In the first piece, we looked at the extended pattern of political lobbying by CIJA, including Senators, and MPs in the House of Commons from all parties. Over 1200 “communications reports” took place over the last 20 years, or about 1 every 6 days.
Period (2019-09-01 to 2020-01-14)
The second article covered the agenda that CIJA was pushing. Beyond generic business interests, CIJA is pushing an anti-free speech agenda. “Hate speech” according to this group, is essentially anything Jews don’t like and can claim to be offended by.
In fact, CIJA has, for many years, been lobbying the Federal Government to make licensing of media personalities mandatory. This is so the Israeli lobby can claim “hate speech” to shut down people and views that they disagree with. It can also be used to silence those who speak uncomfortable truths.
Now, let’s get into the nuts and bolts of this Federal “Non-Profit” Group which is waging war on free speech in Canada.
By no means is this an exhaustive list of the documents available, but it should provide a good indication of what CIJA is, how it operates, and what its goals are.
4. By-Laws: Voting Members
Member
Number of Memberships
The Atlantic Jewish Council
3
Calgary Jewish Federation
1
Jewish Federation of Edmonton
1
Hamilton Jewish Federation
1
Jewish Federation of Ottawa
3
The Jewish Federation of Victoria and Vancouver Island Society
1
Jewish Federation of Winnipeg Inc.
3
London Jewish Federation
1
the Montreal Federation
13
the Toronto Federation
15
UIAC
4
UIAC, in trust for the Jewish community of Regina*
1
UIAC, in trust for the Jewish community of Saskatoon*
1
UIAC, in trust for RJCO (excluding London and Windsor)*
1
the Vancouver Federation 4 Windsor Jewish Federation
1
TOTAL
54
Unsurprisingly, it is weighted so that larger areas like Toronto and Montreal get more voting power. This happens in many organizations.
Worth asking: do all of these branches support CIJA’s overall war on free speech? Do they all support the suppression of ideas they don’t like, and uncomfortable truths?
Straight from the source. CIJA’s goal (among others) is to influence political affairs in “its” version of what it views as hate speech and anti-Semitism. In other words, ban things that Jews don’t like.
From the first article, it was shown that CIJA had 1248 “communications reports” over the last 20 years. Could it be they have finally made some progress in clamping down on free speech in Canada?
6. Politicians In Bed With Israeli Lobby
Current candidate for leadership of the CPC, Erin O’Toole, openly shills for Israel. See here, and here for just a few examples.
When Maxime Bernier ran for the CPC leadership in 2016/2017, his main critique of the UN is that it was dysfunctional, and spends too much time condemning Israel. Really? For an ex-Foreign Affairs Minister, that is the best you can do?
Two non-voting Directors of CIJA are of a particular interest. One is John Baird, former CPC Cabinet Minister. The other is Dexter Darrell, former Premier of Nova Scotia.
Stockwell Day, ex-CPC Cabinet Minister was on CIJA BOD
Sheila Copps, ex-LPC Cabinet Minister was on CIJA BOD
Rafi Brass: Raphael (Rafi) Brass has been a government consultant at Bluesky Strategy Group since April 2015 and worked on Parliament Hill for two Liberal MPs. He will be joining the Board as a delegate from CIJA’s Young Leaders Circle.
Rafi Brass is an ex-staffer, for 2 Liberal MPs.
Now he’s a Director with CIJA.
Of course, these names here represent only a small portion of what actually goes on. More to come in a follow-up article.
7. Where Things Stand
CIJA is a lobbying organization that is extremely influential in Canada. It has political connections across party lines and spends an inordinate amount of time lobbying and promoting Jewish interests.
By itself, this may not be a problem. However, promoting the interests that this group does directly interferes with Canadian interests. A politician cannot be “CANADA FIRST” and be an Israeli shill at the same time. As the expression goes, a dog cannot have 2 masters.
This group is anti-Canada, and anti-free speech, to name just a few criticisms. Showing what it really does is important to educate the public.
The last piece focused mainly on the extensive lobbying efforts that CIJA was involved in doing, namely who and when it was taking place.
Now we get to the “what”. What exactly is CIJA lobbying for, and what do they want? If an organization spends that kind of time and money, they must be serious about it.
3. CIJA’s Prolific Lobbying Efforts
As was covered in the previous article, CIJA, the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs has been heavily involved in lobbying the Federal Government for decades. Now, let’s take a deeper look into what they actually are lobbying for.
4. CIJA’s Stated Goals
What makes CIJA different from other Jewish organizations?
.
CIJA is the only registered lobbyist for the Jewish community. It is the sole advocacy agent of Canada’s Jewish Federations, focusing much of its work on communications with the non-Jewish community. Its approach to advocacy is strategic, based on research, polling, and analysis. CIJA is the only organization to bring – literally – hundreds of Canadian influencers and decision-makers to Israel on educational missions every year.
Based on information provided in the FAQ, CIJA openly states its goal is to influence policy, and states it brings hundreds of Canadians to Israel annually to help achieve that.
5. IHRA Definition of Anti-Semitism
About the IHRA
The IHRA is the only intergovernmental organization mandated to focus solely on Holocaust-related issues, so with evidence that the scourge of antisemitism is once again on the rise, we resolved to take a leading role in combatting it. IHRA experts determined that in order to begin to address the problem of antisemitism, there must be clarity about what antisemitism is.
The IHRA’s Committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial worked to build international consensus around a working definition of antisemitism, which was subsequently adopted by the plenary. By doing so, the IHRA set an example of responsible conduct for other international fora and provided an important tool with practical applicability for its Member Countries. This is just one illustration of how the IHRA has equipped policymakers to address this rise in hate and discrimination at their national level.
The Working Definition of Antisemitism
In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.
On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:
Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
And if this sounds too vague, don’t worry. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance will get much, MUCH more detailed in what fits this definition.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
-Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
-Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
-Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
-Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
-Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
-Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
-Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
-Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
-Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
-Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
.
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
Yes, this IHRA definition of anti-Semitism means any such behaviour listed above should be criminalized.
Also note: it has the wording “include, but not limited to”. This means that the extensive list of “anti-Semitic behaviour” may be expanded on as time passes.
Language that seems dehumanizing? That also is extremely vague, and seems ripe for abuse. And Jews are greatly overrepresented in government, academia, banking and the media. How is pointing out these facts considered bias?
Even questioning even the scale of the Holocaust is considered a hate crime according to these people?
And Israel DOES practice a double standard when it comes to managing its affairs. Israel has strong border walls, strict immigration, and is extremely ethno-centric when it comes to determining who it should allow to live there. But if you question the hypocrisy, you are an anti-Semite.
Is all of this an academic exercise? Hardly.
6. Pushing IHRA Definition on Others
CIJA has been successful in getting Westmount (Montreal), and Vaughn, and Toronto, to adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, which is basically anything Jews don’t like.
As a political tactic, this is proving to be very effective.
Looking at this in terms of silencing potential critics: how is this different from the Motion M-103 which Iqra Khalid previously got passed in the House of Commons? The effect is the same — using the claim of victimhood to silence free speech.
7. Changing Human Rights Code
Hate messages
13 (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
Marginal note:
Interpretation
(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.
Marginal note:
Interpretation
(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter.
CIJA wants to bring back Section 13 of the Canada Human Rights Act, which was repealed in 2013. The idea is to make it easier to claim anti-Semitism by pointing to electronic communications.
8. (Internet) Hate Speech, Criminal Penalties
The previous section dealt with “online hate” via the Canada Human Rights Act, but here, CIJA wants to push for it to be “criminally punishable” as well. That’s right, not only would this be a human rights violation, but potentially a criminal offence as well.
Of course, CIJA supports the extremely broad and excessive definition of “anti-Semitism” as laid out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. Don’t worry, this won’t trample on your free speech or anything.
9. Deportations For “Hate Speech”
One of CIJA’s stated goals is to influence policy to make it easier to remove citizenship of Canadians for a variety of reasons, including what it calls: extreme promotion of hate.
Presumably — although it doesn’t specify — this would only apply to people who immigrate to Canada and later become citizens. One can also assume — but again, it doesn’t state — that after the citizenship is revoked the person would then be deported.
While removing people who commit terrorism and crimes against humanity is certainly a reasonable goal, it is disturbing to see “hate speech” included as well. This is especially true since CIJA doesn’t really believe in free speech to begin with.
It would be interesting (at least in some academic sense), to see how this plays out. Under Bill C-6, we no longer pull the citizenship of actual terrorists. Yet we are now supposed to do so for hate speech?
10. Holocaust Training Obligations
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance unites governments and experts to strengthen, advance and promote Holocaust education, research and remembrance and to uphold the commitments to the 2000 Stockholm Declaration.
The IHRA (formerly the Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research, or ITF) was initiated in 1998 by former Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson. Today the IHRA’s membership consists of 34 member countries, each of whom recognizes that international political coordination is imperative to strengthen the moral commitment of societies and to combat growing Holocaust denial and antisemitism.
The IHRA’s network of trusted experts share their knowledge on early warning signs of present-day genocide and education on the Holocaust. This knowledge supports policymakers and educational multipliers in their efforts to develop effective curricula, and it informs government officials and NGOs active in global initiatives for genocide prevention.
Yes, this is very productive: constantly reminding Canadians that Jews are victims.
Interesting to note: IHRA wants to criminalize it (everywhere) to deny or even question the Holocaust, but it is only “this” one that is off limits. Every other alleged atrocity is fair game to dissect and analyse. Perhaps the cover story is falling apart after all these years, so the skeptics must be silenced.
11. CIJA And Durban II
From 20-24 April 2009, the Durban Review Conference took place in Geneva. It is also known as Durban II, a follow-up to the infamous “Durban I” World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in the late summer of 2001. At Durban I, an NGO Forum accepted what can be summed up as a declaration of war against Israel. Participating nongovernmental organizations adopted a strategy for the complete isolation of Israel through boycotts, divestment, and sanctions.
The Durban I is seen as waging war on Israel. So CIJA is trying to lobby Canada and other nations to act as a counter-weight against future proposals or movements.
12. CIJA Behind Media Licensing Req
Period (2012-05-10 to 2012-07-19)
Period (2015-02-02 to 2015-06-10)
Period (2016-03-01 to 2016-03-18)
Period (2017-06-15 to 2017-08-04)
Period (2019-09-01 to 2020-01-14)
Do you get the picture? For years, the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs has been lobbying the Federal Government about the issuances of broadcast licenses.
This is not a one time thing, but has been going on for several years, at least. Any wonder why we now have a government that openly calls for all media outlets (regardless of size), to be regulated? This is a deliberate attempt to give control to the government to deplatform anyone who is deemed to be anti-Semitic, or involved in hate speech.
That is correct. The ISRAELI group has spent years lobbying the CANADIAN Government over how media licenses should be issued. This is straight up foreign interference in our affairs.
The CRTC has recently made many recommendations, including forcing those in the media to get licenses. Understandably, the Minister, Steven Guilbeault, and the Federal Government are taking a lot of flak over this. People may have believed it to be the Islamic groups that led to this, and that certainly is a reasonable suspicion. However, the fact is that CIJA has lobbying specifically for this for many years.
13. More Than Just Free Speech
Of course, there are many other things CIJA advocates for.
One is increasing markets for kosher food, that is food killed in barbaric and inhumane ways (much like Islamic halal). Looks like animal rights don’t matter as long as it is cloaked in culture and diversity.
This group also pushes for increased trade and for changes to the tax code that presumably Jews would personally benefit from.
CIJA also wants to see more immigration with easier pathways. But of course, this only applies to people coming to Canada. Israel can remain an ethno-state. CIJA further wishes to entangle Canada in its military and political obligations.
So there is no denying that this group — which has filed 1248 “communications reports” has been busy trying to change Canada’s laws. But the worst one in the eyes of many is its continuous assault on free speech in Canada.
White Westerners are told that identity politics is evil and wrong. But CIJA, and groups like it, endlessly play JEWISH identity politics in order to get their way. Seems hypocritical.
An awful lot of people criticize “ISLAMIC” influence in Canadian politics. And there is certainly reason to be worried. Creeping Sharia, prohibitions on criticizing Islam, and cultural practices that are incompatible with the West are being pushed. And there are of course, political movements to eventually take over.
However, what isn’t really discussed is the ZIONIST influence in Canadian politics. It’s there, and it’s just as bad as the push for Islam. Difference is, it’s more subtle, and the media is much more controlled on the subject.
3. Who Are The Lobbyists?
2001 Listings For Centre for I/J Affairs
PHILIPPE ELHARRAR
Position title: PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONSULTANT
SHIMON FOGEL
Position title: NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
ROBERT RITTER
Position title: NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Current Listings For Centre for I/J Affairs
Dan-Michael Abécassis, Director, Government Relations (Quebec)
David Cooper, Vice President, Government Relations
SHIMON FOGEL, Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Sophie Helpard, Associate Director, Government Relations (Ontario)
Richard Marceau, Vice President, External Affairs and General Counsel
Martin Sampson, Vice President, Communications and Marketing
Jonathan Schneiderman, Vice President, Development and Public Affairs
Noah Shack, Vice President, GTA
Nico Slobinsky, Director, Pacific Region
Eta Yudin, Vice President, Quebec
4. Israeli Lobbyists In CDN Office
5. Cited: 1248 “Communications Reports”
Going through the communications reports, let’s take a look at who the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs has been meeting with. Here is the list alphabetically. Note: there are a lot of repeats in here.
The list is alphabetical, not chronological.
