Saturday, 17 September 2011

Slaughtering Sheep: The Planned Destruction of Canada’s Sovereignty By Immigration

By: Shawn Dalton

Who is an immigrant? According to Webster’s New World Thesaurus: “it is a newcomer, a naturalized citizen and adoptive citizen.” There are three myths that continue to confuse and deceive Canadians concerning identity, immigrants and immigration. The first is that Canada’s identity is based on immigration and multiculturalism. The second is that massive immigration compensates for anemic birthrates and to fill a labor shortage. The last is that massive amounts of immigration boost Canada’s economic success and security. These are myths perpetuated over and over again by lawyers, politicians and religious groups. The cold hard facts of reality will easily refute such chicanery. At the end of the day, Canadians and immigrants deserve an accountable, healthy and responsible immigration system that benefits Canada’s own economic self-interests. 
Canada has a nearly eighty percent Christian population (refer to: Canada Year Book 2009). That’s why Christmas is celebrated with such enthusiasm. Canada is therefore a Christian nation. Canadian culture is English and French. It’s also hockey and beer. Foreign-born citizens comprise approximately seventeen per cent out of a total population of thirty four million people. Americans love guns, football, beer and are devout churchgoers every Sunday. The United States has a foreign born population of ten per cent or about thirty million people out of a total population of three hundred and seven million people. India is eighty percent Hindu and cricket is the national sport. The best kick boxers are from Thailand, a majority Buddhist peoples. The only place that might come close to the reality of an immigrant or multicultural state is the United Arab Emirates. The reality is shown through the investigations of Pepe Escobar of the Asian Times. He stated:

At the base is the average construction worker, inevitably South Asian, either Pakistani or Indian. He’s invisible. But he and his fellow workers now comprise an astonishing 80% of the UAE’s population. Human rights Watch has repeatedly complained that this archetypal construction worker is never treated like a human being. But the UAE power structure couldn’t care less. He works a minimum of 12 hours a day in [temperatures of] up to 50 degrees, with a half-hour break, six days a week, and earns no more than $150 a month. He lives in a camp, four and sometimes as many as 12 to a 15 – square meter room lost in the dreary al – Quoz industrial suburb….He has no rights. Trade unions are banned. If he speaks up, he’s instantly deported.

Since these workers aren’t even given citizenship rights, the UAE by definition, is also not an immigrant country. However, it does appear to be based solely on brutal repression and human slavery. Opinion polls reflected the reality that most people felt towards newcomers. Victor Malarek was an award winning senior reporter for the Globe and Mail Newspaper. In 1987, he released “HAVEN’S GATE: Canada’s Immigration Fiasco”. 
Victor discovered that the wishes of Canadians were at complete odds with the political elite in charge of Canada’s immigration policies. How did ordinary Canadians truly feel about immigration, assimilation and other complex issues?

A study of attitudes done by Policy Concepts Inc. for Employment and Immigration Canada released in November 1985, uncovered a disturbing level of racism among Canadians – primarily in Montreal, Edmonton and Vancouver – based on fear that Canada’s predominantly Anglo – Saxon and European culture could be swallowed up by increased immigration from Third World countries. Over all, people surveyed believed that immigrants add to unemployment, compete with Canadians for educational and employment opportunities, and add to their tax burden if they are unable to find work. 
The study also found that there was a general feeling among the respondents that new Canadians do not make sufficient efforts to assimilate. Visible groups such as Chinese, Indo – Pakistanis and black were singled out repeatedly. The respondents said they would like future immigrants to Canada to bemonied, well – trained, well – educated and ready to assimilate.” They saw present immigrants as poor, mostly from Third World countries, uneducated, untrained, reluctant to assimilate, prone to congregate in urban ghettos and a potential tax burden. “This immigrant is seen as posing a threat to our economy and our social fabric and a quality of life Canadians are reluctant to relinquish,” the study stated, adding that there was serious apprehension among respondents of Anglo – Saxon and northern European background” about becoming a minority group in one’s own country.” Most respondents also favored strict immigration controls. Some said they would like to see immigration stopped completelyuntil we get our house in orderand take care of those already here.

During the next two years, thousands of bogus queue jumpers from Portugal, Turkey and a few hundred from Brazil forced the government to place Visa restrictions on these countries. However, no further action was taken. The immigrant vote was not to be disturbed; it was to be fought over. It was to be used as an ethnic vote bank, to be nurtured and encouraged no matter what the economic circumstances. Even if there weren’t enough jobs, mass immigration was to be relentlessly continued. Two years later, not much had changed. Canadians knew something was seriously wrong.

It comes as no surprise that a public opinion poll carried out by Environics Research Group Ltd. for the Globe and Mail in early March 1987, found that 65 per cent of Canadians questioned felt there was too much immigration into Canada. Much of the negative sentiment by Canadians toward immigrants can be directly traced to their lack of trust in the government’s ability to handle immigration.

In a public opinion poll published in the Toronto Star on June 3, 1987, 83 per cent of Canadians questioned said they supported a bill introduced in the House of Commons a month earlier that would make it far more difficult for people claiming refugee status to enter the country.

As Canadians are being forced to share the public space with new Canadians, it became apparent that the most important thing to bring along wasn’t a book, but an I Pod or walk man. Canadians found it a major headache to have to listen to Arabic, Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi, Tagalong, Mandarin, German, Russian and Spanish. On September 11, 1998, the Vancouver Sun ran a report on a poll that Angus Reid Associates had done earlier in the year for Madame Robillard’s department. The results were stunning but fair, accurate yet revealing.

The poll…indicates an overwhelming number of Canadians (76 per cent) want newcomers to be able to speak either French or English when they arrive and want immigration officials to institute tough measures to ensure that immigrants are healthy and have no criminal record.”

It’s possible that Prime Minister Stephen Harper might be seen as a red neck Canadian dictator. However, at least he listened to our American neighbors south of the border. The Liberals never even tried to meet the Yanks half way. They shunned their noses up at them. Part of being a strong leader is the ability to listen to critics and adjust accordingly. On the eve of the Tory majority, Harper finally got together with Barack Obama and signed that border agreement. There was sufficient evidence that Canadians would have given their blessings much sooner.

An Ipsos – Reid poll released in October 2001 found that more than 80 percent in favour of a joint North American security perimeter and a harmonized immigration and refugee system.

After September 11th, most Canadians understood that we are in a clash of civilizations. The assault on western civilization had started. The Americans considered themselves to be in a state of war and Canada should be as supportive as possible. Canadians and Americans share common bonds and values. The people arriving on our shores must be here to add to our cultural and economic prosperity and not to wage holy jihad against infidels. There are limits to how welcoming Canadians can be. This brings us to the second myth; that massive immigration compensates for anemic birthrates and a labor shortage.
The government is always talking about falling birthrates and a looming labor shortage. This rhetoric is constantly reinforced by government agencies.

Canada’s post recession economy demands a high level of legal immigration to keep our work force strong, stated Immigration Minister Jason Kenney.

Instead of continuing the destructive trend of bringing in 178,487 temporary workers to Canada each year, the Conservatives should allow for even more families to join their loved ones in Canada, said NDP immigration critic Olivia Chow.

I think we can look at getting over the 250,000 mark and up to approaching 1% of our population if not going beyond that,” stated Liberal immigration critic Justin Trudeau.

With their strong work ethic and entrepreneurship, they create wealth and increase demand for housing and services, which creates jobs. They trigger a virtuous economic cycle,” wrote Haroon Siddiqui in The Toronto Star.

We need more immigration, we need better family reunification. The [Tory] government has gone completely wrong on family reunification. We need to increase family reunification visas. The best way to do immigration is family reunification,” stated Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff while attending the annual Khalsa Day parade.

We’re becoming ever more dependent on immigration in order to grow this economy. Regardless of your political stripe, we need to ensure that we are seen to be attractive place for immigrants and very efficient in providing services [to newcomers so that they become contributing members of the society and our economy,” stated Ontario Premier Dalton Mc Guinty in an interview at Queen’s Park with The Generation Next Newspaper.

One of the most popular myths is that low birth rates demand high immigration. Canada might not be growing like the third world, but is it indeed a dying country? In an article entitled “The year ahead” immigration lawyer Ryan Rosenburg analyzed Canada’s demographic scenario. He stated:

By comparison, according to Statistics Canada, Canada’s current birth rate is approximately 1.1 per cent (381,000 births) and our current death rate is approximately 0.72 per cent (247,000 deaths). This equals 134,000 people (381,000-247,000) each year. He then explained:

With a national population of 34 million people, 240,000 to 265,000 new permanent residents in 2011 represents approximately 0.70 to 0.78 per cent of our current population. In 2006, Statistics Canada estimated Canada’s population at 30 million people and at the time 240,000 to 265,000 new immigrants represented approximately 0.80 to 0.88 per cent of our then population.

Upon more careful analysis and examination, it is observed that this isn’t even close to the reality. A Canadian high school math wiz with a bad case of zits and crooked glasses simply subtracted 34 million in 2010 from 30 million in 2006. That totaled four million people over a 4-year period. Thus 4 million people divided by 4 years equaled one million people per year. Therefore the average population growth for Canada between 2006 and 2010 wasn’t 0.80 to 0.88 at all. It’s a lot closer to 3.18% each year or 866,000 people and remember to add in an extra 134,000 Canadians from natural growth (births minus deaths). Since 2006, Canada’s population had increased by 1 million people each year. Doesn’t Canada have a labor shortage in key sectors? Isn’t Canada’s labor force simply disappearing like an endangered tropical rain forest?

Unemployment in Canada, as of May 2002, was almost 8 percent, a number that included many well –educated post – secondary graduates. Moreover, a large group of young workers have just begun entering the labor market. These are the baby – boom echo, the offspring of the boomers. They were born between 1980 and 1995 and, at 6.5 million, they are the second – largest population cohort in Canada, after the boomers themselves. A steady stream of echo boomers will be looking for their first jobs between now and 2015. Why make their entry into the labor force more difficult by bringing in armies of competing workers from abroad?”

Canada’s foreign-born population is less than a quarter and there are tens of thousands of highly skilled Canadian college and university students that confidently look forward to earning good money in exchange for hard earned degrees and diplomas. The majority of immigrants used to arrive in Canada from developed nations with strong educational systems and stable democracies. After 1991, the Canadian government decided to pursue ethnic votes and started mass immigration from the third world to achieve this objective. Lowell Green was able to get some very detailed information straight from the government’s database.

In an effort to keep everything as current as possible, I have been able to obtain some figures from Immigration Canada for 2007 and 2008. While a breakdown per individual nation is not available, here are the numbers for those two years on a regional basis:
Source area Total immigration 2007-2008

Africa and the Middle East 99,878
Asia – Pacific 230,138
South and Central America 52,385
United States 21,665
Europe and the UK 79,720

It doesn’t take a genius or mathematician to decipher what’s happening.

The Four –to-One Ratio

We’ve accepted 330,015 immigrants from Africa, the Middle East, Asia and the Pacific in the past two years but only 101,385 from the UK, Europe and the US.”

Isn’t Canada simply creating millions of jobs for newcomers? Does Canada actually create millions of great paying jobs for native-born Canadian as well as newcomers each and every single year? CIBC’s Chief Economist Benjamin Tal explained in a detailed report why this simply isn’t even close to the reality. He wrote:

the softening in the monthly pace of job creation from an average of 31,000 in 2010 to 20,000 in 2011 will single-handedly slow growth in personal spending by more than 0.4 percentage points,”.

Therefore, in 2010, 372,000 new jobs were created (31,000 X 12 months) and Canada had 1.4 million people unemployed. In 2011, Canada is expected to create about 240,000 (20,000 X 12 months) new jobs. That’s a 35% plunge in what is shaping up to be Canada’s worst recession ever. Most developed nations have slashed immigration to a trickle to allow their native labor markets time to recover. They don’t dare flood the market with 250,000 new entrants and with family reunification, up that number to 866,000 new entrants. How many of these people actually dug in their heels and stayed?

A 2006 Statistics Canada study revealed something rather astonishing. Many thousands of immigrants do not come here to become Canadian or make Canada their home: more than one – sixth of all immigrants who come to Canada return to their native countries within a year, and one – third within twenty years!”

The last myth is that massive amounts of immigration boost Canada’s security and economic success. Due to mass immigration, Canada now has a large contingent of homegrown terrorist cells and skyrocketing poverty rates. 
In 1967, Lester B Pearson’s Liberal government introduced Canada and the world to the revolutionary points system. Those with an advanced education and the ability to speak English and French were preferred. Australia copied it and so did several other countries as well. Brain Mulroney helped pioneer the idea of mass immigration for the purpose of harvesting ethnic votes. Most countries decrease immigration during a recession. Prime Minister Mulroney made history by raising immigration levels to record highs during a recession. By 1993, Canada’s annual intake was 256,000 up from 84,000 only four years earlier. In 1993, Daniel Hamermesh at Princeton University Press, published “Labor Demand” which examined the responsiveness of wages to changes in supply.

In the case of Canada, a 17 percent increase in supply, due to immigration, reduces wages by 5 percent.”

The factory and farming industries of 1902 have given rise to the information and knowledge economies of 2002. The lack of a good education is a recipe for disaster.

The minister and the senator learned that post – 1980 immigrants to B.C earned 60 per cent of the income of Canadian – born people in equivalent age brackets. Moreover, they were quoted the testimony of Meyer Bernstein, director of research and analysis in Madame Robillard’s ministry. He had told the Commons Standing Committee on Labor and Immigration that:

Immigrants who don’t have French of English are half as likely to participate in the labor market; the unemployment rate is twice as high and even after a period of eight years in the country there are still performance differences….Language ability is correlated more strongly with settlement success and with contribution and income and taxes, etc., than almost any other measure you can think of.

In her statement to the minister and the senator, Dr. Roslyn Kunin said that her research findings revealed that “language is one of the best predictors of success” and that “suitability and having the spark are more important than any [government designed immigration] class.”

