Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'math proficiency test'.
Radical, Hateful, Left Wingers Are Running Canada Your government, education system, and your state funded media sources have been infiltrated by radical leftists and they are misleading you. There are no racist, Nazi, organizations terrorizing minorities/racialized people in Canada in 2022. Additionally, there is no systemic racism and racialized people are succeeding/dominating at every level and in every aspect of Canadian society. In fact, white male, Canadians are not even in the top four of average earnings and white women are near the bottom of the groups. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/36-28-0001/2022001/article/00004-eng.pdf Take a look at recent court decisions, proposed legislation, and examples of violent crimes in Ontario. Ask yourself if you think our country is wandering in s fog of lies. Do you see that our demise is imminent? The woke, represented by all of the 3 major political parties, are seeking to destroy our nation all in the name of their woke anti-racism agenda. Judicial System They have cracked our legal forums. You will find woke, social justice warriors making key legal decisions all across Canada. This includes bail for accused cop killers and for other alleged murderers but not for people involved in the peaceful trucker convoy. Legal decisions have become a joke and make a mockery of our country’s values. All in the name of the left wing, woke agenda. Math: MPT Divisional Court of Ontario in Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council v. Ontario (Minister of Education) ONSC 7386 The Divisional Court of Ontario recently determined that racial equity was more important than teachers demonstrating proficiency in math; this applies to teachers who would potentially teach math. The Ontario government tabled Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018 on Oct. 18, 2018, and the bill received royal assent on April 3, 2019. The minister of education filed two regulations on Aug. 20, 2019, O. Reg. 272/19 under the Education Quality and Accountability Office Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.11 adding a Mathematics Proficiency Test (MPT) that all teacher candidates must pass to become certified teachers in Ontario. Reg. 271/19 under the Ontario College of Teachers Act (OCTA) required all candidates who apply for certification after March 31, 2020, to pass that test. Subsection 18(1) of this Act was amended to include paragraph 18(1)(c) relating to proficiency in math. The court ruled that requiring teachers to be proficient in math was unconstitutional as it represented a violation of Section 15 of the Charter. Equality Rights Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law 15 (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. Affirmative action programs (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. The claim for the MPT being “racist” was because white candidates scored higher than black candidates. Disparity is not evidence of racism. In fact, EastAsians/South Asians scored the highest at over 92%. No reasonable person could conclude that being “racialized” is a barrier to passing the MPT when a racialized group is the leading performer. See the figure at part 1 https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/12/2021-12-16-OTCC-v-Ontario-FINAL-signed-by-all.pdf *You will note that the Judge uses “LatinX” as opposed to Latino or Hispanic. Court Ruling  In conclusion, the MPT’s deleterious effect of the breach of equality rights outweighs the salutary effect of encouraging teacher candidates and Faculties of Education to focus more on math skills. The objective could be achieved directly by introducing math course requirements for admissions to B.Ed programs or in B.Ed programs themselves. This would be significantly less impairing of equality rights and at least as efficacious in furthering the objective of improving student achievement in math.  Accordingly, the Respondent has failed to demonstrate that the MPT is a reasonable and justifiable limit on the Applicants’ equality rights under s. 1. Summary If 70% of Canada is white and 20% is South Asian/East Asian then is it not reasonable to expect someone to be competitive with 90% of the population? Our courts claim a Charter breach because the expectation is to be at the level of 90% of the entire population? This is the “evidence” of racism in Canada in 2022. This is Canada in 2022. Woke and void of logic. Manipulating data to find “racism”. If diversity, not meritocracy, is our strength then why would we need to remove proficiency requirements for our teachers? If some racialized groups are dominating the system and are impervious to “systemic racism” where are the barriers to racialized people? Bail The woke agenda leads decisions on bail. See several examples in which a reasonable perosn would be shcokced by the release decisions. Umar Zameer https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2021/09/22/man-accused-of-killing-toronto-police-const-jeffrey-northrup-is-released-on-bail.html In September of 2021, the man accused of murdering Det. Const. Jeffrey Northrup received bail. Based on the limited information available due to a publication ban this alleged murder seemingly happened with many Police on scene and with parking garage video evidence available. The suspect, Umar Zameer, was arrested on site. He is currently out on bail. 13 Year Old Alleged Murderer/Armed Robber In April of 2022, a 13 year old allegedly robbed a pharmacy and then killed a 15 year old the next day in North York. The youth was released on bail. The logic seems to be