In a reporton what President Trump has done this year to make ‘conservative’ evangelicals happy, a reporter discusses the refugee program and names the federal resettlement contractors as being a group of Christian Conservatives unhappy with the President. Trump with evangelicals in the White House. I can assure you that no one was there laying on hands from the federal ‘religious’ resettlement agencies.
For most of the article the evangelicals are said to be happy over Trump’s actions so far. And, it is noted that 80% of evangelicals voted for him.
Then this:
Immigration and refugees
“When it comes to his very strong statements on life, on support for Israel, on the Iran nuclear deal, on religious freedom and on judges, we fully expect him to keep his pledge … to the American people.” — Ralph Reed.
After calling for a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the U.S., Trump has signed executive orders temporarily suspending the refugees program, banning Syrian refugees and restricting travel to the U.S. from several predominantly Muslim countries and giving preference to refugees claiming religious persecution. He confirmed to CBN News he saw persecuted Christians as a priority.
Those orders have met with mixed reviews from the courts, as well as from conservative Christians, many of whom are involved in refugee resettlement through faith-based agencies including World Relief, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, Church World Service, Episcopal Migration Ministries and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Make no mistake, those five ‘faith-based’ ‘Christian’ agencies are anything but conservative. They are actively Open Borders Leftwing political activist organizations. They receive almost all of their funding from you, the taxpayer, and then act as if they are community organizers in the mold of the now discredited ACORN. [I know all of my regular readers know this, but lots of new readers don’t!—ed]
And, of course the reporter never mentions the fact that they are seeing their federal funding cut drastically and so are mad-as-wet-hens over that!
The Mormon Church is donating heavily to those Leftwing agencies!
I wondered if the Deseret News from Salt Lake City was purposefully calling them conservative because the Mormon Church is sending millions of dollars to them at this time.
If you are a Mormon and politically conservative, you better let the church know how you feel about that!
This is something to watch. The cynic in me says this is about creating more political pressure from refugees on world governments as the flow of migrants will increase in coming years.
Kind of like those detainees with their digital agitation from inside the camps to keep up political pressure on Australia, see earlier post.
And, it is about Mastercardgetting in on the ground level for the redistribution of wealth from the first world to the third world. Already there are plans to send money directly to refugees (maybe more than plans) and how handy would it be to do it through a credit card.
Forget the humanitarian mumbo-jumbo….
The refugee industry is a big (global) business!
Refugee camps will become digital communities says FinExtra. Globalist Hamdi Ulukaya, Mr. Chobani Yogurt, is cooking up the redistribution schemes at Davos through his Tent Foundation. https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2017/11/18/the-tent-foundation-hires-lutheran-refugee-contractor-to-write-refugee-hiring-guide/
Mastercard and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) today announced the launch of a public-private coalition that will bring together technology, solutions and experience from multiple sectors to transform refugee settlements into digitally-connected communities. This commitment delivers on a vision laid out in research conducted last year by Mastercard to better understand the critical needs of the over seven million refugees living in camps or settlements today.
The coalition, led by Mastercard and USAID’s Power Africa initiative, will launch pilot programs during the first half of 2018 to address some of the biggest barriers to development. For example, mobile phone and internet access is as critical to refugees’ safety and security as food, shelter and water. The organizations will work together to introduce internet and mobile connectivity, access to clean, efficient energy, and digital financial tools for communities in Kenya and Uganda, with plans to scale to other refugee-hosting countries around the world.
In addition to Mastercard and Power Africa, organizations participating in the coalition include: Accenture, Acumen, BRCK, Danish Refugee Council, Energy Peace Partners, Fenix International, GSMA, The Innovation Village, Lutheran World Federation, Mercy Corps, Microsoft, Moving Energy Initiative, NetHope, Norwegian Refugee Council, Off-Grid Electric, Pawame, PowerGen Renewable Energy, SolarKiosk, Tent Foundation, USAID Global Development Lab, U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Vecna Cares Charitable Trusts, and World Vision.
