Immigration Watch Canada 4

Very close to knew website until then please share updates posted here Oct 15/17

Immigration Watch Canada introduction with Dan Murray!: posted Oct 24/17

Attention Immigration Reformer:
For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Government’s Proposal to Ramp Up Immigration Levels is Misguided.” 
Dan Murray 
Government’s Proposal to Ramp Up Immigration Levels is Misguided posted Nov14/17
Madeline Weld, President  Population Institute of Canada
The Canadian government announced in October that it would significantly increase the intake of immigrants to Canada for each of the next three years, with minimum levels of 300,000 each year. Since 1990, Canada has been accepting approximately 250,000 – and sometimes more – newcomers each year. In 2017, 75% of Canada’s population growth resulted from immigration.
Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen argues that the government’s proposal for even higher levels of immigration would promote economic growth, overcome skills shortages and meet the demographic challenge of an aging population.
Population Institute Canada believes that economic and demographic arguments for growing Canada’s population are on shaky ground, while the negative environmental consequences of its rapid growth are very much in evidence, and growing. We contend that there are no good reasons to grow Canada’s population and many compelling environmental reasons to stabilize and reduce it.
It is true that Canada’s growing population over the past few decades has resulted in a bigger economy. There has, however, been no growth in per capita wealth. The real earnings of the average Canadian worker have not changed, while those of the poorest Canadian workers have fallen.
Economists Herb Grubel and Patrick Grady have calculated that immigrants cost the government $30 billion more in services each year than they pay in taxes. And Immigration Minister Hussen admits that his proposed increase in immigrant intake will cost at least an additional one billion dollars in resettlement expenses each year.
Already, large numbers of young people, many with significant debt loads, face a very challenging job market, one which Finance Minister Bill Morneau has called a “job churn.” Many job seekers, especially young and new Canadians, have few prospects of secure employment and must work multiple contract or part-time positions. They can only dream of better wages, a steady schedule and paid sick days. How, PIC asks, will adding hundreds of thousands of additional job seekers improve the prospects of these Canadians, when increasing automation, the loss of factory jobs to developing economies, and outsourcing are already putting significant pressures on Canada’s workforce?
It has also long been recognized that the problems associated with an aging population cannot be solved through immigration. Among studies showing that immigration, even at high levels, has little effect on Canada’s age structure is a 2006 analysis by the C.D. Howe Institute (No Elixir of Youth: Immigration Cannot Keep Canada Young). It found that to keep a constant dependency ratio, Canada would have to have an unrealistically high intake of immigrants and by 2050 would be taking in 7 million immigrants per year and have reached a population of 165 million. Due to the rapid and unsustainable growth of the human population during the 20th century, all countries will have to deal with an aging population during the coming decades.
In addition, the dependency ratio as currently calculated (number of workers for every person 65 years and older) merits re-examination. No doubt many retired grandparents over 65 years old are helping to subsidize their grandchildren. The fees paid by elderly people in retirement residences support many workers and economists anticipate a large intergenerational transfer of wealth as aging baby boomers die. All these factors complicate the issue of the dependency ratio and suggest that it is simplistic to use number of people over 65 versus the number working as a sole determinant.
Furthermore, many people 65 years of age and older still work, some because they must, others by choice. Thus, designating every person a dependent at 65 is not realistic. It is also relevant to note that significant numbers of newcomers – and of the proposed increase in intake – are in the family reunification category. Many of these are the parents or grandparents of earlier immigrants and are therefore older than the average Canadian and more likely to require the healthcare services paid for by working Canadians.
Clearly, the economic arguments for relentlessly driving population growth through high levels of immigration do not hold up to scrutiny. There is also an increasing awareness that the size of a country’s economy or its GDP is an inadequate measure of its people’s well-being. As Canada’s population grows, more Canadians are having to contend with ever more crowded cities, increased traffic congestion, densification that has eliminated greenspace but not urban sprawl, increasingly stressed infrastructure, rising housing costs, and longer waiting times for healthcare and other government services. The resources of the cities in the southern belt of Canada where most Canadians live, and almost all immigrants settle, are as overstressed as those in cities anywhere in the developed world. What’s more, a growing population is putting enormous pressure on our irreplaceable farmland and very limited fruit-growing areas.
It is wrong to consider Canada as an “empty” country when so much of it is unsuitable for human habitation or incapable of supporting a dense population. The very high per capita “ecological footprint” of Canadians has already badly eroded our biocapacity per individual. For example, the latest (2017) Living Planet Report by the World Wildlife Fund shows a serious and significant decline in wildlife populations as our growing population and demands for space and resources convert wildlife habitat to human uses.
Our finite planet cannot support a continuously growing human population and expanding economies. Canada, too, is finite. And yet as a direct result of government policy, our population is growing as rapidly as the global average of 1.12% annually. The policy to keep expanding our economy by growing our population through immigration is no more sustainable than any other Ponzi scheme. Nor is the government’s planned immigration policy supported by a majority of Canadians – an Angus Reid poll conducted in 2017 found that 57% of Canadians thought that Canada should accept fewer immigrants and refugees (see page 15 of document).
Before increasing immigration levels, PIC believes it incumbent on government to assess the impact of current levels of immigration and the impact that higher levels would have, not only on the economy and the revenue and costs for the government, but also on the environment, climate change, farmland, property prices, public infrastructure, and the livability of our cities, among other parameters.
In its external aid programs, the current government has shown commendable leadership by supporting reproductive health and education programs that will contribute to a slowing of global population growth, leading to real social and environmental benefits coincident with significant increases in standards of living. Yet at home it continues to promote rapid population growth through immigration. Rather than pursuing economic growth for its own sake (or for the benefit of the few), PIC is urging government to show leadership on the home front (as it does abroad), through policies that promote human well-being and the preservation of Canada’s natural heritage for future generations.
Population Institute Canada believes that we must allow our population to stabilize to sustainable levels by moderating immigration intake while helping developing countries to achieve sustainable populations through our development aid programs…. and by our example.
PIC urges Canadians to contact their Member of Parliament and advocate for Canada to stabilize its population, while directing foreign aid to those developing countries which seek to control their own population growth through ethical policies and effective family planning programs.

