So long Andrew. So long Mike. Don't let the door hit you in the butt!
I do have to say that Trudeau's speech impressed me greatly. So much hope, and so much pride for our country. A pride, and a hopefullness that has been sorely lacking for too many years.
62 comments:
Amazing!! Justin Trudeau spoke so eloquently. And, good riddance Andrew and Mike!!
According to the Canadian Press Harper is stepping down as leader of the Conservatives.
The uploader has not made this video available in your Country.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, hey Harper, goodbye
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, BALANCED BUDGETS .. goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, CORPORATE INVESTORS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, SHIPYARD CONTRACTS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, TAXFREE SAVINGS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, INCOME SPLITTING ... goodbye.
I would imagine Mr. Mike Little will end up in District Council seat again perhaps in a bi-election or at regular election.
And maybe Ms. Dianne Watts will be the next conservative leader.
The Prime Minister's concession speech last night was a study in the art of being generous and magnanimous in defeat. A real class act.
Barry`s sniggling comments speaks volumes. The gloating of a common person that one hopes is not a trait of our new majority.
A sad step for the country.
Fortunately, Barry will never make it past his egotistical visions of being in charge of something.
Cheap shot, from the cheap seats. Stay classy Barry.
You mean "get classy"...He has never BEEN classy!
Mike Little will most likely run for the Mayors Office, since Mayor Walton isn't planning to run again.
Anon 5:15pm, what's with the personal attacks? Does that sort of thing make you feel like a bigger person?
Surprised Justin did not do a pirouette!!!
Anon 7:48...perhaps you could address the same comments to Barry...as they are equally fitting.
Anon 1:30am, are you on crack?
Who says Walton isn't running again? Too early. Cheap shot.
Trudeau made 174 promises in order to get elected. Making promises can be much easier than keeping them.
A website to track which ones he keeps and which ones he breaks has been created. Comments concerning each individual promise can also be found on the site.
See https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/
Anon 8:58 a.m. The answer is no. Are you?
Then stop behaving like a twelve year old. Discuss the topic and stop it with the personal attacks.
Sunny ways my friends, sunny ways.
Once your TFSA deduction is halved, your income splitting for working couples without children is cancelled and taxes increase and the interest payments on the borrowed money to pay for deficit financing are tacked onto the tax burden the sun may be a bit harder to see.
As posted the other day ...
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, BALANCED BUDGETS .. goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, CORPORATE INVESTORS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, SHIPYARD CONTRACTS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, TAXFREE SAVINGS ... goodbye.
Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah, nah, INCOME SPLITTING ... goodbye
Any new lines for the refrain? C[mon EVERYBODY.. follow the bouncing ball... engage..make up a line and contribute.
Harper good-bye! Bon Voyage!
Perhaps somebody should post about Trudeau's Cabinet.
You just did. If you want more, then perhaps you should be the one to step up to the plate. Or are you just looking for another person's opinion that you can either rally behind or criticize?
It dawns on me that 25,000 Syrian refugees by Dec 31 amounts to around 500 per day if they were processed 7 days a week and through all stat holidays ( November 11, and the Christmas thing).
Anyone know how these people are being vetted?
Are they pre-screened by the UN?
Just asking.
Gloat
verb (used without object)
1.
to look at or think about with great or excessive, often smug or malicious, satisfaction:
Smug? Malicious? Barry?
Where was that picture taken?
Perhaps the recent events in Paris will result in a little more interest in my Nov 9 comment at 9:25 PM.
I'm not confident tur new 'crown prince' and his team are capable of understanding that you can't know much about people when you process them at 500 a day even if you had 500 people processing them.
I, for one, would like to know how this is being done and if we, as Canadians, are just trusting the UN to do our screening for us or are we going to risk welcoming some very dangerous people so Trudeau can look like 'CHANGE' is happening in Canada.
No I mean it. I'd really like to know. Does anyone have any information on how the 25000 Syrian refugees will gain entry into this country?
Why are you so worried about people who are fleeing terrorists and violence? Or are you just assuming that all Muslims are prone to terrorist activity? Xenophobia is an ugly trait.
Well, now, it has been determined that one of the terrorists in the Paris bombings has been identified as coming from Syria on a refugee boat that landed on the Island of Lesbos and processed through Greece. Is that not enough to strike fear in your heart? And does that not lend credence to the argument that any country accepting anyone from anywhere MUST be careful? If you don't believe that, then you are nothing but a Pollyanna. It's not Xenophobia...it's just plain common sense, which you obviously lack.
Anon 9:21...
I'm not particularly worried about people who are fleeing terrorists and violence. I'm worried about people who AREN't but claim that they are and use a lax or confused process to gain entry to our country.
And you should be too.
I'd appreciate it, as well, if you would cease trying to put words in other posters mouths. I never said anything about Muslims. I asked if anyone knows how these 500 people a day are being vetted.
And... as Germany is learning ... many of the so called refugees are really economic migrants. If they were only fleeing terrorism, they could stay in Turkey. Instead many are adamant they do not want to stop travelling until they reach the perceived socialized comfort of northern Europe. I dont blame them for that but let's call a spade a spade shall we?
Anon 9:21 is the liberal's liberal. Like so many we have heard from you are not allowed to question or discuss the foolishly trusting "sunny ways" in the face of reality or they pull the "phobia" or race card.
As long as reality is far off they will keep parroting their vacuous refrain. You will notice how they will retreat and their childishly innocent opinions will disappear if the consequence of their negligence approaches.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/15/why-syrian-refugee-passport-found-at-paris-attack-scene-must-be-treated-with-caution
Are you still gloating over PM Trudeau's performance at the G20, today?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/video-justin-trudeau/article27278446/
As stubborn as his daddy. But insecure like his mommy.
We should be standing with our allies England, France and the US. Withdrawing our air support to the ground forces fighting ISIS is a disgrace. Sunny ways.
Anon 2:06, Justin's mother is diagnosed bipolar. Are you really so insensitive as to make fun of a person's mental illness?
Good grief. 129 dead in Paris. The day before a bomb blast in Lebanon resulting in multiple deaths with ISIS claiming responsibility. Russian passenger aircraft downed killing hundreds. ISIS threats against Washington. Canada dithering.
The big concern is that somebody might be insensitive and hurt someone's feelings? Are you kidding? Get your head in the game. These people want to hurt us. Let's focus on urging our sophomoric leaders to step up and demonstrate meaningful action.
Other than accepting as many refugees as we can, what would you suggest Canada do? It's not like we're a military powerhouse. Humanitarian action is what we were known for prior to the past 10 years of Harpers miserable reign. Let's return to being a compassionate nation.
I almost felt sorry for Justin at the G20 today. When he was in front of a camera without his teleprompter, he seemed very uncomfortable, almost at a loss for words, and those that did come out were full of ums and ahs, and awkward pauses and not particularly substantial. He's no statesman, that's for sure, and obviously "not ready" for the international stage.
Of course, he was all gung ho and smiling from ear to ear when he was posing for selfies with the local folks before the conference started. I certainly don't look forward to four years of this.
Let's see if he can make a better showing at the APEC Conference.
Look 10:13 ..
There is being compassionate and then there is being stupid.
Put down the Guardian and put yourself in ISIL's place. Would you, from that viewpoint, squander an open invitation to come to Canada under cover of a mass migration that, coincidentally, you caused? If the doors were wide open would you not go trhough them?
Then put yourself back in our place and ask if you want ISIL operatives in your neighbourhood or your country because if our government insists on continuing with the charade that it can properly vett 500 of these people per day then they ARE COMING.
These events may prove all too soon that our 'boy prince' is not only still coming up to speed, but is woefully unfit for the difficult tasks he and his new 'progressive' cabinet are faced with.
You're aping the same fear mongering that turned away ships of Jewish refugees prior to WW2. Oh, there might be Nazis or 5th Columnists on board! Didn't turn out well for the refugees, did it?
The news says the refugees are being vetted, so I'm not sure where you're getting your news from. Ezra Levant maybe?
The Jews might be Nazis? Wow. The liberal agenda will grasp every straw.
Meanwhile, back in 2015, in response to the ISIS claim that they will be embedding their operatives within the Syrian refugee claimants the Director of the FBI has advised Congress that it is impossible to vet the Syrian refugee applicants and effectively screen sleeper ISIS terrorists.
Wakey, wakey Anon 8:05. Reality is a toughie.
Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. Did you never learn about the MS St. Louis? Shameful. If you want to live in fear, that's your business. Conflating terrorists with refugees is reprehensible.
You liberals are so full of yourselves. Always an assumption that you are more intelligent, more informed. Lets start at the beginning if you are concerned about forgetting our history.
The refusal to permit the Jews on board the St. Louis had absolutely nothing to do with being the passengers being Nazis as you proposed in your preposterous 8:05 post. Both Cuba and the US had enacted legislation restricting entry. "Foreigners", in the case of Cuba and "new immigrants" in the case of the US. Anti-Jewish backroom boys persuaded Prime Minister King (ironically a Liberal) to reject a request for the passengers to disembark in Canada.
What is shameful is your attempt to manufacture a manipulation of historical facts to suit your agenda and even more shameful to try to apply that red herring to today's unfolding events.
What is loathsome is ISIS stated intention to embed their operatives with legitimate refugees.
What is concerning is the expression of world terrorism experts that vetting the applicants with certainty, especially in a short time frame (FBI says 18 months would not be enough time to vet less than half as many refugees than we are considering) is impossible.
What is pathetic is ignoring the facts as they evolve so that you may blindly serve your dogma.
Demonstrating prudent caution is not living in fear but I wouldn't expect you to know the difference as you seem to love hyperbole.
If you want to live in denial be my guest. Please don't expect the rest of us to be so foolish.
Don't assume to speak for everyone, anon 11:01. The refugees are being vetted according to news reports I've heard on CBC (sorry, I don't subscribe to Sun News). So your repeatedly saying they aren't being vetted holds no ground unless you can prove your statements. Go ahead, prove that the refugees are being let in without scrutiny. I'll wait.
You will be waiting a long time. The liberal trick of stating a falsehood and then building on it is well-known to those that have been around a while. Pants on fire.
My posts are 11:01, 9:15 and 9:50pm. Kindly review same and provide excerpts where it "repeatedly" states "they aren't being vetted."
As you say, I'll wait.
Back in reality, the concern lies with the goal of ISIS embedding terrorists with legitimate refugees. The security expert-stated difficulty of differentiating between the two and the extent of being certain that no terrorist operatives arrive with the thousands.
I tend to have more faith in the security professionals who say it is not prudent than a rookie politician trying to live up to campaign promises. But, as you point out, that's just me.
BTW, thanks for sparing us additional historical tripe. Best to just move on.
8:05 ..
'The news says the refugees are being vetted'. Oh well then... no need to worry.
Could you let us in on which 'news' you refer to?
By the by.. nobody, except yourself, has said these people would enter Canada without some vetting process. What's being said is that it isnt possible to PROPERLY vet 500 people every single day and it must be done PRIOR to entry into Canada.
Since you seem to think the 'news' is reliable, then I point you to CNN 'news' where you can read the following about refugees attempting to enter the USA:
'The average processing time for refugee applications is 12 to 18 months, but Syrian applications can take significantly longer because of security concerns and difficulties in verifying their information.'
BUt no... 'boy prince' will jam them through 500 a day.
G@@Gle that article, please. It's enlightening.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/politics/syrian-refugees-u-s-applicants-explainer
Of all the refugees admitted to the US since 1980, none have committed a terrorist act.
"U.S. refugees don’t become terrorists: The history of the U.S. refugee program demonstrates that the lengthy and extensive vetting that all refugees must undergo is an effective deterrent for terrorists. Since 1980, the U.S. has invited in millions of refugees, including hundreds of thousands from the Middle East. Not one has committed an act of terrorism in the U.S. (update for those unwilling to read the source, the Boston bombers were not refugees). Traditional law enforcement and security screening processes have a proven record of handling the threat from terrorist posing as refugees."
Source-
https://niskanencenter.org/blog/six-reasons-to-welcome-syrian-refugees-after-paris/
If you can prove otherwise, please do.
If you'd like to hear what Peter Showler, the former head of Canada's Immigration & Refugee Board, has to say on the matter, perhaps you can find tempt listen to the linked recording of this afternoons interview on CBC's BC Almanac. I feel safe. I'm sorry that you don't.
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/bcalmanac_20151117_42765.mp3
ISIS didn't exist until 2003 and wasn't an international threat until 2013. So for 33 years out of 35 (since 1980) the refugee threat posed by ISIS didn't exist. Manageable numbers of refugees from the Middle East entered 2013 to present and the screening process plus the Dept. of Homeland Security, (which is an enhanced mirror of the C-51 legislation opposed by the Liberals) has been effective. So you're thinking that we should leave C-51 in place as it's cousin seems to work well?
The overwhelming numbers proposed by the Liberals are not a similar comparison when it comes to thoroughly vetting the applicants as the American process is extremely thorough and takes much longer than 6 weeks.
Peter Showler, appointed by the Chretein Liberal government as Chair of the Immigration and Refugee Board 1999-2002. A Liberal appointee supporting Liberal policy is not really a shocker.
Non-aligned and independent analysis is impressive but political bagmen not so much.
When an order comes from the PMO to civil servants they hop. Corners get cut. Rushing headlong through the vetting process to meet a political promise deadline doesn't seem like a prudent course that protects the safety of Canadians.
No confidence is leadership that is prepared to roll the dice and damn the consequences.
If you want American policies, move to America.
Anon 2:26
I am confused as to your point.
Wha I THINK you post says is..You can bring in refugees safely if you take the time to do a proper vetting as has been proven in the USA by the fact that no refugees have ever committed a terrorist act.
I think we agree on that. Problem is... Canada is NOT taking the time to emulate the USA process that seems to be working. And yes.. that does make me feel unsafe. You can't process 500 people a day to the level where terrorists would be discouraged from even trying to sneak in as refugees. You just cant.
And I am writing that to my new Liberal MP this afternoon.
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/11/18/Canada-Can-Meet-Syrian-Refugee-Commitments/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=111815-1&utm_campaign=editorial-1115
Anon 2:04. You appear confused.
Anon 2:26, clearly a liberal poster, points out that American policies have successfully screened refugees since 1980 and the US has not suffered terrorist attacks from refugees. The point of this information is to bolster Anon 2:26's point that we shouldn't fear the arrival of Syrian refugees in accordance with Justin Trudeau's election promise.
Anon 2:26 doesn't state that we should have the same policies as the US. However, given Anon 2:26's point that would be a logical conclusion.
So Anon 2:04 we have Canadian policies. Our vetting procedures for refugees doesn't provide for the same depth and length of time to vet prospective refugees as those of the US. Are we to conclude that you are in favour of a more superficial vetting of refugees than that of the US?
Anon 4:44. Provides a link to an opinion piece from the Tyee, an on-line newsmagazine.
For perspective, the Tyee receives the majority of it's funding from big labour reflecting the predictable bias.
You want only articles from right wing news sources?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/rcmp-csis-support-trudeaus-plan-to-resettle-25000-syrian-refugees/article27342588/
Not necessarily but like to know the bias of what I read.
On that note, Anon 2:26 used Peter Showler's comments to support a claim of safety to the Canadian public in the face of rapid vetting and immigration of Syrian refugees.
Here is a verbatim quote from today's Province:
"But the question remains: can the humanitarian resettlement project be pulled off by the Liberal government’s Dec. 31 deadline without compromising domestic security?
“I hate answering that question at this point,” said Peter Showler, former chair of the Immigration and Refugee Board and former director of the Refugee Forum at the University of Ottawa."
Not so fast. Maybe Peter Showler is a little less certain than some posters would lead us to believe. And if he, as a Chretein Liberal plum position Refugee Chair appointee, "hates answering that question" than that doesn't leave much confidence for the rest of us.
Yes, sources and context can be important.
Nov. 17. National Post
Representatives from Canada and the UN and diplomats from other embassies posted in the (Middle East) region privately expressed grave doubts about whether such a large resettlement project could be completed in a safe and responsible way in such a short time frame.
Independent of each other, several of them said they were surprised and disappointed that the prime minister had not used the terror attacks in Paris and Beirut as justification for slowing the Canadian resettlement program down to a more manageable pace.
None of these officials could remember any country trying to resettle 25,000 refugees in such a short time period, particularly across almost half the world to a country where they will experience a serious winter for the first time in their lives.
Comparisons were drawn with Australia and Britain, where more modest schemes to resettle Syrian refugees were being spread out over between six months and several years largely because of security concerns and logistical hurdles.
The chief concern was whether Canada had given itself enough time for its security teams to conduct the rigorous vetting required to ensure that refugees bound for Canada were not connected to ISIL or other banned terrorist organizations that control parts of Syria. This was particularly important in light of claims in recent days by Syrian-based ISIL that it intends to continue carrying out murderous attacks overseas.
The UNHCR does some initial vetting to check if anyone was a combatant in the Syrian civil war during the registration interviews it conducts with all refugees — if they were this would usually exclude them from consideration, Rummery said. The UN agency also tracks biometrics, including retinal screening, of those it registers.
However, it is primarily the responsibility of host resettlement nations such as Canada to conduct “in-depth screening” for security reasons for those who were “identified for resettlement,” Rummery said.
There were also criticisms in Beirut of Ottawa’s plan to conduct some of the security checks once the refugees landed in Canada because if refugees were identified as possible terrorists the accused could spend years fighting deportation in the courts.
No need to worry. As it says in todays 'Province' paper:
"Michel Dorais was one of Denis Coderre’s top employees when he served as immigration minister. Now, he’ll head up the efforts to welcome thousands of Syrian refugees, at a rate of $1,800 per day."
That should take care of any concerns you might have.
So let's take a little recap on how it is going so far.
1. Promise broken. 25,000 Syrian refugees won't be here by year end.
2. 2nd promise broken. Liberals said that they would bring in the 25,000 on public money. Last week they announced that they would be bringing in 15,000 on public money and 10,000 would arrive with private sponsorship.
3. The original number of refugees for the Lower Mainland was released as 7,500. Then 2 weeks ago a correction was reported that the LM would only receive between 400 - 800.
4. This morning CKNW reports Immigration Minister announcing that the Liberals are changing the number of Syrian refugees to between 35,000 and 50,000. No mention of who is paying for the latest revelation.
Management 101. Make a plan, obtain funding, follow through.
Is a confused and unfocused leadership really what Canadians want? If this is an example of the ability to manage that we have to look forward to over the next few years we are in trouble.
Immigration Minister says 41,000 Syrian refugees asked if they would like to come to Canada. 1800 have agreed to consider it. Are things not as dire as we were led to believe?
Post a Comment