Washington lobbyist for big business: “The basic goal is to promote the free flow of labor into the USA”.

Tamar Jacoby

That is a quote from Tamar Jacoby, President and CEO of  Immigration Works USA, at a meeting we reported, here, in 2009.  It was a closed-to-the-public and press conclave held at a MARRIOTT HOTEL in Washington, DC and included such luminaries as Grover Norquist.  The assembled, as reported by a NumbersUSA expose, were talking about how to get amnesty after grassroots activists (like those who would later become the tea party) had defeated the Kennedy/McCain/Bush “comprehensive immigration reform” in 2007.

So, when you find yourself getting all sentimental about the impoverished immigrant coming to the US for a better life, have some sympathy for the immigrant but remember that the biggest driver for amnesty is BIG Business—whether its the meatpackers I mentioned in my previous post or the major hotel chains looking for maids and dishwashers—make no mistake, there is BIG money behind the amnesty/open borders movement AND the Refugee Resettlement Program.

That 2009 secret gathering (Storming the Hill National Summit) was located at a Marriott Hotel, and….

The welcome was by Deborah Marriott Harrison, who is granddaughter of the Marriott Hotels founder and V.P. Government Relations for the chain.

Burmese refugees working for Marriott in Utah

I’m sure the grateful refugees receiving awards for their good service by a Marriott hotel are wonderful people.  But, don’t for one second think that refugee resettlement is driven primarily by warm and fuzzy humanitarian motives—this is about making money with legal laborers who come ready to work and have almost zero chance of going home again.  Refugee labor is better than other immigrant labor for that very reason.

Here is just a bit about the awards the Burmese refugees received from grateful hotel management:

Five years ago, the Marriott Summit Watch needed new housekeeping staff members. At the time, hiring a group of Burmese refugees seemed like a good business decision with help from Utah’s Department of Workforce Services and the Refugee Services Office, hiring the refugees was an easy process.

[…..]

However, hiring refugees did not come without a few hiccups. Company lore tells of mishaps like dishwashers overflowing with suds from Palmolive, or the machines being loaded with toasters. “We had to learn their culture to teach and train them,” Belnap says of the early days working with the refugees.

These days, transitions for refugees working at the Marriott are becoming a little easier. Are Min, unofficially serves as the Marriott’s representative to help new refugees. He also works with Refugee Services to help those new to the area buy groceries, find places to do laundry, and adjust to life in Utah. He also encourages other refugees to apply to the Marriott Summit Watch. “We talk about how much better this Marriott is,” he says.

The Marriott is also very happy with their Burmese employees and Belnap says the company frequently speaks with other employers in Utah about the benefits of hiring refugees. “[It’s] rewarding in every way,” he said, “these are hardworking people, working to benefit themselves and their families.” Another advantage to hiring refugees versus other foreign employees is that they are legal to work as soon as they arrive, [and they have no where else to go!—-ed] said Perkins. Are Min says a few of the other hotels in Park City also hire refugees including the Canyons, Westgate, and Montage, among others.

But, it’s not always so great for the generally docile Christian Burmese as we saw here a few years ago when a Burmese Muslim refugee murdered a little Christian Karen girl after the Muslims were placed in the same apartment complex in Salt Lake City as the Christians.

The point of  what I’ve posted above is that “humanitarianism” is not driving the open borders movement, corporate giants are (along with the federal refugee contractors like Catholic Charities), and that the lives of the refugees are not always as sweet as this Marriott propaganda would have you think.

The bottomline for me is that I would have a lot more respect for the Refugee industry (and for the open borders position generally) if they admitted that their goals were largely financial (and political) and not driven by emotion and a sympathy for the poor and downtrodden immigrant.   If the general public understood that point then perhaps a serious policy discussion might be possible… but I won’t be holding my breath.

Senator Rand Paul: Did the meatpackers, hungering for cheap captive labor, get to him?

…..or was it Grover Norquist that got to him?

Oh brother, looks like we are having another invasion of the body snatchers moment.  Just when I thought there was someone speaking up for American workers besides NumbersUSA and Rush Limbaugh we learn that Paul has been snatched by big business interests.   (Imagine a conversation) Kentucky big meatpacker to Paul:  Get with the program boy if you want to move up!

Looks like Paul is singing a different tune now that he has Presidential aspirations compared to 2011 when he stood up to one of the leading LEGAL labor importing programs in the US—the Refugee Resettlement Program—when it imported two (now convicted) Iraqi refugee terrorists to work in the Kentucky meatpacking industry.

Read it all at Potomac Tea Party Report, here!

 

Australia again! Immigration the Trojan Horse for Jihadists

Since we talked about Australia yesterday, and about a new political party which seeks a ban on Muslim immigration to Australia, here, below are a couple of more bits of news from Down Under.

First see Ezra Levant and the Arab Underground  interview with Jonathan Halevi showing clips of Australian “radical Muslims” (Islamists) talking about spreading Islam through immigration.  (Hat tip: The Muslim Issue)

Then, see this report, about how much the taxpayers of Australia are paying to give “refugee” status to the illegal alien Muslims arriving on their shores.

The Australian immigration budget has increased by $1.3 billion over four years, as the government prepares to expand the humanitarian visa program to 20,000 each year.

A Senate estimates hearing on Monday was told the Immigration Department’s budget for humanitarian arrivals will rise by $150 million this year alone, accounting for about $24,000 for each person resettled in Australia under the expanded humanitarian program.

You can bet the Islamists are laughing their heads off at dumb infidels!   They are getting paid to invade!

Time to nag!  Don’t forget—read about Al-Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration!

“Rise up Australia” political party launched

I guess these folks in Australia didn’t have their indoctrination trip to Turkey yet!

By the way, for any of you hankering to move to Australia, don’t rush.  They have been having a massive influx of Muslim “refugees” and “asylum seekers” in recent years inspiring much political turmoil (see our category on Australia, here, with 89 previous posts).

However, Aussies, including this Sri Lankan man leading the new party, don’t seem to have been as intimidated by the PC Speech Police as have most Americans!  (nor have the journalists reporting the story!).

Here is the story from World News Australia:

A Sri Lankan migrant has launched a political party that runs on an anti-multiculturalism platform.

Rise Up Australia already boasts about 1,500 members and plans to run 65 candidates in the upcoming federal election.

“Rise Up Australia Party, which is committed to keeping Australia for Australians, is utterly and completely opposed to multiculturalism,” says Rise Up Australia’s founder Daniel Nalliah.

The Sri Lankan-born pastor draws on his own migrant past in defence of assimilation.

His message has the backing of international figures. “If you come here, then follow Pastor Danny’s example and enjoy it and celebrate it and do not seek to destroy it,” says Christopher Monckton from the UK Independence Party.

The leader of the new party has come under fire in the past for anti-Islamic comments, but he wasn’t backing away from making controversial statements again today.

“True Muslims are radicals, unfortunately. If they practice the Koran, they’re radicals,” he said.

If elected, Rise Up wants to restrict the number of Muslims calling Australia ‘home’.

The party has 1,500 supporters across the country, and is putting forward 52 candidates in the Lower House and a dozen in the Senate in the upcoming federal election.

Many of the supporters are concerned about what they claim is the “Islamification of Australia”.

“If we’re not careful, we’re going to lose this country,” said a supporter. “I don’t want to see Sharia Law in Australia,” said another.

Do not stop using the word “Islamist” when you need it!

The Politically Correct Speech Police are on a crusade to silence your use of the word “Islamist.”

This is cross-posted from Potomac Tea Party Report, but I thought readers here would also find it informative:

Today, writing at NRO, Karen Lugo (hat tip: Paul) alerts us to more in the on-going battle of ideas on the subject of freedom of speech.  Islamists want to stop free thinkers from using the word “Islamist!”

And, look who is leading the world community to silence critics of Jihad and Shariah law—-that supposedly great example of a moderate Muslim country—Turkey!

Here is Lugo (emphasis mine):

In just the latest episode of censorship in the prophet’s name, Muslim activist groups now want reporters to stop using the word “Islamist.” “Islamist” is an important and useful word — it identifies the politically motivated Muslims who are intent on injecting sharia into Western law and culture, and distinguishes them from other followers of Islam.

There is no question that sharia is anathema to the American sense of individual liberty and civil rights, so actual Islamists must hide behind Muslims who have no interest in bringing Muslim Brotherhood–style regulations to America. Uninhibited discussions of the conditions in Western Europe’s sharia enclaves evoke instant rejection of similar arrangements here in the U.S. Thus, the conversation must be stripped of frank terms such as “Islamist.” Those who seek to promote sharia are anxious to bypass debate on the matter on the way to cultural domination.

Don’t we know some Marylanders who went on an indoctrination trip to Turkey?

Islamists certainly do not want the American public to consider the current international campaign to make inspection of Islamism a crime. In January, journalists and journalism students were invited to a conference in Istanbul where Turkish deputy undersecretary Ibrahim Kalin announced that the Turkish government “has been working on projects to have Islamophobia recognized as a crime against humanity.” Prime Minister Erdogan committed the Turkish government to “immediately start working on legislation against blasphemous and offensive remarks” and bragged that “Turkey could be a leading example for the rest of the world on this.”

Update:   Richard Falknor at Blue Ridge Forum reports that there are lists of elected officials who went on Gulen sponsored trips to Turkey, here is one such list. I don’t know if the journalists were also sponsored by the Gulen movement.

We need to be able to freely use  the word “Islamist” so as not to lump all Muslims in with the Shariah law agitators like say, Grover Norquist (who says you are all a bunch of “Islamophobes” if you question shariah law!):

Quietly working within the US government to silence us:

So far, America’s institutions have chosen to defer the moment that the culture must be defined and defended. Islamists have stepped into the void. For instance, at Islamists’ behest, the DOJ, FBI, and Department of Homeland Security have purged from counterterrorism manuals references to the connection between Islamic radicalism and jihadist terror. Many city- and county-level agencies have followed suit. If our law-enforcement agencies cannot stand up to the threat, how can we expect the media to?

More than most, Tea Partiers and Liberty-minded advocates and LOL! Tea Party bloggers know the importance of free speech because without this Constitutionally protected pressure release valve the US would turn to chaos and rioting and rebellion to solve the greatest threat we have faced since the founding.  Hint to Obama and pals—silence Americans at your great peril.

Lugo concludes:

Caving to demands for speech codes dangerously skews political arguments and makes the voices of the censors only louder. When one side of the argument is censored or restrained, conspirators are allowed to perpetrate a fraud on the majority. This is exactly how Islamists have been selling Americans on the idea that sharia is soft, socially just, and not a threat to the American way. By maligning the use of the word “Islamist” and thereby suppressing inspection of Islamism, sharia advocates hope to dismiss as racist any who would challenge them.   [They have free speech too—do not cower when they call you a racist, besides Islam is not a race!—ed]

It is not too late to frame the debate and press American Muslim leaders for honesty. Unapologetic and public conversations are key to defending American constitutional standards, and they demand clarity of terminology.

No one explains this better than Pamela Geller.   Coincidentally, just last evening  Brad Botwin of Help Save Maryland sent around a clip of a CNN interview with Pamela Geller from a few months ago on this very subject.   Watch it!