Tag Archive for: Canada

VIDEO: What not to tell the Canadian taxpayers about Syrian refugees

/in , , , , , /by

This is an excellent use of 6 minutes of your time!

I don’t know this program, but thank Paul for sending the youtube clip from The Rebel.

I’m guessing that what Faith Goldy learned about Canada’s new 40,000+ Syrian population applies to America’s flow as well.

We have followed Boy Trudeau’s rash Syrian resettlement program since it began in 2015, see our Canada archive for previous posts.

The Rebel learned that they can’t speak the language, that they are sick (TB!), and that they use large amounts of welfare because they aren’t finding work, but worst of all it was revealed that the documents, obtained by investigators, are littered with admonitions to not tell the taxpaying public the bad news!

If the video doesn’t play below, then watch it here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

HuffPo: U.S. Refugee processing pipeline being restarted, contractors optimistic

Falls Church, Virginia Mosque Dar al-Hijrah to Host Pro-Brotherhood Egyptian Imam

15,726 refugees admitted to U.S. since Inauguration Day, see where they went

Read the Confidential David Brock Memo Outlining Plans to Attack Trump

VIDEO: Special Gun Rights for Muslims?!

/in , , , , /by
Faith Goldy reports:

When I applied for my Canadian firearms licence after passing my federally mandated PAL and RPAL courses, the RCMP got all of my information. They asked for everything from medical history, relationship history, familial structures, and a photograph.

However, when I recently logged online to renew my license, I noticed something peculiar:

An exception to the usual regulation requiring a photograph, citing religious exemption!

So, I contacted the RCMP, and you won’t believe what happens next.

While I’m no fan of tighter gun control measures, shouldn’t all law-abiding gun-owners be treated equally in Canada?

Why are special rights being granted to members of certain religious sects while other Canadians are held to a different standard?

Open letter to Mayor Jim Watson RE: Ottawa becoming a Sanctuary City

/in , , , , /by

Mayor Jim Watson, Councillors Bob Monette and Stephen Blais:

My name is Shabnam Assadollahi. I am a resident of Orleans, a taxpayer who was born a Muslim in Iran and immigrated to Canada in 1991.

I heard that the City of Ottawa might consider to vote that Ottawa becoming a “Sanctuary” City. Please allow me to express my disapproval and grave concerns about this suggestion.

As an immigrant and former political child prisoner of notorious Evin prison by the Islamic regime of Iran and international award winning Human Rights Advocate, I have no issues with Ottawa welcoming immigrants and refugees, as long as they are here legally and Canada takes in numbers that we can readily accommodate. As a professional working on a daily basis with refugees and newcomers, I hear their devastation by this so called “open-border” policy of Canada. Every immigrant and newcomer I have spoken to strongly believes in upholding the rule of law and in maintaining national security and they are so fearful about their families safety and security. It is also very important for our nation’s capital to set an example by following the law, for example, by having our police forces cooperate with Border Services in immigration-related areas.

I recently watched a video by a U.S. Immigration expert, (please click on this link), who spoke of the U.S. immigration experience and the effect of having large numbers of illegal immigrants on the economy, on crime, on drugs, on wages and so on. I was left with very deep concern about the implications of living next door to the U.S. at a time when the U.S. Government is deporting illegal immigrants from the U.S., if they have a criminal record or if they are terror suspects. I expect that we will see increasing numbers of these people streaming across the Canadian borders to avoid being deported to Mexico or elsewhere, and as a nation do we really want these people living in Canada? As more Canadian cities consider becoming sanctuary cities, based on the U.S. experience, our Canadian cities may have difficulty absorbing these people, with not enough jobs for them, increasing crimes, lower wages, etc. As a hardworking taxpaying Ottawa resident, having senior parents living alone who are frustrated by this scary news, I would be extremely disappointed to see it happen.

Have you examined what is happening in European countries as a result of the huge influx of immigrants they are receiving? Those nations are weekly experiencing chaotic events, riots, murders, and rapes. Although media has been encouraged by the European Union not to associate crime with Islamic immigration, the truth is that 500% increases in rape, for example, are related to those coming from Islamic majority counties. President Donald Trump is acting to protect America based on these examples, and it is my professional opinion he is very prudent and discerning. It has already been proven that the vast majority of immigrants are not even the women and children we might out of compassion hope to help. Often, young, strong males are coming, and they are a restless bunch! Remember the old saying, “Idle hands are the devil’s playground?” For many Europeans, they are learning the meaning of this first hand, are suffering much, and are very unhappy. It is, in fact, inspiring uprisings.

Do we want civil war on the streets of Canada?

When it is more cost effective for world leaders to find less expensive means to care for immigrants in the Middle East, ask the American President, until they can resettle back in their homeland, and when those restless men believe unveiled women are free game sex slaves, no joke, it makes total sense to keep them in the Middle East. There are plenty of YouTube videos (Not Fake News) made by people who are documenting the insanity in their countries. It would be an awful shame for the women of Canada to have to dye their hair black and where chastity underwear like girls in Sweden do. That would be on your hands if you freely open our doors to a huge influx of immigrants.

Are we a country seeking to please the European Union, or a biased United Nations? Or, are we interested in preserving our people and our majestic country? Cars set aflame through the streets of our cities does not sound desirable.

I know how welcoming Canadians are—and indeed we are! But, we also have to be wise protecting this country and our peaceful and beautiful cities we live in. I hope that you agree with me and five members of my family and vote against this dangerous suggestion. Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Respectfully,

Shabnam Assadollahi

RELATED ARTICLE: Canada – Fredericton, NB aiming to become a “sanctuary city”

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s Anti-Free Speech, Pro-Radical Islam Reporting

/in , , , /by

Attention Canadian Broadcasting News Agency (CBC),

My name is Shabnam Assadollahi. I am a Canadian of Iranian origin, an award winning human rights advocate and freelance writer.

Reference your February 18th article “Protesters outside Masjid Toronto call for ban on Islam as Muslims pray inside.”

As an Iranian, a former refugee and former child prisoner of Evin for 18 months by the Islamic Republic of Iran who has been advocating for democracy and woman’s rights, I am strongly against the Political and Radical Islam and openly have shared my views about Motion-103. I am also appalled by a small group of people protesting in front of the mosque on Friday, some held hateful banners while ordinary Muslims were in and out and praying. IMHO, what that minority small group did yesterday was NOT activism but another form of hate.

I read your bias coverage of the demonstration at the mosque in Downtown Toronto and the connection you made between the demonstration and the controversy over Motion-103 which reminded me of what Muslim Brotherhood’s frequent cover up in Egypt and Iran’s Qods Forces propaganda in Iraq, Yemen, and Syria.

Religious freedom is part of our Canadian values and such small group’s hateful rally will only harm our Free speech but we already have laws to protect Every member of our nation. Shouldn’t your remind ALL Canadians to take pride to know that in 1982 the Charter of Rights and Freedoms made all Canadians equal? Don’t you think that this is the most important value that has been holding us together as Canadians?

As a former radio producer working for over twelve years knowing the ethics in journalism, I have observed that you frequently give a disservice to all Canadians by not sharing the complete information which can have an effect on one’s response to an issue. The last thing any of us should do is promote divisiveness because of lack of information especially coming from taxpayers funded media outlet.

This well documented article by CIJNews-Canada shows the supplications at Masjid Toronto Mosque located in downtown Toronto which is affiliated with the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC). According to this investigative journal, the mosque operates in two locations in downtown Toronto: Masjid Toronto at Dundas (168 Dundas St. West) and Masjid Toronto at Adelaide (84 Adelaide St. East).

Dr. Wael Shihab was appointed in April 2014 to a full-time resident Imam of the mosque Masjid Toronto. Shihab has a PhD in Islamic Studies from Al-Azhar University and he was the head of the Fatwa (Islamic opinion) Unit of IslamOnline.net (English website) and the Shari’ah (Islamic Law) consultant of the Shari’ah department of OnIslam.net. Shihab is also a member of the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) headed by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, who played a major role in launching both aforementioned websites.

Shihab’s views as presented in articles and Islamic rulings posted on Onislam.net:

“Slay them one by one and spare not one of them; The solution to the global violence, extremism and oppression is Islam; Qaradawi’s book “Jurisprudence of Jihad” should serves as a guidance to Muslims; Thieves’ hands should be chopped off no matter their social status; Person who underwent gender reassignment surgery should return to his original gender; Muslims should avoid gays as homosexuality is evil and succumbing to the temptations of the Satan; Wife should not reject her husband’s call for having sex”

The above preaching is also against our Charter of Rights and Freedoms which ONLY creates hate and spreads radicalism among the worshipers, especially the youth. At the same time, a group of protesters rallying in front of this mosque and shouting for banning a religion in Canada is no difference from what the Islamic Republic of Iran is doing to atheists, Sunnis, Bahais Christians, and Jews, to name a few. Islamic republic of Iran also does not recognize Bahai as a religion/ faith. What is the difference between this small group of protesters, the radical Imams as such and what Iran regime is doing to Bahais? IMO: No difference.

Going in front of a place of worship calling to ban the worshipers’ faith on a “FRIDAY” especially a few weeks after a mass shooting happening in a mosque is NOT Canadian and it is not defending Free speech; but IMO is Hate Speech. The acts of radicalism by the small group of people is absolutely unacceptable. What they do will only assist the MSM and the Muslim Brotherhood to take advantage and to attack Freedom loving Canadians and to silence Freedom of Speech.

It is very sad that some Canadians from Islamic faith express that they don’t feel safe under Canada’s Charter of Rights and equality laws. When government and the media choose one group over another in a country that is diverse, they attack the very fabric that holds all of us together by saying that we are failing at diversity. If we do not treat all groups equally and say no to hatred to all; not singling out one group over another, then would only degrade our Charter.

It is appalling that when NCCM calls Canada to pass M-103, Canadian MSM such as yours cries for their call and yet QC imam Sayed AlGhitawi calls for the annihilation of the Jews and CBC and the rest of Canadian MSM won’t give any coverage on his hate speech.

It is the responsibility of our officials, educators and the media to remind all people living in this country that we are all equally protected-that no one needs an extra motion or extra protection-for that would make some “more equal” than others.

I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam” which I sent to MPs, and Senators Thank you.

Kind wishes,

Shabnam Assadollahi

RELATED ARTICLE: Quebec legislature adopts sharia blasphemy motion condemning ‘Islamophobia’

EDITORS NOTE: According to Wikipedia CBC News.

In 2009, CBC President Hubert Lacroix commissioned a study to determine whether its news was biased, and if so, to what extent. He said: “Our job — and we take it seriously — is to ensure that the information that we put out is fair and unbiased in everything that we do”. The study, the methodology of which was not specified, was due to report results in the fall of 2010.

In April 2010, the Conservatives accused pollster Frank Graves of giving partisan advice to the Liberal Party of Canada, noting his donations to the party since 2003. Graves directed a number of public opinion research projects on behalf of the CBC as well as other media organizations, and also appeared on a number of CBC television programs relating to politics. An investigation conducted by the CBC ombudsman found no evidence to support these allegations, stating that personal donor history is not relevant to one’s objectivity as a pollster.

In March 2011, the Toronto Sun accused Vote Compass, an online voter engagement application developed by political scientists and launched by CBC during the 2011 federal election campaign, of a liberal bias. The accusation centred on the observation that one could provide identical responses to each proposition in Vote Compass (i.e., answer “strongly agree” to all propositions or “strongly disagree” to all propositions) and would in each case be positioned closest to the Liberal Party in the results. This claim was directly addressed by Vote Compass representatives, who noted that the propositions in the application are specifically constructed in such a way as to avoid acquiescence bias and that the result described by the Toronto Sun was arrived at by gaming the system.[11] Vote Compass also released analyses of the data it gathered from the federal election, which have further negated efforts to discredit it. It is widely speculated that suspicions of bias were fuelled by Sun Media in an effort to promote its anti-CBC agenda and the concurrent launch of its cable news channel. The criticism appears to have been isolated to the 2011 Canadian federal election edition of Vote Compass and has not re-emerged in any subsequent editions of Vote Compass, either in Canada or internationally.

In February 2015, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made comments relating to the allegations. Speaking to Radio-Canada, the outlet’s on-air Quebec division, Harper commented saying he understood that many at Radio-Canada “hated conservative values”. Radio-Canada did not deny the allegations.

During the 2015 federal election, CBC was again accused of bias by some viewers and outlets. The majority of these claims spawned from a promise by the Liberals and New Democratic Party of Canada after the two groups promised to increase funding for CBC. The pledges came after the then Conservative government had cut $115 million from the CBC in the 2012 budget. Shortly before the pledges were made, CBC president Hubert Lacroix complained of the Conservative cuts, saying “the cuts make us weaker and affect morale, critics, key stakeholders and even some of the citizens we serve.”

Asylum is the next big problem President Trump must face!

/in , , , , , /by

Most of what I write about here at Refugee Resettlement Watch is about the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program which was created when ol’ Ted (Kennedy) and Uncle Joe (Biden) created the program that was signed in to law in 1980 by Jimmy Carter.

The main thrust of the program is that refugees are chosen abroad (the UN is picking most of our refugees) and we fly them here. The nine major resettlement contractors we talk about all the time are then paid by the head to place them in your towns and cities.  They, and the US State Department, choose the resettlement sites often secretively.

boston bombers

Tsarnaev brothers.

The Tsarnaev (Boston Bomber!) brothers were refugees whose father had successfully gained asylum and brought the family to join him.  Just goes to show that security screening isn’t going to be enough to keep us safe. Your tax dollars benefited the boys who were once cute refugees, but grew into Jihadi killers.

However, an originally small, but now growing part of that same law deals with asylum.  To keep it simple, asylum seekers get here on their own steam—either they enter illegally across borders or they have a visa for some reason and overstay the visa (they are not screened abroad at all).

When those coming illegally hit the border, they know to apply for asylum claiming that if they are sent home they will be persecuted for their religious beliefs, political beliefs, race, sexual orientation (a booming category!) and a few other things. They are then referred to as asylum seekers.

They go through one of two processes that I have found confusing and are either granted asylum or not.  If they are turned down, they must leave the country.  Yesterday we learned that the Obama Administration was releasing from detention failed asylum seekers who are high-tailing it to the Canadian border.

A successful asylum seeker is called an asylee or sometimes the broader term political refugee.  The Boston Bomber brothers were part of a family that entered the US this way.  As full-fledged refugees they then could (and did) avail themselves of all the same welfare goodies of refugees we flew in and they were free to work and to travel outside the country. They could also bring in more family members.

Here is a good report at the American Immigration Council.

On average we grant asylum to 24,000-25,000 of those who are here illegally, but can make a persuasive case that they will be harmed if they go home. Add that 25,000 or so to the number we discuss often here (Obama proposed 110,000 refugees for FY17 and to that add this 25,000). To Trump’s 50,000 cap add this additional 25,000.

Those Africans we mentioned yesterday who are running to Canada right now are FAILED asylum seekers NOT refugees!

According to the American Immigration Council:

In FY 2015, USCIS found 33,988 individuals to have credible fear. These individuals, many of whom were detained during this screening process, will be afforded an opportunity to apply for asylum defensively and establish that they meet the refugee definition.

The number of credible fear cases has skyrocketed since the procedure was implemented—in FY 2009, USCIS completed 5,523 cases. In FY 2014, case completions reached an all-time high of 49,607.

screenshot-260

The largest number of successful asylum seekers are Chinese! Do you know we have a policy (I believe it is still in effect) that allows Chinese men to use China’s one child policy as an argument about why they should be here—they want more than one kid—and will thus be persecuted if returned to China!

The countries of nationality for individuals granted asylum have largely remained the same in that 10-year period, with nationals of China and Egypt accounting for nearly half (46 percent) of grants each year since FY 2012. The rest of the asylum grants provided in that time period consistently went to nationals of Ethiopia, Venezuela, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Guatemala, Russia, Nepal, and Eritrea.

In FY 2014, the most recent year with available data, more individuals from Syria were granted asylum than in any previous year (4 percent of all grants). Individuals from China, Egypt, and Syria combined accounted for half of the nearly 24 thousand individuals granted asylum—either affirmatively or defensively—in FY 2014 (Figure 2). A total of 96 nationalities were represented among all individuals granted asylum in FY 2014.

So you can add another 1,000 Syrians getting in to the US through asylum each year (a large number could be the Christians that the UN is keeping out of our normal refugee flow).  I digress, but didn’t Obama (with the UN) use a religious test when 98% of the Syrians admitted in the normal refugee program are Muslims?

One last thing!

I was annoyed by a Drudge headline last night that read: “Refugees self-deport” about a story about the failed asylum seekers heading for Canada. They are NOT refugees! They failed to be designated as refugees.  But, I see this morning that the headline has changed to the more accurate, “Illegals self-deport!”

The Open Borders Left has for years been working to control the language and they want you to think that anyone on the move anywhere in the world, for any reason, is a refugee. It is a big lie that the mainstream media helps to perpetuate!

Those migrants entering Europe by the hundreds of thousands are most likely economic migrants, but most will apply for asylum in Europe. They are not resettled refugees comparable to the ones we (with the UN) bring from around the world. They are in fact not refugees at all until they have successfully gained legal asylum although media around the world deceptively uses the word ‘refugee.’

Where is Congress?

I said as early as 2011, that this asylum process must be thoroughly investigated by Congress because I suspect that  someone or some groups are helping third worlders (possibly even paying them) to come across our borders and ask for asylum.

RELATED ARTICLE: Quickie numbers check this morning, now up to 956 refugees since EO signed

Honeymoon over for Canada PM Trudeau’s 35,000 Syrian refugees who can’t find work

/in , , , , /by

This time last year Canada began ‘welcoming’ thousands of Syrian refugees who were flying in by the planeload as the young new Prime Minister had promised when he was elected weeks before.  As a result, Justin Trudeau became the darling of the world’s humanitarians who were clamoring for America to do the same!

Now, one year on, my alerts today are filled with stories like these—panic sets in as one year of government support ends and Syrians can’t find jobs to support their families!

From The Star:

Bedrettin Al Muhamad and his wife, Mariam [featured family—ed] have been taking English classes and making every effort to immerse themselves in Canadian culture since arriving here from Turkey in February.

[….]

But the honeymoon will soon be over, as the Mississauga couple ponders quitting their English classes and starting to look for jobs to support their five children, Hanan, 13; Hasan, 11; Azzam, 9; Mohammad, 8; and Rahaf, 6.

“We are scared we are not going to find jobs. It’s a cause of stress. How are we going to pay for our ($1,735) rent when money stops coming in?” asked Al Muhamad, 37, whose family’s monthly government refugee resettlement assistance ends on Feb. 12.

[….]

For many of the 35,000 Syrians who have arrived in the country — 15,000 in Ontario — since Canada started bringing in planeloads of newcomers last Dec. 9, what is commonly known in the refugee resettlement circle as “Month 13” is looming.

After a year of being warmly welcomed into local communities across the country, the 12-month financial commitment to these refugees by Ottawa and private sponsorship groups will start to come to an end.

trudeau-bearing-coat

Trudeau in December 2015: I come bearing coats (no jobs) but we have coats for this year at least!

And, here is another story (with another featured family) from The Guardian:

Canada had previously granted asylum to a small number of Syrian refugees. But one year ago this week, 163 Syrian refugees were greeted at the airport by Justin Trudeau, Canada’s prime minister, in scenes that contrasted sharply with the hostile rhetoric emanating from some US politicians, including then Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Thousands more refugees would arrive in Canada the following months, supported either by the federal government or by private citizens who committed to covering their expenses for their first year in Canada.

[….]

But the one-year mark means an end to the monthly living allowance from the government that has, along with food banks and donations, sustained their new lives. From February onwards, the family must either support themselves – a seemingly monumental task considering the parents’ search for jobs have so far been fruitless – or enroll in the province’s social assistance program, in which they would likely receive less of an allowance than what they’re currently receiving.

“All the Syrians say the same thing, we’re worried about what happens after one year. We don’t know. With no stipend, how are we going to live?” Alsakni said through a translator. “It’s like we’re blindfolded. We don’t know what is coming.  [This is the mother in the family speaking, she is the only adult in the family to begin to learn English, but she still needs a translator!—ed]

There are many more stories like this in my alerts today.

It is a good thing we have Germany and Canada as models for what NOT to do about Syrian refugees!

For our complete Canada category, go here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Senate voted (and Obama signed) the Continuing Budget Resolution overnight, refugee program comes up short

America’s Refugee Admissions Program a dumping ground, Krikorian has it exactly right!

Was Nebraska student diagnosed with TB in November a refugee?

Which refugees have gone to Missoula, Montana’s new resettlement office?

I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam

/in , , , , , /by

Isn’t “Phobia” a type of mental disorder, an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something? Isn’t the “Islamophobia” motion which was ‘unanimously’ passed by the Canadian Government which calls for limiting the rights of Canadians to criticize Islam, contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

The definition of Islamophobia from a Google search is dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.

What exactly has the Parliament of Canada petitioned against? Criticism of Islam? Criticism of Muhammad? Criticism and condemning the Islamic State and all Islamic terrorist groups affiliated with radical Islamic ideology? Petitioning against those Canadians who Condemn Sharia law? If Canadians criticize Islam or convert from Islam, will they now be considered an “Islamophobe” by Canada?

Is Canada Planning to Make Criticizing Islam Illegal?

What’s next? Sending Iran and Hamas type morality police to the doorsteps of Canadians critical of Islam, while radical imams continue to spew openly radical Ideas in schools and mosques? What about Canadians who are suspicious of others plotting possible terrorist activities – will they be afraid to report it to authorities in case they are wrong?

The petition your government recently passed a motion for was initiated on June 8, 2016 by Samer Majzoub, President of the Canadian Muslim Forum condemning Islamophobia in “all” forms.

The details in the petition which was sponsored by the Liberal MP are extremely sketchy to say the least- e-411 for the parliamentary petition:

“We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

Again I say, please keep in mind Islamophobia’s definition.

Is Canada Planning to Make Criticizing Islam Illegal?

It seems that many Western politicians, the “Mainstream Media”, and our political elites use the term “Islamophobia” without even knowing what is in Islam. There might be lot to rationally be “phobic”, or simply fearful, about.

Since Trudeau Liberals came to power, Canadians have been constantly reminded that to speak negatively about Islam is supposedly acting as a fear-mongering, racist, xenophobic, “Islamophobe”.

It is far more probable that they are none of those things; rather that it is the accusers who are racist (Quran: 2;65; 2.89 (Allah transforms Jews into apes); 3:110-112; 4;160, and on and on); Xenophobic really does not apply to Jews, Christians, Yazidis, Hindus, Kurds, Baha’is , Zoroastrians, and a few different sects of Islam; it is truly the other way around.