Muchmore here.
It is brilliant actually. The globalists all get to make money (cheap labor, etc.), destroy national sovereignty around the world, and wear the white hat of humanitarianism while they do it!
This is now the third post in three days about the Obama deal with Australia to take to America over a thousand illegal aliens*** who tried to break into Australia and who were subsequently detained in offshore locations. See hereand herefor background. Amazing how little US media attention is being paid to the deal that Trump (foolishly in my opinion) went along with!
Now we learn from RNZ (New Zealand)that a new round of vetting will begin shortly.
Protests continue…. A picture worth a thousand words. https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/pacific/348913/more-us-vetting-for-manus-refugees
So far, if the detainee is from one of the banned countries, they are not being considered, but frankly that makes no difference because those on the way to your states are from mostly Muslim Pakistan, Afghanistan and Burma (Rohingya). Radio New Zealand:
Refugees detained by Australia on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island have been advised more vetting for United States resettlement will begin at the end of the month.
About 110 refugees from Manus and Nauru have been taken by the US so far, with another 130 from Nauru expected to go in the coming weeks.
The US agreed to take up to 1250 refugees from Australian offshore detention in November 2016.
A note telling the refugees about the upcoming vetting was posted online by the Kurdish journalist and Manus Island refugee Behrouz Boochani.
“Journalist?” Social media is available to detainees like this one. They probably all have phones too!
It said the selected men would be transported to Port Moresby to attend appointments and then returned to Manus Island.
Refugees from six Muslim-majority nations including Iran will not be considered due to a US travel ban on their residents.
Australian statistics from 2014 indicate the majority of Manus Island refugees are from Iran.
Thought you might like to see some comments from readers to my previous post on the Australia “dumb” deal.
‘FatherJon’ from Australia says this:
No surprises that some of them couldn’t substantiate their bona fides, seeing as the trick was for them to destroy or sell their IDs prior to being landed in Australia in order to re-establish favourable identities as someone else.Unsurprisingly the do-gooders prefer not to acknowledge that, claiming the IDs were ‘lost’ at sea. As for ‘youngsters’ being amongst them, that’s more confected narrative, many of them were clearly young adult males at time of landing, but claimed to be under 18 yoa, in order to gain greater sympathy from laws dealing with children, similar to America’s problems with ‘kids’ from Latin America.
The list goes on…..they have more tricks than in Harry Houdini’s toy box!
‘Kiltsandaggers:’
I see that at least two of them want to study “human rights”. Will this study include our rights, the rights of legitimate citizens of this country? I feel that my right to safety and a quality of life that includes not being crowded or forced to compete for scarce resources are being violated by these people’s presence here.And what about the rights of people who have been murdered, raped, robbed and tortured by “refugees” who should have never been allowed into our country in the first place? If they are really so concerned with human rights, stop ignoring ours for a change.
‘TakeBackOurRepublic:’
As always seems to be the case, if these are truly refugees then where are the women and children?? If Australia was unwilling to integrate these men into their cities, why didn’t they just return them to whence they came? Their resulting anger, sexual repression and mental health issues after being sequestered for 5 years in a remote location are now America’s to bear. There is nothing about this bad “deal” that Obama committed us to that makes sense. Shame on President Trump!
‘Mn4freedom:’
I wonder if they’ll get a “Welcoming” parade from our local “welcoming” community organizers? We will be watching. We will hold them accountable. That is YOU LIRS in my area! [LIRS is the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service which we learned previously is one of the federal contractors being paid to place the Australian rejects into US towns.—ed]
See my complete (extensive!) archive on the Australia “dumb” deal byclicking here. If you once knew but have forgotten, as part of the unprecedented deal, Australia is going to take some Central American Christians now in Costa Rica in exchange. (So how are those people even our problem?) LOL! Donald! It is “dumb!” US to Australia:We will take over a thousand illegal alien Muslims off your hands. Australia to US: And, in exchange we will take an undetermined number of Christian economic migrants presently living in Costa Rica off your (US) hands. (huh!)
