Is Burlington TOO White?

City Hall, on Brant Street

A mid-sized CANADIAN city has received a complaint from a foreign-born BLACK woman and her “committee” that Burlington, Ontario, one of Canada’s five top-rated cities to live in… apparently TOO WHITE!





Yes, the city of Burlington is 90% White …. and that’s described as a problem according to these foolish committee people. Imagine for a brief moment (I did say “brief”) as a White Canadian having emigrated to Kingston, Jamaica and noting that city as being “TOO BLACK”. Now, further imagine the responses you’d receive from the local, politically incorrect inhabitants if you had uttered that complaint to them… aside from them being incredulous to what they’re hearing from you.

If this race-related Burlington story had all the “delicious ingredients” of having “too many blacks” in ANY given situation, that news item would have erupted like a gushing oil well all over the MSM media, then spread across the country like a raging tsunami containing the usual references and innuendos of “racism” attributed to white people… of which, the interpretation still befuddles me.

Instead, this story will simply remain a localized issue that won’t gain much national publicity because the racial component points in the other direction. (If you live in the Burlington/Oakville area, feel free to email a link to this story to your friends and family members.)

The White liberal mind is likened to an impenetrable fog of naiveté, sentimentality, and moral self-righteousness whenever critical viewpoints are directed towards Blacks and other visible minorities. It’s almost impossible to override their own indoctrinated minds filled with liberal white-guilt and to formulate an independent thought contrary to what other members of their hand-wringing, leftist herd may have assigned to them.

Based on satire, the above photo is a prime example of how a fawning White couple present their false masks in the presence of Black people. The White couple’s hypocrisy shines forth when trying to satisfy the demands of a situation not representing their true inner personalities.

They proudly proclaim a common  “See, we’re not racist” reaction in this scenario….and wear their “badge of honour” with a smug satisfaction of knowing how morally superior they’ve now become… compared to those “other” White people.

Sadly, the above illustration is not too far-removed from most White people’s behaviour patterns due to modern media’s efforts in successfully achieving one of their desired goals… and that is embedding a white-guilt complex into their personal nature.

[Proportion of Visible Minorities for ALL of CANADA, 1981-2001Stats Canada

[For the year 2011, the Vis-Min numbers were over 19% and those 6,000,000+ (SIX million!) foreigners who’ve arrived only in the past 20 years is largely the result of one of the greatest immigration deceptions ever perpetrated on White Canadians who are destined to become a racial minority in their own nation.]

Report ILLEGAL Immigrants*

Any country which does not protect its majority population through limitations on immigration, invites the contempt of the immigrants who have entered its territory and who have become a majority in a part or the whole of its territory.”

As Thomas Friedman observed in his book ‘The Lexus and the Olive Tree‘ —  Few things are more enraging to people than to have their identity or ethnic sense of home stripped away.”

…and, what may be the total percentage (%) of WHITE people on Earth?  Answer HERE.

To sum up this “tail wagging the dog” story.

Essentially, what we have is an immigrant member of a 1% visible-minority (Black) group, who inserted herself into a White Canadian community, and makes a bumptious attempt to contemptuously coerce the long-standing, majority White Canadian residents into guilt-tripping themselves, by shamelessly playing her race card!

“Seeking to force “diversity” down the throats of an unreceptive segment of society, is the religious mission of rabid, agenda-driven ideologues.  None of this apparent concern for “social justice” has ever been about virtue.  It’s about power.”Elizabeth Wright

Before proceeding, see this short video to hear how the “rules” of engagement are applied in this game. It’s from an American perspective but the theme remains the same where ever you live.

The original article follows below….and click onto the “original source” for some inspiring reactions to this story.

By Ken Peters

The problem is, Burlington is too white. It’s also too white on city council. And it’s too white on virtually every single city citizen committee and board.

The 12-member Burlington Inclusivity Advisory Committee, which identified the problem, hopes to change that. The committee presented six recommendations to the community service committee Wednesday that aim to make Burlington’s movers and shakers more ‘diverse’.

Burlington is a white community. Very white. Snow white,” said committee chairperson Ancilla Ho-Young. <Her Photo

“That is not to say we don’t have people of all kinds of nationalities living in Burlington, but they are invisible. They are not in the forefront, we do not hear from them. Our city council is not representative of the community it serves.”

Burlington’s seven-member (city) council is comprised of six men and one woman. None are a visible minority. Advisory committee vice-chair Brian Heagle noted the irony. “This (report) is going into the valley of the beast. It’s like we’re saying, ‘We’re asking people to change, and by the way, we’re asking people to change YOU (councillors),” he said.

But veteran Burlington Councillor Jack Dennison wonders what all the fuss is about.

“I don’t see it as broken. Anyone is free to put their $100 down and run for council,” he said. Dennison said in the past, the various city boards and commissions have virtually accepted anyone who has applied. “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink,” he said.

Ho-Young, president of the Burlington Caribbean Connection (email her:, said the city’s ethnic numbers are growing. But that ethnic population is not reflected on city boards, committees and commissions, she says.

Ho-Young said her committee wants to encourage those bodies to actively seek out potential members from ethnic backgrounds. (Translation: No White people). –Original Source– Also displayed at American Renaissance



Canada Is NOT For Sale

Happiest City In Canada

Affirmative Action Police

Race Diversity – But Why?

White Males Under Attack

“Embracing” Racial Diversity

White People Are Hypocrites

Embolden Minorities Eye Canada

Canada – Land of Pandering Fools

Is Racial Diversity Good For Canada?

Guelph, ON Importing Multi-racialism

“A Racial Program For The 20th Century”

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

Racial Differences ARE Self-Evident

Our Tragic Immigration System

Italian Town Ejects All Africans

Racial Diversity – A CON Game

Whitewashing BLACK Racism

How To Colonize Britain


Yes Virginia, WHITE Slavery Did Exist








Canada’s Foreign-Born 20%


Nearly 20% of Canada’s population (6,186,950 people) are foreign-born. That’s the highest proportion since the 1930s.

From the report: “Between 2001 and 2006, Canada’s foreign-born population increased by 13.6%. This was four times higher than the growth rate of 3.3% for the Canadian-born population during the same period.

“The census estimated that 1,110,000 immigrants came to Canada from January 1, 2001 to May 16, 2006. These newcomers made up 17.9% of the total foreign-born population, or 3.6% of Canada’s total population of 31.2 million.” (31,200,000)

The main source country for new immigrants in 2006 was the People’s Republic of China* (14%), followed by India* (11.6%) the Philippines (7%), and Pakistan (5.2%). These countries accounted for 38% of all newcomers in 2006, and were also the top-four source countries in the 2001 census as well.

Rounding out the top 10 source countries for immigrants are: the United States, South Korea, Romania, Iran, the United Kingdom and Colombia.

Statistics Canada said that among Western countries that were also major immigrant-receiving countries, the proportion of the foreign-born population in Canada was exceeded in one other country — Australia. According to Australia’s census, also conducted in 2006, 22.2% of Australia’s population was foreign-born, unchanged from 1996.

However, Canada’s proportion of foreign-born was much higher than that of its neighbour to the south. According to the American Community Survey in 2006, the foreign-born represented 12.5% of the U.S. population. >>Source


By the numbers for CANADA

58.3% — Share of recent immigrants born in Asia (including the Middle East)
12.1% — (1971) Share of immigrants from Asia

16.1%Recent immigrants born in Europe (the second largest pool of newcomers)
61.6% — (1971) Share of immigrants from Europe

10.8% — Share of recent immigrants born in Central/South America & the Caribbean

8.3% — Share of recent immigrants born in Africa

*Population of CHINA 1,319,000,000

*Population of INDIA1,136,000,000

Population of CANADA33,000,000

(Note: Chinese births since 2005 are equal to Canada’s entire population! Click ‘China’.)


More Refugees To Support

Canadian Border Madness

Canadian Generosity Vs Stupidity

Foreign Seniors Displacing Canadians

Frank Talk On Immigration (2003)

100,000,000 NON-Whites In U.S.