that he is too young and vulnerable to be around older kids in the youth detention center, Roy McMurtry Youth Centre . The accused murderer is on bail in the care/custody of aunt, and grandmother. It is known for privacy reasons but one might ask if these are not the same people who were previously caring for/raising/controlling him in the first place? https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2022/04/12/13-year-old-boy-granted-bail-in-shooting-death-of-toronto-boy-15.html Pat King As of April 20, 2022, Pat King has been denied bail for his role in the trucker convoy rally/protest. You might notice that he is White and is part of the group that PM Trudeau and MP Jagmeet Singh called “white supremacists”. https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/freedom-convoy-leader-pat-king-charged-with-perjury-obstruction-of-justice-1.5867415 Human Rights Complaints and Unconscious Bias The woke agenda dominates decisions at the HRTO. They even know your "unconscious thoughts" and your "implicit bias" is evidence of racism.Just because, systemic racism. https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/doc/2020/2020hrto172/2020hrto172.html Below is a summary of a case before Ontario’s Human Rights’ Tribunal. Peel Police Officers were called in to a school when a six year old was out of control and the school could not control her. She was determined to be a safety threat to herself and others. The Officers did their best to apply their techniques to keep her calm and safe but were tiring. As the girl continued to flop and flail and spit and head butt, they restrained her with handcuffs. This is what experts in mental health do as well when the safety of people is in jeopardy. The adjudicator at the tribunal determined they did it because she was Black and they had “implicit bias” which made them fear the six year old girl. There was no evidence to support this just the philosophy that white people have “implicit bias” and therefore they did it because white people are inherently racist. This radical and absurd belief is in our legal system. If anyone can suggest what to do with a six year old behaving in such a dangerous manner please share your idea with the world and you will be a billionaire and a legendary sociologist. The takeaway is no one can do anything ever to a racialized person. Regardless of how reasonable the action as based on by a nuanced situation, everything is racist. This is because the court/tribunal knows your subconscious thoughts are racist. Excerpts from the Tribunals’ decision is below for context. JKB v. Peel (Police Services Board), 2020 HRTO 172 (CanLII) 85] The officers took the applicant to the front office and placed her on a chair with one officer on either side, each holding one of her hands. Meanwhile she was wriggling, flailing and kicking her feet and trying to break their grip. DP testified that the officers had had to be “hands on” with the applicant because she was “kind of all over the place.” The officers tried to de-escalate the applicant. NE said that they used “professional tactical communications” to try to calm the applicant down and figure out what was going on but had no luck. DP agreed that the officers had no greater success than he had had in de-escalating the applicant.  It was DP’s evidence that the first set of handcuffs were placed on the applicant in the front office in the following circumstances. The applicant was spitting, head butting and trying to break free. She began kicking the officers, swinging her legs out sideways and coming backwards, like a heel kick. The officers spoke with each other and agreed to handcuff the applicant’s ankles. DP recalled that one officer told the applicant a few times that if she did not stop kicking, spitting and head butting they would have to put cuffs on. When the applicant continued to kick, one of the officers held both of her hands and the other officer handcuffed her ankles and then stood up to make a phone call. It appeared to DP that the officers were trying to figure out what to do. This happened 5 -10 minutes after they arrived in the office.  Based on the evidence of all three witnesses, I conclude that after the applicant’s ankles were handcuffed, she continued to spit and bite, attempt to flail and struggle to break free.  The explanations that NE provided about his decision to place handcuffs on the applicant were as follows: • In his interview, NE stated that the handcuffs were applied “…solely for the purpose of controlling her, reducing the risk of injury to myself and my partner and other staff, we saw no other option that was fit at the time.” • His explanation at the hearing as to why they did not just continue to hold the applicant was that it was “stressful and exhausting”, that tactical communications had not worked, that he had done everything he possibly could but it felt like they were wrestling with the applicant and he did not want her to get hurt. He was aware that the trained professionals at the school had been unsuccessful in restraining the applicant so the best solution at the time was to put handcuffs on the applicant to control the range of motion of her limbs while continuing to hold her. He said that the handcuffs helped control the applicant’s limbs to prevent injury to the officers, to anyone else and “of course” the applicant. • NE was asked if he ever saw the applicant as threatening. He said, “Never. I saw her as a little child.” He was also asked whether, throughout his entire interaction with the applicant, he ever asserted his authority as a police officer. He answered that he had not. He said that visibly he is a police officer because he is in uniform, but he was not there doing a criminal investigation and a big part of his work is almost like social work, dealing with people in crisis. He said that in this case he knew immediately that this was some kind of behavioural issue or crisis. He explained that with tactical communication, different approaches are used in different situations and in this case, he took a soft, gentle approach, not invading personal space while initially in the office and using pitch, tone and volume which was the same as that he was using in giving his evidence.  In this case, police officers with no training in dealing with children in crises were called into a school to deal with a situation involving the applicant which the school staff had been unable to manage. The applicant’s behaviours, before the arrival of the officers on the morning of September 30, 2016, included hitting another child, running away, throwing objects at her principal and behavioural teaching assistant – and hitting him on the lip – and hitting out at both adults. We do not know what prompted such behaviours in this six-year-old girl. The officers were told about the applicant’s behavioural history upon arrival and understood that they had been called in to “control” the applicant – which they proceeded to try to do. Although the applicant was sitting calmly in the office when NE arrived, there is no evidence that either SK or NE did anything to prompt the applicant’s abrupt departure from the office – rather, this was a continuation of her behaviours from earlier that morning. The applicant’s resistant behaviours began as SK initially held her on the stage and attempted to encourage her to return to the office with them. Her behaviours continued until the paramedics arrived. The evidence is undisputed that the officers conducted themselves throughout the incident in a professional and polite manner and that they did make efforts to verbally de-escalate the applicant while she continued to struggle, kick, head butt and try to scratch and bite them. It is also clear that the focus of the officers from the point SK began to hold the applicant by the arms when she emerged from behind the piece of furniture on the stage was on attempting to “control” the applicant through physical means.  The officers provided very similar explanations at the hearing for their decisions to use handcuffs on the applicant after returning to the office. First, they both wanted to prevent harm to others and themselves, and to the applicant. NE said in his interview that the sole reason for using handcuffs was to reduce the risk of injury to himself, his partner and staff. SK said that he was concerned that the applicant might run out of the room and that there was a potential she could hurt herself, including running out to the driveway in front of the school, or hurt others including other students. SK said that there was “definitely a potential that she could cause harm to herself or others.” Second, both officers said that they were tiring from holding the applicant. SK said that this meant they would have to apply more pressure in holding the applicant as she continued to struggle.  Since the officers’ explanation for their treatment of the applicant -- to ensure the safety of themselves, others and the applicant -- does not justify the degree of control to which they subjected her, and since the officers placed the applicant on her stomach despite NE’s statement that he would never do this to a child, then is an inference of racial discrimination warranted in this case? I believe that it is.  The expert opinion evidence provided by JC and Dr. K. explained how, in a dynamic situation, such as the one in this case, implicit bias can kick in and be a factor in decisions made by police. Dr. K. said that once it registers that someone belongs to a different group – for example in the case of a White person, that the other person is Black -- the negative characteristics and stereotypes associated with that other group are activated in our brains. Those characteristics and stereotypes influence how that other person is perceived and how they are treated. Dr. K. also testified that research on implicit bias has demonstrated that in the case of Black children, because of the stereotypes and negative characteristics triggered, Black children may be perceived to be older, bigger, stronger, faster or more of a threat than they really are simply because they are Black. Canadian research has shown that Black children engaging in exactly the same behaviour as White children are perceived to be older, more muscular, more aggressive than they actually are with the result that it is perceived that more force is needed to control a Black child than a White child.  NE said that he would never place a child on her stomach because it would put her at risk of asphyxiation. However, NE and SK did just that. The clear difference between the applicant and a typical child, from the perspective of two White police officers, is her race – as a Black person, the applicant is a member of a ‘different group’. While I do not believe that it was the intention of these officers to discriminate against the applicant based on her race, it is clear that their focus throughout was on controlling her. Their overreaction can only be explained by the inference that because of implicit stereotypical associations that arose because of the applicant’s race, they saw her, as a Black child, being more of a threat, being bigger, stronger and older than she was and, consequently, of being more in need of control than they would have seen a White child in the same circumstances.  In the absence of any explanation for their overreaction in placing the applicant stomach down with her wrists cuffed behind her, ankles cuffed and maintaining her in this position for 28 minutes, the evidence supports the conclusion that the most probable reason for this action is that the officers were influenced by implicit bias in respect of the applicant’s race. I find, therefore, that race was a factor in the officers’ treatment of the applicant on September 30, 2016 and, as a result, the respondent has violated the applicant’s rights to equal treatment in the provision of services under s. 1 of the Code. JKB v. Peel (Police Services Board), 2020 HRTO 172 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/j5mq2> Nazi Hate Crimes in Canada in 2022 Our politicians are dedicated to promoting the radical left’s hateful agenda. They also want to promote the notion that white people are hateful and racist and need to be stopped. They are passing significant legislation across the country to embed their ridiculous philosophy into our laws and policies. It is not just the Liberals and the NDP- all politicians, even "Conservatives" are supporting these motions/legislation. House of Commons Designated Proud B***oy** as Terrorist Organization As per the NDP’s website, they claim the following: “Members of the Proud Boys joined a group armed with deadly weapons as they led an assault on the U.S. Capitol – this was an act of domestic terrorism. Alarmingly, their founder is from Canada.” -end quote- In fact, as of April 21, 2022 no PB members have been convicted of any illegal firearm charges relating to the alleged trespassing incident on January 6, 2022 or convicted of any domestic terror charges. At worst, the dozen or so that have been charged are facing “Obstruct Justice” and other similar charges- no terror-related charges. Their founder was actually born in the United Kingdom but grew up in Canada until he moved to New York after starting Vice. In actuality, on January 6, 2021, the leader of the PB was a Black man of Cuban descent. Regardless of the facts, MP Jagmeet Singh used the “do what I say or you are a racist” tactic to have the PB labeled as a terrorist organization on par with ISIS. Singh claims the “proliferation of white supremacist organization hate groups” demands immediate action by the government. https://globalnews.ca/news/7598355/motion-passes-proud-boys-terrorists/ There have been zero acts of hate committed by the PB organization in Canada. The use of fear and disinformation is how the radicals operate today and why Canada has now banned a group for no reason or any facts. The Halifax 5, men who nobly served the Canadian military, and are part of the Indigenous and the LGTBQ community seem to be the only example of the PB’s “terror” in Canada. None of the 5 were charged and simply asked protestors why there were defacing a public statue. However, in today’s leftists Canada, this is terrorism. All politicians across all parties supported this move to label a group as “terrorists” with zero evidence of any terror activities. In 2022, you are a racist just because someone says so and you could even be labelled a terrorist with no evidence or even any allegations of terror. The crime is because they think you are part of a Nazi organization even though your leader is Black and your members are of all races and backgrounds. https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/no-charges-in-halifax-proud-boys-incident-servicemen-return-to-duties-navy-1.3570098 There have been no serious (murder/attempted murder) hate crimes linked to racist, white organizations this century. We do have many examples of other groups murdering in the name of hate but politicians like MP Singh do not hold press conferences to condemn non-whites involved in hate. Yes, there are hate crimes and evil acts in Canada. But, there is no link to organized Nazis or white supremacist organizations as they want you to believe. Below are some of the most prominent acts of hate in Canada over the past ten years. Michael Zehaf-Bibea/Ottawa Attack Cpl. Nathan Cirillo died because of Zehaf-Bibea. The killing of a Canadian soldier on duty would be a legitimate domestic terror attack not politely asking people why they are defacing a public statue. However, the narrative- a Muslim killing a white soldier- does not lend itself to promoting the left’s agenda so this tragedy received no calls to action by any politican. https://globalnews.ca/news/2885513/michael-zehaf-bibeau-followed-british-islam-preacher-convicted-of-inviting-support-for-is/ Patrice Vincent The 2014 Saint Jean sur Richelieu ramming attack was a terror attack that happened in Quebec on October 20, 2014. Two Canadian Forces members were hit by an Islamic terrorist, Martin Couture-Rouleau. Warrant officer Patrice Vincent died from injuries, while another soldier was injured, but survived. The RCMP and the Government of Canada has characterized the homicide as a terrorist act by an Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant-inspired terrorist. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu_ramming_attack Saad Akhtar: ISIS Gruesome Hate Crime A Muslim man, an alleged ISIS member, killed an elderly Asian woman in the name of hate. Annie Hang-Kam Chiu had her head bashed in with a hammer in August of 2021. Neither Justin or Jagmeet had much to say about that and you probably have never heard of Annie but you know the name of a fentanyl selling, counterfeit 20 passing, career criminal in Minneapolis. https://globalnews.ca/news/8143311/isis-supporter-pleads-guilty-to-killing-toronto-woman-with-hammer/ Faisal Hussain/Danforth Shooting The Danforth shooting in July of 2018 took the lives of Reese Fallon, aged 18, and Julianna Kozis, aged 10, were killed. Additionally, 13 others were injured in the shooting by the Pakistani Muslim. There was no outrage from any politician. https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/mandel-new-questions-arise-about-danforth-shooting-was-terror-the-motive Dante Andreatta Marroquin: 12 Year Old Gunned Down in Toronto 12 year old Dante Sebastian Andreatta was grocery shopping with his mother in the Jane and Finch area when he was shot in the mid-afternoon on Nov. 7. He died in hospital four days later. Police said the Saturday shooting began when two vehicles entered a parking lot near Jane Street and Stong Court at about 2:20 p.m. Two occupants of one of the cars got out and started firing at the second vehicle, chasing it outside of the lot while firing about 30 rounds. Jahwayne Smart, 25, and Rashawn Chambers, 24, who police alleged were the shooters who killed Andreatta, were arrested last week leaving a Canadian Tire store in downtown Toronto. They have both been charged with first-degree murder in addition to dozens of other offences. https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2020/11/17/toronto-police-arrest-third-man-in-shooting-death-of-12-year-old-bystander-dante-andreatta.html Richard Jonathan Edwin/TTC Shootings Richard Jonathan Edwin has been charged with two counts of first-degree murder in connection with the death of Kartik Vasudev, a 21-year-old Seneca College student, who was shot on April 7 outside the Glen Road entrance to Sherbourne Station. The second shooting victim was Elijah Eleazar Mahepath who was killed in cold blood in the vicinity of Dundas and George streets about 48 hours later. The identity of the accused has been released but his photo hidden and initial descriptions of his colour/race have been redacted. There was originally outrage as suspicion that this was a hate crimes by evil, white racists but the release of the description ended that outrage. In time, more details will be released but this heinous murder does not fit Canada’s narrative of white supremacist, Nazis killing racialized people so do not expect this story to have any legs. In juxtaposition, consider the horrific London car incident in which a Muslim family was killed. Certainly, that produced outrage and fueled the claims of racist, white Canadians being a threat to everyone. Mississauga Bear Spray Attack in Mosque: March of 2022 Initially many people took this unusual attack involving bear spray and a hatchet to be a great opportunity to bemoan the terror of racist, white Nazis attacking Canadian communities but when the name of the suspect was released, the outrage vanished. Mohammad Moiz Omar, 24, was charged with: Assault with a weapon. Administering a noxious substance with intent to endanger life or cause bodily harm. Possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose. Uttering a threat to cause death or bodily harm. Carrying a concealed weapon and mischief to religious property. Police allege he walked into the building near McAdam Road and Matheson Boulevard East, Mississauga and discharged bear spray toward people while brandishing a hatchet. There has not been any updates from politicians and media since learning that the suspect himself has a Muslim name. Politicians and the media have abruptly ended their interest in this story. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/mosque-attack-1.6420433 April 2022: Toronto Mosque Shooting For now, the media is not releasing any details on the suspects in the Scarborough shooting during Ramadan that wounded five people. Typically, this is an indication hat the suspects are not white; however, that is not evidence of whether or not the shooting was part of the “growing hate and violence” by white, supremacist, Nazis that the media politicians are constantly discussing. However, monitor this situation and see who the eventual suspects/perpetrators turn out to be. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/five-men-attacked-in-drive-by-shooting-outside-scarborough-mosque-during-ramadan-police-1.5863972 https://www.torontopolice.on.ca/homicide/mostwanted.php Jahiem Robinson, 18:Shot by 14-year-old in Scarborough at School Kids being murdered while at school would seemingly ring alarms for politicians and the general public. However, when there is no link to white supremacists….silence. No press conferences. No motions to name a gang or two as domestic terror organizations. No call to declare war on these gangs or to ask questions about who are these shooters? Whats happening in their communities to allow them to behave like this? Nothing. No new anti-crime bill to make sure no student will ever be murdered at high school again. In fact, leftists fight to have police in schools. The Police are the enemy to them even they consistently do an amazing job of catching the criminals until the leftist judges place them back on the street. The real problem is systemic racism, they want you to believe. Don’t ask for data or use logic. Just blame racism. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/scarborough-school-shooting-david-mary-thomson-1.6352346 John Wheeler: Randomly Shot and Killed in Toronto It is unlikely that you have ever heard of John Wheeler. In 2020, the 45 year old Wheeler was standing outside his residence at 1350 Danforth Rd. when he was shot in the back. He died in hospital. It is not believed that he knew the attacker or that there was a reason for the murder. The alleged suspect is Black so this story is of no interest to the media or politicians. If Mister Wheeler had been a Black man allegedly shot by a white man for no reason, it would have been labeled as racist and the story would be discussed ad nauseam. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tps-make-arrests-in-two-homicide-cases-1.5728513 White Attacks: London and Toronto Mosque Stabbing This contrasts the mosque stabbing in Toronto in which a white man is alleged to have stabbed a caretaker to death. MP Singh frequently references this tragic loss of death but does not seemingly know of any other cases unless the suspects are white. The London car attack of a Muslim family is currently on trial and if convicted this might actually be a legitimate example of a white person committing a racist, violent act in Canada this century but I would wager that it was not organized or linked to an organization and that, if convicted, mental health was likely a factor. Regardless, a handful of horrible incidents juxtaposed against the total crime data would place these two to three examples in context. No reasonable person would see white crime against no-whites as a national emergency. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/toronto-man-charged-in-stabbing-death-of-mosque-volunteer-1.5111062 Proposed Legislation Bill C-229: Ban on Flags and KKK in Canada ndp.ca/news/ndp-bill-would-ban-hate-symbols-0 As per the NDP’s website, “NDP House Leader Peter Julian, MP (New Westminster–Burnaby) tabled Bill C-229, a private member’s bill that would prevent anyone from selling and displaying symbols that promote hatred. The symbols that would be banned are Swastikas and other Nazi emblems of the genocidal regime, Klu Klux Klan symbols and the Confederate flag, symbols of slavery, racism and of white supremacy. Bill C-229 is a tool designed to address the growing violence and hatred in Canadian communities.” Firstly, it is implicitly implied that racist white people are involved in violence and hatred in Canadian communities. This is simply, brazenly, and commonly stated as fact by a member of Parliament with no fear of recourse. Of course, there is no evidence that Nazis or the KKK are engaged in hatred or violence in Canada in 2022. There is no actual racism or hate in Canda so the radicals seek out historic groups from another country to engage in fear and hate mongering against white people. MP’s want the public to believe that there is a need to pass legislation to stop racist, whites from their violent and hateful attacks on Canadian communities. How is this not absurd to a reasonable person? Symbols of white supremacy? What does that even mean? We hear there is white supremacy and systemic racism everywhere, don’t we? Math is “white supremacy”. The Police and hospitals/health care, teachers/schools are “white supremacy”. The NDP want to pass a law that makes anything a symbol of “white supremacy” to be banned and illegal? Where is this country headed? Bill 67: Ontario’s Equity in Education Act This should shock you. Please read about the NDP’s proposal to mandate critical race theory in Ontario schools. The Act would officially recognize that there is “systemic racism” in Ontario schools, fine students/people for “anti-racist” behavior in schools including sub conscious thoughts, rate teachers by how well they “promote racial equity” which means to see better outcomes for non-whites over whites and many more surreal points. https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/42048-open-letter-to-honourable-member-of-provincial-parliament-linda-mae-lindo-bill-67/ Only one MPP Belinda Karahalios in Ontario opposed this bill. The Conservatives were right on board. Listen to Jordon Peterson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fogGeB8YmnQ Liberal Gun Bans Liberal leader of Ontario Stephen del Luca is campaigning on a promise to ban handguns and Liberal MP Bill Blair also pushed legislation to take guns off the street. Both plans involve legal gun owners- not the criminals using the guns to kill people and making the country unsafe. https://globalnews.ca/news/8769542/ontario-liberals-promise-handgun-ban-few-details/#:~:text=leader%20Steven%20Del%20Duca In no reasonable society would the government look to implement legislation to address a serious health and safety/ public interest issue without providing the data demonstrating the risks and the key factors involved. For example, driving accidents and insobriety or cancer and smoking or obesity and diet. However, in Canada today when we talk about murders, gun violence, and crime we do not discuss who does these acts. It is simply not to be discussed or raised. Accordingly, we take action to solve the issue of gun violence by not having to data to show who the people are that shoot and sell arms. We do not look for commonalities or patterns . Instead we move to ban guns time and time again. If someone asks who are the people doing the shooting and what might be the causes, they are cancelled as racists. Can you imagine that no politician or media outlet will ask what are the traits of people killing/shooting people? The truth is that everyone knows that a certain democratic of males 16 to 40 years old who make up around 1% of the nation’s population are involved/responsible for over half of the shootings in Canada but we will not release the data and we continue to pretend that it is not important to know the traits of the shooters in order to solve the problem. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5915995 To prevent lung cancer, we identified that smoking was a a cause and targeted smokers with an information campaign and directed efforts to reduce lung cancer. To reduce driving accidents, we have drinking and driving efforts/RIDE checks and educational campaigns but for the shooting epidemic we target legal gun owners with little representation in crimes and we ignore the people who commit these heinous crimes. On no level does this make sense. The Toronto Police’s most wanted list does not show many white supremacists or Nazis as great threats to public safety. However, left wingers only focus on them as the “greatest threat” to Canadians. https://www.torontopolice.on.ca/homicide/mostwanted.php I loathe to use US data because it is a different country with a different history and with a weaker societal net of care but as Canada will not release data on murder as it would be “racist”, take a look at the 2019 data from the FBI. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls According to the FBI, African-Americans accounted for 55.9% of all homicide offenders in 2019, with whites 41.1%, and "Other" 3.0% in cases where the race was known. Among homicide victims in 2019 where the race was known, 54.7% were black or African-American, 42.3% were white, and 3.1% were of other races. The per-capita offending rate for African-Americans was roughly eight times higher than that of whites, and their victim rate was similar. About half of homicides are known to be single-offender/single-victim, and most of those were intraracial; in those where the perpetrator's and victim's races were known, 81% of white victims were killed by whites and 91% of black or African-American victims were killed by blacks or African-Americans. Victim Data: Canada Naturally, our government will release data on the race of victim’s but not the perpetrators. This allows for there to be a “pandemic of grief” with the Black community as victims of systemic racism. Of course we all want to stop murders and shootings and to make Canada safe for everyone. It starts with an honest conversation and the left wing radicals hiding data does not help anyone especially those disproportionately victimized by the crime. The report showed 44% of homicide victims are Black which should make everyone want to ask: “What is happening in that community?” But, this cannot be asked as it would be racist. The report will not say who is doing the shooting or give any direction as to how to stop this from continuing. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/new-uoft-research-sheds-light-on-homicides-1.6315931 Bill C-5 In response to the high rate of gun violence, murder , and violent crimes in the Black community, the federal government is passing Bill C-5. This Bill will reduce mandatory minimum punishment/sentencing (MMP) for many serious crimes. The reasoning, “systemic racism”. There are a lot of Black people in jail so there must be systemic racism and the answer, apparently, is do not put them in jail. It is worth noting that no other data points were used in concluding that systemic racism was responsible for the “overincaerceration”. Simply, Black people represent 3.5% of the population and are 7% of the incarceration rate, ergo, systemic racism. This is an example of actual systemic racism. The government will release more serious offenders, place more on non-custodial sentences, and go easier on dangerous offenders because of their colour. As a result, tragically, they will be back in their communities and racialized people, mostly Black, will suffer as a result. No one will track the number of victims that will suffer because of Bill C 5 because that would be inconvenient but every reasonable person will recognize that some of these people released back into the communities, as opposed to serving an MMP, will repeat offend and harm the community. These communities are not “racialized or Black” communities. They are Canadian communities and they deserve respect and protection. We are failing them to serve the demands of the woke, extremists who act without facts or logic but based on anger and vengage to “correct historical wrongs” that do not exist in 2022. Here are some crimes for which Bill C-5 will remove MMP, as per the website: To address the overincarceration rate of Indigenous peoples, as well as Black and marginalized Canadians, MMPs for the following offences would be repealed: Using a firearm or imitation firearm in commission of offence (two separate offences) Paragraphs 85(3)(a) and (b): MMPs of 1 year (first offence) and 3 years (second and subsequent offence) Possession of firearm or weapon knowing its possession is unauthorized (two separate offences) Paragraphs 92(3)(b) and (c): MMP of 1 year (second offence) and 2 years less a day (third and subsequent offence) Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition Paragraphs 95(2)(i) and (ii): MMPs of 3 years (first offence) and 5 years (second and subsequent offence) Possession of weapon obtained by commission of offence Paragraph 96(2)(a): MMP of 1 year Weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition) Subsection 99(3): MMP of 1 year Possession for purpose of weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition) Subsection 100(3): MMP of 1 year Importing or exporting knowing it is unauthorized Subsection 103(2.1): MMP of 1 year Discharging firearm with intent Paragraph 244(2)(b): MMP of 4 years Discharging firearm — recklessness Paragraph 244.2(3)(b): MMP of 4 years Robbery with a firearm Paragraph 344(1)(a.1): MMP of 4 years Extortion with a firearm Paragraph 346(1.1)(a.1): MMP of 4 years Selling, etc., of tobacco products and raw leaf tobacco Subparagraphs 121.1 (4)(a)(i),(ii) and (iii): MMPs of 90 days (second offence), MMP of 180 days (third offence) and MMP of 2 years less a day (fourth and subsequent offence) https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2021/12/mandatory-minimum-penalties-to-be-repealed.html