Won’t the children of poor immigrant families rise up and climb out of the pits of poverty? Can’t people simply get great paying factory jobs? The majority of Canadians have no clue as to the hardships faced by new Canadians in a vicious cutthroat economy.

Diane Francis is a columnist for the National Post Newspaper. With razor sharp skills and intense focus, she has unleashed a multitude of hard-hitting best selling books. These include: Controlling Interest: Who Owns Canada, Fighting for Canada, and 50 Best Stocks. In 2002, she released: IMMIGRATION: The Economic Case. Here is what Diane’s investigations revealed:

Only 15 percent of American workers and 18 percent of Canadian workers are employed in the factories, half as many as after the Second World War. These workers are highly trained and highly paid. Farm jobs no longer exist either, except seasonally and at very low wages.

The only labor – intense services that are growing employ highly skilled knowledge workerswho must have the languages, adaptability, and education to improve professionally. Canada does not need more parking lot attendants, dishwashers, housekeepers, or cab drivers, but that’s the skill level of many who came in the 1990s. The labor mismatch, and low education levels of most entrants (twice as many immigrants have less than Grade 9 education as do native – borns), is why it is less likely now for the performances of their children to improve in the future. Most will live in economic – ethnic ghettos for generations and remain members of their underclass. Dropout rates for the children of immigrants are higher than for native – borns, according to inner – city statistics in Toronto. 
We cannot keep the kids in high school because they either hate it, because they struggle with the curriculum, or else they have to work to help support the extended family, or they have absolutely no ambitionsaid an exasperated secondary school principal in downtown Toronto. In other cases, it’s a cultural thing. Everybody is a cleaning lady or everybody grows marijuana indoors or everybody in their ethnic group is a laborer. That’s all they aspire to be or that’s all they are capable of doing.

Another impediment is the sheer number of arrivals. Enclaves of certain ethnic groups, who have taken the most advantage of family reunification rules, have formed in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal. These groups have little reason, or incentive, to assimilate. And if they don’t assimilate, they cannot achieve. Many don’t learn English. Their attitudes are often impediments to social advancement. “National origin matters in terms of success. Ethnicity matters for a long time,said economist Professor Borjas in his book Heaven’s Door.

In Ontario, for instance, huge numbers of Chinese children, even those born here or raised by their grandparents or other caregivers speaking Mandarin only, are hitting the school system and don’t qualify for English as a Secondary language tutoring because they have been more than two years in the country or were born here. That means funds from other students must be streamed, if all possible, into their tutoring. Even if tutored for a short period of time, the child’s success will be sandbagged from the get go because of poor language skills.

Toronto school board chair Donna Cansfield said that dropout rates among immigrant and refugee children, indicators of future success, are horrific among certain ethnic groups. The board tracks such figures and has found that many cultures simply do not value education. Dropout rates are high for children who are disadvantaged because they come from dysfunctional or fragmented families, or because they cannot master Canada’s culture, make friends or finish schoolwork.

Immigration and the lack of resources to help assimilate these kids has been a concern of mine for a long time. Everybody acknowledges the problem and nobody takes responsibility for it,she said. Immigration is one of the greatest challenges we have as a school board. They are literally flooding into Toronto. How does a teacher cope with four different languages in her classroom? It is not unusual for one classroom of 25 to have 16 kids who do not speak any English. In one school in Islington there are 64 languages spoken by the students,she said.

Daniel Stoffman is one of Canada’s best investigative writers. He wrote best sellers such as Boom, Bust and Echo and The Money Machine. He was commissioned by the Atkinson Society to research Canada’s immigration industry. He started his investigations in 1990 and finished in 2001. In 2002, he released “WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it”. He had this to say about family reunification.

The expansion of family – class immigration over the past 20 years is the main reason the economic performance of immigrants has declined. Family – class immigrants need meet no criteria of skills or education; they can come even if they are illiterate in their own language. And so recent immigrants earn less, pay less tax, have higher unemployment rates, and make more use of welfare than previous cohorts of immigrants.

In 2011, the honorable Prime Minister Stephen Harper slashed family reunification by 40%. Immigrants have also whined about not being able to pass The Conservatives Government new citizenship test. Good!!! It’s about time people had to work for their Canadian identity. The test should be expanded to several pages to include entire sections on Canadian culture and history too. Canadian culture should be aggressively forced on all new Canadians. Give them all a case of Molson’s Canadian, a hockey stick and a copy of Robert Bothwell & J.L. Granstein’s “OUR CENTURY: THE CANADIAN JOURNEY”. 
According to The Centre for Immigration Policy Reform, in 2009, only 17 percent of new Canadians were taken in under the points system. In 2010, it had decreased to a paltry 15 percent. This is a severe waste of an innovative system, which was designed to help new Canadian citizens integrate and succeed in society. The consequences are devastating to newcomers.

The poverty level of immigrants who came after 1991 had soared to more than 50 percent, while the poverty level among the Canadian – born remained almost unchanged. Why the surge in poverty among immigrants? Only 23 percent of immigrants are chosen for their occupational and linguistic skills. A proposal in the Not Just Numbers report to make knowledge of English or French a mandatory requirement for immigrants was ignored; so many new residents of Toronto cannot speak English. The city’s employers are naturally reluctant to hire immigrants who can’t communicate.”

Most new immigrants to Canada are struggling and living in poverty. People with degrees are driving taxis. Doctors are working as security guards in libraries. The story is much different south of the border. Newcomers to the United States have contributed enormous benefits and wealth to the local and global economy. The most talented students from around the world end up studying in America’s colleges and universities. In the era of advanced communications technology, this strategy has enabled America to lead the world in the creation of new and useful technologies, medicines and gadgets that people come to depend on every single day of the year. EDWARD ALDEN is the Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and the former Washington bureau chief for the Financial Times. In 2008, he released “THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN BORDER: Terrorism, Immigration, and Security Since 9/11”. He revealed exactly what the United States has done in order to achieve this great success.

Throughout the postwar period, the best students from around the world have flocked to American universities. Since the mid – 1950s, there had been a virtually uninterrupted rise in the number of foreign students enrolled in the United States, with the exception of a slight dip following the deep recession of the early 1980s. The numbers grew from fewer than 50,000 to a peak of nearly 600,000 by the year 2000.

The payoffs could be measured in multiple ways. In science and engineering in particular, foreign students and researchers have become increasingly important as American students showed less interest in those fields. By 2000, nearly 40 percent of the doctorates in Science and engineering and 30 percent of the master’s degrees awarded by U.S universities were held by foreign – born students. The proportion was even higher in mathematics, computer science, and the physical and life sciences. Among postdoctoral students doing research at the highest levels, nearly 60 percent were foreign - born. The economic value of those graduates was extraordinary. The universities served as a pipeline into American business, channeling talented students into positions at the best U.S. companies or connecting them with financial bakers if they wanted to strike out on their own. Once here to study, a surprisingly high percentage of the top foreign students remained. A 2001 study found that nearly two – thirds of those who received doctoral degrees in science or engineering were still in the United States two years later. At U.S. multinational companies surveyed by the National Academics, between 30 and 50 percent of researchers were foreign born. The research and development divisions of U.S corporations continue to develop new technologies and remain internationally competitive in part because immigration provides them with the best talent in the world, said a major 2004 study on foreign students.”

America has transformed immigrant engineers and entrepreneurs in global superstars. Success stories are numerous: Andy Grove of Intel, Sergey Brin of Google, Pierre Omidyar of Ebay, and Yahoo’s founder Jerry Yang. Why doesn’t the Canadian government compete on this level? Why doesn’t Canada copy America’s great strategy? Will the new Harper government change our immigration policy, reduce the amounts taken in and set high standarts for the people we do bring in? There is a very good reason that Lowell Green entitled his new book on Canada’s disastrous immigration system “Mayday Mayday”. The jobless rate in 2002 of eight percent about 520,000 people might have seemed high, but eight years later, it actually appeared rather low.

According to Statistics Canada, as of May 2010, 1,498,300 people were unemployed in Canada. Yes, you are reading it right. Figures for May 2010 show that one million. Four hundred and ninety – eight thousand, three hundred people were looking for jobs in this country.

Which surely begs the question: Why in the world are we importing another 250,000 immigrants, to say nothing of 30,000 or 40,000 thousand refugees, a quarter of a million temporary workers, and 79,000 foreign students every year?”

A few of these new guests have transformed Canada into a major strategic hub for terrorist organizations that find undefended borders irresistible not to penetrate.

In 1998 Ward Elcock, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, told a Canadian Senate committee that “there are more international terrorist groups active here than in any other country in the world,” perhaps with the exception of the United States. CSIS, he said, was investigating 50 organizations and 350 individuals suspected of being terrorists. The organizations included Hezbollah and other Shiite Islamic terrorist organizations; several Sunni Islamic extremist groups, including Hamas; the Irish Republican Army; the Tamil Tigers; the Kurdistan Workers’ Party; and all the major Sikh terrorist groups.”

How long will it be before the subway bombings in Spain, Russia and France, the tube bombings in Britain or the Twin Tower attacks in the United States finally catch up to Canada’s obvious vulnerabilities? A terrorist attack is likely to occur sometime in the future and somewhere on Canadian soil. The good news is things are slowly changing.

Canadians are beer drinkers, hockey lovers and gift givers on Christmas day. Canada is an English and French speaking Christian nation. Large-scale immigration damages Canada’s majority Christian identity. It costs our native-born labor workers billions of dollars in lost wages each year. Security threats have also become huge concerns, especially to large and powerful American neighbors. Terrorists now operate on Canadian soil, threatening Canadian and American national sovereignty and ways of life. It was approximately twenty-five years ago that the religious fanaticism reared its ugly head.

In June 1985 Sikhs blew up an airliner, in support of an independent Kalistan on the subcontinent. This mass murder of 329 people apparently was plotted by Canadians on Canadian soil.

Canada should deploy the army, arrest all the terrorists, strip them of citizenship rights, put them all on a plane and deport them all back to their home countries. Immigration levels must be reduced from 866,000 people per year back to the 1989 level of 84,000 people per year. Seventy five per cent of all new immigrants should be stringently assessed under the points system. Eighty percent of all new Canadian citizens should come from democratic nations with strong western values. Isn’t it racist to exclude others from non-western countries? Aren’t we all similar deep down? Doesn’t everyone love Canada and it’s democracy as much as anyone else? In Tarek Fatah’s “CHASING A MIRAGE: THE TRAGIC ILLUSION OF AN ISLAMIC STATE”, the answer is a resounding “no” and it is also revealed that an evil and aggressive form of ideological fanaticism has already seeped inside Christian Canada’s precious gates.

IT WAS A COLD January morning in 2003 as I walked through ankle – deep icy snow into the Toronto Convention Centre. I was attending a conference of Muslims arranged by groups allied to the Saudi – based World Assembly of Muslim Youth – WAMY. The freezing temperature and frosty welcome I received at the hands of the young Islamists had not prepared me for the chilling lecture I was about to hear. The speaker, a Kuwaiti politician, said: “Western civilization is rotten from within and nearing collapse…it[the West] will continue to grow until an outside force hits it and you will be surprised at how quickly it falls.”

The crowd burst into applause. Just sixteen months beforehand, an “outside force” had hit the New York Twin Towers on 9/11, and here was Tareq Al Suwaidan, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood from Kuwait, rubbing salt into the wounds of the West. The audience of more than two thousand young Canadian Muslims, many of them associated with the Muslim Students Association (MSA), carefully segregated into male and female sections, listened in awe. Suwaidan used elaborate charts to draw projections about the impending collapse of the West. His words were worrisome, but the response to his speech by the young Muslim Canadians was deeply troubling. They lustily cheered the Kuwaiti Islamist as he predicted the doom of the very civilization these young men and women were living in.
Why were these Muslim youth, born and educated in Canada, cheering the fall of the West? Did they not consider themselves to be part of the West? If they did, why would they be cheering its imminent collapse and who were they expecting to carry out the “outside force” attack? How could they, as citizens of a democratic Western country, allow a Kuwaiti politician to write the obituary of the West, but also cheer him on as he did so?”

Islamic immigration has become a dangerous Trojan horse and must be totally stopped.

It’s an aggressive form of Nazi ideology and it breeds hatred towards Canadians and the western identity. This doesn’t happen inside churches or Jewish Synagogues. It’s unlikely to occur in Buddhist, Sikh or Hindu temples. The Canadian Security Intelligence Agency and the CIA south of the border are more likely to target the one religion that inspires violence and war. Mark Steyn explained all about it in his global bestseller “AMERICA ALONE: THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT”. In it, he explained that:

The mosques are recruiters for the jihad and play an important role in ideological subordination and cell discipline. In globalization terms, that’s a perfect model. Unlike the Soviets, it’s a franchise business rather than owner – operated; the Commies had “deep sleepers” who had to be “controlled” in a very hierarchical chain. But who needs that with Islam? Not long after September 11, I said, just as an aside, that these days whenever something goofy turns up on the news chances are it involves some fellow called Mohammed. It was a throwaway line, but if you want to compile chapter and verse, you can add to the list every week.

A plane flies into the World Trade Center? Mohammed Atta.
A sniper starts killing gas station customers around Washington, D.C? John Allen Muhammed.
A guy fatally stabs a Dutch movie director? Mohammed Bouyeri.
A gunman shoots up the El Al counter at Los Angeles airport? Hesham Mohamed Hedayet.
A terrorist slaughters dozens in Bali? Noordin Mohamed.
A British subject self – detonates in a Tel Aviv bar? Asif Mohammed Hanif.
A terrorist cell bombs the U.S embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? Ali Mohamed.
A gang rapist preys on the women of Sydney? Mohammed Skaf.
A group of Dearborn, Michigan, men charged with cigarette racketeering in order to fund Hezbollah? Fadi Mohamad – Musbah Hammoud, Mohammed Fawzi Zeidan, and Imad Mohamad – Musbah Hammoud.
A Canadian terror cell is arrested for plotting to bomb Ottawa and behead the prime minister? Mohammed Dirie, Amin Mohamed Durrani, and Yasim Abdi Mohamed.

