Arrest (in Edmonton) leads to renewed criticism of refugee policy

[taxme]

8 hours ago, capricorn said:

President Trump must be loving that our Prime Minister threw open the doors for illegals to migrate into Canada. Look at all the money the US will be saving not having to take action to find, investigate and deport the illegals living in that country. It will be mega millions.

Yup, and look at all the tax dollars that Canadians will have to blow on taking care of all these illegal refugee criminals. No wonder our politicians keep looking for more ways to tax Canadians. They obvious will need more money to take care of all those criminals entering into Canada illegally. That immigration minister we have for Canada probably just loves watching all these refugees coming here. It helps to put Canadian Caucasians into an even more minority status. The plan for racial suicide is still on.  

[taxme]

9 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Trudeau's message is clear to those who care to listen. Canada remains an open country is that Canadians have confidence in our immigration system, the integrity of our borders, and the help we provide people who are seeking relief and a better life. We will continue to ensure that laws are enforced and followed and that we remain demonstrating the strength and integrity of our immigration system. We will be welcoming, but we need to make sure that it is done properly at the same time by all officials in Canada.

Of course there are many people out there who are incapable of listening and have their own echo chamber to listen to and then pretend the alternative facts they portray are from Trudeau.

I don't want to listen to trudeau anymore. He is a dictator, and I want him gone. He is not my PM. He is destroying Canada to the point of no return. We already had one destroyer of Canada many decades  ago, and now his son will finish the job. My oh my, what have Canadians done to themselves. 

[?Impact]

14 minutes ago, taxme said:

Watching all those illegal criminals cross the border into Manitoba appear to have been all non-white.

What exactly are suggesting?

[taxme]

37 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

What exactly are suggesting?

More third world immigration which Canada does not need anymore. Why is Canada's immigration policy always favoring more third world immigration over less Caucasian immigration? Canada once had an immigration policy that favored more British and European immigration. Why would our Canadian politicians be more in favor of more non-white immigration to Canada over more Caucasians coming to Canada?  Do you know why this is so or care to explain as to why this is so?  Over to you.  

[?Impact]

7 minutes ago, taxme said:

Why is Canada's immigration policy always favoring more third world immigration over less Caucasian immigration?

Could you point out the policy, and suggest how to change it. The policy I am aware of has several categories, but none of them that I am aware of favour one source nation over another. I would favour lower overall immigration, I have said so for years. Unfortunately the capitalists and economists that seem to be able to twist the ears of politicians don't agree.

[taxme]

1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

Could you point out the policy, and suggest how to change it. The policy I am aware of has several categories, but none of them that I am aware of favour one source nation over another. I would favour lower overall immigration, I have said so for years. Unfortunately the capitalists and economists that seem to be able to twist the ears of politicians don't agree.

Check out Canada Immigration website. There it will show you as to how and where most of our new immigrants are coming from. The last I checked non-white immigration was at approx. 80% while white immigration was at approx. 20%. Immigrants from Asian countries,The Phillipines, and Pakistan are in the top three. 40,000 muslims just arrived. 

I would be in favor of a moratorium for a few years, if not longer. Maybe it is time for Canadians to twist the ears of our politically correct politicians, and get them to at least slow down om immigration or stop it altogether for awhile.  

 

[?Impact]

7 minutes ago, taxme said:

I would be in favor of a moratorium for a few years, if not longer. Maybe it is time for Canadians to twist the ears of our politically correct politicians, and get them to at least slow down om immigration or stop it altogether for awhile.  

I'm with you there, I have been saying that for years. I don't think we should be planning an economy based on population inflation. I'm not anti-immigrant, I am against the economic models that have been the driving factor here.

[eyeball]

53 minutes ago, taxme said:

I would be in favor of a moratorium for a few years, if not longer. Maybe it is time for Canadians to twist the ears of our politically correct politicians, and get them to at least slow down om immigration or stop it altogether for awhile.

Okay so now we have your opinion on immigration why did it escape your notice that everyone else is talking about refugees?

[taxme]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Okay so now we have your opinion on immigration why did it escape your notice that everyone else is talking about refugees?

Yes, I have noticed that everyone here has been talking about refugees. Duh. So, what's your point?  

[eyeball]

Just pointing out that your attempt to characterize refugees as immigrants is intended to change the nature of the discussion and the subsequent nature of what one policy should be towards two very different things.

You see the same phenomenon happening when conservatives deliberately confuse mental illness with crime, they have to first establish the lie that one is the same as the other so as to advance the argument they really want to make or avoid as the case may be.