Hoax: A high profile “hate crime” involving racist graffiti swept the nation a little over a month ago, creating tremendous excitement in the mainstream media. An unidentified black cadet pretended to be a victim of racial slurs but actually had written them himself. […]

Harvey Weinstein, who has been accused of rape and sexual assault by scores of actresses, used a company that employs former Israeli spies and the Israeli Defense Force to discourage his accusers and journalists from going public with their charges. […]

After local law enforcement and the FBI began investigating, Dauntarius Williams confessed to defacing his own car with racist slurs, but, in order to avoid prosecution, he claimed it was a “Halloween prank that got out of hand”. It worked. […]

A shooting spree that took place on a major Texas interstate over the weekend left a 7-year-old child in critical condition and several people injured. Austin police arrested illegal alien Rolando Martinez, 25, on Sunday […]

As many as 600,000 British children may have been victims of rape. A 14-year-old girl was charged with racial crimes in 2014 after complaining about being raped by local Muslims. […]

Dear Tami, More violation of our rights in Canada revolations posted Nov 7/17

This morning, I received this notice below from the Media Action Group.  It is self-explanatory – and frightening!  Motion M-103 seems to be marching down the road, much like the Liberal Government has planned.  I do not know why the Liberals do not see the dangerous waters that they are swimming in, with their support for M-103.  Perhaps they think they can feed the sharks without becoming part of the food chain themselves.  They are wrong!

Islamophobia” means that those who fear certain Islamic practices are crazy.  Are we?  Should wife-beating be made legal?  Should female genital mutilation be made legal? Should a woman’s testimony before the courts be worth only ½ that of a man’s.   Should we criminalize criticism of ISLAM or any religion!  That is the road down which Motion M-103 will take us, if we don’t stop it at this stage.   Please stand with me for Free Speech!