Eve Adams, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Mark Adler, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Leona Aglukkaq, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Harold Albrecht, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Omar Alghabra, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Stella Ambler, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
André Arthur, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Michael Atallah, Analyst | Privy Council Office (PCO)
Paulina Ayala, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
John Baird, Minister | Transport Canada (TC)
Denis Bazinet, Director, Electoral Operations and Planning Administration | Elections Canada
Michael Beaton, Director of Policy and Stakeholder Relations | Transport Canada (TC)
Patricia Beh, Director of policy | Canadian Heritage (PCH)
Karl Belanger, OLO | House of Commons
Mauril Belanger, MP | House of Commons
Rachel Bendayan, Parliamentary Secretary | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Carolyn Bennett, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Tyrone Benskin, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Carolyn Bernier, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Nathan Bessner, Special Assistant | Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)
Dennis Bevington, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Douglas Black, Senator | Senate of Canada
Kelly Block, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Peter Boehm, Senator | Senate of Canada
Randy Boissonnault, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Francois Boivin, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Mathieu Bouchard, Senior Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Ray Bougher, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Alexandre Boulerice, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Peter Braid, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Garry Breitkreuz, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Scott Brison, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Bert Brown, Senator | Senate of Canada
Gordon Brown, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Lois Brown, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Patrick Brown, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Daniel Burgoyne, national manager | Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
Eloge Butera, Office of the Minister of Public Safety Canada | Public Safety Canada (PS)
Brad Butt, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jenni Byrne, Issues Managment | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Oren Cainer, Minister’s Exempt Staff – Deputy Chief | House of Commons
Mark Cameron, Director | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Mariann Canning, Assistant Director, Accessibility & Outreach | Elections Canada
Guy Caron, Member of parliament | House of Commons
Jim Carr, Minister | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Colin Carrie, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Robert Chisholm, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Richard Clark, Policy Assistant | Industry Canada
Rob Clarke, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Tony Clement, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Anne C. Cools, Senator | Senate of Canada
Michael Cooper, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Raymond Cote, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Irwin Cotler, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Darren Cunningham, Chief of Staff | Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
Izabel Czuzoj-Shulman, Parliamentary Affairs Advisor | Justice Canada (JC)
Julie Dabrusin, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Haritage | Canadian Heritage (PCH)
Joe Daniel, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Chris Day, Chief of Staff | House of Commons
Stockwell Day, Minister | Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAITC)
Allison Dean, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Dean Del Mastro, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
John Delcourt, Advisor to the Leader of the Opposition | House of Commons
Paul Dewar, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Luc Desnoyers, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Peter Donolo, Chief of Staff to the Leader of the Opposition | House of Commons
Earl Dreeshen, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Lisa Drouillard, Director | Elections Canada
Gilles Duceppe, Member of Parliament, Leader of Bloc Québécois | House of Commons
Nicolas Dufour, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
John Duncan, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Rick Dykstra, MP | House of Commons
Wayne Easter, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Ali Ehsassi, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jeff English, Director of Communications | Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)
Ed Fast, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Greg Fergus, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Andy Filmore, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities | House of Commons
Doug Finley, Senator | Senate of Canada
Jim Flaherty, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Ann Flanagan Whalen, EU/European Bilateral and institutional relations | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Kyle Fox, Western Desk, Office of the Minister of Middle Class, Prosperity and Associate Minister | Finance Canada (FIN)
Shawn Fried, Assistant | Members of the House of Commons
Linda Frum, senator | Senate of Canada
Katharine Funtek, Executive Director | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Marc Garneau, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Mehalan Garoonanedhi, Policy Advisor & Assistant to the Parliamentary Secretary | Canadian Heritage (PCH)
Randall Garrison, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Julie Gaudreau, Special Assistant Public Liaison | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Jonathan Gauvin, Staff | House of Commons
Garnet Genuis, member of parliament | House of Commons
Marc Gervais, Director of Parliamentary Affairs | Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)
Robert Goguen, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Marc Gold, Senator | Senate of Canada
Karina Gould, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Claude Gravelle, Member of parliament | House of Commons
Martin Green, Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Assessment | Privy Council Office (PCO)
Michel Guimond, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Cheryl Hardcastle, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Laurie Hawn, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Randy Howback, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Candice Hoeppner, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Anthony Housefather, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minster of Labour | Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC)
Graham Howell, Policy Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Carol Hughes, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Bruce Hyer, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Blair Hynes, Deputy Director | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Jamie Innes, Exempt Staff – Director of Parliamentary Affairs | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Sylvie Jacmain, Director, Alternative Voting Method and Operational Outreach | Elections Canada
Roxanne James, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Olivier Jarda, Policy Advisor | Justice Canada (JC)
Brian Jean, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Matt Jeneroux, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Eleanor Johnston, Senior Special Assistant | Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAITC)
Jonathan Kalles, Quebec Regional Desk | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Vandana Kattar-Miller, Deputy Director – Outreach | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Jason Kenney, Minister | Citizenship and Immigration Canada
Peter Kent, Member of parliament | House of Commons
Andrea Khanjin, Director, Issues Management | Finance Canada (FIN)
Jean-Yves Laforest, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Sangeeta Lalli, British Columbia Regional Desk | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Jean-Francois Larose, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Alexandrine Latendresse, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
David Lametti, Minister | Justice Canada (JC)
Monique Lamoureux, Deputy Director – Democracy, Inclusion and Religious Freedom | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Melissa Lantsman, Policy Advisor | Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAITC)
Brad Lavigne, Principal Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition | House of Commons
Dominic Leblanc, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jordan Leichnitz, Parliamentary Affairs | House of Commons
Kellie Leitch, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Chungsen Leung, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Michael Levitt, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Rheal Lewis, Chief of Staff | House of Commons
John Light, Director of Regional Affairs | Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAITC)
Ben Lobb, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Elliot Lockington, Special Advisor | Canadian Heritage (PCH)
James Lunney, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Dan Lussier, Exempt Staff – Policy Advisor | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Lawrence MacAulay, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
John MacKay, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Hoang Mai, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Fabian Manning, Senator | Senate of Canada
Elizabeth May, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
John McCallum, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Michael McDonald, Senator | Senate of Canada
Dylan Marando, Director of Policy | Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC)
Wayne Marston, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
John McCallum, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Marilla McCargar, Senior Policy Advisor | Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)
Andrea McGuigan, Policy Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Anne McGrath, Chef of Staff, NDP Leader Jack Layton’s office | House of Commons
Marc Mendicino, Minister | Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)
Larry Miller, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Maryam Monsef, Minister | House of Commons
Christine Moore, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Marty Morantz, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Isabelle Morin, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Tom Mulcair, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Joyce Murray, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Samantha Nadler, Exempt Staff – Policy Advisor | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Giuliana Natale, Director, Democracy, Inclusion and Religious Freedom | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Peggy Nash, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Anita Neville, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Jamie Nicholls, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Rick Norlock, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jose Nunez-Melo, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Alexander Nuttall, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Ross O’Connor, Policy Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Tilly O’Neil Gordon, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Rob Oliphant, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Joe Oliver, Minister of Natural Resources | House of Commons
