September 20, 2007


No, no, no.

Posted by Kate at September 20, 2007 1:36 AM

'No' to what?

Posted by: Stephen at September 20, 2007 1:50 AM

Asylum seekers from the U.S.A. What's wrong with this picture?

Posted by: Guilt Free White Man at September 20, 2007 1:56 AM

Here's my favourite quote from that article:

"Give us a chance to show what kind of people we are,"

We've seen what kind of people you are - grubby criminals with no respect for Canadian law. No thanks, we have enough of those already.

And why would they "rush" across the border? Mexicans can walk across easy enough - they don't need a visa.

Posted by: Robert at September 20, 2007 1:59 AM

No? No to the plight these poor Mexicans are in, or no you don't want Mexicans crossing into Canada? Well, we need workers in the oil sands don’t we?.
Ok Mexicans, welcome to Canada. Head north and make left at Thunder Bay, there's lots of work.

Posted by: albatros39a at September 20, 2007 2:01 AM

Albatros: Get with the program, we've been bringing them into Alberta by the hundreds - selectively on the basis of employers' needs and LEGALLY. To date, there's been no serious resistance from unionized Canadian workers.

Posted by: Zog at September 20, 2007 2:32 AM

"Teresa Piruzza, executive director of Ontario Works said, as of Monday, ten families and 18 individuals had applied for social assistance. "We're just starting to process them," Piruzza said of the applications."

For once I agree with Kate completely.



Posted by: Raphael Alexander at September 20, 2007 3:00 AM

No - they must apply and move here legally, if they really want to live here.

Posted by: Jema54 at September 20, 2007 3:48 AM

**** so help me if we make the same mistakes the Americans made and my tax dollars go towards social services for illegals I will pull my assets out of Canada so fast, pay the twenty five grand for a convenience passport from one of the "Saint" islands in the Caribbean, and never send a penny to the Receiver General again. Canada: I am not your donkey.

PS watch for the baby boomers to support illegal immigration since it will push up their house prices before they cash out.

Posted by: Andrew at September 20, 2007 6:11 AM

No to illegal immigrants pouring into Canada, to enjoy free rent, free medical and dental services, free food vouchers, while the rest of us working stiffs foot the bill--many of us without either a doctor or benefits.

There's a limit to how "charitable" a country can be. I'd question whether it's charity or unmitigated lib-left-bleeding-heart stupidity, that nine times out of ten misreads human nature, to allow thousands upon thousnds of illegal Mexican "refugees" to clog our social services.

Canadians are already taxed to the max and hardly get any return on our largesse (health "care's" totally inadequate, our eastern cities, at any rate, are decaying and declining, our highways and city streets are a mess, etc.). Why do we need to be further burdened?

Hard-headed wisdom needs to prevail here, not bleeding-heart-white-man's-guilt imbecility.

Cuidado, Gringos Canadienses! Una palabra a nos amigos Mexicanos: "Nuestras casas no estan sus casas...unless you're willing to fully pull your weight.

Posted by: 'been around the block at September 20, 2007 7:07 AM

Wait, I spoke too soon. Sometimes happens when I post before eating, heh.

Send four million of the hottest Mexican latinas you can find up here post haste and I might buy into this scam.

Hey, we have a child care crisis, don't we? Instead of unionized state run daycare why not do what normal societies have done since time immemorial and have nannies, and save several billion tax dollars in the process?

And since we're all libertarians here I think we can all agree that a) prostitution should be legal, and b) there is a definite shortage of sex trade workers and we clearly need to fill the gap, so to speak.

Looks to me like it's win-win all around, am I missing anything?

Posted by: Andrew at September 20, 2007 7:23 AM

Did you notice where the Mexican immigrant family is from? Google Naples, Florida -- haven of the wealthy -- there's massive real estate development in that area that is displacing former agricultural land.

VDH got it right in his book on Mexifornia -- the rich like their serfs.

Posted by: Hannibal at September 20, 2007 7:33 AM

If you read the article, Windsor's social services is already being overwhelmed and it's barely begun. The best thing Canada can do in the short term is institute a VISA requirement for Mexican citizens. NO VISA, no entry, no refugee claim.

Posted by: BBS at September 20, 2007 7:40 AM

Oh NO!!! I was just wandering through Toronto's Little Korea the other day, noting with satisfaction that the Spanish bookstore was the one Spanish-business in a thriving neighbourhood of Korean and Ethiopian businesses. I thought about the North-Eastern American city I live in, off and on, where Spanish dominates the multi-culti landscape. The stickers on the stores saying that there is almost nothing in the safe are in Spanish. The bank machines are in English and Spanish. There are Spanish-language newspapers strewn here and there. Teenagers on the bus refer to themselves as "wet-backs." In other places, sudden arrivals of thousands of Mexicans have transformed towns overnight. A sudden influx of thousands of ANY kind of immigrant (not to mention illegal and therefore not exactly law-abiding)is a dangerously destabilizing force.

What the hell are border guards for??? Do we really want America's problems? PROTECT US, YOU IDIOTS!

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 8:20 AM

Okay, who in the heck signed this U.S.-Canada Safe Third Country Agreement for Canada? Talk about buying a bridge, this deal has to be the stupidest thing I have heard besides giving anyone who steps foot on Canuck soil full rights and access to our social "safety net". I have no sympathy what so ever for queue jumpers.

Posted by: Texas Canuck at September 20, 2007 9:02 AM

Agree that we should let SOME of them in,the ones without a record. Don't we need a new Northern Army? I know Iqualit(Frobisher Bay) is just lovely this time of year! It can remind them of the deserts back home,but with the added bonus of snow and no sun, plus none of those nasty poisonous insects/snakes. Bonus!

Posted by: Justthinkin at September 20, 2007 9:04 AM

Looks like a typical middle class family to me. Check out the youngest boy making 'bulls horns' over his sister's head for the photo.

Apply for your paperwork in Windsor, but go to work in Alberta.

Posted by: grok at September 20, 2007 9:07 AM

That's right. NO NO NO - to more Roman Catholics in this country.

That's what you meant. Right?

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 9:13 AM

albatross - as usual, you don't understand it. These are not 'poor Mexicans in a terrible plight'. They are people who moved to the US, as illegal aliens, who refused to apply to move there legally as citizens and therefore, rejecting paying taxes to support their use of the social services they use, such as medical care, schooling for their children, the whole infrastructure of a city.

And now - they are afraid they'll be caught out as illegals in the US. Rubbish - their claim that they don't want to go back to Mexico because of 'corruption and drugs'. That's found in every country; they don't want to go back to Mexico because Mexico is offloading its poor class on to the USA so that it won't have to provide jobs and services for this class.

In the US - there are jobs, but the problem is - they won't move there legally - but do so illegally - and don't pay for the services they use. You think that's right, eh?

So, they 'flee' to Canada, and again, don't apply as legal immigrants. Instead, they ask for refugee status. Refugees from what? As refugees, again, they make enormous use of the taxpayers' money - for they are housed, fed, cared for, given legal aid - by the Canadian taxpayer. Just as in the US - they worked, paid no taxes, and used all the social infrastructure of that country.

Albatros39 - where have you been living since your presumed birth date of 1939? Do you not realize that the social infrastructure and services are paid for by taxes? You may feel it's OK for the US taxpayer to be burdened with illegal aliens, but, do you also agree that Canada should do the same? Why? If they are given refugee status - and we pay for all of this - what's to stop them doing just as they did in the US - disappearing into the underground economy?

