162
 68,294

 Tamil Migrants

  1 2 3 4   
I was reading about this situation on a news website and was reading a bunch of the responses to the story. I was shocked how pretty well everyone that replied had the same opinion of what should happen to these people. I am kind of torn. I don't like how sneaky they were about coming to Canada, and some of the facts are fishy, but I also believe in being fair too and wonder how many people on that boat just desperately want a better life for themselves and family. However, is it fair to let the legitimate refugees into Canada though when we weren't even expecting them and millions of others have gone through the system the legal way? So I'm just curious if WB has the same opinions as the other site did...

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:16 PM
 14 May 2009
RachelGettingMarried
WB Chatterbox
464
Why should CANADIAN tax payer's money be spent on healthcare,welfare, shelter... of illegal immigrants. Why does Canada accept ANYONE with open arm? I'm not being mean but I rather my taxes be spent on my own people first then helping others

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:17 PM
 23 Jun 2007
 Tinseltown
Poulette
Postaholic
9,801
Finally! A REAL issue! teeth

I am also torn...

Yes, the LTTE is a terrorist organization. Are all of these members part of the LTTE? If they aren't, then yeah, they likely are seeking a better life here. If they are, since the LTTE was defeated by the government, they are likely being persecuted by the political system in place. However, does that mean accepting them might jeopardize our political ties with their country of origin?

If they are let in, how likely is it that they will build their new life here, but then use their earnings to finance battles and wars overseas?

I don't see why they would risk their lives and their health for so long if the situation wasn't bad enough to require it, and for that reason, I feel like we should let them in. But I can't justify letting them in based on the potential consequences that might affect us later...

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:23 PM
 21 Oct 2009
lastone
Postaholic
8,824
If you let illegal immigrants in you will have more and more attempting to get in this way. That is why I say they should be sent back. They will open a door for more potential problems down the line.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:26 PM
 28 Jun 2004
 Unknown
Anonymous472
Unknown
1,899
I voted to send them back.

There is a process on how to legitimately enter this Country. I can't begin to understand the desperation that some of these people feel that they would risk 3 months at sea to get to a better place BUT they aren't the only ones out there who are looking for a better life. What they have done (twice now) is completely unfair to those who have been waiting YEARS to come here.

I think they (Canadian military) should have intercepted the ship at the 12 mile mark, given them food, water, gas and medical care (for those requiring it) and then sent them on their way. The only people I would give consideration to would be the 30 children and their immediate family (parents). Even then, the parents should be under severe scrutiny as to their (possible) criminal past and ties.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:33 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
My option:

- confiscate the ship and sell it for scrap to help fund our Navy. Make this information well-publicized throughout the world (you can bet no other shipping company in the world will want to transport illegal immigrants---which is of course a form of human trafficking which is illegal in nearly all countries)
- arrest the people who actually did the illegal human trafficking---start with the crew of the ship, get INTERPOL (or whoever's) help to catch the international criminals. Get as high up as you possibly can since these are the people who have profited significantly from the illegal activity. None of the victims have profited like that.
- investigate the immigrants and see if they qualify for immigration status, refugee status, or deportation, based on our current standards for all of these. Providing medical and other basic care in the meantime is our obligation as human beings and as Canadians.

We should all remember that refugees are NOT burdens on "our" society. These people nearly invariably will not access public social services (like welfare, which I see constantly mentioned as a fear on the other forums) and rarely even enjoy accessing independent services like reading groups offered through the library or the YMCA/YWCAs. They are, in general, afraid that if they look like a burden, they will be sent back. If they go to the police about working conditions, living conditions, etc., they will be sent back (or beaten and sent back, depending on what their home police are like). If they go to the doctor or dentist, they will be sent back. About the only safe place you can count on many refugees to go for social services is their religious community. And thank goodness for that because that's now how many of them are able to receive basic services, like doctor's check-ups and advice on getting their kids into schools.

