They want to know what we think

lol
immigration attorney was clueless?

That's why she won for them on the H&C, and she works for Green and Speigel, one of the best immigration law firms in T.O.
(as per my info)

Secondly, you're upset at people fleeing persecution in other countries and seeking protection elswhere?

I know for a fact that religious minorities suffer alot of torture and persecution in Pakistan, so i think thats a good decision to let them stay.

What Canada should be doing is deporting those who spread violence, drugs and crime after settling here. their status should be scrapped and they should be sent back

This morning's Vancouver Sun ran an article about immigration by former Executive Director of the Canadian Immigration Service, James Bissett.  It had the inflammatory headline: "An argument for turning off the immigration tap".  The article is not nearly as inflammatory as the headline.  

And that helps a woman married to a Canadian with a 5 year old child how?

The fact that the refugee claim was refused should not give way to H&C status, in fact if the appeal doesnt work then that should be it. If a spousal application fails, perhaps I should try on the PNP, no, I set my application on sposal because I want to be with my family, otherwise we have an over run of options for people who clearly do not qualify.

Just because a lawyer wins a case, means nothing, I won an appeal against speeding in the UK, was my barrister good then? Actually, had I not insisted, and against his advice, that I go on the stand and explain to the judge then I would have lost.

And McDonalds is a pretty big country, probably the most sucessful fast food restraunt in the world, but some of the muppets who work for them are a waste of space, I asked for a vanilla milkshake and got chocolate, but hey, by your reckoning, they must be good because the work for a large well known company.

Every case is rife with its own particulars, its own equities, and its own baggage, so trying to second-guess the compelling reasons behind this or that decision is almost always an exercise in speculation, and often futile or even foolish speculation at that.

One can pose certain probable hypotheticals, and based on those suggest relatively reasonable estimates of why this or that might have happened, but that still leaves the reality of any particular case in the realm of speculation.

Personally I have a lot of confidence in the Canadian immigration system, despite some obvious flaws and occasional injustices.

I recognize that some may object, and argue that this is easy for me to say since my own application sailed so easily and quickly through the process. Yes, mine did. But my personal experience does not tell the story any more or any less than someone's bad experience tells the story. And thus it is not my personal experience that compels me to express such confidence (nor will any one else's in particular suggest reason enough to think the contrary).

CIC deals with well over a million visa applications by FNs every single year, over two hundred thousand citizenship applications, and the statistics overwhelmingly indicate that the vast majority of such applications are processed appropriately and relatively timely (recognizing that we live in an age demanding immediate results and no, the results are a long way from immediate -- but that is not, I believe, a reasonable standard, particularly given the vast volume of applications processed for a country of merely 33 million people). I have read case decision after case decision, and it is clear from many of those decisions that CIC very often is dealing with many difficult clients, many tough cases, and that they are doing a pretty good job even in respect to most of the tougher cases.

With more than a few breakdowns, sure, some fairly egregious mistakes occasionally, and of course there are real people, real lives, people with families and loved ones whose futures are at stake, whose lives are hurt, sometimes hurt badly by those mistakes. I do not excuse the mistakes. I do, however, recognize the hundreds of thousands of cases that do go through the system in an appropriate fashion with what appears to be appropriate results.

The system not only usually works, but the statistics suggest it works and works and works, and only rarely doesn't work well. And this is important. If sweeping changes were suddenly implemented, the odds are there will be more failures, a lesser rate of success, that more people and their families would be left in limbo or in the lurch even. And it must always be remembered that there is more than a small number of people out there who would take any opportunity to change the immigration system to push it toward more draconian limitations on immigrating, to impose more restrictions, longer timelines.

redeagle wrote:  Lol, beer will do that to you, well spotted though Matt. Mind you, give them time........ you never know