force.

Thirdly it educates us on the fallacy of looking to immigration as the solution to the problems of population stagnation or decline. It is well accepted by those not tied to the immigration industry and who take their credentials seriously that immigration cannot alleviate ageing populations or reverse population declines. To disagree with this is to believe a myth. In the case of the Maritimes if those provinces are having a hard time keeping their own people in their respective provinces what makes them think a bunch of foreigners are going to stick around long enough to grow their populations. And not surprisingly they have retention problems when it comes to holding on to their immigrants.

The result has been that the Maritimes has some of the lowest retention rates for immigrants under the provincial nominee program, with some studies saying as few as half the immigrants nominated by the Maritime provinces end up settling there. The number of immigrants who stayed is almost impossible to gauge, since none of the provincial governments tracked whether its immigrants even set foot in the province. Nova Scotia’s auditor-general found that of 618 immigrants nominated under the province’s business mentorship program, only 212 were ever matched up with local businesses. In P.E.I., the auditor-general found just 368 of 1,100 immigrants ever registered with provincial authorities to let them know they had arrived.
The scandals that have engulfed the Maritime provincial nominee programs have proved a cautionary tale for a region enticed by the prospect of reversing years of population decline with a flood of new money and young families, but without the budget or expertise to manage its own full-blown immigration system.

Though the libertarian National Post seeks to root the problem in inexperience I think it more truthful to believe that most of the immigrants had little intention of staying in the Maritimes. They were only there to stick around long enough to get Canadian citizenship so that the can skip town for greener pastures by either moving to elsewhere in the country (Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary) or back to their homeland (China) with a Canadian passport in hand.

And why not? What do the Maritimes have to offer anyone? If population growth is a paramount concern for the Maritimes then it should be investing in industries that will support its current population and encourage population growth. These would be industries that offer well paying jobs, like ship building or resource extraction as examples, that would act as an incentive for the local population to stay and grow as well as act as a magnet for others to move to the provinces. I know this is easier said than done but nothing worth doing is easy. However, what I am trying to say here is that the Maritimes problem of population retention and growth is a domestic issue that needs a domestic solution by investing in the domestic population and economy. Inviting foreigners from China to settle in the Maritimes who end up opening up restaurants, flower shops, corner stores, and dry-cleaners is not going to accomplish anything of real long-term value for the region. This the cheap and easy route where the only accomplishment is the turning of the Maritimes into a Chinese colony of the Canadian East Coast ensuring Canada becomes the Asian colony of Canadasia from Vancouver B.C. to St. John's Newfoundland.

Another lesson is the limits to population growth. How big a population can P.E.I. realistically support?

Ultimately this is about the commodification of Canadian citizenship and the resulting devaluation of it. By placing a price on it like the investor program does it means Canadian citizenship can be measured for its worth by placing a dollar value on it. Canadian citizenship should be priceless of which the only way one can obtain it is by receiving it as a gift. Sadly the Canadian government has cheapened the value of Canadian citizenship by relaxing the standards by which can obtain it, practically giving it away at wholesale prices to every Johnny-come-lately. With the investor class one can simply buy it and as a Canadian how cheap does that make you feel?

Contribution Or Competition, Integration Or Conquest: It's The Beginning Of The End For New-Canada™ (and Canada) As We Know It.

2011-12-29T13:02:00.002-05:00

I don't know if this is their idea of contributing to Canada and integrating into Canadian society but it seems like competition and conquest to me.

I don't see how this is of any benefit to us Canadians. How can it be? We are expected to make way, indeed forcibly pushed aside as the article implies, for the new-Canada™ which means surrendering jobs and forgoing careers to satisfy the career aspirations of belligerent "new Canadians" who are exploiting immigrant driven demographic changes to satiate their hunger for economic power and political influence. And all at the expense of social stability.

Let's not kid ourselves. This is about power and conquest. It is not about integrating into the whole and being a neighbour in the neighbourhood. It is about being a neighbour and running the neighbourhood by being the neighbourhood.

The rapid demographic shift immigration brought to Peel Region in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is alarming and in my view is an attack on Canadians. According to the article:

In the 1996 census, Peel’s visible minority population was about 265,000. By 2006 it had climbed to 577,000, half of the region’s population. Projected figures for 2011 put it at 60 per cent, with the biggest change in Brampton, where the number of visible minority residents jumped from 79,950 to 246,000 in 10 years. Projections for this year suggest Brampton’s residents are 67 per cent visible-minority.

Incredible! And the fruits it is apparently producing is social disharmony, a culture war against Canadians living in the region, race based power struggles, and more social disharmony to come. You see, the three main racial groups in Peel Region are whites, blacks, and south Asian (primarily Sikh Punjabis). If south Asians are complaining that there are too many whites in positions of civic power and influence (because they want a piece of the action you see) then what is stopping blacks from protesting that there are too many south Asians in the same positions?

If the government did not insist on attacking its citizens with socially destabilizing immigration policies Peel Region would not be facing this problem. And it is a problem. Why? Because race matters! You can sugar coat it in all you want with the language of diversity and multiculturalism but what we have brewing in Peel Region is a race based power struggle. If all the immigrants to Peel Region reflected the host culture and society then there would not be a problem as they would have integrated and disappeared into the host culture seamlessly. But that is not what happened since the vast majority of immigrants settling into Peel Region could not have been any more different than the host society. And now that they have overrun the place they want a new sheriff in town because they say so! The threats could not be any more clearer on this:

“Usually, every institution is designed to resist change. Status quo is the norm,” says Naveed Chaudhry, director of the Peel Multicultural Council, a non-profit group that receives United Way and government funding.
From the top down, he says, public bodies have to accept “the new realities.”
“You will be seeing more complaints if the change doesn’t happen,” he predicts. “Institutions can resist change, but they cannot stop it.”

The effrontery on display is offensive but should be taken as a warning for the nation as a whole of the clear and present danger that is the current immigration system. Looking at Peel Region is like gazing into a crystal ball and seeing what a future Canada will look like, and function like, when its Euro-American based host culture is reduced to minority status with no clear racial group to unify the nation.

It will be socially destabilized as race-based, ethnic politics comes to define Canadian society and the Canadian political scene even more so.

Ottawa will find itself paralysed to enacting an effective public policy in an increasingly ungovernable nation without fear of offending some identity group.

The same can be said of its foreign policy as years of multicultural dogma and complacent cultural accommodations has redefined the Canadian into being an empty shell of a human; as nothing more than someone who posses some vague "shared values" that no one can agree on, has a job, and regularly shops in a mall; that a Canadian is just someone who resides in Canada while one's cultural and and emotional attachments reside somewhere else. With a nation full of these people it will be difficult to have an effective foreign policy without giving consideration to the sensibilities of some voting bloc.

The nation will fracture as separatist factions arise across regions of the country and find a voice in Ottawa through special interest parties. I say this because world events and history have made clear that people like to govern themselves and what unites a people is primarily language, race, religion, ethnicity, as well as a shared history. Most immigrants to Canada have little to none of this in common with the host society and will only divide the nation as they increase in number. As a consequence certain regions will become defined by their ethnicity/race/religion and will have little in common with each other. An Asian dominated B.C. will have little in common with with a south Asian dominated Ontario which will have little in common with a native dominated Saskatchewan and Territories which will have nothing in common with French speaking Quebec. If language is enough to compel Quebec to secede imagine the potency when you through race and religion into the mix.

To save Canada it will have to become increasingly totalitarian. (Sadly, I think Canadians will be comfortable with this being one of the most politically passive people in the world, we are a tyrants wet dream.) It already is so in some respect and immigration and multiculturalism is to thank for it. Under the guise of "hate-crime" laws drafted to "protect" Canada's "just society" our freedom of speech has been curtailed for this very purpose. I believe we will have even more freedoms restricted and regulated for the sake of the survival of the future new-Canada™.

The losers are us Canadians and the future generations of Canadians whose country we gave away.

The winners are foreign nations (like India and China) who can influence Canada's domestic affairs to suit their interests through their Canadian colonies Ottawa so stupidly imported, nurtured, and grew.

Also, the winners are the parasites in the grievance industry like Barbara Hall. This kind of conflict justifies her job - her existence - and ensures she gets a steady pay check care of the tax payer. She thrives on this, indeed encourages it, which is why she and her ilk love mass immigration so much. Without the easily foreseeable conflicts the mass importation of disparate peoples is bringing to the new-Canada™ Barbara Hall would not have much of a post political career to speak of right now.

For Barbara Hall it's about self-preservation and self-interest and that's what this is all about. Immigrants don't come to Canada to "contribute" to the country, they come to enrich themselves from Canada's bounty. It's pure selfishness and any social benefits that spring forth from this selfishness is just an unintended consequence. When gathered under the banner of "community" this concentrated self-interest makes demands on the host society with the goal of extracting economic and political power unto itself with the hopes that this surrendered power will trickle down to the individual and advance his or her ambitions (which is what is clearly at work in the linked article). Repeat this many times across the nation to reflect each "community" and you have yourself an unified, dissatisfied, ungovernable body politic.

I may be going a little overboard here but I don't feel I'm too far off the mark. An internally conflicted nation is a possible outcome out of many for the new-Canada™ and one that should be considered as we sleepwalk into the future. And if the actions of immigrant groups in Peel Region are any indication of which direction we are headed it appears rough waters await HMS Canada that will end up capsizing the ship.

They say immigration built the country. I say immigration is going to destroy it.

A Merry Christmas To All And A Toast To Christianity: The Most Truly Canadian Religion Of Them All.

2011-12-20T20:14:00.004-05:00

So some multicult joker contributed a piece to the Toronto Star that suggests Christmas should surrender the spotlight in the Canadian cultural psyche to give equal stage time to other "truly Canadian" cultural celebrations. It's like asking Christmas to give up its starring role and become just another player in an ensemble multicultural cast. And what are these other "truly Canadian" festivals you ask? Why, Diwali, Hanukkah, Eid, Kwanzaa, Chinese New Year, and Kushali of course along with the many other unspecified beautiful celebrations that are somehow "truly Canadian."

While the piece should be yet another reminder to Canadians that the current immigration system and multiculturalism are, characteristically, about cultural conquest and colonialism I don't know where he gets off calling non-Christian religions "truly Canadian" because to me, for the most part, these can't be considered Canadian at all.

For starters Diwali is a Hindu festival that the vast majority of Canadians have never heard of and who couldn't tell you at what time of the year it is celebrated even though we should since it is a "truly Canadian" celebration, or so we're told. But how can it be when Hinduism fails to meet the basic criteria of what makes one a Canadian. If a Canadian is one who accepts a set of cherished values then one cannot be a Hindu and call him or herself a Canadian at the same time because one of those values is the acceptance that all men and women are equal irrespective of race, gender, and station in life. But Hinduism doesn't believe in that at all. Hindus believe in the natural, divinely sanctioned inequality of men and women as expressed in the caste system. So how can Diwali be "truly Canadian" when a core belief of Hinduism is completely unCanadian?

Eid is an Islamic observance and Islam never fails to show us that it is a bigoted, sexist, supremacist religion that seeks dominance through coercion, subjugation, and intimidation. It doesn't even believe in the principals of multiculturalism or democracy. It only does so when Islam is a minority culture but once it constitutes the majority it becomes "our house, our rules" and all minor religions be warned. So how can Eid be considered "truly Canadian" when multiculturalism and democracy are two cherished Canadian values?

Hanukkah is a relatively minor Jewish holiday that has now become over gloried. It gained popular observance in the late 19th century by Jews in the North American diaspora as a way to shield themselves from the assimilating influences of Christmas by providing them with a Jewish alternative and Hanukkah conveniently coincided with Christmas. It was a way to protect them from integrating into the whole of society and allow them to remain separate in their unique Jewishness. Hanukkah is for Jews only and us gentiles are not exactly invited to participate. So, how does that gel with basic Canadian values of inclusion and equality?

Kwanzaa is a fake holiday started by an American black supremacist and segregationist. Enough said!

Canadians don't celebrate Chinese New Year. The Chinese celebrate Chinese New Year. That's why it's called Chinese New Year and not Canadian New Year.

As for Kushali the only thing a Google search tells me is that this clown probably spelt it wrong (I think it is spelt Khushali) which suggests to me even he doesn't know what it is. But doesn't that say it all? I don't think this guy knows exactly what he is talking about because he doesn't know anything about those "truly Canadian" holidays (Kwanzaa a truly Canadian holiday? Is he serious?!). Hell, Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur are more apt choices than Hanukkah but he chose Hanukkah because it occurs at the same time as Christmas and this gets to the core of his argument; that Christmas is one celebration among equals and that it doesn't deserve to be considered truly Canadian over others. To hell with that!

This guy is talking out of his ass if he thinks these ethnic, niche holidays are as Canadian as Christmas. If we were to rate all of these holidays on a "truly Canadian" scale then none can get any more Canadian than Christmas, not even close.

The fact that Christmas is now heavily secularized means one need not be religious to participate attesting to its inclusive character.

But still, one cannot estrange Christmas from Christianity and of all religions Christianity is the most Canadian of them all. It is a religion of invitation unlike Judaism which espouses separateness, difference, and uniqueness largely through bloodline. It is a religion of persuasion through discussion and reason, respecting the free will of man unlike Islam which is a religion of coercion and congest by the Qur'an or the sword. Christianity is a religion the teaches one to love thy neighbour as thyself and that we are all equals; all being children of a shared God unlike Hinduism which teaches that some cows are more equal than others. Out of all world religions you can't get any more Canadian than Christianity and thanks be to that religion for it is what helped make this country so great.

So Merry Christmas to all and a toast to Christianity: that most truly, truly, truly Canadian religion.

Dear Natasha Burge

2011-12-17T14:44:00.001-05:00

You go girl!

And just when I had lost hope for the rising generation of Canadian youth. I was left with the impression that they were all drunk on the mutlicult kool-aid forced fed to them by Canada's politicized, left leaning indoctrination camps we call the public education system.

But Canada's youth should be concerned and they should be fighting back because culturally they have everything to lose in the new Canada™. It's their future after all and how can they sit by idly as their country disappears from them right before their eyes.

The words Natasha choose to express herself are crass but the sentiment is definitely shared by many, many Canadians across the nation. I just wonder if she would have still been suspended by her cowardly school administrators had she used a civil tongue in her facebook protest.

In any case she is right and a suspension will not change that. Immigrants choose to come to Canada of their own free will and accord. They were not forced into it yet somehow they feel entitled to make demands of the host society and that's has to stop. It's high time we start making demands of them.

The Corruption, The Incompetence.

2011-12-10T16:58:00.004-05:00

It's been a while since I updated my blog so I will do so with two stories that I think nicely illustrate how dysfunctional Canada's immigration system truly is.

The first one comes out of Prince Edward Island. The province's immigration program has invited scrutiny by the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency over allegations of fraud and bribery. According to the allegations relatives of Premier Robert Ghiz, along with cabinet ministers, deputy ministers and several MLAs, benefited financially from the immigrant investor program that allowed primarily Chinese nationals to buy their way into Canada. If true this is a scandal reminiscent of project sidewinder where Chinese Triad gangsters, businessmen, and operatives of the Chinese government gained entry into Canada through bribery and fraud.

This isn't the first time a scandal plagued immigration system has visited the Maritimes. Nova Scotia's failed immigration nominee program provides us with another example where immigrants were fleeced by the Nova Scotia government and private business. The program allowed foreign nationals to pay $130,000 each for a six-month internship that would allow them to immigrate to Nova Scotia. They got paid a minimum salary of $20,000, with companies getting up to $80,000 to cover costs associated with being a mentor. About $30,000 went to cover program fees.

The program was a disaster. Not only were the jobs not there for half of them but the jobs being provided were considered below the skill sets of the immigrants. And all the while being paid less than what a Canadian would be paid to do the same job. It was a transfer of public money to private enterprise while immigrants drove down the incomes of the local population through wage competition. Both immigrants and Nova Scotians were getting fleeced. The immigrants who took part in the program complained and are now going to get refunded their money albeit partially since the government hasn't committed to a total refund. The only one who came out laughing in the end was Nova Scotia's private sector who took advantage of the immigration system for profit.

In the second story we learn that over half of all the immigration judges at the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) are not qualified to do the job.

That’s because more than half of them failed to meet new criteria that will be a requirement of the role after it undergoes legislative changes.

The immigration system in Canada is currently in the process of being amended by Bill C-11.

The bill, which will be introduced next June, will replace the position of board members, or refugee judge, with a new title, but the job will remain more or less the same.

Furthermore:

Of the 63 Immigration and Refugee Board judges currently hearing refugee claimant's files, 32 don't meet criteria for the same job under Bill C-11.

Twenty-four of the applicants were eliminated after multiple choice and written exams. Twelve more withdrew their application or failed to submit the exam. One was screened out and seven more eliminated after interviews.

That leaves the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) with 10 candidates who had passed the interview and nine who were waiting for an interview to be scheduled, as of Nov. 4, the most up to date information available.

These jokers were acting as guardians at the gate and now armed with this insight into their ineptitude who knows how many criminals, terrorists, spies, and shyster bogus refugees they allowed into Canada because of their incompetency. But considering the history of the IRB this news comes as no surprise. Picked largely from refugee advocacy groups and well connected individuals looking to land a highly paid sinecure public sector job these immigration judges at the IRB have turned Canada's asylum system into an international joke. Being mostly ignorant and agenda driven and lazy these people didn't seem to care who they allowed in. It was the easiest six figure salary they ever made and at the end of the day that's all that really mattered.

So there you have it. Crooks, cronies, mooks and morons have been playing an influential role in the shaping of Canada's immigration system and its outcomes. And it explains a lot doesn't it? Walking the streets of Toronto alone and meeting the world's imported "best and brightest" should leave one thinking that we Canadians are being cheated in immigration's version of the subprime mortgage scandal where quantity not quality ruled the day; where a group of parasitic individuals reap rich returns on the tacit understanding that all toxic assets will be bought up by the taxpayer freeing them to act in a reckless fashion and estranged from its consequences. Meanwhile it is the rest of us who have to put up with their shit and frankly I'm getting tired of it.

Should Domestic Violence Be Grounds For A Refugee Claim?

2011-11-14T19:45:00.003-05:00

I don't think so and it's good to see many of those commenting on the Toronto Star article agree including a woman who is actually from St. Vincent.

Domestic violence is not covered by the U.N. Convention Relating To The Status Of Refugees because it is not "persecution" per se but misandrist women and the immigration industry - with eyes blinded by dollar signs - were adamant to make Canada recognize it as so. So in 1993 Canada decided to make domestic violence grounds for an asylum claim, the first country in the world to do so, because our "compassion" makes us stupid like that and we're too intellectually lazy to think things through.

Think about it. There's over 7 billion people on the planet right now. About half are women. Of those women how many do you think are victims of domestic violence? The number must be in the hundreds of millions. Technically, and legally, if they all made as rush for Canada they can file an asylum claim. And we don't have the resources to process them all. And the opportunities for abusing the system with bogus refugee claims based on domestic violence are obvious.

Canada's refugee determination system is a mess because we have allowed it to get that way by going way beyond the scope of the the UN Convention. This broadening of criteria and allowing issues like gender discrimination, domestic violence, the persecution of homosexuals, amongst others, to be grounds for an asylum claim opened the floodgates causing Canada to lose control of her borders.

Life can be ugly. That's just how it is. Domestic violence happens and it's never going to go away. The best way to address it is not by allowing victims of domestic violence immigrate to Canada but to change the attitudes - and the law - of the societies that harbours it. Whereas the former only benefits the few, the latter will benefit the many.

The Vast Majority Of Mexico Is Safer Than Toronto!? Say Whaaaaat!!!???

2011-10-26T18:18:00.018-04:00

Who knew? But I guess if you lived there like these ex-pat Canadians do then you'd know that.

Mexico was, at one time, Canada's top source country for refugee claims. Using 2010 figures it has now fallen to fourth place behind Hungary, China and Colombia, and just ahead of the Island Of Bullshitters and Their Bullshit Asylum Claims.

The fall was because the government slapped Mexico with visa restrictions to deal with what it regarded were a steady steam of bogus asylum claims coming out of the country, some claims being Mexican newly-weds honeymooning in Canada on our dime. Only 10% of asylum claims made by Mexican nationals are ever accepted. The rest are either rejected or abandoned.

Since much of the news out of Mexico concerns itself with the violence of the country's drug wars to hear someone say that Mexico is, for the most part, about as safe as Toronto may come as a shock. But to those who actually live there they seem quite happy to set the record straight for you.

This cuts to the heart of the problem of allowing inland refugee claims and the establishment of a legal apparatus to entertain them. Those hearing asylum claims and deciding on their validity here in Canada are too far removed from the countries producing the asylum claims to make a qualified decision since they have little context to work with. They know so little about those nations and may even be hard pressed to find them on a map. Operating in a bubble of near ignorance their opinion of a foreign country may be solely shaped by what they read in the news. This systemic ignorance is a major reason why Canada's asylum system is rife with abuse.

This is why the bulk of Canada's refugee claims should be assessed abroad by people possessed of a knowledge of the country they are working in and an understanding of its people and culture. Right now Immigration and Refugee Board judges are, for the most part, appointees for which the only qualification you need is to be well acquainted with the right people. If I'm not mistaken Queen Mila Mulroney, wife to King Brian the Buffoon, once appointed her hairdresser to the IRB. How's that for quality? One former IRB judge let his politics decide his cases for him. Essentially, Canada's refugee system and the IRB are inefficient mechanisms to deal with asylum claims. But when sinecure, six figure salary civil service jobs are at stake don't expect any change to happen any time soon.

It Looks Like We Didn't Need immigrants To Fund The CPP Afterall.

2011-10-25T18:30:00.005-04:00

One of the government's selling points to a weary Canadian public for upping immigration intake numbers beyond reason is that immigrants are needed to fund the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP). It is argued that retiring "baby boomers" will put a lot of stress on the CPP's resources testing its solvency. Therefore we need to import many immigrants in increasing numbers to work and provide the taxes needed to keep the CPP afloat.

It turns out the CPP is doing fine. So good in fact that there will be enough money in the fund to pay out CPP benefits for at least the next 75 years! This news should be taken along with a recent poll that found close to 70% of people polled planned to keep working in some fashion post-retirement.

It appears the argument suggesting that without immigration the CPP will become underfunded is just a scare tactic to compel Canadians to embrace an immigration system they otherwise have grave issues with and works against their interests.

We know that any positive effects mass immigration has on an ageing Canadian society are negligible at best; we know that mass immigration does not create jobs for Canadians; we know that mass immigration inadequately addresses skills shortages; we know that immigrants eat up more taxes than they produce as a group; and now we know that immigrants are not needed to support the CPP.

So can some please tell me exactly why we need to import record numbers of immigrants into Canada each and every year? Seriously! If I am supposed to surrender my country to succeeding waves of de facto colonizers then at least give me a legitimate reason why I should embrace this unwanted fate.

TFWs: Doing Work Canadians Want To Do.

2011-10-23T22:38:00.008-04:00

Know how we Canadians are incessantly told that immigrants do jobs Canadians don't want to do [at that pay mind you but they always stop the sentence short and I should add they are jobs immigrants don't want to do either (nor their Canadian born children) but will do until their permanent residency is assured)? Well, it turns out immigrants are doing jobs Canadians want to do after all.

I should be more accurate. They are temporary foreign workers (TFWs) to be precise, not immigrants per se, but as anyone in the immigration field will tell you there is noting more permanent than a temporary foreign worker.

I've been reading the comments to the article and it appears the story is a little more complicated than the reporter in the Edmonton Sun makes it out to be. I recommend you read the comments as well and if you do see if you can spot the company shill providing spin to the issue.

What appears clear to me is that this is yet another example of the business community using the immigration system to bust unions and drive down incomes, and consequently living standards, of Canadians.

One of the comments argues that the labour shortage in places like the Alberta tar sands is manufactured by purposely offering low wages and no benefits to drive away any domestic interest so that companies will have little option but to import TFWs. I think this is right on the mark. At the right pay coupled with other incentives you can easily attract the labour you desire but there seems to be no interest in doing this. There is also the option to train and retain employees but there is no interest in doing this either which appears to be especially true with the construction industry. If there is a labour shortage in this country Canadian businesses share some of the blame.

The issues here are thus. One is the use of foreigners - Filipinos and Portuguese in this case - to attack the living standards of Canadians by driving down incomes and eliminating benefits. This redistributes wealth upwards and into concentrated hands which in turn exacerbates the growing income divide. This should be a concern because concentrated wealth is harmful to the health of the economy. The second issue is private companies - private citizens - selecting who gets to immigrate to Canada. Immigration is largely a federal issue because it affects Canadian sovereignty and I don't believe unaccountable, private citizens should decide who gets to settle here. The third issue is the misnamed temporary foreign worker. There is no such thing as a temporary foreign worker since too many of them never leave even after their visa expires which leads to the last issue. This has to do with the business practice of externalizing costs which means dumping the cost of doing business onto someone else. In this case, private companies offer unattractive pay packages to discourage domestic interest so that they can pursue the cheaper imported foreigner option. They can recapture the costs of importing them by paying them less (which means less taxes being sent to Ottawa than a Canadian worker would send), offering little to no benefits, and then disposing of them once they have maximized their investment in them. The business then dumps the cost of the TFW onto the Canadian taxpayer because now in Canada the TFW does not always leave the country on his or her own volition once their visa expires. Along with the cost to the government of having to track them down to deport them the now illegal immigrant needs to meet his or her basic necessities which will necessitate a source of income of sorts. These are costs to Canadians in some way or another. The now illegal may make a refugee claim to extend his or her stay which means even more costs to Canadians. To the business community TFWs means profits. To the rest of us TFWs just aren't worth it.

When foreign workers were invading Canadian territory and negatively affecting the incomes of Canadian citizens, and jeopardizing their financial well being, the government did something about it to protect the interests of the citizens who elected it. It installed a head tax. Now it chaperones foreign workers into the Canadian labour market with no regard to how this affects Canadian incomes and Canadian society.

Sweden Hates Itself, Wants To Commit Suicide.

2011-10-18T19:32:00.004-04:00

Looks to Canada for ideas on to end it all.

As usual the real story is in the comments.

Pick One: Multiculturalism Or Preserving Canadian History Because You Cannot Have Both.

2011-10-15T16:26:00.005-04:00

Looks like Muslims are causing communal tension again this time with the residents of Markham, Ontario. The issue is over the approved construction of a 28,000-sq. ft. Mosque to be built on Markham's 16th avenue just east of St. Brother Andre Catholic School.

Opponents charge the Mosque will cause disruptive traffic congestion along with potential parking and traffic overflow issues. But the main concern, it appears, is the the Mosque will disrupt the historic atmosphere of Markham's town core. This is a real concern after all since, according to the report, Markham town council rejected the construction of a Taoist temple for that reason ruling it "out of character with the community" as if a 28,000-sq. ft. Mosque isn't. So as it is with Christianity it's Taoism out, Mohammed in.

Responding to the rejection of the design of the Taoist temple one of the architects stated that the project was "oriented to Steeles Avenue" and that "Steeles Avenue is a neighbourhood in transition" implying concerns over aesthetic compatibility with Markham's historic town core setting are nonsense. So here lies the conflict: you have two group - Taoists and Muslims - who want to effect cultural change on an apparent unreceptive townspeople who find value in preserving the historic character of the neighbourhood in which they live. Who's side should prevail?

It's not like the Taoists and Muslims do not have options. Facing negative public reaction they could do the neighbourly thing and move their projects elsewhere in town. This will be an act of mutual accommodation the residents of Markham may find endearing and consequently build good interfaith and cross-cultural relations. Of course this is not what happened.

When it comes to issues like this I have come to expect the introduced faiths and cultures to Canadian society to never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to build good relations with their Canadian neighbours. Prompted with a multiculti fuelled raging sense of entitlement the Taoists expect to build where they want to irrespective of the concerns of their neighbours and the hopes of the town council that they would build elsewhere. As for Muslims, with Allah on their side and doing His work they just do not give a damn as long as they get what they want even in the face of a petition wanting them to build elsewhere. We Canadians should be familiar with this by now: we accommodate them, they do not accommodate us.

The Taoists refuse to budge on point of principal. "If we are out of sight, we are out of mind," stated a spokesperson in the report which seems to suggest they want to shove their culture in as many faces as possible even if we are all content with ourselves by ignoring it.

For the Muslims I think the issue is the same but one better: it is also about conquest. The Mosque is not being built in any part of Markham. It is being built in it's historic town core. This is symbolic for several reasons.

One is it is a stamp of Islamic permanence by co-opting an historic setting. This suggests that Islam is now apart of local history ignoring the fact Islam had nothing to do with the establishment and development of the town itself. But this does not really matter in the long-term. What really matters now is that Islam can affect any future cultural direction the town makes which we can reasonably suppose will be done out of self interest.

This leads to the second reason: the appropriation of an historic setting implies that Markham's future, or at least a part of it, belongs to Islam; that pre-Islamic Markham is a thing of the past to be forgotten and possibly destroyed. The disconnect between a newly built Mosque designed to bring attention to itself and its pre-Islamic setting is making that statement. I do not think the choice to design the Mosque to reference the Taj Mahal in India is purely for aesthetic reasons. The Taj Mahal is one of Islam's grandest symbols of Islamic permanence in a region where Islam didn't exist before. It also harkens to the days of Muslim conquest in south Asia.

For any of this to be possible Markham's residents must allow the surrender and slow death of any semblance to the town's history. Muslims and Taosits (amongst others) cannot preserve their culture and history on Canadian soil alongside Canadian culture and history. Someone has to give and time and time again it is us Canadians doing the accommodating. This is at great cost to us because a people estranged from their history have no sense of self in the present and is lost to the future.

One last thing. The rejection of the Taoist temple was criticized as a case of NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard) in the linked article above by a proponent and I think this generally describes Canadian attitudes towards immigration and multiculturalism and why it is mistakenly perceived as being a "success" in this country as nations the world over are rejecting it. Canadians are typically warmer to mass immigration and multiculturalism so long as they do not have to see it. If they have places to go to escape it then they do it. That is why in Toronto there are white majority neighbourhoods almost free of any evidence of immigration and multiculturalism. And that is how the white residents in these neighbourhoods like it. They won't admit to it but actions speak louder than words and where they choose to live and what neighbours they want speaks volumes about their real preferences.

The residents of Markham do not have problems with Taoists and Muslims so long as they can be moved to the corner and out of the way where they can easily be ignored. This is so that they can go on for one more day pretending that the colonization of their town and country is not happening but this solution to their discomfort is superficial. The core of the problem is with our immigration system and the colonizing effect it is having on the country. If they truly cherish Markham's historic town core then they need to address this fact or else lose it forever.

If you are interested in signing the petition here it is again.

If Landlords Can Advertise For Muslim Only Tenants...

2011-10-10T22:06:00.009-04:00

...does that mean, if principles are to be applied equally, that Canada can choose to accept only non-Muslim citizens?

Isn't it the same thing only on different scales?

Are we to see this as yet another example of Muslims rejecting the principles of living in a multicultural society while hypocritically reaping the benefits of living in one? If they don't want to live with non-Muslims then why are they in Canada in the first place? Is Muslim immigration really about immigration or is it Islamic colonialism and invasion through immigration? And are demands for accommodation acts of conquest? If so then they are not here to live with us. They are here to eventually rule over us and turn Canada into an Islamic state. If that is true, even in the slightest, then we need to rethink Muslim immigration and the place Islam has within Canadian society.

In all honesty I happen to side with the landlords. It is their property and if they so desire want to rent to Muslim tenants only then so be it.

But this should be applied to the nation as well expressed through the immigration system. We only accept immigrants from all over the world, including Muslims, on principle but in reality there is nothing compelling us to do so. If Canadians want to keep the country white majority and preserve its European heritage then let our immigration system reflect that desire. Being Canadian is more than just the acceptance of a bunch of values that aren't even unique to the country anyway.

Seriously, what people whole heartedly embraces a future in which they will be rendered a minority through the steady importation of disparate and unassimilating peoples who at times find themselves in conflict with the host culture? I'm pretty sure all native Tibetans just love the Han Chinese colonization of their country and welcome each Han Chinese immigrant with open arms. Aren't they enriching them with their diversity after all?

Muslims can't have it both ways. They can't establish colonies and enforce "no go zones" - quasi mini Islamic states in western cities exclusive to Muslims - yet support indiscriminate, liberal immigration systems that let them waltz into western nations and set up their exclusive Muslims colonies in the first place. I think the populace has made it clear that they are uncomfortable with Muslim immigration and the ever growing presence of Islam within Canadian territory. So, if Muslims feel they have the right to deny non-Muslims the opportunity to live on Muslim owned properties in Canada then I guess the citizens of Canada have the right to deny Muslims the opportunity to enter and settle in the country.

Fair's fair, is it not?

As for Canada's Human Rights Commission let's stop kidding ourselves once and for all. They are not about the universal protection of human rights but a weapon of mass destruction aimed at the host European, Christian heritage culture of Canada chiefly conservative, white, working class males.

Coming Soon To A Workplace Near You: ATTACK OF THE TOXIC MINORITIES!!!

2011-10-02T16:53:00.010-04:00

The photo accompanying this Toronto Star article shows Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL) president Sid Ryan with a banner behind him displaying the slogan "solidarity works." Well, that might be true but apparently diversity doesn't. It appears the OFL is having some internal conflicts one of which can be blamed on the agenda they are pushing as good medicine down our collective throats.

It was revealed that a high ranking official levied charges of racial discrimination and harassment against OFL president Sid Ryan. The complainant, one Terry Downey, is the OFL's third highest ranking officer who is an African-Canadian woman born in Nova Scotia. It should be noted that she is a former investigator at the Human Rights Commission of Ontario which tells us she knows how the game is played. Ironically, she too is facing grievances from OFL staff relating to allegations of harassment and mistreatment. I guess what comes around goes around.

OFL infighting aside there is another issue here and that is the toxic minority in the workplace. What is a toxic minority? It can be anyone of any gender or race or religion or sexuality or a language group or a combination of any of all of those markers who will exploit their minority status to satisfy their ambitions or advance an agenda. Personal gain is their chief motivator and they will use what they can to get what they want, chief among their weapons is the law backed kangaroo court system called a Human Rights Commission.

Despite Terry Downey's accomplishments the ideology that guides the minds of those who have co-opted and lead Canada's labour movement leave this nagging at the back of one's mind that Terry Downey, among others, may have been a beneficiary of identity politics. She is, after all, non-white, female, and a single mother; three criteria that if played well can get one far in an environment were diversity and/or a leftist agenda determine the rules of the game. This is a shame really, since it casts doubt on an individual's competency as they are seen as the token "diversity hiree"; a stock character cast to pander to a particular group in a play seeking to appeal to as wide a range of an audience as possible. But it can be to one's benefit and if endowed with ambition you ride it for as far as it will take you.

In the OFL example one high ranking official charged another with racial discrimination and harassment. The allegations were eventually found baseless after a costly investigation and to me this is another example of victim politics strikes again. Victim politics tells us that if you are a woman, or a woman of colour, or a single mother, or a man of colour, or an immigrant, or disabled, etc., it's because you are being discriminated against and to deny you a job, or advancement, or any perk and benefit is a violation of your human rights. Terry Downey may have felt her ambitions were being frustrated because she is a woman and a "racialized" member of society and for no other reason but. So to show that discrimination is not at play Terry Downey should get what she wants because she is a woman and a "racialized" member of society. See how that works?

The University of Windsor's Faculty of Law provides another example. About a year ago the Faculty was looking for a new dean. It ended up not hiring anyone at that time but one of the unsuccessful candidates wasn't going to hear any of it. Claiming discrimination on the basis of race and sex Dr. Emily Carasco sought to force the University to rethink their decision and give her the job anyway. The University should have seen it coming because Dr. Carasco is an apparent grievance monger.

Arguably one of the most asinine examples of late was when an Ottawa couple was awarded $12,000 to be paid by Air Canada because a stewardess was unable to assist them in the French language.

The Employment Equity Commission in Ontario during the governing years of the NDP under the leadership of Bob Rae provides another example and I'm certain there are more.

The lessons here are obvious: 1) if a member of one of the government's official victim groups (which is anyone who is not an able bodied English speaking white male) gets a job or a promotion then its due to competency and accomplishment and if not then its because of discrimination necessitating an investigation and possible rectification; 2) a member of an official victim group should be accommodated everywhere and at all times and if that is not possible then compensation is in order to the benefit of the victim. This being entrenched in the psyche of our multicultural society should we at all be surprised when immigrant and minority groups act like spoiled children throwing a tantrum every time they don't get what they want?

What fuels toxic minority behaviour is a sense of entitlement germinated in the identity politics of perpetual victimhood which itself is rooted in Marxist ideology. This works in concert with multiculturalism which encourages immigrants to feel they deserve special consideration and exemption in the form of accommodation and diversity quotas. So on the one had they are victims and therefore deserve stuff while on the other hand they are different and thus special and deserve stuff as well. The result is an individual with a raging sense of entitlement that if they are denied the stuff they expect to receive the conclusion they come to is systemic discrimination as oppression which means lawsuits and human rights complaints and tribunals and nag, nag, nag.

Small business owners beware. The internal complaint brought against OFL president Sid Ryan cost more than $350,000 dollars in union dues to bring to resolution. That's $350,000 dollars in union dues! Not only is it a large sum of money wasted on nothing it also means Sid Ryan didn't have to pay a cent for his defence. Other people did via the OFL. Now imagine if you are a small business owner and one of your employees brought a similar suit against you. How will you handle it? How do you address charges of racism and sexism? You can defend yourself against wrongful dismissal suits by proving incompetency on the part of the employee. But how do you prove you're not racist or sexist? Do you have $350,000 to spend on a legal defence because few are in as fortunate a position as Sid Ryan to have other people pay it. The complainant on the other hand has their case paid for care of the taxpayer. They have nothing to lose.

In these situations the small business owner will likely capitulate to the irritant because the other option is to fight the complaint which itself is financially punishing and thus risky possibly forcing you out of business as a consequence. This is a reason why small businesses are often exempt from the dogma of diversity for diversity's sake. When it comes to diversity they simply cannot afford the risks it brings with it. Diversity from this vantage point is not good for business.

Larger organizations can absorb the costs of toxic minorities and may see it as a cost of doing business. Canada's major banks, as an example, are tripping over each other to sell financial services to the ever growing immigrant and non-white demographics. As a business strategy they'll hire people who represent target ethnic markets not because the person is possessed of any particular competency but more so to act as a magnet to attract to the bank members of target ethnic markets along with their money. You see this practice clearly on major TV news networks as ethnic talking-head newscasters of no real appeal aside from their telegenic qualities feed us the news while offering no sense of why we should take them or what they are talking about seriously. They are tokens chosen to appeal to particular ethnic markets whose eyes and ears are valued to advertisers at the cost of delivering a newscast of any real substance. To see this tokenism one only need to ask why a major Canadian market like Toronto with its sizeable black population displays a poverty of black faces on the evening news while one cannot go for more than ten minutes without seeing a face from the over represented Asian and south Asian communities. Follow the money and see which ethnic groups are more upwardly mobile and you'll see which ethnic communities are most valued by advertisers and how they influence hiring decisions.

Smaller operations, if they choose to embrace diversity in its hiring practices, better be prepared to embrace the consequences as well and the government appears intent on forcing those consequences on them. One way it does this is through the social pressure generated by a government intent on forcing diversity in all it shapes and sizes onto a passive albeit unreceptive population. Another way is through a kind of rewards system by doling out lucrative government contracts to businesses that best adhere to the diversity dogma. Small businesses will feel compelled to adopt a diversity quota in its workforce and this includes the hiring of potentially toxic minorities even if they are not the best candidates.

To illustrate imagine a work environment that is all white males. Now imagine a position opened up at the work place. Say there are ten applicants of which one is a white woman, another is a non-white woman, and another is a non-white male. Odds are the best candidate may be one of the remaining white males but even if that is the case that still leaves you open to a grievance suit. The failed applicants can allege a culture of discrimination benefiting white males and file a human rights complaint. This will cost the business time and money but not to the complainant who gets their case paid for by the tax payer. To avoid this and to bring diversity into the workplace the business selects the diversity option and hires one of the non-white male candidates. This still doesn't free them of future grievance suits since promotions may be viewed as another avenue of white male privilege if the non-white male employee feels their advancement within the organization is not happening fast enough if at all.

How promoting diversity in the workplace is a good thing is never fully explained. Some argue that it helps make a business, indeed the nation, competitive internationally but this has not, and cannot, be verified. I don't see how choosing the diversity candidate over the best candidate makes you competitive when the potential toxicity of the diversity candidate can make the workplace a poisonous environment. Choosing diversity - especially for it's own sake - does not guarantee competitiveness, or efficiency, or innovation for that matter. The more likely outcome will be mediocrity.

This post was inspired by this video.

Proving The Fraser Institute Right By Getting It Wrong.

2011-09-22T19:36:00.003-04:00

A study conducted by two economists for Metropolis British Columbia (who?) was released in response to the Fraser Institute's own study which concluded that "in the fiscal year 2005/06 the immigrants on average received an excess of $6,051 in benefits over taxes paid" leading to a the fiscal burden in that year estimated to be between $23.6 billion and $16.3 billion. The Metropolis study seems to agree with that conclusion to a degree but it argues that the costs are not great enough to be of a concern. How does it do that? It picks an earlier date to work with and that's where it goes astray.

The Fraser study picks 1987 as the date from which to make it's analysis. The Metropolis study goes back to 1970. Now, it's important to understand the relevance of a base year.

The Fraser study picked 1987 because that's the year Canada's immigration system was being revamped (at the behest of the banking sector I suspect) to become the burdensome mess that it is today. By picking 1987 the Fraser study is demarcating a difference between a pre and post 1987 immigration system. It is, in effect, comparing two different immigration systems to make arguments for what worked and what did not and to suggest how we can fix it.

The Metropolis study, on the other hand, goes back to 1970 and lumps everything into one immigration system. Here's the problem with that. By doing so all the costs of the current immigration system can be masked or ameliorated by previous cohorts of immigrants who brought value to the nation instead of mostly absorbing the benefits. It's like having a really mediocre sports team win the championship because of three star players who do most of the work and score the majority of points, but once all three are gone from the team it descends into last place.

This is what's referred to as moving the goal posts. If you don't like the results of an argument you just change the parameters until it satisfies your position. I mean why stop at 1970? Why not go back to 1950 and take advantage of the golden age of capitalism? How about 1920? How about 1867, the year of Confederation? Why not 1534 when Jacques Cartier first explored the Gulf of St. Lawrence? That way you have over 470 years of Canadian economic history to play with.

The Fraser Institute is not against immigration but it is highly critical of the current immigration system and indeed we do have a different immigration system now than we did in 1970. For starters, the immigration system was more selective, had smaller intake levels which itself was influenced by the nation's economic prospects. Today, it's the sky's-the-limit-anyone-from-anywhere-it-don't-matter-how-the-economy-is-doing free for all. There's a difference and the current immigration is burdensome to the country, quite possible to the extent of hurting the economy.

What's funny is that despite it's efforts to defang the Fraser study the Metropolis study still concludes that immigration is a cost to Canadians at $450 for each immigrant per year! This makes the Fraser study's conclusions all the more plausible. It's raison d'etre it seems is to say the Fraser Institute is right but not by so much. If they are unable to salvage any fiscal benefit of immigration to Canadians by going back to 1970 then it seems likely that the immigration system has been terribly financially burdensome to the country as the Fraser Institute argues. It is a losing investment where all the benefits are eaten up by immigration with little benefit to Canadians.

Reading the CTV news piece on it makes me think there is an agenda afoot by Metropolis BC primarily to keep immigration lax and plentiful so as to direct funds to those who otherwise without the immigration system would have to find alternative work. Metropolis BC is almost exclusively funded by tax dollars and it exits to "place in the public realm relevant material that will aid rational discussion on Canada's emerging immigration policy issues" whatever that's supposed to mean.

The CTV piece also appears to be a plug for S.U.C.C.E.S.S., a mostly tax dollar funded social service agency that "provides services in settlement, English as a second language training, employment, family and youth counseling, business and economic development, health care, social housing and community and volunteer development."

Both Metropolis and S.U.C.C.E.S.S. are dependant on tax dollars for their existence, an existence based on the "need" for dialogue and services that pander to an immigrant community. More immigrants, more tax dollars. Less immigrants, less money. In other words they're rent-seeking organizations.

To show their usefulness, at least in the case of S.U.C.C.E.S.S., the article provides the example of a Japanese immigrant who was unable to find work in Vancouver so S.U.C.C.E.S.S. helped her open a flower shop. But if she was unable to find work then why is she in Canada if there are no jobs for her here? How is her opening a flower shop beneficial to Canadians? How many jobs does that create and how many are well paying? How does it improve our standard of living? It contributes to economic activity but so does a crime wave. In any case economic activity does not equate quality of life.