These last three represent a “broad strata” of Canadian society, according to Mike McDonnell, assistant commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and a man who must have aced Sensitivity Training class. To the casual observer, the broad strata would seem to be a very singular stratum: in their first appearance in court, all twelve men arrested in that Ontario plot requested the Koran.

Geert Wilders had called the Koran a book of war and violence. He is the leader of The Party For Freedom; which forms part of a powerful government coalition in The Netherlands. All across Europe, right wing or ultra nationalist parties are coming to power. Denmark has the toughest immigration policies in the EU. Others simply put their heads in the sand and pretended like nothing was wrong.

While Denmark was making a serious effort to tackle its immigration and integration problems, Sweden was doing nothing – and going to hell in a handbasket. Crime figures were making major jumps every year. The number of ghettos was rising at a dizzying speed. Sweden now had a murder rate twice that of the United States. Yet politicians and journalists continued to pretend there was no problem. Instead, the establishment was persecuting people for belonging to the Swedish Democratic Party – the one party that acknowledged the problems and wanted to put them on the national agenda. In a blonder version of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Swedish Democrats were being driven from their jobs as a result of staged “people’s protests” organized by the youth divisions of other parties.* Since 2002, left – wing activists had broken up Swedish Democratic meetings more than once, issued death threats, and committed acts of violence against party members, including severe beatings and at least one attempted murder. On the country’s National Day in June 2005, Stockholm was rife with radical – left unrest: a thousand protesters marched in masks; several extremists burned the Swedish flag while calling for their country’s downfall; and members of the far left and right clashed brutally in a subway station. 
The hub of Sweden’s integration crisis was Malmo, the country’s third – largest city, now nearly 40 percent non – Swedish. In Malmo, the incidence of rape was five or six times higher than in nearby Copenhagen; child rapes had doubled in a decade; during the autumn of 2004 alone, the number of robberies had gone up by 50 percent. Teenagers were torching schools, laughing at the firemen who came to put out the fires, and then torching them again. Anti – Semitic harassment was now routine; so were honor killings. Things were so bad that even the Swedish media couldn’t entirely ignore them. (“Do you have control over the situation in Malmo? A reporter for Aftonbladet asked a police investigator. “No, I can’t say we do,” he replied.) Swedes were leaving the city in droves. The only ethnic Swedish children left in some schools, said one observer, were “the children of welfare cases and drug addicts.”

France and The Netherlands are deporting tens of thousands back to their home countries. The Danish People’s Party, France’s National Front, Belgium’s Vlams Block, Finland’s The True Finns, The Swedish Democrats and Austria’s FPO have all made enough gains in order to form coalition governments. Political correctness simply couldn’t hide the statistics pouring out of the government’s own crime figures. These figures were either ignored or completely disregarded by a fat and thick, bureaucratic and disconnected political elite that continued to make a series of mind numbing public statements.

Few in Norway have influenced evolution of the immigration debate more dramatically than Wikan. A slender, grandmotherly woman with long white hair and wide, searching eyes, she’s a complicated and often maddening contradictory figure, sometimes sounding like a typical academic elitist – a priestess of PC – and sometimes piping up to quash received opinions. (I like to think of her as embodying the tensions that exist between the establishment and the man in the street where these issues are concerned.) On the one hand, she’s argued that it’s not unreasonable to expect immigrants to integrate, learn Norwegian, and respect democratic values; on the other hand, she’s invariably responded to criticism of any aspect of Islam with the flat assertion that it’s a religion of peace, justice, and gender equality. If the Iraqi – Norwegian writer Walid al – Kubaisi calls Islam an all – comprehensive world view, Wikan insists on attributing the worldviews of Muslims exclusively to their various national or tribal backgrounds; she seems determined to erect a firewall, as it were, between those worldviews and Islam itself.

On September 6, 2001, it was reported that 65 percent of rapes in Norway were committed by “non – Western immigrants” (a term that in Norway is essentially synonymous withMuslims”); asked to comment on this alarming statistic, Wikan said that Norwegian women must take their share of responsibilities for these rapes because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. One reason for this high figure, she explained, was that in the Islamic world rape is scarcely punished,” since Muslims “believe that it is women who are responsible for rape.” Wikan concluded not that Muslim men in Europe needed to adjust to Western norms, but that “Norwegian women must realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt to it.”

Norwegian citizens eventually realized that there was a rape spree occurring in the streets. Photos of young girls covered in blood from the sex assaults were splashed across daily newspapers. Many of the victims were young teenagers. Carl Hagan’s anti immigration Progress Party, which was founded around 1997, moved from obscurity into second place. The far right Swiss People’s Party is ruling Switzerland, has tightened its borders and banned Minarets on new mosques. A group of Algerian French women have started a group called “Neither Whores nor Submissives”. Many had been gang raped several times over. This had also occurred in record numbers in Sweden, Denmark, Holland and Norway. European women can’t go out anymore and enjoy dancing or a few drinks without having to worry about roaming gangs of Muslim rapists. Women in heavily populated Muslim neighborhoods in France now wear veils in order to avoid being harassed. Go and get a copy of the Muslim holy book and flip to Q. 33:59. Muslim women are instructed accordingly:

O Prophet tell your wives, your daughters and the women of the believers that they should bring some of their cloaks (Jalabib) closer/nearer (yudnina) to themselves, that is a minimum [measure] so that they would be recognized [as such] and hence not molested.

Canadian taxpayers aren’t forking over hard earned dough so that their daughters will get called “hoar” in public places for not wearing a goddamn headscarf. It happens in the clubbing district of downtown Toronto on Richmond Street. In the early morning of New Year’s Day, 5 Muslim men followed 2 Canadian women through downtown Toronto back to their hotel room. They were trapped in their suite and sexually assaulted. France, Holland, Denmark and Germany have banned headscarves in the public schools. The equality between men and women is a universal western value and totally non negotiable. The headscarf is a declaration of war against women. It reduces them to transient officials, nothing more than commodities. Muslims have launched a reverse crusade colonization of the western powers. This invasion is occurring in places that nobody would have ever suspected. The assault on western values is even occurring in the land down under.

In October 2006, an Australian imam of Lebanese descent, the country’s most senior Muslim cleric, triggered outrage when he described women who dress immodestly (in his view) as “uncovered meat” who invite sexual attacks. Sheikh Taj Aldin al – Hilali, the so – called Mufti of Australia, condemned women who he said “sway suggestively”, wear makeup, and do not wear the hijab. The idea that women are to blame for rape is preposterous, but that is what the sheikh suggested while delivering a sermon during the month of Ramadan. Not a single member of the congregation protested or challenged the imam. Later, the imam apologized for his comments, but his apology reflected the deep – seated attitudes among many clerics of Islam about women. He told reporters, “I had only intended to protect women’s honour.” During the sermon, al – Hilali had said:

If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden,
or in the garden, or in the park, or in the backyard without cover, and the cats come
to eat it…whose fault is it – the cats’ or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is
the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would
have occurred.

Women, al – Hilali of Australia said were “weapons” used by “Satan” to control men.
If Sheikh al – Hilali of Australia believes that women are Satan’s weapons against men, he is relying on the long history of interpreting the Quran in a particular misogynistic manner. These interpretations that place women as sexual objects are not just the work of medieval scholars, but the leaders of the contemporary 20 – century Islamist movement. Such leaders include the late Abul Ala Maudoodi, who worked closely with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Maudoodi’s writings are widely read and believed as absolute truths in Islamic schools and mosques in North America and Europe. Maudoodi gives a nod to the rape of non – Muslim women who are captured in war, yet few Muslim women have stood up to condemn an ideology that gives religious sanction to rape. Little wonder that Pakistani troops in the Bangladesh war had no hesitation raping Bengali women after clerics had declared these Muslims women as non – Muslim enemies of Islam. The same ideology today gives religious license to the Janjaweed Arab militia in Sudan to rape Darfuri women – their very own Muslim sisters.

Australia severely tightened its immigration systems, making it very difficult to gain entry. Voters have demanded tighter controls and they got them. Meanwhile, Pakistan is on Canada’s top ten source countries. It is one of the most violent and fanatical terrorist states in the world. Women are prisoners in the home. Hindus and Christians are raped and murdered on a daily basis. Suicide bombers roam freely, killing thousands of people each year. In David Pryce - Jones “THE CLOSED CIRCLE: AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ARABS”, a French sociologist and militant progressive, Juliette Minces, explained why sexual aggression is manifesting in the sick, twisted and primitive minds of some Muslim men.

In such cases, sexuality combines with an almost racial form of nationalism. The idea is to prove not only one’s potency but also the sexual superiority of one’s group. Furthermore, the Western woman is not a member of the clan, so everything is permissible....Even more than an Arab woman, a Western woman is seen as potential prey.”

Isn’t that disgusting? Young men are being raised to believe that women are property and are nothing more than a target for gang rape. The clan mentality promotes a clash of cultures between western ideals of individualism and the group mentality of tribal family life. This has severe consequences for young women that want to strike develop their own style and Canadian identity. Aruna Papp is the author of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy’s study, “Culturally – driven violence against women: A growing problem in Canada’s immigrant communities,available at/ . She wrote an article in the Epoch Times about this cultural phenomenon. In it, she stated that:

Back in June, in an “honour – killing” murder trail now known across Canada, Muhammad Parvez and Waqas Parvez pleaded guilty to the 2007 murder of 16 year old Aqsa Parvez (their daughter/sister respectively). According to media reports, not one of the 12 people present in the house could – or would – bear witness to the crime.

Regrettably, unless attitudes in some immigrant communities change, this may not be the last time Canadians hear of such tragedies.
The same day the Parvez males pled guilty to murdering Aqsa for “dishonoring” their family, I happened to conduct a workshop in an elementary school for south Asian women in Toronto. I asked the participants why the boys and girls were segregated on the playground and learned that about 75 per cent of the children in this school are from one region of South Asia – the same one Aqsa Parvez came from.
While segregation of children by gender is not the school policy, the volunteer parents who monitor the playground and speak their language instruct the children in appropriate culturally – accepted behaviors. For example, a majority of the boys and girls wore native outfits and few spoke English.
The consensus among the 19 mothers in the workshop was that if Aqsa had obeyed her parents, she would still be alive today.
All these mothers were resistant to the notion their children should adopt Western values – the problem for Aqsa Parvez. Aqsa had wanted to wear the clothes other Canadian kids do, go to the mall with her friends, hold down a part – time job, and that’s why she was killed. Like many of Aqsa’s friends from a local Mosque, these mothers had agreed she brought her death upon herself.”

Refugee intake should be cut by ninety nine percent from 40,000 down to 100 per year. Isn’t it simply cruel and malicious to stop refugees from arriving on our shores? In 2001; Mr. Collacott, a former ambassador to many overseas countries, Charles Campbell, former vice – chair of the Immigration Appeal Board; J.C Best, former deputy minister of immigration; and Des Verma, former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board published an open letter in several Canadian newspapers. Here’s what they all concluded:

Our refugee program is facing widespread abuse. Canadians are proud of their tradition of accepting refugees fleeing persecution. But a particular serious problem arising from the refugee determination system is lack of control over our borders resulting from the application of the 50 – year – old United Nations Convention on the status of Refugees and from an interpretation of the Charter of Rights. Our adherence to the Convention makes it possible for virtually anyone who sets foot on our soil or arrives at our borders to enter our refugee determination system and stand a good chance of never being forced to leave.

Our system, arguably the most generous in the world, has thus become a magnet not only for tens of thousands of persons who are simply seeking better economic opportunities but also for criminals and terrorists who are fugitives from justice in their own countries. Because Charter protection is now available to everyone on our territory, it is also now almost impossible to remove serious criminals and terrorists, along with many others who should not be allowed to remain here.”
Our first responsibility is to Canadians. When the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was being drafted, those preparing it were warned that, if its wording did not restrict its application to Canadians, it could be used to bypass and frustrate our immigration laws. This is precisely what has happened.
The result is a 1985 Supreme Court decision that concluded that the Charter applied to anyone on Canadian soil or within Canada’s territorial waters, whether here legally or not. In consequence, we have the most time consuming and expensive refugee determination system in the world.

In the circumstances, the application of the Charter to those who have no right of residency here needs to be re – examined as a matter of urgency. The relevant sections should henceforth apply only to Canadian citizens and legal permanent residents of Canada. This could be achieved by amending the Charter or invoking the notwithstanding clause.

There is a proposal in Bill C-11 [passed December 2001] to extend Charter rights to anyone in the world who wants to come to Canada. This will make the situation significantly worse than it already is. When it may be a boon to immigration lawyers, it will throw into even greater disarray the efficiency and effective management of our immigration program and the protection of our national sovereignty. The government, regrettably, has shown no disposition to re – examine this important and sensitive issue in spite of the extremely negative impact it is having on Canada.”

We must emphasize that Parliament’s will – as expressed in the Immigration Act prior to the 1985 court decision – was that there should be no right of appeal against a decision to deny a Canadian visa, except in the case of applications for the immediate families of legal Canadian residents. This corresponds with the laws of most other countries of the world. For Canada to throw away this provision seriously undermines our sovereignty.”

Special interest groups and armies of immigration lawyers have blocked any meaningful reforms to our current deplorable systems. Michael Cheena is the president of “THE ABORIGINAL URBAN ALLIANCE OF ONTARIO”. In early 2010, he fired off a letter to the Honorable Minister Jason Kenney with similar concerns. It stated:

The refugee assessment process warrants a review in terms of how Canada deals with its refugee claimants or those seeking asylum from persecution. As an Aboriginal Canadian, I welcome any proposed changes to reform the refugee system that will put a cap on the influx of refugees that Canada has to absorb. The powerful Canadian refugee lobby groups should not dictate policy changes to the Canadian government that are more lenient in allowing entry of refugees into Canada.

