Guest Peeves Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 "All and any" isn't in the current refugee policy. You should check it out. Check this out. Quote
Moonbox Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 uh..? Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
-TSS- Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 I think it is wrong to tag all people who are against immigration as racists just because some of them are racist but; I dare say, a minority are against immigration because they fear that some mystical national unity or purity of the nation is under threat. The vast majority of people who are either against immigration or at least very sceptical towards it are so because of economic factors. The debate on immigration here in Europe differs a lot from that of yours in North-America simply because you are such a magnet for immigrants so you really have to do some picking and choosing, if you let anyone in who is willing to come to the USA or Canada you would be inundated with immigration. As you get to pick and choose you obviously choose the ones who are useful to your countries. I'm not saying that a country like Canada would not accept immigration on humanitarian grounds as well, on the contrary, but the work-based immigration easily outnumbers humanitarian immigration. here in Europe, especially in a country like Finland, we get a lot more of those immigrants who really contribute nothing and who are not seen as an asset to the society but a drain on it. As we do really have plenty of our own citizens who contribute nothing but we can't do anything about them, there is really no need to import more similar people. Quote
Argus Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 Wilfrid Laurier ideas on Immigrants and being a Canadian in 1907 still apply today, or should. 'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes a Canadian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet a Canadian, and nothing but a Canadian... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is a Canadian, but something else also, isn't a Canadian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Canadian flag... And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Canadian people.' Wilfrid Laurier 1907 I approve of this message ^ Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 I think it is wrong to tag all people who are against immigration as racists just because some of them are racist but; I dare say, a minority are against immigration because they fear that some mystical national unity or purity of the nation is under threat. The vast majority of people who are either against immigration or at least very sceptical towards it are so because of economic factors. I think to a large degree that is true. Economics of a native born being somewhat less than an immigrants can and does fuel anger. We had one poster who left no doubt about that, and I also doubt he was alone (although no one else here was as bad) That would be mikdavid00 who no longer posts here. He couldnt/wouldnt look for a job, wouldnt vote if it was raining and complained incessantly about the 10 immigrants living in some house in his neighbourhood. What he couldnt fathom was that the ones he decried were doing so to get a better life, pay off the house faster, move to a bigger one, everyone sharing the profits and before long they owned their own 10 houses vs 10 in one. He, and his attitude were what is wrong with Canada. (not that much is really wrong when living here) He could just not see life getting better and blamed the immigrant for his station in life. The debate on immigration here in Europe differs a lot from that of yours in North-America simply because you are such a magnet for immigrants so you really have to do some picking and choosing, if you let anyone in who is willing to come to the USA or Canada you would be inundated with immigration. As you get to pick and choose you obviously choose the ones who are useful to your countries. I'm not saying that a country like Canada would not accept immigration on humanitarian grounds as well, on the contrary, but the work-based immigration easily outnumbers humanitarian immigration. We are a target, I hope so anyway, and yes, we do need to be choosy. No one denies that . But how do we be choosy? The folks wanting to come, they fill out forms, wait years and find out either yay or nay? What are the qualifications of those who choose? Is it done here in Ottawa or is the thought process and acceptance done at the emabassy? here in Europe, especially in a country like Finland, we get a lot more of those immigrants who really contribute nothing and who are not seen as an asset to the society but a drain on it. As we do really have plenty of our own citizens who contribute nothing but we can't do anything about them, there is really no need to import more similar people. We have them too. Native born Canucks dominate welfare offices, csocial housing places,food banks, our jails and the like. I dont mean more on the surface, but more as a proportion of the makeup of the country. Why any non-english speaking person would want to go to Finland is beyond me. I dont mean Finland is not a nice place, on the contrary, it is a gorgeous country with beautiful people (<---read women) but man, learning Finnish has to be one of the hardest things to do. I place it a notch north of Icelandic in trying to learn. Oh...and your winters are pretty damn long, but we have that in common. Quote
