Mennonites may lose Canadian citizenship

[Catchme]

Personally, I find it hard to feel sorry them, and think they should be deported. They were looking for a place to live without government interference, eh?! Excuse me, but a get a grip, the fact of life is if it is NOT a democratic government interring it is either a dictatorsip or a monarchy that owns everyone. They wanted this, no interference, but have nerve asking for it now . It is the height of hypocrisy to now want the Canadian GOVERNMENT to bail them out, I say NO! Your family did not want government interference back then so stop asking for it now.

Hundreds of Mennonites living in Canada are in danger of losing their Canadian citizenship because of a legal technicality in Latin America where almost 7,000 of their ancestors moved in the 1920s.

The Mennonites went to Mexico and Paraguay looking for a place to live without government interference in their lives. But they have been trickling slowly back to Canada ever since.

...Fehr has asked the federal government for a general amnesty in hundreds of cases like this across Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/20...e-citizens.html

[jefferiah]

Well, Catch Me, if the Mennonite in question has been living in Canada for so long and was considered a citizen for so many years only to be told now they are not-----well I dont think they should be deported. But perhaps a Latin American Mennonite should have to undergo the same process to get back in that other immigrants have.

[Catchme]

Sorry, no, not only do/did they NOT want government interference in their lives and are now asking for it, when they themselves need assitance, if it was any other group in Canada illegally, some people would be screaming for their deportation. The knife cuts both ways.

Obviously they thought they could play it whatever way they wanted to, and have dual citizenship for their own conveinence. I say, cut em loose, send to wherever, they came from and have them apply for citizenship just like every other person wanting to immigrate to Canada.

[kimmy]

Sorry, no, not only do/did they NOT want government interference in their lives and are now asking for it, when they themselves need assitance, if it was any other group in Canada illegally, some people would be screaming for their deportation. The knife cuts both ways.

Obviously they thought they could play it whatever way they wanted to, and have dual citizenship for their own conveinence. I say, cut em loose, send to wherever, they came from and have them apply for citizenship just like every other person wanting to immigrate to Canada.

In the cases of people who've used deception or subterfuge to gain illegal residency in this country, yes. There's no reason not to send such people home. Yet even in such cases we find "progressives" decrying the injustice of racist and Hitlerite immigration department rulings, sending poor people back to bad countries.

I feel there's a considerable difference between such people and the people in this story, people who've been living in Canada without deception or subterfuge for years only to discover that their citizenship is being revoked for, essentially, a paperwork glitch that was made over 80 years ago.

I also find it puzzling that you apparently wish to see these people punished for a decision made by their grandparents or greatgrandparents.

And the distinction made by the Latin American countries-- not recognizing church marriages as legal-- isn't one that Canada makes anyway. By Canadian standards, these people were not born out of wedlock.

Personally, I find it hard to feel sorry them, and think they should be deported. They were looking for a place to live without government interference, eh?! Excuse me, but a get a grip, the fact of life is if it is NOT a democratic government interring it is either a dictatorsip or a monarchy that owns everyone. They wanted this, no interference, but have nerve asking for it now . It is the height of hypocrisy to now want the Canadian GOVERNMENT to bail them out, I say NO!

I also think it's rather snobbish of you to pass judgment on these people based on your 2007 urbanite notions of what their situation might have been.

I encourage you to read about Clifford Sifton and the Ukrainian immigration he promoted during his time as Minister of the Interior. Canadians of the time were utterly against bringing such people to Canada, but Sifton sought them to turn the unproductive prairies into a productive agricultural region because he recognized their industrious character and talents for farming. Sifton brought these people-- the Mennonites and Doukhobors-- to Canada with many promises, some of which were honored, but some of which were bald-faced lies.

Are you aware of the intense bigotry these people faced at the time?

"The Galicians, they of the sheepskin coats, the filth and the vermin, do not make splendid material for the building of a great nation. One look at the disgusting creatures after they pass through over the CPR on their way West has caused many to marvel that beings bearing the human form could have sunk to such a bestial level."

Were you aware that thousands of them were interred during World War I, and tens of thousands were classified as "aliens of enemy nationality" and treated like parolees? Thousands were sent to forced labour camps? (were you aware that Canada still has not apologized or provided any compensation for property seized or forced labour performed?)

It strikes me as somewhat ignorant of you to question why they'd want to leave Canada after these experiences.

-k

[Catchme]

Punishment, I never once used the words punishment. Thank you for NOT putting words into my mouth in the future.

They are in the country illegally, that is the point here. Plus, we do not know that they were/are not using subterfuge now do we? Also, many people get deported back who are here illegally even though they were law abiding citizens. Why would an exception be made for these people?

They left of their own free will because they DID NOT WANT government interference in their lives. Now they want government intereference when they feel it would benefit them. That is hypocrisy.

This has got nothing to do with why they left. It has only to do with the fact they came back or their children or children's children came back. Moreover, if their persecution was such that it forced them to leave, why did they keep what they thought was dual citizenship and try to pass it to their children and grandchildren? So, it most certainly is not ignorant to question why they came back or their offspring did.

Canadian officials promised all sorts of things to all sorts of immigrants and First Nations and never followed through, that is not a reason to overlook people being here illegally. And is a different issue completely.

Leo Tolstoy paid for most, if not all, Doukhobors to come to Canada to escape extreme persecution in Russia. Please do not confound the 2 dfferent sects. They are not the issue here.

[hiti]

Oh boy........ why not also bring back the cane for prisoners as Art Hanger suggested or put 10 year olds in jail which was another suggestion by Canada’s justice minster Vic Toews... he says, August 2006, that it might be appropriate to lower the age of criminal responsibility from 12 to 11 or even 10-year-olds.

Notwithstanding that despite the Conservative government’s claims of rampant criminality among children, statistics clearly show that the Youth Criminal Justice Act, which was introduced by the previous Liberal government, is working. Since the law came into effect, Canada’s disproportionately high youth incarceration rates are declining and youth custody facilities are being closed across the country.

[Black Dog]

Punishment, I never once used the words punishment. Thank you for NOT putting words into my mouth in the future.

You are saying these people should experience negative consequenses asa result of their (actually, their ancestors) actions. What is that if not punishment?

They are in the country illegally, that is the point here.

As kimmuy said, they are "illegals" only because of a beuracratic cock-up from 80 years ago.

Plus, we do not know that they were are not using subterfuge now do we?

Sure we do. Most of these people weren't even aware of their status.

also, many people get deported back who are here illegally even though they were law abiding citizens. Why would an exception be made for these people?

Because there's no good reason to not consider them citizens.

They left of their own free will because they DID NOT WANT government interference in their lives. Now they want government intereference when they feel it would benefit them. That is hypocrisy

Your blaming them for their ancestors' actions?

This has got nothing to do with why they left.

So why do you mention it?

It has only to do with the fact they came back or their children or children's children came back. Moreover, if their persecution was such that it forced them to leave, why did they keep what they thought was dual citizenship and try to pass it to their children and grandchildren? So, it most certainly is not ignorant to question why they came back or their offspring did.

If why they left is ireelevant, then so to is why they chose to come back. The question is: is the law being applied reasonably in this case or not?

[Catchme]

Negative consequences? Being forced to adhere to the Laws of the Land just as everyone else is, is negative consequences and punishment?

Some of the grandchildren in question have just come back in the last 10 years. It was known prior to 10 years ago that there were 100's without citizenship, in fact there was general amnisty. I say they came back only to get in on the dual citizenship boat again as they knew it pertained to them too.

I addressed it only to point out why and if indeed the leaving was because of persecution why do think you they were keeping dual citizenship? Why come back? Why ask for government interference nowadays? In fact, they still do not want government interference with their lives.

[Black Dog]

Negative consequences? Being forced to adhere to the Laws of the Land just as everyone else is, is negative consequences and punishment?

I'd say that if you were uprooted from your life and livelihood and deported from the country tyou've called home for most of your life, you would probably regard that as a negative consequence.

Some of the grandchildren in question have just come back in the last 10 years. It was known prior to 10 years ago that there were 100's without citizenship, in fact there was general amnisty. I say they came back only to get in on the dual citizenship boat again as they knew it pertained to them too.

Source? There's calls for a general amnesty, but there doesn't appear to have been one yet. And there's nothing in the article about dual citizenship. It seems you're confused.

And it seems this is being resolved.

I addressed it only to point out why and if indeed the leaving was because of persecution why do think you they were keeping dual citizenship? Why come back? Why ask for government interference nowadays? In fact, they still do not want government interference with their lives.

I think when they say "government interference" they are talking about the kind of interference kimmy mentioned earlier: the persecution and religious intolerance faced by Eastern European immigrants in the early 20th Century. It's a little odd to make these people into ingrates for wanting the government's help resolving a citizenship glitch and not wanting to be persecuted.

[Canadian Blue]

Why don't we deport real criminals who refuse to adhere to our laws instead of Mennonites who call this place home and are actually a productive part of society.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National

MONTREAL -- By the time he appeared before an immigration judge in 2002, Jean-Yves Brutus was known to Montreal police as a street-gang member who wore gang colours, recruited runaway girls and possessed a pistol and a sawed-off rifle.

An immigrant from Haiti, he was ordered deported but he never left Canada, because his lawyer successfully persuaded immigration officials that Mr. Brutus's life would be threatened if he were sent back.

Last week, Mr. Brutus, 26, was charged with attempted murder in a case in which the victim was reportedly shot in the back for being part of a group that wore the wrong colour of clothing in a gang neighbourhood.

Mr. Brutus's case puts the spotlight on the procedure known as preremoval risk assessments, in which immigration officers have to balance how much risk someone facing deportation poses for society against the potential dangers that person faces once expelled from Canada.

"You're going to be forced to deal with people whose characters are not assets to society but who nevertheless are human beings. It's not easy," said Mr. Brutus's immigration lawyer, Stephen Fogarty.

Mr. Brutus was ordered deported in December of 2002 by adjudicator Pierre Turmel of the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Mr. Brutus had pleaded guilty in 2001 to possession of a prohibited firearm and assaulting a police officer.

The IRB heard from a Montreal police officer, who said Mr. Brutus was a member of the Crack Down Posse, a gang whose members are mostly of Haitian origin.

The hearing was shown two photos in which Mr. Brutus posed with CDP members, wearing a blue bandana, the colour of the gang.

The photos were found in a vacant apartment, "which was used as a refuge by runaway girls," Mr. Turmel's ruling said, noting also that Mr. Brutus was suspected of recruiting young girls.

Mr. Turmel ordered Mr. Brutus deported. He was, however, eligible for a preremoval risk assessment.

Mr. Fogarty said he submitted several human-rights reports, including one from the U.S. State Department, that said Haitians sent back to their country with criminal records are often detained, beaten, burned with cigarettes or hooded and choked.

He said his client was in 2003 the first applicant in Quebec to be successful in staving off his deportation by citing the dangers he would face in his native country. No more than 3 per cent of applicants are successful, the lawyer said.

[jdobbin]

I have no problem showing mercy and compassion to people who somehow lost their citizenship in this way. It just doesn't make sense to to come down hard on them when one of the few privileges of being government is to pardon such mistakes.

[jefferiah]

It's nice to see so many people come to the defense of the Mennonites.

[Hydraboss]

jdobbin, please tell me you were not replying to CB's quote about Mr.Brutus. I agree that the Mennonite people should not be denied citizenship. Scum like Mr. Brutus do not deserve risk assessments; if they are killed in their own country...well...darn.