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 9:14 AM

I guess it's inevitable. CanUSico. One county, with a new unified $ to rival the Euro. Also, no Republican president ever, because Canada and Mexico would all vote Dem.

Where's a nice, safe tropical island to move to?

Posted by: ann at September 20, 2007 9:15 AM

Alberta doesn't require unskilled labourers. Central and Eastern Canadians found this out the hard way the last time they tried to flood into Alberta.

Sending the Mexicans to Alberta would be pointless — and our social assistance programs aren't as generous as (say) Toronto's...

Posted by: Garth Wood at September 20, 2007 9:18 AM

As long as they come in the front door and aquire legal citizenship what's the problem? The article is rather disingenuous because it underplays the very real disaster that illegal Mexican immigration has made in the US....30 million illegals and counting.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at September 20, 2007 9:23 AM

Except for the social inconveniences of blood sacrifices, Ted, they could be practicing Aztec refugees, and the problem would still that they are an unwarranted strain on the tax-payers of this country. I don't think it really matters which side of Martin Luther's divide they are on.

Posted by: T. Robert Wolfram at September 20, 2007 9:26 AM

You are about to discover that you don't have enough schools or teachers. Not enough housing. Not enough access to medical care. Inadequate access to government services for monolingual Spanish speakers. Inadequate space in jails and prisons.

Oh, I forgot. That's already the case.

Posted by: Mystery Meat at September 20, 2007 9:33 AM

Well, I am a Roman Catholic myself, and I can tell you that not all Mexicans are Roman Catholics. There are quite noisy Mexican Evangelical crusades in the north-eastern American city where I live. Lots of merry music and then Southern Baptist-style screaming into microphones so the whole neighbourhood can hear. I can't see what Catholicism has to do with objections to thousands of ILLEGAL immigrants flooding Canada overnight, unless lefties in the Church work hard to get the illegals settled here.

Man, there are zillions of legal RC immigrants who don't dominate the multi-cult landscape of Canadian cities because they come from all over the place. Italians, Hungarians, Bavarians, Vietnamese... Lots of Catholics. And yet the languages on the bank machine remain English and French. The issue is not religion, obviously, but the prospect of thousands of ILLEGAL immigrants passing happily through the Canadian border to live on Canadian taxpayer's dime.

I haven't found SDA anti-Catholic and believe me, I have a very thin Irish Catholic skin.

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 9:34 AM

CE and Wolfram - ted doesn't really believe that the problem is the religion of these illegal immigrants. He's trying to trivialize and divert the debate away from the real issue - which is their illegal immigration, their fraudulent claims of requiring refugee protection, their enormous drain on the Canadian taxpayer. Just like their enormous drain on the US taxpayer.

Ted, obviously, belongs to that mentality that considers that it is the RIGHT of any person on this planet to move to the US to live and work, without paying taxes for the infrastructure of that society. And that it is the RIGHT of any person rejected by the US for such behaviour, to come to Canada - and behave exactly the same.

And, it is the DUTY of the US Taxpayer and the Canadian taxpayer - to support these people. After all, it is claimed, they are working, aren't they? heh - so are we all. But we, unlike them, pay for the societal infrastructure, the common elements of which we make extensive use. They, unlike us, don't pay a penny for this.

Ted is all about fairness and equality.

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 9:45 AM

The answer is obvious. It is time for Canada to return to her British imperialist roots. We need to build up our armies and then (with Americas permission) march down into Mexico. All Canadian citizens will have the opportunity to contribute financially or militarily (grab a gun). Fighting to take over Mexico or for a 5000 dollar military donation will buy you 1 acre of prime ocean front property in Mexico. Once there we can install a Liberal government so that Mexicans will not be too shocked with a significant drop in government corruption. The Liberals will immediately start by increasing wages so that they can tax tax tax. The new Canadian landowners will become the new welfare class of Mexico, living off of the hard work of others as they will be the direct recipients of half the tax base.

Posted by: johnboy at September 20, 2007 9:52 AM

Truly we are governed by IMBECILES. Refugee claims from AMERICA?!!!


I've got an idea, how about when some guy and family shows up at the border and tries to claim refugee status from the USA we tell them "No." How'd that be, eh?

Maybe if 12 million pissed off Mexicans with a taste of life in America go back to Mexico, they'll FIX IT and it won't be such a hell hole anymore.

Attention Mr. Harper, your constituent here would like you to kick some asses please!

Posted by: The Phantom at September 20, 2007 9:53 AM

Hey Ted, I vote we use all YOUR money to feed and house these dorks. When that runs out, we can use Alby's money. If he even has any...

Refugee claims are supposed to be for people who are going to be killed by their government if they get sent back. To suggest that applies to illegal immigrants in the USA who are running to Canada...

Come on. Even Ted isn't that big an idiot.

By the way Ted, its the Lefties that don't like Roman Catholics, not conservatives.

Posted by: The Phantom at September 20, 2007 9:58 AM


I never realized that Mexicans would demand refugee status from the U.S.A. You Canadians need to kick these people out Quickly, or you will experience the same flood us Yanks have for the past 20 years.

Oh, it would be a good idea to screen them for infectious diseases, like antibiotic resistant TB, etc., before you place them in crowded housing.

Also, inform them you don't take it kindly when they stop to urinate on the sidewalk. They do require a bit of housebreaking, but think of all the money Canadian businesses will save by employing these people at lower wages than they've paid native Canadians for years. It's good for the company stock!

They'll also set up a drug smuggling pipeline as soon as they get established.

You all have a lot to look forward to. Welcome to the new North America. Sigh. . . .

Posted by: PineKnot at September 20, 2007 10:11 AM

Can't help but wonder, how would the Unions like it if suddenly there was a cheap and plentiful workforce on every other corner?

Strike? Sure, go ahead, we'll send out the buses and replace you guys at 20 percent of what we're paying you. Walk the line until hell freezes over.

Posted by: Twisted Concepts at September 20, 2007 10:20 AM

"Ted, obviously, belongs to that mentality that considers that it is the RIGHT of any person on this planet to move to the US to live and work, without paying taxes for the infrastructure of that society. And that it is the RIGHT of any person rejected by the US for such behaviour, to come to Canada - and behave exactly the same.

And, it is the DUTY of the US Taxpayer and the Canadian taxpayer - to support these people. After all, it is claimed, they are working, aren't they? heh - so are we all. But we, unlike them, pay for the societal infrastructure, the common elements of which we make extensive use. They, unlike us, don't pay a penny for this.

Really, ET? "obviously", ET? Where do I make any comment at all about the Mexican "refugees"? Or in your parlance, please "prove" that that is what I believe or think.

ET, once again, "obviously", showing a reading comprehension problem.

Like, I expect, most people on this thread, the extent of this influx of Mexican is news. I'm pretty sure I, unlike you, haven't formed a vitriolic opinion about this one way or another.

I will say that what is once again very unsurprising, is how quickly and readily some readers here are to accept holus bolus (ET, that means "Altogether; all at once") a product of the hated "MSM" when it fits their general views of how the world should work and whine about The Vast Leftwing Media Conspiracy the very next moment.

All I know is what is in that article. What I don't know is whether there really is this sudden influx of thousands of Mexican refugee claimants or if it is the typical media sensationalism and hyperbole at work.

