Blurring the lines between legal and illegal immigration

[Anonymous]

I want to say, that in no way, do I support illegal immigration. I believe and I know legal immigration of highly educated and skilled migrants is an economic boost to any nation. illegal immigration of unskilled migrants and sometimes criminals is a drain.



And it is liberals who are blurring the lines between the two. The rise of anti immigration governments across the West is about ILLEGAL immigration.



CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS Legal and illegal immigration are different, and that matters



There is nothing racist about opposing illegal immigration.



Indeed, while polls show most Canadians are opposed to the stream of illegal immigrants flooding across our borders in Quebec — over 15,000 so far this year — it is the illegal part they oppose, not the immigrant part.



I'm guessing there will be far less opposition to the announcement this week by Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen that Canada will admit 350,000 immigrants annually by 2021 (up from 310,000 now).



It's my sense a majority of Canadians are OK with a high annual intake of immigrants, provided those immigrants have come here the proper way; provided they have filled out all the necessary paperwork, submitted to all reasonable background checks and waited patiently in their home countries for permission to come to Canada.



We are not an inherently racist people.



But Liberals and other "progressives" are incapable of understanding the distinction between support for legal immigration and opposition to the illegal kind.



Increasingly, our federal Liberal government and its media supporters see any opposition whatsoever to an open-door immigration policy — legal and illegal, alike — as proof of rising "populist" (read "racist") sentiment.



When announcing the government's increase in immigrant quotas on Wednesday, Minister Hussen said he would also launch a propaganda campaign on the benefits of immigration to counter "anti-immigrant, anti-refugee rhetoric" that he sees as all around us.



This is an excellent example of the jumble that goes on in the minds of "progressives" whenever an issue veers close to the subject of race, as the issue of immigration does. "Progressives" become so afraid of being called racist that they lose their ability to reason.



The people illegally crossing the Quebec border are neither refugees nor legal immigrants. They are, by definition, illegal immigrants.



They are mostly coming from the United States. And while liberals may see the prospect of living in Donald Trump's America as a threat to life and limb, the U.S. is a safe country. So, since these migrants' lives and liberty are not threatened, they are not refugees.



Some of the illegals may be at risk of being sent back to Haiti, but even then, as unpleasant as that may be, they are not refugees.



Hussen and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried this summer to get Canadians to call these illegal immigrants "irregular migrants," but the public saw through that euphemism in an instant.



Look, too, at the way "progressives" have railed against U.S. President Donald Trump's claim that the caravan of thousands of central Americans now making its way through Mexico en route to the U.S. is not made up of refugees, either.



Trump is wrong about a lot of things. He may even be racist in an out-of-touch, old, white, rich-guy kind of way. But he's right that Mexico offered these migrants safe haven and work, and the caravaners turned it down. So since they are no longer in danger, they cannot be refugees. Rather, they are simply seeking a shortcut to life in America, something the American government is within its rights to deny them.



The big problem with elites confusing legal and illegal immigration — and labelling everyone who opposes either kind as racist — is that that reduces public support for legal immigration.



That's a huge problem in the States. Politicians put off dealing with illegal immigration for so long that now there is less support for legal immigration and Donald Trump is president.



If you wonder why populism appears to be on the rise in Italy, France, Poland, Hungary, the U.S. and elsewhere, one of the biggest reasons is immigration. Blame elites on the right and left for refusing to deal with it honestly.

[Anonymous]

My problem with the immigration file is refugees. There are very few genuine refugees today. Most people that claim asylum are economic migrants.

[Anonymous]

I want to say, that in no way, do I support illegal immigration. I believe and I know legal immigration of highly educated and skilled migrants is an economic boost to any nation. illegal immigration of unskilled migrants and sometimes criminals is a drain.



And it is liberals who are blurring the lines between the two. The rise of anti immigration governments across the West is about ILLEGAL immigration.



CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS Legal and illegal immigration are different, and that matters



There is nothing racist about opposing illegal immigration.



Indeed, while polls show most Canadians are opposed to the stream of illegal immigrants flooding across our borders in Quebec — over 15,000 so far this year — it is the illegal part they oppose, not the immigrant part.



I'm guessing there will be far less opposition to the announcement this week by Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen that Canada will admit 350,000 immigrants annually by 2021 (up from 310,000 now).



It's my sense a majority of Canadians are OK with a high annual intake of immigrants, provided those immigrants have come here the proper way; provided they have filled out all the necessary paperwork, submitted to all reasonable background checks and waited patiently in their home countries for permission to come to Canada.



We are not an inherently racist people.



But Liberals and other "progressives" are incapable of understanding the distinction between support for legal immigration and opposition to the illegal kind.