What have these Mennonites done that threaten the country? Bake too many loaves of bread? Raise too many chickens? I don't recall any reports of Mennonite gangs running rampant in the streets. As much as I a believer in black and white laws, I also believe that there must be allowances for paperwork screw-ups.

Grant them their citizenships and be done with it.

And deport all the criminal immigrants - regardless of what they face in their country of citizenship.

Even if it's Syria.

[blueblood]

Negative consequences? Being forced to adhere to the Laws of the Land just as everyone else is, is negative consequences and punishment?

Some of the grandchildren in question have just come back in the last 10 years. It was known prior to 10 years ago that there were 100's without citizenship, in fact there was general amnisty. I say they came back only to get in on the dual citizenship boat again as they knew it pertained to them too.

I addressed it only to point out why and if indeed the leaving was because of persecution why do think you they were keeping dual citizenship? Why come back? Why ask for government interference nowadays? In fact, they still do not want government interference with their lives.

how about deporting all the illegal immigrants in the cities then too. I like how you pick and choose rights for your own benefit. Are western Canadians second class citizens? Are western Canadian beliefs second class too?

[Canadian Blue]

If you're afraid of getting tortured back home, then maybe people should think before breaking the law by taking part in violent crime, it's a no brainer.

What have the Mennonites does that's so bad anyways, like I said before if they are productive members of society why should we deny them citizenship.

[jdobbin]

jdobbin, please tell me you were not replying to CB's quote about Mr.Brutus. I agree that the Mennonite people should not be denied citizenship. Scum like Mr. Brutus do not deserve risk assessments; if they are killed in their own country...well...darn.

I was referring to the Mennonites. I work with many and they are exactly what Canada would want in a citizen.

[guyser]

I was referring to the Mennonites. I work with many and they are exactly what Canada would want in a citizen.

They are a good people. My only beef, and this is waaaay off topic, is the free ride they get with their "markets"

They get away with a lot more than the average food marketer.

[jdobbin]

They are a good people. My only beef, and this is waaaay off topic, is the free ride they get with their "markets"

They get away with a lot more than the average food marketer.

I don't know much about that. Only one of the people I work with is also a farmer.

[August1991]

Personally, I find it hard to feel sorry them, and think they should be deported. They were looking for a place to live without government interference, eh?! Excuse me, but a get a grip, the fact of life is if it is NOT a democratic government interring it is either a dictatorsip or a monarchy that owns everyone. They wanted this, no interference, but have nerve asking for it now . It is the height of hypocrisy to now want the Canadian GOVERNMENT to bail them out, I say NO! Your family did not want government interference back then so stop asking for it now.

Catchme, I have to say that I find your post offensive (and also plain wrong).

What have you against Mennonites?

This problem does not apply only to Mennonites. Many non-Mennonites are also affected.

The US government's decision to require passports of everyone crossing its borders has provoked this problem. Many people (not just Mennonites) living in Canada who used to cross the border without problem have applied for passports recently only to learn that they are not Canadian citizens.

This is the reason for the recent headlines.

Canada's first Citizenship law was passed in 1947 and it has many clauses now considered politically incorrect. (1. Imagine. Canada existed for 70 years without a citizenship law. 2. What clauses of modern laws will be considered politically incorrect in 2066?)

For better or worse, Canada's 1977 Citizenship Act (more practical and generous) was not retroactive. So, many people's citizenship is determined by the 1947 act.

---

I happen to think that if Chretien had reacted differently to Bush Jnr in 2001/2002, we wouldn't be in this mess. It used to be a source of pride that Canada and the US had the longest undefended "border" in the world that people could cross with merely a nod of the head. It is sad that we have lost that. I also believe that the US has not obtained anymore security.

The best place to verify people is when they enter North America, not when they cross a long, arbitrary line drawn across a continent.

This is what I believe we should have done.

[scribblet]

I'm guessing that the attitude towards these people ais because they are of a religious persuasion and not secular. If Canada was trying to deport a number of illegal aliens or refugees, there would be a huge outcry from the 'progressive camp'.

Normally I would be the first to say illegals should be deported, but these people are not of that variety, they are losing a citizenship they always thought they had, because of a technicality. These are hard working people who don't break the laws and simply wish to live in peace.

[Catchme]

Personally, I find it hard to feel sorry them, and think they should be deported. They were looking for a place to live without government interference, eh?! Your family did not want government interference back then so stop asking for it now.

Catchme, I have to say that I find your post offensive (and also plain wrong).

What have you against Mennonites?

I happen to think that if Chretien had reacted differently to Bush Jnr in 2001/2002, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Fair enough, I find a good many posts at this site very offensive too. That is the nature of freedom of conscience and speech, people differ in opinion.

I have nothing against Mennonites, I have no sympathy for them either though. Different story. As I have stated several times in this thread, if this was any other group of people, people would screaming for their removal, even the thread has born this out, all the comments are; they are hard working people, nice, just the kind of people we want here, etc etc. Thereby inferring that the "others", who have been in the same boat or similar are "inferior" and not worthy of being in Canada. The rules have to be applied fairly. It would seem some do not think so.

Moreover, these people and their ancestors did not want to be here so they left, but thought they were keeping their citizenship, and for some reason they decided to come back. I say if they were firm in their convictions and felt their persecution was so bad, they would've renounced their citizenship, eh?!

I have met a good number of great Mennonite people, and I have met a good number of not so nice ones too, they are people just like everyone else, subject to the same personal personal proclivities, of anyone other peoples: greed, deceit, and other such things.

[kimmy]

I was stuck home yesterday, still recovering from the flu, so I was chatting online with my friend Chris, an avid NDP supporter from Toronto. I made mention of this thread, and here's his reaction:

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:35:29 PM): the taste of puke has that side effect

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:36:36 PM): http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....wtopic=7915&hl=

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:39:48 PM): can we all get together and declare Catchme to be not Canadian

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:39:53 PM): i feel dirty by association

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:40:34 PM): I was somewhat riled up about this earlier

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:40:54 PM): I then felt this strange glimmer of hope at the notion that mom might get deported.

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:43:37 PM): at any rate, an odd position for a supposed "progressive" to take.

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:43:55 PM): where was this alleged progressive?

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:44:06 PM): well, you know, other than you

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:44:20 PM): Catchme is the alleged progressive. I've never alleged myself to be progressive.

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:45:03 PM): I consider myself to be a liberal, in the historical meaning of the word.

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:45:09 PM): Catchme may consider *himself* progressive, but that just indicates a poor grasp on reality

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:46:59 PM): she might have been trying to provoke some sort of reaction that would give her opportunity to proclaim how people react differently when the "illegal aliens" are white rather than brown.

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:47:07 PM): that was a she?

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:47:15 PM): as far as I know...

Kimberly (1/26/2007 9:50:11 PM): anyway, I'm pleased to see the response from the other members

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:50:17 PM): well, male or female, all i got was "arrogant", "self-congratulatory", "pig-headed", and "asshole"

Christopher (1/26/2007 9:50:39 PM): i had just assumed she'd be voting Reform

I guess this is not very relevant to the issue under discussion, but I thought it was interesting to see how an outsider to MLW reacted to the thread.

-k

[kimmy]

Leo Tolstoy paid for most, if not all, Doukhobors to come to Canada to escape extreme persecution in Russia. Please do not confound the 2 dfferent sects. They are not the issue here.

I mentioned the Doukhobors alongside the Mennonites because Sifton specifically recruited both groups to this country. Neglecting to mention the Doukhobors would have been an error of oversight. The two groups have a lot in common. Both were religious pacifists. Both endured many years of persecution and forced migration around Europe. Both were recruited to Canada because of their well-known work ethic and agricultural skills. Both were promised exemption from combat duty in time of war. Both groups were considered filthy and disgusting by the British descendants who made up most of Canada's population at the time. They're very much alike, except, apparently, that the Mennonites didn't have a famous patron.

I have nothing against Mennonites, I have no sympathy for them either though. Different story. As I have stated several times in this thread, if this was any other group of people, people would screaming for their removal, even the thread has born this out, all the comments are; they are hard working people, nice, just the kind of people we want here, etc etc. Thereby inferring that the "others", who have been in the same boat or similar are "inferior" and not worthy of being in Canada. The rules have to be applied fairly. It would seem some do not think so.

Why don't you just say it. We know you're dying to, so why don't you just come out and say it:

"You guys are racists! You want these white aliens allowed to stay, but you want the brown aliens to get deported! Racism! Racism!"

I mean, on the one hand, we have Jean-Yves Brutus, who's a brown illegal alien, and on the other hand we have these Mennonites who are white illegal aliens. They're practically the same, right? So why are people clamoring for poor Mr Brutus to be deported, yet clamoring for these Mennonites to be allowed to stay? Must be racism!

Well, yeah. Aside from the skin colour, the situations are practically identical.

Jean-Yves Brutus was supposed to be deported because he's a street-gang member who carries illegal weapons, pimps young girls, and shot somebody in the back for wearing the wrong colour.

And these Mennonites are religious pacifists who are supposed to be deported because of clerical errors made in Mexico 80 years ago.

So what's the difference, aside from skin colour? Gotta be the racism! God, it's so racist I can hardly live with myself. I am going to go seek out some fucking sensitivity training right this fucking minute.

Tell you what, Catchme, if you can find some case where a non-white person who's lived in Canada for years and is going to be deported for such a chintzy reason, why don't you present it to us. If that person's case is as sympathetic as these Mennonite non-citizens, I can promise you that most people here will support that person no matter what his skin colour-- brown, green, purple, plaid, whatever.

You said:

inferring that the "others", who have been in the same boat or similar are "inferior" and not worthy of being in Canada

Well, find us these "others" who are in "the same boat or similar." So far, we haven't heard about these "others". We've heard about Jean-Yves Brutus, whose boat, I'm sorry to say, isn't the same. Or remotely similar.

The message here, and I suspect the view of most Canadians, is that if our immigration system can allow a street-thug like Jean Yves Brutus to stay in Canada, then forcing these Mennonites to leave due to 80 year old paperwork would be an extraordinary injustice.

Moreover, these people and their ancestors did not want to be here so they left, but thought they were keeping their citizenship, and for some reason they decided to come back. I say if they were firm in their convictions and felt their persecution was so bad, they would've renounced their citizenship, eh?!

As August just tried to explain to you-- unsuccessfully, it appears-- Canada's citizenship laws didn't even *exist* at the time these people left Canada. Your continued attempt to portray their retaining Canadian citizenship as some sort of cynical ploy on their part is quite simply wrong. The law that made most (but not all) of these people Canadian citizens even after they left the country was not made until *years* after they left.

Further, this ongoing refrain of yours, the "if Canada was so bad to them, how come they want to come back?" has echoes of the "love it or leave it" mentality that most progressives despise.

Why'd they decide to leave? Probably because Canada was not the paradise they'd been told of, and because as a people, relocating to avoid persecution was more or less a habit to them.

Why'd they decide to come back? Probably because Canada has changed for the better and Latin America has changed for the worse. Probably because they have family in Canada.

-k

[jefferiah]

Wow Kimmy

[geoffrey]

Most are born here. As with the protection the left extends to terrorist sympathizers like the Khadrs... I think I'm ok with extending some sympathy towards people that make damn good vegetables for my consumption.

Most were born here, they are Canadians by that alone.

To make my statement not hypocritical, your free to deport any of the surviving adults from the 1920s move.