[Argus]

15 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Could you point out the policy, and suggest how to change it. The policy I am aware of has several categories, but none of them that I am aware of favour one source nation over another.

The number of immigrants we get from each region/country is dependent upon how many immigration visas various immigration offices are awarded by Ottawa. For example, let's say the visa centre in London is given 5,000 visas by Ottawa, but gets 50,000 acceptable applications. It still only hands out 5,000 visas. Meanwhile, the visa processing centre in Abu Dhabi gets 20,000 visas and also gets 50,000 acceptable applications. It can process  more immigrants than the one in London, even though both got the same number of applications.

The basis for why each visa office is awarded X number of visas is unknown. Just for the hell of it, I put in an access to information request a few weeks back asking how many visas were awarded to each office, and how many applications were received by those offices. Wth, it costs $5 and only took a couple of minutes on their web site, so we'll see what, if anything comes of it.

I don't think it's a stretch of logic, however, to suggest that the reason we're getting so few immigrants from countries in Europe which have had huge unemployment for years now - and I'm talking like 20%, and higher among younger people, is not because nobody there wants to come to Canada, but because there's very few visas available there.

 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Argus

[?Impact]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Just for the hell of it, I put in an access to information request a few weeks back asking how many visas were awarded to each office, and how many applications were received by those offices.

Good, hopefully that will lead to some answers although I will not hold my breath. What you forgot to ask for however is what is the citizenship on the applications each office receives and awards. I expect a significant percentage of applications are not made from the applicants home country.

[Argus]

Just now, ?Impact said:

Good, hopefully that will lead to some answers although I will not hold my breath. What you forgot to ask for however is what is the citizenship on the applications each office receives and awards. I expect a significant percentage of applications are not made from the applicants home country.

You're right, but I wasn't looking for individual nations. The visa office in London for example, handles visa applications for a number of other countries, but if a huge number of Irish overwhelmed it so that there were many more applications than it had visas to offer the number I asked for would still say that this office had many more applications than it could issue vias for. And you can't choose which office to apply to. If you are in Ireland you must apply in London for example. If you are in Pakistan, you must apply to the Abu Dhabi office. If you are in Iran you must apply to the office in Ankara. All I was really looking for was supply/demand mix and raw numbers for the regions.

[taxme]

6 hours ago, Argus said:

The number of immigrants we get from each region/country is dependent upon how many immigration visas various immigration offices are awarded by Ottawa. For example, let's say the visa centre in London is given 5,000 visas by Ottawa, but gets 50,000 acceptable applications. It still only hands out 5,000 visas. Meanwhile, the visa processing centre in Abu Dhabi gets 20,000 visas and also gets 50,000 acceptable applications. It can process  more immigrants than the one in London, even though both got the same number of applications.

The basis for why each visa office is awarded X number of visas is unknown. Just for the hell of it, I put in an access to information request a few weeks back asking how many visas were awarded to each office, and how many applications were received by those offices. Wth, it costs $5 and only took a couple of minutes on their web site, so we'll see what, if anything comes of it.

I don't think it's a stretch of logic, however, to suggest that the reason we're getting so few immigrants from countries in Europe which have had huge unemployment for years now - and I'm talking like 20%, and higher among younger people, is not because nobody there wants to come to Canada, but because there's very few visas available there.

 

People from western countries need not apply for immigration to Canada. I wonder why? 

[Argus]

16 hours ago, taxme said:

People from western countries need not apply for immigration to Canada. I wonder why? 

I think one of the problems is our immigration system was changed decades ago when very few Europeans wanted to come to Canada because things were going so well there. But given the economic circumstances there since 2008 I think we could find plenty of very capable immigrants from Europe. Why have we not bothered? I think three reasons. One is bureaucratic inertia. Bureaucracies don't like change. The second reason is that immigrants from a country inspire more people from that country to want to come here. The more people from Pakistan who arrive, for example, and then tell their relatives how great life is here compared to Pakistan, the more demand there is in Pakistan for Canadian immigration visas. So this feeds on itself. It was the same for Ireland in generations past.

The third, and most important reason, of course, is that no one in any position of authority dares to even suggest that maybe we could get a higher quality of immigrant from Europe than from Asia or the middle east. Notwithstanding the evidence that this is so, notwithstanding that Europe has a sophisticated, modern, western culture with educational and technological capabilities similar to ours. To even suggest it will draw howls of racism because Europeans are largely White, and Asians are largely not. So no one dares to suggest it.