Canada’s refugee system has been abused by the amount of time spent to try to prove the legitimacy of false claims. Since Canada has required visas from claimants in an attempt to deter the mass of refugee claims, bogus claimants far exceed legitimate claimants in numbers. The system needs revision so that false claims are weeded out earlier.

Finally, Canadian taxpayers are being burdened with the responsibility of providing the most generous package of benefits to anyone who is accepted as a refugee in this country. I do not believe we have the responsibility to support a greater number of refugees than we currently support.

Canada is giving away citizenship on the cheap without anyone ever knowing anything about our culture, history or ways of life. People are literally cheating and lying to get in and nobody is stopping this fraud. How much are Canadian taxpayers forking over? Jack Manion is a former immigration deputy minister and a former immigration official. He had quite a bit to say about these deficiencies at Senate hearings. He stated:

The refugee process has become so mammoth that it is soaking up virtually all the available resources in the immigration portfolio. Governments in Canada are now spending something in the order of $4 billion on immigration and refugee matters. Most of that is spent unproductively. There is not enough money for enforcement. There is not enough money for visa control overseas and proper co – ordination. Proceedings are started and then run automatically over the telephone and by paper. It is no way to run an immigration program. I am horrified by what I see and what I hear every day from friends of mine who have connections in the immigration service. The morale in the immigration service is deplorable.

It’s a disgrace when people like me write letters successively to one minister after another and get pre – printed replies from correspondence clerks,”

They should listen to people other than the interest groups, if they want to find out what Canada thinks and what can be done about these problems.”

Canada could consider replacing weak and incompetent leaders with strong ones. Mayor Rob Ford is such an example as he continually strives for “RESPECT FOR TAXPAYERS” and less useful idiots like Jason Kenney, our Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism. Why criticize Jason Kenney? It has to do with an assortment of bizarre and perplexing statements that he has made to the local press but in particular, to the Islamic Society of North America in Mississauga, Ontario on November 29, 2008. Here’s some of what he said during that morning.

We are maintaining historic high levels of immigration from across the world, including South Asia, including North Africa. In fact, many developed countries are actually cutting their immigration levels right now because of the economic difficulty. Yesterday I was proud to announce that Canada, I think alone in the developed world, is going to maintain historically high levels of immigration because we believe that immigration helps fuel our economic security and future.

George Borjas of Harvard University, is the world’s leading authority on the impact of immigration on local economies. He invented a formula to estimate the immigration surplus in any free-market economy. How much money does mass immigration actually cost Canadian workers?

Applied to Canada, the Borjas formula reveals a loss to native workers of $30.7 billion annually.

Increasing the labor force effectively depresses wages. People then work longer and longer hours to compensate for the lost income. But doesn’t immigration make Canadians richer? What about the financial benefits that we keep hearing so much about? Don’t immigrants simply create tons and tons of wealth for all Canadians?

To conclude: a recent study by Economist Herbert Grubel of Simon Fraser University revealed that the 2.5 million immigrants who came to Canada between 1990 and 2002 received $18.3 billion more in government services and benefits in the year 2002 alone than they paid in taxes for that year! Grubel states that this amount was more than the federal government contributed to health care in 2000-2001, and more than twice what it spent on defence.”

This is a massive amount as immigrants are draining billions which could have been used elsewhere. Almost twenty billion a year could be used for new schools, an expansion of the TTC subway lines or even a larger tax return for hard working Canadians. It could even be applied to the deficit. This is taxpayer money and it’s being thrown away needlessly. Binoy Thomas of the Weekly Voice found out from Jason Kenney the exact sums that Canadian taxpayers are forking over for this failed experiment.

Our government has tripled the federal funds for immigrant services like free language classes and job search skills. So nationally we’re spending $600 million this year as opposed to $200 million back in 2005.”

Will Canada have a population of fifty million people by 2026? Where will they all live? Most of Canada consists of lakes, rivers and vast forests. Most cities are already overcrowded. There are about one and a half million unemployed Canadians. Are Canadians willing and able to declare a common culture and actually stand up to defend Christian values? Canada is a majority Christian nation. Canadians communicate in English and French. Canadians are a beer drinking and hockey loving people. Canada is competing in the information economy and should obtain a majority of its immigrants from well-developed first world nations. What are the consequences of Canada’s recent switch of getting the vast majority of new Canadians from failed third world banana republics?

Patrick Grady, an economist consultant with Global Economics Ltd., and a former senior official with the Federal Department of Finance and Bank of Canada, writes an interesting chapter in the book The Effects of Mass Immigration on Canadian Living Standarts and Society. He says: “There is growing evidence that Canadian employers are not just being stupid. They have reasonable grounds to discount the value of foreign education. The disconnect between education and skills for many immigrants from third – world countries seems to be a definite factor explaining the poorer earnings performance.”

He goes on to list a number of economic studies that indicate the education obtained in many foreign countries is simply not as good as it is in Canada. He cites the recent International Adult Literacy Survey that identified a 45 – percentage point difference between average skill – level test scores of immigrants with no Canadian education and those of the native born. Another study, using the same test scores found, “a learning gap of 3.0 years for recent immigrants and 2.1 years even for those whose first language was English or French. That is enough to make a foreign university graduate with a pass degree equivalent to a Canadian high school graduate.”

According to Statistics Canada, between 1996 and 2001, Americans have done the best in Canada with only 23.2 percent living below the poverty line. It was 33.7 percent for Europe, 44.6 percent for Asia and 48.8 percent for Africa. This shouldn’t shock anybody because Canada and The United States share an almost identical western culture. Canada must slash family reunification. This program admits tens of thousands of unskilled labor each year and is bankrupting legal aid and bleeding Canada’s precious welfare benefits dry. Isn’t it sheer cruelty to deny immigrants the ability to reunite with family members? Herbert Grubel is a professor of economics at Simon Fraser University and a fellow at the Fraser Institute. He is also a member of the advisory board of The Centre for Immigration Policy Reform. He recently wrote an article for “The National Post Newspaper” entitled “The invisible price tag of immigration”, in it he stated:

There has been much huffing and puffing by politicians, the media and immigrant lobbyists about the government’s plan to reduce the number of parents and grandparents joining their immigrant offspring in Canada next year.

Yes, the policy change is unfair. Many immigrants have come to Canada having been promised that their parents and grandparents could join them so that they can continue the cultural traditions of their homelands and receive help with family chores and child care.

But, as is the case with all government policies, benefits to one group of citizens impose costs on another. In this case, the benefits to immigrants come at the expense of Canadian taxpayers. Unfortunately, these costs do not show up in government budgets but are hidden behind the provisions of the welfare state and driven by low average incomes of recent immigrants.

New data and studies show the extent of this fiscal burden; recent immigrants remit lower average incomes and tax payments than other Canadians, even 10 years after their arrival. At the same time, these immigrants on average absorb at least the same amount of social benefits as other Canadians.

As a result, $6,000 is annually transferred to the average immigrant at the expense of Canadian taxpayers. In 2006, the value of these transfers to all 2.7 million immigrants who arrived between 1987 and 2004 and still live in Canada came to $16.3-billion. Taking account of the 1.5 million immigrants who arrived since 2004, the fiscal burden comes to $25-billion in 2010. These costs represent a significant portion of the federal government’s $55-billion deficit projected for the fiscal year 2011.

Important here is the fact that parents and grandparents lower the observed average incomes of all immigrants. The reasons are obvious: parents and grandparents tend to be elderly, often cannot speak English or French and possess few marketable skills. At the same time, the number of parents and grandparents arriving as immigrants are high: 84,917, or 6.7% of the 1.3 million immigrants admitted to Canada from 2006 to 2010.”
The government must also completely eliminate the temporary guest worker program. It’s sheer idiocy to bring in a quarter of a million temporary workers when there are one and a half million Canadians are out there looking for work. Binoy Thomas of The Weekly Voice might have felt bewildered and confused at times as Jason Kenney stated that:

It is a temporary program. This is not an immigration program. Everyone knows that. A lot of people wish it were something else but Canada – one of the reasons that our immigration program has worked for Canada and one of the reasons our immigration program is renowned around the world is because we have focused our economic programs on highly skilled, well – educated people from around the world that have flexible and adaptable skills and can make s significant contribution rather than what some countries have done which is simply to focus on low skilled, you know, workers. And I also think it would be irresponsible for any government to shift our economic programs away from highly skilled, highly educated people to simply folks who are doing low skilled labour. Not that there’s any lack of – I don’t want to denigrate low skilled labour but we have the entire world to choose from in who we accept as immigrants to Canada and our experience has been pretty clear that those who succeed most are those with – who tend to have higher levels of education. So I don’t think we intend to change the focus.

Finally, let me just say…and on and on and on…

Canada needs to create a new right wing anti immigration party. How about The Christian Heritage Party or The Wild Rose Alliance? They’re new. Vote for them. Here’s some of what they would do if elected to parliament. The CHP’s website stated the following:

  • Canada has the world’s highest immigration rate, between 1990 and 2009 our population increased by 3.9 million. In the nine years between 1996 and 2005 well over 200,000 of those immigrants came to Canada from Muslim countries with high numbers of radical Islamists. These immigrants have received insufficient screening simply because the sheer size of the infrastructure required to screen such high numbers of immigrants does not exist in our Department of Immigration. Today, very few immigrants are even interviewed by a Canadian visa officer. The sheer weight of numbers means the vast majority of applicants are processed on paper only. With these kinds of numbers arriving within our borders there is also insufficient time to integrate these newcomers into the broader fabric of Canadian society.
Therefore, CHP Canada will immediately overhaul Canada’s current unsustainable policy of mass immigration to:
  • Recognize that immigration is being used as a form of jihad designed to undermine Canada’s Judeo-Christian culture and law to replace it with Sharia law; CHP Canada would immediately implement a moratorium on immigration from any Muslim nation.
  • Deny immigration to any person who holds an ideology known to pose a threat to Canadians and Canadian society.
  • Increase the resources available for screening and reduce the levels of immigration and refugee claims to levels which can be adequately screened for security and criminal risks.
  • Increase the use of detention for individuals whose identity is questionable, who pose a potential security threat, and those who have been ordered to leave;
  • Continue to use the immigration security certificate which is a useful instrument for detaining and removing foreign terrorists;
  • Track, stop, arrest, and if needed, deport individuals engaged in fundraising for the purpose of aiding and abetting terrorism.

The other parties are content to simply throw our English European cultural heritage in the garbage. Mass immigration destroys Canada’s fragile culture and that of labor markets. It has also exposed the subways and airports to potential attacks by religious fanatics bend on destroying Canadian society from within. Canada has become the butt of jokes south of the border.

At 10 o’clock at night, the security between the United States and Canada is an orange rubber cone, just a big old orange rubber cone. It cannot talk. It cannot walk. It cannot shoot. It cannot tell a terrorist from a tow truck. It is just a big fat dumb rubber cone sitting in the middle of the road.” – Former U.S Senator, Byron Dorgan in 2001

The era of idealism can be directly traced back to Pierre Elliot Trudeau. His bubbly vision for Canada was heaped upon an unsuspecting public. He would lead the Liberal Party of Canada down the road to pure socialism. When did the government start looking at minorities as helpless welfare cases instead of as equal contributing members of Canadian society? Luckily there’s Michael Alexander to fill us all in. He holds a law degree from Columbia University and the University of Toronto and has studied political science and philosophy at the graduate level at both schools. In 2005, he released “COMPETING AGAINST AMERICA: Why Canada Has Fallen Behind In The Race For Talent And Wealth (And What To Do About It)”. He zeroed in on this development when he wrote:

So, from the start, Trudeau and the Liberals were committed to an egalitarian politics that aimed at redistributing income and leveling social and economic conditions across the country. During the 16 years that Liberals were in power, the egalitarian politics of the Just Society unfolded in three distinct stages. In the first stage (1968 to 1974), the Liberals slowly expanded the fiscal boundaries of the modern welfare state; transfers to the unemployed were increased to seniors under Old Age Security, the Canada Pension Plan and the Guaranteed Income Supplement, transfers to the poor under the Canada Assistance Plan, and transfers to everyone else under Medicare and Family Allowances. In the second stage (1975 – 1984), the government expanded the welfare state itself by creating new government programs and agencies, such as the Foreign Investment Review Agency and Petro – Canada, while allowing spending to increase vastly across the board on all existing programs. In the final stage (1978 – 1984), which overlapped the second, the government concentrated on changing the rules of the game in its relentless pursuit of equality. During this period, it allowed group rights to replace individual rights as the basis for determining wage scales and employment opportunities in the federal government, and all federally regulated bodies, which included all of the country’s banks. This meant that pay equity schemes and quota systems for women and minorities were established for over 20% of the full – time Canadian workforce.
As liberal egalitarianism went into high gear in the late 1970s, Canadians were asked to endorse the new high – spending, interventionist Canadian state based on a compassionate concern for minority groups. The Just Society became the Compassionate Society. This transformation was dictated by the overriding imperative of helping the disadvantaged, which proved to be the enduring theme of the Just Society. It was also dictated by the changing base of Liberal support. When taxes and regulations began to multiply, the business community felt that the helping hand of the Just Society had become a heavy hand, and a similar feeling emerged among most Western Canadians when the federal government ignored their concerns about the practicality of bilingualism, the mounting debt and the government’s partial expropriation of the oil patch. By the 1980s, the Liberals were forced to seek support from youth, women, minorities and the poor. If there was any doubt about this development, we need only consult the writings of Tom Axworthy, Trudeau’s Principle Secretary, who made the following statement in National Forum in November 1984:

By the mid – 1980s, the affluent, and especially members of
the business community, had deserted the Liberal Party in
droves. They had been replaced, however, by an almost
classic social demographic core of the young, women, ethnic
supporters, and the disadvantaged.

Under the influence of the politics of compassion, Trudeau’s Liberals had changed fundamentally the way in which Canada was governed. In 1968, they had began with a liberal agenda that guaranteed equal opportunity, but by the late 1970s, they had moved to a social democratic agenda that was designed to equalize outcomes in the name of helping disadvantaged minorities. They had moved us from a society where everyone would be given the freedom to define his or her standing in life to a society where selected groups would have their standing defined by government action. In the process, the Liberal party brought us many of the ills that have eroded our standard of living. By spending recklessly, they burdened us with overwhelming public debt, high taxes, high inflation, high interest rates and low rates of investment in infrastructure and post – secondary education. And, by changing the basic rules of the game, they took us from a merit – based society, which gave everyone the incentive to produce wealth, to a politically correct society where individual justice and national prosperity were eclipsed in favor of an obsessive concern with the status of minority groups.”

Multiculturalism must also be scrapped for a melting pot society just like the Americans have. Since when did it become shameful to be a proud Canadian first? Doesn’t Canadian language and culture come first? In “THE GULF WITHIN”, Zuhair Kashmeri explains to Canadians exactly how this concept came about. He stated:

Multiculturalism became official Canadian policy as part of the Trudeau government’s response to the challenge of Quebec. The Trudeau policy to counter demands for Quebec sovereignty was bilingualism and multiculturalism for all of Canada. Multiculturalism went several steps further than the American model of the melting pot, where all newcomers were blended together – a cultural imperialism of sorts. Canada decided to support immigrants in maintaining their culture.

Cynics, however, labeled the concept a ploy by the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau, which saw the ethnics as a massive vote bank that needed to be nurtured so that the voting Liberal became a family tradition. When Brain Mulroney and the Tories assumed power in September, 1984, they were no different. They decided to take multiculturalism several steps further and not only passed the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, but also set up a separate department for multiculturalism. If Pierre Trudeau would be remembered for expounding on the multicultural mosaic, the Tories figured they should be remembered for enshrining it in law.”

Will new Canadians ever feel like true Canadians? They are aggressively encouraged to preserve their cultural heritage. All the tribal dirges such as polygamy, female genital mutilation and gender discrimination are legitimized. Subway travelers retreat and withdraw into the comfort of portable music devices. Personal space is invaded by foreign blabbing of Mandarin, Urdu, Tagalong, Hindi, Arabic, Korean and Spanish. English and French is rarely ever spoken. Why is this happening? In “Who Killed Canadian History?”, J.L Granatstein stated that:

The federal government, committed to a multiculturalism that is enshrined in the Constitution as a fundamental characteristic of the nation, promotes a very weak nationalism. Remain a Somali, a Taiwanese, a Ukrainian, or a Bolivian, the message goes, and you will be just as good a Canadian as everyone else. In effect, the message is that Canada (or English Canada, at least) has no culture. Moreover, the federal, provincial, and municipal governments will give any group money to preserve its original culture, heritage, and language. In Quebec, in sharp contrast, the provincial government controls immigration policy and follows a deliberate anti Canadian approach as it half – heartedly tries to assimilate immigrants into francophone culture. 
Ottawa’s policy toward immigrants aims to encourage slow integration and to preserve the cultural mosaic in a nation that is marked by tolerance and goodwill. This approach may well be intentioned, but is it sound when no effort, other than the citizenship test, is made to teach newcomers that Canada is a nation with a past, with traditions, with a history? No one should be surprised, therefore, that the Croatian defence minister is a Canadian who returned “home” when the civil war erupted in Yugoslavia. No one should find it unusual that Serbian and Croatian Canadians, born in Canada, returned “home” to fight against the boy they went to high school with. Unthinking Canadians complacently assumed that our schools and our society had turned them all into good, bland, peace – loving Canadians. But a combination of federal multiculturalism, ignorance of an understanding of their new homeland, and the practices of progressive education had prevented them from becoming what they out to have become: Canadians.

The era of multiculturalism, of pandering to the ethnic vote is over. Canadians are sick and tired of being guests in their own country. They are angry and tired of watching their culture eroded by government programs that promote one hundred different ethnic street festivals. Where’s the Canadian street festival celebration? Where’s our beaver and moose maple syrup and beer cultural festival? A Globe and Mail Public Opinion Poll that began on October 1st 2010 and ended on June 12th 2011 paints a very telling tale. Of the 12,402 Canadians that were asked: “Is multiculturalism a failed experiment in Canada? 8244 people voted “yes”. That’s 66% of the total. Only 4158 voted “no” or 34% of the total. The very first three online comments were as followed:

5:05 PM on October 1, 2010


You are exactly right.

I answered "yes", thinking I was agreeing that it was a failed experiment.

Instead it seems that I voted that multiculturalism is working for Canada.

For the record.... multiculturalism is an ongoing train wreck that will destroy much of what was good about Canada.

8:40 AM on October 2, 2010

The Duke of Clarence.

Canada is the best country in the world.

If you want to come here, then come with an open mind and celebrate what it is to be Canadian.

If you feel you aren't accepted it’s probably because you continue to live the way you did in your previous country. Canadians are now at the point of a mature Country and we are tired of being guests in our own country and having to accommodate others, so that they may feel comfortable.

Canadians, when traveling tend to be respectful other cultures, so why not do the same?

I think people are so lucky to come to Canada... and the country gives you so much opportunity, why wouldn't you want to celebrate that?

If you are not happy here you can always go to the United States

11:28 AM on October 2, 2010


The saddest aspect of this social experiment is the cynical spin our political class wove into the mosaic that has always been a characteristic of our country.

The pandering, sycophantic politicizing of our communities has turned an otherwise colorful richness into a marketing segmentation strategy for politicians to re elect themselves. Re engineering the constitution, inventing Human Rights Tribunals and restructuring historical norms that separated church and state, criticized historical religious communities at the expense of new emerging communities to seek votes has poisoned views that otherwise would be open minded and welcoming.

"Diversity", inclusiveness", "multicultural" are words that make me shiver and remind me of Chairman Mao's "Little Red" book and all his useful idiots licking his hand for positions and jobs.

Nice try but Canada is a wonderful country that doesn't need a structural multicultural bureaucracy and Ministry of Silly Behavior

Luckily, most new Canadians try to quickly integrate. However, it doesn’t help that the government of Canada is playing Russian roulette with our cultural heritage all in the reckless pursuit of the ethnic vote. Canadian history is being wiped out in the name of the political correctness, that which has poisoned Canadian society from inside. Instead of being united and strong, Canada is dividend and weak. It all started in the public schools. Elisa Lochan, a journalist for The South Asian Generation Next Newspaper wrote an absolutely brave and heartbreaking personal article that she entitled “Tolerance”. In it, she explained that:

As a child I didn’t think much about identity, nationality or heritage, all things that separate us from one another. Other than skin colour, I didn’t really know that anything else was different about my friends. It wasn’t until we were taught tolerance that we all began to look at each other differently.

In my grade three class most of us were first or second generation Canadian. We were given an assignment about our backgrounds. We learned about each others’ languages, cultural garb, religions and holidays.

At the time I didn’t know it, but in learning about my background I also learned all the things I wasn’t. Now we were being shown all the ways we were supposedly different. There was no assignment about how we had grown up together finding all the ways we were the same, that despite the differences we were growing up and being educated in a Canadian society.

It wasn’t long after that my best friend told me I was “Paki”, not that she meant any harm, but it was our way of conforming our eight year minds to what we learned. She and I worked together to get new best friends because we were tolerant but different. She was white so we found her a new white best friend and me, a brown one.

We all started building cliques with definitions of who fits and who doesn’t. We were all friends but only those that fit were allowed into the inner circle. We changed to meet those requirements, even then it wasn’t always enough.

Looking back, I wish we never learned the lesson of tolerance because it didn’t teach us acceptance. It didn’t allow us to be the children we were and still accepted by our heritage and each other.”

Lowell Green, a veteran broadcaster literally declared a country wide red alert in his 2006 gem; “HOW the granola – crunching, tree – hugging thug huggers are wrecking our country!”. He rightly warned Canadians that:

Our reluctance to teach our children Canadian history, the gradual erosion of many of our traditions, such as Christmas, in our public schools and institutions, the terrible neglect of our military and our proud military traditions are only some of the more public manifestations of our disappearing national identity.

It’s hard to believe that what is behind this anti – Western sentiment, but it is fascinating, isn’t it, that a growing number of scientists claim it is this deep – seated hatred of Western culture and capitalism that is really behind Kyoto?

Frankly, the more I look around the more convinced I become that I prefer the old Canada that was not only brave, really brave, but damn proud of it too! Imagine that! Proud of being perched at the northern end of the underground railway, the promised land for thousands of fleeing slaves. Even when my children were growing up, we all knew that this was the country that captured Vimy Ridge, that it was we who stood fast against the deadly mustard gas at the Somme; ours was the country that helped to liberate Italy, whose brave soldiers advanced further against the enemy on D-Day than those of either Britain or the US. We knew that it was Canadians who liberated Holland and were – and still are – loved for it. We knew we had the world’s best hockey players, that Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone here and made the first long – distance call between Brantford and Paris, Ontario. We were proud of the fact that it was in Canada that Jackie Robinson prepared himself to break the colour barrier in the big leagues.

We even took pride in knowing we had beaten the Americans in the War of 1812. We knew all of that and a great deal more. We thought we had a wonderful heritage and culture and it wasn’t until Pierre Trudeau and his camp followers informed us otherwise that we realized how mistaken we had been.
And so the “self – chosen ones” inform us smugly, in order to create this brave new Canada we must first tear down that which we had before and rebuild something far better.
The tearing down seems to be coming along quite nicely. It’s the rebuilding part that worries me.

Why is it so dangerous to base a country’s identity on such a fluffy concept? Bruce Bawer hit the nail on the head in the run away global best seller “While Europe Slept”. In it, he stated that:

To discourage children and grandchildren from identifying with the country of their birth and from bearing allegiance to its values is to encourage them to look elsewhere for something to identify with. Such multicultural conduct isn’t an act of generosity – it’s an act of cultural self – hatred and cultural suicide.”

Down at Victoria Park and Lawrence, new drivers can take their computer G1 tests in Mandarin, Arabic, and even Urdu. Of course all the road signs in Ontario are written in good old English. The Christmas tree is now the holiday tree and Canada is no longer an English and French speaking Christian nation…Canadians are apparently now citizens of the world. Canadian history is being systematically cleansed from all our schools.

Ontario’s appalling 1993 Guidelines for Ethnocultural Equity in School Boards complains that “Ontario’s school system has been and continues to be mainly European in perspective. The prevalence of our cultural tradition limits students’ opportunities to benefit from the contributions of people from a variety of backgrounds.” The guidelines go on to say that “exclusion of the experiences, values, and viewpoints of Aboriginal and ethnocultural minority groups constitutes a systemic barrier to success for students from those groups and often produces inequitable outcomes for them.” The government’s Resource Guide for Antiracist and Ethnocultural Equity Education (1992) makes the point that the province’s schools, because they have been western European in content and perspective, have left students of other backgrounds believing that they have not been “represented in Canadian history” or not “represented positively. This failure of the system to give equal attention and respect to all groups has contributed to stereotyping.” In other words, sugar – coat everything that is not positive for every non – white group and for immigrants other than those from northern Europe. On one level, the impact of such policy is that schools no longer feel able to celebrate a holiday such as Christmas unless they do the same for Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist festivals. This reaction, silly through it be, drastically shortchanges all Canadians. Our civilization and culture is Western, and there is no reason we should be ashamed of it or not wish to reach our students about it. Canadians are the inheritors of Greek and Roman traditions and the British and French experience, and the West is the dominant civilization in the world today in part because its values have been tested and found true. To pretend that simple relativism should apply in the schools and that immigrants, who have come here because they want to buy into our civilization and value system, should be told to retain their own culture is wrongheaded in the extreme. It also discriminates against newcomers by systemically patronizing and marginalizing them.”

Quebec forces immigrants to assimilate. All signage by law must be in French and nobody there will even speak to anyone else unless it’s in French. Take a trip to Montreal and try speaking English and the result is angry silent stares. Quebec defends its culture. Will the rest of Canada do the same before it’s too late?

In October 1996, Heritage Canada released a report on multiculturalism that found much public dissatisfaction with the concept. There is, the government was told unmistakably, a backlash from vast numbers of conservative – minded Canadians who see multiculturalism as divisive, and who fear for social cohesion in light of the demands of ethnic and linguistic groups. So, to policy makers in Ottawa, what was the best way to counter these perceptions? Not to integrate newcomers; not to teach recent arrivals in Canada about the heritage of the country to which they have come. No, the key point was that the government should promote a “new” Canadian identity based on justice, peace, and “compassionate solidarity” rather than on history and geographical considerations! As Liberal multicultural minister Hedy Fry said, multiculturalism is about “the core Canadian values of fairness and respect, compassion and equality,” about building bridges between communities and individuals of all backgrounds.

In other words, more bafflegab. The federal government, the provinces, and the school boards simply fail to realize that the backlash against multiculturalism comes from the widespread realization that it will erode the history and the heritage that Canadians share. Canadians want justice, peace, and compassionate solidarity, to be sure, but they also instinctively believe that they have their own history and heritage. They see no reason why it should be eliminated by government fiat for a misguided policy that tries to make everyone feel good. As the teachers at one high school said, the pressure is on to teach everyone’s history but our own.”

