Jump to content

A Muslim immigrant's letter to South Vancouver MP Wai Young's


Recommended Posts

I think Hardwork your posts are transparent. The fact you label me conservative and anti-immigrant because I do not buy your victim role play on this forum is par for the course.

The more you write the clearer your using your story as a pre-text to insult this country, its government, and its laws becomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Cyber you think if you ignore my answer and go back to a question that tries to turn a complex issue into a yes or no answer, it establishes your opinion as valid?

Clearly you believe you can answer your question in the absence of basic l information you do not have and would require to make a decision,

Don't expect me to engage in that irrational process..

You and Bleeding Heart have bought what this poster has stated hook line and sinker without taking the time to consider some basic questions you need to ask first.

I think the two of you have suspended rational thought process and are engaging in irrational faith belief. You accept what this man says with zero proof.

Go ahead but don't expect me to buy into your religion and worship of this individual. He is no martyr and I think your turning him into one is not just irrational but as Bleeding Heart would say, silly.

Here let me put it in terms the two of you should be able to grasp:

jump off that cliff, but don't expect me to follow-you are no angel and neither am I.

As for Guyser right on cue.

Courage in numbers so they say.

Edited by Rue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You accept what this man says with zero proof.

You mean like this pile of hooey? Or the one where you try and convince anyone you have knowledge of Law.

Here is one story why.

I met a man who had seconds to flee his village in Zimbabew with his wife. He had to leave his family behind. His crime-being a teacher, Mugabe had gone on a campaign wiping out all the teachers.

This man escaped into South Africa and came to Canada as a refugee. When I met the man he walked 3 hours a day to see his wife in another hostel a and then walk back to his. He put a newspaper in his shoes to protect his feet from the holes. His wife almost died from tuberculosis and he went to t he hospital every day and walekd 4 hours there and back because he saved his bus money.

He got up every morning early and went out to Canada's wonderland for a minimum wage job. He could not fix his teeth, his infected feet, but he worked. He saved every penny. Then he got a job as a janitor in a synagogue. He worked and he worked and he saved his money and he went back to Ryseron part-time and he is a teacher now.

He struggled over 8 years. He never complained.

I know many like him. When I was young we took in a Muslim family from Uganda. They lived in a basement. They had nothing and they worked and saved amnd eventually they found factory jobs.

As for Guyser right on cue.

Courage in numbers so they say.

Not at all. Notrhing he has posted is in any way a stretch.

But then again, I suspect maybe you worked for Immigration Canada too :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cyber you think if you ignore my answer and go back to a question that tries to turn a complex issue into a yes or no answer, it establishes your opinion as valid?

Clearly you believe you can answer your question in the absence of basic l information you do not have and would require to make a decision,

Don't expect me to engage in that irrational process..

You and Bleeding Heart have bought what this poster has stated hook line and sinker without taking the time to consider some basic questions you need to ask first.

I think the two of you have suspended rational thought process and are engaging in irrational faith belief. You accept what this man says with zero proof.

Go ahead but don't expect me to buy into your religion and worship of this individual. He is no martyr and I think your turning him into one is not just irrational but as Bleeding Heart would say, silly.

Here let me put it in terms the two of you should be able to grasp:

jump off that cliff, but don't expect me to follow-you are no angel and neither am I.

As for Guyser right on cue.

Courage in numbers so they say.

it's a simple question. Forget hardworker's story.

Should immigrants have to wait more than 5 years for an answer? I'm not asking if the answer should be yes or no. I'm asking about getting any answer at all.

It's pretty interesting that you won't even answer that.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cyber I did answer your question directly twice. You just don't like the answer I am giving you.

Your question is illogical and based on a defective premises.

You pulled the number "5" out of the air because you accept this as the number the poster gave you.

You also assume since "5 years| sounds like a lot to you it must be unfair.

That is illogical

Whether a government policy is unfair or inefficient depends on examining many factors, factors you do not have.

Simply assuming a time period sounds long is the criteria is not logical.

