HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2017, 11:46 PM
BretttheRiderFan's Avatar
BretttheRiderFan BretttheRiderFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post

What Canada should do is round up all these migrants, place them in a holding facility on some island, or a isolated area like the arctic. Then bar them all from settling in Canada and deport them either home or to a third country that is willing to take them for some change, like say Mexico or Honduras etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2017, 2:23 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
Because these refugees never land in Australia. They are apprehended or turned around on the seas, not once they entre Australia.
They dont land in Australia because the illegal migrants no longer try to land in Australia. According to Australian law all maritime arrivals go to the island detention centers. It does not matter if they are intercepted on the ocean or in Melbourne.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
What Australia is doing is quite possibly a crime against humanity.
I would absolutely love to hear the logic behind calling this a crime against humanity. For me personally what would be a crime against humanity would be for Australia to do nothing. For me a crime against humanity is Trudeau inviting illegal migrants to cross the Canadian border. To me that is the real crime against humanity. But politics are politics I suppose.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2017, 4:38 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
They dont land in Australia because the illegal migrants no longer try to land in Australia. According to Australian law all maritime arrivals go to the island detention centers. It does not matter if they are intercepted on the ocean or in Melbourne.
That's the problem - they can't do that once someone claims asylum in their territorial waters/land. They're breaking international law.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2017, 4:48 AM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
They dont land in Australia because the illegal migrants no longer try to land in Australia. According to Australian law all maritime arrivals go to the island detention centers. It does not matter if they are intercepted on the ocean or in Melbourne.



I would absolutely love to hear the logic behind calling this a crime against humanity. For me personally what would be a crime against humanity would be for Australia to do nothing. For me a crime against humanity is Trudeau inviting illegal migrants to cross the Canadian border. To me that is the real crime against humanity. But politics are politics I suppose.
So then if they are intercepted in Melbourne, technically they have landed in Australia proper, not even a territory. Does Australia not have the same constitutional rights for those on its soil if not a resident/citizen?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2017, 1:41 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: File 13
Posts: 13,984
Some of us have differing opinions on what humanity means.
__________________

-- “We heal each other with kindness, gentleness and respect.” -- Richard Wagamese
-- “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2017, 6:50 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,409
Mexican asylum seekers flock to Canada

Well well well

Mexican asylum seekers flock to Canada

FIRST POSTED: FRIDAY, MARCH 17, 2017 08:10 PM CDT | UPDATED: FRIDAY, MARCH 17, 2017 08:33 PM CDT

Canada is once again dealing with a surge in asylum claims from Mexico, according to new data exclusive to the Sun.



In January 2017, Canada experienced a 700% rise in asylum claims from Mexico compared to the number of claims made in January 2016.

February 2017 saw an increase of 2,500% from February of the previous year, according to a new report by the True North Initiative based on data from the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB).

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lifted the visa requirement for Mexican travellers in December 2016, against the wishes of some immigration and border security experts, and in turn, hundreds of Mexicans are now taking advantage of Canada’s generous asylum program.

During the first two months of 2017 Canada has received 156 asylum claims from Mexican nationals, compared to the 15 claims made in the first two months of 2016, an increase of over 1000%.

As with those arriving at our border on foot, any foreign national in Canada can ask for asylum and apply to be a refugee. The person must demonstrate to a Canadian judge that they meet the legal definition of a refugee – that they face a well-founded fear of persecution and that their home country has failed to provide safety and protection.

In the meantime, these applicants are given full access to Canada’s generous social safety net, including the controversial Interim Federal Health Program – which offers services above and beyond what Canadian taxpayers receive.

But Mexican asylum seekers typically fail to meet Canada’s standard of a refugee.

Prior to the 2009 decision to impose a visa on Mexican travellers, Canada received nearly 10,000 Mexican asylum seekers in 2008.

Only about 10% of those applications were eventually accepted and given refugee status in Canada.

The remaining 90% of cases were either abandoned by the claimant or rejected by a Canadian immigration judge. These bogus claimants cost Canadian taxpayers hundreds of millions annually, through social welfare programs, legal aid, court costs and deportation services. The low acceptance rate for Mexican asylum seekers is due to the fact that, while Mexico is a dangerous country, simply coming from a dangerous place is not enough to qualify for asylum in Canada.

A person must face direct persecution, and most Mexicans are not persecuted according to legal definitions.

Trudeau’s decision to lift the visa requirement allows any Mexican to arrive in Canada without prior background screening or a guarantee the person plans to leave.

The increase in refugee applications from Mexico was expected, but a 2,500% surge in claimants is unprecedented.

And there is reason to believe this is just the beginning.

A recent Reuters report included interviews with Mexican nationals deported from the United States, who now have their sights set on Canada.

“I want to go to Canada,” said one man who was deported from the U.S. for drug possession and working illegally without immigration status.

“For those without documents, I think (the United States) is over. Now it’s Canada’s turn,” said the criminal.


http://www.winnipegsun.com/2017/03/1...lock-to-canada



Well Canada, your heard the nice criminal man; it's "our turn".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2017, 7:24 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
Well well well

A recent Reuters report included interviews with Mexican nationals deported from the United States, who now have their sights set on Canada.

