Leaderboard

Perhaps, but immigration leads to citizenship. And my point in posting that was to put some perspective out there. The kind of efforts the Swiss currently go through seem to make even Trump's proposed 'extreme vetting' look pretty shallow and lackadaisical. And at the same time we have Trudeau openly stating that Kellie Lieitch's proposal for face to face interviews to try to weed out people whose values are hostile to ours is 'fringe'. I'm pretty sure if anyone in Canada proposed this level of effort to look into potential citizens the media and politicians would be aghast, and there'd be all kinds of references to extremism and alt-right and racism and anti-immigration. Yet the Swiss are a pretty moderate bunch, though careful. How many of our current immigrants do you think would win Canadian citizenship if we put them through this kind of thing?

A motion like this one is just rhetoric. It has no legal effect what-so-ever. The wording proposed by the Member of Parliament from Erin Mills in Mississauga is a young Muslim woman who was concerned about Islamophobia. She wanted to make a feel good statement. The bottom line is "feel good statement" through motions are rhetoric. They have zero legal meaning. Criminal Law in the Criminal Code of Canada already has hate sections that could be invoked and are more generic in reference.. Provincial human rights commissions already invoke such rhetorical references in their decisions. In the grand scheme of things its just more rhetoric.

Man this story aint is only gonna get worse. What you see coming across into Canada are people who have paid coyotes, aka people smugglers to get them to Europe, the US, wherever. They are not refugees in the political sense. They lie. They lie and make up stories. They lie because they know they won't qualify for immigration status. Canada has to make some hard choices. Its nice to say, take in everyone. But can we or do we set such people up for failure? What is happening today at this moment is that organized criminals will now make millions bring people to the Canada border. Its time the CBC, CTV, that rag Toronto Star stop portraying people as hero refugees escaping persecution. All they do is hold up a flame for moths. It simply sends a signal to other starving people to come. Its called opening the floodgates. It is cruel. Its causing a stampede for the smugglers to make money from. These coyotes loved it when the dead baby washed up. It meant more business for them. It meant justification for exploiting victims. They told their captive audience, the bay makes them cry for you, go! That is reality. What do you think happens once the inevitable dead frozen baby story surfaces? The media is already running stories of frozen Africans in hospitals with limbs marred by frostbite.Now what? What the hell do you think happens to that African with no toes? First thing he will do is apply for benefits and bring his family. Do any of you liberals plan to feed him and sponsor him and his family for life because he won't be working. He'll be on disability. Been there, done that, seen it. Its called the court system. Burned out liberals who once thought they would save the world make the most miserable of bigots once these same migrants line up swamping the system asking for benefits.. Me? I know how the legal system works. Its broken down. It can't provide legal aid. It is providing housing to these migrants while Canadians are living homeless and aboriginals are engaging in mass suicide. Its not a nice picture asking-who do you save or help is it? I have travelled enough to camps in the Middle East see how stomach parasites work and slowly kill. I get maggots and flies and rats and cholera, and the stench of impacted bowels. Know that smell. The smell of pus or rotting flesh or gangrene or death or near death, it never leaves your nose. So what would you like me to say that we can save such people? The reality is so many who really need help are dying and any you think we can save well..we will soon have to make cold hard difficult decisions about such as do we turn people away the same reason most of you now do when you walk in a crowded city and now don't give every single person who asks you for money, money.

You were just schooled and that is your best comment......we already have an idiot spending our tax dollars....one that knows better than the experts, one that is above the law when it comes down to purchases, and competition one that changes the rules to suit his needs.....

Lack of face-to-face interview! How is that? It used to be that every immigration applicant was interviewed, but not anymore. Since 2002, only immigrants from the spousal category are interviewed. Are all applicants for immigration, coming as spouses? http://paceimmigrationlaw.com/canadian-immigration-needs-interview/ In this context, what Kelly Leitch proposes in her campaign, can't be called extreme at all. It's only sensible, and definitely, the right thing to do. What we have in place now - hardly any proper screening/vetting at all - is, what's extreme. It's recklessly irresponsible! Security of a nation and its citizens, has to be the highest priority!

