Migration

Since the early 1900s, hundreds of thousands of refugees in countries throughout the Middle East left or were forced to leave without a Pound or a Franc from lands where they had lived in since biblical times. What is often not addressed in English language media or worldwide as a whole, is that many of these people were Jewish communities which were slowly destroyed for political, cultural and religious reasons in the 20th century. Many of these communities eventually inherited the fate of the Jewish Community in Spain during the Spanish Inquisition, leaving towns and villages where their cultures and communities thrived for generations for new destinations abroad, slowly losing their heritage and homes to satisfy the desires of the political majority. While not all countries in the Middle East treated their Jewish communities with severe contempt and some communities were given some equality in their respective societies, the majority of Jewish people who had lived for thousands of years in the Middle East were forced to leave for Europe, the Americas the new state of Israel and even Asia.

Many Jewish people from Arab lands settled in France where Algerian, Tunisian and Moroccan Jews could speak French and integrate into society. Jewish people from Iraq and other former British colonies settled in London and the United States, even making it as far as China and Singapore. Many settled in Latin America as well, with Syrian, Lebanese and Iraqi Jews creating communities in Brazil and Argentina and many Turkish and Syrian Jews settling in Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela and even Cuba. In one community in Havana alone, an entire village with all their religious texts and chattels from their original town in Turkey were transplanted into Cuba in the early 1900s. They moved to live in the US Protectorate at the time of Cuba, which spoke Spanish, similar to the dialect of Ladino they inherited from their ancestors who escaped from Spain to live in Turkey, Italy, France and Greece. In 1948, half of Israel’s population alone was made of Jewish people who came from Arab, Persian, Central Asian and Turkish lands. These refugees were often forced to leave their birthplace and all their funds and land built up upon generations in order to arrive poor and homeless in Israel and abroad. While these people often had a difficult time in their birth countries and in Israel upon arrival, their situation has only been given some slight attention in the last 10 years. Almost none of their original communities exist today; making Jewish culture from Arab lands some of the oldest decimated cultures to have been lost to the world in the last 100 years.

Some slight progress has been made in addressing the issue of Jews from Arab and other Middle Eastern lands. On April 1st 2008, the U.S. Congress passed House Resolution 185, which grants first-time-ever recognition to Jewish refugees from Arab countries. For the first time those hundreds of thousands of refugees and emigrants who lost their homes and were turned into poverty were recognised 60 years later as being not simply a forgotten people. US Rep. Ros-Lehtinen made a statement saying:

“Far fewer people are aware of the injustice faced by Jewish refugees from Arab lands and Iran. Many Jews saw their communities, which had existed vibrantly for centuries systematically dismantled. They lost their resources, their homes, and their heritage sites, fleeing in the face of persecution, pogroms, revolutions and brutal dictatorships.”

With many smaller cultures in the Middle East facing persecution in the last 50 to 100 years, the first steps to addressing refugees beyond those well known refugee groups are beginning to take place. Beyond those Jews from Arab lands, other groups such as Zoroastrians, Armenians, Kurdish, Bah’ai, Assyrians, Christians, recent Iraqis and various other oppressed groups and political refugees need to be acknowledged. After 60 years of unknown suffering, this small group of people are finally able to reconcile their history and future as a recognized people and culture in the world community.

**The Following Blogpost is a complement to the FPA’s Feature on Canadian Immigration and Economic Rights: Great Decisions Analysis: Economic Rights and Migration by Rich Basas.

In an FT.com article published this week called Jobs for workers of the world, writer Bernard Simon discusses how the Canadian immigration system and local Canadian businesses address the vast number of foreign workers trying to make a living in the city of Toronto, Canada’s largest and most ethnically diverse city. Mr. Simon makes a clear and direct point in discussing the changes made by the company Steam Whistle Brewery in its efforts in absorbing skilled foreign workers in an economy which treats all foreign experience as a burden rather than an asset.