Please donate to help us fight Motion M-103

Irving Weisdorf

Founding Member
Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights & Freedoms

“A DANGEROUS GAME” Anthony Furey
Now that the hearings of witnesses by the Heritage Committee is winding down, there is a lot of concern since many ‘witnesses’ interviewed showed strong support for Motion M-103 recommending legislation be enacted to criminalize offensive language.

Read the summary report of each witness on the C3RF WEBSITE
under Heritage Committee to learn what the witnesses said in their interviews.


“Oh Canada, Who stands on Guard for Thee…”

Muslim Brotherhood quote (not a myth): “The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is kind of a grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” (From the Explanatory Memorandum of the General Strategic Goals for the Group in North America, an internal document of the Muslim Brotherhood written in 1991, discovered by the FBI in 2004.)

On March 23, 2017, the Canadian House of Commons passed Motion M-103, officially called “Systemic racism and religious discrimination.” Why are so many Canadians, whose country is supposedly a role model for “tolerance and diversity,” so upset about this motion?

Read article.

Listen to this powerful video with Raheel Raza speaking, “By the Numbers” which explains how many Muslims are radical? Why is this important? What about Islamophobia?

Anthony Furey’s article:
” This is a dangerous game we are playing… prosecution?”
What prosecution? Who will be ‘prosecuted’?   

If you are worried AND YOU SHOULD BE, the only solution is letters, large numbers of letters, TO OUR MPs, THE PM, AND OF COURSE HEDY FRY – see below. (Get family and friends to write!)

 A sample letter and a letter from a citizen.   We need strong powerful letters, BUT, keep letters brief, polite, and check spelling and grammar – use your own words! Include your name, Postal Code and address – this verifies the constituency in which you live!

Use information from the articles above or below especially from Deborah Weiss BELOW.

Write a letter to the Honourable Hedy Fry – you can send a copy to our Prime Minister, and your MP or write to each separately.
CLICK HERE to find your MP and email address!

FOR OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN: do it for your children and grandchildren – what kind of world are we leaving them without Freedom of Speech and other freedoms? A large number of letters can make a difference. If you can, please forward me a copy of your letters so that I can assess our effectiveness…

SAMPLE LETTER: (in your own words or create new)

Dear Ms Fry,

I am very concerned about the Heritage Committee hearings with witnesses which have been held over the last few months regarding motion M-103. As a Canadian citizen, I am counting on you, Ms Fry, to listen and act on my concerns. I am VERY worried that the Heritage Committee will recommend legislation to the Canadian Parliament, to criminalize free speech which might offend a particular group or religion – this would take away basic freedom of speech from all citizens.

As head of the Heritage Committee discussing M-103 you must do what is right for Canada. We have seen similar laws enacted in Europe where it has curtailed freedom to criticize terrorism in the UK, France, and Germany.  And I don’t want that for Canada – this will destroy our country.

I look forward to an immediate reply to my concerns.

Yours very truly,
(Your name –  your Postal Code for authenticity and your address)

Letter to Michael Levitt MP, from a constituent:

Dear Mr. Levitt,

I’m certain you know who Ms. Raza is so I needn’t provide background information on her. I had the good fortune to listen to her speak at Beth Tikvah Synagogue today. While I have heard her on a few occasions previously, I decided today that you deserve to hear the voice of one of your constituents. I have had conversations with and among friends concerning this attitude of political correctness but it hadn’t gone much farther if at all.

Let’s put it on the table.

I am sick and tired of being politically correct.

Sharia Law? That’s next on their agenda. Are we to live by the law of the land or are we to adjust the law of the land to accommodate Muslim Fundamentalism. Or…will their numbers increase to many times ours and result in the law of “our” land becoming Sharia.

Imams…Do we continue to allow them to preach antisemitism and anti-Western civilization? Do we Canadians have no recourse?

When professors at our universities preach hate and antisemitism are we to stand silently by and allow them to continue in their positions in our schools of higher learning and make excuses for their behaviour?

No! Not according to my Canada.

I fear the results of pandering and political correctness that I see in the future of “my Canada”.

