That's simply a way to try to silence dissenting opinions because it's not from a select group of "experts" (which the UN isn't).
Pretty sure that's the argument people use against climate change and legalization of marijuana. And yes, the UN is most definitely an expert on refugees.
CSIS said they would be up to the task where does that say that it would be "good overall"?
CSIS is concerned about security, not economy. CSIS has said that they are happy with the current screening processes.
We're not arguing if a certain group of people (which isn't everyone) agree that it will be "good for Canada", I am arguing if it objectively will be good for Canada.
You mentioned economic concerns, so I linked to an article discounting that (but here's another). You're going to have to be more precise on what benchmarks you're using to decide what's "objectively good for Canada" instead of vague concern trolling and zero supporting articles.
I can't be skeptical because some experts don't agree?
All experts. Not some, all.
So people's opinions are all wrong because some "experts" don't agree.
Yes, generally, if a mob of uninformed people disagree with all of the experts, they're still wrong.
Well here is a source for you, http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/syrian-refugees-security-risks-paris-attacks-canada-1.3323603 these experts you so high in esteem think the process shouldn't be rushed, like I was saying the government shouldn't.
That's exactly the kind of bullshit that I'm talking about. No one rushed anything. No one cut any corners. CSIS already signed off on the process (as linked. twice). Articles like that (and opinions like yours) simply encourage that same ignorant circlejerk.
Discussing other opinions is vital to the freedoms of this country. You may not agree with everyone, but you can deal with it.
There's a difference between disagreeing based on the same facts, and vaguely stating concerns based on no facts at all. Not all opinions are equal. Just because someone can open their mouth doesn't mean that they're worth listening to.
I think we are done here, this is getting nowhere. There is little reasonable discussion to be had for people who flame you personally when someone doesn't agree with their worldview.
Right. There's little to be said to someone who disagrees with the facts and all of the experts. I haven't even told you what my worldview is, I've simply been relaying what the experts say.