While not known by most Canadians, Canada is well known in many immigrant communities as a place which offers dreams of skilled employment and promotes it via its embassies and cultural offices worldwide, but restricts the certification of foreigners and locals with foreign education so that many will never qualify for the skill which allowed them to come to Canada in the first place. Beyond these economic restrictions, Canadian Immigration policy has focused it efforts in bringing in skilled labour to offset the shortage of skilled workers being lost due to the retirement of Canada’s baby boomers. This is not a problem only in Canada, as developed countries worldwide are desperate to bring in new immigrants to contribute to skilled labour markets, research and development, and create a new productive tax base for supporting those retirees who built the country over the last decades. In reality it is more Canada that depends on those immigrants, not the immigrants who are lacking opportunities in other countries.

Many of those born in Canada often do not go into the trades as commented on in the FT.com article, but often work in larger companies and government positions which afford a good salary and benefits to their employees. While many of the newcomers to Canada often have skills greater or equal to those trained Canada, the bias against any foreign experience including that from Western Europe is common and often discriminatory in its nature, but not considered to be illegal by the government in Ontario even though many newcomers have the same legal rights to work in Canada and are protected under the Canadian Constitution. While there are programs in Ontario and other parts of Canada to help immigrants find equitable employment, there are few true successes and little research and attention paid to these new workers beyond promoting Canada as having multicultural values, but not employing some of the most intelligent people in the country while pushing them toward the economic margins of society.

One of the main issues is that there is no legislated standards in certifying newcomers to Canada, but only private or university run offices which translate scores and qualifications into Canadian grades, but are wholly unofficial in Canada and not given much weight in the hiring process. Another major problem is that many professional associations which have great restrictions on newcomers to Canada are not on par with other developed countries in allowing a fair and equitable method for the re-qualification of people coming into Canada. Until the shortage of skilled labour was made a priority in the latest budget from the Government of Canada, there was no more attention placed on the issue than unknown advisories to companies to give foreigners a try with no concrete push for enshrining their Economic Rights in any Canadian legislative house or jurisdiction. The limitations are so insensible that in one case many nurses who come from other countries to work as foreign nurses on contract are not able to obtain the same job once they enter the process to become a Canadian citizen, but can work with no problems as foreign nurses on contract with the Government of Ontario.

In the past it was assumed that immigrants were on equal footing with Canadians in obtaining those jobs which account for much of the middle class in Canadian society. The issues in letting immigrants work when their initial experience was not in Canada was seen in the past as solely a difference of culture as opposed to that of skill or language. In reality, 45.7% of Toronto’s population was born outside Canada, and while the argument has been made presently that newcomers must adapt to Canadian culture, its often the case that people must adapt to several different cultures, but their skills are not diminished for the sake of lack of Canadian Experience in any way. The true barriers in the past were ethnic, but now even though many ethnicities work in the Toronto job market, “Canadian Experience” is being used as the term which is preventing good jobs from going to good skilled people. This is not uncommon as in the past those immigrants barred from employment in Canada’s large companies and government now account for the majority of Toronto’s Small and Medium Sized entrepreneurs and make up a good number of jobs and tax revenue going into the local economy. With approximately 30% of Canadians working for one branch of the government and large numbers working for Banks and larger institutions, in Canada’s largest cities the small business is dominated by immigrants who came in the last few decades. The unfortunate reality is that these resource rich people if immigrating today to Canada would not have the points to qualify for citizenship as only immigrants with a high levels of education are allowed to come here and work. As we see above, the reality is that they just don’t end up being considered to work in the areas Canadian’s are desperate to fill. A competitive Canadian economy will not be able to compete if it will prevent its most skilled people from jobs it needs to fill in order to grow as a country. It is a classic lose-lose situation, for New Canadians and Old Canadians alike.

 *This post has also been cross-posted in the FPA’s Latin America Blog.

Mexico has always had a mixed relationship with its citizens abroad. Problems dealing with poverty in Mexico have not tarnished pride in their roots. Class divisions never quelled a strong sense of nationhood with its citizens on every social strata. While many Mexican’s left the country since the 1970’s, it was often for economic opportunity which was hard to come by for many in the north of Mexico and in the southern estados, and was a way to escape living in the violent areas of Mexico City where opportunity disappeared in crisis after crisis following oil shocks and multiple collapses of the economy in the late 70s to late 90s.

What those on both sides of the border have seldom addressed in those years is the connection that those who have left Mexico have to their heritage in Mexico, and towards their new lives in the United States. Many in Mexico see those who left as abandoning the country, but with poverty rates of over 30% there was never any question that leaving Mexico was a logical decision by those who made the journey. The change in perception is stark, with new generations being born and growing up in the US often as Mexican-Americans, growing up speaking only English while listening to music in Spanish and being a mix of many diverse cultures. This relatively new culture would have never existed in Mexico, but is not seen as uniquely American by those who belong in it or those outside it. Many in this new culture love being “Mexican”, but are not treated as such in Mexico and often have a tough time becoming typically American in their own places of birth. Recently politicians in both countries have taken interest in this new community as well.

After years of not being noticed politically, since the 1990’s the Latino vote has become key in the next Presidential Elections in the US. The recent Clinton Campaign has relied on much of the Latino vote in the latest Primaries, with Hispanics in America, mostly of Mexican descent, making up a large portion of Hillary’s support in many American states. Mexico has noticed it may have influence as well, if it can re-adopt many of those forgotten Mexicans living abroad. Since the Presidency of Vicente Fox there has been efforts made by his Administration and his PAN party to generate positive relations with the United States on many fronts. Before the War on Terror, the Bush administration was seen as a key player on reforming immigration and helping re-connect Mexicans in the US and Mexico to produce closer ties. While these policies were abandoned for the most part, the interest of President Calderon of Mexico to re-initiate closer ties with the US remains. With the new President likely to be one who is open on immigration, Clinton, Obama and McCain will likely have a positive partner in Felipe Calderon of Mexico.

Calderon will not only have a positive partner in any President who is elected, but is reaching out to discuss policy initiatives and re-engage Mexicans of all backgrounds with Mexico itself. While he has an opportunity to put Mexico back on the agenda in the US, he must be careful not to be seen as dictating policy to the new American President who often lose support on their policies on immigration to the US, and must give a new respect to those Mexican-Americans who feel abandoned by Mexico and will make up a large portion of America’s educated and middle class youth in the future. While Calderon can rally all Hispanics on human rights for newcomers to the US, it will be an uphill struggle to gain complete acceptance from Americans and Mexicans in America alike.

Among the hype of Super Tuesday, I thought a frank and brief opinion on the Republican and Democratic Candidates would be a nice relief from the overkill of information and issues coming out of mainstream media about who might be the next President. I hope my perspective, not being a US citizen and from the point of view of the Latino community and other diverse minorities may give some clarity to the issues currently being discussed.

Republicans:

Mike Huckabee: An eloquent speaker and intelligent good hearted man, he is limited to one specific community in the United States, that of the Christian right. While there are diverse opinions in that religious community as well, much of Bush’s support came from the same political groups and this has lead to very bad policies by Bush, and perhaps blurring the line between the Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Religious expression. In reality, while many good spirited people are from Huckabee’s supporters, the rest of the American people do not belong to those supporters or religious affiliations. A lot of the views also are seen by some as being the catalyst for the Iraq war. America is and always will be a diverse community, and no candidate can go forward with one community in a larger America, especially if conflict has been the result in the past. Historically, this support grew after the personal actions of Bill Clinton and his mistreatment of women collegues for decades. A new moral America under Bush after Clinton has lead to the Iraq war, so the result of each administration has its pros and cons, but changing from either one might be better than a return to Clintonism, Bush I and Bush II or Reaganism.

Mitt Romney: Clearly a good businessman, he is the biggest threat to John McCain in the Super Tuesday vote. I always see Romney as somewhat of a Swiss Army Knife. Romney is talented in many ways but nothing specific stands out about him. Romney is really the in between if you dislike the left Republican McCain, or can’t stand the right leaning Huckabee. Unfortunately for Romney, people often will just not vote as opposed to vote for the least worst candidate. He will need a lot of luck.

John McCain: No one wants to say this, but McCain, Clinton and Obama are only slightly different in their political outlook. McCain is in the midst of trying to get the Republican Right to support his campaign but with policies which are seen as soft on immigration balanced against his support for staying in Iraq, he is trying to become everyman’s Republican. He can only do this by using his past as a patriotic American and his time under Reagan to reach out to those past supporters of Bush in order to solidify his support. The thing about remembering people in the past is that they look a lot better than they actually were. Reagan was the Republican who was very soft on immigration with an Amnesty for illegal immigrants at the time. McCain, who is trying to create a reasonable and realistic compromise on immigration would do better trying to be the balanced President between the Democrats and Republicans than attempt to become the next Reagan who was by no means perfect. It is true that McCain is a real conservative, but he may not be Republican enough to capture the Right as Bush did and Huckabee is trying to do. In reality after eight years of Bush someone like McCain is the only one who can produce a long term change for the Republican party. As well, its not like any Right leaning Republicans will vote for Clinton in any case.

Democrats:

Barak Obama: Critics of Obama say that people do not know enough about him, and that he is inexperienced, but in reality he is in his late 40’s, and adult and has a young face which is no crime. No one knows how he will do as President, but if he can conquer the racial divide without having the political fate of Colin Powell or Connie Rice then he has earned a lot of respect already. Unlike Romney, Obama is offering something, a change in the opinions Americans have in the next election. When a country that is based on the Separation of Church and State and the elected official not being kings or from one ruling class or family has a religiously based Bush I and Bush II, and then Clinton I and possibly Clinton II, pulling change can only be done by someone who is not a Clinton or a Bush. Compared with McCain, the Iraq issue outstanding, Obama and McCain would do well learning from each other. Both of them can be the candidate who can bring change to their respective parties and allow for the United States to pass through the damage incurred by Bush and Clinton. In the end, the country would do better if the two ran together..not such an unnatural fit but a likely impossibility. Obama must be vigilant, as while he has much of the youth vote, who knows if they will bother voting at all. Remember, Bush won the last election and he was as unpopular with youth as ever.

Hillary Clinton: Change is not in her vocabulary, unless it will get her the votes. For someone who’s husband cheated on her which gave ammunition to the moral debate in America which did more for the Bush campaign than George Bush himself, Clinton is surprisingly popular. Much of this comes from the backtracking in the campaign to patch up any issues or errors they have made, as well as Bill and Chelsea Clinton pushing for her nomination. Obama was right to question her on whether he is running against her or Bill, but it is evident that the momentum from team Clinton is strong as Clinton in the end is not Bush. In comparison to McCain, her past support for the Iraq war will be an issue in the election but will make no difference in the end if Congress is not willing to act, but may lose her some votes in the end from Democrats. Her support for a public health system is a good policy, but despite problems in the American private system, there has not been a real debate about the pros and cons of a publicly funded system. There are bad points in both, but McCain’s push to reform and fix the current system as opposed to replacing it will always win as most Americans do have good health care. The Clintons unfortunately have been known to play dirty politics, but defaming the minority candidate will not help anyone, and has already caused damage to their campaign. Regarding Latinos, Clinton has a lot of support as they like Bill, but whether Hillary decides to be the next President or the next Clinton, the diverse communities of the United States can and will be swayed to vote for others, namely Obama and McCain who with Clinton want to be the pioneer of the Middle Way in American politics.

We encourage fair and sensible debate on our Blog…please feel free to agree and disagree and submit your comments.

PBS.org in the last few years has done a remarkable job at airing many great shows like our Great Decisions program, documentaries on the Second World War and the most recent documentary series The Jewish Americans. The Jewish Americans series goes through 350 years of Jewish history in the United States and does a great job at defining the different types of Jewish people who came to the US and the evolution of the community in line with the development of rights in the United States over its history as a nation. In the latest episode which aired the week of January 21st, the civil rights movement was placed in the context of how Jewish Americans viewed it as well as how African-Americans saw the interaction for better or for worse of the two communities. This cultural analysis allows for racist ideas to be placed into a historic context, highlighted by the recent Presidential candidates ability to leave race out of the major decision making processes for many Americans, whereas just a few years ago it would have likely determined the result of an election.

The contrast to the upcoming UN Conference on Race is stark. Due to the experience in the last UN Race conference, many countries have not been able to agree on the debate of the upcoming conference as issues on the denial of Jewish history in the Holocaust and motions attacking Jewish people from some UN members has been seen as directly Anti-Semitic in a conference which would serve the world better if it tackled real issues. Holocaust and the lack of acknowledgement of the Jewish people’s suffering in it in a UN forum to reduce racism really pushed the opportunity to help in Darfur or address real concerns for other nations away from the purpose of such a conference and makes it into an entirely politicized venue focused against many Western nations. As a result, countries such as Canada have decided not to attend and many others have taken a defensive position on many conference issues.

From debates on trade and aid and from race to the laws of space, UN debates are often split between wealthy Western nations and developing countries. This is the nature of the UN and often it creates a perfect forum to lose the opportunity to tackle any global issues. The irony of it is that if the UN did not exist, we would have to create one as it is the only way to attempt to tackle issues of a global dimension. It is only hoped that issues of a historical context would be valued as they have been by many in the evolution of race in the United States.

Some of the Republican party’s most celebrated candidates have come from lives which mirror the stereotype of a true American hero. Presidents like George Bush the First gained early notoriety as an Aircraft Carrier bomber pilot in the Second World War, being shot down in an attack on the Japanese navy. Reagan, a model for many Republican candidates at least acted as a hero on the silver screen and gained notoriety as the man who threatened the Soviets by words and by assaulting countries such as Grenada and Libya with air strikes and small invasion forces. He also gave birth to a trend which created such films as Red Dawn and Iron Eagle, the latter referring to Reagan as “Ray-Gun”, promoting his no nonsense style of dealing with threats from foreign nations and possibly extra-terrestrial attacks.

In 2008, the candidate to beat is one that was not only on a Carrier when it exploded accidentally, but was also shot down in his A-4 Skyhawk over Vietnam, and in a Ramboesque fashion imprisoned in Vietnam for a good part of his 20’s. In the upcoming Michigan Primary, John McCain is the man to beat for the next Republican nomination, but this stereotypical true American hero has one issue which is taking its share from his campaign, he is able to be tortured and beaten for almost a decade in a Vietnamese prison, but he is seen as being “soft” on immigration. With Giulani far down in the polls and Mitt Romney looking at getting his 2nd place campaign replaced, Huckabee and McCain seek to polarize Republican support between the religious right for former Pastor Huckabee, and everyone else for McCain. Republican voters however in Michigan may be an advantage in this primary, as with only Republicans in Michigan in this vote many who would be independent may vote for this Republican primary. With more centrist interested not being taken by a Democratic campaign in Michigan, immigration may not hinder McCain, but give him a small advantage.

Some Republicans like Arnie in California have taken non-traditional approaches to immigration in the Republican Party. With the fight brewing over the African-American vote amongst the Democrats, McCain may be a winner in this race because he is willing to realize that even if many foreign nationals are not legally residing in the US, many others are legal American citizens and Latinos are becoming the largest minority and more economically diverse. Like in California, the next President must address an America that is not only Black or White, but a lot of shades of American heros.

The British government is committing GBP 70 million to bolster the confidence of Muslim women, in an effort to shield them from becoming targets of radicalization. Hazel Blears, Communities Secretary in the Brown government announced that the funds would go toward supporting “assertiveness” training, communication and mediation skills. The courses are part of a wider initiative to get members of the Muslim community to actively participate in public life. Officials hope that empowering women will lead to increased visibility of positive role models while insulating a vulnerable part of the community against radical rhetoric and extremist tendancies. Mentoring programs, leadership training and management skills are to show women alternatives to their more traditional role within the Muslim social construct, government representatives hope. They argue that this new initiative reflects a growing desire by Muslim women to play a greater role in British society and to work toward changing the generalized suspicions that remain following terrorist activity in the country.

Muslim groups, meanwhile, are accusing the government of dividing the community. In an interview with the Sunday Times, Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “The government at first wanted our imams to act as spies on young British Muslims and now they seem to want Muslim women to do the same.”

German newsmagazine, Der Spiegel, suggests that the government decision in favor of additional funds for adult education comes in response to two widely-publicized cases of differential treatment of Muslim women by the authorities. Aisha Azmi, 24, was fired from her job as an elementary school teacher after refusing to remove her headscarf. School officials had argued that children could not learn the English language from a teacher with a veiled face. Azmi’s lawyer has taken the case to the European Court of Human Rights. Samina Malik, meanwhile, branded herself as an “lyrical terrorist” was the first woman to be convicted under the controversial UK Terrorism Act. Supporters have criticised the verdict, based on contacts she had and internet poetry posted to radical web pages as a “wrong signal to Muslims” demonstrating that a judicial double standard is at work in the UK.

For more on this story, see the BBC, The Telegraph and The Times.

Like Canada and Australia, Britain has sought the adoption of an immigration points system in order to limit the number of unskilled workers entering the UK and promote highly skilled workers coming in to support the British Economy. While this idea is a logical one, it often leads to dozens of smaller issues which while limits the number of low-income immigrants, also makes life fairly intolerable in the process.

While not on a points system, the City of New York has set out to conquer an issue which is also prominent in cities like Toronto, Canada. New York has always had an issue with illegal immigrants being victims of unreported crimes because upon contacting legal officials, often the immigrant would be simultaneously placed into the removal process since they did not reside legally in New York and the US. In Toronto, while three years ago and prior to that police did not have powers to enforce immigration orders, since then they can now check someone’s legal status in Canada and detain them when responding to criminal investigations. The problem in immigrant cities like Toronto, is that due to the points system, people who used to come in as middle income workers often now come as illegal migrants. In Toronto as well as New York, immigrants not able to be personally secure because it will surely result in the end of their lives in their resident country.

Growing in great numbers due to its booming economy, the city of Calgary in Canada shows an example of how the lack of law enforcement for many illegals can lead to some undesirable situations. In the North-East part of the city, dozens of illegal Asian migrants were found working in an illegal brothel which takes advantage of many people in similar situations entering Canada without a proper legal status. Many similar organizations exist across the country, and due to the new police powers to enforce immigration rules, many more underground operations have the roots to keep them beyond the law.

The UK is likely to have many of these issues plaque their cities in the near future. While trying to crack down on immigration, there is a real threat that society as a whole will lose in the long run.

*This article has been posted both on FPA’s Migration Blog as well as the Mexico Blog this week.

Illegal immigration may be one of the hot button issues for the next Presidential election, and will favour neither party in the process. In the Democratic party debates televised widely among American networks this past weekend two things were made clear. Firstly, that immigration will likely be a key issue in the next election, and Secondly that no one has a clear idea on how to handle the situation as there is no clear solution to the problem. This has lead to many candidates being seen as slightly differing on the issue in insignificant amounts with the exception of Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo who’s recent campaign commercials make reference “that Islamic terrorists roam free in the United States because of an unsecured border”. This has made me wonder in a personal context, do Mexican’s and Islamic terrorists look similar to each other? I’ll leave it as an open question for the reader to decide. In the end the answer is as clear as the debate on the issue as neither has anything to do with securing the border in any realistic way or giving necessary rights to individuals regardless of their legal status. Of course, It will not make a difference for Rep.Tancredo as he is quite far from winning the Republican nomination and has nothing to lose making a decisive choice on an issue no one can resolve.

What did result from the debates this past weekend is that Senator Clinton is starting to assert herself against rival Edwards and Obama after losing some support in the last few weeks in her campaign. Migration issues can place candidates in a position of losing much of the Hispanic vote, or alternatively losing the vote of many Americans who desire an answer to the Immigration question. This was made evident on challenges made by the candidates of each other on specifics of the issue, knowing full well that a slight change in answer or attitude may set their campaign into a downward spiral. With Bush’s attempt to deal with illegal migration last summer to turn his legacy away from the focus on problems in Iraq, an explosive question was laid for the next election that could affect the outcome of the election at the end of the day. With such evenly matched candidates in Obama, Clinton, Romney and Edwards poised to challenge other strong candidates in Giulani, America’s 9/11 hero and John McCain Vietnam war hero and torture victim the outcome is that one of these American heros will win, but small opinions such as on Immigration may absorb thousands of votes in the process even if the issue will not be resolved itself. The only assurance in the debate on migration and the upcoming election is that people are going to be fatigued with the election well before it begins as much as they are already fatigued discussing the Immigration issue which no one can solve for the next while. It seems that next year’s big blockbuster issues are ones that we have seen for months already and will be dealing with for the next months to come.

Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant to Canada who came to live with his mother on Oct 14th of this year was killed while police tried to detain him after arriving at Vancouver’s international airport. While being kept up for more than 10 hours in the airport, Mr. Dziekanski was seen as having an angry reaction for an unknown reason and after many hours he took to physically attacking a small table and a laptop computer before police responded with two taser shots at the individual, putting him onto the ground and then subsequently leading to his death for unknown causes yet to be investigated. Despite Robert Dziekanski’s behaviour for such an extended period of time, no efforts were made to communicate with him in his own language nor was it seen by many as appropriate to use such excessive force in detaining him as he was not assulting anyone at the time nor abusing any offices in the process. The incident was recorded by a teenager on his cellphone at the time and was widely published in the media on November 14th.

See the video here. 

Canadian officials emplored the public to consider other evidence besides the video regarding the case of Robert Dziekanski. In reality however, a witness account which was filmed goes well beyond DNA or other evidence in investigations of any crime of any type. The reality of the situation made clearer my the young man’s recording made new headlines yesterday on the BBC, across Canada and worldwide as a clear conflict in handling persons who are not considered to be a great threat, where no efforts were made to speaking to him in his own language in an international airport after more than 10 hours of a possible conflict, and which was a necessity in diffusing such a situation as an alternative to the use of tasers. In addition, it is well known by many in the policing and legal community in North America that tasers are a questionable tool, as it is overused in many cases due to its ability to maintain a proper distance from suspects, but also that more that 200 deaths have been attributed to the use of the devices without a proper inquiry into the dangers of tasers.
Lingisutic barriers and newcomers in societies such as Britian and Canada face many challenges integrating into society. One barrier however when considering law enforcement in the cases of the Brasilian victim de Menezes seen as a terrorist during the London bombings, or Canada’s Polish immigrant losing his life due to a lack of communication and responsility of law enforcement to take the initiave to communicate with people in communities which are very diverse. Logically, patience is required with linguistic situations to avoid death which are uncalled for, accidentally or otherwise. As seen in last week’s posting, the London Police were considered responsible for the death in their case, raising the standard of care towards immigrants or residence in communities without a uniform language spoken among all residents. In the Canadian case, some simple words in Polish may have made a world of difference to the lives of the Dziekanski family.