In 1923, Frederick Grant Banting and Charles Best were credited with the invention of Insulin. This amazing feat of medical ingenuity was accomplished inside a research lab at the University of Toronto. Montreal’s Maurice Richard (nicknamed “the Rocket”, was the first hockey player to record a fifty-goal season. Richard was also the first hockey player to score more than 500 goals in his career. He would finish with a total of 544 goals. In 1986, Rob Angel of Vancouver, B.C, developed Pictionary and by 1992, had sold more than 15 million copies. It was in 1957 that, the Avro Canada Ltd created the CF – 102 Arrow. With a record shattering speed of MACH 2+, it turned out to be the fastest fighter jet in the world. It was a mark of Canadian engineering brilliance and genius. Canadian voters are slowly waking up to the horrible reality of yesterday’s disastrous policies. The Liberal Party of Canada was recently decimated in the national elections. They lost official opposition status and were replaced by Jack Layton’s socialists, “The New Democratic Party”. Michael Ignatieff ‘s poor showing reflected Canadians discontent for The Liberal strategy of being everything to everyone. It’s the liberal perspective and it’s out of touch with modern reality.

And it’s from a liberal perspective that we can see what is perhaps the greatest problem with Ignatieff’s multiculturalism: it fails to address how the demand for equal approval can block human development. This demand prevents us from questioning different commitments and beliefs. For example, we cannot ask whether a life devoted to cross – dressing deserves the same approval as one devoted to eradicating injustice. But can we really believe that Rue Paul is the moral equal of Martin Luther King? In a world where equal approval is required, we cannot ask that question for fear of offending Rue Paul or his fans and, indeed, every citizen who believes in the right to equal approval. What this means is that we no longer have the freedom to discuss what it means to lead a good life, an inquiry that requires us to ask whether some ways of life are better than others. Properly understood, Ignatieff’s politics lead to wholesale political correctness and the end to liberal democracy’s greatest claim to fame – freedom of thought.

This result is certainly troubling from a political standpoint, but it’s also problematic in economic terms. In an age where we have to compete against other nations on the basis of intellectual discovery, multiculturalism presents a strange threat to economic advancement by undermining the atmosphere that promotes freedom of inquiry. Again, while some politicians would have us believe that multiculturalism promotes wealth creation by facilitating foreign trade, in fact, it has the potential to subvert the conditions that promote national prosperity.

This point brings us back to the main object of this book, which is to promote national prosperity by arguing for a more complete actualization of the equal opportunity ideal. As we’ve seen in the discussion of “employment equity”, multiculturalism has undermined the equal opportunity ideal by creating an atmosphere where employment systems in the public sector, and in some cases, the private sector, have placed considerations relating to race and ethnicity ahead of criteria based on merit. If Canada hopes to become truly competitive, it must make sure that it’s getting the most out of its people, and the only way to do that is to ensure that public and private employers focus on matching people’s talents, with the work that must be performed. By diminishing the focus on talent, employment equity is taking us down the road to a society that is politically correct, but that fails to maximize its individual and collective economic potential.
The politics of multiculturalism also eat away at the social conditions that promote national prosperity. The project of recommitting Canada to the equal opportunity ideal as the necessary means to achieving our economic potential will require all Canadians to focus on the task of cultivating their own talents and the talents of those around them, with a view to creating an atmosphere where decisions regarding advancement in schools, community associations and the workplace are based on merit. Yet the greater Canadian problem continues to be how to manifest a national will in the face of regional and linguistic divisions, and the omnipresent influence of American society. That problem has been exacerbated by multiculturalism, which invites us to divide ourselves in an almost infinite number of ways. Can we manifest the national will we need to build a just and prosperous society when the government asks us to define ourselves in relation to over 190 different ethnic categories at last count? This problem is made all the worse by the conflicts that necessarily arise when groups compete for public entitlements and recognition. Multiculturalism undermines the national cohesion that we need to succeed in a fiercely competitive global economy.”

All across Europe, people are waking up to the horrible realities of multiculturalism. Europeans have started to feel like strangers in their own lands. They have started voting for new parties and the top three leaders have made an about face on this important issue. Here are some of their comments:

Our Muslim compatriots must be able to practice their religion, as any citizen can, but we in France do not want people to pray in an ostentatious way in the street. If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community. And if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France”.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in a nationally televised debate that multiculturalism was a "failure," warning that such a concept fostered extremism.
We don't tolerate racism in our society carried out by white people; we shouldn't tolerate extremism carried out by other people. It certainly means changing the practice, changing the groups you fund, the people you engage …the people you let into the country. It needs a whole new way of thinking.
Stated British Prime Minister David Cameron last month in his first speech on Islamic radicalization.
We are a country which, at the beginning of the 1960s, actually brought guest workers to Germany. Now they live with us and we lied to ourselves for a while, saying that they won't stay and that they will have disappeared again one day. That's not the reality. This [multicultural] approach -- saying that we simply live side by side and are happy about each other -- this approach has failed, utterly failed.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on October 16 at a meeting of her Christian Democratic party in the city of Potsdam.

Multiculturalism has been a spectacular failure just about everywhere. Without a national identity, students are emerging from Canada’s schools with mentally fractured views of the world. New Canadians learn all about Quebec culture, history and language. Is it any wonder that the top performers emerge from Quebec? Lucien Bute and Jean Pascal are titleholders in the light heavyweight boxing division. Jean St Pierre is the king of the Ultimate Fighting League. There is fierce competition in Quebec politics as the fringe party ACQ took the balance of power from the Bloq in 2005. Quebec banned the Sikh Kirpan from the national assembly and kicked a Muslim woman out of a free French class because she wanted a female teacher instead of a male one. They aren’t swayed by political correctness and have never signed the charter of multiculturalism. They know who they are and assert themselves with confidence. However, they also discriminate against English speaking Canada. No English signage is allowed. This has fractured Canada even further. The result is that Canadians now make twenty percent less than Americans. A lack of unity means a lack of confidence. The QMI Agency revealed a startling reality in a recent survey of high school and post secondary school students. The 24 Hour Newspaper published the findings. Here they are:

When thinking of the future, today’s high school and post secondary students want to own a home, have a good job and spend time with family and friends, but they won’t be taking many risks to make it happen, a new survey shows.
The Canada 2020 survey also reveals travel is low on their list of priorities and only 25% would consider becoming an entrepreneur (60% said they will never start their own business), while 60% said they welcome change in all its forms.

The survey results show the group to be idealistic and optimistic and confident in their abilities to accomplish goals, but the majority of students are not entrepreneurs and don’t believe they will be millionaires,” said Suzanne Tyson, president of Studentawards Inc., which did the survey.

We found these students are looking for happiness in life, not financial riches, because they place low importance on values such as collaboration, innovation and leadership, and high importance on compassion, integrity and optimism.

The online survey questioned 1,000 high school students and 1,500 post secondary students throughout Canada. The results are accurate to within 5% percentage points, 19 times out of 20. The survey asked students about their current and future (2020) beliefs on social issues, employment, technology, media, as well as their values and life priorities.

70% of students are optimistic and believe they will create their own destiny and their top priorities will remain unchanged in 10 years. As well, 60% said their values and beliefs are very different from their parents’ generations.

Canadians need to work together as a nation to create new companies. These corporations also need to be protected from foreign influence. They are not simply being created for the sole purpose of being sold to foreign investors. Canadian jobs are for Canadian workers. Canadian culture need not be dismantled piecemeal and re engineered beyond recognition. A common saying by the political elite has been that we must adhere to our international obligations. Trudeau’s Foreign Investment Review Agency lowered foreign ownership of Canadian firms from 37.4 per cent in the 1970s to 21.4 percent. It was replaced in 1985 by Brian Mulroney’s Investment Canada. This firm gave the green light to the foreign takeover of Canadian industry once again. Instead of monitoring, reviewing or regulating this activity, it actually invited suitors to swoop in and acquire prime Canadian firms. Michael Byers holds the Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. In 2007 he released the much heralded “What is Canada for? INTENT FOR A NATION: A relentlessly optimistic manifesto for Canada’s role in the world”. He shined a bright light on the events that are on the verge of changing Canada forever. Here’s what Michael’s investigations revealed:

Indeed, over half of all manufacturing in Canada is foreign owned, a level more than three times higher than in any other major industrialized country. And in the first six months of 2006 alone, forty-nine major Canadian companies with a combined value of $93 billion were sold to foreign investors. The list of recent sell – offs is a roll call of leading Canadian brands. In addition to Fairmount Hotels and the Bay, two of Canada’s largest mining companies are gone: Falconbridge to Switzerland’s Xstrata; Inco to Brazil’s CVRD. Hamilton – based steelmaker Dofasco was sold to Luxembourg’s Arcelor SA; Ghelph – based Sleeman Breweries to Japan’s Sapporo Brewers. Vincor, our largest winemaker, went to New York – based Constellation brands; Thornhill’s ATI Technologies, a world leader in the production of graphics chips, to California – based Advanced Micro Devices; Montreal –based Domtar, the last large Canadian owned producer of paper, to Weyerhaeuser, the U.S – based forestry giant. In British Columbia, Intrawest, the proprietor of Whistler Blackcomb ski resort, went to New York – based Fortress Investment Group. Just think about it: even the principle site of the 2010 Winter Olympics now belongs to foreigners.
It’s not as if other countries don’t restrict foreign investment. In January 2006, the Bush administration gave permission for Dubai Ports World, the world’s largest marine terminal operator, to purchase six major port operations in the United States. News of the deal sparked a firestorm of protest in Congress, where the fact that Dubai World Ports is based in the United Arab Emirates was cited as a cause for concern about possible links with terrorism. As a result of the pressure, the company eventually agreed to sell the assets to a U.S – based investment group. In 2005, China National Offshore Oil Corporation made a bid to purchase Unocal and was also blocked by congress. The company was eventually sold to another U.S oil company.

The potential pitfalls of foreign investment go far beyond security concerns. Such investment can erode a country’s domestic tax base, as profits are shifted offshore through creative accounting, including by overpricing goods and services supplied by foreign companies that belong to the same proprietor. Foreign – owned companies are also less likely to act as good corporate citizens. They have less incentive to invest in the arts, sponsor local sports teams, fund scholarships or encourage workers and managers to play active roles in the local community. Although some foreign – owned companies do make token gestures, they are unlikely to have the same loyalties as domestically owned firms. Being inherently mobile, they find it difficult to justify the kinds of long – term investments that would strengthen the societies in which they operate. For the same reason, foreign – owned companies are more likely to push for lower taxes and less stringent regulations, even if those taxes and regulations are a necessary part of maintaining the quality of life, education and health care that attracts and maintains high – quality jobs.”
Today, when Canadian business leaders speak about the issues of public policy, it is important to question whose interests they are serving. Many of them now work for foreign – owned companies whose presence in Canada is not unlike a one – night stand. If they can get a better deal elsewhere, they’ll be gone tomorrow.

Other industrialized countries realize this. Most European countries have stringent procedures for reviewing foreign buyouts, ensuring that industries considered essential to their societies, such as utilities and transportation companies, remain under majority domestic control. Japan, the world’s second largest economy, is even more restrictive. Only in Britain is global capitalism as unrestrained as it is in Canada. To some degree, Canadian voters have themselves to blame. Following the sale the Bay and Fairmount Hotels, the Economist said: In many other countries, the sale of national heirlooms would spark fierce opposition. Not in Canada.
Well, not yet. But remember, it took just ten years for Pierre Trudeau to cut foreign control of the Canadian economy almost in half. All that is needed is for the Canadians to realize the scope of the corporate sellout that’s underway and the relative ease with which we could stop it. Ten years? When do we start?

It’s one of the few policies that Pierre got right in what was otherwise a very culturally destructive series of terms in office for Canada. In order to facilitate the mentality that leads to new ideas, Canada should focus its attention on its entrepreneurial capabilities. Besides protecting what Canada already has, much more should be done to further encourage and promote the creation of more start up firms. The government should invest much more in the Liberal arts. These programs train students how to think critically. America has about 900 Liberal arts colleges compared to only about 3 in Canada. New ideas will lead to innovations; which are the main creators of new wealth. Creativity and critical thinking are the traits that push people towards innovation. These are the main ingredients that drive the new global information economy. Citizens of advanced nations that are bestowed with a strong sense of national identity do the best economically and socially. America now leads the entire world in these critically important areas. However, the Americans have also been caught up in a tangled mess of white guilt and shameless apologizing. In “THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF NEW WORLD ORDER”, Samuel Huntington explained that:

The multicultural trend was also manifested in a variety of legislation that followed the civil rights acts of the 1960s, and in the 1990s the Clinton administration made the encouragement of diversity one of its major goals. The contrast with the past is striking. The Founding Fathers saw diversity as a reality and as a problem: hence the national motto, e pluribus unum, chosen by a committee of the Continental Congress consisting of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams. Later, political leaders who also were fearful of the dangers of racial, sectional, ethnic, economic, and cultural diversity (which, indeed, produced the largest war of the century between 1815 and 1914), responded to the call of “bring us together,” and made the promotion of national unity their central responsibility. “The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing as a nation at all,” warned Theodore Rooselvelt, “would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities.”

It’s shameful that instead of promoting Canadian culture and heritage and sharing Canada’s greatness with new citizens; the government does everything possible to encourage people to continue living life as though they never left their home country.

J.L Granastein zoned in of this issue in a chapter dubbed “Multicultural Mania”. His well thought out solution stated:

The aim of every Canadian and of all levels of government should be to welcome immigrants and turn them into Canadian citizens as quickly as possible by giving them the cultural knowledge they need to understand and to thrive in our society. If immigrants feel the need to associate with others like themselves and to maintain their ties to the Old country, more power to them. But they and their communities must accept that, in Canada, political opponents and people with cultural and religious differences do not kill each other or try to censor others into silence. They must also come to understand that if they wish to honour the Old country’s ways and practices, they must do it themselves. They should pay for language and heritage instruction on their own, and not one cent of federal, provincial, or municipal government money should be devoted to fostering the retention of their cultures.

