Vladimir Putin — Common Sense on Immigration & Minorities

Posted on by
Vladimir Putin — Common Sense on Immigration & Minorities
 
Vladimir Putin’s speech – SHORTEST SPEECH EVER.  Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:
Frederick Fromm's photo.
 
“In Russia, live like Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, it should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, and live the life of Muslim’s then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law.
“Russia does not need Muslim minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’. We will not tolerate disrespect of our Russian culture. We better learn from the suicides of   America , England, Holland and France   , if we are to survive as a nation. The Muslims are taking over those countries and they will not take over Russia. The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of Sharia Law and Muslims.
“When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the Russian national interest first, observing that the Muslims Minorities Are Not Russians.”
The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation.

THE CULT OF THE VICTIM:Microaggressions & The Rise of HYPERSENSITIVE Victimhood Culture

Posted on by

Microaggressions & The Rise of HYPERSENSITIVE Victimhood Culture

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTROCGb5qj8
Preview YouTube video Microaggressions & The Rise of HYPERSENSITIVE Victimhood Culture

http://vidmax.com/ —————————————- If you would like to support this channel, donations are…
YOUTUBE.COM

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.

Diversity DESTROYS Social Cohesion in the West

Posted on by
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video Diversity DESTROYS Social Cohesion in the West

Diversity DESTROYS Social Cohesion in the West

Interview With Dan Murray, Founder of Immigration Watch Canada

Posted on by

Interview With Dan Murray, Founder of Immigration Watch Canada

Canada Was NOT Created by Immigrants of Diverse Races: A Statistical Demonstration

Posted on by

Canada Was NOT Created by Immigrants of Diverse Races: A Statistical Demonstration

by Ricardo Duchesne

Canadian Soldiers in WW I
Canadian Soldiers in WW I

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

Facts
Facts to lean on
  • 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 naturalincrease allowed the population of Canada to grow from 3.7 million to 4.8 million”.
Ukrainian Farming Family, Saskatchewan
    • 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.
English Immigrants
English Immigrants
  • 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!

George Orwell 1984 on control of the past
George Orwell (1984) on the totalitarian method of manipulating history

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.

Sources

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

How to Confront People With an Anti-White Mindset

Posted on by
https://youtu.be/kpVNBHH7acM
Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Don’t Apologize To The Sikhs—Part 1

Posted on by
For your information, we are sending you our latest bulletin : "Don't Apologize To The Sikhs---Part 1" 

Respectfully,
Daniel Murray
www.ImmigrationWatchCanada.org

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 

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 event 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 !!. 

END OF PART 1
Hot Books & DVDS 
__ Demography is Destiny by Jerry Vila, demographer. Hard hitting. Colourful dvd about the immigration invasion and falling European birthrates. $20.00
__  White Guilt Reconsidered by Robert JarvisNEW Canadian context. Looks at behaviour of Indians and Asiatics in British Columbia. Great antidote to White Guilt. His last booklet. $7.00
_ Harry Stevens: Immigration Reformer, Reconstructionist, Canada Firster by Robert Jarvis. A portrait of a populist hero and the leader of Canada’s Asiatic exclusionist movement in the early 20th Century. $6.00
__ The Workingman’s Revolt: the Vancouver Asiatic Exclusion Rally of 1907 by Robert Jarvis. A chapter of suppressed history detailing the successful fight against Third World Immigration in the early years of the 20th Century. $5.00
__ The “Komagata Maru” Incident: A Canadian Immigtration Battle Revisited by Robert Jarvis. Rediscovered Canadian history. The Canadian Government in 1914 reluctantly gave in to majority pressure to deport a shipload of Sikh illegals. A Sikh terrorist then assassinated William Hopkinson, a Canadian Government official. JUSTIN TRUDEAU SHOULD READ THIS. HE PLANS TO MAKE ANOTHER APOLOGY IN PARLIAMENT FOR THE KOMAGATA MARU.  No apology needed. Canada was right in 1914! $5.00
Name:____________________________________________________________________________________
Address:__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________E-mail: _________________________ 

Order from C-FAR Books,
P.O. Box 332,
Rexdale, ON., 
M9W 5L3,
CANADA.

 

Justin Trudeau Shouldn’t Apologize to the Sikh’s on May 18th – 1 of 2

Posted on by
 
 
 
Part 2
 

http://youtu.be/HYJDIS6

 

Insurance Corp. rejects my applications for various “white” personalized plates, and the BC Human Rights Tribunal rejects my discrimination complaint.

Posted on by
Insurance Corp. rejects my applications for various “white” personalized plates, and the BC Human Rights Tribunal rejects my discrimination complaint.
Hi Folks….,
Another example of White privilege?
Some of you are aware I’ve been studying racial and ethnic issues for some time now.  In the process I’ve learned many interesting things, one of them being (contrary to popular opinion), that White people are not an inherently evil race, nor are they responsible for all the evils on the planet.  There are reasons why many believe this, but I won’t go into that now.  Once I got rid of this delusion, I was able to realize (and give myself permission to see) that the White race has in fact contributed many good things to the collective human experience.  Yes, of course there have been dark periods, but that can be said of all races and ethnic groups at various times down throughout history. 
Last year, in order to celebrate this newfound knowledge and appreciation for my race (and test the waters), I put an application into ICBC (the state-owned Insurance Corporation of British Columbia), for a personalized licence plate with the slogan “WHT PRD,” standing for “White Pride.”  I thought since various other races and ethnic groups are allowed to openly celebrate their identity and heritage (Black History Month, Asian Pride Week, Mexico’s La Raza, to name a few), I might be as well. 
Wrong…..
The application came back rejected because the Manager of the Dept. had “performed an internet search” and found that the phrase “White Pride” was being used by some White Supremacist groups.  His Dept’s determination was that this slogan, among other things, “might be considered not in good taste.” I took it up with their Customer Relations Dept. and then their Fairness Commissioner, but they both just parroted what the Dept. Manager had said.  I then filed a complaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal for discrimination based on race, colour, and ancestry.  That took a year and they ended up not accepting the complaint.  Bad enough, but the Tribunal Chair took things a step further in his letter and more or less scolded me for thinking that I should be allowed to be proud of my race, and that this sort of thing does not line up with “the purposes of the Act.”
Ok…, Round 2.  In Feb this year I sent in an application to ICBC for another personalized plate with 3 choices this time:  WHT BOY, WHT FLR (feller), and, wait for it….., WHT MAN (I know, highly evil).  I just got their reply last week and all 3 were rejected — the reason given?  Each “contain a collection of characters that may be considered offensive.”  Wow!  I will take this up with their Customer Relations Dept. and Fairness Commissioner again, and see what kind of reasons they come up with this time around.  If it’s not resolved I will file another discrimination complaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal and see what they have to say.
Now to be fair, it may just be that ICBC has a policy not to allow anything “racial” on personalized plates, and just isn’t able to come out and say this since they would run the risk of sounding politically incorrect.  It would be interesting to see what would happen though if someone put in a plate application for ASN (Asian) PRD, HSP (Hispanic) PRD, BLK (Black) PRD…, or NTV (Native) PRD.  Would these be accepted?  If not, and if discrimination complaints were filed with the Human Rights Tribunal, would they be accepted?  I’m curious to know.
I know just a handful of non-White folks, and they either don’t have cars or are apolitical/not into activism, so if anyone knows of any Asian, Hispanic/Latino, Black, Native, or any other non-White person in BC that wants to celebrate their racial identity with a personalized plate, please help me get in contact with them.  There is a $100 application fee for personal plates, but I will pay this, so it won’t cost anyone anything.  BC Human Rights Complaints are easy to do and free, and have the potential of paying out thousands of dollars if there is a finding of discrimination.  If I can’t find anyone, I will put these applications in myself, but it would be better if other individuals of the various racial/ethnic groups did so.
With respect to my current applications and rejections, I will apply to www.theccf.ca and see if they can help.  They’re a non-profit, and if they show an interest in my case and take it on, it will cost little if anything.  I’ve also been consulting with a clever  law student with an interest in free speech and freedom of expression.  He is recommending we file for a Judicial Review of ICBC’s decision(s) and challenge Motor Vehicle Act Regulation 34.04 for vagueness.  I am also looking into filing for a Judicial Review of the HR Tribunal’s decision, but that avenue is a bit more of a long shot.  The law student will write the JR application for about $750, and filing fee’s will be about $250.  
I’ll provide updates as things progress.  If you’re not interested in this issue, let me know and I won’t send.
Best,
Lawrence