US White People – An Endangered Species

Mass Immigration Numbers (Short Video)

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

Racial Diversity – A CON Game

Taboo News: Mass Immigration

Global Population Growth is Driven By Developing Countries.

Source: United Nations, World Population Prospects: The 2006 Revision (2007).



Is there something endemic in state broadcasting in the Anglophone world which makes it taboo to discuss the population question and to air views that are critical of immigration? If so, where is it coming from: the journalists, the presenters, the researchers, the producers or the administrators? Is state media more a captive of political correctness than the private media?

In attempting to answer some of these questions, it is useful to look at two fascinating accounts, one about the British Broadcasting Corporation (the BBC), another about the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (the ABC) and finally to summarize the disgraceful record of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).

In “The Treason of the BBC” , the late Jack Parsons argued that “The BBC has been systematically excluding virtually all material on the question of basic population policy.” For example, BBC reporters allowed Beverly Hughes, a former Minister of Immigration, to “blandly repeat, unchallenged, the government’s mindless policy of continued mass immigration to meet the alleged needs of the economy.” Also, it granted a free pass to former Home Secretary Charles Clark to say that there were ‘no obvious limits’ to net migration and rapid growth. At the same time, the BBC did not question the fact that “our present government has adopted a policy (without discussion or mandate) of deliberately increasing our numbers by about one million every five years,” making Britain the fastest growing country in Europe with a population density almost twice that of China.

Parsons asks, “How can BBC claims about the carrying capacity of the prison system and its “overpopulation” be made so openly, so effortlessly, so devoid of fear and moral opprobrium, while not the slightest hint can ever be allowed to slip out vis a vis the vastly more important case of the carrying capacity and numbers of the nation as a whole?”

He accuses those who run the BBC of “colluding in a very Great Betrayal, fostering the myth that human numbers have so little consequence that there is no need to take them seriously.” “The charge I am leveling at all executive levels of the BBC as a corporate body concerns what I am convinced is coercive, institutionalized bias which for years has prevented virtually all BBC news of, and discussion about, a literally vital object, the long-term balance between human numbers, resources and the quality of life…; this was not always so, but has been the case for at least 15 years.”

The signs of population myopia were apparent to Parsons in 1967 when he asked the BBC why it was so concerned about the Tory Canyon Oil-Tanker Spill disaster, but so unconcerned about the doubling of the world’s population in 30 years. Since the early seventies, “a steady and insidious process among governing circles, opinion-formers, the greater bulk of the media, including the BBC, has built a powerful and near universal censorship, by consent…that the absolutely fundamental ecology question, the need for a sustainable balance between numbers and resources—is almost totally ignored. The sad corollary of this is that mass migration—since it has a major and obvious impact on the overall population situation—cannot be rationally discussed either.”

Parsons, in a letter to a BBC Complaints Unit, asks, “Dare one hope that, one of these days, someone in the higher echelons of the BBC will screw his/her courage to the sticking point and actually issue and follow through on a set of instructions that free the BBC—and hence the nation ­from this appalling and near-totally disabling taboo.” He is given to wonder “Why does this large, wealthy, powerful, highly prestigious institution…cringe so abjectly at the very idea of free speech in the realm of discourse?” And why the taboo? “Has there been an explicit but secret directive to all producers to steer clear of the subject? Has this policy been built up by means of nods, winks and frowns on high; or does it stem from tacit acceptance by all concerned at the prevailing orthodoxy in the wider society?”

According to Parsons, four things are needed to reform the BBC. Firstly, there needs to be major change in ‘media Zeitgeist’ (thinking) that will permit an open discussion about population. Secondly, the BBC needs to “stop cowering beneath its cloak of political correctness” and, by honest analysis, foster the emergence of a mature, ecologically informed electorate. Thirdly, the BBC needs to hire reporters who are population experts. “Some BBC presenters, who have an overweening confidence in their qualifications, start laying down the law on those population topics which are allowed a mention, and in the process frequently display their ignorance…They pick up and mindlessly repeat half-baked notions about alleged labour shortages and pension problems, and swallow hook, line and sinker any free-floating opinions about how much better things will continue to become as numbers inexorably swell.”

Fourthly, it would be nice if the BBC followed its own Producer Guidelines. “Due impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC. All BBC programmes and services should be open-minded, fair and show a respect for truth. No significant strand of thought should go unreflected or unrepresented at the BBC.”

Until then, however, its Motto will remain that of the Three allegedly Wise Monkeys: See no population problem! Hear no population problem! Speak no population problem!

Mark O’Connor, poet and one-time Vice-President of Australians for an Ecologically Sustainable Population (AESP, re-named SPA), has made a similar assessment of the ABC. In his upcoming book, “Overloading Australia”, O’Connor concedes that the ABC is critical to Australian democracy and is able to speak to the people—“and often does”. “But the ABC has in some parts of its news and current affairs sections failed to provide objectivity or fairness to portray debates or news coverage relating to population, immigration or economics.” It is living the Comfortable Lie: that growth is good and sustainable, and that the mass immigration that fuels it must continue. “The fact must be faced. There is something deeply wrong in some parts of it.”

But O’Connor is unable to locate precisely where the fault lies. Whether researchers withhold information from presenters, or presenters refuse to use the research provided to them, or whether producers, strategy planners or management dictate programming, is a question outside observers can’t answer. “But there certainly is a bias,” he asserts.

He offers some examples of this bias. During those years when Australia had the highest per capita immigrant intake of any country in the world, the ABC refused to challenge propagandists who illogically and brazenly claimed that Australia’s high immigration intake was “shamefully low” and “proof of racism”. In addition, the ABC collaborated with both the government and the opposition party to promote high immigration by ignoring inconvenient facts like the one about Australia’s high per capita immigrant intake and suppressing most of the debate. And while going after the jugular of the One Nation Party as if it were alone in its call for a zero net immigration policy, “among its many acts of censorship, ABC TV News suppressed the fact that the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Australian Democrats (two other parties) had long been calling for zero net migration.”

O’Connor speculates as to why the ABC behaves in this manner. “The ABC’s failure through nearly three decades to deal with population issues ­the most important matter facing Australia today— may have less to do with individuals than with a pervasive institutional culture.” Nevertheless, “if there are such persons blocking the debate, then it is assuredly time they were persuaded to move on to other areas where their biases will do less harm.”

He concludes, “The ABC has a problem with its news service and current affairs programs. It may not be able to rectify past unfairness, but it needs urgently to offer guarantees that the censorship will cease, and that at least in future those who disagree with high immigration or with ‘birth-bribes’ will receive equal time on its programs.” New ‘balance and accountability’ guidelines announced by management in October of 2006 “will not address ABC News’ pro-growth, pro-natalist, pro-conventional economic views.”

Can what has so far been said of the BBC and the ABC be said of the CBC as well? In one word, yes, and more. While some regional centres have attempted to bring more balance to immigration issues, CBC Radio, especially the National centre in Toronto and the Vancouver centre, have emphatically not. In general, the CBC (like the ABC previously) has refused to engage the public on the two questions that critics keep asking: Why is the government importing more people per capita than any other country in the world? And what effect is this influx, which gives us the highest growth rate of any G8 nation, having on our economic, cultural and environmental health?

Timidity and cowardice are not the exclusive province of CBC journalists, but the fact is that only the private media outlets have on occasion exposed abuses of the immigration system and questioned the country’s high immigration intake. The CBC, on the other hand, has done what it can to promote mass immigration on the basis of its misinterpretation of its 1991 legislated mandate to promote “multiculturalism”. Somehow, CBC logic equates the stated “CBC Vision” (to reflect “the cultural diversity of our people”) with support for mass immigration. In addition, to the CBC, the promotion of a diversity of cultures displaces the promotion of a diversity of opinions.

Those very many Canadians who voice negative concerns about immigration are simply denied airtime by the people they subsidize. As Immigration Watch Canada has noted, the CBC sees no contradiction between holding out one hand to ask for public funding while clenching the other in a fist to drive into the mouth of the taxpayer who dares to challenge the CBC line on immigration. Furthermore, the CBC allows generous airtime and interviews with pro-immigration groups, so that they may in turn, as a quid pro quo, advertise for the non-commercial CBC. So to partiality and deceit, one can therefore add corruption to the list of CBC immigration vices.

So what then is the remedy? Suffice it to say that the CBC’s commitment to mass immigration and multiculturalism comes at the cost of balanced, honest journalism. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage can obviously rectify this situation by ordering the CBC executive to answer for this conflict of interest. It can further help by demanding that the CBC terminate the corporation’s corrupt arrangements with the immigration industry, its blatant pro-immigration advocacy and the employment of its employees who engage in it.

Such measures would seek not to curb journalistic freedom, but to end shameless CBC journalistic abuse—and return public broadcasting to the public. As with the BBC and ABC, our National Broadcaster should be offering a forum where indeed “no significant strand of thought should go unreflected or unrepresented”. The exclusion of topics or the shunning of voices should be foreign to its corporate culture and democratic mission.

The BBC, ABC and CBC conspiracy to silence critics of immigration and population growth has been an insult to democracy and to the public that has had to put up with it. The conspiracy has to end now.


Publisher’s Memo On Immigration

Mass Mind Control Through MSM

“News” Vs Propaganda

Turn Your Television OFF

Mass Media: Smoke & Mirrors

C.B.C. & The Immigration Question


“The goal of ABOLISHING the WHITE RACE is on its face SO DESIRABLE that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition, other than from committed white supremacists. Make no mistake about it, we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the WHITE RACE’ is destroyed – not ‘de-constructed’ but DESTROYED.”

Jewish studies professor, Dr Noel Ignatiev

100,000,000 NON-Whites In U.S.

By Edwin Rubenstein

The Census Bureau recently announced that the number of non-white Americans has surpassed 100 million for the first time. It estimated that on July 1, 2006, minorities accounted for about one-third (33.6 percent) of the U.S. population, while non-Hispanic whites made up the remaining 66.4 percent.

As recently as 1990, three quarters (76 percent) of Americans called themselves non-Hispanic white. In 1965, nine-tenths (88 percent) of the American population was white.

When I reported the 100 million milestone in May, I estimated that 2038 would be the first year in which present-day “minorities” would be in the majority. As early as 2011, I found, most births will be minority.

This shift is essentially all caused by public policy—specifically, the Immigration Act of 1965 and the simultaneous collapse of law enforcement against illegal immigration. As a result, the U.S. demographic balance has been completely destabilized. The U.S. federal government is literally doing what the poet Bertolt Brecht suggested only satirically that the East German communist government should do: dissolving the people and electing new one.

My method was crude—little more than an extrapolation of 2006 white and minority population growth rates. I made no effort to adjust for increased immigration or declining fertility rates.

Yet (ahem!) it turns out that my back-of-the-envelope calculation is remarkably close to that of a new study which makes all of these adjustments: the CIS Backgrounder 100 Million More: Projecting the Impact of Immigration On the U.S. Population, 2007 to 2060 by the redoubtable Steve Camarota.

Camarota’s major focus is immigration’s impact on overall population growth and age distribution. But, in a table discreetly placed at the back of the report, he projects the racial composition of the U.S. population at different assumed rates of immigration. Applying these figures to his population projections we can discern the intimate link between immigration and minority population growth.>>MORE

[CANADA has about 4 million NON-whites in a country comprised of 86.5% White citizens, according to 2001 StatsCanada … revised statistics expected in Spring 2008]


CANADIAN Border Madness

600,000 “Refugees” Since 1987

Criminal Minds & Open Borders

Violent Hispanic Gang In Canada

US White People – An Endangered Species

Illegal Aliens Kill Thousands Yearly (U.S.)

Guelph Importing Multi-Racialism

Local MPP Liz Sandals wants Guelph to become Ontario’s next “immigrant gateway community.”

