Salim Mansur book launch

Salim Mansur- 6/17/2019

“Below is a video I re-discovered today by sheer accident.

It was made by my good friend Fred Litwin and his Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa. It was filmed on the occasion of an event he arranged at the auditorium of Archives Canada in Ottawa in September 2011 to launch my book, Delectable Lie, in the capital.

I now recall that it was a beautiful late summer evening in Ottawa and a lot of people came out to the event.

My remarks that evening in retrospect are poignant at the present given what has occurred with me this past week, as I was informed nearly ten months after I submitted my papers for nomination contest to be the nominee for the Conservative party in London North Centre, that my candidacy has been disallowed. No reason was given.

That evening in Ottawa 8 years ago I spoke about freedom, free speech and democracy, that “all men are created equal”, and that we as individuals are equal and made in God’s image, not cultures. For the idea implicit in multiculturalism that all cultures are equal is a flat out falsehood, it is indefensible philosophically, or by any other measure, except by the “Liberal” ideology concocted in Canada by Liberals of the Justin Trudeau type some half-century ago and pushed down our throats.

Because of multiculturalism we have contorted ourselves in Canada and boxed ourselves in political correctness, and are turning our country — one of the most envied examples of a free society — into a dog’s breakfast of a third world culture and society that fears freedom, free speech, and free individuals, as we are witnessing in Hong Kong thirty years after the Tienanmen Massacre in Beijing.

And our politicians, especially on the right, those who swear by the mantle of Sir John A. Macdonald, are afraid today of their own shadows, afraid to defend freedom based on individual rights and free speech as the foundational principle of our liberal democracy. This is why our freedom today hang in balance 75 years after Canadians landed in Normandy beach risking all to keep the freedom of their children and unborn generations alive, free, and strong. Contemplate how far we have fallen from the ranks of those young men who walked in the face of fire in defence of freedom of their devotion to “God, Queen, and Country,” and we quiver against the sock boy pushing his UN-based and Sharia-laced agenda to our Canada into a laboratory of Globalism.

History of free societies eventually dying, as is happening to Great Britain, is a history of those born with the silver spoon of freedom in their mouths who proved to be unworthy of what their fathers fought and died for, since freedom as the breath of God in man is as fragile as a flickering flame of a candle standing in the whirlwind of those who will snuff it as the father and brother of the young girl, Aqsa Parvez, choked her to death all because she wanted to be a girl to live freely in Canada like any other girl born free.

Please share this video as we what we are losing by a thousand cuts on our body politics by those who are the progeny of those men who refused to enlist against Nazi Germany and sat out the war instead of joining the ranks of the men who landed in Normandy coast iii June 1944.”

Ontario family files human rights complaint after six-year-old girl upset by gender theory in school

Barbara Kay

 by Barbara Kay

The following story has its source in an application filed before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario by Jason and Pamela Buffone, on behalf of their daughter “N,” against the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board for discrimination on the basis of gender and gender identity in contravention of the Human Rights Code.

In January of 2018, in a Grade One class at Devonshire Community Public School, part of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board network, six-year-old N watched a YouTube video as part of her teacher’s lesson plan on gender.

N is the kind of child, her mother Pamela told me in a telephone interview, that adores school—or did until the particular morning that prompted this column. The video was entitled, “He, She and They?!?—Gender: Queer Kid Stuff #2.” The video contained statements such as, “some people aren’t boys or girls,” and that there are people who do not “feel like a ‘she’ or a ‘he,’” and therefore might not have a gender. The young teacher, whom I will refer to by her initials, JB, continued to teach gender theory throughout the semester. According to N’s feedback to her mother, JB told the children that “there is no such thing as girls and boys,” and “girls are not real and boys are not real.”

By mid-March, N’s parents could see the lessons were having an impact on their daughter, as she began spontaneously and repeatedly asking them why her identity as a girl was “not real.” She asked if she could “go to a doctor” about the fact that she was a girl. She said she was “not sure if she wanted to be a mommy.” (Ms Buffone explained to N that grown-up women had a choice, but was concerned that the subject was coming up in Grade One gender lessons.)

The Buffones were naturally alarmed by their daughter’s persisting signs of confusion, as she had never previously shown a single sign of discontent regarding her biological reality. Ms Buffone therefore met with JB in March to discuss the impact of the gender discussions on her daughter.

JB, they could see, was very committed to the teaching of gender fluidity as a reflection of “a change within society.” She told Ms Buffone that gender fluidity was the School Board policy, that some children are struggling with the idea that gender is binary and confirmed that the topic of sex change had come up for discussion. She did not appear unduly concerned about N’s personal distress, and did nothing to affirm N’s female identity. 

