Written by Paul Fromm
Saturday, 09 January 2010 11:00
Former Political Prisoner Brad Love on A Wealthy Gulf State vs. Mismanaged

Reading a *NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC* the other day, I came across an article on
what an Arabian country has done with its oil revenues. Oil $$$ that we
gave to them via our local gas stations, was turned into gleaming new
cities, ports, rec ctrs, mega malls they even have a twin luxury hotel
facility where a formula 1 racing course travels through its glass arches.
Wow! Crime is non-existent. Workers pay no income tax. (Imagine how rich
you’d be if this were you?) And banks charge no interest. Tuition for its
citizens at any university is gov’t sponsored. It is almost surreal.

And go to it’s huge well-planned airport and you’ll see a 5-mile long tarmac
lined up with airlines from every nation watched over by a fleet of jet
fighters that could blow us off the map in hours. Again, all of this was
paid for by Western drivers. Not good. Or is it???

Now, shine the light on what is going on here in Alberta. ... taxes are
through the roof. The deficit is crippling. Health care facilities are cut
or simply closed. Yet, their CEOs still earn 6-figure salaries. The
infrastructure is a wreck. Higher education is beyond the reach of most,
unless your parents are the high-paid CEOs of such schools. Yet,
ironically, all our foreign aid $$$ currently being pissed away in the Third
World as educating them over there. Fair, right? Seniors suffer, jails
fill up and food banks run dry. We pay through the nose, get nothing for
it, and all the while watching our short-sighed bumbling gov’t squander our

So what’s the diff? How does such a small emerging nation outdo us? Well,
think about it: they do not spend $$$ educating foreigners or
feeding/housing/jailing them. You’re either qualified or self supporting and
prove it, DICKHEAD!!! They do not get involved in overseas wars with
countries that despise them. Anyway, there is no costly appeals process for
unwanted, uninvited and often criminal migrants wishing to stay. They don’t
pay pensions to boat people. They don’t have four different levels of gov’t
and two houses of political leeches who’d be better off buried. They do
not build dams, roads, clinics and schools for deadbeats abroad. They build
them for their own people. For it’s their money. Fair, right? And they do
not support or tolerate other people’s cultures, goofy customs or languages
and same goes with deviant sexual lifestyles.

“It’s our way or to the departure lounge in that gleaming airport you go.”
I mean, think of the billions that our gov’t was stupid enough to piss away
on foreign aid costs! Your kid could have used that for college or better
senior care for your parents or you or that homeless guy or your soon to be
minuscule pension could be boosted.
Never truer!!!


*Former political prisoner Brad Love, who was sentenced, in 2003, to 18
months in prison for writing non-threatening letters to public officials,
keeps his writing skills sharp with his comments from Alberta. He served two
further terms for writing non-threatening letters to other politicians and
newspapers for alleged “breach of probation” gag orders, yes, here in
Canada, not in North Korea or Burma. He faces a "breach of probation" trial
for writing non-violent letters to York University Student Union and the
Canadian Jewish Congress next May. Apparently, the Crown wants to toss this
dissident in jail for THREE ( yes that 3!) years.] *
Written by Paul Fromm
Friday, 08 January 2010 09:20
*Is This A Great Country -- Or What?*
"A Calgary operator of a marijuana grow-op who preyed on new immigrants and
was the source of some pot sent to Toronto has won a legal victory in his
fight to stay in Canada. *De Bing Li*, 38, *of Vietnam*, was jailed for 16
months in February 2006 after pleading guilty to production of a controlled
substance and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. He
was one of four men charged in August 2004 after Calgary police raided four
homes used for marijuana growing operations and seized more than 2,000
plants with an estimated street value of $2.5 million. Police said the ring
grew pot in a network of grow-ops in Calgary. Most of the drugs were sold
in that city with some being trucked to Toronto and other parts of Canada.

Court heard Li, who is a permanent resident and father of two young
children, was declared inadmissible to Canada and ordered deported in July
last year because of his criminal record. [Naturally,] he appealed the
deportation to the *Federal Court **of Canada*, which this month ruled there
was an error made in the case by an immigration and refugee board. The
court ruled he should receive a new hearing. Court was told the ring preyed
on newcomers to Canada who were offered big money to look after the plants.
Many, like Li, quit their jobs to go into the drug trade. *'The appellant
is not rehabilitated and has not shown remorse,' Federal Court Judge Robert
Barnes said. 'The only objective finding in his favour is that he is
bringing in a revenue to this household.*' Li claimed he did not know what
he was doing was illegal. No date has been set for a new hearing." (*
Toronto** Sun*, October 12, 2009)

[This article appears in the January, 2010 issue of the *CANADIAN
HOTLINE*is available by subscription for $30 per year. You can
subscribe by sending
a cheque or VISA number and expiry date to *CANADIAN IMMIGRATION HOTLINE*,
P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3.]
Written by Paul Fromm
Friday, 08 January 2010 08:53
*When a Canadian is concerned about his own way of living, this
concern is not racism.*
Thursday, December 31st, 2009 | 8:00 am
Canwest News Service

'Stretching over that empty sea, aground some fifty yards out, (lay) the
incredible fleet from the other side of the globe … There were better than a
hundred ships in all, each one caked with rust, unfit for the sea … They had
lined up in almost mannerly fashion … and all around, thousands of floating,
white clad corpses … A hundred ships! … On this Easter Sunday evening, eight
hundred thousand living beings, and thousands of dead ones, were making
their peaceful assault on the Western World."
This is the opening scene in Jean Raspail's famous – some would say infamous
– novel, *The Camp of the Saints*, which offers a darkly futuristic tale of
Europe inundated by wave after wave of desperate Third World migrants. When
it was first published in 1973, Raspail was immediately tagged a "racist,"
that label used to silence anyone who speaks outside the box of political
The novel tells of the flight of hundreds of thousands of desperate Indians
from the cesspools of Calcutta. Led by a self-styled messiah, they
commandeer a fleet of boats and embark for the Mediterranean. When the
armada arrives off the southern coast of France, the hordes simply come
ashore and spread across the continent. Millions more follow suit. Europe's
political and social leaders are helpless. If they try to stop the refugees,
millions will die. If they don't stop them, European culture will be
destroyed. I won't give away the ending; suffice to say that irrational
compassion holds sway.
It's not hard to understand why Raspail's book stirred so much controversy
36 years ago. European powers had only recently abandoned their former
colonies. Westerners were taught to feel guilty about their imperialist
past. Intellectuals inflated themselves with self-loathing. As Susan Sontag,
one of the more prominent flagellants, said in 1967: "The white race is the
cancer of human history."
In the last decade, however, Raspail's book has gained a better reputation.
Journalist Lionel Shriver referred to the book as "prescient," saying it
voices "an emotion whose expression is increasingly taboo in the West, but
that can grow only more virulent when suppressed: the fierce resentment felt
by majority populations when that status seems threatened."
– - -
This greater appreciation of Raspail's fable is linked, no doubt, to the
tide of events. Over the last 30 years, and especially in the last decade,
Western nations have found themselves playing host to increasing numbers of
migrants – legal and illegal – from the Third World. The International
Organization for Migration estimates that, as of 2008, there were 214
million migrants worldwide – about three per cent of the planet's
population. Europe has the largest number, 70 million, or nearly 10 per cent
of its population. Another 50 million are in the United States and Canada –
43 million and seven million, respectively – comprising about 14 per cent of
those two countries' populations. Asia hosts 61 million, or 1.5 per cent of
the population.
(The UN defines a long-term migrant as someone who moves to another country
from their usual residence for at least a year, effectively making the host
country their residence.)
Raspail may have been writing dystopian fiction, but reality, it seems, is
catching up. In 2004, the UN Global Commission on International Migration
concluded, as German journalist Klaus Brinkbaumer writes, "migration could
become the most important issue of the 21st century."
For many it already is. In Africa, thousands trek the length of the
continent to cross the Straits of Gibraltar into Spain. Thousands of
migrants from the Middle East and Asia Minor cross the Mediterranean in
rickety boats to land on the shores of Greece, Italy and southern France.
Boat people from as far as Afghanistan cram onto rust buckets in hopes of
making it to Australia. Thousands of Mexicans risk being shot by U.S. border
This mass migration, arguably the greatest movement of people since
Europeans came to the New World, is prompting much debate. Kevin Andrews, a
former Australian immigration minister, called on Australians to have an
open discussion on the country's burgeoning Muslim population. French
President Nicolas Sarkozy said body-covering burkas are "not welcome" in
France. The Swiss recently voted in a binding referendum to ban building
Islamic minarets. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has announced measures
to control the flow of immigrants. (Recent surveys found that 80 per cent of
Britons want immigration reduced, but 70 per cent were reluctant to talk
about it lest they be labelled racists.) The Netherlands has imposed some of
Europe's most stringent requirements for would-be immigrants, and other
European governments are following that example as politicians react to
anti-immigration sentiment.
– - -
Canada has not been immune from the South's march North. About 260,000
immigrants come to this country each year. That doesn't include illegal
immigrant claimants. The recent example of 76 illegal migrants, mostly Sri
Lankan Tamils, who were intercepted on a rusting ship off the coast of
Vancouver Island, is only the tip of the iceberg. Estimates of the number of
illegal immigrants range between 35,000 to 120,000. Nonetheless, it is

