# SYR Refugees to Canada (split fm SYR refugees thread)



## Brad Sallows (6 Sep 2015)

>... Trudeau said his party had already set a target of accepting 25,000 refugees from Syria and the region, but are “committed to doing more.”

Why only that region?  What quotas do the NDP and LPC suggest for other parts of Africa, southeast Asia, and eastern Europe?

Headlines go back years announcing the deaths of X dozen or X hundred people - at sea, suffocated in containers, overcrowded vehicles in MVAs, attacked by combatants while fleeing or assembled in camps, etc.

This has followed the usual pattern: general indifference to everything in print; then a Shocking Image; then demands that someone (government of the day) do something Right Now.  Extra emphasis if it might be used for political leverage.  None of the people bleating showed much interest until a picture of a corpse face down in the mud on a beach showed up on the front page and in their social media feeds.

I understand the motivations: people care, a little bit, about the dead kid; mostly, they care about exploiting the circumstances of his death for political advantage.

Those people remind me of a verse from "Go Away" by Living Colour: 
I see the starving Africans on TV
I feel it has nothing to do with me
I sent my twenty dollars to Liveaid
I've aided my guilty conscience to go away​
This is chiefly about guilty consciences and winning elections.  Most of the people who beak off about R2P have no intention whatsoever of following through.


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Sep 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >... Trudeau said his party had already set a target of accepting 25,000 refugees from Syria and the region, but are “committed to doing more.”
> 
> Why only that region?  What quotas do the NDP and LPC suggest for other parts of Africa, southeast Asia, and eastern Europe?
> 
> ...



Brad, in general I can agree with you.

I assume you are not rationalizing inaction.  As I`ve said before, we can`t be everywhere all the time and solve all the problems.

In my view the situation calls for a bit of Ralph Klein`s wisdon:  it is time for the politicians to see which way the crowd is heading and run to the head of the parade.

Other versions: strike while the iron is hot, make hay while the sun shines - or Emmanuel Rahm`s never let a crisis go to waste.

In 2001 a catalyzing event permitted action.  10 years later the adrenaline was all gone and people just wanted it all to go away.  Is five years enough time for people to recharge their batteries and feel the adrenaline rush again?


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Sep 2015)

The voice of reason?

Analysis - On refugee crisis, PM must heed more than public opinion
Canadians may feel a moral imperative to act in the face of tragedy — but good public policy demands scrutiny

By Neil Macdonald, CBC News Posted: Sep 09, 2015 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Sep 09, 2015 5:00 AM ET


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Sep 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Brad, in general I can agree with you.
> 
> I assume you are not rationalizing inaction.  As I`ve said before, we can`t be everywhere all the time and solve all the problems.
> 
> ...



Maybe. No matter what any politician does about it, the majority of the vocal minority, that are flagellating themselves over this, aren't going to change their vote anyway. It would garner no gain, so why bother. All the leaders have given their platform, thoughts and swipes at the other two. I suspect it won't dominate the huskings much past Monday or Tuesday. Unless, the MSM has a slow news day, or Harper gains in the polls. Then the stops will come out.

At least Harper wants security checks on every one of them we bring in.


----------



## George Wallace (10 Sep 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> At least Harper wants security checks on every one of them we bring in.




Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.



> On refugee crisis, PM must heed more than public opinion
> *Canadians may feel a moral imperative to act in the face of tragedy — but good public policy demands scrutiny*
> By Neil Macdonald, CBC News
> Posted: Sep 09, 2015 5:00 AM ET
> ...



Photos, links and more on LINK.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2015)

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rick-hillier-on-help-for-refugees-i-think-we-need-to-do-it-in-a-big-way-1.2556849

The former CDS thinks Canada should do more.  I wonder if he was asked to comment or if he did so on his own initiative.

*Modified for atrocious spelling.


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Sep 2015)

Military assets will be deployed to what location Mr. Hillier?  Latakia, in Syria?  Kobane, on the Syrian-Turkish border?  Iskenderun in Turkey?  Mosul in Iraq?  

ISIS is operating in Mosul and Kobane.  The Turks don't want more refugees on their turf even momentarily.  The Russians have blocked out Latakia and Tartus in Syria.   Some of the governments involved see not "refugees" but "criminals in flight" and would cheerfully invoke the ancient border law of Hot Trod.  The idea of another Ayatollah Khomeini hanging out in Paris on the Left Bank and organizing their local insurrection is not considered appealing. And just in case - the Islamic State sees itself as a State.

To be honest, I don't have a problem with going into any of the places I have mentioned and recreating Kandahar 2007-2011.  In fact I think it is the right course of action. 

But it would require a Canadian Brigade and not a Battlegroup.  And it would require a permanent presence (no exit strategies are possible in an area that saw urban warfare 5500 years ago. And it would require a willingness to authorizing Strategic Corporals to spill blood according to their assessment of local conditions - and tolerate their occasional screw ups.  But I am sure Mr. Hillier knows that better than me.

As to accepting refugees at a faster rate.  I might actually be okay with that.  The value of the existing rules and procedures can be debated - but now is not the time to be debating them.  We should operate under the existing rules.  What is the availability of qualified personnel trained in the existing procedures?  How many of them are available to turn the wheel faster, while still maintaining existing Quality Control standards, so that more refugees of the quality currently accepted can be accepted in a shorter period of time?

Is it appropriate to divert resources from other tasks so that, for example, these young girls could NOT be accepted as refugees in Canada?



> One of two sisters sentenced to be gang-raped in India has spoken of her fear that the village elders who ordered the vile punishment will send someone to carry it out.



Because frankly I would rather have those two girls, and their brother, and his girlfriend/wife and their parents as neighbours than any of these gentlemen.







But hey, that's just me.  And my name isn't Hillier.

Edited to incorporate the correct image.

PS - and if you wish to debate how long race has played a role in the affairs of man:  Sumer, now southern Iraq, was the land of the "ung sang gig-ga".  Translated that means the black headed people: their own name for themselves and not a pejorative.  They invaded the turf circa 3600 BC - coincident with the urban warfare mentioned above.  The locals that were there before them are currently known as the Ubaid culture.


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Sep 2015)

This got done pretty quickly, even with an election campaign under way ....


> The Government of Canada announced today the creation of the Syria Emergency Relief Fund.
> 
> The Government will match every eligible dollar donated by individual Canadians to registered Canadian charities in response to the impact of the conflict in Syria, up to $100 million, effective immediately and until December 31, 2015.
> 
> ...


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Sep 2015)

Well big Rick has an answer: 

Rick Hillier says military can help bring in 50,000 refugees by Christmas

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-rick-hillier-refugees-military-christmas-1.3225732

The Canadian Forces could play a key role in helping to bring at least 50,000 Syrian refugees — far more than the government is planning — to Canada by Christmas, retired general Rick Hillier says.

"We've got these incredible leaders in the Canadian Forces, across the RCMP and many other places in our nation who are ready to step up," he said in an interview with Rosemary Barton on CBC News Network's Power & Politics.

Hillier, the former chief of the defence staff, called for the government to bring in at least 50,000 Syrian refugees over the next three months, a figure he called realistic. <more at link>


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Sep 2015)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Well big Rick has an answer:
> 
> Rick Hillier says military can help bring in 50,000 refugees by Christmas
> 
> ...


We know the CAF _can_, the debate is whether they _should_.

I guess we'll see October 20th ....


----------



## George Wallace (13 Sep 2015)

I really hope that in all this "Bleeding Heart, knee jerk," political grandstanding on the part of some, they have a plan to not allow this to happen here:


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Sep 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really hope that in all this "Bleeding Heart, knee jerk," political grandstanding on the part of some, they have a plan to not allow this to happen here:



Link to the story behind the photo ?


----------



## George Wallace (13 Sep 2015)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Link to the story behind the photo ?



The photo is of Muslims clashing with German Polizei (back a few years ago according to another site member who says they researched it, but gave no links).  It is not relevant that the photo was not taken two minutes ago or not.  What is relevant, is that there already exists a problem with Muslims migrants in many Western nations, and it is only expanding at a rate far larger than it has been in the last decade.  This migration has been in the news for quite some time.  Now that it now has numbers in the millions, it is suddenly news worthy for ALL the WORLD'S MSM.  The current solution of putting them all on Social Assistance in ethnic ghettos only creates a breeding ground for crime and violence.


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Sep 2015)

Riots Canadians Have Known -  Link

1971 - Vancouver - 1000 Potheads in Gastown
2008 - Montreal - Canadiens Fans because they won
2002 - Montreal - Concordia over Netanyahu appearance
1919 - Winnipeg - General Strike
1994 - Vancouver - Canucks Fans because they lost
1992 - Montreal - Guns n Roses Fans riot because
2001 - Quebec - 3rd Summit of the Americas
1969 - Montreal - Sir George Williams (Concordia) riot over racism
1955 - Montreal - Rocket Richard riot
1993 - Montreal - Canadiens Fans because they won

Some others

2010 - Toronto - G20 protests
1933 - Toronto - Christie Pits riots
1935 - Regina - Labour riots
1992 - Toronto - Yonge Street riots over racism
1913 - Vancouver Island - Coal Miners riots.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (13 Sep 2015)

Interesting article from the Toronto Star of all places, where the author, Martin Regg Cohn, believes that this ongoing refugee crisis may be just the beginning of something that will become normal. Re-produced under the usual caveats of the Copyright Act.



> Some hard truths no one wants to hear on refugees: Cohn
> 
> We need to open our hearts to the latest wave of Syrian refugees, but we also need to open our minds to what lies ahead.
> 
> ...



 Article Link


----------



## dimsum (13 Sep 2015)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Interesting article from the Toronto Star of all places, where the author, Martin Regg Cohn, believes that this ongoing refugee crisis may be just the beginning of something that will become normal. Re-produced under the usual caveats of the Copyright Act.
> 
> Article Link



Wow - I had to double-check the link that it was indeed the Toronto Star that printed it.  Good article and on point.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Sep 2015)

But what's in a name? I notice that the press in Europe is almost universal in calling them migrants, where the press here is almost universal in calling them refugees.

Does it matter? Does one require more urgent intervention than the other?


----------



## George Wallace (13 Sep 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> But what's in a name? I notice that the press in Europe is almost universal in calling them migrants, where the press here is almost universal in calling them refugees.
> 
> Does it matter? Does one require more urgent intervention than the other?



I would suggest that the migrants are moving for economic reasons, as opposed to the refugees fleeing from persecution from an ethnic or religious majority.  When I see a Pakistan being interviewed by the media (probably because he could speak English and no translation was needed), I would say he was a migrant.  The migrants from Libya and other North African nations, coming from Eritrea, Ethiopia and other African nations; I would call migrants.  Christians, Kurds and other non-Islamic religions fleeing persecution in Syria, Iraq, etc.; I would call refugees. 

Next question:  Security Checks.  Can anyone explain to me how any Security Checks can be done on any of these people, refugee or migrant, if they are, in the majority of cases, from Failed states?  How does anyone in our political scene expect such a check to be done in less than three months?  Only solution is to blindly bring in all and sundry and cross our fingers, we did not allow too many criminal or other disruptive persons in.


----------



## Rifleman62 (13 Sep 2015)

> This got done pretty quickly, even with an election campaign under way ....
> Quote
> 
> The Government of Canada announced today the creation of the Syria Emergency Relief Fund.
> ...



Now we will see if Canadians put their money where their mouth is according to certain political heads and the media party. All the media who used this migration as a sob story should be first up to the donations table.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Sep 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Riots Canadians Have Known -  Link
> 
> 1971 - Vancouver - 1000 Potheads in Gastown
> 2008 - Montreal - Canadiens Fans because they won
> ...



Except most of these (modern ones anyway) were not trying to change the way we live, change our constitution or marginalize our religions. They were simply drunken hooligans.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Sep 2015)

I'm not referencing this video which I got third hand, via social media, to express my anger at the acts of desecrating the graves of our war dead. I cannot vouch for its provenance, nor did the group which posted it. At a _guess_ it is from the Middle East, perhaps Iraq, likely a few years ago, maybe it was a "protest" against British military actions in Iraq. I'm pretty sure this is a Commonwealth War Graves cemetery ~ see about 3' 05".

What this video illustrates, to me, is the level of rage, _*frustration*_, hatred, based on generations of _humiliation_, that exists in the region, the Middle East, towards us. And now we propose to bring tens of thousands of them here, to be equally humiliated and frustrated ... is that right? Rick Hillier says the CF can help to bring 50,000 here; with all due respect to the retired CDS: _that's crazy!_


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Sep 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ick Hillier says the CF can help to bring 50,000 here; with all due respect to the retired CDS: _that's crazy!_



Under the "Golden Oldie" file - Operation Haven in Kurdish Iraq - 1991.

I prefer this solution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UJWAIjpWfs


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Sep 2015)

I'm no expert in refugee crisis management, BUT if Canada is to accept x number of refugees, I agree with the PM. They must be properly screened.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Sep 2015)

Take on 10'000 refugees without screening them? Absolutely retarded.



> Rome (CNN)Muslims who were among migrants trying to get from Libya to Italy in a boat this week threw 12 fellow passengers overboard -- killing them -- because the 12 were Christians, Italian police said Thursday.


Ya that's really what we need in Canada.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2015)

Interesting - former Ministers and DM's say the PM could do more, even during an election - highlights mine:


> .... As former federal ministers and deputy ministers, appreciative of what it takes to translate political announcements into realities, we urge Mr. Harper to think big and not let the exigencies of the election campaign diminish the call to action. There is nothing in the caretaker convention, followed during election campaigns, to stop government from responding to a crisis – particularly when there is all-party support.
> 
> Mr. Harper can turn to his professional public servants with their past successful history of managing Bosnian, Ugandan, Kosovo, and Indochinese mass movement of refugees. *He can ask them to determine Canada`s maximum capacity for absorption of individuals* now streaming into Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Europe. Under the Public Policy provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the government can *launch a significant new humanitarian Syrian refugee resettlement program*. Its goal should be to increase the overall Canadian commitment to numbers of refugees and significantly simplify administrative burdens for both private sponsors and immigration officials.
> 
> Mr. Harper can *ask officials in the Departments of Finance, Treasury Board, Citizenship and Immigration, Defence and Foreign Affairs to ascertain the financial and human resources required and set those aside*. The public record of the contributions of the previous waves of past refugee settlement programs demonstrate the long-term returns to Canada from what may, in the short term, look like significant costs. The government can *engage with provincial governments*, who are also committing resources, to maximize the effectiveness of all efforts. It is short term investments which will be critical to the success of the program: there will be ample payback for an adequate number of visa and security officers in the field for refugee selection, for professionals to expedite medical clearances and security assessments, and for transportation costs and staging areas in Canada when the refugees arrive. Pending full program implementation, the government can *ensure ”all hands on deck” in fast-tracking existing applications, particularly those with family connections in Canada* ....


----------



## Edward Campbell (16 Sep 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Interesting - former Ministers and DM's say the PM could do more, even during an election - highlights mine:




While I agree with the authors of the _open letter_ that "security cannot be an excuse for inertia," it, security, can and must be a very high priority in deciding who ~ refugee, migrant, tourist or student ~ is allowed to enter Canada for any reason. A government that puts the welfare of these unfortunate people ahead of the security of Canada would be derelict in its duties to both.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> While I agree with the authors of the _open letter_ that "security cannot be an excuse for inertia," it, security, can and must be a very high priority in deciding who ~ refugee, migrant, tourist or student ~ is allowed to enter Canada for any reason. A government that puts the welfare of these unfortunate people ahead of the security of Canada would be derelict in its duties to both.


Just curious - what's your read re:  how much prep the bureaucrats can _really_ get done during an election.  Those signing the op-ed piece suggest a lot, and I'm guessing someone's doing some work on briefings for transition in the event there is one, but things like "launch(ing) a significant new humanitarian Syrian refugee resettlement program" seem quite a leap when you don't have a Parliament, even compared to this announced during the campaign.


----------



## Edward Campbell (16 Sep 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Just curious - what's your read re:  how much prep the bureaucrats can _really_ get done during an election.  Those signing the op-ed piece suggest a lot, and I'm guessing someone's doing some work on briefings for transition in the event there is one, but things like "launch(ing) a significant new humanitarian Syrian refugee resettlement program" seem quite a leap when you don't have a Parliament, even compared to this announced during the campaign.




I'm pretty sure the authors of the letter are correct: there is a lot of work that bureaucrats _can_ do, election or not, to prepare for any reasonable contingency, work that will not have any _political_ impact, even if it is made public. The more important question, for me, is: for just what contingencies _should_ those bureaucrats prepare?

Remember, also, please, that the sitting government, in the middle of an election campaign, has announced a spending programme aimed, specifically, at this _"event."_ Messers Mulcair and Trudeau _could_ argue that the government is using its office to advance its own re-election chances ... but I don't think they will. The government has taken _reasonable_, caretaker steps in the face of a perceived "crisis," the (unwritten) Constitution doesn't seem to have been offended.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The more important question, for me, is: for just what contingencies _should_ those bureaucrats prepare?


 :nod:  Especially given the range of options being offered by the contenders should they get the reins.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Sep 2015)

>Under the Public Policy provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the government can launch a significant new humanitarian Syrian refugee resettlement program

Why only Syrians?  Why not apportion the number of places the estimate determines can be made available among refugees worldwide and ensure Canada is not trying to digest lumps of monoculture?


----------



## Kirkhill (16 Sep 2015)

Inertia no.  Action yes.  Defuse the situation at a distance from Canadian borders then manage the flow of immigrants.


----------



## Jed (16 Sep 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Inertia no.  Action yes.  Defuse the situation at a distance from Canadian borders then manage the flow of immigrants.



Now that is a big picture comment I can agree with. Now we can get to work on the phasing details.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Sep 2015)

Note to people working in DND - yes, they CAN tell when you update a Wikipedia page - original in French/excerpt from Google Translated version below:


> .... The IP address 131 137 245 208 has indeed recently made changes on a Wikipedia page on refugees in the Syrian civil war. In one part showing the number of refugees in different countries, the vandal has written that "there are more than 300 families with very large dildos" in Argentina.
> 
> Thirty minutes later, another user has deleted these changes.
> 
> ...


Stay classy ....  :facepalm:


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Oct 2015)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Well big Rick has an answer:
> 
> Rick Hillier says military can help bring in 50,000 refugees by Christmas
> 
> ...


Uh, maybe not?


> During the election, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau promised that his government would bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by the end of 2015.
> 
> But it’s a tall order, say refugee advocates. Though they applaud the idea of vastly increasing Canada’s intake of Syrian refugees, they wonder if the timeline is a bit too tight.
> 
> “People are suggesting if necessary take a bit longer and do it better, rather than just bringing people here and not having things ready for them,” said Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees ....


More ....


> .... Canada currently takes about 7,500 government assisted refugees each year, who are typically met by non-governmental organizations whose staff help with orientation and and place them in temporary housing, either in reception centres or even cheap hotels.
> 
> If that number is to be boosted to 25,000 over the next two months, these organizations will know what needs to be done, but their capacity to do it will be strained to breaking, said Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees.
> 
> ...


Still, retiree hope springs eternal ....


> Two retired leaders of the Royal Canadian Air Force say it is “technically” possible for Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau to reach his goal of resettling 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of the year.
> 
> However, they say a successful mission would require fast action and a full-fledged military response.
> 
> ...


Meanwhile, serving CAF folks are getting 'er done ....


> The Canadian Armed Forces is scrambling to determine how many Syrian refugees could be temporarily accommodated at military bases as they draft plans to help the incoming Liberal government fulfill a campaign promise to bring 25,000 asylum seekers here by Jan. 1.
> 
> Ottawa is considering private airplanes to bring the refugees to Canada. Military aircraft are available, and the CC-150 Airbus Polaris could bring as many as 190 per flight, but Forces officials say it is hard to beat the cheaper, high-density seating of a chartered wide-body aircraft.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (30 Oct 2015)

Here's a thought:

Declare one of Canada's Arctic Islands as an Extra-Territorial possession.  Establish a refugee facility there.  Invite all-comers.  Consider it a Canadian version of Christmas Island with the added benefit that it is close to the North Pole and Santa.

In a generation or two they can request to join the federation as a territory like Nunavut.


----------



## c_canuk (30 Oct 2015)

Sounds like a reasonable solution if enough funds were spent to make it hospitable while they are guided on integration into our society, however, the wailing and gnashing of the teeth from SJW would make it political suicide, even if it was just a year to screen, educate and integrate.

It's still a good idea, just have to set it up somewhere more hospitable, though the SJW will refer to it as a camp no doubt... I suppose it's more likely to be seen as a good idea if the LPC is at the helm rather than CPC.


----------



## YZT580 (30 Oct 2015)

An integration centre is a great idea that will not pass due to earlier history.  Grosse Island served as just such a facility in the 19th century and its memories will not allow the concept to be tried again.  Besides, these folks won't even accept water if it isn't in the correctly labelled container so they certainly won't tolerate being settled anywhere but near or in civilization   Expect riots if such an attempt is made.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Oct 2015)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> An integration centre is a great idea that will not pass due to earlier history.  Grosse Island served as just such a facility in the 19th century and its memories will not allow the concept to be tried again.  Besides, these folks won't even accept water if it isn't in the correctly labelled container so they certainly won't tolerate being settled anywhere but near or in civilization   Expect riots if such an attempt is made.



So, you are telling us that they are being civilized in their demands?  Excuse me for being less than accepting in anything other than offering humanitarian aid as we would deem the norm.  If they are such that they do not want to assimilate or integrate into our society, then please do not come here demanding the world of us.

It is bloody ridiculous to demand that we create a "Halab" policy for ungrateful peoples.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Oct 2015)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Here's a thought:
> 
> Declare one of Canada's Arctic Islands as an Extra-Territorial possession.  Establish a refugee facility there.  Invite all-comers.  Consider it a Canadian version of Christmas Island with the added benefit that it is close to the North Pole and Santa.
> 
> In a generation or two they can request to join the federation as a territory like Nunavut.



Are there not existing Barracks in Goose Bay that are sitting empty?  Would it be feasible to build infrastructure in Churchill to house, process and provide medical needs to the large numbers promised, which would further develop the North and provide infrastucture that Churchill and surrounding settlements could use well after the migrant issue is over?  Unlike Southern locations, the demand for Security forces would be minimal.


----------



## GAP (30 Oct 2015)

Nah, Churchill has little in the way of excess housing. Use Kapyong.


----------



## George Wallace (31 Oct 2015)

GAP said:
			
		

> Nah, Churchill has little in the way of excess housing. Use Kapyong.



Ship in ACCO trailers.  They were good enough for PMQ's on the Pine Tree Line.  They could be used after the "crisis" to encourage more to move North, or as Temp Qtrs for organizations involved in business or leisure in the North, or moved to any other location that would need them.

The problem with these migrants (NOT those that are sponsored by family members.) is that they are not happy with what is being given to them and are inclined to wander off the environs that are set up for their administration, disappearing into the population.  Placing them in any location within a metropolitan area is only asking for problems.  From experience in Germany, when they accepted Russian, Polish and other immigrants who had claims to German heritage after the Wall came down, the crime rate in the locations that they were settled rose 500%.  (Experience from 1990's in Lahr/Offenburg region.)  There is a good possibility this experience will be repeated.


----------



## Altair (31 Oct 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> The "Oktoberfest" speil was all an unknown blogger in the UK, with not known identity, who raised a bogus "demand".  It has NO credible authenticity.


Why let facts gets in the way of a good fear mongering?


----------



## PuckChaser (31 Oct 2015)

Altair said:
			
		

> Why let facts gets in the way of a good fear mongering?


Wasnt that the NDP and Liberal supporters entire set of campaign messaging for the past election?

Being weary of the intentions of people who are violently trying to move from safe country to safe country is not fear mongering. If they were fleeing fighting in Syria they should be happy in whatever EU nation they got to.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (1 Nov 2015)

So I'm not opposed to allowing Refugees in to the country.  I had a great argument with my significant other about this today though.  I said that I would be willing to allow refugees into Canada on the condition they stay with Canadian families that are willing to house them while they await a residency claim.  I said I would be more than willing to sponsor a family and that they could even live in my house as long as they agreed to follow my rules.