Ted Opitz, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Annick Papillon, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Pierre Paquette, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Zubair Patel, Chief of Staff | Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)
Claude Patry, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Alexis Pavlich, Manager, Cultural Media & Vancouver Regional Comm Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Eve Peclet, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
France Pegeot, Executive Vice-President | Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
John Penner, Deputy Chief of Staff and Director of Parliamentary Affairs | House of Commons
Pat Perkins, MP | House of Commons
Pierre Poilievre, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Manon Perreault, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Anne Minh-Thu Quach, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Zara Rabinovitch, Senior Policy Advisor | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Bob Rae, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
John Rafferty, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Lisa Raitt, Minister of Transport | Transport Canada (TC)
James Rajotte, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Tracey Ramsey, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Murray Rankin, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Rachel Rappaport, Press Secretary | Indigenous Services Canada (ISC)
Yasmin Ratansi, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Brent Rathgeber, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Mohammed Ravalia, Senator | Senate of Canada
Mathieu Ravignat, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Darrell Reid, Deputy Chief of Staff | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Roy Rempel, Policy Advisor | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
David Richards, Senator | Senate of Canada
Greg Rickford, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Pablo Rodriguez, Minister | Canadian Heritage (PCH)
Giovanna Roma, Senior Desk Officer, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Europe Bilateral and EU Institutions | Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Rick Roth, Director of Communications | Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada
Pierre-Paul Roy, Advisor to Gilles Duceppe, MP | House of Commons
Harjit Sajjan, Minister | National Defence (DND)
Andrew Saxton, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Andrew Scheer, Leader of the Official Opposition | House of Commons
Deb Schulte, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Anton Sestritsyn, Strategic Communications Advisor | House of Commons
Judy Sgro, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Bev Shipley, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Scott Simms, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Gail Sinclair, General Counsel | Justice Canada (JC)
Jill Sinclair, Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet | Privy Council Office (PCO)
Jagmeet Singh, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jagmeet Sra, Parliamentary Assistant & Policy Affairs Assistant | Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)
Dahlia Stein, Senior Policy Advisor | Health Canada (HC)
Peter Stoffer, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Chuck Strahl, Minister | Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada
Marci Surkes, Office of the Minister of Public Safety Canada | Public Safety Canada (PS)
David Sweet, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Caitlin Szymberski, Policy Advisor | Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
Glenn Thibeault, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
David Tilson, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Vic Toews, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Susan Truppe, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Merv Tweed, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Tim Uppal, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Kevin Urbanic, Senior Director | Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
Dave Van Kesteren, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Peter Van Loan, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Adam Vaugham, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families and Social Development | House of Commons
Joseph Volpe, Member of Parliament | Members of the House of Commons
Jeremy Waiser, Advisor | House of Commons
Mark Warawa, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Chris Warkentin, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Jamieson Weetman, Analyst Foreign and Defense Policy Secretary | Privy Council Office (PCO)
David Wells, Senator | Senate of Canada
Paul Wilson, Director | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Lizan Wladyslaw, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Nigel Wright, Chief of Staff, | Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Kate Young, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Terence Young, Member of Parliament | House of Commons
Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu, Senator | Senate of Canada
A few things to point out.
This is a huge number of people being lobbied, and it doesn’t included repeat attempts.
Party leaders such as Justin Trudeau (Liberal), Andrew Scheer (Conservative), Jagmeet Singh (NDP), and Elizabeth May (Green) have all been lobbied as well. So was Gilles Duceppe, former BQ head. This cuts across party lines. Also, it includes — from the previous administration — Stephen Harper, Nigel Wright, Stockwell Day, Jason Kenney, Vic Toews, John Baird and Chuck Strahl.
Tom Mulcair was lobbied when the NDP was official opposition.
6. What CIJA Lobbies For
Grant, Contribution or Other Financial Benefit
Darfur Conflict: advocacy for more political and financial support from the Government of Canada to resolve the conflict.
Public Security threats to the safety and security of the Jewish community of Canada and the extension of funding of capital costs and staff training for security of communities at risk
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution
CITIZENSHIP ACT (continued support for the power of the state under the current citizenship act to remove citizenship in cases involving war crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorism and extreme promotion of hate.)
Criminal Code of Canada with respect to combating antisemitism.
Parliamentary consultations and reviews about antisemitism; the establishment of a parliamentary enquiry
Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act with respect to combating antisemitism.
Support for Bill C-277 (Palliative Care)
Support for Bill C-305 (Hate Crimes)
Support for Bill S-201 (Genetic Discrimination)
Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution, Policies or Program
Hate speech and internet-based hate: For Canada to adopt policies – either/and through legislation or policies adjustments that will provide measurable standards for internet-based dissemination of hate speech, including explicit provisions within the Crimical Code
Policies or Program
Advocating for the development of a national anti-poverty strategy.
Agriculture Canada: Assist in securing termination of Israeli ban on Canadian beef imports as a result of BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) protocols.
Anti racism initiatives related to Durban II and expand support by Canadian government of different initiatives to promote tolerance and diversity
Assisted living and low income housing for developmentally challenged: To ensure that the developmentally challenged benefit from the recently announced government programs regarding affordable housing and that a specific portion of the funds allocated for housing be designated for the developmentally challenged.
Canada and Israel relationship with regard to expanding trade between Canada and Israel through the promotion, application and expansion of free trade agreement
Canada-Israel bilateral relations related to trade, investment and scientific and academic exchanges
Canadian diplomatic relations related to the trade agreements with Israel and other nations in the Middle East
Canadian participation in International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)
Continuing support of the Government of Canada’s policy in maintaining the office of the special advisor on antisemitism of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Defence: Canadian participation in Operation Proteus; Discussions on Canada-Israel military cooperation, joint training exercises and military staff exchanges.
Government Procurement: Facilitation of Canada-Israel meetings at ministerial level on issues of budget and procurement “best practices”.
INTERNATIONAL TASK FORCE ON HOLOCAUST EDUCATION, COMMEMORATION AND RESEARCH; ensure that the Government of Canada fulfills its obligations as a full member.
Immigration: Discussions regarding the Immigration Refugee Board policies regarding refugee claimants from Israel; Discussions regarding overall Canadian immigration policy, integration of new Canadians and Israeli “best practices” regarding new immigrant absorption (e.g., certification of foreign trained medical professionals) and language training.
Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada: Assisting Aboriginal leaders and Aboriginal women’s groups is learning new models of community development through presentations on Israeli development models at MASHAV (Israel’s Agency for International Development Cooperation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Israel’s equivalent of CIDA)
Infrastructure and community relations with regard to the expansion of current PSC (Public Safety Canada) security related funding proposals to include broader definitions of participation and extended funding qualification timetables as well as broader range of items to be funded
International Development: Advice on Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development of Canada (Global Affairs Canada) approach to aid directed at UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency); Advice on the renewal of the McGill Middle East Program in Civil Society and Peace Building
International Relations: Discussions on Canadian interventions at the UN regarding economic sanctions approved by the Security Council; Canadian positions on the NPT (Non-proliferation treaty) review conference; Canadian involvement in the Israel-Palestinians peace process.
Myanmar/Burma: Rohinga refugees and displaced persons: For Canada to augment humanitarian allocations to assist the Rohinga refugees in Burma and Bangladesh and implement elements of the recommendations submitted by The Hon. Bob Rae regarding the Rohinga refugee population.
National Holocaust Memorial: To ensure that the Government of Canada provide resources for year-round access to the memorial as well as educations supports for visitors to the Holocaust Memorial
Qualifications for refugee status claimants and citizenship and immigration requirements for new immigrants related to standards for qualification for entry
Raoul Wallenberg “Park of the Righteous”: For the Government to establish a national park in honour of Raoul Wallenberg paying tribute to individual Canadians who have made a significant contribution to humanitarian causes.
