Catching up: Stories that caught my interest

2015/07/11 Leave a comment

While I have not been blogging over the past month, I have been following events and these stories and reports caught my eye.

From a general perspective, the Environics Institute latest Focus Canada annual survey showed continued strong support for immigration and multiculturalism, including some notable increases in support (e.g., general support for multiculturalism, reduced fear immigrants not adapting to Canadian values, that immigrants can be as good citizens as Canadian-born) along with increased recognition of discrimination and the need for policies and programs to address it.

Jeffrey Simpson in the Globe reminded us of just how successful the Canadian model of citizenship, immigration and multiculturalism has been.

Citizenship

The Canadian government launched its first revocation proceeding, selecting Hiva Alizadeh as the test case given that he is a dual national of Canada and Iran, was tried and convicted in a Canadian court where he pleaded guilty (avoiding many of the issues raised during C-24 hearings regarding due process in foreign courts).

The remaining provisions of the changes to the Canadian Citizenship Act came into force on June 11, provoking the usual stories about how some were affected by the date chosen (no matter which date was picked, there would always be some affected by the transition. The release of ATIP documents on the Citizenship Act consultations revealed that ethnic groups were particularly concerned about longer residency requirements and increased fees, with some concerned about revocation, and many questioned why advertising was focussed on revocation provisions rather than the changes they were concerned about.

Minister Alexander’s Canada Day message repeated the historic naturalization rate of over 85 percent, despite his department knowing that the recent rate is lower. His conflating of niqab-wearing women with terrorists and his highly selective citing of Liberal government restrictions on immigration and related discriminatory practices were savaged by some commentators.

CIC has yet to provide an explanation for the significant drop (over 30 percent) in the number of citizenship applications in 2013 and 2014 (Full 2014 Citizenship Statistics: Declining Applications).

The Australian government, despite a vigorous internal debate on citizenship revocation, appears committed to a fairly draconian approach, applying to both single and dual nationals and the children of those convicted.

Multiculturalism

The usual Multiculturalism Day messages by political parties, with the Government (Ministers Kenney and Uppal) emphasizing “peaceful pluralism and ordered liberty,” sport and “the values of freedom, democracy and the rule of law” (no mention of human rights), the NDP Multiculturalism Critic emphasizing “tolerance, understanding and equality” and the Liberal Party leader emphasizing “acceptance, fundamental freedoms, and mutual respect.”

The Government reversed a new policy requiring “pat-downs” of turbans, following protests by Canadian Sikhs (likely reflecting their political importance), leaving Minister for State for Multiculturalism Uppal to explain why an exemption for one form of religious headgear (the turban) and not another (the niqab). While there is a difference between covering one’s hair and covering one’s face, ironic that this decision took place in the same month as families of the Air India bombing commemorated the 30th anniversary, the largest terrorist attack in Canadian history with some families noting that some temples have pictures of the Sikh mastermind behind the bombing.

A thoughtful discussion of the challenges health care professionals face in dealing with accommodation requests for different groups, and the processes used to decide what can be accommodated and what not.

Declining support for immigration and multiculturalism post 9/11 and 7/7 in Britain was significant (56 percent in 2015 believe multiculturalism makes Britain worse compared to 32 percent in 2001).

Meanwhile, French Prime Minister Walls notes that Islam is “here to stay in France” while highlighting unacceptable behaviour (antisemitism and hate speech). In addition, despite the formal separation of church and state in France, some have initiated programs to have a more open approach to discussing religion in schools.

In a significant discrimination case, the US Supreme Court ruled that the actual results of policies and programs trumped the intent of these policies, providing a basis for challenging systemic racism and discrimination in future cases.

Canadian antisemitic incidents are reported as rising given B’nai Brith reports (which contrast with Statistics Canada police-reported hate crimes report which show a decline).

An interesting opinion piece that tries to assess the boundary between criticism of Israeli policies and antisemitism provided some nuance to debate on either side of the issue. As Israeli governments provide more support to the Israeli Rabinate, a divide may be emerging between American Jews and Israel.

A good discussion on some of the issues around providing Holocaust education to German Muslims, how it gets tied to the general Israel-Palestine issue, and the efforts by the German government to develop programs to reduce radical Islam by establishing centres for the study of Islam. Meanwhile, the Netherlands postpones the release of a report showing antisemitism among Dutch Muslim youth.

