New Updates

Media

Campaigns

Newsletters

*Lady Michele Renouf Slams “Swindlespeak” as a Zionist Tool for Fooling Us**
*

*HAMILTON, September 30, 2012*. A cross Canada speaking tour with Lady
Michele Renouf, British model, actress, film maker and free speech activist
opened to a standing room only meeting tonight here.

Speaking to promote her new two hour video ,* **Dresden Holocaust
1945*Lady Michele urged the use of new language to discuss and define
our
dilemma. Her career in television advertising has helped form her vision
of the use of language.

“Our predators – our traditional enemies – work by ‘swindlespeak’,” she
explained. “It tells us the very opposite of the truth.” For instance, the
term ‘diversity’ describes a good thing. “However, the policy of mass
immigration from the Third World to Europe and North America will destroy
diversity and result in one sad blend.”

The proper definition of the term ‘holocaust’ is a burned offering, the
eclectic free speech supporter who has studied comparative religion,
explained. “The British wartime strategy was to dehouse the German
population and to burn them alive. Churchill sought to create a holocaust.”

“There was a deliberate intention to kill the German people. This was
decided at an Allied conference by Churchill and Roosevelt in 1943. “The
plan was to firebomb and make human torches out of German civilians in 60
German cities.”

At a meeting in 1944 in Quebec City, an even more inhumane plot was hatched
for the post war period,. “The plan was to deliberately starve and decimate
the German people,” she explained. This was the notorious Morgenthau Plan.

The Morgenthau Plan was not fully implemented after the war. The Allies
decided to exploit and “rip off” Germany instead.

Lady Michele Renouf is a world traveller. She has twice visited Tehran and
met Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “I urged President Ahmadinejad
to tell his followers not to shout, ’Death to America,’ but to chant, ‘Down
with Zionism; Up with Jeffersonian America.’” President Jefferson, she
explained, opposed foreign wars and meddling.

Despite death threats, including one police have traced to a fanatical
former Israeli settler in Canada who urged sending her the deadly poison
ricin, Lady Michele is fearless: “We have to get over the fear barrier,”
she said. “Our predator enemies thrive on making people unable to listen
because their jobs depend on their not listening” to questions about the
existing order.

Lady Michele’s Canadian tour is sponsored by the Canadian Association for
Free Expression. Copies of her dvd *Dresden Holocaust 1945** *can be
obtained, postpaid, by sending $30 to C-FAR Books, P.O, Box 332, Rexdale,
ON., M9W 5L3.

Multicultural Madness: The Fall of British Vancouver and the Rise of ‘Pacific’ Canada

Written by Paul Fromm

Saturday, 29 September 2012 22:46

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format.
If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails.
You can read the original version online:
http://ymlp232.net/z7IOYZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Multicultural Madness: The Fall of British Vancouver and the Rise of
‘Pacific’ Canada
Posted onSeptember 19, 2012

Multicultural Madness
By Dr. Ricardo Duchesne, UNB
MAKING AN IMMIGRANT NATION
Ever since Canada was officially designated a multicultural nation
during the prime ministership of Pierre Elliot Trudeau in the 1970s
the age-old British character of this nation has been under relentless
assaults. Multiculturalism promulgates the equality of all races,
religions and cultures; accordingly, it demands a Canada in which no
particular ethnic group has a privileged position in the nation’s
history and culture. Will Kymlicka, the most prominent scholar and
salesperson of Canadian multiculturalism, sums up succinctly what it
all entails: ‘Adopting multiculturalism is a way for Canadians to
say that never again will we view Canada as a “white”’ country
… as a “British” country (and hence compel non-British
immigrants to relinquish or hide their ethnic identity).’
Non-British immigrants can retain and affirm their ethnic identity;
they have a ‘distinctive group identity’, which must be protected
‘from the impact’ of the ‘dominant’ white culture.

Of course, multiculturalism is always presented to the public through
rose-tinted glasses as a pluralistic philosophy dedicated to the
prevention of discriminatory acts and xenophobic feelings. Immigrants
should have the opportunity to celebrate their heritages and religious
beliefs as well as being encouraged to see themselves as members of a
wider liberal-democratic culture. But multiculturalism contains a
negation within its very essence. It protects the group rights of
non-Western peoples while simultaneously denying the host (Western)
nation any group rights of its own. The host culture is seen as a
neutral site characterized by its provision of individual rights,
which apply to everyone, and of group rights, which apply only to
non-whites. The Anglo-French founders are mandated to be ethnically
neutral and historically disinterested; representatives of certain
deracinated values that belong to ‘humanity.’ While multicultural
ideologues implicitly recognize that minorities have deep attachment
to their ethnic backgrounds, and, in this vein, recognize that humans
do have a natural love of their own heritage and ethnicity; they call
upon whites to practice historical amnesia and pretend they were not
the creators of Canada’s institutions, parliamentary traditions, and
common law. The historical fact that Canada was built as a nation
state around a founding ethnic core must be discarded and hidden from
students.

Children were once taught that Canada was a unique nation founded by
two peoples, the French and the English; later they were taught that
the ‘Aboriginals’ were founders as well; now they are learning to
include Asians and new immigrants in the founding narrative. Newcomers
are coming mostly from Asia; therefore Canadians should redefine their
‘roots of citizenship’ to reflect this new reality. In a 2002
publication, A Newcomer’s Introduction to Canada, released by
Citizenship and Immigration Canada ‘for new immigrants,’ it was
announced that ‘Canada is a land of many cultures and many
peoples’. Other than the Aboriginal people, everyone is an immigrant
to Canada: ‘We have all come from somewhere else.’ The lack of
unity or a national culture in Canada is presented as a positive
trait: ‘Through Canada’s history, millions of immigrants have
helped to build this country.’ The heritage of the English and
French amounts to no more than a set of procedural laws and
institutional templates a market economy, equality under the law,
democratic representation which belong to everyone. Minorities
stand for authentic traditions celebrated for their colour and
vibrancy.

Our esteemed liberal elites are also hard at work ‘exposing’ the
colonizing activities of the first settlers, their use of a ‘white
supremacist’ ideology as a nation-building tool, their imposition of
the Chinese Head Tax, their anti-Asia immigration laws, and their
continued existence as the ‘historically dominant majority’. They
fashion themselves as liberators uncovering the suppressed histories
of minorities and correcting ‘the mythology that whites built
Canada’.

The savviest user of the media in the advancement of Asian interests
against Canada’s British heritage is Henry Yu. A history professor
at the University of British Columbia, Yu accuses Canada of being
‘systematically racist’ and in need of reparations through massive
immigration from the non-Western world. He is the recent recipient of
two huge grants, a $1.17 million project entitled ‘Chinese Canadian
Stories: Uncommon Histories from a Common Past,’ which will seek a
major ‘reinterpretation of Canadian history through the lens of
Chinese Canadians,’ as well as $950,000 from the Federal government
to document the ‘ignored histories’ of one of the ‘founding
peoples’ of Canada.

In an Op Ed piece in The Vancouver Sun (February 2, 2010),
‘Vancouver’s Own Not-So Quiet Revolution’, Yu claimed that the
English language ‘stunts diversity’. Calling it a ‘colonial’
language, he demanded that Asian languages, long ‘silenced’ by
‘white supremacists’, be given the same official status. He even
equated the presence of a high number of whites in leadership
positions with ‘the legacy of a long history of apartheid and white
supremacy’. Elsewhere he added that the old bilingual Canada ‘no
longer makes sense’. Canada has ceased to be a Western-Atlantic
nation. Between 2001 and 2006, the top four places of births for
immigrants were in Asia; the five largest Canadian cities are heavily
populated by Chinese ‘migrants’. ‘In Vancouver, Canada’s third
largest city, the visible minority is white.’ This ‘new Pacific
Canada’, he observed, marks a return to a Canada originally Pacific.
The ‘dominance of white supremacy in immigration policy’ between
the 1920s and 1960s disrupted this founding Pacific orientation.

Yu relies on two meagre facts to support these claims: Asians built
portions of the transcontinental railroad in the late 19th century,
and the Chinese proportion of the population in British Columbia in
1901 was 10 per cent. The truth is that Chinese immigrants have played
a microscopic role in Canada’s history. In 1901, 96 per cent of the
Canadian population was European in origin; there were only 17,043
Chinese immigrants (born outside Canada) relative to a population of
5.3 million. Vancouver, with the highest Chinese proportion throughout
Canada’s history, was virtually a white European city from its
beginnings in the 1870s to the 1980s. In the 1950s, when the city had
been fully developed into a metropolis, the British accounted for
about 75 per cent of the population, and other Europeans accounted for
about 18 per cent, whereas the Asian proportion (Chinese and Japanese)
accounted for only 3 or 4 per cent. Patricia Roy’sVancouver, An
Illustrated History (1980), exhibits a city that was overwhelmingly
British in its architectural landscape, notwithstanding its Chinatown
and Little Tokyo.

The sports, the education, the legal system every institution was
British. The Founding Fathers, the Mayors, the magistrates, the school
trustees, the chief constables, the physicians, the presidents of the
Board of Trade were all British descendents.

The famed British sociologist Anthony Giddens calls Canada
‘quintessentially an immigrant society’. This is totally untrue.
The British and the French were settlers, not immigrants. They did not
move from one country to another; they were the creators of a new
country ex nihilo, out of a wilderness. The Aboriginals were here
first, but they didn’t create Canada. Canada’s aboriginal
population, living in tribal groups, reacted to, rather than
participated in, the creation of a new civilization in a massive
continental landmass barely occupied. Indeed the nation-state called
Canada is British. The French certainly created the colony of New
France, but the Canadian nation-state with its economic infrastructure
across the country, and the majority of settlers and homestead
farmers, were British. All Canadians, regardless of ethnic origin, are
the beneficiaries of a British civilization.

‘The city has changed irrevocably in the last 20 years’, Yu says.
It has. The total number of Chinese in Vancouver in 1951 was still a
meagre 8,729, in a population of roughly 345,000; in 1971, it had
increased to 30,640. During the 80s the entire Third World was invited
to come to Canada. Consequently, by the mid-90s, the Chinese
population in Vancouver suddenly shot up to 300,000, out of a total
population of 1.8 million. The population with British ethnic origins
was reduced to 35.9 per cent by 2006, whereas the Asian population
climbed to 42 per cent. ‘In Vancouver’, Yu says euphorically,
‘you can’t go to a neighbourhood now where Chinese aren’t living
in significant numbers. It’s incredible.’

Before this invasion, Vancouver was a jovial city, with a strong sense
of community and family life. YouTube videos show Vancouverites
enjoying life in the city’s parks in the 1940s or 1960s;
harmoniously, with occasional pictures of (happy) Asian children
those days are gone. ‘Vancouver is clearly an Asia Pacific city
now’, says pollster Angus Reid, Canada’s most prominent public
opinion surveyor. The landscape has undergone a massive transformation
unprecedented in the history of cities. However, the legacy of the
past is still visible, creating a bi-polar atmosphere, with a purely
market-driven Asian side, dictated by external forces and controlled
by (foreign) Chinese millionaires, and a European side standing for
tradition, Britishness, and Vancouver as it was. The controversy over
the ‘monster houses’ associated with Chinese real estate
activities in the 1990s a phrase prohibited in polite talk
accurately represents the huge, uniform and soulless houses that
replaced the old European-style homes.

Yu describes present-day Vancouver as ‘a global city that is one
stop within the Pacific world, with two-thirds of male Canadians of
Hong Kong origin between the ages of 25 and 40 living and working
outside Canada.’ For these Pacific trotters, Canada is a place in
which alien businessmen have equal rights to make use of its better
educational opportunities, exploit advanced medical treatment, and
avoid the pollution they create back home. Coming from a background in
which corruption is endemic with officials operating like Mafia dons,
regularly embezzling funds and sending the money to family members
abroad, these migrants covet Canada’s fresher pastures. A 2011
survey showed that more than half of China’s millionaires are either
considering emigrating or have already completed their immigration
applications, of which 37 per cent of the respondents wanted to
emigrate to Canada.

