Scotiabank Prepares Whites for Minority Status

Written by Paul Fromm

Saturday, 17 September 2011 03:41

Scotiabank Prepares Whites for Minority Status By Henry Makow September 13, 2011 *by Henry Makow Ph.D*. *Not only does* Scotiabank, Canada's third largest bank*,* sell financial services, its commercials are helping Canadians of European descent adjust to future minority status. Scotiabank is a sponsor of the Canadian Football League. Thus, millions of Canadians repeatedly see the ad above which depicts a well intentioned but stupid white couple being instructed by a visible minority woman employed by the bank. If this were a one-off, I wouldn't be writing this. But much of this bank's TV advertising discriminate against whites. If white males took the roles of visible minorities and vice-versa, this racism and sexism would be apparent. The couple is returning a refund but the Chinese-Canadian adviser explains that the money is really theirs (for using one of the bank's products.) They greedily scoop it up and make their escape afraid the adviser will change her mind. Indeed, she calls them back and gives them a $20 bill they dropped in haste. "I love this bank!" they exclaim. Indeed, they love "multiculturalism." *It pays them to love it. * Scotiabank can focus on social engineering because, with a market cap of $55 billion, it makes a profit of more than $400 million<http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/30/scotiabank-idUSN1E77T07J20110830?feedType=RSS&feedName=hotStocksNews&rpc=43> *every month*. It has 2000 branches in 50 countries with 70,000 employees. It's motto is "You're Richer than You Think," which one wag changed to "* We're* Richer than You Think." *DEMOGRAPHY* Based on Scotiabank's commercials, you'd think that Canada was full of visible minority women. In fact, according to the last census in 2006<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada>, visible minorities of both sexes made up about 15% of Canada's 33 million population. But don't tell this to Scotiabank. In this commercial<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J50ybQdJayU&NR=1>, entitled *"Who's the Man?"* an East Indian woman adviser gives marriage counseling to a stupid white couple. The overbearing white woman confides that her henpecked husband thinks this is a good time to invest. "Can you set him straight?" The adviser says that in fact, *he may be right.* At which the browbeaten husband tears off his shirt to reveal an "I'm Right" T-Shirt and emits an adolescent "whoop!" heard throughout the branch. The commercial drew the following comment on You Tube: "This beat comes from the great white north. The fat ugly useless white man, thinks he's right about investing, but needs the black woman to confirm to the fatso [wife that] he is, in fact, right. The stupid white man acts retarded and loud, and is so happy that the smart black has made him feel right." Note the black gentleman looking confused at the barbarian antics of the white buffoon." In another commercial <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FiZ2VEoYGQ&NR=1>, an East Indian *male* is able to crash the ranks of Scotiabank's colored female advisers. He gives the proverbial dumb white couple advice on whether to take a fixed or variable-rate mortgage. Then, the couple flip a coin to see whether to have Mexican or Chinese for lunch. The coin stands on its end. In the final scene, they are eating "Chexican" which is what Canada will look like in a few years. In contrast, Chinese Canadian customers get commercials<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwAV5RUSNO4>in Cantonese in which their adviser is a Chinese Canadian. East Indian customers get advice <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQN8rggY6uk>from a white woman who actually speaks some Hindi! It must be nice to be treated with respect in commercials. And customers at Scotiabank's foreign subsidiaries such as Mexico are spared the social engineering because they aren't in the Illuminati cross-hairs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1OCuCPQaeU&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBNxSo6_AWg&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSicdyD0boE&NR=1 *CONCLUSION *As an immigrant, and son of immigrants, I always wanted to contribute to my country. I didn't want to be used by a foreign-based Cabalist (i.e. Masonic) financial cartel to subvert the majority and alter the country's ethnic makeup. I'm sure the majority of visible minority immigrants feel the same way. The Illuminati bankers claim they are promoting "equality" and fighting "discrimination." If this were true, they would be color-blind and promote on the basis of merit alone. Visible minorities in commercials would reflect their proportion of the population. The Illuminati bankers' agenda is to empower visible minorities at the expense of people of European descent. The overall agenda is to undermine the homogenous national character of all European Christian-based nations so they can be integrated into a totalitarian one- world government. "We will undermine every collective identity except our own," they say in *The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.* This applies to race and nation, as well as religion (God) and family. This kind of advertising is not limited to banks. There is a recent *Speedy Lube* commercial where the single white woman needs "an oil change." Naturally she doesn't have a man to take care of this problem. She writes a "Dear John" letter to her dealer, who is a ruggedly handsome white man, informing him that he has been replaced by a little Filipino at Speedy Lube. The white man has been emasculated. I am not against intermarriage, but I get suspicious when corporations are pushing it. If you think I am reading too much into these commercials, don't kid yourself. They are prepared by advertising agencies who get their marching orders from the Illuminati bankers via the Tavistock Institute. Message to corporations: Sell your product not your evil Illuminati social agenda or the public will boycott you. -- Related- Makow "Elite Admit to Secret Social Engineering" * * <http://www.henrymakow.com/eliteadmitstosecret.html>Levis Commercials Promote Paganism <http://www.henrymakow.com/i_have_noticed_a_strange.html>

