No Burqas or Niqabs During Canadian Citizenship Oath

by 1389 on December 14, 2011

in 1389 (blog admin), Ban the Burqa, Canada, immigration, Shari'a, stealth jihad

It’s not only about defending Canadian and Western values, it’s also about putting a stop to immigration and citizenship fraud.
Official portrait of Jason Kenney

Canada’s Ringing ‘No’ to the Niqab

The Canadian government of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper showed new immigrants that Canadian and Western values are paramount in Canada on Monday when it banned face coverings for Muslim women at citizenship swearing-in ceremonies. The prohibition occurred after the country’s immigration minister, Jason Kenney​, had received complaints from citizenship judges and other ceremony participants that it is “hard to tell whether veiled individuals are actually reciting the oath.

“Allowing a group to hide their faces while they are becoming members of our community is counter to Canada’s commitment to openness, equality and social cohesion,” Kenney stated.

The wearing of the Muslim face-veil was becoming a growing problem at citizenship ceremonies. Government officials across the country were being confronted “every week” with veil-wearing women. This went against the grain of the government’s belief that taking the citizenship oath, according to Kenney, was “a public declaration that you are joining the Canadian family and it must be taken freely and openly.” In fact, Kenney called it “frankly bizarre” that regulations had allowed for face coverings at the ceremonies in the first place.

“We cannot have two classes of citizenship ceremonies,” the immigration minister maintained. “Canadian citizenship is not just about the right to carry a passport and to vote.”
The Canadian government’s ban can only represent a defeat for those Islamists who regard the wearing of the face-veil in the West as an outward display of sharia law as well as a barrier meant to separate Muslims from their Western societies. In the West, in the Islamists view, the veil’s wearing was always meant to make Islam visible in public spaces and relay the unspoken message: We are different. Besides being the Islamists’ version of showing the flag, the veil and headscarf have also served as Islamist probes to test a host society’s resolve to defend its values.

As a result of the veil’s and headscarf’s importance to Islamist plans, it is not surprising that in Germany a parliamentary delegate of Turkish origin, Ekin Deligoz, received death threats when she told Muslim women living there to take their headscarves off. Deligoz was a member of the leftist Green Party at the time. Ninety percent of the threats she received were from men and were so serious that Deligoz had to have police protection.

But the Canadian ban’s greatest significance is that it represents a setback for Islamic supremacism. There is currently a religiously motivated, political offensive being waged in Western countries, principally in the courts and under the guise of religious freedom, through which Islamists are attempting to establish a superior position for Islam over other religions in Western societies. Council on American-Islamic relations (CAIR) co-founder Omar Ahmad clearly expressed this Islamist design for the United States when he said to a Muslim audience in Fremont, California, in 1998 when he said: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.”
Read it all.

Michael Coren & Barbara Kay on the burka

Uploaded by on Dec 13, 2011
“ . . . you might as well ask a cat.”

Lilley & Coren on banned nikabs & burkas

Uploaded by on Dec 12, 2011
This is just the start – we need to get this crap banned from everyday life.

Indeed. Let’s start by banning facial disguise from the court system:

John Robson: show your face . . . or get out!

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

John Robson discusses the meaning of freedom of religion, the inferiority of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the place of islamic face coverings in Canadian society and its courts.
The Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments Thursday about whether a Muslim woman accusing her cousin and uncle of childhood sexual abuse should be allowed to wear a full face-covering on the witness stand.

The case, which pits the woman’s freedom of religion against the right to a fair trial for the accused, will have national significance for Muslim women in the Canadian justice system.

Joanna Birenbaum, of the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, said the case will have important repercussions throughout Canada because “if the court requires women who wear the niqab to remove them to testify . . . the result will be that niqab-wearing women will not report sexual assaults at all, and the message is that they can be raped with impunity.”

N.S. — whose identity is protected by a publication ban — was ordered during a preliminary hearing in Ontario court to remove her niqab, a Muslim head and face covering which leaves only a slit for her eyes. She refused and, after making its way through the Ontario court system, her precedent-setting case is now at this country’s top court.

Lawyers for the accused argue that, if N.S. is allowed to testify with her face covered, the judge will not be able to determine the truth of her testimony.

However, David Butt, the woman’s lawyer, said the benefits of including people of the Muslim faith who wear a niqab, outweigh the negative aspects of the face covering, which he says are fairly minor.

“There are certain institutions in our society where it’s really important that they take people just as they are — one of those is hospitals, another one is courts. And, unless it’s going to seriously interfere with the functioning of the court, we should say, if that’s your sincere belief, we’re not going to stand in your way.”

If the court rules that N.S. must remove her niqab to testify, “it will put her in an impossible situation. She will have to choose between violating her religion or not seeking redress as a sexual assault complainant,” said Butt.

But, Tyler Hodgson from the Muslim Canadian Congress, said “the niqab, as an institution, undermines gender equality and full participation in a democratic society and the court ought to at least consider that when balancing these conflicting rights.”

Immigration and citizenship fraud definitely is a problem in Canada and elsewhere:

Palestine House: a locus of immigration fraud

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

The RCMP is investigating a potentially massive case of citizenship fraud involving 300 people who claimed to live at the same Mississauga address where Palestine House is located, according to a front page story in The Globe and Mail today.

The newspaper cites sources claiming that citizenship court judges were briefed on the case late last year and were specifically asked to be cautious of cases where multiple applicants appear to be using the same address.

Palestine House is located on Erindale Station Rd., next door to The Woodlands School in central Mississauga. It offers language and settlement services to immigrants and also lobbies the municipal, provincial and federal governments on behalf of Palestinian causes.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada gave the centre $2.4 million for English-language training in a multi-year agreement last April, an agreement that has been criticized by some Jewish groups who say Palestine House officials have sometimes publicly supported the violent actions of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

An employee at Palestine House, who spoke to The Globe anonymously, said he believes the RCMP investigation involves a rented office suite on the upper floor. The office is leased by private companies not associated with Palestine House.

The employee said brown government envelopes sometime were mailed to people who didn’t live or work at Palestine House. The envelopes contained government cheques for child benefits for people not living in Canada.

The RCMP went to Palestine House to ask about the envelopes in late 2007. The RCMP would not confirm or deny that an investigation is underway.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney confirmed to The Globe that he was recently briefed on a citizenship fraud case by federal officials.

“There are a number of ongoing police investigations into this practice of people abroad hiring consultants to establish for them evidence of residency in Canada, to meet the three-year residency requirement, when, in point of fact, they are often living abroad most or all of that time,” Kenney said.

Proof of residence in Canada for three of four years prior to granting of citizenship is required by Immigration Canada.

– Mississauga News, Feb 1/2010

Jason Kenney clearing out illegal aliens

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 9, 2011

More to the point:

Who is benefiting from mass immigration?

Michael Coren with Peter Brimelow (VDare): immigration

Uploaded by SDAMatt2a on Dec 12, 2011

Peter Brimelow, founder of VDare and author of Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster, joins Michael Coren via video link.

Previous post:

Next post: