Why conservatives want tougher laws and less immigration

[Argus]

Mohamed Jama Yusuf could be the poster boy for why conservatives are frustrated with both our criminal justice system and our immigration system. A Somali refugee, Yusuf attacked and murdered a completely innocent and helpless man a few years back, for no other reason than he wanted to. There was no real motive. He saw the guy riding by on his bike, knocked him off, stomped on his head, and then went to a bar with his friends, high-fiving each other to celebrate.

Why we let vermin like this into the country in the first place is a question I've never understood. But there's no question of the number of such people one will read about in the violent crime reports every week. Nor is there any question of the way they fill up public housing and the welfare rolls.

Why the brutal murder of a completely innocent and defenseless man warrants a sentencing of somewhere between 5 years (defense) and 12 years (crown) is also beyond me. As far as I can see there are no mitigating circumstances, and Yusuf is nothing but scum who will forever be a danger to the Canadian public - thanks to whatever immigration officer allowed him into the country. Twelve years, which probably means bail in four or five, is a paltry punishment for murder. We need tougher laws on evidence and sentencing for such people.

I also wouldn't mind the refugee board members having to appear at the trials to justify why they let him in, and see the family whose lives were devastated by their incompetence.

You know, a long time ago the primary job of the leader of a country was defined as keeping the barbarians from getting over the walls. Now we deliberately let the barbarians come in and live with us.

Vermin pleads guilty to manslaughter

[The Right One]

conservatives are protecting the citizens from the impeding islamic invasion that will soon come to our shores.

we need to remove further restrictions to allow citizens to protect themselves for the time comes. less gun laws and more rights to defend property and persons.

[eyeball]

The only way conservatives will ever fully realize their deepest desires is to round up all the un-conservatives and bury them in a great big hole.

You know you wanna, but first you need to get out of your Momma's basements.

[dre]

but first you need to get out of your Momma's basements.

No no. That would be too progressive

[Jack Weber]

conservatives are protecting the citizens from the impeding islamic invasion that will soon come to our shores.

we need to remove further restrictions to allow citizens to protect themselves for the time comes. less gun laws and more rights to defend property and persons.

Hi Lictor...

What was it you once said about the "howling third world masses"?

Or was it "pocked faced baboons"?

Help me out!

[Shady]

The only way conservatives will ever fully realize their deepest desires is to round up all the un-conservatives and bury them in a great big hole.

You know you wanna, but first you need to get out of your Momma's basements.

More hyperbole. Do you post anything that's not?

[jacee]

conservatives are protecting the citizens from the impeding islamic invasion that will soon come to our shores.

we need to remove further restrictions to allow citizens to protect themselves for the time comes. less gun laws and more rights to defend property and persons.

Omigod ...

Is there a way to deport paranoid gun-totin' ijuts?

The crime was horrific.

But I've seen no proof that the man's race, religion, country of origin, past behaviour nor the behaviour of his family have anything to do with his crime.

Perhaps we should consider all army reservists criminals unfit for Canada because of the actions of three of them?

Three Canadian soldiers kicked Paul Croutch, a sleeping homeless man, "like a football," ...

Croutch was taken to hospital unconscious and died later. The attack broke several of his ribs, tore his spleen and caused a fata njury to his brain, Goody said.

http://www.thestar.com/iphone/news/article/347166--homeless-man-was-kicked-like-a-football-trial-told

[Shady]

Perhaps we should consider all army reservists criminals unfit for Canada because of the actions of three of them?

Why not? That's how you come to your conclusions regarding Conservatives and/or the so-called 1%. Based on the actions of a few. Pot meet kettle.

[g_bambino]

Why we let vermin like this into the country in the first place is a question I've never understood.

A better question is: What led you to believe Yusuf is an immigrant?

[Michael Hardner]

Why we let vermin like this into the country in the first place is a question I've never understood.

The context for the (usual) anti-Muslim immigration thread is often that they are so strictly religious that they could never fit in to our culture. So in this case, we have the murderer noted as drinking in the bar, so he's not a strict Muslim clearly.

So what is the context that you would use to keep this person out of Canada in this case ? What is the objective measure ?

Is the point of this thread that conservatives want tougher laws and less immigration because they judge certain immigrants differently than others ? As such, this thread is more about conservatives than about immigration.

[Jack Weber]

A better question is: What led you to believe Yusuf is an immigrant?

The non-Anglo...er...I should say...The non-Eurocentric name...

That's always the dead give away for some of these folks who might call others "vermin"...

[g_bambino]

The non-Anglo...er...I should say...The non-Eurocentric name...

That's always the dead give away for some of these folks who might call others "vermin"...

Oh, right. I forgot about that law that bars the giving of Canadian-born children names not derived from the European tradition.

[ed.: c/e]

Edited April 1, 2012 by g_bambino

[Guest Peeves]

The initial subject is incorrect. Conservatives don't want less immigration. Conservatives are pushing immigration.

The Liberals induced immigrants for votes regardless the contribution to our job needs or the cost to our taxes. Immigrants are a negative variance to our society. Immigrants cost more in our programs than they contribute in taxes.

Conservatives want immigration to reflect our job needs and our society. We DO NOT need old people that will strain our health care and benefit programs. We do not need phony refugee claimants, lying criminals

coached to defraud our lose system, our lengthy appeals and our (till now) generous accommodation while appealing.

The RCMP has charged a Windsor immigration lawyer and her assistant for allegedly counseling individuals to make refugee claims based on fake stories.

Sandra Zaher and her assistant Diana Al-Masalkhi were arrested on Thursday and charged with misrepresentation, counseling misrepresentation and fabricating evidence.

They were scheduled to appear in court April 26.

The arrests followed a two-month police investigation into allegations they had counseled foreign nationals “to make refugee eligibility claims based on fraudulent stories,” the RCMP said in a statement.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/30/windsor-immigration-lawyer-charged-with-coaching-refugees-to-make-fake-claims/

We don't need a thousand Roma (or others( entering, claiming refugee status from democratic countries as has been tried from the USA, Israel, Hungary etc. then abandoning their claims, disappearing or engaging in illegal activities.

Since an immigrant costs society more than they contribute, what the Conservatives want is those that contribute to Canada's economy and are legitimately interested in becoming a good Canadian, not an absent citizen that can leave for twenty years and claim benefits when wanted. (like those Iraqi or others that demanded rescue and were non residents!)

It's about time our government became selective and responsible to Canadians. Good for Minister Jason Kenney - Citizenship and Immigration ... et al.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Peeves

[Guest Peeves]

The only way conservatives will ever fully realize their deepest desires is to round up all the un-conservatives and bury them in a great big hole.

You know you wanna, but first you need to get out of your Momma's basements.

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

[Jack Weber]

The initial subject is incorrect. Conservatives don't want less immigration. Conservatives are pushing immigration.

The Liberals induced immigrants for votes regardless the contribution to our job needs or the cost to our taxes. Immigrants are a negative variance to our society. Immigrants cost more in our programs than they contribute in taxes.

Conservatives want immigration to reflect our job needs and our society. We DO NOT need old people that will strain our health care and benefit programs. We do not need phony refugee claimants, lying criminals

coached to defraud our lose system, our lengthy appeals and our (till now) generous accommodation while appealing.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/30/windsor-immigration-lawyer-charged-with-coaching-refugees-to-make-fake-claims/

We don't need a thousand Roma (or others( entering, claiming refugee status from democratic countries as has been tried from the USA, Israel, Hungary etc. then abandoning their claims, disappearing or engaging in illegal activities.

Since an immigrant costs society more than they contribute, what the Conservatives want is those that contribute to Canada's economy and are legitimately interested in becoming a good Canadian, not an absent citizen that can leave for twenty years and claim benefits when wanted. (like those Iraqi or others that demanded rescue and were non residents!)

It's about time our government became selective and responsible to Canadians. Good for Minister Jason Kenney - Citizenship and Immigration ... et al.

So we've gomne from someone with a "Mulsimishness" sounding name to Gypsys being a problem?

And those claiming assistance a few years ago were Lebanese,not Iraqi,(but hey,who cares 'cause they all look the same,right?)...

And ol' Steve didn't miss the photo op on that one,did he?I distinctly remember him greeting those "Canadians of Convenience" (which they were/are,by the way) at the door of the plane the Harper Government paid for to bring them "home"...

[-TSS-]

Is being anti-immigration a vote-winner in Canada? It certainly is in Europe especially in my own country. However, I would have thought that in a country like Canada people would realize the irony of being anti-immigration.

[Guest Peeves]

So we've gomne from someone with a "Mulsimishness" sounding name to Gypsys being a problem?

And those claiming assistance a few years ago were Lebanese,not Iraqi,(but hey,who cares 'cause they all look the same,right?)...

And ol' Steve didn't miss the photo op on that one,did he?I distinctly remember him greeting those "Canadians of Convenience" (which they were/are,by the way) at the door of the plane the Harper Government paid for to bring them "home"...

Roma refugees ARE a recognized problem here. Do you dispute that fact? Why end with a question? It's fact you can take issue with if you care to.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/04/record-number-of-hungarian-asylum-seekers-landing-on-canadas-doorstep/

Mr. Kenney has long questioned the merits of claims put forth by members of the stateless ethnic group that says it still faces persecution by ultra-right-wing nationalists and neo-Nazi groups across Europe. Two years ago, he called Czech Roma claims “bogus,” and last year told the House of Commons that some Roma asylum-seekers are “coached to come to Canada, make a false asylum claim, and then register for provincial welfare benefits.”