(Don’t copy – the MP will recognize it.)

Tarek Fatah “Don’t use divisive term Islamophobia

Discusses Dr. Zuhdi Jasser recommending, “stop engaging [with] Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in government and media and recognize their misogynist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and anti-American (and Canadian) ideological underpinnings.”

Video from Deborah Weiss, perhaps one of the most eloquent on the problems with Motion M-103.

Video of Russ Cooper on his testimony for the Canadian Heritage Committee. Russ Cooper perhaps understands the problems with M-103 more than anyone else – he was the first person to begin taking objection by creating a petition that showed that most Canadians are opposed to this motion.

Or to really understand how the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated into our Canadian government and agencies such as the police, listen to Tom Quiggin by going to C3RF website VIDEOS and scroll down to Tom Quiggin… or listen to any of the other excellent speakers from the C3RF Conference, Raheel Raza or Clare Lopez or others.

It’s up to us to make a difference – only we can rescue Canada from the clutches of the Islamists. Now, how about sitting down and writing that letter…

Jessie Daniels, a critical social psychology professor at the City University of New York, asserts that white families offer “protection” for racists and, therefore, support white supremacy. […]

Terrorist suspect, Sayfullo Saipov, entered the US under the ‘Diversity Visa’ lottery program and brought 23 more immigrants to the US through chain migration. President Trump is asking Congress to replace the Visa Lottery program with one based on merit and to get rid of chain migration altogether. […]

A Police instructor said that migrant recruits, especially of Turkish, Afghan and Arabic origins, are “an enemy in our ranks” and have even threatened German police officers with violence. Last year, federal police arrested one of its own officers who was recruiting jihadists and plotting to bomb the agency headquarters in Cologne. [May we dare ask what higher authority requires police departments to accept recruits from the migrant population?] […]

200 pro-immigration protesters blocked an intersection and menaced a man who was trapped in his car by the crowd. As he slowly tried to drive away, demonstrators jumped on his car and hit it with sticks. […]

San Diego: A reporter covering prototypes of Trump’s proposed border wall unexpectedly caught a group of illegal border jumpers hopping over the existing fence. The Border Patrol agent being interviewed says it’s just another day at work fighting the never-ending battle to secure the nation’s southern border. […]

20% of French Islamic State fighters have been collecting social benefits from France to help finance the terror group. A total of $583,200 over the past 5 years has gone directly from the French taxpayers to the terror group. […]

Journalist, Peter Sweden, was the target of a the Hate Crimes Unit of the UK police when they raided his parents’ house after he tweeted, “Palestinian man convicted of raping 14-year-old Swedish girl – Blames the court translator.” He says that he is a target for destroying the mainstream media’s narrative. […]

An estimated 66 million people across America do not speak English in their homes. The huge number of immigrants has overwhelmed the assimilation process. […]

CBC : From Noble Nationalist Institution to Deceitful Scum-of-the-Earth Criminal posted Oct 24/17

