Why The 76 Boat People And CBC’S ‘The Current’ Should Be Shipped Out ASAP


(1) According to information that has been disclosed, the 76 boat people who have arrived have no identification. The question most Canadians are asking is this: “Why?” Undoubtedly, these 76 men had ID in the past, so they are now trying to hide what that ID might have revealed to Canadians. If the 76 are from Sri Lanka, are they from Tamil territory or not? If not, do we assume that they are pretending to be Tamils and using whatever sympathy a connection with the Tamils might garner? If so, they should be sent back immediately. If they are Tamils and either from or not from Tamil territory, are they Tamil Tigers? If so, they are eligible for immediate deportation. If they are real Tamils who are supposedly being persecuted, where did each of them get the $45,000 that it is alleged each paid to the people smugglers who brought them to Canada? Although exceptions exist, most people usually associate the persecuted and downtrodden with poverty. Are you poor if you can pay $45,000 to a people smuggler?

(2) The immigration industry has already begun to trivialize the impact of allowing these 76 boat people to stay in Canada. Canadians are being told that this is a small number and that it will have little effect on our country. The point is that the cumulative effect of allowing over 700,000 people to make such refugee claims in Canada in the post-1990 era of senseless immigration policy has been enormous. Most of the 700,000 have been either accepted as refugees, have been allowed to stay on humanitarian grounds or have disappeared into Canada's underground economy. Some of these people were genuine refugees, but Canada's high acceptance rate has led experts to conclude that most of these claimants would never have been accepted in most countries, that most were fraudulent and that they have managed to convince gullible judges or have used weaknesses in the claimant process to stay here legally. Subsequently, those legally here have brought in as many relatives as possible. The result is that a probable 2+ million people are now here either directly or indirectly through the use of fraud and weaknesses in Canada's refugee claimant system. Is it logical to say that the impact of 2+ million and the weakening of Canada's enforcement system is a trivial thing?

(3) There are three obvious culprits in the weakening and breaking of Canada's immigration and enforcement system. The first culprit has been immigration lawyers who have pressured for weak enforcement in order to profit financially from the weakness. Second are immigration and refugee organizations, who are government-subsidized, but who have done all that they can to bite the hand that feeds them. Finally, ethnic groups have also pressured government to maintain our weak system. The most recent twist in this story is that all three groups now want to have Canada institute a further appeal process, which will make our system even weaker. In doing this, all three groups should take a look into the future. Immigration lawyers add to the contempt that many Canadians already feel for them. Secondly, the NGO's involved in this process seem to be daring Canadians to cut off their funding. Finally, shrill members of ethnic groups draw a cloud of suspicion over not just themselves, but over the innocent in their own groups, for all the fraud that has been committed. Canadians should take note that the ethnic groups that have come here since 1990 in the largest numbers are the ones who have also made the most use of Canada's refugee system.

(4) On the issue of ethnic groups abusing Canada's refugee system, if as is speculated, the 76 are from Sri Lanka, Canadians should remember that Canada has had a very large number of Sri Lankans claim refugee status here. One of the conditions of granting refugee status is that a judge must conclude that an applicant has a genuine fear of danger in the country he or she comes from. However, it is well known that even though large numbers of Sri Lankans were granted refugee status, very high numbers of those Sri Lankan claimants returned to Sri Lanka not long after they received refugee status in Canada. These people were clear abusers, but they were never prosecuted. Now, after bringing large numbers of dependents to Canada, some seem to be gloating over their success in duping Canada and seem to want to convince others to do the same. Many Canadians wonder why our government has not pursued these abusers and many logically conclude that Canada should not permit further abuse. It seems ridiculous for Canada's media now to report that Canada's Sri Lankan “community” welcomes these 76 new arrivals. Who are the “community” the media are referring to? Are they the crooks who have already duped Canada? If so, is this a case of crooks welcoming other crooks? Why are the media using this as a reason to allow the 76 arrivals to stay in Canada?

(5) Canadians should be skeptical of the reporting that particular parts of the media have done on the 76 recent arrivals. The CBC, which should be a beacon of journalistic balance on all issues, has repeatedly demonstrated that it clearly is not and that it cannot be trusted. Its nationally-broadcast radio programme, “The Current”, amply showed that today, Tuesday, October 20, 2009. It devoted a half hour to the arrival of the 76 recently-arrived boat people. It chose 5 guests to interview. Typical of that programme, 4 of the 5 were chosen to create sympathy for the 76 boat people. And typical of the CBC, about 29 minutes of the 30 minute programme were given to the 4 guests who presented views that were sympathetic to the 76 boat people. The only person chosen to present an alternate view on the boat people incident was retired diplomat Martin Collacott who, ironically, had spent a number of years as Canada's High Commissioner to Sri Lanka and who was probably the only one who had direct experience with the conflict there. Typical of that programme and the CBC, “The Current” gave about 1 minute to him.

The first of the other 4 was Michael Lin who had arrived as a 17-year-old in 1999 as one of the Chinese boat people. The next two were Irving Abella, author of “None Is Too Many” and Ali Kazimi who had produced a documentary on the Komagata Maru incident. The fourth was Sherry Aiken, a Professor Of Law at Queen's University and a former Director of the Canadian Council of Refugees.

“The Current's” aim in interviewing its immigration advocates was as follows: Michael Lin was to show that immigrants do well in Canada. Lin currently operates a marble business just outside of Vancouver. Irving Abella was to demonstrate that Canada's record on boat people was troubled. His book described how Canada had refused to allow a shipload of Jews from Germany to land in 1939. Ali Kazimi was to regurgitate the Komagata Maru incident of 1914 and to heap scorn on what he described as a “white Christian” society. Sherry Aiken's part in the programme was to carry on the work of the Canadian Council of Refugees and to point out that Canada had lots of safeguards in its refugee determination process to protect Canada. Needless to say, the interviewer, was extremely sympathetic to Lin, Abella, Kazimi and Aiken and was delighted to hear their views. It is obvious that her producers felt the same way and either initiated, or collaborated on, the choice of guests.

If ever a journalism instructor wanted to show students a case of blatant partisan reporting in the CBC or any other branch of the media, this is the one to choose.

It has often been said that The CBC now shamelessly and arrogantly broadcasts, on publicly-subsidized radio and television, acts that used to be performed in closets and dark rooms. For a number of years, it has been easy to see that the CBC is a virtual propaganda arm for Canada's immigration industry. It has also been clear that it uses every opportunity to do all it can to promote the immigration industry's desire to maintain or increase Canada's abnormally-high immigration levels. There are undoubtedly people within the CBC who do not agree with what “The Current” and other CBC programmes are doing, but hosts and producers for programmes like “The Current” are wielding power now. These people are deeply-entrenched ideologues who believe that their purpose is to use the CBC to heap contempt on traditional Canada and to proclaim Canada's multicultural reality. It may be possible to redeem some of the CBC “herd of independent thinkers”, but it is clear that the staff of “The Current” are unredeemable and that every member of that staff should receive a collective, well-directed boot from Canada. The sooner the better.

As long as the CBC is allowed to get away with abusing its position as a national broadcaster, CBC listeners and viewers will be poorly informed about these 76 boat people and about every other immigration-related incident.

The 76 boat people arrived here on a ship called “The Ocean Lady”. What better example of poetic justice could there be than the sight of the 76 boat people and the entire group of self-proclaimed hacks at “The Current” shipped off to Sri Lanka together on The Ocean Lady?