Jewish group CIJA says Trudeau made ‘unfortunate’ comparison in speech

CIJA’s defence of the Government’s rather mixed messaging on Canadian Muslims rather than acknowledging some of the uncomfortable if imperfect parallels made in Trudeau’s speech:

In a written statement, Fogel said that Trudeau was raising a concern about a “growing atmosphere of Islamaphobia in Canada and around the world, the unfair result of violent, extreme acts of terrorism committed by a minority within the Muslim community.

“We share the belief that as Canadians, we must be vigilant and not allow prejudice and racism to take root in our society. It represents an important message, one all Canadians should heed.”

However, Fogel writes that Trudeau made an “unfortunate” comparison to the “none is too many” policy that has distracted from his “important message.”

“We view this comparison as inaccurate and inappropriate, and we will communicate that sentiment to Mr. Trudeau’s office.

“Canada’s decision to restrict Jewish immigration prior to the Holocaust was the product of an era in which Jews faced extensive social and institutional discrimination in Canada,” writes Fogel.

“Jewish Canadians were subject to quotas restricting admission to university programs, as well as outright bans from numerous social clubs and corporations. Signs in public parks went so far as to declare: ‘No dogs or Jews allowed.’”

By comparison, Fogel said that discrimination today is “rightly countered – rather than fostered – by the vast majority of Canadians.”

“This includes discrimination experienced by Muslims who, like all minority groups, unfortunately face a degree of prejudice from some elements of Canadian society. When it comes to racism and bigotry in Canada, there is little to compare between 1939 and 2015.”

Fogel writes that the federal government has consistently distinguished between “marginal, extreme, terrorist elements of the Muslim community and the broader Muslim community.”

Jewish group says Trudeau made ‘unfortunate’ comparison in speech.

Ferguson’s predatory police are not the only ones

Good summary of the US DOJ report on the Ferguson police:

The report is the story of gun-toting, badge-wearing louts who probably spent hours imagining themselves as impassive, reluctant heroes, telexes in their ears, steely eyes concealed behind sunglasses, preparing to do whatever necessary to enforce the law.

In reality, they ran their little corner of Missouri like a lawless seigneury, bullying citizens, ignoring the law, abetted by an equally bent municipal court system. Ordinary folks didn’t stand a chance.

The federal report effectively describes Ferguson’s police as thuggish tax collectors, willing to use Tasers, fists and boots to satisfy their political masters’ desire for ever more revenue.

Their real job was writing tickets, not protecting the public. How much they could milk from motorists, or pedestrians, determined their career paths.

A few highlights:

  • Ferguson’s mostly white police department blatantly targeted black citizens. “Failure to comply” with police orders that the DOJ said were often illegal, and “walking unsafely in the street” were among the most popular money-generating citations.
  • Officers were particularly harsh with anyone who dared record their behaviour. They would issue an order to stop recording “for safety reasons;” those who kept rolling were charged with failing to comply. Smartphones were seized, video erased.
  • Drivers were cited for imaginary offences. One man was written up and fined for making a false statement. He’d given his name as “Mike” instead of “Michael.”
  • Ferguson police disproportionately went after the poor, who, if they didn’t pay promptly, did jail time and had their fines increased. One woman spent days in jail and paid hundreds of dollars for two parking tickets; she still owes $541.

Ferguson’s predatory police are not the only ones – World – CBC News.

Niqab welcome in federal public service: Clement

That’s interesting. I am not so sure that in fact a niqab or burqa would be welcome in the federal government workplace but Clement’s comments are a welcome change from that of some of his colleagues.

Contrary to his assertion that hijabs and niqabs are frequently worn in the public service, the number of hijabs I believe is relatively small and I am not aware of any niqab-wearing federal employees. But if any reader knows of any cases, please advise.

Muslim women can’t wear a niqab at a citizenship ceremony but they are perfectly free to wear them working for Canada’s public service, says Treasury Board President Tony Clement.

In an interview with iPolitics, Clement said what counts for him as the head of the federal public service is how well someone gets the job done – not what they are wearing.

“If you are in your place of work or privately in your home or in your private life, what you wear is of no concern to the state,” Clement explained. “But the state does have a concern on citizenship and citizenship is a public demonstration of loyalty and allegiance to Canada and its values and its principles and that’s where the niqab is inappropriate.”