The truth is her arrival in Canada is illustrative of the problem of the system. We are bringing in too many immigrants than the economy needs. The jobs are not there at least not the good ones. She should not have been allowed entry and permanent residency but her being her does provide work and government funding for the like of Metropolis BC and S.U.C.C.E.S.S. and that is what this is really all about, not the over all benefit of the country.

Reminder: You Have Until Sept. 19 To Complete The Consultation On Immigration Levels And Mix.

2011-09-05T13:34:00.006-04:00

You can participate by going here.

In Dalton McGuinty's Ontario Immigrants Are More Valuable Than Canadians.

2011-09-05T12:42:00.003-04:00

I just read this.

"People who hire an immigrant for their first job in Ontario would be eligible for a tax credit on the first $10,000 of costs associated with the hiring, a plan that raised some concern on the Liberal conference call.

"It reminded me a little bit of the potential blow back that we could see by positioning it from the opposition as an affirmative action program," said Steele."

Here's the source.

It's infuriating that immigrant vote pandering politics never ceases to reach new lows. While many Ontarians are out of work, underemployed, or precariously employed the ruling Liberal party plans to use the very tax dollars the unemployed and underemployed paid and pay into the provincial coffers to get foreigners - newly arrived people to Canada who haven't paid as many taxes and frankly shouldn't even be here in the first place - into the workforce quicker than Canadians just to hold onto power. It's like having a scarred and bleeding individual pay for salt just so you can throw onto their wounds.

It should be stressed that this is the leaked Liberal party platform for the upcoming provincial Ontario election which I suppose means that it isn't official and is subject to revision. Nevertheless it underscores the psychosis of a political party desperate to hold onto power and save the political careers of mediocre men and women. It's enough to make you consider giving them your vote.

To pursue such a policy is socially dangerous. It can only build resentment towards immigrants by Canadians and foster hostility. It is politics of division, not inclusion, by creating an us vs. them mentality.

It also causes us to question the necessity of immigrants in the first place. If businesses are so desperate for labour and we need immigrants to meet that demand then why does the business community need to be bribed with $10,000 dollars of tax payer money to hire an immigrant?

What it does make clear is that the Liberal party of Ontario is accepting the very real possibility of being defeated at the polls come Oct. 6. Immigrant/ethnic vote pandering politics is a weathervane to how confident a ruling party is with its hold on power. The greater the largess the weaker they feel.

The Real Story Is In The Comments.

2011-08-21T12:41:00.005-04:00

It's gotten to the point now that after reading the headline of an immigration related story in the news I jump to the comments first before I read the article, that is if commenting is allowed. It mostly has to do with the fact that pro mass immigration opinion has become so dependant on discredited assumptions that they have become predictable and boring. It's almost the equivalent of reading studies by scientists who still believe the sun and moon revolve around the earth. Eventually you start to lose patience with what is clearly nonsense but I guess they believe that if they repeat that nonsense often enough others will start to believe it too. If the comments section are any indication of their success, however, then they need to work harder.

For instance this Globe and Mail opinion piece tells us that "More immigrants are in Canada's national interest." The reasons given are, as is typical, assumptive while ignoring the negative impact immigration has on the host society.

For example the authors tells us that "migrants stand to earn as much as 15 times more by moving to another country to work" while not telling us that by moving abroad immigrants decease the earning capacity of those who live in the receiving countries. It's the standard case of "better life for them, worse life for us." That being the case then why should we, as members of the host society, be receptive to existing excessively high immigration levels and the prospects of more?

The authors also utilize the debunked assumption that "Those with the greatest propensity to move are educated young people with access to resources and networks for migration." This is gibberish in the face of reality. It may have been true at one time but it is clearly not true today. Using official Canadian government data we know that less than 25% of immigrants who come to Canada are assessed for any real marketable job skills. The Centre For Immigration Policy Reform puts that figure as low as 17%. The rest are either spouses and dependants, aged relatives who will never work a day in Canada, unskilled sponsored family members, refugees, or the bogus investor class which is nothing more than citizenship for hire, all of whom require no pertinent job or language skills to enter Canada. As for being young, that has been less the case since the 1990s when immigration laws were relaxed and when intake numbers were inflated. As a result the average age of immigrants has increased to the mid 30s, up from the mid 20s when Canada had a sane immigration system. This is mostly due to the fact that Canada is not attracting young skilled workers as the authors want us to believe but rather is importing ageing and aged immigrants instead, made worse by the importation of aged relative imported by the immigrants to attract social benefits unto themselves - like Old Aged Security - while dumping them on our health care system.

It became clear to me, half way through the piece, that the authors were talking out of their asses and if you read the comments to the piece its clear the readers arrived at the same conclusion as well.

In another Globe and Mail article we are informed about Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's meeting in Vancouver with the usual suspects of parasites and rent seekers of the immigration industry. As is expected we are entreated to the usual cry of "more, more, more" from those who make their living off the immigration system while those of us who have to live with the consequences of their selfish motives cry "less, less, less."

For as long as I have been following immigration issues in the "main stream media" it has become increasingly apparent to me that what is presented as consensus opinion in the editorials and op-ed pieces in the nation's major news media outlets and journals of record (which also includes the editorializing embedded in news reports of alleged objectivity) it rarely gels with majority opinion. Indeed, this was the conclusion of a recent Sun TV opinion poll on immigration. Yet despite this the bien pensant still dismiss it as marginal thought on the fringes of debate. This isn't of any surprise since they surround themselves with like thinking individuals and from an optics point of view it would appear to them that they are the majority but in reality they are like the ostrich that hides its head in the sand whereas instead of sand think academia or journalism.

The comments section illustrate that Canadian tendency to say one thing in the public square but the opposite among the "just between you and me" crowd. It provides someone with a comfortable level of anonymity to say what they really think. If a survey of the comments to immigration related news stories over the past few years can be taken as a reading of the pulse of the nation then a majority of Canadians are saying they are displeased with the immigration system and what it is doing to their country. They want change.

Immigration Is Clogging Up The Federal Court System.

2011-08-17T20:04:00.004-04:00

In this interview with Brian Lilley by Ezra Levant on the Sun TV program The Source Lilley states that close to half of federal court cases in most months concern themselves with immigration.

I ventured to the Federal Court of Canada web page and looked to see for myself if what he said is true.

It's hard to tell if close to half the cases are immigration related but it's easy to see that a significant number of them are.

It seems immigration has not only done a great job of extending wait times in the nation's hospitals - putting the health of Canadians at risk - by denying Canadians access to immediate health care but it is also clogging up the nation's courts system on the tax payer's dime no less.

One has to wonder how much money could have been saved if these people were not even allowed to set foot on Canadian soil in the first place. These funds could have been invested in productive ventures that could help improve the lives of Canadians. Instead they are being flushed down a judicial toilet in unproductive court cases that in the end will either extend the stay of an undesirable or they'll be allowed to stay giving the nation another immigrant albatross to wear around the neck.

Part of the problem, as Lilley points out, are unelected, unaccountable judges creating policy at the bench. They have made themselves obstacles to executing a functional immigration system that serves the needs of the nation. But as long as the government allows laws like the Singh decision to remain in effect then who are they to complain? They should go to the source of the problem, not complain about the symptoms it creates and address it with band aid solutions.

Survey Says: Majority Of Canadians Want Immigration Reduced.

2011-08-02T19:37:00.007-04:00

A recent poll tells us, yet again, how out of touch Canada's morally and intellectually superior elites are with the rest of the nation.

Since I have been so lazy of late when it comes to blogging I have to thank Sun TV News for covering this issue.

So, take it away Brian Lilley, I couldn't have said it better myself.

When you share the majority of opinion you are not marginal. You are the mainstream!

Folks, we are legion.

Have Your Say.

2011-07-31T21:01:00.004-04:00

The government is allowing public consultations regarding the immigration system and ImmigrationWatchCanada.org informs us on how we can have our say.

Admission Of Guilt: Kenney Acknowledges The Immigration System Is Inadequate At Alleviating Aging Demographic.

2011-07-23T17:39:00.003-04:00

If you don't have the blog Blazing Cat Fur bookmarked and read it often I recommend you do so. From him I give you this link.

He has posted a video interview of Immigration Minister Jason Kenney by some talking head at the CBC. They discuss the revocation of citizenship of 1800 people who obtained it illegally but what struck me was when he was asked about immigration's role in addressing Canada's aging demographic. At the 5:10 mark he states "merely to maintain the current age ratio of younger to older people in our population through immigration would require more than quadrupling immigration levels to over 1 million a year." In other words the immigration system, aside from the total collapse of the border, cannot help Canada's aging demographic for the better. Immigration critics have been pointing this out for years and it's nice to hear a Minister of Immigration finally admit it. Note that it would take more that 1 million just to maintain the current ratio. How much more would be required just to reverse it?

Despite this Jason Kenney comes off as being weary about increasing levels and I can imagine why. Simply put, it is too damn expensive as is with diminishing returns with each new cohort; the immigration system costs more than it is worth with immigrants reaping the benefits at the expense of Canadians. For this reason it's financially unfeasible to up immigration targets high enough to reverse an aging demographic trend.

The solution I offer is to cut immigration dramatically to 60,000 or so and restrict it to young, preferably single, economic migrants, refugees aside. Family reunification would be non-existent. I'd revoke the Singh decision allowing for the dissolution of the IRB and have refugees vetted abroad. There are billions in tax dollars to be saved by doing so and with this money reinvest it into Canadian families as a means to up the birth rate. Right now Canadian tax dollars are being wasted on under-performing foreign born nationals.

Speaking of under-performing the link above introduces us to this story as well. I can't think of a better way to tackle Canada's skills shortage than with the importation of 100 Somali family members, can you?

Immigration Lawyers Address Canada's 'Broken' Immigration System.

2011-07-22T21:32:00.003-04:00

Blogger Vlade Tepes posted videos of immigration lawyers offering critiques of the immigration system. Watch them here.

The first video is an interview with an immigration lawyer made by Charles Adler on Sun TV News and I am thankful that Sun News is tackling an issue all major news networks across Canada are either too scared or too self-interested to discuss critically. I'm not a cheerleader for the network but they are providing a much absent view from the right on issues affecting Canada.

The other videos are a presentation by immigration lawyer Julie Taub uploaded in three parts. She offers some familiar insight but some very revealing information as well, highlighting the loopholes that enable the rampant fraud that is coming to characterize the immigration system. Some say Canada's immigration system is "broken" or "dysfunctional" but after listening to Julie Taub one may even go so far as to say it is corrupt.

Immigrants Hardest Hit By Recent Recession.

2011-07-19T20:29:00.002-04:00

File this under DUH!

The unemployment gap between immigrant and Canadian-born workers has grown since the global economic meltdown set off in late 2008 and newcomers in Greater Toronto were most affected, says the study being released Friday.{...}

“Recent newcomers already experience significant marginalization in the labour market. What is surprising is they are more badly affected than the other groups and the gap has kept widening,” said York University geography professor Philip Kelly, the report’s lead investigator.{...}

While there is a longer-term trend toward a slightly lower rate of full-time employment for Canadian-born and established immigrants in the last five years, the percentage of recent newcomers working 30 or more hours a week fell from 86.1 to 82.9 per cent.

It suggests new immigrants have found themselves in precarious part-time employment in larger numbers, the report said.

Oh, by the way. We have a skills shortage, or so I'm told.

1800 Stripped Of Citizenship, No Charter Right To Health Care For Illegals, And Immigration Is Down In First Quarter.

2011-07-19T19:14:00.006-04:00

There's some good news to report.

First up 1800 people have been stripped of citizenship due to immigration fraud on their part. My response is, "That's it!?" There's got to be more than that but at least it's something. What's remarkable about this is that since Confederation a total of 67 people have had their citizenship revoked. Now, in one fell swoop, 1800 people will lose their citizenship! I hope this isn't the last we hear of something like this.

Next, the government won a recent court challenge that if they lost would drastically undermine the financial viability of the public health care system. A Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that "An illegal immigrant has no right to free medical intervention or ongoing health care under the Charter of Rights." This is an important court ruling because it will give Canada the legal teeth to prevent "medical tourism". Immigration already brings undue stress to the nation's health care system and can bankrupt it on its own, thank you very much. It doesn't need the help of medical tourists.

And finally, immigration is down by 25% this first quarter. Before we celebrate, however, that's a 25% reduction in comparison to the insane number of 280,000 Canada admitted last year, an amount the government recognizes as being outstanding in relation to official targets. In other words we are still on track to accepting more immigrants we actually need and Canadians want to have around. I should point out it is worth reading the comments to the Toronto Star article. It has been said that the real story is in the comments and if that is the case my assumption that Canadians have become weary of immigration and immigrants are not too far fetched. Perhaps they are finally waking up to the long-term consequences of Canada's immigration system and what it means for the future of their country.

One last thing I should mention. The government has introduced reforms to the asylum system that will take effect in December but the reforms will only be applied to claims made after that date. Claims in the backlog will be handled under the older determination system. Some, it seems, were hoping that an asylum will be granted to those in the backlog like the one that was issued in 1989 when the IRB was formed but that doesn't seem to be the case this time. The government intends to keep the backlog and clear it in time. So no blanket amnesty for the many seeking to immigrate to Canada by abusing the asylum system.

Pride, Pride, Everywhere!

2011-07-17T13:29:00.003-04:00

So we have black pride, asian pride, brown pride, desi pride, native pride, and white shame.

Oy Vey, Again With The Skills Shortage.

2011-07-08T13:44:00.006-04:00

Human Resources Minister Diane Finley announced the launch of a website that will "help Canadians identify which sectors of the economy are currently hiring and where job growth is likely to occur in future years."

The Globe and Mail report notes that "Even during the height of the recession, Ms. Finley said, there were many industries that suffered from a labour shortage because they could not find workers with the required skill sets."

Before we allow ourselves to readily accept the claim that Canada is facing a "skills crisis" - a crisis that both business and their tools in Ottawa have vested interests in promoting regardless of how true it is - we should give consideration to some relevant information.

Linked to the Globe article is a report informing us that Canada pumps out the jobs in June. It tells us jobs in transportation and warehousing were up while jobs in the professional, scientific and technical services sectors were lost. And oh yeah, Canada faces a "skills crisis" by the way.

Furthermore from the Globe we read:

...even though self-employment was way down, there’s good reason to be skeptical that the quality of jobs being created is improving. Not only were most of the gains in services rather than goods-producing sectors of the economy, but part-time job gains outpaced full-time gains after the latter had posted a few solid months in a row. Plus, the annual pace of wage growth slipped to 2 per cent, well below the current rate of inflation and the slowest year-over-year pace since December. {...}

Moreover, total hours worked rose at the slowest annual clip since the first quarter of 2010 -- 1.2 per cent -- which suggests many people who are returning to the work force may be doing so only because they’ve swallowed hard and taken something that doesn’t really replicate the job they lost during the recession.{...}

Also, while the private sector and the public sector both saw job growth in June, governments everywhere are cutting back and it seems extremely unlikely that the public hiring seen during the month -- largely linked to temporary work on the 2011 Census -- will be repeated.

Related to that last point the government is facing budgetary constraints and looking to trim the public sector workforce as a means to address it. The RCMP slashed recruit training by 84% to under 300 recruits this year, down from 1,800 in 2009.

Since Canada is facing a "skills crisis" it should leave one scratching their head to learn that Phds are having a difficult time finding work.

...Canada’s employment rate for PhDs lags behind many European countries, the United States and Australia. Comparable data was not available for many countries including emerging economies such as China, India and Brazil.{...}

In Canada, the unemployment rate for those with PhDs in the natural sciences, it was about 3 per cent; for engineering it was closer to 4 per cent. In the U.S., it was slightly higher than 1 per cent in natural sciences and 1 per cent in engineering.

Is there really a "skills crisis" or is the labour market flooded with so much labour that employers have become unrealistically demanding of qualifications and as a consequence have become extra picky?

Perhaps the truth is that there isn't a "skills crisis" at all but rather the private sector is failing to produce jobs that meet the skills that Canadians posses. Canada has the best educated labour force out of all the G8 nations with the highest percentage of its labour market participants with some form of post-secondary training.

Yet out of all the industrialized nations in the world Canada is one of the likeliest to see its citizens live abroad. Nearly 2.9 million Canadians, almost 10% of the total population, live abroad primarily in the United States making Canada second only to the U.K. out of all industrialized nations in the size of its overseas diaspora. And these are mostly born and bred Canadians not the Canadian-of-convenience variety like the roughly 45,000 "Canadians" living in Lebanon or the some 300,000 "Canadians" living in Hong Kong. There are several reasons why someone would chose to live abroad but I am certain chief among them is employment.

With a highly educated workforce coupled with a high propensity to live and work abroad tells us something about the state of the Canadian labour market. Simply put, the jobs are not there at least not ones that are well paying, stable, and with benefits. True, there may be shortages in health care or the trades but these are not job producing professions in and of themselves and in the case of the trades are oftentimes short-term and contractual. Indeed, the Canadian job is increasingly being described as precarious. This is work that is low paying and insecure.

I believe the "skills crisis" in Canada is being over exaggerated. Hell, even U.S. businesses complain of a skills shortage but the idea is laughable when given further consideration. But the "skills crisis" is thrown around in both countries to promote immigration as a solution while in practice is to be used with the underhanded purpose of attacking the incomes of working Canadians and Americans. If Canada was serious about addressing the "skills crisis" with immigration then why are only 17% of immigrants admitted to Canada come as skilled immigrants.

Even if there is a "skills crisis" is there not enough idle labour in Canada that can be trained to address it? Do we really need 280,000 immigrants (and growing) a year? Did we ever? Why are billions being wasted to import a deluge of foreign born nationals when that money could be redirected into training the Canadian labour force?

And is the continued mass importation of people from China, India, and the Philippines, indeed from most of Asia, going to alleviate it? There is a vast pool of labour of comparable skill and competency to be found in the depressed labour markets of the United States, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece. If a reduction of immigration intake numbers is out of the question then perhaps a shift away from Asia and back to Europe and to the Americas is warranted.

Jesus Out, Mohammed In!

2011-06-30T21:52:00.004-04:00

When I was kid going through the Ontario public school system I remember there was a time when the Lord's Prayer was recited at the start of the school day. That ritual was eventually ended. The arguments for doing so seem reasonable; that the public school system shouldn't show favouritism toward any particular faith and should be neutral in that regard.

Unless that religion happens to be Islam.

I find myself seeing Muslims less so as immigrants but more so acting as a vanguard seeking to convert Canada to Islam and deliver the nation to the caliphate (or at least portions of it). Who needs the sword or Al Quran when you have an immigration system to exploit?

Birds Of A Feather...

2011-06-30T21:01:00.002-04:00

Flock together.

It's interesting that children in their most innocent and untainted existence show signs of racial preference for their own. It makes me wonder if racial preference is innate.

You can argue that the children will grow out of it as they develop a mature outlook on life but do they really? If our own lived existence tells us anything is that we don't. When the majority of whites live in white majority neighbourhoods and communities, avoid certain universities because they are "too Asian", and develop social groups the are mostly white you really can't take them seriously when they proclaim their love of racial diversity and multiculturalism. It's all talk and talk is cheap. And it's not restricted to whites either since the same behaviour is evident in Canada's non-white population as well.

That being the case then what success can there be for the kind of multiracial society Canada's elites are gambling the nation's future on? In that so far unrealized future I can't imagine one saying "diversity is our strength" while keeping a straight face.

Repeal The Singh Decision: So A Sri Lankan Tamil, Somali, And A Muslim Walk Into A Barber Shop...

2011-06-23T23:20:00.009-04:00

Here's a joke that illustrates quite well our refugee system. Just think of the barber shop as Canada.

Though the punchline is executed at the expense of Muslims you can substitute them for Sri Lankan Tamils, Somalis, Lebanese, Mexicans, well pretty much the majority of post Singh decision asylum seekers actually, and it's still funny because it's true.

What's not funny is that the joke is on us Canadians because we're not the ones laughing. We need to repeal the Singh decision.

Supreme Court Rules Sponsors Must Repay Welfare Costs Of 'Rogue' Immigrants.

2011-06-20T21:02:00.004-04:00

It's nice to post some good news every once and a while.

From the Globe and Mail article:

The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants.

The landmark ruling involves the cases of eight Ontario immigrant families that sponsored relatives from abroad, and who later went on social assistance.

Under federal immigration law, the sponsors agreed to repay any welfare payments that their new arrivals may have incurred after they got to Canada.

The high court, in a unanimous 9-0 ruling, overturned an earlier Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the sponsors, all of whom claimed various hardships.

The individual cases involved repayments of $10,000 to $94,000 in social assistance to the Ontario government.

I don't know to what extent sponsorship breakdowns occur but to my understanding they are more frequent then what is cared to be admitted. Hopefully this ruling will put an end to it or at least curb it by providing the government with the legal muscle to go after these people who try to defraud the system.

Canada's liberal immigration laws and the lax enforcement of them have subjected the country to this kind of scam, in fact it encouraged and rewarded it, where a landed immigrant sponsors a relative who then goes "rogue" and winds up on social assistance since the sponsor never had pretensions to fulfill his or her duties to being with. It was purely a means to get someone into the country. That the law was challenged in an Ontario court says a lot about those who brought the challenge and the kinds of immigrants we are importing into the country along with their raging sense of entitlement which seems to be a requisite for immigrating nowadays.

To be fair I will say that the majority of immigrants to Canada do not go on or are on some form of social assistance. Most are hardworking and pay taxes. But they do drive down incomes and contribute to the increased cost of living, especially in our cities, so having said that I am left to wonder what exactly are the benefits of mass immigration. Oh right, the ethnic restaurants Canada's white, childless, upper class, cultural elites like so much. Gotcha.

Bruce Bawer & Hege Storhaug Speak in Ottawa

2011-06-06T19:01:00.004-04:00

June 8, 2011, 7 PM
Library and Archives Canada
395 Wellington
Admission $20 ($10 for students/seniors)

Tickets available at:
Compact Music (785 Bank, 190 Bank)
Ottawa Festivals (47 William)
Collected Works (1242 Wellington)
or online here:

Please join us for an amazing evening when Bruce Bawer returns to Ottawa with his colleague Hege Storhaug to speak on the problems of immigration in Europe.

Hege Storhaug is the information director of Human Rights Service in Norway and the author of several books on immigration and integration, forced marriage, women in Pakistan, and related subjects.