The state should spend its limited funds on helping newcomers to adapt to Canadian society by teaching them the basic knowledge, the symbols, and the ideas that literate, culturally aware Canadians understand and use to communicate with each other. To do anything else condemns immigrants to isolation, to low – paying jobs, to the expanding ghetto of the ill – paid and uneducated. Instead of practicing what the Toronto Board of Education does – grafting multicultural content onto all subject areas – the schools should teach more about Canada, something that might actually be of use to the students. Teach immigrants and their children to read and speak the country’s official languages; train them in the requirements of Canadian citizenship and, where necessary, explain how a democracy functions; instruct them, especially their offspring, in Canada’s history and in the roots of our nationhood; give them the cultural capital that literate and aware Canadian share. Make them good Canadians, in other words. Do not turn immigrants loose to fend for themselves, to struggle alone to master the strange ways of a new and bewildering complex society. Do not tell them, do not even imply, that they can stay East Indian, Somali, Jamaican, German, Chinese, or Chilean and succeed in Canada. Their children might integrate and do well, simply because of the enormous assimilative powers of North American society, but the first generation, if they choose to remain apart, cannot. 
I believe that current multiculturalism policies and use of government funds promote such separateness. This is not only a shameless waste of tax dollars – one undertaken for partisan political, not national, advantage – but a terrible squandering of human resources. Even worse, the policies of multiculturalism have created the idea among immigrants (and even native born citizens, especially in francophone Quebec) that Canada, and in particular English – speaking Canada, has no culture and no nationality of its own. If it did, they ask with some justification, why would the government not try to show it to them? Why else would it fund newcomers to preserve their old ways?”

Deep culture is something much more than the name brand on sneakers or a popular jacket. It’s something people are quite prepared to jealously defend and even die for. In 1952, Pakistan declared Urdu as the state’s main language. This alienated East Pakistanis where Bengali was the main way of communications. Violence erupted into a civil war and East Pakistan broke free to become the independent state of Bangladesh. Alima Hotakie understands culture much better than most of the politically correct elite, the journalists and politicians in Canada. Writing in “THE EAST TORONTO OBSERVER”, she politely reminded every Canadian citizen that:

Language is an integral part of one’s identity. It’s not only a means of communication and expression, but also a marker of distinction.”

In a chapter entitled “THE ILLUSION OF MULTICULTURALISM”, Daniel Stoffman quite accurately stated that:

Language is much more than a way of communicating; it is a way of thinking, or organizing perception, of looking at the world. It’s the basis of cultural identity.

The lack of language skills is creating an economic underclass of citizens. According to a 2002 census, there were approximately 130,000 people living in Ottawa that don’t speak English or French. Nicole Labrie is a supervisor in Family Health at the Region of Peel. In an article in the Weekly Voice Newspaper entitled “Breast Feeding Instructions In Punjabi”, she stated that:

Punjabi is the second most commonly spoken language in Peel

There’s an old saying that is making a huge comeback across Europe, North America and Australia. “When in Rome, do as the Romans do. The faster immigrants learn the ways of the dominant culture, the faster they can adapt and become contributing members to it. There is also a point where it’s an insult to keep people thinking they are immigrants and not full-fledged Canadians. It’s racist to encourage new Canadians not to assimilate.

In “THE TROUBLE WITH CANADA… STILL! A CITIZEN SPEAKS OUT”, William D. Gairdner explained that:

For thousands of years, rulers, kingdoms, and states – governments large and small – have understood very well how human social bonding works (affiliation to the maximum number of common cultural denominators). So they have strived to ensure their people share a common deep culture, and have struggled against all threats to the unity this produces. They have understood that you can enjoy lots of ethnic diversity within an existing deep cultural unity, but you cannot derive cultural unity from diversity. That’s why for most nations in history, assimilation has been the key to unity: get newcomers to forget their old ways and adopt the new host culture.

English is one of the world’s most powerful languages. Great visionaries, laureates, poets, and intellectuals have always exploited its awesome power for the betterment of society. Best selling Author Samuel Huntington explained why this is in the groundbreaking “THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER”. In it he stated:

English is the world’s way of communicating interculturally just as the Christian calendar is the world’s way of tracking time, Arabic numbers are the world’s way of counting, and the metric system is, for the most part, the world’s way of measuring. The use of English in this way, however is intercultural communication; it presupposes the existence of other cultures.”

There are more than enough highly educated Canadians that can see through these complex mazes of smoke and mirrors and will eventually set things straight once more. It’s only a matter of time!!!



PARAGRAPH 1: CHASING A MIRAGE: THE TRAGIC ILLUSION OF AN ISLAMIC STATE/BY: TAREK FATAH/2008/CHAPTER 14: The Islamist Agenda in the West/PG 309/The investigations of Pepe Escobar of the Asian Times.

HAVEN’S GATE: Canada’s Immigration Fiasco By: Victor Malarek/1987/Chapter 5: CONFRONTING CANADIAN RACISM/PG 67+68/A study by Policy Concepts in November 1985 for Employment and Immigration Canada

HAVEN’S GATE: Canada’s Immigration Fiasco By: Victor Malarek/1987/ Preface/PG Xii+Xi/ Environics Research Group Ltd for the Globe and Mail in March 1987, 65% felt that there was too much immigration to Canada/ Public Opinion poll in The Toronto Star June 3, 1987, 83% said a bill should be introduced to make it a lot harder to claim refugee status in Canada.

Betrayal & Deceit: The Politics of Canadian Immigration/By: Charles M Campbell/2000/CHAPTER VII/The Consultation Fraud/PG 174/Angus Reid Associates indicated 76% of Canadians want newcomers to speak either French or English when they arrive to Canada.

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/ BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER ONE: THE END OF INNOCENCE/PG 20+21/Ipsos Reid for October 2001 found that 80% of Canadians in favour of a joint North American security perimeter and a harmonized immigration and refugee system.

PARAGRAPH 2: The Toronto Sun/Tuesday November 2nd/2010/NationalAffairs/10 NEWS/ Family trumps job skill/Brian Lilley/Parliamentary Bureau Oct 24th 2010/Ranting from the right/Haroon Siddiqui

South Asian Generation Next Newspaper/We need to encourage social and cultural integration/ CANADIAN POLITICS/PG 7/South Asian Generation Next/Thursday April 28TH 2011

South Asian Generation Next Newspaper The Federal government must treat Ontario Fairly – Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty/CANADIAN POLITICS/PG 15/South Asian Generation Next/Thursday May 5TH 2011

Canadian IMMIGRANT (is a publication of Star Media Group, a division of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited) December 2010/ONTARIO EDITION/By: Ryan Rosenburg/SETTLEMENT/The year ahead/Same numbers, /One for one/PG 40

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/ BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER FIVE/PG 102/Statistics on Canada’s labor force.

Mayday! Mayday! Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we Know! By: Lowell Green/2010/The Source: Where are today’s immigrants coming from? /PG 57-PG 62/ Immigration sources to Canada for 2007 and 2008.

The Epoch Times Newspaper/Canadians cutting back on debt/ A6/BUSINESS/ /February 3 – 9, 2011. /By: JEFFREY THOMPSON/Job Creation Numbers by Economist Benjamin Tal at CIBC World Markets


PARAGRAPH 3: WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/ BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/PG194/The work of Daniel Hamermesh on labor supply and demand.

Betrayal & Deceit: The Politics of Canadian Immigration/By: Charles M Campbell/2000/CHAPTER VII/The Consultation Fraud/PG 169/ Immigrants who don’t have French of English are half as likely to participate in the labor market.

IMMIGRATION: The Economic Case/ By: DIANE FRANCIS/2002/Unintended Consequences/Will the Children Do Better? /PG 101&102

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it//BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER ONE/THE END OF INNOCENCE/PG 28/The expansion of family class immigration increases unskilled labor and creates poverty.

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it//BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER EIGHT/PG 102/Poverty level of immigrants after 1991 is 50%.

THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN BORDER: Terrorism, Immigration, and Security Since 9/11 By: EDWARD ALDEN/2008Chapter 6: THE CONSEQUENCES/PG 188+189

MAYDAY MAYDAY: Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we know!/BY: Lowell Green/2010/The Great Myth/PG 219/Statistics Canada’s unemployment numbers for May 2010.

The Centre for Immigration Policy Reform www.immigrationreform dot ca

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/BY: DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER THREE/PG 54/ Ward Elcock’s report.

CONCLUSION: Jason Kenney’s Speech on Nov 29, 2008/Hosted By: The I.S.N.A

Whose War Is It? How Canada Can Survive In The Post – 9/11 World By: J.L. Granatstein/2007/ CHAPTER 7/ PG 172/ The June 1985 Sikhs terrorist attacks.

CHASING A MIRAGE: THE TRAGIC ILLUSION OF AN ISLAMIC STATE/BY: TAREK FATAH/2008/CHAPTER 14: The Islamist Agenda in the West/PG 303-304/January 2003/Tarek Fatah in attendance at a conference hosted by the Saudi based World Assembly of Muslim Youth-WAMY inside the Toronto Convention Centre.

AMERICA ALONE: THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT/By: Mark Steyn/2006/Chapter 4:Flying the Coop: B I G M O VS. B I G M A C/PG 63+64

WHILE EUROPE SLEPT: HOW RADICAL ISLAM IS DESTROYING THE WEST FROM WITHIN By: Bruce Bawer/2006/Chapter 3:Europe’s Weimar Moment: The Liberal Resistance and Its Prospects/PG 205/The immigration crisis in Malmo, Sweden.

WHILE EUROPE SLEPT: HOW RADICAL ISLAM IS DESTROYING THE WEST FROM WITHIN By: Bruce Bawer/2006/Chapter 1:Before 9/11:Europe in Denial /PG 55/Wikan stated that: “Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for the rape crisis because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative.”

The Muslim Veil in North America By: Alvi, Hoodfar and McDonough/2003/CHAPTER 7: Women’s Modesty in Qur’anic Commentaries: The Founding Discourse/PG 190+191

CHASING A MIRAGE: THE TRAGIC ILLUSION OF AN ISLAMIC STATE/BY: TAREK FATAH/2008/CHAPTER 13: Hijab – Islamic Piety or Political Islam?/Imam Sheikh al – Hilali, mufti of Australia labeled women without Islamic head covering “uncovered meat in the sun”/PG 286-287.
THE CLOSED CIRCLE: AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ARABS/By: David Pryce – Jones/1991/ Chapter 5: Men and Women/PG 128

The Epoch Times Newspaper / Canada’s new, culture – driven abuse of women and girls/By: Aruna Papp/OPINION/A7/July 29 – August 2010.

IMMIGRATION: The Economic Case/ By: DIANE FRANCIS/2002/Unintended Consequences/An Open Letter in Major Canadian Newspapers About Immigration Policy Deficiencies/PG 122&123

THE ABORIGINAL URBAN ALLIANCE OF ONTARIO/President Michael Cheena’s letter to Jason Kenney/2010/Proposals to halt the serious abuses of Canada’s refugee claims process and calls for reform.

IMMIGRATION: The Economic Case/ By: DIANE FRANCIS/2002/Unintended Consequences/Jack Manion, former immigration deputy minister testifying at Senate hearings/PG 121

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/By DANIEL STOFFMAN/2002/CHAPTER 5/PG 112/the Borjas Formula.


The Weekly Voice Newspaper “Kenney Acknowledges Cultural Media’s Role”/PG 3/Federal Funds For Immigrant Services Have Tripled Since 2005/ Saturday, May 7th, 2011.

MAYDAY MAYDAY: Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we know!/BY: Lowell Green/2010/Doctors Driving Cabs/PG 198/199/ Patrick Grady’s evaluations.

MAYDAY MAYDAY: Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we know!/BY: Lowell Green/2010/The Welfare Burden/PG 204/ Statistics Canada Report on Poverty for immigrants from North America, Europe, Asia and Africa between 1996 and 2001.

The National Post Newspaper “The invisible price tag of immigration”/ by: Herbert Grubel/May 18th, 2011

The Weekly Voice Newspaper “Kenney Acknowledges Cultural Media’s Role”/PG 3/ Canada’s Temporary Foreign Workers’ Program/ Saturday, May 7th, 2011.

24 Hour Newspaper They really like us, but think we’re soft on security: Report/By: DANIEL PROUSSALIDIS/QMI Agency/Wednesday May 11TH, 2011

COMPETING AGAINST AMERICA: Why Canada Has Fallen Behind In The Race For Talent And Wealth (And What To Do About It) By: Michael Alexander/2005/Myth Nine: A COMPASSIONATE SOCIETY IS A JUST SOCIETY/PG 202-204

THE GULF WITHIN: Canadian Arabs, Racism and the Gulf War By: Zuhair Kashmeri/1991/
CHAPTER 12/The Crumbling Mosaic/PG126

Who Killed Canadian History? By: J.L Granatstein/1998/Chapter 1: What History? Which History?/
PG 16+17

The Globe and Mail Newspaper dot ca/ Opinion poll taken From Oct 1st 2010 to June 12th 2011: Is multiculturalism a failed experiment? 66% or 8,244 believed it has failed/ 34% or 4,158 believed it hadn’t failed. Total votes: 12,402.

South Asian Generation Next Newspaper Tolerance/ By Elisa Lochan//PG 13/South Asian Generation Next/Thursday May 26TH 2011

How the granola – crunching, tree – hugging thug huggers are wrecking our country! By: Lowell Green/2006/Chapter 33: The View From Britain/PG 172-174

WHILE EUROPE SLEPT: HOW RADICAL ISLAM IS DESTROYING THE WEST FROM WITHIN By: Bruce Bawer/2006/Chapter 1:Before 9/11/PG 70/The Idiocy of Multiculturalism.

Who killed Canadian history? /By: J.L Granatstein/1998CHAPTER 4: Multicultural Mania/PG 101- 103/The teaching of reverse discrimination in our public schools

Who killed Canadian history?/By: J.L Granatstein/1998/CHAPTER 4: Multicultural Mania/PG 92+93/Mulculturalism erodes Canadian Identity and destroys Canada’s heritage.