These people are rightfully afraid of harm coming to them from Sharia law and radical Islam. I am a living example of one who has experienced harm from radical Islamic Sharia law. I was imprisoned at age 16 by the Iranian Regime for simply expressing my disagreement with their policies. They held me prisoner for 18 months in their notorious Evin Prison; I miraculously escaped the murder and rape I heard every day in that dark place.

The memories of that season still haunt me today. And, their threats still follow me today, to this great land of Canada. Therefore, I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam. To call my fear a phobia, an irrational fear, lacks compassion and fails to recognize the true reality of the same present danger living close to me once again. I am on their hit list. It was reported that the highest commander of the IRGC very recently said they would soon kill all dissidents living abroad.

People who are jittery about radical Islam and Sharia law are this way for many a reason: They look at how Sharia law is practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, by Islamic State and Nigeria’s Boko Haram, and are concerned quite justifiably.

The Islamic Cairo Declaration of 1990, written as a direct refutation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states that all human rights are predicated on Islamic Sharia Law. Therefore, according to this view, beheading, stoning, flogging, slavery, child marriage, wife-beating, amputations, and a woman’s worth considered half of a man’s are all human rights. Is that what we want for Canada, or in Canada? Or, in and for any country?

All that these purported critics are doing is pointing out what is in Islam’s Sharia law if anyone cared to look. And, when it comes to concern with quality of life, people should care to look. What is it that these extremists are so eager to cover up?

To those of us who have experienced Islamic sharia law first-hand, protecting Western values – free speech, common law, equal justice under the law, democratic (“man-made”) governance; individual freedoms, separation of church and state, an independent judiciary, to name just a few – is indeed cause for concern. Every single one of them is contradicted by Islamic Sharia law or radical Islam.

Why should it be against the law to outspokenly disagree with aspects of a different religion or culture? Especially if it outspokenly threatens one’s own?

Interesting to note, there are no such terms as Christianophobia, or Judeophobia, that define a dislike or prejudice against a Judeo Christian worldview and Jews and Christians, especially as a political force. And, when Googling anti Zionism, a photo appears of Islamist Muslims condemning Jews and a State of Israel. What if Christians and Jews petitioned for anti Christianophobia and anti Judeophobia motions condemning “all” forms of these? Would we all put duct tape on our mouths? And, it is true that Christians and Jews would never be allowed to petition for this in any Middle Eastern country on the face of the planet.

Canadians are worried that with the Rise of Islamic Extremism In Canada , the country is on its way to becoming like Europe, with no-go zones. That is why we must keep the secular state and religion completely separate, so that no one’s religion, and in Islam’s case religious ideology, is given special treatment or singled out.

Our goal is, and must remain, equal treatment for all. Equality and pluralistic respect can only be achieved when the government acts constitutionally without bias or favoritism towards any particular religion or religious ideology. Our Western Constitution is one that is founded upon the notion that all men, and women, are created equally, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; free from the harassment of oppressive tyranny inspired by dogma of any sort; religious or political.

It is also important to know who sponsors such articles in the media and why politicians lack information to make accurate assessments and informed conclusions.

For more information, please read about Politics of ‘Islamophobia’ – source of, and purpose of the term.

In Islam, politics and religion are inseparably intertwined. For this reason, apostasy in Islam is equivalent to treason. A notable expression in Islam says it all, “Islam is a religion and a state.” The Penal Code of The Islamic Republic of Iran Mandates Death for Converts. Article 225-1 of this code reads, “Any Muslim who clearly announces that he/she has left Islam and declares blasphemy is an Apostate.” In the Qur’an, Bukhari (52:260) repeats this view clearly: “The Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’” According to Ayatollah Khorasani, a prominent Shiite leader in Iran, “The promotion of Christianity in Iran must be stopped and stated that The Bible (The Gospel) is distorted and the Bible is not the Word of God.” (Farsi)

The Ayatollah’s views are directly of a mind with statements found in the Quran. Verses supporting death for apostates in the Qur’an are: 2:217, 9:73-74, 88:21, 5:54, and 9:66.

Article 19: Universal Declaration of Human Rights States:” Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Canadians must have the right to critique any ideology or religion. Preventing Canadians from speaking about Islam, is about denying Canadians the right to warn about a potential threat to their nation. A warning is not treason, but preventing a warning is. Isn’t this government sponsored Petition against the laws of the Constitution of Canada? CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982 PART I

If the government prevents us the right to criticize any ideology, our government overrides our most basic freedom—the freedom of speech—and at the same time will undermine diversity, the “value” the Trudeau Liberals take pride the most in.

“Islamophobia” is used as a tool by political Islam to shut down criticism of Islam. At what point does western civilization demand that as a free society, all ideological matters conform to some common ground?

Can Canada simply ignore what is happening particularly in Europe, no-go-zones? Many places in Europe have become a breeding ground for radical Islam where they enforced their own sharia law.

Again, Canadians are worried that with the Rise of Islamic Extremism In Canada, the country is on its way to becoming like Europe, with no-go zones.

That is why we must keep the secular state and religion completely separate, so that no one’s religion, and in Islam’s case religious ideology, is given special treatment or singled out.

Our goal is, and must remain, equal treatment for all. Equality and pluralistic respect can only be achieved when the government acts constitutionally without bias or favoritism towards any particular religion or religious ideology.

Our Western Constitution is one that is founded upon the notion that all men, and women, are created equally, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, free from the harassment of oppressive tyranny inspired by dogma of any sort; religious or political.

In reference to the above, I urge you to take the time and read the following article by Canadian investigative journalist, Christine Williams – “Canadian parliament passes anti-Islamophobia motion!”

VIDEO: Homegrown Terror- Why Are Canadians Joining the Islamic State?

/in , , , /by

Canadian authorities have reported that at least 130 citizens are involved extremist activities abroad, with 30 in Syria alone. In Calgary, five youths who attended the 8th & 8th Musallah mosque are known to have joined the Islamic State, leading the Canadian media to emphatically label Calgary a hotbed of terrorism.

VICE founder Suroosh Alvi traveled to Calgary to investigate allegations of radicalization among the city’s Muslim youth, speaking with the imam of the 8th & 8th Musallah, as well as the mother of Damian Clairmont, who died in Syria fighting for the Islamic State.

VIDEO: Hungry Canadians move over — Here come the Syrians looking for free food!

/in , , , , , /by

According to CBC Canada, almost 27,000 Syrians have arrived in Canada since November and already (in 6 months) their private sponsors are falling down on the job and even government-funded refugees are scurrying to local food banks because they have no jobs and no money.

In photo op, Canada’s boy wonder, Justin Trudeau, greets Syrians at the airport. But, has he invited any home for dinner or planned how to feed them all so they aren’t running to the media with tales of woe? Photo and sickening propaganda video:

trudeau-pink-coat.jpg.size.xxlarge.letterbox

Canada PM Justin Trudeau, greets Syrians at airport.

CBC Canada (begins by describing the plight of one hungry family dependent on food banks for indigent Canadians), then this:

“When we come here, we didn’t expect we get any kind of help, and, unfortunately, that was the ugly truth,” she said. “So, we are alone, and we struggle still.”

[….]

Demand is growing for food banks and the organizations that supply them.

From February to March, Daily Bread, which supplies its own food bank and 200 other food programs in Toronto, including the Scott Mission, saw a 20 per cent jump in the number of clients using its services.

[….]

It was the largest increase in recent memory, said head of research Richard Matern, and most of it was because of the influx of Syrian refugees.

“We are being overwhelmed at the moment,” he said.

Across the country in the Vancouver suburb of Surrey, more than 700 government-sponsored refugees have used the local food bank since February. [of the 1,500 resettled there—ed]

Canada has a bifurcated system.  Some refugees are government-funded (like in the US) and some are privately sponsored. Clearly they didn’t screen the private sponsors very well!  But, as reported above, even the government-sponsored refugees are devouring the supplies at local and regional food banks.

Under federal guidelines, private sponsors are legally required to cover the cost of food, rent and other living expenses for up to a year, a minimum of roughly $27,000 for a family of four, according to government estimates.

But in Asoyan’s case, her family’s sponsor, Sarkis Shaninian, is unemployed.

He had a job when he signed up to sponsor the family but has been without work for three months.

“Money, I don’t have money to help them, no,” he said in an interview with CBC News.

[….]

At last count, 26,921 Syrian refugees had arrived in Canada since last November, and thousands more whose applications are still being processed are expected to arrive by the end of this year.

Can Canadians impeach prime ministers (just wondering)?

See our complete Canada category (177 posts), here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Human Rights First: Obama still going (too) slowly with seeding Syrians into American towns

Big news! Kansas watching Tennessee on refugee lawsuit, but bigger still, so is Texas!

Lutheran pastor calls for boycott of Lutheran Social Services over preference for Muslim refugees

Guest post: A report from someone on the inside (information you should know!)

VIDEO: The roots of the Islamic State and Islamic anti-Semitism

/in , , , , /by

On Friday, April 29, 2016, I spoke in Grand Prairie, Alberta on the roots of the Islamic State and Islamic anti-Semitism.

Here is a report on my talk that had been intended for the local paper:

“Robert Spencer speaks in Grande Prairie,” by Kevin Hampson, Our Home and Native Land, May 3, 2016 (thanks to Michael):

I’m a reporter in Grande Prairie, Alberta. My editor, for whatever reason, didn’t want to run my story on Robert Spencer’s talk here (though they did run my advancer). I think it’s worth running, though, since there didn’t seem to be any coverage of what he actually said while here in Canada (see the CBC’s blatant hatchet job here).  I created this blog simply to publish the story I would have submitted (with minor changes befitting  a blog). I might eventually put up other stuff too. 

More than 100 people came to hear Robert Spencer speak about Islam during his stop in Grande Prairie on Friday.

The New York Times best-selling author has appeared on CTV, Fox News, BBC and other networks to discuss Islamic terrorism. His website, Jihad Watch, seeks to call public attention to the ideology motivating Islamic terrorism.

“The longer we misapprehend this problem, and the longer we keep our heads in the sand about it and deny what it’s really all about, the more we will not be able to deal with it adequately and the more lethal it will grow,” Spencer said.

In the years since 9/11, it has become taboo to discuss the ideology that Muslim terrorists themselves cite as their source of motivation, Spencer said. The refrain among Western political leaders is that Islam is a religion of peace, and self-proclaimed jihadists actually have nothing to do with it.

Spencer said this is dangerous, for an obvious reason: “You cannot defeat an enemy you don’t understand.”

The key point that the political and media class don’t want to admit, according to Spencer, is that Islamic terror attacks are inspired by a straightforward reading of the religion’s sacred texts, the Koran and the Hadiths.

Of particular concern is the Koran’s promise of Paradise for believers who “fight in God’s way; they kill and are killed.”

“This is why we see people strap bombs to themselves and go and blow themselves up in a crowd of infidels,” Spencer said. “Because they know that if they kill in the way of Allah, Paradise is promised to them.”

Spencer acknowledges plenty of Muslims aren’t even particularly religious, let alone fundamentalist. However, those who devoutly believe what the Koran tells them present a problem for secular societies even if they don’t resort to violence, he added. This is because Islam comes with a built-in political system, one which believers think is divine.

Spencer also points out that the Koran incites hatred against Jews and Christians, calling them “the most vile of created beings.” Muslims, in contrast, are “the best of people.”

This means some Muslims come to the West with a belief in the superiority of their own societal model and the inferiority of Western secular society, Spencer said. While they may not support terrorism, they do support curtailing basic liberties such as the freedom of speech.

Britain’s Channel 4 last month released the results of a survey in which 68% of British Muslims said they believed people who “insult Islam” should be arrested and prosecuted.

A member of Spencer’s audience on Friday suggested his talks contribute to “Islamophobia.” Spencer said this phrase is deliberately used to place Islam beyond criticism and make Westerners feel guilty for talking about Islamic terrorism.

“Islamophobia is a term that was actually conceived by the Muslim Brotherhood in order to manipulate and intimidate people into thinking that it’s wrong to oppose jihad terror,” he said.

Spencer was invited to speak by a local group called Concerned Canadians for Canadian Values….

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A year after jihadis attacked AFDI free speech event, the war has just begun

Obama plans to cut time spent on screening Muslim migrants

Canadian Liberals War against Liquefied Natural Gas is killing jobs and prosperity

/in /by

President Obama and Democrats have declared a war against coal. This has led to the U.S. coal energy industry to face regulatory burdens that kill jobs and prosperity. It also leads to higher cost for electricity. The Liberal government of Canada has learned from the American president and has declared its own war against Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG or CH4).

Sheila Gunn Reid reports, Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is safe, low carbon and clean burning.

It has the support of local BC mayors, Premier Christy Clark and First Nations. LNG has the potential to pull the entire country out of a recession. So what’s the hold up?The Federal Liberals are the hold up.

Sheila explains how and why in her video.

Lear more.

FAILURE: Canada’s $16,000,000 project to vet Muslim migrants

/in , , , /by

If Canadian authorities had approached this problem realistically, they never would have spent $16,000,000. They would have known from the outset that this program would never work, and that there is no way to distinguish jihadis from peaceful Muslim migrants.

“RCMP refugee screening a $16M flop, says internal report,” by Dean Beeby, CBC News, April 15, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Apr 15, 2016:

A $16-million RCMP project to help keep dangerous refugees out of Canada has turned out to be an expensive security flop.

An internal evaluation says the screening project delivered information too late, strayed beyond its mandate, and in the end did almost nothing to catch refugees who might be linked to criminal or terrorist groups.

Meanwhile, 30 Mounties were tied up for four years on duties that did little to enhance Canada’s security.

“The current approach does not appear to provide much by way of relevant information to support the admissibility screening of refugee claimants,” concludes the Sept. 29, 2015, report, obtained by CBC News under the Access to Information Act.

The report on the anemic results was completed at about the same time as then prime minister Stephen Harper said Canada had to proceed cautiously in accepting Syrian refugees so that Canada’s screening process could weed out terrorists.

“When we are dealing with people that are from, in many cases, a terrorist war zone, we are going to make sure that we screen people appropriately and the security of this country is fully protected,” Harper told a 2015 election rally in Welland, Ont.

“We cannot open the floodgates and airlift tens of thousands of refugees out of a terrorist war zone without proper process. That is too great a risk for Canada.”
Domestic databases checked

The RCMP screening pilot was launched in 2011-12 as part of a package of Conservative reforms tightening up the processing of refugees, including a controversial move to withdraw some medical treatments for rejected asylum seekers. The Liberals have since reversed that measure.

Under the pilot project, the RCMP vetted potential refugees already in Canada — the names were provided by the Canada Border Services Agency — by checking domestic police databases for links to criminal or terrorist organizations, among other things.

But the auditors found a raft of problems:

RCMP officers hired for the work couldn’t get started for months because legislation was slow to be passed in 2012.
The border agency and RCMP computers couldn’t talk to each other, so the organizations had to exchange thousands of names manually.
The cost per screening skyrocketed from a planned $425 to $1,026, on average.

The RCMP delivered screening checks to the border agency too late about a third of the time, rendering them useless because of refugee-decision deadlines.

The RCMP reported only 85 of 4,085 names as potential problem refugees, the auditors said, based on a significant sample of the completed work. But the border agency used only two of those names in its vetting process because of late or inadequate information from the Mounties. And even the information on the two names was later found not to be pertinent to the border agency’s final decision.

The RCMP pilot began poorly by primarily vetting the names of refugee claimants who were brand-new to Canada — and therefore were unlikely to have a Canadian criminal record….

RELATED ARTICLES:

State Department wants to bring in 1,500 Muslim migrants every month

UK: Christian loses appeal of suspension for giving Muslim a religious book

Canada: Parliamentary Petition to keep Iran listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism

/in , , , /by

Shirley Anne from the Canadian Coalition Against Terror (C-CAT) has created a parliamentary petition to keep Iran listed as a State Supporter of Terrorism.

In an email to Canadians Anne notes:

Many Canadians have lost family and friends to Iranian-sponsored terrorism. Please click here to sign the petition.

NOTE: When typing your phone #, NO spaces!

Any Canadian citizen or permanent resident, regardless of age, can sign. After signing you will get an email from parliament requesting that you confirm your support for the petition.

Please don’t forget this crucial 2nd step – go back to your inbox and wait for the email to confirm your support.

/s/ Shirley Anne

P.S. I also think it would make a big impression if everyone wrote directly to their MP on this topic as well…let me know if you do!

ccat petition to keep iran on terror list

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran’s General Soleimani in Moscow for talks: three sources Reuters

Obama Threatens War on Russian Forces in Syria

Canada’s Justice Minister under fire for shady Bay Street fundraiser, plays race and gender card

Canada’s New Democratic Party Supports of Boycotting Israel

/in , , , /by

Last month, the Canadian House of Commons voted 229-51 for of a resolution calling upon the government to denounce the virulently anti-Israel BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanction) movement. The Conservative opposition to the Trudeau government introduced this anti-BDS resolution, and the ruling Liberal Party supported it. The New Democratic Party (NDP), however, voted against it, with some NDP members saying that they did so not because they supported BDS, but solely on free speech grounds.

An NDP MP, Charles Angus, suggested in a parliamentary session that the principle of free speech was at stake in supporting the anti-BDS motion. He said: “I note that last August the United Church of Canada, which represents two million Protestants, supported the divestment movement…This has nothing to do with my colleague’s claim that it is delegitimizing the State of Israel. This was a choice it made.”

Why would the United Church of Canada (UCC) make that choice? Solely on free speech grounds? Then why did it refer to Israel as “the thief,” “the occupier,” and “the aggressor” in their 26-page working group report on a bogus fact-finding mission to Israel? (Only three people constituted this “working group” that went on this “mission,” yet they presented themselves as a “working group” that represented the UCC. I have personally spoken to many pastors in the UCC who are against this and felt that the UCC had been were infiltrated by an agenda that was muscled into the church without their knowledge and against their will.)

NDP MP Angus went on to say: “My Conservative colleagues are asking Parliament to stand up in the House and condemn individuals in this country for their right to debate…We are being asked…to deny and condemn individual students for debating politics.”

On the other hand, Liberal foreign affairs minister Stéphane Dion said: “The Liberals do not support this boycott movement, because we do not believe it is conducive to achieving peace in the Middle East.”

That’s much more realistic. BDS is an aggressive movement forced upon universities by Islamists on campuses globally and in Canada through the Muslim Student Association, which do indeed debate politics, as NDP MP Angus stated: the Muslim Student Association has direct ties to terrorism and the Muslim Brotherhood. BDS is clearly a delegitimization of the state of Israel. Constitutionally, it can be disingenuously presented as needing to be protected under a right to free expression, but it is not ultimately about the freedom of expression. The BDS movement is about the branding of Israel wrongfully. Israel is a state that is threatened with obliteration while BDS and other anti-Israel propagandists accuse it unjustly of everything from apartheid to crimes against humanity.

In light of that fact, voting against the anti-BDS motion, as the NDP did, is not, in fact, a free speech or free expression issue. It is an anti-Israel/antisemitic issue which is disguised as an issue of the freedom of expression or the right to one’s own opinion. What other nation on the face of the earth faces threats to its existence in the face of ongoing attacks? None. Not even states that regularly carry out severe abuses against their own citizens and engage in the persecution of religious minorities. Only Israel.

The idea that the NDP actually opposes the BDS movement, while simply supporting the freedom of expression, is extremely dubious claim on other grounds as well. For example, during the debate on this resolution, NDP MP Hélène Laverdière asked whether by adopting the motion, she would be condemning the Ontario arm of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), which endorsed BDS.

One CUPE local site features this anti-Israel propaganda: an article entitled, “Raid on the Gaza Flotilla Israel’s Attack on Us All.” This CUPE article asserts that “Israel is on a “collision course” with international standards of decency, solidarity, and respect for human rights.” How, pray tell, did the Canadian Union of Public Employees ever think it was part of its duties to get involved in Israel’s business?

For the record, on the CUPE  site it states: “CUPE is a founding partner of the NDP. We are proud to be New Democrats.”

Because we value the freedom of expression, BDS is able to flourish stop in our democracy, but the NDP’s opposition to the anti-BDS motion is motivated by an agenda that is far more ominous than a simple determination to defend the freedom of speech, given the NDP’s history and its partnership with CUPE.

Christine Williams is an award-winning broadcast journalist; advisor to Canada’s Office of Religious Freedoms; and Public Affairs/Media Consultant, International Christian Embassy Jerusalem–Canada.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Muslim wishes Christians happy Easter, is murdered by other Muslim in “religiously prejudiced” attack

Texas: Muslim Dairy Queen owner installs signs comparing Hindus to monkeys

VIDEO: Trudeau, ‘Canadian terrorist who ripped up his passport entitled to have his citizenship restored’

/in , , , /by

Naive and moronic Trudeau says a convicted Canadian terrorist who ripped up his passport is entitled to have his citizenship restored?

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, engaged on Friday, March 11, 2016 with students from American University in Washington, D.C. in a question and answer session which touched on several topics, including the war on terror.

CIJnews reports:

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, engaged on Friday, March 11, 2016 with students from American University in Washington, D.C. in a question and answer session which touched on several topics, includingthe war on terror.

Trudeau justified his decision to restore the citizenship to a convicted Canadian terrorist who ripped up his passport by saying that the policy of the previous Conservative government created two-tier citizenship, In which citizens who have dual citizenship may lose their citizenship if they are convicted of terrorism, treason, espionage or fighting against Canadian forces.

The following is the transcript of Trudeau’s answer (41:16-43:49):

“One of the key elements of that [opposing the proposed Quebec Charter of Values] and a point that I am so incredibly proud of Canadians is a moment in our election campaign where the governing Conservatives put forward a proposal to strip and actually [they] enacted it before the election to remove the citizenship from Canadian citizens convicted of terrorism, dual citizens in this case, which quite frankly they thought it is a great idea because here they were, these are people convicted of terrorism against our country or acts of war against our country and they are therefore forfeiting the right to be citizens which seems like a reasonable thing, again. On a front.

“But when you actually look at it and realize that means that someone convicted of terrorism with a dual citizenship could have different consequences under the law than a Canadian homegrown terrorist who has Canadian citizenship and is a six generation Canadian and therefore can’t have his citizenship removed at all.

“You devalue the citizenship of everyone by making it conditional on good behaviour or non heinous behaviour which is ultimately the same thing.

“So, I found my self in a situation on stage against the former Prime Minister [Stephen Harper] arguing that, yes, a man who he [Harper] had just stripped his citizenship of for being convicted of a terrorist act should have his Canadian citizenship restored even though he had literally, perhaps even literally, ripped up his Canadian passport. And yet I stand here as a Prime Minister of Canada.

Read more.