Bruce Bawer is an internationally-acclaimed author, whose recent book is "Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom". and here are some short reviews:

"Bruce Bawer has yet again written an excellent book....I truly hope that it will serve as an eye-opener for everyone."
Geert Wilders

“Written with an urgency and clarity that makes it hard to stop reading and re-reading it. It should be studied by all who wish to understand the forces at work in the West that make an Islamic ‘House of Peace’ a brewing nightmare.”
Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Bruce has translated Hege's new book, "But the Greatest of These Is Freedom: The Consequences of Immigration in Europe."

The authorized English translation of the explosive Norwegian bestseller about the consequences of immigration in Europe.

From Norwegian and Danish reviews:

“A necessary and brave book.”
Henrik Gade Jensen, JYLLANDS-POSTEN

“A sharp and necessary book, one of the most important of the season.”
Lars Saabye Christensen

“A painful but necessary book to read. It is the most important contribution ever to the Norwegian immigration and integration debate….It should be obligatory reading for everyone who works with foreigners in Norway.”
Tore Andreas Larsen, FREMSKRITT

“If Hege Storhaug’s revelations about how our country and other Western societies are being attacked by Islamic fundamentalists…are not taken seriously by the powerful politicians, we will, within a few years, see a different, illiberal European in which a mentality out of the Middle Ages will wield absolute power…..One of the most important opinion books that have come along in recent years.”\
Oddbjørn Solstad, DRAMMENS TIDENDE

Fred Litwin

Free Thinking Film Society

www.freethinkingfilmfest.ca

(613) 261-9060

I was asked to promote the event of which I am happy to. If you happen to be in the Ottawa area or can make it there on short notice then this may be something you would want to check out. If not then at least you are now introduced to the names of Bruce Bawer and Hege Storhaug.

I must admit I am not familiar with the work of either speaker but judging from the promo Muslim immigration and integration seems to be the key discussing point.

I don't write about much about Muslim immigration to Canada because there are many others covering the issue, like husband and wife bloggers blazing cat fur and five feet of fury as well as jihad watch, Mark Steyn, and others. For me to do so as well would be redundant.

I will say this on the matter. Generally Muslim immigrants are no different than any other. Driven by self interest they are lured to shopping mall Canada and the materialistic fantasies a consumer society such as ours promises. To them, integration starts and stops at buying stuff on credit.

And like all immigrants they too come with baggage but in their particular case that baggage happens to be Islam, a religion that is more than just a belief system but is also a political organization with its own system of jurisprudence called Sharia.

Making things worse is the Islamic ambition of a world wide caliphate. How many Muslim immigrants share in this ambition I really cannot say but considering the community support given to the implementation of Sharia in western jurisdictions and the incessant demands for religious accommodation (as they excuse themselves from ever doing the same) I have to say the number is disconcertingly high. This makes them more than just immigrants. It makes them missionaries who will deliver the nation to Allah either by persuasion, the law, or simply overwhelming the host culture by numbers. Demography is destiny and if Muslims are the majority then they will set the course of the country. If Muslim dominated neighbourhoods in European cities are any indication of how they will behave when they constitute the national majority then we need to address the perils of Muslim immigration in the open.

Mississauga's 'Colony of Wives' Illustrates That There Are No Jobs For Immigrants.

2011-05-29T16:23:00.002-04:00

So why, again, are we importing record numbers of them?

Articles like the one linked to above mask the real story behind a, yet another, immigrant puff piece concocted to curry sympathy from the reader instead of critically thinking about the issue.

In a nutshell the article is about immigrant women, in this instance from Pakistan, who suffer the loneliness and anxieties of being single mothers in Canada while their husbands work abroad.

When I read the story the first thing that came to my mind was to ask why are they here? The article admits that their husbands were unable to find suitable work in Canada and so work abroad while their families remain here in Canada so that they can do time to secure Canadian citizenship. So if they, the husbands, were unable to find suitable work in Canada then why are they here and, more importantly, why did Canada let them immigrate here in the first place since there was no real demand for the labour?

What's striking is that this phenomenon is so commonplace that it has allowed the creation of the so-called "colony of wives" in Mississauga, a city approaching one million inhabitants neighbouring Toronto on its west side. This is more proof in the pudding that Canada is importing too many immigrants and that there are no jobs for them unless they want to work in dead-end service sector jobs.

Also, the story also spotlights the parasitic practice of dumping family members in Canada while one parent, typically the husband, works abroad. By doing so he minimizes his tax responsibilities that otherwise support services he expects to take full advantage. This practice, one Chinese and Korean immigrants have gotten down to a science and made into a cultural practice, has to stop. This can be done by taxing overseas income and making requirements to obtain and hold Canadian citizenship tougher.

Muslim Inbreeding.

2011-05-29T12:35:00.002-04:00

I feel so enriched. How about you?

The Ethnic Conservative Turns Out To Be A Myth.

2011-05-21T12:03:00.003-04:00

The Toronto Star has this to report.

It turns out the Conservatives didn't get much help from immigrant and "ethnic" voters after all.

“Across the board, there doesn’t seem to be anything but a minor shift in terms of the immigrant versus non-immigrant vote where Conservatives are concerned,” said Stuart Soroka of McGill University.

“Up to this point, there’s a bit of gain there, but it seems tiny,” said Patrick Fournier, of the Université de Montréal.

[...]

The Canadian Election Study has found little evidence to back up the suggestion — now almost conventional wisdom — that the Conservatives owe their majority to Kenney’s wooing of the immigrant vote, at least on a national scale.

“Many politicians and journalists, during the campaign at least, bought into a story about the immigrant vote that isn’t reflected in our data,” Soroka told the Star.

So where exactly did the Conservatives find their support to secure a majority?

The academics involved with the Canadian Election Study calculated what they call the “immigrant vote gap” — the percentage of votes from immigrants minus the percentage of vote from non-immigrants. Only the Liberal party, traditionally seen as the party for new Canadians, registers positive figures in this analysis (though less positive than when they were the ruling party). The Conservatives, meanwhile, are still getting more votes from non-immigrants than they are from immigrants, and the vote gap hasn’t changed much since 2008, the researchers found.

[...]

According to Bricker’s findings, immigrants and ethnic minority voters lean Conservative the longer they’ve been in Canada. After about 10 years, in fact, their voting patterns and motives are not that different from Canadians born in this country. The same is true of second-generation Canadians who hail from so-called “ethnic” communities, Bricker told the conference.

In short, the core of the Conservative vote came from Canadians along with some support from immigrants who have been in the country at least for 10 years. So it appears Jason Kenney and the Conservatives accomplished nothing more than import more supporters for their political rivals. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

They should wise up. The Conservatives cannot woo ethnic vote blocks with promises of more immigrants and more liberal immigration policies. It has proven to be a failure this election as it proved to be a failure when the Mulroney Progressive Conservatives were reduced to two seats in parliament effectively destroying the party.

Armed with this knowledge the Conservatives should cut back on immigration targets since we don't need the vast majority of them anyways. Having a majority government grants them power for a minimum of four years, five tops. If they stubbornly insist on maintaining the immigrant inflow they will have imported over one million immigrants into the country during their governance most of whom we can assume will support the Liberals come next election.

My prediction is the Conservatives will try to out-Liberal the Liberals when it comes to immigration (yes I think they're that stupid). As the report in the article notes the Liberals still enjoy widespread support from immigrant and ethnic communities. The Conservatives will work to change that by giving us more of the same which means more immigration even in opposition to economic reality and popular will. And it will get them nowhere.

More On The Skills Shortage Canard.

2011-05-19T22:18:00.003-04:00

A reader brought to my attention this interview with a labour market analyst. It appeared on a CBC radio show called Metro Morning.

It's short, being only 6:24 in length, but informative. For instance he states the open secret that Canada has the greatest number of its labour force participants with some form of post-secondary education in the whole of the industrialized world. That being true then for what reason do we need so many immigrants?

He also mentions that the business community cries poverty when it comes to recruiting available labour to meet its needs when that ostensibly doesn't seem to be the case. It's not that there's a shortage of available labour, I might add. It's that there's a shortage of cheap labour and this is where immigration comes in.

The business community claiming a shortage of labour in contradiction of reality is not new. This was the case for Silicon Valley and the tech boom of the 1990s where tech jobs seemed to be aplenty yet few people were getting hired. Stories of super picky recruiters are infamous and many. The explanation given was that to appear healthy to investors and pump IPOs start-up tech companies created the illusion of growth by putting out ads for employment when they had no intention of hiring. Another explanation was that they wanted to import immigrants to work on the cheap since they were unable to find the right recruit. Supporting this we have this American example from Vdare.com. I doubt the situation differs much here in Canada.

More revealing are the stats he gives. 29% of full time/full year cashiers posses a post-secondary degree. This is true for 19% of cleaners and 45% of servers in restaurants and bars. It is more accurate to say we have a glut of skill labour than a shortage of it. And this is the labour market we are importing record numbers of immigrants into. This is why Toronto has the best educated taxi drivers in the world. It has little to do with systemic discrimination and more to do with the fact the Canada didn't need them at all. If you are an immigrant and you got hired then congratulations on being the diversity quota. The less white your skin the more likely this is true.

He also mentions that the labour market is increasingly becoming polarized between high skilled labour and low skilled labour with the carving out of the middle which is where the middle class was to be found. Those middle ground jobs are being outsourced to the countries from which we are importing labour. This is tantamount to rubbing salt in the wound. At one time those low skilled entry jobs were the stepping stones to advancement within an organization but that is no longer the case.

Let's do away with the labour shortage canard. It's another ruse to sell an unpopular policy to a misinformed public. There may be spot shortages in certain labour markets but I doubt it is enough to justify the numbers of immigrants Canada imports.

And It Only Costs Us $16.3 To $23.6 Billion Annually Along With Our Country.

2011-05-17T21:47:00.002-04:00

Wow! What a bargain!

It's probably a good thing we Canadians are not known for our entrepreneurial spirit. If the way we have been investing in immigration over the past twenty three years is any indication of how we would invest in a business we would be chronically broke and bankrupt.

It's a good thing we are a resource rich nation because how else are we able to subsidize a money hemorrhaging scheme like immigration that seems to only exist now for its own sake; to import voters for the party in power; to support the immigration industry; to support a real estate bubble; and nothing more.

This doesn't mean we don't derive any benefits from immigration. It does mean that any benefits are being eaten up but the system itself and then some.

This is a call for smarter immigration and that means less of it and more strict criteria.

Everyone's A Racist!

2011-05-09T20:22:00.003-04:00

So says science:

Here's something that doesn't make sense: On one hand, we know that racism is still a big deal (you can't argue with it -- studies show it still turns up in everything from jury decisions to hiring practices), but how many outright racists do you actually know? How many people at your office fling the blankets aside each morning and scream, "TODAY I SHALL OPPRESS A BLACK MAN!"?

Probably not that many. So we have the seemingly impossible situation of a world with a lot of racism and not many racists (and no matter how anonymous you make the poll, you can never find significant numbers of people admitting to being racist). Science suggests it's because all of us are a little more racist than we think.

And Canadians being the nicest people in the world may be a rumour that got out of hand, a rumour started by a Canadian no doubt:

See, no matter how much we make self-deprecating jokes or talk about how we suck and play the role of the lovable loser, experiments show that deep down, we think we are nicer and more generous than we actually are. Psychologists have long known that people tend to think they are more altruistic than the world in general, but researchers weren't sure if that was because we overestimate how great we are or because we underestimate everyone else. Hint: It's the first one.

Although the above information is from a humour site it still contains elements of truth. Indeed, what we find so funny is "funny because it's true."

It may very well be that we humans are prone to racist impulses that can be masked or tamed but no so easily defeated. If that is the case then the we as a nation need to stop and reflect upon this if we are to insist upon creating a multi-racial paradise or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof. That paradise may turn out to be fantasy; the reality, hell.

And the altruism of the common man is more myth than fact. Self interest is a very powerful motivator. If there is nothing or little to be gained by being nice then humans are disinclined to behave that way.

This is why I tend to roll my eyes every time I am told that immigrants come to Canada to contribute to her success. Hogwash! They are here for personal gain, not to help us Canadians out as if we need their help in the first place. If they were so inclined to help a people then they would help their own by staying in their respective nations to work to improve their lot in life and those of their fellow countrymen.

A chapter in the book Superfreakonimcs debunks scientific studies that claim to prove that altruism is a dominant characteristic of humanity. It does this by spotlighting the problem these studies had but failed to take into consideration; that the subjects were being watched and they knew it. Armed with this knowledge they behaved in a fashion that would make them look good to those conducting the study. Remove this awareness and people acted differently and not very altruistic at all but were guided more by self interest.

This is why I feel immigration, as well a multiculturalism, oftentimes is regarded favourably by Canadians in polls and surveys. It's because Canadians are responding in the way they think they should to appear favourable to those asking the questions. They know they are being watched and their answers recorded. And on a grander scale they know the world is watching too since inevitably their nation will be measured against other countries. But in confidence and in the real world Canadians' attitudes contradict what is alleged in polls leaving one confused as to how favourable Canadians view immigration and multiculturalism. If I may so inclined as to answer for them I have to say, not very.

I'll be away from a computer for a week. Comments will not be seen until then.

Want To Know Why Immigration Is Off The Agenda With The Main Stream Media?

2011-05-09T20:14:00.003-04:00

Because twits like this work in it. She speaks like a true mutlti-cultist.

This is what happens when you abandon critical thinking and willingly let your brain be dry-cleaned by official propaganda. When you speak you sound more like a well programmed robot than as an individual with a working brain. You can predict the next sentence that comes out of her mouth before she even thinks it.

In Bizzaro World Illegal Immigrants Are Sneaking Into Canada From The U.S.

2011-05-05T17:34:00.002-04:00

Sign of the times.

The first link panders to Canadian hubris but remember it is the weakest segments of Canadians society; the poor, the unemployed, the underemployed, recent immigrants, the disabled; who suffer most from illegal immigration but I doubt the spoiled, privileged brats of the left care about that. I guess their racist war on Canada's host majority society is more important than whether some Canadians can pay the rent and feed the kids.

Multiculturalism Or A Jail Cell. Welcome To The 'New Canada™.'

2011-05-04T20:56:00.007-04:00

First day post-election win and this is what we can expect from the Conservatives and their majority.

This is an assault on Canadians' freedom of speech but should we be surprised it has come to this? You cannot have the "Trudeaupian" multicultural society without an erosion of your rights. And in this case it is our freedom of speech which is the most fundamental principle of a functioning democracy.

To have the "just society" of "peace, order, and good government" of the "Trudeaupian" multicultural variety you need to have a legal framework to force people to get along because left alone to its own devices it is unworkable. This attests to the weakness of multiculturalism and how little confidence those who espouse it have in its viability. So we must be compelled to accept it by threat of legal action.

Dissent in the "new Canada™" is not allowed. Diversity is encouraged just not diversity of opinion. This is, of course, about power and control. It is not about good governance or the creation of a "just society." It's multiculturalism or a jail cell.

If limiting and dictating what one can say and think is one of the "gifts" of immigration and multiculturalism then how does this make the country a better place to live when one lives in fear of saying the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong person?

But it's a good thing most Canadians don't use their freedom of speech anyways so they won't notice let alone bother to care.

So They Delivered. Should They Now Expect Payment?

2011-05-03T19:51:00.003-04:00

It appears courting the "ethnic vote" has paid off for the Conservatives. They managed to secure a majority government in part by capturing seats in immigrant/ethnic heavy electoral-ridings in and around Toronto. So does that mean the Conservatives now owe them?

On immigration matters the Conservative win last night is a double edged sword. The Conservatives were introducing much needed reforms to the immigration system while ruling as a minority government but they found their efforts frustrated in Parliament by the opposition. Now that they have a majority they can now get things done so in this sense there is something to be hopeful about.

However, just remember it was the last Conservative majority government in Ottawa that got the nation into its current immigration mess. Then called the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada; the party of Canada's first Prime Minister and a father of Confederation, Sir John A. MacDonald; it was by the inept leadership of that buffoon Brian Mulroney that the Conservatives upped immigration levels by 100,000 literally overnight and failed to invoke the notwithstanding clause to repeal the Singh decision. Because of a Conservative majority government Canada is now burdened with the highest immigrant intake levels in the world and an internationally infamous joke of a refugee system.

Since the Conservatives made the mess, they should clean it up starting by cutting back on intake quotas and invoking the notwithstanding clause to repeal the Singh decision. But the Conservatives so far has shown no interest in doing either.

My fear is that it will be business as usual to maintain the trust the Conservatives have cultivated with immigrant voters. This means any changes to the status-quo could be perceived as an act of betrayal and lost support in future elections. If any changes are made it will be higher immigration intake quotas, more relaxed rules, more useless relatives, and more immigrants from too few source nations to accelerate the re-colonization of Canada. Canada has lost some of its sovereignty since its immigration system is being determined by the whims of a growing foreign born population of a colonial mindset. How the Conservatives will act now, we'll just have to wait and see.

In related news when you read this just keep telling yourself "a Canadian is a Canadian" or so we're told.

An ideal fertility rate is somewhere between 1.6 and 2.6 births per 1,000 women? Say What!?

2011-05-01T14:02:00.005-04:00

We find some interesting commentary from this Toronto Sun article from a man whose job it is to study demographics, not armchair quarterback it from the editorial desk of some left leaning Canadian newspaper. It appears birth rates have risen for the sixth year in a row according to Statistics Canada:

It's not a baby boom. It's not even to replace our own numbers. But more so than other parts of the developed world, Canadian women are becoming moms.

The number of births in Canada rose in 2008 for the sixth consecutive year, according to data released Wednesday.

[...]

That reflects a total fertility rate in 2008 of 1.68 children per woman - the highest total fertility rate on record since 1992, when it was 1.69.

I think it would be higher were it not for the high cost of living in Canada much of it attributed to increasing housing prices outpacing incomes. Rising housing prices in the midst of stagnant and decreasing incomes is something immigration cannot claim innocence.

While the rate is still "well below" the generational replacement level of 2.1 children per woman - the rate to replace the country's population in the absence of migration - it is still above other developed nations such as Italy at 1.39, and Japan at 1.21.

In comparison to other industrialized nations Canada does not fare too badly.

It should be noted that while many other advanced industrial economies have birth rates below replacement levels none of them have embraced the mass immigration dogma as enthusiastically as Canada has. Some have almost no immigration system to speak of, like Japan and South Korea, or are cutting back on immigration. What makes Canada, an economy that is largely resource based, so special that it needs to import the highest number of immigrants per capita than any other country in the world?

Here's the kicker:

And although the fertility rate is below the generational replacement level, immigration compensates for a fewer births than at other times in the country's history.

"The population of Canada would still be growing without immigration, but at a slower pace," Foot said.

An ideal fertility rate is somewhere between 1.6 and 2.6 births per 1,000 women, Foot said.

A society with too few children can't afford the costs of caring for its aging population, and a society with too many children will suffer from political instability because there won't be enough jobs for them all, Foot said.

Canada, with a fertility rate of 1.6, is on the right track.

"I think our position's very good," Foot said. "Canada's demographic future is considerably better than most of Western Europe and Japan, and Southeast Asia."

David Foot is an economics professor at the University of Toronto. He wrote Boom, bust & echo 2000: Profiting from the demographic shift in the new millennium along with Daniel Stoffman. And you might recall that Daniel Stoffman wrote Who Gets In: What's wrong with Canada's immigration program - and how to fix it so I think it's safe to say these men are better positioned to give informed commentary on the immigration system then most.

What's pertinent to take away from this is that Canada's population will continue to grow in the absence of immigration albeit at a slower pace. This has to do with Canadians having children in a time when we are living longer then ever before. This begs us to ask if immigration is really about population growth; or is that just a ruse to hoodwink Canadians into accepting a disagreeable policy for the sake of special interests like banks, property developers, law firms, the immigration industry itself, social workers, politicians, neo-colonialists, etc.

It's also interesting to read the assurance that even with a birth rate below replacement levels, Canada's 1.68 birth rate is "on the right track." The reasoning is that too many children can outpace job creation and potentially destabilize a society. This is a future Middle Eastern nations like Iran must cope with. On the other hand if you have too few children you will not have enough to support the economy and an aged society but this doesn't appear to be Canada's case.

So all in all the low birth rate argument appears to be an over exaggerated and misleading one. If Canada's 1.68 birth rate is "on the right track" then excessive immigration may create a problem when one didn't exist. The question is if Canada does have excessive immigration. I think it does and we are currently creating future problems that could have been avoided if saner heads prevailed and those who actually know what they are talking about were paid attention to. If immigration built the country it can also ruin it.

Immigration, Union Busting And The Cowardly Silence Of Canada's Labour Movement.

2011-04-27T19:37:00.008-04:00

A reader sent me this link. It's a story about African immigration into Brooks, Alberta and how it is changing the town's cowboy image as if the residents of Brooks want that in the first place. The "cowboy image" is part of the Alberta's history and cultural heritage and it is a rich one at that. It is what makes Canadians a diverse people and Albertans unique within the cultural landscape of the nation. So I can't image the change African immigrantion is bringing to the town and province is being done by invitation but more so by fiat. And even if change is wanted I doubt anyone will look to Africa for guidance.

What African immigration does offer a host society likes Canada's, I have to say I am at a loss. Let's take Somali immigration as an example seeing how Canada hosts the largest population of ex-pat Somali's outside of Africa thanks to, well you know who to blame.

These are a people who come from a tribal society who didn't have a functioning alphabet until 1972; who at this time in their history have been unable to form any semblance of a functioning government, economy, or society prompting some to call Somalia a "failed state"; who practice polygamy, arranged marriages, and female gentile mutilation thanks to Islam's influences; who culturally indulge in an amphetamine called khat, a practice so problematic that it is at the root of Somalia's civil unrest while acting as an economic drain; who have brought this drug to Canada and want it decrriminalized; who have one of the highest secondary school drop out rates in Toronto's school system; and whose only real contribution to Canada are cab rides and representation in the global jihad movement. Canada would have been better off tying a giant albatross around her neck than allowing Somali immigration.

So to say Canada or Brooks, Alberta is enriched by Somali or any African culture should invoke laughter since they have more to learn from us then we from them. But this rant isn't the crux of this post. When you read the linked article a company name pops up: XL Foods Lakeside Packers Inc.

The immigrant puff piece was published in 2009 and undoubtedly co-written by XL Foods PR department if not the whole thing. I say this because XL Foods is the magnet drawing African immigrants into the town. But what has XL Foods been up to lately?

On April 9, 2011 we learn XL Foods laid off 500 workers in Calgary.