wyly Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 , learning Finnish has to be one of the hardest things to do. I place it a notch north of Icelandic in trying to learn. Oh...and your winters are pretty damn long, but we have that in common. Icelandic being a Germanic language shouldn't be too difficult for English speakers... at one time I had a basic knowledge of Norwegian, and knowing that I could understand a little Swedish and Danish as well, Icelandic would be similar...Finnish isn't Germanic so I would think significantly more difficult than a just a notch... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
-TSS- Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 (edited) Icelandic being a Germanic language shouldn't be too difficult for English speakers... at one time I had a basic knowledge of Norwegian, and knowing that I could understand a little Swedish and Danish as well, Icelandic would be similar...Finnish isn't Germanic so I would think significantly more difficult than a just a notch... Indeed, English is grammatically closer to even a language like Hindi than it is to Finnish. Having said all that, we in Finland used to think that our language must be one of the most difficult ones to learn, a kind of secret language that no outsider gets in on, and that opinion persisted until the 1990's when our country started receiving immigrants from all across the world and as a result many of them have learned the language because of living here but still destroying the myth of our language being impossible to learn with its 15 or 16 cases. Oh they must be very academic those people who learn such a difficult language? Not at all, ordinary workers from all walks of life but all of them have gone through the effort of learning the language. Sadly, there are a lot of immigrants who don't speak any language intelligible to Finnish people, be it Finnish, English or any European language. To their detriment, we don't speak Somali here in Finland. Edited October 20, 2012 by -TSS- Quote
Argus Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 Sadly, there are a lot of immigrants who don't speak any language intelligible to Finnish people, be it Finnish, English or any European language. To their detriment, we don't speak Somali here in Finland. Silly of you to let them in then... Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Guest Peeves Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 http://news.national...toning-in-iran/ Fortunately we have a government that has compassion and diligence. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has stepped in to prevent the immediate deportation of Fatemeh Derakhshandeh Tosarvandan, an Iranian woman who feared she would be stoned to death if returned to her home country, a government source revealed Thursday. Ms. Tosarvandan, 41, was scheduled to be deported on Oct. 2 — three days before she was eligible to present critical evidence of her alleged adultery charge to an immigration officer. Mr. Kenney’s order does not guarantee permanent residency for Ms. Tosarvandan. It only delays her departure pending a pre-removal risk assessment, which will block her deportation if an immigration officer finds that she faces “risk of torture.” Related Jason Kenney announces 3,100 people being stripped of citizenship for fraud Immigration consultants hit with dozens of charges as CBSA fraud crackdown continues In 2010, Ms. Tosarvandan fled to Toronto with her son, 16-year-old Hessam Hafezi Mashhadi, after she got word that her husband had been spreading rumours that she had committed adultery — a charge that is punishable through death by stoning. However, the claim was dismissed last October due to lack of evidence. Documented proof of Ms. Tosarvandan’s adultery charge — which she has since obtained through her lawyer — would likely have been enough to guarantee her stay in Canada. Nevertheless, because the documents were not available when Ms. Tosarvandan applied for her initial asylum claim, they have been considered ineligible for review. Quote
Guest Peeves Posted October 21, 2012 Report Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) We sure don't need refugees like this terrorist. How did he sneak by our government? One might question an Iraqi pretty thoroughly- throughly -closely and vet, etc. Canada Judge Says Terror Suspect Can Be Extradited EDMONTON, Alberta October 20, 2012 (AP) A judge ruled Friday there is enough evidence to extradite a Canadian man to the United States to face charges that he helped coordinate Tunisian jihadists believed responsible for separate suicide attacks in Iraq in 2009 that killed five American soldiers outside a U.S. base and seven people at an Iraqi police complex. Sayfildin Tahir Sharif, who holds dual Canadian/Iraqi citizenship, was arrested in 2011 on a U.S. warrant and has been fighting extradition to New York. The prosecution said intercepted phone and Internet conversations show Sharif helped jihadists contact members of a terror network as they made their way from Tunisia to Iraq to make the attack. http://abcnews.go.co...17#.UIQV8FZjfqU Edited October 21, 2012 by Peeves Quote
Guest Peeves Posted October 29, 2012 Report Posted October 29, 2012 http://news.national...-everyone-here/ A sad read, the Shafia, or the Khadrs for that matter. I ask again. How do the likes of these get accepted as immigrants? We have to be pretty desperate for people to accept those kicked out by another country. "Before arriving in Canada, the Shafia family was kicked out of Australia, when trying to immigrate from Afghanistan, for violating the terms of their visa, a fact that contradicts evidence presented at their trial;" Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.