Immigration at Montreal - WTF ?

[SirBillybob]

9 minutes ago, DWnyc said:

Immigration officer: “Que ferez-vous monsieur?” (Thought I’d add that for dramatic effect)

Me (seeing the line of backed up cars I’d have to join if I leave and try to come back): “ I’m going to throw away the pizza, officer”

(get out of the car, throw the pizza away, kicking myself at the waste)

Him: “Good choice, Monsieur. Welcome to Canada. Our pizza is better, please enjoy your stay, and your dinner”

That’s amore. Did you get his number? 

Edited May 6, 2023 by SirBillybob

[DWnyc]

Ha No, but I think he had mine (and all my other info) on his computer for about 50 seconds! 

 

 

[dbar123]

The worst part of crossing the border into Canada is figuring out how to use their stupid ArriveCAN app- the biggest piece of software shit ever written

[+ nycman]

2 hours ago, dbar123 said:

The worst part of crossing the border into Canada is figuring out how to use their stupid ArriveCAN app- the biggest piece of software shit ever written

No doubt. On my first trip to Montreal the AA ticket agent at LGA kept barking at me about ArriveCAN. Which of course is impossible to understand if they’re yelling at you and you have no idea what the fuck "ArriveCAN" is. I was unceremoniously booted out of the "first class" line and told to come back when I had "figured it out". I was honestly standing off to the side and bewildered about what just happened and what the fuck I was supposed to do. 

Then my hunky traveling companion arrives, and the same male agent not only helps him install the app, he then proceeds to entered all of his information for him. I kid you not. While I stood there like a chastised child obliviously waiting for the short bus.

Thankfully my hunk thought it was funny and did everything for me while the ticket agent looked on and jealously glared at me. When I went back up to the counter, I whispered to the furiously confused agent, "let’s just say, I have a big dick and lots of money". 

Edited May 7, 2023 by nycman

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Well, I've never seen whataboutism as a persuasive argument...

5 hours ago, DWnyc said:

And you’re not seeing it now...

 

I guess you don't know what whataboutism is, because this is as clear-cut an example as they come.

Whataboutism - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

"Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.[1][2][3][4]

The communication intent is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism and the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one's own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: "Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany." B: "And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?").[5] Related manipulation and propaganda techniques in the sense of rhetorical evasion of the topic are the change of topic and false balance (bothsidesism)...".

As for your statement that people don't avoid Canada travel because of immigration officers' behavior, you know that's not true because you've seen people on this very string state as much. I remember, some 7 to 8 years after I did the Rainbow Bridge trip with my best friend, discussing possible places to travel, and he told me he didn't want to go through Canadian immigration again. I don't know how much of a dent it makes on Canadian tourism, but it definitely makes some dent. And from some wealthier travelers. 

[coriolis888]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:30 PM, 12is12 said:

I noticed there was a lot of writing about visas and saving time, but I didn't pay attention; my travel agent had unfortunately told me there'd b no problem after pre-paying online for the visa. 

After landing and scanning my passport, I was directed to sit & wait in "immigration 1" room. They said that all non citizens and non permanent residents r required to do so. 

I waited for two hours with about 80 people, 95% of which seemed 'immigrational suspicious'. [I'm a 65 y/o white, and showed them my outbound flight ticket.] When my turn came up, I was asked the same 3 quick questions asked around the globe, and waived thru. 

It took so much time because for the first 90 minutes only 1 booth was operational. The rest of the officers were mainly chatting among themselves, ignoring the waiting crowd. It was almost insulting.

Besides venting my frustration, I'm really asking: why is Canada's system so obnoxious? I travel a lot; have never had such an ordeal, including in very bureaucratic or highly disorganized countries....

It is not only Canada with a time wasteful immigration system. 

Prior to Coronvirus lockdown for most travel, I went to Sydney, Australia.  

I had to spend about three hours in a long line to clear immigration.

After I showed my documents, the immigration office said that someone should have told me that I could have used my Global Entry card to clear immigration almost immediately, depending how many were using the machine. 

I thanked the office and remarked that nothing in the terminal nor on line says that Americans can use Global Entry in Australia.  He agreed it was strange about no mention of the G/E. 

 

[DWnyc]

41 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

I guess you don't know what whataboutism is, because this is as clear-cut an example as they come.

Whataboutism - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

"Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.[1][2][3][4]

The communication intent is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism and the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one's own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: "Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany." B: "And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?").[5] Related manipulation and propaganda techniques in the sense of rhetorical evasion of the topic are the change of topic and false balance (bothsidesism)...".

As for your statement that people don't avoid Canada travel because of immigration officers' behavior, you know that's not true because you've seen people on this very string state as much. I remember, some 7 to 8 years after I did the Rainbow Bridge trip with my best friend, discussing possible places to travel, and he told me he didn't want to go through Canadian immigration again. I don't know how much of a dent it makes on Canadian tourism, but it definitely makes some dent. And from some wealthier travelers. 

Thanks for the schooling.

I haven’t introduced red herrings. And I’m thankful so far folks haven’t taken the bait on the southern border issue.  

No one stopping anyone introducing arguments here it’s an open forum (until the moderators shut it down …)

You’re presuming a lot about my intent.

I doubt the testimony of some individuals on here among the millions who enter Canada every year will carry much weight in a scientific analysis. 

You’re also trying to invalidate my own testimony which includes hundreds of trips into Canada as a U.S. citizen over the last 15 years or so. 

A quick search on stats:

Canada received 22.1m tourists in 2019, up from 21.13m in 2018(Destination Canada) 

USA received 79m in 2019 (US Travel Association)

Canadas tourism to population ration in 2019: 0.58 (using world bank pop stats)

USA: 0.24 (also using world bank pop stats)

Tourism is a $105 billion industry in Canada (per TIAC below) and responsible for 1.8m jobs - I doubt the government would allow rogue (or intentional country-wide) bad behavior to deny such an important part of their economy.

Tourism Industry Association of Canada - Our Focus

TIAC-AITC.CA

---

Over the past couple of years, the Canadian travel and tourism industry has proven itself to be a strong and...

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, DWnyc said:

...

Canada received 22.1m tourists in 2019, up from 21.13m in 2018(Destination Canada) 

USA received 79m in 2019 (US Travel Association)

Why would you use separate sources? When I use the same source (worlddata.info), I get a somewhat similar number for Canada (32.43 million), but a vastly different number from yours for the US (165.48 million) for 2019:

Tourism development in the United States of America

WWW.WORLDDATA.INFO

---

International travelers and tourism sector revenues from 1995-2020 in the United States of America, including comparison with other countries in North America

 

Development and importance of tourism for Canada

WWW.WORLDDATA.INFO

---

International travelers and tourism sector revenues from 1995-2019 in Canada, including comparison with other countries in North America

Part of it may be that Canada allows more visitors visa-free, notably from Mexico and Brazil, with hundreds of millions of potential visitors. I don't suppose that Papua New Guinea, Israel, or the UAE have much of an effect.

Gray requires a visa to the US:

Gray requires a visa to Canada:

The visa difference probably reflects the fact that Mexican and Brazilian citizens often overstay their visas to the US, but Canada has a natural deterrent, namely the months of October through April....

🥶

Edited May 7, 2023 by Unicorn

[mike carey]

Moderator's Note

Gentlemen, can we pare the discussion back to the topic of the thread, please. That is, the immigration clearance experience at Montreal. Other ports of entry are fair game as are brief comparisons of the experience entering other countries as a visitor. At a stretch, discussion and evidence of any effect negative experiences might have on Canadian visitation rates qualify. National and international tourism statistics and 'Why would you want to go to Canada anyway' do not.

[SirBillybob]

In light of the commentary YUL CBSA is initiating the protocol as follows: a publicly available supply jar of these as 1st step arrival screening

Edited May 7, 2023 by SirBillybob

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 5/6/2023 at 5:10 PM, dbar123 said:

The worst part of crossing the border into Canada is figuring out how to use their stupid ArriveCAN app- the biggest piece of software shit ever written

I just go old-fashioned and stand in line to talk with the customs agent, or use a kiosk if required.

The only "apps" I have on my mobile telephone are Grindr and Growlr.  If it's not helping me get laid, then it's not going on my telephone.

I think I feel more relaxed going through customs the old fashioned way than the masses of people who try to do it digitally.

[cany10011]

I cross using Nexus and it minimizes the experience of queuing in line. On the reverse trip back to the US, the biometrics for global entry are super efficient - no passport, no card, no fingerprints... just your retina scan. It happens so fast in a  blink of an eye, and you're through!

Edited May 15, 2023 by cany10011

[coriolis888]

On 5/4/2023 at 9:17 PM, DWnyc said:

I’m sure you didn’t mean it this way, but some might read this and assume you’re saying because of your age and demographic you should be exempt from scrutiny … 

  On 5/4/2023 at 6:30 PM, 12is12 said:

_____________________________________________

I waited for two hours with about 80 people, 95% of which seemed 'immigrational suspicious'. [I'm a 65 y/o white, and showed them my outbound flight ticket.

_______________________________________

I think it is clear that he did not expect to be exempt from scrutiny etc.

I believe he said his age and ethnicity because the probablity of his being involved with something illegal or being an immigration violator is extremely unlikely. 

I do not see where he expected special treatment by stating his description.   

[DWnyc]

10 hours ago, coriolis888 said:

  On 5/4/2023 at 6:30 PM, 12is12 said:

_____________________________________________

I waited for two hours with about 80 people, 95% of which seemed 'immigrational suspicious'. [I'm a 65 y/o white, and showed them my outbound flight ticket.

_______________________________________

I think it is clear that he did not expect to be exempt from scrutiny etc.

I believe he said his age and ethnicity because the probablity of his being involved with something illegal or being an immigration violator is extremely unlikely. 

I do not see where he expected special treatment by stating his description.   

Really? We’re going to revive these conversations even though most on this forum - otherwise fine to discuss fetishes in gory detail - find them so excruciatingly uncomfortable😊? 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

9 hours ago, DWnyc said:

Really? We’re going to revive these conversations even though most on this forum - otherwise fine to discuss fetishes in gory detail - find them so excruciatingly uncomfortable😊? 

Since we've revived the topic...

Since my last post I traveled to Europe via Canada.  I did not have any Global Entry, Canada APP, or any electronic passport or reservations.  My only documentation was a traditional paper passport.  The only line I had to wait in for passport check was a small line for the EuroRail train from Amsterdam to London.  At all airports, including Canada, there was no delay or inconvenience.

Wishing you all safe travels this Christmas and in the New Year!

[mike carey]

16 hours ago, DWnyc said:

Really? We’re going to revive these conversations even though most on this forum - otherwise fine to discuss fetishes in gory detail - find them so excruciatingly uncomfortable😊? 

It's not always entirely as it seems. Sometimes a thread is revived and that prompts members to make comments that they might have meant to make, or where they had not seen a post on which they then comment, in the thread's first life (or on rereading the thread to leave reactions on earlier posts). In this case, the thread was revived by a new poster making two spam posts and although they have been removed, the thread was still active at the top of the 'recent posts' for a while. If no one had made any further comments in that brief time the thread would have disappeared back to 'seven months ago', but it was seen and on-topic discussion of the subject restarted. MC as Mod.