Poll Shows Canadian Immigration Attitudes Hardening - even among immigrants

[Gaétan]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You are misunderstanding the Bible completely.  Those verse are referring individual charity. It is referring to a personal situation.   A country has to be careful about letting immigrants in as too many or the wrong kind can cause major problems as we see now with the housing crisis.  A nation has a perfect right to have borders and limit and control who comes in.  All countries do this and always have. 

You can invite strangers into your home if you wish, but you cannot use other people's money to bring thousands of immigrants into the country.  That is stealing other people's money.

Immigrants are people in need and if you don't welcome them you'll go to hell and people are not judge only for what they do but what they think because if you think like the devil you won't enter the Kingdom of God even if you're not currently doing something wrong.

Matthew 5:28

New International Version

28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

[cougar]

6 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

Immigrants are people in need and if you don't welcome them you'll go to hell

 

??  There are simply people on the move.  Some move for economical reasons others have their own reasons.

The first ones that came were invaders (the term settlers is used as it is more pleasing to the public)

Once a country is formed, the country has zero obligations to let others inside.  In fact this would be detrimental to its integrity and culture.

But then there is the multiculturalism BS (practiced by capitalist nations) which serves a particular agenda to bring fresh slaves into the country and increase the population base.

[Gaétan]

6 minutes ago, cougar said:

??  There are simply people on the move.  Some move for economical reasons others have their own reasons.

The first ones that came were invaders (the term settlers is used as it is more pleasing to the public)

Once a country is formed, the country has zero obligations to let others inside.  In fact this would be detrimental to its integrity and culture.

But then there is the multiculturalism BS (practiced by capitalist nations) which serves a particular agenda to bring fresh slaves into the country and increase the population base.

You have to treat others the same way you want to be treated

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, cougar said:

 

The first ones that came were invaders (the term settlers is used as it is more pleasing to the public)

The first ones that came were the first nations people.  You feel they were 'invaders'?

4 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

You have to treat others the same way you want to be treated

That is a stupid rule.  You treat others the way they'd like to be treated - and they should treat you the way you want to be treated.

Remember - the left WANTS to boil people alive for saying things that they don't approve of. I don't want to be treated like that.

[blackbird]

9 hours ago, Gaétan said:

 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 

That was referring to individuals, not nations.  Big difference.  Can't you see it refers to one person talking to another?    If it meant nations or immigrants, it would have said so.

 

9 hours ago, cougar said:

Never seen a bigger s*t disturber than you and your pseudo Bible on this board.

I use the real Bible, the King James Version 1611.  Not pseudo at all.   Only in your mind.

Edited January 6 by blackbird

[cougar]

11 hours ago, blackbird said:

I use the real Bible, the King James Version 1611.  Not pseudo at all.   Only in your mind.

There you go! You need to use version 1612.   1611 is outdated and therefore not valid.🤣

[cougar]

20 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The first ones that came were the first nations people.  You feel they were 'invaders'?

 

Of course I did not have them in mind, thus using the term "settlers" which should have provided ample clarification.

[cougar]

20 hours ago, Gaétan said:

You have to treat others the same way you want to be treated

I have never been a refugee.    So a war starts in your country, caused by your countrymen and possibly you and this should give you the automatic right to travel to any country in the world at their expense, with or without proper documentation and screening?  Oh my God !   These will be some very high expectations!   But it is not them who sneak into the country.  Canada brings them in, deliberately with a particular agenda that may have very little to do with their well being.

 

 

 

[CdnFox]

48 minutes ago, cougar said:

Of course I did not have them in mind, thus using the term "settlers" which should have provided ample clarification.

The first settlers were the first nations.  Who did you think was first?  That's why they're called the 'first' nations.  They settled here first. All first nations are descended from the original settlers.

So what you're saying is you don't know what you're talking about and are just an air head.

[cougar]

52 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The first settlers were the first nations.  Who did you think was first?  That's why they're called the 'first' nations.  They settled here first. All first nations are descended from the original settlers.

So what you're saying is you don't know what you're talking about and are just an air head.

Start then calling the First Nations "settlers" and see where this takes you, air head.😉

[cougar]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The first settlers were the first nations.  Who did you think was first?  That's why they're called the 'first' nations.  They settled here first. All first nations are descended from the original settlers.

So what you're saying is you don't know what you're talking about and are just an air head.

Now take a look at your own government's website and explanation:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/discover-canada/read-online/canadas-history.html

The term "settlement" is only used in combination with English, French, European and never with Indian or indigenous.

Mr. Senior Air Bubble you are.

Edited January 7 by cougar

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, cougar said:

Start then calling the First Nations "settlers" and see where this takes you, air head.😉

I literally just did.  And im' in the same Place

The first nations were settlers.  They just weren't terribly good at it, couldn't figure out how metal works and such, so other than beating each other up with rocks now and again they didnt' get much done.

Then the second wave of settlers showed up and showed them how it's done.

Sorry kiddo, that's history.

 

[cougar]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sorry kiddo, that's history.

 

Sorry kiddo, that is a deliberate misinterpretation of the true meaning.

The term "settlers" has a meaning of itself and we know who it refers to.

Edited January 7 by cougar

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, cougar said:

Now take a look at your own government's website and explanation:

 

Why? We already know this gov't will say anything to keep them happy thanks for the donations!!!!

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, cougar said:

Sorry kiddo, that is a deliberate misinterpretation of the true meaning.

 

it is literally it's precise meaning.  That's exactly what it means.

They came here and settled the place.  The fact that they kinda sucked at it and lived little better than the animals for much of that time does not change that simple fact.

Quote

The term "settlers" has a meaning of itself and we know who it refers to.

Those who settle.  Settlers. 

I know - you want it to be a pejorative. You want to deny history to make it sound like other people are bad people and the first nations are good people.
The first nations are a group of barely successful settlers who got taken over by a second wave of settlers who were kind enough to not just fight them and wipe them out.  Of course, that's left some of their decendents  a little bitter about their forefather's poor showing and why wouldn't it?

But - ya gotta move on. Just because they were losers at being settlers doesn't mean they can't do SOMETHING to be proud of now.  If they try.

[Gaétan]

11 hours ago, cougar said:

I have never been a refugee.    

If you would be a refugee you would like to be well treated by Canada then you have to do the same.

[cougar]

17 hours ago, Gaétan said:

If you would be a refugee you would like to be well treated by Canada then you have to do the same.

Naah, I don't buy into this refugee BS!

If one is a refugee they should go to a neighboring country and stay there till they can return to their homeland, not go to the opposite side of the globe!  When they do what they do, clearly their idea is not to return home.

A normal country should stop the flow of refugees immediately.  And of course this is no normal country.

[cougar]

On 1/6/2024 at 7:44 PM, CdnFox said:

You want to deny history to make it sound like other people are bad people and the first nations are good people.

Not really denying history, but yes , this is about what I wanted to say.  This is the truth.

[Gaétan]

On 1/6/2024 at 8:47 PM, cougar said:

I have never been a refugee.    So a war starts in your country, caused by your countrymen and possibly you and this should give you the automatic right to travel to any country in the world at their expense, with or without proper documentation and screening?  Oh my God !   These will be some very high expectations!   But it is not them who sneak into the country.  Canada brings them in, deliberately with a particular agenda that may have very little to do with their well being.

 

 

 

The conclusions you draw from the media are not in line with reality. If you hear that a refugee is a criminal in the media, you have a million others who are not, but they don't talk about it. You are naïve to trust the media, to tell us that a refugee is a good person does not bring them anything, but saying that he is a bandit makes their audience grow, the media is an organization of rotten people who run on money.

Edited January 8 by Gaétan

[Michael Hardner]

On 1/6/2024 at 12:12 AM, Gaétan said:

You have to treat others the same way you want to be treated

Of course Canada normally has the capacity to accept refugees.  The arguments against doing so have been the same since forever.  You must acknowledge that our current situation is different though.

[CdnFox]

10 hours ago, cougar said:

Not really denying history, but yes , this is about what I wanted to say.  This is the truth.

No, sorry its a lie, and that's why you wanted to deny history.   I mean lets get real - the first nations people were far worse "settlers' than the second wave.  They kept slaves. They sold women as property. They FREQUENTLY attacked their neighbours and killed them to take their land. they were unable to develop even basic technologies. If the hudsons bay company hadn't shown up they would have all died from disease that came up through south america.

The second wave didn't rely on conquest and didn't kill the first nations in war.  They protected them against illness and disease. They did agreements and treaties, provided goods and opportunity, did their best to respect their way of life.

I'd say those guys were much better people than the first group who sold their women and kept slaves for thousands of years. Not to mention their tendancy to genocide other tribes.

But hey - whatever lies you have to tell yourself to get through the night, we're here to help. THe first nations were noble people with no faults who created great civilizations and lived in peace and were technologically advanced.  There you go
 

[cougar]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

 If the hudsons bay company hadn't shown up they would have all died from disease that came up through south america......

 

The fact that they kinda sucked at it and lived little better than the animals ..........
 

Who would be twisting the history to portray a lie as the truth?  Somebody who is calling himself the Fox of course.

It is well known that First Nations went down in numbers due to the plague brought to North America by the settlers as well as the settlers killing them like animals.

And who are you to say that their lives sucked and that now their lives are better?

Is your life better slaving for life to pay rent and put food on the table with zero freedom to go anywhere or do anything else, as you have no money or opportunities?

Get real.

Edited January 8 by cougar

[CdnFox]

Just now, cougar said:

Who would be twisting the history to portray a lie as the truth?

 

That would be you kiddo    You'd like to pretend that first nations weren't settlers. They were. You've stated plainly that honesty is not your concern, racism and making other people look bad is your concern.

And no - the plague did not come from the second generation of settlers   sorry little guy. The plauge came up from south america and mexico, where it was deposited by natives of the carribbians, who got it from the english who got it from china.

What IS actually history is that the canadian 'settlers' spent a fortune in money and time and resources trying to protect first nations from that plauge.

As to whether their lives are better now or then - i notice that they're not trying to go back to how they lived then.  They're pretty happy with the modern tech, the modern medicine,  power, metal tools, etc.  So it would seem that they prefer things as they are now.

But hey, sure. Maybe women PREFERRED to be slaves and chattel and would really hate having their rights as they do today.  I guess you'd have to ask a modern first nations woman if she's like to go  back to that or prefer things are they are now.

38 minutes ago, cougar said:

Is your life better slaving for life to pay rent and put food on the table with zero freedom to go anywhere or do anything else, as you have no money or opportunities?

That was how it was then'.  They were pretty much stuck where they were, probably dead by about 30, there really only was one 'job', no real opportunities for advancement - this is your life and try not to starve or get sick.

NOw of course they have massive opportunities, they can go to school, they can live anywhere they want, they can do any job they want, they can live remotely and enjoy something somewhat similar to their ancestors if they like or live in the middle of a big city working as an exec at a major company - or be an achademic and study and teach, or just be a simple plumber or electrician or real estate agent or whatever.
 

In fact - they have EVERY SINGLE RIGHT that anyone else does in canada... and THEN some.   So If the asnwer to your question is 'no', then thank god we came along and provided them with better opportunities than they used to have

[taxme]

On 1/3/2024 at 1:41 PM, Moonbox said:

Doesn't hurt me, because I don't believe in Divine Revelation, nor do most thoughtful, intelligent and reasonable human beings.   Clinging to that frankly absurd belief (especially as an Anglican) is contradictory to begin with, but the point remains:  You believe that if people don't think the same way as you, and believe the same things, then they're going to Hell.  As an Evangelical message, that's about as bad as they come, and it's why your Church is dying. 🤷‍♂️

It's not against the rules, but there can be all sorts of things "wrong with it".  Starting a thread for the sake of starting a thread doesn't have much value.  If all you're here for is to shake your fist at the clouds and rant about whatever is grinding your gears on that day or whatever Twitter told you to get upset about, you're not going to be taken very seriously.   

But of course, whatever you post here should be taken very seriously and should be of great importance and interest to all Canadians, eh, O divine one? Personally, your posts appear to be nothing but just more propaganda and brainwashing nonsense. Just saying. 😄

[taxme]

On 1/3/2024 at 2:10 PM, Legato said:

Future Liberal voters maybe.

Trying to appease Trudeau's globalist masters along with the WEF.

Suckholing to the UN.

Probably all three.

The dear leader of Canada has this thing about allowing more British and European immigrants to come to Canada. The dear leader just does not want more white people of color immigrating to Canada. This is the same dear leader that thinks that we are in an environmental crisis, but yet, he still brings in hundreds of thousands of more new immigrants into Canada to make things worse for the environment. not to forget a housing and infrastructure crisis. Typical liberal logic at work here. Make things worse, and not better for Canada. 

The dear leader is a bigtime suck hole of the WEF. Even Klaus Swabster loves his little WEF sucky PM of Canada. 

The dear leader appears to be one big suck for all of those unelected international outfits like the UN, WEF and the WHO for examples and who control all of our lives without our permission. When was the last time the taxpayer's had a say into where and how Canada should go or who to belong to? We all just follow like sheep into the slaughter house. Sad indeed.