If Trump was listening to the CIA he would have taken their advice and not tried to create this ban. Michael Hayden the former NSA/CIA director called it "an abomination" and it won't make the US or it's allies any safer.

Do you let them back out in the streets then? What's our stance if he does this again?

I am just getting started... You know your stance is very confusing to say the least. On one hand you find trumps policies stupid on the other you try to blame Obama.... This is nothing more than rhetoric. It was the sheer incomoetence of a lame duck that he is to read the EO before signing it. But then again if people like Steve Bannon apeal to your way of thinking that's a different matter....I don't....

One of the legal arguments against the ban is that it is against countries who have not harmed the US. Another is that it targets a specific religion.

Trump over stepped his powers and so the courts gave him a smack down. He does need to either read more or get proper legal advice.

We're talking about the difference between illness vs criminality and experts vs people who don't know the difference. Why don't you punish your kids for catching the flu? What if your kids infect your mother and she dies?

It has everything to do with this. You OTOH don't...thank God.

Are you a psychiatric expert? I guess that depends on what the medical experts who know about ebola prescribe. Are you one by any chance? In any case, is it safe to assume you punish your kids when they come home with the flu?

The founding fathers are long gone by now. State legislatures have redrawn many district boundaries and they are a partisan bunch and effect the numbers of EC reps. per state. Kind of like instead of the voters picking their reps., the reps. pick their voters. That's gerrymandering, plain and simple.

You ever had someone you love become ill with schizophrenia Hal? Do you punish your kids when they come home with the flu? Why not?

What shock are you talking about? The only people who seem shocked to me are old stock American right wingers - you know, Democrats and Republicans who still cling to the notion their country is exceptional in some way. If I was shocked it was because Trump finally said something that's true.

You'll have to go to America to find that type of "fun".

Most American's live in the USA.

Since when did two or more wrongs made a right? That's the only real controversy here, or it should be in any case.

Yep....Iran even got some F-14 Tomcats and had a surplus diesel submarine on order. I saw the modified labels/tags myself (Farsi ?) That's why any Iranian who knows better tries to get the hell out of Iran, many going to California (same as so many Armenians).

But you're not aligning with ppls narrative of the US as Evil Empire. Facts are hard. Ths Shah was no great shake, but he sure as hell was better than what followed.

I think it was actually more like the lack of proper vetting procedures within those countries. But once again, it was Trump that tried to create the bam which is why the courts are snubbing him.

Whenever there is an earthquake or other disaster in Iran, the U.S. offers humanitarian assistance while gathering intelligence and targeting data. President Obama lost a spy drone over Iran. Iran is the USA's favourite....enemy !

Ha ha, you don't think flying planes into buildings shouldn't get you on the list? But lets not forget that magic ingredient...oil.

So you think that Trudeau will do something therefore he should not even study the situation. Ignorance is your preferred state of being?

Exactly. Most presidents have had to do some bombing and military actions, and it looks like Trump will have to as well.

The motion asks for a study to determine a 'whole government' approach to combating Islamophobia. Given the current climate and who is in power it is inconceivable such a motion will not be acted upon. Thus there will be a study to determine what the government ought to do about combating Islamophobia. Again, given an interventionist government led by a progressive who has demonstrated little respect for different opinions on social matters it's logical to conclude that the study will call for government laws to ban 'offensive or insulting speech' esp including Islamophobia, similar to those in place in certain European countries, and that Trudeau will want to act on such a 'recommendation'.