“I want to go to Canada,” said one man who was deported from the U.S. for drug possession and working illegally without immigration status.

“For those without documents, I think (the United States) is over. Now it’s Canada’s turn,” said the criminal.


http://www.winnipegsun.com/2017/03/1...lock-to-canada

Well Canada, your heard the nice criminal man; it's "our turn".
I read that Reuters article on Thursday and it included some details about this guy that don't fit the picture the Winnipeg Sun is trying to paint.


In a Reynosa migrant shelter, just yards from the U.S. border, 26-year-old Cenobio Rita said he had earned about $3,000 a month installing playgrounds in Richmond, Virginia, before he was deported on Feb. 15 after police found marijuana in his car.

Having left Mexico as a 14-year-old, he fretted about returning to his violent home state of Michoacan. With Trump taking a tough stance on undocumented immigrants, he ruled out a common path for many deportees - back into the United States.

"I want to go to Canada with my passport," he said. "For those without documents, I think (the United States) is over. Now it's Canada's turn."

Source: http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...BN16N15A-OCATP

If I hadn't read the Reuters article I would have had a totally different opinion about this guy. It's too bad we don't have more info such as did he come with his family to America at age 14 or on his own. It sounds like he was doing alright for himself other than being undocumented. An influx of asylum seekers from anywhere is an issue for this country, especially if they are undocumented, but using this guy as an example of the problem is poor reporting as far as I'm concerned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2017, 9:56 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,482
The real solution to this is to overhaul the slow-ass bureaucracy and get asylum claims processed in weeks, not years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2017, 10:15 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is online now
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Roncesvalles, Toronto
Posts: 11,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
If I hadn't read the Reuters article I would have had a totally different opinion about this guy. It's too bad we don't have more info such as did he come with his family to America at age 14 or on his own. It sounds like he was doing alright for himself other than being undocumented. An influx of asylum seekers from anywhere is an issue for this country, especially if they are undocumented, but using this guy as an example of the problem is poor reporting as far as I'm concerned.

Obviously I can't speak definitively on this but I've always found it interesting and telling that San Diego tends to view illegal Mexican immigrants quite favourably, despite being one of the most Republican parts of California. This view has held up from both statistics I've read and multiple people I've met who live in the city. The profile quoted above seems pretty common. And I have wondered how many people fit into similar categories when I go to restaurants in major American cities (for instance) and see the makeup of the staff.

In case it has to be stated I am NOT advocating for a massive influx of asylum seekers - the views I posted a number of pages back still hold.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #210  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2017, 11:52 PM
Pinus Pinus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,409
Trudeau still talks like we have open borders

First posted: Friday, March 17, 2017 02:16 PM CDT | Updated: Friday, March 17, 2017 02:25 PM CDT

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has once again taken to social media to proclaim that Canada’s borders are open to any and all who want to come here.

Using the Prime Minister’s official government Twitter account – supposedly run by impartial civil servants in the PCO – the following message was posted on Thursday morning, quoting Trudeau:

"Regardless of who you are or where you come from, there’s always a place for you in Canada."

It sounds like a cheesy lyric from a ‘90’s pop song, not the official public message from our top government official.

Unfortunately, the message is flat out wrong.

Despite what our Prime Minister may believe, Canada has actual laws and standards for immigration. In fact, we have some of the toughest rules and requirements in the Western world.

While most European countries and the U.S. are focused primarily on family reunification, Canada’s immigration program is geared towards economic categories. In most cases, you need skills and even a job offer before you can set foot in Canada.

Canada also has hard and set rules on inadmissibility, set out in Sections 34 to 37 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).

A person is automatically disqualified from coming to Canada, for instance, if they have been a member of a terrorist organization or have been convicted of a serious crime, including espionage and war crimes.

In other words, a person’s past – who they are and where they’re from – does matter. It matters a lot.

You could go so far as to say that when it comes to immigrating to Canada, who you are and where you’re from are the only things that matter. There is no room in Canada for serious criminals, terrorists, spies and war criminals.

Trudeau’s incorrect and misleading message raises serious questions about our government.

Has the Prime Minister of Canada been briefed on Sections 34 to 37 of IRPA? Is he familiar with Canada’s rules on immigration and admissibility?

Did the non-partisan bureaucrats in PCO and the Department of Immigration approve this message, which may reach millions around the world?

Or, conversely, is the Trudeau government looking to make changes to IRPA? Do they plan to suspend Sections 34 to 37 in IPRA, to reflect the Prime Minister's message of open borders?

Over the past several months, we’ve witnessed an unprecedented swell in illegal immigration to Canada. What is driving this surge?

In an interview with the Vancouver Sun, an Afghan man who illegally crossed into Canada from Washington State said he came because of Trudeau’s Twitter messages.

“When I heard that the Canadian prime minister announced refugees are most welcome… it really helped me a lot,” he said.

He read Trudeau’s message and decided to brave the Canadian winter to illegally cross our border on foot.