In the 1920’s, the Canadian Radio Commission, the founders of today’s CBC, justifiably acted like a mother-hen who uses her wings to protect her vulnerable chicks from predators. The chicks were average Canadians. The chief predator was a much larger country, the United States, whose large radio stations were beaming their programming into Canada. The CBC’s founders believed that Canada’s survival depended on “countering” the cultural power of the U.S. The CBC was to do all it could to protect Canada’s unique identity and to adopt a virtual “Canada First” cultural policy.
At its nationalist peak between the 1960’s and 1990’s, CBC Radio actually did much to give a voice to cultural and economic nationalists such as Mel Hurtig, Mel Watkins, James Laxer, Kari Levitt and others. In the 1960’s and 1970’s, it supported concern over the Americanization of Canada’s universities and a “Canadians First” hiring policy. Later, one of its most hugely successful series of broadcasts was a nationalist panel featuring reps (Dalton Camp, Eric Kearns and Stephen Lewis) from Canada’s three parties. Nationalist Peter Gzowski chaired the panel. Furthermore, to symbolize its “MOTHER HEN” role, the CBC for many years referred to itself as “THE MOTHER CORP” .
Fast forward to 2017. Today, there is more than ever before a need for Canada to act in nationalist and protectionist ways. Since the imposition of a corrupt mass immigration policy in 1990 by Mulroney’s government, Canada has been flooded by about 8 million newcomers. Canada did not need most of them and a significant number of them are hostile to Canada. Like early large American radio stations, these 8 million are culturally overwhelming Canada’s majority population.
However, the CBC unreservedly “welcomes” these 8 million and thinks that Canada has to be protected from the possibility that politicians like Trump might rise here. In other words, the CBC is no longer a Mother Hen with a “Canada First” mandate. It has become a butcher of its own people. It sees itself as a xenophilic protector. It fawns and grovels at the feet of anyone wearing a turban or head scarf or bearing a brown, yellow, or black face. Its new mandate has become “Canada and Canadians Last”.
In a stroke of gross stupidity, it even has a plan to purge itself of “Whites”. In a complete reversal of the intentions of its founders, its new mission is to assist the immigration lobby (a putrid collection of immigration lawyers, immigration advocates, immigration consultants and ethnic groups) in socially re-engineering Canada so that those from other countries will overwhelm Canada’s majority population. Its virtual goal is to encourage Canadians to commit national suicide.
Every day, it saturates Canadians with Trudeau-like drivel about the wonders of diversity, multiculturalism and unnecessary immigration. Most of its employees are incompetents and ideologues.
The unaffordable housing issue is a prime example of CBC betrayal of its own population. According to very reliable academic research, relentless immigration is the cause of unaffordable housing prices. But the CBC is so ideologically committed to the notion that mass immigration is an unmitigated good that it suppresses any news which might indicate that CBC ideology is wrong. In effect, the CBC has dedicated itself to deceiving, not informing Canadians.
It has spread real estate industry propaganda that the unaffordable housing problem that many Canadians face has been caused by mere “lack of supply”. At best, this propaganda is a blatant lie. At worst, it is a criminal act which has displaced hundreds of thousands of Canadians and burdened hundreds of thousands of others with huge mortgage debt and rabbit-warren Asian living.
According to this real estate industry lie, all that Canada has to do is to build more housing. When that is done, housing will magically become affordable.
CBC deception continues daily. On the eve of Parliament announcing its immigration intake for 2018, CBC reporter Kathleen Harris has just provided yet another example of CBC deception. She has repeated three lies that the immigration lobby has invented to justify unnecessary immigration.
(1) That Immigration will fill labour gaps.
(2) That immigration will solve problems caused by Canada’s aging population.
(3) That immigration will provide an economic stimulus.
Harris’ article demonstrates once again that the CBC has betrayed its nationalist founders and their mission. It has joined forces with Trudeau who is as complete a fool and anti-nationalist as any politician that Canada has ever seen. With some exceptions, the CBC has degenerated into an anti-nationalist, parasitic, deceitful organization which deserves to be treated as the true scrum of the earth and held in utter contempt.

Explosives destroyed the front entrance of a police station in last week, jolting politicians into calling for military intervention in migrant no-go zones. […]

Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook is lobbying for amnesty for 11-million illegal aliens currently in the US and more guest-worker visas for cheap labor. […]

The national rate of African births in France is 39%. And, an astonishing 73% of children born in Paris are African. […]