Clement said to his knowledge hijabs and niqabs “are frequently worn” in the public service.

“I’m sure we have employees in the public sector who wear a niqab – I’m sure we do.”

“If you’re carrying on your job and doing your job well then I don’t think we have a problem with that.

The one exception, he said, might be if a hijab or a niqab posed an operational or safety problem.

“I can’t talk about bona fide occupational requirement – if there is an occupational requirement that requires something that might be different.”

Niqab welcome in federal public service: Clement

Winnipeg: Getting Past the Divide – New Canadian Media – NCM

Third party in a series reporting on the links between racism against Aboriginal people and visible minorities:

The declaration of Winnipeg as Canada’s “most racist city” [by Macleans] has spurred discussions around grassroots solutions that can serve as a starting point for all Canadians.

“Prior to coming to Canada, my only window into the First Nations were from western movies,” shares Shahina Siddiqui, chair of the Islamic Social Services Association (ISSA). “For most newcomers, this is all they know.”

Siddiqui has worked with many ethnic groups in the city and through this experience she realized that the stereotypes of First Nations from western movies were as pervasive as stereotypes of Muslims in Canada – and that the only way to combat them was to open a dialogue. At first, when the Maclean’s article came out, she was apprehensive of the controversial statement it made. “But then I realized that this is an important conversation to have.”

“Accepting a person for who they are and what they are, that can only happen if you have face to face conversation… when you share your stories, when your children play together, when you stand up for each other.” – Shahina Siddiqui, Islamic Social Services Association

Champagne’s reaction was more immediate. “One of my takeaways was relief, that finally we were having this conversation.”

For Siddiqui, the development of community is essential. She says that because newcomers and Aboriginal people have so much in common coming from colonized experiences, it is important to understand and share that.

“Accepting a person for who they are and what they are, that can only happen if you have face to face conversation… when you share your stories, when your children play together, when you stand up for each other.”

With this idea in mind, ISSA runs Conversation Cafes with several of the ethnic and Aboriginal groups in the city, focusing on sharing tradition and histories one on one. Other groups in Winnipeg have begun similar programs with the same goal. Manitoba Educators for Social Justice (MESJ), a group of concerned educators from across the province, hosted its first Salon in which they discussed new strategies to address racism.

Winnipeg: Getting Past the Divide – New Canadian Media – NCM.

Germany looks to Canadian model for immigration policy inspiration

More on the debates within Germany and how Canada continues to be looked at as a model – even as the model changes:

For Germany, the debate over how to manage immigration is critical to its future. The country is facing a demographic chasm as the population ages and families shrink. The working-age population will contract by nearly seven million over the next 10 years, according to the proposal by the Social Democrats. Businesses are already complaining about the difficulty of finding highly skilled employees.

For now, Germany is benefiting from a stroke of luck, say immigration experts. As the strongest major economy in the region, it has drawn in skilled workers seeking opportunity from the rest of the 28-member European Union. But if other major European economies start to rebound, such flows will diminish. And that means Germany will have to look beyond the EU for future sources of immigrant talent.

In recent years, Germany has become the second-most popular destination for immigrants worldwide behind the U.S. The country absorbed 437,000 immigrants in 2013, the highest such total in more than 20 years. That figure continued to climb in the first six months of 2014, according to the latest available statistics from the German government.

Yet there is a sense in Germany that the country’s approach to immigration is neither transparent nor efficient. Most new arrivals come from other EU countries, whose citizens face no restrictions on entering Germany or working there. The number of refugees flowing into the country is also rising. Last year the number of new applications for asylum jumped nearly 60 per cent from 2013 to 173,000.

“There is a feeling that the system we have now is not satisfactory,” said Orkan Koesemen, a migration expert at the Bertelsmann Foundation. But the talk of adopting a point system similar to the one in Canada is less about the policy merits than about sending a message, he said. People believe a points-based approach is the equivalent of “let’s select the best and the ones we want.”

While a majority of Germans say they embrace diversity, immigration remains a sensitive topic. A poll released last month by the European Commission found that 61 per cent of Germans held negative views of immigration from non-EU countries. One new way of expressing that unease came in the form of Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West – or PEGIDA, after its German acronym – a previously unknown right-wing movement that began drawing thousands to its weekly demonstrations.

Looking to Canada, German politicians see an immigration system that is open about its priorities, attracts a large pool of qualified applicants and, most importantly, enjoys widespread domestic support. When the Harper government raised the quota for immigration to Canada for 2015, for instance, it caused barely a ripple.

The Social Democrats, the junior partner in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition government, have formally proposed adopting a points-based system for would-be immigrants. A group of young legislators within Ms. Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party have also voiced support for such a system, as have the Greens, with some variants. Even a new, conservative euro skeptic party, Alternative for Democracy, says it endorses the Canadian approach. (The far left party in Germany’s parliament, however, rejects it.)

Ms. Merkel reacted coolly to the latest plan, calling the issue of refugee flows more urgent than immigration. And Thomas de Maiziere, the Interior Minister, said the questions raised by the proposal could be addressed with existing laws.

A council of migration experts has asserted that Germany doesn’t actually need a points system like the one Canada has. There is already a way for highly skilled workers from non-EU countries to immigrate, through what’s known as the EU’s “Blue Card” program. Plus, since 2012, the council noted, Germany has relaxed some of its rules: For instance, the country now allows certain kinds of immigrants to enter and search for employment, rather than requiring a job offer ahead of time.

What Germany does need, experts say, is a more welcoming image. To that end, an overhaul of Germany’s immigration law might be a good idea. “I think it’s needed for symbolic reasons, not for factual reasons,” said Christian Joppke, an expert on comparative immigration at the University of Bern. He noted that Germany’s last major legislation in this area, which came into effect in 2005, is officially entitled the Act to Control and Restrict Migration.

Prof. Joppke added that Canada’s government has actually moved its policy a little more in the direction of Germany by placing more emphasis on whether would-be immigrants have job offers.

Germany looks to Canadian model for immigration policy inspiration – The Globe and Mail.

Conservative senator: Tories getting bad rap with Muslims, but need to work harder

Good to see some signs of internal debate on the wedge politics strategy:

The messages being sent by the federal government and the Conservative party that form it may be having a negative impact on the country’s Muslim community, a senior Conservative senator acknowledged Monday.

While Sen. Marjory LeBreton said she feels the government is “getting a bad rap” on the issue thanks in part to the media, she told a luncheon crowd she regrets the fact some Muslims are saying they feel unwelcome in Canada.

In recent months, the prime minister has explicitly linked mosques to terrorism and the party has circulated fundraising pitches uses menacing images of Muslim men.

There has also been ongoing controversy over the government’s decision to ban full-face coverings during citizenship ceremonies, as well as a Quebec judge who recently told a Muslim woman she’d have to remove her head covering in order to testify.

Many Muslims have the sense they don’t belong, patent agent Sheema Khan told LeBreton during a luncheon in Ottawa celebrating the political achievements of women.

Khan said her daughters no longer aspire to such achievements, thanks to the government’s approach to Muslims.

“As Muslim Canadians, we are part of this society but we feel that the messaging that is coming out is making us feel a little bit excluded, somewhat under suspicion,” Khan said during a question-and-answer session at the event.

“I have two daughters; I want them to believe that they can be prime minister one day, but they don’t feel they can. They feel they have no voice in politics because they see a political framework where their religion is suspect, where their presence is not perhaps fully welcomed.”

LeBreton said she has many Muslim friends and knows they are just as concerned about radicalization within their communities as non-Muslims, echoing comments made by Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney over the weekend about how integral Muslims have been in working with security officials to thwart potential attacks.

“They have every right to be completely respected like all other Canadians,” LeBreton said of the community — and the fact they feel otherwise is unfortunate.

“I very much regret that that is a view and we’ve got to work very hard to dispel that because it happens not to be true,” she said.

Conservative senator: Tories getting bad rap with Muslims, but need to work harder – Macleans.ca.

Liberal leader Trudeau correctly recognizes the politics of fear:

“These are troubling times,” Trudeau told a gathering organized by the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada. “Across Canada, and especially in my home province, Canadians are being encouraged by their government to be fearful of one another.

“Fear is a dangerous thing. Once it is sanctioned by the state, there is no telling where it might lead. It is always a short path to walk from being suspicious of our fellow citizens to taking actions to restrict their liberty.”

Trudeau compared the Conservative government’s approach to Muslims today to Canada’s restrictive immigration policies for Jews during the rise of Hitler’s Nazis.

“We should all shudder to hear the same rhetoric that led to a ‘none is too many’ immigration policy toward Jews in the ’30s and ’40s being used to raise fears against Muslims today.”

Trudeau also castigated the prime minister for his comments last month in the wake of a court ruling that struck down the government’s policy that forbid Muslim women to wear the niqab, a religious garment, over the face during citizenship ceremonies.

At the time, Harper said his government would appeal the ruling because wearing a niqab is “offensive” and it’s “not how we do things here.”

In subsequent days, the Conservative party reinforced that message to its supporters and financial donors, as the Tories gear up for an election campaign.

“We all know what is going on here,” Trudeau said of Harper and the Tories.

“It is nothing less than an attempt to play on people’s fears and foster prejudice, directly toward the Muslim faith.”

Trudeau said people can dislike the niqab and refer to it as a symbol of oppression.

“This is a free country. Those are your rights. But those who would use the state’s power to restrict women’s religious freedom and freedom of expression indulge the very same repressive impulse that they profess to condemn.

“It is a cruel joke to claim you are liberating people from oppression by dictating in law what they can and cannot choose to wear.”

Trudeau said Canada is a land of a million Muslims who should be allowed to thrive in a free and open secular democracy.

“Keeping these freedoms safe from those who would undermine them through violence is a vital national responsibility.

“What we cannot ever do is blur the line between a real security threat and simple prejudice, as this government has done. I believe they have done it deliberately, and I believe what they have done is deeply wrong.”

  Justin Trudeau says Stephen Harper sowing fear and prejudice against Muslims  

Tories worried about base finding out how much they spend helping immigrants – The Globe and Mail

Interesting but not surprising, suggesting that some of the Conservative embrace of immigration and new Canadians may not be fully shared within the party.

But settlement funding, after an initial increase by the Government, has been trimmed and reallocated to reflect more recent immigration trends (i.e., more to the West, less to Ontario), along with efforts to improve the effectiveness of language training (still the bulk of settlement services I think).

Moreover, there have always been questions regarding the proportion of funding given to Quebec in relation to the number of immigrants choosing Quebec:

A briefing note for a Conservative MP suggests the government is worried about how spending on immigration programs is going over with its base.

The House of Commons immigration committee is currently studying how government-funded settlement services can better help the economic integration of immigrants.

A note which appears to have been prepared for Costas Menegakis, the parliamentary secretary for immigration, says the party’s base will learn as a result that the government spends close to $1-billion a year on those efforts.

The note says the other risk of undertaking such a study is that the government’s relationship with Quebec may surface as an issue.

And while the study only began last month and the committee has only just started hearing from witnesses, the briefing note also lays out five recommendations for its the eventual report.

A copy of the note was obtained by The Canadian Press.

Menegakis’ office declined to comment specifically on the note’s contents.

“Committee members are masters of their own proceedings,” said an emailed statement. “As always, we look forward to hearing testimony from all witnesses.”

Liberal MP John McCallum, who sits on the committee, called it “chilling” to see the reference to the party’s base in the document.

“It’s as if they are concerned their own supporters would be aghast at the idea of spending money to help settle immigrants,” McCallum said in an interview.

“It’s good not only for the immigrants, it’s good for the country if the newcomers settle quickly and work and not be receiving welfare and become productive Canadians.”

The Conservatives credit much of their electoral success in recent years to the inroads the party has made among new Canadians. They’ve also massively overhauled the immigration system which they’ve said is partially motivated by concerns raised from within the newcomer community.

Tories worried about base finding out how much they spend helping immigrants – The Globe and Mail.

Kenney tweets misleading photos of Muslim women in chains

He should and does know better. Undermines his messaging at the Manning Conference (Canada stands with peaceful Muslims, Kenney says) on the role Canadian Muslims play in opposing radicalization, and reinforces wedge and identity politics:

Defence Minister Jason Kenney used the occasion of International Women’s Day to rally support for the war against ISIS by tweeting photographs of Muslim girls and women covered in black and being led off in chains.