He could have died or been seriously injured, like many others who have made this trek, and he took the risk for no real reason – since the U.S. has an equally welcoming asylum program for Afghans.

It should be concerning to Canadians that our Prime Minister is making things up on social media. It is also worrying that the non-partisan civil servants are facilitating, and even promoting, these lies.

Source: http://www.winnipegsun.com/2017/03/1...e-open-borders
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #211  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 12:13 AM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
I agree. I have a lot of concern about letting in poorly vetted asylum seekers from the Middle East when the odds of terrorists who have openly-stated they want to kill us and destroy our way of living getting in are likely. I would rather take in economic refugees and/or those escaping the drug wars in Mexico and Central America. And of course Yazidis and other Christians being systematically wiped out by ISIS. We should have been helping them a long time ago.

For those who are going to claim the vetting process of the Syrians was thorough, I don't buy it. In the past many immigration lawyers said the process would take 18 to 24 months on average. How could it be done now in a matter of a few months? UN prescreening has nothing to do with this either. Refugees were screened in the past as well and it still took another couple of years before they were accepted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #212  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 1:09 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,284
Trudeau's tweet says nothing about open borders. It espouses what has been at the very core of Canadian values for a long, long time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #213  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 1:53 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
Trudeau's tweet says nothing about open borders. It espouses what has been at the very core of Canadian values for a long, long time.
He may not be saying it verbatim, however his message is being interpreted as such, most importantly by those who choose to cross over into Canada illegally. So the misinterpretation of his messages to those choosing not to follow the rules is a problem in and of itself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #214  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 1:58 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
I agree. I have a lot of concern about letting in poorly vetted asylum seekers from the Middle East when the odds of terrorists who have openly-stated they want to kill us and destroy our way of living getting in are likely. I would rather take in economic refugees and/or those escaping the drug wars in Mexico and Central America. And of course Yazidis and other Christians being systematically wiped out by ISIS. We should have been helping them a long time ago.

For those who are going to claim the vetting process of the Syrians was thorough, I don't buy it. In the past many immigration lawyers said the process would take 18 to 24 months on average. How could it be done now in a matter of a few months? UN prescreening has nothing to do with this either. Refugees were screened in the past as well and it still took another couple of years before they were accepted.
What do you understand vetting/screening to entail? What are the shortcoings of the UN identification/assesment process? What parts of normal Canadian refugee vetting have been omitted wrt refugees from Syria?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #215  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 1:59 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Quebec
Posts: 42,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
February 2017 saw an increase of 2,500% from February of the previous year...
At such growth rates, I forecast the Mexican refugee camp where they're getting parked will be overtaking Toronto in population in only three and a half years

(i.e. the very next census, 2021, should already show the GTA having slipped to #2 with MexicanAsylumSeekerVille-in-Canada holding the #1 spot)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #216  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 2:00 AM
spoonman's Avatar
spoonman spoonman is offline
SD/OC
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by niwell View Post
Obviously I can't speak definitively on this but I've always found it interesting and telling that San Diego tends to view illegal Mexican immigrants quite favourably, despite being one of the most Republican parts of California. This view has held up from both statistics I've read and multiple people I've met who live in the city. The profile quoted above seems pretty common. And I have wondered how many people fit into similar categories when I go to restaurants in major American cities (for instance) and see the makeup of the staff.

In case it has to be stated I am NOT advocating for a massive influx of asylum seekers - the views I posted a number of pages back still hold.
San Diego is really only conservative by California standards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #217  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 2:11 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
At such growth rates, I forecast the Mexican refugee camp where they're getting parked will be overtaking Toronto in population in only three and a half years

(i.e. the very next census, 2021, should already show the GTA having slipped to #2 with MexicanAsylumSeekerVille-in-Canada holding the #1 spot)
I don't think it will come as a great surprise if the GofC is eventually obliged to reimpose a visa requirement on Mexicans, although the numbers most recently cited are stilll only half of what it would take, on an annual basis, if I recall the government's message about the possibility when the requirement was lifted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #218  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 2:56 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
He may not be saying it verbatim, however his message is being interpreted as such, most importantly by those who choose to cross over into Canada illegally. So the misinterpretation of his messages to those choosing not to follow the rules is a problem in and of itself.
That some people may choose to misinterpret something does not make their misinterpretation true.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #219  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 4:30 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
That some people may choose to misinterpret something does not make their misinterpretation true.
So then what would that make it? Where do we draw the line? Doesn't our PM have the responsibility to represent our country in an honest manner without false representation, be it misinterpreted or not? Shouldn't someone make him aware (assuming he is not aware that is) that his "tweets" and other messages he's sending the world ARE being misinterpreted, helping to lead up to this issue we are currently facing? Or should the government just stick it's head in the sand, allow this to continue and potentially become progressively worse as the months wear on?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #220  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2017, 5:34 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
So then what would that make it? Where do we draw the line? Doesn't our PM have the responsibility to represent our country in an honest manner without false representation, be it misinterpreted or not?
He's not making false representations. There is nothing false about his statement.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:40 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.