HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 6:29 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
In the 80's I along with my family made it across the Yugoslavia border to Austria, where they were shooting people who did not halt. We applied legally to come to Canada and came in as political refugees after living in Austria for some significant time as official refugees.

These pieces of shit (pardon my language) are nothing but economic migrants entering Canada illegally from a safe country. They are que jumpers and nothing but criminals and imo should be treated as such. Sorry for me being so bitter but unlike everyone else here I actually came to Canada via the refugees system and find the opinions of many here highly insulting.
I don't normally agree with what you say on this forum, but I have to admit if there is anyone's personal experience that can provide validation that Canada should take a tougher stance on these people sneaking across the border into Canada, it can be found in this quoted post.

%100 agree with you (this time )
__________________
Canada's biggest downfall: our proximity and physical attachment to 'Murca.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 6:36 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Without STCA economic migrants and criminals just country shop. Canada and the US share security data, Canada already knows everything about everyone who enters the US once they enter Canada. None of these people have a valid claim and they should be locked up until they can be deported. Also there should be a attempt to recoup costs to Canada, which are significant.
Huh. With all the bluster coming out of Donny's mouth about their allies "paying their fare share", it's time they walk their own walk eh.
__________________
Canada's biggest downfall: our proximity and physical attachment to 'Murca.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 6:45 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
Huh. With all the bluster coming out of Donny's mouth about their allies "paying their fare share", it's time they walk their own walk eh.
Seizing assets from migrants to recoup costs is not something new. Denmark does it, Switzerland does it, Czechia does it etc.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/denmark...osts-1.3419924
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 6:45 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 5,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Without STCA economic migrants and criminals just country shop. Canada and the US share security data, Canada already knows everything about everyone who enters the US once they enter Canada. None of these people have a valid claim and they should be locked up until they can be deported. Also there should be a attempt to recoup costs to Canada, which are significant.
A lot of these so called refugees or asylum seekers as the liberals, left and other bleeding hearts call them have been denied as inadmissible to the US and are waiting deportation, fleeing to Canada before they are deported because Trudeau and his Somali born immigration minister don't have the guts to enforce Canadian laws!
__________________
I'm still here!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 7:00 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinus View Post
I don't normally agree with what you say on this forum, but I have to admit if there is anyone's personal experience that can provide validation that Canada should take a tougher stance on these people sneaking across the border into Canada, it can be found in this quoted post.

%100 agree with you (this time )
To add more to this. The way it worked and continues to work is you go to the first safe country that you can get to, apply for asylum and you become a refugee (if accepted after through back ground checks etc), and go on a waiting list for a country to accept you for permanent resettlement. In Austria we were at first detained of course and ended up in a processing center for asylum seekers, once processed and identified and granted refugee status we were placed in sponsored housing and given German languages classes, school was arranged and everyone was helped with finding work. In our case we eventually had a choice of Australia, South Africa and Canada for permanent settlement as genuine political refugees who could not return to our country at the time. South Africa was already beginning to fall apart and Canada was chosen over Australia because of the nature. We were flown (not for free) to Newfoundland, our plane tickets were a loan from the Canadian government and had to be repaid but we were offered sponsored shelter, English classes and help to find work. There were no jobs in Newfoundland and we managed to get to BC. We were 1 year of refugee assistance where there is some minor financial help that keeps you alive, English classes are free, a apartment is found, job search is helped with and we were given some basic furniture (mattresses, couple dressers, kitchen table, alarm clocks!, and a few other basic necessities). I was fairly young but my parents had to work shitty jobs for years and believe me for a long time they regretted coming to Canada, and to this day are not sure if it was a good choice. Also keep in mind we came with nothing but the clothes on our backs from a equal communist country where the few assets we had were seized the moment we defected. Unlike some refugees and economic migrants coming in today we did not have a dollar to our name beyond the few things we could carry. So it was lots of fun. Food bank helped and various other organizations (in Austria the first sponsored housing fed us expired dog food). Sorry to say I also remember stealing from Value Village a couple times because it was easy and with no money there were few options to get a couple necessities. We were all law abiding but sometimes you unfortunately have to make minor exceptions in emergency times. Anyways everyone learned English quick, and had crappy jobs right away etc.

Anyways the point is there is a functioning system in place for genuine refugees who enter the first safe country. These people are nothing but economic migrants country shopping and que jumping and the fact they are not immediately deported really bugs me. There are legitimate refugees waiting all over to come to Canada, everyone of these parasites that is allowed to stay takes a spot from a legitimate refugee waiting in line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 8:42 AM
Commentariat Commentariat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 46
Australia introduced a 'no advantage' policy after it got tens of thousands of 'unauthorised maritime arrivals' (it is only 200 kms from Indonesia to the nearest Australian island). If you arrive by boat you will receive no advantage in processing compared to somebody who stayed in a refugee camp, and Australia will not be one of your resettlement options. In the meantime you will be sent to a 'regional processing facility' on Nauru (a small Pacific atoll) or Manus Island (in the backwoods of Papua New Guinea) to wait your turn in the queue. It's a harsh policy (and is bitterly criticised by refugee advocates etc) but has proven to be highly effective in deterring people from coming outside official channels. Perhaps someday Canada will have to come up with something similar??

Last edited by Commentariat; Feb 21, 2017 at 8:45 AM. Reason: Forgot something
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 10:40 AM
Pinus Pinus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commentariat View Post
Australia introduced a 'no advantage' policy after it got tens of thousands of 'unauthorised maritime arrivals' (it is only 200 kms from Indonesia to the nearest Australian island). If you arrive by boat you will receive no advantage in processing compared to somebody who stayed in a refugee camp, and Australia will not be one of your resettlement options. In the meantime you will be sent to a 'regional processing facility' on Nauru (a small Pacific atoll) or Manus Island (in the backwoods of Papua New Guinea) to wait your turn in the queue. It's a harsh policy (and is bitterly criticised by refugee advocates etc) but has proven to be highly effective in deterring people from coming outside official channels. Perhaps someday Canada will have to come up with something similar??
Canada has no backbone when it comes to immigration. We are the world's welcome mat. We can't even be bothered to enforce our laws regarding the current influx of American "refugees". In that sense, we are pathetic.
__________________
Canada's biggest downfall: our proximity and physical attachment to 'Murca.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 11:39 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 25,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
I don't get why people don't grasp this. It's like some Canadians just watch US TV news and secretly wish they could have bad hombre "illegals" to the south to complain about too.
Notice that a lot of people aren't listening, though?

Quite the contrast with the sanctimonious self-assurance about Canada in the Multiculturalism thread, isn't it?
__________________
Vos veaux sont après chier - John Diefenbaker
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 12:41 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 15,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Notice that a lot of people aren't listening, though?

Quite the contrast with the sanctimonious self-assurance about Canada in the Multiculturalism thread, isn't it?
Should someone tell the asylum seekers that JT's remarks about Canada being a compassionate, welcoming place are meant for domestic consumption only?

If you ever wanted evidence that Canada is no different from anywhere else and the "I got mine, so screw you" attitude prevails, I think this thread will suffice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 12:50 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is online now
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 4,778
The video at the end of this NP article is interesting.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 1:11 PM
speedog's Avatar
speedog speedog is online now
Moran supreme
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commentariat View Post
Australia introduced a 'no advantage' policy after it got tens of thousands of 'unauthorised maritime arrivals' (it is only 200 kms from Indonesia to the nearest Australian island). If you arrive by boat you will receive no advantage in processing compared to somebody who stayed in a refugee camp, and Australia will not be one of your resettlement options. In the meantime you will be sent to a 'regional processing facility' on Nauru (a small Pacific atoll) or Manus Island (in the backwoods of Papua New Guinea) to wait your turn in the queue. It's a harsh policy (and is bitterly criticised by refugee advocates etc) but has proven to be highly effective in deterring people from coming outside official channels. Perhaps someday Canada will have to come up with something similar??
And where would Canada set up such a 'regional processing facility'.


Wait, I know - Okotoks.

On a serious note though, I was not expecting this thread to produce the amount of discussion it has but that is a good thing as I'm learning things - thanks to all.
__________________
Just a wee bit below average prairie boy in Canada's third largest city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 1:26 PM
JM5 JM5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Should someone tell the asylum seekers that JT's remarks about Canada being a compassionate, welcoming place are meant for domestic consumption only?

If you ever wanted evidence that Canada is no different from anywhere else and the "I got mine, so screw you" attitude prevails, I think this thread will suffice.
Guys, I agree that Canada as a country can stand to take in more refugees but I also see cornholio's point about many of these claimants possibly being economic migrants. I really don't know the stats on who they are, nor am I qualified to judge what constitutes a valid claim.

I do know however, that current system of illegal entry leaves our hands tied. People are already on Canadian soil so unless we flat out deny entry to all claimants based on the fact that they broke the law, we have no choice than to grant ALL of them a hearing.

This is where I disagree. Some may very well be criminals or simply economic migrants from Bangladesh for all we know. These people should be denied entry. Scrap the STCA and enforce the illegal entry law, forcing people to report to the entry points. People with legit claims should be admitted.

Now I understand it's not politically expedient to scrap the STCA so soon after Trump got elected, but I leave that to the diplomats. Otherwise it's the citizens of this country that are at risk. Well, that or enforce both the borders and STCA and deny everyone, which is a bit extreme in my mind. Then again, I don't buy that the US is as bad towards refugees as some people here seem to claim. What would people do if the US decided to withdraw from the UN convention on refugees and simply accepted no one? Would this bring the world to a grinding halt? Refugees choose to go to the US. They could just as well choose to go somewhere else instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 1:55 PM
Taeolas Taeolas is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Fredericton
Posts: 2,104
In the news today for New Brunswick:

N.B. SAW SPIKE IN REFUGEE CLAIMANTS AT UNITED STATES BORDER IN 2016

Quote:
The number of refugee claimants crossing into New Brunswick from the United States saw a significant increase last year.

According to figures released by the Canadian Border Services Agency, there were 23 refugee claimants at the border in 2016, which was more than the previous four years combined.

Officials have said a growing number of people are choosing to walk across the border into Canada to claim refugee status, including dozens who have been arrested in the Emerson area of Manitoba in recent weeks.

The tactic is a way to avoid the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, which prevents most people who have been living in the United States from making a refugee claim at an official border crossing on the premise that they are already somewhere safe.

Communications staff at the Canadian Border Services Agency would not speculate if Donald Trump's victory in the U.S. has had any impact on the numbers in New Brunswick, the only Atlantic province that borders on the U.S.

They declined an interview and would not provide a breakdown of the numbers to show how many people claimed refugee status at recognized border points in New Brunswick and those stopped by the RCMP at remote locations.
So so far, it looks like NB isn't seen as a destination for crossing the border at. IMO, it is probably as easy to sneak across as the Manitoba border; but unlike Manitoba we don't have as many perks waiting for them to make it a good destination it seems.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 1:56 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is online now
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 4,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by JM5 View Post
Guys, I agree that Canada as a country can stand to take in more refugees but I also see cornholio's point about many of these claimants possibly being economic migrants. I really don't know the stats on who they are, nor am I qualified to judge what constitutes a valid claim.

I do know however, that current system of illegal entry leaves our hands tied. People are already on Canadian soil so unless we flat out deny entry to all claimants based on the fact that they broke the law, we have no choice than to grant ALL of them a hearing.
We have to remember that international law allows people to cross 'illegally' into other countries for the purpose of asking for asylum. That's why we say "irregular border crossings" for refugees and "illegal border crossings" for someone crossing for any other reason.

The reason that refugees are arrested on crossing the border is because they have not yet filed a refugee claim. Once they have done that, no charges can be pressed.

As for fears regarding crime, all people seeking asylum undergo rigourous security checks, including - I'm certain Dr. Leitch would approve - extensive face-to-face interviews. There are also health checks, biometric scans and registration, and identity checks. They don't just sign the welcome book then go on their way.

Even before Trump, our border officials and the RCMP had been dealing with this regularly - an average of over 4000 times every year. They are more than capable of handling this year's increased numbers.

Where there are problems is after all these checks - temporary housing, basic services, legal assistance and, perhaps most of all, timely refugee hearings are in short supply. There is a backlog of thousands of cases spanning years, left over from the 50% reduction in IRB judges back in 2013. If it was urgent for us to reduce that before, it will be even more urgent now to make sure that people are not left in limbo, unable to fully support themselves while waiting for a decision.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 2:12 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is online now
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 4,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
In the 80's I along with my family made it across the Yugoslavia border to Austria, where they were shooting people who did not halt. We applied legally to come to Canada and came in as political refugees after living in Austria for some significant time as official refugees.

These pieces of shit (pardon my language) are nothing but economic migrants entering Canada illegally from a safe country. They are que jumpers and nothing but criminals and imo should be treated as such. Sorry for me being so bitter but unlike everyone else here I actually came to Canada via the refugees system and find the opinions of many here highly insulting.
I'd love to hear more about your experiences.

However, I do have to point out that the sponsored refugee stream (as you were) is not the de facto or more legitimate stream. In a normal year, about half of refugees arrive sponsored by Canadians or the government, and the other half (10 000 or so, depending on the year) arrive un-sponsored by just showing up either by land, air or sea. They're not playing the system - that is the system.

In fact, Canada actually has legal obligations towards un-sponsored refugees (by international law) in a way that it does not have towards sponsored refugees. It's an accident of geography and history that Canada generally doesn't receive a whole lot of un-sponsored refugees, so we take in a larger number of sponsored refugees. But just because that has been the de facto stream does not make it the de jure stream or any more or less legitimate.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 2:45 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 25,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
Should someone tell the asylum seekers that JT's remarks about Canada being a compassionate, welcoming place are meant for domestic consumption only?

If you ever wanted evidence that Canada is no different from anywhere else and the "I got mine, so screw you" attitude prevails, I think this thread will suffice.
We even have "alternative facts"!

Seriously though, putting all the bluster aside, Canada does a pretty respectable job ont this front, I'd say.

We'll see how it holds up in the future, as it's not been super-challenging to manage up to now.
__________________
Vos veaux sont après chier - John Diefenbaker
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 2:52 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 15,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
We even have "alternative facts"!

Seriously though, putting all the bluster aside, Canada does a pretty respectable job ont this front, I'd say.

We'll see how it holds up in the future, as it's not been super-challenging to manage up to now.
It sure didn't take much to reveal where the true feelings of many Canadians are. A few hundred half-frozen Somalis drag themselves across the border and the reaction in the newspaper comment sections would have you believe we were being invaded. Maybe Kellie Leitch has a bright future after all.

Honestly, the reaction to this story is just nuts. We now have the absurdity of a refugee calling other refugees "pieces of shit" because he doesn't feel that their approach to entering Canada is as legitimate as the one he chose, even though Aylmer put the lie to that. Maybe the Somalis crossing the border at Emerson are just smarter and more enterprising than Cornholio and his family... if that's the case, can we send Cornholio back to the Balkans or wherever in exchange for a clever Somali or three?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 3:03 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is online now
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 4,778
Ok, well, I think that last bit is unhelpful to the discussion. People in the Balkans lived through unspeakable horror and, even if I don't agree with Cornholio, I find it abhorrent to diminish in any way what his family must have lived through. That just isn't okay. No one deserves that.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 3:07 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 15,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
Ok, well, I think that last bit is unhelpful to the discussion...
Then let's stop talking about migrants in terms that make them sound less than human. If someone wants to assert their right to call them "pieces of shit", then I will assert my right to call them rejects who are failing at being Canadian.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2017, 3:10 PM
shreddog shreddog is offline
Beer me Captain
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a Van down by the river
Posts: 3,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
We have to remember that international law allows people to cross 'illegally' into other countries for the purpose of asking for asylum. That's why we say "irregular border crossings" for refugees and "illegal border crossings" for someone crossing for any other reason.
FTR, in Canada it is ONLY legal to enter the country is at an authorized port of entry. To do otherwise is illegal (in Canada).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
The reason that refugees are arrested on crossing the border is because they have not yet filed a refugee claim.
Again, according to Canadian law, not entering at an authorized port of entry makes your entry illegal (regardless if you are Canadian or not) and thus you can be arrested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
Once they have done that, no charges can be pressed.
Again, if their crossing was not at an authorized port of entry, they can be charged.

Note, I am not passing judgement on those crossing the border in Manitoba or Quebec, just highlighting that in Canada the only legal way to enter the country is at an authorized port of entry. To do so is considered illegal and you can be charged for doing so.
__________________
It really is later than you think!

Do something about your future.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:03 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.