36 Replies to “Cry Havoc!”

  1. I’m sorry. Did you just call us all dogs?
    Granted I’d rather be a dog of war than, say, a yorkie, but still its the principle of the thing.

  3. I did this a week or 2 back.
    I pointed out the lack of proper options, not anywhere was the send them back an option.
    I am willing to wager this gets dumped and buried, the answers we give are not the politically correct ones they want.

  4. I am all for increased immigration just so long as it is based on the idea that both Canada and the immigrant should benefit. I am strongly opposed to family reunification for parents and especially grandparents but very supportive of spouses and children. Canada is a hige country and we need to grow our population to take advantage of our resources. Franlkly, it’s better to grow a Canadian population with Canadian values than to grow third world population with dark ages values.

  5. Well that took longer than I thought.
    Immigration however should not be studied in isolation from the subject of Canadian families already living and working in Canada.
    For one, when is the government *ever* going to eliminate the marriage tax penalty? The Cons promised they would do it at some point in the future when the budget is balanced, but we know that they will never do it. The very fact that they view it as a “cost”, shows that their promise to eliminate it is one big lie.
    Fixing that evil penalty would be a good start to encouraging Canadian families to have more kids. Heck with the tax savings that would result I could almost hire a full-time nanny.
    So to heck with these immigration surveys, which will probably all be ignored. It’s time for a survey for Canadian families.

  6. I’d really like to know what I’m doing wrong. Lately my comments are being caught in the filter. I’m not using bad language and I’m not cut and pasting unduly or trying to introduce links.

  7. Done, and I wasn’t very friendly to parents and grandparents of current immigrants,if they can’t be completely supported by their families,including health care costs.

  8. Whew, done.
    Parents and grandparents should never have a consideration. Stop applications until the number is manageable (I assume those employed by CIC can figure that out!). Cut the numbers to all categories so that the majority of applications can be done in 6 months.
    Get business more involved with all 3 levels of governments to figure out the economic immigrants. Make provinces have more responsibility to the immigrants – the closer to grass roots the more likely they will succeed.
    100% must speak either English or French by the end of their first year. 100% must become Canadian citizens (only because then there might be a more personal connection and a desire to help this nation and it’s people succeed).
    Sheesh – it really does not seem like rocket science!

  9. I did this a few weeks ago. I did not agree with the wording of the questions and choices. I basically believe that immigration should be determined provincially and based on work force requirements. The feds can look after the refugee portion of immigration but should have a limit on the maximum number per year. the reunification portion should be based on the ability of the family unit to be self sufficient. I have been attacked by trolls on other sites and that is their prerogative, but I also believe I am entitled to have my own opinions.

  10. Everybody who frequents this site had better do this survey.
    Rarely (read: never) has the government asked for input like this before.
    Jason Kenney is looking for an excuse to radically change up the immigration system. They must know these extremely high levels aren’t good any longer. They just need an excuse…backed up with SCIENCE! (Read: random poll) in order to have some ammunition against the vested interests who claim we can never have enough immigrants and nobody should ever be turned away.
    I’ve said before that big changes are coming. Do your part to make it happen!

  11. Why is family reunification in Canada so important?
    If grandpa and grandma come over here, won’t they be leaving some family behind in the old country?
    So isn’t that de-unification of the family?
    Or am I a bad person for looking at both sides of the equation?
    I support immigration, but we should be smart about it, and we should completely drop the multiculturalism nonsense.
    High immigration coupled with multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster.
    Ditch the family reunification and increase the refugee and economic percentages.
    Cut the overall numbers by about 40%.

  12. “Ditch the family reunification and increase the refugee and economic percentages.”
    *Increase* the refugee percentages? Are you crazy?

  13. I did the thingy and let them know that we don’t want any more Muslim immigration until they stop hating the West and Israel and give up the Jihad thing. That means no more Muslims period.
    I indicated that we need economic based immigration and not old grandparent who need health care.
    I pointed out how the refugee system is nothing but a back door for terrorist and other bad people to get in here.
    I hope Kenny is serious.

  14. The only Immigrants i want to see are those who love Liberty or who want freedom from living under tyrants.
    The ones who want to be Canadians or Americans.
    This economic PC multicultural garbage is just that. When you allow folks who tell you they want to destroy your society or you. Than its not immigration, but madness.
    By the way Immigration should not be raced based as it is now. If your not from a third world hell hole thts been at war for 50 years forget about applying.
    Its become a voting meter, not about new lives in Canadian by folks who want to be Canadians anymore.
    Its become political.
    JMO

  15. Filled this out a few weeks ago. Really do not expect much change, though. The gun registry and CBC are still there. Still waiting for them to disappear.

  16. Muslim Welfare Fraud in Edmonton
    Thursday, September 15, 2011
    What these men are doing is bringing over one wife and their children, then “divorcing” her after she has been here the requisite time. After the bogus divorce, she applies for welfare. The man then “marries another wife” (i.e., retrieves another wife) from his country of origin. And so forth, for as many wives as he is allowed.
    http://mesopotamiawest.blogspot.com/

  17. Sheesh, that took a while to fill that survey out, especially when you make a number of comments.
    My comments concentrated generally on immigrants not being a drain on our social system, as this was the experience of my wife’s and my families.

  18. Eliminate refugee and family status as qualifications for immigration. Ensure that economic immigrants subscribe to the tenets of the unwritten British constitution on which Canada is based – rule of law, individual responsibility and liberty, one man one vote, one man one wife etc.
    As a country of immigrants, were those classifications important to making Canada into what it is now?
    Those who come here to work to make themselves better will adopt the culture that they live in or they will leave because they cannot support themselves. Those who come here as part of family or as refugees will retain their culture.