To determine whether a government policy is fair or not you first have to establish the criteria you are going to use to determine fairness.

Do you have any? Of course not.

To start with you have no clue whether the security delay is being caused by actual incompetence or some kind of bureaucratic inefficiency by the government, or in fact by factors beyond its control.

More to the point you have no clue as to whether there is even a delay .

Do you?

Of course not.

Don't be ridiculous and ask me to criticize a government policy without having proper criteria in which to measure performance.

If you want to pose as a government efficiency expert and arbitrator of fairness without any criteria other than an arbitrary time period go ahead but don't pretend I haven't answered you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question doesn't have a premise. My question is not an argument. It's a question. In fact, it's a yes or no question and I'm still waiting for a yes or no answer. Is 5 years a reasonable amount of time for an immigrant to wait for an answer? It doesn't matter whether we're talking about hardworker or anyone else. Do you think that it's ok for immigrants to be hanging around in our country without an answer for that long?

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser the personal name calling is par for the course.

The poster came on this forum making the issue about him. He has advanced subjective allegations you have no way of knowing are true or not.

It is my contention you choose to accept them because you agree with what he has said.

It is my contention you choose to insult me because you don't agree with what I said.

In so doing you have established once again my points.

When someone comes on a forum and initiates a thread claiming they have been discriminated against by the federal government because they are a Muslim with zero proof, then engages in partisan comments against the ruling party of the day and then goes further and insults the very legal process of the government in which he seeks to gain its citizenship, I challenge it.

You choose not to. You choose to buy what this poster says hook line and sinker with zero proof.

If this individual gave you the exact same story and said he was being discriminated against because he's white you would be the first to call him a racist.

Call me all the names you want Gusyer I love them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser the personal name calling is par for the course.

Show me where I called you a name . Geebus ! :rolleyes:

The poster came on this forum making the issue about him.

Well duh ! It IS about him. Hes trying to become a citizen. Go read his first post.

He has advanced subjective allegations you have no way of knowing are true or not.

It is my contention you choose to accept them because you agree with what he has said.

I happen to believe what he says. He was clear, eloquent and not prone to ...<cough cough> hyperbole like someone else.

It is my contention you choose to insult me because you don't agree with what I said.

There was no insult. You denigrate the guy for stating his case as he sees it. Five years is a very long time, he deserves an answer, yes or no.

Something of course you cant answer, yes or no.

It really is simple, but lost on some.

In so doing you have established once again my points.

Let us know when you have one. So far .....nada.

When someone comes on a forum and initiates a thread claiming they have been discriminated against by the federal government because they are a Muslim with zero proof, then engages in partisan comments against the ruling party of the day and then goes further and insults the very legal process of the government in which he seeks to gain its citizenship, I challenge it.

Challenge what? This?

I was told that it was undergoing a security review. I was very understanding. It is something to be expected given that I am Muslim. But, it is now 2014. I have no problems with security background checks. What upsets me is that I am continuously misled. All I want is some sort of concrete update. Instead, I'm thrown into this limbo.

You choose not to. You choose to buy what this poster says hook line and sinker with zero proof.

And with zero proof you become an ass towards him. Golf clap...

If this individual gave you the exact same story and said he was being discriminated against because he's white you would be the first to call him a racist.

What an asinine statement. Certainly couldnt be backed up with my words anything remotely close.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guser I have numbered your statements and then answered them:

1-Show me where I called you a name . Geebus !

2-You denigrate the guy for stating his case as he sees it.

3-Five years is a very long time, he deserves an answer, yes or no.4-

4-Something of course you cant answer, yes or no.

5-It really is simple, but lost on some.

6-Let us know when you have one. So far .....nada.

7-And with zero proof you become an ass towards him. Golf clap...

8-What an asinine statement.

In regards to 1 above, you provide the answer in 2, 7 and 8 as well as these words:

"You mean like this pile of hooey? Or the one where you try and convince anyone you have knowledge of Law."