***I repeat, legitimate refugees are to ask for asylum in the first safe place they land. If they fail to be granted asylum by proving they would be persecuted if sent home, they should be returned to where they came from, not be given the ultimate jackpot—a free ticket to America.
Don Barnett writing at the Center for Immigration Studiestoday explained in detail how states are forced to accept and pay for third world refugees admitted through the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) to the US and sent to 49 states.
Read this (these are the opening points in the ‘backgrounder’) and then ask: Where is Congress?
(Emphasis below is mine):
The State of Tennessee filed a lawsuit against the federal government in March 2017 claiming that the refugee resettlement program was an imposition by Washington over which the state had no control.1 The lawsuit is pending, but it highlights a deep problem with how the refugee resettlement program has evolved since the passage of the Refugee Act in 1980.
The Refugee Act of 1980 has been so modified by illegal federal regulations that the states have lost their ability to control their own budgets.
This Backgrounder traces the history of the federal-state relationship regarding refugees, identifies flaws, and proposes solutions. Among the findings:
~Repealing regulation 45 CFR 400.301 could have the immediate effect of allowing states to withdraw from the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) and end initial resettlement activities in the state.2
~Today, states that withdraw from the program find the program continues in the state with the potential to operate on a larger scale than before withdrawal and with no state participation.
~As implemented, states have a limited and ill-defined role in the federal USRAP.
~Congress has shirked its responsibility to fully fund the refugee resettlement program.
~The federal government has shifted much of the fiscal burden of refugee resettlement to states. Three years of reimbursement for the state portion of welfare programs used by refugees in the state, such as Medicaid, TANF and SSI, was authorized by the 1980 Refugee Act. This support was ended entirely.
~The Act authorized Refugee Medical Assistance (RMA) and Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA) for three years for refugees who do not qualify for cash welfare and Medicaid. This support was gradually scaled back; today RCA and RMA are available for only eight months.
~This cost shift to the states means the federal government is, in effect, using state funds to operate a federal program.In cases where a state asks to withdraw from the program, continuation of the program means the state has lost its ability to control its own budget and is deprived of its sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment.
~Consultation among “stakeholders” about where refugees are to be settled is ill-defined in the USRAP. At times there is no meaningful consultation with state authorities.
~The federal government uses a legally questionable regulation (45 CFR 400.301) rather than statutory law to allow private non-profits to operate in a state where the state has asked to withdraw from the program.
~By one reading of the law, prior to 45 CFR 400.301, there was no authority to resettle refugees in states that chose to withdraw from the program.In other words, prior to 1994 when 45 CFR 400.301 was introduced, the states were — knowingly or not — participating in and paying for a voluntary program from which they had every right to withdraw at any time with the expectation that no refugees would be resettled in the state.
Serious students of the USRAP,continue reading here.
And, I repeat! If there is no reform of the entire US Refugee Admissions Program in the next three years, simply reducing the numbersas the Trump Administration is doing is meaningless in the long run.
The President can and must, as part of any immigration reform, issue regulations in keeping with the original law wherever possible, and, or, tell Congress to rewrite the law if it is in our national interest to continue it at all.
If no permanent fix….
…..when President Trump’s term ends, refugee agencies and advocates will push for even larger numbers of refugees to make up for what they will dub the lost Trump years.
Looking for something to do? Get this information into the hands of your state governors and legislators!
But, as expected they use the usual language meant to describe people who want to control immigration as “nativists,” “populists” and “Islamophobes.” Nevertheless, I found this article useful because it does confirm that what they call the Far Right or Radical Right is gaining power in Europe. Hoorah!
Entitled:
How the Far Right Has Reshaped the Refugee Debate in Europe
You can bet Frontline loved this scary and powerful photo of Polish “nationalists” demonstrating! Fires and flags are reminiscent to me of the 1683 Battle for the Gates of Vienna when the Polish army destroyed the Ottoman Turks and saved Europe for Christendom. (But, I doubt the Frontline people ever heard of it.)
