What Next?
Refugee claimant 'not gay enough'
The city's gay community and the Toronto Youth Cabinet are rising to the defence of a gay runaway from Nicaragua who faces deportation next Tuesday after losing his asylum claim because "he did not have any same-sex relationships."
Only in Canaduh, eh. Thank God at least one member of our so-called Immigration Board still has some marbles left.
Adjudicator Deborah Lamont, who conducted the Oct. 6, 2005, hearing from Calgary via videoconference, took issue with his lack of same-sex relationships during his six years in the U.S.
"I determined on a balance of probabilities the claimant did not pursue same-sex relationships in whatever capacity ... because he is not a homosexual," she wrote in her decision.
My concern is are we now going to start allowing this "gay" thing as a reason for seeking refugee status? I guess we have no choice, thanks to Turdeau and our "Charter of Rights For Everybody Except Heterosexual, White, English-Speaking Men and Women". So now more time and taxpayer money will be wasted on figuring out just how gay you have to be to claim refugee status to stay in the country. Of course his lawyer is filing a motion to stay the removal order.
"In my view, the refugee board has failed to recognize that my client is a victim of violence, a victim of abuse. He's simply vulnerable, whether he's gay or straight.""In my view, the refugee board has failed to recognize that my client is a victim of violence, a victim of abuse. He's simply vulnerable, whether he's gay or straight."
Christ. I hope his motion fails. If not, every Tom, Dick, and Jane in the world will be screaming abuse and violence to get in here. As if we don't have enough problems with our Immigration gurus trying to advance our multi-culturalism by already allowing to many dubious people into this country on a whim. And we all know just what "abuse" and "violence" is in the minds of moonbats and socialists.
And has anybody else noticed lately that most of those advancing the socialist agenda seem to have pretty wierd Canadian names? Just look at his lawyer, El-Farouk Khaki, and the guy/gal from the gay community who is also trying to get their 15 minutes of fame through this story, Suhail Abualsameed.
It seems to me these guys should be more concerned about allowing lowlifes and terrorists into this country, like the Khadrs, then somebody who may or may not be gay. Pray for us if this is the direction of our country. Don't these guys know that the solution to the problem of violence is not to allow all the "victims" to come here, but to root out and change the attitudes in their country? So how come Abualsmeed isn't screaming about how the Islamofacists in his country don't grant refugee status to gays, they just behead them?
Per Ardua Ad Astra
The city's gay community and the Toronto Youth Cabinet are rising to the defence of a gay runaway from Nicaragua who faces deportation next Tuesday after losing his asylum claim because "he did not have any same-sex relationships."
Only in Canaduh, eh. Thank God at least one member of our so-called Immigration Board still has some marbles left.
Adjudicator Deborah Lamont, who conducted the Oct. 6, 2005, hearing from Calgary via videoconference, took issue with his lack of same-sex relationships during his six years in the U.S.
"I determined on a balance of probabilities the claimant did not pursue same-sex relationships in whatever capacity ... because he is not a homosexual," she wrote in her decision.
My concern is are we now going to start allowing this "gay" thing as a reason for seeking refugee status? I guess we have no choice, thanks to Turdeau and our "Charter of Rights For Everybody Except Heterosexual, White, English-Speaking Men and Women". So now more time and taxpayer money will be wasted on figuring out just how gay you have to be to claim refugee status to stay in the country. Of course his lawyer is filing a motion to stay the removal order.
"In my view, the refugee board has failed to recognize that my client is a victim of violence, a victim of abuse. He's simply vulnerable, whether he's gay or straight.""In my view, the refugee board has failed to recognize that my client is a victim of violence, a victim of abuse. He's simply vulnerable, whether he's gay or straight."
Christ. I hope his motion fails. If not, every Tom, Dick, and Jane in the world will be screaming abuse and violence to get in here. As if we don't have enough problems with our Immigration gurus trying to advance our multi-culturalism by already allowing to many dubious people into this country on a whim. And we all know just what "abuse" and "violence" is in the minds of moonbats and socialists.
And has anybody else noticed lately that most of those advancing the socialist agenda seem to have pretty wierd Canadian names? Just look at his lawyer, El-Farouk Khaki, and the guy/gal from the gay community who is also trying to get their 15 minutes of fame through this story, Suhail Abualsameed.
It seems to me these guys should be more concerned about allowing lowlifes and terrorists into this country, like the Khadrs, then somebody who may or may not be gay. Pray for us if this is the direction of our country. Don't these guys know that the solution to the problem of violence is not to allow all the "victims" to come here, but to root out and change the attitudes in their country? So how come Abualsmeed isn't screaming about how the Islamofacists in his country don't grant refugee status to gays, they just behead them?
Per Ardua Ad Astra
posted by Justthinkin at 5:06 AM