Unity and Meritocracy Are Our Strength If diversity is our strength why do we need to pump so much funding and effort into it? Typically assets yield positive results and do not suck resources. Why do companies and schools and hospitals pay out so much in legal fees dealing with discrimination allegations, paying for “training”, and hiring Diversity Specialists? We have so much public funding at all levels going to support specific groups based on their race. Toronto has a massive anti black racism program funded by tax dollars. https://www.toronto.ca/community-people/get-involved/community/confronting-anti-black-racism/ The City of Toronto commits more than $1.2 million in cultural and economic investments to confront anti-Black racism. The City is making multiple investments in Toronto’s Black arts and culture community and business sector to address the systemic economic, social and cultural exclusion facing Black communities in Toronto. The City actually has an entire unit dedicated and funded with public funds- i.e, the system- to stop anti-Black racism. A system that is designed to ensure racial dominance also has, within the same system, units to prevent the very purpose of the system. Isn't that diametrically opposed to the system's core purpose- like a braking system designed to accelerate when activated?? https://www.toronto.ca/community-people/get-involved/community/confronting-anti-black-racism/ There is also a Provincial program as well. Throughout Ontario, there are university and college programs specifically helping only the Black community. Queens University has a special program for medical students. This excludes White people. https://meds.queensu.ca/academics/undergraduate/black-medical-students-queens-university The U of T has the Black Student Application Program (BSAP) is an optional application stream for Black applicants who self-identify as Black African, Black Caribbean, Black North American, multi-racial students who have and identify with their Black ancestry, etc. The aim of this application program is to increase and support Black medical student representation at the University of Toronto. Through BSAP, we hope to break down some of the barriers that might impede Black students from applying, and nurture an inclusive environment that is welcoming to all. White students are not eligible and are excluded from this program. https://applymd.utoronto.ca/black-student-application-program The federal government has exclusive programs to help Black businesses and Black homeowners. It is unclear how a country can pump millions of millions of taxpayers dollars into programs with no evidence of anti black racism. It is obvious from these programs taht the opposite is true. Black people get preferential treatment. If one argues that disparity in outcome is evidence of " racism " then white people experience the most discrimination because despite being the majority Asians outperform them in every measurement. The Black Entrepreneurship Program (BEP) is a partnership between the Government of Canada, Black-led business organizations, and financial institutions. With an investment of up to $350.8 million over four years, it will help Black Canadian business owners and entrepreneurs grow their businesses and succeed now and into the future. This opportunity discriminates based on race- against White people. https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/150.nsf/eng/home The TDSB has determined that the gifted program which previously had a standard for entry is racist. There is no longer a score required on exams or a grade requirement to qualify. Students will now voluntarily enroll and preference will be awarded to those from “historically marginalized communities” i.e. non-white students. No reasonable person can imagine this erasing of a gifted program having any global benefit to the country. Diversity and Inclusion There are thousands and thousands of people in the new field of race-complaining. Every school/college/university/major organization has a complaint department. They almost exclusively hire racialized people and their livelihood depends on justifying their employment. This incentivizes them to find complaints. Mirco aggressions and “systemic” issues have replaced actual acts of racism. How long is this sustainable? We are creating an infrastructure based on division. Groups must identify with one another based on superficial traits like solour and country of origin. Who cares? People are demanding that they have someone “who looks like me” provide the, service. This means Black police, doctors, teachers, HR consultants, everything. We are now a tribalistic state. This can only destroy our once great nation. We should see one another as Canadians and ignore superficial factors like melatonin and hair texture. Let's rebuild Canada based on meritocracy and teamwork. The radical leftists have divided us and made us see one another through an " equity lens". People are now living just to hate and complain and to be a victim. This is not sustainable. Conclusion We are a country- unity is our strength. Dividing ourselves by trace, colour, political positions does none of us any good. A small percentage of 3% of the settler population are not succeeding and we should all help them. However, we should use reason, science, and a logical plan not destroying our judicial, work, and educational system. We are on a path of decay. Crime will increase beyond control and businesses will fail and our best and brightest will be anchored with government restrictions keeping them from greatness in the name of equity. With sincere warning, Doug Johnson Hamilton, Ontario