Refugee crisis escalating

[Hydraboss]

But if they're applying strictly as an economic refugee, they don't need a hearing of any nature.  They don't qualify.  Period.

[DogOnPorch]

Folks are keen to take in millions as long as they don't have to pay a dime, themselves.

That's for others to do...pay for it.

[Peter F]

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

All talk...no action.

Action? No action required. immigrants have been coming and going all the time. Even when you didn't approve. Phone the cops!

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, Peter F said:

Action? No action required. immigrants have been coming and going all the time. Even when you didn't approve. Phone the cops!

 

I'm not talking immigrants. I'm talking border jumpers. And since you're not going to house them and feed them, release the hounds.

[Peter F]

Just now, Hydraboss said:

But if they're applying strictly as an economic refugee, they don't need a hearing of any nature.  They don't qualify.  Period.

So you keep saying. Too bad you're not on a refugee board and actually have some facts to deal with. 

[Peter F]

2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I'm not talking immigrants. I'm talking border jumpers. And since you're not going to house them and feed them, release the hounds.

Border jumpers get to make claims without being shot for doing so. I know you wish it were otherwise . 

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, Peter F said:

Border jumpers get to make claims without being shot for doing so. I know you wish it were otherwise . 

 

Do you still beat your wife?

Why for goodness sake?

[Hydraboss]

3 minutes ago, Peter F said:

So you keep saying

http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/RefClaDem/Pages/ClaDemGuide.aspx

Hmm...   Wonder which one of us is right?  It's not that "I" keep saying it, it's that the Gov of Canada keeps saying it.

Quote

You can be given refugee protection in Canada if you meet the United Nations (UN) definition of a Convention refugee, or if you are a person in need of protection. The UN defines Convention refugees as people who have a well-founded fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. Membership in a particular social group can include, but is not limited to, sexual orientation, gender identity, domestic violence and HIV status. Persons in need of protection must show that if they return to their home country, they will face a danger of torture, a risk to their life or a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

Not a single mention of being "dirt poor".

[Peter F]

Just now, Hydraboss said:

http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/RefClaDem/Pages/ClaDemGuide.aspx

Hmm...   Wonder which one of us is right?  It's not that "I" keep saying it, it's that the Gov of Canada keeps saying it.

Not a single mention of being "dirt poor".

Correct and never denied by me. To reiterate: Those from dirt poor places enter Canada because we are rich and it is a possible escape from dirt-poorness. They enter this country illegally because they have zero chance of entering it legally. Thats why they come here and that seems to be a shock to your system? 

[Hydraboss]

No, not a shock.  What I DO find shocking is that the government of Canada (and CBSA) completely ignore our own laws and let these people in.  The fact that you and people like you find that to be okay is another thing that I find offensive, but not particularly shocking.  You said it yourself...you are fine taking from other Canadians ("almost free health care") so why would it be surprising that you have no problem letting other people, who have no right to it, take money from the Canadians who support the whole damn economy?

I've always said there are contributors and there are takers.  Those that only take will never be in short supply and there doesn't seem to be anything that makes them ashamed of that fact.  They exist only because of the graciousness of those that contribute.  I think we've established which you are and which I am.

[Spiderfish]

5 hours ago, Argus said:

Can someone tell me what war is going on in Haiti that I haven't heard of? Is there a great civil war under way? Massive human rights abuses? They're dirt poor. Okay, but that doesn't qualify you as a refugee. Yet our liberal appointees are so generous they accept half of claimants from Haiti. And given Haiti has a 50% illiteracy rate we can't expect many of these "new Canadians" to be able to support themselves with jobs, let alone be paying taxes.

I believe this is referring to the Haitian Coup in 2004, when both the US and Canada implemented a deportation ban on refugees from Haiti, which was extended in 2010 after the earthquake there.  The funny thing is, from what I can make out Trudeau himself cancelled that order last August, requiring Haitians to go back home.  The US didn't cancel their order until May of this year, and the Haitians there decided to illegally enter Canada through the loophole created by the safe third country agreement rather than go home. 

Ironically, Trudeau apparently ordered the Haitians located in Canada to go back home, then promptly put out the welcome mat for the Haitians in the US affected by Trumps order to come on in.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Spiderfish

[GostHacked]

5 hours ago, Argus said:

Are you a bunch of infidels? Then it's certainly fair and righteous! If you don't convert to Islam you must die!

Does that justify the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions?

[capricorn]

2 minutes ago, Spiderfish said:

Ironically, Trudeau apparently ordered the Haitians located in Canada to go back home, then promptly put out the welcome mat for the Haitians in the US affected by Trumps order to come on in.

Trudeau has further muddied the waters by declaring that 'irregular' refugee claimants will be subject to Canadian laws and that acceptance is not guaranteed.

Quote

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who once took to Twitter to welcome Syrian refugees into the country, said on Sunday that there would be "no advantage" to entering "irregularly."

"Canada is an opening and welcoming society," he told reporters in Montreal following talks with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. "But let me be clear. We are also a country of laws. Entering Canada irregularly is not an advantage. There are rigorous immigration and customs rules that will be followed. Make no mistake."

https://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCAKCN1B00M9-OCATP

Nothing like a little ambiguity to confuse people.

[Omni]

52 minutes ago, Peter F said:

So you keep saying. Too bad you're not on a refugee board and actually have some facts to deal with. 

Xenophobes hate facts.

[Hydraboss]

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

facts

Facts are exactly what I posted a link to.  Go back and look.

[Omni]

8 minutes ago, Hydraboss said:

Facts are exactly what I posted a link to.  Go back and look.

I've seen what the refugee claim form says before.

[Spiderfish]

Apparently anyone who disagrees with Trudeau's immigration and refugee policy in Canada is an angry, frustrated racist.  I guess that's one way to  shut down the dialogue on the issue.

Trudeau says racists won't change Canada's openness to Immigrants

20 minutes ago, capricorn said:

Trudeau has further muddied the waters by declaring that 'irregular' refugee claimants will be subject to Canadian laws and that acceptance is not guaranteed.

"Irregular entry???"  The coward can't even muster the words to call it what it is.  Sad performance by our leader as usual.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Spiderfish

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, Spiderfish said:

"Irregular entry???"  The coward can't even muster the words to call it what it is.  Sad performance by our leader as usual.

And with that you just confirmed the first part of your post.

[Spiderfish]

1 minute ago, Omni said:

And with that you just confirmed the first part of your post.

And as usual, Omni has no coherent comment, let alone any sort of intelligent argument to counter.

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Peter F said:

Question asked and answered by your very self: They're dirt poor.    Liberal appointees may be granting refugee status to some of the claimants (and acts of parliament lay out the conditions which refugee claimants can be accepted) but Liberal appointees are not demanding that X amount of Haitians must illegally enter Canada and make refugee claims.  

Since when does being dirt poor country qualify one as a refugee?

Here is the definition. It says nothing about being from a dirt poor country.

"A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it."

[Argus]

45 minutes ago, capricorn said:

Trudeau has further muddied the waters by declaring that 'irregular' refugee claimants will be subject to Canadian laws and that acceptance is not guaranteed.

https://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCAKCN1B00M9-OCATP

Nothing like a little ambiguity to confuse people.

Yes, you better damn well not come here or else it's possible we might send you back eventually! After several years of hearings and appeals, of course. Assuming we can find you.

[Argus]

57 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Does that justify the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions?

When Afghanistan was invaded Osama bin Laden had ten thousand fighters gathered there. So yes, it absolutely was justified after bin laden attacked the WTC. Iraq was questionable. I believe at the time it was justified as a nation-building exercise. Unfortunately, the Americans screwed the pooch, as they say. They had no coherent plan for what to do after they won. Idiots. Thus they won the war and lost the peace. I believe Iraq is better off in the long run, and I believe a civil war was inevitable when Hussein died, but things could have been so much better.

Edited August 21, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Peter F said:

ah, no. Being dirt poor is why people enter this country illegally. They enter illegally because they cannot enter legally.  ... and by the way I get all my healthcare - or most of it - Free! and that i fantastic!   Are you actually surprised that folks from dirt-poor places seek to enter rich places? 

Not in the least. I don't blame them. I'd do the same. My issue is with the government offering an open invitation and now having no clue what to do about it. And my issue is with the lunacy of a system which cannot boot out even obviously false claims in anything under several years - while we have to pay for the food, shelter, clothing and legal costs of the would-be refugee who wants to stay here. For every 20,000 false claims we're forking over a billion dollars just in legal costs, paying for lawyers to fight to deport them and fight to keep them here, as well as court costs.

[Omni]

40 minutes ago, Spiderfish said:

And as usual, Omni has no coherent comment, let alone any sort of intelligent argument to counter.

Sufficient to respond to your comment. All you really tried to do was name call JT.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, Spiderfish said:

 The US didn't cancel their order until May of this year,

 

Technically, President Trump chose to extend the Haitian TPS for another six months until January 2018, mostly for politics in Florida.    Affected Haitian refugees (in Florida and New York) can gamble and stay in the U.S., hoping that another extension is forthcoming or a path to permanent residency is created by Congress.   Refugees from 13 nations are in varying stages of TPS extensions in the U.S.    Mid-term elections could tilt the balance either way.

PM Trudeau created another option out of thin air with a single Twitter post, because he wanted to criticize Trump / travel ban.    Now Canada has to deal with more refugees and illegals than normal for such border crossing activity, which has happened before.