That bed bugs could evict from Canada someone supposedly fearing for their life, or that waiting a few months for a refugee hearing is a deterrent to staying safe in a free country, all but confirmed for the minister what he already thought: Many of the 2,298 claims filed last year are “not bonafide,” and the migration by Hungarian Roma is “very peculiar,” “bizarre,” and “very well-organized.”

“Asylum isn’t about whether you like the country you live in, it’s not about whether life is easy there or not, it’s not even about whether you might occasionally face discrimination,” he said. “If people are interested in Canada because they want to pursue a quality health care system, or economic opportunities, or they don’t like their country of origin, then I would invite them to apply through our immigration system like everyone else.”

He also pointed out that Hungary is a member of the European Union, and citizens can now live and work freely in fellow member states. According to the United Kingdom Border Agency, for example, an EU citizen and members of his or her family can accept a job offer, become self-employed, start a business, or manage a company without asking permission or applying for refugee status.

Still, in the first six months of this year, 1,600 Hungarians claimed refugee status in Canada — three times the number of Tamil asylum-seekers who arrived off B.C. aboard a smuggling ship last summer, amid much controversy and media frenzy.

Hungary is today Canada’s top source country for refugee claims, ahead of African and Asian nations, and the vast majority are believed to be Roma. The number of claims increased almost 100-fold after the country’s visa requirement was lifted in 2008, with claims jumping from 34 in 2007 to 2,298 in 2010.

Ok Lebanese, I stand corrected. Still Makes my point. Dual citizenship of convenience.

So might be snakehead boats landing with claimants attempting to jump the queue.

[-TSS-]

Some time ago there was a news in Ireland that the word "bogus" will be banned in context of asylum applications. It was said that the word was disparaging.

[Guest Peeves]

Some time ago there was a news in Ireland that the word "bogus" will be banned in context of asylum applications. It was said that the word was disparaging.

Disparaging is unacceptable?

Sometimes the truth might well be disparaging even though it's the truth.

Something may be the truth and be offensive.

Calling a spade a spade is free speech.

[Guest Peeves]

Is being anti-immigration a vote-winner in Canada? It certainly is in Europe especially in my own country. However, I would have thought that in a country like Canada people would realize the irony of being anti-immigration.

You are absolutely right. Any country like Canada where the birth rate won't replace attrition better have immigration...selective immigration...

[Guest Peeves]

The context for the (usual) anti-Muslim immigration thread is often that they are so strictly religious that they could never fit in to our culture. So in this case, we have the murderer noted as drinking in the bar, so he's not a strict Muslim clearly.

So what is the context that you would use to keep this person out of Canada in this case ? What is the objective measure ?

Is the point of this thread that conservatives want tougher laws and less immigration because they judge certain immigrants differently than others ? As such, this thread is more about conservatives than about immigration.

Why is it anti-Muslim? If he had killed a Muslim would it be anti-Muslim?

He is a Somali refugee according to all I read.

Is that reference somehow dishonest?

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/27/somali-refugee-guilty-of-fatal-beating-2

[Michael Hardner]

Why is it anti-Muslim? If he had killed a Muslim would it be anti-Muslim?

Why is what anti-Muslim ? I was talking about the anti-Muslim posts that appear on here, and the criteria they use (or imply) to explain why Muslims should be kept out of Canada.

He is a Somali refugee according to all I read.

Is that reference somehow dishonest?

No - but my question stands. How and why would you keep people like him out of Canada ?

For example, is your point that Somalis are murders ? If not then what ?

[Argus]

The context for the (usual) anti-Muslim immigration thread is often that they are so strictly religious that they could never fit in to our culture. So in this case, we have the murderer noted as drinking in the bar, so he's not a strict Muslim clearly.

So what is the context that you would use to keep this person out of Canada in this case ? What is the objective measure ?

Is the point of this thread that conservatives want tougher laws and less immigration because they judge certain immigrants differently than others ? As such, this thread is more about conservatives than about immigration.

There are a variety of reasons why I am opposed to our current immigration system. But you can sum most of them up by the term "barbarians over the walls" I used in my OP. Far too many of those we allow into this country are savages we should be keeping far from our shores. I'm not denying we have brutal home-grown criminals. But we selected this guy and allowed him in. That makes it different. That makes it something we can do something about before he kills someone.

Do conservatives judge certain immigrants differently than others? You're damned right we do. We judge the failures differantly. That's because, unlike liberals, we actually have standards.

By the way, some of the 911 bombers enjoyed themselves at a strip club the night before running an airplane into the world trade center in the name of "Allah".

Edited April 2, 2012 by Argus

[Argus]

A better question is: What led you to believe Yusuf is an immigrant?

While it doesn't state as much in this story in others he is identified as a Somalian refugee.

[Argus]

Is being anti-immigration a vote-winner in Canada? It certainly is in Europe especially in my own country. However, I would have thought that in a country like Canada people would realize the irony of being anti-immigration.

Where is this irony? Surely you're not going to trot out that absurd cliche so many snivelling white liberals like to use about us "all being immigrants". Because I'm not.