Screening for Canadian Values

Argus · January 4, 2017

6 minutes ago, Omni said:

We do under The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. We don't use the Kellie Leitch approach because we know it's a waste of time as it would reveal nothing.

I didn't think you'd answer it clearly. We do buuuut we don't? Huh? All she suggested was screening for values. You say we do... but we don't... uhhh.

I've already posted what we screen for, and it's criminal behaviour and terrorist links. Period.

Here it is again. Show me where values come into play.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/inadmissibility/who.asp

Edited January 4, 2017 by Argus

Omni · January 4, 2017

16 minutes ago, Argus said:

I didn't think you'd answer it clearly. We do buuuut we don't? Huh? All she suggested was screening for values. You say we do... but we don't... uhhh.

I've already posted what we screen for, and it's criminal behaviour and terrorist links. Period.

Here it is again. Show me where values come into play.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/inadmissibility/who.asp

Criminal activity and terrorism reveals a lot about a persons values don't you think? I'd like to hear the Argus list of questions you would seek to ask to reveal these "values" you are after.

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

1 hour ago, Omni said:

Criminal activity and terrorism reveals a lot about a persons values don't you think? I'd like to hear the Argus list of questions you would seek to ask to reveal these "values" you are after.

Are you suggesting their is no one in Canada capable of composing a series of questions that would assist immigration officials in revealing these traits. I mean the military has a test that measures certain traits required for certain occupations, in fact they have been using them for years now.

Because the posters do not know the exact question that would be asked does not mean the whole topic is not valid.

Omni · January 4, 2017

11 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Are you suggesting their is no one in Canada capable of composing a series of questions that would assist immigration officials in revealing these traits. I mean the military has a test that measures certain traits required for certain occupations, in fact they have been using them for years now.

Because the posters do not know the exact question that would be asked does not mean the whole topic is not valid.

I'm suggested that any such series of questions could easily be outsmarted by the applicant regardless of their actual beliefs, if they really wanted to come to Canada. It seems to be the current screening system seems to be doing a better job than simply asking a few obvious questions.

dialamah · January 4, 2017

20 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Because the posters do not know the exact question that would be asked does not mean the whole topic is not valid.

Yup, I started it because much as I don't believe "values screening" is workable in real life, I thought it might be worthwhile discussing and possibly something useful could result.

While some posters actually discussed the idea, others derailed the topic and contined their attacks on Muslims, ignoring an opportunity to support and promote a plan to reduce what they see as a threat. How can they expect to be seen as anything but Islamaphobes?

So this has become another "Muslims are bad/No they're not" thread, thanks to the usual suspects.

Edited January 4, 2017 by dialamah

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

28 minutes ago, Omni said:

I'm suggested that any such series of questions could easily be outsmarted by the applicant regardless of their actual beliefs, if they really wanted to come to Canada. It seems to be the current screening system seems to be doing a better job than simply asking a few obvious questions.

You have not even heard the questions yet, how can you make an assumption before knowing what the questions will be. Perhaps it is the idea of any questions being asked that you dislike. And you've already made up your mind, "nope questions will not do" and are not open to any other argument.

And yet Argus has already provided evidence that our Immigration offices are over worked, and do not spend much time on each file, in fact have to complete x amount of files per day like a quota. Hard to be our nations first line of defence when you spend less than 10 minutes on each file...Perhaps the questions are not enough, perhaps what we need is a total revamp of the immigration system, where proper security checks can be done, references checked out, proper intel files made. Right now we are playing Russian roulette with terrorists or possible terrorist. They're are already examples of known criminals entering our nation, once they have become known , we can not find them or evict them...or bring them to justice takes years....

And here we are arguing about some questions, and what should they be composed of..Sounds about right , no wonder our nation can not make decisions in a timely manner.

DogOnPorch · January 4, 2017

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

You'd be surprised what people think; there are lots of people who think gays need to be beaten/shunned/jailed and otherwise shown the error of their ways. There are plenty of people who determine if a woman is "quality" or "slutty" based entirely on how much skin she shows.

What's important is that they don't act on their private thoughts in such a way that the people they disapprove of are injured.

Really? You've done a study? Asked folks if they want to murder homosexuals and voila...old white guys responded 'yes'?

Goddess · January 4, 2017

5 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Right now we are playing Russian roulette with terrorists or possible terrorist.

" 5 out of 6 people insist Russian Roulette is perfectly safe to play."

Omni · January 4, 2017

4 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

You have not even heard the questions yet, how can you make an assumption before knowing what the questions will be. Perhaps it is the idea of any questions being asked that you dislike. And you've already made up your mind, "nope questions will not do" and are not open to any other argument.

And yet Argus has already provided evidence that our Immigration offices are over worked, and do not spend much time on each file, in fact have to complete x amount of files per day like a quota. Hard to be our nations first line of defence when you spend less than 10 minutes on each file...Perhaps the questions are not enough, perhaps what we need is a total revamp of the immigration system, where proper security checks can be done, references checked out, proper intel files made. Right now we are playing Russian roulette with terrorists or possible terrorist. They're are already examples of known criminals entering our nation, once they have become known , we can not find them or evict them...or bring them to justice takes years....

And here we are arguing about some questions, and what should they be composed of..Sounds about right , no wonder our nation can not make decisions in a timely manner.

Background checks are already completed by various agency's including CSIS and RCMP. They are also interviewed at various levels. No system is going to be infallible but I doubt asking somebody if they have criminal intentions is going to be somehow more effective. I think a certain portion of this discussion is fueled more by a simple dislike of foreigners than it is a worry over security.

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Yup, I started it because much as I don't believe "values screening" is workable in real life, I thought it might be worthwhile discussing and possibly something useful could result.

While some posters actually discussed the idea, others derailed the topic and contined their attacks on Muslims, ignoring an opportunity to support and promote a plan to reduce what they see as a threat. How can they expect to be seen as anything but Islamaphobes?

So this has become another "Muslims are bad/No they're not" thread, thanks to the usual suspects.

I've read all the posts where did you post a source that says value screen does not work or never has worked ? other than your word. And yet you have brushed aside a lot of evidence provided by other posters, dismissed it all, and closed your mind to any other result other than your own, and your surprised it did not work out in your favour....

One of the main reasons Canadians fear their immigration system, is Muslims...we all get the fact not all muslims are the same, but when was the last time there was no mention in the media of a terrorist attack some where in the world. some days there are dozens, most if not all lead, planned, and carried out by a muslims. And not just again'st infidels, most of the targets are other muslims. it paints a pretty vivid picture, they can't stop this violence, shit they don't even like each other....and we wonder why they are featured in every conversation...

DogOnPorch · January 4, 2017

Islamophobe...being the typical response to such concerns.

Argus · January 4, 2017

3 hours ago, Omni said:

Criminal activity and terrorism reveals a lot about a persons values don't you think?

You should simply admit that we don't screen for values. You're not winning any respect by your continued desperate refusal to even admit what everyone else involved in the discussions, both here and in the general media, has already acknowledged.

Omni · January 4, 2017

Just now, Argus said:

You should simply admit that we don't screen for values. You're not winning any respect by your continued desperate refusal to even admit what everyone else involved in the discussions, both here and in the general media, has already acknowledged.

And yet another wild assumption.

Argus · January 4, 2017

7 minutes ago, Omni said:

Background checks are already completed by various agency's including CSIS and RCMP. They are also interviewed at various levels.

Your continued lying is an unimpressive tactic. I've repeatedly posted the statement from the senate committee which points out that only around ten percent of immigrants ever get interviewed.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Argus

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

Background checks are already completed by various agency's including CSIS and RCMP. They are also interviewed at various levels. No system is going to be infallible but I doubt asking somebody if they have criminal intentions is going to be somehow more effective. I think a certain portion of this discussion is fueled more by a simple dislike of foreigners than it is a worry over security.

And how much time are they devoting to each file, i mean immigration checks are not their primary role, and all our security apparatus depts are under manned, under equiped. which is the point, the job is not getting down as we expect it to be...How could known criminals get through the system if it is as layered as you say, that complete back ground checks are down, I mean these guys may be moving in next door to you are you not curious.....and what would the difference be if the decided we will add another step to the process, ask a few questions over the course of time, question odd responses....Why is it to much for you, does it go again'st some of our rights , is it again'st some law, some religious faith thing....why does asking a few questions bother you so much ????

AGain you've made up your mind already "no way it is going to work" and yet it has worked for many government depts when screening candidates for certain jobs...or perhaps you have a source that states other wise, i'd be interested in reading it.

Argus · January 4, 2017

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

And how much time are they devoting to each file, i mean immigration checks are not their primary role, and all our security apparatus depts are under manned, under equiped. which is the point, the job is not getting down as we expect it to be...How could known criminals get through the system if it is as layered as you say, that complete back ground checks are down,

The background checks consist of sending their names/fingerprints to law enforcement agencies to see if they have a criminal record, and then to intelligence agencies to see if they are known to be affiliated with a terrorist group. That's pretty much it. Nobody is driving out to their home to interview the neighbors or their boss at work or their extended families and contacts. It's simply a check on records. The only way they delve deeper is if questions show up on the routine checks. That's why people can actually lie about who they are and still get accepted. As long as the documents don't have anything too suspicious nobody has time to look deeper.

DogOnPorch · January 4, 2017

Not to mention there's a HUGE industry abroad faking Canadian documents.

Omni · January 4, 2017

15 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

And how much time are they devoting to each file, i mean immigration checks are not their primary role, and all our security apparatus depts are under manned, under equiped. which is the point, the job is not getting down as we expect it to be...How could known criminals get through the system if it is as layered as you say, that complete back ground checks are down, I mean these guys may be moving in next door to you are you not curious.....and what would the difference be if the decided we will add another step to the process, ask a few questions over the course of time, question odd responses....Why is it to much for you, does it go again'st some of our rights , is it again'st some law, some religious faith thing....why does asking a few questions bother you so much ????

AGain you've made up your mind already "no way it is going to work" and yet it has worked for many government depts when screening candidates for certain jobs...or perhaps you have a source that states other wise, i'd be interested in reading it.

If they need more personnel to handle the workload then they should hire them. But don't then further load them down wasting time with questions that are unlikely to reveal anything important.

?Impact · January 4, 2017

11 minutes ago, Argus said:

Nobody is driving out to their home to interview the neighbors or their boss at work or their extended families and contacts. It's simply a check on records.

Yes, we could throw much more money at immigration services (and related agencies) and beef up the process. How much should we spend?

300,000/year * ?hours of overseas labour

What do you think the loaded cost of overseas labour would be? My guess is $500/hour, and if these agents are travelling to neighbourhoods around countries then don't forget to include that travel time.

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

11 minutes ago, Omni said:

If they need more personnel to handle the workload then they should hire them. But don't then further load them down wasting time with questions that are unlikely to reveal anything important.

The liberals know exactly how each dept sits, what it's shortfalls are, where they like to invest or expand etc,etc....And they have deemed it to be just fine, it works, relax....do you see any new funding coming forth for new hires.....

But then again that was not the question, why is it you are opposed to the asking of questions ?????????????????? your grasping right now, you did'nt read the posts that were provided or you would have known about the short falls , and the back logs, etc.etc....So what is the really reason you don't want any questions being asked.....

Omni · January 4, 2017

7 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

The liberals know exactly how each dept sits, what it's shortfalls are, where they like to invest or expand etc,etc....And they have deemed it to be just fine, it works, relax....do you see any new funding coming forth for new hires.....

But then again that was not the question, why is it you are opposed to the asking of questions ?????????????????? your grasping right now, you did'nt read the posts that were provided or you would have known about the short falls , and the back logs, etc.etc....So what is the really reason you don't want any questions being asked.....

I quite clearly explained that I don't believe adding further workload to an already stretched system by requiring questions which will reveal nothing is any way to try to fix the system.

Army Guy · January 4, 2017

16 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Yes, we could throw much more money at immigration services (and related agencies) and beef up the process. How much should we spend?

300,000/year * ?hours of overseas labour

What do you think the loaded cost of overseas labour would be? My guess is $500/hour, and if these agents are travelling to neighbourhoods around countries then don't forget to include that travel time.

So your good with our current immigration system then, we get what we pay for.....Right, that would explain all these mistakes that have allowed criminals to enter Canada...thats why we have so many people awaiting to be deported, yes the examples keep coming ....But what we get in return is the typical Liberal answer, it's all about the Money Baby....and everything is going to be ok....

recruit people where we can readily check all the records with little to no costs, like say europe, If it is all about the bottom dollar.....But we have to have some color in there some where, have to look good in front of the cameras...Lets see we got brown guys, some white guys, some asians ....hey what happened to the black guys, or other brown guys like south america, mexico, sorry we don't recruit to many of those guys....Did we send a mission down to Somolia , where they were dying by the thousands from starvation,and war....

?Impact · January 4, 2017

16 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

So your good with our current immigration system

....But what we get in return is the typical Liberal answer

Sorry, but the Conservatives had 9 years to fix the immigration system.

dialamah · January 4, 2017

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

I've read all the posts where did you post a source that says value screen does not work or never has worked ? other than your word. And yet you have brushed aside a lot of evidence provided by other posters, dismissed it all, and closed your mind to any other result other than your own, and your surprised it did not work out in your favour....

I posted a source for the Harvard Implicit Bias test, which I would consider the closest to a workable "values" test. Nobody contested that at all or posted a values test of their own for discussion. I suggested the HIB test might need to be modified for use in immigration. Nobody remarked on that. I suggested the O'Hare psychopathy test, or something similar as another possible tool for screening immigrants. Nobody commented. I posted a link to an article that addressed shortcomings of corporate personality tests. One person responded that they didn't consider it applicable.

The Islamaphobes instead brought up all the same stuff they do in other threads; the Islamaphobes didn't suggest any existing system that is in use or could be used for screening immigrants for values. Why is that?

I can only assume its because they only want to spread fear and misinformation and don't really want a solution - even if that solution is their own and even if its just a discussion on a forum.

And, btw where are your good ideas?

Hal 9000 · January 4, 2017

18 hours ago, kimmy said:

I mean that if I want to hear a bunch of bigoted, ignorant, hateful crap being said, I can go out to breakfast at a family restaurant on any Sunday morning and sit near a table full of elderly "old stock Canadians."

This is an example of the kind of think ?Impact was talking about earlier: even if a guy does passionately believe in stoning rape victims to death for participating in adultery, he's not going to tell you so.

I recall seeing some of the tapes from the British "Undercover Mosque" documentary series, seeing some of the scumbag imams talking about western values, mocking the idea of tolerance for gay people, mocking the idea that women are equal. It's not that they don't understand western values, it's just that they have utter contempt for western values.

-k

People aren't as good of liars as they think.