But I wouldn't want my little pokes at a little irony on the side get in the way of Today's Conservative Outrage.

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 10:37 AM

...dunno what all the howling is about. Talked with a neighbour who works up at Ft. Mac and the 'supplemental' workers a certain oil company is flying in about half of them won't stay. The other half wants to work.

When it's about -40, he says about half promptly want a flight back home, some don't last a week.

But hey, this country was built on the backs of immigrants. Chinese for railways, Ukrainians for farm country up north...

Posted by: tomax7 at September 20, 2007 10:52 AM

"ET, once again, "obviously", showing a reading comprehension problem."

This is the same Ted who wrote "That's right. NO NO NO - to more Roman Catholics in this country. That's what you meant. Right?"

Posted by: Kate at September 20, 2007 10:57 AM

Hannibal - there is no real estate boom anymore in Florida. I live here. You are aware of the real estate bust in parts of the US. Florida is one of the hardest hit areas. Mexicans fueled the construction industry here, but, it's over. As a mobile work force they are moving on.
PS watch for the baby boomers to support illegal immigration since it will push up their house prices before they cash out.

Hey, Andrew, who says that liberatians are for a borderless world where immigration laws don't apply? Boomer's housing prices aren't supported by illegals, the the glut of housing with falling prices is because of cheap illegal labor which has undermined housing prices for everyone. Your comments are ridiculous. The average housing price in Florida has been whacked 20-30%. California and Nevada are in dire straights too. Your indirect slur that Mexicans would be willing to fill in gaps in the Canadian sex trade is vile. Don't even bother trying to refute it, it's there for everyone to see.

Posted by: penny at September 20, 2007 11:05 AM

I would welcome Mexican immigrants if they came in legally and brought useful skills to Canada. But to flee the U.S. claiming to be a "refugee" because you have been living there in violation of the law and you're about to be deported for it....

Stay the HELL out of my country. I'm only willing to share it with people who are law abiding.

Posted by: Sean at September 20, 2007 11:11 AM

I wondered if this would ever happen. I figured the drive would be too long or the rumours of the weather too harsh...

30 million illegal immigrants in the USA. 36 million citizens and landed immigrants in Canada. Think about it. And don't even think 30 million. Think 3 million. If you're from Toronto, think 3 million in Toronto, because you can bet your bottom dollar that will be the first stop. Toronto already has a population of 3 million. Imagine 6 million, half Spanish speaking. We're not talking our multi-cultural city anymore. We're not talking a neat mix of cultures and the cream of the world crop coming to enrich Canada. We're not talking a nice balance of ethnic groups so that no one group can scream "discrimination" all day. At the moment, all of us ethnic Torontonians can complain companionably together. That would not happen if Toronto became-almost overnight-half Mexican. You think Jamaica and Jamaican culture is violent? Find out something about Mexico and Mexican machismo.

This news has ruined my day. It is really serious. Anyone who has lived in the USA would not blow it off. That said, I am trying not to get all panicky and uncharitable. I am not succeeding.

Imagine a picturesque Canadian city or town (maybe yours) into which one single, non-English speaking, ethnic group suddenly arrives, seemingly overnight. This huge group is not interested in conforming to local customs. (Why should they?) They are not interested in learning English or French. Canadian history means nothing to them because there aren't any of their ancestors or co-nationals in it. Meanwhile, they have not immigrated to Canada to become Canadians but to build Their-Town-In-Canada. (This is what happens when people don't immigrate as individuals or as families but as whole towns.) And thus you no longer recognize your own town. This is not ordinary change and adaptation. This is next door to invasion.

This is the reality for some towns and cities throughout the United States. Remember the scene in "Spanglish" where the child heroine makes an illegal dash over the US border (now so ordinary she admits it on her Harvard application)and finds herself, basically, in Mexico? From sea to sea, Our Town, USA has become Our (Mexico-in-the-USA) Town. Huge numbers of immigrants all from one culture don't assimilate into a new country. They don't have to anymore.

I'm amazed to find myself going on like this. After all, like everyone else I sneered at the racist old guy in "East is East" who feared Pakistanis would take over his northern English town. (It was set in the 1960s.) And I felt myself superior to the anti-Mexican dad in "La Bamba". But now I am appalled at how much uncontrolled, unplanned immigration can transform a way of life in ways we would never have voted for, certainly.

Since we were children, Canadians have sung the anthem, pledging to "stand on guard" for Canada. Great! Against what? And if against our way of life being permanently changed by invasion-in-everything-but-name-and-leadership, how do we do that?

Again, this is not a screed against immigration. I love the multi-cultural environment of Toronto. I think it succeeds because no one recently-arrived group of immigrants dominates. The rest of us can more or less tell the more irresponsible members of somewhat incompatable-with-Canadian-values cultures (e.g. Jamaican)to pull up their socks without fearing cries of racism simply because there are so many ethnic groups here, living together reasonably well. For God's sake, let's not let the balance be tipped by hoards of illegals.

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 11:19 AM

In a related story in this morning's Times-Colonist on the Wet Coast, the Jamaican Labour Minister urged 150 construction workers coming to BC on temporary work permits not to run off once they're in Canada. These two combined stories are the legacy of past Liberal governments. It is now apparent that not only has Canada no borders to protect we are now importing third world "construction" workers from a country that we have been deporting illegals to for the last thirty years. The trolls that visit this site should wake up and realize that this country is only a shadow of what we once were and it is past Liberal policies that have brought us to this precipice.

Posted by: Antenor at September 20, 2007 11:22 AM

This is the same Ted who wrote "That's right. NO NO NO - to more Roman Catholics in this country. That's what you meant. Right?"

Sounds like the same Ted whose brother is an Ontario Liberal MLA.

Posted by: Big J at September 20, 2007 11:37 AM

I don't have a problem with Mexicans. They are infinitely preferable to Jamaicans or Muslims.

The problem is that present day softies that run the justice industry don't have the balls or the will to punt law breakers.

Otherwise I would welcome those western world Christian Mexicans. The do have needed skills.

We need waiters and waitresses who are not snarly.

We need landscapers, construction workers, brick layers, truck drivers, farmworkers.

Those are all quick study skills that Mexican get right on top of and they will do the work.

They are not lazy like Arabs and Jamaican generally are.

Most white Canadians are candy asses and don't want real jobs either.

So bring em in says I but make sure the bad ones get tossed. If bringing in Mexicans will cut down on the numbers of Muslim and Jamaican types coming here, I am all for it. I think there is also already an over-representation from south east Asia as well.

Just like Al Gore's Polar Ice, White Christian societies are melting away. Within this century there may no decent society left to live in. Well ... except for Antarctica where the ice is accumulating as fast as it's melting in the Arctic. But I digress.

Posted by: John West at September 20, 2007 11:39 AM

I for one find it very generous of Canada for providing such an elegantly simple solution to the problem of illegal Mexicans in the USA!

Can anyone give a quick estimate as to how much it would cost to charter 1000 buses from San Diego to Windsor? Per month?


Posted by: NewMexiCan at September 20, 2007 11:48 AM

...i heard Spanish was easier to learn than French

Posted by: tomax7 at September 20, 2007 11:56 AM


Once again you show that leftards are obtuse, infantile, smarmy and sarcastic.