The Guelph-Wellington MPP had a motion passed in the Ontario legislature yesterday morning recognizing that Guelph should be designated as a gateway city by the provincial Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration.


Guelph is one of the more ethnically-diverse communities in Canada when you get outside the Greater Toronto Area.” [This statement is complete nonsense! Guelph’s population is about 90% White. -Editor-]
The city still has to apply to become a gateway community, if it wants the designation, she said.

Sandals said the designation would allow Guelph to be promoted on the Internet by provincial and federal immigration ministries as an attractive place for newcomers from other countries. [See: Racial Diversity – A CON Game

So there’s information about your region and people all over the world have access,” she said. “The only way a community grows now is by attracting new people and in particular, new immigrants.” [See: Immigrant Workers NOT Needed

Statistics Canada numbers show immigrants make up 19.8 per cent of Guelph‘s population. That puts the city in 11th place out of Canadian communities that have a large proportion of immigrants.

[When disingenuous, politically-correct politicians speak of “immigrants” and “multi-culturalism in today’s lexicon….they’re really referring to NON-white immigrants. -Editor-]


Joannie said with the aging baby boomers and a declining birth rate in Ontario, communities that don’t embrace immigration risk becoming ghost towns. [Scare tactics!]

In the next few years, places will have to plan to either grow or shrink,” she said. “No one wants to plan for shrinkage.

“Without immigration, there will be no city per se, or certainly no growth.”

[See: 600,000 “Refugees” Since 1987

Sandals said the province’s strategy is still a pilot project so the government doesn’t yet know how effective it is. She said it was launched last year and so far, Toronto, Windsor, Sudbury, Ottawa and London have been established as gateway communities.

[London? Check this out: More Refugees To Support

Sandals said Guelph would be the first city that isn’t a regional centre to be included. She said the province should focus on shifting its immigration pattern towards medium-sized cities as well as the large centres.

[Sandals should just focus on her local constituents and not try to stampede them into directions that would not be suitable to their interests.]

I don’t think people understand how direct the link is in encouraging immigration into the community and ensuring you have a vibrant community,” she said. “In the overall interests of the whole province, what you need to have is immigrants moving in.”

[With statements like the above, one must ask “just what IS this woman’s overall agenda?” What we DO understand, however, is that this so-called “representative” is more concerned with spreading diversity where it’s not wanted!]

Peter Cartwright, the city’s manager of economic development and tourism services, said the designation and marketing strategy sounds great in principle.

I’m very optimistic,” Cartwright said. “I think that bodes well for trying to increase the labour market and trying to get the right people.”

[See: Labour Shortage MYTH

Canadians Want Jobs, Too!

[Editor’s Note: This story carries all the appropriate political-correct weasel words designed to SELL a “multicultural” (multi-racial) program to the citizens of Guelph whether they want this to happen or not. Has anyone consulted with those city residents who may be opposed to this proposal?

Scare tactics such as ………Joannie said with the aging baby boomers and a declining birth rate in Ontario, communities that don’t embrace immigration risk becoming ghost towns“…….. are rather insulting to one’s intelligence.

How many ex-Toronto residents, now living in Guelph, abandoned* their previous address BECAUSE Toronto became a multi-Racial metropolis that was not suitable to them?  *White Flight!]

Update June, 2015:


Happiest City In Canada

Is Burlington TOO White?

More Refugees To Support


Race Diversity – But WHY?

Frank Talk On Immigration

Canadian Immigration Reform


Canadian Generosity Vs Stupidity

Is Racial Diversity Good For Canada?



600,000 “Refugees” Since 1987  (CANADA)

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

Immigrant Workers NOT Needed


Racial Diversity – A CON Game

Canada – “Refugees” Paradise

Fed-Up Canadians


JAPAN Prefers Racial Homogeneity

JAPAN Simply Rejects Mass Immigration


WHITE Americans – An Endangered Species

Destroying Effective Policing With A-A

U.K.’s Inverted Racial Discrimination

British Bobbies Walking A Tightrope

“Institutional Racism” In Britain

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: