Before I chime in, please understand that this is personal opinion only. I am NOT setting policy for the board here.
The question is increased or decreased security risk?
My answer is "none of the above"
Once we learn how to treat people as people instead of on their nationality or other traits, we realise that there is good and bad apples everywhere. Be that a group of Syrian refugees or a group of 5th generation Canadians. I've observed in life that about 1 in every 20 people I meet are assholes. Nothing I can do about that. So, If I take a group of 100 Srian refugees, there will be about 5 assholes. Similarly, if I take a sample of 100 born and bred Canadians, about 5 will be assholes.
When it comes to being a security risk, I don't look at who the refugees or immigrants or Canadians are...I look for the assholes!
Well said Denob!
...When it comes to being a security risk, I don't look at who the refugees or immigrants or Canadians are...I look for the assholes!
If it's your job to get them off the street, you quickly realise that "the assholes" are not distributed equally between every strata of Society. They seem to congregate and are drawn together by mutual interest, experience, lifestyle, religion or culture. Organized crime groups usually have something in common in addition to them not having respect for the law.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
I fail to see the real link between newcomers and prepping. Sorry, Wayne, but the "security risk" question seems like a bit of a red herring here. If government assistance were to stop tomorrow, yes there may be helpless and desperate people - long-time Canadians and newcomers alike. There are criminals, assholes and those with unrealistic or redneck/misogynistic attitudes from all parts of society (and religions I might add). There are repressive communities that have been established in Canada for generations. I have volunteered with newcomers in a local immigrant services centre (and have done their tax clinics so I see what they are earning/doing/volunteering until they can legally work - and often I hear their backstory). I also work for an organization that contributes to security screening of immigrants - so I have seen both sides - some are rejected for legit security concerns. Some people bring their strife with them, and others are so incredibly happy & grateful to be away from a war-torn environment.
From a preparedness standpoint (which is the scope of this forum section), I would say that immigration may change the makeup of our society, but I don't see an overall increase or decrease in "risk". There are also those who are used to surviving on very little & adapting, because they MUST, either due to war/invasion/poverty/poor civil infrastructure abroad, or illness or poverty right here in Canada. In fact what I might call prepping or living off the grid, some would laugh and call that "daily life". I imagine C5 can give some examples.
I'm on the same page as oldschool & denob - to know if I have a security problem, I don't look at someone's national background, I look at whether or not they're an asshole..
HopeImReady
"The thing about smart mother f*ckers, is that they sometimes sound like crazy mother f*ckers to dumb mother f*ckers." -Abraham .”
HopeImReady,
I can understand your perspective, but I see a difference between an immigrant who goes through a proven process and a refugee who's fast tracked for political purposes. Earlier in my career, I've been involved in security clearances and investigating personal backgrounds. The first 10,000 refugees were 'cleared' in less that three months. How is it possible to properly vet that many people in such a short period of time?
The current PM instructed that 250 families that participated in the white helmet program were to be among the first people to be immigrated. Many members of this group were involved in rescuing people from homes damaged by air and artillery fire. Other members have been proven to be actively subversive and aligned with terrorist organizations.
Syria is predominately Muslim, with a literacy rate of 60 something percent. Many suffer from PTSD that requires mental health treatment. They conform to Sharia law, which is a much different system than what we have in Canada. The majority speak Arabic, not English. Many are unskilled.
It would seem that I'm the only one here who sees a difference in displacing 20,000 people from a war zone into our cities without insuring who they are and what their agenda may be. Many can't read, write or speak English and some refuse to learn or be trained to become contributing members of our Society. Call me crazy, but my immediate reaction isn't quickly bring in 20,000 more.
Some people are identified as assholes as a result of their actions. It's too late for the victims. Perhaps I've worked in the dark side for too long...
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
I fail to see the real link between newcomers and prepping. Sorry, Wayne, but the "security risk" question seems like a bit of a red herring here. If government assistance were to stop tomorrow, yes there may be helpless and desperate people - long-time Canadians and newcomers alike. There are criminals, assholes and those with unrealistic or redneck/misogynistic attitudes from all parts of society (and religions I might add). There are repressive communities that have been established in Canada for generations. I have volunteered with newcomers in a local immigrant services centre (and have done their tax clinics so I see what they are earning/doing/volunteering until they can legally work - and often I hear their backstory). I also work for an organization that contributes to security screening of immigrants - so I have seen both sides - some are rejected for legit security concerns. Some people bring their strife with them, and others are so incredibly happy & grateful to be away from a war-torn environment.
From a preparedness standpoint (which is the scope of this forum section), I would say that immigration may change the makeup of our society, but I don't see an overall increase or decrease in "risk". There are also those who are used to surviving on very little & adapting, because they MUST, either due to war/invasion/poverty/poor civil infrastructure abroad, or illness or poverty right here in Canada. In fact what I might call prepping or living off the grid, some would laugh and call that "daily life". I imagine C5 can give some examples.
I'm on the same page as oldschool & denob - to know if I have a security problem, I don't look at someone's national background, I look at whether or not they're an asshole..
Spot on HopeImReady
Thanks Wayne, I think that emoji summed up your gibberish post very succinctly. Your premise for what you are asking is deeply flawed. One can only wonder what your endgame was in asking.
I think his endgame is transparent.That dog whistle is for his homies. I suggest Waynes apparent selfless concern for refugies is betrayed by his refusel to call out and condem the actions that have been generating them. What could that be?? If only we could figure out the cause and then stop it!..... Lets interject some humour...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVyRwWKCtKQ
Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.
In a SHTF scenario, how does increased immigration affect the personal security of your family?
I would love to hear your answer to this question Wayne.
HopeImReady,
I can understand your perspective, but I see a difference between an immigrant who goes through a proven process and a refugee who's fast tracked for political purposes. Earlier in my career, I've been involved in security clearances and investigating personal backgrounds. The first 10,000 refugees were 'cleared' in less that three months. How is it possible to properly vet that many people in such a short period of time?
The current PM instructed that 250 families that participated in the white helmet program were to be among the first people to be immigrated. Many members of this group were involved in rescuing people from homes damaged by air and artillery fire. Other members have been proven to be actively subversive and aligned with terrorist organizations.
Syria is predominately Muslim, with a literacy rate of 60 something percent. Many suffer from PTSD that requires mental health treatment. They conform to Sharia law, which is a much different system than what we have in Canada. The majority speak Arabic, not English. Many are unskilled.
It would seem that I'm the only one here who sees a difference in displacing 20,000 people from a war zone into our cities without insuring who they are and what their agenda may be. Many can't read, write or speak English and some refuse to learn or be trained to become contributing members of our Society. Call me crazy, but my immediate reaction isn't quickly bring in 20,000 more.
Some people are identified as assholes as a result of their actions. It's too late for the victims. Perhaps I've worked in the dark side for too long...
Quite a few serious factual inaccuracies in this post Wayne. Poor research or.....?
It would seem that I'm the only one here who sees a difference in displacing 20,000 people from a war zone into our cities without insuring who they are and what their agenda may be.
Wayne, to put a sharp point on it, It would seem you are the only one who cant see that the problem is displacing 20,000 in the first place. I wonder how you can miss that 🙄
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/11/09/half-million-killed-americas-global-war-terror-just-scratches-surface-human?cd-origin=rss
Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.
...I suggest Waynes apparent selfless concern for refugies is betrayed by his refusel to call out and condem the actions that have been generating them.
peppercorn, I know you'd like to discuss cause. That's of course a valid topic, but it isn't the question I asked. I asked about effect. It seems the commenters don't wish to answer the question, but rather just complain it...
Lets interject some humour...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVyRwWKCtKQ
Pretty funny. 🙂
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Quite a few serious factual inaccuracies in this post Wayne. Poor research or.....?
Rather than throwing stones, perhaps you'd like to join the conversation and point-out where I'm mistaken.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7470/germany-migrants-crime
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/world/canada/syrian-refugees.html
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
I would love to hear your answer to this question Wayne.
Immigration cannot help but increase crime, regardless where the people originate. Quite simply higher population equals increased crime.I believe that an influx of tens of thousands of people who come from a war zone (many with trauma and other physical/mental health issues) put a strain on an already overworked health care system. Moreover I'm aware that security clearances have been abbreviated, which causes me concern.
Perhaps immigration isn't the best choice. Relocating rescue workers (?) from where they're needed is as logical to me as moving Doctors and Nurses out of the hospital and leaving the patients there. As indicated in the aforementioned article, the White Helmets are not rescuers to begin with (many having terrorist affiliations), so I suppose it's logical to move them to Canada... ?
I believe that every nation should support those in need. Building a support structure in the country might be a better way to go than moving people; I don't know. I'm sure most refugees would much prefer to live in their own country than moving to someone else's where they don't speak the language and the culture is different. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't like to move my family to Shenyang. I'm not convinced that the current direction is wise. Some refugees want to move back. To me, that says a lot...
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Tell you what Wayne. I will point out your errors. But you have to promise to apologize for the false information and remove it. And please don't use your usual method when caught in a lie. "oh you must have misunderstood I meant something else."
First one is Syrian literacy rate.. You claim 60 something percent. That a a very vague number. Here are the numbers from your friends at the CIA.
Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 86.4%
male: 91.7%
female: 81% (2015 est.)
...First one is Syrian literacy rate.. You claim 60 something percent. That a a very vague number. Here are the numbers from your friends at the CIA.
Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 86.4%
male: 91.7%
female: 81% (2015 est.)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Lie? No, but it doesn't surprize me that being the person you are that you'd suggest such a defamation. The figure I used was from my recollection, in 1981 it was 55.65 %. I'm sure you look-up everything before you post it and not depend on your personal knowledge for anything. In any regard, I was mistaken.
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Syria/Literacy_rate/
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.