"I suspect maybe you worked for Immigration Canada too "

Your comments above speak for themselves. Lol. Continue.

Your comments in 3-7 are illogical. I never claimed to have proof of anything in fact just the exact opposite. I stated since I have no objective measurement criteria or evidence from which to conduct an analaysis of how Immigration Canada manages its security checks, I have no way of knowing if what it is doing is inefficient or unfair.

I also stated in the absence of such evidence and criteria your choosing 1 year, 6 months, 5 years, any amount of time is necessarily arbitraru and meaningless as the amount of time by itself can not conclude anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've criticized the length of time and hardworker's story and I've told you that his story doesn't matter. The length of time does matter and you can't even give a straight answer on that. That speaks volumes.

No I have said in the absence of sufficient evidence and criteria from which to be able to assess the reason for any security search delays it is illogical to think one can just pull a time line out of the air and assume the length of the time line alone determines it as being unfair.

Also it is illogical state that his story does not matter. Of course it does. First off you do not even know if his story is true. Secondly you do not even know there is a clearance delay. Thirdly even if you could be shown there was a delay, how would you know why do then conclude its unfair?

The length of time in the absence of qualification, measurement and objective criteria is necessarily meaningless and so would any conclusions you make. In fact you do not render any conclusion, you make assumptions in the absence of sufficient evidence to m ake a conclusion and then because I won't claim I am not answering your question.

I have now in fact answered your question 4 times, 5 counting my response to Gusyer. You can continue to say I did not answer you but in fac I have but I simply won't engage you in your line of defective assumption making.

You want to buy what this person has stated with zero proof, go ahead. I do not. I also do not buy into a message where someone portrays himself as a victim of Muslim discrimination with zero proof of it.

I also do not buy into this person's anti Harper and anti Canadian government views and anti Nato views.

You do, I do not. Leave it at that unless you want to join Guster with the references to hooey and ass, Your choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guser I have numbered your statements and then answered them:

1-Show me where I called you a name . Geebus !

In other words, no name was called, Thanks Roo!

I stated since I have no objective measurement criteria or evidence from which to conduct an analaysis of how Immigration Canada manages its security checks, I have no way of knowing if what it is doing is inefficient or unfair.

I also stated in the absence of such evidence and criteria your choosing 1 year, 6 months, 5 years, any amount of time is necessarily arbitraru and meaningless as the amount of time by itself can not conclude anything.

Wow, another crock posted.

Not to mention you purposely avoided any correction on assertions that he denigrated Canada, discriminated because he is Muslim and so on.....

The guy has done nothing but come on her and state his case. It is logical and within reason what he wrote.

Maybe you can apply the same courtesy to him and his case as people extend courtesy to you and your assertions you are a lawyer,of course his case is far more believeable but thats just me.

Got that Roo ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Five years is far too long.

Only someone who has backed themselves in a corner and wont admit it would write long prose full of hoeey to get out of admitting it.

5 years?, the govt can make their case and move on far faster than that. The hearings for oil exploratoion dont take that long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I have said in the absence of sufficient evidence and criteria from which to be able to assess the reason for any security search delays it is illogical to think one can just pull a time line out of the air and assume the length of the time line alone determines it as being unfair.

Also it is illogical state that his story does not matter. Of course it does. First off you do not even know if his story is true. Secondly you do not even know there is a clearance delay. Thirdly even if you could be shown there was a delay, how would you know why do then conclude its unfair?

The length of time in the absence of qualification, measurement and objective criteria is necessarily meaningless and so would any conclusions you make. In fact you do not render any conclusion, you make assumptions in the absence of sufficient evidence to m ake a conclusion and then because I won't claim I am not answering your question.

I have now in fact answered your question 4 times, 5 counting my response to Gusyer. You can continue to say I did not answer you but in fac I have but I simply won't engage you in your line of defective assumption making.

You want to buy what this person has stated with zero proof, go ahead. I do not. I also do not buy into a message where someone portrays himself as a victim of Muslim discrimination with zero proof of it.