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by Argus

[taxme]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

I think one of the problems is our immigration system was changed decades ago when very few Europeans wanted to come to Canada because things were going so well there. But given the economic circumstances there since 2008 I think we could find plenty of very capable immigrants from Europe. Why have we not bothered? I think three reasons. One is bureaucratic inertia. Bureaucracies don't like change. The second reason is that immigrants from a country inspire more people from that country to want to come here. The more people from Pakistan who arrive, for example, and then tell their relatives how great life is here compared to Pakistan, the more demand there is in Pakistan for Canadian immigration visas. So this feeds on itself. It was the same for Ireland in generations past.

The third, and most important reason, of course, is that no one in any position of authority dares to even suggest that maybe we could get a higher quality of immigrant from Europe than from Asia or the middle east. Notwithstanding the evidence that this is so, notwithstanding that Europe has a sophisticated, modern, western culture with educational and technological capabilities similar to ours. To even suggest it will draw howls of racism because Europeans are largely White, and Asians are largely not. So no one dares to suggest it.

 

Political correctness gone bonkers. 

[BillyBeaver]

I would suggest that any and all natural-born Europeans are welcome in Canada right now. If not for their ability to integrate, for their own safety and for the good of our economy. Importing immigrants that can't speak English and have limited labour skills is pointless. That's what temporary visas are for,

The Liberals have been turning out the old immigration infrastructure since they got in.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/vegreville-immigration-federal-government-edmonton-jobs-1.3826058

 

[PIK]

On 2/12/2017 at 3:09 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

 I edited my angry post (calling him sub-human and asking for his immediate deportation) because I read further about the alleged crime (charged not found guilty yet). And then it came to my mind one bad apple out of 35000. What percent of born Canadians may commit similar heinous crime?

That is the point, we produce enough idiots without bringing more in. I wish people would wake up and quit coming out with excuses for these people. We are not bringing in people that will become canadian ,but people that leave one shitty country and come here and expect to live like they did where they came from. Leave the baggage at home or stay home.

[Argus]

49 minutes ago, PIK said:

That is the point, we produce enough idiots without bringing more in.

Yeah, I mean, one of the few things we to check potential immigrants for is a criminal record. Should we say "But... but... we have lots of homegrown criminals! We can't discriminate against them just because of that!"
 

It's the very same logic, if you want to call it that, which says we have no right to check potential immigrants for values which are hostile to ours because we have sexists and racists already here.

[dialamah]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

It's the very same logic, if you want to call it that, which says we have no right to check potential immigrants for values which are hostile to ours because we have sexists and racists already here

Being sexist or racist is not illegal, acting on it in a way that harms someone else is.   And given the growing subculture of bred and born racists and sexists in Canada, its even possible to think it is a Canadian value for some people. 

[drummindiver]

On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 11:29 AM, eyeball said:

Just pointing out that your attempt to characterize refugees as immigrants is intended to change the nature of the discussion and the subsequent nature of what one policy should be towards two very different things.

You see the same phenomenon happening when conservatives deliberately confuse mental illness with crime, they have to first establish the lie that one is the same as the other so as to advance the argument they really want to make or avoid as the case may be.

Another off topic diatribe against conservatives. Incredible how often you do this. 

Immigrants as well as refugees have rules to follow to be allowed into our country legally. If not followed they should be deported, refugee or immigrant.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Being sexist or racist is not illegal, acting on it in a way that harms someone else is.   And given the growing subculture of bred and born racists and sexists in Canada, its even possible to think it is a Canadian value for some people. 

Evidence of this 'growing subculture'?

[BillyBeaver]

Yeah, I'd like to see that evidence too. I'm of the idea that bigots and discrimination have always existed in Canada, the liberals have just amped up the focus. Technology and the speed of digital media also contribute. I think that the -isms have been steadily decreasing since the 80s. here as more awareness and diversity has been promoted and encouraged. But feel free to expound on Soros-funded NGOs talking points. These protest groups are promoting racial tensions and division, not unity and tolerance.  BLM is cancer.

[eyeball]

50 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

Another off topic diatribe against conservatives. Incredible how often you do this. 

Immigrants as well as refugees have rules to follow to be allowed into our country legally. If not followed they should be deported, refugee or immigrant.

I agree there are processes to follow but I wouldn't entrust their application to right-wing conservatives. I think conservatism lacks the empathy and the ethical and moral background that such a sensitive task requires.

The failings and deficiencies of conservatives are always on topic when it comes to dealing with the needs of human beings in distress.

Edited March 8, 2017 by eyeball

[Michael Hardner]

Let's either decide we're going to follow the zeitgeist (anecdotal evidence, cringing fears that blow with the wind) or science.  One or the other.  If you state a principle, then you had better be prepared to be wrong a lot of the time.   Few have the guts to do that.