The Buffones then contacted the school principal, Julie Derbyshire.

In a telephone call, Ms Buffone says, Ms Derbyshire explained that JB had initiated the lessons to accommodate a child in the class who had expressed interest in self-expression as the opposite sex. (There was in fact a child exhibiting symptoms of gender dysphoria in Grade One of that school, who was being teased on that account. But, according to Ms Buffone, as she later learned, the parents of the child did not want the issue to be addressed by lessons on gender; they merely wanted the other children to be taught to act respectfully and not to bully their child.) Ms Derbyshire did not offer to consult with the school’s “gender specialist” about affirmation of non-questioning students like N.

Determined to elicit a response that addressed the issue substantively, the Buffones pressed on, eventually meeting with the Superintendent of the School Board and the Curriculum Superintendent. According to the complaint, “The School Board did not agree to communicate with parents when sensitive discussions took place, nor did they agree to issue any directive or take corrective action in order to ensure that children of female gender identity were positively affirmed.”

At this point, feeling stonewalled at every step of the hierarchical ladder from bottom to top, the Buffones made the decision to enrol N at another school where, Ms Buffone tells me, she is doing well and where, she has told her family, she is happy she will not have a teacher who says that “girls are not real.” Last October, N reportedly told her mother, “This table is real, and this fan is real, and even if the fan was made out of cardboard, it’s still real.”

Stories related to gender identity in childhood usually have for their protagonist a child who is distressed over the disparity between her or his biological reality and their perceived gender. The scenario often presents educators as enlightened, affirming allies of the child, while the parents, behind the times, so to speak, resist affirmation and cause the child further anxiety. In these cases the injustice to the child seems pretty clear cut to many rights-attuned Canadians. The child’s right to express his or her gender identity trumps the parents’ right to oppose it.

Here we have the opposite case. N’s gender identity is—or was—seamless comfort in her biological skin. She had never questioned that comfort. Suddenly she was told to believe that at any moment, what she believes to be real—that she is a girl—may not be true. How very frightening that thought must be to a child who is not old enough to grasp the abstract concept of gender fluidity. Her parents are the allies here, and her educational environment is where she fails to find affirmation. Why could she not be accommodated as well as the questioning child? Why did this situation have to end up at a human rights tribunal?

It wasn’t, after all, an either-or choice, and a little compromise on the part of JB and her superiors would easily have defused the situation, and alleviated the Buffones’ concern. Why couldn’t JB have explained that discomfort with one’s gender identity does occur, but rarely (fact); that it is often a passing phase (fact); that non-conforming dress and play preferences in childhood are normal and only infrequently indicative of deep or lasting dissatisfaction with one’s biological sex (fact); that most children stop having these doubts when they are teenagers (fact); most important, that almost all children are perfectly happy being exactly what they are (fact) and those children should not worry that they are not “real” boys or girls. Where was the difficulty in saying these things? N would have been reassured, and the one child in the class who was experiencing gender confusion would not have been adversely affected.

The Buffones’ HRTO application concludes that JB “subjected N to ongoing discrimination on the basis of gender and gender identity, by a series of lessons that denied the existence of the female gender and biological sex and undermined the value of identifying as a female.”; ii) “The Principal and School Board perpetuated and reinforced the discrimination that N experienced in her Grade One classroom, as neither Ms. Derbyshire nor any school board official took any corrective action to remedy it.”

Their requested remedy is that the Tribunal order the Board i) to ensure that classroom instruction “not devalue, deny, or undermine in any way the female gender identity”; ii) to mandate teachers to  “inform parents when lessons on gender identity will take place or have taken place, including the teaching objectives and the materials that will be or have been used for such lessons”; and iii) to pay the Buffones $5,000.00 in general damages “to compensate for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect caused by the discrimination.”

The School Board’s lawyer responded to the application with a request that the application be dismissed “on the basis that the Application has no reasonable prospect for success,” denying the allegations and promising to provide a “fulsome Response should the Tribunal not dismiss this matter by way of Summary Hearing.”

Citing another complaint against the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, the response pointed to the Tribunal’s finding that the Tribunal did “not have the power to deal with general allegations of unfairness,” and that the facts, even if true, “do not engage any prohibit (sic) ground of discrimination as set out in the [Human Rights] Code.” Also noted was the fact that teachers’ right to teach gender identity is endorsed by the Minister of Education, and that “[t]he age-appropriateness of a classroom discussion does not engage a Code-protected prohibited ground.” In short, even if N was adversely affected by the teacher’s lessons, she has no grounds for redress according to the Human Rights Code.

