Gitmo prisoners returned to home countries where they can rejoin jihadists…

…..but no dice on sending the Uighurs back to China.  Oh brother, the Obama Administration promised to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center by January 2010 and with the clock ticking they are sending some to home countries where they can readily rejoin their Islamic terrorist buddies.

I thought this was funny because it was in the China Post:

WASHINGTON — The United States has sent 12 inmates from the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Afghanistan, Yemen and an enclave in Somalia despite concerns about militant cells in those countries.

The U.S. Justice Department said on Sunday six Yemeni and four Afghan detainees were moved over the weekend to their home countries while two Somalis were transferred to regional authorities in Somaliland, a self-governing region of Somalia.

“These transfers were carried out under individual arrangements between the United States and relevant foreign authorities to ensure the transfers took place under appropriate security measures,” the department said.


Representative Frank Wolf, the senior Republican on the House of Representatives appropriations subcommittee for the Justice Department, criticized the decision to send prisoners back to Yemen or other countries where U.S. officials believe al Qaeda is active.

“It’s a very bad decision by the Obama administration and by the Justice Department,” Wolf said in an interview. “I think it endangers our national security and endangers our citizens.”

So, you can bet the Chinese are now saying, give us our Uighurs back!   Uighurs are Chinese Muslims and China wants them back to face punishment.  This has got to be causing some heartburn in the State Department which originally wanted the Uighurs to be resettled as refugees right here in your town USA.  Instead Obama is trying desperately to find countries we can pay to take the Uighurs since political pressure has kept them from coming to your neighborhood under the care of Catholic Charities (or the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, or World Relief, or Church World Service, etc.)

You can learn more about Uighurs by using our search function.  Our most recent post is here, just two days ago.

Comment worth noting: New acronym! ONGO!

LOL! Reader TonyLee writing in response to my post about Malta this morning, made this suggestion:

I believe you have come up with a new acronym.
We all know what an NGO is. there are also QUANGOs which can be defined as quasi-governmental Non Governmental Organizations (which they all are in fact).

Now we have ONGO – Openborders Non governmental Organizations

For new readers, all of the Top Ten federal refugee resettlement contractors are politically active ONGOs and support amnesty for illegal aliens which continues to puzzle me—-if they are contracted to find legal refugees jobs, doesn’t amnesty for those who come illegally just add more competition to an already overloaded job market?

Obama should cap non-profit group salaries as well

Your tax dollars:

I assume readers are up on the news about the Obama Administration’s plans to cap salaries and bonuses of any “fat cat” CEO’s whose businesses get federal taxpayer money.   I propose that he do the same for Leftwing non-profit groups that to a very large degree are now funded by you!  Remember ACORN and Planned Parenthood are largely funded by you too!

This subject tops my list of subjects that get my blood boiling.   I started to call it a pet peeve, but it is more than that.  If one wonders how the Left and leftwing policies are being so widely implemented (no matter who is in the White House!), it is here, through the non-profits, NGOs, or whatever you want to call them, that are really arms of government and are changing America and the world without any accountability to elected officials; and adding insult to injury, they are using your money to do it.

What prompted this little bit of research (below) was an article in the Washington Examiner on December 18th.  It’s entitled, ‘Federal salaries targeted as private-sector pay stagnates,’ and I encourage you to read it all here.  In the article and in its sidebar, here, we learn the pay levels for a variety of federal employees.

These are some of the federal salaries we learned from the Washington Examiner:

President Obama:  $400,000

Robert Gibbs, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod: $172,000

VP Joe Biden:  $227,300

Nancy Pelosi:  $223,500

Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts:  $217,400

I don’t see it in the article, but I assume the average Member of Congress is under $200,000.

Now, let’s have a look at some Non-profit group salaries largely also paid by you!  And, let me be clear!  If these groups were entirely privately funded it would be none of my business, or anyone’s business, what the salaries are.  Members of these organizations then might have some say, but not the general public.

The ones I have chosen were chosen simply by how easy it was to get at their Form 990s.  Some groups are so hard to find that one must be a forensic accountant to figure them out.

The Nature Conservancy (received $110,616,412 of federal money reported in its 2008 Form 990):  Five directors make over $200,000 a year (more than Chief Justice Roberts) and the CEO makes $349,373 in salary and benefits.    What on earth does TNC’s CEO do that is worthy of an annual salary more than $122,000 higher than the Vice President of the US (no Biden jokes, please!)?

The World Wildlife Fund got $26,142,042 from taxpayers reported in its 2008 Form 990.  Its CEO made $272,404 in that year. 

So Obama can make a big show of capping government salaries in the White House, while people in the NGO community are robbing the taxpayers and setting major policies by the actions and positions they take, and no one says a word largely because there exists this presumption of good intentions on the part of the organization.  They get to wear a white hat and roll in the federal dough (unlike those evil bankers and auto executives whose hats are black).

Here now are a couple of Voluntary organizations (VOLAGs)* that are contracted by the federal government to resettle refugees.  For regular readers you’ve heard this before, but we get new people visiting RRW all the time. 

‘Reader,’ a commenter at this post may not know how much pay CEO’s of resettlement agencies make, while the schlubs work at the ground level with poor refugees often donating hours of time, money and supplying basic needs to the refugees.   Think about this the next time you hear of refugees living in squalor or being evicted and wanting to return to camps in the third world.

International Rescue Committee (from its Form 990 for 2008, they got $104,622,578 from taxpayers):  They have two officers of the Board of Directors over $200,000 salaries and 5 employees in the 6-figure range.  But, the big guy, CEO Charles Rupp, got $428,864 in salary and benefits!  Now, what on earth is Rupp doing that warrants a salary larger than the President of the United States?

US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) (from its Form 990 for 2008) got $22,136,680 from the federal taxpayer out of a total income of $23,138,072—that is 96% of their funding comes from YOU.  So where is the public-private partnership here???   CEO Lavinia Limon made $198,466 that year in salary and benefits.  (I see Ms. Limon is getting cost of living raises, here.)

Now revisit some of those government salaries above and consider whether the salaries at quasi-government agencies shouldn’t be brought into line with government salaries.

Besides setting the direction for your towns and cities with the refugees they resettle, these NGOs (including the environmental ones above) are also running around the world and dealing with our foreign policy with virtually no accountability to you who pay their salaries.

 The average taxpayer—plumbers, janitors, nurses and teachers—are paying the salaries of fat cats at supposed do-gooder non-profits.  It stinks!

* Volag is such a misnomer, they are far from “voluntary” they are well-paid federal contractors.  Here for new readers are the Top Ten.

Malta Update: NGOs campaign to close detention centers

I wonder if there is some sort of international strategy going on by the Open Borders non-governmental organizations (NGO) movement to get rid of detention centers.  We just saw the Obama Administration put in place new, less restrictive, requirements on detention that go into effect in January for “asylum seekers” coming across our borders.  Now I see that in Malta the NGOs (probably mostly funded through some government program) are staging protests against detention of the mostly Africans who arrive there by the thousands each year.

From Malta Today:

Moviment Graffitti spokesperson Andre Callus yesterday said detention centres in Malta were “useless and unjust” and a “waste of financial and human resources”.

Representatives of Moviment Graffitti, Migrants’ Solidarity Movement, Jesuit Refugee Service, Third World Group, Moviment Azzjoni Xellug (MAX), Kopin, Alternattiva Demokratika Zghazagh and Zminijietna last night slept in a tent fenced by wire at City Gate, in solidarity with migrants imprisoned at the detention centres in Safi and Ta’ Kandja.

The shabby tent, intended to symbolise the appalling state of Malta’s closed detention centres, was already set up by yesterday morning, creating an unusual attraction for passers-by on their way to Republic Street for Christmas shopping.

Information leaflets were distributed to onlookers, who – according to the organisers – “have not been very negative about the idea of doing away with detention centres.” Callus however stressed the need for the public to become more familiar with the issue: to “know the difference between open centres and detention centres”, and to be more informed about the inhumane conditions in which the persons inhabiting the latter are currently living in.

“The detention system in Malta is creating unnecessary suffering,” Callus said. “People’s liberty is arbitrarily being taken away when they are locked up for a maximum of 18 months in small spaces with lack of hygiene, limited access to medical care, lack of fresh air and complete uncertainty about their situation and their future.”

Not a a first choice???   We just learned here that it was and the pull factor is the US State Department policy that is bringing hundreds of Malta’s illegal aliens to the US as refugees.

Callus explained that Malta is rarely the first choice for the vast majority of migrants, as many are brought to the island after encountering difficulties on their way to Italy. Therefore, he said, it is a misconception that detention centres act as a deterrent for people to come to Malta.

You know if the State Department had said no to former US Ambassador to Malta, ‘Tea Party Molly,’ who promoted the idea of transforming some of these Africans to refugees and helped send them to a town near you, there might be a significantly smaller pull factor for beleagured Malta.

For new readers, use the key word ‘Malta’  in our search box for the many posts we have written on the subject.