Immigration Watch Canada

Immigration Watch Canada:

I am recommending a class action lawsuit against all levels of government who neglect, dishonor, disrespect and violate the rights of there own citizens while helping unwanted and unneeded immigrants or non-compatible refugees going back many years! Legal Actions against UN treachery that undermines the sovereignty of countries must take place! Our goodwill has been completely corrupted! Tami  check for new postings below

The silent majority voices are heard here as well as empirical research data backing up immigration problems in Canada we Canadians did not give permission to implement.

Words Spoken in 1907 about Immigrations that should be the stand today in Canada except that our languages are English and French for immigrants to learn! Loyalty to Canada and Canadians!

Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

‘In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.’ 
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

With Open Gates: The forced collective Suicide of European Nations –


Sikh Defence Minister Distorts History to Maintain Sikh Immigration Posted Aug 17/16

The plaque below was placed in Vancouver’s Stanley Park to commemorate the Komagata Maru incident.

In recently dedicating a plaque to the Komagata Maru incident of 1914, Harjit Saijan, Canada’s Minister of Defence, has demonstrated his government’s complete ignorance of Canadian history. He also shows that his overall motive is to pressure Canadians into accepting even larger numbers of Sikh immigrants to Canada.


According to the plaque, Canada’s immigration law  which included the “continuous journey regulation” was “racially restrictive”: If Saijan, his gullible “Post National State” boss Trudeau and the writer of the plaque’s text  had read even the most basic history of the time, they would have discovered that the “continuous journey regulation” was directed at thousands of Japanese low-wage labourers whom the CPR and a Japanese labour contractor schemed to bring to Canada. Japan, which claimed to have a tight rein on its citizens traveling abroad was so embarrassed by the arrival of thousands of its labourers in Canada in 1907, all in contravention of Japanese law, that it quickly accepted Canada’s “Continuous Passage Law”.


In other words, the Japanese believed the “continuous journey law” was a legitimate and just defence of Canadian workers whose economic well-being had long been sabotaged. Japan believed the law  had nothing to do with race. In addition, Mackenzie King, Canada’s Deputy Minister of Labour at that time, concluded in his investigation of the Vancouver Riot of 1907 that economic conflict between Asians and Canadians had been an ongoing issue and that Canadian workers of the time were justified in feeling overwhelmed by the arrival in 1907 of close to 12,000 Asian workers.


According to the plaque, the Komagata Maru’s “arrival provoked a strong anti-Asian backlash”. The writers of the text seem completely unaware that a backlash of any kind was justified, particularly the backlash to the Panama Maru incident which occurred in the Fall of 1913. That ship brought 56 East Indians to Canada. Most of that group had forged their documents in order to deceive immigration authorities. With the help of a judge who had repeatedly been drunk on the job, they succeeded in staying in Canada. In the process, they humiliated Canadian authorities and paved the way for other fraudsters to attempt the same action. At the same time, however, the insult made Canada determined not to be humiliated again. The writers of the text make no mention of this humiliation and of its contribution to government attitudes.


The plaque overlooks the fact that the Komagata Maru voyage was the next attempt to humiliate Canada.  Gurdit Singh, the organizer of the Komagata Maru voyage, had succeeded in a litigation case in Singapore and thought he could succeed in a Canadian court with a challenge to the “Continuous Passage” law.  Singh’s action was spurred by a considerable amount of arrogance. He boasted to British authorities in Hong Kong that if he succeeded in his challenge, he would bring 25,000 other East Indians to Canada. British authorities undoubtedly told Canada about this boast. And Canada became even more resolved not to allow the Komagata Maru passengers to land and thus add to a long list of Chinese and Japanese low-wage labour conflict with Canadian workers.


The plaque also says nothing about the international political environment of the time. Many immigrants from India to British Columbia in 1914 were active supporters of  Indian independence from Britain. The British government regarded this network which extended into the U.S. as a threat. Undoubtedly, it was interested in getting Canada to discourage independence activities. One way had to be to limit the number of East Indians in Canada. Another was to spy on Sikh political activities. The Sikhs responded by assassinating one of those spies in Vancouver.


Finally, the plaque will cause many decent Sikhs to cringe.  Significantly, the wording on the plaque is written not just in Canada’s official languages of French and English but also in Punjabi. The intent seems to be to raise Punjabi to the position of an official language of Canada—a goal which a number of gauche Sikhs have advocated .


To Saijan and other crude Sikhs, that incident in which 376 Punjabis  were refused entry to Canada was a black mark in Canada’s history. Let us remind them that if they are going to talk about black marks in history, they should recall a much more serious event : the Sikh bombing of an Air India plane that resulted in the deaths of 325 Canadians in 1985. That was the largest mass murder in Canadian history. Thanks to a Sikh culture of intimidation, the main Sikh conspirators have never faced justice. And that is just one of a large number of other serious blunders the Sikhs have committed. . .


All of this leads to a crucial point : Saijan should properly be named Canada’s Sikh ‘Invasion Minister”, not Canada’s Defence Minister. Why? Because he clearly sees his role not as a Defender of Canada, but as someone who uses so-called “historic events” to guilt Canada into maintaining a mass immigration invasion from the Punjab and into re-creating a failed Sikh society in Canada.


On behalf of Canadians, we demand an apology from “Post National State” Trudeau who acted in complete ignorance when he apologized to the Sikhs in Parliament on May 18 of 2016 for the Komagata Maru incident and when he consented to the Komagata Maru plaque being placed in Vancouver. The Sikh votes he received in 2015 are the modern version of  the Biblical 30 pieces of silver. Trudeau, his government, and many politicians see nothing wrong with selling the soul of Canada to the Punjab or any other place.


On behalf of Canadians, we also demand an apology from “Sikh Invasion” Saijan (and crude Sikhs) and the removal of this historically-inaccurate plaque from Vancouver’s Stanley Park.



Dan Murray


Relentless High Immigration Has Caused Unaffordable Housing—Deal With It !!  Posted Aug 4/16


The results of an Angus Reid poll released last week show enormous public support for a tax on foreign buyers of houses. However, the poll’s most important effect should be that the Angus Reid polling group take the logical next step.


It should conduct a new evidence-based poll which will spur the sluggards at all three levels of government into action. For several years, governments have done virtually nothing to stop the rise in house prices. The public obviously feels that governments at all three levels have been grossly negligent.


The new poll should ask respondents the following questions : (1) Since academic research has concluded that relentless high immigration is the major cause of Unaffordable Housing,  do you agree that Canada should reduce its immigration intake?  (2) What should the reduction be?


As for the recent poll, 90% of residents support the 15% tax on Foreign buyers. Eighty-seven percent of residents support a tax on houses that have supposedly been bought to live in, but appear to have been bought solely as speculative investments. Many houses remain vacant.


Also in the recent poll,  40% of respondents felt that neither the tax on Foreign buyers nor the tax on Vacant houses will improve Housing Affordability or access to more rental housing.


The poll did not reveal why 40% of respondents feel this way. In spite of the sub-standard and often propaganda-style media reporting on immigration’s effect on House Prices, a definite number of Metro residents have heard of the academic research. And it is probable that a definite number agree that relentless high immigration is the cause of Metro Vancouver’s astronomic house prices. These people also probably think that unless the major cause of the Unaffordable Housing problem is dealt with, nothing of lasting significance will happen to end Unaffordable Housing.


One positive result of the 15% tax may be that the tax will remove a number of people who currently  establish “New Benchmark  Prices”. But in order for these people to be removed, the provincial government has to plug loopholes which may sabotage any positive contribution the 15%  tax may make. The people who set “New Benchmark Prices” are probably a small number of buyers, but every time they outbid most other buyers, they establish precedent-setting  new higher prices and make matters worse. Taking them out of the game will make some difference.


Ultimately, the 15% tax is a small measure.


In the end, unnecessary, relentless high immigration has to cease or house prices will continue to rise and the phenomenon of Unaffordable Housing will worsen.



A petition has just been launched in effort to stop the practice of birthright citizenship, wherein pregnant mothers come to Canada expressly for the purpose of having their babies in Canada. This costly practice is dishonest, and possibly illegal.

Having received approval for the petition from the federal government’s Commissioner of Petitions, we are now ready to receive ‘signatures’ for the petition through the government’s new E-Petition process. Please read through the short petition, and complete all required fields in the petition, and then click the Sign button.

***** Remember to Validate Your E-Signature by clicking the link in the confirmation email sent to your email address (please make sure the email does not go in your Spam or Junk folder, which is possible even though it is from the Canadian government) *****


Are these laws below civilized and in compliance with spiritual law mothers earths code of conduct common law or Canada’s values and human rights!?

Sharia Law – List of Key Rules

Sharia law is the law of Islam. The Sharia (also spelled Shariah or Shari’a) law is cast from the actions and words of Muhammad, which are called “Sunnah,” and the Quran, which he dictated. Sharia law itself cannot be altered but the interpretation of Sharia law, called “figh,” by imams is given some latitude (see Hitler and Islam).
Shariah lawAs a legal system, Sharia law is exceptionally broad. While other legal codes regulate public behavior, Sharia law regulates public behavior, private behavior and even private beliefs. Of all legal systems in the world today, Sharia law is the most intrusive and restrictive, especially against women. According to Sharia law:

• Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah, the god of Islam is punishable by death.
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad‘s words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a woman needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• A woman’s testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man’s.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah – i.e., be “Halal“.
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
• The list goes on (see Sharia law in America, UK, Europe and Saudi Arabia).

Which countries use Sharia law?
Muslims’ aspired Sharia state is the birthplace of Muhammad that has no legal code other than the Sharia and enforces it without mercy: Saudi Arabia. But as detailed below, Sharia law is also used in full or in part, nationally or regionally in:

Afghanistan (89%)** France* Lebanon Spain*
Algeria Gambia Malaysia (86%)** Sudan
Austria* Germany* Maldives Sri Lanka
Bahrain Ghana Mauritania Syria
Bangladesh (82%)** India Morocco (83%)** Tanzania
Brunei Indonesia (72%)** The Netherlands* Thailand (77%)**
Canada* Iran Nigeria Uganda
Comoros Iraq (91%)** Oman United Arab Emirates
Djibouti (82%)** Jordan (71%)** Pakistan (84%)** United States (USA)*
Egypt (74%)** Kenya Qatar United Kingdom (UK)*
Eritrea Kuwait Saudi Arabia W. Bank & Gaza (89%)**
Ethiopia Libya Somalia Yemen

* In the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, and other European countries that resist Sharia law, it has proven adept at infiltrating elements of the society that are left vulnerable (see Sharia law in America and Islamization of America).



Attention Immigration Reformer:


For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Housing Unaffordability Is Caused By Immigration Demand, Not A Shortage Of Housing Supply.”




Dan Murray




Housing Unaffordability Is Caused By Immigration Demand, Not A Shortage Of Housing Supply


(Housing Unaffordability Is A Matter Of Demand, Not Of Supply)


The overwhelming cause of astronomic house prices in Metro Vancouver is relentless and unnecessary immigration-driven demand for housing.  Every year since Canada’s mass immigration policy started in 1991, an average of 40,000 to 50,000 immigrants have arrived in Metro Vancouver / Fraser Valley. The voracious demand came first. It used up existing supply and then it created a shortage of supply. Three  British Columbia academics have presented extensive supporting evidence of this.


The key points are (1) that the immigration demand was unnecessary 25 years ago and it remains so today, (2) that correcting Housing Unaffordability damage has to involve cutting demand and (3) that cutting demand means reducing immigration dramatically.


Yet a recent B.C. provincial government report on Unaffordable Housing ignored the role of unnecessary immigration. And a preliminary federal government look at the issue does the same.


Instead, both the provincial and federal governments parrot the statements made by groups who are motivated by their own interest and greed. These groups have told our governments and Metro residents that a shortage of housing supply has caused Metro Vancouver’s unaffordable housing. These groups also like to tell us that  millions of people would like to move here and that Canadians have to take these people by densifying their communities and creating more supply.


Our CBC and most of the private media have helped these groups by playing the role of the propaganda arm of these groups.


At no time do these groups or their propaganda arm recognize that in almost all immigration cases except for a  very limited number of genuine refugees, the purpose of Canadian immigration has not been to help immigrants. It has been to protect the needs of Canada and Canadians. Affordable housing is one of the most important of the basic needs of Canadians. This should be obvious to anyone, but governments at all three levels have broadcast immigration lobby nonsense that mass immigration is wonderful for Canada. In doing so, governments at all three levels have effectively said “To Hell with Canadians’ need for  Affordable Housing”.


It is time for Canadians to say “To Hell With Those Governments”.


Those who observe what is happening from far away might describe what governments and other groups have done in Metro Vancouver and elsewhere as the actions of Organized Crime. Government and other group actions have definitely been criminal but we think such a phrase under-states the gravity of the behaviour and does not get to the sinister heart of what is happening. The phrase “Organized Slime” is much more accurate. “Organized Slime” is a collection of deceivers who pretend to be benevolent .They try to tell us that Canada’s  current immigration intake is no different from its past intake and that Canada’s current intake is making Canada a better and nobler country. Their aim is to convince Canada’s majority population to perform the ultimate national act : to commit national suicide and to do so while chanting “Diversity is our strength”.


Who are they?  Here is a representative sample of the slithering hypocrites and deceivers : ethnic groups who want to vastly increase their numbers, a  groveling political class that will do anything to get ethnic votes, greedy developers, arrogant real estate agents, smoke-screeners at UBC’s business school and other academics, a quisling CBC and a horde of the mentally-challenged in the private media.


Our PM likes to tell Canadians that government policies have to be evidence-based. But federal immigration intake continues to be based not on evidence, but on pressure from Organized Slime.


Our PM does not seem to understand that calling for evidence-based decision making, on the one hand,  and, on the other hand,  following the orders of Organized Slime to bring in unnecessary people does not make sense.


In fact, our PM has declared that Canada is a “post-national state”. This is equal to saying that the needs of  Canada’s majority population are to be subordinated to the demands of non-Canadians or of aggressive new arrivals.


To Canadians who can cut through the mass deceit, our PM and his “Post-National State” supporters have declared war against Canada’s majority population. And any elected official or supporter who has remained silent about federal policies that  tell us we are a “post-national state” has done the same.


“Post-National State” policies have already resulted in the spilling of Canadian blood.  Here are examples of such policies : virtual organized displacement of Canada’s majority population in many cities, preferential hiring,  so-called “anti-racism” campaigns (really campaigns against Canadians of European origin), maginalization of Canada’s own unemployed, the promotion of mindless diversity, endless attacks on Canada’s historical immigration efforts to defend itself,  subsidizing Canada’s treasonous immigration lobby and a host of other betrayals.


Do those people who have spilled blood really think that there will be no consequences to their actions?

Letter Written to our broadcast regulator : or 1-888-256-8646. ASC deals directly with the advertiser, whereas the CBSC deals with the individual broadcaster.

Hi CBSC staff,

I am a third generation Canadian patriot. I believe to keep our country strong it is incumbent upon our government and administrative organizations and businesses to support our own citizens and businesses first in a legal fair manner. To encourage the unity empowerment of our country this means supporting the use and respect of our language values laws and  citizens to promote unity cohesive successful goals serving the highest good for all. From this position of empowerment than stand in integrity of example to help others from outside our country.

I have noticed the erosion of respect for our people, language and values on TV and in government policies.

Please know that forcing Canadians to watch a movie on CBC on Saturday nights in Danish rather then English is an affront to our rights and sovereignty called Follow the money

Second there are commercials that say white Canadians are idiots that cannot even decide what to eat for dinner but an Asian at M&M foods can tell them what to do

Plus a Chevy commercial has a east Indian man telling a white man that he does not know how to dress with a four pleated pants and should not where them in Canada which is our right ! Needles to say I will not ever shop at these companies As well as Oreo cookies advertising to Asians with Chinese language rather then English promotes further reluctance to learn or respect our language and encourage underground economy that only hire Asians and do not pay taxes as well.

Sadly Tami Dickson

CALL TO ACTION: Will You Answer? Posted July17/16

Your civilization was attacked again, and this time, your brothers and sisters of France fell victim for the second time in less than a year.

Here’s what the response to it will likely be:

  1. Tearful sad cartoons and photos will be published.
  2. Facebook flag filters will start appearing on peoples social media profiles.
  3. Politicians, newscasters, citizens etc. will be seen crying on TV.
  4. Major landmark buildings will be lit in blue, white and red, followed by candle light vigils.
  5. The media will excessively push the narrative of how Muslims are the real victims and how their faith has been hijacked by misunderstandings of true Islam.
  6. The media and politicians will preach how tolerant we are as a society, and we’ll wait for the next jihadist attack.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Want to do something about this?

Join Immigration Watch Canada’s community of determined like-minded individuals from across the nation. The first step in addressing this is through free-speech and being apart of a community where people are not afraid to talk about these issues, but instead, free to discuss them openly and critically.

Call us at 1-778-803-5522, email us at, or contact us through our social media links below. 

Eurocanadians: Pioneers, Settlers, or Immigrants? Posted July 15/16

by Dr. Ricardo Duchesne

 White Settlers clearing the land to prepare for planting

Leftist Newspeak


Leftists have been winning the war of words and setting the terms of political discourse for decades. Their discursive power was quite evident three years ago in the decision of the Associated Press to drop the term “illegal immigrant” from its style guide as an “offensive” term that did not accurately describe migrants who enter the United States without documentation. “Islamophobia” is another term used regularly to close down the claim that Islam is an inflexible faith that cannot adapt to Western values. 

Vladimir I. Lenin (1870-1924) instructed his fellow Bolsheviks: “We can and must write in language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.” Today, the most frequently used epithets to smear opponents are “racist”, “sexist”, and “homophobic”. The Left has been so successful in projecting insidious motives on anyone disagreeing with their idiotic views that conservatives now devote considerable time playing up their “good intentions” or singing the same tune by targeting “two-faced liberals” caught making sexist or racist remarks.

Lenin also commanded his comrades: “The communists must be prepared to…resort to all sorts of cunning schemes and stratagems…to evade and conceal the truth.” Current leftists are consummate deceivers, Orwellian double-speakers and fabricators of bellyfeel words that carry a blind yet enthusiastic acceptance of an idea. They are quite apt at distorting the older meanings of words, even to the point of turning them upside down. “Discoverer” and “explorer of Canada” were once terms used in admiration; now they are used in quotation marks as untrue and laughable terms.


I will write about the replacement of the words “pioneer” and “settler” with the word “immigrant”.


Dictionary Definition


The replacement of the words “pioneers” and “settlers” to describe the founders of Canada with the word “immigrant” happened gradually without barely anyone noticing it. In the series of articles written on Canadian immigration these past weeks I have used the term “immigrants” in reference to the French, British, European men and women who arrived in Canada from the 1600s to 1914/21. I did so to show that even on its own terms the established interpretation that Canada is “a nation of diverse immigrants” is false, since most Canadians were either native born with strong ancestries in Canada or and internal migrants from within the British world of North America and the British Isles.


But it is time to question the way the word “immigrant” has been deceptively extended to include what were in truth pioneers and settlers. Almost all the men and women who came to Canada from the British Isles and elsewhere in Europe, and, if you like, from British America, before 1914, were pioneers, not immigrants.


Immigrants started to arrive in Canada mostly after WWII. I am saying this in accordance with all the dictionary definitions I have examined. The New Oxford English Dictionary is very clear. Immigrant is “a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country”. Settler, however, is “a person who settles in an area, typically with no or few previous inhabitants”. Pioneer describes “a person who is among the first inhabitants to explore or settle a new country or area”. “Pioneering” means “to be the first to use or apply a new method, area of knowledge, or activity, open up a terrain as a pioneer”. 

Huntington: Settlers before Immigrants

The one academic I know who has addressed this distinction is Samuel Huntington in his book, Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity (2004). He writes:

Settlers and immigrants differ fundamentally. Settlers leave an existing society, usually in a group in order to create a new community…Immigrants, in contrast, do not create a new society. They move from one society to a different society (p. 39).

What Huntington says about American settlers applies to the Canadians who came to Canada more or less before 1914/21. Huntington says that America’s “core culture” was created by the settlers who came in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This core culture consisted of the:

Christian religion, Protestant values and moralism, a work ethic, the English language, the British traditions of law, justice, and the limits of government power, and a legacy of European art, literature, philosophy and music (p. 40).

While the early settlers were responsible for this core culture, future settlers were responsible for the extension of this core culture into the “American frontier” or the “Great West”. These men and women who opened the West were not immigrants. Immigrants only began to arrive in large numbers after the 1820s into the already created towns and cities.


In Canada, it can be said that the “core culture” was created by the time of Confederation in 1867, with French and English as the major languages, Catholic and Protestant values, French civil law and British parliamentary institutions and law. The “non-French and non-British” men and women who arrived in the 1800s and early 1900s were also settlers, insomuch as many of them settled in the new prairie provinces and British Columbia, or in new areas in Upper Canada and the Maritimes.


This distinction between settlers/pioneers and immigrants, which was recognized (at least implicitly) by past historians, has been explicitly obfuscated by current historians. The two standard history textbooks I have referenced often in my series on Canadian immigration, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (2000), and A History of the Canadian Peoples (2011), avoid the use of the words “settler” and “pioneer”, but always use the words “immigrants” or “diverse immigrants”. Consider this: “immigration” enjoys the longest entry in the index of J.M. Bumsted’s A History of the Canadian Peoples, after the words “Canada” and “Aboriginal Peoples”.


It is not that historians did not use the word “immigrants” or “immigration” in the past. George Bryce’s book, A Short History of Canada, published in 1914, a solid book of 600 pages, uses immigrants often, but he also regularly uses “settlers” and “colonizers” (without the negative connotation this term currently carries). The same is true of Donald Creighton’s Dominion of the North: A History of Canada, first published in 1944, revised in 1957, which I greatly enjoyed reading in a tiny room at summer residence, University of Toronto, this past May. Both these books portray Canada as a nation fundamentally shaped by the French in Quebec and the English, not as a “nation of immigrants”. J.M.S. Careless’s book, Canada: A Story of Challenge (1959), subtitles the first period of large scale immigration to Canada as “Immigration, Development and the Pioneer Age, 1815-1850”. 

Canada’s Pioneers

If I may disagree a bit with Huntington, it is more accurate to identify the settlers who created the core culture as “pioneers”, in contrast to those who extended this culture into new areas in the West, who should be identified as “settlers” proper. The word pioneer carries two key meanings; one is very close to the meaning of settler, that is, a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region. But another meaning is uniquely about pioneering in the sense of being the earliest in any field of inquiry, enterprise, or cultural development. The French and the English were the earliest settlers and originators of Canada’s core culture and therefore the true pioneers, while the Europeans, including English, who settled the West from about 1867 to 1914/21, were setters both in the sense of extending farming to the prairies, as well as extending Canada’s political culture to this barely settled area of Canada.


The earliest settlers, say, up until Confederation, were the ones who pioneered Canada’s institutions, churches, legal system, curriculum, and basic infrastructure. Clearly, they brought with them the customs, values, and know-how of Europe, and in this sense they were not originators of what we have come to identify as British representative government, Protestant values, French civil law and Catholic doctrine. But there is no question that they adapted these values and institutions to Canadian conditions. This is most evident in the rural and urban landscapes that pioneers created in Canada. R. Cole Harris and John Warkentin explain well what was uniquely new about Canadian pioneers (and settlers) notwithstanding their European ancestries. Writing about the period from 1800 until about the 1860s, they note:

In only three generations the whole peninsula of Southern Ontario was occupied by people of European [British] descent. During this time the forest was cut; the geometry of roads, fence lines and fields was stamped across the land; and the prosperity achieved by many was reflected in ample brick farmhouses and in bustling towns. Everywhere the human landscape was new. In the most recent frontier regions settlers still lived in tiny cabins on patches of cleared land; in the older areas there were still some stumpy fields and many people alive who had known the first pioneers. Whereas the human landscape of Western Europe often reflected centuries of human toil, this landscape reflected the recent arrival, the energy, and the apparent wastefulness of its creators. That Europeans had created the landscape there could be no doubt — the architectural forms, for example, were entirely of European origin. But although components of it existed in the British Isles, the human landscape of Southern Ontario could not be found anywhere in Europe (Canada Before Confederation: A Study in Historical Geography, 1974, p. 164).

Edwin Guillet’s Pioneer Days in Upper Canada (first published in 1933, with new editions in 1963, 1966, 1968, 1970, 1973, and 1975, but now discarded), is quite good in bringing to light how the first settlers pioneered the very meaning of “Canadian living”, starting with the immediacy of clearing up heavily forested lands, lumbering against huge oaks, umbrageous elms and stately pines, to open up lands for settlement. Indeed, the clearing of land involved a new co-operative principle of work known as “bees” in which neighbours would gather together to help each other; as no one family could do the work alone in many instances. These bees were also organized for house building, barn raising, and making quilts. The log and sod houses pioneered by these settlers were adapted to local materials in order to withstand long harsh winters. 

White Pioneer school, teacher and students, Muskoka Lakes, Ontario, 1887

The first settlers pioneered many types of home-made foods using local products, including buckwheat cakes, rich batter puddings, berry pies, molasses, gelatin, ciders. The diet of the settlers — wild asparagus and berries, chestnuts, ducks, partridges, cucumbers, celery and turnips, roasted pig, boiled mutton, rice pudding, fishes of several kinds — was far superior to the current overrated food of dirty Chinese restaurants with their artificial sticky sauces and rootless globalist menus. They also pioneered city halls, fire-fighter’s organisations, theatres, Temperance Societies, sports and inter club games (curling, bandyball, lacrosse, softball, hockey, horse racing), public libraries, debating societies, mechanics’ institutes, agricultural associations, literary societies, private schools and colleges, circuses, brass bands.




The goal of the globalist left and corporate right is to destroy the national identities and heritages of European peoples. They want to equate the Canadians who pioneered and settled Canada with the immigrants who came to a ready-made nation after 1921/1945. The fact is that, as we will see in a future article, the immigrants who came between 1921/45 and 1971 were mostly Europeans who came to be part of an already created Canada, worked hard and assimilated without any ulterior motives. The immigrants who have been coming since multiculturalism was announced in 1971 are very different from these European immigrants, and the reason for this is not only that they are from Third World cultures; it is that they are arriving into a Canada that is under the tutelage of an ideology that celebrates their non-European traditions and encourages them to affirm their group rights in ways that will eventually undermine the Canada created by the White pioneers, settlers and hardworking immigrants who came before.


So Now THEY Want a Conversation About Immigration

by Tim Murray

So the Government of Canada is inviting Canadians to “join the conversation on immigration”. Conversation? I think they meant “monologue”. If it was a conversation, then there would have to be an exchange of opinions and ideas. That’s a risk they can’t take. On the other hand, if they got negative feedback to their growth agenda, they could do what the CBC did to the comment section of its online articles last December. It could simply can it,“until better moderating tools” could be developed (we are still waiting for those tools). 

Note the premise of this “conversation”. According to their blurb, “between July 5 and August 5, 2016 we want to hear your views on the future of immigration in Canada. How can we continue to grow our country using the immigration system?” I think that that is what is called a loaded question. 

But it’s the question that all of our political parties ask, from Right to Left. Not that you can tell them apart. The incumbent Liberals, the opposition Conservatives, the social democratic NDP and the Greens all want growth. Don’t worry, as Mr. Trudeau said, we can have growth and a “healthy” environment at the same time. Again, all political parties are on board with that. 

Green Party leader Elizabeth, though, has made noises about putting an end to “economic” growth. But at the same time has argued for an even higher immigration quota that we have had (350,000 per year rather than 300,000 per year). Apparently having the highest or second highest per capita immigration intake in the world isn’t good enough for our “Green” Party leader. Nor is having the highest population growth rate in the G7 group for more than a decade either. And this doesn’t even factor in all of the refugees that Ms. May would like to wave in. Apparently, for Ms. Merkel-May, the sky is the limit. 

One might ask Ms. May how she can promote runaway population growth while stopping economic growth at the same time. Oh, I know, make all of us live more and more frugally and be content with a smaller and smaller and smaller slice of the pie. And we can further densify our cities too so that eventually we will all be living in $2 million shoe boxes. Move over urbanites and squeeze tighter, for there are 80 million new global citizens joining the parade each and every year, and they all have a divine right to migrate to Canada. As Hillary Clinton would say, “rather than build fences, let’s extend the table.” The possibility that soon Canada may not have enough food or resources in the ‘kitchen’ to serve all the new diners at this extended table obviously never occurred to these open borders progressives. 

If the government really wants to involve ordinary Canadians in the formation of immigration policy, let it try this: Hold a Swiss-style or Brexit-style referendum on the subject. Only the question wouldn’t be how we can use the immigration system to “grow” our country but whether we want to grow it at all. Last time I looked, I noticed that after we “used” our immigration system to add 7 million more people to our population, nature didn’t add more water, energy, land or resources to keep pace with that growth. I think a lot of other people noticed the same thing too. Do you think they are happy with this kind of immigration “system”? Well there is one way to find out: put it to a vote. 

If you thought that this phony ‘conversation’ about immigration was all the participatory democracy that the new regime had in store for us, think again. The Trudeau government announced that now ordinary citizens will be permitted to apply for a Senate seat. 

For those unfamiliar with Canada’s brand of democracy, the Canadian Senate is an unelected body packed with party hacks essentially appointed by the Prime Minister. So rather than go for an elected Senate — or simply abolish it — the government is trying to put a better face on it by broadening the pool of potential appointees

Well, if that is the best that the government can offer, I think I should take them up on it. I think I shall make an application on behalf of my neighbour’s horse, which if accepted, would constitute the first time that a whole horse made it to the Senate.


Dissecting Toronto’s New “Anti-Racism” Posters


The City of Toronto has released a new poster which is being featured on bus stops around the city.

The poster is problematic for a number of reasons:

  1.       The most obvious problem is the depiction of white people as “racist”. This message incites hatred towards European Canadians and reinforces a damaging stereotype.

  2.       By disseminating this trope of the “racist white person” Toronto is contributing to the message that “racism” is “something that white people do” and thereby pairing “racism” with “white people” in the minds of the public. This is damaging to European people everywhere because it enables others to disguise attacks on white people as attacks on “racism” and it splashes hatred for “racism” onto white people in general.