How will this play out?

The School Board is taking a “letter of the law” approach. They are basically stipulating that the Buffones’ account of N’s experience is factual, but irrelevant. In other words, they don’t deny the lessons had an adverse effect on the child’s psychological well-being. They are simply saying that whether or not she has been adversely affected is not, legally speaking, grounds for a human rights complaint.

But the Ontario Human Rights Commission defines “discrimination” pretty broadly. In our interview Ms Buffone told me: “The Ontario Human rights Code states that a poisoned environment is a form of discrimination. We’re going to provide evidence that the manner in which [JB] was teaching the concept of gender identity resulted in a poisoned environment. The principal further exacerbated the situation in that the only option provided to us was to remove our daughter from the classroom for these lessons, which is exclusionary treatment.”

Will this be as persuasive an argument for the HRTO as it seems to me?

“This is an important case,” says Ms Buffone. “Our government seems to have given teachers carte blanche in terms of how they teach this concept [of gender identity]. If this is an example of how it can be taught, I think it’s in the public interest for the HRTO to weigh in on it. Teachers are providing a public service and have a duty of care to all of their students, just as the HRTO has a responsibility to all of Ontarians. I think this case is a good example of why we need to set ideology aside when dealing with human rights.” 

If the Buffones win their case, it will set a precedent that may have far-reaching consequences for the teaching of gender issues in Ontario’s elementary schools. The HRTO will be very conscious of the potential fallout from their decision. For that reason, the cynic in me fears the dice are loaded against the Buffones. I very much hope to be proven wrong.

Immigration Is Killing Ontario’s Small Towns

by Maggie McDougal

Arwen~ Two pieces to look at…the first one is from November 23, 2017 and the second one, is from June 14, 2019. What Trudeau’s gov’t is doing is intentional and quite clear …inundating Canada with Islam and changing the culture and very fabric of our nation. Of course the Liberals are not doing this alone…they are in league with the Muslim Brotherhood which is in our gov’t and deeply embedded in our nation.

Elora, Ontario
Historic town: Elora, Ont. is one of many towns targeted for a massive influx of immigrants looking for “quieter” places to “raise their children” as the children of Canadian residents are forced out due to rising housing prices and businesses committed to hiring foreign immigrants only.

I was on my way to work one morning around the beginning of March, when I decided to stop at MacDonald’s for a morning coffee, one of the few luxuries I can afford, despite having trained for four different fields of work throughout my life in Ontario, Canada. At my current job, I am by far the highest educated worker, with vast training, including a graduate degree in the chief public service that the organization provides: human services. Yet, I am employed on contract at the lowliest clerical job, with the poorest status, and wages and without benefit, not even vacation time (only money in lieu of vacation). That in it-self should raise the eyebrows of the handful of critical thinkers that still exist in this nation. 

Immigration is a working class issue, make no mistake about it. If you were waiting for the wealthy to intervene and to try and stop immigration, that isn’t going to happen — ever! 

At this point, the immigration tap doesn’t need to only be turned off, we actually need restoration efforts to make up for the losses sustained by Canadians proper — restorative justice. 

I waited for my coffee, which was being poured by a long-time Canadian such as myself. Likely he was forced to take any job in order to continue to live in this town, like citizens in so many other small Ontario towns, which have suffered for decades as the jobs left for nations where products could be manufactured at a lower cost to create a product of poor quality to sell back to people like us. 

I reached for the newspaper rack, and ended up with a newspaper in my hand, which I have learned through the application of my critical thinking skills to distrust and despise. Yet, it was in my hand, so I read the headline, “The Future Of Ontario’s Small Towns Is Immigration.”1

I was served my coffee and I gulped it down, not paying attention to it, but rather the headline and burning my mouth and throat in the process. The pain was no comparison to the raw feeling of acid burning in my gut as I continued to read the front page newspaper story, which the low wage workers serving me would likely never even get a chance to glance at throughout their stress-full day at work. 

Imagine having watched your entire community being fed a steady diet of raw potatoes and turnips for thirty years, and in order to survive you’ve swallowed it, but not because you liked it, but because you had been led to believe it was the only way to survive. And then one day you discovered that you could have been eating steak and lobster, and it was all a grand farce, because the joke was on you and the rest of the folks in your towns and communities all across the nation. 

Reading that Toronto Star article, on that freezing cold morning in March, I recognized that “we” the working class had all been made complete fools, not once but again and again and again, as lie after lie was unveiled for us by grinning political shysters. 