Anyone who thinks that refugees are a drain on our society has not read about the experiences of refugees in Canada. As a group, they provide valuable labour for little pay while subsisting in below-Canadian standards of living. Their children or their children's children are generally very successful in life (business, lawyers, etc.), and often they are, too (look at all the Chinese restaurants opened by Boat People on the prairies in the early 80s---they're all successful businesses and many of them are still around, even while the town dies around them).

If anyone wants to be concerned about overuse of social services, they should be looking to "our own", not to "the foreigners", although I do think that their looking in general is misguided.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:34 PM
 29 Jan 2006
 Steveston, BC
CowgirlSissy
Postaholic
9,721
500 people on the boat.
$100,000 each to process/house them to see if they are in fact refugees.
$50,000,000.

$50,000,000 that could have been spent on healthcare... schools... bettering the lives of Canadians.

WHY aren't we outraged at this?
People protested the Olympics to the very end. Saying WHY should we spend this $$ on the Olympics? Why not put it to use in better avenues.

I'm sorry, but why aren't people protesting THIS?!
If you are a legitimate refugee, go through the same process as everyone else is REQUIRED to do.

I will accept these migrants with open arms...
When they go through the proper process and are approved to come to Canada.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:38 PM
 31 Jul 2006
 Around the bender!
ms_taken
Postaholic
6,952
so according to that article in Canada, we currently have LTTE's operating big enough Terrorist cells, to be able to afford to pull off TWO shipments of refugees.... And we're CONSIDERING letting in more??

Is that the gyst of it??

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:39 PM
 23 Jun 2007
 Tinseltown
Poulette
Postaholic
9,801
Showy consumerism/commercialism vs. humanitarian aid.

Hmmm..........

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:42 PM
 31 Jul 2006
 Around the bender!
ms_taken
Postaholic
6,952
Im referring to LTTE's not legitimate refugees!

And Dazed I'm not trying to be argumentative, and maybe it's dependant on the type of refugee that has come here the legal vs the illegal!

BUT there are PLENTY of refugees on welfare, if they're awaiting their trial, and can't legally work in Canada, who do you think is footing their living costs?

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 1:55 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Mostly their living costs are being footed by their religious communities. They don't generally qualify for welfare since they are not citizens. They will also sometimes work illegally at pennies on the dollar, risking being sent home for that, to put food on their table.

Many refugees are illegal. They arrive by plane (the majority of refugees these days) and ask for sanctuary upon arrival. Maybe it's just different to people because they came by boat, like the Vietnamese in the late 70s / early 80s? Or is it different because they could have ties to the LTTE (somewhat like the Vietnamese could have had ties to the Viet Cong).

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:09 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Everyone should read this op-ed piece (definitely a biased source since the author is works for an NGO for refugees, but so are they all since it's op-ed): http://www.vancouversun.com/news/should+...l#ixzz0whP24RcF

One of my favourite quotations:
Quote:
avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:31 PM
 26 Feb 2009
 Ottawa, ON
BreeBee
Devotee
1,004
.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:32 PM
 12 May 2010
monkeyup
Fan
576
I voted send them back. They should apply for refugee status like everyone else. And for the record I don't think they are a drain on society (although I'm not sure I agree with Dazed that they generally only seek support from their local religious communities).

One of my best Canadian friends is moving to Malawi. Her Malawian boyfriend has applied for a Canadian Visa 3 times and been denied. They even spent some time in Ireland and Israel in hopes to prove that he has a "good travel history". If my friend's boyfriend can't get here through legal ways, you can be dammed sure I'm not going to support anyone who is getting in illegally.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:44 PM
 23 Jun 2005
 Mississauga, ON
melmo
Devotee
1,758
I vote investigate. 50,000,000 is not that much in the scheme of things. That's what? $2 per Canadian? Meh I'll pay the gst on a meal out and there you go. Considering that we are going to need all the help we can get to pay for the aging population, I have no problems with letting people come in and help me with that burden.
The Canadian way is to send people back, I mean that's what we've always done. I think it's time to change that.
Example here.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:53 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Again, people should read the link I posted.

There is NO queue for refugees. There is no more legal and less legal way for asylum seekers to arrive. Refugees are separate from other forms of immigrants, so comparing it to others seeking visas is like comparing apples to compact cars.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 2:56 PM
 23 Jun 2005
 Mississauga, ON
melmo
Devotee
1,758
It's harder for refugees to get Canadian status, than others seeking Visas as well.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 3:03 PM
 30 Dec 2005
mangoberry
Addict
4,594
Dazed for Immigration Minister. I heart your posts SO much in this thread.

Does anyone actually know how people go through "legitimate" refugee channels? THIS is how. Don't confuse this with immigration.

"Refugee Claim Process
Canada has obliged itself to protect genuine refugees, that is, not to send them back to persecution. People who get to Canada on their own can claim refugee protection at any border point, or inside Canada, at a Canadian Immigration Visa Office."

12. Can I apply for Refugee protection from outside Canada?
Yes, if you are outside your country, but this is very difficult in most cases. You must first apply to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). You usually have to show that you will be economically successful in Canada. Also, the refugee definition is more restrictive, you do not have the right to a lawyer at your interview, and the waiting period could be many years. You must also show that you cannot be settled in your country of present residence.

From all I've read on this it looks like this is a test of our system before they send more boats, and that these people are not legitimate refugees. Makes me INCREDIBLY angry seeing as how my DH and his family were refugees who came here to become very successful contributing members of society. (their story is actually quite frightening and I definitely sympathize with all legitimate refugees now.) They've paid their debt back many times over and so have all their boat people friends. Because we've mandated to protect refugees all we can do is try to screen out the bad ones and send them packing.

Until we change our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and un-sign ourselves from the Geneva Convention, this is how we operate.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 3:44 PM
 31 Jul 2006
 Around the bender!
ms_taken
Postaholic
6,952
Dazed the only thing I'm arguing, not proper refugee channels, is the fact that these individuals aren't being funded by our government!

Lemme explain, I used to work in the airline industry, and I was at flight arrivals from countries that are known to have refugees arriving by plane!
SO here is how it works, IF the refugee is caught by a Canada Immigration official on the aircraft pre dissembarkment (sp?) they will be sent back, the minute they step off the aircraft then they are on Canadia soil, and that's when the refugee claim has to be accepted (for lack of a better term)

If the refugee makes it to the customs counter at the airport terminal, and claims refugee status, that's when the ball starts rolling!
I don't know the behind the scenes specifics, BUT, basically they await a trial date to prove the danger that they face in their home country, during this time there food, water, clothing and shelter are paid for by the Canadian people, as is the lawyer!

I'm not making this up, nor did I hear this through unreputable sources, this is first hand information from Canada Immigration officials who would be at flight arrivals with me to "catch" people arriving without their documents, who want to claim refugee status!!

Either way, I really don't understand why it's okay to let known war criminals into this country?!

But there may be people on here who work in immigration, that know what happens, but other than that, I'm believing what I've been told! Sorry D

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 4:44 PM
 21 Apr 2010
Red_
Addict
3,474
Actually, of the 76 allowed in (on the "Ocean Lady" referred to in Dazed's article) last year - the majority came to Toronto. And most of them are on welfare. This is according to the Canadian Tamil Congress....

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/846299--a-year-later-tamil-migrants-call-toronto-home



avatar
 15 Aug 2010 4:46 PM
 21 Apr 2010
Red_
Addict
3,474
FYI:

About 30,000 people apply for asylum in Canada every year � that�s roughly 100 every day. Some cross the border via the U.S., some take the sea route. But a majority of asylum-seekers fly into the country.

Half the claims are accepted; others go through the system, sometimes for years, until the claimants are deported or leave voluntarily.

Well-known Toronto immigration lawyers Lorne Waldman and Max Berger answered some questions about the process.

Q. What happens when someone applies for asylum?

A. Usually, it�s very simple: a person applies, shows identification and, after proving he or she is not a security threat, is allowed to leave with the promise to appear for a hearing before the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Q. How long does the process take?

A. Refugee claimants have to file their �history� to the refugee board within 28 days. The hearings start about nine months later, depending on the backlog. If refugee protection is refused, they can ask for judicial review in federal court. The entire process can take up to three years before they are deported. In 2008-09, the average processing time for a claim was 16.5 months and cost of each claim was about $4,100.

Q. When are claimants detained?

A. Only a small percentage of those seeking asylum are detained. But there are four typical reasons for detention, say lawyers: having no ID, being deemed a security risk, seen as a flight risk, or thought to be a danger to the public.

Q. Will the process be different for the 490 Tamils aboard MV Sun Sea?

A. Not really. But they are likely to be detained for months while their identities are confirmed and border agents satisfy themselves that they aren�t a security threat and were not associated with terrorist activities.

Q. Will the new law change anything?

A. It will fast-track claims. Under new guidelines, claims will be heard within 60 to 90 days and illegitimate claimants will be moved out within two years.

Q. Australia turned MV Sun Sea away. Why couldn�t we?

A. Under international law, Australia, too, cannot turn refugees away from its shore. In the case of MV Sun Sea, the ship with 490 Sri Lankan refugees, Australia directed it to Christmas Island, an offshore immigration detention facility that can hold up to 1,400 people at one time. MV Sun Sea then changed course to Canada.

In the past, Australia has asked other countries, such as Indonesia, to intercept refugee boats before they reach Australian waters. �Australia gets way more boats than other countries,� said Waldman.

Q. Who is not eligible to make a claim?

A. Anyone who has already been granted refugee protection in Canada or another country, had submitted an unsuccessful refugee claim earlier or came to Canada from or through a safe third country where they could have claimed refugee protection. Anyone who poses a security risk, has violated human or international rights, or committed a serious crime or participated in organized crime is also not eligible.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 4:51 PM
 21 Apr 2010
Red_
Addict
3,474
To me, I just think it is strange that of the 490 people on board, about 400 were adult males.

I think this situation is being carefully watched everywhere. That being written, if each person can prove that they are legitimate, an have sponsers willing to fund them, then it is out of our hands, until the laws change.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 5:09 PM
 30 Dec 2005
mangoberry
Addict
4,594
You can't claim refugee status if you come in through the US unless you fit one of the exceptions.

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/stca-etps-eng.html

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 6:00 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
I'll totally believe what you've been told, too. It doesn't really conflict with my information except that as I've said in all the refugee stories (interviews with refugees) in Canada I've read, they've nearly all been provided care through religious organizations. Maybe the Canadian government works with the religious communities, but again, that's never the impression I've gotten.
Quote:
avatar
 15 Aug 2010 6:19 PM
 3 Sep 2004
 Toronto
Ewokie
Postaholic
5,725
Yep, anyone who arrives on Canadian soil can claim refugee status, and the immigration officer has to process their claim. Then they have to await trial to see if their status is approved, but that can take up to a year or more and in the meantime, they are free to go and live wherever they want on Canadian soil as long as they show up for their trial.

This is what irks me - DH has told me stories of ppl arriving from planes and lying through their teeth about why they are here, who they're visiting, etc etc. and when they're about to be deported (because they have no papers and no one can vouch for the reason they are entering the country), they suddenly claim refugee status and their hands are tied. Those are the ppl who abuse the system - if they were legitimate refugees, why not claim it right off, why go through a whole song and dance to try to get into the country?? GAH.

I have friends whose parents were refugees when they entered the country. Those people have integrated into society and have made contributions for years. I have no problem with legitimate refugees who seek a better life here (those who are coming from war-torn countries, who are under threat of execution, etc). The ones who abuse the system are the ones who go underground, use our social system without even trying to contribute back, etc. There's no way to weed out these people and Canada needs to change their laws before any of this will stop. I think it's ridiculous, there's no limit. And this shipload of alleged Tamil leaders trying to get in? It's just the beginning. And unfortunately, there's nothing anyone can do but stand there and say "Welcome to Canada!".

avatar
 31 Oct 2012 11:59 PM
 30 Apr 2012
 buzzle.ca
buzzle
New Member
0

Want to continue the discussion?

For more discussion like this or to reconnect with weddingbells.ca forum members, check out the forums at buzzle.ca!
avatar
 15 Aug 2010 6:51 PM
 30 Jun 2007
 Victoria
Tropical777
Raving Lunatic
12,667
If you want to read about how the refugee system works in Canada here's a link:

http://www.canadavisa.com/canadian-immigration-refugee-status.html

It states what a refugee is and under what circumstances one would qualify as a refugee.

As a signatory to the Geneva Convention, there are guidelines/rules that must be followed for claiming refugee status and for the government for dealing with the cases. The government simply can not "send them back".

Personally, I just can't imagine the type of life I would have to have in my home county to take such a risk (as in risking making the journey and being alive when docked) as to go on barely sea-worthy ships, without adequate food, water or health care just for the chance to not just have a better life, but to have a life at all.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 8:02 PM
 28 Jul 2008
 Vancouver, BC
OopsieBaby
Devotee
2,252
My initial solution was to take one of the small islands off the coast and turn it into our very own Ellis Island. All boats are steered and docked on the island, and the appropriate paperwork/investigation can then take place. Give immediate health care to those who need it but keep the groups on the boat. Sort out who has a valid claim from who doesn't. Bring those who have a valid claim to the mainland for the next step of integration, and send the others back on the boat they came on. End of story.

Jobs are created, those who are not legitimate refugees are sent back, and the boat people are 1) kept on their boat 2) processed in a timely manner.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 8:38 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
By the way, Red_ I missed your links earlier (because I was posting at the same time, I suspect, and I didn't hang around to ensure my post had posted / return to the forum thing). Thanks for posting them. I am still surprised that they qualify for welfare at all (since, again, that's different than the interviews I listened to) but I think this line can maybe tie mine and ms_matched's knowledge together:

Quote:
avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:20 PM
 30 Jun 2007
 Victoria
Tropical777
Raving Lunatic
12,667
Uhmmm... we're not talking about illegal immigrants. We are talking about refugee claimants. Two different things.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:27 PM
 13 Aug 2010
honeysher 2.0
Postaholic
6,182
Is this the same ship that Australia turned away or am I confusing the ships?

The Star's article on this last weekend noted that if Canada accepts this ship, there are 2 more waiting to leave to head over here.

I don't know much about refugee status versus immigration but by judging where my folks live, over the past 15yrs it has clearly changed. The place is currently filled with folks from this same country, most of whom, when talking to them, claim that they are here on refugee status... living in some of the nicest homes in the neighbourhood. We're talking homes in north east Scarborough that cost well over $300,000. That just boggles my mind. But, I admit that I don't know how refugee status works that allows them to live in such a middle-class neighbourhood.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:40 PM
 13 Aug 2010
honeysher 2.0
Postaholic
6,182
Like I said - I have no idea how it works.

Here's a question - if they left their country so quickly, how would they access funds to buy a house? Does someone send them their money?

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:43 PM
 30 Jun 2007
 Victoria
Tropical777
Raving Lunatic
12,667
I never asked my co-worker. I don't feel that it's my business to ask about his finances.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:44 PM
 13 Aug 2010
honeysher 2.0
Postaholic
6,182
I didn't mean that person specifically. I was just wondering if anyone knew, in general.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 9:52 PM
 13 Aug 2010
honeysher 2.0
Postaholic
6,182
I never actually answered the question. I'm on the "send them back" side but mainly because a friend of mine works for the feds in the Justice Dept. She deals with refugees day in and day out and I think after awhile of hearing these cases, like Ewokie's DH, you tend to start to see a trend.

avatar
 15 Aug 2010 10:23 PM
 18 Feb 2009
hideme
Devotee
1,450
man this is such a conflicted topic for me as well. On the one hand I agree with a lot of the common opinions of why should they become Canada's burden, but even more than that is what message it will send to the world about our process. Granted not everyone who wishes to come here is going to risk life and limb on a boat.
The human side of me though, the mother in me can't even imagine how the 50 women on the boat, or at least those bringing their kids along must feel. Can you even imagine being on a boat nearly 3 months with your kid/baby? Worrying about their survival and you pull up to the shore of a free country and they send you back out to see with your sick child?? As a mom you'd do anything for your kids and I just couldn't imagine how helpless you'd feel when nobody will help you.

So yes, I am worried about the impact this will have and any possible implications of terrorist associations that may be entering the country but I cannot turn of my human side that feels the need to help people who need it.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:59 AM
 25 Sep 2006
Tempestas
Weddingbeller
626
As someone who spent $2000k+ to move to the United States LEGALLY, I would appreciate it if everyone followed the rules in both the US and Canada.

I understand not everyone is not able to afford or be eligible for the process, but the tax payers or govt should not be responsible for that.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 11:38 AM
 19 Oct 2009
 Winnipeg, MB
justagirl
Postaholic
6,643
i havent read all of the posts, so forgive me if this is waaay out there...

i dont understand, if Canada has labelled the "tamil tigers" as a terrorist organization (which is what i've heard on the news) then why do they have a voice here in canada??

can anyone explain this to me???

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 11:39 AM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Thanks for sharing your family's experience.

I am pretty sure there was at least one boat full of people pulled from the refugee camps that landed in Vancouver ... OK, technically, I think it was essentially shipping containers with people in them as opposed to a proper people boat but that's what I'm talking about. Of course "Vietnamese Boat People" generally refers to the people who went to Thailand, Indonesia, etc. and that's definitely the majority experience, and I'm sorry if I confused people by not stating that and assuming people knew about the majority experience.

But I'm sure at least a few ended up in Canada literally off a boat and without going through the legit channels to emigrate (probably didn't have anyone to sponsor them, so they claimed refugee status when they arrived here). And by "I'm sure" I mean that that's one of my friend's family's story and is part of the reason (or the whole reason?) why they ended up in small town Sask instead of Toronto or even a city in Saskatchewan. The details are fuzzy here but there's a tie to the fact that they were refugees (and therefore subject to going where the government told them to? Maybe all immigrants in that time period had to spend time outside of the major metropolitan areas? I wish I could remember what the exact policy was at the time) and their living in small town Sask.

So, it's not that the Tamil experience is different from all other immigrants and refugees who have ever come to Canada (or even all Vietnamese refugees), it's just different from your family's experience because they were able to go through legit channels while living in horrible conditions in a refugee camp. Considering the Sri Lanka government's declaration that all Tamils were dead and eliminated last year (or the year before?) I just don't see them having those same options, let alone choosing to pursue them if they have other faster options instead.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 11:41 AM
 22 Sep 2008
 Alberta
muggins
Addict
4,711
SEND THEM BACK.

Not that I have anything against people immigrating to Canada- but if we let these people stay we are only making it very very clear to THE WORLD that if you want to come and live in Canada just show up and we'll take you. I don't think so- I know of many people/people's family members waiting- THE LEGAL WAY- until their applications are approved.

To let these people in would mean to human smugglers in all developing countries that Canada is the place to go... gah send them back.

Okay, so I read some of the other posters- and it appears that refugees can just show up. Great. In this case I still say send them back- I don't think our country should accept people that have paid money to smugglers to get here. Sorry!

Oh, one last thing- can someone just say they are a "refugee" and get to stay or does our country look into this claim? I clearly don't know the background of the Tamil Migrants but I thought the conflict ended there last year? *off to google*

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 11:42 AM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Scottish : not all Tamils are Tamil Tigers, just like not all Irish are members of the IRA [closest I could get to a Scottish example off the top of my head].

I believe the official Tamil Tiger activities have been shut down in Canada or they function in a similar way to other illegal organizations, like the Hell's Angels or those vigilante groups in Calgary (Red Angels or something?).

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 11:57 AM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Oh man ... can you switch the "or" after Canada to "so I think"? One scroll up too many or something to end up with an "or" where "so I think" should've been!

And you better be offended for my implying there's a link between the two (nevermind the history). wink

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:01 PM
 19 Oct 2009
 Winnipeg, MB
justagirl
Postaholic
6,643
i'll tell all ya'll what kinda irked me, just a little bit with this whole situation...

anytime i've had to go to the emergancy room, with either my children, friends children or anyone really.... i've waited, and waited, and waited - my brother recently went to the emergancy room - he waited 8 hours with road rash over about 20% of his body... i went with a 11 month old who got his little finger caught in a door and almost cut the tip completely off (exposed bone and all) we waited.... wait for it.... 11 freakin hours!!!!

these people get off a boat and are seen by medical personal almost immediately??!!

irked me... like i said though - just a little.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:05 PM
 19 Oct 2009
 Winnipeg, MB
justagirl
Postaholic
6,643
and yes - i did spell emergency wrong *shrug oops smile

Originally Posted By: Dazed
avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:35 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
There is no line for refugees.

And sorry to confuse you, Scottish. With the first half, I came to edit my original response but I saw you'd already quoted it so there wasn't much point. I wasn't very clear originally but oh well. With the second half of my comment, I was trying to be funny and didn't do a good job of it. Ah well, can't win them all, right? smile

Regarding wait time, next time you go to the emergency room, make sure they have at least 3-6 days notice and I bet you'll get seen right away (since they tracked this boat for at least 3 days, and I suspect longer, they had that long to come up with people and places and supplies for the likely issues faced by them). The timeline is very important context explaining some of the care they got, in my opinion.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:41 PM
 19 Oct 2009
 Winnipeg, MB
justagirl
Postaholic
6,643
rofl

ok, re-read it now... im just a little slow this morning apparently lol!

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:47 PM
 8 Apr 2009
 Ontario
Gir
Addict
3,759
I thank the universe that I was born in this country and that I can't even begin to imagine the things refugees have witnessed. By the overall tone in this thread I'm glad I am already in the country and am not running for my life as apparently I would be met with much misunderstanding and borderline hate upon my arrival.

The lack of compassion for other human beings in this thread has greatly disappointed me.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 12:57 PM
 18 Feb 2003
Cindoise
WB Chatterbox
427
I believe we should help the legitimate refugees - screen out the bad guys, and help the ones who really need the help. As one human helping another human in need, I can't see turning these people away would be fair. IMHO, people are incredibly lucky to live in a wonderful country like Canada - my parents are immigrants (yes, they came in the "right" way) and I am thankful every day that I was born a Canadian and not living in a shack with a tin roof in China, ekeing out a meagre existence. I think if more people could see or understand what types of conditions these refugees came from, there might be fewer people saying "send them back".

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 1:22 PM
 18 Jul 2006
Dazed
Postaholic
8,516
Ah, cool that you were in Sri Lanka, Levenah! Were you able to go to the north (the Tamil area) at all?

Everything I've seen the Sri Lankan government has put out for a few years now says that it's not good there and they're doing their best to keep it that way since they want the Tamil to "disperse" (to where???). The reports of disappearances from the refugee camps related by the refugees who have escaped are also particularly disturbing to me (reminds me of Pinochet in Chile). It's basically government-sanctioned genocide (which reminds me of other countries at other times, like Rwanda, Nazi Germany and post-1867 Canada), which is extra-horrifying.

I just cannot imagine if I had banded together to fight for my country and my rights and change it for the better (which is what the Tamil Tigers claimed to be doing, remember), and have that be the consequence of my attempt or an attempt on my behalf. Well, actually, I think I can imagine it but I'm so extremely grateful that I don't have to experience any of that.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 1:44 PM
 17 Oct 2006
 Nomadic
SnowBride08
Addict
2,730
I actually had a hard time reading some posts without feeling sick to my stomach.

Are people just ignorant about what happens to other human beings or do they just not care?

I can�t grasp how elsewhere on this forum, people are oooowing and awwwing over animals �mothering� other species and in here, people are complaining that our country is treating human beings fleeing decades of war �too well�.

Do people understand what civilians experienced in Sri Lanka during the civil war? That tens of thousands of civilians were killed? People tortured and detained?

Are people aware that even though the civil war has been over for a year, that tens of thousands of people are still displaced with no home? Are people aware that journalists are still heavily restricted from covering the situation so relatively little is actually known about what happened? That people who speak out about atrocities committed against civilians are jailed (and reportedly tortured?)

Are people aware that thousands remain in jail with no access to lawyers?

Are people aware that just last month, the UN had to recall its panel from Sri Lanka that was there to investigate human rights violations (read: war crimes) because government officials were organizing protests that rendered panel members unable to do their job?

Amnesty International released this summary in May, describing the situation in Sri Lanka one year after the war ended:

-Some 80,000 people remain in camps and funds for their support are running out.

-The rest of the 300,000 displaced civilians who have tried to resettle remain vulnerable and struggle to survive in communities where homes and infrastructure were destroyed.

-Thousands of people detained for suspected links to the LTTE remain in detention without access to the courts.

-The government continues to extend the state of emergency, restricting many basic human rights and freedom of speech.

-No meaningful action has been taken to investigate reports of war crimes


You don�t think Canada can handle 300 refugees? Fine. You don�t think they should be allowed in because the Tigers are terrorist? Fair enough.

What I don�t understand is people comparing refugee claims to their own immigration to Europe or the United States. I have gone through the visa/work permit process three times before: twice to the UK and once to Hong Kong. My father immigrated to the United States. My mother (American) immigrated back to Canada with him. Yah � it�s a long process, it�s expensive, and it�s challenging. But I�m sorry� a person like myself immigrating to Hong Kong because it would be �neat�, or to the UK because my husband is living there, is absolutely NOTHING like trying to escape the situation in Sri Lanka.

And complaining that they are/will drain our resources (health care, welfare, etc.)? I call bullsh!t on that one. I grew up in a neighbourhood with a large immigrant population, many of whom were fleeing situations similar to that in Sri Lanka. I remember many of my friends� parents working two jobs. And they were hard freakin� jobs that most longtime Canadians would consider beneath them and never take. They worked a helluva a lot harder than most of the pampered middle-class brats I know who take their privileged life for granted.

I can�t, for the life of me, imagine begrudging health care and due process to human beings who have been at sea for 3 months, after fleeing a country where they witnessed atrocities most of us can�t even imagine.

I�m not saying they should automatically be granted refugee status. But I certainly don�t understand the mentality that we should just tell the entire ship to eff� off. It is our duty as human beings to look into the situation of each person on that ship and consider what we can and should do.

avatar
 16 Aug 2010 1:50 PM
 9 Mar 2006
 ottawa
kokopolo
Devotee
1,957
SnowBride for Justice/Immigration/Public Safety/Prime Minister!!

avatar
 31 Oct 2012 11:59 PM
 30 Apr 2012
 buzzle.ca
buzzle
New Member
0

Want to continue the discussion?

For more discussion like this or to reconnect with weddingbells.ca forum members, check out the forums at buzzle.ca!
  1 2 3 4   

More Like This...