  19. Studied the background documents for a few hours and completed the survey this morning. As many here imply, it’s time to take our country back.
    Took advantage of comments sections to elaborate. And I really like that they are asking for input in the first place.
    As for the CBC, if you are a member of the Conservative Party, they recently included funding the CBC as a question on a survey. One of the options was defund completely.
    Baby steps, we’ll get there.

  20. @ rroe, I do not entirely agree regarding the refugee class. Both my my wife’s and my families came to Canada in the 1920s as refugees from the Soviet Union. They never were a drain on Canada’s economy and immediately started to contribute to Canada’s economy as well as to its defense. We adopted Canada’s culture. The only baggage we retained was a hatred of anything Marxist and heaven knows that there are enough domestic Marxists, including some trolls that frequent these pages.

  21. Somewhere recently I saw a remark about immigration whose writer claimed a liberal attitude – willing to admit dozens, perhaps even several hundred well qualified immigrants every year. Pretty much how I answered the survey. I doubt the results will be published, and if published, I doubt they will be honestly tabulated. Based on a sampling of recent discussions, Canadians are in a polite, calm and deeply angry mood about immigration – given a chance to express the mood, they will and to act upon it, even better.Can there be any doubt that a referendum on immigration would completely overthrow family immigration and utterly reject people who reject Canada – but want to live here.

  22. Done. Like many others I have huge problems with the parents and grandparents category. I’ve done cataract lists in which 80% or more of the patients spoke little or no English and had immigrated within the last five to ten years — all paid for by taxpayers or former taxpayers who were waiting months for their procedures. There are more than six billion people on the planet and we can’t treat them all.

  23. On refugees, I too think think we should take more. BUT. But Canada should TAKE refugees, not accept any that show up in Canada after transiting a safe third country. I am all for going a camp somewhere and taking a large number of real refugees.

  24. TJ, I don’t see a problem with getting rid of the grandparent and parent classification which would result in having a higher percentage of economic and refugee immigration.
    I think we need to reduce the total number of immigrants overall to prevent watering down our culture.
    I could have worded it better…

  25. “@ rroe, I do not entirely agree regarding the refugee class. Both my my wife’s and my families came to Canada in the 1920s as refugees from the Soviet Union.”
    Ken, got some very good friends with the same story.
    But remember, the type of refugee that you described in your post is *not* the same as the typical refugee that knocks on Canada’s door today.

  26. Worked with a woman once who had immigrated from Jamaica. What an attitude that woman had. In her view Canada owed her this, that, and everything else in between. Nothing but daily complaints.
    Also knew many immigrants from the middle east when I was at university. Same damn attitude. They moaned and moaned because they wanted handouts, they wanted to pay reduced fees, they wanted access to all scholarships. No respect for the country *at all*, and they refused to speak English unless they absolutely had to. They also formed a giant clan to isolate themselves from all the other students. Their daily mission was to exploit, to their advantage, every weakness they could find in the Canadian system. Bastards. I hated them.
    These sorts of immigrants should not be welcome, and the system should do a better job of screening out such scum.

  27. TJ, exactly. I should maybe qualify my previous comment. When filling out the survey, I left the refugee percentage the same, but did clearly enunciate a number of times that refugees should be political refugees, not economic or as we have had in our neighbourhood, a “refugee” Guatemalan family who was afraid of another family in a vendetta situation. That was stretching it by quite a bit.
    I do not know why immigrants these days seem to think we owe them entitlements or reduced fees of sorts. Our families never dreamed of demanding handouts. They were just happy and thankful to be out of the clutches of the Marxist joy bringer Lenin and his executioner Dzerzhinsky.

  29. I’m all for immigration.
    But you start at your unsubsidised level of self-sufficiency.Whatever someone will pay you for your skills, thats the starting line.We all had entry-level employment. Had to learn a skill, trade whatever.
    Want more? It’s up to you.

  30. When my grandparents both maternal and paternal came to this country back in the late eighteen hundreds they left the old country,their parents and siblings behind and never saw either the country or their relatives again. Then they went to work and helped build this country. If they could do that without aid from the government of any kind then I say the same should apply today.
    Canada has to stop being a sucker for the world’s free loaders.

  33. Done. But ‘stakeholders’ – lawyers, immigration consultants, government groups and supplicants – will swamp and skewer the results in their favour, that’s how they keep your money flowing into their pockets Canada be damned.

  34. hmmm… if you click ‘refresh’ it says the information has to be submitted again. If it is…?

  35. First, Kate, thank you for this post.
    The people running the survey seemed to be overly concerned about backlogs and “service” levels. I meant to tell them they aren’t dealing with people in a grocery store line, but, I forgot. I did point out that we should tell newly minted Canadians that we’re not coming to get them if they move back to the old country and it blows up.
    Anyway, I agree with most of what everyone above me has said. Except that Mr. Slater must not be a prairie boy. The Alberta Capitol wasn’t formerly known as Edmonchuk for nothing. The “founding peoples” of the prairies came from all over western, central and northern Europe, probably moreso than people from the British Isles. French guys too, descended from Quebecois explorers and fur traders and definitely not the pansies who are running (ruining?) Quebec now.

  36. As far as I’m concerned, there are only two classes of people who are allowed to consult stakeholders. They are: Mormons, and Dr. van Helsing. Everyone else should consult “interested parties”.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation