Tag Archives: Tim Murray

DOING THE PRUDENT THING

Posted on by
DOING THE PRUDENT THING
 
by Tim Murray

As time progresses, I am getting more and more of those “senior moments”. I am forgetting the names of people whom I have recently seen, the names of people I grew up with, the names of books and authors that I have long admired, the names of movies that had a great impact on my thinking. I forget  where I left my car keys (damn it I had them in my hand 10 minutes ago!). I forget that I left my sunglasses on the roof of the car before I drove off. I forget, well, you get the picture.

Inline image 1
So maybe you can help me out here. Tell me if I am wrong. Tell me if my memory is failing. I seem to recall that a couple of years ago, when three Western African nations were threatened by a frightening outbreak of the Ebola virus, nations like Australia, Jamaica and the United States placed an immediate ban on travellers from those nations. The decision was founded on the common sense belief that while the overwhelming majority of citizens living in Sierra Leone and Liberia were not carrying the Ebola virus, some were, and that at that point no one knew who they were. Therefore the safe play was to place an embargo on all of them, all of them who wanted to leave their countries and find safety here. It would have been phenomenally and criminally stupid to risk the welfare of our own citizens in order to genuflect to “migrant rights”, would it not?

What I don’t recall, however, is hearing any outraged liberal or Social Justice Warrior denounce this temporary measure as bigoted and ignorant. I don’t remember any of them calling public health officials “racist”, or lashing out a politician who backed the decision of the Center for Disease Control to act swiftly to protect Americans. After all, the first responsibility of elected leaders is to ensure public safety.

Yet, just over a year later, after the San Bernadino murders and the terrorist attacks in Brussels, politicians and commentators of every stripe denounced Donald Trump’s call for a ban on all Muslim immigration as outrageous and appalling. Banning all Muslims from entering this country, Mr. Trump? All Muslims? Really? Why that runs counter to everything this country stands for!

Yet, the rationale for Trump’s proposal was founded on the very same considerations that led to the blanket ban on the entry of people from regions afflicted by Ebola to the United States.  Trump argued that Muslim applicants had not been vetted. True. He argued that even if 99.9% of Muslim applicants were OK, but 00.1% were not OK, we couldn’t take the chance that a hundred terrorists, or even one terrorist was among them. After all, it took what, just 19 Muslim conspirators to bring down the Twin Towers? Moreover, he emphasized that the ban he proposed would be temprorary. A fact that the liberal media seemed to have missed Once the dust had settled, and potential threats clearly identified, the ban would be lifted. Sounds reasonable to me.

Think about it this way. The ideology that inspires ISIL is communicable. It is a virus that afflicts a relatively tiny portion of the total Muslim population abroad, but nevertheless has spread with enormous speed and scope. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have not been able to keep on top of it. Who many ISIL operatives are out there? Who are they? Where are they? We don’t know.

Health officials in Liberia and Sierra Leone were possessed of the same kind of  questions. And they didn’t have the answers. All that they knew, all that we knew, was that the virus had to be contained. But how do you contain a virulent and seemingly unstoppable virus like that?  Well, there is one thing you don’t do. You don’t throw the borders wide open. You don’t wave everyone through the gate because to do otherwise would be a violation of their “rights”. You don’t forget that the primary obligation of any government, any President is, to repeat, protect public safety, not the people who seem to think that they have a divine entitlement to emigrate to your country. These are all things you don’t do. But then what do you do in the face of a threat like this?

You lock that damn gate and slam your front and back doors tight, that’s what.

This Land Is OUR Land: Euro-Canadians Will Not Surrender Canad

Posted on by

This Land Is OUR Land: Euro-Canadians Will Not Surrender Canada

by Tim Murray

What diversity lobbyists hate: Canadian family life in 1950.

It has often been argued by the talking heads of the multicultural and immigration lobby that Canadians of European descent have no well-founded historical or moral case to assert that their culture should enjoy a predominate place or special status in our nation.

Many go even farther than that. Many argue that Europeans and their Canadian descendants invaded and brutally colonized this country, forcibly appropriating aboriginal land. We are what some radical native activists scathingly call “settlers”, occupiers who have no legitimate right to be here — even though many of us are third or fourth generation Canadians. We are told that Europeans did not “discover” or create or build Canada. The land was here before Europeans even conceived of it.

Multicultural Arguments Are Inconsistent

These arguments are fraught with a logical inconsistency and a confusion of terms.

Firstly, it is illogical to argue, on the one hand, that European colonizers and their descendants have no right to live here because they are occupying “stolen” land, and then to argue on the other hand that newcomers fresh from the airport should share that “stolen” land as full-fledged Canadian citizens with equal rights and opportunities. If Euro-Canadians have no legitimate right to remain here, why then should the latest batch of foreign migrants be exempt from this same judgement? Why should they be given a pass? If Euro-Canadians can be told, in effect, to “go back where you came from”, why shouldn’t “New Canadians” be told to do the same thing?

There is another contradiction in this line of reasoning. Multiculturalists accord Aboriginals a special status. They are “First Nations”. After all, they were here first — even though a great many tribes came to occupy land by the “ethnic cleansing” and displacement of other tribes. But if Aboriginal Canadians have “seniority” rights over Canadians of European origin, why then should not the latter have “seniority” rights over “New Canadians”, the great majority of whom hail from “non-traditional”, that is, “non-European” countries? Either there should be a hierarchy of citizenship — or cultures — or there should not. But the multicultural lobby is having it both ways, and Euro-Canadians are not “having it” at all. They are not acknowledged to be a founding culture, nor are they accorded the right to compete for job placements based on merit — recently arrived “visible minorities” are able to leap-frog into coveted positions in the name of employment “equity”. In other words, Euro-Canadians have neither seniority rights nor equal opportunity. They are the “ham” in the ham sandwich of “diversity”.

The multicultural “Party Line” needs to be de-constructed.

Yes, the ‘land’ was here before Europeans arrived. In fact, it was here before aboriginals first crossed the Bering Strait. But the “land” is not the nation. The “land” is not “Canada”. And one can’t credibly deny that the British and French were the primary founders of the nation called “Canada”. It should also be noted that the newcomers from “non-traditional” sources who arrived in the wake of the pivotal shift to Official Multiculturalism more than four decades ago most probably did so because they found this “nation” of Canada superior to the countries they left. That is to say, it appears that those accursed “White settlers” and their descendents didn’t do such a bad job of building this nation after all.

Multiculturalism is a social engineering project that turns Canada into a country resembling those that immigrants to Canada have fled fromYet it is the multicultural project to transform this nation, the nation that immigrants have found so attractive, into something resembling the nations that those immigrants have fled. And it looks like they are half way there. In 1981, there were 6 ethnic enclaves in Canada. By 2010 there were 260. Obviously Canada is in the midst of a vast experiment in social engineering. The question we need to ask, as lab rats, is, “Is this really a good thing?” “Diversity”, we are constantly told, is a strength. In a masterpiece of Orwellian double-speak, the multicultural lobby assures us that there is “unity in diversity”. A look at the rest of the world, however, would not confirm this belief.

Diversity Is Disunity

You don’t believe me? Then ask the people of what used to be Yugoslavia. Ask the people of Syria or Iraq. Ask Ukrainians. Ask Ruandans. Ask Sri Lankans. Ask just about every people in the world. You don’t even have to look far. Take a look at America’s experiment with “integration” right now. Look how it is descending into tribalism. Look beyond soap operas and movies and the make-belief world that the American media presents. Look at America at the ground level. Look at cities, towns, neighbourhoods and college campuses. You will see clusters of African-Americans over here, clusters of Hispanics over there, and clusters of “whites” sitting or standing alone in the corner. This is not a function of mandated “apartheid”, but voluntary segregation. For many parts of America Martin Luther King’s dream has not come to pass. In fact, America is growing further apart, and “Coming Apart”, as Charles Murray’s book of that title suggests. In the words of Coloradan writer Mike Folkerth, “The United States is the most fractured society on earth — the most fractured culture.”

The make-believe world that the media presents and the unrelenting torrent of state propaganda will not long conceal these facts. The spin-machine will not ultimately succeed in perpetuating the “Diversity Illusion”, as British author Ed West calls it, no more than the communist state of Yugoslavia succeeded in convincing its citizens and the world at large that its ethnic blocs were living in blissful harmony.

Multiculturalists, of course, insist that Canada is unique. That Canada can make multiculturalism work: That so far it is a roaring success, and is a model for the world to follow. That those who say otherwise are a delusional fringe without credibility, people who need to be excluded from public forums, ostracized or even punished for spreading “hateful” messages. Rather than acknowledge the inherent division that exists between incompatible ethnic groups, they accuse those who point out this division as divisive!

The communist establishment in the Soviet bloc said similar things about dissidents: That they were insane. That they should be detained in prison or confined to mental asylums. They were tiny anti-social elements who disputed what was obvious: That the socialist state was a Workers’ Paradise where all ethnic groups got along.

But suddenly in the late 1980s and early 1990s the truth came out. The command economy had been a failure, socialism wasn’t working and ethnic nationalism was alive and well.

The silenced majority never did buy into the state myth. Seventy years of trying to change human nature proved futile. “In-group” favouritism, a manifestation of which is “ethnic nepotism”, is built right into our brains. As Australian sociologist, and author of Genetic InterestsFrank Salter, might say, we are “hard-wired” to bond with people very much like ourselves, to identify with them, and to join with them in pursuing our collective interests.

One would think that Canadian politicians would have taken notice. No Canadian government ever had a mandate to change the ethnic profile of the nation. What Prime Minister Mackenzie King said in 1947 is still true today: “…the people of Canada do not wish, as a result of mass immigration, to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population.” Unfortunately, Pierre Elliot Trudeau and the Prime Ministers who followed him paid no heed to public opinion in this area, or affected any interest in what the majority of Canadian wished. Once Trudeau instituted Official Multiculturalism in 1971, it soon became a bipartisan policy, a state religion that could not be questioned. And for good measure, it was even entrenched in the Constitution and in the mandates of federal public sector institutions, including, most crucially, the CBC.

Objective observers of recent Canadian history could be forgiven if they concluded that multicultural lobbyists are intent on denying that Canada’s European heritage has any significance, or that Euro-Canadians have any claim to represent the foundational core of the country. The aim is to marginalize them. That’s why many of these multicultural propagandists are conditioned to think of Europeans as interlopers, a bunch of land-robbers — nothing more, nothing less.

It’s time that Canadians know the truth. Europeans founded this nation. And their descendants have no intention of surrendering it.

The Name Game: The Erasure of European Canada’s History

Posted on by

The Name Game: The Erasure of European Canada’s History

by Tim Murray

BC Ferries
BC Ferries, here Queen of New Westminster

Shortly on the heels of news that a petition was circulating calling for the replacement of the name of coastal B.C.’s highest peak, Mt. Waddington, with the name of a former Chief of the Chilcotin band, the B.C. Ferry Corporation announced in July 2015 that three new vessels were going to benamed in honour of Coast Salish history. They were “Salish Orca”, “Salish Raven” and “Salish Eagle”.

The announcement came after the Corporation received 7,000 suggestions from citizens who were asked to participate. Of course, the Corporation was careful to emphasize that the selection was made in consultation with native representatives.

Earlier, the Victoria Times Colonist ran its own contest, in this case receiving 550 suggestions. As two of their journalists reported, “Aboriginal names were prominent…and the word ‘Salish’ appeared 72 times…The winner of our contest was based on the popularity of names and themes submitted by readers. Queen of the Salish Sea, as suggested by Victoria’s Laura Weston, combined the desire of entrants to retain the old class names with a swell of support for all things Salish.”

Of course, one Indian, that is, “Indo-Canadian”, Suki Grewa, wanted to get in on the action too. His suggestion? “Spirit of Multiculturalism”. I have a more apt name. “Spirit of Eurocanadian Displacement”. A submission by one Sharon Sinclair captured the spirit of Cultural Marxist collaboration, enablement and white self-abnegation with her suggestion of “Shores of Diversity.” How about “Shores of Ethnic Quislings”?

They were several suggestions that the ships be named after people like Rick Hansen, Terry Fox, Hanna Day and newborn Princess Charlotte, but apparently they lacked the ethnic credentials to be considered serious candidates in this year of Truth and Reconciliation. One man even suggested that the three vessels be named after pivotal battles like Vimy Ridge, Dieppe and Normandy. But it turns out these trivial events did little to shape Canadian identity and history in comparison to the contributions of hunter-gatherers.

I think it is only appropriate that “First Nations” nomenclature should be substituted for any locality, vessel or institution named after a wicked White ‘settler’, even if he happened to have been born in Canada. After all, what did Canadians of European origin ever do for this country, except build it?

Yes indeed, the name changers are on a roll.

They took down South Carolina’s Confederate battle flag, they’re intent on taking down Mr. Waddington’s reputation and they have a whole host of statues to take down too. There’s been talk that even Thomas Jefferson isn’t safe anymore, and in Canada, I hear that Wilfred Laurier is on the hit list now. Round and round she goes, where she’ll stop, nobody knows. No doubt if the Statute of Limitations was the “Statue” of Limitations, it would topple too, because the Grievance Lobby wants to keep going further and further into the past so it can “out” more and more Dead White Racists. Perhaps a merger is in the offing. “Racists Getting Fired” will become “White Racists Getting Fired or Retroactively Discredited Dead or Alive.”

Who knows, maybe centuries hence, when there is not even a trace of European-Canada to be found, paleontologists will posit the existence of a “missing link” between the pre-Columbian peoples and conquering Asian supermen. Dubbed “Homo Eurocanadas”, it will be widely thought of as a figment of the imagination of Crypto-zoologists who insist that a few remnants of this species are hiding in the wilderness. All they have as evidence, skeptics will claim, is the skeletal remains of a hominid without a backbone.

The Missing Link, Homo Eurocanadas
The Missing Link — Homo Eurocanadas: Fact or

The Surrender of Europe September 5, 2015: A Day that will Live in Infamy

Posted on by

The Surrender of Europe September 5, 2015: A Day that will Live in Infamy

The walls have come tumblin’ down. The Germans and Austrians have thrown their borders wide open. Syrian migrants in their tens of thousands are pouring in. Soon there will be almost a million of them, with an endless queue forming behind them. Word will get out to Africans and Asians: “The West is weak. They have given up. Their resistance is broken. Pick up your bags and let’s  join the stream.” Jean Raspail’s nightmare has come to pass.

The Camp of the Saints

[French journalist Jean Raspail’s prophetic novel The Camp of the Saints predicted the Third World “refugee” invasion of Europe, aided by political traitors and a rotten anti-white ruling class.. Available for $25.00 postpaid from C-FAR Books, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA.]

We will remember this day for the rest of our lives. 

This is the day we lost our civilization. The enemy is within our gates, and more and more will pour in. We are finished. This is the end. Or at the very least, the beginning of the end.  And to think that it took just one image, one photo of a three year old boy lying dead on a Turkish beach, to shatter our resolve and turn the tide. One image was the straw that broke Europe’s back. 

I can’t find any words to describe my feelings at this point.  A composite of impotent rage, despair, fatalism? It is hard to say. 

 What does one say when he bears witness to the unfolding displacement, conquest or extinction of his tribe, and the destruction of a legacy that reaches back to ancient Athens? What do say when you realize that the people in your family who gave their lives to save Europe seven decades ago evidently died in vain? And what of the heroes centuries ago  who beat back the Muslim invaders at Tours and the Battle of Vienna? It seems in retrospect, that their victories were just a holding action. Europe survived the Muslim and Mongol invasions, but it has succumbed to an incursion of an unarmed army of wretched refugees. 

It is as if, before our eyes, European-based culture in North America, Australia and Europe is being torn apart by a pack of wild dogs. One dog is Middle Eastern, one dog is African, one is Central American, another is Chinese and another is South Asian. And many of them are Muslim. 

Some of us are fighting back. Donald Trump. The Prime Minister of Hungary. The President of the Czech Republic. Populist politicians who are vilified by the mainstream media and shut out of power.  But they are the beleaguered few.  Will this be their Last Hurrah?

We could have stopped the flood. But our leaders lacked the will, and too many people were making money selling out their country. There is no conceivable punishment that could be meted out to these despicable traitors that would be commensurate with their crimes. What retribution would be fitting for Angela Merkel? What is the penalty for betraying one’s people and murdering their heritage?     

Tim Murray
September 5, 2015

--