An account of how “trying white food” is part of the experience of children of immigrants, which complements the increased interest by “white people” in ethnic food, highlights one aspect of integration.

Google quickly learns the limits of its image recognition software when its software labels Blacks as gorillas, but quickly deletes the gorilla label as an interim step to ensuring better image recognition. Appears that software too can be subject to implicit bias and should be made to take the Implicit Association Test (IAT).

New Canadian Media held its first workshop for integration and settlement agencies on how to engage the mainstream media in ethnic community issues.

An amusing yet relevant discussion on when multiculturalism advertising can become offensive, using examples from the 1970s (particularly McDonalds and advertising targeted to Black Americans) and some tips to avoid crossing the line.

Following months of wedge and identity politics around Canadian Muslims (the most recent being the Bill tabled just before the House rose banning the niqab at citizenship ceremonies) and the threat of Islamic-inspired extremism, the PM makes a more positive gesture in hosting an Iftar dinner at 24 Sussex.

President Obama delivers one of his best, and arguably one of the best ever, speeches on racism in America and the need for action in his eulogy at the Charleston funeral for those gunned down by a white extremist. Worth taking the time to view in its entirety:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK7tYOVd0Hs

Nell Painter, recapping some of her insights of her book The History of White People, notes that “whiteness” is often defined by what it is not (“blackness”) and that we need to move beyond such binary expressions of identity.

Extremism

A reminder that right wing extremism has been a greater threat in North America than Islamic-inspired extremism provides again a note of nuance to current security and related debates.

A Canadian government-funded study demonstrated that there are various paths to radicalization, showing that despite rhetoric, the Government is sponsoring sociological research.

An interesting counterpoint to ISIS/ISIL’s destruction of non-Islamic (and non-Sunni) monuments can be seen in Israel considering restoring the historic Islamic site of Khirbat al-Minya, the ruins of an Umayyad palace complex on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee.

Immigration

As been mentioned before, and as apparent in the analysis I did for my forthcoming book (Multiculturalism in Canada: Evidence and Anecdote), immigration is becoming increasingly dispersed beyond the larger urban centres, given housing costs and economic opportunities.

An ATIP request indicates profiling and bias in CIC’s review of potential marriage fraud, although the guide has subsequently been revised, with examples highlighting the extensive documentation required.

Following the Toronto police carding debate, and likely other but less high-profile debates elsewhere in Ontario, the Ontario government decides to develop and implement a province-wide policy.

The Quebec government provided fewer resources to organizations delivering integration courses as part of overall austerity measures.

Other immigration stories of interest included accusations of racial profiling of Roma travellers and the effective ending of the live-in-caregiver program and the impact on childcare needs,

Other

Rick Salutin wrote a good piece looking at the history and definitions of “barbaric cultural practices” providing perspective on the current government fetish to use the term for political marketing purposes.

Daniel Savoie had his usual biting commentary of some of the weaknesses of current governments and their apparent inability to deliver programs and policies effectively.

The issue of Saudi financing of Islamic religious schools in Canada was reported on, with little indication that this funding was influencing the curriculum and approach (largely appeared to be for buildings and other infrastructure).

As part of Canada Day reporting, CBC interviewed foreign academics on their views on how Canada was perceived abroad, highlighting their assessment that it had worsened, not surprising given their more centrist and left-wing perspective. The cut to the Canadian Studies Abroad program in 2012 was again lamented.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, the Government does not make any changes to the mandatory Census questions that would improve the quality of the data, and continues with the voluntary NHS approach.

Will be back to my regular posting schedule on Monday.

Filed under Citizenship, Government, Immigration, Multiculturalism

How Ontario travelled back in time as Canada moved forward: Cohn

2015/06/08 Leave a comment

Martin Regg Cohn on Ontario’s provincial flag and how it was a counter-reaction to the new Canadian flag 50 years ago:

While our flag looks and feels old, it is actually younger than the bold and modern Maple Leaf design of 1965. And was very much a reaction to the convulsive national flag debate led by then-prime minister Lester B. Pearson.