Canada's intake of legal migrants that is the most problematic, say
Canada's immigration "flow rate" is higher than almost any other Western
country, according to Stephen Gallagher, program director of the Canadian
International Council in Montreal. In 2007, he says, Canada had an estimated
net migration about four times that of the European Union, twice that of the
U. S. and a third greater than Australia.
"As a result," says Gallagher, "Canada is undergoing a social and
demographic evolution that is much more rapid and profound than that in
other immigrant-welcoming countries." Already, nearly half the populations
of Toronto and Vancouver – 46 per cent and 40 per cent respectively – were
born outside Canada.
Such a demographic shift has undeniable consequences – economic, social and
political – for the country. Yet there's little debate about what those
consequences might be, and whether they are acceptable to the majority of
"We are led to believe that Canada's immigration policy serves the national
interest and is essential for economic growth, to fill our labour shortages,
and to offset an aging and diminishing population," says James Bissett, a
former Canadian ambassador and the one-time executive director of the
Canadian Immigration Service. "We are also told that most of our immigrants
are selected because they possess the education, trades, skills, and
training essential to meet our labour-force demands. These assertions need
to be challenged because they do not bear up under examination. They have
become myths, used by governments and pro-immigration advocates to justify
unreasonably high immigration levels."
Indeed, according to a recent Globe and Mail report, the federal government
intends to maintain existing immigration levels even though other countries,
from Japan to Spain to Australia, "are cutting immigration targets to
protect fragile labour markets and encouraging itinerant workers to leave."
This is not to deny that Canada has benefited from immigration. You only
have to think of all those who arrived in the 19th century and early and
mid- 20th century to build the country and to fight its wars. However,
according to Patrick Grady, an economic consultant with Global Economics,
more recent immigrants are proving to be a drain on the national economy.
In particular, "recent immigrants coming to Canada from Asia, southeastern
Europe, Latin America, and the Caribbean are not doing as well as immigrants
from Europe and the United States and are not being successfully integrated
into the Canadian labour market."
Grady points out that the existing high level of immigration is justified by
the supposed needs of the market place. If corporations don't get the
employees they need – particularly low-cost employees – then, so the
argument goes, the economy will suffer. Grady challenges that view, citing a
2006 Canadian study that found "a 10-per-cent labour-supply shift caused by
immigration would result in a three- to four-per-cent reduction in wages" in
both Canada and the U.S.
"Employers are always griping about the shortages of labour. But you never
hear them saying anything about the need to raise wages to attract more
workers. " In Grady's view, the "poor performance" of recent immigrants will
only improve after "a radical reform of Canadian immigration policy that
substantially reduces the number of immigrants (no more than 100,000 a year)
and tightens up selection criteria sufficiently to reverse the
Perhaps the most egregious flaw in the immigration system is the family
class category. The Immigration Act currently allows new immigrants to bring
in not only their immediate family (spouse and kids) but also their parents
and grandparents of any age. This generates what is called "chain
immigration." Naturally, all these parents and grandparents – 20,000 in
2006, according to a report to Parliament – are eligible for welfare and
health care even though they have made no contributions to either.
Why is there so little willingness on the part of other Canadians to debate
the immigration issue?
Martin Collacott, a former Canadian ambassador and one-time director general
of security services, says Canadians "are afraid they'll immediately be
called racists by all the interest groups – immigration lawyers, rights
activists and ethnic groups – that have a stake in promoting immigration."
The question, of course, is: What has made Canadians so afraid?
– - -
At the core of Canada's immigration practices – the theory that sustains the
practice, as it were – is the concept of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism,
in turn, is rooted in the notion that all cultures are deserving of equal
respect. As Salim Mansur, a professor of social sciences at the University
of Western Ontario, puts it: "Unfortunately, the politics of Canadian
multiculturalism is based on the notion that all cultures represented within
an immigrant culture are more or less equal, and deserve equal respect and
treatment in politics and law."
Immigrant groups draw on this cultural relativism to assert their right to
maintain traditions – gender apartheid, polygamy, religious intolerance, for
example – even if those traditions are contrary to liberal values and,
indeed, violate Canadian law.
It is this mindset of cultural abnegation reflected in Canada's
multicultural policies that Mansur sees behind Canadians' reluctance to
insist on immigrants conforming to the country's liberal way of life. "The
politics of multiculturalism discourages (if 'prohibit' is too harsh a word)
the majority population from demanding assimilation of minorities
originating from a variety of non-Western cultures," say Mansur, who is also
a member of the board of directors of the Center for Islamic Pluralism in
Washington, D.C. "Multiculturalism promotes and requires accommodation of
ethno-cultural minorities by the host society … Consequently,
multiculturalism together with an open-door immigration policy looses the
host society from its inherited culture."
It is surely a puzzle of our times that liberal-minded Canadians hesitate to
object to the presence of those who "hate democracy and the West."
"We don't do nearly enough to tell people that 'if you come here your
primary political loyalty is to Canada," says Martin Collacott. "If you
can't accept the Canadian way of life, and what it means, you should go
So, why would any liberal society adopt policies and practices – extremist
multiculturalism and open-door immigration, in this case – that encourage
the establishment of more and more illiberal tribalist enclaves in the
Perhaps, as Jean Raspail suggests, it has something to do with the state of
the Western soul. "The West has no soul left. At every level – nations,
races, cultures, as well as individuals – it is always the soul that wins
the decisive battles … I can hardly discern any soul in us."

*[Jean Raspail's prophetic novel CAMP OF THE SAINTS was so right and then
some. You can order a copy from C-FAR Books by sending $25.00 postpaid to
P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada.]*
Page 420 of 454
Powered by MMS Blog