The law firm you see represents immigrants that line up and will follow the rules when applying to get into Canada as a immigrant. You could find of course other lawyers who will disagree with this one because their clients want it as easy as possible to get entry into Canada. When assessing what lawyers say on immigration and they make a living on the subject matter, they will have a vested financial interest in taking certain positions. Then you have all kinds of interest groups that range from those who think anyone should be able to come to those who won't want any. There has to be a middle ground in such discussions. With that said, this lawyer is speaking common sense what-ever side of the debate you are on. If you can't physically interview someone, its just sheer insanity. The huge cut-backs to immigration did not start with the Liberals to be fair. They started with the premises we should use more technology to save having to hire people. That is part of the craze to cut the size of government when-ever possible. Immigration is nasty area of law. It runs the range of dirt poor desperate economic migrants and genuine political refugees to line jumping liars, fugitives, criminals, every category of human and I would say the vast majority of people who want to come to Canada are seeking medical care, the kind they will get in Canada for free and could never get where they are coming from which could mean the difference between life and death. Its not a nice area of practice. I had my share of people asking me to make up stories for them. If you represent legitimate immigrant applicants and you see how easy it is to jump the line to age into Canada what do you say to your client? They tell you its crazy for them to play by the rules as it only disadvantages them. Immigration has to juggle concepts of state security, what the economic needs of the country are that would be best met by the immigrant's skills. their chances of becoming a contributor in a positive way to Canada, and inversely the likelihood of them becoming a burden on the state due to lack of skills, and yes physical and mental disability. All of that has to be considered. Its an emotional debate because most jump to extreme generalizations either for or against immigration. The fact is we need immigrants to replace our baby boomers to keep the economy and tax basin functioning. That said, we also need an immigration system that does not reward line jumpers or bring in people who are only interested in what Canada can give them not what they can give Canada. On this one issue, I have to agree with Besty its just nuts, insane, sheer stupidity. I totally agree with this law firm's comments on this issue.

Have a look at how hard it is to become a Swiss citizen, and compare that to Canada. I guess the Swiss think their citizenship has value. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38917130

If true this is ridiculous that Canada accepts people into this country for a lifetime without even seeing them who they are and a chance to assess their suitability and adaptability!!. What is wrong with the system in this country!!!!!!!.

Proud of that record are ya?

Indeed, why not? All those claiming 'the end of the American Century' like it is a that's-that fact have yet to explain how Red China and Islam are going to save us all from Global Warming (sinister music plays). Like...what the Hell??

President Trump is like 70 years old....he hosted fight cards in his hotels (George Foreman credits Trump for his comeback). For Trump, why can't it be like the good ol' days ? Fight it out !

Yes, and it empties depots and magazines of old munitions stocks. I love the smell of freshly painted missiles and bombs. It's like a new car !

True....and now it's time for some more fun and games with Iran. Iran is so special !!

Here is is our South African girl catching a few rays.

I guess that's why their population is getting so old especially working age people, and therefore the economic future looks dicey. So you reckon that Trump get the US in the race to the bottom?

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between requiring a visa and a total travel ban but the courts do though.

Trump cam only hope that Gorsuch gets to his seat prior to his appeal being heard at the SCOTUS. BUT, Trump did irk Gorsuch with his not so presidential ranting about a "so called judge", so there could be some payback. Even if Gorsuch is partisan, he probably also understands what the constitution says.

Because it is like police knocks your door. It makes you worried even if you are not a criminal. Mods and admins are the polices of the forums.

Except this ban had nothing to do with controlling borders, it was supposedly an attempt to strengthen national security, and that idea was found to have no merit. Trump picked the wrong countries is what it boils down to. Geography is maybe not his strong suit, along with constitutional issues as well it seems.

So you're just blaming him for things that haven't happened yet, and have already been happening for years prior to Trudeau... got it... that makes much more sense.

Sure. FYI, sometimes Google is easier than demanding evidence for super-easy-to-find info. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadian-taxpayers-lose-35-billion-on-2009-bailout-of-auto-firms/article23828543/ The Bombardier information is less clear because they go out of their way to block public disclosure of their repayment history (citing it as third-party competitive industry secrets or whatever). http://www.taxpayer.com/commentaries/more-taxpayer-money-for-bombardier--just-say-no,-mr.-trudeau-22511 is just one source but there are plenty of news sites you can go to as well saying the same thing. We know how much we lent Bombardier. The fact that we're not allowed to find out how much they've repaid is a pretty strong indication in itself that the repayment history is poor.

It see your point, but it's actually very different. First off, the federal and Ontario governments got something like 80% of their money back from the auto-sector bailout (as opposed to the maybe 20-30% we've been paid back by Bombardier). Had the auto bailout been managed better and had the ownership stake been maintained longer and sold at better market prices, we'd have done even better. Additionally, Chrysler and GM are widely traded public companies that went through major restructuring and leadership changes during the bailout and the unions had to make concessions as well. Bombardier apparently gets to just keep following the same failed formula. I'm all for supporting and maintaining manufacturing capabilities in Canada. There will come a time when we're going to have to be more than a resource-based economy and we don't want to be starting from scratch. That being said, there's no reason to continue supporting failed leadership and failed execution for a major manufacturer. If we're going to continue supporting Bombardier, we should be getting ownership stake that we can use to implement changes.

Why delete a profile? Since all your posts remain, as stated by the administrator. All that is accomplished is that the person can no longer login. If you don't want to log in anymore, just don't visit the site. It's that simple really... self control. No need to ask the admins to do anything. Unless of course, this isn't about wanting your profile "deleted", which won't be done anyway, but rather some kind of grand-standing. Whining leftists seek a podium to declare they will self-immolate, but never actually follow through.

Hmmm....a law on the books banning "Islamophobia" with no definition as to what that would entail. What could go wrong?

What that they were going to lie, do what ever it takes to push this agenda through, to GAG all those involved in the project for LIFE, to deny the public any info on the project, you know like costing out to 42 years as the law states, The same law that the Cons were forced to use because it jacked up all the costs.....the one that almost seen the Cons held in content.....To make a major purchase with out a competition of any kind,....... to reorg how DND has reported and done business for the last 25 years,......to purchase a plane that DND has not been consulted on.....to force DND to fly 2 fleets of fighters when it can barely afford to fly one........then lie to DND and promise them it will be properly funded....knowing full well funding is done yearly, and DND is the first target when there is a shortfall.......To disregard all the info and data that DND has gathered in this race to no where, is a slap in the face to all that worked so hard to gather it.....only to have some liberal CIVILIAN (school Teacher) pick the next aircraft for the forces based on what info.....Not DND advice.....But this is a long standing issue with most governments, Cons included they think they know what is best for our defence.....another reason our forces are in the state they are in today...... "open and transparent review process of existing defence capabilities"....this is a joke, what they did was take these matters to the streets of Canada, because tax payers know more than those in charge of the military, on how to defend our nation, how to equip our nation, how to run the military.....What in the frig do we need an NDHQ for......if the people and a bunch of liberals are going to run the show.......funny how the only thing that went to the streets is the question about the military......have we seen the same process on health care, education, provincial transfers, provincial/ federal infra structure ? i have not seen anything.....Not everything that is good for our nation, is going to popular for it...I wonder if DND has had it's voice heard in this circus, and where does that info place on their radar.... I wonder if the Air force has been given priority access to recruitment so it can start training all those pilots and techs that keep all these 18 Super hornets flying......it's not like they have extra guys sitting around for times like this....not to mention an increase in budget, to pay for all of this....

Don't need reading comprehension when you a liberal you just write new policies to back up your statement..... Well when your the boss, you can change what numbers can or will not be reported.....That is what has happened here....DND has been reporting the old way for over 25 years....and now it has changed to have a good reflection on this liberal matter....Nice move Liberals, crafty, when in doubt change the rules..... The liberals changed it on purpose, so they can pursue this interim contract...However there are more than just this one point, that is a point of contention for the liberals. the fact that this fleet will last past 2025,........ they totally ignored they're subject matter experts that the cons hired to look into the last attempt to purchase F-35........, that operating 2 different fleets of aircraft is not good business, and is waste of tax payers money, plus it also takes more aircraft to meet requirements when operating 2 separate fleets....Gagging the entire interim Super Hornets project staff......Not releasing anything about the purchase to the public.....not to mention who did they consult on the purchase of the Super Hornet.....was it the Airforce, or did they go back to the same dept the cons hired to look into the original contract for the F-35....Who is telling the tax payers this is the best interim aircraft.....?

guess you'll have to stay hidden in your tree, so you'll won't be mistaken for a voter....