I don't think anyone cares about race. This isn't an immigration question; it's a question about the laws being followed and not being taken to the cleaners by cheats and loafers.

We have millions of people who dutifully fill out their paperwork and follow the law in the hopes that they will get through the system and be allowed to make a better life here. They wait years on end for a decision on whether they'll be allowed to enter legally.

There are other people who feel the rules do not apply to them, who think they have the right to jump the queue, to break the law and who feel entitled to free money and benefits while they do it.

I have no problem with legal immigrants (who have background checks) so long as they agree to obey the laws of Canada. I have a problem with cheats who file fraudulent "refugee" claims and loaf off the dole for years on end.

Kick out fake refugees and let in more legal economic class immigrants. I have no use for scumbag cheaters of any race, nationality or creed. In fact, it's the reason I despise leftards and the Liberal party.

Posted by: Warwick at September 20, 2007 12:07 PM

For the most part Mexicans are lovely, hard working people. They rank above many other ethnic groups that I'd prefer as immigrants including far too many whiney socialist slackers from Europe. Mexicans aren't getting the welfare bonanza in the US that they get in Canada and they aren't whining about it. They are willing to work hard.

The problem is in the illegalness and sheer numbers. Again, sovereign nations have a right and a duty to defend their borders and protect their native work force. The backlash against Mexicans here isn't that they aren't nice people, it's the chaotic lack of order that this goven't, and, yes, I blame Bush, has shoved down our throats.

We are all damn tired of picking up the pieces for the corrupt in Mexico.

Posted by: penny at September 20, 2007 12:12 PM

I just got a quick estimate for a single 55 passenger bus, San Diego to Windsor, for $6549.87. It's only a 19 hour ride. I couldn't configure the quote for non-return. Still, that works out to only $119.08 per illegal immigrant.

I expect it would be easy to negotiate a volume discount...


Posted by: NewMexiCan at September 20, 2007 12:13 PM

As an American living in Canada all I can say to this is: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

Posted by: Doug at September 20, 2007 12:20 PM

I don't see what the problem with them claiming refugee status. I think the fall under the criteria specified by the government.

I get cheezed off by knee jerk reactionaries who think immigrants are bad. This country was built by foreigners and those fleeing persecution. We have plenty of jobs in Canada going unfilled due to lack of interest. I am actually encouraged that they are applying and not sneaking in. Over the long term immigrants fill many of the jobs "Canadians" are not willing to take. They are a valuable addition to the work force. Likely contributing at a higher productivity rate to boot.

I'm not surprised they make social assistance requests when they get here. Why, because they are legally entitled to. After uprooting a family to a new country it does not surprise me to see that they need time to get settled. If people don’t like that they should lobby to get the law changed but until then it’s all above board.

Canada needs to more dutifully track and enforce the refugee claimants (kicking out violators as required) but that does not preclude us from letting in people who need our help. Legally using the system provided is not abuse of the system.

Posted by: Fotis at September 20, 2007 12:28 PM

Actually, I think I would take about 15 of that guy and his family over one Khadr any day of the week. maybe we can trade the Khadr family to Mexico for him?

Posted by: Kevin at September 20, 2007 12:32 PM

"The best thing Canada can do in the short term is institute a VISA requirement for Mexican citizens. NO VISA, no entry, no refugee claim."

Brilliant BBS. Then Canadians going to Cancun will have fewer problems than Hepatitis, and armed robbery. They'll have to get VISAs to travel to a NAFTA country. FREE trade for everyone (void in Mexico).

Posted by: saskboy at September 20, 2007 12:33 PM


These people arrived from the US, not the fricken Congo you retard!

People on this site aren't complaining about immigration but refugee fraud.

Posted by: Warwick at September 20, 2007 12:34 PM


You're right. Mexicans shouldnt' need visas. While you're at it you can explain why Mexicans and those arriving from the US are entitled to claim refugee status at all.

Why don't we just say that people arriving from countries without war and tyranny are not entitled to make fraudulent refugee claims and anyone who tries will be deported within 24hrs?

Why in hell do we have to pay for this fraud? I mean aside from the fact that the Liberals who instituted the rules were buying the ethnic vote and are scumbags who look out for their own interests first.

Posted by: Warwick at September 20, 2007 12:39 PM

Fotis at September 20, 2007 12:28 PM

I call BS on that. I immigrated 14 years ago to Canada with my wife and four kids. It didn't even occur to us to ask for any government help. BTW, as a legal immigrant you are not entitled to welfare for the first five years. It was not easy to get approved and it shouldn't be easy. We had to proof that we would fit into Canadian society.
I can sympathize with the wish to make a better life for oneself, but it has to be done legally. I say kick them out or better yet, don't let them in.

Posted by: djinbc at September 20, 2007 12:42 PM

Fotis - you will find like the Europeans have that those fat welfare entitlements will attract a class of illegals just for that alone.

Most of the world outside of NA and Europe could make a case for refugee status based on economics, you really think that's a realistic criteria? You could transfer hundreds of millions of people to Canada on the premise that they need "our help". That's what foreign aid is for. It all comes out of your taxes, my friend, and the standard of living of your kids if your largesse blows up in your face. Mexicans aren't fleeing persecution. Nor are they starving in the streets of Mexico. Get real.

Posted by: penny at September 20, 2007 12:42 PM

No to illegal entry into MY country!

What's so F**kin hard to understand about that?

Posted by: OMMAG at September 20, 2007 12:46 PM

Fotis, if an illegal US dwelling Mexican counts as a refugee just because he doesn't want to go back to Mexico, the rules are f---ed.

Ask yourself, do you REALLY want a million or so "refugees" annually coming to Canada from the USA? People who have a well developed disregard for rules and regulations, or they wouldn't be "refugees" in the first place.

You think the Toronto School Board spends money on ESL classes now, wait until THAT wave hits.

The real question is, does Canada need one million more unskilled laborers every year for the next twenty years? I think not.

Posted by: The Phantom at September 20, 2007 12:55 PM

OMMAG - they ARE making legal entry. That's the screamingly funny point. Whether they actually achieve legal immigration status is another thing.

Get ready for a whole lot more.

The scammers have just started: "...The sales pitches started this spring in Florida, preying on unease over state crackdowns on non-status workers. One outfit based in Naples, Fla., told clients they could swap a U.S. deportation order for refugee status in Canada for a $400 fee. Some said Canada offers an "economic refugee program" for Mexicans..."

This news (irregardless of any inherent truthfulness) is spreading by word-of-mouth, community by community. It is not going to stop, even if/when Canada changes its immigration laws, and actually gets around to enforcing them. Face it: Anyone who sets foot on Canadian soil is damn hard to evict.

And the health care is free, eh?

Posted by: NewMexiCan at September 20, 2007 1:08 PM

The refugees FROM THE USA are not refugees.

Who are we accepting? Tell you: traitors, criminals, welfare recipients, more traitors, more criminals...

We don't have money but continue to accept more beggars for money. Ludicrous situation, isn't it?

Close all land crossing for refugee claimants immediately! There is no political repressions or war in USA, thus there is no possibility on Earth that a refugee claim from USA should be successful in Canada. If it's crystal clear that there cannot be a successful claim, why the hell allowing them to submit one? Pike off! I am paying too much in taxes already.