  3.        On a deeper level, the third problem is that the posters reinforce the construct of “racism” itself. The term “racism” is a rhetorical weapon which is used, primarily, to oppress and stigmatize political assertiveness on the part of white people and to moralize us into a state of political impotency. For example, in this poster the white person is depicted saying “go back to where you came from” and this is meant to be an example of “racism”. Although presented in a deliberately simplified fashion, his words convey an entirely legitimate political position. This country is a democracy, and simply by being citizens here, people are granted a share of political power over the spaces in which we Europeans live. It is a rational political practice for European Canadians to endeavour to maintain a greater portion of power over the environments where we live by making up a greater percentage of the voting demographic. It is our responsibility to ensure our own well-being as well as that of our progeny and political power is the only thing that enables us to do that. 

  4.        Another point of interest is how the messages of this poster conflict with our state policy of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is a policy which says that we should maintain our ethnic and cultural identities and continue to view ourselves, and others, not simply as uniform “Canadians”, but as members of groups with unique ethnic, cultural and historical backgrounds. In this poster, the European tells the African Muslim to ‘go back where you came from” and she responds with “Where? North York?” as if she’s oblivious to what people actually mean when they use that expression. The whole project of multiculturalism is to tell people to not forget where we came from, and yet this poster seems to imply that it’s ridiculous and ignorant to suggest that our histories and identities extend beyond our relatively recent time in Canada. Not only is it entirely truthful and accurate to suggest that we are more than just “Canadians”, but that is the very perspective that our government has been encouraging for the past 30 years!

  5.       It’s interesting that, in explaining the project, campaign spokespersons say that the effort is aimed at helping “racialized communities”. The term “racialized” is Marxist rhetoric which refers to anyone who isn’t white. On top of the fact that this campaign incites hatred towards European Canadians by portraying us as “racist”, if it is also the case that it explicitly excludes certain groups from its scope, then it is guided by a special-interest agenda and shouldn’t be receiving public funding.

  6.       According to their press release, the goal of the campaign is to “create a Toronto that says ‘No’ to all forms of discrimination and racism”, and yet, in light of their anti-white themes and Marxist rhetoric, one can’t help but wonder, how would the team behind this campaign define “racism”? If it were asked of them, “isn’t this campaign ‘racist’ towards white people?”, how would they respond? If, like the Marxists in our universities, they hold that it’s not “racism” if it’s against white people and that “only white people can be racist” then we’re sure the white people who paid the taxes that helped fund this effort would be very interested to hear that.

  7.       Toronto brands itself as “the most multicultural city in the world” and its identity is rooted in the idea that diversity and multiculturalism are inherently good. The official city motto is “Diversity Our Strength”. And so isn’t it ironic to now see Toronto, the flag-ship city of Canadian multiculturalism, investing its resources in combating inter-ethnic conflict. So which is it, Toronto? Is “diversity our strength” or is it a source of tension, violence and conflict?

  8.       The final problem is the timing of the posters. Toronto says that the posters are, in part, a response to “a number of crimes committed against Muslims earlier this year”. As evidence of said crimes, CityNews links to story of a Muslim woman who was pushed and called a “terrorist”—in November 2015—by a black male! But, just three days before the campaign’s launch, a Muslim committed the largest mass shooting in the history of the United States. On the heels of this landmark massacre, why are white people the ones being condescendingly thought-policed? If Toronto is concerned about inter-ethnic conflict, then aren’t Islamic bullets a bigger problem than white words? Isn’t getting murdered a more serious concern than being told to “go back where you came from”? Muslims kill us and then Toronto tells us that we’re the problem? This poster is an insult.

  As the forces of globalization continue to create the demographic pressures which are turning European peoples into minorities in the spaces where we have lived for generations, expressions of hostility and hatred towards us will become of greater and greater significance. In this context of anti-white hostility and demographic weakness on the part of Europeans, it is important that we have institutions to study and identify our interests and advocate on our behalf. This is why Students for Western Civilisation exists, and this is why we need a #whitestudentsunion.


Dan Murray


In China, Dogs Are Found In Every Wok of Life


By Tim Murray


News item: Thousands of dogs are slaughtered at annual meat festival, “…where every year animals are kept dozens to a cage before being electrocuted, burned and skinned while alive and conscious.”


This delightful practice, if imported to Canada, would undoubtedly make our society more “vibrant”. Canada was such a boring place when the dominant British population founded the SPCA on the model of the RSPCA in their home country. Now that we are blessed with a large and growing Chinese population, we can hopefully expect that they too will copy many of the quaint traditions that exist in their home country. Surely it would be worthy of a grant.


Empathy and compassion for animals is a “white” thing you know. It’s another relic of Western ‘privilege’ that must be uprooted and cast aside to make way for other cultural perspectives, which of course are as legitimate as ours. (Canadian axiom: All cultures are created equal).


Perhaps, if the SPCA is to survive the purge, Canadians of European origin can be removed from its board and replaced by Afghani tribesmen, Somali villagers, and Islamists from Pakistan, Syria and Saudi Arabia, and other “New Canadians” with a solid reputation in caring for animals.  After all, it is imperative that any nation which is proud to call itself “multicultural” be “inclusive”, and that every government agency or governing body reflect in its composition the community that it serves. According to the Anti-Racist Research Council, Afghanis and Somalis continue to be under-represented in the SPCA, a fact that can only be a result of systemic racism and an aversion to dog-fighting.


 The Chinese too seemed to have been neglected in SPCA recruiting efforts, which indicates that Canada, specifically British Columbia, continues to struggle with its legacy of anti-Asian racism. Despite years of intensive indoctrination in the nation’s classrooms, many Canadians appear to be unaware that not too long ago, Chinese Shi-Tzus and Pugs, as well as Indian Pariahs and Spitz, were barred from entry into this country.  In 1916, in fact, a ship of rescue dogs from India was even turned away by Vancouver Port Authorities, and it was not until recently that both Parliament and the Provincial Legislature acknowledged this shameful episode in our history and made a formal apology. Compensation is also apparently in the offing.


Reflecting upon this development, an unnamed Chinese-Canadian History Professor at the University of British Columbia gleefully predicted that English Setters, Scots Terriers and Irish Wolf-Hounds are on their way out, “Soon be relegated to the dustbin of this province’s history.”


I think we would do well to look to the Chinese for direction in these matters. . Since they have been in the civilization business for Millennia, it must be assumed that their values, beliefs and traditions are the result of the accumulated wisdom of 8,000 years. To think that our ways are a match for theirs, or that somehow our relatively kind attitude toward dogs and cats evidence a higher level of consciousness and ethics, is the height of ethnocentric arrogance. What you perceive to be wanton cruelty is, from an Asian or Afghani perspective, just the value-judgment of a white hegemonist afflicted by ‘colorism’. So remove your lens and check your privilege!


Seriously, the Chinese know a lot more about dogs than we do. The Chinese love dogs—so much so that in China dogs are found in every wok of life.


Canadian Maritimes: Still So White, Immigration 1815-1867/Today Posted June 27/16

by Ricardo Duchesne

“The Maritimes,” sometimes called “the Atlantic provinces,” include the four smallest provinces of Canada: Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland. Barely anyone outside Canada knows a thing about these provinces. Perhaps they should start paying attention, for, as the rest of the European world turns brown, these lands may well stand out as the Whitest in the world. The elites have targeted them for mass immigration, but thus far relatively few non-Whites have arrived.


According to the Canada 2006 census, Prince Edward Island (PEI) is 97.4 percent White. The total non-Aboriginal visible minority population is 1.4 percent. The Aboriginal population is 1.3 percent. The largest ethnic groups, according to a 2011 National Survey, are of “British Isles origins” (Scottish, English, and Irish), followed by French and then European origins.


The same 2006 census informs us that Nova Scotia is 93.2 percent White. This racial situation has remained almost the same according to a 2011 census: the population grew by only 0.9 percent, and 91.8% of the population reported English only as mother tongue, 3.4% reported French only, and 4.1% only reported a non-official language.


New Brunswick is 95.7 White. The total Aboriginal population is 2.5 percent, and the total visible minority is 1.9 percent. The situation in this province, where I have lived for the past 21 years, has barely changed in racial composition since these numbers were collected in the 2006 census. If we go by mother tongue, the 2011 Canadian census showed a population in which the most commonly reported mother tongues were English (65.58%) and French (31.98%).


Newfoundland (and Labrador) is 94.2 White. The total Aboriginal population is 4.7 percent, and the visible minority population is 1.1 percent. This situation has barely changed since the 2006 census.


So, given these White facts in the Maritimes, how is it possible for current historians of Canada to claim that this region was created by ethnically heterogeneous immigrants since the early 1600s through the next centuries until the present? Answer: By manipulating words, employing deceptive images, and misusing the evidence.


Nova Scotia


We saw in an earlier article  that the Acadians were the original founders of Nova Scotia, a people born in the soil of Nova Scotia through their love of big families. We saw that before their expulsion in the mid 1750s they constituted the majority of the population.


In 1767, when a detailed census was taken, after the arrival of some 1500 Germans in 1749-50, some 2500 British Americans in 1749, and about 7000 to 8000 New England “Planters” between 1758 and 1762, the ethnic composition of the part that became Nova Scotia proper in 1784 (leaving aside the relatively few inhabitants of the part that became New Brunswick, though including the population of Cape Breton, which for some years was identified as separate from Nova Scotia),  was English (756), Irish (2000), Scottish (149), American (5968), German (1883), and Acadian (921).


J.M. Bumsted uses these numbers as a demonstration that Nova Scotia was racially diverse early on in its history, ignoring the fact that Acadians were the ones who founded the province and that all these immigrants were White (A History of the Canadian Peoples, p. 86).


Thousands of Loyalists come to Nova Scotia in the early 1780s, but most of them settled in the part that became New Brunswick in 1784. Many of the Acadians who returned from exile also settled in New Brunswick. After 1815, immigration to Nova Scotia picked up, with 40,000 Scots arriving between 1815 and 1838, though some of these moved to PEI. Together with the 1500 blacks who came as “Loyalists” in the early 1780s, a few more thousand blacks arrived between 1815 and 1867.

 Eurocanadians installing the tram tracks on Gottingen Street at Cogswell, NS, ca. 1891

The population of NS was 68,000 in 1806, increasing to 120,000 in 1825, to 168,000 in 1831, to 277.000 in 1851, and to 331,000 in 1861. Clearly, while 40,000 Scots is a high number, the population growth of NS was mainly driven by the domestic fertility rate. The historian, J.M.S. Careless, writing before Canada came to be fully controlled by deceivers, had it right when he observed, in Canada, A Story of Challenge (1959), that “there was not much immigration to” Nova Scotia, and indeed to the Maritime provinces at large, after the Loyalist wave (p. 122). He meant relatively speaking, of course, compared to the steadily increasing size of the population.


Yet. the widely used text Origins: Canadian History to Confederation, in describing immigration patterns to the Maritimes between 1815 and 1867, offers separate sections with the headings  “The English and Welsh,” “The Acadians,” “The Scots,” “The Irish.” “The Blacks,”, and “The First Nations” to create an image of racial immigrant diversity (pp. 388-393). The section on “The English and Welsh” is the shortest; the sections on “The Blacks” and “First Nations” are the longest.


But when we look at the proportions of these groups relative to the total population for the year 1871, in the case of NS (though the same applies to the other Maritime provinces as we will see below), we find that the First Nations constituted a meagre 0.4%, and the blacks only 1.6%. The rest were all Whites, most of them born in Nova Scotia, and most of the “immigrant” ancestors consisting of internal migrants who had moved from one region of British North America to another (the New England Planters and Loyalists), or from the British Isles to British Nova Scotia.


Yet, despite these facts, without any sense of historical veracity, the Canadian Museum of Immigration announces to millions of visitors in its website that Nova Scotia has been a province of people of “African descent” “for over 300 years” no less than people of European descent.


New Brunswick and PEI


When NB was partitioned from NS in 1784, the population essentially consisted of the Acadians who had moved to this former region of NS after their expulsion, and of Loyalists, most of whom had settled in what became NB in 1784. In 1806, the population of NB was 35,000. It can be safely stated that this population consisted of the founding people of this province, the native born Acadians, and the Loyalist internal migrants, who had been native to the British Empire in the American colonies.


This population increased to 94,000 in 1831, and to 194,000 in 1851. The big wave of immigration to NB occurred between 1842 and 1848 when 38,000 Irish arrived.  These Irish immigrants, together with the native born Anglo-French inhabitants, accounted for the demographic patterns of NB. In 1871, the Irish became the major ethnic group, 35.3%, followed by the English (many of these likely the descendants of the Loyalists) at 29.2%, the French Acadians at 15,7%, and the Scots at 14.3. The Amerindians made up only 0.3% and the blacks 0.6%.


The claim that NB’s heritage has been one of multiple immigrant races does not hold an ounce of water.  


Tiny PEI had a non-White population of 1 percent in 1871 consisting of Aboriginals. The rest were all Whites, Scots, English, Irish, and Acadians.



Newfoundland St Johns’s 1800s


Through the first half of the 1600s a number of unsuccessful attempts at permanent settlements were made by the British, and it was only by 1650 that Newfoundland contained about 500 English residents, rising to some 2000 by 1680. There was a French settlement as well with a population of about 900, but these were killed and imprisoned by the British in 1697.


In 1730, the permanent residents amounted to 2300, growing to 20,000 by 1800, and to 40,000 by 1830. The initial English settlers, and then Irish immigrants, played a significant role in this demographic growth. In the 1720s and 1730s, a few thousand Irish immigrants arrived. During the 1770s, the Irish residents numbered between 3,000 and 4,000. By 1815, 19,000 of the residents were Irish immigrants and their descendants.


However, an extensively documented study, “A Reader’s Guide to the History of Newfoundland and Labrador to 1869,” by Olaf U. Janzen, observes that 

Ironically, significant migration to Newfoundland from the British Isles came to an end just as the “Great Migration” to British North America began. By the late 1830s, patterns of population distribution in Newfoundland had therefore become fixed, and growth thereafter was derived largely through natural increase.

The growth based on “natural increase” was substantial: by 1836, the total population numbered 70,000; by 1857, 124,000; by 1869, 147,000; and by 1884, 197,000.


Newfoundland was not only a racially homogeneous province of English and Irish, but its population of 197,000 in 1884 was mostly native born.




Google the words “immigration in New Brunswick,” or in NS, Newfoundland, or PIE, and multiple links will come up, official documents from the government, all committed to the diversification of these provinces. Here is the “Statement of Mandate, 2014-2015” from the “Nova Scotia Office of Immigration”. It is all about attracting “greater numbers of immigrants each year,” making “them welcome,” contributing “to their success” and seeing “the benefits of immigration spread among all of our communities.”


It is pervasive, the obsession with promoting diversity in the Maritimes. Document after document, discussion papers, with networks and partnerships across Canada and the world, at every level of the government, municipal, provincial, federal, doing everything they can to persuade the public that immigration is part of the “DNA of Maritimers” and that Africans, Muslims, and Asians have always been a part of our history. The list of institutions, universities, agencies, corporations determined to bring about a radical alteration in the ethno-cultural heritage of this region is endless:  Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Canadian Heritage, Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Public Safety Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Statistics Canada, Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions, Canada Border Services Agency and the Rural Secretariat of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada


This is why they are rewriting our history, erasing the accomplishments of Whites and deceiving students into believing that diverse races were responsible for the creation of the Maritimes and that only discrimination and “White racism” have stood in the way of acknowledging this supposed diversity.


Don’t believe them. The establishment, from the historians to the museums to the politicians, are all engaged in a campaign of deception in order to legitimise the dispossession of Whites!



Bumsted, J. M. A History of the Canadian Peoples (Oxford, 2011, Fourth Edition).

R. Douglas Francis, Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (Harcourt, 2000, Fourth Edition).

J.M.S. Careless, Canada: A Story of Challenge (St Martin’s Press, [1959] 1965).

Posted at 22:28 1 Comment


Islam Illegal in USA and same in Canada that work toward Sharia law rather then Canadian Loyalty and sovereignty! This is not about freedom of religion but Dark ET Satanic agendas being forced upon us ! UK take your sovereignty back! Posted June 21/16

From: PRIVACY <>
Date: May 19, 2016 02:53:26 AM PDT To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: Ooopsee: ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952 –

Islam was BANNED in the USA in 1952; But you’re not supposed
to know that!

Post by Newsroom
– May 18, 2016
ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952 but Obama doesn’t want
you to know that, nor does he respect or uphold US law.

The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952
revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization and
nationality for the United States.

That Act, which became Public Law 414, established both the
law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of
aliens to the US and remains in effect today.

Among the many issues it covers, one in particular found in
Chapter 2, Section 212, is the prohibition of entry in to the
US if the alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow
the government of the United States by force, violence or by
other unconstitutional means.”

This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration
to the United States but this law is being ignored by the
White House.

Islamic immigration to the United States would be prohibited
under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all
require complete submission to Islam which is antithethical
to the United States government, the Constitution and to
the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their
life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and
its form of government.

Now the politically correct crowd would say that Islamists
cannot be prohibited from entering the United States because
Islam is a â•~religion.’

Whether it is a â•~religion’ is immaterial because the law
states that aliens who are affiliated with any organization
that advocates the overthrow of our government are prohibited.


The first step in solving a problem is recognizing there is one.

“Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so
enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in
their loss of freedom…” Cicero

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 3527.  The law helps the vigilant,
before those who sleep on their rights.


Attention Immigration Reformer:


For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “CBSA WHISTLE BLOWER– Part 3 : BAN INLAND REFUGEE CLAIMS.”  


Dan Murray




Canada’s Refugee System remains in a mess. It continues to allow thousands of people to make Inland Refugee Claims. These are people who fall into two categories : (1) Those who have entered Canada legally by obtaining a 6 month Visitor Visa, yet really want to remain here permanently. (2) Those who have entered Canada illegally by individually walking from the U.S.  into Canada or are guided by a smuggler across the U.S.-Canada border at a place not supervised by a Canada Border Services Agency agent.


These people who cross the border illegally differ from Refugee Claimants who make their Refugee Claims on the day they arrive at Canada’s land borders with the U.S. or at Canada’s airports.


From what I have seen in working for the CBSA for the past 10 years, the only instance for which an Inland Refugee Claim makes sense is if a person comes here from another country on a Visitor’s Visa and, while they are here, their country erupts into a civil war, or there is a massive natural disaster in their country of origin.


This is typically not what happens. Usually, Inland Refugee Claimants are people who come here for a “vacation”. The government’s expectation is that they are to leave once their Visitor Visa has expired. Most times, these people never had any intention to leave and they remain past the authorized period.


I have personally dealt with cases where people have overstayed Visitor Visas in Canada for 12 years. Twelve years !!! They work illegally at cash jobs, live underground and don’t pay taxes. Are these the type of people Canada should even be spending a few minutes of its time considering for Refugee Status?


If they do get caught, they have been here long enough and talked to enough other cheaters or cheater-enablers such as immigration lawyers, consultants and NGO’s in our immigration lobby to know that they can make an Inland Refugee Claim in order to remain here.


Explain to me how if you are so worried about your life being in danger that it takes 12 years to bring forward your concerns for your life !!! These claims are almost always bogus and are only made in an attempt to exploit Canada’s policy which allows people to remain in Canada while their claim is processed.


If these Inland Refugee Claims are accepted, these people are then given a document that entitles them as successful Inland Refugee Claimants to all of this country’s Social System benefits that Canada is internationally admired for : Free Education, Free Health Care, Social Assistance, etc. —–all of which are funded entirely by Canadian taxpayers.


If their claims are not accepted, these Inland Refugee Claimants are now granted access to systems such as Legal Aid. After all, they are “entitled” to due process!!! Why should it matter that their claims had no basis in reality to begin with?   This nonsense further drains and backlogs our legal system which is also funded by Canadian taxpayers.


If a person has a legitimate fear of losing his life, the time to make a claim against his country of origin is when he ARRIVES in the country of his salvation, not 6 months or years later. This should be the case whether you are smuggled into the country or not. Many other countries do not allow this kind of abuse.


My main job for the past decade has been to enforce the Immigration and Refugee Act (IRPA)  The Act states that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) should “effect a removal order as soon as possible”—–once the removal order becomes enforceable.  In most cases, this would be after the refugee claim has been denied. However, the mandate that I am supposed to adhere to has become damn near impossible to actually enforce.


Why? There is an entire industry working tirelessly to manipulate the immigration system to allow EVERY PERSON who has received a removal (deportation) order the right to remain in Canada. This industry consists of immigration lawyers, immigration consultants, NGO’s and others who provide services and conceive tactics that are designed to litigiously erode the government’s ability to enforce a removal (deportation) order in even the simplest of cases. Yet, all of the people in this industry receive money from government directly or indirectly. Why is Canada tolerating this industry?


The Inland Refugee System and the parasites who live off it are a slap in the face to thousands of legitimate immigrants who work hard, learn our languages, wait in line and pay the required fees.


It’s long overdue for Canada to restore some integrity and pride to this country’s immigration system.



Attention Immigration Reformer : Immigration Watch and Galactic Friends disserves your financial and moral physical support! Posted May 26/16

Whistle-Blower-Part 2: Direct Deposit Welfare + Other Cheating Posted June 9/16


(This is Part 2 of A CBSA Officer’s Whistle-blowing account sent to Immigration Watch Canada.)


Our government continues to enable the abuse of Canada’s Social Assistance System by providing assistance to persons who HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND NOT TO BE REFUGEES. These people are without status and are ineligible for government assistance.


According to IRPA (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act), once a person is found not to be a refugee, any work permit or interim Federal Health Certificate issued to them becomes null and void—-even if the validity date has not passed. The dates given on these documents are issued with long time-lines in the event that their claim processing time is lengthy.


However, illegal persons continue to use these documents to send their children to school, attend Hospital Emergency Rooms, and apply for welfare. No follow up is done with Education Departments or Schools, Health Departments or Hospitals, or Provincial Welfare Departments.


The public servants that Canada relies on to cure illnesses, mold young minds, provide for those in need, and protect our borders are receiving CUTS to funding and budgets. This has resulted in low job satisfaction, poor work environments and job losses. At the same time, Canada continues to give handouts to those manipulating Canada simply because these manipulators   DO NOT WANT TO LEAVE. Why? Because they can get nearly everything for free and they know their chances of getting penalized are slim.


Explain to me how a failed refugee claimant, who entered Canada 7 years ago, needs an interpreter to attend an interview at a CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY (CBSA) office. Why would these failed refugee claimants have refused to learn even one of our TWO official languages? Yet they are able to ask a CBSA officer for “compassion” saying they “need” a deferral of their deportation (removal) date from Canada for such reasons as the following  : (1) to sell their condos (YES, THAT’S PLURAL ! ) that they bought in Toronto.   Or (2) to make arrangements to ship their luxury vehicles to their home country (and even ask CBSA to cover the cost of shipping since the CBSA is making their deportation arrangements!!).


Did you know that failed refugee claimants have blatantly asked me to confirm if certain Canadian banks will allow them to access their accounts overseas because those are the accounts that the DIRECT DEPOSIT FROM A CANADIAN GOVERNMENT WELFARE DEPARTMENT IS set up with? Yes, this means that illegals, who have signed up for social assistance and get deported, continue to receive Canadian monthly welfare deposits in their home country!!! This happens because the Failed Refugee Claimants do not notify the Canadian Welfare Department of their “situation” or change of address. It is only when CBSA contacts Canadian Welfare Departments to advise them to cancel an account (because the person is being removed or has been removed from Canada) that the Failed Refugee Claimant’s direct deposit can be cancelled.


In the cases where failed refugee claimants have not disclosed that they are receiving welfare, they are able to leave Canada AND STILL GET A MONTHLY SOCIAL ASSISTANCE DEPOSIT MADE INTO THEIR NON-CANADIAN ACCOUNT INDEFINITELY!!!


(Editor’s Note: Provincial Governments all across Canada provide the Welfare Payments to these people. Yet as far as we know, none of these governments has ordered an investigation of this Direct Deposit cheating. The total of the cheating could be enormous.)       

Attention Immigration Reformer  (3e) : Posted May 31/16

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “CBSA Whistle-blower :Canada Faces Many Obstacles To Deporting Illegals”

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is the Canadian government department that, among many things,  oversees the deporting of non-Canadians. It has about 13,000 employees and a budget of close to $2 Billion. The CBSA evolved from other departments in 2003 and is responsible for protecting Canada and its borders against a large number of threats. The report below was written by a CBSA employee.

Daniel Murray

CBSA Whistle-blower Part 1 : Canada Faces Many Obstacles To Deporting Illegals

By CBSA Employee

I am writing you this letter to express my extreme anger with the Canadian immigration system. I work for Canada Border Services Agency as a front line officer in immigration. My title is “Inland Enforcement Officer”. However, our government does not allow me to do any type of enforcement. Over the years, I have noticed the rampant manipulation and abuse of our already-lenient immigration system. I feel it is my duty to shed light on these issues.

One of the biggest hurdles we in the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) have in removing a person is the lack of travel documents. It is a requirement when you travel to a country. You must have a valid passport or travel document for the entire duration of your stay, and most often countries require that it be valid for 6 months after your departure date. Many people come to Canada and immediately destroy or “lose” their passport and are not able to provide it to immigration officials. In an interesting turn of events, when they apply for status and receive notice that they need to present a valid document for landing, they are able to “remember” where they misplaced the document.

However, many persons without status are aware that if you cannot provide a valid document to immigration, making removal arrangements are difficult because you cannot travel by air without a valid  document, as per airline regulations.

What makes this such an issue is that it is ENCOURAGED by immigration lawyers, consultants and Consulates. It is infuriating to me that Canada allows representatives, from governments all over the world , to come to our country on Diplomatic status to be representatives of their respective governments. There are certain countries that flat out refuse to work with CBSA TO OBTAIN TRAVEL DOCUMENTS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. I have Consul Generals that have told me they WILL NOT issue a document because they want the person to remain in Canada since the Canadian government providing  for them. If they return to their country of origin, they would have to find work or they would be poor. I have also had Consul Generals that told me they have “no paper” and to call back in a few months !!!  When I did call back, I got another stall.

I have also been told that if the illegal immigrant tells the Consulate that they do not want to leave Canada, then the Consulate will not issue a document because of  that person’s wishes, NOT based on Canadian immigration law.  I have even had the Consulate refuse documents to an illegal person who decided she wanted to travel back to her country to see her dying mother, and was denied a visa because they thought it was better for her to remain in Canada. They are especially difficult when it comes to providing documents for persons with criminal histories because they “do not want criminals being sent to their country. They can stay here and be provided for in jail, instead of on the streets in their country.”

HOW IS IT THAT WE ALLOW THESE PEOPLE TO WALK ALL OVER US AND BLATANTLY DISRESPECT THE LAWS IMPOSED ON THE COUNTRY THAT IS GIVING THEM DIPLOMATIC STATUS??? How is it that Canadian immigration laws are seen as something that any person can CHOOSE to follow if they want, or they can blatantly disregard them and still get provided for??

Activists for groups such as “No One is Illegal” promote this kind of mindset, but WHERE IS THE SUPPORT FOR CANADIAN TAXPAYERS? Any form of regulation for cracking down on illegal workers, foreigners who apply for welfare, follow up and billing at hospitals by non-Canadian Medical system users who have no health coverage or insurance…….there is no end to the lack of support. Canadians are expected to work and follow the rules, and pay taxes, and for what? To support the people who show up in our country with their hands out because they know it’s easy (to get away with breaking Canadian law).

I am not against immigration itself. A lot of great people come to this country. They follow the rules. But what do they get? They get longer wait times because the illegals just show up here, jump in front of the legals and think they are entitled to priority over legals.

It’s that time of the year. Immigration Watch Canada is once again asking you to donate money or time for the year 2016-2017.

Thank you very much to all those who have contributed either time and / or money in the past year. We very much appreciate your help.

As we have said before, we could do a much, much  larger number of demonstrations, flyer distributions, research projects and other things if all those who talked about the immigration issue, actually “walked” or did more than spend one minute a month talking about it.. Let’s be honest and blunt : the best way to ensure failure for our cause is to do nothing.

Our cause deserves priority in the lives of all Canadians. It is not like trivialities such as trying to decide where to go for a good meal.

Unnecessary immigration has made Canada’s entire future extremely precarious. It is no exaggeration to say that we are being led by a cowardly, quisling political class from all parties. These people have to be pushed and shamed into changing their ways.

What can be more serious than to lose our country? Let’s be even more blunt: if you have children, doing nothing amounts to putting a bullet in their heads.

Please offer some of your time or some of your money. Meeting like-minded Canadians in our activities will energize and inspire  you and give you hope.

To those who have sat on the sidelines for years, let us repeat the words we used in a recent flyer to all the Mayors and Councillors in over 20 municipalities in Metro Vancouver, “No more excuses”.

To donate now: CLICK HERE

To volunteer, email to:

All the best,
Dan Murray
Immigration Watch Canada

Unjustified Immigration Levels Against Public’s Wishes Posted May 22/16

Why? In particular, why has Canada’s average 250,000 per year  immigration intake remained in place for over 24 years, a clear abnormality in Canada’s immigration history?

The answer is that for many decades, Canada’s major political parties have assumed that, on the immigration issue in particular,  they know better than average Canadians. This  attitude and the promotion of political party  self-interest manifested itself particularly in 1990 when one political party (the Progressive Conservatives) increased immigration levels to 250,000 per year.

At the time they did this, they actually announced they were doing so in order to capture more of the immigrant vote. This may sound hard to believe because it is so brazen, but it is a fact. Since then, all other parties have adopted the same policy. All pretend that their actions are helping people in the rest of the world and that this immigration flood is  also literally and figuratively enriching Canadian society.

The reality is that Canada’s average 250,000 per year immigration intake since 1990 has been far too high. In fact, Canada’s intake is the highest per capita in the world. And it has obviously been destructive and senseless.

What are some examples of the destruction and senselessness?

First, our high intake has had major negative economic consequences for a minimum of 1.5 million Canadians who are looking for work. At the very least, it has forced many of them to compete (through Canada’s so-called “Employment Equity for Visible Minorities” programme and others) with immigrants for a limited number of jobs.

Second, relentless high immigration has caused two results : (1) relentless demand for a basic human need such as housing and (2) relentless increases in house prices. The urban area which is the best example of this is Metro Vancouver where house prices are now the second highest in the world. (Metro Toronto has also been seriously affected.) Much of Metro Vancouver’s population can no longer afford house ownership. In cases where the existing population has bought housing, they have had to take on huge mortgages. UBC Geography Professor David Ley has clearly shown the connection between immigration and Metro Vancouver house prices

Third, the continued pursuit of the “Diversity” social engineering project has led many Canadians to conclude that they are being ethnically cleansed and that Canada is being re-colonized.

Finally, many Canadians see that our governments seem to think that our urban areas can take infinite numbers of people. This attitude has turned many areas of the country into crowded, grid-locked, environmental disasters-in-progress—duplicates of the environmental catastrophes many recent immigrants come from.

We repeat one basic question :

Why Is Canada bringing in 250,000+ immigrants per year? Ottawa and business interests have made wild claims about the economic benefits of immigration, the need to deal with our aging population, and the need for immigration to satisfy current or future labour shortages. But those claims have been refuted by the government’s own studies or by studies done by respected think tanks. In addition, Ottawa and business interests have pretended that current immigration is no different from past immigration. However, a graph of Canada’s immigration intake since 1860 (See above) shows that immigration since 1991 is an abnormality in Canada’s immigration history

We believe Canada should have some immigration, but that immigration levels should be reduced to about 25,000, that is, to about 10% of the current annual 250,000 intake. We advocate that  the 25,000 intake level should be kept in place indefinitely to compensate for the immigration disaster that has occurred in the past 24 years.

We also advocate a significant reduction to Canada’s widely-abused Temporary Foreign Worker program which in 2012 allowed  well over 300,000 non-Canadians to work in Canada. This program should probably be reduced to nearly zero. In any recession, it is madness  for a country to be importing large numbers of immigrants as well as large numbers of Temporary Foreign Workers.

In addition, we also call for major reform to many of Canada’s other immigration policies.  (See our Basics section for details.)

** For background on major immigration policy changes made in the 1960’s and 70’s, click on the following summaries of excellent research done by reporter Doug Collins in his book  “Immigration : The Destruction Of English Canada”  :

Doug Collins: Immigration, The Destruction of English Canada (Part 1)

Doug Collins: Immigration, The Destruction of English Canada (Part 2)

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) :

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “Fraudsters and Human Traffickers Love ‘Sunny Days’  Trudeau ”

Daniel Murray


Fraudsters and Human Traffickers Love “Sunny Days” Trudeau Posted May 11/16

Part 3 of a Report  Written by David Richardson,
Retired Senior Immigration Enforcement Officer

When I was working with the RCMP Immigration out of St. Catharines, Ontario, we received a call from the  border  crossing (POE—-Port of Entry)  at Queenston, Ontario.. A Canadian  who had been in the U.S. and was returning to Canada had  seen three young men get out of a car on the Canadian side  of a bridge as they entered Canada. The Canadian thought this  looked very suspicious and told the Customs Officer what he had seen.

An Iranian (who held an American Green Card and who was living in Ohio) had driven the three young men (all Iranians who  were attending school in Virginia) onto the bridge and up to the Canadian border.

When the car driven by the Iranian Green Card holder arrived at  the initial customs inspection, it was sent to the main building for further inspection. Immigration Officers really had only one option as far as detaining the three men as  there is only one holding cell available, and not enough staff on hand to monitor them separately.  Queenston is more or less a commercial port, lots of trucks in relation  to cars.  Immigration had at best three officers,  most  often two at the POE at any one time.  Therefore,  they  would not be able to do their job and watch three prisoners  simultaneously. This proved to be a very negative thing for the Canadian Immigration Officers because when the three  young men got together, they fabricated  a story to explain why  they had gotten out of the car.

The three students’ story was as follows. They were going to  Toronto to visit a friend. They realized on the bridge that  they didn’t have the visa required to enter Canada, so they got out of the car and were going to  walk back to the US. However, they had left their Iranian passports in the car, and needed to get them in order to  return to the U.S.. They saw their driver being pulled over by Canadian Customs and  they were hoping they could get  their passports back before he left.

Our interrogation of the US Green Card  holder began with the RCMP trying to  determine what was going on, but the Green Card holder requested legal counsel. This is where the power of the Immigration Officer at the POE (PORT OF  ENTRY)  comes into force. At the POE, anyone seeking entry must by  law answer all questions put to them by the Officer. Those trying to enter Canada do not  have a right to Legal Counsel during the process.

So I began by telling him of his predicament. He was a Green Card holder, and if I were to inform USINS (U.S.   IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE) about what he had  been up to, his Green Card status might be in jeopardy.

During the search of the Green Card holder’s car,  Customs found three Iranian Passports with U.S. Student Visas. The Green Card holder then told us much different story was about the three young Iranian students. It was common knowledge on University and College campuses in the U.S. that foreign student visa holders could go to Canada and make  a refugee claim to get supplemental income while they were going to school in the U.S.. Since the claim process takes so long, it would mean the three Iranian students could collect Canadian welfare for at least three years in the U.S. before they had to attend any refugee hearings in Canada.

The three students had gotten out of the car in order to make a refugee claim !!! Their plan was  to have the Iranian Green Card holder get past Canadian Customs and then wait up the  road for the  three Iranian students to finish making their fraudulent  refugee  claim. Later, the Iranian Green Card holder  would return the passports to the students.  As I stated  in a previous case, 95% of those who make refugee claims in Canada are  undocumented. By not having Iranian  passports with them, the three students were following the  same pattern as almost all those who make refugee claims in  Canada.

Since deportation requires a hearing before an adjudicator, which includes several days detention, we wrote up the four and shipped them back to the US after giving USINS a heads up about what this group were up to.  This case about the Iranian students demonstrates how once a  visa is issued (in this case to the Green Card holder) , that’s it.  You are here, and no one seems to care if you leave or stay.  Also, no one cares  whether or not you meet the requirements under which the visa was issued. Most importantly,  this case happened after 9/11 and demonstrates, how after 9/11, while the government was assuring Canadians that they were beefing up Border security, they were actually laying off staff and refusing to allow us to investigate obvious fraud !!!


We were called to the Rainbow Bridge in Niagara Falls.  USINS  (U.S. Immigration) had refused entry to two Chinese females on board a  tour bus destined for New York City. The USINS Officer had noticed that the Canadian Citizenship Cards in the girls’ possession were fraudulent. (Differentiating between fake and genuine documents is something Canada Immigration is not too good at, by the way.)  There is a whole industry in the Jane/Finch area in Toronto that specializes in Fraudulent Documents :  anything from Driver’s Licenses to SIN (Social Insurance Number) cards to Citizenship cards.  The quality of the product is good enough to pass most inspections, but USINS takes their Job a little more seriously than their Canadian counterpart, I’m afraid, and spotted enough discrepancies to refuse the girls entry  to the U.S.

In talking to the girls, we were able to determine that they  had entered Canada in Vancouver three days prior and made a refugee claim there. Then, as far as we could tell, they flew directly on to Toronto where they were met by someone who provided the documents and the seats on the bus to their final destination in New York City—-all in a very short time. Obviously something very elaborate was going on here and many more Chinese were probably doing the same thing.

We detained the girls and sent them to an adjudicator for a  hearing. We took the uncommon step of attending the hearing  to let the adjudicator know that we needed these girls to be held in custody while we investigated further. The adjudicator agreed and ordered the the girls to pay a $5000 bond. (a large amount in the overall scheme of  things).

The next day, we went  to the detention center to question the girls only to find that someone had provided a promissory note for the bond and that the girls had been released to a Chinese representative of a Toronto Immigration NGO  (Non-Governmental Organization)..  As a condition of release, they were required to make themselves available for questioning.

The next day, we drove  to Toronto to the address of the  bond provider where the girls were supposed to be residing. When we got there, we discovered that the girls were long gone. And apparently we could do nothing about it.

Not willing to leave it at that, I decided to go after the bond holder. I had never done this before. I didn’t realize that a promissory note only had to be paid if the conditions were not met. Since conditions had not been met, I asked Citizenship and Immigration (CIC) management what the procedure was for collecting on a promissory note. They did not know. I contacted  CIC  Headquarters Legal Department for the information. No response.  Apparently the government does not require those who agree to pay for a bond to meet  the requirements of the bond.

This is why, from this point on, we never sent any other  offender to adjudication.  It was pointless. This to us was a classic case of human trafficking. The whole thing was so smooth, and if it hadn’t been for the Skill of the USINS, the girls were gone.  We were left to wonder  just how often others got away without getting caught.  As it  turned out, due to our inane system, the girls got to their final destination anyway.  This was one more example of Canadian Immigration officers becoming frustrated in their efforts to stop fraud.

Attention Immigration Reformer: 

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Canada Was NOT Created by Immigrants of Diverse Races: A Statistical Demonstration.” 


Dan Murray


Canada Was NOT Created by Immigrants of Diverse Races: A Statistical Demonstration Posted May 8/16

by Dr. Ricardo Duchesne

One of the most powerful memes in Canada is that “Canada is a nation of immigrants”. Millions of individuals have indeed migrated to Canada since John Cabot first claimed either Newfoundland or Cape Breton Island for England in 1497. But the intended meaning of this phrase goes well beyond this simple fact. 

This phrase, continuously repeated by the media, and shoved down the throats of unsuspecting students from primary to higher education, is intended to fashion an image of Canada as a nation populated from the beginning by peoples from diverse cultures and racial backgrounds, in order to portray the Third World immigration patterns we have been witnessing since the 1970s as if they were a natural continuation — continuation naturelle — of past migration patterns, rather than as what they are: a radical departure aimed at the termination of Canada’s deep-seated European ethnic character. 

What follows is a statistical refutation of this deceptive meme. The historical record, the facts we have about the people who came to Canada, the racial makeup of the immigrants, the proportion of Whites to non-Whites, the birth rate of Eurocanadians, the rates of immigration versus the domestic fertility rates, demonstrate, to the contrary, that Canada was a nation created from top to bottom by immigrants from Europe and by Eurocanadians born in Canada, with next to zero contributions by non-Europeans. 

The Facts

• In 1871, according to the first census after Confederation, of the total population of 3.2 million, 32 percent were of French ancestry, 24 percent Irish, 20 percent English, 16 percent Scottish, and 6 percent German. Notice, therefore, that we should acknowledge the immense importance of the Irish and Scots in the first centuries of “English Canada”. There were only 21,500 blacks and 23,000 natives in 1871; by contrast, there were 202,991 persons of German origin.

• Canada cannot “accurately be portrayed at Confederation as a nation of immigrants”. In 1867, 79 percent had been born in Canada. Over the 400 years before Confederation, there were only “two quite limited periods” of substantial arrivals of immigrants: from 1783 to 1812, and from 1830 to 1850. In these two periods, the immigrants were “overwhelmingly of British origin”. Immigration was not a major factor in population growth from 1850 to the end of the nineteenth century. From 1871 to 1891, “a high rate of natural increase allowed the population of Canada to grow from 3.7 million to 4.8 million”.

• From 1608 to 1760, immigration to New France consisted of only 10,000 settlers, and thereafter it was “almost non-existent”. The French-speaking population numbered about 90,000 by 1770s, and thereafter, until the late 1800s, the population expanded rapidly with women having 5.6 surviving children on average. The increase in population in Lower Canada from 330,000 in 1815 to 890,000 in 1851 “was mainly attributable to the continuing high birth rate within the French-speaking community”. By 1950, the Quebec population was almost 4 million. This increase was not a result of immigration, but primarily of the still continuing high fertility rates. It was only in the 1970s that Montreal saw an increasing inflow of non-European immigrants.

• Between 1896 and 1914, Canada experienced high immigration levels with more than 3 million arriving within this period. However, the ethnic composition of the nation remained 84 percent of British and French origin, while the European component rose to 9 percent. Between 1900 and 1915, the high mark in “Asian immigration” before the 1960s, 50,000 immigrants of Japanese, East Indian and Chinese descent arrived, but this number comprised less than 2 percent of the total immigration flow. In contrast, in 1914, there were nearly 400,000 Germans in Canada, the largest ethnic group apart from the British (which includes the Irish and Scots) and French.

• The total intake of immigrants between 1946 and 1962 was 2,151,505. At the same time however, between 1941 and 1962, the population of Canada increased from 11.5 million to 18.5 million, “largely accounted” by Canada’s “extremely high domestic birth rates”, the so-called baby boom generation. Ninety percent of all immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain.

• It was only after the institutionalization of official multiculturalism in 1971 that immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, the Middle East and Asia at large started to arrive in large numbers. During the 1970s, the proportion originating in Europe was cut by half, whereas the proportion coming from Asia almost quadrupled. Of the 1.5 million who came between 1971 and 1981, 33 percent came from Asia, 16 percent from the Caribbean and South America and 5.5 percent from Africa.

• In the period 1991-2001, immigrants of European origin fell below 20 percent at the same time that Asian immigration soared to nearly 60 percent. From 1991 to 2000, 2.2 million immigrants were accepted, the “highest ever for any decade”. In recent years, Canada’s visible minority population has been growing much faster than its total population: 22 percent growth from 1996 to 2001 versus 4 percent growth in the general population. Today, roughly one out of every four people in Canada is a member of a visible minority.

Fight Against Multicultural Revisionism!

Don’t let them deceive you! Copy these facts and use them against the deceivers occupying our educational establishments. Don’t believe the globalist claim that your nation was a creation of diverse races and that “White racists” were supposedly hiding away the equal contribution of non-European immigrants. This is a historical falsehood of major proportions. Canada was created by people of British and French descent, and other European ancestries. All the institutions, legal system, educational curriculum, transformation of wilderness into productive farms, all the cities, the parliamentary traditions, the churches, the entire infrastructure of railways, ports, shipping industries, and highways, were created by hardworking Eurocanadians. 


It should be noted that the following authors try to portray Canada as a nation that was from its beginning created by diverse immigrants leading to the official enactment of multiculturalism by P.E. Trudeau in 1971. Nevertheless the facts they bring out, which are the ones contained in the documents, show that Canada was a nation homogeneously White from its very beginnings. 

• J. M. Bumstead, Canada’s Diverse Peoples: A Reference Sourcebook, 2003

• J. M. Bumstead, The People’s of Canada: A Pre-Confederation History, 2003 and The People’s of Canada: A Post-Confederation History, 2004

• Ninette Kelley and Michael Trebilcock, The Making of the Mosaic. A History of Canadian Immigration Policy, 1998

• Roger Riendeau, A Brief History of Canada, 2007

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) :

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “Sikh Hijackers Should Apologize to Canada”.

Daniel Murray


Sikh Hijackers Should Apologize to Canada Posted May 3/16

A group of crude Sikhs has hijacked the entire Sikh group and has succeeded in getting our naive Prime Minister to announce that he will formally apologize to Sikhs in Parliament on May 18, 2016. The apology is supposedly for denying Sikhs the right to enter Canada in the Komagata Maru incident. of 1914.

If anything should happen on May 18, crude Sikhs should apologize to Canada. Here are more reasons why :

(1) Uninformed Sikhs refuse to recognize that Western countries had no obligation in 1914 (nor do they have in 2016) to accept the excess populations of India (as well as of China and Japan). For example, around 1900, China had around 400 million people, was overpopulated and poor and was sending workers overseas.  Japan was doing the same. Of the three countries, only Japan admitted that Canada had a right to defend itself, particularly its unemployed, from unnecessary job competition.  China was in political chaos and had little control over its workers. Ironically, China and India eventually got rid of their colonizers and re-gained their independence. In contrast, Canada, after developing a society which until the late 1970’s was the envy of many countries, has since allowed itself to be colonized by such models of civilization as Mainland China and India’s Punjab. Douglas Todd of The Vancouver Sun has described the behaviour of wealthy recent Chinese in Metro Vancouver as parasitic. A group of Sikhs has behaved similarly.

(2) Parasitic behaviour is not the only issue. In 1985, a group of  Sikhs committed the greatest mass murder in Canadian history (329 people killed when Sikhs bombed an Air India plane that had left Toronto). Thanks to a culture of intimidation of witnesses, the Sikhs who committed the mass murder, have never been convicted—– in spite of Canada spending around $130 Million to prosecute them. When a Surrey Sikh publisher probed too much into the Air India bombing, he was shot, paralyzed and finally murdered. That bombing, not the 911 Muslim attacks,  caused the first mass security checks at Canadian airports. Are all the current airport delays and costs of screening (some of which are now done by Sikhs !!!) that resulted from Sikh bombings to be thought of  as an immigration benefit to Canada?  In the entire world, that Sikh bombing is second only to the 911 attacks in scale of people killed in airplane terrorism.  Furthermore, if Sikh conspirators had been successful in detonating another bomb on a plane leaving Japan, the death toll through Sikh air plane terrorism would have been even higher.  It takes enormous arrogance for some Sikhs to now pressure our government to apologize to them when this mass murder firmly placed them in the category of some of Canada’s worst immigrants. If any apology should be made, it should be crude Sikhs apologizing to Canada !!!

(3) The shameful story does not stop there. Not long after former Prime Minister Jean Chretien opened a new consulate in the Punjabi city of Chandigarh in 2003 as a reward to Sikhs for voting for him,  a Canadian consul official witnessed a huge amount of fraud at that Consulate. In fact, he described the consulate as the fraud capital of all Canadian Embassies / Consulates in the world.  But Canadians don’t have to go back to PM Chretien  for precedents of  a PM giving “pay-offs” to Sikhs.  Prime Minister Trudeau recently appointed four Sikhs to his 30 member Cabinet. That means Sikhs, who represent about 1% of Canada’s population, comprise about 13% of Trudeau’s Cabinet.  The overall intention of the crudest of the Sikhs is to have Canada maintain or increase its immigration intake. Trudeau has catered to that intention by yet another “pay-off”. For 2016, Trudeau has increased Canada’s immigration intake to over 300,000—a significant number of whom will be elderly Sikhs who will be a burden on Canada’s healthcare system. In addition, Immigration Minister John McCallum, who has ironically and wrongly stated that Canada needs high immigration because of its aging population,  has stated that immigration will rise even more in 2017 !!! It is no exaggeration to say that Canada’s contingent of crude and aggressive Sikhs believe they have Trudeau on his knees and that they believe he will commit even more degrading acts in order to get their votes.

(4) The crude Sikh saga continues to this day in the Surrey area of Metro Vancouver. Surrey is notorious for a large number of shootings and drug trafficking offences. Young Sikhs have long been disproportionately represented in this criminal activity. Politicians say that they need more police, but the real answer is that Canada needs less crude Sikh (and Somali) immigration.

(5) And that’s not the end of the story. The Sikhs have used intimidation to get exemptions for wearing a turban and carrying a kirpan. They know that a turban is not compulsory in their religion, yet they have duped many Canadians into believing it is. Similar intimidation / aggressive demands have resulted in Sikhs being allowed to carry a knife (the kirpan) into Parliament, other legislatures and public places. Recently, a Quebec high school student was expelled for having a jackknife in his backpack. He had used the knife to do his farm chores. Meanwhile, other Sikh students carry kirpans to school every day and go unchallenged.

(6) When Canada seeks to get rid of Sikh law violators, crude Sikhs rise to the occasion. Canadians should recall the case of  Laibar Singh, a Sikh who had made a fraudulent refugee claim and been ordered deported. On the day scheduled for his deportation, hundreds of Sikhs demonstrated at the Vancouver Airport and intimidated enforcement officers into abandoning their efforts to deport this man. Canada eventually succeeded in getting rid of Laibar Singh, but not before having to put up with this disgraceful and shameless display of Sikhs championing fraud. That display has been accompanied by a disproportionate amount of other refugee fraud and marriage fraud—-all of which demonstrate that some Sikhs have outright contempt for Canada and that they have become so emboldened that they believe they can get away with not just mass murder, but almost anything.

(7) The economic damage that many Canadians have suffered from unnecessary Sikh and other ethnic immigration is huge. For example, low-wage Sikh truck drivers have forced most Canadians out of the trucking industry in British Columbia. When the Sikhs later discovered that they could not live on the undercut wages they received, they staged a lengthy strike which cost the Port of Vancouver millions of dollars. By cheating, Sikhs have also taken over much of the detached house construction industry in B.C.  According to former Sikh MP Ujjal Dosanjh, “Several years ago, a report on the front page of the Vancouver Sun stated that close to a billion dollars of unaccounted and undeclared money was circulating in the construction industry in Surrey. Such massive fraud did not elicit even a peep from the usually loud public voices. It was well-known that almost all of the residential and a portion of the commercial construction was in the hands of Indo-Canadians. Complete silence reigned in the political sphere.”.The “Indo-Canadians” Dosanjh referred to were Sikhs. Like other Asian immigrants, the Sikhs have compounded the problem of unnecessary immigration by pressuring government and private industry to give hiring preference to Sikhs and other Asians.

We repeat : Canada’s Sikh population has been hijacked by a crude, grasping element which is exploiting Canada. It is long overdue for PM Trudeau and all of our other politicians to give this crude collection the back of their hands, investigate them, put them behind bars or deport them.

We repeat : The skepticism Canadians felt toward aggressive Sikh migrants on the Komagata Maru in 1914 has been shown to have been justified. Sikhs should be apologizing to Canada. Canada should never apologize to them. ( Criminals should be immediately permanently deported Tami)


Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) :

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “Don’t Apologize To The Sikhs—Part 1”

Daniel Murray


Don’t Apologize To The Sikhs—Part 1

Prime Minister Trudeau has recently announced that on May 18 he will make an apology in Parliament to Sikhs. Most of the 376 Sikhs aboard a ship called the Komagata Maru were denied entry to Canada in 1914.  According to aggressive Sikhs, Canada had no justification for doing this. Undoubtedly, a number of other Sikhs are cringing at Trudeau’s announcement because they believe that the incident was much more complicated than the picture a group of Sikhs claim it was. They also think the Sikhs have already received an apology and that endless, aggressive Sikh demands are alienating most Canadians.

Most Canadians, including our Prime Minister, know little about the Komagata Maru issue. We offer the following facts to inform Mr. Trudeau and other Canadians of the historical record in 1914 and of numerous other shameless recent Sikh actions.

(1) Gurdit Singh, the leader of the Komagata Maru voyage, had successfully challenged British authorities in a Singapore court on an unrelated matter. His victory gave him confidence that he could get Canada to accept his 376 passengers. In fact, he boasted to authorities that after landing his 376 mostly Sikh passengers, he would take another 25,000  to Canada. In 1914, Vancouver had a population between 60,000 and 70,000. Twenty-five thousand additional Sikhs would have significantly diluted the European-based population, added to the ongoing conflict over low-wage Asian workers and inflamed concern that B.C.’s population could be overwhelmed by large numbers of Asians.  Many crude Sikhs like to suggest that Canada had no right to defend its B.C. population and workers from being culturally and economically overwhelmed by Asians. Ironically, B.C. resentment was very similar to the resentment that the Chinese and East Indians felt towards European colonizers in their countries at the same time. If Chinese and East Indians were justified in resisting colonization, so were Canadians who faced a similar danger from huge numbers of Chinese and East Indians.

(2) The Komagata Maru incident was preceded by the Panama Maru incident of October 17, 1913. That evemt helps to explain much of what happened in the Komagata Maru incident 7 months later. The Panama Maru had carried 56 East Indians to Canada. Most of the passengers had not lived in Canada previously, but falsely claimed that they had. They produced fake money order receipts, time cards, etc. to substantiate their claims. Immigration authorities allowed 17 (those physically recognized to have been here before) to land, but they detained 39 of the 56. A Board of Inquiry looked into the case and ordered that the 39 be deported, but litigious East Indians in Canada determined to make the Panama Maru case a test case. Their lawyer J.Edward Bird appeared before Justice Dennis Murphy, the author of a Royal Commission which  had investigated Chinese Immigration Fraud. He ruled against the East Indians. Bird then went to Chief Justice Gordon Hunter, who was notorious for appearing drunk in court and who was a clear embarrassment to the government. He allowed the 39 to stay. Even 4 of the 39 who had been ordered deported for medical reasons, escaped from detention and could not be found. Canadian immigration authorities became determined not to let these people humiliate them again.

(3) The crude members of the Sikhs claim that the Sikhs aboard the Komagata Maru were unjustly treated. The reality is that the Sikhs were merely one part of an ongoing battle that the Vancouver / Southern British Columbia population had already been involved in with low-wage Japanese and Chinese. When the federal government introduced a $500 Head Tax on the Chinese to protect Canadians in 1905, the number of Chinese passengers on the Canadian Pacific (CP) Steamships fell substantially. To end the drop in CP passenger traffic, CP aggressively advertised tickets in India in order to get East Indians like the Sikhs to travel. In 1907, 901 East Indians arrived, doubling B.C. ‘s East Indian population.  In  the first 10 months of 1907, a total of about 11,500 East Indians, Japanese and Chinese arrived—an overwhelming number compared to other years. Most of this number were Japanese who had violated Japanese law by not getting Japanese government permission to travel to Canada from Hawaii (where they were working as farm labourers).  Half of Vancouver’s population, more than 30,000 paraded through Vancouver streets on Labour Day, in September, 1907 to protest the arrival of these people. Many of the 11,500 migrants were illegals or unneeded labourers who were imported to displace Canadian workers. The Vancouver Riot of 1907 followed the parade.

(4) The immigration lobby has completely distorted the 1907 Vancouver Riot and all of the events before it. The crude propagandists among the Sikhs like to cite Ottawa’s “Continuous Passage” law as an example of punishment of Sikhs, They conveniently omit the point that the law was primarily intended to stop illegal Japanese labourers from leaving Hawaii and causing unnecessary job competition in B.C. The law was later applied to East Indians for the same reason.

The Vancouver Parade and Riot of 1907 should be remembered in our media and school textbooks as events in which Vancouver residents actually defended themselves against unnecessary and overwhelming immigration. Vancouver residents have to revive the Spirit of 1907 !!.


Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Justin Trudeau and the Dismantling of Canadian Identity.”


Dan Murray


Justin Trudeau and the Dismantling of Canadian Identity

Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, is a man with a vision for his country. What remains unknown, however, is whether or not Canadians share this vision.

Thus far in his tenure, Trudeau has been far more explicit about what he does not want for Canada than he has been regarding the kind of nation he envisions for our future.

One thing he does not want, as publicly stated shortly after taking office, is a Canada based upon “national identity.” This bold assertion, in effect, tells us Trudeau does not believe in a Canada defined by a national heritage developed over 148 years of history. From Canada’s early pioneer settlers, to our cultural roots as an English and French Canadian society, through to the struggle for an identity independent of American cultural domination — Justin Trudeau has deemed these symbols of our nationhood to be irrelevant.

Up to this point in our political evolution, it was understood that a primary role for a Canadian prime minister was one of nation-building. As a prototype, we can look to the founding of our country, whereby the fathers of confederation envisioned a federalist nation united coast-to-coast by the Canadian Pacific Railway.

At present, however, we find our current prime minister desirous of negating the foundations of our national heritage. It is prudent to keep in mind that when a decision is made to eradicate a nation’s historical identity, something concrete will be required to serve as a replacement.

Curiously, rather than unveiling a bold new plan for the society we are to become, Trudeau has been rather obtuse about the subject. Stating early in his four year term that nationalism is not part of Liberal government ideology, Trudeau wants our nation to find its identity by way of a concept of “shared values.”

How are Canadians to comprehend this post-modern proclamation? After all, we live in a nation which holds “diversity” to be among its top core values. Indeed, present-day Canada is a composite of some highly divergent communities. For example, it is reasonable to state our LGBT community maintain values largely opposed to those of our fundamentalist religious communities.

How then are we to develop the synergy necessary to create unity among such disparate communities? To employ a biblical allegory, Trudeau’s vision is not unlike tearing down a house built upon rock, and rebuilding it upon sand.

Marcus Garvey once stated, and I paraphrase slightly, that “a nation without history is like a tree without roots.” Even a six-year old understands that when a tree is severed at its roots, it dies. Are Canadians to be believe this concept is beyond the understanding of the prime minister of our country?

Taking into account the demise of our nation cannot possibly be among Trudeau’s intentions, what are we to make of his intangible conception of our identity? Lacking a properly articulated definition from government, Canadians are left to speculate for themselves.

Based upon Trudeau’s curious allegiances and alignments, one really has to wonder. For example, since gaining office in late 2015, the Liberals have been an absolute tear regarding the importation of Middle Eastern refugees. One billion dollars spent, 30,000 refugees and counting brought to Canada. Yet, despite the U.S. government’s declaration that the murder of Christians in the Middle East constitutes an act of genocide, the Trudeau government has excluded these poor souls by way of a program focused exclusively on Muslim refugees.

Is this an example of shared values? If it is, it is unlikely to be shared among the 85% of our nation raised within the Christian faith. How about the fact that our government refuses to officially declare we are at war with ISIS? Do Canadians share this sentiment, as they sit in their homes wondering if the senseless mass murder which took place recently in Brussels will also occur upon Canadian soil?

Through these developments, we begin to gain insight into the true nature of the Liberal agenda. Indeed, beyond the voting process by which he gained office, Justin Trudeau has little, if any, concern for public opinion or the will of the majority.

In reality, his loyalties lie elsewhere — with the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon, Barack Obama, Melinda Gates and other powerful globalist entities. Indeed this is Justin’s “sweet spot” — the area where we find his true ambitions.

History may prove otherwise, however, it is unlikely that Justin Trudeau will amount to much more than the man who put the final nail into our nationalist coffin. It appears Trudeau is simply leading Canadians down a path toward a blank slate of a nation.

What shall occur as a result? Considering the history of nations, the situation has every potential to result in a social power struggle of gargantuan proportions. Traditional versus Multicultural Canada. Progressive versus Conservative Canadians. Secularism versus religious fundamentalism. Foreign money versus domestic need. Indeed, it is all rather “Lord Of The Flies” — and most of us educated within Canada’s public school system know how that story turned out.

The entire spectacle is incredulous — first, former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau takes it upon himself to cancel Canada’s English and French bi-cultural identity. Now, Liberal PM Justin Trudeau takes it upon himself to cancel our national identity in its entirety.

Such is the state of our nation under Justin Trudeau — a leader unable or unwilling to envision how Canada will move forward in its quest to become a united and harmonious nation.

Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Government Covers Up Real Number of Illegals–Part 2 of an Immigration Officer’s report on Canada’s Department of Immigration.”


Dan Murray


Government Covers Up Real Number of Illegals–Part 2 of an Immigration Officer’s report on Canada’s Department of Immigration Posted April 18/16

By David Richardson, Retired Senior Immigration Officer

After working at  the Fort Erie Port of Entry (POE) for several years, I took  a secondment to the Removals Department at the Main Immigration Office in Niagara Falls. The Removals Officer’s responsibility was to make sure that failed  refugee claimants and deportees were returned to the country  from which they entered Canada. Since all our refugee  claimants came from the US, they were removed to Buffalo, New York.

We would receive from the  Immigration and Refugee Board the detailed files of failed  claimants. These people had already been in Canada for 3 to  5 years since they had to go through the appeals process as  well !!

Once the file was  reviewed ,we would schedule a removal date and inform the  claimant when they were to present themselves for removal.  We would try to schedule enough removals to fill the bus we  had for this purpose. We would notify USINS (United States  Immigration and Naturalization Service) when we would arrive  so that they would be able to process them back into the  US.

The “bus” we  used for removals was a 12 passenger van.  We scheduled  removals for twice a week, Tuesdays and Thursdays.  The number of people that showed up depended on whether there were families involved. Some families were as large as 7 or 8 people.  Any children born in Canada did not count.  On average I’d say 40 to 50 percent of families did not show up, while 75 to 80 percent of singles did not show.  These are conservative estimates because sometimes no one  would show and we would have to cancel.  Needless to say  the majority of time spent by a removals officer was in preparing deportation orders.

In the year and a half I worked in Removals, never once did all the scheduled removals show up for departure. Those that didn’t show, were issued a  Deportation Order, and they were to be detained and delivered to Immigration to be deported forthwith by any law  enforcement agency they came in contact with. This almost  never happened. They just disappeared.

When I made an inquiry as to what the department was doing about this, I was told the official response was that the claimant must have made their own arrangements to leave. This was a cover-up and demonstrates the sloppiness in  government policy and the willingness of government to  tolerate fraud.

A  shocking fact is that the government keeps a running total  of “NO SHOWS”for five years only. For example,  when I checked the figures for 1998, I found there were over 100,000 “NO SHOWS” for the five years ending in 1998. NO SHOWS are people ordered deported who did not report to be deported. However, when a year passed and the  government published the “NO SHOW” figures for 1999, they added the “NO SHOWS” to the 100,000, but then subtracted the number of “No Shows” for 1993. In other words, the “NO SHOW”total remained constant and is an outright lie. It is definitely  not a measure of the total illegals residing in Canada at  any given time. This government practice had been going on  long before I worked for the Department and probably long  before even that Act.  The practice probably  continues today. Toronto is a very easy place to hide out  in and we know of many unscrupulous employers that take  advantage, but the government refuses to provide the  resources to root them out.

While “NO SHOWS” provide the bulk of illegals that I’m aware of, there are also illegals who got here on foreign student visas and on  work visas. As far as I know, these numbers are never counted in the “NO SHOWS” list.  The  department just assumes these people leave when their visa  expires.  But that does not happen. For example, we know  that there was a problem with work visas, especially for strippers from Eastern Europe, of which there were many in a  small place like  Niagara Falls.  I can only guess what the figures would be for very large cities like Toronto or Montreal.

It upset Immigration Officers  to no end to know  that the public was being kept in the dark as to how many “NO SHOWS”, “ILLEGAL  WORKERS” and “ILLEGAL VISITORS” were in Canada. Job-seeking Canadians were obviously having to  compete with these “NO SHOWS” and  “ILLEGALS” for work, but the government did very little to  ease the frustrations and suffering of Canadians. In fact,  idiotic politicians in Toronto, Hamilton and Vancouver  declared their cities to be “SANCTUARY CITIES” so  that these illegals could continue to abuse honest  Canadians.  And these politicians actually were proud of  what they had done !!!

Enforcement Officer

My next position was as an Enforcement Officer at the main office in Niagara Falls. The nature of this job  was investigating Immigration violations IN-Land. An Immigration Officer at the Port of Entry (POE) has far more  legal authority than an In-land Officer. Under the  Immigration Act, and Criminal Code as it was at that time,  the RCMP was the agency responsible for laying charges under  the Act.
Immigration would investigate. If we had a case, we would inform the RCMP and  they would lay the charges and make the arrest.

The RCMP was also responsible  for criminal charges at the Port of Entry.  At this time, a new Area Manager had arrived in Ontario South. He was disturbed at  the lack of co-operation between the RCMP and Immigration.  He contacted the RCMP Office in St. Catharines and made  arrangements with the Sargent in charge to form a Unit  exclusively to deal with Immigration Issues. I was seconded  to this Unit that consisted of a lieutenant, two Officers  and myself.


One day, we got a call from  the Queenston (Ontario)-Lewiston (New York) Port Of Entry  that they had detained an American woman from West Virginia. When we arrived at the POE we discovered that the day before, she had been refused entry at Toronto’s Pearson  Airport. The Senior Immigration Examining Officer  there had discovered that the woman had made a refugee claim in Canada the previous year. She said she  was coming back to Canada to attend a hearing. Immigration officers assumed that if a person makes a  refugee claim here that they will stay here until their  claim is evaluated. However, in questioning the woman, we discovered she was working as a Toll Collector on the thru-way in West Virginia and was going through a messy divorce. She told us  her Pastor had recommended she make a refugee claim in Canada to procure another source of income (welfare) !!  In  other words, she had no intention of becoming a refugee in  Canada. She was looking for extra cash and she had heard through the grapevine that she could easily defraud Canada’s refugee system and provincial Welfare Department in order to get that cash. We warned her about  the fraud she was committing and deported her on the  spot.

As a follow up, I  contacted the Welfare office in Toronto to inform them of  the fraud and requested that all welfare payments cease to  that woman. I was told by the Welfare Office that they couldn’t do that without interviewing the recipient. I  told them that that would not be possible as she was not  allowed to enter Canada. I was told,  “Too bad.  That’s the procedure.” I then contacted the Ministry of Social Services to complain. They told me they would look into it. I never heard back.  I concluded that  the Welfare Office never did anything, that refugee cheats are very aware of this negligence, that refugee cheats had taken advantage of this and that they continue to take  advantage. As far as trying to estimate the cost to the  province, I would need to know what the rate of welfare is, and I don’t.  But I suspect it is large and I’m  pretty sure if the public were aware, there’d be a huge backlash.

One of the main  reasons I eventually left government service was that in all good conscience, I could not tolerate another day of 35% of my  pay going to support these fraudulent government practices.  Political correctness has destroyed my Country.

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) :

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “Government Covers Up Real Number of Illegals”. This is Part 2 of an Immigration Officer’s report on Canada’s Department of Immigration.

Daniel Murray


Government Covers Up Real Number of Illegals  Posted April 17/16

After working at  the Fort Erie Port of Entry (POE) for several years, I took  a secondment to the Removals Department at the Main Immigration Office in Niagara Falls. The Removals Officer’s responsibility was to make sure that failed refugee claimants and deportees were returned to the country  from which they entered Canada. Since all our refugee  claimants came from the US, they were removed to Buffalo, New York.

We would receive from the  Immigration and Refugee Board the detailed files of failed  claimants. These people had already been in Canada for 3 to  5 years since they had to go through the appeals process as  well !!

Once the file was  reviewed ,we would schedule a removal date and inform the  claimant when they were to present themselves for removal.  We would try to schedule enough removals to fill the bus we  had for this purpose. We would notify USINS (United States  Immigration and Naturalization Service) when we would arrive  so that they would be able to process them back into the  US.

The “bus” we  used for removals was a 12 passenger van.  We scheduled  removals for twice a week, Tuesdays and Thursdays.  The number of people that showed up depended on whether there were families involved. Some families were as large as 7 or 8 people.  Any children born in Canada did not count.  On average I’d say 40 to 50 percent of families did not show up, while 75 to 80 percent of singles did not show.  These are conservative estimates because sometimes no one would show and we would have to cancel.  Needless to say  the majority of time spent by a removals officer was in preparing deportation orders.

In the year and a half I worked in Removals, never once did all the scheduled removals show up for departure. Those that didn’t show, were issued a  Deportation Order, and they were to be detained and delivered to Immigration to be deported forthwith by any law  enforcement agency they came in contact with. This almost  never happened. They just disappeared.

When I made an inquiry as to what the department was doing about this, I was told the official response was that the claimant must have made their own arrangements to leave. This was a cover-up and demonstrates the sloppiness in  government policy and the willingness of government to  tolerate fraud.)

A  shocking fact is that the government keeps a running total  of “NO SHOWS”  for five years only. For example,  when I checked the figures for 1998, I found there were over 100,000 “NO SHOWS” for the five years ending in 1998. NO SHOWS are people ordered deported who did not report to be deported. However, when a year passed and the  government published the “NO SHOW” figures for 1999, they added the “NO SHOWS” to the 100,000, but then subtracted the number of “No Shows” for 1993. In other words, the “NO SHOW”  total remained constant and is an outright lie. It is definitely  not a measure of the total illegals residing in Canada at  any given time. This government practice had been going on  long before I worked for the Department and probably long  before even that Act.  The practice probably  continues today. Toronto is a very easy place to hide out  in and we know of many unscrupulous employers that take  advantage, but the government refuses to provide the  resources to root them out.

While “NO SHOWS” provide the bulk of illegals that I’m aware of, there are also illegals who got here on foreign student visas and on work visas. As far as I know, these numbers are never counted in the “NO SHOWS” list.  The department just assumes these people leave when their visa  expires.  But that does not happen. For example, we know  that there was a problem with work visas, especially for strippers from Eastern Europe, of which there were many in a small place like  Niagara Falls.  I can only guess what the figures would be for very large cities like Toronto or Montreal.

It upset Immigration Officers  to no end to know  that the public was being kept in the dark as to how many “NO SHOWS”, “ILLEGAL  WORKERS” and “ILLEGAL VISITORS” were in Canada. Job-seeking Canadians were obviously having to compete with these “NO SHOWS” and  “ILLEGALS” for work, but the government did very little to  ease the frustrations and suffering of Canadians. In fact,  idiotic politicians in Toronto, Hamilton and Vancouver  declared their cities to be “SANCTUARY CITIES” so  that these illegals could continue to abuse honest  Canadians.  And these politicians actually were proud of  what they had done !!!

Enforcement Officer

My next position was as an Enforcement Officer at the main office in Niagara Falls. The nature of this job  was investigating Immigration violations IN-Land. An Immigration Officer at the Port of Entry (POE) has far more  legal authority than an In-land Officer. Under the  Immigration Act, and Criminal Code as it was at that time,  the RCMP was the agency responsible for laying charges under  the Act.

Immigration would investigate. If we had a case, we would inform the RCMP and  they would lay the charges and make the arrest.

The RCMP was also responsible  for criminal charges at the Port of Entry.  At this time, a new Area Manager had arrived in Ontario South. He was disturbed at  the lack of co-operation between the RCMP and Immigration.  He contacted the RCMP Office in St. Catharines and made  arrangements with the Sargent in charge to form a Unit  exclusively to deal with Immigration Issues. I was seconded  to this Unit that consisted of a lieutenant, two Officers  and myself.


One day, we got a call from  the Queenston (Ontario)-Lewiston (New York) Port Of Entry  that they had detained an American woman from West Virginia. When we arrived at the POE we discovered that the day before, she had been refused entry at Toronto’s Pearson  Airport. The Senior Immigration Examining Officer  there had discovered that the woman had made a refugee claim in Canada the previous year. She said she  was coming back to Canada to attend a hearing. Immigration officers assumed that if a person makes a  refugee claim here that they will stay here until their  claim is evaluated. However, in questioning the woman, we discovered she was working as a Toll Collector on the thru-way in West Virginia and was going through a messy divorce. She told us  her Pastor had recommended she make a refugee claim in Canada to procure another source of income (welfare) !!  In  other words, she had no intention of becoming a refugee in Canada. She was looking for extra cash and she had heard through the grapevine that she could easily defraud Canada’s refugee system and provincial Welfare Department in order to get that cash. We warned her about  the fraud she was committing and deported her on the  spot.

As a follow up, I  contacted the Welfare office in Toronto to inform them of  the fraud and requested that all welfare payments cease to  that woman. I was told by the Welfare Office that they couldn’t do that without interviewing the recipient. I  told them that that would not be possible as she was not  allowed to enter Canada. I was told,  “Too bad.  That’s the procedure.” I then contacted the Ministry of Social Services to complain. They told me they would look into it. I never heard back.  I concluded that  the Welfare Office never did anything, that refugee cheats are very aware of this negligence, that refugee cheats had taken advantage of this and that they continue to take  advantage. As far as trying to estimate the cost to the province, I would need to know what the rate of welfare is, and I don’t.  But I suspect it is large and I’m  pretty sure if the public were aware, there’d be a huge backlash.

One of the main  reasons I eventually left government service was that in all good conscience, I could not tolerate another day of 35% of my  pay going to support these fraudulent government practices.  Political correctness has destroyed my Country!

Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Senior Immigration Officer Cites Fraud and Incompetence in Refugee System–Part 1.“


Dan Murray


Senior Immigration Officer Cites Fraud and Incompetence in Refugee System–Part 1  Posted April 5/16

By: David Richardson, Retired Senior Immigration Examining Officer

I began my work for Canada’s Department of Immigration as a Senior Immigration Examining Officer (SIEO) at the Fort Erie Point of Entry (POE) at the Peace Bridge.

After some initial problems, I was elected to act as their Union Rep. About eight months
later I was elected to be the Immigration Rep in Southern Ontario for the Canadian Employment and Immigration Union, Ontario Council, where I then became the president of that council.

Management sent me to get the training I needed for the job: two weeks in Vancouver for SIEO training, and 3 weeks in Regina at the RCMP Depot for Use of Force Training. I felt satisfied that I was able to do the job. However, that job was not exactly what I thought it would be.

Fort Erie, Ontario is opposite Buffalo, New York. The Peace Bridge joins the two cities. In the 1990’s, Fort Erie processed 4000 to 5000 refugee claims a year. The process was convoluted and resulted in a major industry being developed on both sides of the border to handle it. Churches, refugee holding facilities, immigration consultants, lawyers, NGO’s, and translators were all part of the process. The Immigration Officer was responsible for the identification and documentation of the claimants. The resulting forms and documents and schedules provided to the claimant included healthcare and welfare and transportation to Toronto where their refugee claim would be finalized.

The process at the border could take three to four hours as many claimants came as families. There were two Officers working with translators working two claims a shift, days and evenings. The process as a whole, from claim to determination of status could take up to three years or more. And if an individual was found not to be eligible for refugee status, they would be sent back to Buffalo, where after three months, they could start all over again !! This sounds hard to believe, but it was a fact.

The Port of Entry Process

The refugee claimant would arrive from Buffalo, New York via specialized Taxi service paid by Canada. Information about name, the country of origin and language preference would be recorded so that a translator could be booked and an appointment made for the client to formally make their claim. They would then be returned to Buffalo, to await their appointment.

This was the process in 1995—-before an agreement was made with the U.S. which resulted in non-American claimants being ineligible to make claims in Canada if they were in the U.S.
When the claimant arrived for their appointment, they were photographed and fingerprinted and brought to an interview room where the translator was present and the interview would commence. We had a form made up to get the required information to begin the claim. Readers may be shocked to read the following:

The information from all applicants was almost always exactly the same, no matter where the applicants came from. Obviously, they had received coaching in how to lie at the holding center in Buffalo. From the very beginning, fraud and lies like the following prevailed:

(1) Almost all claimants said they had flown into New York City in the company of an agent, who for a fee of $10,000 to $15,000 a person, would bring them through US Immigration. The Agent would then take their passports and return to the country of origin. On arrival in New York, the vast majority (95%) of applicants / claimants had no documents to prove that they were really from the country they claimed to be from.

(2) They would take a bus to Buffalo to the Church that housed and prepared them to make their claim. (Obviously they had duped the Churches into accepting their lies / stories.)

(3) All claimed they were being persecuted for clan membership or religious affiliation or abuse of some nature. We soon learned that we couldn’t believe a word they said. (As a side note, photographs and fingerprints were not the norm for a long period of time, but were introduced because it was found that claimants would make a claim in Fort Erie with one group of children, return to the US and return with a whole new family and make another claim in Niagara Falls. This enabled them to collect much more in welfare payments when they got to Canada.)

(4) Another interesting thing was that the interpreters would tell us that the claimant was lying to us, but we could do nothing about it as it was the refugee board’s job to determine veracity of claims.

(5) We would fill out the forms with the names that they gave us, print out the claim form, give them forms to get medicals, and eligibility for welfare and childcare. Then up the road they went.

(6) The fraud we saw was extremely shameless very early in many cases. For example, Pakistanis, who had succeeded in getting refugee status in the US, were coming to Canada to make a refugee claim here in order to get extra welfare cash from Canada. They found it harder to commit this fraud in the US because the US requires fingerprints on ID cards and the US has card readers that scan information. We tried to get one of these readers at the Fort Erie Port of Entry, but our Immigration Department refused.

(7) The really disturbing thing is that these claimants are not the pathetic cases you see on TV. These people can afford to pay a great deal of money to get here, and were most likely the upper middle class in their country. In other words, they were economic migrants and it disturbed the translators to no end that these people were getting away with so much fraud from the very star

Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Immigration Minister ‘Know Nothing’ Speaks.”


Dan Murray


Immigration Minister “Know Nothing” Speaks Posted March 28/16

In a recent speech to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce, Canada’s Minister of Immigration (John McCallum) boasted about the economic effects of immigration. Once again, he showed that he does not know what he is talking about.

His government has recently raised Canada’s immigration intake to over 300,000 for 2016. This intake is the highest in 100 years. Now, he is proclaiming that his government will raise immigration to even higher levels in the years following—-all supposedly to stimulate Canada’s economy.

Let’s point out some basics for Mr. McCallum : In the late 1980’s, Ottawa asked The Economic Council of Canada to investigate whether immigration had produced economic benefits for Canada. Their answer : almost none for every decade since 1867. In other words, if government wants to stimulate the economy, immigration has not done it in the past and is unlikely to do it in future.

Even worse, according to a recent study done by SFU Economics Professor Emeritus Herb Grubel and Veteran Economist Patrick Grady, recent immigrants are annually taking up to $35 Billion more out of government coffers than they are contributing.

On top of that, two UBC professors have just released studies which demonstrate that Canada’s relentless immigration intake is the cause of astronomic house prices in Metro Vancouver in particular, but also in Toronto—the two major destinations of immigrants.  Speculation by Chinese buyers has literally driven many Vancouverites out of Metro Vancouver. Does McCallum consider displacement “an economic benefit”?

McCallum seemed to be completely unaware of these studies and that all contradicted what he says.

But that did not deter him. His speech to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce got worse. He stated “I know that when a society faces an aging population and does not have an access to immigrants it is a recipe for trouble, and if you don’t believe me, just look at Japan. ” He implies that if Japan were to use immigration as a tool, it could solve its aging population problem.

For McCallum’s benefit, let’s make something else clear. Regarding the aging population issue, in the late 1980’s, Ottawa asked its Health and Welfare Department to determine whether Immigration would solve the potential problem of an older population outnumbering the workforce. The possible result : government tax revenues would decline and both Canadian workers and the Canadian economy would be burdened with providing for older citizens. The Department looked at many options (including one option of greatly reducing the age of immigrants). It concluded that even increasing immigration to 600,000 per year would make very little difference to the proportion of workers to the number of aged Canadians. It concluded that Canada get both its 45+ year-old unemployed males and more women into the workforce.

Mr. McCallum also does not seem to understand that the conclusions that Health and Welfare Canada drew were based on mathematical projections, not wishful, ideological opinions as McCallum’s are. Japan has probably done similar projections and concluded that even if Japan were to ignore the crucial cultural issue of being overwhelmed by non-Japanese, it would not make mathematical sense to import large numbers of immigrants.

Let’s give Minister “Know Nothing” more evidence. In 2006, Canada’s C.D. Howe Institute added to the mathematical investigation of the aging population issue. Its overall conclusion was that immigration would not make Canada younger. It looked at three strategies that Canada might use. Two of them involved stabilizing the number of older Canadians. In one strategy, immigration intake would have to rise to 7 million per year by 2050­­ at which time Canada’s population would be 165.4 million !!! Obviously, such a solution was not an option.

The other very interesting thing about McCallum’s reference to Japan is that he (and previous immigration ministers and Prime Ministers) seem to think that the cultural effect of a high immigration intake is unimportant. Most countries, particularly China and India would regard the process of being overwhelmed by foreigners as an invasion. They would not tolerate it. In contrast, McCallum has raised no objections to his own riding becoming over 70% Chinese. Does he want to cover up his own guilt by making the rest of Canada look like his own riding? Furthermore, the Prime Minister’s own riding is now majority visible minority. Does he also at heart feel so guilty that he approves what Minister “Know Nothing” recommends?

Let’s spell things out for Immigration Minister John McCallum, PM Trudeau and politicians of all stripes : The current Chinese and the East Indians came to Canada because they know that the people who have built the country of Canada had built a culture and a country that was significantly superior to that of the current versions of China and India and to that of most other countries. Both China and India are vastly over-populated, economically unsustainable and, according to Canada’s Privy Council, the major environmental cesspools of the planet.

In fact, China’s Deputy Minister of the Environment had a name for the large number of Chinese who were leaving China and going to “Western” countries such as Canada. He called them “parasites” who had exploited the Chinese landscape and Chinese workers to acquire profits and who had left sordid messes behind them in China.

As Canada has found out, those same “parasites” are repeating their behaviour in Canada. For example, several hundred thousand Chinese immigrants have entered Canada under Canada’s so-called “Investor Immigrant” programme. Huge numbers of them live in mansions, pay little (if any) income tax but extract all the benefits they can get. One of those benefits has been getting a Western education for their children at a dirt-cheap price and without the cut-throat competition for professional degrees that their children would have faced in China. The result has been displacement of thousands of Canadian students by Chinese students who never should have been allowed in.—–a fact that, unbelievably, a number of university presidents such as those at UBC and SFU have cheered. Is this what our Immigration Minister calls an economic “benefit” of immigration?

What other reasons do many Chinese and Sikhs have for coming here? Some are undoubtedly here for sincere reasons, but it seems clear that significant numbers of them want to re-create the national cesspools they came from and to plunder and displace as much as they can. They see themselves as colonizers and relish the thought of becoming a majority in different parts of Canada. For example, a number of Sikhs now want to have Punjabi elevated to the status of an Official Language of Canada. In addition, there are so many Chinese in places like Metro Vancouver and Markham, Ontario (Minister “Know Nothing’s riding) that the public now say, “Free Tibet. But First Free Metro Vancouver and Markham.” To make matters worse, a number of Chinese with equally malicious intent, are watching the crude and boorish tactics of some Sikhs. Other groups feel the same way.

How do our Immigration Minister, the PM and a considerable number of our politicians respond? Well, our PM announces that Canada is ‘a post-national state” !!! Then, he and others get down on their knees and give new arrivals whatever they ask for— in return for their votes.

Let’s be blunt : The next time our PM, Immigration Minister “Know Nothing” and his like are on their knees in boot-licking position, they should pause for a few minutes from their degrading activity and look up at the faces of the crude elements in the Chinese, the Sikhs and other groups whose boots they are licking. Those getting boot-licked are laughing at them and have contempt for them.

A fiasco is happening in Canada and it is being led by fools, quislings and Know Nothings.

Things don’t have to be this way. It’s time for a major ass-kicking !!!


Attention Immigration Reformer: 

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Total Failure of Multiculturalism in Sweden: A Factual Exposition.”


Dan Murray


Total Failure of Multiculturalism in Sweden: A Factual Exposition Posted March 27/16

by Clare Ellis 

“Refugees” Heading for Sweden

The following is a factual breakdown of the costs of Sweden’s program of cultural enrichment and demographic change through large-scale immigration, multiculturalism, and refugee quotas. 

Immigration into Sweden

First, keep in mind that the population of Sweden is less than 10 million people. Between 1998 and 2015 net immigration steadily increased from under 11,000 to over 78,000 per year. 

In 1960 the number of foreign-born citizens in Sweden was almost 300,000 and today this number has increased 500% to over 1.6 million people or 17.0% of the total population. 

In 2014 the amount of residents with a foreign background in Sweden, which includes foreign-born and Swedish-born with two foreign-born parents, amounted to over 2 million people or 21.5% of the population. In 2015 this number had increased to 22.2%. This means that nearly one quarter of Sweden’s population is currently of foreign background. If trends continue, within 15 years foreigners in Sweden will make up nearly 1/3 of the Swedish population. 

According to Statistics Sweden

In 2014…one-fifth of the persons aged 25-64 were born abroad. This percentage is expected to increase to one-fourth in 2020, and close to one-third in 2030. As the years go by, the percentage of foreign born persons of older ages will increase and in 2060, an estimated one-fourth of those who are age 80 and older will have been born abroad.

The majority of foreigners in Sweden come from outside of Europe, specifically Africa and Western Asia. The four top countries of origin for non-EU foreign-born citizens are Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Somalia. Immigrants from Lebanon, Syria, and Afghanistan are also top-sources. All of these countries are Muslim-majority nations. 

In 1960 there were only 348 immigrants from Muslim majority countries but fifty years later Muslims made up between 5-10% of the Swedish population or more, amounting between 500,000 and 1+ million people. Today, due to ongoing immigration from the MENA region, as well as illegal migration and the 2015 ‘migrant crisis’ influx of young Muslim males, their numbers are much higher. 

Low Employment Levels of Immigrants

The majority of immigrants in Sweden are not economic migrants who have secured a job in Sweden before arrival. Only 14.3% arrive in Sweden as labour market immigrants. Most immigrants (68.4%) enter Sweden as refugees or under family reunification policies. 

Most often, refugees and next of kin migrants lack relevant skill sets (such as higher education and language ability) to successfully integrate into the labour market, which is a high-skilled, knowledge and service-driven economy. As such, 48% of working-age immigrants in Sweden do not work and 42% are long-term unemployed. 

But lucky for them, Sweden offers generous free housing and social welfare benefits. 

Welfare Costs

The foreign-born population of Sweden uses over two-thirds of government financial assistance. This means that the cost of financially assisting the foreign-born population is ten times more than for real ethnic Swedes. The foreign-born population receives over 950 million CDN$ per year whereas the Swedish-born — 83.5% of the total population — receives around 320 million CDN$ per year. 

In Sweden’s third largest city, Malmo, foreign-born residents account for over 50% of the population and over 75% are receiving welfare benefits. 

Over the years, numerous public figures in Sweden have stated that mass-immigration is threatening the welfare system: 

    •    In 2010 Swedish Social Democrat Chairman Henrik Sass Larsen stated that: “We do not want to sacrifice the welfare state in the name of humanism…the welfare state is…a society built on the principles of freedom, equality and solidarity. Mass immigration…will undermine the economic and social foundation of the welfare state.”

    •    In 2013 Immigration Minister Tobias Billström said immigrants “are coming to households where the only income is support from the municipality. Is that reasonable?”

    •    In 2015 economic expert Tino Sanandaji explained that open borders can’t be combined with a welfare state: “If you’re offering generous welfare benefits to every citizen, and anyone can come and use these benefits, then a very large number of people will try to do that. And it’s just mathematically impossible for a small country like Sweden to fund those benefits.” Also see this video.

High Levels of Crime

Ethiopian asylum seeker Ephrem Tadele Yohannes molested Swedish woman Elin Krantz in the Gothenburg tram before raping and killing her nearby (2010).

Open border policies are not only crippling the Swedish welfare state, they are also creating unprecedented criminal problems and associated financial costs for Sweden and its people. 

Since 1975, when Sweden introduced mass-immigration, there has been a rapid rise in crime. Violent crime has risen 300% and reported rapes have risen 1,472%. First and second generation immigrants are over-represented in both these statistics. 

Today, Sweden has the second highest number of reported rapes in the world: there are 53.2 reported rapes per 100,000 people. In less than ten years the number of reported rapes almost tripled, from 2200 in 2003 to over 6000 in 2010. Between 2002 and 2012 reported rapes and gang rapes against children under 15 doubled. 

In 2002, 85% of those sentenced to 2 or more years for rape were foreign-born or second generation immigrants. The Crime Prevention Council in Sweden reports that the overwhelming majority of foreign-born rapists are from Muslim majority countries. 

Sexual assaults by foreigners in Sweden are increasing every year. Just recently eight sexual attacks against girls and women by ‘foreign men’ in just three weeks in Östersund, a town of 44,000, has led police to warn women not to go out alone at night. County police commissioner, Stephen Jerand, said “The situation is tense. We have never experienced anything like this before. It is almost unreal”. 

Ethnic Enclaves

The Rosengard shopping centre in Malmö, southern Sweden, a city where immigration is a thorny issue.

Government-mandated multicultural polices in Sweden have actively encouraged and funded immigrants to remain distinct peoples and have led to the fracturing of Swedish society. A new law that was implemented in 2010, the content of which was already encouraged for many years, enforces immigrant separatism: 

The preservation and development of the cultural and social life of ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities should be promoted.1

Essentially, this view and its enforcement by law has led to the formation of multiple parallel societies or ethnic enclaves made up of first, second, and third generation immigrants with different cultural values and ways of life that often conflict with Swedish norms, society, and the legal system. 

Many ethnic enclaves are referred to as “exclusion areas” or no-go zones, parts of Sweden characterised by low levels of employment and high levels of crime, including bomb and hand grenade attacks. The number of these areas grow every year. In 1990 there were three exclusion areas, in 2004 there were 136, and in 2006 there were 186

In Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, there are over 20 such no-go zones constituting around 75,000 people. Swedish authorities have effectively lost control in these areas — they are persistently attacked by gangs of immigrants when they attempt to provide public aid such as police, fire fighting and ambulance services. Journalists are also being attacked. Businesses are leaving these areas and even bus services have had to be suspended due to the risk of violence. 

According to a recent police report, around 55 of these “exclusion areas” function as parallel communities and justice systems governed by Islamic Sharia law and criminal gangs. They are characterised by high unemployment, low education, high levels of crime, and Muslim radicalisation. 

Fire and ambulance services require police escorts to enter these areas due to the violence directed against them: ranging from physical assaults, theft, and muggings, to damage to service vehicles and equipment. The Ambulance Union has requested military-grade protection gear to enter these places, such as bullet proof vests and helmets. 

Police are also attacked by Muslim gangs, most often rocks are thrown, but sometimes fireworks, Molotov cocktails, and bombs are used. The escalation of violence in these areas, including gun-related crimes, have forced police to use shatter-proof glass on their vehicles and to use back-up; one police unit responding to a complaint requires a second police unit for protection. 

Immigrant Riots

There have been a multitude of violent immigrant riots in Sweden that cost millions of dollars in damage and resources. Just some examples of many: 

    •    In 2013 hundreds of Muslim immigrants rampaged through parts of Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmo for several days, torching cars and buses, setting fires to buildings — including a police station and schools, smashing windows, vandalising property, and hurling rocks and bottles at police, rescue and fire services.

    •    In 2015 violent racial unrest between immigrants erupted in Stockholm and Malmo involving bombs, guns, and hand grenade attacks between Turkish and Kurdish and other ethnic minority immigrants.

    •    Migrants setting cars on fire has also become a tradition that has escalated year by year in Sweden: in 1996 police responded to 219 car fires, in 2006 to 964, and in 2013 to 1372 (one response can mean 10 cars are on fire).

