Subscribe to Jill Colton >>HERE
CLICK centre to begin video
OTHER videos by Faith Goldy, and to Subscribe, click HERE.
By Andrew Joyce, Ph.D
I remember at least two occasions on which my blonde, blue eyed wife was thoroughly questioned/harassed on entry into Europe by African and Pakistani immigration officials. A young woman whose family origins stretched deeply into the British Isles, Germany, and Sweden, thus found her ability to enter her ancestral homelands placed in the swarthy hands of Third-World newcomers.
Photo h/t Irish Savant
Today, “Border Protection” seems to mean nothing more than limiting the ability of law-abiding, documented Whites to travel freely, safely and comfortably, while turning a blind eye to floods of illegals, rapists, vandals, and welfare claimants.
[…] The full story here: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/10/11/banned-in-americaa-sequel/#more-154813
The CBC published a story about a Syrian refugee family in Nova Scotia who found success and self sufficiency one year on after arriving in the province.
They did so by starting a small family run chocolatier business in the community of Antigonish that now employs ten people. It’s a Syrian refugee “success story” that attracted the attention of Justin Trudeau who referenced their entrepreneurship at the UN as an example of Canada’s welcoming spirit, and the rewards refugees and immigrants bring to the country. It’s an awesome feel-good story. So what about the other 39,499 Syrian refugees?
This is an example of cherry picking. It’s a logical fallacy where favourable examples are given particular attention to support one’s argument, but those that invalidate it are conveniently ignored and swept under the rug.
It’s one of the more common logical fallacies one encounters in debates and comment sections of internet articles. When one employs this fallacy they typically do so by stating “My neighbour from India…” or “I work with someone from China…” or “My doctor is a Muslim…” or statements of that nature.
Not only are their debate points anecdotal but are also isolated cherry picked examples that can’t be used to argue the successes or failings of the immigration and refugee systems. If all it takes is one positive story to show “the system works” then I guess the Toronto Police Services most wanted page irrefutably shows that it doesn’t.
One Syrian refugee family finding success in Canada is not a validation that the government’s approach to the Syrian refugee crisis was the correct one (or proof that our refugee system in general is not a lax mess of a system that doesn’t help legitimate refugees for the most part, and is of little benefit to the country). It’s just a story of a Syrian family who came to Canada as refugees and started a small business in Nova Scotia.
And that’s it! >>con’t HERE.
“Now for the rest of the story!“
“Post National” Trudeau is now being criticized for breaking the MP Code of Ethics. The criticism is based on the fact that he accepted a vacation stay and a helicopter trip from the Aga Khan who is the spiritual leader and lobbyist for the world’s Ismaili Muslim
. Justin Trudeau
The key point is that the things for which Trudeau is being criticized are trivial when placed beside the much more serious sins he has committed . Here is a list of those sins :
(1) He approved a treasonous 300,000 immigrant intake in 2016, In addition, he has approved a 300,000 immigrant-intake for for 2017. We use the word “treasonous” because Canada has over one million unemployed [people].
A Prime Minister’s key role is is to protect the job prospects of Canadians, yet Trudeau foolishly plays the role of Philosopher-King and says things like ‘Canada is a post-national state’.
In doing this, he has implied that the needs of Canadians are far less important than the needs of immigrants. If he wants to imitate his father who did play the Philosopher King role, he should dramatically cut immigration as his father did in the early 1980’s. His father, by the way, was the last Canadian Prime Minister to cut immigration in order to protect jobless Canadians.
Trudeau is surrounded by the like-minded. Not a single member of Canada’s House of Commons has challenged the federal government’s post-1991 immigration intake. All are guilty of gross negligence. In fact, Canada’s House of Commons could be more appropriately called Canada’s House of Cowards and Quislings because its actions have been cowardly and treasonous to its citizens.
As a result, Canada’s large number of unemployed have been been languishing on the employment sidelines for years. Bringing in 600,000 immigrants in two years is going to cause unnecessary further competition for a limited number of jobs and more languishing and unnecessary hardship for Canada’s unemployed. “Post National” boasts that he wants to enlarge Canada’s middle class. However, his actions regarding Canada’s unnecessary immigration intake will further destroy the country’s middle class.
(2) A significant number of Canada’s current population are Muslim immigrants who support the Muslim Brotherhood which has declared in a widely-publicized Memorandum that its purpose in settling in North America is to infiltrate our society, and destroy it from within.
Let’s quote from that Memorandum :
“The process of (Muslim Brotherhood) settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process,’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in North America is kind of a grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house… “The Aga Khan is a prominent supporter of the sinister Muslim Brotherhood.
Trudeau should not be even associating with the Aga Khan, let alone staying under his roof. >>more “sins” HERE.
By Tim Murray
Multiculturalism is Canada’s Ingsoc (Orwellian term). The ideology of a “soft” totalitarian state. A state that does not need gulags, detention camps, or torture chambers to achieve its goals because the ruling political-class can “manufacture consent” through its control of the media, the universities, and government departments.
To use Marxist terminology, the political class— the ruling class–does not need to control the “infrastructure”, it only needs to control the “superstructure”. It is far more important — for their purposes — to control the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) than it would be to control any major corporation listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
The most effective way to promote this ideology of “Diversity and Tolerance” and Cultural relativism (Marxism) is to shape the language, to supplant “Oldspeak” with “Newspeak”, to replace accurate descriptions with euphemisms, to make it impossible for younger generations to think subversive thoughts by putting them in a verbal straight-jacket. The point is not simply to deny them the words they would need to express critical thoughts, but through the loss of these words to deny them the ability to form critical thoughts.
Is this not what has been happening step by step in the last forty years, picking up speed as time by passes by? Dumbing young people down by displacing plain standard English with PC jargon? Displacing critical thinking with ideologically programmed responses? Is this not what Canadian universities do now? Is that not their mission? The goal of a liberal arts “education”? Are Canadian universities not just boot-camps of political correctness, factories to churn out soldiers for Multicult Group-Think? Soldiers who one day will occupy the newsrooms, cabinet rooms, staff rooms and board rooms of the nation?
Long ago an American military officer concluded that in order to complete the conquest, displacement and assimilation of Native Americans, “We must kill the Indian in the child”. In other words, for any colonial agenda the final solution to the native “problem” must involve the eradication of native culture—and that culture is best transmitted through its language. It’s a habitual strategy. English occupiers tried to do that in Wales and Ireland, and the Department of Indian Affairs tried to that in Residential Schools here [in Canada]. Now we are doing it to ourselves in our universities. Or rather, they are doing it to us.
Who are “they”? They are not our colonial occupiers but their handmaidens … the Puppet Intelligentsia, the political class who are paving the way for our ongoing conquest by dressing it up as an opportunity to enjoy more “diversity”. Hence the invention of a language and a vocabulary which can frame the invasion in positive terms, and exclude alternative interpretations.
How ironic is it then, that by displacing Oldspeak with Multi-cult Newspeak, young Canadians are able to become reconciled to their own displacement. The political class is killing the Canadian in the child. Source
[For added emphasis, all bolded words by Editor]