South Sudan humanitarian relief: For Canada to increase humanitarian support for the South Sudanese, especially in the area of food security.
Taxation and Finance: Discussions regarding CRA tax policies with respect to charitable organizations, and general policies.
Transportation: Assisting in the development of briefings on airport security by Israeli officials for Transport Canada – including ministerial staff.
WAR CRIMES PROSECUTIONS (continuing advocacy to push the denaturalization and deportation of persons found in Canada who lied about their records in the Second World War or more recent conflicts and the prosecution of war criminals when sufficient evidence is adduced.)
Broadcasting: Discussions regarding the award of new broadcast licenses by the CRTC
Conflict of Interests, Ethics, Lobbying, Canada Revenue Agency. Ensuring CIJA fully respects all its legal and regulatory obligations while advocating for the current framework to be more efficient and respectful of the needs, objectives and resources of cultural and religious communities.
Dairy Board: tariff exemptions for kosher cheese products: To ensure that kosher cheese products not produced domestically be designated as tariff-exempt dairy products.
Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, related to the application of and the issuance of visas.
PSC (Public Safety Canada) and Infrastructure Canada seeking program applicability to full range of Jewish communal institutions with respect to the timing of the program and the scope and determination of reimbursements
Tax credit for volunteerism: proposing that a process be added to provide tax credits for individuals who contribute time to charitable activities on a sustained basis.
Government Institutions
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
Canadian Heritage (PCH)
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC)
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT)
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)
Competition Tribunal (CT)
Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)
Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC)
Elections Canada
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC)
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)
Finance Canada (FIN)
Global Affairs Canada (GAC)
Health Canada (HC)
House of Commons
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)
Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB)
Indigenous Services Canada (ISC)
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)
International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
Justice Canada (JC)
National Defence (DND)
National Research Council (NRC)
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan)
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)
Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada (OIC)
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC)
Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
Privy Council Office (PCO)
Public Safety Canada (PS)
Public Service Commission of Canada (PSC)
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)
Senate of Canada
Shared Services Canada (SSC)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC)
Statistics Canada (StatCan)
Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB)
Transport Canada (TC)
Treasury Board Of Canada Secretariat (TBS)
Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC)
Can we drop any pretense that there is nothing wrong with this? This Jewish/Israeli group is lobbying huge numbers of politicians and their staff. They are trying to influence major parts of our government and society.
It’s all parties involved in this, and at all levels. No one’s hands are clean. It is an outright sell out of our country by Zionist shills.
While this is not exhaustive, let’s look at a few initiatives that the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs has been up to
7. CIJA Is Anti-Free Speech
Weren’t people up in arms when Iqra Khalid pushes M103 (the blasphemy motion) through Parliament? This is even worse. Instead of some “non-binding” motion, it would actually criminalize what is considered hate speech.
Of course with this group, criticism of their BEHAVIOUR is often tagged as hate speech. So good luck getting that exception through.
8. CIJA Wants Media Regulation
The CRTC has recently made many recommendations, including forcing those in the media to get licenses. Understandably, the Minister, Steven Guilbeault, and the Federal Government are taking a lot of flak over this.
But something is missing from the discussion. Who’s behind it? Who’s pushing to make it mandatory for people in the media to be licensed. From their own lobbying information, CIJA is advocating for exactly that.
9. CIJA Supports Animal Cruelty
Do you support animal rights, as in the humane treatment of animals? Do you want animals killed for food to be treated without being tortured? Well, stop being a bigot. Kosher is something that CIJA is pushing.
Is it any different than halal food? Not really, but it’s anti-Semitic to criticize it.
10. CIJA Wants Holocaust Memorial
Want to have something burned into your brain for you had absolutely no role in doing? Do you want to feel endless white guilt? Now you can. CIJA wants the Holocaust Memorial to be preserved and protected to constantly remind people that they are victims.
11. CIJA Pressuring Ottawa On Durban II
CIJA is pressuring Canada regarding the Durban II conference, which it views as an attack on Israel itself. That is more than a little hypocritical, considering Israel conducts DNA testing to prove Judaism, and it was upheld as legal by the courts.
12. CIJA Controls Our Government
There will certainly be followups to this article, but know this: CIJA is lobbying politicians in all parties on a variety of topics. Indeed, it is an attack on Canadian sovereignty.
But good luck getting conservatives, or “Conservative Inc.” to address this assault on our country. They have little to no interest in addressing such matters.
13. Double Standard For ADL
Worth a look, as the ADL has the same double standard as CIJA when it comes to diversity and tolerance.
Furthermore, bi-nationalism is unworkable given current realities and historic animosities. With historically high birth rates among the Palestinians, and a possible influx of Palestinian refugees and their descendants now living around the world, Jews would quickly be a minority within a bi-national state, thus likely ending any semblance of equal representation and protections. In this situation, the Jewish population would be increasingly politically – and potentially physically – vulnerable.
It is unrealistic and unacceptable to expect the State of Israel to voluntarily subvert its own sovereign existence and nationalist identity and become a vulnerable minority within what was once its own territory.
But no objection to forcing OTHERS to become minorities in their lands.
(There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)
The United Nations has done a surprising amount of research on people being smuggled illegally across international borders. But there seems to be little interest in curbing the problem.
1. UN Review On Smuggling Migrants
(Page 11)
1. Introduction
The purpose of this thematic review is to survey existing sources and research papers on smuggling of migrants and to provide a gap analysis of existing knowledge from a global perspective. Indeed, despite the fact that smuggling of migrants has attracted great media and political attention over the last two decades, there has not been any comprehensive analysis of the state of expert knowledge. Great confusion still prevails about what smuggling of migrants is within the global context of irregular migration.
To be honest, I wonder that myself. “Irregular migrants”, which are really illegal aliens, are being who have entered a country illegally, or who entered legally, but remained when their status changed. This could simply be trying to make a distinction where none exists.
Article 6 of the Smuggling of migrants Protocol, requires States to criminalize both smuggling of migrants and enabling a person to remain in a country illegally in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit, as well as to establish as aggravating circumstances acts that endanger the lives or safety or entail inhuman or degrading treatment of migrants. By virtue of article 5, migrants are not liable to criminal prosecution for the fact of having been smuggled. It is therefore understood that the Protocol aims to target smugglers, not the people being smuggled
So, are we to give a pass to the people being smuggled and only focus on the smugglers? What happens if the people being smuggled are a willing part of it?
From a sociological perspective, smuggling of migrants may then include every act on a continuum between altruism and organized crime. Doomernik defines smuggling of migrants as “every act whereby an immigrant is assisted in crossing international borders whereby this crossing is not endorsed by the government of the receiving state, neither implicitly nor explicitly”.
(Page 12)
To the extent that the literature available allows a distinction to be made, the issues of irregular migration and trafficking in persons are deliberately not covered per se by this thematic review, despite the fact that these phenomena are closely connected with smuggling of migrants in practice.
They are not immigrants, but aliens.