Posted by: Aaron at September 20, 2007 1:27 PM

I think we all agree that we need to defend our borders. If the borders are porous because of lacunae in the laws, then we have to fix them immediately. Illegal aliens fleeing prosecution for their illegal activities in the USA are not refugees. If the law protects lawbreakers over the rights of Canadian citizens, then it must be challenged and changed ASAP. In fact, I suggest we make this an election issue.

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 1:27 PM

Did it escape everyone that the same Manuel Ortega who was "steadily employed" for 15 years in the US arrived here so broke he applied for help from social services as soon as hit Canadian soil?

Because it seems to have escaped the two twits who wrote this bit of uncritical tearjerkalism.

Posted by: Kate at September 20, 2007 1:31 PM

And also, after being steadily employed in the USA for 15 years, he does not speak English well. What a nightmare; we've been noticed.

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 1:45 PM

Why should failing and failed states like Mexico and most Islamic countries fix themselves, when they are allowed to foist their whole mess of over population on successful countries. Especially those plagued with too many conspicuously compassionate leftoids?

Misery indeed loves company. So much so, they'll illegally come to your country and make it miserable.

Presumably the citizens of failed states must share in the failure of that state. The honourable thing for them to do is to stay and fight to make it successful and thereby share in its success one day.

For us, immigration solves nothing. Yet it costs Canadian taxpayers $5 billion a year in settlement and welfare. Apparently the cost is about to go up again.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Posted by: irwin daisy at September 20, 2007 1:57 PM

I was just waiting for the Fotis' argument to come up about illegal immigrants coming up here to "do us a favour" and take jobs "unfulfilled due to a lack of interest." This is the same argument used in the U.S. and it's BS.

What is actually at work in the U.S. is that the illegals have driven down wages in so many industries in the U.S. that it's not economical for Americans to take these jobs. Furthermore, the corporations who hire illegals (in violation of U.S. law) don't care about Americans because all they care about is cheap labour.

I laugh at the suggestions that it's all the Liberal party's fault. Does anyone really think that ANY of our political parties will do anything about this? Look south to see that the Republicans and Democrats aren't doing anything. Both parties are so tied to big business and the cash they have that neither will do anything about it. Follow the money. And... the votes of illegals who might become legal.

The Liberals and Conservatives won't do anything about it, nor will the Greens, NDP or anyone else. The BQ might... but if every illegal promised to speak french, they'd cave I'm sure.

It's all about money. Big corporations here look at the U.S. with envy. They'd love to have loads of cheap illegal labour to drive down wages even more.

Stephen Harper is the one in talks with Mexico and the U.S. to "harmonize" our labour, environmental and other laws to make it easier on trade. Mexico is the lowest common denominator, so that's where all the laws will go. He's in the pocket of big business and it's business driving the integration agenda. He won't stand up for Canada. None of our politicians will. We need our own Minuteman.

There will, as always, be those who cheer wages being driven down. Oh, unions are such a scourge, etc. Well, who buys all the goods that drive our economy? It's the middle class that drives it. Who buys all the cars, appliances, electronics, houses, etc? Do you think people on minimum wage (or less) buy houses, new cars, etc? Good luck.

No, we had better put a stop to this Conservative trial balloon, because that is exactly what it is. If the Liberals were in power, it'd be their trial balloon. What's the difference? Neither party (or any other for that matter) cares about this country. They just care about money and power.

Posted by: Alain Saffel at September 20, 2007 2:00 PM

"For the most part Mexicans are lovely, hard working people. They rank above many other ethnic groups that I'd prefer as immigrants including far too many whiney socialist slackers from Europe. Mexicans aren't getting the welfare bonanza in the US that they get in Canada and they aren't whining about it. They are willing to work hard."

I would tend to agree with this statement.We took a vacation in the US a few months ago and I was surprised at how many Mexicans I saw everywhere, from Pennsylvania to the outer banks of the Carolinas. In fact, most of the workers we saw in visible jobs were Mexican. I don't think that they are afraid of hard work and we could use them if they want to come LEGALLY. Frankly, I'd rather import immigrants from this continent than people who come here, live in enclaves and refuse to assimilate....ever.

Posted by: KP at September 20, 2007 2:16 PM

...We need our own Minuteman...

Where do I sign up?

Posted by: Aaron at September 20, 2007 2:18 PM

Really, you say--in most of the visible jobs from Pennsylvania to outer banks of the Carolinas? Well, then, it will certainly be nice when most of the visible jobs from Windsor to the inner edge of the Muskokas are taken by Mexicans, too, then, won't it?

Posted by: CE at September 20, 2007 2:23 PM

I can never figure out why the so-called compassionate crowd joins hands with the business interests to create a huge pool of cheap labour which can be exploited.
Also, these same people scream access to health care, i wonder how they will feel when the system is choked by migrant workers.
Too much unskilled, uneducated labour drives down wages, it's as simple as that.
I have no interest in seeing unemployed men standing on street corners waiting for work. i suspect lefties like this image; they can drop by and preach some "social justice" to them.
If we need jobs filled, we fill them through legal immigration.

Posted by: dean spencer - fox at September 20, 2007 3:14 PM


Entering Legally?

If someone is in the US illegally that makes them a criminal....if that person fails to tell OUR border or immigration services that they are a criminal then they are committing a crime HERE.
That makes it illegal....
Our Border Services and Immigration bureaucrats need a tune up!

Posted by: OMMAG at September 20, 2007 3:34 PM

Actually, phantom - there have been several cases of Americans claiming refugee status in Canada; they were all young men who had joined the US military - for its benefits (free education etc) but when it came time to go to war, ie, Iraq - they refused - and came to Canada, as 'refugees'.

Naturally, the Canadian Left welcomed them with open arms, money etc, etc - while the Canadian refugee system also funded them. Oh- and they somehow even worked here while their refugee claims went slowly through the bureaucracy. And were rejected. And - were appealed. And were rejected. And - they are still here. So much for The Canadian System.

As for Mexico - it has a deliberate policy of offloading its uneducated lower class onto the US economy. That means that Mexico doesn't have to spend any taxpayer money on developing jobs for these people, schools, housing, health services. Nothing. It can spend its tax dollars on its middle and upper class - which it does.

Meanwhile - these people zip off to the US, and drive down wages - and the leftists who write in here shouldn't get upset about this - that's capitalism, and it means that you get your California artichokes and vegetables all year round up here in Canada - at affordable prices.

But - these illegals in the US don't pay any taxes. However, they send their children to schools, use the hospitals - which have to treat them, etc etc. What do they do with their money? They send billions, yes, that's right, billions back to their families in Mexico. Which means that Mexico doesn't have to provide welfare, support, jobs, anything - for this poorest class in its own country.

Now- that's quite the economic tactic. You offload your lowest class onto another country. You don't have to provide any social or economic infrastructure for them - and - they send their wages back to support their extended family. Neat.

Now- they are getting chased out of the US, because the US taxpayer has HAD ENOUGH. So, they are coming to Canada. As refugees. Right away, the Canadian taxpayer is on the hook for them. And do you think they'll even stay around for their refugee hearing? Or, if they don't get taht status - would they leave? Look - if they chose to go to the US as illegals, they'll do the same here - behave illegally.

Now, ted and albatros39 - fight for their 'rights'. What about our rights, the taxpayers' rights?

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 4:27 PM


From the article: "...After driving his 1996 Grand Caravan for 24 hours without stopping -- except for gas and food -- the Ortegas arrived at the Windsor tunnel Sept. 11. When they told the border guard they were seeking refugee status, the Ortegas were given a list of social services organizations to contact for support..."

They didn't lie, or sneak over the border.
They told the border guard they were seeking refugee status! If their subsequent entrance doesn't qualify as legal entry, then what does?

Posted by: NewMexiCan at September 20, 2007 4:31 PM

In a recent article about conditions in bordering states with Mexico ranchers and townspeople talked about how it is like a plague of locusts are crossing their land. Pictures showed abandoned equipment scattered for miles as the crowds of illegals poured across the landscape. Broken fences, livestock wandering around, cars and trucks stolen along with gas, food and anything else that could be taken from the farms. Local law enforcement is overwhelmed as are the hospitals and other social services.

Entire villages were reset into the US fully intact as if they were still in Mexico. Kate noted Ortega couldn't speak English after 15 years, why bother when you are living in your old village!

The impact of this flood is amazing as almost overnight American towns are changed into Spanish speaking barrios. No country can possibly absorb the millions of latin American poor that America is faced with. If just a small percentage of this hoard arrives on our border....

Posted by: David Hand at September 20, 2007 4:51 PM

NewMexican - They did lie; what were they refugees from? That's their lie. If they were sent back to Mexico, would they be tortured, killed etc? No.

If they were sent back to the US - well, wait, they aren't legally in the US! They are illegally in the US! As OMMAG pointed out - clearly - they are already criminals, and Canada can't accept, as refugees or immigrants, criminals.

They've been living and working in the US for 15 years; as Kate pointed out; they've been working for years; they've bought a van - why are they now sponging off the Canadian taxpayer as 'refugees'? Just as they sponged off the US taxpayer as illegals.

There is, in Canada, a specific program, called SAWP, Seasonal Agricultural Worker's Program, which allows seasonal workers, about 20,000 to come for employment for 6 weeks to 8 months. Obviously, these people aren't interested in that. Instead, they want to continue their illegal role - that's their application as bogus refugees - and want to continue to live off the taxpayer.

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 4:59 PM

ET: When you make up write stuff like that do you spend time dreaming up creative ways of inventing support for whatever position you want to take on an issue, or do you just close your eyes and start banging away at the computer?

"... And were rejected. And - were appealed. And were rejected. And - they are still here." Who? Who is still here? Proof please.

"As for Mexico - it has a deliberate policy of offloading its uneducated lower class onto the US economy." Proof please.

"That means that Mexico doesn't have to spend any taxpayer money on developing jobs for these people, schools, housing, health services." You are obviously ignorant about the Mexican social safety net which is barely anything.

"It can spend its tax dollars on its middle and upper class - which it does." You are obviously ignorant about the Mexican population. While a lot come to the US, the percentage of Mexico's poor who cross the border as illegal immigrants would hardly dent the spending of Mexico.

"What do they do with their money? They send billions, yes, that's right, billions back to their families in Mexico." Do you have a scintilla of evidence for this? Proof please.

"Which means that Mexico doesn't have to provide welfare, support, jobs, anything - for this poorest class in its own country." Again, show your ignorance of how wealthy a country Mexico is and how much it spends on its poor and how little a few million less changes anything for them.

"Now- they are getting chased out of the US, because the US taxpayer has HAD ENOUGH. Really? I thought Bush tried to give them amnesty. Hardly chasing them. The battle is over amnesty or not. No one is really "chasing" them out.

"So, they are coming to Canada. As refugees. Right away, the Canadian taxpayer is on the hook for them." LOL. What total BS. Your reading comprehension problems know no bounds, do they, ET? The article, none of which proven but I'll take at face value until shown otherwise (interesting how in a situation like this the MSM is right, but when they give facts undermining a conservative point of view they are suddenly part of The Vast Leftwing Media Conspiracy (TM)), indicates that several thousand might be here. Not the millions that are in the US.

So your post has no facts, just typical hyperbole and misunderstanding and let's call them errors of information instead of lies, shall we?

Oh, and ET, please don't mistake me ridiculing your ridiculous postings as support for illegal immigrants. You don't know my position and I'm not aware of making any statement about supporting their rights.

I do happen to believe rights are universal and should benefit everyone, which is I suppose from your comment something you don't believe in, but I'm not sure what rights of these illegals have been violated that you even think I'm supposed to be defending. If they are getting here illegally, we should deport them. Pure and simple. While you obviously disagree, that doesn't mean they don't have rights.

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 5:10 PM

Once they're in, they stay.


"...To be successful, refugee claimants must prove they are fleeing persecution at home, something most of the Mexicans arriving in Windsor would be hard-pressed to do. The IRB's Hawkins said there was only a 13 per cent acceptance rate of refugee claims filed by Mexican nationals during the first six months of the year, compared to an overall rate of 47 per cent.

But the average processing time for a refugee claim in Canada is currently 14.2 months, said Hawkins, a period during which the applicant is eligible for financial and other support. A failed claimant then also has the right to seek leave to appeal his or her rejection to federal court.

Despite the high number of failed applications cited by the IRB, Sinjuste said he gets calls to his Naples centre from "a lot of people" who've arrived in Windsor. "They say everything is OK -- they are doing good, going to schools, going to work," he said..."

Posted by: refugee_overload at September 20, 2007 5:18 PM

Selfish, self-involved scofflaws fleeing the US for Canada? Once again, those Mexicans are taking jobs from REAL Americans! Next thing you know, they'll be bragging about the superiority of the free Canadian health care system! Thats Michael Moore's job people!

Welcome to the North American Union.

Posted by: James Lykins at September 20, 2007 6:17 PM

ted - 'rights are universal'. What rights? List them. The only universal rights that I can suscribe to as universal are the 'rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'.

American war deserter Jeremy Hinzman, for one, is still here. Arrived 2004 and claimed refugee status. Refused in 2005. His review dismissed by Federal Court in 2006. And he's still here in 2007.

You know, I think that 12 million of a population of 107 million is significant. That is, more than 10% of Mexico's population lives and works in the US.

Here's a quote: "Last year, Mexico received a record $20 billion in remittances from migrant workers. That is equal to Mexico's 2004 income from oil exports and dwarfing tourism revenue.

Arriving in small monthly transfers of $100 and $200, remittances have formed a vast river of "migra-dollars" that now exceeds lending by multilateral development agencies and foreign direct investment combined, according to the Inter-American Development Bank.

The money Mexican migrants send home almost equals the U.S. foreign aid budget for the entire world, said Arturo Valenzuela, director of the Center for Latin American Studies at Georgetown"

"While migration has long served as a safety valve for Mexico, the current wave may also be hindering the political and economic reforms that most agree are needed -- in education, taxes, energy, agriculture and law, where systemic corruption is a serious barrier to growth."

Ongoing economic and social concerns include low real wages, underemployment for a large segment of the population, inequitable income distribution"

No - Bush might have tried to give them amnesty but aren't you aware, ted, that Congress soundly rejected this?

Don't slither, ted; I didn't say that millions were here. Even if it's ten - or one thousand - my point is their claim to refugees status (a lie) and their claim to taxpayer funded benefits.

But, don't let the facts bother you, Ted; you prefer innuendo. Again - what 'rights' are you talking about? Is everything a 'right'???