Not only are immigrant enclaves hotbeds of crime and riots, asylum centers in Sweden are too: 

    •    Since 2015 a Swedish National Criminal Investigation report revealed that there had been a huge and rapid surge in asylum crime. More than 5000 incidents of crime at asylum centers were committed within only a period of three months (between October 2015 and the beginning of January 2016), including two bomb threats, 4 rapes, 600 assaults, 450 fights, 194 violent threats, 58 fires, and 9 robberies.

    •    There have been several riots in Swedish asylum centers. For example, nineteen youth in a Swedish refugee center for unaccompanied children in Lindås rioted, attacked staff with weapons and caused massive damage to their housing and in a refugee center in the town of Ljusne in Sweden, 15 Afghans were involved in a violent brawl that left one man dead and three injured.

The surge in gang-related immigrant crime and riots, the rise of crime by migrants and asylum seekers, asylum center unrest and riots, the threat of Islamic terrorism, Muslim radicalisation, and problems with border controls have stretched police resources, whose capability to deal with these issues is often too little and ineffective. National Police Commissioner Dan Eliasson recently demanded an extra 4100 police officers and civilian employees for the police and a budget increase of between $285 million and $444 million because the “migrant situation means a significantly higher workload for the police”. 

Costs of Asylum Seekers

On top of the huge financial costs of the foreign-born population in terms of welfare and crime, asylum seekers are also taxing Sweden’s financial resources. 

For several decades Sweden used to accept less than 30,000 refugees a year. In 2014 Sweden received just over 81,000 asylum applications, the majority of which were from the Middle East and North Africa. In 2015, 162,877 people sought asylum in Sweden, which is over double from the year before and over 8 times the amount at the turn of the century. 

An IMF report published at the beginning of this year (2016) addressed the economic impact the surge in refugees had for Europe; it provided tentative proposals for the budgetary expenses of the costs of asylum seekers for EU member countries by % of their GDP: for Sweden the asylum budgets will have to increase to around $60 million, which is more than three times the amount in 2014. 

In January 2016 the Swedish government announced it would expel between 60,000 and 80,000 migrants who arrived in 2015 and had their asylum applications rejected. Economist Jan Tullberg, who teaches at Stockholm University, estimated how much just one year’s worth of refugees (103,000) will cost Sweden over their lifetime. Processing costs for one year of the accepted refugees will amount to around 2.5 billion CDN$. 

As the average time it takes for a new arrival to enter the workforce is about 8 years, if all 103,000 new arrivals did not enter the labour force for 8 years then the cost would amount to almost 21 billion dollars. For one year of open-door policies it will cost almost 96 billion CDN$ over the lifetime for the 2015 new arrivals, which is 14 times more than the cost of Swedish Defence for one year. 

What of the costs for those asylum seekers who have had their applications rejected? On top of welfare and housing costs for the asylum seekers waiting for their applications to be accepted, once rejected it will cost around $48,000 to deport one person. This means, for Sweden, that for the 60,000 rejected asylum applications in 2015 it will cost almost 3 billion dollars to deport them. 

Prior to 2015 Sweden was accepting around 500-1000 underage and unaccompanied migrants per year. In 2015 Sweden accepted more than 35,000 unaccompanied migrant youth, most of whom were teenagers and came from Afghanistan. They require special housing (24/7 care) and cost between 500-1000 CDN$ per day, with some cases costing over 2,400 CDN$ per day. This means that to take care of the 35,000 migrant youth that arrived as refugees in 2015 it costs Sweden more than 26 million CDN$ per day or more than 9.5 billion CDN$ a year. An overwhelming number of ‘youths’ are actually “frauds”

No Dissent Allowed

In 2003, when immigration levels were around 29,000/yr, 57% of Swedes thought immigration levels were too high and wanted immigration numbers reduced to more sustainable levels.2 58% of Swedes think the same today. However, all mainstream political parties are for continued large scale immigration and large refugee intakes and since 2003 the Swedish government has increased immigration levels by almost three times more — to around 75,000 per year in addition to the 100,000 accepted refugees in 2015. 

If a person publicly questions the mainstream narrative and top-down practice of mass-immigration and refugee intakes that are altering Sweden from the outside in and the multicultural policies that are altering it from the inside out, then they are likely to be called xenophobic, fascist, racist or Nazi. In fact, critics of immigration are being hunted down, exposed on television, and intimidated “in a sort of 21st century televised witch-hunt”. And on January 1st 2015 a new law was enacted that allows for the criminal prosecution of anyone who is critical of immigration. 

In effect, out of fear of arrest and out of fear of being intimidated and publically shamed by their hostile elites, dissenting Swedes are being silenced into submission. 


Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Suppressing House Price Truth = Cheering Destruction.”


Dan Murray


Suppressing House Price Truth = Cheering Destruction

With some exceptions, Canada’s media continues to suppress the real causes of astronomically-high housing prices in Metro Vancouver and Toronto. And Canada’s new government seems to be imbibing what most of the media say. It has just announced that it will increase Canada’s immigration intake to over 300,000 per year, the highest in 100 years—-thus inflicting even more demand for housing and more financial damage on millions of Canadians.

One of the latest shameless efforts to suppress the truth happened in a CBC Radio interview done by CBC Early Edition Host Rick Cluff with Jia Wang, Deputy Director of the China Institute at the University of Alberta. In response to an allegation that Mainland Chinese were the cause of Metro Vancouver’s high housing prices, Ms. Wang said there was no hard evidence to support the charge.

There is a major flaw in asking such a question to someone like Ms. Wang or anyone else that is a Mainland China promoter.

These people are here to defend Mainland China and to portray Mainland China as a benevolent actor in the world’s affairs. She and others know that, with the collusion of business interests in the West, Mainland China has largely de-industrialized the West and has become a colonial power. She and others will do all they can to distort reality in order to further China’s interests. And naive, quisling Canadian governments are eager to help them. The evidence : According to the China Institute’s web site, “The China Institute at the University of Alberta (CIUA) was established (mostly for educational reasons) in the fall of 2005 with an endowment fund of C$37 million from the Government of Alberta.”

Informed Canadians, but obviously not those at our CBC, know the answer they will get (from a China promoter) to a question about China’s intentions. It is like asking a coyote in front of a chicken coop whether he intends to break into the coop. The coyote will lie. So will countries like China who are seeking to expand their control of Canada and the Canadian fools, particularly those at the CBC, who will believe them. For details, see

Here is one of the most recent realities that our new government and the CBC choose to ignore :

According to a March 14 column by Douglas Todd in The Vancouver Sun, UBC Geography Professor Daniel Hiebert has concluded that immigrants have a major impact on fast-rising house prices in Metro Vancouver and Toronto.

The following is a shortened version of that column :

“There is definitely an impact on the housing market,” said Hiebert, who believes a key factor behind the phenomenon is many new immigrants arrive in Canada’s major cities with a great deal of money.

The veteran researcher’s exclusive cross-tabulation of housing and immigration data, including between 2006 and 2011, found on average that 53 per cent of immigrants to Metro Vancouver during those five years became homeowners in that period.

“They bought roughly 100,000 homes in Metro Vancouver during the five years, ranging from suburban condos to ritzy mansions.”

‘“New Chinese immigrants were at the top of all this. Kind of incredibly, their rate of home ownership was 73 per cent,” said Hiebert.

Hiebert, who has published major studies on immigration, housing and ethnic enclaves, believes immigrants are seriously affecting housing affordability at both the high and low ends of the market.

“I think it would be a pretty big stretch for someone to arrive tabula rasa (without a lot of money) in a housing market like Vancouver and within five years be able to purchase a home in this place. That would be really difficult to expect,’ says UBC geographer Dan Hiebert.

“Prices of Metro Vancouver’s expensive properties, those in the $4-million-plus range, are being dramatically affected by immigrants”, Hiebert said. ‘But, at the low end, so are costs for new Syrian refugee families, who need government subsidies to afford a basic place to live.”

While some of the new immigrants who end up classified as homeowners might be among the relatively few who arrive on a family reunification program and join an existing household, Hiebert believes most would be buying homes by transferring large financial resources into Canada.

Hiebert’s findings support the conclusions of UBC’s David Ley, holder of the Canada Research Chair in geography and author of Millionaire Migrants. The Oxford-educated professor has found an “unusually decisive” correlation between high immigration to Metro Vancouver and high home prices.

The overall rate of home ownership among all residents in Metro Vancouver is almost 70 per cent ­ out of a total 1.5 million households, according to Hiebert’s work.

“Based solely on visible-minority status, and disregarding immigrant status, ethnic Chinese have the highest ratio of home ownership, followed by South Asians,” Hiebert said.

“The percentage of home ownership among Chinese is 81 per cent, accounting for 290,000 Metro households, Hiebert said.

“And South Asians are second at 75 per cent, or roughly 160,000 households.”


For details, see :

Liberal Idiot Goes To Help “Poor” Refugee Children, Smacked With Brutal Truth posted March 17/16

Attention Immigration Reformer :

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin: “Like Father, Like Son: How Immigration Shows the Trudeau Liberal Contempt for Canada and Canadians.”


Dan Murray


Like Father, Like Son: How Immigration Shows the Trudeau Liberal Contempt for Canada and Canadians  posted March17/16

by Gerry T. Neal

Filipino Extended Family: Hi Canadians; we love your Family Reunification Policy!

On Tuesday, the new Liberal Immigration Minister John McCallum, speaking in Brampton, Ontario, announced that this year the government would seek to bring from 280,000 to 305,000 new permanent residents into Canada by the end of the year. This, an increase of over seven percent from last year, is the highest number at which the government’s immigration target has ever been set. With current rate of unemployment being 7.2%, only slightly lower than the percentage by which the immigration target has been increased, this causes one to question whether or not the Liberals are deliberately trying to add insult to the injury they are perpetrating upon our country and her citizens.

If so, it would be well in keeping with the precedent the Liberals set during the premiership of the first Prime Minister Trudeau. That the present generation of Trudeau Liberals are looking to their antecedents for inspiration is evident in McCallum’s announcement which also declared that the government would be focusing on “family reunification” and the settlement of refugees.

“Family reunification”, is one of those phrases, an endless stock of which seems to be available to liberals of both the small and big L varieties, that are designed to sound nice and pleasing to the ear while concealing something rather nasty and vicious. “Family reunification” suggests the idea that in the processing of immigration applications, the government ought to give priority to those from would-be immigrants with close relatives already living in Canada. Few people, I think, would object to that idea, per se, and it is hardly new, having been part of government immigration policy in one form or another since the early twentieth century. It came into play especially after large conflicts like the World Wars in which we sent our young men to fight overseas, where many of them married “war brides” for whom an expedited immigration application process was then required. While the words “family reunification” are intended to evoke this concept, they actually mean something quite different, something introduced by the Liberals upon Pierre Trudeau’s assumption of the reins of power, and enshrined in law as a major objective of the government’s immigration policy in the Immigration Act of 1976.

If “family reunification” meant what most people think it means, then how do we explain the case of Norman Stacey, as related by the award winning journalist and columnist Doug Collins at the beginning of his book Immigration: The Destruction of English Canada, which to this day remains the best, most honest and most daring, book length treatment of the subject ever written. Norman Stacey was the son of a Canadian woman who had married a New Zealander and had returned to Canada following her divorce to take care of her terminally ill mother but then, having come down with health problems of her own, asked her son to come and help her. Stacey applied to the Canadian High Commission in London, which turned down his request, telling him that it was in his own interest to do so. (1) This was in the summer of the year that the Trudeau government passed the Immigration Act in which “family reunification” played so important a role, and as Collins, who cited many more such instances noted “the Stacey case is by no means an isolated one”. (2)

If “family reunification” meant what it is assumed to mean then someone like Stacey ought to have had his application speedily accepted. Instead he ran into a wall. The true nature of “family reunification” was hinted at by an officer at the London High Commission who quietly advised him that he would have better luck if he applied from Nairobi.

The Liberal Party prides itself on having given Canada a fair, non-racist, immigration policy when it introduced the points system in 1967 and frequently condemns the old policy, practised by all governments and supported by all parties, for the first century after Confederation, of giving preference to prospective immigrants from traditional sources such as the UK, other Commonwealth countries, the USA and Europe, as “racist”. The Liberals are wrong on both counts. It is not racist to love your country and to want your children and grandchildren to grow up in a Canada that has not been radically transformed from the country you grew up in and it is this, not an irrational fear or hatred of other peoples, that was the sentiment behind the old policy supported by Conservatives and Liberals alike, including the Liberal Party’s longest serving Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King (3). Furthermore, although there was nothing wrong with the old policy, it was not the Liberals who changed it.

It was the Conservative government of John Diefenbaker, that in the 1962 Immigration Act, declared that Canada would no longer give preference to immigration applications from traditional source countries but would process applications from everywhere in the world on the merits of the individual making the application. This change did not, in itself, radically alter the nature of immigration to Canada, nor was it intended or expected to do so. Four years after this bill was passed, almost ninety percent of the immigrants to Canada were still traditional immigrants. In 1970, however, three years after the Pearson Liberals introduced the points system, and two years after Pierre Trudeau took over as Prime Minister of Canada, half of Canada’s immigrants came from non-traditional sources, as would the majority of new immigrants thereafter. (4)

It was, again, not the introduction of a racially and ethnically neutral policy under Diefenbaker that brought about this change, but rather two changes introduced by the Liberals who succeeded Diefenbaker. The first, was the introduction of a new system of racial and country-of-origin preferences that was the exact opposite of the original, favouring immigrants from Africa (except white Rhodesians and Afrikaners), Asia, and Latin America over immigrants from the UK and Europe. This new preferential system was informal, of course, as the Liberals, having already latched onto the reprehensible and dishonest trick of castigating the pre-1963 Canada and their Conservative opponents as being “racist” could hardly put down in writing that “we will accept so many immigrants from Africa, so many from Asia, and a handful from Britain.” Rather, they accomplished it, by a campaign of actively and aggressively recruiting immigrants in the Third World which was paid for by the Canadian taxpayers they thereby sought to replace, the relocation of the visa officers charged with the task of processing immigration applications abroad from traditional source countries to our embassies and consulates in the Third World, and by taking a much more relaxed approach to the requirements of the points system in processing applications from the Third World while strictly enforcing these requirements for applicants from Britain and Europe.

The second change reinforced the first by making this double standard for the Third World and traditional sources of immigration possible. The 1967 Immigration Act had created three classes of immigrants: independents, whose applications would be processed on the basis of the new points system; the sponsored, who were immediate relatives; and the nominated, which included much more distant relatives. (5) There were more requirements for immigrants of the nominated than of the sponsored class, but it still made it easier for someone whose fifth cousin, twice removed had just arrived in Canada to get in, than someone who otherwise had the same credentials but no relatives in Canada. Since immediate families in the Third World are much larger than their counterparts in traditional source countries, thanks to the modernization and liberalism that has reduced family size in the latter, and, large extended families are much more closely knit together there, for the same reason, these new rules essentially created a large back-door to the points system, one which was fully exploited by the Liberals during the Trudeau years to radically alter the composition of Canadian immigration.

This is what “family reunification” in the language of Trudeau Liberalism is really all about – making it easier for someone from the Third World to bring his entire village over to Canada than for someone from Britain or Europe to be accepted on his own merits under the points system. This would radically change Canada from the country one reads about in the history books, the stories and novels of Stephen Leacock, Mazo de la Roche, L. M. Montgomery and Robertson Davies, or may even have experienced on a smaller scale if, like this writer, one was fortunate enough to grow up in rural Canada. This was not a change Canadians either asked for or wanted and by it, Pierre Trudeau demonstrated his utter and absolute contempt for the old Canada and for the Canadians who liked their country the way it was.

What John McCallum has just announced, therefore, is that in this new Trudeau era, we can expect much more of the same. Doesn’t that just thrill you?

(1) Doug Collins, Immigration: The Destruction of English Canada, (Richmond Hill, Ontario: BMG Publishing Ltd., 1979) pp. 1-2. Stacey came to Canada as a tourist, and applied to be allowed to stay on compassionate grounds because his mother needed him, but the Ministry initially denied this as well, relenting only after Collins hounded them mercilessly in his column over it.

(2) Ibid., p. 3.

(3) MacKenzie King declared on May 1st, 1947 that “The people of Canada do not wish as a result of mass immigration to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population…The government, therefore, has no thought of making any change in immigration regulations which would have consequences of the kind.”


(5) The 1976 Immigration Act, which came into effect in 1978, rolled the sponsored and nominated into a single family class and created a new third humanitarian class, i.e., refugees.

For sensible immigration policies for the 21st century. 

Muslim Surgeon Putting Patients at risk for misguided Religious beliefs! Posted Mar 8/16

After spotting a Muslim surgeon trying to do something dirty during an operation, a hospital consultant decided to do the right thing and confront the issue. However, after exposing the Islamist’s unsavory practice, the hospital decided to repay him with quite the nasty surprise of their own.

There’s no doubt that we live in a world rife with political correctness. Sadly, it’s leading to the degradation of our society, as seen in a story coming out of Sheffield, South Yorkshire in the UK, which details an incident that took place between Dr. Vladislav Rogozov and a female Muslim surgeon at Sheffield’s Royal Hallamshire Hospital.

Man Informs Hospital Of Muslim Breaking Rules, Gets Suspended

Dr. Vladislav Rogozov (Photo Source: Mail Online)

“I came into the operating room, where I met the surgeon, a woman shrouded in a Muslim headscarf,” he later explained. “I immediately stopped the operation of the hall and asked her to put down her scarf and replace it with the prescribed headgear. After a long discussion held with respect, decency and factual arguments, the surgeon refused and left the operating room. We managed to subsequently find another surgeon who performed the operation.”

In essence, the Muslim surgeon was willing to forego the safety of her patient by wearing a hijab. After Dr. Rogozov pointed out the risk posed to the patient, the Islamic surgeon got mad, stormed out, and would later file a complaint regarding racial discrimination. (Islam is a religion, not a race.)

Things didn’t exactly go according to plan for the Muslim surgeon. After an investigation, the hospital sided with Rogozov, but unfortunately, it wasn’t over yet. The incident actually took place in 2013, but the doctor was sworn to secrecy which he maintained –until now.

Most recently, Rogozov has spoken with an Internet blog, detailing the incident as well as others that many are too uncomfortable to disclose. The hijab situation was actually just the tip of the iceberg. As Mail Online reports, “Dr. Rogozov also spoke of an incident where a male doctor recited extracts from the Quran during surgery, and claimed Muslim staff took prayer breaks during operations.”

Man Informs Hospital Of Muslim Breaking Rules, Gets Suspended

Sheffield’s Royal Hallamshire Hospital (Photo Source: Mail Online)

At this point, it’s clear why the hospital didn’t want any of this out. Not only did the Muslim surgeon completely disregard the safety of her patient, but the hospital put the lives of other patients on the line as well. Imagine, just for a moment, if you found out that your surgeon stopped for a few minutes to oblige their religious culture. I know I’d be unhappy.

The hospital was clearly distraught over Rogozov coming forward with the truth and decided to repay him by suspending him for a month. What a nice way to repay a guy who saved your hospital from potential lawsuits. Although they say it had to do with “his tone,” it seems more likely that they’re mad about being exposed.

The religion of Islam is irrefutably behind the times when compared to modern society. Not only do they insist on their outdated and often unsanitary culture, but they’re willing to put the lives of others at risk, so that they can practice how they want, completely disregarding infection control policies. The religion of Islam is a cancer to this planet, and just as is the case with any other illness of this nature, it’s time to cut it out.

Attention Immigration Reformer :

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada is sending you its latest bulletin : “Syrian Refugees Displacing Canada’s Homeless.”


Dan Murray


Syrian Refugees Displacing Canada’s Homeless
The TABLE below contains a sample of Canadian cities that are accepting Syrian refugees. The TABLE indicates the number of Syrian refugees that each of the cities is taking, the number of Homeless Canadians in each of the cities and the number of Canadians who are on Waiting Lists for Housing in each of those cities.Quite a number of these figures are very shocking. For example, Toronto had 5219 Homeless and had a Housing Waiting List of 77,109 in 2014. Yet it has taken 4234 Syrian refugees and is now providing housing for them  !!!As we have said before, Toronto politicians are now strutting around the city like arrogant roosters in a barnyard, implying that they should be congratulated for betraying their own citizens. Politicians such as MP’s, MLA’s, Mayors, Councillors and School Trustees are doing the same things in other cities.Most Canadians would be willing to send money to groups overseas to help Syrians in refugee camps or in the foreign cities where they are living. But most Canadians think it is immoral  to give a very limited supply of Canadian housing to Syrians and all other non-Canadians.Multiply by 10  the betrayal of taking 25,000 Syrian refugees. The answer is 250,000.  That has been Canada’s average yearly immigration  intake for the past 25 years. Then, Multiply 250,000 by 25. The answer is over 6 million immigrants in those 25 years. Most of these people were unnecessary and most of them are now competing with Canadians for housing and jobs. Obviously, this betrayal  is even more  outrageous.The overall point that this TABLE makes is that our federal government has made a choice : It has placed the needs of these Syrians over the needs of Homeless Canadians. This is a shameless betrayal of Canadians and Canada. In the past, many people have twisted in the wind for doing much less harm.NOTE : The information on Syrian refugees who have come to Canada and on Homeless Canadians came from the following two sources :
TORONTO 2,615,060 5219 77,109 (2014) 4234
PEEL REGION 1,269,814 1558 12,630 (2014) 410
YORK REGION 1,108,570 2891 10,580 (2014) 152
HAMILTON 569,549 5653 5,553 (2014) 1099
OTTAWA 1,236,324 7235 10,089 1579
WATERLOO REGION 563,000 3492 2719 (2014) 1245
LONDON 366,651 12,000 (using shelters) 2341 (2014) 1275
EDMONTON 877,926 2307 19,000 (2012) 1657
WINNIPEG 730,018 2865–3165 2000 778
REGINA 193,100 232 30,000 446+
SASKATOON 222,189 379 34,000 439-478
CALGARY 1,195,194 3555 3200 1762
VANCOUVER 2,313,328 2777 2800 1681
VICTORIA 344,615 1500 1377 313

Attention Immigration Reformer: Posted March 4/16

Things are changing.

The raise of Donald Trump south of our boarder and the flood of migrants to the West have resulted in exponential traffic increases to our website and social media pages. Evidently, there is unprecedented interest in Immigration Watch Canada.

Just under a year ago, our Facebook page would average 1 new ‘like’ per day. Within the last few months, our paged has averaged 100 new ‘likes’ per week, and post reaches averaging 25,000. Our website once averaged 12,000 unique visitors per month. This number has over tripled as of recently — and the numbers keep raising.

It’s been a while since we last organized a meet-up, conference, flyer campaign, or assembly. With momentum panning out in our favor, this couldn’t be a better time to get the ball rolling again! We are especially considering the Greater Toronto Area, Edmonton and the Lower Mainland of B.C. as places to get started.

However, we need people, like you, to participate in these actions. Whether you are a leader, or a follower, we need to hear from you!

Contact us at the following address or leave a phone message at 778-803-5522
Dan Murray 

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e)  :

We have just put a petition on line. Here is the petition’s title  : TELL CANADA’S POLITICIANS TO CUT OUR IMMIGRATION INTAKE
We need your support. Please read it and sign it ASAP. Here is a link to it.:

Please help us to spread the word in whatever way you can. .
Daniel Murray

Subject: BREAKING: Liberals to build refugee camps on Canadian military bases — taxpayers will fund mosques, Korans – The Rebel  Posted Feb 10/16

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “No More Boot-Licking”

Daniel Murray


No More Boot-Licking  Posted Feb 22/16

Every day, Canadians are seeing more and more clearly that the government’s election-time promise to bring 25,000 supposedly “desperate” Syrian refugees here was extremely foolish.

Canadians will remember that during the election campaign, all of our major political party leaders tried to outbid one another in a poker-style game to show which one would take the most Syrians.

The latest news shows that most of the near 25,000 who have arrived here are far from “desperate”. In fact, most of them have been living for years in housing in countries that neighbour Syria. The Canada Border Services Agency revealed this a few days ago. The Syrians had fled their country, but they were not getting bombed every day.  What our government has really done is merely transfer people who were safely housed in the Middle East to safe housing in Canada. But what are the consequences for Canada?

One of the real stories that remains to be told is how many homeless Canadians have been displaced from potential homes in Canada by the Syrians in the 24 Canadian cities which have agreed to accept Syrians. The even bigger story is how many Canadians have been displaced in many other ways by a relentless inflow of 250,000 immigrants—most of whom Canada did not need? For example, how many have been displaced from spaces in Canada’s post-secondary system and jobs?

If our PM, his immigration minister and other politicians find it hard to believe that incoming Syrians and other groups are displacing Canadians, they do not have to go far from their comfortable offices in the City of Ottawa. There, where those MP’s are now sitting, about 9500 people are already on a waiting list for housing. Yet, the City of Ottawa has agreed to take about 600 Syrians. The big question that many Canadians in Ottawa and other cities are asking is this : When places are found to house the homeless on that Ottawa list and the Syrians and new immigrants, who will get the housing first : Canadian citizens or Syrians and other newly-arrived?

This gets to the heart of the whole Syrian issue. Our political leaders, their fellow conspirators and their supporters seem to think that non-Canadians should be given preference for this housing. Unbelievably,  hypocrisy and betrayal have reached the point that these people strut around Ottawa and other cities waiting to be congratulated for the sins they have committed against their own people.

In fact, Immigration and Refugee Minister John McCallum expressed the institutionalized stupidity of Parliament when he said in January : “It’s a delicate balance, “We want to welcome all of these refugees with open hearts and with love the way Canadians have, but at the same time we are mindful that we don’t want to offend Canadians who have themselves been waiting for a long time for social housing and things of that nature.”

You have that wrong, Mr. McCallum. There is no “delicate balance” that has to be achieved. Canada’s immigration and refugee policies have to serve the interests of Canada and Canadians, not those of immigrants and refugees.  The first responsibility of Parliament is to serve Canada’s majority population, not to lick the boots of ethnic groups and the rest of the immigration lobby.  You should look outside of Canada’s borders only after you have satisfied the needs of the people inside Canada’s borders. You are a long way from doing that.

Like recent  predecessors, Canada’s current PM and Immigration Minister have abandoned Canadians. Up until 1990, Canada acknowledged that it should cut immigration in times of high unemployment. The reason : Canada does not have unlimited resources and an unending number of jobs. Yet in spite of four serious economic downturns since 1990, including the present one  in which over 70,000 Albertans alone have lost their jobs, Parliament has made no move to cut Canada’s annual 250,000 immigrant intake.

There are much more prudent ways to show humanitarianism than to move the world to Canada.  The big question is this : If Canada’s politicians do not look out for the interests of Canada and Canadians, who will? Will it be India’s Punjab, Mainland China or the Middle East? Many (but not all)  people from these and other areas have demonstrated clearly that they are here for Canada’s booty, that they will flood Canada with sponsored relatives, and that they will claw for as much booty as possible. If Canadians are looking for evidence,  they can easily see ample data. In the past six months, Statistics Canada has revealed that recent Asian immigrants live in mansions in parts of Metro Vancouver, but pay little if anything in taxes to support the many services they grasp for (Example : educational services for their offspring).

Some of Canada’s politicians understand what is going on,  but have done little. The majority of them have decided, like our CBC, to lick the boots of immigrants and refugees. Like our PM, they like to declare that “Diversity is our strength”. If any of these hypocrites and quislings wanted an example to demonstrate that “Diversity really means Displacement”, the Housing Waiting List in the City of Ottawa alone is it.

And as is clear, that is just the beginning of this story..


For details, see

Henry Yu Believes that Canada Must Become Asian to Overcome White Supremacism Posted Feb 10/16

by Ricardo Duchesne

Henry Yu, professor of history at University of British Columbia, believes that “Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States are settler colonies that were built around white supremacy.” He asserted this in a recent article, White Supremacy and the Foreign Investment Debate. White supremacy is “an overt structuring of society that gives privileged access to resources to those who could be considered white.”
Elsewhere he has insisted that one of the “unresolved legacies of colonialism and white supremacy in British Columbia“, are the “policies designed to erase non-English language use among children” in Canada. Mandarin, and other Asian languages should become official languages.He believes the recent debate over Chinese investment in real estate in Vancouver is yet another example of the prevalence of White supremacism in Canada. Objecting to wealthy investors from mainland China is nothing less than “racial scapegoating”. What about the affordability crisis brought on by Chinese buyouts of Vancouver homes? The Canadian government should simply provide more public housing for Canadians who can’t compete with entrepreneurial Chinese foreigners. They should just learn to build public housing as in Hong Kong.Inferiority Complex?Now, why would someone seriously believe that Canada is ruled by White supremacists considering there is:a massive bureaucratic apparatus pushing multiculturalism and special group rights for immigrants across Canada, Chinese have already been paid reparations for the head tax at the federal, provincial, and municipal levels, and non-Whites or “visible minorities” already constitute the majority in Vancouver, 51.8 percent, as of 2011, whereas Eurocanadians have been drastically reduced to 46.2 percent of the population, with projections showing that they will constitute “only two out of five residents by the year 2031“?

It is not as if Henry has not been extremely successful at the Anglo-created University of British Columbia, collecting over two million dollars in two recent grants: a $1.17 million project entitled “Chinese Canadian Stories”, and $950,000 from the Federal government to show that the Chinese were one of the founding peoples’ of Canada.

Why does he keep arguing, to this day, in every paper and every conference he goes, that Canada is a White supremacist nation and that Chinese millionaires should be allowed to buy out Eurocanadian natives out of their own cities?

I detect in him a psychological trait I have noticed among some professional non-Europeans inhabiting European-created lands. Henry is an ethno-nationalist, attached to his heritage and his race; and yet he feels uneasy in this ground, unsure about it, because deep down he knows he is inhabiting a European created country, a land he craves to claim as his own. He can’t suppress the reality that Europeans were the actual creators of it, but as a Chinese ethno-nationalist he can’t accept this reality, so he needs to be constantly harping against White supremacy as a way of fighting this disconcerting reality.

With these resentful feelings, and determined to advance the ethnic interests of the Chinese race, he has decided to make the most of White ethnomasochistic tendencies, falsifying the history of Whites, enhancing the role of the Chinese, and thus reclaiming for his people the Canada he wishes had been created by Asians.

“Pacific Canada”?

In an Op Ed piece in The Vancouver Sun (February 1, 2010), Vancouver’s Own Not-So Quiet Revolution, Yu claimed that the English language “stunts diversity”. Calling it a “colonial” language, he demanded that Asian languages, long “silenced” by “white supremacists”, be given the same official status. He then equated the presence of a high number of Whites in leadership positions in Vancouver with “the legacy of a long history of apartheid and white supremacy”.

Only our multicultural self-flagellation has given Henry the nerve to talk about Eurocanadian “apartheid” today, even though Chinese immigrants come from a country that officially engages in eugenics research, the Han majority in China, 92 percent of the population, has a monopoly control over all the institutions, prohibits immigration, and disallows any foreign purchases of real estate in their country. There are no minority rights in China; Mongols, Miao, Hui, Tibetans, and Uighurs are routinely described as superstitious, lazy, ignorant, and dirty.

Look at this video of an orphaned Uyghur kid beaten in China:

Yu enjoys taunting White Canadians that they are soon to become a minority in Canada, writing a few years ago:

Our city [Vancouver] will soon be over 50 percent visible majority, with the vast majority of these non-whites of Asian heritage. Who is the minority in a city that has such strong historical and demographic connections to the Pacific?

He claims to be a historian who has proven that this “new Pacific Canada” marks a return to a Canada that was originally Pacific, that it was only the “dominance of white supremacy in immigration policy” between the 1920s and 1960s that disrupted this original Pacific/Chinese orientation. The history of Vancouver, British Columbia, and Canada between the 1920s and 1960s should be seen “as an aberration” to the original, and future, Pacific Canada.

“I’m a historian, and what I’ve said builds on the past”, Yu brags. Yet he relies on two measly facts to support this outlandish claim that Canada was originally a Pacific nation; namely, that Chinese coolies built portions of the transcontinental railroad in the late 19th century, and that the proportion of the population in British Columbia that was Chinese in 1901 was 10 percent. That’s it.

Canada and Vancouver Totally Created by Eurocanadians

Sorry Henry: the historical record is incontestable: Eurocanadians were thesupreme builders of Canada. 

In 1901, 96 percent of the Canadian population was European in origin, and it remained 96 percent European as late as 1971, when all the institutions and modern infrastructure had been created from the ground up. In 1901, when the Chinese population was supposedly building everything across Canada, and Canada was supposedly “Pacific”, there were only 17,043 Chinese immigrants (born outside Canada) relative to a population of 5.3 million.

The city of Vancouver alone, which had the highest Chinese proportion throughout Canada’s history, was virtually a White European city from its beginnings in the 1870s to the 1980s. In the 1950s, when the city had been fully developed into a metropolis, the British accounted for about 75 percent of the population, and other Europeans accounted for about 18 percent, whereas the Asian proportion (Chinese and Japanese) accounted for only 3 percent.

Patricia Roy’s Vancouver, An Illustrated History (1980), exhibits a city that was overwhelmingly British in its architectural landscape, notwithstanding its Chinatown and Little Tokyo. All the major landmarks were British: the Post Office, built 1905-1910; Dominion Trust, the Canadian Pacific Railway station; Canadian Bank of Commerce; the Strand Theater and Birks Building, with their sidewalk canopies in 1933; the Tudor revival style homes in Shaughnessy Heights in the 1920s. The sports, the education, the legal system — every institution was British. The Founding Fathers of Vancouver, the Mayors, the magistrates, the school trustees, the chief constables, the physicians, the presidents of the Board of Trade were all British descendants.

Abiding by the historical record does not make one a supremacist.

Opportunism and Cheating

Yu is cited (in 2007) saying, with obvious pride, that Vancouver is now the most integrated Asian city in North America…in Vancouver, you can’t go to a neighbourhood now where Chinese aren’t living in significant numbers. It’s incredible.

Notice how confidently he calls it an “Asian city” while classifying anyone who calls the city European a “white supremacist” even though the city was overwhelmingly European for most of its history.

Yu views Canada’s past strictly from the perspective of Chinese interests. He even says that the Hong Kong Chinese are a “new kind of immigrant” superior in education, in wealth and in expectations; they not only deserve the best neighbourhoods created by Whites, but they are too globally minded to be constrained to Vancouver only, but instead view this city as:

a global city that is one stop within the Pacific world, with two-thirds of male Canadians of Hong Kong origin between the ages of 25 and 40 living and working outside Canada.

These males “know that a key to making money is not to view the place you make money as necessarily the same place you live.” They are:

residents with multiple homes throughout the world, creating great demand for real estate in Vancouver, but also leaving many condominiums unused for portions of the year.

This is why Yu prefers the term “migrant” over immigrant — it captures this new type of opportunistic immigrant that corporations prefer, a global economic consumer who can move in and out of cities, find ways not to pay taxes, while showing no loyalty to the European-created cities they acquired citizenship from. They look upon Vancouver not as a city to which they are rooted, with memories of its landscape, its beautiful old British homes, but as a place to be bulldozed to make way for generic houses. This Facebook page documents in photographs how Vancouver has been vanishing right before our eyes.

Yu claims these migrants changed Vancouver “for the better”, they are “first-class citizens” (whereas, presumably, natives are second class). But should we be so sure that these migrants are “first class” in light of these reports in the mainstream media of recurring cheating by Chinese in exams, paying others to write exams, in one Canadian university after another, indeed everywhere in the West, purchasing university essays?

We object to the use of the term “White supremacist” against the working classes, including Aboriginals, who worked so hard to create Canada. Multiculturalism in Canada grants all ethnic groups the right to affirm their culture. Yu is an ardent promoter of Chinese ethnic interests in Canada, which is understandable. But he is inconsistent in the way he opportunistically borrows Marxist ideas to curtail Eurocanadians from pursuing their own ethnic interests. We object to this double standard. We believe in historical veracity, in the Western principle of individual rights; we oppose dog-eating, and child slave labour. We are for a clean environment and object to the “horrific practice of eating aborted fetuses” (see images here) as a business for medical companies.

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e)  :

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “It’s Time To Leave, Haseeb””

Daniel Murray



On most days of the week, Imperial Oil won’t win much sympathy from Canadians. But even they will win some points for having to put up with a complaint made about them to the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Muhammad Taimoor Haseeb, a Pakistani man who came here as an International Student, is claiming that Imperial Oil denied him a job because he was neither a Canadian Citizen nor a Canadian Permanent Resident.  In other words, Haseeb is claiming that Canadian citizens or Permanent Residents should have no right to be considered first for any job in Canada. And, he would probably add, a century plus of such first consideration has been completely unjustified and should be abolished.

According to The Toronto Star,  the Pakistani man said,  ” Treating me as lesser of a human being because I was not born in Canada is upsetting. Telling me that immigrants take up jobs that locals deserve and have the first right to is just as discriminatory,” said Haseeb….

And Haseeb added : “If it were true, Imperial Oil should not give jobs to anyone but the First Nations folks, who are the only ones who possibly meet the criteria.”

If Canadians wanted one of the most ridiculous consequences of equally-ridiculous statements such as “We are all immigrants” and “We have to abolish White Privilege”, this is it. Most important, if Canadians wanted to hear a brazen example of international students or immigrants swallowing such nonsense and spitting hatred back into Canadian  faces, this is it.

The logical thing to do would be to ask Haseeb what Pakistanis like him would do if a Canadian were to go to Pakistan and say that Pakistan had no right to give hiring priority to Pakistani citizens. We suspect that Pakistan (as well as all other countries) has such a rule and that if a Canadian were to go there and make such a statement, then that Canadian would be sent packing.

In other words, what value does Citizenship have if citizens, in this case Canadian citizens, are not given hiring priority by Imperial Oil or by all employers in Canada?

Here are a few key points that have to be made :

(1) Haseeb’s comments are extremely insulting, yet they are broadcast daily on our Quisling CBC and other media. The fact that Haseeb is making them shows that he thinks he can get away with making them and that our CBC, large parts of the private media and the gullible section of our public will accept what he says. The point is that such an arrogant and insulting comment should result in Haseeb and the many others like him being immediately sent packing.

(2) Human Rights Commissions have a record of throwing in their lot with complainers like Haseeb. This raises the obvious point that such groups should never have been given the power to hear and rule on such important matters. Allowing the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to hear such a complaint  this March in Toronto, is like giving our treacherous CBC the right to make such rulings.

(3 ) According to Ottawa, on  December 1, 2012, Canada had 265,404 international students.  That figure has risen to over 300,000.  The previous government said it would increase Canada’s international student intake to about 450,000 by 2022. Canada’s post-secondary institutions have boasted about the economic benefits of international students to Canada.  Yet, neither the post-secondary institutions nor governments have ever provided any concrete evidence that international students pay the true costs of their education. In fact, there is authoritative evidence in countries such as the U.S. that even though international students pay higher fees, U.S. citizens continue to substantially subsidize the education of international students.

(4) The International student issue has to be examined much more closely. Canada’s post-secondary institutions, particularly those which are publicly funded,  exist for the benefit of Canadians. As in the past, there will continue to be  a humanitarian component to allowing some foreign students  to come to Canada and then return to their home countries with the enrichment they have received here. But Canada’s International Student programme has  been  sabotaged. It is now an alternate immigration door into Canada for characters like Haseeb who have no intention of ever returning to their  home countries and who have clearly absorbed a hatred of Canada’s majority population. Canada should be making it clear to them that they are obligated to  return to their home countries. The sooner, the better. Canada does not need them.


For details, see


 Is the ‘Migrant Crisis’ Part of a Zionist Plot Against White Europeans? – Non-Aligned Media Posted Jan 22/16

Swiss Member of Parliament Has Had Enough! – YouTube from four years ago 5 min Posted Jan 6/16

Revealed:1000+Migrants Brawl, rape, Sexually assault, and steal at one German train Station On New Years Eve Posted Jan 4/2016


Posted on October 22, 2014 by Raheel Raza

Canada is under attack. Since 9/11 and perhaps even before that, some of us Muslims have been insisting that Canada is not safe from terrorist attacks and that it’s just a matter of time. Yesterday we heard the shocking news that a Canadian soldier was run over in Quebec. Some people shrugged this off as the work of a mentally deranged person probably acting alone.

I was concerned that this response is too simplistic and reality is very different. Today another soldier was killed at the war memorial in Ottawa and our Canadian Parliament is under attack by one or more gunmen.

Events will unfold and Canada may go back to doing business in its usually politically correct way. In the meantime 90 known unsavory characters who wish to harm Canada and are known to the RCMP are still around. What are we doing about this?

As a Muslim whose faith has been replaced by an evil ideology, I can’t stand by idly and watch these events evolve when they have already been forecast not just by me, but by many others like me who are concerned about the security and safety of this land we call home.

Today we have two clear options. We can either continue to believe in the handbook titled “Radicalization for Dummies” and act vague and politically correct on clear indications of where the problem originates from, or we can take immediate action as Canadians. Otherwise, rest assured the rabid ideology behind acts of blatant terrorism will only grow. And when that happens, please don’t come looking for ‘moderate Muslims’ as we have been saying this since a decade and continue to stand on guard for Canada but is anyone listening?

Here is what Canada needs to do.

1.Close all mosques for three months to have intense scrutiny on the Imams and their sermons in the past 3 months. This is not abuse of religious freedom – it’s to ENSURE that religion can be free and survive in Canada while protecting the country.

2.All Muslim organizations (including mine) should submit detailed financial statements to show where their donations are coming from.

3.Put a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries for a set period till matters here settle down. Anyone wishing to partake in armed Jihad abroad or proven to be returning from such a venture, needs to have their citizenship revoked and given a one-way ticket to the country of their choice as soon as possible.

4.Islamic schools need to have accountability and if their syllabus shows even an iota of hate, they should be shut down.

5.The Islamists calls for un-reasonable accommodation like face covering, special prayer spaces, Friday prayers in public schools should be taken with a pinch of salt and instead of just giving in to these demands, there should be a body of well-informed Canadians discussing and debating these issues in light of Canadian values and norms.

We know that the new enemy is an ideology and we have to defeat it in the way communism was defeated. Not by targeting the faith, but by targeting those who are using their faith to promote subversive agendas of violence and terrorism. This has to be done with active participation of government and citizens from all walks of life without resorting to hate and bigotry.

We need to expose, educate and eradicate.

Geert Wilders is a Member of the Dutch Parliament. Posted Nov 29/15

In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: “Who lost Europe ?” Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom the Netherlands , at the Four Seasons in New York , introducing an Alliance of Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem .

Dear friends,
Thank you very much for inviting me.

I come to America with a mission.  All is not well in the old world.  There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic.  We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe.  This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West.  The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.

First, I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe ..  Then, I will say a few things about Islam.  To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem .

The Europe you know is changing.

You have probably seen the landmarks.  But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world.  It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighborhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen.  And if they are, they might regret it.  This goes for the police as well.  It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners.  The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighborhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe .  With larger congregations than there are in churches.  And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region.  Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam , Marseille and Malmo in Sweden ..  In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim.   Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighborhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities.

In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims.

Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils.  In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims.  Non-Muslim women routinely hear ‘whore, whore’.  Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin.

In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin .  The history of the Holocaust can no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity.

In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighborhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves.  Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.

Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II.  French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya , Israel ..  I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering  25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now.  Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers.  And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate.  But there are few signs of that.  The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France .  One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favor of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’.  And this is how we give them respect.  We have Muslim official state holidays.

The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority.  We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey .

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behavior, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example, against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots.   Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus.  I call the perpetrators ‘settlers’,  because that is what they are.  They do not come to integrate into our societies; they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam.  Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities, their countries.  Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet.  His behavior is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized.  Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem.  But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time.  Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed.  Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza.  If it is good for Islam, it is good.  If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.

Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion.  Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins.  But in its essence Islam is a political ideology.  It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person.  Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life.  Islam means ‘submission’.  Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia.  If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam ‘the most retrograde force in the world’, and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran.  The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor.  I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times.  I support Israel , first, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz , second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam’s territorial advance.   Israel is facing the front lines of Jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines , Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan , Lebanon , and Aceh in Indonesia .   Israel is simply in the way, the same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel .  It is a war against the West.  It is Jihad.   Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us.  If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest.  Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities.  But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West .  It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values.  On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam.  They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed.  The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning.  It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination.  If they can get Israel , they can get everything.  So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a ‘right-wing extremists’ or ‘racists’.  In my country, the Netherlands , 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II.  And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat.  Yet there is a greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing.  The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine.  An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America – as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs.  With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and Jerusalem ….

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts.  My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives.  All throughout Europe , American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish.  My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians.  We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe ‘s children in the same state in which it was offered to us.  We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams.  Future generations would never forgive us.  We cannot squander our liberties.  We simply do not have the right to do so.

We have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from destroying the free world that we know.

Please take the time to read and understand what is written here, Please send it to every free person that you know, it is so very important.
Snopes’ authentication:

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) :

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada sends you our latest bulletin : “Is Our Immigration Minister as Poorly-Informed As In His Past?”

This bulletin quotes excerpts from an OP ED that was written in 2001 by Canada’s new immigration Minister, John McCallum. They demonstrate McCallum’s immigration mindset 14 years ago. From statements he has made recently about the Syrian Refugee issue, we suspect he still has not done his homework. We recommend that he go off to some deserted military base, do some deep knee bends,  and inform himself before he makes more immigration mistakes.

Daniel Murray


Is Our Immigration Minister As Poorly-Informed As In His Past?

(1) McCallum said : Canada needs more immigrants; We face an aging population and need to hire tens of thousands of people to replace baby boomers who will retire soon.

Reality : Where is the evidence that Canada needs more immigrants ? The fact that Canada for years has had over 1 million unemployed and hundreds of thousands of under-employed should be ample evidence that Canada needs few if any immigrants at all. If McCallum were minimally aware, he should know that Health and Welfare Canada studied the aging population issue in the late 1980’s and concluded that immigration of up to 600,000 per year would not make Canada younger or solve problems created by our aging population. As Health and Welfare recommended, using a made-in-Canada solution in which Ottawa would get more female Canadians and unemployed 45+ year old males into the work force was a far sounder solution.

(2) McCallum said : One thing we are very good at is attracting people from all over the world and creating a society that welcomes people of all races, religions and cultures.

REALITY : Canada does not welcome people from all over the world——particularly those whose background is similar to that of Canada’s majority population. In fact, it discourages well-qualified European applicants by accepting very few applicants from Europe. The source countries of most of Canada’s immigrants show that Canada goes out of its way to encourage applicants from Asia. For the past 25 years, the highest number of those accepted have come from countries like Mainland China, The Philippines, Pakistan and India. These people know a fool when they see one and they have taken considerable advantage of Canada’s immigration programme and Canada’s generous social safety net.

(3) McCallum said : In terms of immigration, a second advantage (Canada has) is that we have a lot of space. As Morton Weinfeld of McGill University has pointed out, as a theoretical proposition, if we were to take the lower one- tenth of our land— the slice of land adjacent to the U.S. border— and increase its population density to that of Holland, all of a sudden there would be 400 million Canadians.

REALITY : In 1978, Ottawa asked The Science Council of Canada to propose an optimum population for Canada. The Science Council examined the resources and technology Canada had, and stated that if Canada wanted to maintain its standard of living, it had to conserve its resources, not squander then by allowing its population to grow uncontrollably through an open-door immigration policy. In particular, it should take steps to protect its limited amount of farmland from being converted to roads and subdivisions. It should use its farmland to become a major world food exporter. In order to do that,  it has to limit and stabilize its population (probably around 34 million), not the wild 400+ million that McCallum proposed and the 100+ million that a number of others have recently campaigned for.

Here’s a special note for McCallum and Morton Weinfeld : Like most countries in Europe, Holland is crowded and could use a major population decline. A stable, sustainable population is a key goal for the future of any country. Imitating countries like China and India is not the road to follow. As Canada’s Privy Council decreed, they are the greatest environmental disasters on the face of the planet—largely because they do not have the resources to support their insane population levels. Their insanity is an example of what most countries should never do.

(4) McCallum said : A third advantage is our points-based immigration policy, designed to attract the best and the brightest immigrants to Canada. This is not at the expense of family reunification and refugee policies, areas in which we are as generous as any. However, while some 60 per cent of Canadian immigrants are in the “economic immigrant” class, the corresponding percentage for the United States is a mere 10 per cent.

REALITY : Even Citizenship and Immigration admits that the vast majority of the 125,000 to 150,000 immigrants who enter Canada through the “economic immigrant” class are really dependent children and spouses. This is the group that McCallum proclaims will be the one that will help Canada economically. The latter are average people, not the brightest and best. And even if they were the brightest and best, Canada’s primary responsibility is to its own population, not to non-Canadians. In other words, Canada should not be putting a bullet in the heads of its own citizens in order to proclaim, like McCallum, many politicians, and our treacherous CBC, that it is becoming “Diverse”. The point is that, when added to the immigrants that enter Canada through the Family and Refugee Classes, the majority of Canada’s immigrants are dependents on the Canadian purse.

(5) McCallum said : My riding, Markham, illustrates both Canada’s success in welcoming people from all over the world and the second potential problem arising from higher immigration. In recent years, Markham has enjoyed remarkably high population growth, fuelled in part by immigration. Too often, population growth gets ahead of governments’ ability to provide the needed infrastructure—- housing, roads, transit, environmental protection and so on. As a result, transportation gridlock was a major issue in Markham at the time of the last federal election.

REALITY : McCallum is correct in saying that immigration-driven population growth got ahead of government’s ability to provide the necessary infrastructure. But he is wrong in saying that if government had spent the billions needed on infrastructure, that Canada would have been better off. The point is that neither Markham nor any other city in Canada needed the number of immigrants it received. In fact, those cities will pay much more in future infrastructure costs than they will ever get back in taxes. In fact, Markham’s population growth was probably mostly driven by wealthy immigrants who entered Canada through Business programmes. Those immigrants to Markham, like their counterparts in Richmond and Vancouver, were mostly Chinese and they have become notorious for paying no income taxes, or very low income taxes.

(6) McCallum said : There’s the question of how to ensure that highly qualified immigrants don’t end up driving taxis, as well as the matter of what if anything the federal government should do to influence how all these new immigrants would be distributed across the country.

REALITY : Even in cases where immigrants are driving taxis, that is, working in jobs that they are over-qualified for, the point is that most educated immigrants (as well as uneducated) who have come here in the past 25 years were not needed and have either competed with Canadian-born for a limited number of jobs or been given priority in hiring—thus displacing Canadian-born. The latter has doubled the unnecessary immigration insult that had already been committed against Canadians. If McCallum and a huge number of other MP’s had been doing their jobs, they would have raised a coast-to-coast uproar over Canada’s immigration intake. Instead, they have grovelled to recent immigrants and made statements as uninformed as those made by McCallum. .

John McCallum is one more Immigration Minister who suffers from the delusion that Canada’s immigration policy exists to help immigrants— at the expense of Canada and Canadian citizens. The larger problem is that his boss, PM Justin Trudeau seems to think the same way. Canadians have to send both of them a strong message. FAST !!!


To see McCallum’s complete OP ED, see the following :


 Exploiting Canada All The Way To The Bank Posted Oct 31/15  (This list does not cover all the Muslim groups who have had there hands out as well Tami)

Listed below are the names of 25 organizations to which Citizenship and Immigration has given grants or contributions in the name of multiculturalism. The grants are probably close to $1 Billion per year and were made in the two fiscal years 2013 / 2014 and 2014 / 2015. A list of another 40 groups which have received at least $5 Million in that time can be found at

Here are some observations about the grants—

(1) The total amount of grants for fiscal year 2013 / 2014 was about $920 Million. The total for fiscal year 2014 / 2015 was over $720 Million. These totals are only for grants that were over $25,000. If the totals included grants under $25,000, they would .be substantially higher.

(2) Most Canadians do not have a million dollars to throw around, but Ottawa does. And Ottawa’s ruling parties don’t seem to mind throwing money to ethnic groups directly or indirectly —–especially if they are going to get votes in return. It is extremely obvious that Ottawa pays no attention to the consequences of its immigration policies on Canada’s majority population. The total of these grants pale in comparison with the huge amounts that Ottawa contributes to subsidize immigrants. That total is now up to a phenomenal $35 Billion per year. !!! Together, the subsidies demonstrate the point that Canada’s high immigration intake is not only extremely foolish, but shamelessly treacherous. It is no exaggeration to say that Canada’s Parliament consists of a majority of quislings.

(3) Revelations in the past few months show that wealthy new immigrants are paying little if any income tax, yet are living in multi-million dollar mansions and grasping for every benefit they can seize. Previous other revelations demonstrate that relentless immigration has caused massive increases in house prices. Again, this information clearly shows that Ottawa continues to expect its majority population to tolerate the massive tax evasion these new immigrants have engaged in for years and assumes that its majority population will pay for what the tax evaders are not paying. It also shows that Ottawa (as well as provincial and municipal governments) see nothing wrong with the fact that tax evaders are displacing Canada’s majority population in the struggle for housing. They are also making home ownership unreachable or extremely difficult and causing widespread environmental destruction and crowding that resembles the environmental conditions that prevail in the source countries of Canada’s immigrants.

(4) The groups that have received the grants extend from coast to coast. For example, in the list of groups that received the largest grants are groups from B.C., Alberta, and Saskatchewan. But, because Ontario has taken about half of Canada’s unnecessary immigration intake since relentless high immigration began in 1991,  over half of the 25 groups that have exploited the immigration system the most are located in Ontario, particularly around Toronto. For example, the Newcomer Centre of Peel (Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon, population about 1.4  million) received $75 Million (the largest grant) and is home to a large number of new immigrants (Sikhs and others) who now outnumber the former population of Peel. The group which received the third highest dollar value of grants (over $34 Million) is Thornecliffe Neighbourhood Office. This is especially worth noting because although receiving the third highest grants, Thornecliffe Park is a small section of Toronto. It has a population of about 20,000  and is home to a large population of East Indians, particularly Muslims from Pakistan and other parts of South Asia.

(5) The Toronto District School Board, which is notorious for its “Don’t Ask. Don’t Tell.” policy of providing illegal students access to schools, received over $55 Million, the second largest total of grants. This group claims to be merely implementing Ontario law, but it ignores the point that immigration law in general exists to protect Canadians, not to benefit immigration lobby groups. Yet, for sentimental reasons and systemic weakness in dealing with the immigration lobby, it has ignored its former majority population and  burdened that former majority population economically and culturally with people that Canada never needed..

(6) The grants also show that organizations like post-secondary institutions (for instance,  Bow Valley College in Calgary which placed fourth in the amount of grants received) and churches have either been duped into participating in this grasping for grants or have willingly participated in the widespread corruption that surrounds the entire immigration issue.

(7) Groups such as S.U.C.C.E.S.S. are sixth on this list. It is important to note that this list  does not include grants from provinces or municipalities. S.U.C.C.E.S.S. receives provincial grants. Of all the ethnocentric groups, it is one of the worst.  It is notorious for promoting high levels of immigration from Chinese source areas and depends heavily on Ottawa’s grants to undermine Canada.



(1) Newcomer Centre of Peel-Mississauga,Ontario,  2014-03-13 ($24,980,620.00 )+ 2014-04-03 ($25,204,788.00  ) + 2015-03-09 $25,254,788.00……………………………………………………………………………..$75,440,196

(2) Toronto District School Board-Toronto,Ontario,  2013-04-05 $3,530,532.00 + 2014.01.30  ($18,421,826.00)  + 2014..04..01 ( $17,075,154.00  ) + 2015-03-27 $16,800,000………………………………………….$55,827,512

(3) Thorncliffe Neighbourhood Office-Toronto,Ontario,  2014-01-23+30… $9, 744, 506 +  2014-04-15…$7,177,819 +  2014-04-15 $2,566,687 + 2014-07-16 $7,440,347 + 2015-03-31 $7,603,063…………………..$34,532,422

(4) Bow Valley College-Calgary, Alberta  2013-08-27 $329,808 + 2014-09–$17,145,374 + 2014-11-21 $17,376,566……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………$34,851,748

(5) Immigrant Services Society of B.C. (Vancouver, Richmond, Maple Ridge, New Westminster, Langley, Coquitlam, Burnaby)– $22, 400, 129 +  2014-07-07–$4,901,806.00—-2014-11-19 $6,615,690………..$33,917,625

(6) S.U.C.C.E.S.S.—Metro Vancouver + Fort St. John–2014-03-20+21+26+29  $22, 286,602+ Surrey —2014-08-19 $4,042,690.00 + 2014-09-05 $1,479,355.00 + 2014-09-30 $794,883.00—$6,316,928 + 2014-10-01 $3,025,738 + 2014-10-14 $496,325 + 2014-10-22 $1,291,208…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………$33,416,801

(7) Calgary Catholic Immigration Society-Calgary 2013-09-26 $2,254,542.00 + 2013-09-26 $184,416 + 2014-01 TO 03 28—$9,164, 093—2014-09-15 $1,250,786.00 + 2014-09-12 $6,316,214 + 2014-10-07 $4,919,971 + 2014-10-07 $6,508,499 + 2014-12-10 $1,840,105 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….$32,438,626

(8) Edmonton Catholic Schools-Edmonton, Alberta  2013-07-02 $7,990,158 + 2014-03-28…$9,799,097.00 + 2014-08-18 $10,082,920……………………………………………………………………………………………$27,872,175

(9) YMCA of Greater Toronto-Toronto,Ontario–2013-09-06 $689,091 + 2013-10-17 $6,175,106 + 2013-04-01 + $5,365,991 + 2014-09-18 $6,539,034.00 + 2014-09-11 $5,613,510.00………………………………..$24,578,501

(10) Malton Neighbourhood Services-Mississauga, Ontario 2014-03-06 TO 2014.03.12…$12, 102, 069.00 + 2014-07-16 $9,575,090 + 2014-12-18 $2,687,979……………………………………………………………..$24,365,138

(11) Saskatoon Open Door Society-Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, $14, 865, 884— + 2014-02-14+18+19 + 2014-07-24 $4,311,877 + 2015-02-10 $3,574,829…………………………………………………………………$22,752,590

(12) Centre for Immigrant and Community Services (CICS)-Toronto, Ontario, Canada 2014-03-10 $6,190,107.00 + 2014-03-04 $9,798,125.00 + 2015-03-31 $6,278,451.00…………………………………………….$22,266,683

(13) Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers-2013-07-02 $5,763,992 +  2013-12-20 $461,094 + 2014-08-18–$6,406,598 + 2014-11-26 $5,346,337–2015-03-30 $869,646 + 2015-03-30 $3,355,161……… $22,201,828

(14) Toronto Catholic District School Board-Toronto,Ontario 2014-09-11–$10,638,160.00 + 2015-03-19 $10,988,184………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..$21,626,344

(15) COSTI Immigrant Services-Toronto, Ontario—2013-07-02 $298,242 + 2015-03-31–$15,238,478 + 2015-03-31 + $5,530,441 + 2015-03-31 $741,461.00………………………………………………………………$21,808,622

(16) Polycultural Immigrant & Community Services-Toronto, Ontario,  2013-11-01 $8,781,657 + 2013-12-06 $11,896,939………………………………………………………………………………………………………….$20,678,596

(17) Centre for Newcomers Society of Calgary-2013-07-26 $4,633,537 + 2013-09-09 $6,261,281 + 2014-09-09 $3,212,937.00 + 2014-08-28 $5,162,957 + 2014-10-07 $1,302,079………………………………….$20,572,791

(18) Centre for Immigrant and Community Services (CICS)-Toronto,Ontario,Canada 2014-03-04–$9,798,125.00 + 2014-09-03-$9,853,326…………………………………………………………………………………….$19,651,451

(19) Ottawa Community Immigrant Services Organization-Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 2013-04-09 + 2013.06.27…$9,132,794 + 2013-07-02–$3,321,408 + 2014-03-26  +  2014-03-26 $5,722, 949……………….$18,177,151

(20) Multilingual Orientation Service Association for Immigrant Communities-Burnaby, New Westminster, North Van, B.C. 2014-03-20.TO 31……………………………………………………………………………….$18,032,933

(21) Quality Continuous Improvement Centre for Community Education Mississauga,Brampton, Oakville,Ontario,Canada 2014-07-15 $9,096,385.00 + 2014-08-01 $8,146,655.00………………………………….$17,243,040

(22) Dixie Bloor Neighbourhood Drop-in Centre Mississauga, Ontario, Canada 2013-09-06………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..$16,800,147

(23) Calgary Immigrant Women’s Association Calgary, Alberta, Canada 2014-09-26 $5,908,077.00 + 2014-09-22 $2,748,997.00 + 2014-09-22 $3,798,139.00 + 2015-03-31 $4,126,806.00 …………………….$16,579,019

(24) Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration (Ontario) Toronto, Ontario, Canada 2013-06-04…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. $16,640,000

(25) NorQuest College Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 2014-08-18 $14,307,341.00 + 2014-08-13 $2,164,849.00…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………$16,472,190

 Refugee Migrant issues in Europe from front lines! Oct 26/15

Date: 19 October 2015 11:59:31 GMT+01:00
Yesterday, at the hospital we had a meeting about how the situation here and at the other Munich hospitals is unsustainable. Clinics cannot handle emergencies, so they are starting to send everything to the hospitals.

Many Muslims are refusing treatment by female staff and, we, women, are refusing to go among those animals, especially from Africa. Relations between the staff and migrants are going from bad to worse. Since last weekend, migrants going to the hospitals must be accompanied by police with K-9 units.

Many migrants have AIDS, syphilis, open TB and many exotic diseases that we, in Europe, do not know how to treat them. If they receive a prescription in the pharmacy, they learn they have to pay cash. This leads to unbelievable outbursts, especially when it is about drugs for the children. They abandon the children with pharmacy staff with the words: “So, cure them here yourselves!” So the police are not just guarding the clinics and hospitals, but also large pharmacies.

Truly we said openly: Where are all those who had welcomed in front of TV cameras, with signs at train stations?! Yes, for now, the border has been closed, but a million of them are already here and we will definitely not be able to get rid of them.

Until now, the number of unemployed in Germany was 2.2 million. Now it will be at least 3.5 million. Most of these people are completely unemployable. A bare minimum of them have any education. What is more, their women usually do not work at all. I estimate that one in ten is pregnant. Hundreds of thousands of them have brought along infants and little kids under six, many emaciated and neglected. If this continues and German re-opens its borders, I’m going home to the Czech Republic. Nobody can keep me here in this situation, not even double the salary than at home. I went to Germany, not to Africa or the Middle East.

Even the professor who heads our department told us how sad it makes him to see the cleaning woman, who for 800 Euros cleans every day for years, and then meets young men in the hallways who just wait with their hand outstretched, want everything for free, and when they don’t get it they throw a fit.

I really don’t need this! But I’m afraid that if I return, that at some point it will be the same in the Czech Republic. If the Germans, with their nature cannot handle this, there in Czechia it would be total chaos. Nobody who has not come in contact with them has no idea what kind of animals they are, especially the ones from Africa, and how Muslims act superior to our staff, regarding their religious accommodation.

For now, the local hospital staff has not come down with the diseases they brought here, but, with so many hundreds of patients every day – this is just a question of time.

In a hospital near the Rhine, migrants attacked the staff with knives after they had handed over an 8-month-old on the brink of death, which they had dragged across half of Europe for three months. The child died in two days, despite having received top care at one of the best pediatric clinics in Germany. The physician had to undergo surgery and two nurses are laid up in the ICU. Nobody has been punished.

The local press is forbidden to write about it, so we know about it through email. What would have happened to a German if he had stabbed a doctor and nurses with a knife? Or if he had flung his own syphilis-infected urine into a nurse’s face and so threatened her with infection? At a minimum he’d go straight to jail and later to court. With these people – so far, nothing has happened.

And so I ask, where are all those greeters and receivers from the train stations? Sitting pretty at home, enjoying their non-profits and looking forward to more trains and their next batch of cash from acting like greeters at the stations. If it were up to me I would round up all these greeters and bring them here first to our hospital’s emergency ward, as attendants. Then, into one building with the migrants so they can look after them there themselves, without armed police, without police dogs who today are in every hospital here in Bavaria, and without medical help.

Is this situation coming to England?

The boarders are not closed in Germany, the authorities just want to organize the migration of 1,000s of migrants coming every day. The Sunday 10 days back alone 17,000 to Bavaria, mostly young man. In the neighbor city I work a whole area is used for a in between stop for the migrants … I’ve read today that around the half of the people of Syria is on the flight. So when in 2013 there lived around 30 million people this means around 15 millions is on the way to Europe, the majority to Germany.

Now the winter comes, so the pressure increases to provide them all with shelter and food. For the authorities and helpers almost not to handle because of the increasing number of people coming.

Besides of this the whole social and cultural system here will collapse in the coming years I’m afraid.

The media here is totally controlled by the country because when you publish you need a license. I’ve also read that they will establish a law where they can put down every protest or critics or YT video regarding to this topic.




“It is no measure of good health to be well-adjusted to a sick society.” – Krishnamurti

White Students Union Causes Flap with double Standards at Universities in Ontario!

Deluded Justin groupies who believe that importing atavistic hordes of Africans, Asians, and Muslims will “enrich” their lifes Posted Oct 26/15

On October 19th the Liberal party won a majority government with 184 seats whilst the Conservatives have been reduced to 99 seats and the NDP has once again become a third party. Until election day I assumed that there would be a minority government of some description; possibly NDP or Conservative. Trudeau managed to make some impressive gains, however, and has brought his party back from obscurity. Pierre Trudeau is treated like a saint and his legacy had an impact on the election’s outcome. That and the general feeling of malaise most Canadians had for a Harper’s near 10-year long reign. Trudeau also had better style and panache. He had a certain joie de vivre his opponents lacked. The popularity contest aspect of democracy was a major factor in the outcome. It has always been one of democracy’s biggest failings.

Trudeau is in many ways a continuation of his famous father. And much like Pierre, Justin is an internationalist. An example of this is Justin’s support for the peacekeeper mythos invented by the Liberal Party. I am no hawk and especially when it comes to the Middle East which in my opinion we should leave alone — clearly supporting rebels in Syria, Libya and elsewhere is only making the situation catastrophically terrible — but nor do I have anytime for this peacekeeper nonsense. It means yet more being wasted on foreign aid. Something SJWs adore. They also adore affirmative action policies and Trudeau and the Liberals are full supporters of such measures. Take for example his commitment to gender parity in the cabinet: this will not magically lead to good governance and in fact could lead to quite the opposite as choices will not be based on merit.

His views on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) are harder to gauge at the moment. He has taken a middle-ground approach to it, neither fully endorsing nor fully rejecting it. Given Obama’s support for the project I doubt Trudeau will scrap TPP. As much as I distrust the NDP I retract my previous statement and concede there was one reason to vote for them and that was their opposition to the TPP. The implementation of the TPP would not only allow for yet more foreign workers being brought here, but it would also threaten internet freedom.

Naive Trudeau who thinks Chinamen are Liberals instead of racialists exploiting our values.

One potential scandal that didn’t get too much coverage is of the connections between Justin Trudeau and ex-Liberal MP for Richmond, BC, Raymond Chan. Bob Mackin states that both the Tories and the NDP are aware of this issue and have attempted to raise it before but it seems the Liberals have managed to keep this more or less under the radar. Evidently Chan has connections to dirty Chinese money which isn’t hard to believe given how Chinese Richmond is and how much illicit money comes into this country from the PRC. Connections with corrupt Chinese businessmen and politicians is hardly “real change”.

The Liberals historically haven’t been too great for Euro-Canadians and given Trudeau’s support for affirmative action, an increase in our intake of ‘refugees’ and the continuation of his father’s already well-entrenched multiculturalism policy appears more than likely; I have no hope for him. As with the NDP Trudeau was more than eager to jump on perhaps the most enduring controversy of this past election: Harper’s old-stock Canadian comment. His rivals were quick to jump on that comment and said it was racist. I heard this again and again on social media and people were quick to make references to the National Citizens Coalition which wants smaller government and lower taxes. Evidently many were under the impression it is a White nationalist organization. So what if it is? Clearly Harper has rejected whatever White identity politics they may or may not espouse.

Cuckservative Harper trying to outshine his rivals in pandering to ethnic vote

NDP Bill Tieleman was one of many to make reference to Harper’s association with that group and believed old stock Canadian was a tactic to cause fear and division to win votes. However, Tieleman and others like him were also engaging in fear and division when they make the Conservatives out to be hate filled racists targeting minorities. Harper should have owned the quote. It really didn’t matter how he attempted to wave it off as no matter what he was going to be labeled a racist. Same goes for his stance against niqabs in citizenship ceremonies and his unwillingness to launch an inquiry into murdered Amerindian women. Harper was also damned as racist for trying to woo immigrant voters with anti-Trudeau ads. The Conservatives are wrong to think they can use mass migration to their advantage.

Given that the Liberals were just as willing as the NDP to promote the issues of non-Whites first I think it is clear the Conservatives will have to change their strategy. They can either continue down the road of the cuck and blindly ape their more vigorous leftist opponents or they can stand up for their heritage and people. The Conservative Party (much like centre-right parties throughout the West) need to promote White identity because that is their base. So long as centre-right parties in the West such as our Conservative Party, or the Australian Liberals or the GOP continue to ape the left there can be no revival of conservatism. If these parties do not care about the people who invented their conservative philosophy than they should really stop pretending to care about said philosophy as it won’t survive the displacement of Europeans.

The left has always wanted to destroy the nation-state and they may succeed in doing this thanks to the willingness of rightist parties to follow their lead and toe the line they create. For example, as Gerry T. Neal notes, although it was Pierre Trudeau who set a target for the number of immigrants needed to be brought in per year, it was Brian Mulroney who raised the target to exceptionally high numbers. It has remained high ever since.

I often fear the damage done by journalists and the “great march through the universities” may be too pronounced. It is wrong to point out that there are differences between disparate groups, or that Western values are indeed Western and are under threat by an incoming of masses of non-Westerners. Studies into the matter don’t hold water for many. Reports on crimes committed by non-Whites are waved away and ignored. It has almost become a crime to speak out against illegal immigration, never mind legal. Just look at how so many call Trump a racist for wanting to combat illegal immigration, even though he fully supports legal migration. But at least there are figures like him around. If they can allow for more open resistance to the internationalist, “progressive” narrative than greater are the chances that there can be a more open and honest discussion on issues like immigration and multiculturalism instead of just simply stating “diversity is strength” or some other newspeak phrase.

The overton window has been pushed far too much to the left and it is high time it was pushed rightwards again. This will not happen, however, until the cuckservatives in our midst are replaced.

Attention Immigration Reformer:

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada sends you its latest bulletin: “Thoughts on the Canadian Election 2015.”


Dan Murray

White Student Union Flyers Incite a Legitimation Crisis in Canada

by Obimbola Chibuzo

White Students Union Flyer on Toronto university campuses
Flyer calling for a White Students’ Union, posted on three Toronto campuses

A major legitimation crisis hit three Canadian universities last week when a few flyers calling for a White Students’ Union were posted by a group called Students for Western Civilization. “We do not condone this. We find it offensive,” said Ryerson administrator Michael Forbes. “We need safe spaces on university campuses” against this act of aggression by Whites, said a member of Ryerson’s “Racialized Students’ Collective”. The York University Federation of Students even said the flyers were “violent” and have made students “feel unsafe, harassed, and unwelcome”.

Anti-White Hysteria and Double Standards

Can you believe this? We are speaking about three university campuses in Toronto (Ryerson University, York University, and University of Toronto) all of which are one-hundred percent dedicated to the promotion of diversity and all of which have multiple unions for non-Whites along racial lines. At Ryerson alone we find the following race-oriented unions:

  1. African Students’ Association
  2. United Black Students Ryerson
  3. Caribbean Students’ Association
  4. Afghan Students’ Association
  5. East African Students’ Association
  6. Indian Students’ Association
  7. Chinese Students’ Association
  8. Indigenous Students Association
  9. Organization of Latin American Students
  10. South Asian Alliance
  11. Sri Lankan Student Alliance

The following image welcomes students interested in finding information about these unions:

Ryerson Students' Union
Welcome image of Ryerson Students’ Union, a place for everybody on the campus — except the people who founded this university and the entire nation-state of Canada.

Ryerson, York, University of Toronto were all created by Whites; in fact, universities are a singularly Western invention (see addendum for a collection of expert sources), and all the disciplines taught at them, physics, chemistry, history, anthropology, biology, sociology, philosophy etc. — are fields of research invented by Whites.

Ethnic unions exist at every university in Canada, and while it is true that there are a few unions for particular European ethnic groups, Portuguese and Italian, these unions tend to be folksy-oriented, whereas the ethnic unions for non-Whites are heavily infused with ethnic affirmation, proud signs about their traditions and history, and not a word about how they killed natives in their homelands or how much they love the cultures of others. But more importantly, there are many student unions formed strictly along racial lines, “Black”, “Asian”, “Aboriginal” and even “Jewish”. There is not a single union for Whites or Europeans generally. And these racially-oriented unions by non-Whites are very outspoken in their racial affirmation: check the blatantly anti-White club called “United Black Students at Ryerson”.

Reverse racism is l’ordre du jour at campuses in Toronto and Canada. Every ethnic group is allowed to organize along racial lines but not Eurocanadian students. How can leftists claim that this does not constitute a blatant
double standard?

So why the insane hysteria against three flyers advertising a White student union? I can only think of one reason: the entire pro-diversity structure in Canada (and the West at large) is premised on the expectation that the Whites, the pioneers and nation builders of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and America, must relinquish their nations to diversity. But why not allow Whites to celebrate their racial identity in the same way as Asians, Aboriginals, and Blacks? Are they fearful that the moment Whites self-identify as a race, or as ethnic groups with a common European identity, the entire system of lies about how we are all immigrants and how Canada has always been diverse, will be exposed?

Are they fearful that once Whites get together as Whites, they will start reasoning about how they created Canada, how non-Whites are exploiting the anti-White sentiment imposed by our traitorous elites, how non-Whites are using White ideas about humanity and universal right to advance their own particular ethnic interests?

Desmond Cole’s Reverse Racist Column in the Toronto Star

Desmond Cole, as of Sept 17,
will have a weekly column to address “subtle racism”

As if this were not enough, the Black journalist Desmond Cole, who has made a career solely from writing about how Whites keep Blacks down and in prisons, is now insisting, in yet another article about the flyers (see below a list of press articles, excluding multiple ones in Chinese) that Whites who claim there is a bias against them must be designated as “White supremacist” (see here for leftspeak decoding), and dealt with at the “root”.

Our unacknowledged assumptions, and our language about human diversity are better indicators of racism and discrimination than the impolite outbursts we seem so prone to recognizing. The clumsy expressions of hatred on local university campuses this week are like weeds — we can tear out the unsightly offshoots that pop up, but ultimately we have to address the problem at its root.

Imagine; at the bottom of this article, which is dated September 17, it is stated that Cole’s column, “as of today, will appear every Thursday on the Toronto Star.” The Star, apparently, has agreed to give Cole a weekly column in response to the legitimation crisis brought by the posting of three flyers. The Toronto Star, be it noted, is the major circulation newspaper in Canada.

It may be that Cole already thinks that Canada is some African barbaric state where dissenters are regularly muzzled. But we need to expose these claims for what they are asking: total submission of Whites to non-Whites pursuing their own racial interests; total silencing of Whites who talk about Western civilization and its achievements. Cole likely has no clue about the immense intellectual greatness of the West; instead he says that any White who is interested in learning about this civilization and feels any pride in its achievements is a White supremacist who must be rooted out from Canada. Even those who “sympathize” with the idea that the teaching of Western civilization is valuable should be rooted out as racist. He writes

it is important to challenge and oppose Duchesne, Students for Western Civilization, and their sympathizers. But we must also recognize them as merely the leading edge of a racist undercurrent in Canada, a mainstream fear that insists White people are under attack, but skilfully avoids examining what Whiteness is or where it originated (emphasis mine).

Cole’s previous writings consisted of sporadic articles accusing those who spoke about “Black-on-Black violence” as racist; never mind “Black-on-White violence”, which is not even a conversation anywhere in Canada. But now, apparently, he will be in charge, in his regular Thursday columns, of hunting down, destroying careers, ostracising, and designating as “White supremacist” Canadians who even sympathize with White unions or believe that the teaching of Western Civilization is important. The Toronto Star believes that students will learn more from reading his columns than reading about Western Civilization.

“Racialized Minorities”

Notice how Cole and all the critics of White unions regularly use the term “racialized groups” to designate non-Whites. This is a new Orwellian term the left has now implanted in social science textbooks intended to allow cultural Marxists to say, on the one hand, that race is a social construct and, on the other, that non-Whites have a right to group themselves along racial lines. Whites are not only a construct and do not exist, but should not be allowed to form unions, for doing so is a continuation of their “racialization” of non-Whites. Whites invented races when they colonized the world, and having invented races and racism, non-Whites were “racialized”, and in order for non-Whites to overcome their racialization, they need to form racial unions. As the York Federation of Students has said, “the term Western civilization is nothing more than colonialism”.

This is now the standard curricular line of reasoning in all Canadians universities: Whites who create unions are trying to racialized non-Whites; non-Whites who create unions are fighting White racialization. And since White racialization is “systematically present” in all European nations, non-Whites must be allowed to form unions.

This reasoning is pure sophistry as can be easily revealed once we realize that

  1. Europeans appear to have been the only colonizers because they were the most sophisticated at colonizing, inventing the best navigational techniques and weaponry;
  2. Europeans were the ones responsible for the abolition of slavery upon otherwise recalcitrant Africans and Moslems who love to enslave their own people and anyone different;
  3. the current generation of Whites has nothing to do with racializing non-Whites;
  4. non-Whites crave to come to European lands because they are superior and less racist than their own places of birth;
  5. non-Whites are simply exhibiting a naturally human preference for their own ethnicity when they form ethnic groups;
  6. while hypocritically borrowing cultural Marxist ideas which prohibit Whites, and only Whites, from forming racial groups.
Students For Western Civilisation Website
Students For Western Civilization proposing the formation of a White students’ union at York University on their home page

Once Whites are educated properly to see through the fog of ignorance and anti-White teaching at our universities, they will see that forming White or Eurocanadian unions, groups and associations, even political parties, is consistent with the principles of liberalism, free association and freedom of speech. It is also consistent with our natural disposition to prefer our own ethnic groups and race.










Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) : Sept 10/15

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada sends you our latest bulletin : “Manufacturing Responsibility: Canada And The Syrian Refugee Crisis”.

Daniel Murray

Manufacturing Responsibility: Canada And The Syrian Refugee Crisis
By Brad Salzberg

While responsibility for the Syrian refugee crisis is a complex international issue, the subject of Canada’s responsibility for the crisis is straight-forward ­ our nation is not responsible.

There is, however, little doubt that many within our society are at odds with this statement. Canada is by-and large a compassionate country, and it is therefore reasonable to expect Canadians to support a substantial intake of those affected by the war in Syria.

What is less reasonable, however, is the current perception that Canada is somehow responsible for the crisis­ or if not directly responsible, at least culpable by way of a modest refugee intake quota. In particular, it should be expected that our politically correct, pro-multicultural contingents would adhere to this belief system. A prime example among these minions is No One Is Illegal, an organization which espouses the idea that Canada should be an “open border” nation, whereby anyone can enter our country­ thus rendering the concept of citizenship meaningless. Minister of Multiculturalism Jason Kenney, commenting on the organization and its leader Harsh Walia, recently referred to the group as “Trotsky-ite.” Clearly, he is not a fan.

As it happens, the aunt of the young refugee child who tragically perished as a result of the conflict resides in Canada. Quoted in dozens of Canadian publications was her statement that “the world is responsible.” While her grief is understandable, and may have resulted in a statement based on pure emotion, international responsibility for the crisis is a controversial and provocative topic. No, the world is not responsible, and neither is Canada. Blaming our government, our Prime Minister, or our citizens is misguided. When assigning blame, it should be directed toward the perpetrators of the crisis­ the nation of Syria, its President and most of all, Islamic State, or ISIS, as it is commonly known.

Simply put, the refugee debacle is a Middle Eastern problem­ therefore it should be dealt with first and foremost by Middle Eastern nations. On this topic, it is most interesting to note the various responses from these nations. How many refugees have the Gulf States taken in? In fact, so-called “brethren nations” of Syria­Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Quatar and others have not accepted a single refugee. What gives? Why aren’t these oil rich, co-religionist nations helping their suffering brothers-in-arms?

The main reason is­ they do not have to. It turns out that none of the Gulf Nations signed a document called the “1951 U.N. Refugee Convention”­ therefore they are exempt from accepting refugees into their nations. How fortunate for them.

How have Canadians responded to the fact that neighbouring Islamic nations are refusing to accept these pour souls? The answer is­ they haven’t responded at all­ because they have no knowledge of this essential component of the equation. Reason being, our mainstream media sources have yet to reveal these facts. What has been revealed, however, is a plethora of commentary criticizing and condemning our country, Prime Minister Harper, and Minister of Immigration Chris Alexander, implying these entities are somehow responsible for the death of the young refugee child.

What about the reaction from other neighbouring Islamic nations­ for example, Iran? President Hassan Rouhani of Iran is very concerned­– so concerned that he says European countries have a “humanitarian and historic duty” to take in the refugees!

In light of the questionable reaction from Middle Eastern nations, several thought-provoking questions are in order. Are western nations being hoodwinked by militant Islam? Is this situation, in fact, a strategy to disseminate followers of Islam throughout the democratic, and mainly Christian, nations of the world? Considering the extremity of militant Islamic ideology, this idea is not of out the question.

In the meantime, all skepticism within our nation has been washed away by a political tide of altruism for those lost in the whirl of the crisis. While admirable in many respects, it is arguable an element of manipulation exists on the part of those indulging in the “blame game”—- organizations such as No One Is Illegal, and others such as Ontario-based Lifeline Syria.

With a federal election on the horizon, it is fair to suggest that political party opposition leaders and immigration critics are pushing the compassion button in order to secure votes­—in particular, the votes within Canada’s twenty-four ridings which are today majority “ethnic” communities. Such is the increasing relevance and power of the ethic vote within our country.

Can it be argued that Canadians are taking a superficial, or overly simplistic view of the refugee crisis? If so, it is not their fault. As with all issues related to immigration policy, there is more to the story than meets the eye. At present, what the eyes of Canadians are witnessing is far from a complete picture. The fact is, political correctness, candidate posturing and vote-pandering are playing a pivotal role in the general perception of the refugee crisis.

The refugee situation may well impact the entire world, however this does not mean the entire world is responsible. Until this is properly understood by the Canadian public, the Syrian refugee crisis will function as yet another weapon in the hands of Canada’s politically correct, pro-immigration contingent.

The Illegal Migrant Invasion of Europe: Just Another Day at the Office for the CBC

by Tim Murray

Asylum applications for Germany in 2015
CBC: “Carrying capacity? What’s that?”
Estimated asylum applications in Germany in 2015: 800,000 — and no end in sight

August 28, 2015 was just another day at the office for CBC television’s flagship news hour The National.

Since the beginning of the year, viewers have become accustomed to seeing one or two news clips or features each night that are designed to draw attention to the inherent bigotry and racism of whites — the new “blacks”. Every time you sit down to watch The National, you can always count on the CBC to present a story about the evils of Residential Schools or the high rates of violence against native women, or the lack of parity with whites in medical care, or past discrimination against Chinese, Sikhs and blacks, or the barriers that they faced in rising to athletic or military fame, or the plight of “undocumented” immigrants in Canada… the list goes on. The message: we have much to be ashamed of, much to apologize for, and many amends to make. We owe our standing to “White Privilege”, and we must proceed with haste to relinquish it.

Last night viewers saw another installment of this ongoing campaign. This time, however, the issue was the current refugee crisis in Europe. The lead story was about 71 “asylum-seekers” who were jammed in a truck and found dead by a roadside in Austria, the victims of suffocation. Then viewers bore witness to disturbing scenes of corpses washed ashore in Libya, all drowned in a failed attempt to reach Europe. Of course, this footage was provided to give a human face to the statistics that the CBC spewed out in machine gun fashion. Statistics like the number of migrants who had so far drowned in the Mediterranean (2500), the number that had arrived so far this year (340,000), and the staggering number whom Chancellor Angela Merkel and her collaborators will have processed before the year is out (800,000). This will be quadruple the number who came last year.

Stopping the flow of illegal migrants to Europe? Not even an option at the CBC. Instead talk about how Canada should follow the — suicidal — European example. How should Europe cope with this flow? Stopping it was not an option. It was not on the table. This is the CBC we are talking about, after all. No, instead we heard from people like an Austrian official who said that we must “build legal channels” for these people to get here. It is about getting EU member states to “fairly share the burden”. After all, Germany is “a big and prosperous nation”, and there is lot of room in the nations to the north (Scandinavia).

But how many will come? How many more will come when the news gets out that entry into Europe will be safer and easier? The possibility that the queue is never-ending does not factor into the Cultural Marxist equation. But why should we expect otherwise? You might get Cultural Marxist politicians to talk about immigration, but you will never get them to give you a number. Like Samuel Gompers, when asked about what trade unions wanted, they simply answer “more”. Neither Merkel nor Cameron nor Jeb Bush nor Thomas Mulcair nor Justin Trudeau will tell you how many people they ultimately want to live in their respective countries. They will only tell you that we must do “more”. Some might concede that we can’t absorb new waves of migrants indefinitely, but in the meantime, the sky is the limit. Carrying capacity? What’s that?

Ian Hanomansing, the National’s anchor this night, in referring to the fact that the Canadian government relies heavily on private sponsorship to determine refugee intakes, stated that “Canadians must step up to the plate”. But then came the good news. There is a coalition of people in Toronto who are doing just that. People of disparate faiths. One of them was a descendent of Holocaust survivors who felt it here obligation to do for Syrian and Iraqi refugees what Canada did for her relatives. Oh yes, the Holocaust card. Play it and you win the argument every time. That is why the phrase “None is Too Many” is always thrown out whenever a critic introduces a word of caution about opening the floodgates too widely and quickly. “None is Too Many” is the infamous reply that Prime Minister MacKenzie King gave to a question as to how many German Jewish refugees Canada should admit.

To cap this formulaic narrative, viewers were subsequently treated to one of those famous CBC “Panel” discussions, where veteran commentators or experts who are on the same ideological page pretend to offer a genuine debate about the issue. Their opinions typically range from the centre-Left to the far Left. This time, however, there were only two panellists, Janice Stein, Director of the Munk School of Global Affairs, and Saeed Khan, a lecturer in Near East and Asian Studies at Wayne State University — and there was a hint of division.

Khan said that Europe can expect one million, not 800,000, refugees this year, but, not to worry. Since there are 740 million Europeans, one million will be a “small percentage”. Moreover, they will be just popping over for a visit, an overnight stay if you will, as once the dust settles in the Middle East, and Syria and Iraq are sorted out, these asylum-seekers will want to go back. They will “re-migrate”.

Yeah sure they will, Dr. Khan. It seems that Khan was reading from the same script that the late Senator Ted Kennedy read from in 1965 when he assured opponents of his proposed changes to immigration policy that it would not result in a significant change to the ethnic profile of the United States or to the country’s population level.

Stein, to her credit, was not so optimistic. She pointed out that there are 4 million displaced Syrians, and there is no end in sight. Then came a shocking revelation. “Europe does not want nor is it capable of accommodating these numbers”, Stein pointed out. One wonders how the CBC faithful survived this sudden injection of reality.

CBC health warning logo
CBC health warning logo. The broadcasting station is liable for a heavy overdose of anti-European propaganda.

It is clear that the CBC has a mission: Manufactured Consent. Indoctrination by increments. Watching the CBC should come with a health warning.

As any good official State Broadcaster would do, the CBC is softening us up for the coming invasion, whose proportions would boggle our imagination. Think not of a million refugees. Think in terms of tens of millions of refugees. Think even of a billion people on the move in the next decade or two — and that may be a conservative estimate. The consequences will be lethal to our nation, and to those in Europe, America and Australia.

By the time the masses come to their senses, it may be far too late. And you can bet that as more take to the streets or protest outside migrant centres, as more so-called “far right” parties rise in strength, the propaganda campaign waged against them will grow ever more intense. “Anti-immigrant” groups will be vilified with greater vigour, and politicians like Chancellor Merkel will be praised for taking “a real leadership role” in turning a deaf ear to the people. Germany, she has declared, is a nation proud of its diversity, and “has no room for violence or intolerance”, or “those who are not willing to help where help is needed”. But one day most Germans will have no room for Angela Merkel.

We are headed toward an epic storm.

Attention Immigration Reformer (3e) : Sept 3/15

For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : “Visible Minorities Were Majority in 24 Federal Ridings”  Note that this bulletin consists of a Table compiled by Statistics Canada which used information from the 2006 Census. In 2006, Canada had about 300 Federal Ridings.  Of that number, 24 were classified as Majority Minority. In other words, Canada’s Visible Minorities dominated those 24 ridings.
A table showing more recent information will probably show that the number of Visible Minority-dominated ridings is much higher. Note also that the 24  ridings that were  dominated by Visible Minorities were in Ontario and B.C. which have received relentless inflows of recent immigrants as a result of Canada’s mass immigration policy.
If senseless mass immigration continues, Canada’s majority population is projected to become a minority in many larger centres by 2031 at the latest. Not long after, it will also become a probable minority in the entire country.  And Canada’s quisling political class cheerleads the news !!


Daniel Murray
Rank Province Riding Visible Minorities Total Population Percentage
1 Ontario Scarborough-Rouge River 117,085 130,555 89.7%
2 Ontario Markham-Unionville 98,860 126,920 77.9%
3 Ontario Scarborough-Agincourt 85,250 111,170 76.7%
4 British Columbia Vancouver South 89,595 118,905 75.4%
5 Ontario Etobicoke North 76,020 107,110 71.0%
6 British Columbia Vancouver Kingsway 81,385 118,775 68.5%
7 Ontario York West 70,425 103,600 68.0%
8 British Columbia Richmond 75,995 113,520 67.0%
9 Ontario Bramalea-Gore-Malton 97,810 152,315 64.2%
10 Ontario Scarborough Centre 65,125 106,470 61.2%
11 Ontario Scarborough-Guildwood 65,760 107,745 61.0%
12 Ontario Mississauga-Brampton South 82,020 135,680 60.5%
13 Ontario Willowdale 76,955 128,595 59.8%
14 Ontario Don Valley East 62,020 108,810 57.0%
15 British Columbia Newton-North Delta 67,020 118,360 56.6%
16 Ontario Brampton-Springdale 74,010 130,950 56.5%
17 British Columbia Burnaby-New Westminster 64,075 117,665 54.5%
18 Ontario Brampton West 91,555 169,510 54.0%
19 British Columbia Surrey North 59,800 110,980 53.9%
20 British Columbia Burnaby-Douglas 57,705 111,200 51.9%
21 Ontario Mississauga-Erindale 74,135 142,895 51.9%
22 Ontario Mississauga East-Cooksville 64,530 126,120 51.2%
23 Ontario York South-Weston 57,785 113,535 50.9%
24 British Columbia Fleetwood-Port Kells 61,560 122,535 50.3%

The Resignation Of UBC President Arvind Gupta is not the only mess at UBC

While pundits scramble to uncover why UBC President Arvind Gupta really left his position, most of them will be certain to ignore  the factors that created the general mess that exists at UBC and many other Canadian universities.

(1) UBC’s policy of pursuing Diversity has undoubtedly displaced many Canadian-born students of European-descent. According to Douglas Todd of The Vancouver Sun, Visible Minority students comprised about 70% of UBC’s student population in 2010. Most of these students are economic migrants who can see how, compared to universities in China, for example, Canada’s universities are easy to enter. Many also saw that they could easily enter many high-paying professions which they could never have entered because of massive competition in their own countries. Past UBC President Stephen Toope, UBC President from 2006 to 2014, repeatedly stated that he wanted to create Diversity at UBC. By focusing on Asians, he in effect gave preference to them. If one group is preferred, then another is rejected. The matter is as simple as that. In fact, in the “UBC Stephen Toope tradition”,  one of the main reasons for hiring Arvind Gupta as UBC President a year ago was probably the fact that he was of East Indian / Asian descent. By aiming for Diversity, Toope accelerated the process of leading UBC down a road not to Diversity, but to a virtual student monoculture—largely Asian and primarily Chinese.

Similar things are probably happening with the UBC Faculty where Faculty are given preference if they are not of European descent. These factors blend with projections for all of Metro Vancouver : If common sense is not restored to a suicidal mass immigration intake, Metro’s  current majority population will become a minority by 2031. The key point is that neither Metro Vancouver nor Canada  needed almost all of these people. To add insult to injury, the B.C. government  recently announced that B.C. would give $150,000 in new scholarships to Asian students so that they could study in B.C. schools. This move has been condemned by the Canadian Federation of Students who say that this money should have gone to lower-income Canadian students who are already carrying huge debt.

(2) The pursuit of Diversity (Monoculture) at UBC reveals much about the mentality of UBC Administrators and Faculty. There was a time when hiring at many universities was said to be based on “the old boys’ network”. This meant a tendency of the established teaching staff and administration to hire friends and acquaintances. But this criticism has evolved into a strictly race-based one in which Canada’s majority European-based population is blamed for all of the failures that women and recently-arrived minorities have suffered in their job searches. To be more specific, the term ” White” has come to be used in much the same way as the words “Chink”, “Packy” or “Raghead” might be used. And the people who use it today seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to use the word “White” like this.

In fact,  Professor Jennifer Berdahl of UBC’s Sauder School of Business did just that recently. In a blog about the resignation of Dr. Gupta from his position as UBC President, Ms. Berdahl stated Gupta was the first “brown man” to serve as president—as if UBC had an obligation to hire “Brown People”, particularly those whom Ottawa brought here with no justification whatsoever.  Furthermore, Berdahl wrote that Gupta “lost the masculinity contest among leadership at UBC, as most women and minorities do at institutions dominated by white men.”  This statement ignores the fact that the roots of Canada’s European-based population go back over 400 years. It also ignores the point that it is one thing to complain about gender-based hiring, but quite another to expect Canada’s majority population to surrender control of its country and to give up its right to priority in all hiring. Here is another way to look at the situation : Would Berdahl go to China, Pakistan, or the Punjab respectively and complain that there were too many “Chinks”, “Packies”, “Ragheads” and other brown/black people in university positions and that those countries had an obligation to hire “White People”? Yet she does this at UBC and sees nothing wrong with saying something like that.

(3) As expected, Berdahl’s words have received the approval of our CBC and other media hacks. To them, Berdahl is to be admired because of what she has said and because she teaches a course called “Gender and Diversity in Leadership”. In fact, she also holds the so-called “Montalbano Professorship in Leadership Studies: Women and Diversity”. That professorship is named after John Montalbano who obtained a $2-million gift from Canada’s largest bank (RBC) to finance Berdahl’s professorship and who sits on the advisory board for the UBC Business School and is Chair of the UBC Board of Governors.

According to Berdahl, Montalbano read her recent entry on her blog , then phoned her and told her she should not have made such comments. Ms. Berdahl subsequently complained that John Montalbano was suppressing her freedom of speech.  The point is that Ms. Berdahl and hundreds of university “others” in positions like hers (as well as her admirers in the CBC and other media) will see nothing wrong with denying free speech to those who oppose half-witted ideas like “Diversity”. In fact, all those like her will self-righteously believe that they have a right  to damn their opponents to the lowest circle of Hell, but that they have the right to whine about being denied free speech in trivial cases like the one she cites.

(4) There is a considerable amount of irony in this behaviour. For example, the people who pay her a very comfortable salary for teaching her views and so-called “research” are The Royal Bank (RBC) and its CEO. Both have promoted unjustified high immigration and Diversity. If she were to use her head on the facts available about Canada’s high immigration intake, she would easily see the folly of that policy. But she seems to think that using her head is not one of her obligations. Instead, she robotically spews out the cliched racial slurs of many of her colleagues. Let us compare the “free speech” issue she raises with an issue that her colleagues in the UBC Business School have notoriously raised and which she has to be aware of. Those colleagues have denied that any significant connection exists between wealthy foreign buyers  and immigration, on the one hand  and  Metro Vancouver’s astronomic house prices on the other hand. If she is really going to insist on her right to free speech, why has she not challenged her Business School colleagues? Strange for UBC, solid contradictory evidence compiled in the UBC Geography Department exists. She could easily have championed one of the most fundamental of rights : the right of  many Metro Vancouver-born to a realistically-priced roof over their heads? The fact that she spends her time playing the race card instead demonstrates that she is a champion of academic triviality.

(5) Furthermore, if she thinks of herself as such a champion of academic virtue, why did she accept a teaching position which was funded to the tune of $2 million by Canada’s largest bank. This has all the stench of a conflict of interest. Obviously, UBC Board of Governors’ Chair John Montalbano allegedly reprimanded her  because he wanted to prevent any loss of funding to the “Montalbano Professorship In Leadership Studies” from the Royal Bank (RBC). As part of a university, The UBC School of Business’ first duty should be to be impartial, but it has accepted money from an institution like the Royal Bank that wants to advance its high immigration and Diversity interests. In fact, Montalbano is the former CEO of RBC Global Asset Management. Why did the provincial government appoint him of all people to be Chair of UBC’s 21-member Board of Governors? If there were ever a conflict of interest, this case is it.

Also, to illustrate the sleaze factor, let us recall that The Royal Bank was caught last year displacing its  entire IT workforce who were told their work was to be out-sourced to India. (For the benefit of Ms. Berdah who thinks only in racial terms, let’s say The Royal Bank was out-sourcing the jobs to “brown people”). And most insulting of all, RBC required “White employees” to train their “Brown displacers”—- in order for the “Whites” to qualify for severance pay. When this scandal was exposed, Gordon Nixon, The Royal Bank’s  then CEO, was forced to apologize to Canadians and to re-hire all of the displaced workers.

Even more sleazily, just a few years before, the same RBC CEO Nixon had advocated that Canada increase its immigration intake to 400,000 per year from 250,000. This was one of the most ridiculous recommendations that anyone in the immigration lobby has ever made. Any knowledgeable academic should have known this. But academics are not expected to be aware of such things any more because Diversity is supposed to trump everything else. We suspect Berdahl never criticized CEO Nixon for saying something as nationally damaging as that. It is widely acknowledged that unnecessary immigration of the kind CEO Nixon supports had already caused wage suppression and job losses. If Ottawa had agreed to implement Nixon’s proposal, that increase would have caused even worse consequences. Those results have affected both Canada’s majority population as well as Canada’s minorities. But apparently, when it comes down to important issues like this, Berdahl thinks that petty race-based comments are far more important to make and that RBC greed has to be satisfied at all costs.

(6) Finally, the Canadian University Teachers Union (CAUT) has stated that Berdahl’s right to free speech must be defended. It has also called for an investigation of John  Mantalbano’s alleged “suppression” of Berdahl’s “free speech rights”. This is laughable because anyone who follows the immigration issue in Canada knows that anyone in a university setting who voices even a peep of dissent with Canada’s current immigration intake and the promotion of Diversity is intimidated and ostracized on all campuses. In fact, many will be threatened with firing. It is no exaggeration to say that on the mass immigration issue, the current toxic Canadian university environment resembles that of Stalin’s Russia and Hitler’s Germany.  While any thinking academics cringe in terror,  those academics who support unnecessary immigration, Diversity and the most groveling of apologies to minorities are funded lavishly. Why? This funding is absolutely necessary in the propaganda and mis-information assault on Canada—whether that assault happens in the classroom or in textbooks.  UBC’s “History” Department is glaring evidence of that. In fact, if any students are looking for a true education in Canada’s history, they should stay away from most Canadian universities, particularly UBC.

These are some of the messes at UBC.

It doesn’t have to be this way.


For details, see the following :

<a href=”“></a>

<a href=”“></a>

<a href=”“></a>

For your information, Immigration Watch Canada sends you our latest bulletin : “The Resignation Of UBC President Arvind Gupta is not the only mess at UBC”.

Daniel Murray


By Bill Harrison  Aug 14/15

I and many others, I’m sure, are receiving emails from your party urging us to become involved in accepting and promoting the NDP programs, policies, and ideals. While I have been a loyal NDP voter for many years now, I must confess I’m losing faith in the NDP too. The reason for this change of heart can be directly attributed to the fact that your party, among other Canadian political parties, is too cowardly to acknowledge the biggest political elephant in the room that this country has ever encountered.

That elephant, to which I refer, is immigration.

It is my opinion that if the NDP are serious about forming the government of Canada, then they would rise to their feet and take a stand against the insane immigration policies of this country as they are practiced today. If you really wanted to win this next election that is.

I cannot believe that you could possibly be that out of touch with reality so as not to realize that the majority of Canadians are fed up to the teeth with the destruction of Canada brought about by the massive injection of Third World and Asian immigrants into our country. Canadians have already become akin to second class citizens in their own homeland.

Do you not ever monitor social media, blogs, and other such forums in regards to public opinion on issues such as immigration?

If you were to do so, I imagine the hair on the back of your neck would stand up with the realization of just how angry…no… more than angry…. furious, Canadians are with you, (the politicians of Canada). You, who are supposed to represent us, and yet so blatantly disregard and refuse to acknowledge the absolute right of Canadians to determine and preserve the culture, flavour and ethnicity of our own country! No government has the right to change the ethnic face of Canada, without the express consent of Canadians, and yet you do!

Do you realize that excessive immigration drives wages down to the poverty level and even lower?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that excessive immigration is completely and utterly destroying the social fabric of our country?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that Canadian students are finding it more and more difficult to get a seat in a suitable university due to the massive numbers of foreign students now usurping the space in our educational institutions?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that it is becoming more and more commonplace for companies in Canada to require that potential employees speak not one of the official languages such as English or French, but any one of a number of foreign languages including Mandarin, Tagalog, Punjabi, and Farsi in order to be eligible for employment?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that as opposed to 3 or 4 ethnic ghettos, (now referred to as enclaves) of twenty years ago, Canada now has upwards of 265 ethnic ghettos where immigrants have become totally independent of Canadian culture, language and values by purposely isolating themselves from Canada, the country they “chose” to migrate to?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that many of these ethnic enclaves now produce their own news media, including radio, television and newspaper each in their own particular language, thus totally removing themselves from any “outside” Canadian influence?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that many hundreds of thousands of “immigrants” maintain their old country citizenship in addition to their Canadian citizenship, so they may park their families in Canada to take advantage of Canadian social services and other benefits such as medical, while the breadwinner returns to work in his/her home country and thus escape Canadian taxation?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that students, single mothers, and impoverished seniors are unable to obtain employment at even the basic and most menial levels, because these positions also have been absorbed by the excessive numbers of immigrants who will and do work for even less remuneration than the minimum wage requirements of the above mentioned group ?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that, overall, immigration costs Canadians approximately 23.5 to 30  billion dollars a year over and above that which it contributes to the Canadian economy?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that immigrants who are employed in Canada, take out some 22 billion dollars each and every year to send back to their home countries on top of the 23.5 to 30 billion dollars a year they already cost the Canadian economy?
Of course you do.

Do you realize that the politician (who has the foresight and wisdom to present as a main plank in his/her platform, a moratorium on all immigration until the results of a Canadian referendum on the matter can be held, and the results incorporated into law) will be recognized by hundreds of thousands, no, millions of citizens as a true Canadian hero, and a man deserving and worthy of the title Prime Minister of Canada?

Perhaps you didn’t.


The recent shut-down of The Richmond Review, a community newspaper in Richmond, B.C. (population about 200,000, and a suburb just south of Vancouver) should set off immigration alarm bells in Ottawa and all across Canada. The alarm bells are particularly relevant now because our government has just declared that Canadians will be voting in a federal election on October 19.

Politicians who keep telling Canadians that unjustified high Immigration is not a major election issue in Canada and that Canadians should celebrate Mass Immigration and its benefits should take special note of the fate of The Richmond Review. Why? Because Richmond, B.C. is the proverbial canary in the coal mine called Canada.

The shut-down of The Richmond Review is a result of Richmond’s European-descended population being reduced to a minority. Being reduced to minority status in one’s own country should not just be one of many election issues. It should be a major election issue—if not the major election issue. Allowing such a thing to happen is equal to giving one’s country away.

What has already happened in Richmond is also happening in many other Canadian communities. Unless stopped, Canada’s mass immigration policy will turn Canada’s majority population into strangers not only in a large number of communities by 2030, but in their entire country not long after. In Richmond, the new majority are the Chinese. Those of the Mainland Chinese segment, with the collusion of our political class, are practicing in Richmond the Mainland China tactic that was used in Tibet and China’s Xinjiang province : overwhelming the local populations with Chinese. Other immigrant groups are doing something similar in many Canadian cities where the new majorities will be Sikhs, Muslims and others. It is no exaggeration to say that Canada is being invaded and Balkanized.

In the midst of all of this, Richmond, B.C. for many years has had two community newspapers : The Richmond Review and The Richmond News. In fact, The Richmond Review existed for 83 years. But on July 24, 2015, it announced that it was shutting down. According to the editor, “Recently, market forces have clearly indicated that while…(The Richmond Review’s) readership is strong, Richmond would be better served with one local newspaper.”

If readers want a translation of this statement, here is a very probable one : Richmond has been overwhelmed by Chinese who have their own newspapers. Chinese businesses have chosen to spend their advertising dollars on Chinese language ads in the Chinese papers, so advertising revenue for English-language newspapers has been considerably reduced. Competing with another English language newspaper such as The Richmond News for decreasing revenue is proving to be difficult. In fact, if the mass immigration situation continues and the English-speaking population of Richmond becomes an even smaller minority, then the remaining English-speaking Richmond community newspaper will probably also close down.

The immigration lobby and its supporters will downplay this event by saying that newspapers everywhere are experiencing many difficulties. In addition, many Canadians will say that the death of a community newspaper does not deserve much sympathy.

Admittedly, market forces were at play. For example, in December, 2014, two community newspaper groups (Glacier and Black) decided to ensure their share of community newspaper profits. They did this by further dividing the Metro Vancouver and adjoining Fraser Valley community newspaper market into two kingdoms. Black would take the east and Glacier the west. This meant that Glacier, which already owned The Richmond News, would buy The Richmond Review in 2014 from Black. Glacier thereby achieved a monopoly in Richmond. The obvious planned outcome of the division was to reduce competition in Richmond between Glacier and Black, to eventually close one of the two newspapers and for Glacier to send advertising production jobs to the Philippines and India.

But the overall point is that as a result of relentless Chinese immigration, the Richmond English language community newspaper market had declined precipitously while the Chinese-language market had greatly expanded. In fact, Chinese-language newspapers that circulate in Richmond and through other parts of Metro Vancouver seem to be doing very well. In fact, they could very well dominate in a place where English has long been the dominant language and is supposed to be one of Canada’s two official languages. Far from expressing sympathy for the majority population at this development, Immigration lobbyists and their political supporters arrogantly boast that “Metro Vancouver is an Asian City”. If gullible and naive Canadians needed confirmation that the immigration lobby views the immigration issue as a war between Canada’s existing population and unnecessary immigration, this immigration lobby boast is it !! It is very clearly saying that mass Asian immigration has won the Battle of Metro Vancouver.

Obviously, if federal politicians had been doing their jobs, they would have closed the floodgates. But they have betrayed Canada’s majority and have done nothing. Provincial and municipal governments could have helped considerably, but they have been equally treacherous. And if most politicians have their way in this election campaign, they will say nothing about the dire results of their inaction.

That is why Canadians have to put politicians up against the wall in this election.

As for The Richmond Review, here is part of the editor’s obituary : “This is a very sad day….Decisions that result in the loss of jobs to extremely dedicated and hard-working professionals are never easy to make. They’re anguishing.”

We will close with a comment from one of Immigration Watch Canada’s readers :

“Isn’t it curious that we often hear about the problem of invasive foreign species that displace and eradicate local ones, often because the invaders don’t have to face any predators in their new territory and can therefore multiply infinitely. And yet the same wording is seldom used when it comes to humans.”

For details, see the following :

Immigration Watch Canada is an organization of Canadians who believe that immigration has to serve the interests of its own citizens. It cannot be turned into a social assistance / job-finding program for people from  other countries. It should not be a method to suppress wages and provide employers with an unending supply of low-wage labour. It should never be a social engineering experiment that is conducted on Canada’s mainstream population in order to make it a minority. **

But immigration has become those three things.

Why? In particular, why has Canada’s average 250,000 per year  immigration intake remained in place for over 24 years, a clear abnormality in Canada’s immigration history?

The answer is that for many decades, Canada’s major political parties have assumed that, on the immigration issue in particular,  they know better than average Canadians. This  attitude and the promotion of political party  self-interest manifested itself particularly in 1990 when one political party (the Progressive Conservatives) increased immigration levels to 250,000 per year.

At the time they did this, they actually announced they were doing so in order to capture more of the immigrant vote. This may sound hard to believe because it is so brazen, but it is a fact. Since then, all other parties have adopted the same policy. All pretend that their actions are helping people in the rest of the world and that this immigration flood is  also literally and figuratively enriching Canadian society.

The reality is that Canada’s average 250,000 per year immigration intake since 1990 has been far too high. In fact, Canada’s intake is the highest per capita in the world. And it has obviously been destructive and senseless.

What are some examples of the destruction and senselessness?

First, our high intake has had major negative economic consequences for a minimum of 1.5 million Canadians who are looking for work. At the very least, it has forced many of them to compete (through Canada’s so-called “Employment Equity for Visible Minorities” programme) with immigrants for a limited number of jobs.

Second, relentless high immigration has caused two results : (1) relentless demand for a basic human need such as housing and (2) relentless increases in house prices. The urban area which is the best example of this is Metro Vancouver where house prices are now the second highest in the world. (Metro Toronto has also been seriously affected.) Much of Metro Vancouver’s population can no longer afford house ownership. In cases where the existing population has bought housing, they have had to take on huge mortgages. UBC Geography Professor David Ley has clearly shown the connection between immigration and Metro Vancouver house prices

Third, the continued pursuit of the “Diversity” social engineering project has led many Canadians to conclude that they are being ethnically cleansed and that Canada is being re-colonized.

Finally, many Canadians see that our governments seem to think that our urban areas can take infinite numbers of people. This attitude has turned many areas of the country into crowded, grid-locked, environmental disasters-in-progress—duplicates of the environmental catastrophes many recent immigrants come from.

We repeat one basic question :

Why Is Canada bringing in 250,000+ immigrants per year? Ottawa and business interests have made wild claims about the economic benefits of immigration, the need to deal with our aging population, and the need for immigration to satisfy current or future labour shortages. But those have been refuted by the government’s own studies or by studies done by respected think tanks. In addition, Ottawa and business interests have pretended that current immigration is no different from past immigration. However, a graph of Canada’s immigration intake since 1860 (See above) shows that immigration since 1991 is an abnormality in Canada’s immigration history

We believe Canada should have some immigration, but that immigration levels should be reduced to about 25,000, that is, to about 10% of the current annual 250,000 intake. We advocate that  the 25,000 intake level should be kept in place indefinitely to compensate for the immigration disaster that has occurred in the past 24 years.

We also advocate a significant reduction to Canada’s widely-abused Temporary Foreign Worker program which in 2012 allowed  well over 300,000 non-Canadians to work in Canada. This program should probably be reduced to nearly zero. In any recession, it is madness  for a country to be importing large numbers of immigrants as well as large numbers of Temporary Foreign Workers.

In addition, we also call for major reform to many of Canada’s other immigration policies.  (See our Basics section for details.)

** For background on major immigration policy changes made in the 1960’s and 70’s, click on the following summaries of excellent research done by reporter Doug Collins in his book  “Immigration : The Destruction Of English Canada”  :


Paying For Our Own Demise: Funding “Multicult” Canada

By Brad Salzberg,
May 2015

In 1988, multiculturalism in Canada officially became government policy. This was the year the policy became entrenched in our constitution, thereby completing a seventeen- year- long transition from political ideology to legislated government policy.

Within Canadian society, this is fairly common knowledge. What may be less well known is that on an international scale, constitutionally-based multiculturalism is a rarity. In fact, only two nations in the world have such a policy­—Canada and Australia. While many countries promote the concept of diversity, a mere one percent of the world’s nations are officially multicultural.

At present, Canada has the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world. In conjunction with legislated multiculturalism, the impact upon our nation has been profound­— so profound, it is arguable the long-term result will be a complete reinvention of Canadian society.

For decades, Canadians have been informed by government that multiculturalism is equitable, and beneficial to all. Is this really the case? The answer–­ one which may surprise a great number of Canadians–­is absolutely not.

The reason for this cannot be found simply by reading the statute’s content­ —though it does contain explicit wording which validates its negative impact­—- but rather, in the degree to which external circumstances surrounding the policy have changed.

One of the most relevant issues is the manner in which our society has defined the word “minority”—-­as in one of Canada’s minority communities. In 1971 when Multiculturalism was in its infancy, about 95% of Canada’s population was of European descent.  In 1988, the definition was similarly straight forward. The reasons for this are simple enough : in terms of overall population, ethnic communities were clearly in the minority.

In this regard, however, things have obviously changed. Decades of large-scale immigration, particularly from Asia and the Middle East, have rendered the traditional meaning of the term irrelevant. In 2014,  twenty-six out of Canada’s 308 political ridings such as Richmond, B.C. and Brampton, Ontario were majority non-white. A number of additional ridings will soon find themselves in a similar situation.

What is the difference between a country like the U.S., which promotes “diversity”, and a country such as Canada, which has the official policy? The answer is money—­as in monetary funding­— as in the fact that multicultural policy mandates that our tax payer dollars­—–hundreds of millions of them—–­ be given to ethnic and multicultural organizations to promote their specific culture, identity and political agenda.

Is this necessarily unfair or harmful? No—­unless a situation were to develop whereby the so-called minority becomes the dominant population within the country. And that is what’s happening.

Let us consider the ramifications of this new reality. Canadians of European descent are now minorities within these twenty-six ridings­—– and yet hundreds of millions of dollars are still being funnelled to multicultural organizations to promote their cultural agendas——-­despite the fact they are no longer minorities at all. On the flip side, the freshly-minted Caucasian minorities receive nothing. Even more disconcerting is the fact that when citizens point out the inequality of the present system, the pro-multicultural forces play what is known as the “race card.”

What is this curious phrase all about? In basic terms, playing the race card occurs when multicultural leaders accuse those who question the funding, or any other aspect of multicultural or immigration policy, of behaving in a racist manner. Lacking a sound, logical rebuttal, they deliver the only tool they have in their arsenal—-the race card. Thus far, it has proven to protect their interests successfully. The positive news is, however, the general public is beginning to understand the insidious world of what can most appropriately be called “Multicult” Canada.

To comprehend the full scope of the Multicult’s influence upon our society, we must first realize that the agenda is not served up on a platter for all to understand. It is very much a hidden operation­ and not intended for general public understanding. For instance, is the public aware of multiculturalism’s influence within our institutions of higher learning? They certainly should be. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being provided to our largest universities for the purpose of promoting non-democratic political ideology to Canadian-born students, that is, to the few Canadian-born students still walking the halls of the University of Toronto, McGill, or the University of British Columbia. UBC’s own data tells us the percentage of Canadian-born students of European-descent on campus is eroding at a rapid pace, largely due to the fact that foreign students pay double, and even triple, the tuition fees of Canadian students.

As with our multicultural organizations, Mainland China’s ideology on campus is largely paid for by Canadian tax payers. Less commonly understood is the fact that a significant portion of the remainder of the funding comes directly from China’s Ministry of Education. Bottom line? Canadian tax payers, along with the government of China, have paid for the establishment of “Asian Studies” departments throughout our university system. The most conspicuous example is our half-dozen branches of China’s Confucius Institute. There used to be more. However, due to accusations that the organization is little more than a propaganda arm of China’s government, a number of universities have formally severed ties with the organization.

Throughout our business community, multiculturalism, or “diversity” as the banking industry prefers to call it, is trumpeted within the board rooms of all major Canadian corporations. They can dress it up with a fancy word, but they cannot take away the fact that in reality, diversity means hiring a person based on their ethnicity, rather than their job qualifications. Even under these circumstances, pro-Multicult leaders and academics continue to bash white Canadians for having the nerve to be better qualified for jobs, or for having a full command of one of our official languages.

Clearly, the situation is serious business. The fact of the matter is that multicultural policy in Canada has led to a situation whereby the Canadian public are funding the demise of their own culture. Over half a billion dollars has been taken from tax payers and delivered to a relatively small collection of multicultural organizations, ostensibly for purposes of ethnic “cultural promotion.” At least, promoting their ethnicity is what they used to do. Today, the use of the money goes well beyond promotion, and is presently being utilized to undermine traditional Canadian identity, culture and religion, as well as our official languages.

It all sounds rather ominous.  Upon close inspection of the activities of organizations such as Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, SUCCESS Immigrant Services, Mosaic, and Canada-China Business Council—– often in tandem with our real estate or banking industries——­a tangible pattern of cultural erosion can be detected.

All the while, Canadians go about their daily business. The majority of them are simply unaware of the multicultural power game playing out within their nation. There have been, however, some promising signs of change. Several articles which recently appeared in mainstream news publications have helped expose Mainland China’s influence upon Canada’s real estate market.  In Vancouver, a petition to regulate foreign real estate investment has gathered over 24,000 signatures. Most recently, a public rally took place to protest a growing lack of home affordability. Even Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, an absolute champion of all-“things-China”, issued a public statement on the need for “something to be done” to help with home affordability for lower and middle income residents.

In short, Canadians are beginning to push back against enforced multiculturalism and unnecessary immigration—–both of which were implemented without public input, or approval. Frankly, it is about time. The fact is, if the status quo is maintained for much longer, traditional Canadian culture, heritage and identity will become fully marginalized, and eventually eliminated. Multiculturalism in Canada­— what was once a fluffy policy—–is today an industry, and if permitted, this industry will eradicate the very meaning of what it means to be Canadian.

Daniel Murray


(1) A significant number of recent immigrants have grossly abused Canada’s income tax system, have regarded Canada as an easy dupe, and have to be held to a severe accounting. A recent Vancouver Sun column by Douglas Todd re-confirmed that Chinese immigrants living in  Richmond, B.C. ( as a result of under-reported income revealed to Stats Can ) were classified as “poor”, but lived in mansions.  These people live not just in Richmond, but over all of Metro Vancouver and in many other parts of Canada.

(2) This is a major problem. For example, according to UBC Professor David Ley,  in the case of Business Immigrants alone,  between 1980 and 2001, the Business Immigrant Programme allowed about 330,000 immigrants (BI’s plus their dependents) to enter Canada.  That programme was almost a complete failure, yet it was allowed to continue for about 35 years. Almost all BI’s had no intention of conforming to government intentions for the programme : establishing job-creating businesses in Canada.

(3) All of Canada’s cities can take only a limited number of people. Limits have to be established. Metro Vancouver’s population in 1981 was 1.268 million. In 2001, it was 1,986 million. Business Immigrants and dependents alone were completely unnecessary, yet they were permitted entry. They and other unnecessary immigrants have comprised almost all of Metro Vancouver’s 718,000 population increase. Southern Ontario”s population has increased much more —as has immigration-driven gridlock there. Our politicians continue to delude themselves and Canadians into thinking that our cities and the country can take unlimited numbers of people.

(4) Canada’s tax system  has to have strong checks to ensure that it has the ability to support Canada’s social services. It cannot tolerate wealthy parasites. As Metro Vancouver lawyer Samuel Hyman recently stated in a Vancouver Sun OP ED, Ottawa sent a very foolish signal to Canada’s home-grown tax cheats and new immigrant cheats when it cut $300 million from the Canada Revenue Agency’s enforcement budget and laid off  3000 auditors in 2012. It sent a similar message when it recently dismissed 61 of its most experienced auditors.  These people had the ability to prosecute corrupt international cheats.

(5) UBC Professor David Ley has clearly shown that relentless immigration demand for housing has been the cause of Metro Vancouver’s astronomic housing prices. Corrupt figures in the immigration lobby and the real estate industry have conspired to conceal the truth and have to be held to a severe accounting.  The same applies to governments who have allowed this disaster to unfold.

(6) Our treasonous, government-funded CBC continues to act as the propaganda arm of the immigration lobby . It has betrayed the interests of Canada’s majority population and it too has to be held to a severe accounting.

(7) Unnecessary immigration necessitates costly infrastructure projects. For example, British Columbia’s $8.8 Billion Site C  Hydro-electric dam and Metro Vancouver’s $7.5 Billion Transit Infrastructure additions are being built almost solely to prepare for the arrival of another million people in the Metro Vancouver area. Canada has no need for most of them. Almost all will be from offshore.

(8) Canada’s Treason legislation has to be activated to charge the country’s immigration lobby for activities that threaten the existence of Canada’s majority population and give priority to the interests of recently-arrived minorities.

(9) The Economic Council of Canada established in 1990 that immigration has never provided any significant economic benefit to Canada. Also according to veteran economists Herbert Grubel and Patrick Grady, recent immigrants to Canada are now taking up to $30 Billion per year more out of Canada’s economy in transfers (social benefits) than they are contributing in taxes.  In 2011, that figure was $23 Billion. In other words, the figure has increased substantially, not decreased.

(10) Unneeded immigration has turned Canada’s federal elections into National Grovelling Campaigns in which  many politicians perform countless  treasonous, degraded acts in order to get their share of the  recent immigrant vote. This is a national disgrace and should never have been allowed to happen, let alone have been permitted to continue for 25 years.