Last year XL Foods locked out 200 employees from its Moose Jaw plant in Sask.

Prior to the lockout those workers where on layoff.

Why was XL Foods importing employees from Africa to work in Alberta while it had trained, idle employees in Saskatchewan it could utilize? Meanwhile it just laid-off workers in Calgary.

The initial article claims that immigrants are needed because well paying jobs in Alberta's oil fields are attracting away potential workers. This is nonsense since XL Foods would rather lock out laid-off workers then relocate them to Brooks. This looks like union busting to me and immigration is there to play its role. So where the hell is the Canadian Labour Congress?

Like its cowardly pathetic counterparts in the the environmental movement the CLC and the labour movement as a whole have been silent on immigration. This is curious since immigration is being used as a weapon to roll back wages, promote poor working conditions, and bust unions. Indeed, this is characteristic of North America's meat packing industry which has found itself reliant on immigration, legal or not, to provide an obsequious workforce to keep working conditions poor. This encourages a high turnover rate to ensure low wages and an upward flow of wealth. Since meat packing doesn't have the luxury to outsource its operations overseas to avoid labour laws and union influence it has to import the foreign workforce it wants to exploit.

If Canada's labour unions actually cared they'd pressure the government for more stringent immigration criteria and quotas so that it cannot be used as a weapon to attack the livelihood of Canadians. Instead we get silence but I have come to expect that. Canada's unions have to come to caring only about protecting their own turf and bargaining power. Shows of worker solidarity are just that: shows. Calls for good jobs are just words. When a union is broken down to its component members you realize that the only job they care about protecting is theirs and if immigration does not affect it they simply do not care who it hurts.

The Birth Rate And How Immigration Is Keeping It Low or When A Better Life For You Means A Worse Life For The Rest Of Us.

2011-04-14T22:34:00.008-04:00

A news piece from the Toronto Star informs us young adults are holding off home ownership. The reason: rising house prices are outpacing income growth.

As rising home prices continue to outpace income growth, many young Canadians have decided to delay home ownership for another year, according to a poll released Thursday by Royal Bank of Canada.

RBC’s annual home ownership poll found that 55 per cent of respondents aged 18 to 34 said it made sense to delay a home purchase until next year. That’s 10 percentage points more than the national average for all age groups.

Meanwhile, about half of the young people in the survey who had already delved into home ownership said their mortgage was eating up too much of their income — suggesting their peers may have good reason to wait.

As a consequence property taxes are rising sharply in concert with rising property values.

Immigration is the likely culprit. From the first linked article we read:

The national average home price rose 8.8 per cent year over year to a record $365,192 in February, although it was skewed upward by sales in the red hot Vancouver market where the average home price was $790,380.

From the third link we read:

Areas with average increases of more than 20% since last assessed: Mid-Toronto (C9, C10, C11, C12), The Beach (E2), Thornhill (N1), Markham (N10, N11), Richmond Hill (N3).

Vancouver home prices have skyrocketed beyond affordability due to an influx of capital from Asia from primarily Chinese immigrants who bring it with them. Thornhill, Markham, and Richmond Hill also have considerable Asian immigrant populations, mostly Chinese but increasingly some south Asian as well.

We know mass immigration has had a measurable negative influence on Canadian incomes due to the over supply of labour. We also know demand for housing increases prices. It appears mass immigration has delivered a one-two knock out punch for young Canadians looking to buy homes and start families.

Too often we look at immigration from the immigrant's point of view and rarely consider what effects it has on the host population. If home ownership is part of the Canadian dream then mass immigration is denying this to many Canadians, at least for time if not indefinitely. An immigrant's pursuit of a better life in Canada is translating into a worse life for us who live here.

This has dire consequences for the birth rate. Historically Canada has relied on a natural growth rate to grow its population. And this growth rate depended on a birth rate above replacement level. Immigration was just a complement to it. The fact that Canada has to rely on immigration to fuel population growth is a recent phenomenon and this should be sounding alarms. If population growth is a desired goal then this should be pursued "in house", so to speak, since immigration is costly in comparison and the returns on recent waves of immigrants has been diminishing. Besides, tax dollars should be invested in Canadians not importing and supporting foreign born populations who end up disrupting Canadians' standard of living.

Affordable housing in hand with rising incomes are key ingredients to those desirous to start and support families. This, in turn, grows the population and strengthens the nation. But immigration has proven to be an assault on both and thus contributes to a stubbornly low birth rate. That being the case mass immigration is not the solution it is being made out to be but is indeed part of the problem.

T o Contribute To Or Take Advantage Of?: Looks Like We Need Another Head Tax.

2011-04-12T23:05:00.006-04:00

In their latest weekly bulletin ImmigrationWatchCanada brings our attention to some very frank words from a Chinese national who, I assume, may also be a Canadian citizen.

As offensive as it may be I appreciate the honest words. For once we are told the open truth straight from the horses mouth about what is driving much Asian immigration to Canada untainted by the official multicultural propaganda that works to mask it. It also explains why Chinese immigrants are almost total failures when it comes to assimilating choosing instead to establish and live in functioning colonies within any host society they introduce themselves into. Sadly I feel the attitude on display is inveterate to the Chinese community which is often coupled with a smug sense of cultural superiority.

I'm sure they don't realize it but such behaviour contributes to social tensions and be the spark that ignites the powder keg. Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines have all witnessed anti-Chinese riots in their histories.

Vancouver had an anti-Asian riot in 1907 in response to the downward pressure on incomes Asian immigration into the city was effecting. More akin to human trafficking than immigration the government sought to discourage it by cutting into the smugglers' profits by enacting a head tax. This is why the United States had a head tax of its own. By doing so Ottawa was protecting the interests of working Canadian citizens and if the head tax was the way to do it then it was the right thing to do.

Recently anti-Chinese graffiti popped up in Vancouver and southern Ontario experienced a series of events called "nippertipping." Is it racism or have Asian immigrants, particularly Chinese immigrants, brought this negative attention upon themselves? If Asian immigrants have no desire to assimilate and see Canada as a country to be taken advantage of then why encourage it? Why tolerate it from anyone? You don't have much respect for a spouse who only loves you for your money.

These are the fruits of accepting too many immigrants from too few sources. Canada accepts too many immigrants for China and from Asia as a whole. This is an assimilation and loyalty problem so the solution would be to diminish any Asian influence in the country by reducing Asian immigration as a whole especially from China. This will encourage assimilation and they will become Canadians. It worked for the Japanese, it can work for the Chinese.

Why Are We Importing People Who Need Further Skills Upgrading In The First Place?

2011-04-10T16:28:00.004-04:00

It's the obvious question the media never bothers to ask.

It's election time again and that means the obligatory pandering to key block votes. In this case it's every party's favourite, the immigrant/ethnic block vote.

So apparently still, to this day, we are introducing immigrant cohorts into Canada's labour market ill-equipped to get a running start. It's been a problem for quite a while now and it looks like, finally, they're going to do something about it, fingers crossed.

The underemployed/unemployed skilled-immigrant-driving-a-cab phenomenon has provided many a journalist an opportunity to engage in moral exhibitionism while pretending to look like they care.

Yet time after time they fail to ask the most obvious question which is the one I ask in the post title, a question immigration reformers have asked before and will continue to ask for years to come but a question no one seems to be able to answer.

If immigrants need further skills training, tax payer subsidized of course, upon arrival in Canada then it says a lot about the effectiveness of the points system doesn't it? It also illustrates the inefficiency of the immigration system. If they need further skills training then obviously we are bringing in the wrong types of immigrants. If their skills are outdated then they shouldn't be coming here. If the skills they offer are in surplus then that's the fault of the immigration system and they still shouldn't have come here. If they are to be retrained for a job they were not imported to fill well there are plenty of unemployed and underemployed Canadians who can be trained for that job.

As for credential recognition ask yourself this: will you go to a doctor educated at an Indian university? I rest my case. I acknowledge that there are immigrants with credentials from western education systems. But the hurdles they face are set before them by Canada's professional colleges and organizations as a way to protect themselves from the negative economic impacts of mass immigration that the rest of us have to put up with. It's mostly out of professional courtesy and class loyalty that the political classes are not pressure them to get immigrants credentials recognized and get them working.

To Contribute To Or Take Advantage Of?

2011-04-10T15:02:00.004-04:00

That is the question.

We've all heard it spoken enough that to repeat it invites a gag reflex; that immigrants come to Canada to contribute to it. As noble as this sounds I think this is hardly the case given human nature.

To contribute to implies an act of selflessness as if Canada and Canadians are in desperate need of outside help. I wouldn't describe Canada as a struggling nation nor Canadians as a struggling people so what exactly are we importing people to contribute to? Besides, if selfless contribution is at the heart of every immigrant to Canada then there are plenty on nations around the globe that could use their help more so than Canada. However, I do understand that it is more fulfilling to help a rich person who may also make you rich in the process.

To take advantage of implies a selfish act for personal gain and this to me is the more accurate motive bringing many people to Canada's shores. And I say that not to disparage those who come here but an acknowledgement of the human impulses that compels someone to act one way or another. Self-interest is stronger than altruism.

The linked Vdare article above makes that case. Though it is about the United States it is equally applied to Canada. And though it is about Chinese immigrants the behaviour outlined is not restricted to them.

The motives driving immigrants to Canada is important because it is an indication of what kind of citizens they will be and what Canada really means to them. If Canada is nothing more to them than a shopping mall, a job, an urban sprawl home, and a list of social benefits; health care, education, passport; then the desire to assimilate and be "more Canadian than Canadians" is elusive if at all present. This desire is further hindered by the current state of communications technology and affordable travel which allows one to live a satellite existence in Canada away from the home country. The ever growing foreign presence in Canada, colonies euphemistically referred to as "communities" or "enclaves", let's one live in Canada without actually leaving the homeland.

If contributing to Canada was the real intent then "being Canadian more than Canadians" would be desired but this is no longer the case like it once was. What we experience instead are incessant demands for accommodation which is the demand on the host culture to reshape itself and rethink itself so the introduced one doesn't have to. What we have are so-called "Canadians of convenience", a greater phenomenon than we care to accept.

The way to screen out the opportunists is to make it more difficult for them. This would require rewriting the citizenship laws denying birthright citizenship to anyone born on Canadian territory (or airspace as the case may be) to non-citizen parents. Another would be to rethink dual citizenship. Another would be to make residency requirements tougher, possibly with routine reviews to see if the requirements are being met and a penalty of forfeiture of citizenship if they are not. Another would be to close the loopholes one can exploit to dodge Canadian taxes while drawing an overseas income. These are just a few ideas.

Making it tougher for immigrants to come to Canada and become Canadian citizens would attract those who sincerely desire to come to Canada and repel those who see Canadian citizenship simply as the best deal in town. Something worked for is better appreciated than something not and by making immigrants work for their citizenship will make better citizens of them. Right now, this is something we don't do. Canada is more than just a land of benefits and entitlements.

India, That Wonderful Land Of Fraud (and Canada's top source of immigrants).

2011-04-03T14:10:00.004-04:00

News out of India reports airline pilots were being awarded flying licenses by fraudulent means.

A government aviation official and three other people have been arrested in a widening investigation of corruption in awarding flying licenses to airline pilots, police said Saturday.

The four men were arrested Friday in New Delhi for their involvement in a flying school in the western Indian state of Rajasthan that had issued fake certificates of training flights flown by its students.

[...]

On Friday, aviation authorities canceled the licenses of commercial pilots for exaggerating their flying time while training.

Something to keep in mind for those who advocate the awarding of licenses to foreign trained professionals. There are reasons why Canada has the best educated taxi drivers in the world. These credentialed immigrants either don't meet the standards or we simply didn't need them in the first place.

More to the topic at hand Canada not only needs to scale back immigration but immigration from places like India. The prime reason: it is a haven for fraud.

Reporting about fraud in India is like talking about the weather here in Canada. It is so banal and obvious there really is no reason to talk about it aside from having nothing to talk about at all. For a country like India, and even China, fraud is to be expected and is pretty much what keeps the country going. Just recently a former Indian state official and three of the country's telecom companies are being charged for fraud by state authorities.

The fact that fraud is as Indian as a masala is something that should be of concern since Canada irrationally imports more people from that country than it warrants. By doing so we are exposing ourselves to that culture of deceit for gain.

The foremost problem is documentation fraud. How many Indian immigrants have acquired their credentials by fraudulent means? This is something that cannot easily be answered.

Marriage fraud is epidemic within the south Asian community. Sometimes it is an Indian national scamming an Indian with Canadian citizenship. Sometimes it is the other way around. Oftentimes it is a conspiracy with both parties to scam the immigration system.

The Khalsa Credit Union, a financial institution servicing Canada's Sikhs, found itself involved in a GST scam in 2003.

A corruption trial in British Columbia involving B.C. Rail and two prominent members of Canada's south Asian population ended in a guilty plea.

The Bank of Montreal left itself vulnerable to fraud in its zeal to sell mortgages to immigrants. The mortgage fraud cost the bank $30 million dollars that was funneled to Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and, of course, India. Called "Oklahomans", it should come to no surprise that south Asians are front and center in BMO's lawsuit. As far as I'm concerned the bank deserved what it got.

This is just a sampling. And this is saying nothing of the daily fraud the Liberal Party of Canada exposed the nation to when, for political reasons, it opened a mission in Chandigarh, Punjab; arguably the fraud capital of India.

What is primarily driving Indian immigration to the west is fashion, not necessarily a better life. Western citizenship is a sign of status (as is skin tone and complexion) and having it, or someone in the family who does, separates you from those on the lower rings of India's caste based society. Many Indian immigrants lived, well, damn good lives back in India, comparatively speaking, but their obsession with status drives them west and into obscurity. They are not here for a better life because they lived it back home. They are here for fashion and many will do anything, even cheat, to get it.

When you actually think about it there is no legitimate reason why Canada should be importing so many immigrants from India. I'm sure one can point to a few "success stories" but as a whole Indian immigration hasn't done much for the nation except deliver votes to the Liberal Party, a racket the Conservatives have made clear they are hellbent on breaking into, while crowding our cities and fueling urban sprawl. The reason why India, and China, top the list consistently is not based on Canada's need for them but on pure volume of applicants. India are China are the world's most populace nations and by consequence produce the most number of immigration applications to Canada, dwarfing everywhere else.

Canada can protect itself simply by scaling back immigration. Doing so will allow better scrutiny of each applicant. The current numbers driven, not quality driven, immigration system makes this difficult if not impossible.

The Singh Decision Makes Canada Complicit To Human Smuggling.

2011-04-03T12:29:00.004-04:00

The National Post has published a four part investigative series on human smuggling authored by Stewart Bell. If you had read the book Cold Terror: How Canada Nurtures and Exports Terrorism Around the World his name should be familiar to you.

From the preview we read:

In Part One, we identify for the first time the members of the smuggling network believed to be behind the migrant ships. We expose how they operate and meet one of the suspects in a Bangkok prison.

In Part Two, we reveal the untold story of the Canadians whose names and photos appear in Thai police files in connection with the Sun Sea smuggling operation.

In Part Three, we introduce readers to the Canadian and Thai police officials trying to stop the smugglers.

And in Part Four we shine a light on the dark side of Canada’s anti-human smuggling program: the hundreds of migrants who have been rounded up and held in an overcrowded Thai prison.

Part One and Part Four have two parts to them that I linked to so make sure you don't miss that. So, in total there are about six article in the series.

Related, we have this sob story from the Globe and Mail. Apparently some of the smuggled Sri Lankan Tamil migrants who arrived on the MV Sun Sea are upset that they may be forced to sell their belongings and land holdings back home in Sri Lanka in order to pay off the smugglers. And somehow this is Canada's fault.

Lawyers for some of the MV Sun Sea migrants say federal immigration rules have forced their clients to sell their belongings and family land so they can pay off smugglers and be released from detention.

[...]

“It’s become this weird perversion of the law where we’re forcing people to pay these debts,” said Gabriel Chand, who represents some of the 492 Sri Lankan Tamils who arrived on the cargo ship last August. “They’re selling their land, their jewelry, so that they can pay these debts so they can be released from custody.”

[...]

He said the migrants he represents are not under the smugglers’ control. In fact, he said, they have no intention of paying the smugglers.

Two things to take note of.

The first is that these "refugees" have property and jewellery in their home country of Sri Lanka. I guess the "persecution" they were suffering from in Sri Lanka didn't stop them from amassing a considerable amount or wealth.

The second thing is that, according to their parasite lawyer, the migrants have no intention of paying the smugglers. I can see why he would say that. Paying the smugglers would amount to an admission of guilt to being party to a human smuggling operation which is a federal offense. I guess they intended to flip the bird to the smugglers once on Canadian soil and protected by Canadian law. But if forced to pay then how would they do it? From the article Jason Kenney has the following answer:

“They’re not paying that off while they’re in detention; they’re paying it off after they’re released from detention. They’re then in contact with the smuggling syndicate’s representative, usually in the Toronto area, and according to information I was given by the Australian Federal Police, they’re often pressed into criminal service in areas like credit-card fraud.”

This whole thing is worthy of David Mamet's pen. We have cheaters cheating cheaters. If not that then Canadians are the victims of fraud on several levels so that the migrants can keep their property at home while stealing from ours. Any way you look at it someone is getting screwed.

ImmigrationWatchCanada has this to add from their forum:

These "refugees" claim they are being persecuted and are forced to flee by any means necessary (bypassing numerous closer countries) all the way to Canada and once here, it turns out that they have land and other assets to sell in order to pay off their smugglers? Why didn't they simply sell the land and flee to, say, India or Vietnam or Laos or Cambodia or Indonesia, or ... (you get the idea)? Showing up at the border of these countries with some cash in hand will likely gain you an automatic entry as an economic immigrant. Instead, they paid smugglers to get them into Canada where, it would seem, they expected they wouldn't have to sell their land or jewelry in order to remain here. I am speculating, but it would seem that keeping their land in Sri Lanka would make perfect sense if they expected a quick and easy refugee claim and wanted a familiar place to relax and recharge during a Canadian winter.

We should be mindful of the alleged "Canadians" involved here. These are Sri Lankan Tamil immigrants who had to take a loyalty oath to Canada in order to obtain citizenship. It appears to these men the oath is just words on paper and not to be taken seriously. But with official multiculturalism and a ragging sense of entitlement that seems prerequisite to immigrate to Canada, should have we expected more from them? Odds are they are "refugee" claimants from Sri Lankan, like the vast majority of Sri Lankans in Canada, and this is their idea of repaying the country that gave them asylum. With such low expectations from our immigrants with a selection criteria of even lower standards these are the kind of people we attract: the best and the brightest.

The whole thing stinks and the frustrating part about is that there is little we can do about it thanks to the Singh decision. Rubbing salt in the wound is an asylum system that has been fashioned to pretty much keep people here. Aside from some cosmetic solutions there has been no discussion at seriously attacking the problem by addressing the root of it. As long as the Singh decision stands unchallenged Canada will remain a top destination for human smuggling. This makes Canada complicit to the crime while encouraging it. There are more efficient ways to address the needs of refugees. The Singh decision is not one of them.

Diversity Is Our Strength: "Too Black" vs. "Too Asian" (and "too white" is still all the rage).

2011-03-29T22:31:00.007-04:00

It appears the idea of a "too black" school doesn't sit well other non-whites, particular Asians. From the Toronto Star we read:

Some Oakwood Collegiate students warn that opening a proposed Africentric high school there could rebrand it as a largely “black school” and discourage others from attending, reducing its cultural mix.

“Unfortunately, some people are racist and I know for a fact a friend who's Asian, whose parents wouldn't send them to a school that's unofficially labelled as black,” said Grade 11 student Matteo Ferrero-Wong, who is of Chinese and Italian descent.

[...]

Senior Toronto school board staff scrambled to do damage control Monday at Oakwood, where student panic over a proposal to open an Africentric alternative high school in part of the building has sparked a Facebook petition with some 320 names as well as brief rumours of a wildcat student strike.

The petition can be found here and judging from the names it appears there is a white/Asian coalition against the idea.

The reason given for converting part of Oakwood C.I. into an Africentric school is to address the 40% drop out rate for black students who constitute 40% of a student body where 60% are non-white. The implication is that the high drop-out rate for blacks is an institutional failure, not a failure of the homes who produce these underachievers. Since I can never recall a time where the black community accepted responsibility for its short comings, choosing instead to avert blame by pointing their fingers at everyone around them, it's only understandable society's institutions are at fault and need correction. But I digress.

Ferrero-Wong's friend, Fadzai Masvosva, is black and from Zimbabwe.

Masvosva agrees an Africentric alternative school “would make the school less diverse because more of the black students would stay and the white and Asian kids' parents would send them somewhere else. Some people say if the population is more black, it makes some people feel less safe.”

Macleans Magazine took heat for its "too Asian" issue a while back from Canada's Asian population. The insinuation was that Canada's "too Asian" university campuses do more to drive students away than attract them. I have personal experience with this.

I once took a tour of the University of Toronto's main downtown campus. In my small tour group of about six individuals there were three young white Brazilian women who were in Toronto at the time to participate in an English immersion program. At the end of the tour our student guide asked us what we thought of the school. One of the Brazilian women spoke frankly and said, in her laboured English, she liked the campus but there were too many Asians at U of T (I kid you not!). Her frankness made me smile but our guide, who was a white male, didn't know how to respond and therefore didn't.

In another instance I was at the offices of The Varsity, a student run newspaper at U of T. I was waiting to speak with someone and was looking around the operation which was empty and quite at the time save for a conversation that was happening in a small adjacent room. Pinned to a wall at someone's desk was a newspaper clipping that quoted the then president of the university. He was quoted as saying, and I'm paraphrasing, that many white students skip U of T, choosing to go to Queen's or elsewhere, due to its sizable non-white student body. The clipping hung there to out white male bigotry but the man was just speaking truthfully and meant no offense. But his words still say much.

Funny, then, to see Asian parents threatening to remove their kids from a school were it to be considered "too black". It seems "too Asian" is okay but "too black" is not.

What is happening at Oakwood C.I. has been repeated in neighbourhoods all across Toronto and the surrounding area. Any neighbourhood that has lost its white majority status has become less appealing to everyone except to those who share the racial background of the new majority. When a neighbourhood goes Asian, it drives everyone out who is not while attracting those who are. When a neighbourhood goes Indian, it drives everyone out while attracting only those who are. This is how the balkanization of Toronto is being accomplished. The only neighbourhoods that consistently attract those of all racial backgrounds, especially Asian, are white majority neighbourhoods. These are the ones that are held up as "proof" that multiculturalism works but as more and more non-whites move in, the more whites move out to other white majority neighbourhoods leaving the one they left behind to become another ethnic ghetto.

It appears racial minorities are more comfortable in a "too white" environment than any other save one where they are the dominant. One has to wonder how attractive Canada will be were it to become "too Asian", "too black", "too Indian", etc. Will Asians immigrate to a non-white Hispanic/black majority United States, or just to the white majority parts of it? Will Asians immigrate to Canada or just the Asian and white parts of it? Canada's white majority status is an asset to attracting immigrants from all over the world. I don't see much value in losing it.

Comment Limit Reached, It Seems.

2011-03-29T00:29:00.004-04:00

So far there are 52 comments to this thread but only 46 get displayed. I believe each post has a size limit and it was reached. I don't know if this is the case since I'm really lazy with this blogging thing and haven't researched its technical capabilities and limitations in depth.

I don't know how to rectify this. If anyone knows how let me know. But if you have anything to say better save it for another thread.

Or go join the ImmigrationWatchCanada forum and get a thread going there. Message boards are better venues for long discussions.

Conservatives Announce Funding Help For Gay Refugees. Wait, What!?

2011-03-26T17:14:00.005-04:00

The title of this post comes from this National Post article.

Apparently the Conservatives are now the gay community's party in Ottawa. And in an election year, no less. What are the odds!?

Isn't this the same party that held a House vote to recognize marriage as a union between a man and a woman? Didn't it vote against same sex marriage legislation? And didn't it pull funding for Toronto's gay pride festivities in 2010?

Liberals, Conservatives, it's like trying to tell the difference between Pepsi and Coke nowadays; in the end you're still getting a soft drink.

Now, go ahead and tell me immigration has nothing to do with politics and elections. Go ahead and tell me, I dare ya!

Diversity Is Our Strength: My Holocaust Is More Important Than Yours: A Lamentation (And Omen) For Multicultural Canada.

2011-03-26T12:26:00.004-04:00

When I first heard about the Canadian Human Rights Museum and who was pushing for its development I concluded that upon completion it would be another Holocaust memorial that gives a polite nod to other genocides, under the auspices of diversity and inclusion, while deeming them of lesser value. This, all the while being heavily dependent on tax dollars for its survival.

It appears I was right about the first assumption and will be proven in time to be correct about the second (it's pretty much a given).

According to news reports plans for the museum specify a separate place for the Holocaust within it, singling it out for special attention, while all other genocides are to be lumped together in an all inclusive exhibit. The implication is that the Holocaust is exceptional compared to all other acts of genocide and thus more deserving of reflection and reverence. As for other genocides, well, they're all pretty much the same so we will just stick them all into that corner over there and out of the way. After all, we don't want people to trip over them and hurt themselves.

Ukrainian groups are not amused because they have their own Holocaust to brag about. Called the Holodomor, it was an event that witnessed a man made famine in the Ukrainian SSR during 1932-33. Death tolls range from anywhere between 1.2 million to 12 million in a campaign led out of Moscow to wipe out ethnic Ukrainians in an act of genocide. There are more Canadians who are of Ukrainian extraction than there are those who are Jewish so it is reasonable to argue that the Holodomor should occupy a space for itself as well.

How many Canadians died in the Holocaust? How many Canadians died in the Holodomor? Why are Canadians building a museum to memorialize these events? Why are Canadians bickering about which genocide is more important than another? If we're all Canadians than why has this become controversial?

On the plus side polls suggest the Holocaust should not be given a special place but should be apart of a display showcasing all acts of genocide. This just illustrates, yet again, that those in decision making positions are grossly out of touch with the values of the majority of people.

What is disconcerting about this is how even after generations within Canada some Canadians still identify with an ancestral homeland where, I doubt, many of have ever visited (or can locate on a map) and this is the core issue here. This is the fruit of multiculturalism and the immigration system that gives it its breath. How can we function as a coherent nation when the country is divided along ethnic lines all trying to advance their special interests? This is something that should be considered as the foreign born population swells in the coming decades. The Human Rights Museum is proving to be more of a symbol of division than understanding but isn't that what multiculturalism accomplishes anyway?

Immigration Watch Canada Is Now On Facebook.

2011-03-22T22:03:00.001-04:00

You can find them here.

Did We Say Family Class Decreases? No, We Meant Increases (let the sellout continue).

2011-03-22T21:25:00.004-04:00

I think Conservative Party strategists reminded Jason Kenney that 2011 may very well be an election year so he had to back-peddle on his initial plan to reduce family class immigration by 5% and increase it instead. Here's the scoop.

I am afraid that your newspaper has inadvertently misled your readers about family class immigration levels (Government chops visas that reunite immigrant families, February 18).

In fact, the Harper government is planning to increase family class immigration this year.

We believe in the importance of family reunification as one of the objectives of Canada’s immigration policy.

That’s why, in the 2011 immigration plan I tabled in Parliament late last year, which remains in effect today, I made clear we are increasing our planning range for family class immigrants to allow up to 65,000 immigrants into Canada.

That’s an increase from the 59,029 who were admitted in 2010; and not, as you call it, a “cutback.”

Within the family class, our government is putting wives, husbands, and children first.

That means more dads, mums, and children being reunited with their loved ones than in previous years.

In the five years the Harper government has held office, the average number of immigrants admitted under the family class each year has been 63,476.

That is significantly higher than under the six years prior to that when the Liberals held office, during which the annual average was 60,224 immigrants.

Unlike the Ignatieff Liberals, our government doesn’t just talk about the importance of immigration, we actually take steps to welcome more immigrants to Canada, and help them succeed once they arrive.

Hon. Jason Kenney, PC, MP

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Note the braggadocio tone of the letter. Also note how politicized it is.

Hands up if you think Jason Kenney is a tool. Keep them up if you think the Conservative Party has been an absolute disappointment on the immigration issue. The Conservative and Liberal parties are pretty much the same party in Canada now with a slight difference in taste like Pepsi is to Coke.

The family reunification class has been a prime contributor to increasing poverty rates within immigrant communities since those who enter Canada this way need no pertinent job skills and language skills. Thus, Canadians are forced to pay for their skills upgrade just to give them a fighting chance in the job market which translates into years of below par productivity and heavy public subsidy. But they do work on the cheap. And the Conservatives plan to bring in more of them during a slowdown in the economy. And this is saying nothing of the negative effects this has on Canada's working poor, recent immigrant arrivals, on our health care system and public school system.

They are also future voters which is what this is all about (and Jason Kenney's future run for leader of the Conservative party). Indeed, be they Conservative or Liberal or NDP, immigration is first and foremost a voter importing mechanism. Go ahead and tell me it isn't.

Hat tip to Immigrationwatchcanada.org.

Any Way You Look At It Immigration Is Colonialism If You're A Native.

2011-03-15T19:12:00.008-04:00

Canada's first nation's peoples occupy a paradoxical place in the immigration question. On the one hand they are used to justify immigration (from non-traditional sources) while on the other hand they are used to shame Canada for being a nation founded on "stolen land". They serve to justify immigration while questioning its legitimacy at the same time. Whatever the case may be aboriginals serve as stones to be thrown at Canada's host white majority population to undermine its legitimacy and place in Canadian society.

We've all heard it. The saying goes, "all Canadians are immigrants expect native Canadians." The intent of this statement is to conflate everyone who is not native Canadian into an immigration narrative as if the first European settlers and the next batch of immigrants to arrive tomorrow are one and the same. This view is too simplistic and it is superficially true but the issue is more complex than that albeit not hard to understand.

Simply put immigrants today are coming to a country that is, for the most part, different from the one they left. (This isn't entirely true since too much immigration from too few source countries has created what are de facto colonies on Canadian soil. We give them cute names like Chinatown or Little Italy but they are extensions of foreign nations into Canadian territory due to the anti-assimilated behaviour of those who arrived. It is colonialism, at least culturally, but we give these immigrants/colonialists citizenship which allows us to pretend colonialism isn't happening.) This isn't too dissimilar from what the first European settlers experienced when they left their native countries and arrived in Canada. They arrived and entered into a host society constituted of the indigenous peoples who populated the land. As the European presence grew it eventually overshadowed the indigenous host society only to replace it and itself become the host society that we, and the world, have come to be familiar with. That host society is a European presence in a North American context.

That host society is what immigrants today are entering into and since the vast majority of immigrants to Canada today are from what are called non-traditional sources, meaning non-European sources, history seems to be repeating itself. What we have is the mass introduction of a people, predominately Asian, into a host society dissimilar from itself. This mass introduction, if history truly repeats itself, will overwhelm the host society and eventually replace it creating a new majority and new national identity, a "new Canada" if you will (what was wrong with the old one?)

There are those who object to this prospect (such as myself and I believe the majority of Canadians as well) and this is where native Canadians become a useful tool to deflect opposition. You see, if we are all immigrants (except native Canadians of course) then who are Canadians, especially white Canadians in whose faces link Canada to its historical settler foundations, who are they to complain when non-European immigrants do what their European forefathers did: settle and colonize indigenous lands? If Europeans settled on "stolen lands" then why not Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, Pakistanis, Nigerians, etc.? Immigration is colonialism's legacy; it is colonialism just expressed in another word. If we are all immigrants (and if no one is illegal) then the next person to immigrate to Canada is a colonizer since he or she have every intention to settle on stolen indigenous lands.

The great hypocrisy in all of this is that those who justify their presence in Canada by invoking the native Canadian card are often from countries who have suffered from colonialism as well; a negative period in their histories from which many nations have not yet recovered. Yet, they see no parallel in what they are doing here in Canada. You see, colonialism is only bad when it's happening to you. When you're the one doing it and have a lot to gain from it then that's different.

In this vein immigration isn't population growth but population replacement; it isn't immigration but colonialism. This is doubly true for immigrants today who are not only colonizing "stolen" indigenous lands but are contributing to the colonization of the host society that replaced the indigenous one that preceded it. And this is done with tacit government approval in the guise of multiculturalism.

Since Canada was founded on "stolen land" it is odd to hear immigrants (even the children of immigrants and aren't we all children of immigrants?) accuse Canada of being an apartheid state. I have heard this hypocritical nonsense before from Arab and Palestinian rights groups operating on Canadian universities. Their arguments are made bankrupt by the fact that they make these statements while benefiting from the fruits awarded to them by the alleged apartheid state of Canada simply by living here. By immigrating to Canada immigrants express their approval of the colonization of "stolen lands" (as long as its not theirs) and wish to be apart of it. If the rights of indigenous Canadians are really a concern for them the only way they can be taken seriously is if they pack their bags and make their denouncements from the lands of their ancestors. However seeing how the individual in this case, one Chadni Desai, is south Asian then maybe she should get her own house in order first before moral grandstanding here in Canada.

Any way you look at it immigration is colonialism if you are native Canadian. And they are still losing out because of it. In this SaultStar article First Nations chiefs attack the immigration system as a disservice to Canada's indigenous peoples.

First Nations chiefs slammed the federal and provincial governments Monday for efforts to attract and to educate immigrants in light of education and other funding shortfalls faced by natives in this country.

"It has been been mentioned here many times how many millions of dollars they are pouring into bringing people to this country when we've got the demographics of a young population that's a ready workforce that needs the capacity, that needs the education," Grand Council Chief Patrick Madahbee told a crowd at an education rally Monday that stopped traffic east of the city for a little less than two hours. "We could take advantage of the energy sector, we could take advantage of mining, forestry."

Madahbee complained that during a recent hospital visit he saw no Anishinabe people working in higher-paying jobs.

"If there's any Anishinabe working there at all, they're working in custodial positions. Where are they in the labs? Where are they as doctors? We need education," said Madahbee.

This dismay was expressed in response to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty's intention to "spend $30 million over the next four years to provide scholarships to international students completing doctorates at Ontario Universities."

The moral exhibitionists who make allegations that Canada is an apartheid state oftentimes harbour liberal views regarding immigration as if the two points of view are not connected in some way. If there was any sincere concern for the issues facing Canada's native community then advocating lower immigration targets and forcing the government to look to Canada's indigenous population to satisfy labour shortfalls would be prominent. This would help lift them out of their third world status. But aside from us racist immigration reformers this option is never made by those who pretend to care. Indeed, immigration pushes native issues further and further off the political radar because as a political voting block they do not matter compared to voter rich urban centers where the majority of Canada's immigrants reside. And I don't see this changing anytime in the future. For native Canadians it's more of the same: more immigrants, more colonialism, the beat goes on.

But does anyone even truly care about native issues? It seems when First Nations chiefs speak no one cares to listen. Perhaps it's because when they do their responses are uncomfortable. What good is immigration to native Canadians when it continuously displaces them from jobs that they could be trained for? What good is immigration if it marginalizes native Canadians politically and removes their concerns from mainstream discourse to make room for hijabs, and kirpans, and silly Chinese superstitions? What good is immigration to native Canadians at all if ever? It's easy to dismiss white Canadians who disagree with immigration. It's not so easy when even the indigenous population sees no benefit to the immigration system as well so we'll ignore them, just like we always do.

I Think We've Been Cheated: Immigration Is More Bane Than Boon For Canadians.

2011-03-03T22:01:00.007-05:00

This report out of the U.K. reveals that the Labour party knew of and covered up negative conclusions about mass immigration to the U.K. while it was in power.

Labour is today accused of a ‘shocking’ cover-up over the impact of years of mass immigration as damning official research buried by the last government is revealed.

Ministers will publish three reports commissioned at the taxpayers’ expense by Labour politicians – but then apparently ‘sat on’ because of their inconvenient conclusions.

Government advisers concluded immigration had depressed wages, threatened to increase community tensions and seen many incomers stay longer than intended.

Since Canada foolishly (and naively) accepts more immigrants per-capita than any other country in the world I doubt the conclusions would be much different here.

Indeed, some data point us to that reasonable assumption. For instance, this wikipedia entry provides some valuable insight.

According to this StatsCan report "a migration-induced shift of 10% in the supply of labour is associated with a 3% to 4% movement of wages in the opposite direction. International migration, in other words, raises a country’s wages whenever it decreases the size of its workforce; it lowers wages whenever the opposite is true." Putting it bluntly, immigration driven population growth drives incomes down.

Trying to put a positive spin on this "inconvenient conclusion" the "brain-trusts" at the Montreal Gazette inform us immigrants improve pay equality in Canada. How do they do this? By driving the incomes of professionals down towards the income levels of those who earn less. Since Canada, allegedly, places emphasis on education and training the immigration system technically favours those with professional credentials. This has resulted in the over-supply of skilled labour, like IT and engineers, allowing employers to pay them less. From the StatsCan report we read "immigration played a
role in the 7% drop in real weekly wages experienced by workers with post-graduate degrees in Canada between 1980 and 2000. Over this period the immigrant share of all workers with post-graduate degrees in Canada increased; between the 1986 and 2001 censuses they report that this share rose from 32.5% to 38.2%."

In relation to the above the OECD concluded in a 2008 study titled Growing Unequal?: Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries that in Canada "after 20 years of continuous decline, both inequality and poverty rates have increased rapidly in the past 10 years, now reaching levels above the OECD average." I'm sure immigration had nothing to do with that.

From this ironically pro-immigration site we read the following summary.

Analysis of census data as of 2000 shows that immigrant incomes were at 80% of the national average after 10 years of residing in Canada.In previous decades, immigrant income levels did rise to the national average after 10 years, but in recent years the situation has deteriorated. A 2003 study published by Statistics Canada noted that "in 1980 recent immigrants had low-income rates 1.4 times that of Canadian born, by 2000 they were 2.5 times higher, at 35.8%."The study noted that the deterioration was widespread and affected most types immigrants. The 2003 study explains that the low-income rate among non-immigrants declined in the 1990s, but this was more than offset by the income profile of new immigrants, resulting in a net rise in Canada's total low-income rate. An updated January 2007 study by Statistics Canada, explains that the deterioration continued into the next decade, with the low-income rate of recent immigrants reaching rates of 3.5 times that of Canadian born in 2002 and 2003, before edging back to 3.2 times in 2004. The 2007 study explains that this deterioration has occurred even though Canada implemented changes in 1993 to encourage more highly educated immigrants, with 45% of new immigrants having university degrees as of 2004, compared to 13% in the early 1990s.

We also read "recent immigrants are also significant users of subsidized housing, with 42% of immigrants who arrived after 1990 having a "core need" (as defined by CMHC) for subsidized housing as of 2001 compared to 17% for the non-immigrant population."

Furthermore:

In 2001, the overall unemployment rate of immigrants was 37%. Combined with the overall participation rate of 70%, this means that only 44% of landed immigrants aged 15 years and higher were working in 2001 (i.e., a majority of 56% were not working). The 44% employment rate was significantly lower than the average 2001 employment rate in Canada of 61%. Immigrant unemployment levels do not reduce to the Canadian average during at least the first 10 years of residing in Canada.

Then, of course, who can ignore the The Fraser Institute's claim "that immigrants who arrived between 1990 and 2002 cost governments $18.3 billion per annum (as of 2002) in excess of taxes raised from those immigrants."

Has much changed in the last decade?

It is clear that when it comes to immigration Canadians are the ones bearing most of the costs and the majority of the benefits are going to immigrants. This is made more true when we consider that the majority of immigrants to Canada come from the developing world and immigrating to Canada moves them from an environment of low consumption to one of high consumption (as the saying goes it's better to be poor in Canada than poor in the third world). Mass immigration, as has been demonstrated, is having a negative effect on Canadian livelihoods while nursing social tensions. It is reckless to continue down the path that the nation's politicians have, in their arrogance and self-interest, undemocratically steered the populace. Sadly, it's see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil in Ottawa. It is abundantly clear that Canada accepts too many immigrants, especially the wrong type of immigrant, and has been doing so for a very long time.

They say immigrants built Canada. If that is the case then immigrants can also ruin it.

Canadians Are Being Abused By Immigrant Caregivers.

2011-03-03T21:14:00.003-05:00

Here is another story about immigrant caregivers abusing Canadians and cheating the immigration system.

Fernandes, 45, believes new federal regulations introduced last April have left Canadian employers more vulnerable to a relative handful of unscrupulous individuals who are using the caregiver program as a front to enter the country.

His nanny said she knew no one in Canada, which is why Fernandes was shocked to encounter a group of strangers at his door, claiming to be her relatives. They accused him of abuse and demanded she leave with them.

The situation ended with police in his hallway, asking his nanny if she had been mistreated.

"I told the cops, ‘I don’t know what’s going on,'" says Fernandes. "I didn’t want these problems, I’ve got two little kids."

His caregiver left a week later after her "relatives" showed up again. When Fernandes complained to immigration authorities and his MP, he was told it was between him and his caregiver.

"The sad thing is, bad people can get away with this," he said. "The government is doing nothing."

Confronted with an aging population and the soaring cost of daycare, Canadians who need help caring for their loved ones are turning more and more to the live-in caregiver program, which has its own specialized category within the Temporary Foreign Worker Program.

The caregiver program can lead to permanent residence for applicants who successfully complete 24 months or a total of 3,900 hours of authorized full-time employment.

The changes made by the Conservative government last year shifted more financial responsibility onto would-be employers to improve protections for caregivers.

As a result, employers are now required to pay for a caregiver's medical coverage, airfare, recruitment fees and health insurance — the bill usually totals between $3,000 to $4,000 — and agree to a contract outlining clear overtime provisions.

Successful applicants get a four-year work visa, but have no legal obligation to remain with the family that brought them in.

Immigrant caregivers should be categorized for what they really are which is temporary foreign workers. It should not be a backdoor into Canada and a path to permanent residency. They are typically dispossessed of any marketable job skills and have little intention of staying as caregivers once their permanent residency papers come through. Thus, the caregiver program accomplishes nothing more than to flood the Canadian job market with unskilled labour and their equally unneeded relatives. Like the refugee system, it is just another hole in the border undermining Canadian sovereignty.

Jason Kenney, in his immigrant vote buying foolishness, decided to make it easier for these individuals to get citizenship. The result has been a stronger incentive to cheat the system and abuse Canadians for a quick and easy ride into shopping mall Canada. If nothing is done about it, like removing the permanent residency carrot, then these kinds of abuse stories will come to characterize the live-in caregiver program.

Canadians could also, you know, raise their own children but I know that is asking for too much.

New Book, Some Blogs, And A Society.

2011-02-21T20:29:00.004-05:00

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.

2011-02-21T20:20:00.002-05:00

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.

Selling Out Canada: Jason Kenney: An Introduction.

2011-02-20T17:57:00.007-05:00

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.

TB, Homeless Shelters, And Immigrants.

2011-02-17T18:50:00.002-05:00

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?

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

2011-02-15T21:51:00.005-05:00

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.

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

2011-02-13T13:10:00.015-05:00

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.

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

2011-02-12T15:39:00.005-05:00

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.

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

2011-02-10T22:41:00.003-05:00

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.

2011-02-10T22:08:00.004-05:00

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.

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

2011-02-05T15:04:00.003-05:00

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.

Little Hope For Jobless In 2011.

2011-02-04T18:36:00.007-05:00

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?

Nanny Abuse, Nanny Abuse!!!: Foreign Caregivers Exploiting Their Canadian Employers. Wait, What!?

2011-01-30T14:21:00.003-05:00

I stated in this blog post the exploitation of the nanny program is a two way street. Amidst the many stories that circulated over the past year about the abuse vetted upon foreign caregivers by their Canadian employers this Toronto Sun article informs us that the nannies are just as prone to exploit their employers to satisfy their selfish designs.

Canada’s nanny program is being used as a loophole to get into the country, an industry group says.

“There is no obligation for nannies to work for the family,” said Manuela Gruber Hersch, president of the Association of Caregivers and Nanny Agencies Canada, a group that works with nannies and sponsors.

Gruber Hersch said she worked on a case three months ago in which a nanny called her sponsor in Grande Praire, Alta. after arriving at Calgary International Airport to tell them she wasn’t showing up for work.

“This family had spent a lot of money and had repainted a room for the nanny,” she said on Wednesday. “This happens a fair bit and it was totally devastating for the family involved.”

She said a family can spend up to $5,000 to bring a nanny to Canada since they have to pay for their medical examination and airfare. Once approved, a nanny is issued a three-year work permit and sponsors are responsible for providing them room and board as well as a weekly stipend.

A loophole to exploit the program was created after a April 2010 policy change stemming from a controversy in which two nannies, who were hired by Brampton Springdale MP Ruby Dhalla to care for her mother, complained their passports were seized and they were not paid, Gruber Hersch said.

She said 600 nannies have changed employers in the last year.

Some nannies engage in acts so they can be fired by their families. Their visa is valid for them to work elsewhere, she said.

The nanny program is akin to the refugee system in that both are the steady inflow on unskilled immigrants who otherwise would be inadmissible to Canada. Since both are avenues to permanent residency and eventual citizenship they are essentially just alternate immigration routes and thus invites abuse. In an earlier post we learned that male Punjabis are the dominant applicants for the nanny program out of India even though in the chauvinistic Punjabi culture domestic duties are the realm of females.

The nanny program should not be an avenue for permanent residency. Nannies should be regarded for what they really are: temporary foreign workers. It is clear, and easily presumed, that those admitted as nannies have no intentions of continuing the work once they are eligible for permanent residency. The article tells us of one nanny who spent more time searching the internet for alternate work then doing her job by minding the kids. I'm sure this is quite common.

Of course, that majority of nannies are Filipinos and according to the article "more than 90% of those who arrive in Canada under the program apply for permanent residency after two years." We can then surmise that the nanny program is nothing more than the steady importation of unskilled female Filipinos who otherwise would be inadmissible to Canada. In turn they can then start importing the rest of their families after a mere two years of baby sitting.

Since these nannies flee this line of work so readily the labour market demand for nannies is never satisfied creating a permanent demand, and another gaping hole in the border, for others to take advantage of. So what we have in actuality is the perpetual importation of unskilled labour, primarily female Filipinos, flooding the Canadian job market who end up competing with Canadians for available jobs and school admissions (to upgrade their skills). Compounding this is the importation of family members who do not need pertinent job skills or language skills to enter the country as a sponsored relative. As a consequence they can have a negative effect on wages and salaries and pressure businesses to adopt employment equity standards designed to deny jobs to the majority host society. I fail to see how this is beneficial to Canada and Canadians. Indeed, it is yet another example of where the system benefits the immigrant more so.

Of course, Canadians can raise their own damn kids or is that asking to much?

Job Recovery Worse Than Previously Reported.

2011-01-29T15:30:00.002-05:00

Looks like StasCan goofed about those job numbers and the severity of the recession.

Statistics Canada says the economy has not yet recouped all the jobs it lost during the recession, as the agency had previously reported.

In a revision of much-quoted statistics, the agency says the country lost more jobs than it thought during the recession and created fewer that it thought during the recovery so far.

The agency says Canada lost 428,000 jobs during the 2008-09 slump, about 11,000 more than previously reported.

But the big change is to the number of jobs created since the recession ended in the summer of 2009.

The agency had previously reported that over 460,000 were created since July 2009 but now it says the number is actually 398,000, which leaves Canada 30,000 shy of the pre-recession peak.

Makes you wonder what good all that stimulus money did. More importantly, it makes you wonder what the hell we need 260,000 immigrants (and an equal number of temporary workers) for. Oh right, election around the corner. A Conservative majority is more important right now than your job is. But when they get it everything will be okay right?

Assimilation Fail: Silly Chinese Superstitions v. Canadian Compassion.

2011-01-23T13:41:00.003-05:00

A decision by the University of British Colombia to build a hospice next door to an upscale condo development situated on UBC property has rattled the predominately Asian residents who live there. Read it here.

Dozens of angry Asian residents of a posh, University of B.C., highrise building aim to stage a placard-waving protest rally to protest a 15-bed hospice being planned next door.

“We cannot have dying people in our backyard,” said rally organizer Janet Fan, Wednesday “It’s a cultural taboo to us and we cannot be close to so many dying people. It’s like you open your door and step into a graveyard.”

Fan lives on the 17th floor at Promontory, at 2688 West Mall, near Thunderbird Stadium.

[...]

Fan said 80 per cent of the residents of her 18-storey building are Asian and are strongly opposed.

Their concerns:

“Units here are worth $1 million,” she added. “We put our life savings into this.”

She said residents are worried the hospice will have a negative impact on their property values.

Asian residents living in other buildings in the upscale Hawthorn Place neighborhood have signed a 200-name petition, including 65 from Fan’s building.

So money is the issue. It is apparent that a return on their investment is more important to these Asians than the well being of a few terminally ill patients. I should also add that the hospice would also serve as an instrument for research and instruction for the university's Faculty of Medicine.

It should be noted that this isn't the first time the hospice has met opposition:

It met with complaints when it was originally planned for Marine Drive, close to Place Vanier student residences.

Joe Stott, director of Campus and Community Planning, said objections came from students who didn’t want to have to keep quiet at night and from Pacific Spirit Park and the Wreck Beach Preservation Society.

So should we hold the Chinese residents of 2688 West Mall to a different standard? The answer is yes. Were they assimilated immigrants who could properly call themselves Canadians, which they are not but more akin to Chinese colonialists abusing Canadian hospitality, then it wouldn't be an issue.

You see, the reason why it is an issue to Asians is because of the address of the building. It has the number 8 in it. Two of them in fact and in Chinese culture 8 is a lucky number. It also has a 2 and a 6 in the address and these are also condiered good numbers. This is primarily the reason why the condo units are fetching such a high price. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the developer was aware of the significance these numbers have to superstitious Chinese and constructed the building to Asian cultural sensibilities. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if the developer himself was Chinese. Whatever the case may be it explains why the building is occupied by 80% Asian residents who were likely the target market (who probably paid more than what the units are worth). In turn the residents intend to sell their properties at inflated prices to other Chinese buyers drawn to the residency by the numbers of the address ending in double 8s. So the building was constructed to sell over valued condo units to Chinese buyers because of the address numbers, who in turn intend to flip their properties at inflated prices to other Chinese buyers. Its Asians selling to Asians selling to Asians selling to Asians selling to Asians all because of a 2 and a 6 and a magical double 8.

The hospice threatens the money-grubbing ambitions of these Asian real estate speculators because it negates the magical powers of the condo's address. The hospice houses and treats the terminally ill. That means death will reside next door and as stated death is a "cultural taboo" to Asians. This is why they are protesting. It's about money, not compassion. It is to the shame of the student body whose objections are based on a need to party all night but it is equally shameful to the objecting Asians who concerns are buoyed by silly Asian superstitions.

When it comes to real estate, address numbers are of little concern to us Canadians. So are cemeteries. Indeed, a well kept cemetery can oftentimes be an attraction to people out for recreational purposes like walking or jogging or a place for quite contemplation. Mount Pleasant cemetery here in Toronto provides an excellent example. What's important to us is location, location, location and we are willing to pay good money for a decent location but we don't care to pay an inflated price just because the Asian seller thinks the address numbers are housing supernatural power. Only one who shares that same kind of magical thinking will entertain the asking price which invariably means another Asian.

This is an example of culture clash where unassimilated Asian, mostly Chinese, immigrants have failed to adopt the host culutre's sense of compassion. Nor have they come to appreciate how little we care about their nonsensical superstitious thinking and why it should be at the bottom of the list when it comes to cultural accommodation. And that is if, and I mean a big IF, we should bother to accommodate them at all. If they claim to be Canadian then perhaps they should show some of that compassion we Canadians are told we have. If they cannot do that then perhaps they should be shown the door because it's quite clear from their objections to the hospice that they have no intent on assimilating and are in fact in Canada for less flattering reasons.

For more read this ImmigrationWatchCanada.org bulletin.

Tamil Tigers 'May Be Using' Or 'Are Using' Canada As A Base?

2011-01-21T22:24:00.008-05:00

Tamil Tigers using Canada as a foreign base? You think? In fact I assumed this was this case already with the Canadian Tamil Congress set-up to operate as a de-facto government in exile to wage, at least, a cold war with Colombo in the event of an LTTE defeat.

File this one under duhhhhhhh herp derp duhhhhhhh.

Security intelligence authorities are warning that exiled Tamil rebel leaders are re-establishing their violent Sri Lankan separatist movement in Canada.

“We don’t know how far advanced it is, but their intent is pretty clear — to set up a base-in-exile here for the leadership. Some leadership is already here” a well-placed federal government official told the Ottawa Citizen.

The warning accompanied a report late last week to senior government officials revealing that two southeast Asian smuggling syndicates are arranging the launch of two more shiploads of Tamil migrants to British Columbia in the coming weeks. The boats are expected to carry as many as 50 former Tamil Tiger rebel leaders and fighters, according to intelligence estimates.

“Why here? It doesn’t make any sense because it is much easier to go to Australia,” said the official. “This is the reason.”

Well there's that plus our internationally famous (or infamous) joke of an asylum system that is more about immigration than it is about asylum. Were it not for that then there wouldn't be much of a Sri Lankan Tamil population in Canada to write about; the largest in the world outside of Sri Lanka as well as the single largest Sri Lankan Tamil settlement in the world residing in Toronto.

To quell hysteria I will say there is little to worry about Canada's Sri Lankan Tamils as a whole. Most of them are just shameless opportunists who scammed a humanitarian program by using the civil war as a pretext to immigrate to "shopping mall Canada" even though their lives were never in danger (a lie is the truth to someone so long as that person believes it). I doubt the majority of them are even that politically involved.

The way to stop LTTE leadership from gaining entry to Canada is is to reject all asylum claims from Sri Lankans and send them back like we should have been doing years ago. With the civil war at an end and the U.N. itself helping to repatriate Sri Lankan Tamils there is little justification for being generous to any asylum claim from Sri Lanka. The ones arriving here now are likely high ranking LTTE officials trying to sneak into Canada amid asylum scammers who hope it is not too late to game Canada's refugee system. If not that then they are likely criminals trying to escape justice. Stopping them will be difficult so long as the Singh decision remains unchallenged. As long as the Singh decision stands, and the government has stated it refuses to revisit the disastrous ruling, there is little we can do to prevent this from happening.

Assumptions Of A Mass Labour Shortfall Due To Retiring Boomers Have Been Greatly Over Exaggerated.

2011-01-17T23:06:00.004-05:00

Read it here.

More than two-thirds of Canadians plan to keep working after they officially retire, according to a survey by Scotiabank.

In Ontario, seven-in-10 plan to work during retirement the survey found with a little under half saying they would do so because they need the money. An even higher portion said they plan to work primarily because it keeps them mentally and socially active.

If that is the case then what will become of the immigrant labour Canada has been stockpiling over the years?

My prediction is that immigrant communities and racial minority groups will pressure the government more so for discriminatory labour laws that will work in their favour even though, as a group, they will consitute the majority in places like Toronto. For the cause of "diversyfying the workplace" and "employment equity" white males have been the acceptable target of discriminatory hiring practices but expect it to be expanded to encompass whites as a group irrespective of gender or ethnicity. Everyone favours discrimination in the workplace so long as it favours them. The fact that policies such as "employment equity" (or "affirmative action" as it is called in the U.S.) exist in the first place tells us that the labour market is tight already so there is little need for many and more immigrants.

Employment equity only applies to low level positions. It is not applied to the top tiers where meritocracy (and family name and connections, nepotism, money, proper schooling, and class loyalty) trumps political correctness. Thus, employment equity is a weapon against working class Canadians where immigration is an assault on working-class incomes and multiculturalism is an assault on working-class culture. It is class warfare.

Should we then be so surprised that many drawn to neo-nazi, white-supremacist groups are disaffected working class youths who find themselves sacrificing a future and a culture for the pet-hobbies/social experiments of their upper class betters who don't equally share that sacrifice? However, their anger is misdirected. It shouldn't be at immigrants. It should be at those who brought them here and who insist on maintaing a system of which they have estranged themselves from bearing any of the costs, dumping it instead on the lower class rabble.

But I digress. More to the topic at hand, it has been explained that due to the retiring baby boomer cohort Canada needs a mass immigration regime of ever increasing intake numbers to fill those vacant positions as well as fuel job growth. It seems the possibility that many boomers may still be working post-retirement in some capacity wasn't a consideration yet we face that reality. So it seems the youth and immigrants have more to be gloomy about.

Many of the so-called "gen-x" cohort found themselves struggling to get into the job market and get their careers off the ground due to the large presence of baby-boomers already in the workforce. This also made advancement in their careers difficult. Now, as they saddle the rising generations with higher taxes to pay for their pensions and health care costs, the boomers will keep them in a state of career arrested development as they stay in the workforce longer. Since they benefited so much from being born at the right place and time perhaps they should use their influence as a voting bloc to pressure the government for reduced immigrant intake targets as a way to give younger Canadians a fighting chance and a future to look forward to.

If Youth And Immigrants Are Gloomy About The Future, What Do The Incoming 260,000 Have To Look Forward To?

2011-01-13T19:48:00.003-05:00

Here is what may be a veiled plea by a Toronto Star columnist for a reduction in immigration targets.

A new year is usually cause for optimism. Yet a recent study in which I was involved surveyed the attitudes of 100 post-secondary students and recent immigrants living in Calgary who were found to be quite pessimistic about their prospects.

[...]

Everyone rejected the talk of recovery promoted by economists and politicians and repeated in the news media because they are not experiencing any such recovery. Participants have lost faith in experts, opinion-setters and major institutions in both the public and private sector.

University students don’t believe administrators or politicians act in their best interests. Anyone looking for work believes the system is stacked against ordinary job-seekers and in favour of well-paid CEOs. Many immigrants believe the federal government doesn’t know what it is doing when it comes to immigration policy.

[...]

Immigrants with university degrees and other credentials are encouraged to come to Alberta because the economy is stronger here than in other parts of the country. But if they come expecting to find work in their field they are too often disappointed. Like students, they end up taking minimum-wage jobs because there are so few professional opportunities available to them.

Some recent immigrants in the focus groups were so frustrated they talked about going back to their home country. One immigrant from China said: “Employers and the government — they have to see the potential of the immigrants. They are very qualified but they are wasting their talent.”

I doubt it was the writer's intention but she unwittingly invites the reader to question Canada's immigration system. Why wouldn't they? According to the article "many immigrants believe the federal government doesn’t know what it is doing when it comes to immigration policy". They are right to believe that.

Another group they are equally skeptical of, as they should be, are the so-called "experts". The "experts" are overpaid, overeducated, Vegas oddsmakers with advanced degrees in the soft science called Economics who occupy offices in the downtown towers of major Canadian cities and look at numbers and graphs all day. They then go on camera or in print to try and convince everyone to believe that they know what they are talking about when in reality they couldn't predict the exact moment the clock strikes twelve. Their view of reality are numbers on a computer screen. What do they know?

I once read the "experts" have a hard time predicting the past so why should we believe them about the future? This appears to be the case here. The "experts" tell us the Canadian economy is recovering and that jobs abound however lived experience may tell us otherwise. It may be true that jobs are plenty but those jobs may be part-time, seasonal, contract, or for one day paying a low wage, demanding few (if any) skills, with almost no opportunity for advancement. Is this why we need 260,000 immigrants year after year? If you are unemployed or underemployed will importing 260,000 more permanent residents into the country make your life better? Has it ever?

Canada already has the highest educated workforce amongst all the G8 nations. We already have an underutilized workforce ready and willing to be trained and retrained to satisfy labour market needs. No reasonable excuse exists to maintain a high immigration regime in this economic climate. What Canada needs now is a highly selective immigration system at greatly reduced intake figures. Maintaining the status quo will not make things easier for immigrants and recent graduates. It may worsen the situation and create a long-term, compounding problem by continuously injecting superfluous labour into a flooded job market, as we have been doing for the past several years. The Canadian population may have grown and economic activity may have increased but many futures have been derailed or stalled if not ruined in the process, all for the sake of a ruinous, out-of-control, nonsensical immigration system and the careers of those it supports.

African Refugees Are Israel's S.S. St. Louis.

2011-01-10T20:10:00.005-05:00

Here is an interesting story in the Toronto Star about African Refugees in Israel.

In recent years, tens of thousands of Africans like Abdul-Rasul have entered the country through its long desert border with Egypt, turning Israel, like parts of Europe, into a magnet for asylum seekers, and even more, for migrants desperate for jobs in the industrialized world.

Their arrivals are hardly being welcomed. Facing a public furor, the government is scrambling to erect a fence along the 220-kilometre Egyptian border and a massive detention centre in the remote southern desert.

With Israel, however, come special complications: Founded six decades ago in the wake of the Nazi Holocaust, its society is torn between a sense of duty toward the persecuted and fears that the influx might make the country less Jewish.

In a speech to parliament this month, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of a “flood” of illegal migrants. “It is threatening the jobs of Israelis, and it is threatening the Jewish and democratic character of the state of Israel,” he said.

The government says that all but a select few are economic migrants and not eligible for refugee status. But critics charge the government is turning away bona fide refugees fleeing persecution.

“The state is lying, it knows it is lying and it purposely refuses to check the refugees’ status because that will prove that it is lying,” said Sigal Rozen of the Hotline for Migrant Workers advocacy group.

The article reminds me of the S.S. St. Louis only in reverse. When the Jewish state of Israel is confronted with an S.S. St. Louis of her own she acts in kind by erecting a wall to hinder safe passage of would be asylum seekers as well as constructing a detention centre in the Negev desert to house those who make it to Israeli soil. That, plus a legal framework to keep asylum seekers in "legal limbo" as measures to dissuade others from following.

In 2008, for example, France recognised 9,648 refugees. In the same year, Israel recognised only four, despite the fact that several hundred asylum seekers enter the country every month.

According to Tally Kritzman, an assistant professor at the College of Law and Business in Ramat Gan and an expert on immigrant and refugee law, not one application has been approved since July 2009 when the interior ministry set up a new office to deal specifically with asylum requests.

"Basically what the government is afraid of is the pull factor," Kritzman explains.

"If the asylum seekers get status here, that has rights attached. They are supposed to get temporary residency, national health care, and social security."

The state fears that this will encourage more to come.

"The Israeli government is experiencing this as a mass influx and is trying to control it," Kritzman adds. "The main tool of control is to keep people in a legal limbo."

The words of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are clear on the matter: Israel does not want an influx of non-white, non-Jewish immigrants into the country. Allowing one would threaten "the Jewish and democratic character of the state of Israel". This is tantamount to saying a Jewish influx into Canada would threaten the Christian and democratic character of the dominion.

Considering how Jews in the diaspora, many of them refugees themselves from Nazi Germany, were influential in the shaping of western asylum systems in the post WWII era, including Canada's, Israel's resistance to African asylum seekers is hypocritical. The fact that many are fleeing genocide in Darfur makes the hypocrisy of the Jewish state grosser.

I don't wish this post to come off as "Israel bashing". Despite the criticisms of the state it is still the freest nation in the Middle East. What I wish to emphasize are the parallel concerns both Canada and Israel share in the face of an influx of a largely alien people.

One concern is the pull factor. The large scale granting of asylum and eventual citizenship to refugees will in fact attract more, many of whom we can reasonable assume will be bogus; being economic migrants abusing a humanitarian system for immigration purposes. We've seen that here in Canada with Sri Lankan Tamils, Mexicans, Roma from Hungary and Czech Republic, and others. The large and ever increasing influx becomes hard to manage making it nearly impossible to screen and monitor those who enter the country as well as deport those who are deemed inadmissible. National sovereignty is effectively undermined at considerable financial and social cost.

Another concern is the negative effects it will have on incomes and wages as well as poverty rates.

The ultimate concern is demographics. Should immigration and asylum systems be so unrestrained that they effectively alter the demographic character of a country? Is it wrong for Israel to want to maintain a Jewish majority and its Jewish character? There are advocates within Israel as well as in the diaspora who support African refugees in Israel but I wonder if that support has limits. It is one thing to advocate for residency rights for 20,000 non-Jewish Africans in a country of 7.6 million people that is 75% Jewish. But will that advocacy still burn bright if that 20,000 balloons to 100,000; to 200,000; to 1 million? Will their voices still be there when the steady inflow reduces the Jewish population of Israel to 60%? How about 50%? Is it still a Jewish state if the percentage of the Jewish population is reduced to 49.9%?

Will Canada still be Canada if the host majority is reduced to a racial and cultural minority? Is it still Canada when soccer and cricket become the top two sports replacing ice hockey and curling and the CFL? What will Canada become if nothing more than a postal code where saying you're Canadian describes where you're from but not who you are?

Many of the champions of Canada's immigration system are immigrants themselves but I doubt their zeal will still be there if immigration patterns were reversed. Israel seems to be a case in point. Italy is another. Mexico is building a wall on its southern border with Guatemala to stem the inflow of illegal migrants into Mexico while doing nothing to prevent many of its citizens from illegally entering the United States or even Canada. India is building a wall around Bangladesh for similar reasons while right-wing voices in the Indian Punjab decry migrants as a threat to Sikh cultural and political supremacy in the state.

I feel many immigrants prescribe for Canada what they would not consider for their native countries. But they feel confident enough to do so anyways because they are comforted by the knowledge that their identity is not threatened in their native lands by the mass introduction of disparate peoples. It seems what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.

Big Brother Is Watching Me: Hello 'New Canada', Goodbye Freedom of Speech.

2011-01-01T13:56:00.003-05:00

Upon picking up the "Insight" section of the Toronto Star today and I was greeted by this story on the opening page.

It's about censorship and thought control in theocratic Islamic societies in the Middle East. Bloggers in the Middle East who are critical of theocratic regimes and the limitations it places on individual freedoms are finding themselves targets of police action charged with such crimes as “blasphemy against the prophet and the Qur’an”. A jail cell awaits them if apprehended.

I was going through my comment moderation the other day and a poster named Peter had the following to say on this blog post:

I am pretty sure you will not post this but I have sent your site to a friend of mine who monitors this kind of thing.

I don't how I should take that comment or even take it seriously but what he is doing is threatening me. The implication is clear: you are being watched so you better be careful as to what you write.

They can monitor "this kind of thing" all they want. I really don't care. But if they posses any kind of state sanctioned power to shut my blog down or if any law exists that will allow them to do so then it is illegitimate. There is no place for that kind of nonsense in a functioning modern democracy like Canada where freedom of speech is the keystone value of our society. Besides, I do have the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms on my side, right? Am I right? Anyone?

What the bloggers in the Middle East and myself are doing is challenging the prevailing orthodoxy and the power structure upon which it resides. Like them I am questioning the official state religion that is being used to organize society and control the population. In the Middle East it is Islam. In Canada we call it multiculturalism and like in the Middle East, Canada too has tools at its disposal to silence heretics who dare “blasphemy against the prophet and the Qur’an”. We call these tools Human Rights Commissions and Hate Crime Laws.

When ground was broken in creating the "new Canada" it was only right to expect some opposition to it. After all, what was so wrong with the old one that we needed a new one? So a kind of quasi-legal framework arose to punish those who dare to openly challenge a pet project of "those who wear no clothes". The examples are numerous and telling, revealing that it is agenda driven and has little to do with the enforcement of human rights.

You see, the "social experiment" that is the "new Canada" cannot survive without placing limitations on our freedoms especially the freedom of speech. A privileged, select, and self appointed few have taken it upon themselves to micromanaging the lives and thoughts of the citizenry to force them to abide by the principles of the "new Canada" (and to keep themselves employed). This requires laws and enforcement mechanisms to threaten those who dare to dissent from the program and openly question the obvious wisdom of our moral and intellectual superiors. This can range from as petty as Mccarthyesque mud-slinging accusations of racism to financially punishing Human Rights Tribunals to ultimately a stint in jail and a criminal record. Whatever the tactic the message is the same: shut up and play along or else.

So far the program has been running smoothly because Canadians are a typically passive, mall shopping crowd of people who care more about the latest iPhone app, hockey score, or the latest tid-bit of celebrity gossip than they do about the future direction of their country. The Canadian is one who goes to work, pays taxes, aimlessly shops, and has unquestioningly internalized all the multiculturalism dogma government propaganda campaigns have shoved down their throats. Rarely do Canadians exercise their freedom of speech (or even free thought) and many take it for granted. But for us bloggers we use our freedom of speech on a daily basis and some of us in Canada have learned that freedom of speech is a Charter protected right so far as it is government approved.

Limiting and policing Canadians' freedom of speech is all in the service of the state religion of multiculturalism for the preservation of the "new Canada". Like dogmatic Islam it is a force to organize and govern (control) the population. It says a lot about the validity of the multicultural sate if Canadians have to be not only sold on it through endless government sponsored propaganda campaigns but laws must be legislated to force everyone to play nice. Beneath it all, for those self-appointed and privileged few who have taken it upon themselves to lead us to the land of milk and honey called "new Canada", it is about power, plain and simple. And since this is the "new Canada" I will not stand for it.

This post has not been screened by Peter. Approval by Big Brother is still pending.

The Alleged Economic Benefits Of Immigration And More Sobering News On The Economy.

2010-12-15T17:04:00.003-05:00

When discussing mass immigration proponents will tell you that immigration increases a nation's economic activity. The implication is that the national standard of living increases with it. Therefore it is absurd to be opposed to mass immigration because who is opposed to increasing one's standard of living? It may be true that mass immigration does bring an increase in a nation's economic activity but this does not necessarily translate into an increase in the national standard of living.

To take a simple but not unrealistic example imagine an immigrant from South Korea who settles in Toronto and opens a neighbourhood corner store. He has already contributed to Canada's economic activity simply by traveling here because he would have employed the services of others to get here. He will also employ the services of others to help him navigate Canada's immigration laws. He contributes further to Canada's economic activity by buying basic goods and services. To make a living he opens a corner store. This too contributes to economic activity. Despite all of this he has thus far done nothing to increase the standard of living of Canadians and most likely never will. The fact that he is in Canada and has opened a small business has almost no effect on increasing Canadian's standard of living. The only ones who benefiting in this arrangement is immigrants, not Canadians.

It could be argued that one doesn't make a difference but many do. As reasonable as this sounds this isn't the case. Having gleaned this Australian op-ed piece from this thread we read:

That's fine for them, but it doesn't necessarily follow that a bigger economy is better for you and me. Only if the extra people add more to national income than their own share of that income will the average incomes of the rest of us be increased. And that's not to say any gain in material standard of living isn't offset by a decline in our quality of life, which goes unmeasured by gross domestic product.

The most recent study by the Productivity Commission, in 2006, found that even extra skilled migration did little or nothing to raise the average incomes of the existing population, with the migrants themselves the only beneficiaries.

This should be taken in consideration of a 2008 British House of Lords study that concluded the economic benefits of immigration to Britain is negligible. Since Canada accepts more immigrants per-capita than either Australia or the U.K. it is quite likely that any economic benefit mass immigration brings to Canadians on average is nil.

Toronto may be the canary in the mine. According to a recent survey Toronto ranked as the "most miserable city" in Canada. I don't know if I care to give this study much credence because how do you measure something like happiness? I will say that immigration has not made Toronto a more desirable place to live. Indeed, I say it is ruining it. What good has it brought to those who live there? A diversity of dishes in the guise of ethnic restaurants that are predominantly frequented by the city's childless cultural elites? Okay, what else? Take your time, I know it's hard to think of something else. Cultural festivals that most Torontonians don't go to? Anything else? That's it? Can't think of anything else?

What mass immigration has given Toronto is the worst gridlock in North America and as a consequence adding stress to the daily lives of Torontonians through increased commute times and more polluted air. It has contributed to escalating hydro rates through increased demand, has increased wait times in the city's emergency rooms, and is adding strain to the city's public services. Toronto now has a garbage problem it does not know how to solve. Immigration has created a scarcity of affordable housing and maintains upward pressure on the prices of single family dwellings thus negatively affecting both the poor and young families alike. Since housing in Toronto has become unaffordable to many, immigration is what is fueling urban sprawl threatening some of the most fertile soil in all of Canada while bringing Toronto's urban problems to the suburbs and beyond. The city is being divided up into ethnic ghettoes (including white ones) creating social tensions while becoming a place many a Canadian would find alien (and cause many a tourist to stop and make sure that they are in fact in Canada). And this is saying nothing of the jobs that will be denied to many Canadians in Toronto for the sake of "diversifying the workforce". Toronotonians, possibly all of Ontario, can expect higher taxes just to address the problems mass immigration has brought to the city. Talk of toll roads is just the start. So, if Toronto has become the "most miserable city" in Canada then it should be obvious why. These are things that determine one's quality of life and standard of living and immigration has attack it negatively while contributing to the economic activity of the city. Oh yeah, staged car accidents are on the rise but I'm sure it's unrelated.

With the above in mind the Toronto Star reports on a study that projects deepening income divides in the city by 2025.

Toronto is headed toward a scenario where nearly two thirds of residents will be in the low income bracket by 2025, according to a study released Wednesday.[...]

Prior to this latest update, one released last year that was based on the latest census data showed that 15 of the city’s middle income neighbourhoods have disappeared since 2001. The majority of these areas reverted to low income, where individual earnings were 20 to 40 per cent below the city average.

It shows that if current trends continue, a total of 10 per cent of the city will be middle income earners by 2025; 30 per cent will be upper middle income; and a whopping 60 per cent of Toronto’s residents will be in the low to very low income bracket, sources say.

That’s quite a swing from 1970, when 66 per cent of Toronto neighbourhoods were middle income, 15 per cent were upper income, and 19 per cent were low income.

But I'm sure immigration has nothing to do with. It's only a coincidence that the city's immigration and "minority-majority" population will also be around 60% at the same time.

So what of the economic health of the nation? Well, Canadians can expect persistent high unemployment for one thing while the Canadian economy crawls at a modest 1.6% growth rate until 2017. Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney reminds us "the crisis is not over" while Canadians are spending far beyond their means. This dangerous rise in debt levels coincided with the rise in precarious work (part-time, contract, seasonal, temporary) while well paying, stable full-time jobs with benefits are outsourced to the countries Canada is importing immigrants from in a two front attack on the incomes of working Canadians. Canadians, indeed the majority of North Americans, have witnessed a stagnation of real wages and incomes for the past thirty years.

Immigration has done nothing to increase the standard of living for Canadians and their incomes as they have to manage record levels of debt with precarious, insecure jobs just to maintain an illusion of prosperity. One has to wonder how much of this debt is being serviced by immigrants behaving like full fledged citizens of "shopping mall Canada", the only Canada they care to belong to. And the government's solution: maintain existing immigration trends for the foreseeable future including Canada's destructively high intake numbers. Thanks for nothing!

It is too often stated that Canada was built by immigration. If things don't get back under control it will ruin the country. Feel-good slogans and baseless assumptions will not be enough to save us. What is clear is that the vast majority of Canadians reap no benefits from the nation's immigration policy and are most likely victims of it in one way or another.

Looks Like The Party's Over As Acceptance Rates For Sri Lankan Refugee Claims Plummets.

2010-11-24T19:10:00.003-05:00

And it's about f**king time! The laughably high acceptance rate Canada lavished on Sri Lankan asylum claims has been an embarrassment to this country and a knock at the credibility of the Immigration and Refugee Board. It really was a con game and we Canadians were being played for saps. From the Vancouver Sun:

For each month from January 2009 to July 2010, the percentage of accepted refugee claims from Sri Lanka was typically greater than 80 or 90 per cent, the data show.

But in August, the month the Tamils arrived aboard the MV Sun Sea — sparking a heated debate about Canada's refugee system and vows by the Harper government to crack down on human smuggling — the percentage of accepted claims dropped to 75 per cent. It then plunged to 47 per cent in September.

Since it takes an average of 22 months for a refugee claim to be heard, none of the cases decided in September were connected to the migrants aboard the MV Sun Sea.

So it looks like Sri Lanka's Tamils are going to have to get in line and apply to immigrate to Canada just like everybody else instead of shamelessly scamming a humanitarian system.

If this is not an anomaly, as the Canadian Tamil Congress hopes it is, and is indicative of an ongoing trend that will witness further drops in acceptance rates then this will substantially hinder Sri Lankan immigration to Canada since Sri Lankans, especially the Tamils, have been primarily dependent on Canada's asylum system to immigrate here. Were it not for the most gullible and generous asylum system in the world, along with its partner in crime the family reunification act, there wouldn't be much of a Sri Lankan Tamil presence in Canada speak of let alone a Sri Lankan one.

I wouldn't be angered by this if I genuinely felt they were real refugees but my researching the matter tells me otherwise. I often wondered why Canada was the target of so many asylum claims from Sri Lanka yet witnessed very little from places like Darfur or Rwanda. The simple explanation is that real refugees do not have the relative safety to wait around at a specified spot in their home country for their government issued passport to arrive in the mail. Nor do they have the financial means to buy a plane ticket, or a spot on a smuggler's boat, to travel half way around the world to make an asylum claim, passing through safe third countries en route.

Real refugees are constantly on the move. That's why they are called displaced persons. The only time they are at a fixed address for a determinant amount of time is when they make it to a refugee camp. Yet, thanks to the Singh decision, these are the one's we ignore to favour the gate crashers. That's the whole irony of Canada's asylum system. By allegedly being made compassionate it is least compassionate to those in need of real sanctuary.

If one good thing can be said about the abuse of Canada's asylum system by Sri Lankans it is this: they have demonstrated to us the fiasco that is our refugee system and the need for the government to return to a process by which claims are vetted abroad. Inland claims should be turned away if they arrived by way of a safe third country. Failing that they should be detained until their status is determined and not released before that which is what we do now. Inland claims should be discouraged but since this is how lawyers and refugee advocacy groups get paid expect resistance by them at the cost of those who need our help the most.

A Book To Add To Your 'To Read' List.

2010-11-10T21:45:00.003-05:00

Broadcaster Lowell Green has written a book titled Mayday. Mayday: Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism or it's the end of the Canada we know. You can read more about it here.

The publication of this book in a line of books critical of Canada's immigration system is encouraging. Along with the official launch of the Centre for Immigration Policy Reform I hope a momentum is brewing to put pressure on the government to bring some sanity to, what I feel is, an unpopular, destructive, and unsustainable immigration system.

Mocking Diversity: Canada Accepts Too Many Immigrants From Too Few Source Countries.

2010-11-10T21:00:00.005-05:00

I argue that not only does Canada accept too many immigrants for its own good, it is importing them from too few source countries. According to this report it appears a growing number of Canadians agree.

Forget changing whether we take more family immigrants or skilled workers, a new poll shows Canadians want to shake up the selection of countries from which we select immigrants.

A Leger Marking poll of 1,503 Canadians found that 40% of Canadians say the government should limit immigrants from certain countries in order to change the mix of immigrants coming to Canada.

[...]

In 2009, close to one-third of all new immigrants to Canada came from just three countries - China (29,049), Phillipines (27,277) and India (26,122).

When we add in the rest of the Asian nations approximately half of all immigrants to Canada, if not more, come from one region of the world. Simply stated Canada is importing too many Asian immigrants.

In Toronto immigration means Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, and then everyone else. I'm sure it is the same across the nation. Though Toronto's motto is the Orwellian sounding "Diversity is our strength" the immigrants Toronto mostly receives mocks that motto because they are anything but diverse since three nations make up the lion's share of immigrant producing countries.

Now, this wouldn't be a bad thing if Canada was an Asian nation itself but it is not (at least not yet). The rapid introduction of a people into a host society that is dissimilar to it causes integration problems and societal stresses in the form of racism, distrust, prejudice, a lost sense of community and belonging, among others. The end effect is colonialism, not nation building.

Thou Shalt Not Offend Immigrant Vote Banks: Immigration Levels To Remain Steady During Uncertain Economic Times.

2010-11-04T18:34:00.004-04:00

If anyone needs convincing that Canada's federal MPs care more about their jobs than those of the people they allegedly represent than look no further than the latest announcement concerning immigration levels. Barely crawling out of a deep recessionary period that created an unemployment level above 8% (unofficially it is probably above 10%); coupled with an OECD report that projects an unimpressive rate of growth for Canada averaging at 1.6% until 2017; these amid predictions of a jobless recovery; Jason Kenney, minister responsible for immigration, has the nerve to tell us that the governemt intends to keep immigration levels steady between 240,000 and 265,000 new permanent residents next year.

If that isn't bad enough he also announced that the government intends to decrease the number of economic class immigrants by 5,000 while increasing the number of spouses and children and refugees. In other words they want fewer skilled immigrants to settle in the country while increasing the number of unskilled immigrants because "Canada's post-recession economy demands a high level of legal immigration to keep our workforce strong”. Does that make sense to you? Can anyone with a rational mind wrap their brian around that and explain how lowering skilled immigration and raising unskilled immigration will "keep the workforce strong"?

Whether Jason Kenney is conscious of it or not he appears to have given a veiled pessimistic view of Canada's economy in the years to come. Why would you want immigrants with high expectations over those whose expectations are lower in comparison if the jobs Canada will be churning out are low paying, low skilled, dead end occupations? He seems to be aware of this and that's why he wants fewer skilled immigrants to come to Canada.

Ultimately this is an ill-advised decision made to save political careers. The Conservatives do not want to jeopardize their bid for a majority in the next election by potentially offending immigrant and ethnic vote banks in Canada's voter rich urban centers. They know that were they to do the right thing and reduce immigration levels at this time their political opponents will jump on them and denounce them as anti-immigrant in the hopes that such baseless accusations will score them political points with ethnic urban voting blocs. Sadly none of them seem to appreciate the possibility that immigrants want less immigration too.

What other reason could it be? We are told that we need to maintain a mass immigration regime to "keep the workforce strong" as the economy crawls along at the lightning speed of 1.6% growth a year. When we were in the midst of the recession we were told we needed to maintain a mass immigration regime to (get this) "prepare for the recovery". When the economy was healthy and booming we not only needed to maintain a mass immigration regime, we were told, to keep pace but we needed more immigration.

So the question is what economic conditions will necessitate less immigration? The Trudeau Liberals thought the recession of the early 1980s was enough to reduce immigration targets and that's what they did. Now it seems we need a depression and then, maybe.

Putting The Final Nails In The Coffin Of A Sri Lankan Tamil Refugee Claim.

2010-10-25T23:05:00.003-04:00

This news article out of the Toronto Star describes a Sri Lanka that is not rosy but not bad either. What is remarkable about this article is that the paper bothered to send a reporter to get a first hand account of what is going on instead of editorializing on second hand information from the comfort of the paper's offices at 1 Yonge Street. And if the negative conditions that the reporter chooses to focus on are the worst a Tamil in Sri Lanka can expect then compared to millions of other people in the world they have little to complain about.

The negative spin it is giving a healing nation is to be expected since it is pandering to a 250,000 strong reader base that it wants to sell to advertisers. This is in comparison to the the almost non-existent attention it has given to Toronto's 10,000 Sinhalese Sri Lankans. The only time the paper bothered to pay attention to the Sri Lankan Sinhalese living in Toronto is when it reported, in passing, of an act of vandalism against a Sinhalese owned restaurant in Brampton and a firebombing at a Sinhalese Buddhist temple, two events that occurred after the LTTE was defeated. I don't recall if the paper ever bothered to get a Sri Lankan Sinhalese perspective on the war instead spilling most ink to curry favour with the large Tamil diaspora in Toronto. From a business angle this makes sense. It is better to sacrifice 10,000 potential readers for the sake of 250,000. At the end of the day the paper is still a profit seeking, profit maximizing entity beholden to the concerns of shareholders.

Though the article attempts to make it appear that Sri Lanka's Tamils are still victims after the war there is nothing in the article that would justify an asylum claim. And how bad can things be when, as the Toronto Sun reminds us, many Sri Lankan Tamils in Canada return to Sri Lanka to holiday.

The final blow should be this CTV BC report where we learn that some who arrived on the MV Sun Sea had their asylum claims rejected by the U.K.

Speaking in Delta, B.C., in front of one of the two ships used to bring in migrants, Kenney told reporters the government has learned some of the migrants were already found not to need refugee protection in the United Kingdom.

In immigration and refugee circles this is what is called asylum shopping and by my understanding the UN Convention on Refugees, which the U.K. is a signatory nation, has provisions to prevent this kind of behaviour. So if the U.K. rejected these people then why should Canada accept them?

Like any pest if you see one then there is a whole bunch you are not seeing and this is true about Canada's refugee system.

Vancouver immigration lawyer Daniel McLeod has seen the situation several times.

"It may surprise someone like Mr. Kenney who hasn't been around the refugee field that long, but I've been working in the area for 20 years and it's not common, but it's not unusual for someone to come to Canada who's been refused in another jurisdiction."

Honest words from the parasite lawyer.

So it appears Canada is granting asylum to people no other nation would consider a refugee. Is this compassion or naive stupidity?

The arrival of the MV Sun Sea is generating information that delegitimizes the excessive presence of Sri Lankan Tamils in Canada. Looks like some repatriations are in order. We have been played for fools and rightly so because we are a nation of trusting fools. Acceptance for Sri Lankan refugee claims should drop dramatically and approach zero if any competency is to be found at the Immigration and Refugee Board. Sadly my confidence in the IRB is lacking so I expect the foolishness so continue.

Mass Immigration Inhibits Innovation.

2010-10-20T20:30:00.003-04:00

One of the unchallenged myths that is allowed to propagate in any discourse about mass immigrations is that it brings with it technological innovation to the host society. This seems to be a given, I suspect, based on the assumption that the mass influx of a people into a society will at least include a Guttenberg, an Einstein, or what have you that will excel and bring rewards and bragging rights to whatever country that agrees to host them. Thus, Canada must maintain an open mass immigration system not unlike the nets of a deep sea troller scrapping the ocean floor to catch the best fish. The question is if the assumption has any basis in reality? I don't think is has much.

Despite decades of mass immigration Canada is still considered a commodities based economy with a poor record on technological innovation even though Canada hosts some world class institutions of higher learning and has contributed to advances in the sciences and technological innovation while, I must add, in the absence of a mass immigration policy. It seems mass immigration has not delivered the miracle of technological innovation it promised. Indeed, it may have the opposing effect.

Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies offers a snippet of why we should be suspicious of the grandiose claim that mass immigration brings technological innovation but a little primer on the book itself.

Guns, Germs, and Steel attempts to explain why it was Eurasian people who did the conquering and no one else; why it was the Europeans who conquered the Americas, Africa, and Australasia and not the other way around. His book is not a glorification of European culture and society. Far from it. He claims Europeans had advantages offered to them that allowed them to prosper and conquer over weaker and more "primitive" societies. And it wasn't just the Europeans but other societies who behaved in like fashion had similar advantages offered to them as well. To go further into detail will just side track this post but this wiki entry will suffice. Needless to say what I want to get across is that Diamond approaches the topic from an equalitarian point of view on the origins of man, a view that is at home in a left of center paradigm.

On pages 249-48 in the chapter titled "Necessity's Mother" he discusses explanatory factors that historians of technology suggest may determine and explain why a particular society may be receptive to technology and engage in technological innovation. One of the factors is:

The availability of cheap slave labor in classical times supposedly discouraged innovation then, whereas high wages or labor scarcity now stimulate the search for technological solutions. For example, the prospect of changed immigration policies that would cut off the supply of cheap Mexican seasonal labor to Californian farms was the immediate incentive for the development of a machine-harvestable variety of tomatoes in California.

This suggests that cheap imported labour discourages the need to seek alternatives and thus inhibites technological innovation. I think this is true. For a real world example we need only to look at Japan. It's lack of an immigration policy and scarcity of labour in the face of an aging population has made it one of the most technologically innovative societies in the world. Equally important is the Japanese government's intervention in the Japanese economy as well as a culture that has grown to appreciate technology and innovation.

That last sentence would explain the United States. The U.S. is still the leader in scientific and technological discovery but this has to do with government intervention via the Pentagon in the creation of new and better technologies for the benefit of U.S. based corporations. Aside from a few imported scientists and engineers the mass immigration policy of the U.S. contributes little to its success as a technologically innovative nation state. In fact, it may be a hinderance in some regards.

The assumption that mass immigration brings technological innovation to a host society is specious at best. Necessity, culture, and government support appear to be the deciding factors.

Why Is Organized Labour Silent About Mass Immigration?

2010-10-20T19:32:00.003-04:00

Thomas Walkom is proving to be the only writer worth reading at the Toronto Star. In this piece he takes organized labour to task over its failure to capitalize on the recession to marshal the people to its cause. Following on what he wrote I have this to ask: why is organized labour silent about the harmful effects of mass immigration on not only the wages and salaries of working Canadians but also on the standards of their work environment? Much of the gains made by the labour movement over the course of its history is being undermined by mass immigration. The steady importation of a desperate people willing to work for any wage under any conditions only undermines labour's negotiating power and relevance.

The unions that have suffered the most are private sector unions. This is not surprising given the mobility of capital and the option to outsource work beyond the reach of unionized labour. On top of that they too are subject to the ups and downs of the business cycle and sometimes are forced to make concessions so as to save their jobs.

On the other hand public sector unions live in a world of their own. Not only do they monopolize the services they deliver they are also not as affected by the business cycle as everyone else is. Their jobs, though not guaranteed, are relatively more secure than those in the private sector yet somehow have better benefits and incomes.

Public sector unions are now, pretty much, the labour movement as private sector unions are at their weakest. So why no show of solidarity and compassion for the working man by pressuring the government to reduce immigration quotas that effectively attack working Canadians?