A former career diplomat, Pearson understood from his foreign travels that Canada’s emerging national identity demanded a flag that bespoke more than its colonial heritage. Yet in Parliament, Progressive Conservative opposition leader John Diefenbaker raged against the Maple Leaf as a betrayal of our British antecedents.

Tapping into that vein of resentment, Robarts’s PC government embraced the remnants of the discarded Union Jack design — and made it Ontario’s own ensign.

Until 1965, our national flag had featured a miniature Union Jack in the upper left quadrant and our coat of arms to the right — lumping Canada with other former British colonies boasting nearly indistinguishable and interchangeable flags. When Ottawa discarded that template, Ontario adopted it.

While retaining the Union Jack image, Robarts substituted Ontario’s Shield of Arms where the Canadian symbol had once been. The legislature quickly adopted the premier’s suggestion, though one dissenting MPP dubbed it a “revenge flag.”

And very much a reactionary response.

Parliament had chosen a flag for the future that captured the national spirit in early 1965. The Legislature had reacted, three months later, by travelling back in time to conjure up a flag of the past inspired more by tit for tat than tradition.

As Canada renounced the Union Jack, Ontario revivified its British roots, ever mindful of its official motto: “Loyal she began, loyal she remains.”

Do we dare display disloyalty to that design today? Is it time to revisit our faux flag?

It’s not a historical keepsake but a political quickie dreamed up by Robarts in the mid-1960s — just as another false idol, the Gardiner Expressway, was being completed. Should we be stuck with such symbols of short-sightedness for all time?

In Ontario, times change. But it takes time to build up momentum.

The British monarchy is in malaise — out of date and out of place in Canada, but difficult to dislodge. Just as our old Union Jack ensign could be confused for the British flag, so too Canadian postage stamps showing the Queen as our head of state are an anachronism (my airmail letters to British friends look like domestic mail to them).

But when I covered Australia’s ill-fated referendum on ridding itself of the monarchy in 1999, I watched voters quarrel over what would replace the Queen. The lesson is that you first need to marshal public opinion toward a durable consensus.

While many Ontarians clamour for an end to funding of separate schools, public opinion is still deeply split on ending constitutional protection for Catholic education. Until there is a consensus, there is no point launching a battle that will inflame religious passions, divide the province and end in stalemate.

As Ontario becomes less Loyalist and more modernist, demographic shifts will drive democratic change. In time.

How Ontario travelled back in time as Canada moved forward: Cohn | Toronto Star.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Tory bill raises too many barriers for expat Canadian voters: Globe editorial

2015/06/06 Leave a comment

Unfortunately, all too characteristic of the Government in making it harder to vote (as in the case of Elections Act revisions), even if  maintaining the 5 year rule makes sense:

Last year, an Ontario Superior Court judge struck down a rule that barred citizens living abroad for more than five years from voting in federal elections. The government has rightly appealed that decision, while also introducing legislation that will enshrine expats’ voting rights, but with a twist. Expats will get to vote – it will just be really, really hard.

So hard, in fact, that many of the 2.8 million expats around the globe may well not bother. Others will try but won’t be able to meet the onerous new requirements in Bill C-50.

Under the bill, currently in committee after second reading, Elections Canada will eliminate the international register of electors, the long-established list of expat Canadians eligible to vote federally. In future, expats will have to re-register for each election, and can only do so after the writ is dropped.

That means an overseas Canadian would have about 36 days, the minimum length of an election campaign, to write to Elections Canada to request a ballot, wait while officials examine the extensive paperwork the bill requires, receive a ballot in the mail, make their mark, and then return the ballot by mail.

Critics say many long-time expats won’t be able to produce the new documentation required, which includes proof of the voter’s last Canadian address provided by a Canadian company or government office. The alternative is to find someone in the voter’s last riding who will vouch that the person in question once lived there – a time-consuming process.

The Harper government says the goal of the new rules is to prevent voter fraud, the same canard that it used to justify the Fair Elections Act. There are widespread concerns that as many as 400,000 eligible voters will be unable to cast a ballot in the fall election because of the Fair Elections Act. If Bill C-50 is adopted before Parliament is dissolved, the franchise of thousands of expats could also be compromised.

We are not convinced that the right to vote extends to Canadian who have chosen to live outside the country for decades, or even a lifetime. The government was right to appeal, and we hope a higher court will side with it. But in the interim, that lower court’s decision has to be respected. The bill should not be recognizing a right with one hand, while effectively taking it away with the other.

Tory bill raises too many barriers for expat Canadian voters – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Flophouse American Diaspora Reading List

2015/06/06 Leave a comment

Victoria Ferauge’s updated American diaspora and expatriate reading list:

“Sometimes we feel we straddle two cultures; at other times, that we fall between two stools.”

Salman Rushdie, Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism 1981-1991

Time for an update of the Flophouse American Diaspora Reading List – the best books and articles I’ve read recently about American people and communities abroad.  New books are in green.  As always, please feel free to add to the list.

This list has three sections:  Upcoming titles – Books that have not been published yet but that I plan on reading; General books/articles – the larger view.  Some talk about specific issues (like citizenship), others are studies, portraits or serious research about Americans abroad;  Expat autobiographies – Accounts of Americans in different countries.  These are not books that tell a potential American migrant how to live abroad.   These are personal accounts that talk about what happens to American identity when it gets transplanted somewhere else for a year or two, or for a lifetime.

The Franco-American Flophouse: Flophouse American Diaspora Reading List.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Australia: Citizenship laws ‘not a bravado issue’ says Malcolm Turnbull

2015/06/04 1 Comment

Observing the polarized debate within the Australian Cabinet over citizenship revocation, I can only wonder whether there was a similar debate behind closed doors in the Canadian Cabinet.

I suspect not. Despite the Harper government’s discipline, some glimmer of internal disagreement would likely have become known had it been major:

[Communications Minister and former Liberal party leader] Turnbull has warned that the fight against terrorism is “not a bravado issue” and emphasised the importance of safeguarding the rule of law in Australia.

The communications minister and former Liberal party leader said terrorists “want to destroy us because they hate the rule of law” and he argued a controversial proposal to strip sole nationals of their Australian citizenship raised “very big legal and practical issues”.

Turnbull’s comments provide an insight into the Coalition’s internal dispute over how to deal with the citizenship of Australians suspected of involvement in terrorism. The government has agreed to introduce a bill to give the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, the power to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals linked to terrorism, but deferred a decision on powers to deal with sole nationals after a cabinet backlash last week. Turnbull was among those cabinet critics.

“What is the essence of a democracy? Some people would say a democracy is one where the majority get to do what they want. That’s not a democracy. That’s a tyranny,” Turnbull said at a media conference in Queanbeyan on Wednesday.

“The genius of a democracy governed by the rule of law, our democracy, is that it both empowers the majority through the ballot box, and constrains the majority, its government, so that it is bound by law.”

Turnbull added: “Why does Daesh [another term for Islamic State] hate us? Why do they want to kill us? Why do they want to kill, destroy our society? They want to destroy us because they hate the rule of law.

“They hate the fact that the government has to stand up – can be stood up by citizens and held to account. They hate the fact that we have freedom of speech. They hate the fact that we are a free society governed by law not just by whatever the direction of one religious leader is from time to time.

“Our freedoms are absolutely critical and it is important that we have a debate about this but I just want to be very clear … some people like to suggest that some people are tougher on terrorism or tougher on national security than others.

“Let me say this to you – honest people, knowledgeable people, really well-informed people can have very different views about what the right measures are on national security and have very different views about the right balance between, say, citizenship and national security.”

Citizenship laws ‘not a bravado issue’ says Malcolm Turnbull | Australia news | The Guardian.

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with ,

Buying Your St. Kitts Citizenship May Get More Expensive Soon

2015/06/04 Leave a comment

The risks of citizenship for sale and who it appears to attract:

While the government’s citizenship-by-investment program, in place since 1984, helped St. Kitts & Nevis weather the global financial crisis, it has earned the country criticism as well. Canada in November revoked St. Kitts & Nevis citizens’ visa-free travel. The U.S., which offers its own residency-for-investment program starting at $1 million, issued a financial advisory against holders of citizenship-by-investment passports, saying Iranian nationals used the St. Kitts program to evade sanctions on their country.

The passport deal “is attractive to illicit actors because the program, as administered, maintains lax controls as to who may be granted citizenship,” Treasury said.

The program injected more than $74 million into the $766 million St. Kitts & Nevis economy in 2013, according to a budget presentation last year by then-Prime Minister Denzil Douglas. The IMF forecast revenue from the program at about $37 million per year from 2015-2017.

The island’s success has inspired governments from Cyprus to Grenada to create similar incentives for investment. For the buyer, the program can offer visa-free travel, a safe haven from political instability or a tool for avoiding taxes.

Newly minted citizens aren’t required to live on the islands, or even visit them, according to the government, whose webpage on frequently asked questions about the program begins with “Where is St. Kitts and Nevis?”

Buying Your St. Kitts Citizenship May Get More Expensive Soon – Bloomberg Business.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

English test should be mandatory for people wanting citizenship in Australia, says Liberal MP Sharman Stone

2015/06/03 Leave a comment

Always interesting to see how Canada and Australia look to each other and adopt similar practices. Minister Kenney, early in his mandate as Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, visited Australia to learn from the then Howard government’s approach to multiculturalism, identity and related issues.

Discover Canada‘s approach was influenced by some of the experience of the Australian “history wars,” the debates over their historical narrative. Express Entry was largely modelled on Australia’s equivalent.

Now the Abbott government is taking a Canadian approach to citizenship revocation for treason or terror and this proposal for greater rigour in language testing may be a variant of the Canadian approach of pre-screening for language competency using an equivalency-based approach (rather than a separate test to administer):

People wanting to become citizens in Australia should have to undertake an English language test, Liberal MP Sharman Stone says, in a push to overhaul the current citizenship requirements.

Would-be citizens are currently asked 20 questions in the Australian “citizenship test” about Australia’s beliefs, values, its law system and Australian people. Questions are multiple choice and require a basic knowledge of English and Australian laws to pass it.

But Dr Stone says the requirements are “slack” and not rigorous enough, supporting a suggestion in a government discussion paper released last week that would require new citizens to sit an English exam before they are announced as Australians.

The paper also suggests “standardising English-language requirements, to ensure citizens have adequate language ability, taking into account particular circumstances such as age”.

Dr Stone said it was not a benefit to the individual, nor for Australia, if people cannot speak English in Australia, drawing from experience at citizenship ceremonies in her Victorian electorate of Murray where she estimates a number of new citizens cannot read, write or speak basic English.

“The citizenship service is a mockery,” she told Fairfax Media.

Knowing the basics of the English language is imperative for people to be able to participate in the Australian society, including voting, jury duty or understanding “Australian responsibilities”, she said.

“It makes me very sorry when people who come into my office and say they need an interpreter and are feeling alienated,” she said.

English test should be mandatory for people wanting citizenship in Australia, says Liberal MP Sharman Stone.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Government of Canada now able to revoke citizenship of dual citizens convicted of terrorism – Coming into Force

2015/05/30 1 Comment

Clear signal on which cases will be a priority: those tried and convicted in Canada, neatly avoiding some of the foreign judicial process issues raised during C-24 hearings.

But not avoiding, of course, the more fundamental issue of differential treatment for dual citizens compared to Canadian-only citizens:

Measures came into force officially today that enable Canada to revoke citizenship from dual nationals convicted of terrorism, treason and high treason, and/or spying for foreign governments.

Canadian citizenship can now also be revoked from dual citizens for taking up arms against Canada and the Canadian Armed Forces, whether as a member of a foreign army or in non-state terrorist groups like ISIS.

Also officially in force as of today is a new, more streamlined citizenship revocation process.  This new process will help ensure Canada and Canadians are protected, and that revocation decisions can be made quickly, decisively and fairly.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) officials will be implementing these new measures immediately and will prioritize cases that have been tried and convicted here in Canada on at least one of the grave crimes listed above.

Government of Canada now able to revoke citizenship of dual citizens convicted of terrorism

 

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation

Australia: Debacle over terrorism and citizenship is leak-based policy in its purest form | Lenore Taylor | Australia news | The Guardian

2015/05/30 Leave a comment

Lenore Taylor of The Guardian on the leak strategy being used to sell the proposed Australian revocation policy change for convicted terrorists:

One might ask what is to be gained from so many headlines galloping so far ahead of actual decisions, or indeed, actual facts.

Does it help the police and intelligence agencies with their very important task of “keeping Australians safe” either by preventing acts of violence in this country, or preventing dangerous foreign fighters from returning, or the strategy for countering violent extremism aimed at stopping people here from becoming radicalised and dangerous?