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “​​​​​WILL JAGMEET AND THE NDP SOON BE DOG MEAT?.” 
Dan Murray 
Jagmeet Singh’s acceptance speech revealed three key things about about him.
(1) He is arrogant and loves to repeat the cliches of Canada’s immigration lobby. For example, Singh began his acceptance speech at the NDP LEADERSHIP CONVENTION by saying that everyone in the hall should acknowledge that the NDP Leadership meeting was being held on Aboriginal land. Most Canadians will agree that Canada has to settle Aboriginal land claims and reconcile other matters. However, most do not appreciate being lectured to by members of aggressive, power-hungry immigrant groups like the Sikhs who have arrived here relatively recently. In particular, Canada’s majority European-based population does not like to be told that they have no right to be in Canada. Furthermore, Canada’s majority population also does not like to be told that recently-arrived immigrants (a) have a status identical to that of the builders of modern Canada and (b) that Canada’s majority population also should have no privilege in hiring and in defending itself from an inflow of Sikhs and other immigrant groups whom it clearly never needed and who have engaged in extensive immigration fraud to get here. In fact, several years ago, one senior government official described the Canadian consulate in Punjab’s Chandigarh as the virtual fraud capital of all Canadian Consulates and Embassies. Obviously, Singh’s words are extremely insulting. If he really thinks this is a good way to launch his political campaign for 2019, he suffers from delusions. Here is some advice for him : Loosen your turban so that a normal blood flow gets to your brain.
(2) He likes to play the role of victim. In his acceptance speech, he said that while driving, he had been profiled by police and stopped. In his view, that happened because he wore a turban and had brown skin. He should know that Sikhs are disproportionately represented in drug dealing in places like Metro Vancouver and elsewhere. Almost every week, Canadians hear news reports of Sikhs shooting one another and endangering the lives of non-Sikhs who happen to be nearby. He conveniently neglected to say that the police have not just a right, but a clear obligation to stop people who fit the demographic profile of those who are clearly guilty of a large amount of criminal activity. Hard as it may be for Jagmeet Singh to grasp, most Canadians would like to see all of these Sikh drug dealers rounded up and deported.
(3) He seems to believe that the NDP and all Canadians think there is nothing wrong with Sikh electoral tactics. Singh proudly boasted about getting over 50% of the vote at the leadership convention. In imitation of the late Jack Layton, he gushed to his supporters with declarations of love. The big questions he did not answer were these : (A) Who exactly voted for him so that he could achieve over 50% on the first ballot ? Such a result has seldom occurred. Anyone who has observed Canadian politics knows that the Sikhs, probably more than any other group, are notorious for buying large numbers of PARTY memberships before conventions and nomination meetings and busing new members to fill meeting halls. It is quite likely they did that at the NDP LEADERSHIP CONVENTION. (B) How many of those voters were checked to see whether they were even in Canada legally? It is well known in Sikh circles that many Sikhs have entered Canada through fraud marriages, phoney TFW applications, fake visitor visa applications and many other kinds of fraud. Canadians who do not know much about immigration numbers may be shocked to hear that close to 400,000 Sikhs recently showed up for a Sikh parade in Metro Vancouver. (C) How did such a number get into Canada? Most NDP insiders and honest Sikhs probably feel very uncomfortable about this very crude Sikh activity, but they hesitate to state the truth : that a significant number of recently-arrived Sikhs probably voted for Singh and that the tactics that were used were questionable at the very least. The other NDP leadership candidates and a large number of non-Sikh veteran NDP members have probably already begun whispering among themselves about this. The key thing they will be saying is this : Singh managed to get large numbers of fellow Sikhs to vote for him, but the big problem now is whether Singh will be able to convince large numbers of Canadians to vote for him—especially since it seems quite probable that Singh’s supporters won by “playing most foully” for the prize he now holds.
Former NDP leader Mulcair made a colossal mistake in the 2015 election when he naively supported an arrogant Muslim woman who demanded to be allowed to wear her face-covering niqab for a citizenship ceremony. Has the NDP made a big mistake again? Mulcair’s blunder cost the NDP a large number of ridings in Quebec. Mulcair refused to accept that Quebec had become fed-up with aggressive, recently-arrived Muslims who demand that Canadians accept Muslim customs. In addition, a significant percentage of the rest of Canada’s population is fed up with recently-arrived immigrants demanding that Canada re-engineer itself so that it looks like the environmental cesspools or the politically-failed states that huge numbers of these recent immigrants come from. Singh should relish his victory because there is a good chance it will probably be short-lived. If the NDP does not have the courage to admit even among themselves that Singh’s victory is a serious mistake and that they have to put a leash on Singh’s arrogant mouth, the entire NDP will soon be dog meat. And Jagmeet Singh will also be dog meat.