Scotty

Sure. You tell me when they start holding big public funerals attended by thousands of garbagemen around the country who march in uniforms behind the casket...

The militarization of policing is not up for debate. It's clear and obvious. And attitude comes with that. Not sure what else you want but I doubt we'll find statistics on incidents where police pull their guns improperly on those who were really no threat, like jaywalkers and litterers. However, here's a good article on the transformation of policing over the years, especially away from the 'negotiated management' phase of the 70s. Now this deals with protests, but really, the kind of climate and culture it breeds leads to the same sort of treatment for anyone disputing police authority, or even failing to instantly comply with that authority - even when there really isn't any legal basis for it. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/why-i-feel-bad-for-the-pepperspraying-policeman-lt-john-pike/248772/

Such people are perfectly free to find another profession. Yes, that's the old refrain from those who reflexively support the police in their attempts to turn themselves into urban commandos. In point of fact, policing is just not that dangerous and never has been. Fishermen are in far more danger of death and injury. So are loggers and roofers, garbagemen, miners, farmers and truckers. But people don't make TV shows about those occupations. Nobody cares about heroic garbagemen dying and leaving behind poor little orphans. Most media outlets agree on the story, and the fact the charges were rapidly withdrawn are an indication of that story's veracity. The FOX story, which you evidently prefer, was the same as the others except that it left out details about drawn guns, cops jumping on the hood of the car, and trying to smash the car window. Apparently you think that the less information the better. Clearly you're a perfect FOX viewer! You don't want to hear anything disturbing, anything that might make you question your unwavering, blind obedience to the refrain about heroic police. You don't want to hear it.

And you're fine with that? You presume that neither you nor anyone you care about will ever be thumped?

It's not in place. Swearing to accept responsibilities is far too vague. And in any event religious people have always found ways around their oaths. They simply tell themselves God doesn't want them to obey that oath and they're good to go. What I'm looking at is better screening on an individual level of people's cultural/emotional mindset, its divergence from Canadian values, and willingness to accept the need for change.

The woman being accepted is merely an example of what few standards we have for refugees -- and by extension, since virtually all refugees become immigrants, for immigrants. And as I said in an earlier post, topics veer from side to side, and I was addressing the questions on Muslim immigrants. As to your queries on the difficulties of testing. I don't claim it would be easy. I simply think it would be worth it. These are people who are going to be here for life. Why not ensure we get the best possible? I don't think courts can intervene, however, with a failed immigration candidate. At least, I've never heard of them doing so.

Oh come on. You live in the same world. You see the same things. What I see is a police culture which now seems to think any disagreement, any refusal to instantly comply with orders, no matter on how minor a matter, leads to them screaming and jumping them. We see it in Vancouver at the airport, where the four mounties immediately jumped and tazered that Polish guy. We saw it at the G20 police riots. Hell, have a look at this from the other day, from Montreal. This was a noise complaint. But the police felt they couldn't actually discuss anything with the guy. They had to attack him when he didn't instantly comply. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/06/19/montreal-youtube-police-arrest-merchant-vieille-europe-the-main.html But in America, it seems to be worse, with the more militant mindset there leading to ridiculous overuse of hand guns, and police drawing weapons on the mildest of pretexts. Here's another very recent one where police drew guns on a 16 year old boy whose crime was failing to stop when a non-uniformed man who didn't identify himself as a cop tried to talk to him. http://www.nbc4i.com/story/22451153/new-albany-mom-seeks-answers-after-drawing-weapon-on-son It's all part and parcel of the militarization of policing in the US, where cops tend to dress, be equipped, and often enough act like soldiers. The problem is that soldiers, and the mindset of soldiers, isn't really about civilian policing. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/police-militarization-an-interview-with-radley-balko

Oh, grow up. The weatherman is predicting rain tomorrow. That doesn't mean he's hoping for it or wanting it. I predicted South Africa and Zimbabwe would be cesspools after black rule. I was half right. And I think South Africa only staved off what happened to Zimbabwe because Mandela was such an extraordinary man. Do you see any such men in Afghanistan? The jury is still out there. I'd like them to survive another year before I put any money on that government continuing. But there's too much difference between them and Afghanistan to use one to predict the other.

I don't want it part of a ceremony I want it part of a testing process before these people are accepted. I want it weighed with other aspects of their candidacy for which they get points. Just because something isn't textbook easy to do doesn't mean we shouldn't do it, given the stakes involved. You could start with the various questions posed to determine when someone thinks violence is acceptable, for example, when it's allowable to hit your wife. Obviously you don't pose the question that baldly because few would be dumb enough to get tripped up by it, but there are a lot of clever ways to phrase hypotheticals in these tests that are designed to get people to admit their thoughts without knowing what they're revealing.

I remember watching cop shows decades ago. The police would speak politely, even to those they arrested. That likely wasn't always the case. But it did seem that police didn't have this gung-ho, over the top, commando style attitude they display today. The screaming (command voice) the knee to the head, jamming your face into the ground, and the army type outfits and weapons used on even casual arrests. Incidentally, after I heard about this story I googled it. The first cite is FOX news. Read it. It's very short. You won't find much there to upset you. FOX, of course, is a law and order outfit which rarely finds anything to criticize about what the police do. Then read the actual facts of the case in the second cite. How it can take seven officers and how they think they need to draw guns on a college student they suspected of buying a case while being under the legal age is beyond me. But it's not that wildly out of line with some of the other stuff I've seen, like cops tazering old ladies for refusing to sign a ticket. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/30/virginia-college-student-arrested-after-buying-bottled-water/ http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/virginia-college-student-arrested-after-buying-bottled-water/

I am not 'hoping' for a defeat. Stop personalizing things. All I am saying is the US has built nothing in Afghanistan that will endure. Their fixation on democratic government has allowed an incompetent, corrupt man of no substance to sit in the president's chair for the last decade instead of someone who might have been able to build alliances and create a solid structure of government. He and his family will take his millions and leave soon after the US goes, and the government, such as it is, will collapse as various warlords and provincial governors make deals with the Taliban. The US and NATO should never have gone in there in the first place beyond searching for Bin Laden, who wound up being found in the back yard of their so-called allies instead.

See, I don't get this attitude, that we can't put much effort into checking out people who will be here for the rest of their lives, and be either a contributing part of society, if we select properly, or a drain on society if we don't. We don't need any more drains on society. We have enough losers, leeches and criminals without importing more. Many large corporations do psychological testing on all prospective employees. They evidently find this to be worth the money. Why shouldn't Canada do likewise?

"We"? I'm not sure what YOU were talking about. Evidently it wasn't of much interest to anyone, however, since others were discussing the broader implications of lowering refugee requirements to the point where virtually anyone discriminated against throughout the world would qualify. This had turned to Muslims in Burma some time ago, and my reply was to that aspect of the topic. Perhaps if you could catch hold of your frantic knee-jerk political correctness and stop attacking and belittling people long enough to actually read through a topic you might find yourself able to contribute more than puerile insults.

Seriously? You didn't know before? Really?

The Israelis spy on the US routinely. The English spy on the French, who spy on the Germans. In fact, the French are among, if not the worst in the world in terms of industrial espionage. And, of course, the US, Russians and Chinese spy on everyone else, including each other. I agree. All this "shock" that the US would spy on the EU is nonsense.

You seem to forget that there is no rule of law in China. Any more than there is in Russia. The idea that either government would be deterred from doing anything they wanted to do because of insufficient paperwork or legal technicalities is hilarious. If China had wanted to send Snowden to the US they'd have simply scooped him up and put him on a plane.

No they didn't. Iraq was a country. Afghanistan is a collection of tribes and clans. None of the members of the Afghan military has any loyalty for Afghanistan. Their loyalty is to their tribal and clan leaders. And their leaders have no loyalty to anyone but themselves. The only thing holding Karzai in power is foreign troops. As soon as they're gone, he's gone.

The situations are similar but not identical. The US was able to establish a real, legitimate government in Iraq which has general support across the nation. There is virtually no support left for the previous regime and no active military resistance on their behalf. The fighting in Iraq is between communities. In Afghanistan, the Taliban have never been successfully suppressed, and continue to control large parts of the countryside. The government in control has no real support, is widely perceived as thoroughly corrupt and incompetent, and has very little in the way of loyal, capable security forces at its disposal.

Some people admire process. Some prefer results. In suggesting the Americans "did their job" in building a government you're admiring the process even though the results are abysmally bad.

Do you consider that snarky, snotty reply to have any real value? I mean, it wasn't even clever...

How do you screen for friends? Most people look for those who pretty much share their values and beliefs. Do you hang around with a lot of homophobic racists? I'm guessing, based on your postings to date, you probably don't, and wouldn't. There are psychological personality tests all over the place to screen potential employees to determine personality traits. Some of them are quite clever in ferreting out things without those taking them even realizing it. Why couldn't we use that in immigration? Immigrants are a lot more important than employees. You can FIRE employees, after all. We can't get rid of immigrants who turn out to be unpleasant people.

Negotiating with the Taliban on the eve of withdrawal is pointless. The Taliban have no need to make compromises, and will easily overthrow the corrupt and incompetent administration of Hamid Karazai, who will probably not stay much longer than his American backers. He will be on a plane to Qatar with his family and his stolen millions, and the Taliban will be in control of Afghanistan once again. The only question will be whether the last of the Americans can get out before the Taliban smash their way through the gates of the US embassy. Will we see Americans desperately climbing up into helicopters as we did in Vietnam?

Would it not be more intelligent to draw in immigrants who don't require substantial "change" to conform with Canadian community standards and cultural values? That is to say, ones who don't think gays should be executed, Jews are the source of all evil and women should be beaten into obedience?

What makes you think we won't? Military preparedness is preparing for possibilities not certainties. There are precious few of the latter in reading the future.