Our immigrants generally come from cultures which, by our standards,
are not merely illiberal but vulgarly racist. The works of Frank
Dikötter on Chinese racism are worth considering. In The Discourse of
Race in Modern China (1992), he reveals how traditional Chinese
notions about inferior ‘barbarians’ intermingled with Nazi forms
of ‘scientific’ racism to form a distinctively Chinese racial
consciousness in the 20th century. In Imperfect Conceptions: Medical
Knowledge, Birth Defects, and Eugenics in China (1998), Dikötter
references government publications calling for eugenics as a vital
tool in the enhancement of the ‘biological fitness’ of the nation,
and heralding the twenty-first century as an era to be dominated by
‘biological competition’ between the ‘white race’ and the
‘yellow race’. M. Dujon Johnson’s Race and Racism in the Chinas:
Chinese Racial Attitudes towards Africans and African-Americans
(2007), focuses on a series of incidents during the 1980s and 1990s,
including one in which thousands of Chinese students set about
destroying the dormitories of African students in Nanjing, Beijing,
Shanghai and Tianjin, shouting ‘Kill the black devils!’ Johnson
writes, ‘[my experience] demonstrated how life in Chinese society is
racially segregated and in many aspects similar to a system of racial
apartheid.’ Recently, NBC News reported (May 16, 2012) that
‘racial discrimination is a harsh reality within China’s ESL
(English as a second language) industry’, where having a white face
is a near-absolute requirement.

Ethnic minorities in China are treated as second-class citizens.
Tibetans are routinely described as lazy, ignorant, and dirty. Han
migration to Tibet is destroying their heritage; Han companies
dominate the main industries, and the Chinese get the best jobs. The
province of Xinjiang, nominally an autonomous region, is likewise
being flooded with Han migrants. In 1949, Han Chinese amounted to only
5 per cent of Xinjiang’s population; today they are up to 41 per
cent. Urumqi, the capital city, consists of 75 per cent Han Chinese,
of the 2.5 million inhabitants. The average Chinese views the natives
from Xinjiang as backward and as ungrateful for not appreciating the
modern infrastructure bestowed upon them by the Han. In the summer of
2009, this region saw violent riots by 2,000 to 3,000 thousand Uighur
workers and Xinjiang separatists, in which approximately 150 Han
Chinese were killed. The Communist reprisals were swift; the policy of
Sinicization was intensified; in May 2010 Beijing announced a new
development strategy to pour $1.5 billion into the region, encourage
the migration of more Han Chinese businessmen, together with a ‘love
the great motherland, build a beautiful homeland’ patriotic
education campaign that aimed to indoctrinate the Uighurs that
‘ethnic minorities are inseparable from the Han’.

Multiculturalism calls upon Canadians to ‘never again view Canada as
a white [or] a British country’. This command has been thoroughly
implemented in Vancouver. No one is allowed to call the city British.
Anti-racist campaigns, regularly directed at whites, are enforced in
the schools and workplaces. While the founders have been dispossessed,
the Chinese migrants have been encouraged to celebrate their ethnic
identity. How about some answers to these run of the mill questions:
How can one argue that Han Chinese migration into Canada is a
wonderful act of diversity when most of the ‘migrants’ come from
places where diversity is suppressed and Han supremacist ideas are
officially sanctioned? Why are ‘Anglo’ people the only ones
disallowed from retaining their ethnic identity and ancestry? Why is
the dismemberment of Anglo heritage, history, and ancestry in Canada
viewed as progressive and its affirmation as xenophobic? Can we
interpret Han migration into Vancouver, in combination with
multiculturalism and the continuous campaigns against white racism, as
a form of Sinicization? Why are whites the only people on the planet
expected to accept diversity and massive immigration? Why is everyone
assuming that pride, loyalty, and affection for Canada’s European
heritage are incompatible with the liberal-democratic values Europeans
developed?

Indeed why is it that, not just within Canada, but across the world,
the greatest intellectual movement in history, the European
Enlightenment, that extraordinary flash of moral vision which rescued
billions from ignorance, hunger, disease, slavery, anarchy and
despair, creating the very opulence and freedom its critics bask in,
has become the latter’s target? Perhaps in their hearts, like all
colonialists, they are terrified of democracy, the voice of the
people.

Ricardo Duchesne is Professor of Sociology at the University of New
Brunswick, and author ofThe Uniqueness of Western Civilization (2011).

_____________________________
Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp232.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqgbhygguewwmw
Powered by YourMailingListProvider

<< Start < Prev 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 Next > End >>

Page 155 of 454

Media

Campaigns

Newsletters

Most Read