Couldn’t one actually say that the refugee and migrant invasion is so great that sensible Germans, Poles, Hungarians, Swiss etc. are saying enough is enough because they do not want to be overrun and out bred.
The Open Borders Far Left, by permitting the refugee invasion, is shaping the debate in my view. The sensible people are reacting to the Left’s aggression.
Here is the opening segment of a longer interview. It is worth reading in its entirety.
Across Europe, parties on the far right are experiencing renewed vigor, fueled by economic uncertainty, cynicism toward the European Union, and anger over an ongoing crisis that has brought more than 1.5 million refugees and migrants to the West since 2015.
By last October, there were right-wing nationalist members of parliament in 24 European countries. In Germany, the EU’s largest country, the Alternative for Germany party became the first far-right group in more than six decades to win seats in parliament, with co-leader Alexander Gauland vowing after the election to fight “an invasion of foreigners.”
These parties have helped reshape the immigration debate in Europe. In countries like Hungary, razor-wire border fences have gone up to keep refugees and migrants out. Elsewhere on the continent, there’s been an upsurge of protests against refugees. In Poland, for example, an independence day celebration of around 60,000 people this past November was marred by thousands of far-right nationalists waving banners of “White Europe,” and chanting slogans of “No to Islam.”
Frontline’s big expert is an associate professor at the University of Georgia at Athens, GA. He is a Dutch Leftwinger indoctrinating your American kids. http://spia.uga.edu/faculty-member/cas-mudde/
According to Cas Mudde, a political scientist at the University of Georgia and a leading expert on far-right politics in Europe, Europe’s far right has used the refugee crisis to its advantage — channeling decades-old stereotypes about immigrants to rally support for their cause. These parties didn’t create anti-immigrant stereotypes, he says. Rather, they feed on them to influence the conversation.
Ahead of FRONTLINE’s Jan. 23 premiere of Exodus: The Journey Continues, we spoke with Mudde about the rise of Europe’s radical right, the refugee crisis, and why he considers the current political situation a “crisis of liberal democracy.”
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
What are the defining tenets of Europe’s far-right movement?
The vast majority of the parties that are relevant are parties that are best called “radical right.” That means that they accept the basics of democracy — that the people elect their leaders — but they have major problems with some of the liberal protections of democracy. Most notably, minority rights. And so, they combine nativism, authoritarianism and populism. [Watch the increasing use of the word authoritarian because the Far Left is attaching that word to President Trump.—ed]
The assumption is that nativists are bad people and Frontline and Mudde want you to get that message loud and clear. LOL! they worked the word “nativism” into the story six times! I might suggest ‘preservationists’ is a more applicable term—-preserving culture and western civilization seems like a more accurate driving force for a growing number of Europeans and Americans. Frontline:
We’ve obviously seen our own resurgence of many of these same beliefs in the United States. How has Europe’s nativist, populist movement paralleled what’s happening here?
Well, in the narrow sense of the movement, there are not so many links. The radical right forces here, they are first and foremost American organizations with very few ties to Europe. Much of their nativism stands in a very long tradition of American nativism, going back at the very least to the mid-19th century. It is a bit different because there is a different enemy: Mexicans. [Huh?—ed] It also feeds into, of course, the specific history of racism and African Americans that Europe doesn’t have.
Look at his language dripping with bias—Islamophobic!
The strongest ties are actually within the Islamophobic community, because that argument is very similar. They have the same view because Islamophobia is not just about the Muslims inside of your country, it’s also against so-called “global Islam.” But I find it pretty stunning how prominent and salient Islamophobia is in a country like the United States, which has such a tiny Muslim population, which is not the case with the Muslim population in Europe.
Could that be because Americans are smart and are studying Islam and looking to Europe as the canary in a coal mine and they don’t want to be a dead canary country (as Mudde’s homeland is about to be, or is already!).