My significant other was vehemently opposed to this of course.  Her thoughts were that they should be allowed to come here but she wants nothing to do with them and wouldn't want them living in her house.  I disagreed with her and said if we are willing to accept these people in to our country, we should be willing to accept them in to our homes.  I think the average Canadian wants that feel good moment of helping someone,my it doesn't want to actually do anything to earn it.  If we can't accept someone in to our home, why. Should they be allowed to settle here?


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> So I'm not opposed to allowing Refugees in to the country.  I had a great argument with my significant other about this today though.  I said that I would be willing to allow refugees into Canada on the condition they stay with Canadian families that are willing to house them while they await a residency claim.  I said I would be more than willing to sponsor a family and that they could even live in my house as long as they agreed to follow my rules.
> 
> My significant other was vehemently opposed to this of course.  Her thoughts were that they should be allowed to come here but she wants nothing to do with them and wouldn't want them living in her house.  I disagreed with her and said if we are willing to accept these people in to our country, we should be willing to accept them in to our homes.  I think the average Canadian wants that feel good moment of helping someone,my it doesn't want to actually do anything to earn it.  If we can't accept someone in to our home, why. Should they be allowed to settle here?



I agree.  If you do not have the trust in the 'guest' to live in your home, then why be hypocritical about it and allow them into the country and have an affect on other Canadians peace of mind.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> I think the average Canadian wants that feel good moment of helping someone,my it doesn't want to actually do anything to earn it.


I think you've hit both ends of the "committment spectrum" - "so happy to have 'em that I'll put some up" to "let 'em in as long as they don't disturb my chunk of the universe".

Not to mention the extension of the spectrum to cover the "none are too many" camp.



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> If you do not have the trust in the 'guest' to live in your home, then why be hypocritical about it and allow them into the country and have an affect on other Canadians peace of mind.


NIMBY defined right there.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Nov 2015)

As I have made clear, I think, in  these fora, I believe that our, global, response to refugees is, to be charitable, madness.

I believe that most _legitimate_ refugees want to return to their homes and our second priority should be to help them to do that.

Our first priority ought to be to make them safe (and reasonably comfortable) as close to home as possible.

Priority 1 costs money: to persuade neighbouring states to accept refugees; to build and staff camps with schools and hospitals and, and, and ... and, when the camps in the regions are full to overflowing, to build new camps farther away. But, camps from which almost all the refugees will, eventually return to their homes, not new homes in far away, foreign lands. 

Priority 2 costs even more: making the place from which refugees fled _safe_, may, likely will require concerted, swift, violent, large scale military action.

But doing 1 and 2, in fairly short order, is the right answer ... doing what we (Canada) proposes is more madness.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Nov 2015)

My take?

What is being proposed by the incoming government is not a refugee scheme. A vanishingly small percentage of the 25k that they propose to import from the Middle East will ever return home.

What is being proposed is taking 25k hastily screened people and (effectively) moving them to the front of the immigration queue. I would hope that the quality of the screening remains high, but I have worked around bureaucracies long enough to accept that there will be all sorts of unforeseen second and third order effects.

interesting times....


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Nov 2015)

Altair said:
			
		

> good fear mongering?



Lame.  Accusing someone of fear mongering is ripped from the same page book as calling someone a nazi in a political argument.  If you don't think there's valid crap to be afraid of out there you obviously haven't turned on the news or better yet seen it for yourself.  Research some of the problems associated with mass-relocating refugees.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Being weary of the intentions of people who are violently trying to move from safe country to safe country is not fear mongering. If they were fleeing fighting in Syria they should be happy in whatever EU nation they got to.



Yup. There's videos and news articles about them refusing to be located to countries they feel don't provide enough hand outs and free shit, to be blunt.  Country shopping.



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> So I'm not opposed to allowing Refugees in to the country.  I had a great argument with my significant other about this today though.  I said that I would be willing to allow refugees into Canada on the condition they stay with Canadian families that are willing to house them while they await a residency claim.  I said I would be more than willing to sponsor a family and that they could even live in my house as long as they agreed to follow my rules.
> 
> My significant other was vehemently opposed to this of course.  Her thoughts were that they should be allowed to come here but she wants nothing to do with them and wouldn't want them living in her house.  I disagreed with her and said if we are willing to accept these people in to our country, we should be willing to accept them in to our homes.  I think the average Canadian wants that feel good moment of helping someone,my it doesn't want to actually do anything to earn it.  If we can't accept someone in to our home, why. Should they be allowed to settle here?



I think this is the best summery I've seen or will see on the issue.

People want to feel good and tell themselves they've helped out the down trodden but it's another story when their own lives are directly impacted.
Will the new Prime minister be taking in one of these families?




One of my friends was at the same base that took in those refugees years ago.  Lots of stories stories of what happened never hit the news (he said soldiers were basically told to STFU about what was going on).  I do remember there were instances of them bringing in diseases including a big TB scare if I recall correctly.

I agree with SeaKingTacco, they're not looking to return home. Why would they?


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Yup. There's videos and news articles about them refusing to be located to countries they feel don't provide enough hand outs and free shit, to be blunt.  Country shopping.



Once they do that, they are no longer refugees in my books; but "Economic Migrants".

Harper's Government was working for three years to bring in families of Canadians of Syrian descent, doing the proper screening and ensuring that they would have the family resources and assistance to integrate into Canadian society.  There is no MAGIC WAND that can safely do that in two months and ensure that the "Economic Migrants" that Trudeau wants to bring in will not be a burden on our resources and Welfare System.  I will not dwell on security risks.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Once they do that, they are no longer refugees in my books; but "Economic Migrants".
> 
> Harper's Government was working for three years to bring in families of Canadians of Syrian descent, doing the proper screening and ensuring that they would have the family resources and assistance to integrate into Canadian society.  _There is no MAGIC WAND that can [size=14pt]*safely*__ do that in two months_[/size] and ensure that the "Economic Migrants" that Trudeau wants to bring in will not be a burden on our resources and Welfare System.  I will not dwell on security risks.




Very true, but ...

     1. Canadians were promised just that wand in the last election campaign;

     2. Canadians voted for the guys and gals who promised to do magic tricks; and

     3. Watch for the _*emphasized*_ word to be sacrificed in the name of political expedience.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Nov 2015)

Germany
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEUARxP2NSI

Greece
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj8hpKx_oOk

Hungary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDMdtbfMnVE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl16QDk2sig



I'm actually pretty excited about this.  

1. My CCOI course was canceled. I'm still course wait listed so I'm hoping I get another chance at the course.
2. I hate flying, I'm thinking we'll be able to collect danger pay at home? (minus dudes crying because clerks get the same danger pay of course)
3. Won't have to miss my family for 6 months at a time.


----------



## Stoker (1 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Germany
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEUARxP2NSI
> 
> Greece
> ...



If we open the floodgates is this what we will expect here or will we cave into them and give them everything they want?


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Nov 2015)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> If we open the floodgates is this what we will expect here or will we cave into them and give them everything they want?



Good question.
Given the numerous examples of our LEOs ignoring latent crimes being committed like barricading roads, harassing travelers, trespassing etc.. by some First nations members I suspect the latter. I can envision our LEOs being told to back off in order to avoid bad publicity or images like in those videos I posted.  If 50 first nations members are allowed to blockade highways and national rail ways what can 25'000 refugees do?


----------



## Stoker (1 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Good question.
> Given the numerous examples of our LEOs ignoring latent crimes being committed like barricading roads, harassing travelers, trespassing etc.. by some First nations members I suspect the latter. I can envision our LEOs being told to back off in order to avoid bad publicity or images like in those videos I posted.  If 50 first nations members are allowed to blockade highways and national rail ways what can 25'000 refugees do?



Problem is I suspect we have a lot more than 25'000 before long. I'm all about helping people however I would like to see these people be placed in a safe area and returned to their home country when and if their situation stabilizes. The social system cannot afford this. I wonder where all the bleeding hearts will be when start to have incidents like in Germany and the rest of Europe.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2015)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Problem is I suspect we have a lot more than 25'000 before long. I'm all about helping people however I would like to see these people be placed in a safe area and returned to their home country when and if their situation stabilizes. The social system cannot afford this. I wonder where all the bleeding hearts will be when start to have incidents like in Germany and the rest of Europe.



Walking around some of the streets in German cities right now is like walking around a street in a foreign land that is NOT Germany.  The numbers of Muslims and others from not only the Middle East, but South West Asia, Pakistan, Turkey and North Africa totally outnumber the German population.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Nov 2015)

Don't worry, we're likely going to dump them into military bases. We'll still need ID to get onto the base, but the Syrians won't need a background check to live there.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Nov 2015)

Nice spot out near Five Fingers.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Nov 2015)

I recommended we use the urban ops sites, plenty of empty buildings.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Nov 2015)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I recommended we use the urban ops sites, plenty of empty buildings.



Some will probably feel at home with the bullet marks on the walls and soldiers doing dynamic entries all over the place.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Nov 2015)

Interesting times indeed.  I fear for my children and future grandchildren.


----------



## Zoomie (1 Nov 2015)

Winnipeg South is ready and waiting - chain link fences included.


----------



## captloadie (2 Nov 2015)

The longer this thread gets, the more and more it begins to sound like a bunch of people scared this influx will begin to "darken" the population and convert the masses. Did you all have these same fears when we brought in the Vietnamese 30 years ago? Were you not scared they would begin slowly infiltrate the political system and bring about a new communist state?

Has anyone done the research on who these people are that are leaving Syria? The masses are people who are trying to escape the war and terror of their homeland. Sure, maybe they are economic migrants trying to find a better life for themselves and their families, but so were the Irish, who also were bringing their own religious beliefs with them.

25,000 individuals would make up a minuscule portion of the Canadian population as a whole. Even if they all came in and went on welfare, if you divied them up and put 2500 in each province, their demand on social assistance programs would be negligible to those who are already on welfare. More than likely though, a large majority of them might actually become gainfully employed, some might even be professionals who would improve Canadian society.


----------



## jollyjacktar (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> The longer this thread gets, the more and more it begins to sound like a bunch of people scared this influx will begin to "darken" the population and convert the masses. Did you all have these same fears when we brought in the Vietnamese 30 years ago? Were you not scared they would begin slowly infiltrate the political system and bring about a new communist state?
> 
> Has anyone done the research on who these people are that are leaving Syria? The masses are people who are trying to escape the war and terror of their homeland. Sure, maybe they are economic migrants trying to find a better life for themselves and their families, but so were the Irish, who also were bringing their own religious beliefs with them.
> 
> 25,000 individuals would make up a minuscule portion of the Canadian population as a whole. Even if they all came in and went on welfare, if you divide them up and put 2500 in each province, their demand on social assistance programs would be negligible to those who are already on welfare. More than likely though, a large majority of them might actually become gainfully employed, some might even be professionals who would improve Canadian society.



I wasn't concerned that any of the boat people "might" be sleeper agents, or want to commit acts I would consider terrorism when they arrived here.  The only concerns I had with the boat people was in getting into a traffic accident with one.  There were a few examples of them stabbing the poor bastard they collided with.  And their winter driving capabilities were down right scary for the first winter or two.  Otherwise, they've fitted in nicely.  

I have no doubt there will be those members of the Syrian refugees that will make outstanding, excellent immigrants and can bring things to the table for the benefit of this country.  I have no issues with these people coming and quite frankly welcome their arrival as we do need immigrants.  I want the immigrants who come to this country will be of a benefit to this country, not a security concern or drain on resources.


----------



## Strike (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> The longer this thread gets, the more and more it begins to sound like a bunch of people scared this influx will begin to "darken" the population and convert the masses. Did you all have these same fears when we brought in the Vietnamese 30 years ago? Were you not scared they would begin slowly infiltrate the political system and bring about a new communist state?
> 
> Has anyone done the research on who these people are that are leaving Syria? The masses are people who are trying to escape the war and terror of their homeland. Sure, maybe they are economic migrants trying to find a better life for themselves and their families, but so were the Irish, who also were bringing their own religious beliefs with them.
> 
> 25,000 individuals would make up a minuscule portion of the Canadian population as a whole. Even if they all came in and went on welfare, if you divied them up and put 2500 in each province, their demand on social assistance programs would be negligible to those who are already on welfare. More than likely though, a large majority of them might actually become gainfully employed, some might even be professionals who would improve Canadian society.



The difference is that this migrant group is not solely from Syria, which is the cause du jour of the incoming government when it comes to refugees, but from many other countries as well looking to specifically country shop. Go talk to your int shop.  I'm sure they can show you the numbers.

On top of that, when the Vietnamese and Kosovars came during their respective crisis, it was carefully managed and very specific to those countires.  Because of the country shopping going on, people are worried that the same thing is going to happen here and, until they are shown otherwise with a set plan that will ensure the refugees being accepted are indeed from Syria, that is what they will believe.

Lack of information tends to breed fear.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> The longer this thread gets, the more and more it begins to sound like a bunch of people scared this influx will begin to "darken" the population and convert the masses. Did you all have these same fears when we brought in the Vietnamese 30 years ago? Were you not scared they would begin slowly infiltrate the political system and bring about a new communist state?
> 
> Has anyone done the research on who these people are that are leaving Syria? The masses are people who are trying to escape the war and terror of their homeland. Sure, maybe they are economic migrants trying to find a better life for themselves and their families, but so were the Irish, who also were bringing their own religious beliefs with them.
> 
> 25,000 individuals would make up a minuscule portion of the Canadian population as a whole. Even if they all came in and went on welfare, if you divied them up and put 2500 in each province, their demand on social assistance programs would be negligible to those who are already on welfare. More than likely though, a large majority of them might actually become gainfully employed, some might even be professionals who would improve Canadian society.



I agree completely.  I've got no problem letting refugees in to the country, I just want to make sure it's done properly and not in some sort of halfassed fashion for short term political points.  I would even consider letting some stay with me.  

I would like to see some smaller communities take these people on.  I think showing them some good old rural Canadian hospitality would be a good introduction to the country.  Would definitely be preferable to throwing them in to an urban ghetto.  

A society should be judged on how it treats the vagrants and least fortunate members.


----------



## captloadie (2 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> I agree completely.  I've got no problem letting refugees in to the country, I just want to make sure it's done properly and not in some sort of halfassed fashion for short term political points.  I would even consider letting some stay with me.
> 
> _*I would like to see some smaller communities take these people on.  I think showing them some good old rural Canadian hospitality would be a good introduction to the country.  Would definitely be preferable to throwing them in to an urban ghetto. * _
> 
> A society should be judged on how it treats the vagrants and least fortunate members.



I wholeheartedly agree with the highlighted portion. Find smaller communities that can both accept and support these family units. How many small communities have those one or two Vietnamese families that make you wonder, "how in the hell did they end up here running a variety store?" 

Maybe we could try to pluck out some medical staff from the groups of migrants, fast track their equivalencies (as opposed to the impossible system in place now) and co-locate them in areas where we settle the migrants.

I'm thinking of a real life "Little Mosque on the Prairie" setups.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (2 Nov 2015)

Personnaly, I have no problems taking in 25,000 real refugees.

My problem is the following: If you take them in hurriedly on the basis that you will do the proper screening after they get into Canada, then can someone tell me _HOW_ and _WHERE_ do you return the ones that fail security screening?

And BTW, captloadie, spreading them evenly on welfare to all provinces, so 2500 per province would bring at least one province's system, PEI, to a breaking point.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Personnaly, I have no problems taking in 25,000 real refugees.
> 
> My problem is the following: If you take them in hurriedly on the basis that you will do the proper screening after they get into Canada, then can someone tell me _HOW_ and _WHERE_ do you return the ones that fail security screening?
> 
> And BTW, captloadie, spreading them evenly on welfare to all provinces, so 2500 per province would bring at least one province's system, PEI, to a breaking point.



Well, from what I can understand from the soon to be former prime minister, we have to take an expansive view of PEI and include the Ottawa suburb of Kanata (population 80K) in any discussion of PEI...


(The fallacy of keeping PEI, NS, NB and NL as four distinct provinces is another issue that needs to be addressed; the combined population is low, while the political influence at the federal level is grossly oversized.  And the resulting ongoing federal pandering with EI rules etc has resulted in today's reality in Atlantic Canada)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Nov 2015)

Aiming at sacred cows is sure to create a visceral response. Highly unlikely they will offended such well trained voters.


----------



## dimsum (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> I wholeheartedly agree with the highlighted portion. Find smaller communities that can both accept and support these family units. How many small communities have those one or two Vietnamese families that make you wonder, "how in the hell did they end up here running a variety store?"
> 
> Maybe we could try to pluck out some medical staff from the groups of migrants, fast track their equivalencies (as opposed to the impossible system in place now) and co-locate them in areas where we settle the migrants.
> 
> I'm thinking of a real life "Little Mosque on the Prairie" setups.



Could the authorities actually order the migrants to settle in rural places?


----------



## Jed (2 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Well, from what I can understand from the soon to be former prime minister, we have to take an expansive view of PEI and include the Ottawa suburb of Kanata (population 80K) in any discussion of PEI...
> 
> 
> (The fallacy of keeping PEI, NS, NB and NL as four distinct provinces is another issue that needs to be addressed; the combined population is low, while the political influence at the federal level is grossly oversized.  And the resulting ongoing federal pandering with EI rules etc has resulted in today's reality in Atlantic Canada)



So to be fair and unbiased, if the current wishes of the Atlantic area wish to follow Liberal policies and accept their  entitlements ala Dingwall, they should be willing to accept their apportionment of the incoming Syrian Refugees. (based on provincial apportionment, of course)


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (2 Nov 2015)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Could the authorities actually order the migrants to settle in rural places?



They wouldn't settle there but the refugee camps could be set up there and this would represent their initial taste of Canada.  A lot of smaller towns have declining population and have plenty of suitable facilities for this sort of thing (old schools, unused arenas, etc).  A refugee centre could be set up in fairly short order, the military could support this sort of initiative and it would be a good way to get the Army Reserves involved as well.  I would lean on the Army Reserves heavily in this instance as many Reserve Units have deep connections within their respective communities and know which strings to pull to make things happen.

The deal would need to be sweetened of course, perhaps every community handling the refugees would receive a large pot of Federal money, part of which would go towards the refugees and the rest could be used for other projects needed in the community it self.  They would basically receive a subsidy in exchange for looking after the influx of refugees.  Teams of experts could also be surged in to these communities to provide a variety of social services.  

This idea also has an ulterior motive behind it.  This sort of campaign could serve as a very powerful counter-narrative for us to use against our enemies (fundamentalists).  I see it as a sort of IO campaign conducted at the strategic level.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Nov 2015)

Have we got a deal for you

http://globalnews.ca/news/1483593/ghost-town-mysteries-the-30-year-slumber-of-kitsault-b-c/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Falls

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/07/15/bradian-bc-ghost-town_n_7805222.html


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Maybe we could try to pluck out some medical staff from the groups of migrants, fast track their equivalencies (as opposed to the impossible system in place now) and co-locate them in areas where we settle the migrants.


1)  That's mostly up to the self-governing doctor groups out there.
2)  As a specialized sub-set of migrants, I'm guessing places would be happy to put up a doc and his/her family to treat NON-refugees in communities aching for an MD.



			
				captloadie said:
			
		

> I'm thinking of a real life "Little Mosque on the Prairie" setups.


I remain optimistic, but I don't know if I'd be THAT optimistic ....



			
				Dimsum said:
			
		

> Could the authorities actually order the migrants to settle in rural places?


In previous waves of migration, Canada has said, "we have a job and a place to live for you at a gold mine in Northern Ontario", with a "no" leading to someone else being offered said job/slot.  That, though, was another time ....

A few factors to consider:
-  Are we moving people temporarily or long-term?  (temporary = OK in a smaller place without as many job prospects vs. long-term = need for higher chance of finding longer-term gainful employment)
-  Are we aiming to move them to be near folks already here from "the old country", or to have them learn "the Canadian way" via assimilation/acculturation "cold turkey"?
-  How many refugee/migrants are willing to move to a smaller centre with fewer resources?
-  How many small centres want to take on new folks?



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The deal would need to be sweetened of course, perhaps every community handling the refugees would receive a large pot of Federal money, part of which would go towards the refugees and the rest could be used for other projects needed in the community it self.


That, too, would affect the calculus considerably as well.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Nov 2015)

Oh my, what could possibly go wrong with the bit in yellow?


> .... members of the outgoing government warn Trudeau will have a hard time meeting a promise to bring in 25,000 Syrian refugees by year-end.
> 
> By comparison, the United States, with nine times as many people as Canada, is aiming to take in at least 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jed (2 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Oh my, what could possibly go wrong with the bit in yellow?



I guess it will be like that Tom Hanks movie and all these Refugees will have to live in the Airport facilities.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Nov 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> The longer this thread gets, the more and more it begins to sound like a bunch of people scared this influx will begin to "darken" the population and convert the masses.



Yea, what a bunch of racists  :nod:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Nov 2015)

Except some of the people concerned are dark skinned and come from other countries. They realize that not everyone who comes in will be good for the country or community. In fact i just spent 1/2 hr talking to my dark skinned immigrant wife who is volunteering with a church to teach ESL. If you think "Us Canadians" are worried about unrestricted immigration, just ask a successful immigrant, you be surprised by their blunt response I think.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Nov 2015)

Meanwhile, here, an consultant's vote for Kapyong as a temporary home ....


> The Kapyong Barracks is the perfect place to house up to 2,000 Syrian refugees according to a Winnipeg military expert.
> 
> Gary Solar is a retired Colonel and chief of operations at the Centre for Crime and Terrorism Studies in the United States.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The deal would need to be sweetened of course, perhaps every community handling the refugees would receive a large pot of Federal money, part of which would go towards the refugees and the rest could be used for other projects needed in the community it self.  They would basically receive a subsidy in exchange for looking after the influx of refugees.  Teams of experts could also be surged in to these communities to provide a variety of social services.


First step:  "reaching out" to provinces & large municipalities, which is what Minister McCallum is telling reporters he's going to be doing (according to Twitter posts from a news conference now under way).

As for housing refugees in military facilities?  Still a maybe, according to various reporters:

_"McCallum says one of the possibilities for temporary housing Syrian refugees is military bases."_
_"McCallum says Army playing major role because military bases may be used to house refugees #cdnpoli"_
_"McCallum says military is playing a major role with potential for refugees to be housed on army bases."_

More from Info-machine Red here:


> The Honourable John McCallum, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, today announced the creation of a new Cabinet ad hoc committee to help bring Syrian refugees to Canada.
> 
> An Ad Hoc Committee on Refugees will be a driving force in delivering on the government’s commitment to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by the end of 2015.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Nov 2015)

And the calls for calm/tolerance begin - this from the 2 Div Info-machine, via 45enord.ca after reports that Valcartier _may_ be host to some refugees - Google translation below ....


> Message à l’intention de tous les membres de la 2e Division du Canada et de la Force opérationnelle interarmées (Est)
> Brigadier-général Stéphane Lafaut
> 
> Commandant, 2e Division du Canada/Force opérationnelle interarmées (Est)
> ...


Google English:


> Message to all members of the 2nd Canadian Division and Joint Task Force (East)
> Brigadier General Stéphane Lafaut
> Commander, 2nd Canadian Division / Joint Task Force (East)
> 
> ...


----------



## newwifey (9 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, here, an consultant's vote for Kapyong as a temporary home ....



I suggested as much when the topic was brought up in more local news groups.  General consensus is the City needs to focus on their homeless and the poverty issues before this occurs.  Yes, the First nations and ownership will also be a concern moving forward but this is a temporary thing which no one seems to understand. No one is going to start demo'ing and rebuilding tomorrow or in December either.  

Of course there is a rather affluent area right there....NIMBY is rampant!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Nov 2015)

Not everybody supports this move.  I've read thru some news articles and comments from (assumingly) average Canadians.  Many voice concerns and point towards the chaos in Europe and ask what is going to be done by the government to ensure this does NOT happen in Canada.


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> First step:  "reaching out" to provinces & large municipalities, which is what Minister McCallum is telling reporters he's going to be doing (according to Twitter posts from a news conference now under way).
> 
> As for housing refugees in military facilities?  Still a maybe, according to various reporters:
> 
> ...


Next step:  name someone at PCO as the refugee lead ....


> Malcolm Brown, currently Deputy Minister for International Development, becomes Special Advisor to the Clerk of the Privy Council on the Syrian Refugee Initiative. - See more at: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2015/11/09/pm-announces-change-senior-ranks-public-service#sthash.IlWVNh4n.dpuf


More on Brown here.


			
				Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I've read thru some news articles and comments from (assumingly) average Canadians.  Many voice concerns and point towards the chaos in Europe and ask what is going to be done by the government to ensure this does NOT happen in Canada.


While comments sometimes have to be taken with a grain of salt, that's still a reasonable question to ask - wonder how long it'll take to get asked?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> While comments sometimes have to be taken with a grain of salt, that's still a reasonable question to ask - wonder how long it'll take to get asked?



I tend to ignore the comments that sound like they come from the "_Happy Birthday, Uncle Dad_!" crowd; some of the comments from posters were quite reasonable and mature.  There are some who are 'all in', some who are 'why are we doing this?!?!?' and some "I see the need for this; are we doing it in a way that won't be a detriment to our country, neighborhoods and citizens?".

Agreed that the last question is a reasonable one, and one that should be addressed and communicated.   :2c:


----------



## a_majoor (9 Nov 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I tend to ignore the comments that sound like they come from the "_Happy Birthday, Uncle Dad_!" crowd; some of the comments from posters were quite reasonable and mature.  There are some who are 'all in', some who are 'why are we doing this?!?!?' and some "I see the need for this; are we doing it in a way that won't be a detriment to our country, neighborhoods and citizens?".
> 
> Agreed that the last question is a reasonable one, and one that should be addressed and communicated.   :2c:



That is the real issue. The new government suddenly saying we will take in a huge influx of refugees _without_ any sort of plan (scrambling to determine where and when they will be screened, scrambling to find places for them, no apparent discussion of the long term plan or reprecussions of this) smacks of "virtue signalling", and as the virtue signalling in Europe shows, not having a plan leads to trouble.

Will Canadians torch old military bases to prevent them from being used? Highly unlikely for now, but as time passes and problems arise due to lack of planning (or questions are not being answered becasue there are no answers available), then the sorts of forces that drive the nativists in Europe will find grounds to grow and prosper here. I would be all for a considered pause and some proper long term planning over virtue signalling and rushing to do a half assed job with the refugees.


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Nov 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Will Canadians torch old military bases to prevent them from being used? Highly unlikely for now, but as time passes and problems arise due to lack of planning (or questions are not being answered becasue there are no answers available), then the sorts of forces that drive the nativists in Europe will find grounds to grow and prosper here.


I'm going to have a bit more faith in Canadians (not to mention those guarding said bases) than that for now.

Meanwhile, one caught so far (out of ~102,000 this year landing in Italy & Greece), but more than zero ....


> Italian police caught a Tunisian member of an Islamic terrorist group among a group of boat migrants rescued last month, and promptly repatriated him, the La Repubblica newspaper reported Sunday.
> 
> Bar Nasr Mehdi, 38, was said to have been picked up from the Mediterranean on October 4 by a navy rescue team along with more than 200 people, and taken to the Italian outpost island of Lampedusa.
> 
> After fingerprinting, authorities discovered he had given a false name and was the man who had been arrested in Italy in 2008, convicted to seven years‘ imprisonment for terrorism, expelled and banned from returning after serving his time ....


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Nov 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Not everybody supports this move.



Nope.  I'll leave my family and risk my life to deploy to Syria or Iraq and help Syrians fight ISIS and get their home back.  
I don't support taking marginally screened refugees and dropping them into my town, or country. The security risk is too much.  

I suspect the security teams designated to watch them won't even be armed for fear of headlines.  

It was a stupid number of refugees to promise to take into Canada and the government will go ahead with it because they don't want to lose face.


----------



## Jed (9 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Nope.  I'll leave my family and risk my life to deploy to Syria or Iraq and help Syrians fight ISIS and get their home back.
> I don't support taking marginally screened refugees and dropping them into my town, or country. The security risk is too much.
> 
> I suspect the security teams designated to watch them won't even be armed for fear of headlines.
> ...



In my opinion that is by far the majority of any informed military members opinion. I could be wrong though.

I suppose just like in World War I we kept putting troops 'over the top' and damn the consequences our newby Government priority will be to save face and do the obviously very stupid and dangerous thing.  Here Jeeves, hold my champagne and watch this.


----------



## Bass ackwards (9 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> While comments sometimes have to be taken with a grain of salt, that's still a reasonable question to ask - wonder how long it'll take to get asked?



And how long will it take for the person asking it to be branded a racist and an Islamophobe? End of debate.

Unfortunately, a lot of the animosity and hard feelings that result from that will spill over onto the refugees themselves, regardless of whether they've done anything to deserve it -instead of being directed at the people doing the branding (cough CBC cough).


----------



## a_majoor (9 Nov 2015)

> Quote from: Thucydides on Today at 16:59:43
> 
> 
> > Will Canadians torch old military bases to prevent them from being used? Highly unlikely for now, but as time passes and problems arise due to lack of planning (or questions are not being answered becasue there are no answers available), then the sorts of forces that drive the nativists in Europe will find grounds to grow and prosper here.
> ...



As a student of history, I have faith that people are motivated by the same things that were identified by the first Thucydides as he was writing the "The History of the Peloponnesian War": _kleos, doxa and timē_, and sadly, people who feel slighted in these things will begin to seek out ways to regain them, even to the point of conflict (indeed this is sometimes seen as the source of conflict). On a less rhetorical plane, we can also see that the unrestricted immigration of Europe since the 1980's has led to the rise of Nativist "National Socialist" parties and their increasing electoral success, which current events has only boosted. One mustn't forget the PQ was also a National Socialist party, and Parizeau's "Money and the ethnic vote" shows where their heads were at the time.

So while I hope as you do, I am also aware that the new government is not exactly setting the conditions for success with this display of virtue signalling.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Nov 2015)

Article Link

Canadian military can already house 12K Syrian refugees

The Canadian military is already prepared to house 12,000 Syrian refugees -- nearly half of the 25,000 that the Liberal government has promised to bring to the country -- by the end of the year, CTV News has learned.

Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance ordered a review weeks ago so that the military could hit the ground running in case the government asked for his support.

Refugees could be housed in cadet summer camps and military training bases.

"We've got the whole network of bases across Canada -- probably, though I’m just guessing at this stage of the game -- it could probably come back to (Canadian Forces Base) Trenton, where they could be processed and distributed out," said retired Major General David Fraser.

Earlier on Monday, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Minister John McCallum announced that a cabinet sub-committee has been tasked with bringing the Liberals’ goal to fruition.

The chair of the sub-committee will be Health Minister Jane Philpott. Other members include Heritage Minister Melanie Joly, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion and Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef.

McCallum said each sub-committee member has a portfolio that touches on the refugee issue. He singled out Philpott, who has worked with refugees in Africa, and Monsef, who was herself a refugee from Afghanistan.

McCallum said the Liberal government is still committed to bringing the refugees in by the end of the year, but wants to do it “correctly.”

In a statement, NDP MP Jenny Kwan said her party "supports" the Liberals’ goal, but believes that McCallum's announcement was "short on details."

"We believe Canadians were looking for a concrete plan for getting vulnerable refugees out of harm's way, not hearing about new cabinet subcommittees," she said.

"This is the new government's first test on delivering the change they promised to Canadians. We hope that the next announcement on how they will achieve this goal is coming very soon."

McCallum said that Ottawa is relying on support from provinces, territories and municipalities, as well as groups and individuals who want to support refugees to accomplish its goal.

“As long as we do the job right, that is to say with speed but also with due attention to important considerations of health and security,” he said.

He acknowledged “time is limited” for the government to meet its goal, but said he will have a more detailed announcement “soon.”

In an appearance on CTV's Power Play on Monday, immigration lawyer Jennifer Bond said she believes the refugee target can be achieved and that so far the Liberals have taken the right steps forward.

"I think we should feel confident that a lot of senior people have been put on this portfolio, today's subcommittee is filled with people who have both good portfolios to be at the table but also a lot of good individual personal experiences," she said.

"We need to move quickly and I'm very hopeful that today's announcement is not a stall tactic, but actually a real commitment to actually work together to make this happen."

Bond added that refugees are "dying every single day and the increasing numbers of people are dying as conditions worsen overseas."

"As Canadians we can't only cry over the children that have died but we really have to do what we can do to help those that are still at risk, and I think that's where we’re heading," said Bond, who is also behind the University of Ottawa's Refugee Sponsorship Support Program.

Former Canadian ambassador to Syria Glenn Davidson, who also appeared on Power Play, agreed with Bond's assessment, saying that there's "no question (Canada) can handle" 25,000 refugees.

"I think that the steps that the government is taking -- that minister McCallum announced today -- are exactly right," he said.

"Put the focus of this new team firmly on this, put the resources behind it and move aggressively to make it happen."

When asked how the refugees will travel to Canada, McCallum said that “every option is on the table.”

He said involving the Royal Canadian Air Force, commercial planes, as well as ships, are possibilities.

"We would do what is the most efficient, cost-effective quick way to get those people here, and then we have to welcome them, and we have to accommodate and we have to help them settle into Canada," he said.

However, the air force likely won't have as large of a role as commercial airliners because of its limited capacity.

Air Canada has already offered to help the government transport Syrian refugees “to the fullest extent possible.” A company spokesperson told CTV News that the airline has so far only exchanged “preliminary information” with Ottawa.

McCallum said the government now has to figure out the fastest, most secure and cost-effective way to bring Syrian refugees from other countries that have taken them in. He said Ottawa will focus on Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon.

“We have to clearly liaise with the governments of those countries and with the United Nations.”

McCallum said the government has already deployed "dozens of additional immigration officials" to the region to handle the incoming case load.

Treasury Board President Scott Brison, who is also on the refugee sub-committee, will examine the related costs, McCallum said.

The exact cost of the mission has yet to be determined because all the "variables" have yet to be sorted out, but McCallum said it is going to cost a "penny or two."

"We've put aside some money in our platform for this, but it is not going to be cheap to bring 25,000 people to country and help them settle," he said.

"Don't forget these people come from the most dire of circumstances … this is probably the worst refugee crisis in decades," McCallum added.

The government will also have to find accommodations for all the refugees once they arrive. McCallum said that Canadian military bases are “one possibility” in the "short run," but working with provincial governments, as well as municipalities, non-governmental organizations and will be key.

McCallum said many groups, including the Syrian community, and individuals across the country have also offered to take in refugees.

McCallum said he also hopes to have refugee health care reinstated in line with the same end-of-year deadline.

"I don’t control the parliamentary calendar, and we will not have very much time before Christmas. But I certainly am hoping very much this will be the case," he said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- If we can house 12k of them on bases, why is there 'no room' in the SQs sometimes and waiting lists for PMQs?

- so the Liberal's definition of 'doing this right' is to try to get everyone else to pay for it?   ^-^  As stated, it will only be a penny...or two...


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Nov 2015)

Former CFB Cornwallis site offers to house Syrian refugees as well.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1321583-former-cfb-cornwallis-site-offers-to-house-syrian-refugees


----------



## brihard (10 Nov 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> - If we can house 12k of them on bases, why is there 'no room' in the SQs sometimes and waiting lists for PMQs?
> 
> - so the Liberal's definition of 'doing this right' is to try to get everyone else to pay for it?   ^-^  As stated, it will only be a penny...or two...



They're talking about the tent lines of weatherhavens found at such bases/camps as Gagetown, Connaught, Aldershot, Blackdown, etc. It would be very spartan. And cold...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Nov 2015)

When the Kosovo refugees were brought to Aldershot, it was the military members who were kicked out of their SQs and living in the tents on the old Black Watch parade square.  The refugees got the hard shelters.


----------



## Jed (10 Nov 2015)

Brihard said:
			
		

> They're talking about the tent lines of weatherhavens found at such bases/camps as Gagetown, Connaught, Aldershot, Blackdown, etc. It would be very spartan. And cold...



And how long before all the 'poor pitiful me' whining starts?


----------



## Harris (10 Nov 2015)

Brihard said:
			
		

> They're talking about the tent lines of weatherhavens found at such bases/camps as Gagetown, Connaught, Aldershot, Blackdown, etc. It would be very spartan. And cold...



Camp Argonaut in Gagetown has three nearly new accommodation buildings that hold 300+ each.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Nov 2015)

A sliver of info via the U.N. ....


> Syrian refugees being brought to Canada by the Liberal government will only be given temporary residency permits until their cases have been fully processed in Canada, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee says.
> 
> It's the first sliver of concrete detail about how the Liberals will meet a target to resettle 25,000 people by the end of the year, a logistical challenge now being overseen by a cabinet committee set to meet for the first time Tuesday.
> 
> ...


Here's today's (10 Nov 2015) statement from the UNHCR:


> UNHCR today welcomed the announcement by the Government of Canada to take in a further 25,000 Syrian refugees through humanitarian admission programmes by the end of 2015.
> 
> "This is a huge gesture of solidarity with the Syrian people and the countries neighbouring Syria which together are hosting more than four million refugees and bearing the brunt of this crisis. I urge other countries to follow Canada's lead, galvanise their resources, and dramatically increase the number of Syrians who are able to rebuild their lives in safe countries without having to take perilous journeys," said UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Nov 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> When the Kosovo refugees were brought to Aldershot, *it was the military members who were kicked out of their SQs and living in the tents on the old Black Watch parade square.  The refugees got the hard shelters.*




Is anyone surprised by that? I wouldn't be surprised if the military members still had to pay for their SQs.


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Nov 2015)

Using the UNHCR's statement, Canada with 10,000 plus another 25,000, will stand to take 22.5% of all pledged Syrian refugees. If we stuck with 10,000, we'd be at 6.5%, which is still double what the numbers would be if everyone took an equal number of 5168.

I somehow still feel there will be cries that Canada's not doing enough. Maybe we can cram a few more in the Weatherhavens at Meaford in January.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Nov 2015)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Using the UNHCR's statement, Canada with 10,000 plus another 25,000, will stand to take 22.5% of all pledged Syrian refugees. If we stuck with 10,000, we'd be at 6.5%, which is still double what the numbers would be if everyone took an equal number of 5168.
> 
> I somehow still feel there will be cries that Canada's not doing enough. Maybe we can cram a few more in the Weatherhavens at Meaford in January.


Hey, even the World Socialists complain about Mulcair/NDP not being socialist _enough_, so SOMEONE's gonna be unhappy, right?


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Nov 2015)

A bit more "target realignment" on Canada's commitment to taking 25,000 refugees -- here's the promise from the platform ....


> .... we will expand Canada’s intake of refugees from Syria by 25,000 through immediate government sponsorship ....


.... and what was said ....


> .... The Liberals would accept 25,000 by Jan. 1, 2016 ....


... compared to what the Immigration Minister's mandate letter says - highlights mine:


> .... Lead government-wide efforts to resettle 25,000 refugees from Syria *in the coming months* ....


----------



## a_majoor (13 Nov 2015)

Given the events in Paris tonight, perhaps a pause is in order before we start importing all these people. The idea of bringing them over without any prior screening at the point of departure or country of origin is sheer madness (what happens when they are already here and you can't identify them because the records are destroyed or corrupt, or you do identify a terrorist suspect? No one in the new government has apparently thought this through).

Step back, make a real plan, and then we can execute.


----------



## cavalryman (13 Nov 2015)

Insufficient opportunity for virtue signalling, Thucydides.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Nov 2015)

If anything we should speed up their arrival. 

Placing them in military bases is a great idea.  All the fences,  locked buildings and and armed guards make it very secure.


----------



## Jed (13 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> If anything we should speed up their arrival.
> 
> Placing them in military bases is a great idea.  All the fences,  locked buildings and and armed guards make it very secure.


Yep, just what we need, Boer War style concentration camps or WWII Japanese detention camps.
 :sarcasm:


----------



## tomahawk6 (13 Nov 2015)

How about not taking any of these so called refugee's ?


----------



## dimsum (14 Nov 2015)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> How about not taking any of these so called refugee's ?



Political suicide - it was one of the Liberal Government's top campaign priorities.


----------



## cavalryman (14 Nov 2015)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> How about not taking any of these so called refugee's ?


How about sticking to Christians and Yezidis - you know, folks from Syria getting butchered by ISIS because they're infidels.  I'm sure the Iranians can help the Shia and Alawites much better than we can.


----------



## Alpha dog (14 Nov 2015)

cavalryman said:
			
		

> How about sticking to Christians and Yezidis - you know, folks from Syria getting butchered by ISIS because they're infidels.  I'm sure the Iranians can help the Shia and Alawites much better than we can.



I don't think only the Yezidis and the Christians are considered infidels... anyone that does not share their beliefs is considered an infidel.


----------



## dimsum (14 Nov 2015)

Alpha dog said:
			
		

> I don't think only the Yezidis and the Christians are considered infidels... anyone that does not share their beliefs is considered an infidel.



Yes, including the other sects of Islam.


----------



## Jed (14 Nov 2015)

cavalryman said:
			
		

> How about sticking to Christians and Yezidis - you know, folks from Syria getting butchered by ISIS because they're infidels.  I'm sure the Iranians can help the Shia and Alawites much better than we can.



That is a good compationate compromise in my mind.


----------



## citizen who supports CAF (14 Nov 2015)

> 1,000 Syrian refugees to be flown daily to Canada
> 
> Posted by: CIJnews Editor November 13, 2015
> 
> ...




Source BBC:





> '
> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911
> Where do the migrants come from?
> 
> ...



--------------------------- 

Now the Kicker:



> New survey: 13% of Syrian refugees in Europe support ISIS
> 
> Posted by: Ilana Shneider November 11, 2015
> 
> ...





quick calculation gives:
*
1000 per day brought in by Trudeau
15% support ISIS =
about 150 Syrian terrorists / supporters will be imported into Canada DAILY by Trudeau and the Liberal sellouts.
*


----------



## a_majoor (14 Nov 2015)

The post by "Citizen who supports the CF" is the leading edge of a wave of Canadian public sentiment (and reading some social media and newspapers like the Winnipeg Free Press shows this is a pretty broad and deep wave) that isn't too far behind that of Europe. Events in Paris are certainly not going to make Canadians, Americans or Europeans more accommodating or understanding, and the political elites who dismiss or close their eyes to this public sentiment are being naïve at best and willfully ignorant or arrogant at worst.

And every follow up attack the Jihadis manage to make will only inflame public sentiment against humanitarianism even further, and it won't take too long before things become very ugly in Europe, and I suspect that here in North America people won't be too far behind.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Nov 2015)

citizen who supports CAF said:
			
		

> Source BBC:
> ---------------------------
> 
> Now the Kicker:


Here's the links providing the information in question, in case one wants to peruse and analyze them ....

_"New survey: 13% of Syrian refugees in Europe support ISIS"_
_"1,000 Syrian refugees to be flown daily to Canada"_
As for the stat shown, I've attached a chart from the study in question, showing the response to "In general, do you have a positive or negative view of ISIL?".  I found nothing there about the ISIS supporters being "terrorists" (which _IS_ something I agree has to be tracked/monitored/screened before refugees come here).

I'll bring another stat into perspective:


			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, one caught so far (out of ~102,000 this year landing in Italy & Greece), but more than zero ....


So now we  have a range of between one out of 102K and one out of 8 - discuss  ;D



			
				Thucydides said:
			
		

> The post by "Citizen who supports the CF" is the leading edge of a wave of Canadian public sentiment (and reading some social media and newspapers like the Winnipeg Free Press shows this is a pretty broad and deep wave) that isn't too far behind that of Europe .... it won't take too long before things become very ugly in Europe, and I suspect that here in North America people won't be too far behind.


Until I see more evidence of this, I'm going to continue to be more optimistic about not seeing Canadians burning down military barracks/refugee centres.  I'm also in this camp:


			
				PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> We have radicals here (in the West) now.  They are either home-grown or plants - likely the former, as the latter requires a degree of sophistication so far lacking in ISIL tactics - it is so much easier to turn someone in place, than to train and dispatch them.  Either way, we have mechanisms and institutions charged with protecting us from that threat.  So far, they have done a bloody good job.
> 
> I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as well.


----------



## a_majoor (14 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Until I see more evidence of this, I'm going to continue to be more optimistic about not seeing Canadians burning down military barracks/refugee centres.  I'm also in this camp:



Edward posted an article in the Globe and Mail in a different thread which says exactly that:



> Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
> 
> « Reply #18 on: Today at 20:48:38 »
> 
> ...


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Nov 2015)

This seems too ignorant not to be a hoax.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/13/watch-migrants-dislike-food-demand-tvs-threaten-go-back-syria/



> In a performance of ingratitude so staggering it should almost be satire, a group of newly arrived migrants in the Netherlands have declared their accommodation so poor they want to go back to Syria.
> 
> Clearly used to appearing in front of a television camera, a glamorous, well-coiffured and made up Syrian migrant launches into a tirade against the generosity of Western European states. Gesturing to the modern accommodation building behind her, the clearly middle-class Syrian complains in perfect English: “*This is not a life when you get inside to a room without a TV. Just a bed, there is no fridge, no lockers, no privacy*”.
> 
> Telling the television crew why the group of 15 had walked out on their free accommodation and food, the woman said: “we’re going to stay outside because we don’t want to eat this food, and we don’t want to stay in the room. We’re running away from our country because of the situation, and now we live in a jail.


----------



## BillN (15 Nov 2015)

WOW, if they find Europe cold........welcome to Winterpeg


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 Nov 2015)

I would tell them what I would tell a guest in my house if they complained my home is not...lavish enough for them;  the door locks people out, not in.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

And the provinces are lining up with their positions ....

_“(BC’s) Christy Clark among premiers welcoming Syrian refugees despite fears over Paris attacks”_
_“(AB) Premier Notley in favour of Ottawa’s refugee plan”_
_“Saskatchewan premier demands Justin Trudeau suspend ‘rushed’ Syrian refugee resettlement plan”_
_“No time to turn away refugees: Manitoba Premier”_
_"(ON) Provincial Liberals confident in refugee security screening process despite concerns"_
_“Accueillir 6.000 réfugiés d’ici janvier : « Impossible », dit Québec”_


----------



## BurnDoctor (17 Nov 2015)

So basically two premiers who possess critical-thinking skills, four who are delusional, and four who've had the political savvy to not comment yet.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

BurnDoctor said:
			
		

> So basically two premiers who possess critical-thinking skills, four who are delusional, and four who've had the political savvy to not comment yet.


To be entirely fair on the bit in yellow, I picked the lowest-hanging fruit stories - I could have Googled harder to get EVERY premier & territorial leader, but I didn't  ;D


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

And it's not just Valcartier that's seeing social media opposition to refugees - highlights mine ....


> Labrador (Liberal) MP Yvonne Jones is still pushing to use facilities at 5 Wing Goose Bay to screen Syrian refugees entering Canada, and is taking on online comments that she says have crossed the line.
> 
> Jones told CBC Radio's Labrador Morning Tuesday that she understands that some residents have fears that are legitimate about her suggestion that CFB Goose Bay could help process refugees who have fled turmoil in Syria.
> 
> ...


Re:  that bit in yellow - really?  We'll see how that unfolds ....


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Nov 2015)

Housed in local facilities? With or without security checks? Are we posting guards? The only way I want them in Canada without a background check is behind fences with concertina wire on the top. Once they pass the security screening, doors wide open.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> And it's not just Valcartier that's seeing social media opposition to refugees - highlights mine ....Re:  that bit in yellow - really?  We'll see how that unfolds ....



Sounds like the community doesn't want a military presence, so let's abide by their wishes and close Goose Bay.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

Bear with me, folks - I'm starting to separate the "refugees to Canada" posts into a thread of its own from the "refugees from Syria" thread.

I've moved this to Canadian Politics because it sounds like it'll be more than just the military involved.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Bear with me, folks - I'm starting to separate the "refugees to Canada" posts into a thread of its own from the "refugees from Syria" thread.
> 
> I've moved this to Canadian Politics because it sounds like it'll be more than just the military involved.
> 
> *Milnet.ca Staff*



Good idea, thanks!


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

Thanks for your patience, all - back at 'er, then!  ;D


----------



## dimsum (17 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Sounds like the community doesn't want a military presence, so let's abide by their wishes and close Goose Bay.



 :nod:


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Nov 2015)

Cabinet Ministers:  Stand by for "the plan" ....


> Security will be at the forefront of the move to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada, Liberal ministers pledged Tuesday, promising a detailed plan to deliver on its promise will be announced in coming days.
> 
> “I think what we will do is make sure that security is at the forefront and we are in consultation with all of our security partners to make sure the we do this right,” Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan told reporters on his way out of a meeting of the cabinet committee on refugees.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Nov 2015)

Part of the (possible) plan for Ontario:  put 'em up in old hospitals ....


> Ontario is considering using recently decommissioned hospitals as one way to temporarily house a large influx of Syrian refugees expected in the province before the end of the year.
> 
> While the federal government has pledged to take in 25,000 refugees by the end of December, Ontario has committed to taking in 10,000 refugees by the end of next year.
> 
> ...


----------



## mariomike (18 Nov 2015)

^ "We have a new Humber River Hospital, for example, that moved from three sites into one" ^

That will empty Humber Memorial, York-Finch and Northwestern.


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Nov 2015)

So far there is an interesting demographic of refugee's- 72% are male.Perhaps after they are settled with a job they will send money home or send for their families,if they are legitimate refugee's.


----------



## GR66 (18 Nov 2015)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> So far there is an interesting demographic of refugee's- 72% are male.Perhaps after they are settled with a job they will send money home or send for their families,if they are legitimate refugee's.



That may be the demographic, but according to this article they're not the ones likely to make the cut.  The refugees being selected by Canada are to come from registered refugees in UN refugee camps primarily in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon where they are already undergoing screening for suitability for relocation by the UNHCR.  The priority candidates it says are mothers with children, unaccompanied minors, the elderly and individuals with health issues.  The article says specifically that young, unattached males who may have been combatants or who cannot account for missing documents do not make the cut.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/11/18/syrian-refugees-will-face-three-levels-of-intense-screening.html


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Nov 2015)

I wish Canada Bon Chance with your new immigrants.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2015)

Clever ISIS info op ....


> The so-called Islamic State and right-leaning politicians agree on at least one thing: Muslim refugees aren’t welcome in Europe and North America.
> 
> A new propaganda video targets refugees fleeing violence – and ISIS itself – in Syria, saying these refugees won’t be welcome by “infidels” in the west.
> 
> ...



Meanwhile, here's how one nordic nation is dealing with mo' refugees:


> *Former military camp turned into Arctic migrant center*
> 
> Rajan is happy with the bed he got after three days on travel from Moscow, across Russia’s snowy Kola Peninsula towards the border to Norway. He is one of the first to be transferred to Reception Center Finnmark that opened on Wednesday.
> 
> ...


Some of the photos from the slide show attached.


----------



## Edward Campbell (19 Nov 2015)

Reuters is reporting, citing unnamed sources, that "Canada's government will inevitably have to cut some corners on security screening to achieve its ambitious goal of bringing in 25,000 Syrian refugees by year-end ..." Although both Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale and his spokesperson Josée Sirois were quoted,  those expressing "concerns" were not named, except for Rand Beers, a former deputy secretary of the U.S. Homeland Security Department.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2015)

A bit more detail - and an op name (PROVISION)- via French-language media - Google English translation below:


> Current plans of the Department of National Defence provide that the Canadian Forces will provide temporary accommodation in bases in Quebec and Ontario, at first.
> 
> Other bases and locations could be used if the Canadian government planners requested it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Nov 2015)

Hmmm I just put this here



“project” means a physical activity that is carried out on federal lands or outside Canada in relation to a physical work and is not a designated project.

Project carried out on federal lands

67. An authority must not carry out a project on federal lands, or exercise any power or perform any duty or function conferred on it under any Act of Parliament other than this Act that could permit a project to be carried out, in whole or in part, on federal lands, unless

    (a) the authority determines that the carrying out of the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects; or

    (b) the authority determines that the carrying out of the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects and the Governor in Council decides that those effects are justified in the circumstances under subsection 69(3).


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

More details, in English:


> The Canadian Armed Forces are preparing to lodge hundreds of refugees at bases in Ontario and Quebec on a temporary basis as the government prepares to resettle 25,000 refugees by year's end.
> 
> The government has yet to say how it intends to meet its goal of resettling thousands in a limited timeframe, but an announcement is expected soon.
> 
> ...


Also, this:


> *Canadian Armed Forces officials are attempting to quash a rumour that members of the military and their families are being forced out of barracks to make way for an influx of Syrian refugees.*
> 
> After letters were sent to various bases in Ontario and Quebec inquiring about available accommodations, CAF offices were flooded with calls from “certain soldiers reacting to rumours they may be relocated,” according to a spokesman.
> 
> ...


Highlights & underlining mine ....


----------



## Edward Campbell (20 Nov 2015)

The _Ottawa Citizen_ reports that costs ($1.2 Billion over six years) have been identified and funding is earmarked ($876.7 Million) for this year (2015-16) some of which ($116 Million) is already in place. DND will need almost $100 Million according to the report. It's not clear, from the report, exactly what costs DND will be expected to shoulder.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The _Ottawa Citizen_ reports that costs ($1.2 Billion over six years) have been identified and funding is earmarked ($876.7 Million) for this year (2015-16) some of which ($116 Million) is already in place. DND will need almost $100 Million according to the report. It's not clear, from the report, exactly what costs DND will be expected to shoulder.


So far, only a bit of winterization of some houses @ Valcartier coming via MERX ....


> .... The work includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the supply of labour, material, supervision and equipment necessary to winterize 10 houses at the Cadet Camp, including among others, the replacement of power cables for the main electrical panels and the replacement of the main electrical panels, the installation of new electrical panels, the installation of an heating system, the additions of rails and fireproof curtains, the construction of new exterior walls, the construction of landings and treated wood steps, the installation of exterior doors, floor and roof insulation as well as the addition of a venting system. Also, the delivery and the installation of fireproof curtains in 3 additional houses shall be completed. The work must be carried out within a very short timeline, i.e. by December 30th, 2015 ....


Stand by, though ....


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Nov 2015)

> The CAF said its intent was to use vacant spaces, and Koronewski confirmed *no permanent residents of the barracks* will be affected ....



I wonder what constitutes as permanent?  If I am living in barracks on IR I'm not permanent.   

I'm told there is also a year waiting list for PMQs. Will members who have been on the waiting list for a year be put out so refugees can move in?   I think people also need to realize vacant space (tents & transient buildings) doesn't automatically mean enough food and toilet facilities.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Nov 2015)

Being put up at the cadet camp in Valcartier starting in December: These poor people are about to get a rude introduction to Canadian winters and to Canada's wilderness. 

Haven't been up there for a good while, but I seem to recall that at the cadet camp you definitely hear the sound of gunfire from the ranges and from the training areas. If so, is this good for the psychological well being of people that just escaped from a war zone? I wonder.

In any event, using military bases that way does not strike me as best for the refugees. 

When they come into Canada the usual way, they have sponsors - usually church/mosque/temple groups or other community based charities - that take care of them, provide them with food, clothing, furniture and a place to live in the community, and then visit with them constantly to orient them, help them deal with new circumstances. 

I have no doubt about the community spirit of the members of the CAF and their families, but they are not community workers or charities volunteers and they have another job to do on the base. Putting the refugee sort of away also, at the cadet camp, is enough physical separation that the refugees will not necessarily be on the mind of anyone not "tasked" with looking after them, and that I fear will leave them on their own where integration is concerned. I can only see this being fine if it is used as a clearing area for a week or two pending relocation inside the normal refugee channels employed in Canada (those community groups I mentioned above).


----------



## George Wallace (20 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Being put up at the cadet camp in Valcartier starting in December: These poor people are about to get a rude introduction to Canadian winters and to Canada's wilderness.
> 
> Haven't been up there for a good while, but I seem to recall that at the cadet camp you definitely hear the sound of gunfire from the ranges and from the training areas. If so, is this good for the psychological well being of people that just escaped from a war zone? I wonder.
> 
> ...



 :goodpost:

I fully agree that the yellow highlighted part is the best way to bring them into Canada, along with reuniting them with family who are already here.   It is not a rapid influx of thousands as made as an "Election Promise", but a much slower method that would seem to be less of a strain on Social and Medical Services, finances, and infrastructure requirements, as well as being much safer security wise.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

The Ministers (Immigration, Public Safety) chatted up Quebec politicos yesterday - highlights mine ....


> “.... Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale and I had the great pleasure of meeting with Kathleen Weil, Quebec’s Minister of Immigration, Diversity and Inclusiveness, and Pierre Moreau, Quebec’s Minister of Municipal Affairs and Land Occupancy and acting Minister of Public Security.
> 
> “Our discussion focused on our plans to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada. The Government of Canada values our unique partnership with Quebec on immigration and refugee matters, as defined by the Canada-Quebec Accord. We are also holding consultations with our counterparts in other provinces and territories as we implement this significant, complex and compassionate humanitarian initiative.
> 
> ...


----------



## Journeyman (20 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> In any event, using military bases that way does not strike me as best for the refugees.


Your entire post is both true...and completely irrelevant.

There are a significant number of military personnel right now whose throw-away COA of 'wringing hands and wishing what might have been' is long past.  Whether it's a steaming pile of feces or a brilliant humanitarian move no longer matters* for those whose focus is on, "OK, let's get this done."



* OK, except over a pint at the end of the day..... when its many fecal qualities are bemoaned.


----------



## Jed (20 Nov 2015)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Your entire post is both true...and completely irrelevant.
> 
> There are a significant number of military personnel right now whose throw-away COA of 'wringing hands and wishing what might have been' is long past.  Whether it's a steaming pile of feces or a brilliant humanitarian move no longer matters* for those whose focus is on, "OK, let's get this done."
> 
> ...



 [ Roger that.


----------



## dimsum (20 Nov 2015)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Your entire post is both true...and completely irrelevant.
> 
> There are a significant number of military personnel right now whose throw-away COA of 'wringing hands and wishing what might have been' is long past.  *
> Whether it's a steaming pile of feces or a brilliant humanitarian move no longer matters* for those whose focus is on, "OK, let's get this done."*
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

This just out ....


> Marie-Claude Landry, Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission issues the following statement:
> 
> “The events in Paris and other recent tragedies are unspeakable. Our hearts go out to the victims and their families. Canada must work with its partners to ensure that those responsible for creating so much misery are held accountable. The security of all citizens should be of paramount concern to all governments.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Nov 2015)

Very nice statement, but completely none of her business.

It's not the place of the Human Rights Commission to make political statements on behalf of the government, which is what her statement is (it does not really cover any apparent problem with infractions to the human rights act and what the Commission intends to do about it - nor provide guidance on interpretation/application of a human right). If she wants to do that, she should get herself elected instead of appointed to a post that is supposed to independent and be above politics.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

The latest?  More, next Tuesday ....


> The Liberal government says it will release details next Tuesday of its plan to settle 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of the year.
> 
> The program -- which could cost as much as $1.2 billion over the next six years -- will involve several government departments as well as the military in a co-ordinated effort to take in some of the most vulnerable people who have fled the war in Syria over the last four years.
> 
> ...


 op:


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

Meanwhile, this via the government's buying page - also attached if link doesn't work:


> The Government of Canada is seeking interested companies that have the capacity, capability and availability to provide leasing, management and servicing of temporary winterized lodgings for groups of 500-3000 people by early December 2015at sites to be confirmed.
> 
> The purpose of this posting is to generate a list of possible suppliers that would be interested in being provided a copy of future solicitation(s) relating to the type of goods or services identified in the requirements described below.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Nov 2015)

So they are looking for hotels and motels in the middle of summer cottage regions.


----------



## GAP (20 Nov 2015)

Hmmm.....how do I get myself a Syrian Passport?......

Oh wait, they'll be lots lying around when they leave.......silly me.....


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> So they are looking for hotels and motels in the middle of summer cottage regions.


Thinking outside the box, cruise ships could fit most of those requirements, too - never been on a cruise, so I don't know about phone connections.

I'm guessing the PWGSC contact person listed in the posting has been a pretty busy guy over the past day or so.


----------



## Privateer (20 Nov 2015)

Vancouver real estate magnate offers up building for Syrian refugees
link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-real-estste-developer-ian-gillespie-syrian-refugees-1.3327123



> Vancouver property developer Ian Gillespie is refurbishing and furnishing a 12-unit property in the city's West End in order to provide temporary accommodations for Syrian refugees.
> 
> Gillespie, founder of Westbank Developments, has offered the building to the Immigrant Services Society to be used as first-stop housing for refugees waiting for permanent homes in B.C.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Thinking outside the box, cruise ships could fit most of those requirements, too - never been on a cruise, so I don't know about phone connections.
> 
> I'm guessing the PWGSC contact person listed in the posting has been a pretty busy guy over the past day or so.



Yes, that would work. Phone is no problem while the ship is in harbour.

Two problems, though: Not a single cruise ship flies the Canadian flag and the next six months are the super high season for cruises (Northern Hemisphere winter).


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Nov 2015)

"Canada's government will inevitably have to cut some corners on security screening to achieve its ambitious goal of bringing in 25,000 Syrian refugees by year-end ..."

That would be inappropriate if it turned out to be true.

As progressives are fond of pointing out, taxes are what we pay for the services we receive.

One of the services Canadians pay taxes for is to not be the victims of someone who should not be admitted to the country, but is admitted because short cuts are taken in order to satisfy the virtue posturing of those who suddenly took an interest in one particular source of refugees because a picture of a child's corpse showed up in their Facebook feeds.


----------



## Scoobs (21 Nov 2015)

It's interesting to try to watch the refugee discussion that is ongoing in Canada while being posted OUTCAN.  

FYI, here's what it is like in the States:

-huge ongoing discussion about bringing 10,000 (yes, only 10,000) Syrian refugees to the States;
-there's no deadline to get them here (interesting, eh?);
-Obama basically wants to go full steam ahead;
-the Republicans and some Democrats want it slowed down (the House of Representatives passed a bill that would effectively do this, but it still has to go through their Senate.  Obama has stated that he will veto it.  This will be interesting as both the House and Senate can override a Presidential veto if they have 2/3 support in each, which they did in the House);
-more than half of the State Governors have stated that the refugees are not welcome, although the general consensus is that they have no legal basis to do that;
-there is real fear amongst the Americans.  Some of my wife's American friends have curtailed their travel to NYC as they are really scared;
-that being said, NYC is still functioning as New Yorkers tend to be of the opinion, "hey, we gotta live life";
-there is a firm belief that the security clearing is insufficient (remember, they don't have a deadline like Canada); and
-of course, there are very extreme views on both sides.

Now, compare this to Canada (this includes some of my opinions):

-an election promise has somehow turned into a firm and hard deadline.  Besides the Government of Canada telling us to do it (which is of course what we will follow so please no statements like, "because the Government told us to"), can someone give me an operational reason why 31 Dec / 1 Jan 16 is such an important date?  I'm not being sarcastic, is there one?
-10,000 vs 25,000, that's a considerable difference between what the US and Canada are taking, respectively; and
-if the vast majority of the refugees are being taken out of camps in Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon, what's the rush?  Are they in danger there?  It is my understanding that they are not as after all, we are being told that a large number of them have been in the subject camps for approx 4 years now.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Nov 2015)

I still have the same question I asked in the post which split this off: why are these refugees more deserving and in need of front-of-the-line privileges than any others?  (I get that it's a public pose for most people; I'm asking if there is really anything beyond that.)


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (21 Nov 2015)

Rumour mil reports that Pers in shacks in kingston just got told that they were being moved to older shacks to make way for refugees.

Curious how they're going to secure 1 EW, 1 div HQ, and CFJSR


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Nov 2015)

So kick the troops out of their current shacks so they can live in the old ones.  Sorry, I don't agree with this.   :


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Nov 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> So kick the troops out of their current shacks so they can live in the old ones.  Sorry, I don't agree with this.   :



I dont agree with it either, but in the end, one has to wonder why any accommodations on a CFB base are substandard. the answer lies in  the fact the successive governments from 1968 to the present have not adequately funded base maintenance, they wouldn't even pay the cost of demolishing or refurbishing outdated buildings, even though for more the 25 years they have a list of those buildings. That especially includes PM Harper, who in his final years in office spent less on defence (GDP) than PET(by GDP).


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Nov 2015)

Couldn't resist a Harper dig, could you? Underfunding base facilities is a bi-partisan issue. It's not especially attributable to anyone.

Has CBC gotten a story out that soldiers are being evicted (without proper notice)? I think its an important issue that Trudeau needs to answer to.


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Nov 2015)

Just calling a spade a spade. I wish he were a diamond.


----------



## McG (21 Nov 2015)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> ... they wouldn't even pay the cost of demolishing or refurbishing outdated buildings, ...


There have been plenty of buildings demolished in the last few years to reduce PILT and other associated costs.


----------



## Old Sweat (21 Nov 2015)

The rumour net is working overtime and there is no end of speculation about the reception plans. It may be a very interesting four years, but let's wait and see what Tuesday brings.


----------



## dimsum (21 Nov 2015)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The rumour net is working overtime and there is no end of speculation about the reception plans. It may be a very interesting four years, but let's wait and see what Tuesday brings.



Exactly, and I'll bring up Journeyman's post from this very thread:

There are a significant number of military personnel right now whose throw-away COA of 'wringing hands and wishing what might have been' is long past.  Whether it's a steaming pile of feces or a brilliant humanitarian move no longer matters for those whose focus is on, "OK, let's get this done."


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Nov 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> "Canada's government will inevitably have to cut some corners on security screening to achieve its ambitious goal of bringing in 25,000 Syrian refugees by year-end ..."
> 
> That would be inappropriate if it turned out to be true.
> 
> ...





> Reuters is reporting, *citing unnamed sources*, that "Canada's government will inevitably have to cut some corners on security screening to achieve its ambitious goal of bringing in 25,000 Syrian refugees by year-end ..."



So how about we wait for the fricken plan before we declare it to be junk, instead of quoting that famous Chinese strategist, Sum Gi, to feed our own preconceived notions?


----------



## Haggis (21 Nov 2015)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> So how about we wait for the fricken plan before we declare it to be junk, instead of quoting that famous Chinese strategist, Sum Gi, to feed our own preconceived notions?



Because Sum Gi and his cousin Buddi are the most prolific and popular sources of information in the absence of official direction.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Nov 2015)

>So how about we wait for the fricken plan before we declare it to be junk, instead of quoting that famous Chinese strategist, Sum Gi, to feed our own preconceived notions?

Better to express reservations beforehand, the better to prevent someone from promulgating junk.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Nov 2015)

My suspicions

1. The $$$ figure we've recently been given regarding the cost of housing and supporting our new guests will rapidly go the way of the F35 project and end up being a hell of a lot more. 

2. Our new guests will be placed in these winterized accommodations,  complain about how shitty it is,  and rapidly be moved into much more comfortable living quarters.  See below. 

3. Our military members will be moved from quarters they're presently living in to other quarters,  including being "down graded". 

4. Security will be compromised for image.


----------



## McG (21 Nov 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >So how about we wait for the fricken plan before we declare it to be junk, instead of quoting that famous Chinese strategist, Sum Gi, to feed our own preconceived notions?
> 
> Better to express reservations beforehand, the better to prevent someone from promulgating junk.


It is called a strawman.  Making-up conditions that are easy to attack, and then attacking the false reality to undermine what is real.

Constructive critisism would describe the conditions necessary for success.  Instead, this thread has its share of posts taking shots from positions of ignorance.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Nov 2015)

There's nothing "made up" about the widespread belief - "expert opinion", where experts hold it - that the deadline for moving the desired number of refugees is too aggressive.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Nov 2015)

There is a picture circulating around social media that some soldiers in Kingston got. Members presently living in single quarters in certain buildings need to pack their bags and move into 4 person rooms to make room for our guests to use the single rooms.  I'm just guessing but I can't imagine they'll try to cram whole families in this single rooms.  I hope whole barracks buildings are given over to our guests and they're not placed piecemeal.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Nov 2015)

Maybe they'll put them in the Dawe Building, so they can trash them like the Kosovars did to Sherman Hall. That way, all of our barracks can be $@#!holes that DND overcharges for.


----------



## Scoobs (23 Nov 2015)

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/troops-clearing-space-at-cfb-kingston-for-syrian-refugees-1.2670111

Graham Slaughter, CTVNews.ca Staff 
Published Sunday, November 22, 2015 10:25PM EST 

Soldiers and military personnel at a Kingston, Ont. base are being asked to clear their barracks to make room for an early wave of Syrian refugees arriving in just over a week, CTV News has learned.
Multiple residences at CFB Kingston are being cleared for Nov. 30 to house the refugees, according to an internal memo obtained by CTV News.
The orders will also affect some officer cadets attending the Royal Military College, many of whom are nearing exams.

Sources tell CTV News that several military bases across Canada are gearing up to host Syrian refugees.

On Tuesday, the government is expected to reveal more details of its plan to resettle 25,000 Syrians by the end of the year.
And while the memo warns of the fast-approaching deadline, it does not indicate where military personnel will be resettled. However, it does say a place will be found for the personnel.
The notice comes just two days after Minister of Immigration and Refugees John McCallum reaffirmed the government’s plan to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2015.
“We are determined to bring refugees here quickly, but we are also determined to do it right in terms of security and in terms of health,” he said.
“This is the right thing to do,” he added. “It is the Canadian way.”
Sources also tell CTV News that several bases across the country are gearing up to host the newcomers, with a maximum capacity of about 12,000 Syrian refugees.
Earlier this month, CTV News reported details from a document entitled “Operation Syrian Refugees” that suggested up to 900 Syrian refugees a day could arrive in Toronto and Montreal from Lebanon, Jordan and possibly Turkey.
Those arrivals could begin as soon as soon as Dec. 1, the report suggested.
The document also identified places such as Cornwall, Ont. and Trois-Rivières, Que. as possible sites for temporary accommodation.
The document suggested refugees would be identified overseas by the United Nations and then screened by Canadian officials on the ground.
The refugees would be screened once again in Canada before receiving permanent resident status, the document said.
The government is expected to confirm its plan Tuesday.
In the past, military bases have been used to house newcomers to Canada. In 1999, 5,000 refugees from Kosovo were divided between two military bases: CFB Greenwood in Nova Scotia and CFB Trenton in Ontario.
Despite short notice, the plan was executed successfully, according to retired Brig.-Gen. Gaston Cloutier, who was on the Trenton base at the time.
“It was hard work, but it was done properly,” he told CTV’s Power Play last month.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Nov 2015)

This from CBC.ca - highlights mine....


> *The federal government's much-anticipated Syrian refugee plan will limit those accepted into Canada to women, children and families only*, CBC News has learned.
> 
> Sources tell CBC News that to deal with some ongoing concerns around security, unaccompanied men seeking asylum will not be part of the program.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

Maybe the military will give CF members who were ordered to move a break and let them stay in other military accommodations rent free.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Nov 2015)

I really love how everyone is patting themselves on their back over the fact that we have housed refugees on military installations in the past, in some cases with little warning.  A nice feel good feeling.  What do we hear of the condition of those facilities after the refugees have left?  Very little.  Is the cost of repairs or demolition of those facilities taken into account by the people advocating housing these refugees, or is it just a afterthought that DND/CAF must make up after all is said and done?


----------



## PuckChaser (23 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Maybe the military will give CF members who were ordered to move a break and let them stay in other military accommodations rent free.



Hahaha.

They'll likely charge them for cleaning the room when they vacate, and charge to have cable/phone/internet reconnected.


----------



## Jed (23 Nov 2015)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Hahaha.
> 
> They'll likely charge them for cleaning the room when they vacate, and charge to have cable/phone/internet reconnected.



Get the IRP consultants right on that.


----------



## cavalryman (23 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really love how everyone is patting themselves on their back over the fact that we have housed refugees on military installations in the past, in some cases with little warning.  A nice feel good feeling.  What do we hear of the condition of those facilities after the refugees have left?  Very little.  Is the cost of repairs or demolition of those facilities taken into account by the people advocating housing these refugees, or is it just a afterthought that DND/CAF must make up after all is said and done?


Virtue signalling by the bien pensants has little to do with the facts or the aftermath of decisions.  Stop trying to inject reality into the discussion.


----------



## Remius (23 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Maybe the military will give CF members who were ordered to move a break and let them stay in other military accommodations rent free.



Put them on FOA and put them up in tents.   [lol:


----------



## Nuggs (23 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> Put them on FOA and put them up in tents.   [lol:


Don't give them ideas lol


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really love how everyone is patting themselves on their back over the fact that we have housed refugees on military installations in the past, in some cases with little warning.  A nice feel good feeling.  What do we hear of the condition of those facilities after the refugees have left?  Very little.  Is the cost of repairs or demolition of those facilities taken into account by the people advocating housing these refugees, or is it just a afterthought that DND/CAF must make up after all is said and done?



Let's not forget that most of the long term costs of managing and caring for these people for the next 5-10 years will be borne by the Provincial and Municipal government, who will likely not see a dime of extra funding.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> Put them on FOA and put them up in tents.   [lol:



And if soldiers don't like it they can quit!


----------



## Remius (23 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> And if soldiers don't like it they can quit!



With six months notice that ought to cover it...


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> This from CBC.ca - highlights mine....



As long as they really keep the single fighting aged males out of the country.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (23 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really love how everyone is patting themselves on their back over the fact that we have housed refugees on military installations in the past, in some cases with little warning.  A nice feel good feeling.  What do we hear of the condition of those facilities after the refugees have left?  Very little.  Is the cost of repairs or demolition of those facilities taken into account by the people advocating housing these refugees, or is it just a afterthought that DND/CAF must make up after all is said and done?



They are not "the military's barracks" they are government facilities, which the government can use as they see fit.  The CDs has made it very clear that the CAF will not be the limfac in this operation - and for all of the right reasons.  How about we a) wait for the plan, b) follow direction, and c) find a little of the milk of human kindness inside our shrivelled little hearts.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Nov 2015)

You mean like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGSs33DQ1F0  ;D


----------



## RocketRichard (23 Nov 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> You mean like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGSs33DQ1F0  ;D



Well said, well said indeed.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

There's no doubt about it the barracks will be trashed and require renovations afterwards.


If it's true that we will only be accepting families I think it's a brilliant move that will significantly reduce the security concerns so many Canadians have.


----------



## Remius (23 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> There's no doubt about it the barracks will be trashed and require renovations afterwards.
> 
> 
> If it's true that we will only be accepting families I think it's a brilliant move that will significantly reduce the security concerns so many Canadians have.



It certainly reduces the odds of a breach.  Nothing is impossible but it seems like a prudent COA.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> Put them on FOA and put them up in tents.   [lol:



Or put them in tents, but with wooden pallet floors and hessian;  no FOA required.   >


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Nov 2015)

_CTV News_ has a report, without too much in the way of official confirmation, that some soldiers, in Kingston, at least, have been given only three days' notice to clear out of some barracks.

The media will make hay, at the CF's expense, until someone gets out front with a plan.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The media will make hay, at the CF's expense, until someone gets out front with a plan.


 :nod:


----------



## Sarah_H (23 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _CTV News_ has a report, without too much in the way of official confirmation, that some soldiers, in Kingston, at least, have been given only three days' notice to clear out of some barracks.
> 
> The media will make hay, at the CF's expense, until someone gets out front with a plan.


Some people were told last Friday they had a week to move out. Myself and a bunch of others on course were just told today to be ready to move out by Wednesday. The weird thing is the refugees aren't even moving into our shacks. They're going elsewhere on the base. So the reason for us to move is silly. No clue either where we'll be moved to. It's very frustrating as the course I'm on is stressful enough with tests every few days. Now having to deal with packing all my things up on top it all is not fun.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

Sarah_H said:
			
		

> Myself and a bunch of others on course were just told today to be ready to move out by Wednesday. The weird thing is the refugees aren't even moving into our shacks. They're going elsewhere on the base. So the reason for us to move is silly.



I'm completely shocked by this  :


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/gay-men-will-be-included-among-syrian-refugees-in-addition-to-women-children-families



> *The federal government will include gay men among the Syrian refugees it brings into Canada as part of a plan that puts the focus on accepting women, children and families.*
> 
> The Citizen has learned that while the Liberal government, because of potential security concerns, will not accept lone males — at least during the first wave of migrants — this approach will come with an important caveat. The government is sensitive to the fact that gay men escaping violence in the region could be persecuted, so they will be permitted to come to Canada.
> 
> ...



Who wants to bet all of the single males self-identify as being gay  ;D


----------



## PPCLI Guy (23 Nov 2015)

Sarah_H said:
			
		

> Some people were told last Friday they had a week to move out. Myself and a bunch of others on course were just told today to be ready to move out by Wednesday. The weird thing is the refugees aren't even moving into our shacks. They're going elsewhere on the base. So the reason for us to move is silly. No clue either where we'll be moved to. It's very frustrating as the course I'm on is stressful enough with tests every few days. Now having to deal with packing all my things up on top it all is not fun.



No doubt even more stressful than being relocated to a strange country because your government was dropping barrel bombs on you and your children.

Like as not, you are being moved as part of an effort to consolidate the housing plan so that it makes sense, and frees up space for those annoying refugee families.


----------



## Sarah_H (23 Nov 2015)

As I stated in my original post, the refugees are *not* moving into our shacks. Instead they're shuffling everyone around on base from one building to another. The people who are giving up their shacks to the refugees are taking over our building, which is full of people(approx 130-150) currently on course. Our staff opposes the idea of moving us and are trying to fight the decision as it's completely unnecessary.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (23 Nov 2015)

Sarah_H said:
			
		

> As I stated in my original post, the refugees are *not* moving into our shacks. Instead they're shuffling everyone around on base from one building to another. The people who are giving up their shacks to the refugees are taking over our building, which is full of people(approx 130-150) currently on course. Our staff opposes the idea of moving us and are trying to fight the decision as it's completely unnecessary.




Just so you know, that whooshing sound was this going right over your head:



> No doubt even more stressful than being relocated to a strange country because your government was dropping barrel bombs on you and your children.



And as I said, and you have confirmed, you are being relocated as part of plan to rationalise the allocation of available space.



> Like as not, you are being moved as part of an effort to consolidate the housing plan so that it makes sense, and frees up space for those annoying refugee families.



You do realise that you may be asked, in the course of your career, to occasionally sacrifice your own comfort and convenience in the process of achieving an assigned mission or task, right?

Never mind.  Better get back to your stressful studying.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (23 Nov 2015)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really love how everyone is patting themselves on their back over the fact that we have housed refugees on military installations in the past, in some cases with little warning.  A nice feel good feeling.  What do we hear of the condition of those facilities after the refugees have left?  Very little.  Is the cost of repairs or demolition of those facilities taken into account by the people advocating housing these refugees, or is it just a afterthought that DND/CAF must make up after all is said and done?





			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> There's no doubt about it the barracks will be trashed and require renovations afterwards.
> . . .



What makes anyone think that temporary accommodations (military owned or otherwise) provided for these refugees will be damaged by them?  While my personal experience with a similar operation (OP MAGNET II) was limited to the Southeast Asian boat people who were housed  at Griesbach, I don't think that the situation would have been much different at the other locations.  The accommodations (_which in Griesbach were the barrack blocks that, with the exception of a very few JRs who worked and lived down there, were primarily used as temporary shacks for pers on course at CABC or for militia during the summer_) were not "handed over" to the refugees to have free run of the place.  We still managed the facilities and there were staff on duty 24 hours a day.  While the operation lasted over the space of several months, individual refugees (or families) did not spend the entire time at these locations.  After arrival in Canada (Edmonton was one of the APODs) the refuges were moved to their accommodations for the processing.  While I don't have any official stats on how long the average stay was, I would guesstimate about one month was the maximum before the new arrival moved on.  There was no hard and fast rule, it all depended on how quickly arrangements could be made (usually through a civilian non-profit or church group) to resettle them somewhere in Canada.  Quite a few settled in Edmonton, and, a few years later when I was posted back there, much enjoyed the Vietnamese restaurant scene.  Even "re-met" one owner who recognized me from his time at Griesbach.

As for the condition of the barracks following their use by the refugees, probably no worse than if they had been temporarily occupied by a battalion of soldiers for several months.


----------



## JesseWZ (23 Nov 2015)

Sarah_H said:
			
		

> As I stated in my original post, the refugees are *not* moving into our shacks. Instead they're shuffling everyone around on base from one building to another. The people who are giving up their shacks to the refugees are taking over our building, which is full of people(approx 130-150) currently on course. Our staff opposes the idea of moving us and are trying to fight the decision as it's completely unnecessary.



And persons from my unit are being asked to give up Christmas with their families in order to deploy on short notice for this Domestic Op. Whether they agree with the decision to bring them or not, they still will support the government mandate and carry it out. That's what being in the Canadian Forces is all about. We do the bidding of the government, not the other way around.

Welcome to the club where _Service before Self _ is the mantra. If you don't like it, leave now. It will save your section from your belly-aching later.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Nov 2015)

Scoobs said:
			
		

> In the past, military bases have been used to house newcomers to Canada. In 1999, 5,000 refugees from Kosovo were divided between two military bases: CFB Greenwood in Nova Scotia and CFB Trenton in Ontario.
> Despite short notice, the plan was executed successfully, according to retired Brig.-Gen. Gaston Cloutier, who was on the Trenton base at the time.
> “It was hard work, but it was done properly,” he told CTV’s Power Play last month.



Even the most basic internet search would have helped with accuracy in reporting.   :

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/od-bdo/di-ri-eng.asp?IntlOpId=196&CdnOpId=236


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Nov 2015)

JesseWZ said:
			
		

> Welcome to the club where _Service before Self _ is the mantra. If you don't like it, leave now. It will save your section from your belly-aching later.



In all fairness Sarahs staff of NCOs and Officers are apparently not on board with playing shacks hot potato either.  I'm guessing they feel the move can be accomplished with less people being effected.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (23 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> In all fairness Sarahs staff of NCOs and Officers are apparently not on board with playing shacks hot potato either.  I'm guessing they feel the move can be accomplished with less people being effected.



Granted...and moot.  I doubt that they are aware of the myriad factors that go into establishing and maintaining a base housing plan when you feed in an additional and significant demand with little notice.  I will also give them the benefit of the doubt, which is that they do not know the higher commander's intent, vice simply paying it no heed.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Nov 2015)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Granted...and moot.  I doubt that they are aware of the myriad factors that go into establishing and maintaining a base housing plan when you feed in an additional and significant demand with little notice.  I will also give them the benefit of the doubt, which is that they do not know the higher commander's intent, vice simply paying it no heed.



 >

Devils Advocate:  You are under the impression that the persons in Base Accommodations are of the highest calibre.   If they are not, then they are creating more havoc than necessary.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Nov 2015)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> As for the condition of the barracks following their use by the refugees, probably no worse than if they had been temporarily occupied by a battalion of soldiers for several months.



Only if the Snr NCO Corps has dropped to such low levels of management and leadership would such a statement be true.


----------



## ringo (23 Nov 2015)

How many are moving into Trudeau's neighbourhood?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (23 Nov 2015)

ringo said:
			
		

> How many are moving into Trudeau's neighbourhood?



Probably more than in yours....



> Papineau is a federal electoral district in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, that has been represented in the House of Commons of Canada from 1948 to 1988 and since 2004. Its population in 2006 was 101,019. Justin Trudeau, who is currently Prime Minister of Canada and Leader of the Liberal Party, has represented the riding since the 2008 federal election.
> 
> The name of the riding comes from a street in the Villeray neighbourhood, named after Joseph Papineau.
> 
> At nine square kilometres, it covers the smallest area of any federal riding in Canada. Linguistically, 45% of residents list French as their mother tongue, 8% list English, and 47% list neither English nor French, with large groups speaking Spanish, Italian, Greek and Arabic. *The total immigrant population is 40 per cent.*


----------



## Strike (23 Nov 2015)

ringo said:
			
		

> How many are moving into Trudeau's neighbourhood?



Oh, about 25,000. He is the PM and therefore all of Canada could be considered is his 'hood.


----------



## chevalnoir (23 Nov 2015)

I've spent more time in the Kingston shacks than I care to remember, and only two things come to mind:
-Most of the shacks are well past the point where a few thousand refugees, or a herd of rampaging buffaloes for that matter, could inflict significant additional damage
-I've never yet been there for more than a month without at least one change of quarters to make someone's re-organization brainchild come true. If you're lucky, you just move rooms between adjacent buildings and you have a few days notice. If you're unlucky, you move to the other side of the base, and you have maybe two hours notice. One course involved 5 moves for a 4 1/2 month course. And yes, we had tests every few days too. It sucks. But it's part of living in the shacks, at least in Kingston. Only without refugees involved, no one cares.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> Oh, about 25,000. He is the PM and therefore all of Canada could be considered is his 'hood.



Zing!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> This from CBC.ca - highlights mine....
> The federal government's much-anticipated Syrian refugee plan will limit those accepted into Canada to women, children and families only, CBC News has learned.
> 
> Sources tell CBC News that to deal with some ongoing concerns around security, unaccompanied men seeking asylum will not be part of the program.
> ...



Perhaps these are the details that need to be pushed out loud and clear to appease Joe and Jane Concerned Taxpayer who are concerned about "who" is actually coming after the realities being experienced in Europe, for example, have raised valid concerns.

If the details in the CBC news article are true, it would be beneficial if they were made part of a more formal announcement (which may have happened and I missed it?).


----------



## McG (23 Nov 2015)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> What makes anyone think that temporary accommodations (military owned or otherwise) provided for these refugees will be damaged by them?


Bigotry (or prejudice) makes it easy to prejudge any situation with absolute certainty when one party can be referred as "these people."


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Nov 2015)

>Soldiers and military personnel at a Kingston, Ont. base are being asked to clear their barracks

That doesn't quite have the ring of truth.

Notwithstanding my own whinging about facets of the undertaking, has the Statement of Defence Ethics changed or is it still:
1. Respect the Dignity of All Persons
2. Serve Canada before Self
3. Obey and Support Lawful Authority


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Nov 2015)

It is actually somewhat more detailed... 

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about/statement-of-defence-ethics.page


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Nov 2015)

Anyone who's  been in uniform has gotten those change rooms/change buildings orders where someone is panicking that the world will end if you don't move in the next two hours.   Naturally people will bitch about it and then move cause really at the end of the day it's just dragging some kit around. 

The thing with this I think is the bad optics to the public.  They don't see  someone moving their shit across a street to a new building they read about Canadian soldiers being evicted from where they are living and given 3 days notice.  I'm not a smart dude but even I could for see the bad optics of that without putting  out some kind of PR statement.   
The Cf is crazy about social media and how many hits stuff get in twitter and Facebook,  it's like they are shooting  themselves in the foot with this.  People  (civilians)  are pretty pissed off.  We could have mitigated this with more information. 

When the refugees come I hope they tell everyone the horror stories of what they seen and have been through,  maybe the government will be more inclined to increase our presence there.


----------



## Journeyman (24 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'm not a smart dude but even I could for see the bad optics of that .....


Careful, you could end up getting punted into the Public Affairs world.  ;D


Oh...and you know I think you're a pretty smart dude.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Nov 2015)

The "story," DND's side of the story, anyway, is starting to come our ... piecemeal. 

I think everyone should have anticipated the media's reaction (and the ill-informed/uninformed service members' reactions, too) to the _rumours_ that people were going to be _evicted_. I think the government PR machine missed a beat here ... perhaps because it is so very, very new. Perhaps they thought that the overwhelming majority of Canadians would just assume that the CF could do this (whatever "this" is) without any fuss or bother, but the mainstream media found a "story;" it was there, for the looking, on social media I'm told (I, apparently, don't subscribe to the right "sources," or so an acquaintance who works in the media tells me.) It appears that DND is now "scrambling" to set the record straight when I think the government, the political centre, would have wished for an _active_* response to the minister's statement that refugees would be held on military bases; maybe that was wishful thinking on the government's part ...

The mainstream media is not anti-Liberal (yet) or anti-refugee (yet). Reporters, however, want their story to be "above the fold" or they want their 30 seconds of "on the air" time and so they look for _cracks_ in any and all programmes and then they try to drive _wedges_ into those cracks by quoting poorly sourced _rumours_ (and, in fairness, they identify them as such) and then wait for more. It;'s a good tactic and, in this case, it worked.


____
* As opposed to _reactive_


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The "story," DND's side of the story, anyway, is starting to come our ... piecemeal.
> 
> I think everyone should have anticipated the media's reaction (and the ill-informed/uninformed service members' reactions, too) to the _rumours_ that people were going to be _evicted_. I think the government PR machine missed a beat here ... perhaps because it is so very, very new. Perhaps they thought that the overwhelming majority of Canadians would just assume that the CF could do this (whatever "this" is) without any fuss or bother, but the mainstream media found a "story;" it was there, for the looking, on social media I'm told (I, apparently, don't subscribe to the right "sources," or so an acquaintance who works in the media tells me.) It appears that DND is now "scrambling" to set the record straight when I think the government, the political centre, would have wished for an _active_* response to the minister's statement that refugees would be held on military bases; maybe that was wishful thinking on the government's part ...
> 
> ...



It was the number one trending news story on my facebook yesterday.  

The optics of this are terrible.  Especially with a 600 bed Kingston Pen sitting empty on the Kingston waterfront.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> It was the number one trending news story on my facebook yesterday.
> 
> The optics of this are terrible.  Especially with _a 600 bed Kingston Pen sitting empty_ on the Kingston waterfront.




The "optics" of putting refugees in an old, 19th century, penitentiary that was too bad for Canada's worst convicts would be far, far worse ...


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> The "optics" of putting refugees in an old, 19th century, penitentiary that was too bad for Canada's worst convicts would be far, far worse ...



Would it be though?  I've heard many people in Kingston suggesting it.  It would also fulfill the Whole of Government Approach  8)

Disclaimer - I agree we shouldn't put them in an old prison but I also think CFB Kingston hasn't done the best job, nobody has a smick what the heck is going on around here.  The base commander should have a town hall to clear the air.


----------



## Old Sweat (24 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Would it be though?  I've heard many people in Kingston suggesting it.  It would also fulfill the Whole of Government Approach  8)
> 
> Disclaimer - I agree we shouldn't put them in an old prison but I also think CFB Kingston hasn't done the best job, nobody has a smick what the heck is going on around here.  The base commander should have a town hall to clear the air.



I think it goes higher than the base commander. Speculating here, but there may well have been direction prohibiting public announcements or disclosure of details until the Minister of Immigration and Refugees provides details of the plan later today. Good, well okay not bad intentions, but lousy unexpected consequences.

In the meantime, the troops are not gruntled (opposite of disgruntled and probably not a real word.)


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Nov 2015)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> I think it goes higher than the base commander. Speculating here, but there may well have been direction prohibiting public announcements or disclosure of details until the Minister of Immigration and Refugees provides details of the plan later today. Good, well okay not bad intentions, but lousy unexpected consequences.
> 
> In the meantime, the troops are not gruntled (opposite of disgruntled and probably not a real word.)



Nobody has been muzzled.  A plan was circulated around a week ago via email but none of that was ever communicated to the troops.  Another case of leadership by email.  

Also, you can clear the air without divulging too much information.


----------



## Remius (24 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Also, you can clear the air without divulging too much information.



Agreed. Or set the tone.


----------



## Strike (24 Nov 2015)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> I think it goes higher than the base commander. Speculating here, but there may well have been direction prohibiting public announcements or disclosure of details until the Minister of Immigration and Refugees provides details of the plan later today. Good, well okay not bad intentions, but lousy unexpected consequences.
> 
> In the meantime, the troops are not gruntled (opposite of disgruntled and probably not a real word.)



Here's the problem in a nutshell:
1.  The CAF is still under the writ period from the election.  One of the main reasons for this is the extended delay in the ministers sorting out their staff (hires and such) and being able to come out with a comms plan for both the GoC as a whole and then its smaller organizations (like CAF, Tpt Can, etc.).  Until that PAG is developed and released, the CAF has to get approvals at the highest levels for the simplest of media opportunities.

2.  The CAF is not the lead in this, so it isn't up to us to announce anything, and especially not first, to the media.

3.  The overall plan has yet to be released, which is also why it hasn't been shared completely with units on bases/within CAF that don't have a direct impact on the whole affair.  And because of the sensitivity of the whole thing, there are a very limited number of people who have seen any of the plans out there.

It's fine to suggest a town hall, but then soldiers go home and tell their spouses, who tell their families, who post it on FB and suddenly the 'might happen' becomes ' is happening.'  And it's hard to turn off that tap once it starts going.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> Here's the problem in a nutshell:
> 1.  The CAF is still under the writ period from the election.  One of the main reasons for this is the extended delay in the ministers sorting out their staff (hires and such) and being able to come out with a comms plan for both the GoC as a whole and then its smaller organizations (like CAF, Tpt Can, etc.).  Until that PAG is developed and released, the CAF has to get approvals at the highest levels for the simplest of media opportunities.
> 
> 2.  The CAF is not the lead in this, so it isn't up to us to announce anything, and especially not first, to the media.
> ...




Thanks, Strike, that makes perfect sense: no Public Affairs Guidance ... yet; DND is not the lead; and the "plan," such as it is is on close hold. It is a recipe for media (and general) speculation and it allows the media to make the CF leadership look less than stellar ... even if that is not the intent.


----------



## Remius (24 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> Here's the problem in a nutshell:
> 1.  The CAF is still under the writ period from the election.  One of the main reasons for this is the extended delay in the ministers sorting out their staff (hires and such) and being able to come out with a comms plan for both the GoC as a whole and then its smaller organizations (like CAF, Tpt Can, etc.).  Until that PAG is developed and released, the CAF has to get approvals at the highest levels for the simplest of media opportunities.
> 
> 2.  The CAF is not the lead in this, so it isn't up to us to announce anything, and especially not first, to the media.
> ...



All good points.  I've been privy (like many here) to bits and pieces but have no idea about the larger plan or even how those bits and pieces fit in it.  I can surmise but that can lead to false info and what not.

I think that Bogarts suggestion of a town hall is more along the lines of letting the troops know that stuff might happen and that there may or may not be some disruption and that they are being counted on to be flexible and professional.  Eevn just stating that they haven't received any orders or instructions but to be prepared should that happen.   It may not seem like much but even something that vague can put them in right mind set should something happen.


----------



## Remius (24 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Thanks, Strike, that makes perfect sense: no Public Affairs Guidance ... yet; DND is not the lead; and the "plan," such as it is is on close hold. It is a recipe for media (and general) speculation and it allows the media to make the CF leadership look less than stellar ... even if that is not the intent.



And already social media and those against bringing in refugee are talking about this making soldiers and veterans homeless... :


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> All good points.  I've been privy (like many here) to bits and pieces but have no idea about the larger plan or even how those bits and pieces fit in it.  I can surmise but that can lead to false info and what not.
> 
> I think that Bogarts suggestion of a town hall is more along the lines of letting the troops know that stuff might happen and that there may or may not be some disruption and that they are being counted on to be flexible and professional.  Eevn just stating that they haven't received any orders or instructions but to be prepared should that happen.   It may not seem like much but even something that vague can put them in right mind set should something happen.



 :goodpost:

It's called a warning order and it's a proven way of doing business.

Lets leave the smoke and mirrors to the politicians.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> It's fine to suggest a town hall, *but then soldiers go home and tell their spouses, who tell their families, who post it on FB and suddenly the 'might happen' becomes ' is happening*.'  And it's hard to turn off that tap once it starts going.



But that's exactly what happened.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> But that's exactly what happened.


But now, because the _official_ word isn't out yet, only tidbits, rumour, hearsay and RUMINT is getting back to the families and comment boards ;D

All joking aside, thanks, Strike, for showing an important part of the REST of the story explaining the dribbling flow of information outwards in some quarters.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Nov 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> But now, because the _official_ word isn't out yet, only tidbits, rumour, hearsay and RUMINT is getting back to the families and comment boards ;D
> 
> All joking aside, thanks, Strike, for showing an important part of the REST of the story explaining the dribbling flow of information outwards in some quarters.



The media blackout deals with external communication from the department.  Internal communication is totally fine.


----------



## Strike (24 Nov 2015)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The media blackout deals with external communication from the department.  Internal communication is totally fine.



Except that there are several departments involved and, even with a new government, there is probably still that hesitancy to share between agencies before the full go-ahead is given.


----------



## Loachman (24 Nov 2015)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> gruntled (opposite of disgruntled and probably not a real word.)



I first heard it, from my first father-in-law, in 1978.


----------



## Good2Go (24 Nov 2015)

I've been overseas for the past few weeks & I live in single quarters at *CFB Kingston*.  I don't return until Friday.

Can anyone tell me if *Bldg C-46* is affected?  I hate surprises...  Many thanks!


----------



## Blackadder1916 (24 Nov 2015)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> , the troops are not gruntled (opposite of disgruntled and probably not a real word.)



It's in the COD (a colloquial backform of disgruntled), so you're safe from the pedants.  It's an adjective - so while you may say "you are gruntled", it is improper to say "my girlfriend gruntled me last night".


----------



## Stoker (24 Nov 2015)

Good2Go said:
			
		

> I've been overseas for the past few weeks & I live in single quarters at *CFB Kingston*.  I don't return until Friday.
> 
> Can anyone tell me if *Bldg C-46* is affected?  I hate surprises...  Many thanks!



The memo that is circulating online does not mention C-46.


----------



## Good2Go (24 Nov 2015)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> The memo that is circulating online does not mention C-46.



Thank you so much.  I am having an awful trip & hearing that I might return to a move pde was making a bad situation worse.

Any chance you could send me the link for the memo?


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Nov 2015)

It's official - they're still coming, but not as many as first planned by year end ....


> The government will resettle only about 10,000 Syrian refugees by the end of the year, or less than half the 25,000 promised by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during the election campaign.
> 
> Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship officials revealed the shortfall on Tuesday, as they presented the government’s plan for bringing the Syrian refugees to Canada. The entire 25,000 won’t arrive in Canada until the end of February, the officials said. The effort will cost as much as $678 million over six years ....


This from the Info-machine:


> The Government of Canada is taking immediate action to welcome 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada as quickly as possible, through a five-phase national plan. Canada can and will do more to help Syrian refugees who are desperately seeking safety, by offering them a new home.
> 
> The five phases are identifying Syrian refugees to come to Canada, selecting and processing Syrian refugees overseas, transportation to Canada, arrival and welcoming in Canada, and settlement and community integration. Protecting the safety, security, and health of Canadians and refugees is a key factor in guiding the Government of Canada’s actions throughout this initiative.
> 
> ...


More in the Backgrounder here - infographic of five phases attached - all material also attached as PDF in case links above don't work.


----------



## Remius (24 Nov 2015)

Glad to see they stretched the timeline.


----------



## Loachman (24 Nov 2015)

Yes, finally, because the logistical nightmare would have surpassed the security concerns.

I have recently been involved in the private sponsorship of a refugee family, from a much different area, and it takes a lot of effort from a bunch of people to do it right. Anything less risks setting the family up for failure.

It should not have taken this long for the government to listen to what everybody who had real experience in such things was telling it, or to reassure a good chunk of our population who had legitimate concerns that the security aspect was being taken seriously.

This did not have to get so many people worked up.

I am also concerned that Syrians have merely become fashionable for Liberals. There are many others elsewhere at least equally suffering and/or at real risk who seem to be invisible to them.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Nov 2015)

>Of those selected, the target is to have 10,000 Syrian refugees arrive in Canada by the end of this year, and the remainder to arrive by the end of February 2016.

Good.  The government will undoubtedly take a brief hit from the critics who take Trudeau to task for uttering so much as "good morning", but it will be much better than a never-ending series of interviews with refugees about the quality of their experience since being rushed into Canada to fit a campaign promise deadline.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Nov 2015)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Yes, finally, because the logistical nightmare would have surpassed the security concerns.
> 
> I have recently been involved in the private sponsorship of a refugee family, from a much different area, and it takes a lot of effort from a bunch of people to do it right. Anything less risks setting the family up for failure.
> 
> ...



Of course they did.  They had an election to win and a Natural Order to restore.   >


----------



## vonGarvin (25 Nov 2015)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I  am also concerned that Syrians have merely become fashionable for Liberals. There are many others elsewhere at least equally suffering and/or at real risk who seem to be invisible to them.


Amen. If you count IDPs the same as refugees, then you must also remember those in Afghanistan (anyone remember them anymore?), Colombia, Sudan, etc. The list goes on and on....


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Nov 2015)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Amen. If you count IDPs the same as refugees, then you must also remember those in Afghanistan (anyone remember them anymore?)....


Like these folks (as of April 2014)?


> .... Canada’s immigration department says about 800 interpreters, support workers and some eligible family members will “eventually” wind up in Canada under the special visa program. But a spokesperson for Citizenship and Immigration Canada could not say how many of those applicants have already arrived. Nor would CIC say how many former interpreters applied and were rejected, left behind as the final Canadian troops left Afghanistan (March 2014) ....





			
				Technoviking said:
			
		

> .... Colombia, Sudan, etc. The list goes on and on....


Look out for more if/when Canada gets involved elsewhere in Africa under PMJT & Co. ....


----------



## Finnthegreat (25 Nov 2015)

Good2Go said:
			
		

> Thank you so much.  I am having an awful trip & hearing that I might return to a move pde was making a bad situation worse.
> 
> Any chance you could send me the link for the memo?



I'd also like to see this memo if possible - the only one I've seen online turned out to be a fake and that certainly doesn't help the machine of misinformation that's going around.  :facepalm:


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Nov 2015)

Finnthegreat said:
			
		

> I'd also like to see this memo if possible - the only one I've seen online turned out to be a fake and that certainly doesn't help the machine of misinformation that's going around.  :facepalm:




I cannot help you directly, but the media is reporting that "Residents of six different buildings at CFB Kingston were told in a letter on Friday they would need to move their personal effects on Monday to make way for incoming refugees."

Assuming that report is accurate ~ and we have a whole thread devoted to media errors, etc, which suggests it _might_ not be ~ then the "letter" is out in public and someone should be able to post it here or send you a copy by IM.


----------



## Finnthegreat (25 Nov 2015)

Thanks - I've seen that Sun article, different outlets have similar versions. I know CTV had one earlier this week that was then slammed for being misleading. That's the whole part of the problem, as was stated earlier in this thread. One day someone says something, who tells someone else ect and suddenly it becomes a fact and being reported on as such. It wouldn't take much for that to NOT happen... but you know, why put in the effort?




			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I cannot help you directly, but the media is reporting that "Residents of six different buildings at CFB Kingston were told in a letter on Friday they would need to move their personal effects on Monday to make way for incoming refugees."
> 
> Assuming that report is accurate ~ and we have a whole thread devoted to media errors, etc, which suggests it _might_ not be ~ then the "letter" is out in public and someone should be able to post it here or send you a copy by IM.


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Nov 2015)

Theo Moudakis, drawing in the _Toronto Star_, says:

     
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




     Source: https://twitter.com/TheoMoudakis?lang=en


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Nov 2015)

Michael Den Tandt, writing in the _Ottawa Citizen_, says that breaking the refugee promise (25,000 by 31 Dec 15) is a political 'winner' for the Liberals.

    "They have not, it seems, entirely lost the smarts that won them 184 seats and a whopping majority just over a month ago.

     In announcing the details of its long-anticipated, feverishly-speculated upon and much-criticized plan to rescue 25,000 refugees from the Syrian war by year’s end, the Liberal government deftly lopped off the last part of the promise,
     something they could have done three weeks ago.

     Their plan is now to bring in 10,000 refugees to Canada by year’s end, with an additional 15,000 to come in the ensuing couple of months — more or less in line with what many stakeholders and critics — including refugee advocates,
     some mayors, provincial premiers and the Conservative party — have demanded for weeks.

     “Canadians said, if it takes a little bit longer to do it right, then that’s what you should do,” said John McCallum, Minister of Immigration and point man on the refugee effort, in explaining the change."


----------



## dapaterson (25 Nov 2015)

If we bring in 10K between now and the end of the year, that's about 300 people per day, which is a single Boeing 767 (with room to spare) or a pair of Boeing 737s.  Pearson generally handles about 100,000 passengers a day.  So if all refugees are channelled through Pearson, it's a 0.3% increase - hardly unmanageable.  Fly the 737s to two different airports and the increase is even less.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Nov 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Theo Moudakis, drawing in the _Toronto Star_, says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do Syrian female refugees have special cultural rules like not being looked at by a male or not searched by a male or something?

Also I haven't read anywhere about our kitchen facilities providing special meals?


----------



## Journeyman (25 Nov 2015)

Good2Go said:
			
		

> Thank you so much.  I am having an awful trip & hearing that I might return to a move pde was making a bad situation worse.
> 
> Any chance you could send me the link for the memo?


Have you considered contacting your chain of command?


----------



## ballz (25 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> If we bring in 10K between now and the end of the year, that's about 300 people per day, which is a single Boeing 767 (with room to spare) or a pair of Boeing 737s.  Pearson generally handles about 100,000 passengers a day.  So if all refugees are channelled through Pearson, it's a 0.3% increase - hardly unmanageable.  Fly the 737s to two different airports and the increase is even less.



I don't think getting them through screening and through airport security is going to be the biggest hurdle. There is a lot more to it than putting them through a metal detector. The biggest issue is going to be the logistics after they make it through the screening and are living on Canadian soil.


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Nov 2015)

As someone else mentioned,  these refugees of the moment are all fine and good.  WFT about our Terps, they contributed to this country already, and we owe them a debt that should be upheld.   That is shameful we're not.


----------



## Nuggs (25 Nov 2015)

ballz said:
			
		

> I don't think getting them through screening and through airport security is going to be the biggest hurdle. There is a lot more to it than putting them through a metal detector. The biggest issue is going to be the logistics after they make it through the screening and are living on Canadian soil.


The whole plane could be pre-screened by CBSA prior to departure at origin.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (26 Nov 2015)

Canada already accepts 200,000 immigrants per year which is 16,667 per month.  An additional 10,000 in one month shouldn't be particularly difficult.  Rent them apartments, open them a bank account, buy them some groceries and introduce them to locals whose Arabic dialect they can understand - end of story.  The only further involvement needed would be giving them a welfare cheque by direct deposit each month for a certain time.


----------



## Strike (26 Nov 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> Canada already accepts 200,000 immigrants per year which is 16,667 per month.  An additional 10,000 in one month shouldn't be particularly difficult.  Rent them apartments, open them a bank account, buy them some groceries and introduce them to locals whose Arabic dialect they can understand - end of story.  The only further involvement needed would be giving them a welfare cheque by direct deposit each month for a certain time.



I'm going to have to ask where you got those numbers from.  Link please?

And remember - temporary visas for students and tourists are completely different than accepting immigrants to stay permanently in Canada.


----------



## Remius (26 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> I'm going to have to ask where you got those numbers from.  Link please?
> 
> And remember - temporary visas for students and tourists are completely different than accepting immigrants to stay permanently in Canada.



http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2014/index.asp

That is permanent residents only.  So about 250 000 or so for 2014.  They classify temporary residents under other stats specific to that.


----------



## Strike (26 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2014/index.asp
> 
> That is permanent residents only.  So about 250 000 or so for 2014.  They classify temporary residents under other stats specific to that.



I'm pretty sure that's not how many they accept per year.  That's how many are considered permanent residents at any point in time.  My sister-in-law is part of that number and has been since she immigrated to Canada with her family when she was 2 and that was 45 yrs ago.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure that's not how many they accept per year.  That's how many are considered permanent residents at any point in time.  My sister-in-law is part of that number and has been since she immigrated to Canada with her family when she was 2 and that was 45 yrs ago.



According to the CICReport on Plans and Priorities for 2015/16,


> In 2015, we plan to welcome between 260,000 and 285,000 new permanent residents to Canada.


http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/rpp/2015-2016/index.asp


----------



## Remius (26 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure that's not how many they accept per year.  That's how many are considered permanent residents at any point in time.  My sister-in-law is part of that number and has been since she immigrated to Canada with her family when she was 2 and that was 45 yrs ago.



No.  That's the annual intake.  Read the link.  

Or go to wikipedia if you want it in laymen's terms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Canada#Immigration_rate


----------



## Strike (26 Nov 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> According to the CICReport on Plans and Priorities for 2015/16,http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/rpp/2015-2016/index.asp



My bad then.


----------



## Remius (26 Nov 2015)

Strike said:
			
		

> My bad then.



Looking at the numbers at first glance I thought the same thing you did.


----------



## PuckChaser (26 Nov 2015)

A new permanent resident can be an American with a Canadian spouse receiving that status. Let's compare apples to apples here:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/canada.asp

Canada takes 10,000 of the 100,000 resettled refugees every year. The Liberals are taking 2.5 that number in 3 months. Little bit different when you resettle a refugee than when you allow someone from a G8 nation permanent resident status when they immigrate here.


----------



## YZT580 (26 Nov 2015)

Just by counting the number of mosques and temples that have opened in Mississauga and Brampton I would suggest that a significant portion of those 260,000 have been from places other than Europe and the U.S.  Harper clamped down on immigration fraud but he never touched the numbers: it was mainly bad optics.  The figure of 260,000 was the number that the government and the private sector believed could be absorbed annually.


----------



## Remius (26 Nov 2015)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Just by counting the number of mosques and temples that have opened in Mississauga and Brampton I would suggest that a significant portion of those 260,000 have been from places other than Europe and the U.S.  Harper clamped down on immigration fraud but he never touched the numbers: it was mainly bad optics.  The figure of 260,000 was the number that the government and the private sector believed could be absorbed annually.




Well you can see the yearly breakdown up to 2013 here.  

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2013/permanent/10.asp 

The trend is likely the same for 2014.

China being number 1.  Followed by India and the the Philippines.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Nov 2015)

Remius said:
			
		

> ..... *China* being number 1.  Followed by India and the the Philippines.


That bit intrigued me ....


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Nov 2015)

It shouldn't.

China, India and Philippines all share one common attribute: they have, relative to_ opportunities_, a surplus of well educated, sophisticated people for whom good, productive, satisfying jobs are in short supply at home. They actually and actively encourage emigration and they make life easy for the would be emigrant.

With regard to opportunity. I just learned that a young lady who used to work for me, in my civvy 'second career,' returned to China after finishing both her BComm and MBA here in Ottawa. She thought that her skills, knowledge and contacts would stand here in good stead in China ... and so they did, jobs were not hard to find, at all, but the sorts of good, productive jobs with bright future prospects that she wanted were scarce. She returned to Canada, almost certainly to stay, to take up an entry level management position, with good prospects for her future, with a big Canadian bank.

Every theoretical physicist, accountant or engineer that we _take_ from China or India is just one from a battalion of qualified people who are "surplus to requirements opportunity," we act, in a way as a social safety valve for the Chinese and indian governments. But when we take a physicist or accountant from, say Bolivia or Ghana we are taking one from a section, at best, not from a whole battalion. Our immigration policies often rob poor countries of their "best and brightest."


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Nov 2015)

The high-education/skilled folks, I understand - I think I was more surprised to see China (only just) in the top ten countries sending _refugees_ here in 2014, not to mention all those who've come here since 2004 ....





.... and holding the top slot in 2014 (see CIC spreadsheet attached).


----------



## Rocky Mountains (27 Nov 2015)

The US had 4,451 refugees to Canada in 10 years.  Amazing that a country that is, in my opinion, a lot freer and fairer than Canada would generate any legitimate refugees.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Nov 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> The US had 4,451 refugees to Canada in 10 years.  Amazing that a country that is, in my opinion, a lot freer and fairer than Canada would generate any legitimate refugees.


It would be interesting to see how many of those have been deserters from the various ME/SWA wars.  The Info-machine definition is _"Refugees are people who have fled their countries because of a well-founded fear of persecution, and who are therefore unable to return home"_.

In the case of deseters, one man's "persecution" is another's "enforcing the terms of enlistment" - discuss  ;D


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Nov 2015)

>I don't think getting them through screening and through airport security is going to be the biggest hurdle. There is a lot more to it than putting them through a metal detector. The biggest issue is going to be the logistics after they make it through the screening and are living on Canadian soil.

Yes.  Transporting people is not the issue.  Settling them once they arrive is.

That is why - relaxed deadline aside - I still render an overall thumbs-down on the project.  The whole commitment was about bidding for votes and has become an exercise in maintaining the new government's image and sustaining the social posturing of well-meaning people with short attention spans - selfishness on all parts.  Long after the government delivers the last of the 25,000 refugees into someone else's hands and spends its last committed dollar, other people will be dealing with the problem.  To the extent that organizations (and their funds) are occupied with cleaning up the mess created by the Liberals and the people whose interest in refugees was born during the election and will disappear again once the government declares "mission accomplished", more deserving and needy refugees will necessarily have been shunted aside and will have to wait longer.  That is shameful, not praiseworthy.


----------



## my72jeep (28 Nov 2015)

So I was listening to CBC Friday morning( some parts of N Ont it's all you get) and some minor Liberal functionary was going on about how we sent 500 personal over to screen the new Canadians. One thing he said struck a nerve, upon arrival they get resident status automatically. Doesn't that mean we can't get rid of them if later it's found out that whoops we missed his or her terrorist status?


----------



## Ostrozac (28 Nov 2015)

my72jeep said:
			
		

> So I was listening to CBC Friday morning( some parts of N Ont it's all you get) and some minor Liberal functionary was going on about how we sent 500 personal over to screen the new Canadians. One thing he said struck a nerve, upon arrival they get resident status automatically. Doesn't that mean we can't get rid of them if later it's found out that whoops we missed his or her terrorist status?



Nope, you can strip resident status from an individual, and it's a much easier process than the newly introduced (and not yet fully Supreme Court approved) method to remove Canadian citizenship.

In practice, it probably doesn't matter. We are not going to be deporting anyone to Syria so long as the war continues. Note the problems we've had deporting people to Iraq and Afghanistan over the past few years.


----------



## The Bread Guy (28 Nov 2015)

From the "it's never left enough for the hard left" files ....


> The Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has capitulated to the reactionary anti-refugee campaign whipped up by the political right in the wake of the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris. In the name of “security,” it is imposing reactionary restrictions on its refugee resettlement program, effectively excluding most “unaccompanied” males, and delaying implementation of its pledge to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by year’s end ....


----------



## McG (28 Nov 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> The US had 4,451 refugees to Canada in 10 years.  Amazing that a country that is, in my opinion, a lot freer and fairer than Canada would generate any legitimate refugees.


If you are crazy, the whole US might be out to get you.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/randy-quaid-seeks-refugee-status-in-canada-1.930839


----------



## PPCLI Guy (28 Nov 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> The US had 4,451 refugees to Canada in 10 years.  Amazing that a country that is, in my opinion, a lot freer and fairer than Canada would generate any legitimate refugees.



I live in the States.  

I guess it is "freer and fairer" for me - because I am a) white b) have a job that comes with platinum plated health care and c) am happily ensconced in the top 3% of earners.  

Everyone else?  Not so much.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Nov 2015)

How does our monetary assistance program work?
From what I read the refugees will get a one time start up bonus then a monthly pay check of around $500 or $600 depending on a few variables.

How long does that last for? Are they cut off after a year or 5 years or could they hypothetically receive assistance for 20+ years?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (28 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> How does our monetary assistance program work?
> From what I read the refugees will get a one time start up bonus then a monthly pay check of around $500 or $600 depending on a few variables.
> 
> How long does that last for? Are they cut off after a year or 5 years or could they hypothetically receive assistance for 20+ years?



Like Maritmer fishermen....


----------



## Blackadder1916 (28 Nov 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> How does our monetary assistance program work?
> From what I read the refugees will get a one time start up bonus then a monthly pay check of around $500 or $600 depending on a few variables.
> 
> How long does that last for? Are they cut off after a year or 5 years or could they hypothetically receive assistance for 20+ years?



http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/outside/resettle-assist.asp
Resettlement Assistance Program

Resettlement assistance is provided by the Government of Canada to Convention Refugees Abroad and, in some instances, to members of the Country of Asylum Class who have been identified as refugees with special needs and who have been admitted to Canada as government-assisted refugees. Refugees who claimed refugee protection from inside Canada are not eligible for this program. These funds are used to help pay for:
•meeting the refugee at the airport or port of entry; 
•temporary accommodation;
•help in finding permanent accommodation;
•basic household items; and
•general orientation to life in Canada.

This money is also used to give the refugee income support for up to one year or until that person becomes self-sufficient, whichever comes first.


----------



## winnipegoo7 (29 Nov 2015)

The National Post is reporting that Montreal has hired an official co-ordinator to welcome the Syrian refugees to Montreal. He will be paid up to $110,000 for the three month period.   

Not a bad job.



> Syrian refugee coordinator in Montreal to make $1,800 a day to welcome the newcomers to Canada



http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/syrian-refugee-coordinator-in-montreal-to-make-1800-a-day-to-welcome-the-newcomers-to-canada


----------



## Jed (29 Nov 2015)

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> The National Post is reporting that Montreal has hired an official co-ordinator to welcome the Syrian refugees to Montreal. He will be paid up to $110,000 for the three month period.
> 
> Not a bad job.
> 
> http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/syrian-refugee-coordinator-in-montreal-to-make-1800-a-day-to-welcome-the-newcomers-to-canada



A good job to hand out some pork barrel funding.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (29 Nov 2015)

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/01/23/conservative_government_hiring_consultants_to_sell_sick_leave_reform.html

By: Alex Boutilier Staff Reporter, Published on Thu Jan 23 2014

OTTAWA—The federal government is hoping private sector consultants can help sell planned sick leave reforms to public servants.
Ottawa is looking for “disability benefit consultants” to assist the Conservatives’ push for public sector sick leave reforms — an issue that will be front and centre as a number of unions head to the negotiating table this year.

The consultants will be asked to do everything from advising Treasury Board on the design of the new sick leave system to developing “communications products” singing the praises of the new system to employees and union reps.

Treasury Board expects to pay as much as $525,000 over a four-year period for the consultants to help transition the public service to the new system, including interacting “with different stakeholders to explain the benefits of proposed short-term disability plan designs to meet the Government of Canada’s objectives.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing to see here.  Move along.


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Nov 2015)

I have it, first hand, from one working Ottawa church-supported charity that it will cost $24K to $26K per year to house, feed, clothe and provide e.g. bus passes and job help to one refugee family (arbitrarily described two adults and two school-age children). That's market rate rents and groceries. When asked what sort of help her little organization needed she replied: "just a bit of money. We've been doing this, nearly full time, since the Vietnamese "boat people" _circa_ 1980," she said, "and we know what to do and how to do it; we don't need any consultants, just access to the people who need our help and some financial support from the community." Quite frankly I trust this lady and her two (equally grey haired) colleagues more than I trust ALL the politicians and bureaucrats and (especially) consultants, combined. My wife and I agreed that every penny we will offer to help the refugees ~ who really do need our help ~ will be funnelled through my wife's church group to this little, local organization; nothing goes to anything associated with government or "big welfare."


----------



## SeaKingTacco (29 Nov 2015)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/01/23/conservative_government_hiring_consultants_to_sell_sick_leave_reform.html
> 
> By: Alex Boutilier Staff Reporter, Published on Thu Jan 23 2014
> 
> ...



I am unclear what point you are attempting to make. Can you offer some clarification?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (29 Nov 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I am unclear what point you are attempting to make. Can you offer some clarification?



In response to this:



> A good job to hand out some pork barrel funding.



I am suggesting that consultants are often hired by governments of all stripes to assist with the roll out of new programs etc - and that there is nothing wrong with that.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (29 Nov 2015)

Gotcha. I was particularly dense today and was not tracking.

(An alternate theory is that it is wrong no matter which government does it....)


----------



## ballz (30 Nov 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> Canada already accepts 200,000 immigrants per year which is 16,667 per month.  An additional 10,000 in one month shouldn't be particularly difficult.  Rent them apartments, open them a bank account, buy them some groceries and introduce them to locals whose Arabic dialect they can understand - end of story.  The only further involvement needed would be giving them a welfare cheque by direct deposit each month for a certain time.



Immigrants is a very broad category, most of them are not "refugees."

According to this, Canada only accepts 10-14k refugees a year, so yes, an additional 10,000 in one month is a lot.

http://www.ancnl.ca/?Content=FAQ


I am not against taking in 25,000 refugees, but everyone on both sides of the fence so far needs to try and keep it real.


----------



## GRU (30 Nov 2015)

The United States of America accept immigrants and refugees by the hundreds of thousands every year. They can accommodate all of these because of an effective taxation system. Their taxes are low that cause foreign investments and domestic investments exceed the employment rate. So no matter how large the number of refugees is, these refugees would in turn become enterpreneurs just like the ones who coddled them. Look at America, the no.1 superpower. They can afford adjustable water heaters unlike socialist countries. They have too much money for infrastructure that road signs become too redundant.

Because foreigners are allowed to buy houses in USA, the real estate industry is such a thriving one. If only we can reduce real estate taxes to foreigners, then there would be a boom in real estate. No, the members of Parliament practice that false nationalism that cause negative repercussions in the economy like the 60-40 share of Hydro. It's stupid! Why would I invest in a business where I would only get 40%?

If I were a closet communist economic saboteur I would aim first at the taxation system to sabotage the economy. We have plenty of these among Members of Parliament. Try thinking out of the box. Whom would you blame for Canada's 1 trillion dollar debt?

As a card-carrying member of the Communist Party of Canada and the Maoist Revolutionary Party, I am 'proud to say' that I've been 'there'. Applicants of CPC and the Maoist Party are advised to lie low, falsely profess their adherence to capitalism and apply as members of the Liberal Party and NDP. From there, their handlers would take over and dictate to them to table economy sabotaging and spending laws that would seal the fate of Canada. When we reach the status of Greece, everybody would finally realize the damage done and we cannot do anything anymore but apply for bailout from China. That would be the time when the Communist Party of Canada can justify itself. If no mole in CSIS succeeds to blow my lid off, I can outlast members to be the Vice Chairman, and influence policies from there. If not, then consider me dead. ha ha ha ha ha


----------



## Nuggs (30 Nov 2015)

Alright, who's been feeding the trolls?


----------



## Remius (30 Nov 2015)

GRU said:
			
		

> ha ha ha ha ha



HA HA HA HA


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Nov 2015)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/outside/resettle-assist.asp
> Resettlement Assistance Program
> 
> Resettlement assistance is provided by the Government of Canada to Convention Refugees Abroad and, in some instances, to members of the Country of Asylum Class who have been identified as refugees with special needs and who have been admitted to Canada as government-assisted refugees. Refugees who claimed refugee protection from inside Canada are not eligible for this program. These funds are used to help pay for:
> ...



Thanks a lot.  
And after that resettlement assistance they can apply for regular assistance.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Nov 2015)

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1909861-swedish-village-torn-apart-from-fighting-between-migrants-and-locals/

Hopefully we fair better.


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Dec 2015)

Meanwhile, while receiving end is working full tilt to bring folks over, it appears not everyone who's left Syria is in a huge hurry to move to Canada at this point - highlights mine:


> Only a fraction of the tens of thousands of Syrian refugees whom the United Nations tried to contact over the past month said they were interested in coming to Canada by the end of the year, federal immigration officials revealed Wednesday.
> 
> While the low response rate raises questions about why Syrian refugees don't want to travel here, officials said they remain confident about the Liberal government's plan to resettle 25,000 Syrians by the end of February.
> 
> ...


----------



## c_canuk (3 Dec 2015)

alternating between wanting to laugh and cry.

my god what a gong show.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Dec 2015)

I can't say that this is much of a surprise to me.

There are a few factors at work here, IMO. 

First, the Media has conflated the issue of the European "refugee crisis" by making it look bigger than it was. How many people here have noticed that you regularly saw pictures of alleged "huge" columns of refugees on the march, but when you paid attention to the top of the pictures, you could see that the tight column just ended a few hundred feet further. these pictures did not denote "thousands and thousands" of refugees on the march everywhere, but a few hundred in one specific location - likely a group traveling together. Similarly, I am sure the media showing the "assault" on European borders probably was filmed at the specific locations where such "assault" was carried out and therefore, by its very nature the pictures exaggerated the overall reality.

Secondly, no distinction was made during the crisis between economic migrants and real refugees. Yes some refugees were in the masses (at some specific points, likely the majority were refugees), but if the number of real refugees was actually determined and then compared to the number of  Syrians displaced by the civil war and taking refuge out of country, I suspect that the proportion of refugees that  want to get into Europe, or the West generally, is not that high. In fact, I suspect that, like refugees every where else, the first and foremost hope of the large majority of refugee is being able to go back home, and the sooner the better.

 This leads to my third and last point: There is a false belief in the USA but also in Canada, though not to the same extent, that we live in the best country in the world and that the whole world is beating a path to get in here and live like we do. In my experience, nothing can be further from the truth. There will always be people that wish to immigrate to North America and start a new life, but by and large, the citizens of other countries, when they even know anything about Canada or the US*, are quite happy with their societies and to spend their life in their own countries, without any inkling of moving somewhere else.

*: Anybody see that family being processed for Canada on the National yesterday? They decided to apply after checking Canada on the internet and discovering, in their words, that Canada has forests and lakes and nature like Syria and that this fact clenched it for them.


----------



## GAP (3 Dec 2015)

Well..............if you were a refugee leaving Canada......where would you like to go? 

or would you just want to go home?


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Dec 2015)

GAP said:
			
		

> Well..............if you were a refugee leaving Canada......where would you like to go?
> 
> or would you just want to go home?


Depends on how bad Canada was, and how long it might take for it to get better.


----------



## Gunner98 (3 Dec 2015)

Meanwhile Op Provision carries on with soldiers and Bases wasting time and money. Just WOW!  New government, big promises, great plans, poor estimate of the situation. Same shyte, different pile.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Dec 2015)

> 41,000 text messages to potential applicants to see if they were interested in coming to Canada.



No one has ID but everyone has Iphones lol

So are we going to double the benefits we offer them in order to meet the magic 25'000 number?


----------



## Danjanou (3 Dec 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Thanks a lot.
> And after that resettlement assistance they can apply for regular assistance.



yup and be interesting to see how many do, however there will be no tracking of that.


----------



## ballz (3 Dec 2015)

GAP said:
			
		

> Well..............if you were a refugee leaving Canada......where would you like to go?
> 
> or would you just want to go home?



Switzerland. I told my current partner that if things don't work, I am going to do just that... and judging by her reaction, I would be legitimately seeking refuge.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Dec 2015)

The Minister's response to the low hit rate for offers to come to Canada?


> The idea that there are many refugees who don’t want to come to Canada is “crazy,” said federal Immigration Minister John McCallum on Thursday, in response to reports that only a small percentage of Syrian refugees are interested in relocating to this country.
> 
> McCallum had just returned from visiting a refugee camp in Jordan, where he said there is “huge enthusiasm — a great hunger to come to Canada.”
> 
> He was responding to questions about comments his own immigration officials made on Wednesday, which were reported by several Canadian news organizations ....


----------



## dimsum (4 Dec 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> The Minister's response to the low hit rate for offers to come to Canada?



To be fair, would the translators for the Minister _really_ say "oh, most of these folks you're here on this high-profile visit don't actually want to come to Canada"?


----------



## captloadie (4 Dec 2015)

Maybe its true that many don't want to permantly relocate to another country. Maybe we are taking people from the wrong areas. Let's assume that those that have made a rush for a European border are those who have finally made the leap to resettle somewhere other than the middle east. Is it possible the majority that remain in the Camps are groups who either haven't reached the breaking point yet, or who really want to return to their homeland of Syria and are just waiting it out?


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Dec 2015)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> To be fair, would the translators for the Minister _really_ say "oh, most of these folks you're here on this high-profile visit don't actually want to come to Canada"?


A different question to consider:  would the Ministers be given a chance to speak to anyone other than those _wanting_ to come to Canada?


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Dec 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> The idea that there are many refugees who don’t want to come to Canada is “crazy,” said federal Immigration Minister John McCallum on Thursday, in response to reports that only a small percentage of Syrian refugees are interested in relocating to this country.
> 
> McCallum had just returned from visiting a refugee camp in Jordan, where he said there is “huge enthusiasm — a great hunger to come to Canada.”
> 
> He was responding to questions about comments his own immigration officials made on Wednesday, which were reported by several Canadian news organizations ....



I think I see what is _actually_ crazy in this...a political mamby-pamby ignoring SME opinion.  

I am not sure which of these applies more;   :facepalm: or  : or  :brickwall:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Dec 2015)

So has anyone heard anything concrete about using the Cadet camp at Quadra for the refugees? Apparently the rumour is going through the cadet corp.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Dec 2015)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I think I see what is _actually_ crazy in this...a political mamby-pamby ignoring SME opinion.


Happens under all colours of government - sadly ....


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Dec 2015)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Happens under all colours of government - sadly ....



Yes but at least try to not be so..._open_...about it!   >


----------



## quadrapiper (4 Dec 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> So has anyone heard anything concrete about using the Cadet camp at Quadra for the refugees? Apparently the rumour is going through the cadet corp.


If the disembarkation points were on the West Coast, it'd make sense (along with Work Point, Albert Head, and a smaller number of spaces at 19 Wing): that said, suspect rumour is all it is, as the refugees are IIRC entering through Montreal and Toronto.

If there was a need to quarter refugees on this coast, Quadra would likely be the least-bad option, though most of the quarters are spartan barracks bays.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Dec 2015)

thanks


----------



## The Bread Guy (8 Dec 2015)

This, from the Info-machine this morning - highlights mine:


> New receiving areas for Syrian refugees at ports-of-entry at Toronto Pearson International Airport, and Montréal–Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport are being temporarily put in place and will be operational until the end of February 2016. This will make processing at the airport as efficient and comfortable as possible for refugees who have made a long journey to their new home in Canada.
> 
> (....)
> 
> ...


----------



## McG (11 Dec 2015)

The first military flight of refugees has arrived in Toronto.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/syrian-refugees-arrive-on-government-aircraft-in-toronto-1.2694801

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/syria-refugees-arrive-1.3360154


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Dec 2015)

More court action halted by the new federal government ...


> "Today, the Government of Canada announced that it will not pursue its appeal in the case of The Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v. Canadian Doctors for Refugee Care et al.The case involves changes made in 2012 to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) for refugees, refugee claimants and claimants who were denied refugee status.
> 
> “In July 2014, the Federal Court of Canada ruled that those changes violated Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our government has promised to fully restore the IFHP. The temporary coverage announced after the Federal Court decision will stay in place until a new program is implemented.
> 
> ...


... but still no word on this one yet.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Dec 2015)

MCG said:
			
		

> The first military flight of refugees has arrived in Toronto.
> 
> http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/syrian-refugees-arrive-on-government-aircraft-in-toronto-1.2694801
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/syria-refugees-arrive-1.3360154



Premier Wynne was on hand to give them a bill from Ontario Hydro.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Dec 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Premier Wynne was on hand to give then a bill from Ontario Hydro.



WHAT!

She wasn't there handing out popcorn?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (16 Dec 2015)

Making sure there was no homophobes coming in.


----------



## kratz (16 Dec 2015)

The Premier could have been on hand, to give them each a free laptop and offer each family free rent for a year.

Ok, the laptops are from a group in Edmonton AB, but Toronto is complaining about landlords trying to follow due diligence, even with refugees.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Dec 2015)

kratz said:
			
		

> The Premier could have been on hand, to give them each a free laptop and offer each family free rent for a year.
> 
> Ok, the laptops are from a group in Edmonton AB, *but Toronto is complaining about landlords trying to follow due diligence, even with refugees.*


I caught that ya. Imagine that, someone wanting to follow policy and the rules. Not exactly the landlords fault that no one thought of this ahead of time. They're paying a guy $1800 a day to organize this, he should be able to figure something out.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (16 Dec 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I caught that ya. Imagine that, someone wanting to follow policy and the rules. Not exactly the landlords fault that no one thought of this ahead of time. They're paying a guy $1800 a day to organize this, he should be able to figure something out.



For 1800/day, I bet he takes his time though.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Making sure there was no homophobes coming in.



Oddly enough that would likely disqualify about 2/3rds of the incoming refugees


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Dec 2015)

Mooooooore refugees for 2016?


> The Canadian government could double the intake of Syrian refugees to 50,000, according to Canada’s minister of immigration, refugees and citizenship.
> 
> John McCallum said the Canadian government hopes to resettle 35,000 to 50,000 refugees by the end of 2016.
> 
> ...


Nice thought, but if they're having trouble rustling up folks to come to the Land of the Beaver & Mountie now ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Dec 2015)

This tidbit, via Kurdish media, about Canada also helping refugees closer to the fight - highlights mine ...


> While visiting the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Canadian Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan met with Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani in Erbil on Monday December 21st, to discuss the latest political and security developments.
> 
> According to a statement by Kurdistan Region Presidency office, Sajjan praised the effective role of Kurdish Peshmerga forces in the war against Islamic State (IS) in northern Iraq, and reiterated that the sacrifices by Peshmerga are highly valued by Canadians.
> 
> ...


A bit more in the brief statement from the Kurdish Region President's info-machine attached.


----------



## McG (23 Dec 2015)

There will be at least 2,000 but it looks like Canada will not make the 10,000 refugees in country goal by year end.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/10k-syrian-refugees-may-not-be-on-canadian-soil-by-year-s-end-mccallum-1.3378261


----------



## Halifax Tar (23 Dec 2015)

MCG said:
			
		

> There will be at least 2,000 but it looks like Canada will not make the 10,000 refugees in country goal by year end.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/10k-syrian-refugees-may-not-be-on-canadian-soil-by-year-s-end-mccallum-1.3378261



Do I blame Harper for this ?  I dunno I feel so confused...


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (23 Dec 2015)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Do I blame Harper for this ?  I dunno I feel so confused...



I saw McCallum's news conference and thought it was an exercise in talking in circles. The 10,000 by 31 Jan was a liberal promise which clearly they can't make, but was self imposed with Canadians probably not really caring about numbers. Why not just say they can't make the number? It's THEIR number!

Also, what's up with the refugees needing extra time to sell property and say good bye? We were led to believe these people were desperate... seems somewhat the opposite


----------



## Jed (23 Dec 2015)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> I saw McCallum's news conference and thought it was an exercise in talking in circles. The 10,000 by 31 Jan was a liberal promise which clearly they can't make, but was self imposed with Canadians probably not really caring about numbers. Why not just say they can't make the number? It's THEORY number!
> 
> Also, what's up with the refugees needing extra time to sell property and say good bye? We were led to believe these people were desperate... seems somewhat the opposite



Yep, it just does not fit the narrative.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jan 2016)

This, from Ottawa city councillor and CF vet Jody Mitic:


> ... "I didn't go fight in Afghanistan to not help Syrian refugees" ... Mitic ... said he was "bummed" Wednesday when people on social media suggested Canada should do more for its war vets rather than help Syrian refugees fleeing from war.  "I don't want people to feel sorry for me because we're bringing in refugees," Mitic said in an interview.  "One is not the other, and don't use veterans as a wedge issue just because you don't like refugees." ...


QFTFT


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Jan 2016)

He also said later in the article that he doesn't understand why we can't do both. Completely agree. If we can bring in 5,000 refugees in a couple months, we should be able to quickly find homes and link into support systems for the roughly 2,500 homeless vets out there right now.


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Jan 2016)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> QFTFT



Can you translate that for the slower members of the audience, please?


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jan 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Can you translate that for the slower members of the audience, please?


Politely put, Q-uoted F-or T-he F-lipping T-ruth ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Jan 2016)

Thanks.  You learn something new every day.


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Jan 2016)

Niiiiiiice ...


> More than a dozen Syrian refugees were pepper sprayed late Friday night in an incident that police are treating as a hate crime.
> 
> The attack happened outside the Muslim Association of Canada Centre during a “welcome night” event for newly-arrived Syrian refugees.
> 
> ...


This from Vancouver PD ...


> The VPD’s Major Crime Section is continuing to investigate last night’s pepper-spraying outside of the Muslim Association of Canada Centre.
> 
> Shortly after 10:30 p.m., a large crowd of refugees were gathered outside of the Muslim Association of Canada Centre located at 2122 Kingsway Avenue when an unknown man on a bicycle rode up and pepper-sprayed a group of men, women and children.
> 
> ...


... and this from the immigration minister:


> “I was appalled when I heard of last night’s incident outside the Muslim Association of Canada Centre in Vancouver, in which an unknown assailant pepper sprayed a group of Syrian refugees. Paramedics treated more than two dozen men, women and children for exposure to the noxious substance.
> 
> “That the group was there to attend an event welcoming them to Canada only makes this attack even more infuriating and reprehensible.
> 
> ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (9 Jan 2016)

That is no cool.  I hope they find who did it and make them account for their actions.  The victims weren't asking for trouble, would be a different story if it was the bunch from Cologne.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Jan 2016)

Meanwhile, standby (at least some) CFBs - highlights mine...


> Refugee agencies and the Red Cross are racing to line up housing for thousands of Syrians in the coming weeks as the focus of the Liberal government's program shifts from refugees with private sponsors to those assisted by the government alone.
> 
> *Three military bases in Ontario and Quebec* should be ready by the end of next week to provide essential services for government-assisted refugees, said Hossam Elsharkawi, associate vice president, international operations for the Canadian Red Cross.
> 
> ...


Re:  the bit in yellow, here's the list of all the "possibles" from the Op PROVISION backgrounder:


> If requested, the CAF is prepared to provide interim lodging for refugees at the following bases/wings in Ontario and Quebec:
> 
> *- Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Kingston;
> - CFB Borden;
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Jan 2016)

Wanted:  someone to cater meals (more in attached) and do laundry/dry cleaning for refugees @ CFB Borden - _just_ seeking information for now.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Feb 2016)

Some of the latest ...


> Plans to temporarily house Syrian refugees at Canadian Forces Base Borden and the base in Meaford have been cancelled.
> 
> According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), officials have determined that only two of Canada's military bases will be asked to house some of the 25,000 Syrian refugees expected to land on Canadian soil by the end of March.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Feb 2016)

And here's the risk you run writing stories about _past_ briefing notes*** in the _present_ tense ...


> The government of Canada has ordered its military to draw up plans for migrant camps that will allow more than 6,000 Muslims to be housed on a long-term basis at several Canadian Forces Bases.
> 
> Planning documents for migrant camps requested by the centre-left Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (pictured) were released in response to an ‘Access to Information’ request from the political website, The Rebel.
> 
> ...


On that bit in yellow, uh, no they won't _all_ be at this point ...

_"CFB Trenton no longer on standby for refugees"_
_“Syrian refugees won’t be coming to CFB Borden, Meaford”_
Still, let's not delay the outrage bus any longer than we have to ...


> ... It’s shocking that Canadian Armed Forces personnel will be ordered to abandon the coalition battle against ISIS and return to Canada to become waiters, chauffeurs and social workers for Muslim migrants, and that *Canadian Forces Bases will be turned into squalid refugee camps* ...


 :facepalm:

*** - Although I WILL give credit to the outlet for sharing at least some of the material they obtained and wrote about to allow readers to reach their own conclusions - most media don't share their "obtained" documentation obtained via ATIP.


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Feb 2016)

Jokes on him, most PMQ housing and single quarters already resemble squalid refugee camps.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Feb 2016)

I couldn't find a better place for this.

Good news is our new friends seem to be learning how to work the system, just like good Canadians.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/syrian-refugees-bedbugs-follow-feb10-1.3442623


> mmigrant Services Association of Nova Scotia says staff thoroughly inspected an apartment to ensure it was bedbug-free before moving in a family of six Syrian refugees on Feb. 1.
> Director of operations Gerry Mills said families are moved into safe and appropriate housing, and ISANS staff keep the health and well-being of refugees in mind.
> 
> "Our staff know what bedbugs look like and since Friday we've had staff there every day in different apartments, honestly trying to look for bedbugs. We have found not one bedbug," she said.
> ...


----------



## kratz (14 Feb 2016)

I read the same news report, but wasn't certain if there was a good place for discussion on it here.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Feb 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I couldn't find a better place for this.
> 
> Good news is our new friends seem to be learning how to work the system, just like good Canadians.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/syrian-refugees-bedbugs-follow-feb10-1.3442623



This story has been making the rounds.

This Iman in Edmonton is a good candidate for DEPORTATION, but we know that Trudeau is highly unlikely to carry out any such action:

http://www.therebel.media/syrian_refugees_in_alberta_welcomed_with_prayer_destroy_enemies_of_islam


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Feb 2016)

kratz said:
			
		

> I read the same news report, but wasn't certain if there was a good place for discussion on it here.



I think there's a penchant to blow any story involving refugees, especially Muslims, out of proportion.  Social Media is full of stories and comments about giving help and what not to refugees when homeless (and homeless vets) are suffering. Most of those people didn't seem to give a shit about the homeless until it was a convenient argument against refugees, right?

So someone is trying to rip off the system, how is that news?  As I said in my post they're a new family here and they've already realized they can try and buck the system with a false claim. I'm going to guess they, and others in the same boat, realize being a refugee will give them a bit of political clout when it comes to the media or politicians. 
When we army types live away from home we're lucky to have heat or a roof that doesn't leak.  If you go to Connaught in Ottawa on a tasking you're instructed to bring your own bed sheets. These people are given free lodging in the form of their own apartment but it's not good enough. Stuff like this effects public support and compassion IMO.
Lastly there seems to be a number of cases where stories of refugees in the news get hidden or pushed to the side. In some places (Sweden, Germany) the government is outright trying to coverup and hide refugee-related problems. It'll be interesting to see if Canada follows the same path.


----------



## CougarKing (17 Feb 2016)

It seems Trudeau's pledge to take in more Syrian refugees overlooked those who came into Canada via the US:

CBC



> *Syrian boy seeking refugee status ordered deported to United States*
> [CBC]
> 
> February 15, 2016
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Feb 2016)

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> It seems Trudeau's pledge to take in more Syrian refugees overlooked those who came into Canada via the US:
> 
> CBC


I'm sympathetic about the plight of folks who've been f**ked over in Syria, but this causes me pause:


> ... Mohammed's family fled Syria for Egypt after the war began. But when Mohammed turned 16, his residency permit in Egypt expired. He faced being sent back to Syria and being conscripted into the military.
> 
> Fearing that, his parents flew with him to the United States and then arranged to get him to the Canadian border. They believed Canada's openness to accept Syrian refugees meant he would be safe here while *they flew back to Egypt* ...


Were they in a refugee camp?  Someplace else?  As usual with media stories, we're not hearing the WHOLE story.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Feb 2016)

If I'm reading the French correctly, it looks like the CF bases won't be needed after all ...


> À quelques jours de la date butoir que s'était fixée le gouvernement Trudeau pour l'accueil des 25 000 réfugiés syriens, tout porte à croire que les bases militaires rénovées pour leur arrivée ne seront pas utilisées.
> 
> À la sortie du caucus libéral mercredi, le ministre de l'Immigration, des Réfugiés et de la Citoyenneté, John McCallum, a indiqué que nous étions au «point où l'on n'aura pas besoin des bases militaires».
> 
> En séance de breffage technique un peu plus tôt, des hauts fonctionnaires n'avaient toutefois pas fermé complètement la porte à ce que les bases de Valcartier, près de Québec, et Trenton, en Ontario, soient éventuellement réquisitionnées. Ils excluaient toutefois qu'elles puissent être utilisées cette semaine ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 May 2016)

Some giving back ...


> When Rita Khanchet saw images of a vicious wildfire destroying homes and uprooting tens of thousands of people in Fort McMurray, she immediately thought of Syria, the homeland she fled just five months ago with her husband and young son.
> 
> Khanchet and her family know first-hand how scary it is to leave a community, home and possessions behind, and she was determined to help the people of Fort McMurray.
> 
> ...


Something about having walked a mile in similar shoes ...


----------



## CougarKing (9 Jun 2016)

"Photo op" or "Selfie op" ?  :blotto:

Yahoo Daily Brew



> *Language training for refugees no laughing matter, Rempel says*
> [Daily Brew]
> 
> June 7, 2016
> ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Aug 2016)

Too bad the slavers couldn't be summarily slaughtered...


----------



## The Bread Guy (13 Aug 2016)

Interesting point - shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_ ...


> Local refugees (in Newfoundland) from South Sudan are calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to offer the same concern and support for displaced Sudanese people as the country has for Syria.
> 
> Overshadowed by war in Syria, the civil war in South Sudan has displaced over a million people, and resulted in an estimated 300,000 civilian casualties since 2013.
> 
> ...


----------



## AbdullahD (13 Aug 2016)

So I didn't feel this little tid bit needed its own thread but a neat little aside... about the character and motivation of the refugees in kamloops.

One Syrian brother (and his family) got work shortly after coming to canada, one of them within 24hrs of getting posted to kamloops. I let one of them know (since we are on good terms) that I am submitting my applicaton for the Canadian forces in the first week of september and he got very excited, he told me that once he was a Canadian citizen his intention is to sign up 

So I told him I "believe" people with Permanent residence status were good too and I would doubke check and the guy darn near wanted to sign up then and there 

Now dont get me wrong when thousands of people come, a few bad ones may get in too. But this family at least are not trying to be bumbs on the log.

Had to get it out, a lot of the Syrians feel a lot of love for Canada because of what we have done and want to pay Canada back.

Abdullah


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2016)

Aug 25, 2016 

Ontario puts another $1.55M to refugee settlement, support
http://www.680news.com/2016/08/25/ontario-puts-another-1-55m-to-refugee-settlement-support/
Ontario is putting another $1.55 million toward refugee supports, including settlement services, mental health care and programming for students.


----------



## Lightguns (25 Aug 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Aug 25, 2016
> 
> Ontario puts another $1.55M to refugee settlement, support
> http://www.680news.com/2016/08/25/ontario-puts-another-1-55m-to-refugee-settlement-support/
> Ontario is putting another $1.55 million toward refugee supports, including settlement services, mental health care and programming for students.



Well, it's a good thing they raised license plate sticker prices, wouldn't want to go in the hole!


----------



## Bass ackwards (25 Aug 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Aug 25, 2016
> 
> Ontario puts another $1.55M to refugee settlement, support
> http://www.680news.com/2016/08/25/ontario-puts-another-1-55m-to-refugee-settlement-support/
> Ontario is putting another $1.55 million toward refugee supports, including settlement services, mental health care and programming for students.



I wonder exactly what they mean by _programming_...


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2016)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> I wonder exactly what they mean by _programming_...



It's Ontario, B A. You don't wanna know...


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Sep 2016)

Now and then I read stories about Syrian refugees  upset and being mistreated - like in London a couple months ago blow
http://www.lfpress.com/2016/06/14/londons-cross-cultural-learner-centre-mistreated-refugees-20-just-arrived-syrians-say


> Staff at the London Cross Cultural Learner Centre (CCLC) — the agency that settled more than 900 Syrians since December — “did not do their duties as they should,” states the letter.
> 
> The complaint goes on to list four examples in which the centre “failed to take care . . . and help,” said the refugees who signed it:
> 
> ...



Few more quick examples.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/programs/metromorning/syrian-refugees-hotel-toronto-1.3418220
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/syrian-refugees-food-banks-1.3562887
http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonton/2015/09/29/syrian-family-trapped-by-pests.html


I came across the story below about a 19 year old Syrian woman_  holding the line_ so to speak and dying in the process.  It's got me thinking maybe instead of trying to mass settle tens of thousands of refugees (then seemingly forgetting about them) we should have been offering women like Asia Ramazan Antar (and men, of course) more support. 



https://www.funker530.com/?s=heroic+19-year&limit=10&ixsl=1


> Heroic 19-Year-Old YPJ Fighter Falls Stopping 3 ISIS SVBIEDs
> 
> Nineteen-year-old female YPJ Kurdish fighter Asia Ramazan Antar has been killed while stopping 3 ISIS SVBIEDs advancing on her position.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I came across the story below about a 19 year old Syrian woman_  holding the line_ so to speak and dying in the process.  It's got me thinking maybe instead of trying to mass settle tens of thousands of refugees (then seemingly forgetting about them) we should have been offering women like Asia Ramazan Antar (and men, of course) more support.
> 
> https://www.funker530.com/?s=heroic+19-year&limit=10&ixsl=1


Here's where the "Kurds within Kurds" thing comes in -- the group this woman's fighting with is part of this Kurdish group, which is under this group, which Turkey says is still part of this group, which Canada still lists as a terrorist group.

Clear as mud, right?  ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2016)

Thanks for trying but no  not clear at all lol
What a mess.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Thanks for trying but no  not clear at all lol


You're not alone!



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> *What a mess.*


Sadly, that part IS clear ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Dec 2016)

The _NY Times_ shares the story of one family settled in Toronto, with a lot of stuff being sorted out at a lot of levels -- shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_


> *Wonder and Worry, as a Syrian Child Transforms*
> 
> _Canada welcomes Syrian refugees like no other country. But for one 10-year-old’s parents, is she leaving too much behind?_
> 
> ...


----------



## PuckChaser (25 Dec 2016)

Frontloaded Syrian refugees for the good press, Liberal government imposing hard cap of 1,000 privately sponsored Syrians coming to Canada next year as an early Christmas present:

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/12/24/ottawas-new-cap-on-refugee-applications-upsets-sponsors.html



> Ottawa’s new cap on refugee applications upsets sponsors
> 
> Private sponsors fear new 1,000-application limit for 2017 will prevent many refugees from escaping danger of war-torn Syria.
> Sat., Dec. 24, 2016
> ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Dec 2016)

Who can blame the hair?  The selfie cow on this issue must be just about milked dry by now.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Dec 2016)

> prevent many refugees from escaping danger of war-torn Syria.



Correct me if I'm wrong but the refugees we accepted were not dodging AK fire while running to get on airplanes. They were in UN refugee camps for years. And give or take, less than 3000 of the some 30'000 initially didnèt even want to come to Canada.  Some had to wait until their property and effects were sold.

Hardly life or death.


----------



## George Wallace (25 Dec 2016)

I still see that so many are not making the distinction between refugees and immigrants.  Refugees, as I understand it are fleeing the fighting until such time as it is safe to return home.  Immigrants are intentionally moving, for whatever reasons, to make homes in a new country and become citizens of that new country.  If we are talking about bringing in refugees, then what is the Government plan to return them to their homes at a future date when it will be safe to do so?


----------



## Remius (25 Dec 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I still see that so many are not making the distinction between refugees and immigrants.  Refugees, as I understand it are fleeing the fighting until such time as it is safe to return home.  Immigrants are intentionally moving, for whatever reasons, to make homes in a new country and become citizens of that new country.  If we are talking about bringing in refugees, then what is the Government plan to return them to their homes at a future date when it will be safe to do so?



Nowhere does it state that the intent is to send them back.  Both refugees and immigrants are treated with the goal of integration.  The distinction is limited as to the why they are leaving their country to come to Canada.   

This is from the CIC web site.

_Canada’s resettlement programs are respected internationally because they provide permanent residence as a long term solution._

More here at the site that explains Canada's refugee system.  There is no mention of returning them at any point.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/ENGLISH/refugees/canada.asp


----------



## George Wallace (26 Dec 2016)

Remius said:
			
		

> Nowhere does it state that the intent is to send them back.  Both refugees and immigrants are treated with the goal of integration.  The distinction is limited as to the why they are leaving their country to come to Canada.
> 
> This is from the CIC web site.
> 
> ...



And Remius, you confirm my statement.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Dec 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I still see that so many are not making the distinction between refugees and immigrants.  Refugees, as I understand it are fleeing the fighting until such time as it is safe to return home.  Immigrants are intentionally moving, for whatever reasons, to make homes in a new country and become citizens of that new country.  If we are talking about bringing in refugees, then what is the Government plan to return them to their homes at a future date when it will be safe to do so?




The notion that refugees wanted to return home was never enshrined in law ... it existed, as something more than just an idea, prior to the 1940s, but the situation of millions of "displaced persons" in Europe in 1945 put paid to any thought of making "return" part of the equation ~ except, of course, for the Palestinians where the "right of return" is a major political tool.

In a perfect world refugees should be cared for in safe, well managed, places of refuge near their homes ... where and when numbers permit. But how in hell do we "manage" hundreds of thousands of refugees (small cities, actually) in e.g. Dadaab in Kenya, Dollo Ado in Ethiopia or Al Zaatri in Jordan? Do we really believe we can resettle everyone back to Somalia or Syria? But, equally, how many of those refugees are "ready" to adapt to life in Australia or Belgium or Canada? Do we make things better by resettling people here or should we spend billions to make the camps better, safer and so on?


----------



## Remius (26 Dec 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> And Remius, you confirm my statement.



I was actually trying to refute this statement: *Refugees, as I understand it are fleeing the fighting until such time as it is safe to return home.*

That is a common thought about our refugee system but isn't actual policy.  Hence why there will never be a plan to send them back.  And good luck to the poor fool who tries to make that policy part of any party platform.

I do agree though with Mr. CAmpbell's perfect world argument.


----------



## Canuck_Jock (26 Dec 2016)

I think the government’s consistent policy is to presume that resettlement of refugees is permanent. This paper compares the Canadian and Australian response to Kosovan refugees: here.  Once Kosovo was secured by NATO, Australia giving them a big cheerio whilst Canada gave them the choice of staying or leaving.

Similarly, in 1998 Germany required that all Bosnian refugees left the country having declared the country safe.
Whether it is right to do is a matter of debate.  Certainly, if refugees were admitted only for the duration of a conflict, then I think the host population at large would be more accommodating.  Alternatively, some conflicts are protracted to decades long, and there is so much power on the migrant/immigrant/refugee advocate industry that I think it is a political non-starter.

Morally, is it questionable to retain refugees?  I see that Germany has commenced a low level programme of teaching the trades so that refugees (70% of the 1 million are working age males) can put them to good use on their return.  There is historic precedent as the quarter million Belgian refugees in the UK 1914-18 were largely concentrated in clumps together and administered themselves.

Imagine if Canada had a policy of teaching refugees construction skills, accountancy, engineering, administration, etc. so that they could help rebuild Syria on their return?  It might prove controversial.  Call me cynical, but no more selfies?? No more heart rending stories of Syrians telling us how fantastic we are and how grateful they are and how much they love Canada. Some segments of the political class can be a bit needy at times.

Although I think it good we have helped several thousand of them, ultimately, there effect would probably be greater in Syria (at war’s end) than here in the longer term.  Certainly, Professor Paul Collier (‘Exodus’) believes that a generous refugee policy followed by a return at conflict’s end, is the best way to rebuild a war torn state.  He calls the returning diaspora, a country’s ‘sovereign wealth fund’.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Jan 2017)

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.



> Lack of jobs, housing: why some of Canada's Syrian refugees are relocating
> CBC - The Current
> Tuesday January 03, 2017
> 
> ...



More on LINK.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Apr 2017)

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.



> Canadians are right to be concerned about border security
> By Candice Malcolm
> First posted: Friday, April 14, 2017 06:09 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, April 14, 2017 06:17 PM EDT
> 
> ...



More on LINK.

Well briefed, well coached, persons are being taken to unofficial Border Crossings, and circumventing the system.  These persons can be from any origin, not necessarily Syria, and as such are abusing our Policies.  The Government is showing little concern publicly on this matter.  No wonder people are becoming concerned.


----------



## jmt18325 (16 Apr 2017)

What exactly could the police have done differently in that exchange?  I see no way, short of erecting a barrier, of changing that.


----------



## Nuggs (16 Apr 2017)

I think we should build a wall and make America pay for it

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Apr 2017)

Nuggs said:
			
		

> I think we should build a wall and make America pay for it
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk



#TrudeauWall2017


----------



## George Wallace (16 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> What exactly could the police have done differently in that exchange?  I see no way, short of erecting a barrier, of changing that.



Was that NOT the whole point of the article?  They are hamstrung by our Laws and the loopholes in enforcing them.  The article is aimed at the Government getting off their asses and doing something before the matter worsens.


----------



## jmt18325 (16 Apr 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Was that NOT the whole point of the article?  They are hamstrung by our Laws and the loopholes in enforcing them.  The article is aimed at the Government getting off their asses and doing something before the matter worsens.



But what could be done differently?  Canadians can't enforce the law on the US side of the border, the sage third country agreement only applies to actual border crossings, and once they are in Canada, they can only be arrested.  Once they say the word asylum, we have to process their claim.  So, we can't send them back to the US, and even when their claim is done, in most cases, we can't send them home.  I'm not sure the solution.

Further - it was predicted there would be a big spike with warmer weather.  That hasn't happened.  I think there is less actual danger than there is fear.


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> But what could be done differently?  Canadians can't enforce the law on the US side of the border, the sage third country agreement only applies to actual border crossings, and once they are in Canada, they can only be arrested.  Once they say the word asylum, we have to process their claim.  So, we can't send them back to the US, and even when their claim is done, in most cases, we can't send them home.  I'm not sure the solution.
> 
> Further - it was predicted there would be a big spike with warmer weather.  That hasn't happened.  I think there is less actual danger than there is fear.



You just answered your own question. Expedite an amendment to Third Safe Country that bars any applications for refugee status unless they are made at a legal border crossing (that is not with the US). Immediately stops the problem. You should not be able to claim asylum when arriving from the US, including those useless deserters who we've allowed to hide in Canada for years because they wanted a free education, not war when they joined the military.


----------



## jmt18325 (16 Apr 2017)

If that's possible, I'd be in favour of that.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> If that's possible, I'd be in favour of that.



 The article seriously points out the fact that our Government has done NOTHING to solve the problem; in fact not paying attention to it.  It is time, as I said already, for the Government to get off their ass and address this problem.  PuckChaser has provided one such solution.  Now the Government of Canada must get to work and make it so.


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Apr 2017)

Good luck with getting the present PM to do anything that jepoardizes selfie opportunities and looking pretty.


----------



## Stoker (16 Apr 2017)

I don't buy that its that bad in the US for them to cross the border like that. Are there any numbers on how many have crossed in this manner?


----------



## George Wallace (16 Apr 2017)

With the surge of millions into Europe, that still continues, I can see this as the same thing, but on a smaller scale.  Opportunists looking for the handouts that Western nations have through their Social Programs.  It would appear that the American Social Programs, Health and Dental Care, etc. are not as good as ours.


----------



## YZT580 (17 Apr 2017)

Why not simply provide those RCMP officers tasked with patrolling the border with the authority to rule that an individual is inadmissible.  Give them the authority to say no and then provide the would-be refugee with a one way cruiser ride to the nearest border crossing.  Seems simple and relatively inexpensive.  No individual crossing from the US is running for his life so 'refugee' and asylum do not apply.


----------



## Stoker (17 Apr 2017)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Why not simply provide those RCMP officers tasked with patrolling the border with the authority to rule that an individual is inadmissible.  Give them the authority to say no and then provide the would-be refugee with a one way cruiser ride to the nearest border crossing.  Seems simple and relatively inexpensive.  No individual crossing from the US is running for his life so 'refugee' and asylum do not apply.



Unfortunately that's not in accordance with Canada's new "Sunny Ways" and very uncanadian.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Why not simply provide those RCMP officers tasked with patrolling the border with the authority to rule that an individual is inadmissible.  Give them the authority to say no and then provide the would-be refugee with a one way cruiser ride to the nearest border crossing.  Seems simple and relatively inexpensive.  No individual crossing from the US is running for his life so 'refugee' and asylum do not apply.



I don't think that's possible.  We need an agreement whereby the US takes them back.  Once they're on our side of the border, we can't send them back.  That's why we'd need to modify the safe third country agreement.


----------



## Jed (17 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> I don't think that's possible.  We need an agreement whereby the US takes them back.  Once they're on our side of the border, we can't send them back.  That's why we'd need to modify the safe third country agreement.



Why?  
just do it. What is the harm in that? At least find out if the US Customs officials are cooperative.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

Jed said:
			
		

> Why?
> just do it. What is the harm in that? At least find out if the US Customs officials are cooperative.



If they're willing take them back, fine.  Somehow, I doubt it.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> If they're willing take them back, fine.  Somehow, I doubt it.



I'd have to agree with JMT here;  if they aren't stopping them from leaving/crossing, they are likely just as happy to see them go.  If they aren't US citizens I'd hazard a guess they have a snowballs chance in H-E double hockey sticks of getting back into the US once their 2nd foot crosses over.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I'd have to agree with JMT here;  if they aren't stopping them from leaving/crossing, they are likely just as happy to see them go.  If they aren't US citizens I'd hazard a guess they have a snowballs chance in H-E double hockey sticks of getting back into the US once their 2nd foot crosses over.



For the same reason, I feel that they'd be unwilling to amend the safe third country agreement.  The best option, IMO, is to withdraw from the safe third country agreement.  Let these would be asylum applicants apply through the normal channels at CBSA staffed border crossing points.


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Apr 2017)

If we pull out, it adds a whole whack of issues to the US's border security problem. The reason they're not stopping people in rural Manitoba/Quebec is because a majority of the manpower is down south solving the masses of people trying to cross from Mexico/Cuba.

You can't just throw your arms up and pretend we're in this by ourselves. There's a lot of agreements we can leverage to get the US on border with amendments to Third Safe Country. The problem is, there's no political will/fortitude to do something about it, until one of those people crossing the border kills someone.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> If we pull out, it adds a whole whack of issues to the US's border security problem. The reason they're not stopping people in rural Manitoba/Quebec is because a majority of the manpower is down south solving the masses of people trying to cross from Mexico/Cuba.
> 
> You can't just throw your arms up and pretend we're in this by ourselves. There's a lot of agreements we can leverage to get the US on border with amendments to Third Safe Country. The problem is, there's no political will/fortitude to do something about it, until one of those people crossing the border kills someone.



That's because the problem is minor at the moment.  Without US cooperation, we are literally doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment.  The US could solve this by A ) stopping them on their side, or, B ) agreeing to amend the safe third country agreement.  Whether they've been asked about that second piece - I have no idea.


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Apr 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> ... It would appear that the American Social Programs, Health and Dental Care, etc. are not as good as ours.


If that was the case, why are we seeing what appears to be a surge?  Haven't our programs been different than theirs in the same general ways for a _looooooong_ time now?  Why do you think we're seeing more of this now?


			
				jmt18325 said:
			
		

> ... we are literally doing everything that is *legally allowed* at the moment ...


The bit in yellow -- if the rules on the U.S. side allowed them to take them back AND the rules on the Canadian side allowed them to just turn them around without due process, this wouldn't be happening.


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> That's because the problem is minor at the moment.  Without US cooperation, we are literally doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment.  The US could solve this by A ) stopping them on their side, or, B ) agreeing to amend the safe third country agreement.  Whether they've been asked about that second piece - I have no idea.


How do you know we don't have US cooperation? The current government has done nothing thus far, so I wouldn't expect the US to start wading into our domestic politics until our government leaders say there's a problem and demand change.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> How do you know we don't have US cooperation? The current government has done nothing thus far, so I wouldn't expect the US to start wading into our domestic politics until our government leaders say there's a problem and demand change.



I didn't say that we didn't have US cooperation.  I said that only cooperation from the Americans can change the situation, and that I don't know if we have that or not.  I'm guessing not.  I'm guessing they're more than happy to be rid of the people who are coming here.  I don't know what you would propose that the current government do differently, quite frankly.  They are having the illegal migrants detained on entry.  That they then claim asylum, as they are legally allowed (they're in Canada, and have full protection of the Constitution - this isn't like at a border post) is where the problem comes from.


----------



## YZT580 (17 Apr 2017)

so declare that every point at which a person crosses the border is a de facto border crossing point and SEND THEM BACK!!!  Why should the people of Canada foot the legal, medical and social bill of someone who has already reached a safe haven in the States and wishes to change?  And the point is not without precedent.  Illegals who enter via air can be stopped on the bridge and ordered back onto the aircraft.  So why should a trail through a field be any different?  It still links foreign soil with Canadian just as the bridge links foreign soil, the aircraft with Canada (the terminal building).


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Apr 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> I didn't say that we didn't have US cooperation.



Actually you did.



			
				jmt18325 said:
			
		

> Without US cooperation, we are literally doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment.



If your phrase was meant to be conditional, you should have phrased it conditionally: "Without US cooperation, we would be doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment." Or, more precisely worded, "If we didn't have US cooperation, we would be doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment."

Your existing sentence had no such condition - its phraseology was merely a re-arranged "We are literally doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment without US cooperation."  

Grammatically yours,

G2G


----------



## Eye In The Sky (17 Apr 2017)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> so declare that every point at which a person crosses the border is a de facto border crossing point and SEND THEM BACK!!!  Why should the people of Canada foot the legal, medical and social bill of someone who has already reached a safe haven in the States and wishes to change?  And the point is not without precedent.  Illegals who enter via air can be stopped on the bridge and ordered back onto the aircraft.  So why should a trail through a field be any different?  It still links foreign soil with Canadian just as the bridge links foreign soil, the aircraft with Canada (the terminal building).



If they are illegal immigrants, etc in the US, once they *leave* the US will the US take them back?  I think not.  Can we "make" them?  Ya..there's a conversation I'd like to hear between the PM and POTUS.   :nod:


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Actually you did.
> 
> If your phrase was meant to be conditional, you should have phrased it conditionally: "Without US cooperation, we would be doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment." Or, more precisely worded, "If we didn't have US cooperation, we would be doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment."
> 
> ...



This is what I said:

Without US cooperation, we are literally doing everything that is legally allowed at the moment.  The US could solve this by A ) stopping them on their side, or, B ) agreeing to amend the safe third country agreement.  *Whether they've been asked about that second piece - I have no idea.*

----

I should have worded it a bit differently, but the context of the rest of what I said was important to my meaning.  I wasn't accusing them of anything.  I don't know if we've asked the US about any of it, so they may be just waiting for an ask from us.  Somehow though, I doubt that this administration is in a hurry to keep those people or get them back.


----------



## jmt18325 (17 Apr 2017)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> so declare that every point at which a person crosses the border is a de facto border crossing point and SEND THEM BACK!!!



I'm thinking that would also require input from the US, being as it would impact the safe third country agreement in a material way.


----------