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 6:21 PM

Ted - here's another analysis:June 14, 2007. Council on Hemispheric Affairs

The new bipartisan immigration bill unveiled in the U.S. Congress last month would provide a dual opportunity for Mexico’s new president, Felipe Calderon, to confront the “brain drain” that is robbing Mexico of much of its intellectual capital. It would also present a good opening for him to restructure the Mexican economy, in order to prevent thousands of poor Mexicans from being lured into working for drug cartels or forced to legally, or more likely, illegally migrate to the U.S. to find a job. Each year, approximately 450,000 Mexicans immigrate to the United States in search of work, where they can earn more in an hour than in a full day in Mexico. This phenomenon comes from an inability of Mexican migrant workers to secure livable job opportunities in their home communities. For example, it is not uncommon for a Mexican worker to be able to secure a full day’s work only one day a week; while in the U.S underground economy; one can almost always secure a full time job, at least as a gardener or bus boy.

Recognizing that fewer Mexicans will be able to leave the country under the bill, Calderon’s administration will have to take the lead in providing opportunities for those who must seek a better life at home. This was an effort that his predecessor, President Vicente Fox, talked about but rarely got around to undertaking. Calderon can take advantage of the benefits that additional human capital could offer to the Mexican economy. By creating a more positive work environment with higher wages and with constructive competition encouraged, Mexico could reap the benefits of a larger, more productive and better trained work force. Instead of this human capital being outsourced to the U.S. labor market by means of illicit immigration, it will now stay in Mexico"

So- Mexico has to 'create a more positive work env't'. But - so far, it has refused to do so. It's easier getting that 20 billion by having your impoverished class illegally dash off to work in the US. Heck - this money comes in for free. It's not a loan, and you get away with not having to provide for that population. Neat.

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 6:29 PM

this will probably be the last post on this item but anyone who thinks that any person should be able to come to canada at any time and stay and suck of the taxpayer teat should leave the damn country now. extreme anger, rage fed up up with shit like this.

Posted by: old whiteguy at September 20, 2007 6:39 PM

ET, it was you who claimed I was defending their rights and so I ask you again - nice slithering away from that question - what rights of their's do you think I am fighting for? I think they are entitled to due process like everyone - which is a basic fundamental right of all civilized western democracies, which I take it you don't believe in - but if they are here illegally, then deport them. Again, what rights of theirs have been violated? You are making things up.

You slither away from your assertion that there are many US army deserters here who have been rejected, appealed, rejected, and remain here. Bravo for mentioning the one single highly publicized case that you found (on Google I'm guessing). You said there are many. Name the many others, ET.

You also slither away from the question of your assertion that there is a deliberate Mexican government plan to ship poor Mexicans to the US so they can give money to the upper classes. Do you have a single scintilla of evidence of that? Where's your proof?

Instead of slithering away from answering to your own made up assertions by talking about the Mexcian job market, answer a question for a change.

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 7:06 PM

Sure they have rights Ted. Among those rights is not the right to pick my pocket with bogus refugee claims.

They also have -responsibilities-. That's a word I never hear uttered by socialists. They haven't fulfilled their responsibilities in the USA, there's no reason to think they will here.

However this is all beside the point. The problem is not Mexicans taking advantage of our immigration system. Our immigration system is the problem.

A refugee hearing for a family in a car coming from the States should be done by the kid in the booth at the border, not some asinine lawyer fest that takes years and costs tens of thousands in fees and bureaucrat's pay. The kid should say "No, eh?!" and turn them the hell back around to face the music.

As I said back in the beginning, we are governed by IMBECILES.

Posted by: The Phantom at September 20, 2007 7:31 PM

Seems some people have a difficult time with understanding the difference between the meanings of the terms legal immigrant and illegal immigrant.

Posted by: BL@KBIRD at September 20, 2007 7:54 PM

Ted - I didn't 'claim' you were defending their rights. You actually said it; you said, in this thread dealing with Mexican immigrants/refugee claimants - that "rights are universal" - and I asked you - what rights are you referring to? You brought up the topic - so - what rights are you referring to?
Now, you have dropped the term 'rights' - and are asking me 'what rights'? You brought up the term. You define what YOU mean by it. Now, you have movedon to 'due process'?

With regard to American army deserters - your question was 'who'. I answered you. I never said 'many' (having trouble with reading comprehension, Ted?). I said 'several cases'.
There's Jeremy Hinzman, Brandon Hughey, Phillip McDowell, Dean Walcott. Toronto lawyer, Jeff House said he's spoken to 170. And said that there could be as many as 250. Hmm. That's many.

Yes, if there is no deliberate Mexican plan to develop an infrastructure to provide jobs, schools, housing, medical care - for these millions of lower class Mexicans - then, this is a deliberate agenda of offloading them on to the US.
No, I never said that 'they' (the Mexican gov't) can give money to the upper classes (reading comprehension, ted); I said middle and upper classes.

And, it's billions of dollars that are sent back to Mexico. Makes a difference, doesn't it? Did you read the quotes?

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 8:10 PM

Seems some people have a difficult time with understanding the difference between the meanings of the terms refugee and leech.

Posted by: ural at September 20, 2007 8:43 PM

ET at 8:10PM: "I didn't 'claim' you were defending their rights.

>> ET at 9:27AM: "Ted, obviously, belongs to that mentality that considers that it is the RIGHT of any person on this planet to move to the US to live and work, without paying taxes for the infrastructure of that society. And that it is the RIGHT of any person rejected by the US for such behaviour, to come to Canada - and behave exactly the same."

>> ET at 4:27PM: "Now, ted and albatros39 - fight for their 'rights'. What about our rights, the taxpayers' rights?

ET at 8:10PM: "I never said 'many' (having trouble with reading comprehension, Ted?)"

>> ET at 4:27PM: "there have been several cases of Americans claiming refugee status in Canada"

ET at 8:10PM: "No, I never said that 'they' (the Mexican gov't) can give money to the upper classes (reading comprehension, ted"

>> ET at 4:27PM: "It can spend its tax dollars on its middle and upper class - which it does."

What I can't decide, ET, is whether you are one of those forgetful foggy headed professor types who forget what they say from one hour to the next or whether your reading comprehension problems are so bad that you don't even understand the meaning of the very words you write.

I'm guessing the latter, but I'm a nice guy so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the former.

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 9:12 PM

Phantom: "As I said back in the beginning, we are governed by IMBECILES."

You know what, Phantom, looking at who is in Ottawa right now, I couldn't agree with you more.

What's that? The second time in as many weeks we've agreed with each other? What's that? Do I hear the gallop of horses? Four of them maybe?

Posted by: Ted at September 20, 2007 9:14 PM

The truth is that the potential problem for Canada has probably *moved* further north than Windsor already.

This article may actually answer a question I have been asking around here for the last three weeks.

I have noticed Mexicans in the Native American casinos in the UP of Michigan in an increasing number during the last month, where there have been none seen before.

There are no crops to be harvested here. There are no jobs here.

On the way to the Soo, or Thunder Bay?

Posted by: Yoop at September 20, 2007 9:25 PM

So, ted, you actually consider that, when you say that 'rights are universal', that this term of 'rights' is similar to my use of the term in asking whether it is the 'right of any and all people to move to the USA to live and work without paying taxes'.

Hmm. So, moving to the USA to live and work without paying taxes has now become, in your belief system, a 'universal right'? Heh.

Ted, the term 'several' is not equivalent to 'many'. Try again. Check out a dictionary. Or check out basic statistics.

Ted, if I say middle and upper class, then, the use of the word 'and' makes it a binary term with two units in the set. So, you can't reduce it to only one unit, ie, 'upper'. Try again. Check out propositional logic and set theory.

I'm not into ad hominem insults, ted. Can't be bothered to reduce to the level of a ten year old. Think about it.

By the way - it's interesting that France, under Sarkozy, has just introduced some much needed immigration rules. With regard to relatives of current immigrants who want to come to France, there must be proof that the individual is solvent, and can already speak French and understands French values. The family living in France must be able to support them. And, if there is any suspicion of the validity of the relation, DNA testing is required - to be paid by the applicant. So there.

Posted by: ET at September 20, 2007 9:40 PM

"Truly we are governed by IMBECILES. Refugee claims from AMERICA?!!!"

For this we can thank that assh*le Tudeau. His 'Charter" has ruined out country. He got what he deserved when he buried his son.

Horny Toad

Posted by: Horny Toad at September 20, 2007 10:22 PM

Ted spracht: "You know what, Phantom, looking at who is in Ottawa right now, I couldn't agree with you more."

That'd be funnier if the Liberals hadn't set the current immigration policy years ago Ted. Let Harper and Co. TRY to do something reasonable about this (like turn 'em back!) and just watch the Opposition go berserk.

No one in Ottawa is interested in doing the intelligent thing for the country, so all the little bureaucrats get to play God. 14 months on the public tit waiting for a hearing? No problem senor! I suggest the Holiday Inn, they have a really good lunch.

Posted by: The Phantom at September 20, 2007 11:35 PM

Snigger? Moi?

No, certainly not!

Posted by: mojo at September 21, 2007 12:47 AM

Once they're in, they stay.


"...She suggested she might even be able to find employment as an interpreter for others she is sure are coming behind her from Florida."

Posted by: refugee_overload at September 21, 2007 1:11 AM


Again, ET, and I'll type more slowly this time so maybe it sinks in: where do I fight for any rights? do you have any basis for your fantasy that I think non-Canadian citizens have a "right" to be here? You claim I believe there is right for people to come into our country. I don't, but I'm curious about where you get such an idea. As I asked before, do you just make that stuff up hoping I won't notice or are you just a lazy writer who likes to cast aspertions and invent things to fit your argument?

But maybe I should not bother having a discussion with you about rights. After all, you think the US phrase 'rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' - which is not even in the US Constitution by the way - are the only universal rights that I can suscribe to as universal and don't even recognize due process as a fundamental right.

Posted by: Ted at September 21, 2007 8:55 AM

Oh, and this made me laugh out loud:

"Can't be bothered to reduce to the level of a ten year old."

"So there." I can just here the nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah in the background.

And this is the who teaches our kids. At a university level no less.

Posted by: Ted at September 21, 2007 8:57 AM

ted - in your claim to support 'universal rights', you never mentioned 'due process'. When I asked you what you meant by that phrase - you didn't reply. Finally, you started to talk about 'due process'. So, now you are saying that what you mean by 'universal rights' is 'due process'. That's quite the reduction of the term 'universal rights'.

OK - but the problem with 'due process' as a fundamental right is that it must be obeyed by both sides of the claim. Mexicans who are in the US as illegals, have no right to apply to Canada as refugees. That's a profound misuse of the refugee status in our country. And Mexicans, as well, applying from their own country, are highly suspect as 'refugees'. Their country, corrupt as it is, isn't a cause for refugee status. Try again, Ted.

Again - you reduce back to the insults. That's childish. Try, instead, for reason, logic and fact grounded comments.

So what if the phrase 'life, liberty and pursuit of happiness' isn't in the US constitution? As usual, you are slithering from the point. I never said it was; I said that I considered these as fundamental rights.

Posted by: ET at September 21, 2007 9:42 AM

No you said those are the only "rights" that you suscribe to as universal. It is a great great statement of the important values that underlie much of our culture. But it is incorrect to say that "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are rights, per se. They are the concepts behind our rights, but you don't see such words in the Charter or the US Bill of Rights or the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the UN or any other equivalent.

And don't be daft, ET. I didn't reduce all rights to just being due process. I make fun of you and your ridiculousness because you make stuff up like that, right out of thin air, make stuff up like I am fighting for the rights of illegal immigrants, make stuff up like I think everyone has a right to be a Canadian.

And, unlike you, I do believe human rights are universal and fundamental to a civilized human being. Someone's right to speech and religion and due process is every bit as important in China as here, possibly more so. Obviously, you disagree.

You said I was fighting for the rights of these refugee claimants. You still slither away from telling me where I did so. The only thing I have said, and it was in response to your ridiculous assertion, was that the only right I could see as applicable would be due process since there is no "right" to come to Canada. And yes, I would want to make sure that Canadian authorities were handling these claimants properly and kicking them out properly in accordance with our own laws. I stunned that you think that that is objectionable, but maybe I shouldn't be.

Posted by: Ted at September 21, 2007 10:20 AM

Meant to say: "I do believe human rights are universal and fundamental to a civilized nation."

Posted by: Ted at September 21, 2007 10:26 AM

Some responses (to those that deserve them):

djinbc at September 20, 2007 12:42 PM: My parent also came to legally 50 year ago so I can personally relate to the importance of proper immigration. But showing up on Canada's door step and applying for refugee status is legal with the restrictions in the link I provided. You say kick "them" and/or not let "them" in. My parents were "them" 50 years ago; They dressed funny, they looked awkward, and "they" did not quite fit in. I was one of "them" 35 when I entered school. I looked different, I talked different, and I ate different food.

penny at September 20, 2007 12:42 PM: Though I agree that an open system can be prone I feel (no actual data here on my part and if someone could provide it it would be great) that it is the exception rather than the rule. It's easy to pick on the few that MAY be abusing the system (again it is not certain that they are). But at first blush I'm not overly concerned about the work ethic of someone who has spent 10 years working as a migrant laborer illegally in the US to make a better life for them and/or their family. I find it difficult to fault someone for not wanting to return to the squalor of Mexico (we are taking about people here with limited options).

The Phantom at September 20, 2007 12:55 PM:
If the rules are "f*cked up, then they need to be changed. As a liberal (note the little "l") I am always amused when conservatives (notice the little "c" who believe in law and order disregard the law (note that I'm not saying you are conservative but the line of thinking generally applies). "But it's not what we meant"
Teh fact that they are applying for refugee status seems to indicate they are playing by our rules. they may be along for the ride (and no doubt some are) but I am not inclined to think that most/all are.
"... does Canada need 1 million more unskilled laborers..." falls into the category of fear mongering. I doubt that the problem will get very bad at all.

Alain Saffel at September 20, 2007 2:00 PM
Generally I agree with you that corporate interests have vested interest in keeping wages low. Some good parts related to this in "Fast Food Nation"
The truth is that there are jobs going unfilled, I would assume that business factors in many of these cases are preventing paying more otherwise the salaries would have gone up. The easiest job to get in Ontario right now is a job @ Tims or any of the fast food chains. But this is unskilled labor (regardless of MacDonald’s says). This does not apply to all jobs in all places.

Posted by: Fotis at September 21, 2007 1:02 PM