“On #IWD2015, thank-you to the @CanadianForces for joining the fight against #ISIL’s campaign to enslave women & girls,” he tweeted along with the pictures on Sunday.

One image shows a group of girls, dressed in burqas and chained at the wrists, being with taken away in pairs. Another shows four women with faces covered, also chained together.

To the casual viewer, these appear to be compelling photographic evidence of the mistreatment of women in some parts of the Muslim world.

And, read with Kenney’s reference to ISIS, they suggest to the reader that these scenes occurred under the terror group’s watch in Iraq or Syria.

But Kenney did not explain that the first image is actually from a ceremonial Shia Ashura procession that celebrates the heroism of the prophet Mohammad’s grandson, Hussein, and his family. The girls and women in the photo Kenney tweeted symbolize Hussein’s sister, who was taken in chains to Damascus after he was beheaded.

That is to say, the girls in the photos are actors in a play that depicts events said to have occurred 1,300 years ago. They are not a depiction of the current enslavement of Muslim women. There are thousands of images of these ceremonies online.

A Christian equivalent does not readily come to mind, but Kenney’s use of the images against ISIS might be compared to presenting photographs of annual re-enactment of the Crucifixion in a tweet denouncing Romans or Jews.

Kenney, as minister of multiculturalism, would likely be familiar with the Ashura processions, as they occur in many countries with Shia populations, such as Turkey.  The ceremonies are perhaps better known for a self-flagellation ritual performed by some men.

Kenney is not the first to misrepresent the Ashura photographs. The same image circulated widely online last year with the false caption, “Muslim girls being lead off in chains to meet their new husbands.” (For a full debunking, see here and here.)

I asked Kenney’s office if he would retract or even clarify the tweet. No response yet.

The Gargoyle – Kenney tweets misleading photos of Muslim women in chains | Ottawa Citizen.

Australia: The complexities of citizenship (revocation debate)

Some of the Australian debate on the stated intent to expand citizenship revocation on security grounds by Clive Williams, an adjunct professor at Macquarie University’s Centre for Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism:

Australian citizens by birth cannot currently have their Australian citizenship revoked. Similarly, those conferred with citizenship after fully disclosing all relevant factors cannot have their Australian citizenship revoked.

Under existing legislation, Australian citizenship can be revoked if it is deemed “contrary to the public interest for the person to remain an Australian citizen”. Such a general ground would seem difficult to enforce. Legislative reform would be needed to make it easier to remove citizenship on national security grounds. The UK, France and Canada already have legislation to strip citizenship from dual nationals considered to pose a national security threat.

Once dual nationals have had their Australian citizenship revoked and any appeal grounds considered they could be forcibly deported from Australia provided that did not place them at risk – in which case they would have to go into indefinite immigration detention or go somewhere that would accept them.

Looking at the case of our Islamic State foreign fighters, it seems likely that many would have become Australians by birth as second-generation migrants. Many are probably also dual nationals by dint of their parents’ country of origin. It would also be worth checking the background of any foreign fighter who gained dual Australian citizenship by application to see if there are reasonable grounds for citizenship cancellation.

Another option for the government is extending the cancellation of passports on security advice.

The complexities of citizenship.

John Williamson apologizes for ‘offensive’ comment on temporary workers program

Bit surprising that a former PMO director of Comms would make such a faux pas but to his credit, he made a quick and full apology (not the usual mealy mouthed “to those who I may have offended”):

Media outlet iPolitics is reporting that New Brunswick MP John Williamson told delegates at a conference in Ottawa that it makes no sense to pay “whities” to stay home while companies bring in “brown people” as temporary foreign workers.

Williamson posted a series of tweets Saturday to apologize for language he used in reference to the controversial federal program, but he did not elaborate on what he said.

“Today I used offensive and inappropriate language regarding the Temporary Foreign Workers Program,” he wrote on Twitter.

“For this I apologize unreservedly.”

In terms of the substance, of course, he is right: it makes no sense to facilitate Temporary Foreign Workers in a province with high levels of unemployment.

John Williamson apologizes for ‘offensive’ comment on temporary workers program – CBC News – Latest Canada, World, Entertainment and Business News.