Another Tamil ship on its way to our shores

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
Seems the Tamil's are once again going to make a mockery of our immigration laws by illegally sailing one of their human smuggling ships to BC's shore. Frankly, I'm of the opinion that boats like these should not be allowed to enter our waters period, even if it means they are forcibly turned around. What is the point of having immigration laws if one ethnic group continually flaunts it without repercussion?


The Canadian government made clear on Monday it is worried about who is aboard the cargo ship reportedly smuggling 200 Tamil migrants bound for British Columbia, and pronounced that it is "important to send a message that Canada should not be viewed as an easy entry into North America."
Weeks after it was turned away from Australia, a Thai cargo ship believed to be carrying about 200 illegal migrants from Sri Lanka is now expected to reach Canada any day.
The question is: Are those aboard terrorists or genuine refugees?



Is suspected migrant ship carrying terrorists or refugees? - thestar.com
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Too bad about who ever they are. If they're not coming through proper channels, turn the boat away. It's not a Con thing. It's not a Lib thing. It's a law thing....
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Too bad about who ever they are. If they're not coming through proper channels, turn the boat away. It's not a Con thing. It's not a Lib thing. It's a law thing....
Once you land you are entitled to all protections under the Charter.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Too bad about who ever they are. If they're not coming through proper channels, turn the boat away. It's not a Con thing. It's not a Lib thing. It's a law thing....

I agree, the national post title is pretty misleading.
Gentlemen, I agree wholeheartedly...

This is just one of those things that I dream about sometimes.

On one hand, I would expect the usual suspects to come out screaming about how bad Harpo and company is.

On the other, if they don't, the next time they claim Harpo and company have done nothing of any good, I can point to this thread.

Hence, Durka, you get two virtual thumbs up for a great OP!!!

...and while they're still at sea, they're subject to all the mysteries in Davy Jones' locker...
He's right Lone, but I like yours better, way better actually.
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
I disagree with sending this boat back, without knowing the consequences of that decision. I'd hate to see a repeat of this event:
MS St. Louis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If these people are legitimate refugees and are no threat to Canada or Canadians, then we are morally and legally obligated to accept them.

Right of asylum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


We owe these people nothing. If they are in fact refugee's and they can afford to pay human smuggler for a ship to Canada surely they can enter Canada via the appropriate channels?

These people are abusing our immigration laws and are a slap in the face to refugees who go through the proper channels to get here.

Send them back.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
We owe these people nothing. If they are in fact refugee's and they can afford to pay human smuggler for a ship to Canada surely they can enter Canada via the appropriate channels?

These people are abusing our immigration laws and are a slap in the face to refugees who go through the proper channels to get here.

Send them back.

Then we should unsign ourselves from all the international treaties regarding refugees which require us to provide these people a safe haven. Until then, we are obligated to keep our word.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Then we should unsign ourselves from all the international treaties regarding refugees which require us to provide these people a safe haven. Until then, we are obligated to keep our word.
Yep, we sure are...But as you usually do, you over look a few facts. Like proper channels and such eh.

No worries though, you're still as entertaining as hell.

Why is it LAW is only important to you when you use various definitions thereof, against a certain group of people?
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
Too bad about who ever they are. If they're not coming through proper channels, turn the boat away. It's not a Con thing. It's not a Lib thing. It's a law thing....

Yes but...doesn't that make you a racist if you enforce the law and their skin color is different?

BTW...I agree with you.

I know ... and the one thing this country doesn't need is another bunch of pushy queue-jumpers.

Isn't there an unmarked torpedo shoal out there somewhere?

Or unmarked torpedoes.
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
Then we should unsign ourselves from all the international treaties regarding refugees which require us to provide these people a safe haven. Until then, we are obligated to keep our word.

Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that "everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

That statement does not seem to indicate that the asylum seekers can employ criminal means to get here nor does it touch on fake refugee claims nor does it cover maritime defense laws.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
Why is it LAW is only important to you when you use various definitions thereof, against a certain group of people?

To folks like him International Law and UN Treaties supercede Canadian Law. In their quest to be loved and noticed they will sacrifice all that makes your country Canada.

Do we have a buffer zone on our nautical border where we can turn around boats like this?

The sooner the better.