Centerpiece

I've always agreed with that approach IF there were a need and a will to adjust the system. It's a smaller change and one that would be clearly understandable to Canadians.

Remember Trudeau's promise that 2015 would be the last election using First Past the Post? He never did offer any sane reasoning for why he broke that promise - although it's clear the only reason his backroom boys put those words in his mouthl was to sucker NDP voters. Here's a quote that didn't get much play at the time. Just call him Mr. Popular: Link: https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/marin-horwath-loses-cool-and-credibility-over-toronto-council-protest

Mostly makes sense. A perfect example is the Haitian rush for the border. When Haiti had an earthquake in 2011, the US created a Temporary Protected Status program to give temporary sanctuary to those who were particularly hard-hit by the earthquake. Trump gave 18 months notice that the TPS would be ending and people would have to return home before the end date. Canada, under Stephen Harper, created a similar temporary program which the Liberal government itself ended in August, 2016. Then Trudeau opened his big, virtuous yap - and they came swarming over the borders. And here we are today.

Not to incur any thread drift but I'll throw abortion in there as well. They've done zero to show how almost all western countries have had mature conversations and arrived at legislation that has put the issue to bed. Your whole post is one of my pet peeves that goes to the heart of journalistic integrity. I hope it is laziness. After all, what other possible reason could there be?

Since this board is for opinions, I can't help but express mine. You're deflecting/ignoring the very valid point that Argus raised and the very valid example of waste that he used. You've let your personal history disliking Argus' positions on immigration (and his dislike of yours) "muddy" this serious issue. Your replies can be sanctimoniously judgmental (I used pompous it describe it previously). It can usually be taken with a grain of salt but becomes tiresome when it does nothing to advance discourse. Just my opinion of course.

Just to put that figure in perspective.......$270 million could provide a $5000 housing subsidy for over 50,000 Canadians who might be living on the edge. The Left constantly whines about poverty - yet thinks nothing of wasting huge amounts of money on Illegal border-crossers - economic migrants who jump the queue ahead of those who are genuinely fleeing terror and persecution.

I think we're saying the same things - with a bit more frustration in your words - felt by many Canadians. "due Process" is fine - as long as it's defined in a way that makes sense. Did the brainiacs who designed the border/refugee process really intend to intentionally omit illegal crossings? Of course not. Illegal crossings should all be treated as if they had crossed at a legal entry point. This "one foot in Canada" business is ludicrous. The appeal process is an industry - infested with "consultants" and filled with lawyers. Why do some of these illegal border crossers mysteriously have no documents? Not hard to figure out. A claimant - no matter what the circumstances - should be dealt with in 6 months - no more. I say all this because the real refugees - the ones in squalid camps who have already been pre-cleared by the UN - end up waiting even longer and I dare say - probably completely miss out on coming to Canada. It's so totally frustrating that the Trudeau-loving media will not hammer them for such a lack of compassion - letting in illegal hordes who were already safe in the US (regardless of the unfounded rhetoric) while thousands of the truly persecuted languish.

Too much time spent arguing about the word "crisis". It can mean a time of extreme difficulty - usually where decisions have to be made, That sounds about right. But whether or not you use that particular word, there is no denying that the past year has seen a huge surge in illegal border crossers. But the "crisis" is not in processing claimants coming in - it's in how long it takes to remove the 80% or thereabouts that are proven NOT to be genuine refugees. It's already been posted how the endless appeals and delays - and outright "disappearances" result in bogus claimants staying in Canada for years - and mostly on the taxpayers' dime. Canadians are looking for leadership that brings all elements of processing - from entry to exit - into an efficient, understandable and compassionate system. It's not just about the border. And yes - when you look at it that way - the right way - it is a crisis.

In general - yes, I agree.....in the absence of full disclosure and hard and fast "hard" evidence, there's a lot of speculation going on. As I said - it hit me yesterday that there is something bigger going on that has necessitated putting a lid on reporting. That's the only sense I can make out of the media silence after arguably the most devastating/chilling/heinous attack in Toronto history.

Those links refer to not much more than hearsay from 8-10 years ago. Nothing will be official until it's verified that he was being treated more recently for psychosis or severe depression. You could have posted just as many links that showed that his current associates saw none of his "dark side". From your first link (just sayin'):

Don't forget that you said that.........

I'm not an economist - I just know that business reacts to policy (or non-policy). As I said, I'll watch the stock market. So far, my US based RRSP is doing pretty good.

Honestly - I'm hoping I haven't missed anything.........can you provide any proof (not hearsay) - other than the "family statement" - that he was mentally ill?

I usually don't react this way - but we have not heard one iota about Faisal Hussain for several days - including The Sun. Think about it - something as simple as verifying that he had been treated for mental illness/psychosis - but nada. News reporters usually dig this stuff up really quickly. It's as if the editors have been advised to shut everything down. In summary, it hit me that something major is likely going on - linked directly to national security. I guess we should let the authorities do their job - as long as we get an explanation at the end.

Like I said - you and I are too far apart in our thinking......but I am now clear on your perspective.

1. Where's your proof of this anti-Muslim press? Quite the opposite actually as you can see by the dearth of reporting in the Danforth episode - if there was ever an opportunity to feed an anti-Muslim narrative, that was it. There's still plenty of Islam-related bombs and killings going on around the world that don't even gain a mention in our media. The media and Canadians have so far been able to move on from the Toronto 18, Parliament, Richelieu, Edmonton and Yonge Street terror acts. While the residue may be starting to build, I see very little if any forming your "body of anti-Muslim press". 2) Yes we had our own despicable act. Alexandre Bissonnette. Why was this immediately called an anti-Muslim terrorist attack? Where was the immediate cry that he was mentally ill? 3) Instead of insults, perhaps you should reflect on the example I provided - instead of reducing it to "metrics". As is statistically shown, Jews have been - and are - subjected to many times more hate crimes that any other race/culture in Canada - yet you have condoned the Islamaphobia "measure" that singles out Muslims. And all this hubbub is done in the absence of true anti-Muslim activity in our society. Discomfort with certain cultural "traditions" like Burkhas or FGM or anti-women mindsets does not constitute anything approaching "hate" - but it can validly represent "discomfort". Big, big difference. You and I seem to be too far apart to gain any common ground. That's too bad.

Understanding that hate crimes against Jews are considerably more frequent than against Muslims, Canadians are proving to be exceptionally tolerant in a world that is tarnished with heinous acts perpetrated by those who claim to be adherents of Islam. With ISIS, the Taliban and "lone wolf" attacks right here in Canada - it is comforting (if that's the right word) that Canadians have for the most part, been quite serene and peaceful in their response - in spite of media opinions to the contrary, including yours. Let's not lose track that in 2016, we had 139 reported "hate crimes" against a population of over one million Muslims. When Muslim hate crimes - on a per capita basis - exceed those against Jews, perhaps there will come a day when an "Islamaphobia" motion might deserve some discussion. As you say - context is everything.

In case you missed my response to Dialamah: In 2015, hate crimes against Catholics rose by a similar percentage - from 35 to 55. Crimes against Jews actually dropped from 213 to 178. In 2016 - crimes against Muslims went down to 139 - and crimes against Jews went up. One thing is clear - with a population of only 400,000 Jews as opposed to one million Muslims - hate crimes against Jews are still much more prevalent than those against Muslims. I would also speculate that Jews are even less likely to report a hate crime because they have become so used to it - sadly. Yet the media and politicians zero in on Muslim "hate crimes" - as so shamefully demonstrated with the Hijab hoax fiasco that had politicians tripping over each other with apologies and outrage.

In 2015, hate crimes against Catholics rose by a similar percentage - from 35 to 55. Crimes against Jews actually dropped from 213 to 178. In 2016 - crimes against Muslims went down - and crimes against Jews went up. One thing is clear - with a population of only 400,000 Jews as opposed to one million Muslims - hate crimes against Jews are still much more prevalent than those against Muslims. I would also speculate that Jews are even less likely to report a hate crime because they have become so used to it - sadly. Yet the media and politicians zero in on Muslim "hate crimes" - as so shamefully demonstrated with the Hijab hoax fiasco that had politicians tripping over each other with apologies and outrage.

Where's your proof that anti-Muslim hate crimes are rising? If they weren't, would you alter your opinion? Try this source for starters - I've also included a link to the supporting news story......... Link: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/171128/dq171128d-eng.htm Link to Story: https://globalnews.ca/news/3884829/hate-crimes-against-muslims-down/

I'm glad to see you post that. I'm sure you can see why so many people feel any legislation that singles out "Islamaphobia" is mis-guided.

The point is - almost all of us know that the Mafia is but a tiny subset of Italians. Likewise, regardless of your drum-beating - almost all of us know that extremists are but a small subset of Muslims. Sure - there are some lunkheads who paint with a broad brush - just like there's some puddin-heads who equate all Italians with the Mafia. To blow it all up into "islamaphobia" and hatred is just fear mongering where very little genuine hatred exists - a wooly-headed attempt to sew political divisions. Jews have had to "suck it up" for millenia - but no one has called for Jew-phobia legislation.

If you can cleanse your mind of the rigidity of your thinking - look at Italians.......they have the Mafia within their "culture" - yet almost all Italians will have nothing to do with them and are absolutely OK with the whole of society vilifying them. And they all happen to be Catholic. That's pretty much what I expect of Muslims - to openly and constantly vilify extremism, jihad and all the trappings - and to accept that it's OK for society as a whole - including Muslims of course - to vilify it. And our politicians have to be brave and bold enough to support that position - all for one and one for all - and together we marginalize those who would perpetrate these acts and foment violence. All that said, I'm not completely sure how Muslims can so clearly express their rejection/disgust with extremism and all it represents. There is no central mechanism. That's where our media and politicians come in - stop pussy-footing around. Get buy-in from Muslim groups and give them voice - a loud and clear voice. If there's a reluctance to buy-in, then we've actually got a problem.

You're right - as is Ford of course. The patchwork system is the inevitable result of a government pandering for votes by offering up piecemeal "programs" that over time, waste resources through bureaucracy while losing their intended purpose. Just because a program is introduced doesn't mean it should last forever. After 15 years of Liberal rule, it makes total sense to look at the big picture again and rationalize where money is spent, how it is tracked and managed - and how it can be measured against the desired outcomes. Partisanship aside - money that is wasted or ineffective - is money that is just that - wasted.