Screening for Canadian Values

[Benz]

3 hours ago, Peter F said:

 

Canada doesn't have problems of any note with Islam. Nor do we have anything to indicate that there is decades of violence ahead of us.

So there be no need to compel anyone to anything

Poor terrorists sacrifying their lives to kill any unfaithful ones, they have not gain your attention yet. Not enough victims for you yet. Same for the obscurantists trying to screw up your values and establish a different society based on the Sharia within your borders. You insult their efforts.

In the name of what? Saving a religion as is? Of course Canada does not have a problem with Islam. Canada has a problem with those trying to impose Islam. All religions, including christianism, have few values that are against, or the contrary of the canadian values. When that happen, Canadian should values prevail.

[?Impact]

14 minutes ago, Goddess said:

He killed her and basically got off in court due to "diminished capacity".

Perhaps it is better to start a separate topic here. I agree with the concepts of "diminished capacity" or "not criminally responsible", but what I don't agree with is that they are interpreted as no incarceration. I believe that the consequences on your freedoms should be similar, but that the method at how those consequences are imposed is where they should differ. Locking someone up in a traditional 'correctional' institution is wrong, because those warehouses do not treat the underlying problem. There should still be a correctional institution, but one that is more focused on proper correction. None of that should override the consequences for ones action. You may not be 'criminally' responsible for taking someones life, but you are still responsible.

[dialamah]

12 minutes ago, Goddess said:

I thought of that same idea, but I think this would be better if done BEFORE they get here, so they understand what our goals are for Canadian society.

Perhaps, but this is all funded by taxpayer money.  Such courses would certainly be less expensive if carried out in Canada.  Or perhaps economic migrants would be expected to pay for the course, whilst asylum seekers would not?  

14 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Edit to add:  It should probably continue well after they arrive.

Perhaps, but would you expect a Brit or an American or an Australian to require ongoing classes?    Or would you only expect 'certain' people to need the information?   And once you start assigning screening needs based on a label such "Islam", aren't you back to the problem of painting an entire people with a single brush?   If we are going to screen immigrants to ensure they'll abide by Canadian laws and values, it needs to be *all* immigrants, don't you think?

16 minutes ago, Goddess said:

I remember a case in the UK of a couple who moved there from the Sudan - Omar and Afaf.

Yes, that sounds like a horrible case of abuse and a very unsatisfactory outcome.   There are many horrible cases of domestic violence, even here in Canada, among certain ethnic groups, among certain religious groups and among the general public.   I might like to see a system where a criminal's religion or ideology, along with their ethnicity was officially tracked.   I understand there is a fear among some that such tracking would result in 'stereotyping' certain people, but it seems lack of knowledge of who really does what has not helped that issue.   If, by percentage of population, it could be demonstrated that there are certain risk groups, that could be helpful information.   

22 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Our yardstick for assessing these crimes is woefully inadequate. And there seems to be a serious lack of support networks for women who arrive with husband who have these views.

I do agree with you here, that more resources for women who are in situations of abuse are needed. 

23 minutes ago, Goddess said:

That being said, I think it is much easier for people to change/modify certain cultural practices when they immigrate to a new country but very difficult to explain the history of patriarchy and the science behind gender and sex, etc when an immigrant's religious beliefs overrule all of that.

Perhaps not.   Discussion with my Egyptian brother-in-law has resulted in some modification of his views.   Of course, he was already among the more progressive element of Egyptian culture.   In any case, providing newcomers with the information can't hurt, can it?   Especially for women coming from more patriarchal societies, along with info about resources for women who may want support to leave those situations.  

And again, the topic is applicable to *all* immigrants, not just Muslims so basing the screening process, whatever it is, entirely on what is believed (rightly or wrongly) about Muslims isn't productive.   We don't want an influx of violent and intolerant white supremacist nuts any more than we want an influx of violent and intolerant religious nuts. 

 

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Perhaps it is better to start a separate topic here. I agree with the concepts of "diminished capacity" or "not criminally responsible", but what I don't agree with is that they are interpreted as no incarceration. I believe that the consequences on your freedoms should be similar, but that the method at how those consequences are imposed is where they should differ. Locking someone up in a traditional 'correctional' institution is wrong, because those warehouses do not treat the underlying problem. There should still be a correctional institution, but one that is more focused on proper correction. None of that should override the consequences for ones action. You may not be 'criminally' responsible for taking someones life, but you are still responsible.

It would indeed be an interesting topic.  My point in recounting the case was to show the need for us to understand the motivations behind these things, in order to deal with them before they kill.

Should it be discussed with them that their wife/daughter may adopt some of the values of their new home country and prepare them for that fact?  How will they react if their daughter wants to marry a Canadian?  How will they react if their daughter/wife refuses to stay in the house or wants to not wear the hijab?  They need to consider these things before they get here.

[dialamah]

9 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Perhaps it is better to start a separate topic here. I agree with the concepts of "diminished capacity" or "not criminally responsible", but what I don't agree with is that they are interpreted as no incarceration. I believe that the consequences on your freedoms should be similar, but that the method at how those consequences are imposed is where they should differ. Locking someone up in a traditional 'correctional' institution is wrong, because those warehouses do not treat the underlying problem. There should still be a correctional institution, but one that is more focused on proper correction. None of that should override the consequences for ones action. You may not be 'criminally' responsible for taking someones life, but you are still responsible.

It would be an interesting discussion, I think.   My son's attacker was considered mentally incapacitated and is, as far as I know, indefinitely held in a psychiatric facility.  

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Perhaps, but would you expect a Brit or an American or an Australian to require ongoing classes?    Or would you only expect 'certain' people to need the information?  

Sure.  Screen them all.  In general though, Brits, Aussies and American share many of our values. Perhaps they would just need a "history of Canada class" and a run-down of our laws, tax systems, whatever....

If it happens to be Muslims who need a more indepth study of our values, then I say give it to them.  Why would you not want them to understand our views on women, LGBT, etc.?

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Should it be discussed with them that their wife/daughter may adopt some of the values of their new home country and prepare them for that fact?  How will they react if their daughter wants to marry a Canadian?  How will they react if their daughter/wife refuses to stay in the house or wants to not wear the hijab?  They need to consider these things before they get here.

Yes, very good points. Perhaps we are not clear enough when we talk about plurality, and freedom and respect for individuals. We should emphasize that this is not just about some anonymous person on the street, but it can be someone in your own family. Your wife and draught are individuals with their own rights. The whole issue of parental influence on dress code is a very interesting one. What is the difference between a Muslim father wanting his daughter to wear a hijab, and an old stock Canadian father not wanting his daughter to go out in a skimpy skirt and bare midriff? How does age of the daughter influence it?

[dialamah]

28 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Sure.  Screen them all.  In general though, Brits, Aussies and American share many of our values. Perhaps they would just need a "history of Canada class" and a run-down of our laws, tax systems, whatever....

If it happens to be Muslims who need a more indepth study of our values, then I say give it to them.  Why would you not want them to understand our views on women, LGBT, etc.?

I'm sorry, but I find this extremely discriminatory.   If we are screening immigrants, or teaching them Canadian values/our charter/our constitution, then it's all immigrants.  After all, even in Canada we have plenty of people who disapprove of homosexuals, who believe women should be subject to men, who aren't above killing their wife/girlfriend if she tries to leave.   We also accept immigrants from India, another culture with a terrible record of oppressing women; by remaining focused on "only Muslims" the way you are, you could be letting all kinds of nasty people in.

All immigrants, not just Muslims, is who this screening is intended for.  

Earlier, I posted a link to an implied bias test developed by Harvard.   Perhaps applicants could be given the test prior to the course for a 'baseline', and again at the end; if they fail to achieve a certain score, or a pre-determined improvement on the second test, they would need to retake the course.   Perhaps this would allow us to re-educate the more intolerant/patriarchal among even Americans/Brits/Aussies.

[Goddess]

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

by remaining focused on "only Muslims" the way you are, you could be letting all kinds of nasty people in.

If you read my comment again, I'm not saying "only Muslims"....You asked if I expected a Brit, Aussie or American to require on-going classes.  I said Sure, Screen them all.  If it shows up in the screening that they believe tossing gays off of buildings is a great idea, then yes, on-going classes.   

 

[Rue]

54 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Yes, very good points. Perhaps we are not clear enough when we talk about plurality, and freedom and respect for individuals. We should emphasize that this is not just about some anonymous person on the street, but it can be someone in your own family. Your wife and draught are individuals with their own rights. The whole issue of parental influence on dress code is a very interesting one. What is the difference between a Muslim father wanting his daughter to wear a hijab, and an old stock Canadian father not wanting his daughter to go out in a skimpy skirt and bare midriff? How does age of the daughter influence it?

Your analogy makes a good point and it shows just how difficult defining "Canadian" values  is and may not in many cases be possible unless we define them in very general ways and then the more general they get the more wishy washy they get and then how would you score someone? We have a citizenship test but people an memorize answers. Doesn't mean much other than they have a good short term memory. I mean if someone really is an extremist, one would think they know how to lie and get past tests.

In fact genuine sociopaths can pass any test because of their lack of emotions. Its very difficult to spot them.

Also for  a lot of these tests to work they can't be leaked out to tip people off and then we get into issues as to  secrecy.

The Charter of Rights also states we have to treat anyone who steps foot on our soil as if they were Canadian when it comes to determining whether they have rights under the Charter. Any changes to screening tests will be tested constitutionally as violations of the Charter unless the Supreme Court of Canada redefines the Charter's reference to peace order and good government to accommodate such screening tests. That won't happen because the court has said it will only interpret the charter in as wide a manner as possible, not a narrow one when it comes to determing its applicability to human rights.

Bottom line is if we screen it will have to be something objective like eye scans and some kind of tangible link to terrorism.

Tests as to one's cultural beliefs just aint gonna work. Being Muslim in itself won't be sufficient either. The Law won't allow that.

 

 

 

.

[Hal 9000]

23 hours ago, dialamah said:

Do you really think they don't know already?    I mean, I know there are things like culture shock and all the differences between countries, but do you think they come to Canada and are surprised by the concept of female equality or homosexuals being accepted, etc?   

Honestly, I really don't think they understand the equality that women and homo's have in Canada.  In fact, I'm not sure most Canadians agree on the equality levels either.

[Argus]

6 hours ago, Omni said:

As I did to try and educate you to the fact screening does in fact occur.

This is simply blatant, in your face lying. You know very well that NO screening occurs for values. Or are you too lazy to even read the topic title.

[Argus]

6 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Is that sarcasm, or are you living in a different Canada than I.

They were present during the New Years celebrations in Ottawa a couple of nights ago. They're present throughout Europe. I highly doubt they were absent from celebrations in Toronto either.

[Argus]

6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

I'm here to counter Islam.

And there you have it. To the far left that makes you just as bad as the people who drive trucks into crowds and shoot women and children. Didn't you realize?

 

[Argus]

5 hours ago, ?Impact said:

The point is however these kind of tests really don't do much other than establish that someone spent a few hours studying,

Do you really think the test industry hasn't come across people trying to fake things? It can be done, but it's not nearly as easy as you seem to believe, and only a small percentage of people from third world countries are going to try anyway.

“‘What’s the point? Anybody can fake them!’ We hear people ask that question,” says test designer Robert Hogan, Ph.D., president of Hogan Assessment Systems. He claims this can be overcome with the “faking profile” that his company’s tests generate. “We’re doing a whole personality profile,” he says of his organization’s tests. “They may be able to fake a whole scale (a single aspect of the measurement), but they won’t fake a whole profile.”

http://www.performanceprograms.com/hogan-assessments/hogan-resources/can-job-applicants-outsmart-personality-tests/

 

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Hal 9000 said:

Honestly, I really don't think they understand the equality that women and homo's have in Canada.  In fact, I'm not sure most Canadians agree on the equality levels either.

I agree.  I think it's one thing to know something intellectually, and another thing to understand it completely.   Levels of understanding and accepting varies a lot even for people whose families came from England 150 years ago.   

[dialamah]

16 minutes ago, Argus said:

They were present during the New Years celebrations in Ottawa a couple of nights ago. They're present throughout Europe. I highly doubt they were absent from celebrations in Toronto either.

Please address the topic.  You can argue security issues at public events elsewhere.

[?Impact]

15 minutes ago, Argus said:

“‘What’s the point? Anybody can fake them!’ We hear people ask that question,” says test designer Robert Hogan, Ph.D., president of Hogan Assessment Systems.

Well, naturally the guy that designed and earns an income from selling tests is going to tell you they work. I don't expect the kid at the Ford dealership to tell me the car is a lemon. 

[Argus]

Just now, ?Impact said:

Well, naturally the guy that designed and earns an income from selling tests is going to tell you they work. I don't expect the kid at the Ford dealership to tell me the car is a lemon. 

You didn't bother to actually read the cite, did you.

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

If you read my comment again, I'm not saying "only Muslims"....You asked if I expected a Brit, Aussie or American to require on-going classes.  I said Sure, Screen them all.  If it shows up in the screening that they believe tossing gays off of buildings is a great idea, then yes, on-going classes.   

 

If I misunderstood you, I apologize.   

I doubt a test would demonstrate that someone thinks tossing gays off buildings is a good idea; more subtly would seem to be required.  In the Harvard Implicit Bias test, as I understand it,  may identify that someone disapproves of homosexuality but not to what degree or if they would violently express their disapproval.   Since disapproval of homosexuality is not all that uncommon, I don't think that alone would be enough to justify denying entry into Canada; something more would be needed.   What occurs to me is that there is the O'Hare Test for psychopathy, which identifies traits associated with psychopaths.    Perhaps something like that, along with other tests, would be a deciding factor.

But then, if we're going to disallow people who score well on psychopathy traits, why would we worry about biases?  Is it their thoughts we're concerned with, or their actions?

 

[Hal 9000]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

 

 

People can't fake personality tests as well as they all seem to think.  They're the same type of people who don't think they're swayed by advertising.

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

People can't fake personality tests as well as they all seem to think.  They're the same type of people who don't think they're swayed by advertising.

There is another aspect to faking it. Generally, to fake one of these things requires a level of sophistication and understanding of such tests, and studying to figure out how they work and defeat them. But the people we're hoping to screen out are, for the most part, the antithesis of sophisticated. They're fundamentalists with closed minds who've never given a thought to their medieval beliefs because the Koran tells them that's what they need to think. They're not going to study up and figure out how to defeat a personality test.

Second, if you actually are going to study up and figure out what questions you need to lie about and then go through the whole process it's going to be kind of hard to act surprised when you get here and find out there are Jews and gays all over the place, and that women have bare shoulders and knees. I mean, the very process of studying to cheat it makes it uttterly obvious to you what kind of society you're trying to get into, and that you're lying to do it, which means you'll know damn well your beliefs won't be acceptable once you get there.

[?Impact]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

They're not going to study up and figure out how to defeat a personality test.

No, they only want to learn how to fly the plane, they don't care about the landing.

[dialamah]

A reminder that this thread is about *Immigration*, and how to effectively screen for people who possess anti-Canadian values, whether they are Muslim, Indian, Koreans or White Supremacists.   If you want to argue about how awful Muslims are, there are at least two other threads in which you can do so.   

[Rue]

6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

I'm here to counter Islam.

.

Had you said instead, I'm here to counter EXTREMIST or ORTHODOX or FUNDAMENTALIST or MAINSTREAM Islam the perception you hate ALL Muslims would no arise.

Now I have read your comments in full context and it is in fact extremist/orthodox/fundamentalist/Mainstream Islam you challenge.

That said I don't think you  give a damn and neither does Argus about being politically correct.

I know people like you. You are not bigots. Its the ones who smile and pretend to defend extremists under the pretense of being liberal and tolerant I watch.

 

Why Dog On The Porch Does Not Discuss Hemmeroids of Canadian Values

by CanadianRue, Jew + Cowboy

 

the jack ass came stormin ' in tah Porch's stable

demanded a  horse without a saddle he did 

said he knew all about horses and didn't need no lecture on how to ride

so he trotted off with his butt bouncing an' a funny smile on his face jus' like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Well Sir, he soon came back a few hours later

rubbin his buttox  and complainin tah Porch  he said:

" hey why didn't you tell me my butt would get sore "

at which time Porch just said

well there was no  point even tring explainin it to yah

yer head was  jammed so far up yer butt

you wouldn't have heard me anyways

next time you ride a horse

best make sure to hold yer head high