Immigrants resent me for being Canadian
I am an environmental refugee, having twice fled the shameless and unnecessary destruction of the green spaces in and around central Ontario, in the name of atrocious and unnecessary development projects which include row after endless row of cookie cutter housing for immigrants. At forty-five years of age, I have watched the replacement of Canada’s host population with nothing but wall to wall immigrants. I have experienced deep hate and racism from immigrants in the workplace and in the communities I have lived in. The hate they direct at me is called “internalized oppression.” They resent me for being Canadian. It has been vicious abuse from them and nobody is interested in hearing my story, and seems like nobody ever will. 

I came to live in the community my husband spent much of his youth in, and which is a two and half hour drive from Toronto. One would think that I had travelled far enough to escape, but not so. In the decade since coming here, we have watched the community emptied out of working class Canadians, many of whom were in tears at having to return to urban centres such as Toronto and surrounding communities. Like all of us, they had to go where they could find work. As if that wasn’t enough, to further aid the destruction of the community the provincial government has mandated the closure of small hospitals in all small Ontario communities, as they move to a centralized model for healthcare. They have also closed high schools and junior schools to ensure real estate opportunities for the new, wealthy immigrants. 

There is one common theme for people who live in Central Ontario, north of Toronto, “Good luck finding a job, eh!” 

Most of those who are able to live here and find work have to accept that their children will have to leave and come home only when they have a long weekend. Most of these children would love to work and live in the communities they were raised in, and have deep roots in, but they can’t. 

With no jobs for us, where are the jobs coming from for the immigrants?
Apparently, while this exodus continues all around us, the Toronto Star, for some reason is assured that the future of our small towns across this province is immigration. The logical question, which media outlets such as the Toronto Star, and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) will never pose is: How can the future of Ontario’s small towns be immigrants, when there is no future here for Canadians? 

I want to jump to the heart of the matter: Where are the jobs coming from for the immigrants when there are no jobs here for Canadian citizens and their children? 

One has to accept that assertions such as this one, made by mainstream media are steeped in knowledge of a strategy at-work, one which includes many sectors of society working together to ensure high employment rates amongst immigrants and not citizens, no matter how educated. Such a duplicitous strategy is often referred to as a conspiracy or elites breathing together for their own gain. 

Immigration portal of Leeds & Grenville

As a human services professional I have become aware over the past decade of the agencies that are funded by the government to find immigrants jobs, and which provide incentives to their staff to do so. The Local Immigration Partnerships which exist in every single community in Ontario and which are working with private enterprises and local social service agencies, to ensure new immigrants find jobs, but not us. We are not the future, we are ghosts walking around remembering amongst ourselves about what was, but which we cannot celebrate any longer, for fear of being labelled and losing what few options for employment we still have. 

There is a vast network of immigration lobbyists that have lined their pockets with gold, as they lead Canadians to believe that we must remove the shirts from our backs, and leave our home communities, in order to make way for the immigrants, lest we be accused of our lack of humanity. 

Last week, CBC Radio aired a live phone in program called Disappearing Life Lines and it exposed some of the different stories not being heard from small town Ontario. It basically spelled out for us the death of Ontario’s small towns. The guests on the program cited the unnecessary closure of high schools and hospitals in towns such as the one I live in, as a final death knell and guarantee of population decline. Yet, the pro-immigrant CBC Presenter made no connection between this and the Toronto Star‘s assertion that the future of Ontario’s small towns is immigrants. If these towns are brimming with so much opportunity, then how come Canadian citizens have been so hard pressed to find any? Why would they leave if there are opportunities? 

First they let our jobs disappear by allowing industry to flee to the Third World, causing a dramatic decline in the population of Ontario’s small towns. They could have simply applied protectionist policies to protect Canadians from greedy corporations — of course they couldn’t do that because protectionism is a taboo word in globalist circles. Then they over-populated central Ontario through immigration, and now they are going to re-populate our beloved small towns with wealthy immigrants, when the Canadians who long to live in these towns can’t afford to stick around! 

One immigrant is quoted in the Toronto Star article as stating, “A smaller community makes the transition easier. There is no hustle and bustle, and people … It would have taken me much longer to settle down in a big city like Toronto,” said the 35-year-old from Bangalore, a metropolitan city in India with a population of nine million. 

“There are more opportunities and less competition here. The salaries are not as high as in the big cities, but the cost of living is lower,” said Joseph, who works as an operation and planning co-ordinator at an area trucking company. 

Joseph states exactly what we Canadians like about our small towns, and the way we would like to keep them, but there is no opportunity in these communities for most Canadians, so exactly how does he come to find it? 