 

Hear Paul Fromm -- The Fighting Side of Me: Getting at the Truth

Written by Paul Fromm

Friday, 16 September 2011 05:15

Hear Paul Fromm -- The Fighting Side of Me: Getting at the Truth<http://reasonradionetwork.com/20110906/the-fighting-side-of-me-getting-at-the-truth> September 6, 2011 [image: Rick Perry with the Mexican flag] *Paul Fromm discusses:* - Public Safety Minister Vic Toews criticizes release of Walter Ernesto Guzman of El Salvador on $3,000 cash bond after appearing before the Immigration and Refugee Board (Guzman was in the country illegally after being convicted of drug trafficking, assault and other serious offences. Toews knows better. The law must be changed.); - Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty slaps unemployed Majority Canadians in the face; promises $10,000 subsidies for employers who hire new (mostly Third World) immigrants; - Register for National Eurooean American Leadership Seminar, Sept. 17 near Knoxville, TN — Stormfront.org <http://www.stormfront.org/> — David Duke, Derek Black, Don Black, Sam Dickson, Paul Fromm - Check out : Nationalist Alternative is an Pro-White intellectual think-tank and an activist group in Australia. To find out more information go to the website which is www.natalt.org or send an Email to [email protected] - Gob. Rick Perry “Scalawag of the Month” favours subsidized tuition for illegals in Texas. He’s no immigration reformer. - They breed, but must we feed–a quick look at the famine in basketcase Somalia http://reasonradionetwork.com/20110906/the-fighting-side-of-me-getting-at-the-truth

 

