poochy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Last time I checked, Christians weren't the only groups facing a crisis in Syria. Not the only, but when even being the wrong muslim sect can get you killed, being christian can only put you at a higher risk, so about those votes being bought... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 In your honest opinion. how many votes did they or could they have bought and what is the likelyhood that those votes purchased could have changed any election? Like other extreme ideologues, he's stretching as much and as far as he can to justify his hate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Like other extreme ideologues, he's stretching as much and as far as he can to justify his hate. Of course, and you can only beat back the horde with logic so often before you tire of the stupid. Im waiting for an answer, it seems unlikely to me that a few thousand refugees of any stripe will change the election, but again when you are on the left you only have to yell loudly, your words don't have to mean anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 when you are on the left you only have to yell loudly, your words don't have to mean anything. Trudeau Jr. gave an academy award performance today. "It's disgusting" he yelled at the top of his lungs. What a hypocrite! Had he been in Harper's shoes he probably would have done the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Not my fault the PMO interfered and tried to buy votes in specific communities by matching them with the appropriate immigrants. Really... Toto I'm not in Kansas anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Really... Toto I'm not in Kansas anymore Yes the owner of that statement appears to be too busy to defend it, not that it can be, and it's just one more example of the screeching horde doing what it does, it never has to be true, the people who care about truth aren't the ones they are trying to attract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Yes the owner of that statement appears to be too busy to defend it, not that it can be, and it's just one more example of the screeching horde doing what it does, it never has to be true, the people who care about truth aren't the ones they are trying to attract. Take it up with Bob Fife, it's his source that is drawing the line between which refugees were getting through and which were being delayed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 I don't get your point. So what if the PMO ordered it. There's nothing wrong with that. To listen to the idiots of the media the PMO actually ordered all the files sent over to them and pored over them one by one. Which is ludicrous, on the face of it.People in the PMO don't have the training nor the clearance to pore over such files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 What group in that region is more vulnerable than Christians, other than Yazidis, who were also given priority, along with gays.The PMO does't have the right to make those decisions. It's similar to Jason Kenney deciding to ban the niqab. He has not the authority. Tough noogies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Take it up with Bob Fife, it's his source that is drawing the line between which refugees were getting through and which were being delayed. How many votes did it buy? How much impact could those numbers have on an election? How many of these refugees are even of voting age? Don't run away from it, you made a ridiculous claim, stand by it and tell us just how it is that the conservatives could think so few people could change a national election. o, and the answer, the conservatives are stupid, isn't an answer. Stop screeching and own up to how dumb a thought that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 How many votes did it buy? How much impact could those numbers have on an election? How many of these refugees are even of voting age? Don't run away from it, you made a ridiculous claim, stand by it and tell us just how it is that the conservatives could think so few people could change a national election. o, and the answer, the conservatives are stupid, isn't an answer. Stop screeching and own up to how dumb a thought that is. All the parties have been hitting micro demographics (hence Mulcair's spirited defenseman of Quebec dairy farmers). In very tight races, getting an edge via targeting small groups could mean victory. Besides, forming up a potentially shaky base by "saving the Christians" isn't that hard to believe. Why else would the PMO suddenly take such an interest in Syrian refugee claimants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 The PMO does't have the right to make those decisions. It's similar to Jason Kenney deciding to ban the niqab. He has not the authority. Tough noogies. I would imagine the Prime Minister has the right, as head of Cabinet. My understanding is that Cabinet does indeed have power via legislation to intrude upon matters of immigration. But in general one would think the Prime Minister would need some compelling reason to intrude upon one of his own cabinet minister's departments. Is Alexander an incompetent? Was the department screwing up? What possible reason could the PM have for ordering files be reviewed at the highest level of government? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 I would imagine the Prime Minister has the right, as head of Cabinet. My understanding is that Cabinet does indeed have power via legislation to intrude upon matters of immigration. But in general one would think the Prime Minister would need some compelling reason to intrude upon one of his own cabinet minister's departments. Is Alexander an incompetent? Was the department screwing up? What possible reason could the PM have for ordering files be reviewed at the highest level of government? He certainly has the right as far as I can tell to order an audit of procedures for any department. However, I don't think people in his office have the training, or the clearance, to access files properly in the hands of CIC. And he, nor Chris Alexander sure as hell don't have the authority to attempt to sway decisions as to the acceptance/rejection of those files, especially based on the religious orientation of the people named in those files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truth Or Dare Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Let's be real here. Harper's position on Syrian refugees is a no brainer - especially in the midst of an election. When there is no election coming up, he drags his feet for months and years to help the Palestinians. Timing is everything. Lets see what he does after the elections... if he wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Well, the dishonourable person who divulged classified sensitive information which is against the law and violates the conditions of employment could soon be prosecuted as the RCMP have been called in to investigate. Of course, that person will be seen by some as an 'whistle blower' or whatever then cheered on by those who support unethical employee behaviour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Well, the dishonourable person who divulged classified sensitive information which is against the law and violates the conditions of employment could soon be prosecuted as the RCMP have been called in to investigate. Of course, that person will be seen by some as an 'whistle blower' or whatever then cheered on by those who support unethical employee behaviour. Yes, how dare anyone reveal that the Tories had politicised refugee intake. How could voters have any interest in that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 People in the PMO don't have the training nor the clearance to pore over such files. Which is probably why it didn't happen. They simply held meetings and discussions with Immigration. Harper made that quite clear in his response to this question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 The PMO does't have the right to make those decisions. It's similar to Jason Kenney deciding to ban the niqab. He has not the authority. Tough noogies. The government most certainly has not only the right but the responsibility to ensure that security precautions are being taken, and to give guidance on what kind of refugees should be prioritized. In this case that was those most endangered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Besides, forming up a potentially shaky base by "saving the Christians" isn't that hard to believe. Why else would the PMO suddenly take such an interest in Syrian refugee claimants? You forgot that Yazidis and gays and lesbians were also prioritized, along with mothers with small children. How is it with you progressives the magic word 'christian' sets your hair aflame and you lose sight of everything else written? "Ahhh! He's prioritizing Christians! Aaaahhh!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 The government most certainly has not only the right but the responsibility to ensure that security precautions are being taken, and to give guidance on what kind of refugees should be prioritized. In this case that was those most endangered. Is the Minister of Immigration not capable of doing this? Why would this require any intervention from the PMO at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Yes, how dare anyone reveal that the Tories had politicised refugee intake. How could voters have any interest in that? There is ZERO evidence they politicized refugee intake. Don't let that stop you, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 There is ZERO evidence they politicized refugee intake. Don't let that stop you, though. Someone in Immigration thinks there was political interference. And I'll ask again, why would the PMO need to intervene at all? Is the Minister of Immigration an incompetent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Is the Minister of Immigration not capable of doing this? Why would this require any intervention from the PMO at all? Again, from the links posted by the outraged, this initial brief halt came shortly after the Americans expressed concern over the security implications of bringing in thousands of undocumented people from that region. I would imagine that had a lot to do with it. As for prioritizing those most endangered, this is nothing new. We discussed this before the election was even called. It's not a secret or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 Again, from the links posted by the outraged, this initial brief halt came shortly after the Americans expressed concern over the security implications of bringing in thousands of undocumented people from that region. I would imagine that had a lot to do with it. As for prioritizing those most endangered, this is nothing new. We discussed this before the election was even called. It's not a secret or anything. You still haven't explained why the PMO needed to get directly involved and request files. Is the PMO now directly liaising with American authorities over security matters? Is the Minister of Public Safety also an incompetent? Is there anyone in Cabinet capable of doing their job, or is the PMO now taking over all executive functions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Share Posted October 10, 2015 (edited) You still haven't explained why the PMO needed to get directly involved and request files. Who says they requested the files? Who says the files were sent? At a campaign rally in Vancouver, Stephen Harper angrily denied political staff interfered in any specific files. “Political staff are never involved in approving refugee applications,” he said. “Such decisions are made by officials in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.” Edited October 10, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.