Again, it seems to be searching for a difference where none exists. Illegal aliens (or “irregular migrants” in UN duck-speak) are people who enter other countries illegally. People who knowingly aid these illegal aliens are people smugglers. The UN engages in this mangling of the language in order to attempt to separate the two.
(Page 15)
2.1.1 Irregular migration
The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.
The legal definition of smuggling of migrants finds wide acceptance among the academic community, which usually refers to articles 3 and 6 of the Smuggling of migrants Protocol. Contrary to the concept of smuggling, the notion of irregular migration does not have a universally accepted definition; however, most academics and experts refer to the definition provided by IOM, which highlights that the most common forms of irregular migration are illegal entry, overstaying and unauthorized work.
In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents
Finally, we are getting some real honesty. Smuggling helps to facilitate so called “irregular migrants”, who are really illegal aliens. Smugglers transport these aliens, and often obtain false documents for them.
Why doesn’t irregular migration have a universally accepted definition? Is it done deliberately to obscure what is going on?
(Page 15)
2.1.2 Trafficking in persons
Smuggling of migrants must also be differentiated from the concept of trafficking in persons, defined under article 3 of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Trafficking in Persons Protocol) as: The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs
This is actually true. There is a difference between voluntarily arranging to come to another nation illegally, and being forced or coerced into doing so. This is a valid distinction.
(Page 18)
2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’
Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
legitimate and illegitimate sides. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.
The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.
Aranowitz puts forward a similar view and claims that smuggling could not have grown to such proportions if it were not supported by powerful market forces. Furthermore, Aranowitz argues that smugglers exhibit entrepreneur-like behaviour and circumvent legal requirements through corruption, deceit and threats. They specialize either in smuggling or in trafficking services, and the profit generated varies accordingly.
This is surprisingly well written. Smuggling and trafficking are businesses, and the people are the commodity. That being said, if the people are consenting to being smuggled, they are accomplices and not victims.
(Page 21)
The network theory also departs from the migration business theory by looking at the migrant as an actor in the migration process and not merely as an object, as in the organized crime theory. Van liempt and Doomernik have questioned the assumption that smuggled migrants are recruited by criminals and have little to say within the migration process. In their view, the relationship between the smugglers and the smuggled is more complex.
Looking at migrants as actors in the migration process, de Haas also insists on the need to depart from prejudiced views against smuggled migrants. According to him, rather than a desperate response to destitution, migration is generally a conscious choice made by relatively well-off individuals to enhance their livelihoods. Detailed discussions of migrants’ profiles and relationships with their smugglers are in chapters 5 and 7.
2.3 Conclusions
Sources reviewed reveal a strong interest among the academic community in analysing the phenomenon of smuggling of migrants from a conceptual perspective. In particular, experts have debated the link between smuggling of migrants and other forms of transnational movement of persons—in particular irregular migration and trafficking in persons. Recent literature has also attempted to improve concrete understanding of smuggling of migrants through the conceptualization of the phenomenon as a migration business, a security threat or a family (network) business.
Some useful points:
Smuggling is not usually that of desperate people, but rather well-off individuals looking for a better life. The refugee system is being gamed.
Also, there is a clear link between these illegals (no they are not “irregular”) and the smuggling that facilitates this. To suggest otherwise is to blur reality.
The book is some 148 pages, and is far too long to go through in a single article, but do have a read.
2. UN Hypocrisy On People Smuggling
This cannot be overstated. It is extremely hypocritical for the UN to condemn human smuggling, while promoting and excusing so-called “irregular migration”. It is well known that many of these illegals come to the West by means of smuggling.
If smuggling itself is to be rejected by society as a whole, then why is it okay for the accomplices of these smugglers to reap the rewards that come from it?
The UN also insists that nations have an obligation to allow terrorists to return home. Needless to say this endangers the public greatly. You can’t simultaneously expect this, and for nations to have safe borders.
This same behaviour also happens on the U.S./Mexico border. In 2018, the UN facilitated large “caravans” of economic migrants with the intention of bringing them up through Central America and overwhelming the U.S. border. How does this respect national sovereignty in any way at all?
3. Organizing “Irregulars” is Smuggling
As much as the UN would like to blur the line, arranging for migrants to enter other nations without permission is smuggling.
The UN insists that all migrants (even if in these countries illegally) are entitled to basic services. As such, the UN advocates for smuggling. The only reasonable conclusion is that having all these amenities will lead to more people trying to enter illegally.
As much as they try to engage in mental gymnastics, the UN is directly involved in people smuggling. They promote policies that only ensure the smuggling (and trafficking) will continue indefinitely.
The UN document claimed that migration is a huge industry. They were absolutely right about that.
(UNHCR: United Nations High Commission on Refugees, has released another guide in how to circumvent the Canada/U.S. border)
It’s rather difficult to have any real sense of a border between Canada and the U.S. when neither country has full control over their affairs. An obvious example is the Safe Third Country Agreement.
1. The Loopholes Written Into S3CA
EMPHASIZING that the United States and Canada offer generous systems of refugee protection, recalling both countries’ traditions of assistance to refugees and displaced persons abroad, consistent with the principles of international solidarity that underpin the international refugee protection system, and committed to the notion that cooperation and burden-sharing with respect to refugee status claimants can be enhanced;
ARTICLE 1
In this Agreement,
“Country of Last Presence” means that country, being either Canada or the United States, in which the refugee claimant was physically present immediately prior to making a refugee status claim at a land border port of entry.
ARTICLE 4
Subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, the Party of the country of last presence shall examine, in accordance with its refugee status determination system, the refugee status claim of any person who arrives at a land border port of entry on or after the effective date of this Agreement and makes a refugee status claim.
The “land border port of entry” is clear. However, in practice it is becoming such that if you simply bypass the official border ports, you can actually take advantage of it. Poor wording, but it has become a real headache.
Where the Agreement is in effect
The Safe Third Country Agreement applies only to refugee claimants who are seeking entry to Canada from the U.S.: -at Canada-U.S. land border crossings
-by train or
-at airports, only if the person seeking refugee protection in Canada has been refused refugee status in the U.S. and is in transit through Canada after being deported from the U.S.
This clearly was not meant to reward people for illegally crossing the border, provided they do so anywhere other than a port of entry. If this really was just poor drafting, then it would be really easy to fix. The fact that there’s no effort to is very revealing.
2. More Loopholes In S3CA
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they have a family member who:
-is a Canadian citizen
-is a permanent resident of Canada
-is a protected person under Canadian immigration legislation
-has made a claim for refugee status in Canada that has been accepted by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB)
-has had his or her removal order stayed on humanitarian and compassionate grounds
-holds a valid Canadian work permit
-holds a valid Canadian study permit, or
-is over 18 years old and has a claim for refugee protection that has been referred to the IRB for determination. (This claim must not have been withdrawn by the family member, declared abandoned or rejected by the IRB or found ineligible for referral to the IRB.) citizens, permanent residents, or various other statuses, you qualify for an exception to the rule. The “family members” list include: the spouse, sons, daughters, parents, legal guardians, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews.
Unaccompanied minors exception
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they are minors (under the age of 18) who:
-are not accompanied by their mother, father or legal guardian
-have neither a spouse nor a common-law partner, and
-do not have a mother, a father or a legal guardian in Canada or the United States.
Document holder exceptions
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they:
-hold a valid Canadian visa (other than a transit visa)
-hold a valid work permit
-hold a valid study permit
-hold a travel document (for permanent residents or refugees) or other valid admission document issued by Canada, or
-are not required (exempt) to get a temporary resident visa to enter Canada but require a U.S.–issued visa to enter the U.S.
Public interest exceptions
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if:
they have been charged with or convicted of an offence that could subject them to the death penalty in the U.S. or in a third country. However, a refugee claimant is ineligible if he or she has been found inadmissible in Canada on the grounds of security, for violating human or international rights, or for serious criminality, or if the Minister finds the person to be a danger to the public.
Source is here. Okay. Are there is any cases that DON’T meet any of these exceptions?
3. UNHCR Is A Party To S3CA
CONVINCED, in keeping with advice from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its Executive Committee, that agreements among states may enhance the international protection of refugees by promoting the orderly handling of asylum applications by the responsible party and the principle of burden-sharing;
ARTICLE 8
(1) The Parties shall develop standard operating procedures to assist with the implementation of this Agreement. These procedures shall include provisions for notification, to the country of last presence, in advance of the return of any refugee status claimant pursuant to this Agreement.
(2) These procedures shall include mechanisms for resolving differences respecting the interpretation and implementation of the terms of this Agreement. Issues which cannot be resolved through these mechanisms shall be settled through diplomatic channels.
(3) The Parties agree to review this Agreement and its implementation. The first review shall take place not later than 12 months from the date of entry into force and shall be jointly conducted by representatives of each Party. The Parties shall invite the UNHCR to participate in this review. The Parties shall cooperate with UNHCR in the monitoring of this Agreement and seek input from non-governmental organizations.
Source is here. Serious question: why have Canada and the United States signed an agreement that quite clearly gives the UN a seat at the table?
There has never been a full and proper debate on this Treaty either in the U.S., or in Canada. While the document sounds great, it has so many loopholes that it’s close to worthless.
(Shafia family murders, 4 dead in honour killings)
(First FGM case in America, yes, America)
(Nigerian Muslims committing genocide against Christians)
(Iqra Khalid’s blasphemy motion, M-103)
Context for this article:
Yes, Islam has been covered before on the site. Just look at the included articles.
This one focuses on the exploitation that Islam enables and encourages. Forced child marriages, no rights for women, slavery or killings of non-believers or apostates is common in Islamic culture. This isn’t something that can shrugged off as normal, but amounts to serious human rights violations.
Despite censorship, information is getting out about how people are being abused, sexually exploited, trafficked and killed. Certainly these crimes are not exclusively because of Islam, but it does play a role in much of it.
So why isn’t this much more public? Quite simply, because of a concentrated effort to shut down criticism and discussion about Islam. Individual campaigns have been launched, national legislations introduced, and even global bans have been attempted. Beyond that, attempts have been made to frame Islam (ex. the Cairo Declaration) as entrenching human rights.
It’s quite a clever strategy to disguise a political ideology as a religion. That way, any criticism — regardless of how valid — can be condemned as bigotry and hatred. If the enemy cannot criticize you, then you have already won.
It should also be noted that the endless demands of Muslims to accommodate have taken their toll.
1. Grooming Gangs In The UK
In allowing this criminality to fester for decades, the British authorities have effectively become criminal themselves as accessories after the fact. They could also be accused of breaking not only domestic law but international treaties regarding child protection, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.
As the abuse is largely perpetrated by “(South) Asian” criminals, UK authorities now find themselves in a bind. To act with concerted government and police action may increase existing community tensions. Alternatively, by not acting, faith in the country’s institutions and laws — and minority communities themselves — will continue to deteriorate among large sections of the public. As that may not happen immediately on the watch of the current crop of feckless UK politicians, there is most likely the inclination among them to kick this human tragedy down the road.
The UK has abdicated its responsibilities to protect its citizens, and especially to protect children from exploitation.
Under the guise of wanting to be tolerant and not inflame ethnic tensions, UK law enforcement has effectively turned a blind eye to hundreds of sexual predators operating within its borders.
However, they are not being completely useless. In the rare time that charges are brought, police are ready to snag someone like Tommy Robinson for reporting on the proceedings of the grooming gangs.
2. Islamic Slave Trade
Younger Yazidi girls fetch higher prices in the Islamic State slave markets. According to some accounts, those higher up in the organization’s command structure get first choice. But it’s clear the trade comprises a real wing of the Islamic State’s internal economy.
“The girls get peddled like barrels of petrol,” Zainab Bangura, the United Nations’ special representative on sexual violence and conflict, said in an interview with Bloomberg. “One girl can be sold and bought by five or six different men. Sometimes these fighters sell the girls back to their families for thousands of dollars of ransom.”
The Washington Post details some of the barbaric practices that been going on be ISIS fighters. Women are bought and sold like property, and become slaves for men willing to do cruel things to them.
Of course, this practice long precedes ISIS. In fact Islam itself has a lengthy history of slavery, which is permitted for “infidels”. Funny how leftists in the West blame whites for limited slavery by some ancestors, yet are silent about the ongoing slavery that goes on under the name of Islam.
3. Forced Child Marriages
Almost one third ( 32% ) of refugee marriages in Jordan involve a girl under 18, according to the latest figures from Unicef. This refers to registered marriages, so the actual figure may be much higher. The rate of child marriage in Syria before the war was 13%.
Some families marry off their daughters because of tradition. Others see a husband as protection for their daughters, but the UN says most are driven by poverty.
City of the dispossessed
“The longer the crisis in Syria lasts, the more we will see refugee families using this as a coping mechanism,” said Michele Servadei, deputy Jordan representative for Unicef. “The vast majority of these cases are child abuse, even if the parents are giving their permission.”
It involves Syrian brokers and men – mainly from the Gulf States – who present themselves as donors, but are actually shopping for brides.
They prey on refugee families, living in rented accommodation, who are struggling to get by.
This piece is very heartbreaking. Many are abandoned by their family out of poverty, or married off due to tradition.
Circumstances also make these young girls easy targets for adult men who fully intend to exploit them. This isn’t “marriage” in any real sense of the word. It’s child sex slavery.
4. Polygamy, Multiple Marriages
If the idea of forcing a young child into marriage isn’t sick enough, consider the idea of forcing children (yes, multiple) children into marriages.
Considering the power imbalance in child marriages, and under Sharia law in general, how exactly is the well being of these “wives” supposed to be looked after?
5. Female Genital Mutilation
This is a move that should outrage feminists, but they are stunningly silent on it. Young girls, often against their will, and having their privates mutilated in order to prevent them from getting aroused in later years.
Obviously, if there is unwanted sexual contact, it is exclusively the girl/woman’s fault. The man is never responsible.
This practice is banned in dozens of countries, but is going on under the radar in the West. The U.S. recently had a very public case against 2 doctors performing such actions.
Dr. Jumana Nagarwala is the lead defendant in the case. While the charges of conspiring to commit and committing female genital mutilation, as well as aiding and abetting others in doing so, have been dropped, Nagarwala still faces charges of conspiring to travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct and conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding. She was charged alongside Dr. Fakhruddin Attar, his wife, Farida Attar, and five other residents of Michigan and Minnesota.
Congress had no authority to pass a law criminalizing female genital mutilation, judge says
Apparently, a law designed to protect girls and women from violence directed at them is unconstitutional. From the CNN article, it shows how the victims have been failed by the courts.
Make no mistake. FGM does happen elsewhere in the West. However, Islamic groups would much prefer that it not be discussed publicly.
6. Domestic Violence
This was addressed in another article. The example included research by a Calgary group for violence survivors, who found that up to 40% of their patrons were visible Muslims. Of course one may ask “why” there is such rampant abuse in Islamic families, but that would be bigoted.
7. Honour Killings Of Girls
Of course, it doesn’t always stop at just violence. It can, and does, often lead to murder.
Two cases that made national headlines were: (a) the Shafia family killing, where 3 daughters and an ex-wife were killed; and Asqa Parvez, killed by her brother and father.
While those are just 2, there are many more that are going on in the West. In the name of diversity, we import cultures who do not believe in equality between men and women.
8. Pro-Islam Campaigns Pushed By Media
Now that we’ve gotten into the horrendous, exploitative things done in the name of Islam, we have to ask the next question. Why aren’t these things repeatedly and thoroughly condemned by the media?
In short, great marketing. Islamic groups frequently push and promote their “religion”, using selective truthfulness. It happens very often.
Consider this example of a CBC article promoting World Hijab Day. 2 women are at the Windsor Regional Hospital to talk about and promote the event. They speak of it in absolute glowing terms.
Of course, neither these women (nor other Muslim women) mention the ugly truth: women in many regions are FORCED to wear the hijab. See here, see here, and see here. Certainly this should at least be mentioned. Otherwise, this is just propaganda.
9. Media Sweeps Islamic Terrorism Under Rug
The church leaders said that “over 6,000 persons, mostly children, women and the aged have been maimed and killed in night raids by armed Fulani herdsmen,” which is prompting their cry to the government of Nigeria “to stop this senseless and blood shedding in the land and avoid a state of complete anarchy where the people are forced to defend themselves.”
The press release also pleaded with the international community, as well as the United Nations, to intervene in the Fulani attacks, fearing they might spread to other countries as well.
“We are particularly worried at the widespread insecurity in the country where wanton attacks and killings by armed Fulani herdsmen, bandits and terrorists have been taking place on a daily basis in our communities unchallenged despite huge investments in the security agencies,” they added, saying President Muhammadu Buhari has failed to bring attackers to justice.
In Nigeria, as well as other places, Muslims openly wage war against infidels. This is nothing short of a genocide. People, often Christians, are slaughtered simply for believing in something different.
This has been going on for 1400 years in some form or another. However, Islamists using Taqiyya (deception) have been largely successful in persuading large parts of the public that it is only extremists who are engaged in this sort of thing.
Articles and stories like this are quite common, but you will never hear about it on the mainstream media.
April 29, 2019 Update
As per the Minister of Public Safety’s statement on the 2018 Public Report on the Terrorist Threat to Canada, a review of the language used to describe extremism has been undertaken and is ongoing. The Government’s communication of threats must be clear, concise, and cannot be perceived as maligning any groups. As we continue this review, it is apparent that in outlining a threat, it must be clearly linked to an ideology rather than a community. The Government will carefully select terminology that focuses on the intent or ideology. As a first step, the Government has updated terminology used in the 2018 report to eliminate terminology that unintentionally impugns an entire religion. Going forward, the Government of Canada is committed to applying a bias-free approach to the terminology used to describe any threats inspired by ideology or groups.
Ralph Goodale, who identifies as the “Public Safety Minister”, tries to sanitize the report by emphasizing that it is not the ideology itself (Sunnis and Shias) who are committing acts of terrorism, but rogue elements.
Never mind that Islam is an ideology which requires its followers to commit violence against non-believers. This is just whitewashing the truth. He can’t even call a spade a spade.
This is as absurd as when former U.S. President Barry Soretoro (a.k.a. Barack Obama) claimed that the Fort Hood shooter — an Islamist who killed 40 troops — was committing workplace violence instead of terrorism.
11. Legislation To Combat “Islamophobia”
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has upheld a conviction against an Austrian woman who publicly called Mohamed a “pedophile” for marrying a 6 year old girl. Also see the video.
In Canada, the Federal Government passed a motion to ban “Islamophobia” and other forms of discrimination. Not accidently, “Islamophobia” was never explicitly defined, making it easier to be interpreted broadly.
Those are just 2 examples of creeping Islam, and efforts to shut down any questions or criticism, regardless of merit.
12. Global Efforts Against “Islamophobia”
This was covered in a previous article. There are attempts to make criticism of Islam a crime everywhere in the world. While these movements are portrayed as stopping religious defamation and prejudice, the real goal is to shield Islam from people speaking the truth
There are 57 members in the UN OIC, which is the Organization of Islamic Countries. This makes up the single biggest voting bloc in the UN. Their goal, predictably, is to work collectively to advance Sharia Law.
Several of these nations are also on the UN Human Rights Council. That’s right. Nations which commit human rights abuses are on the HRC.
15. Cairo Declaration Provides No Protection
ARTICLE 2: (a) Life is a God-given gift and the right to life is guaranteed to every human being. It is the duty of individuals, societies and states to safeguard this right against any violation, and it is prohibited to take away life except for a shari’ah prescribed reason.
ARTICLE 12: Every man shall have the right, within the framework of the Shari’ah, to free movement and to select his place of residence whether within or outside his country and if persecuted, is entitled to seek asylum in another country. The country of refuge shall be obliged to provide protection to the asylum-seeker until his safety has been attained, unless asylum is motivated by committing an act regarded by the Shari’ah as a crime.
ARTICLE 22: (a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah.
1.. Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari’ah.
ARTICLE 23:
(b) Everyone shall have the right to participate, directly or indirectly in the administration of his country’s public affairs. He shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari’ah.
ARTICLE 24: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah.
ARTICLE 25: The Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.
Nice bait-and-switch here. While the Cairo Declaration presents as an enshrinement of human rights, one thing must be pointed out. All of these “rights” are solely within the context of Shari’ah. This effectively means that there are no real rights, nor any true equality.
Certainly, the Cairo Declaration “appears” to enshrine many basic rights for everyone, and to ensure equality between men and women. It appears to support free speech, and fundamental freedoms for all. But again, only within the context of Sharia law.
So what is really going on here with Islam?
Media propaganda to promote Islam
Keep names out of government reports
Pass laws to ban “Islamophobia”
Work to ban criticism of Islam (globally)
Infiltrate human rights organizations
Enshrine meaningless declarations
Of course, this is only a partial list, but should illustrate the point. But why do all of this though?
It’s to cover up the exploitive and downright predatory nature of Islam. It’s to silence and discredit people who ask questions — regardless of how well founded they are. To keep people in the dark about how women and girls are really treated in Muslim majority areas.