Increasingly, our federal Liberal government and its media supporters see any opposition whatsoever to an open-door immigration policy — legal and illegal, alike — as proof of rising "populist" (read "racist") sentiment.



When announcing the government's increase in immigrant quotas on Wednesday, Minister Hussen said he would also launch a propaganda campaign on the benefits of immigration to counter "anti-immigrant, anti-refugee rhetoric" that he sees as all around us.



This is an excellent example of the jumble that goes on in the minds of "progressives" whenever an issue veers close to the subject of race, as the issue of immigration does. "Progressives" become so afraid of being called racist that they lose their ability to reason.



The people illegally crossing the Quebec border are neither refugees nor legal immigrants. They are, by definition, illegal immigrants.



They are mostly coming from the United States. And while liberals may see the prospect of living in Donald Trump's America as a threat to life and limb, the U.S. is a safe country. So, since these migrants' lives and liberty are not threatened, they are not refugees.



Some of the illegals may be at risk of being sent back to Haiti, but even then, as unpleasant as that may be, they are not refugees.



Hussen and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried this summer to get Canadians to call these illegal immigrants "irregular migrants," but the public saw through that euphemism in an instant.



Look, too, at the way "progressives" have railed against U.S. President Donald Trump's claim that the caravan of thousands of central Americans now making its way through Mexico en route to the U.S. is not made up of refugees, either.



Trump is wrong about a lot of things. He may even be racist in an out-of-touch, old, white, rich-guy kind of way. But he's right that Mexico offered these migrants safe haven and work, and the caravaners turned it down. So since they are no longer in danger, they cannot be refugees. Rather, they are simply seeking a shortcut to life in America, something the American government is within its rights to deny them.



The big problem with elites confusing legal and illegal immigration — and labelling everyone who opposes either kind as racist — is that that reduces public support for legal immigration.



That's a huge problem in the States. Politicians put off dealing with illegal immigration for so long that now there is less support for legal immigration and Donald Trump is president.



If you wonder why populism appears to be on the rise in Italy, France, Poland, Hungary, the U.S. and elsewhere, one of the biggest reasons is immigration. Blame elites on the right and left for refusing to deal with it honestly.

Opposition to open borders does not equal racism. I agree with that.

[Anonymous]

I want to say, that in no way, do I support illegal immigration. I believe and I know legal immigration of highly educated and skilled migrants is an economic boost to any nation. illegal immigration of unskilled migrants and sometimes criminals is a drain.



And it is liberals who are blurring the lines between the two. The rise of anti immigration governments across the West is about ILLEGAL immigration.



CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS Legal and illegal immigration are different, and that matters



There is nothing racist about opposing illegal immigration.



Indeed, while polls show most Canadians are opposed to the stream of illegal immigrants flooding across our borders in Quebec — over 15,000 so far this year — it is the illegal part they oppose, not the immigrant part.



I'm guessing there will be far less opposition to the announcement this week by Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen that Canada will admit 350,000 immigrants annually by 2021 (up from 310,000 now).



It's my sense a majority of Canadians are OK with a high annual intake of immigrants, provided those immigrants have come here the proper way; provided they have filled out all the necessary paperwork, submitted to all reasonable background checks and waited patiently in their home countries for permission to come to Canada.



We are not an inherently racist people.



But Liberals and other "progressives" are incapable of understanding the distinction between support for legal immigration and opposition to the illegal kind.



Increasingly, our federal Liberal government and its media supporters see any opposition whatsoever to an open-door immigration policy — legal and illegal, alike — as proof of rising "populist" (read "racist") sentiment.



When announcing the government's increase in immigrant quotas on Wednesday, Minister Hussen said he would also launch a propaganda campaign on the benefits of immigration to counter "anti-immigrant, anti-refugee rhetoric" that he sees as all around us.



This is an excellent example of the jumble that goes on in the minds of "progressives" whenever an issue veers close to the subject of race, as the issue of immigration does. "Progressives" become so afraid of being called racist that they lose their ability to reason.



The people illegally crossing the Quebec border are neither refugees nor legal immigrants. They are, by definition, illegal immigrants.



They are mostly coming from the United States. And while liberals may see the prospect of living in Donald Trump's America as a threat to life and limb, the U.S. is a safe country. So, since these migrants' lives and liberty are not threatened, they are not refugees.



Some of the illegals may be at risk of being sent back to Haiti, but even then, as unpleasant as that may be, they are not refugees.



Hussen and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried this summer to get Canadians to call these illegal immigrants "irregular migrants," but the public saw through that euphemism in an instant.



Look, too, at the way "progressives" have railed against U.S. President Donald Trump's claim that the caravan of thousands of central Americans now making its way through Mexico en route to the U.S. is not made up of refugees, either.



Trump is wrong about a lot of things. He may even be racist in an out-of-touch, old, white, rich-guy kind of way. But he's right that Mexico offered these migrants safe haven and work, and the caravaners turned it down. So since they are no longer in danger, they cannot be refugees. Rather, they are simply seeking a shortcut to life in America, something the American government is within its rights to deny them.



The big problem with elites confusing legal and illegal immigration — and labelling everyone who opposes either kind as racist — is that that reduces public support for legal immigration.



That's a huge problem in the States. Politicians put off dealing with illegal immigration for so long that now there is less support for legal immigration and Donald Trump is president.



If you wonder why populism appears to be on the rise in Italy, France, Poland, Hungary, the U.S. and elsewhere, one of the biggest reasons is immigration. Blame elites on the right and left for refusing to deal with it honestly.

Illegal immigration and fake asylum seekers should be deported on the spot. But, mass legal immigration is bad too. 350,000 immigrants a year....YIKES.

[Anonymous]

I want to say, that in no way, do I support illegal immigration. I believe and I know legal immigration of highly educated and skilled migrants is an economic boost to any nation. illegal immigration of unskilled migrants and sometimes criminals is a drain.



And it is liberals who are blurring the lines between the two. The rise of anti immigration governments across the West is about ILLEGAL immigration.



CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS Legal and illegal immigration are different, and that matters



There is nothing racist about opposing illegal immigration.



Indeed, while polls show most Canadians are opposed to the stream of illegal immigrants flooding across our borders in Quebec — over 15,000 so far this year — it is the illegal part they oppose, not the immigrant part.



I'm guessing there will be far less opposition to the announcement this week by Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen that Canada will admit 350,000 immigrants annually by 2021 (up from 310,000 now).



It's my sense a majority of Canadians are OK with a high annual intake of immigrants, provided those immigrants have come here the proper way; provided they have filled out all the necessary paperwork, submitted to all reasonable background checks and waited patiently in their home countries for permission to come to Canada.



We are not an inherently racist people.



But Liberals and other "progressives" are incapable of understanding the distinction between support for legal immigration and opposition to the illegal kind.



Increasingly, our federal Liberal government and its media supporters see any opposition whatsoever to an open-door immigration policy — legal and illegal, alike — as proof of rising "populist" (read "racist") sentiment.



When announcing the government's increase in immigrant quotas on Wednesday, Minister Hussen said he would also launch a propaganda campaign on the benefits of immigration to counter "anti-immigrant, anti-refugee rhetoric" that he sees as all around us.



This is an excellent example of the jumble that goes on in the minds of "progressives" whenever an issue veers close to the subject of race, as the issue of immigration does. "Progressives" become so afraid of being called racist that they lose their ability to reason.



The people illegally crossing the Quebec border are neither refugees nor legal immigrants. They are, by definition, illegal immigrants.



They are mostly coming from the United States. And while liberals may see the prospect of living in Donald Trump's America as a threat to life and limb, the U.S. is a safe country. So, since these migrants' lives and liberty are not threatened, they are not refugees.



Some of the illegals may be at risk of being sent back to Haiti, but even then, as unpleasant as that may be, they are not refugees.



Hussen and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried this summer to get Canadians to call these illegal immigrants "irregular migrants," but the public saw through that euphemism in an instant.



Look, too, at the way "progressives" have railed against U.S. President Donald Trump's claim that the caravan of thousands of central Americans now making its way through Mexico en route to the U.S. is not made up of refugees, either.



Trump is wrong about a lot of things. He may even be racist in an out-of-touch, old, white, rich-guy kind of way. But he's right that Mexico offered these migrants safe haven and work, and the caravaners turned it down. So since they are no longer in danger, they cannot be refugees. Rather, they are simply seeking a shortcut to life in America, something the American government is within its rights to deny them.



The big problem with elites confusing legal and illegal immigration — and labelling everyone who opposes either kind as racist — is that that reduces public support for legal immigration.



That's a huge problem in the States. Politicians put off dealing with illegal immigration for so long that now there is less support for legal immigration and Donald Trump is president.



If you wonder why populism appears to be on the rise in Italy, France, Poland, Hungary, the U.S. and elsewhere, one of the biggest reasons is immigration. Blame elites on the right and left for refusing to deal with it honestly.

Illegal immigration and fake asylum seekers should be deported on the spot. But, mass legal immigration is bad too. 350,000 immigrants a year....YIKES.

I didn't know we are accepting 310,000 immigrants per year..



I thought it was about 250,000 annually.

[Anonymous]

In 2016, Canada admitted 296,346 permanent residents, vs. 271,845 admitted the previous year — the highest admissions levels since 2010. Of those admitted, 53% were economic immigrants and their accompanying immediate families; 26% were family class; 20% were either resettled refugees or protected persons; and 1% were in the humanitarian and other category.



Permanent Residents Admitted in 2015, by Top 10 Source Countries



1 Philippines 50,846   18.7%

2 India  39,530   14.5%

3 China   19,532   7.2%

4 Iran  11,669   4.3%

5 Pakistan    11,329 4.2%

6 Syria  9,853 3.6%

7 United States   7,522 3.0%

8 France   5,807   2.0%

9 United Kingdom   5,451 2.0%

10    Nigeria   4,133   2.0%

Top 10 Total   165,672   61.5%

[Bricktop]

What?



No Australians?



You poor guys.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't find similar numbers for recent years for Australia.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't find similar numbers for recent years for Australia.

I'd like to see similar figures  you posted for Canada for Australia and New Zealand too.

[Chuck Bronson]

Illegal immigration and fake asylum seekers should be deported on the spot. But, mass legal immigration is bad too. 350,000 immigrants a year....YIKES.

It's too many.  People may not always see the results of mass immigration unless you live in certain big cities, but where I live I have seen the results...



Vancouver is a classic example of a once nice city that has essentially destroyed itself due to mass immigration.  Too many, too quickly.

[Anonymous]

In 2016, Canada admitted 296,346 permanent residents, vs. 271,845 admitted the previous year — the highest admissions levels since 2010. Of those admitted, 53% were economic immigrants and their accompanying immediate families; 26% were family class; 20% were either resettled refugees or protected persons; and 1% were in the humanitarian and other category.



Permanent Residents Admitted in 2015, by Top 10 Source Countries



1 Philippines 50,846   18.7%

2 India  39,530   14.5%

3 China   19,532   7.2%

4 Iran  11,669   4.3%

5 Pakistan    11,329 4.2%

6 Syria  9,853 3.6%

7 United States   7,522 3.0%

8 France   5,807   2.0%

9 United Kingdom   5,451 2.0%

10    Nigeria   4,133   2.0%

Top 10 Total   165,672   61.5%

 

[DKG]

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has pointed out that the need to secure the U.S. border is a matter of "humanitarian conscience."

"The reason for strong border control is not xenophobia, bigotry, or hate. The reason is humanitarian conscience," Kennedy noted in a post on X, the social media platform previously known as Twitter.

"Democrats and Republicans can agree that the humanitarian nightmare that has resulted from essentially handing immigration policy to the drug cartels is unacceptable. We need to take back control," he declared. "Ruthless criminal cartels have woven drugs, immigration, and human trafficking together into a multi-billion dollar business," he noted. "Biden administration policy has greatly exacerbated the situation. The border is out of control. Immigration is being administered by the cartels, not our government," he added.

Kennedy asserted that he would "destroy the cartels' business model" and indicated that "cameras, motion detectors, lights, and where necessary, physical barriers" could be used to help secure the U.S. border.

[Oerdin]

He is correct but Democrats elites will ignore him.

[Herman]

He is correct but Democrats elites will ignore him.

Worse than that, they will slander his ass into dropping out of the race.

[Adolf Oliver Bush]

It wouldn't be that much of an issue if certain governments weren't all about golden handshakes to the migrants. Consider; if your country was only concerned with providing services to its bona fide citizens and ejecting any migrant that engaged in behaviour that was detrimental to the citizen's interests, I could see a case made for more relaxed border policies. "Sure, come on in, pay your dues to the society you wish to join and maybe in time we'll afford you the same rights as the legitimate residents. Which includes tossing your ass in the drink for shark food if you fuck with us."

And if you applied that across the board for both documented and undocumented migrants, you'd sort the wheat from the chaff very quickly I imagine.

Of course that's rarely the way it works out, governments being only too happy to extend all sorts of considerations they wouldn't afford the locals, be it for votes, ESG scores, whatever. When really, if things sucked so bad in the places the migrants were departing, you might think they'd be no stranger to adversity and could easily meet the criteria for integration standing on their heads.

In a democracy, a citizen might reasonably expect the right to thrive, to have a say in what they think should happen and for the betterment of themselves and their countrymen. Anyone else needs to earn that, not on the say-so of some governmental flunkey, but by their actions and deeds. And if they prove unequal to the task, chopper them out and drop them into the Atlantic.

I imagine that would work a damned sight better than the current arrangement.