Or is it playing to a very different audience – with the much more political aim of keeping security threats at the forefront of the national conversation and, perhaps, goading Labor into disagreement so that they can be portrayed as “weak on terror”?

The prime minister’s most powerful advisor is taking a keen interest in the policy and politics of the issue – his chief of staff, Peta Credlin, told a recent meeting of Coalition staff she was spending at least 40% of her time on the issue.

Another clue might lie in yet more information from the prime minister’s office to the Daily Telegraph, this time in an article entitled “The first cracks in Australia’s bipartisan approach to terrorism could doom Bill Shorten” which revealed that the prime minister received 900 emails in the week after the budget expressing anger at the possibility that “repentant Australian jihadis” might be allowed back into the country.

The article praised the prime minister’s “instinctive” response that “If you go abroad to join a terrorist group and you seek to come back to Australia, you will be arrested, you will be prosecuted and jailed” in comparison with Shorten’s reaction that “There are laws in place, I’m not going to play judge and jury.”

But of course, there are laws in place, and they do have evidentiary requirements. Which means the courts may not in every case implement the prime minister’s “instinct”. Which is presumably where the new policy-thought about citizenship-stripping comes in. And Shorten has been pretty careful to make sure there are no “cracks” in the bipartisanship on these issues, no matter what the government proposes.

There is, of course, an alternative to slap-dash policy in response constituent-email reaction, or policy by cabinet-pre-empting, headline-seeking press leak, and that is that old-fashioned idea of policy developed to address a real problem, thought through and discussed by cabinet, before public announcement.

Debacle over terrorism and citizenship is leak-based policy in its purest form | Lenore Taylor | Australia news | The Guardian.

Filed under Citizenship, Radicalization, Revocation Tagged with

Goodbye, citizenship! Australia takes a cynical turn on Muslim radicalisation | Jason Wilson | Comment is free | The Guardian

2015/05/28 Leave a comment

Some of the initial critical commentary on Australian plans for citizenship revocation and approach to radicalization, along with the perennial values debate. Echoes of C-51 Government messaging and issues:

You may notice if you read the transcript of Abbott’s press conference that this is political communication that doesn’t impart any information. Is “radicalisation” the same as “violent extremism”? Does one cause the other?

Are they linked in a causal chain? What should we be looking for? What is acceptable for citizens in a democracy to say, think, or read and what isn’t? What is the distinction between “extremism” and ordinary Muslim belief that the government keeps insisting that they respect? From whence comes the assumption that this is related to an insufficient inculcation of the virtues and responsibilities of citizenship?

Anyone who looks to the attorney general’s department’s materials will find a lack of clarity on all of this that is either chilling or embarrassing, depending on your point of view.

We’re told that “People can become radicalised to violent extremism due to a range of factors.” We’re also informed that people can get grants for combatting it to provide support for a range of activities, including mentoring, counselling, “case management” and sport, “But we are open to a wide range of ideas!” And we’re also told that the list of organisations offering services in this area will be collated without being made public. All in all, it’s bewildering.

To the observer, it may seem that debate without any specific terms is being had about existing schemes without clear public criteria of success, with the promise of further discussion whose terms are murky. There’s no reference to the extant scholarly and professional discussion about why and how people drift to Islamism, which emphasises the role of perceived injustice.

More cynically, you might say that this all works pretty well to keep terms like “radicalisation” and “extremism” as content-free, flexible terms that do little more than gesture towards the Muslims in our midst as a source of potential danger, and authorise governments to protect us from that danger, whatever it is, and empower them to police deviations from an equally imaginary moderate middle. A lot of reporting is not helping to clarify the situation: it’s simply taking all of this as read.

This effort by government to produce a vague sense of insecurity, then offer to protect us from it, can lead us in strange and alarming directions. Last week Christopher Pyne mooted a “jihadi-watch” scheme for schools, where education authorities would move to train students and teachers “to watch for shifts in behaviour such as students drifting away from their friends, running into minor trouble with the law and arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own”.

Goodbye, citizenship! Australia takes a cynical turn on Muslim radicalisation | Jason Wilson | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Filed under Citizenship, Radicalization Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →