hello all

after much contemplation I’ve decided to close this blog soon. this is due mainly to my health concern. if anyone is interested in inheriting the domain name pls let me know. it’s been a pleasure blogging on civ and I thank all readers for your support. best wishes

No tags for this post.
Related posts

• No related posts.

The following is a letter of complaint we received over the weekend. It reminds us of how racism against the Chinese in North America (especially when at a time so many US politicians are playing the anti-China card in the mid-term election).

————————————————–

I am beginning to think that racism and racial hatred cannot be abolished. I used to think we could. I treat others well, I respect others, and living here in Vancouver, I was confident that here we tend to look past the colour of one’s skin.

Now, I am fighting against racism as I experienced it in Vegas. But fighting racism once you experience it so blatantly is more difficult since your sense of objectivism and your ability to identify what is right and wrong and your ability to move past bad experiences become very very limited.

Right now, I can say that if I were to hear Spanish on the street, I will go out of my way not to be able to hear it whether that meant crossing the street or getting out of the skytrain, whatever.

But I know my reaction is not justified. I have always tried to participate towards social justice to achieve a greater common goal for all. But now I am not sure whether I want this common goal to be shared by all. Maybe time will heal this experience and bring me back to who I was before my trip to Vegas. Maybe I was naïve, but I would rather be naïve than racist myself.

Here is my story…

I need to let this story out for the sake of all Vancouverites travelling to Vegas, especially my sister and friends who frequently travel there.

My husband and I have been married for two years, and since we never had the chance to go on a honeymoon, we decided to go to Vegas to watch Le Reve. We were there earlier this year and stayed at the Venetian. We did have a good time and watched an amazing show by Cirque so we wanted to check Le Reve, an anniversary gift from my husband. On our first trip, we noticed people were quite rude and although we decided not to ever go back, the show seem worth a second try.

I am of Korean decent while my husband is Filipino. I speak and understand Spanish fluently and also have a number of friends here in Vancouver with Central and South American decent.

We were in Vegas from October 18 to 21 and stayed at the Riviera, a choice we deeply regret now.

On our second day in Vegas we went to the 711 store next to our hotel on the strip. As we walked in, a customer cried out in Spanish, “fucking chinks everywhere”. One of the cashiers replied also in Spanish, “Yeah, fucking chinks. I would love to take them out and smash their heads”. I was shocked by this reference to hate crime. I had scenes from American Generation X running so fast through my head. The whole time they were laughing and saying horrible things about us, I was staring at them as though telling them I understood everything they were saying. So I spoke out in Spanish too, “I understand everything you said about us just now”. Jaws dropped. The cashier then asks me in Spanish “are you sure?” “where did you learn Spanish?” in an offended manner as though he was testing my Spanish skills. While he is asking me this, he is also taking my husband’s money for the bottle of water. My husband unaware since he does not speak Spanish pays the money. No one apologized. My husband and I walk out quickly since I was scared that he might actually act upon his comments. I was devastated by this public humiliation and violent thoughts from the cashier and the customer. I have never experience this form of racism, this form of loathing that might one day lead to hate crime.

I went to the front desk of the hotel the morning after to request the staff at the Riviera to assist me in documenting this issue and assist me in getting the information of this 711 store as well as the name of the specific people working at the 711 store between 12am and 3am. After a summary of what had happened, the man at the front desk asks, “so this did not happen here at the hotel” and I said “no, but i am afraid of confronting them.” The man replies, “there is nothing I can do about something that happens outside of the hotel”. I replied, I am a guest here, and all I need is your help to figure this information out” to which the man says “i am sorry. but you will have to take care of this on your own. go back to 711 and talk to the manager.” As I go back to the room I am thinking that there is no way I am going back to the store. What if I get attacked? I text my sister in Vancouver to help me getting the store details and the names of the men that worked there. At his point I am thinking, I will wait until I get back home and deal with it from Vancouver where I feel safe.

On our third day, my husband and I decide to go to LA SALSA Mexican restaurant at the food court in the Riviera Hotel. As we walk into the establishment, I hear the man staring at us and speak to his two coworkers (again in Spanish), “fucking chinks. disgusting”. While they laugh and the man closest to the cashier asks “what can get you?”. Again, I confronted them in Spanish and said “I understand everything you said.” The guy replies, “is that so?” and smiled. In English in a higher voice so that people eating at the same establishment could hear I said “I am not even Chinese you racist jerk” to which he replied in English “I wasn’t talking about you”. I cried out, there is no one else here that looks Asian. And the guys just gestured a whatever shoulder movement and we walked out.

We went out to the strip to cool down. As I can’t really translate the feeling of humiliation and worthlessness to my husband I cried during our long walk up and down. My husband was trying really hard to understand but I guess I failed to communicate accurately the way and things they said, the look we got and the agonizing feeling I was going through.

On our way back, we dropped by 711 again to get the information of the people who were there the night before. The lady that worked there was friendly and provided the information.

As we got back to the Riviera Hotel I approached the front desk one more time. I assertively said, I need to speak to the manager on duty. The lady at the desk said there was no manager present at the moment and asked what the issue was while she is helping two guests check in. I firmly stated, “regarding a racist incident at your hotel”. She didn’t even look at me and she asked “what was that?” to which i replied in a louder and firmer voice “about racism at this hotel”. All the guests turned and looked at me while avoiding eye contact.

The lady at the front desk goes to back and brings the manager who heard the whole ordeal from the beginning. The manager takes me to the side and I explain what had happened. She make me fill out a comment form which she promised to forward to the VP in charge of vendors and retail at the hotel.

In the letter I have requested for a formal letter of apology and admittance of guilt from the men working at LA SALSA restaurant and an explanation why they were apologizing. I further wrote in the form that I will have these letters published in the local media in Vancouver because no one needs to go through what I did. I gave them one week to get back to me and mail the letters to our home address.The same night I emailed corporate 711 requesting them to rectify the issue.

I am not saying that everyone working in Vegas was rude and mean. Our waitress at Denny’s next to our hotel was great. Her name is Brenda. Although she started a bit cold, she warmed up to us and we had the best service ever! What bothers me is the bitter after-taste this has left in me. After these two incidents, while our walk through the Forum Shops at Ceasar’s a caucasian man said something resembling a Chinese phrase towards us while we walked passed him. I could not stand it anymore. It was too much. So I stopped, turned, and in an angry voice full of hate I loudly asked “What???” “What did you say???”. The man then asked in English, “are you lost?” to which I yelled with hate, “just because we look Asian doesn’t mean we are Chinese!!!!” I turned and quickly started walking down the escalator. I heard in the background a soft voice saying, “sorry, have a good day”. I never had a chance to apologize to this man because I was so angry that apologizing would mean that I had to explain why I yelled at him and I knew I was going to break down and cry right there and then. If I had a chance, I would go back and look for the same man in a suit with a name tag I never bother to read, and genuinely apologize.

My husband and I are now dealing with all this on our own but it feels like i am doing this alone because he will never understand this feeling of worthlessness and humiliation, belittling experience that cannot be translated in English nor words ugly and descriptive enough.

I hope you publish this story for the sake of all people who travel to Vegas. To empower them while they are strangers in cities with no contacts nor familiarity with local culture, no one willing to really listen to them or provide a helping hand.

I do not mean to spread more racism or hatred but if my story can help someone and maybe make a small difference, perhaps then I can understand this devastating experience as a valuable social lesson.

There is definitely racism in Vegas. It is blatant yet subtle. It is in your face but you will never know. As people in hotels and in position of authority are uncomfortable speaking of racism and hate crime, the issue becomes more than just isolated incidents.

Thank you and best regards,

Min

Tags: Asian, Chinese, Korean, Las Vegas, racism

Related posts

• Canadians killed in Philippine tour bus carnage — and the anti-Chinese comments (100)
• Rich Chinese buyers eye prime Canadian properties (7)
• Neo-Nazis clash with anti-racism protestors (31)
• Canada eyes rich Chinese immigrant investors (25)
• How do the Chinese see the world (and Canada)? (0)

A new study released by the APF celebrating the “success” of Canadian businesses in China…

Landmark Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada survey reveals more than three-quarters of Canadian businesses in China are profitable despite constraints to doing business

A report released today reveals that 76% of surveyed Canadian companies operating in China are profitable despite challenges such as the inconsistent interpretation of legislation, red tape, and pollution.

The report — Canadian Businesses in China 2010: Survey of Constraints and Opportunities — was undertaken by the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada and is the first of its kind focusing on exclusively on the views of Canadian firms in China. It was launched today at the Annual TE Ladner Business Law Symposium hosted by the Vancouver offices of the national law firm Borden Ladner Gervais LLP.

As the world flocks to China for business opportunities, there is growing interest in the operations of foreign enterprises in China and the obstacles that they face. The APF Canada report provides a unique Canadian perspective that can be benchmarked against findings of similar studies by groups such as the American and German Chambers of Commerce in China.

The finding that most Canadian companies in China are profitable runs counter to a common perception that it is very difficult for foreign firms to make money in that market. An even larger number of respondents (85%) expressed some level of satisfaction with their current overall performance in China.

At the same time, 68% of respondents highlighted the problem of inconsistent interpretation of regulations as a major business constraint. Other challenges include the lack of transparency and bureaucratic red tape — in particular obtaining a business permit/license. These findings stand in contrast to the concerns expressed by other foreign firms in China, which tend to focus on the lack of qualified personnel, intellectual property rights, and limited market access as the key impediments to doing business in China.

“The obstacles to doing business in China should not be underestimated. The results of this survey provide a roadmap for Canadian and Chinese interests, together with the international business community, to work on business constraints such as the inconsistent interpretation of regulations and lack of transparency in China,” said APF Canada President and CEO, Yuen Pau Woo.

Also in contrast with other studies of foreign enterprises in China, most of the APF Canada survey respondents were in the services sector. When asked about the living environment in China, respondents expressed a high degree of satisfaction with respect to housing, safety, and social support, but were clearly dissatisfied with the air quality and level of pollution.

China is Canada’s second largest trading partner in the world and one of the fastest growing export markets for Canadian firms. Mr. Woo added: “There is no question that two-way commercial ties between Canada and China will grow in the years ahead. The challenge is to remove the barriers that hold back the potential for even stronger and deeper economic relations between the two countries.”

The survey was conducted by APF Canada between August and October 2010 among over 600 Canadian companies that have done business in China. The survey received 95 valid responses, representing a 16% response rate. The survey was supported by the Canada China Business Council, the Government of Quebec, Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, Export Development Canada, and Canadian trade offices in China.

For a link to the survey, please click here.

Summary of findings:

• 76% of surveyed Canadian companies are profitable in China. This level of profitability is comparable to 80% of German and 65% of American companies, according to surveys completed by these countries.
• The top three priorities for Canadian business in China are: selling into the Chinese market, building partnerships with
  Chinese firms and attracting investment to Canada.
• The vast majority of Canadian operations in China are focused on market opportunities and potential in China. Two thirds of respondents indicate that China’s impressive growth, its huge market and following key customers were the top three factors in their companies’ decision to enter the Chinese market.
• Canadian firms are strongest in the services industry. Over 67% of Canadian businesses operating in China are in the
  service sector.
• Canadian businesses identify the rule of law and environmental problems as the two greatest obstacles to doing business in China. Nearly 68% of respondents noted that the inconsistent interpretation of regulations made business highly difficult. These results are in contrast to similar surveys done among German and US companies. For them, lack of qualified personnel, lack of Intellectual Property Rights protection, and limited market access are the key obstacles to doing business in China.
• There is great potential for Canadian businesses to be engaged in the Chinese market on a long-term base. What is required is that both the Canadian and Chinese governments work together constructively on issues that are of greatest relevance to Canadian businesses in China.

Tags: Asia Pacific Foundation, business, Canada-China, China

Related posts

• [GB] Nobel Peace prize to Liu Xiaobo signals a push needed (0)
• Former Chinese ambassador mentions June 4th in rare talk (1)
• 50% Chinese students plan to stay after graduation; 25% plan to start own business (10)
• Vancouver has Canada’s lowest business tax costs, placing first out of 41 global cities: KPMG study (3)
• China taking over Canadian oilsand, copper miner (1)

Sid Tan (Chow Ming Fai) is national chairperson of the Chinese Canadian National Council and a founder of Head Tax Families Society of Canada and W2 Community Media Arts Society.

To clearly stand out a guest blogger entry, all such headlines will begin with [GB]

Controversy abounds in the Norway-based Nobel committee’s award of its 2010 Peace Prize to China’s Liu Xiaobo, literature professor, human rights activist and political prisoner. It’s ironic he heard the news from his jailors much after the rest of the world.

It’s not surprising most of his fellow citizens still have not been informed of his Nobel. Liu’s imprisonment is courtesy of the judicial system and one party government of the People’s Republic of China. He was convicted recently for inciting subversion of state power. This is the fourth prison stint for the 54-year old. His other convictions include instigating counter-revolutionary activities, being involved in the democracy and human rights movement and disturbing the social order. He is an advocate of non-violence and his “crimes” are ideas and words.

Unwittingly, the PRC regime has cast fuel on the smoldering fire of what will be a more visible democracy movement. Its black out and control of the media in Liu’s award story within and outside its borders speaks volumes on what ails the souls of dictators.

It also speaks volumes about the role of ideas, words and those cornerstones of our democracy such as free speech, public assembly, independent media and an informed public. The PRC spin-meisters and media apparatchik must be choking on their current task. Their job is to smother a story pregnant with a champion and ideas thrust onto the
world stage. It would be remarkable if the story is soon widely known to China’s citizens.

If so, this instance would signal a seminal moment when the so-called Great Firewall of China was forever penetrated.

The courage shown by the Nobel committee and Liu Xiaobo is the human spirit at its best. The reaction of the PRC government is revealing and instructive. Prior to the announcement of the prize, the PRC foreign ministry warned the Nobel committee the award to the criminal Liu Xiaobo as it would be against Nobel principles. On the issue of human rights and democracy, most observers know such an award would be highly symbolic and political. The Nobel committee noted Liu has become the foremost symbol of the struggle for human rights in China. Following the announcement, the PRC foreign
ministry reiterated Liu is a criminal while state run Xinhua news said the award “defiles” the Nobel and could harm China-Norway relations. The deed is done, however, and what remains is a more vigourous call for a quick end to Liu’s incarceration.

Not since June 4, 1989 has the wide and oppressive power wielded by the PRC government been clearer. Then, China’s rulers ordered the military to crush a peaceful human rights and democracy demonstration in what is known as the Tiananmen Square massacre. Now, the regime’s media fixers have impose a black out of foreign news sources reporting the award. The propaganda machine is spewing out the message of nationalism: this is a Western plot and the world should look at the country’s economic gains. Although there is in-border media control, laws of political convenience and guns at the ready, the dictators must know good ideas and stories will eventually emerge.

The regime’s prisoner is honoured for moving ideas into words and action. Liu Xiaobo saved hundreds of lives by persuading the demonstrator to leave Tiananmen Square before the soldiers and tanks moved in. The Nobel committee stated he was awarded the prize for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.

Liu Xia, the new Nobel laureate’s wife, is his sole voice to outside world. According to a Human Rights in China report, she visited her husband on October 10, two days after the award was announced. It mentions it was an hour- long meeting and that Mrs. Liu said her husband was informed of the award the day before. The HRIC report goes on to state: “When they spoke of the award, he was very serious, saying, “This award is for the lost souls of June Fourth.” He said that it was due to their non-violent spirit in giving their lives for peace, freedom, and democracy; upon finishing, he was moved to tears.”

Liu Xiaobo is a thoughtful and powerful writer. His final statement – I Have No Enemies – was released prior to being imprisoned last Christmas Day for eleven years. Published on the HRIC website, it tells of love, ideas and becoming an activist. He writes that he has no enemies or hatred and bemoans an enemy mentality: “Hatred can rot away at a
person’s intelligence and conscience. Enemy mentality will poison the spirit of a nation, incite cruel mortal struggles, destroy a society’s tolerance and humanity, and hinder a nation’s progress toward freedom and democracy. That is why I hope to be able to transcend my personal experiences as I look upon our nation’s development and social change, to counter the regime’s hostility with utmost goodwill, and to dispel hatred with love.”

Rightfully acclaimed and wrongfully a prisoner, Liu Xiaobo and his seemingly Quixotic quest is a story to span generations. If his writing is an indication, he has great fortitude tempered with understanding and tenderness. He tells his wife: “Your love is the sunlight that leaps over high walls and penetrates the iron bars of my prison window, stroking every inch of my skin, warming every cell of my body, allowing me to always keep peace, openness, and brightness in my heart, and filling every minute of my time in prison with meaning. My love for you, on the other hand, is so full of remorse and regret that it at times makes me stagger under its weight. I am an insensate stone in the wilderness, whipped by fierce wind and torrential rain, so cold that no one dares touch me. But my love is solid and sharp, capable of piercing through any obstacle. Even if I were crushed into powder, I would still use my ashes to embrace you.”

We are a species of ideas, words and action. The 2010 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Liu Xiaobo is a boost to non-violence action and human rights and democracy loving people. The Nobel committee did honour to itself with this year’s choice. Now if there was only a way to get Liu released from prison. Take a few moments to savour how good it feels to be human and experiencing this moment.

—————————————

Disclaimer: Views expressed by guest bloggers are theirs and may not represent those of CIV.

By inviting guest bloggers to write here, we’d like to see us grow together with more diverse ideas and perspectives. If anyone believe the idea is cool, please don’t hesitate to submit your stuff to us. We use real names and identities here. Thank you.

Tags: China, human rights, Liu Xia, Liu Xiaobo, Nobel Peace prize, Sid Tan

Related posts

• 2/3 Canadian businesses are profittable in China: APF study (1)
• Former Chinese ambassador mentions June 4th in rare talk (1)
• [GB] Whose History? Our History or the Media’s… (23)
• Harper visits The Great Wall, calls it ‘unbelievable’ (1)
• 2/3 Canadians urge PM to focus on China’s human rights, not trade: poll (8)

Guest blogger: Gabriel Yiu, former BC NDP candidate for Vancouver Fraserview

To clearly stand out a guest blogger entry, all such headlines will begin with [GB]

After dragging on for seven long years and over two provincial elections, just on the eve of the former finance minister Gary Collins’s testimony in court, the BC Rail corruption trial suddenly ended.

The following day, Premier Campbell stepped forward and condemned the two Liberal insiders as criminals acting on their own. He also announced that the case was over.

The Liberals are really capable. They have a knack for doing this kind of maneuver. They have demonstrated it again and again: when senior Liberal officials got into trouble, it all ended with their assistant(s) taking the blame. Former Solicitor General John Les was investigated by the RCMP for allegedly having profited from changing the land use purpose of his farm land when he was the mayor; the case ended up with his staff being charged and Les exonerated.

Then another Solicitor General, Kash Heed, was investigated by the RCMP for cheating in the election, but the special prosecutor only charged Heed’s campaign manager and financial agent. The intriguing point is that a court document revealed by the media two weeks ago stated that the RCMP believed that 15 offences were allegedly committed. Offence no.12 and no.13 are violations of section 266 of the Election Act — publishing a misleading report. Offence no.12 was committed by Satpal Johl (the financial agent) whereas no.13 was committed by candidate Kash Heed. Although the 121 page document does not indicate that Johl or Heed knew about the illegal dirty tricks beforehand, the prosecutor decided to charge Johl and exonerated Heed. (Please note that this case is scheduled to appear in court in November.)

When I heard from the media about the sudden end of the BC Rail corruption trial because the prosecutor had made a special agreement with the defendants, I couldn’t stop wondering, “What is the problem with our prosecution system? How come every time it’s only the Liberal assistants who have to take the blame? Is that merely coincident or is there more behind the scene?”

The abrupt ending of the BC Rail corruption trial has sparked numerous questions and puzzles. Unless an independent public inquiry is conducted, like the one that investigated the death of the Polish immigrant at the airport, it is difficult for people with common sense to believe what Gordon Campbell and the Liberals are telling us.

First, Basi is involved in two corruption cases: one is taking bribes in the sale of BC Rail and the second is taking bribes from a developer for helping change the land use purpose of some farm land in Victoria. Basi took $25,695 in the first case and $50,000 in the second.

Just before former Finance Minister Gary Collins was to appear in court, the prosecutor made an extraordinarily attractive but unreasonable offer to the defendants. If they plead guilty, there will be no jail sentence, just two years of house arrest (and they can still go to work, go shopping, go to gym, take kids to sports, live with the family and sleep with their wife), and 150 hours of community work. The provincial government will waive their $6 million legal fee, but they also need to sign a non-disclosure agreement not to disclose anything related to the case and their past work for the Liberal government.

People have to wonder why the Liberal government would table such an attractive deal in exchange for a guilty plea and non-disclosure.

Abusing public trust and taking bribes in two corruption cases — the result? No jail, no financial penalty, legal fee waived. With such a precedent set, would it not encourage civil servants to cross the line?

For ordinary citizens who evade tax, Canada Revenue Agency would seek penalty and interest. So why is a corrupt official only required to repay the sum he has pocketed?

Waiving the legal fee is simply absurd. According to a news media report, Basi held some properties. In 2003, Basi with his wife and mother held four houses. In 2004, it was reported that Basi bought five acres of land at Shawnigan Lake as well as a house in Esquimalt valued at $280,000. The media also reported that Basi had signed his family house (now valued over half a million dollars) as collateral to pay his legal fee. Thus, what the Attorney General Mike de Jong said, that there is nothing the government can collect from the convicted, is most unconvincing. Even if the government cannot collect the entire sum, it can still get some money back. By not taking their wealth and property to repay the legal fee, it is as if the government is giving a sum of money to Basi and Virk.

When the team of RCMP searched the offices of two cabinet ministers at the Legislature, the news sent shock waves across the entire country. The way the trial ended has made British Columbians disappointed, suspicious and ashamed. How can such an absurd thing happen in BC? Do the Liberals really see all the citizens of BC as fools?

Think about this. The BC Liberals vowed in the 2001 election that they would not sell BC Rail, but started the selling process once they got into office. BC Rail paid $300,000 to the Liberal campaign chief Patrick Kinsella to be the crown corporation’s advisor. Earlier, the court revealed that the executives of BC Rail who took part in the bidding process had taken goodies from the agent who represented CN Rail. It is incomprehensible why four senior executives of BC Rail were still on the payroll ($1.2 million a year) for six years after pretty much all of the crown assets had been sold? What’s going on? What’s the pay for?

CN Rail, the company which successfully bought BC Rail, had donated $270,000 to the BC Liberal Party. Its chairman is a great supporter of Gordon Campbell and helped him to become the leader of the BC Liberal Party… Aren’t all these a little too convenient?

Isn’t it a little off-the-wall when the guys being convicted only pocketed $25,695?

The Liberal government has been promoting the Gateway Project, which utilizes Prince Rupert as an entrepot to North America serviced by our railway system. It is a puzzle why Campbell only launched this project after BC Rail had been sold. If not sold, wouldn’t all the transportation revenue go to our treasury instead of private pockets?

If this corruption case is truly as what Campbell and the Liberals said, merely the bad deeds of Basi and Virk, why not comply to public opinion and launch a public inquiry? Why did the Liberals sign a non-disclosure agreement with the two Liberal insiders instead?

Last but not least, it was revealed that the Liberal government had given order to destroy premier and cabinet emails and documents related to the BC Rail corruption case in the last election. If the Liberals had nothing to hide, why gave the order? Who gave the order?

Who said Quebec is the most corrupt province in Canada?

—————————————

Disclaimer: Views expressed by guest bloggers are theirs and may not represent those of CIV.

By inviting guest bloggers to write here, I’d like to see us grow together with more diverse ideas and perspectives. If anyone believe the idea is cool, please don’t hesitate to submit your stuff to me. We use real names and identities here. Thank you.

Tags: BC, corruption, Gabriel Yiu

Related posts

• [GB] Shanghai Expo (0)
• [GB] How can a columnist use fabrications to support Fadden? (101)
• [GB] 9 reasons why CSIS chief should resign or be fired (3)
• [GB] CSIS chief should be accountable for his public remark (14)
• HST will eat up average household spending by $521: StatCan (4)

The owner of this blog is currently on sick leave. The owner apologizes for not being able to update this blog as often. Thank you.

No tags for this post.
Related posts

• No related posts.

Here they come again. CBC should be proud of being THE target of Tory attack…. that means CBC is really doing what our tax dollar’s worth. Kudos to the CBC!

On the other hand, we again see the dictatorial nature of this government. It reminds me of how the PRC government has been trying to stop HK’s public broadcaster RTHK to produce programs critical of gov policies.

Tories blast ‘agenda-driven’ CBC gun-registry coverage

Stephen Harper’s Conservative can’t seem to get enough of the culture wars. They’re at it again, complaining to the public broadcaster about its recent coverage of the long-gun registry.

A little CBC bashing never hurts Conservative fundraising coffers. This time they’re upset with a story last week suggesting the powerful American gun lobby, the National Rifle Association, was helping to fight the battle against the long-gun registry in Canada.

The Tories sent a stinging letter to CBC ombudsman Vince Carlin on Sept. 17. “I am writing to express my concern with the blatant agenda-driven reporting by Canada’s national broadcaster,” writes Jenni Byrne, the director of political operations for the Conservative Party.

She is one of the most senior women in the party and is said to have the ear of the Prime Minister. “This type of reporting is neither objective nor accurate and does a disservice to all Canadians. ”

Tags: CBC, propaganda

Related posts

• CBC should be blamed (139)
• More spies spies spies (19)
• China to set up CNN style network (6)
• Mind it: it’s propaganda from BOTH sides (1)
• Beijing, Dharamasala both use heavy propaganda machines (0)

In a letter to the parliament, CSIS boss Richard Fadden confirms he has clearance from the Tory cabinet before publicly talk about his infamous “spies” theory (previous stories here).

Click the following link to read Fadden’s letter:

Canadian Security Intelligence Service 2010-09-07 B

Here’s a response from MP Don Davis:

DAVIES DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM MINISTER REGARDING FADDEN’S COMMENTS

VANCOUVER – New Democrat MP Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), Vice-Chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, received a letter yesterday from CSIS Director, Richard Fadden. The letter acknowledged the fact that Mr. Fadden got approval from Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’ office before appearing at Royal Canadian Military Institution (RCMI) and on Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) where he made inflammatory comments about foreign interference with Canadian politicians.

Fadden’s letter reveals that the Conservative government had advance notice of and ongoing involvement with his views. Fadden confirmed that he met with the Minister and discussed the content of his speech to the RCMI and interview with the CBC prior to both of these events taking place.

The letter also states that Minister Toews personally approved Fadden’s appearance at RCMI and his interview with the CBC. In fact, the text of his speech to RCMI was actually vetted by the Minister’s office. After his interview with the CBC, Fadden spoke with staff in the Minister’s office prior to issuing his clarification.

“It is clear to me that the Public Safety Minister was in direct contact with Fadden on a number of occasions directly before and directly after he made his comments which have tarnished the Chinese Canadian community”, says Davies. “I call on the Minister to answer to Canadians whether he authorized Fadden’s accusations.”

On August 5th, Don Davies wrote to Minister Toews asking for a simple yes or no confirmation whether he had received a report from Fadden outlining the specific individuals involved in foreign interference. As of today, Davies has still received no response.

Furthermore, the Conservatives are silent, and the Liberals refuse to call for Fadden’s resignation. Only the NDP says Richard Fadden needs to resign for his poor judgment and for insulting the Chinese Canadian community.

Unfortunately, while this development received much coverage in the Chinese media, it has generated little to none reports by the mainstream media.

Tags: CSIS, Richard Fadden, spy

Related posts

• Fadden’s problem now a PM’s (12)
• [GB] How can a columnist use fabrications to support Fadden? (101)
• [GB] 9 reasons why CSIS chief should resign or be fired (3)
• 2/3 Canadians want Fadden to name names (5)
• Media reports point to ‘China’ as spy culprit in Fadden’s mind (12)

Guest blogger: Steven Meurrens （辛湉王） is an Immigration Associate at Larlee Rosenberg.
To clearly stand out a guest blogger entry, all such headlines will begin with [GB]

Steven Meurrens’s blog

Those reading about the immigration debate raging in the United States over Arizona’s recent attempt at passing Senate Bill 1070, which would allow police to inquire as to the immigration status of people whom they had detained for any offense, might be forgiven for missing a quieter discussion that is taking place in the immigration community about recent calls by prominent Republicans for the abolition of birthright citizenship.

Since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the United States has had birthright citizenship.  Clause 1 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the Citizenship Clause, provides that:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Canadian law contains a similar principle. Ever since Canadian citizenship was first granted on January 1, 1947, an individual has been considered to be a Canadian citizen if he/she was born in Canada.  This is provided for by section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, which states that:

3. (1) Subject to this Act, a person is a citizen if

(a) the person was born in Canada after February 14, 1977;

Granting citizenship on the basis of geographic birthplace is known as citizenship jus soli, or “from the soil”. In countries that have citizenship jus soli, or birthright citizenship, it makes no difference what the citizenship or immigration status of the infant’s parents was at the time of birth is (with the exception of children born to diplomats).  For example, if a tourist arrives in Canada on a six-month visa, does not disclose that she is pregnant, and then gives birth in Vancouver six months later, then her child will be Canadian.

Birthright citizenship has become increasingly controversial in the United States because of the phenomenon of “anchor babies”.  Anchor babies are children born to non-permanent residents who subsequently use their child’s status as a means to immigrate. Under both Canadian and American immigration law, it is not that difficult to obtain a stay of removal against someone facing deportation if that individual is the parent of a citizen.

Also, in the United States, an American child can petition for his/her foreign national parents to become lawful permanent residents once the child reaches the age of twenty-one.  This is similar to the parental sponsorship provisions found in Canadian legislation.

In Canada, it is also possible for a parent to make an application for permanent residence on humanitarian & compassionate grounds on the basis that the parent has a child who is a Canadian citizen, and where that child would experience hardship if removed from Canada.  Indeed, our office has been successful in doing this.

Largely because of the “anchor baby” phenomenon, an increasing number of Republican politicians in the United States have been calling for the abolition of birthright citizenship, or at least holding hearings on the issue.  Prominent senators who have voiced such an opinion include Lindsey Graham, John Kyl, Mitch McConnll, and John McCain.  In the House of Representative, more than half of the House Republican Caucus signed on as co-sponsors to the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009, which would provide that only children who have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen, a legal permanent resident, or an undocumented migrant serving in the U.S. military could be granted citizenship if they were born in the United States. According to a recent CBS poll, roughly 47% of Americans support repealing or modifying birthright citizenship.

Although no Canadian politicians have called for a similar repeal of birthright citizenship in Canada (to my knowledge), recent opinion polls regarding the Tamil migrants show a hardening of Canadian attitudes towards immigration, and it is not difficult to imagine a similar debate in Canada arising.

Proponents of repealing birthright citizenship argue that it will reduce illegal immigration and ensure that citizens have allegiance to their host nation.  This is of course one area where the birthright citizenship issue differs in Canada and the United States. In the United States, the issue is intertwined with illegal immigration. Indeed, a recent Pew study has estimated that 8% of newborns in the United States have undocumented parents.  In Canada, however, it is not generally not people without status that give birth in Canada to parents who are foreign nationals. Rather, it is people on visitor visas, as well as refugee claimants. As these individuals at least have status in Canada, the issue is not as intertwined with illegal immigration as it is in the United States, and hence not as controversial.

Opponents of repealing birthright citizenship point out that denying citizenship to people who are born in a country would create an underclass of non-citizens who may also have difficulty in obtaining citizenship in the land from which their parents immigrated. As well,  they maintain that it offends sensibilities of both Americans and Canadians who view their respective nation as being a “nation of immigrants”.

What is interesting about the current debate is that it seems to be occurring in a North American vacuum.  Rarely do commentators ever address the immigration systems of non North-American nations. Indeed, if you read some American commentaries you would think that if America were to repeal birthright citizenship, then it would be the first nation in history to do so.

This is not the case.

Jus soli is currently observed by just 16% of the world’s nations. Major states that grant citizenship based on birth include Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, and the United States. It is generally prevalent in Latin America.

It is not elsewhere. Furthermore, in the last twenty years, many countries that previously granted citizenship by birth have introduced restrictions and have imposed additional requirements. Indeed, Canada and the United States are the only two OECD countries that currently have birthright citizenship.

The United Kingdom abolished jus soli in 1983. A child born in the UK is only deemed to be a citizen of the UK if that child has a parent who is a British citizen or “settled” in the UK. “Settled” means that the parent is a resident of the United Kingdom and has the ride of abode. For children born before July 1, 2006, if only the father meets the citizen or “settled” requirement, then the parents must be married. In such cases, it is possible for the father to petition that the child become a citizen.

Australia, meanwhile, abolished jus soli in 1986. Section 12 of the Australian Citizenship Act currently provides that an individual born in Australia is only Australian if at least one parent is an Australian or a permanent resident. A child born in Australia to foreign nationals and who lives in Australia will acquire citizenship upon his/her 10th birthday (if the child has not already been granted citizenship for another reason). This rule appears to be to ensure that the child has developed connections to Australia. There are special provisions for stateless individuals.

As of 2005, an individual born in Ireland will be entitled citizenship if he/she would not be entitled to citizenship elsewhere. As well, he/she would be an Irish citizen if at least one of his/her parents is:

• An Irish citizen;
• A British citizen;
• A resident of the island of Ireland without any time limit;
• A legal resident of the island of Ireland for three out of the 4 years preceding the child’s birth – time spent as a student or an asylum seeker does not count.

France, meanwhile, awards citizenship on the basis of double jus soli. An individual born in France is only considered a citizen if at least one parent was also born there. For children born to parents who are both foreign nationals,

• At age 18 the child will acquire citizenship if he/she had been resident in France for at least 5 years since the age of 11;
• At age 16 upon request by the child and if resident in France;
• At age 13 upon request by the child’s parents and if resident if France;

Germany previously never practiced jus soli.  However, it had to modify this position due to the increasing number of descendants of Turkish workers. Now, a child born after January 1, 2000 to non-German parents will acquire German citizenship at birth if at least one parent had a permanent resident permit or had been residing in Germany for at least 8 years. Such children are required to apply to retain their German citizenship by the age of 23.

China, meanwhile, has never had birthright citizenship. The Nationality Law of the People’s Republic of China provides that when a person is born in China, that person is a Chinese national if he or she has at least one parent of Chinese nationality, or if both parents are settled in China and are stateless.

The point of these comparisons is not to argue for one system or another. Rather, it is to point out that there are alternatives, and that Canada and the United States are part of the exception, rather than the norm, in how it maintains a very broad birthright citizenship regime.  Although I personally think that this is a proud example of North American exceptional-ism, there are features in what I shall call the European approach that are interesting.

So what do you think? Should Canada move away from birthright citizenship, and switch to a system found elsewhere? Or, is the current system fine?

—————————————

Disclaimer: Views expressed by guest bloggers are theirs and may not represent those of CIV.

By inviting guest bloggers to write here, I’d like to see us grow together with more diverse ideas and perspectives. If anyone believe the idea is cool, please don’t hesitate to submit your stuff to me. We use real names and identities here. Thank you.

Tags: Guest Bloggers, Immigration, Steven Meurrens

Related posts

• [GB] Shanghai Expo (0)
• [GB] How can a columnist use fabrications to support Fadden? (101)
• [GB] 9 reasons why CSIS chief should resign or be fired (3)
• [GB] Does party affiliation affect views on immigration? (7)
• [GB] Justice or rights? (6)

Angus Reid poll – The recent implementation of the harmonized sales tax (HST) is affecting residents of two Canadian provinces in different ways, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

The online survey of representative provincial samples of 804 Ontario and 803 British Columbia adults also finds that respondents question whether the promise of lower consumer prices down the road will actually materialize.

Effect of the HST

Overall, two thirds of respondents in the two provinces (ON 67%, BC 68%) say the HST has severely or moderately affected the finances of their household. Three-in-ten British Columbians (31%) report being “severely affected” by the new tax, along with one-in-four Ontarians (24%).

Less than one-in-ten respondents in the two provinces (ON 7%, BC 9%) say the HST has not affected the finances of their household at all.

Personal Experience

Ontarians report being particularly impacted by two items that now include HST. Four-in-five respondents in Ontario say the total cost of gasoline (79%) and their electricity bill (80%) has increased “significantly” or “moderately” since the HST came into effect. These two items were not affected by the introduction of the HST in British Columbia.

Ontario residents also report noticing an increase in costs for other goods and services, including basic groceries (63%), their cell phones (54%) and adult clothing (47%). All of these items have not experienced a price increase as a result of the HST, according to the province’s government.

A large majority of British Columbians (89%) say dining out has become more expensive, along with basic groceries (76%), cell phone bills (63%) and adult clothing (61%).

Fewer people in the two provinces are reporting a higher cost for children’s clothing (BC 29%, ON 17%) and dry cleaning (24% on both).

Purchasing Behaviour

One-in-five Ontarians (22%) and three-in-ten British Columbians (29%) say they are buying much less than they used to since the HST came into effect.

While two-in-five Ontarians (42%) claim that the HST has not impacted their purchasing behaviour so far, only 28 per cent of British Columbians feel the same way.

Lower Prices?

The two provincial governments have argued that the implementation of the HST will ultimately lead to lower consumer prices. A sizeable proportion of Ontarians (65%) and British Columbians (72%) believe that the total cost of most goods and services that now carry the HST will increase over the next two years, rather than decrease.

The likelihood of lower consumer prices down the road rings true for only one-in-twenty respondents in the two provinces (ON 4%, BC 5%).

The Provincial Governments

The Government of Ontario does not get high marks on the way it explained its decision to implement the HST. Only 12 per cent of respondents think it did a good job, with four-in-five respondents (81%) saying it performed badly (36%) or very badly (45%) in this regard.

Still, the numbers are nowhere near the level of animosity that is palpable in British Columbia. Only three per cent of respondents think the BC Government did a good job in explaining its decision to implement the HST. About one-in-five (18%) say their efforts were handled badly, but three-in-four (75%) say the BC Government did a very bad job.

Analysis

The survey shows that the implementation of the HST has affected the two provinces in dissimilar ways. The impact in Ontario appears incongruous: Ontarians report noting an impact in areas where the new tax regime had an effect (like gasoline and electricity costs), but also in areas where the new regime does not represent a change in the way these goods and services were taxed prior to July 1, 2010. Further, a significant proportion of this province’s residents report that, while their household finances have been impacted by the tax, they are not yet changing their purchasing behaviour.

In British Columbia, which does not have to deal with heftier gas or electricity bills, the negative reaction to the tax appears to be more consistent and deeper. Three-in-ten British Columbians say the HST has severely affected the finances of their household, and three-in-five have already modified their purchasing behaviour. The public is almost universal in panning the way the tax was implemented and explained by the provincial administration.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

Tags: HST, poll

Related posts

• BREAKING NEWS: HST petition a success! (11)
• 2/3 Canadians want Fadden to name names (5)
• HST will eat up average household spending by $521: StatCan (4)
• It’s official: Tax free for BCers to buy in Washington (11)
• Poll: Byelection in Vancouver Fraserview? (0)

A friend of Ken Leung, who died shielding his family from the gunman in the Philippine hostage taking tragedy, said Leung and his wife have previously bought graves in the Vancouver area. Tat Bong Lau said Amy Ng, Ken’s wife, is considering bringing the bodies of Ken, daughters Jessie and Doris to Vancouver and lay them to rest.

However, Lau also said Amy Ng is so busy caring for the lone surviving son Jason, who is still in coma, that the plan may still be on hold for another while.

The Leungs are all Canadians and they were holding Canadian passport when travelling in the Philippines. Media reports say that the Canadian embassy in HK still hasn’t paid Amy Ng a visit to date.

Amy Ng has never asked for any financial assistance from the Canadian embassy.

That make me wonder, yes, Amy Ng didn’t ask for help…But when so many people in HK and Canada (Chinese and Filipinos included) are praying for the Leung’s (look at the amount of facebook pages dedicated to Amy Ng and Jason Leung), it’s very hard to imagine that no representatives from Canada even care to make a visit to the widow just out of courtesy. Perhaps it’s a true statement as many callers to recent radio phone-ins say: “Us Chinese are never seen as real Canadians by Canada and the Canadian public.”

Meanwhile, Amy Ng issued an open letter asking all of us not to cry for them any more and encourage us to live on with strength:

Amy Ng Yau-woon lost her husband and two daughters in the Manila bloodbath. Her remaining child is fighting for his life in hospital. But the tragic mom’s message to the people of Hong Kong is: “Please don’t cry for us.”

The brave woman, whose family was shattered in last week’s tragedy, said in an open letter that Hong Kong must move on despite her personal suffering.

She wants to concentrate on taking care of her 19-year-old son, Jason Leung Song-xue, heartened by the support and wishes of the Hong Kong people.

“I don’t want to see all of you crying because of our sadness,” Ng wrote. “I know the people of Hong Kong are very concerned about Jason’s condition and from the bottom of my heart I thank all of you for the gifts and your caring hearts.

“I hope to take the liberty to encourage everyone to live on with strength and to return to normal life,” she said in the letter, read out by Tuen Mun Hospital’s head of neurosurgery, Dawson Fong To-sang, who is treating Jason.

Tags: Chinese Canadian, citizenship, Philippines, tour bus

Related posts

• Donald Tsang = tour operator? (9)
• 2 heros in a family (8)
• Photos – Hijack bus becomes tourist destination? (17)
• Canadians killed in Philippine tour bus carnage — and the anti-Chinese comments (100)
• Anti-Chinese graffiti not ‘hate’? (42)

This city council needs some really good floggings!! How could they justify the “neccessity” of spending taxpayers’ money like that? Once again, I’m so glad that I don’t live in City of Vancouver.

This Vision Vancouver council is soooo political… everything they do carries a political goal. They are almost as partisan as the federal Conservatives. >:<

From Citycaucus.com:

Mayor Gregor Robertson decreed that he and council, plus his staff need Apple iPads and state-of-the-art iPhone 4 handsets, and 15 of each of the units are to be ordered through Vancouver’s IT department.

In case you’ve not noticed already, Canada’s Blackberry devices produced by Ontario’s Research in Motion company, are the device du jour for cities and other levels of government across the continent. However, there is that “hipness factor” which apparently is drawing Hizonner into the Apple fold.

Yes, it seems that in order to be seen as a “progressive” government, it makes more sense for Robertson & co., and the City Manager to be carrying around iPads and iPhone 4s.

Now, of course this produces massive headaches for IT departments, who by nature have one set of support and security protocols across the board. But we’re told that the City Manager effectively told staff – if that’s what the Mayor wants, that’s what he gets.

Not to forget how this council wasted money on emptying the city hall and moving staff around the city, paying millions of unnecessary rent. Listen to the mayor’s lame excuse here. No wonder the staff morality is at all time low.

Tags: Gregor Robertson, iPad, taxpayers, Vancouver

Related posts

• Video – Mayor Robertson’s now famous F words (1)
• Rich Chinese buyers eye prime Canadian properties (6)
• Vancouver has Canada’s lowest business tax costs, placing first out of 41 global cities: KPMG study (3)
• Laneway house… not a bad idea eh (4)
• Opening ceremony photos… 2010 Olympics (19)

CTV made a mistake on the title of Hong Kong’s chief executive Donald Tsang during its early reports of the tour bus carnage.

Well, maybe that was the reason why the Philippine president did not return Tsang’s call on the first day? :)

Tags: Philippines, tour bus

Related posts

• The Leungs may be laid to rest in Vancouver (2)
• 2 heros in a family (8)
• Photos – Hijack bus becomes tourist destination? (17)
• Canadians killed in Philippine tour bus carnage — and the anti-Chinese comments (100)

on a lighter note… cute!!!

No tags for this post.
Related posts

• No related posts.

Jessie Leung peeped out from the tour bus just hours before she was killed. (cropped from TV footage)

It turns out that Ken Leung wasn’t the sole hero of his family. According to the account of a survivor-witness, Jessie Leung, 14, took two bullets for her brother Jason, 18, when the gunman aimed the gun towards Jason’s head.

All five members of the Leung’s family are Canadian citizens. Ken Leung (58), daughter Doris Leung (21) and Jessie Leung (14) were all killed on the bus. Jason (18) suffers blunt force trauma to his head and is still in ICU after a head surgery. Mother Amy Ng (53) was slightly injured.

Earlier reports say that Ken Leung bravely charged at the gunman in an attempt to save the other passengers on board. He was described as a hero by many Canadian media.

Oriental Daily of Hong Kong (story in Chinese) interviewed Chan Kwok Chu, a tourist who survived the ordeal with (only) his hand being smashed by bullets.

“He (the gunman) was shooting at people’s heads! He was determined to kill us all!” said an emotional Chan.

Chan said the HK tourist guide was the first to be shot. After that, about 5 members of the tourist group jumped at the gunman, attempting to grab his gun and point it towards the bus roof. “Two or three were killed at this instant,” Chan said.

The gunman then began shooting at people’s heads, one person at a time, consecutively.

When the gunman aimed the gun towards Jason, his 14-year-old sister Jessie threw herself over Jason and took two bullets at her back. She died instantly.

What a heart-breaking story.

Tags: Chinese Canadian, citizenship, Philippines, tour bus

Related posts

• The Leungs may be laid to rest in Vancouver (2)
• Donald Tsang = tour operator? (9)
• Photos – Hijack bus becomes tourist destination? (17)
• Canadians killed in Philippine tour bus carnage — and the anti-Chinese comments (100)
• Anti-Chinese graffiti not ‘hate’? (42)

Oh yes, that’s definitely a good way to “remember” the tragedy. Thank you, really appreciate that. >:<

A female police officer poses and smiles for a "photo op". (HK Oriental Daily)

Students take group photo in front of the bus. (Apple Daily)

say cheeeeeze (Ming Pao)

Tags: Philippines, tour bus

Related posts

• The Leungs may be laid to rest in Vancouver (2)
• Donald Tsang = tour operator? (9)
• 2 heros in a family (8)
• Canadians killed in Philippine tour bus carnage — and the anti-Chinese comments (100)

Amy Ng's husband was killed when trying to save his wife from bullets. (Reuters)

A family of five was crushed after 3 were killed, 1 is still in critical condition with gun shoot to the head during the tour bus carnage in the Philippines. CBC reports they might be holding Canadian passports.

Three of the nine people killed in a hostage-taking aboard a tour bus in the Philippines on Monday may have been Canadian citizens, media reported Tuesday.

Jessie Leung, 14, and Doris Leung, 21, were killed in gunfire during the hostage-taking, their mother told Hong Kong Cable Television. The two, who were students in Canada, were travelling in the Philippines as Canadian citizens, she said.

Their father, Ken Leung, 58, was also killed. He was a Canadian dual-citizen living in Hong Kong, CTV reported.

Ken Leung’s wife Amy Ng was unhurt, but their son, Jason Leung, 18, remained in hospital after surgery on a head wound.

Tour organizers had said earlier that five of the people involved in the hostage-taking were carrying Canadian passports.

What shocks me AGAIN is the reaction of many Canadians to this tragedy who left pages of comments on the CBC website. Rather than showing any sympathy they are pointing fingers at the dual citizenship of the Leung family (nonetheless, have to stress that there are many more comments that condemn the “distastefulness” of picking up on the victims’ citizenship).

Why would a tragic story like this could quickly turn into a citizenship/racism debate? The Leung family isn’t even asking for the help from the Canadian embassy…

Here’re a few examples:

Yeah sure part time Canadians again???

Why do you hold a “dual-citizenship” and claim you pay your taxes in Canada? Aren’t you in fact a dual-citizen for this very reason? If you are in fact in North Vancouver, then do you reside in Canada long enough during the year to pay your FULL share of Canadian taxes? How much tax do you pay on your holdings in Hong Kong? If you want to lay your love of Canada on the line then I will call you a part-time Canadian patriot – who uses dual citizenship to counter-balance the tax system to your advantage. I won’t call you a part-time Canadian, however your heart lies in your wallet and you’ll swear allegiance to the best tax policy that you can benefit from. Don’t give us your part-time patriot stance unless you tell us you pay 100% Canadian taxes. You only get “half” the right to advocate.

Most people around the world have a Canadian passport. It is as common as having a credit or debit card..we give them to everyone..

More Canadians of convenience.When are we going to wake up and insist that immigrants that choose to come to Canada actually live here and contribute and not just visit for the benefits?Just like the Tamils who are under no threat at home being allowed to stay.They are simply cue jumpers taking the place of those that play by the rules.We are becoming a laughing stock who will fold with a little well planned public demonstration.Enough already!!

Canadian passports should only be for Canadians who live, contribute in building and defending our economy and Canadian values.

China does not recognize dual nationality. The Article 3 of China Nationality Law holds that People’s Republic of China will not admit the dual nationality of a Chinese citizen. Moreover, the Article 9 of China Nationality Law declares that as soon as a Chinese takes a foreign citizenship, he will automatically lose his Chinese citizenship.

These people were all living in China under a Aliens’ Permanent Residence in China. Official website: http://www.chinaembassy-fi.org/eng/lsfw/t415689.htm. Many thousands of Chinese who left during the pre-1997 panic, returned to China with open arms under this arrangement. Thumbs down but do your research before you blindly come to the defence of some poor, picked on immigrant and accuse your fellow Canadian of the old standby…racism..

The sooner many of you admit to the truths about our irresponsible and mis-guided immigration admission practises, the blatant abuses of our system, and the ineptness of the department to maintain any form of control and monitoring, the the sooner we can get things fixed and begin to attract loyal, stable immigrants to help this country grow stronger.

If the Chinese government had not meddled in this crisis in the first place, the Philippines would have been free to exercise its own judgment as to when to storm the bus, etc without China breathing down its neck. China often meddles in others’ affairs!

All those immigrants from Hong Kong and Lebenon who just want Canadian citizenship in case violence was to breakout in their country and they can flee at taxpayers expense to Canada I dont welcome.

disagree with the assertions on here that if you hold a Canadian passport you’re automatically Canadian. The law may technically be that now because our immigration system is so whacked out we give citizenship to people who fill the most minimum requirements and then go back and live in their homeland. I’m sorry bleeding hearts, but this is wrong and we need to UNcitizenize people who just use this passport as a convenience. They are NOT Canadian even if you’re twisted minds say they are.

As for the article, it is somewhat unclear if the 2 girls were actually living here (which then indeed they would be Canadian)or were just students going to school here and their family was in Hong Kong.

Ok its like this… If you come here and learn our ways and mix in with society you are Canadian. If you come here and hide at home and send money back to your country then you are not a Canadian,
Simple.

Wow… the Chinese government’s angry about murderous behavior?

This one from the Vancouver Sun:

The fact is, the Leung’s aren’t asking Canadian taxpayers for help!!

More Canadians of convenience – never paying taxes here – getting in trouble in some rathole – now the Canadian taxpayers are to be on the hook to sort out someone elses problems.

Rebukes:

I bet if the victims in question were white Canadians, we wouldn’t hear so much as a single blip from those loudly croaking about “Canadians of convenience”.

I am shocked by some of the racism comments on this forum toward to Chinese Canadians. Canadians are supposedly open mind and multicultural. Why are you questioning person who is holding a Canadian passport as if they are still foreigners to Canada? I am not sure if Canada is as friendly country as it looks, especially its attitude towards to Chinese Canadian in general. Remember, most immigrants from HK to Canada are well educated or financially well off therefore they make contribution to Canadian society as well as building bridge between HK and Canada. Whereas some of your Canadians are taking advantage of the social welfare system that is partially supported by these HK people in Canada. Please peoople; this is a difficult moment for the killed hostages. Not time to make racist and fun comment to them. Rising China should not bring so much hate toward to Chinese people; you should see it as a great contribution to mankind.

There was an article about those two Canadians getting killed on a tour bus just like this one (albeit through an accident and in Switzerland instead). You can still find it by googling it.

No comments appeared on that article about “Canadians of convenience.” In fact, one of the top comments (with over 300+ agreements, and very few disagreements) was by someone saying that they were a “Canadian living in Switzerland.”

Even though there are “Canadians” who would admit to having a Canadian passport and living in an European country (ie, UK, France, Switzerland)… the comments about “Canadians of convenience” only come up when the story involves a NON-European country.

Some people will try to say that we shouldn’t pull out the “racism card.” But I think it’s pretty clear that racism is a strong factor behind these comments considering the amount of hypocrisy on stories that are about Europeans versus non-Europeans.

I am deeply disturbed by your comments about whether the victims are real Canadians. I am of Chinese descent, came to Canada from Hong Kong at age 5, have been educated in the Ontario system ever since. I have contributed to society, to taxes, and to the education of future Canadians in my role as a teacher with the YCDSB. I consider myself Canadian and am proud of my dual heritage. My family have made an honest living in Canada and consider this country are home. We frequently travel to East Asia and South East Asia for vacation with our relatives who reside in Hong Kong. From your comments, I am appalled to find that if anything were to happen to families like mine in a foreign country, we will be looked at as aliens, outsiders, and undeserving of sympathy.

Why is it SOOOOO hard to believe that Chinese Canadians, might well have traveled during the summer holiday to Hong Kong to visit friends and relatives and then go over to Manila (a short 2 hour hop from Hong Kong) for a simple bus tour???

All the comments about “handing out” passports and Chinese Canadians should “stay in the country” are insane and touch on blatant racism!!!

Should Canadians of European descent also be restricted from traveling?

Ashamed to be even remotely associated with people like that, even just through citizenship. This was a horrible tragedy on many levels. Country of origin should not matter. Human beings were terrorized and killed. Let’s give the racism a rest and let the healing begin….

I just love how CBC decided to call them “Canadian passport holders” rather than JUST Canadians. Are there non-Canadian Canadian passport holders? Does the government issue passports to non-citizens? No. So they are just Canadians.

CBC is framing their stories with more and more bias these days. Anyone who has ever studied marketing can tell you that these are done on purpose to pursue an agenda. Even CNN would have exercise such bias. I’m switching over to CTV.

CBC has handled this story clumsily at best. “Travelling in the Philippines as Canadian citizens” is a long-winded way of saying that they were Canadian citizens. The five people “carrying Canadian passports” are Canadian citizens, otherwise they would have been carrying travel documents or identity certificates (http://www.ppt.gc.ca/non-cdn/index.aspx?lang=eng). If the CBC cannot confirm they were Canadians, they shouldn’t be putting it in the headline. This is amateur, shoddy work that would have been cleaned up in any high school paper.

I was born in HK and raised in Canada for more than 20 years. I pay tax ever since I have to. Why Canadian government not willing to step in or even offer any help? Those two victims confirmed entered Philippines with a valid Canadian passport. So what’s the meaning of taking the oath but not being protected or helped?

I find it extremely saddening that, here we are, faced with a story of immense tragedy, and yet the boards is filled with hatred and debate about the true “citizenship” of those killed.

You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Have you no respect for the dead?

If we changed all the races in this story, would that finally elicit some shred of sympathy, compassion, and human decency from you?

All within 5 hours of the onset of the incident. The HKSAR leader was phoning the Filipino President (to which he ignored), as well as having a press conference announcing how the situation is being handle with China’s foreign affairs people (HK’s foreign affairs are handled through Beijing), and getting assurance from Philippines’ authorities the safety of the hostages.

Where were the people from the Canadian embassy? Over 24 hours later our Foreign Affiars people still can’t confirm if there were Canadians citizen involved!?

Is our Manila embassy only good for handling remittance and issuring work permits??

Tags: anti-Chinese, citizenship, Philippines, racism

Related posts

• The Leungs may be laid to rest in Vancouver (2)
• Donald Tsang = tour operator? (9)
• 2 heros in a family (8)
• Photos – Hijack bus becomes tourist destination? (17)
• Anti-Chinese graffiti not ‘hate’? (42)

I love this article in the Richmond News. And I’d never want anyone to believe a second that the Chinese community shares any of the beliefs of CASJAFVA.

MP: Writer has wrong Wong
Wong never raised cash for lobbyists

Richmond Conservative MP Alice Wong has never hidden the fact she considers herself an evangelical Christian.

She is on a list of “MPs to help you pray” on the noapologies.ca website.

And the Conservative MP admits she has attended functions sponsored by the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association (CASJAFVA) — a Chinese-Canadian Christian organization that has lobbied against things like gay marriage.

But she denies ever raising money for the organization, as suggested in a new book called the Armageddon Factor by Marci McDonald (Random House).

“Now the Conservative Member of Parliament for Richmond, Wong had been an enthusiastic speaker and fundraiser for CASJAFVA, the right-wing advocacy group whose mostly Chinese membership had organized the largest protest against the Corren agreement,” McDonald writes, referring to the B.C. government’s controversial decision to allow Murray Corren, a gay man, help write the curriculum for a class called Social Justice 12.

While CASJAFVA members may have raised money for Wong, the Richmond MP said she has never raised money for CASJAFVA. That was the other Alice Wong, she added.

“There was another Alice Wong who was helping them with fundraising — not me. I never raised funds with them,” she said.

K-John Cheung, director for CASJAFVA, confirmed that an Alice Y. F. Wong has participated in fundraising for the organization in the past.

CASJAFVA may be best-known for its fight against the implementation of a Social Justice 12 high-school course designed to teach a variety of social justice issues.

The organization, led by Vancouver lawyer K-John Cheung, collected 17,000 signatures opposing the course’s implementation.

In her book, McDonald suggests the Christian right has received support from other religious and ethnic groups, like Muslims and Sikhs. And it got a big boost from the Chinese community in places like Richmond.

Despite their religious difference, these ethnic groups tend to share the Christian right’s views on things like same sex marriage.

“That realization was not lost on Stephen Harper when he drafted his theo-conservative strategy, nor was it any accident that Harper kicked off his 2008 election campaign clad in a blue sweater, indulging in a round of baby kissing in the B.C. riding of a three-time candidate named Alice Wong,” McDonald writes in her book.

Wong said she takes exception to the suggestion in McDonald’s book that the Harper Conservatives want to see Christian values forming government policy, to the exclusion of non-believers.

“If that’s the camp she’s putting me in, or the Conservative Party, then I categorically deny her assertion,” Wong said. “I would identify myself as an evangelical Christian in my religious beliefs, but I will never ever advocate for a Canada in which ‘non-believers have no place.’

“My very role as the Parliamentary Secretary for Multiculturalism, I endorse the right of all cultures and religions to peacefully coexist here in Canada.”

Wong added that she wonders why her attendance at CASJAFVA events means she is a religious bigot, but that other politicians aren’t.

“I have attended those events sponsored by that organization,” she said, “but so have other politicians from all political stripes.”

She said Ujjal Dosanjh (Liberal MP for Vancouver South), Sam Sullivan (former Vancouver mayor), Raymond Chan (former Liberal MP for Richmond) and Joe Peschisolido (current Liberal candidate for Richmond) have all attended CASJAFVA events.

“If my attendance at those events equates to religious intolerance or bigotry, I would assume you would have to paint those other politicians with the same brush,” Wong said.

Braeden Caley, former assistant to Raymond Chan, said the attendance of Liberals like Chan, Dosanjh and Peschisolido would have been around 2002 or 2003, before CASJAFVA began to show its true colours after the debate on same sex marriage heated up in Canada.

“Since (2003), it would have made no sense for a Liberal to associate with a group that has taken such a hard turn to the right,” he said. “But Alice Wong has been, and Stephen Harper did a fundraising event for them when he was leader (of the Conservative Party).

Caley added there is evidence that the Harper government’s policies do in fact reflect fundamentalist Christian values. He cites the Harper government’s attempts to repeal the legalization of same sex marriage in its first term is a good example.

The Harper government’s refusal to include funding for abortions in international aid package for women’s health in developing nations is a more recent example.

It’s not just Liberals who think the Conservative Party has been mixing too much religion into its politics.

In 2005, Charlie Horton, the Richmond riding association president for the Conservative Party, resigned after another evangelical Christian, Darrel Reid, was nominated as the Conservative candidate here. At the time, Horton said he was uncomfortable with the Conservative Party favouring evangelical Christians like Wong and Reid.

No tags for this post.
Related posts

• No related posts.

Recent developments on the “China spies conspiracy” indicate that the Chinese Canadian community is turning its anger more and more from CSIS boss Richard Fadden to PM Stephen Harper.

Harper was in Vancouver on Monday and held a “media roundtable” with the local ethnic media. Though many media have shown interest in getting the PM’s response on whether Fadden has filed his report with the public safety minister (as he promised in his showing at the parliamentary committee meeting in June), Harper has been very evasive. Harper only said that Fadden’s works fall into the category of “operational matters” which he cannot comment on.

In the June hearing, Fadden told the parliamentary committee — UNDER OATH — that his investigation on the “foreign spies” thing was completed and he would file a report with the government in 4 weeks. He did not do that — well, we don’t know if he’s done that or not because the public safety minister has refused to either confirm or deny if a report has been filed.

Public safety minister Vic Toews made a comment this week which only puts oil onto fire:

“I’ve heard Mr. Fadden’s comments. I was somewhat surprised by media reaction,” Toews began.

“His comments as I understand is something I’ve been reading in pages of newspapers across this country for the last 20 or 30 years. There’s nothing remarkable about the fact that governments may seek to influence politicians or senior bureaucrats. I mean I found it astounding that that would be a story.”

Two week ago, I thought the issue would cool down soon. But late developments are showing a reverse trend. Please read the following strong comments from the NCCC.

National Congress of Chinese Canadians Pacific Region Media Release

Aug 11, 2010

NCCC Pacific Region Co-Chair David Choi calls on Prime Minister Harper to Apologize to Canadians and Fire his Public Safety Minister.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is wrong for not condemning CSIS Director Richard Fadden’s smear against Canadian cultural communities, especially Chinese Canadians, Chinese Canadian community leader and two Privy Councillors of Canada say.

The sweeping slur of Canadians was rebuked by David Choi, Pacific Region Co-Chair of the National Congress of Chinese Canadians (NCCC), MP John McCallum and Andrew Telegdi, both Privy Councillors.

The Harper government’s continual refusal to acknowledge the harm caused by heartless allegations by its spymaster is a slap in the face to Canadians in the Chinese community, a leading spokesman said yesterday.

David Choi of Vancouver, co-chair of the Pacific Region of the National Congress of Chinese Canadians, said the government’s insensitivity to the Canadian Chinese community was reinforced Tuesday by Vic Toews, the federal public safety minister and the direct boss of Richard Fadden, the director general of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS).

Toews told a Toronto audience that he was “astounded” that Canadian ethnic communities would be angered by charges by Fadden that some provincial cabinet ministers and municipal politicians have come under foreign influence. Fadden subsequently mentioned B.C. specifically.

CBC televised Peter Mansbridge’s interview on June 22 with Fadden, in which Fadden alleged elected officials and government employees from different cultural communities are agents of foreign governments. Fadden also alleged that foreign governments has influenced Canadian universities. Fadden refused to back up his allegations with names and facts, upsetting Canada’s diverse cultural communities.

The CSIS Director’s promise under oath more than a month ago to produce a report for the parliamentary standing committee on public safety and national security by Aug. 2 has been broken, provoking outrage among ethnic communities.

Choi, based in Vancouver, has travelled to Ontario to talk to political and ethnic leaders and ordinary Canadians about the dangers poised by Fadden’s sweeping and unsubstantiated allegations.

NCCC finds Public Safety Minister Toews’ continuing refusal to address the issue to be an assault on Canada’s democracy, openness, and accountability.

“This is government persecution by innuendo,” Choi said. “Minister Toews’ and PM Harper’s inaction is appalling and completely unacceptable to Canadians.”

Choi was in Ontario and met with Canadians from the Chinese, Irish, Sikh, Muslim, French, Hindu, Greek, and Hungarian communities.

“Since it’s obvious that the Public Safety Minister Toews has utterly failed to respond properly to the Fadden issue for over a month, now it’s time for Prime Minister Harper to step up to the plate, and take responsibility by apologizing to Canadians and fire Toews,” Choi said.

“It’s appalling Toews is making the same attempt to whitewash serious government wrongdoing while innocent Canadians continue to be hurt by Fadden’s comments. These are Canadians who are government employees, elected officials, researchers, ordinary citizens seeking jobs and promotions, those studying at and employed by universities, etc.,” Choi said.

McCallum, an MP, Privy Councillor, and a senior minister in the previous Liberal government, expressed his deep concerns over the Harper government’s stand when Choi met with him last week in McCallum’s Markham/Richmond Hill riding.

Telegdi, former MP, another Privy Councillor, Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister Paul Martin, who also met with Choi said: “For Fadden to engage in a drive-by smear against various Canadian ethnic groups and to fail to back up those allegations with elaboration is an indecent thing to do. Canadians abhor that kind of behaviour.
“Toews’ refusal to acknowledge the damage done to innocent Canadians by holding his official to account is also contemptuous of all Canadians and Parliament.

“David Choi and NCCC is right to fight the Harper government for hurting innumerous innocent people” Telegdi Said.

McCallum and Telegdi commended NCCC and David Choi for their leadership in fighting for government accountability and their efforts in promoting strong ethno-cultural relations among Canadians.

What is more interesting is a recent counter-response shown by Tory supporters. Our newsroom received a call from a lady today, “complaining” that too much negative reporting has been put on Fadden, insisting what Fadden said “was right and everybody knew it”.

Sounds familiar?

The “official” Tory line was also uttered through its supporters’ mouths who have been eagerly calling some recent Chinese radio phone-in shows. (Actually, I have a feeling that these Chinese phone-ins are *always* the best indicators of how the Tories stand on issues — when the Tories cannot openly comment on issues that may hurt their ethnic votes, you’d find these “fighters” calling in radio shows to say something defending the Tories. Very interesting.)

Another interesting development on the Fadden controversy is that traditionally some pro-Tory Chinese media outlets are also picking up the stick against the Tories. For example, Sing Tao has been very active condemning the Tories lately (I wonder if that lady who called us today would have also called Sing Tao?) They did a “poll” (quotations needed because it’s not scientific, with a sample size of merely 45) which showed that 1/3 of those interviewed would switch to the Liberals just on the Fadden issue. It was a front page headline story.

I’m sure the Fadden issue is not going away any time soon. The Tories may have underestimated the damage of this issue to their ethnic base, just like how they misjudged the effect of their anti-China stand in 2006/7 on voters’ support.

FYI, the opposition is trying to keep the issue alive (thought very much paper-tigerly):

NDP’s release on Aug 11:

CONSERVATIVES MUST ACT ON FADDEN ACCUSATIONS

OTTAWA –After it was revealed this week that Richard Fadden has violated his sworn testimony by failing to report his foreign interference allegations to the government, New Democrat critics are calling on the Conservatives to show leadership and fire the CSIS director.

“Mr. Fadden testified under oath at committee that he would report his findings to the government within four weeks,” said New Democrat Public Safety Critic Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway). “After his terrible judgment in making the accusations in the first place, and his comments which revealed the identity of a French secret agent, violating his own sworn testimony is the third strike for Mr. Fadden. Instead of taking responsibility for the bungling of his agency director, the Public Safety Minister has been silent. Minister Toews must take action and fire Richard Fadden.”

New Democrat Citizenship and Immigration Critic Olivia Chow (Trinity Spadina) echoed the call for Fadden’s resignation, and highlighted the damage his remarks have caused.

“Mr. Fadden smeared entire communities of people with his reckless comments,” said Chow. “His report to the government is more than a week overdue, yet they have done nothing that shows they understand the serious of his accusations.”

“Why are the Conservatives doing nothing while Mr. Fadden’s accusations continue to cast suspicions on thousands of innocent Canadians?” said Chow. “The Conservatives must show leadership and deal with the situation so that reputations can be cleared once and for all.”

Liberals’ release on Aug 12：

Harper must reveal CSIS allegations of foreign influence

MARKHAM – Liberals are again calling on the Harper government to publicly reveal the allegations made by CSIS Director Richard Fadden.

“Mr. Fadden publicly promised the Minister of Public Safety a comprehensive report by August 2,, 2010,” said Liberal Public Safety Critic Mark Holland. “Either Mr. Fadden has failed in his commitment or the government is covering up the truth. In either case Mr. Harper has an obligation to step in and ensure that the hard won reputations of Canadian politicians across the country are protected.”

Last month, CSIS Director Fadden revealed that a number of Canadian politicians were under the influence of foreign governments – including two provincial cabinet ministers. Mr. Fadden also unfairly singled out the Chinese government as a source of foreign influence.

“By not releasing any supporting evidence Minister Toews, and his boss Mr. Harper, have tarnished the reputation of the Chinese-Canadian community,” said Liberal Finance Critic John McCallum. “Mr. Harper and Mr. Toews need to take responsibility for this file and either reveal the details of these accusations or publicly dismiss them as baseless. They cannot continue to allow provincial and municipal politicians to operate under a cloud of suspicion.”

Officials from numerous provincial and municipal governments have asked that the government to clarify Mr. Fadden’s remarks, including British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty.

“This government claims to be open and transparent, yet on an issue that is important to so many Canadians nary a word is heard,” continued Mr. McCallum. “Governments across Canada have been operating under a fog of uncertainty for too long.”

“This government is behaving recklessly with Canadians’ confidence in their municipal and provincial elected officials,” finished Mr. Holland. “If Mr. Fadden’s report shows that there is no cause for concern, the government must clear the air; otherwise Canadians have a right to know about these threats to the public order.”

Tags: CSIS, Richard Fadden, spies

Related posts

• [GB] How can a columnist use fabrications to support Fadden? (101)
• [GB] 9 reasons why CSIS chief should resign or be fired (3)
• 2/3 Canadians want Fadden to name names (5)
• Media reports point to ‘China’ as spy culprit in Fadden’s mind (12)
• FLG fights back… (80)