The Canadian press outdoes our home-grown propagandists. Check the first sentences of the article:
'' A six-month-old baby and two pregnant women were believed to be among those taken to a Victoria hospital Friday as the first passengers from a migrant ship that arrived in British Columbia earlier in the day were taken to be checked out by doctors.
About five ambulances started delivering migrants from the cargo ship to Victoria General Hospital. Security screening prevented a clear view of how many people were exiting from the ambulances that started arriving late morning.
The cries of young children could be heard behind the security fence.
"That's the shame of it," said one of those watching behind the police tape as screams from what sounded like at least two toddlers built in volume.
Officials confirmed Friday that 490 Sri Lankans were on board the ship that arrived in Esquimalt Harbour, near Victoria, around 6 a.m. local time amid tight security.''
Of course no one wants to be hard-hearted toward children, and maybe the 21st century invasion forces bring women and children for just that reason; if just young males were arriving on our shores, I think there would be a much less sentimental reaction than that which is evoked the presence of women and children. It's as though this kind of ''immigration'' is designed to take advantage of Western compassion and chivalrous tradition.
Canada, of course, is much more liberal than even the United States, at least on paper. We in America still maintain a rather less-than-credible formal appearance of sovereignty and immigration laws, but Canada has put out the welcome mat for Third Worlders.
"Canada has very generous refugee and immigration laws and my concern is that individuals now take advantage of the existing law in order to further criminal or terrorist activities.
"Our goal is not to stall or stop political refugees, or refugees generally. Our goal is to ensure that our refugee system is not hijacked by criminals or terrorists."
[...]
"This operation is part the Government of Canada's clear message to those who would take advantage of Canadian generosity that human-smuggling and illegal migration cannot and will not be tolerated."
Heads-up, people on the American West Coast: how long before shiploads of 'refugees' arrive in your area? If this tactic is successful, it will continue.
It's sad that Sri Lanka is a 'war-torn country' but we all know that many countries on this planet today are racked with some kind of conflict or chaos; this is the normal state of things in Third World countries, at least in recent years. Do we then owe everybody in the Third World, or any violent country, a place in our country? Where does it end?
Sooner or later we have to develop a lifeboat mentality; can we load everybody onto our lifeboat without us all going under?
3 comments:
It goes beyond wars; women are now claiming asylum because of domestic violence. If every time a Latino smacked his woman the woman got the right to emigrate here, about 2/3 of Latina women would qualify. It's ridiculous and has nothing to do with what's good for the US, but it's been pushed by the feminist intelligentsia.
Yes.
I know you must have seen the NYT article about the DHS decision allowing an abused Mexican woman asylum or refugee status. And of course we have the Moslem women who can claim asylum because of certain barbaric practices in their countries - not just the feminists but the counter-jihad 'conservatives' are all in favor of giving asylum to them.
-VA
"Of course no one wants to be hard-hearted toward children"
No one from our side. Libs forced busing and integration of schools and made life miserable for many white children. That was hard hearted.
Our side should drill into people's heads, that if they hate our children, then they hate us.
Post a Comment