The article goes on to state: According to the latest census, populations fell between 2011 and 2016 in one in four of Canada’s 723 municipalities with 5,000 people or above, with those further from urban centres more likely to show a decline in population than those close to a larger city. 

Neither the Toronto Star nor the CBC haven’t wasted their time interviewing Canadian Citizens who have been forced to leave small towns for the urban centres, because we don’t ever want to get near the heart of the matter, lest some truth be revealed to the general public. 

Finally, the new measures instituted by Ontario politicians to bring the price of houses down in Toronto, brought UP the price of houses in small communities across the rest of the province, which in my mind is more evidence of a larger strategy at work, not to control an out of control market, but rather to spread the “out of control” aspect of it to the impoverished working poor who are clinging to life in small town Ontario. 

Employment agencies do not advocate for Canadians and place them into jobs
In the town I live in, a Syrian refugee family was given a handsome house to live in, while a homeless guy spent the last two winters in a cardboard hovel tucked into a corner of the local cemetery. He is a nice man, whom I am sure could be placed in to do a good job, but that’s not ever going to happen, is it? Government funded employment agencies are not in the business advocating for Canadians and placing them into jobs. They are only good at collecting government money and engaging in nonsense such as the resume critique. 

One million wealthy immigrants are on the way and will be enjoying the good life here in Canada by 2020. Millions of Canadians will most definitely be displaced by them including in the area of jobs, housing, business opportunities, political opportunities … the list goes on and on. The best part is that the Trudeau government has made it clear that the one million are not headed to Canada’s major cities. Oh no, these immigrants are going to be provided with INCENTIVES to settle in our small towns. The same small towns the host population can only dream of living in and which most Canadians have to wait until they retire to live in. 

I have lost everything, at this point, I don’t feel there is a future for me and what is left of my family. I missed the chance to have children because I wasn’t able to afford to and now there is nothing but hollowness inside of me. I don’t know what I will do with the rest of my life, but it is very sad to think of the future. I don’t know what I risk by writing this letter, or what they will do to me, but I just had to write it. 

There is an alarm belling ringing, and it is warning us about the future, and it is time to listen to it. 

Hussen names 11 communities for rural immigration experiment

Ahmed Hussen

Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Ahmed Hussen speaks at the Black History Month reception in Ottawa on Monday, Feb. 4, 2019. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

Teresa Wright, The Canadian Press 
Published Friday, June 14, 2019

OTTAWA — Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen says 11 communities the federal government is choosing for a new rural immigration program will gain new workers and citizens that are badly needed to boost dwindling economies.

On Friday Hussen announced the communities chosen for the “rural and northern immigration pilot” — a program that will give rural employers the ability to directly select immigrants to hire in their businesses and will also give immigrants the ability to choose one of these 11 communities to make their permanent residence.

By taking the decisions on matching immigrants to employers and communities out of Ottawa’s hands, rural and northern areas struggling with population declines and worker shortages hope to find newcomers who want to come and stay.

“People don’t realize just how much the rural economy needs immigration,” Hussen said.

He has spoken to rural employers desperate for workers, some of whom are turning away multimillion-dollar contracts because of a lack of skilled labour.

“Some of them are saying, ‘We’re going to make decisions to move if we don’t have the workers that we need,’ and that’s just unacceptable. And I know how much these small towns are relying on that large employer to stay in place.”

With more than two-thirds of immigrants to Canada settling in bigger cities, municipal leaders in smaller towns and communities have been calling on Ottawa to do more to help them attract newcomers.

A number of rural communities have already been investing in settlement and integration supports for newcomers to make their towns more attractive to immigrants looking for permanent homes in Canada.

That’s what Ottawa was looking for when choosing the 11 communities. Now, those areas will receive a range of supports to test the new program.

The selected communities are:

  • Thunder Bay, Sault-Ste-Marie, Sudbury, Timmins and North Bay, Ont.
  • Gretna-Rhineland-Altona-Plum Coulee and Brandon, Man.
  • Moose Jaw, Sask.
  • Claresholm, Alta.
  • West Kootenay and Vernon, B.C.

This new program is designed after an experiment that has seen success in expanding the population and filling labour needs in the Atlantic provinces.

The Atlantic model sees immigrants arriving in the region with job offers and settlement plans for them and their families. Before the program was introduced, the retention rate for newcomers in Nova Scotia was at 60 per cent — four in 10 immigrants moved on before long. Now, more than 90 per cent of immigrants who arrive in Nova Scotia through this program are staying.