I also do not buy into this person's anti Harper and anti Canadian government views and anti Nato views.

You do, I do not. Leave it at that unless you want to join Guster with the references to hooey and ass, Your choice.

I'm simply asking your opinion on a hypothetical situation, regardless of whether hardworker is telling the truth or not, is it fair for an immigrant to wait over 5 years for a yes or no answer? You can continue to type up these long rants every time I respond. I'm still not going to read them. It's a simple question asking for a simple answer.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser your attempt now to bait me is not working.

Anyone can go on the Canada Immigration website and see for themselves the process for security clearance.

There are two distinct processes. One is obtaining a police certificate. This is used to see if the person applying has a criminal record.

A security background investigation is also done to see if the applicant is engaged or could be possibly engaged in espionage, terrorism, subversive activities or is engaging or associating with known criminals or terrorists.

In addition a US citizen or resident must provide police clearances from the state they resided in and there are numerous overlapping police and government agency jurisdictions in the US.

The actual fact is in this process the Immigration Ministry has to go outside Canada to ask others beyond their control for information so for Guyser and Cyber to keep chirping they can assume if something is beyond the Canadian government's control it is the Canadian government's fault simply because they decided 5 years sounds too long is illogical and of course to Cyber would seem simple.

More to the point when someone makes an unsubstantiated allegation that the poster did who started this thread that he is a victim of discrimination because he is a Muslim in fact denigrates this country's laws and its obligation to protect its citizens and it is illogical to state I am denigrating this individual for saying that. He came on this forum making an allegation he can not prove that is negative and casts a smeer against the motives of people working in your government to protect you knowing these people he smeers can not defend themselves or explain fully what they are doing.

IS it denigrating to say to someone who claims to be a victim of Muslim discrimination to put up or shut up?

What about all the immigrants who waited while their security clearance was done? Were they discriminated against?

Where is the proof that this security clearance process was only done because the government only decided to do it because they hate Muslims or this alleged Muslim?

Not a shred of proof.

Edited by Rue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser your attempt now to bait me is not working.

Bait....LOL... asking questions? Oh my.

Cant answer can you? Name calling?

Anyone can go on the Canada Immigration website and see for themselves the process for security clearance.

There are two distinct processes. One is obtaining a police certificate. This is used to see if the person applying has a criminal record.

A security background investigation is also done to see if the applicant is engaged or could be possibly engaged in espionage, terrorism, subversive activities or is engaging or associating with known criminals or terrorists.

In addition a US citizen or resident must provide police clearances from the state they resided in and there are numerous overlapping police and government agency jurisdictions in the US.

The actual fact is in this process the Immigration Ministry has to go outside Canada to ask others beyond their control for information so for Guyser and Cyber to keep chirping they can assume if something is beyond the Canadian government's control it is the Canadian government's fault simply because they decided 5 years sounds too long is illogical and of course to Cyber would seem simple.

More to the point when someone makes an unsubstantiated allegation that the poster did who started this thread that he is a victim of discrimination because he is a Muslim in fact denigrates this country's laws and its obligation to protect its citizens and it is illogical to state I am denigrating this individual for saying that. He came on this forum making an allegation he can not prove that is negative and casts a smeer against the motives of people working in your government to protect you knowing these people he smeers can not defend themselves or explain fully what they are doing.

IS it denigrating to say to someone who claims to be a victim of Muslim discrimination to put up or shut up?

Oh I am sorry Rue. I figured you read the OP, which by this prose of hoeey proves you didnt.

Have a nice out of this world day.

:blink::blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, rue, since you have now declaimed that all of us "need proof" for every personal story or observation anyone makes...that of course applies to all your posts, all your unsubstantiated opinion.

So congratulations...all discussions, from here on in, will have to be prefaced with such remarks.

Including all your own posts...without a single exception, of course. You're going to be a busy fellow, qualifying everything you post with "substantiation" (which has not till now been exactly your style...has it?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...