Presenting, from Pakistan With Her Belly & Her Hand Out, The Heartburn Kid

Written by Paul Fromm

Thursday, 15 September 2011 04:31

*Presenting, from Pakistan With Her Belly & Her Hand Out, The Heartburn Kid * The photo shows a stricken woman, head in hands. It is the hands that are arresting. A French manicure costs $20 to $30 and should be renewed every week to 10 days. While genuinely depressed people generally don't go in for manicures, it is a nice look if the taxpayers can afford it. Parveen Anwari, 34, immigrated from Pakistan in 2000 with her husband and child. Despite seemingly insurmountable health and financial difficulties, the couple managed to produce three more children in Canada. The husband's resume consists of a stint working as a convenience store clerk, although he apparently suffers from unspecified health problems. Parveen has never worked and is -- mysteriously -- a Grade 12 graduate, yet illiterate. Once again, how did these dynamos get in? Were they refugees? If not, what in-demand skills do they bring to the table? In due course, Parveen applied for disability benefits and Ontario's Social Benefits Tribunal acceded, ruling that her heartburn, migraines and depression (all side effects of chronic pregnancy) precluded her ever looking for work. An odd finding, given that the woman never even consulted a specialist about her "debilitating" conditions. A real court recently overturned the tribunal's decision (*Ontario v. Anwari 2011 ONSC 4500*). The court said that some challenges are common to us all and as adults, we are expected to assume responsibility for the decisions we make. Court ruled that while sympathy may or may not be in order, government funds decidedly are not. However, Parveen has only been removed from disability, or gold card, social assistance, she is presumably still eligible for coach class welfare. "“She cries nightly. She misses her family back in her homeland and worries about them and the war torn existence that surrounds them. Her in-laws are not helpful to her,” the Tribunal decision reads." (*National Post*, September 9, 2011) ."Her reasons for this decision, however, 'do not meet the [legal] requirement of completeness,' the judges ruled. The Social Benefits Tribunal is one of several quasi-judicial tribunals set up by the Ontario government to resolve disputes outside of full courts, such as the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the Landlord and Tenant Board." These tribunal boards larded with their social activist appointees do not make good rulings. The principals understand their personal agenda but they do not understand the law. What has been the cost to Ontario taxpayers for this protracted nonsense? If the morose Parveen is overwhelmed by feelings of sadness because she misses her family back in her homeland, Ontarians should be grateful that it was beyond the scope of Ms. LeBourdais' powers to bring Parveen's extended family to Canada as a pacifier. Paul Fromm Director Canada First Immigration Reform Committee "An Ontario court has scolded the province’s Social Benefits Tribunal for giving disability benefits to a mother of four who did not even try to work, and had only minor or easily treated ailments. In a written ruling, three Ontario Divisional Court judges said the tribunal blurred the line between the difficult personal circumstances of 34-year-old Parveen Anwari — who suffered migraine headaches, depression and heartburn — and her claimed disability. “It would have been very helpful to the disposition of this appeal if the Tribunal had given more extensive reasons better explaining its analysis and conclusions, particularly in light of the fact that the respondent had not actually tried to function in any workplace,” according to the newly released judgment. In overuling two earlier rejections, Tribunal Member Linda LeBourdais ruled in 2009 that, in her opinion, “this young mother is overwhelmed with what is on her plate, over and above the impairments she experiences from her conditions. Together they make functioning on a day-to-day basis difficult. Lacking a significant education, a lack of workplace skills and experience, in addition to an inability to read and write, realistically preclude any chance for employment.” *[Really? Apart from the completely legitimate fear of breaking one of those exquisitely maintained nails, even an illiterate could presumably function as a cleaner. Oh wait, her doctor also reported an impairment in her ability to do housekeeping -- read on]. * That is a regrettable plight, the Divisional Court judges ruled, but it is not a disability. “Although it is difficult not to sympathize with the plight of [Ms. Anwari], her struggles and challenges resulting from other causes do not entitle her to the benefits that she claims and the Tribunal has stepped beyond what the act allows,” the Divisional Court judgment reads. Under the law, a person is disabled if and only if they have a continuous or recurring physical or mental impairment, verified by an expert and expected to last a year or more, that results in a “substantial restriction” in their ability to function in the community and workplace. If deemed eligible, a person may then receive payments from the province, which vary depending on circumstance, but for example, the maximum a single person could receive each month for basic needs and shelter under the program is $1,042, according to Charlotte Wilkinson, a spokeswoman for Ontario’s Ministry of Community and Social Services. Ms. Anwari, according to court records, completed a Grade 12 education in Pakistan before her school was shut by the Taliban, and she immigrated to Canada with one child, settling in rural Port Elgin, Ont., with her husband, where they lived in a two-bedroom apartment that lacked basic furnishings, even beds and strollers for the children. She did not smoke or drink, has no history of obesity, and has never been employed. At the time of her disability application, in the summer of 2008, she was pregnant with a fourth child, and being treated for gestational diabetes, which was expected to resolve after the birth. Her husband had lost his job at a convenience store, and he was dealing with health problems of his own. Her family doctor, Don McCulloch, reported on a medical form “minimal” concern regarding a number of things, and moderate concern only in “learning,” such as language, math or attention. He also reported “mild or slight” impairment in ability to do housekeeping. He said it is “unrealistic” that she would try to enter the workforce. “She will need to be a ‘stay at home’ mother for the next few years until her children are out of school,” Dr. McCulloch wrote. *[What, 15 years from now?] * The initial rejection letter from the ministry cites several reasons for turning her down, including lack of documentation about any advanced symptoms or attempts at treatment or diagnosis. There were no hospitalizations, no visits to specialists, and indeed no past treatments other than some medication for her heartburn. GERD, or chronic heartburn, is “generally understood to be a manageable condition,” the letter says. At her appeal to the Tribunal, another doctor confirmed the diagnosis of “major depression,” but said there was no reason it could not be treated after her pregnancy. Her testimony, however, painted a darker picture of an overwhelmed, housebound woman, unable to sleep, and confused by her sadness. “She cries nightly. She misses her family back in her homeland and worries about them and the war torn existence that surrounds them. Her in-laws are not helpful to her,” the Tribunal decision reads. In granting Ms. Anwari disability benefits, Ms. LeBourdais said she relied on a rule that allows the Tribunal to “consider the applicant in the context of her own situation,” and not just as any person with these ailments. Her reasons for this decision, however, “do not meet the [legal] requirement of completeness,” the judges ruled. The Social Benefits Tribunal is one of several quasi-judicial tribunals set up by the Ontario government to resolve disputes outside of full courts, such as the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the Landlord and Tenant Board, and the Custody Review Board. The court ordered a new hearing under a differently constituted tribunal. (*National Post*, September 9, 2011)