CANADIAN FIRSTS /By: Lisa Wojna/2008/Inventor of Insulin, PG 141/Invention of the Avro Arrow, PG 160/The creation of Trivial Pursuit, PG 231/Maurice “Rocket”Richard, 1st to score 50 goals, PG 257

COMPETING AGAINST AMERICA: Why Canada Has Fallen Behind In The Race For Talent And Wealth (And What To Do About It) By: Michael Alexander/2005/Myth Three: Multiculturalism Promotes Peace & Prosperity/PG 77-79

France’s Sarkozy: “Multiculturalism Has Failed” By: CBNNEWS dot com/Friday February 11th, 2011

British PM: “Multiculturalism has failed”, David Cameron’s remarks on West’s policy draw fire from Muslim community By: Europe on MSNBC/msnbc dot com/updated: 2/6/2011 12:55:43 AM ET

Merkel Says “German Multiculturalism Has Failed” By: Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty/October 17th, 2010

24 Hour Newspaper /Students want to be happy, not rich: Study/Breaking News/ Report By: QMI Agency/Wednesday July 28TH, 2010

What is Canada for? INTENT FOR A NATION: A relentlessly optimistic manifesto for Canada’s role in the world By: Michael Byers/2007/CHAPTER 9: DO WE NEED A CONTINENTAL ECONOMY?/FOREIGN INVESTMENT: THE LAND OF THE ONE NIGHT STANDS/PG 200-PG202

THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER By: Samuel P. Hungtinton/1997/Chapter 12: The West, Civilizations, and Civilization/PG 305+306/The unraveling of America’s national identity.

Who killed Canadian history?/By: J.L Granatstein/1998/CHAPTER 4: Multicultural Mania/PG 85+86/The Canadian government should help new citizens become genuine Canadians.

THE EAST TORONTO OBSERVER Bengali community celebrates native tongue/By: Alima Hotakie/Friday March 4TH 2011.


THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE REMAKING OF WORLD ORDER By: Samuel P. Hungtinton/1997/Chapter 3: A Universal Civilization? Modernization and Westernization/PG 61/The importance of the English language.

Immigrant Population By Place of Birth and Period of Immigration

Until the early 1990s, most immigrants coming to Canada were from the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States, with much smaller numbers coming from China and India. As the following figures graphically illustrate, those days are long gone. All figures are from Statistics Canada, 2006 Census.

Birthplace Immigrated Immigrated
Before 1991 After 1991

United Kingdom 515,135 64,485
Italy 289,820 7,035
United States 168,840 81,695
Germany 149,020 22,385
Poland 123,435 47,055
Portugal 136,945 13,445
Netherlands 102,415 9,580
France 44,685 34,860
Greece 69,385 3,735
Ukraine 23,180 36,285
Hungary 39,080 6,855
Ireland (Eire) 20,340 2,030
Austria 19,205 1,590
Belgium 16,625 3,590
Switzerland 13,760 6,195
Other 113,760 185,695

TOTAL 1,845,630 (60%) 529,515 (22%)

Amazing isn’t it? Prior to 1991, 1,824,830 immigrants arrived in Canada from the UK, Europe and the US. Since 1991, that number has dropped to 510,000.

Now let us have a look at another set of figures:

Birthplace Immigrated Immigrated
Before 1991 After 1991

China 133,910 333,025
India 156,830 286,855
Philippines 107,765 195,425
Hong Kong 107,925 107,505
Vietnam 107,760 52,410
Pakistan 19,760 113,520
Jamaica 84,345 39,070
Iran 24,285 67,800
Taiwan 12,670 52,530
Afghanistan 4,215 31,950
Iraq 6,420 27,120
Bangladesh 4,325 28,900
Algeria 3,615 28,645
Ethiopia 5,460 14,255
Somalia 3,240 16,270
Other 464,700 502,420

Total 1,247,225 (40%) 1,897,700 (78%)
You cannot help but notice that, among other things, China has become a greater source of immigrants to Canada since 1991 than all of the UK and Europe combined.

To get an even more revealing look at what is happening, let’s examine the most recent numbers from non – European sources of immigration to Canada in the ten years from 1996 to 2006.

Birthplace Total Immigration 1996-2006

China 263,390
India 219,030
Philippines 129,940
Hong Kong 40,935
Vietnam 21,405
Pakistan 98,780
Jamaica 20,715
Iran 52,265
Taiwan 35,290
Afghanistan 26,560
Iraq 18,910
Bangladesh 23,685
Algeria 22,480
Ethiopia 9,830
Somalia 8,230
Other non Western immigration 1996-2006 274,720
Total non – western immigration 1996-2006 1,266,165 (82.5%)

Now let’s compare the non – European data with immigration from the Western nations, which historically produced the largest number of immigrants.

Birthplace Total immigration 1996-2006
United Kingdom 43,855
Italy 4,495
United States 62,925
Germany 16,230
Poland 14,400
Portugal 5,650
Netherlands 7,025
France 27,045
Greece 2,020
Ukraine 29,375
Hungary 4,520
Ireland (Eire) 1,210
Austria 1,070
Belgium 2,715
Switzerland 4,035
Other Western Countries 41,955

Total Western countries 268,525 (17.5%)
As you can see, immigration from non – western nations for the ten year period between 1996 and 2006 is more than four times higher than from Western nations.

Mayday! Mayday! Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we Know! The Source: Where are today’s immigrants coming from? /PG 57-PG 62

By that magic year 2031, fully 63 per cent of Toronto’s population will be visible minorities – in Vancouver the ratio will be 59 per cent, in Montreal 31 per cent. Ottawa’s visible minority population will increase from the present 10 percent to 36 percent. It is important to realize that we are doing something in Canada no other nation on earth is even contemplating. This country is undergoing a societal and demographics evolution that is much more rapid and profound than is taking place in any other nation on earth.
For example, while only ten percent of Americans today are foreign born, here in Canada the foreign – born figure is about 20 per cent. While some US cities have large foreign – born populations, none of them approach what is occurring in Toronto and Vancouver. Americans often joke that Miami’s first language is Spanish, but in fact only about 36 percent of its population was born outside the United States, compared to nearly 46 per cent of Toronto’s population and almost 40 per cent in Vancouver in 2006.

The Significance of this is even greater since Toronto and Vancouver are by far the largest cities in English Canada and pretty much determine which political party governs the country.

Mayday! Mayday! Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we Know! Troubled Waters /PG 36


MAYDAY MAYDAY: Curb immigration. Stop multiculturalism. Or it’s the end of the Canada we know!/By: Lowell Green/2010

Spruce Ridge Publishing (613) 831 6307
www . maydaymayday . ca/www . lowellgreen . com
Also at Chapters Indigo Bookstores.
Total At Chapters Indigo Bookstore: $30.00-$35.00


John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd
Suggested Price: $10.00 or less @ Chapters Indigo Bookstores


Available at Chapters Indigo Bookstore: $24.95

WHO GETS IN: What’s wrong with Canada’s immigration program – and how to fix it/BY: Daniel Stoffman/2002

Macfarlane Walter & Ross
Suggested Price: $30-$35 Canadian
Bookstores online: Chapters Online

Betrayal & Deceit: The Politics of Canadian Immigration
By: Charles M Campbell/2000

Gordon Soules Publishing (604) 922 6588
Email:books@gordonsoules dot com
Total with shipping+ tax: $27.54

WHILE EUROPE SLEPT: HOW RADICAL ISLAM IS DESTROYING THE WEST FROM WITHIN By: Bruce Bawer/2006/Doubleday Broadway Publishing Group/www . Chapters Bookstore/ Total: $10.00 or less.

Name: Shawn Dalton/Researcher & Analyst
Research Site:
Email: and request a free electronic transcript of this essay right now.

Thanks for your time!!!

Immigration Watch Canada

Contact Your MP, MLA and Municipal Councillors

Please write, phone or visit your MP, MLA (MPP), or City Councillors. A visit is the most effective. Take someone with you as a witness to what is said.
It is important that Canadians tell elected officials that Canada’s current immigration policies are in need of major reform. For example, present immigration levels have to be reduced dramatically. Immigration Watch Canada believes in a major reduction from the 250,000+ present levels to approximately the 50,000 per year level. We are not advocating abolition of immigration.
Immigration is primarily a federal responsibility; so concerned Canadians should contact federal politicians first. However, provinces have a constitutional right to be involved in immigration, so provincial politicians are part of the problem too. When any politician (federal, provincial or municipal) preaches unsustainable growth or a provincial or municipal politician says immigration is a federal issue and beyond their jurisdiction, they have to be challenged. These people won’t hesitate to look for federal money or federal moral support. Tell them this loud and clear. Tell them also that they know perfectly well that they can influence federal immigration policies and that it’s time for them to stop playing games such as being helpless.
If a municipal, provincial or federal politician seems to think that no critical comment can be made about immigration, tell them they are speaking absolute nonsense. Being able to say nothing critical today about Canada’s immigration policies is like being able to say nothing critical, fifteen years ago, about Canada’s massive deficit spending. Canada’s spending had to be brought back to sanity. So do Canada’s present immigration policies. The latter are a formula for even greater disaster than unrestrained deficit spending.
If politicians are marveling about multiculturalism, you will know that they are in favour of present immigration levels and/or that they know very little about Canada’s present immigration policies and/ or that they have given very little thought to the immigration issue. Challenge them. Canadians have had enough of robotic immigration comments from people who are supposed to have the ability to think. Tell them that their primary responsibility is to the majority of Canadians and that this means that the economic, environmental and cultural well being of the majority of Canadians has to take precedence over such clichéd and vacuous ideas as multiculturalism, diversity and vibrancy. It is important that you speak out. The economic, environmental and cultural well being of Canada is at stake.
Send us a copy of your letters. We regularly publish a selected number of comments in the “WEEKLY BULLETINS” section of our web site. They are usually titled something like, “The People Speak Their Views On Immigration”.
One of the more effective ways to contact politicians is to write or type an old-fashioned letter on paper and to use Canada’s mail system. Such hard copy gets more attention than electronic copy. To send a hard copy letter to Canada’s Prime Minister or any other MP, just use the MP’s name and the following address: C/O Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0A6.
If you don’t know your MP’s name, you can find him or her by calling the Library of Parliament in Ottawa (1-866-599-4999). Give the receptionist your postal code and address. That will help to locate the MP. If talking to someone in Ottawa sounds intimidating, you can always phone the constituency offices of these people in the place where you live. If you have the Internet, check it for constituency office contact information. Your phone book should also have constituency contact information.
Paper letters to MP’s require no postage!
Please send a copy of your letter to your own MP and to 3 or 4 other related departments. MP’s will usually respond to letters, but will often ignore e-mails.
If you wish to use e-mail, here is a list of e-mail addresses. We have included other information you can use to make a complaint about the immigration issue:
(1) Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper:
(Ph. 613- 992-4211 ; Fax: (613) 941-6900
(2) Canada’s Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney: (Ph. 613-992-2235 ; Fax. 613-992-1920)
(3) The leaders of the other parties in Parliament: Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff (, NDP Leader Jack Layton ( and BQ leader Gilles Duceppe (
(4) The 12 MP’s who are on the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration spend most of their time discussing immigration and refugee issues. They make decisions on what immigration and refugee changes should be introduced to the House of Commons. Incredible as it may sound, they spend almost all of their time listening to Canada’s immigration industry (immigration lawyers, immigration consultants and ethnic groups whose votes they want). These MP’s need to hear from real Canadians. Here are their names and e-mail addresses:
David Tilson (
Maurizio Beviliacqua ( )
Thierry St-Cyr ( )
Paul Calandra ( )
Olivia Chow (
Denis Corderre ( )
Nina Grewal ( )
Justin Trudeau ( )
Eve-Mary Thai Thi Lac ( )
Alice Wong ( )
Terence Young ( )
Rick Dykstra ( )
(5) Canada’s Minister responsible for the Canada Border Services Agency, which investigates fraud and deports offenders, Peter Van Loan:
(6) Canada’s Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews :
(Ph: 613-992-3128 ; Fx:613-995-1049)
The CBC receives about $1 Billion a year of taxpayer money to be Canada’s national broadcaster. With that billion, it regularly abuses its role by acting as the propaganda arm for Canada’s immigration industry. The abuse comes in the form of television programs like “Little Mosque on the Prairie” or in the form of summer radio programs that promote the hiring (at the expense of Canadian-born) of immigrants that Canada never needed. These are but 2 of hundreds of examples of CBC television and radio support of high immigration levels. When you hear the CBC give airtime to Canada’s immigration industry, phone them and complain. It is no exaggeration to say that the CBC is betraying Canadians. The CBC has to hear from thousands of us.
Here are people you can complain to:
A. The CBC Ombudsman: This person (currently Kirk LaPointe) investigates complaints against the CBC. Complaints about the CBC should be sent to French complaints against Radio Canada should be sent to
The CBC Ombudsman for English broadcasting can be contacted by regular mail or by phone. Here is the appropriate contact information:
Kirk LaPointe, CBC Ombudsman
P.O. Box 500, Station A
Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6
Fax: 416/205-2825
Tel.: 416/205-2978
B. Canada’s Minister of Heritage oversees the CBC. Here is the e-mail address for the Minister, James Moore:
Each province or territory has a minister responsible for immigration. You can get that person’s name and e-mail address by phoning any provincial government office.
Here is a list of phone numbers by province and territory:
1. British Columbia : 250-356-2771
2. Alberta : 780-427-2711
3. Saskatchewan : 306-787-1117
4. Manitoba : 1-866-626-4862
5. Ontario : 1-800-267-8097
6. Quebec : 514-644-4545
7. New Brunswick : 1-888-762–8600
8. Nova Scotia : 1-800-670-4357
9. P.E.I. : 902-368-4000
10. Newfoundland and Labrador :1-709-729-3699
11. North West Territories : 1-867-873-7500
12. Yukon : 1-867-607-5811
13. Nunavut : 1-888-252-9869