That phrase I believe is being echoed around the world and most assuredly in the countries of Eastern Europe that are having to cope with German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s insane decision to allow unregistered refugees to flow in to Germany by the tens of thousands and who must naturally cross other sovereign nations to get to Merkel’s welcome.
That phrase is also near the very end of a detailed story about Merkel’s flip-flopping over first opening, then closing and now (maybe?) opening German borders to the swarming mass of humanity she has surely unleashed.
I’m running out of time now, but want to bring this latest news at The Guardian from earlier this afternoon. Go here to learn more about Germany and the mess “Mama” Merkel has created.
A reader reminded me of this: Do you remember Merkel saying that “multiculturalism has failed” in Germany? Here in 2010.
Here is another 2016 Presidential candidate suggesting that the resettlement of 10,000 (65,000 or 100,000) Syrians to American towns represents a security threat.
Strong positions have already been taken by Donald Trump and Scott Walker in the run-up to the CNN Presidential debate scheduled for tomorrow evening.
Carson: If we are doing such great screening how did the Tsarnaev Brothers get in? From CNN:
Washington (CNN) Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson on Monday recalled the men who orchestrated the bombing at the Boston Marathon to argue that the U.S. should not accept emergency refugees fleeing Syria.
The retired neurosurgeon, who is recently earning silver medals in national opinion polls, raised the specter of Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev***, the immigrant brothers who came to the United States in 2002 and a decade later organized the attack. Carson said the U.S. had not substantively improved how immigrants those like the brothers were vetted when they came as refugees from Kyrgyzstan.
“How did that screening process work for the Tsarnaev Brothers?” Carson told CNN’s John Berman on “The Lead.” “We don’t know whose those people are, and the majority of them are young males, and they could easily be people who could be infiltrated by terrorists.”
Carson said it was all too easy for Islamic militants to take advantage of the relaxed standards for refugees.
“If I was ISIS, if I were the global jihadists, and I knew the United States was about to take in 10,000 or 65,000 or 100,00 people from my region, I would infiltrate them with my people,” he said.
Carson also characterized his position on immigration as “probably not that far away” from Trump’s, despite having disagreed with Trump on the viability of deportations of undocumented immigrants.
Mr. Carson might be advised to question all those who will now dump hate-filled vitriol on him over his lack of humanitarian concern and ask them how many Syrian Christians are they planning to help since the vast majority of Syrian refugees (95%) taken in by the US now are UN-chosen Syrian Muslims.
Our security concerns might be dramatically lessened if Christians were the recipients of our generosity (they aren’t after all the ones doing the terrorizing!).
***The Tsarnaev brothers may not be the best example because they came in as children, and as asylum seekers. We did not select them abroad with or without the help of the UN. Better examples would be the Iraqi refugee terroriststhat we did select and who did go through our security screening process which failed miserably.
However, the Tsarnaev brothers do exemplify a more serious problem in my view and that is what we are seeing with many next generation refugees, most notably the Somalis from Minnesota some of whom are not assimilating and are becoming radicalized in America cities (probably in radical mosques).
Those young men who left to join Al-Shabaab and ISIS over the last 8 years or so, could not have been screened against and their parents might have been fine people. The point is, that even if the Syrian Muslims, or any other Muslims, being admitted to the US now are perfectly decent and peaceful, their children may not stay that way. Let’s consider Frank Gaffney’s proposal today—a moratorium on Muslim colonization of America! That seems to offer us the safest choice wouldn’t you say?
Citizens critical of refugee resettlement on-going in Twin Falls, Idaho were hoping to get all of their many questions answered when a panel of “experts” come together at 6:30 p.m. on September 22nd. But, unless the meeting is fair and open to any and all questions, the opportunity to fully inform the community will be squandered by the Twin Falls Times-News.
I sure hope the organizers aren’t planning on using one of many manipulative techniques (Delphicomes to mind) that would steer the outcome to a predetermined conclusion and that is that everything is just fine and dandy, so let’s ‘welcome’ the Syrians to Idaho.
For new readers, this latest round of controversy started brewing when the resettlement contractor, affiliated with the College of Southern Idaho and the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, began bragging about Syrians being on the way to Twin Falls.
By the way, Syrians have already begun arriving in Boise according to State Department data.
Here is themake-up of the panelthat will answer attendees questions on the 22nd:
The panelists are:
Larry Bartlett, director of the U.S. State Department’s Office on Refugee Admissions, Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration
Ken Tota, deputy director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement
ZeZe Rwasama, director of the College of Southern Idaho Refugee Programs
Brian Pike, Twin Falls deputy city manager of public safety
Mike Mason, CSI’s vice president of finance
Dr. Steven Kohtz, with St. Luke’s Magic Valley Regional Medical Center
Wiley Dobbs, superintendent of the Twin Falls School District.
And, the discussion is being moderated by Times-News editor Matt Christensen who is hardly unbiased. Readers may remember that he actually editorialized calling me a “thief” here in June when he said I snipped too many paragraphs of a news story they had published.
Here then is how this meeting should be held to allow for the free and fair flow of information
~The moderator should not be affiliated with the newspaper. Christensen must be replaced. Perhaps find a respected former judge or someone not presumed to have a bias.
~The program must be videotapedfor future use and available to those who can’t be there.
~Panelists are there to answer questions, not to give speeches or lectures (we are nation of immigrants, blah! blah!). There is no need to hear opening statements that will only serve to drag out the meeting. If the organizers wish, they could provide written short opening remarks by panelists to be distributed as audience members arrive.
~Everyone present who wishes to ask a question should be allowed to do so. No one should be sending in questions for pre-screening by the moderator (as the paper is presently urging people to do). Only those present should be allowed to ask a question (or more than one question). No advance screening of questions should be permitted even at the meeting itself.
~Questions should be permitted to be asked if the meeting goes half the night. Everyone there who has a question, should get an answer. Cutting it off prematurely will only appear to shortchange one side or the other.
~Perhaps to be fair and orderly everyone who wants to ask a question must put his or her name in a hat—a hat which can be added to as the evening progresses. Names would be drawn randomly to determine speaker order.
~Questioners should be permitted to ask more than one question if during the course of the evening something needs further clarification, or something said prompts a new question.
~If someone on the panel is unable to provide the needed information on that evening, they should agree to promptly supply itand the paper should agree to publish it expeditiously.
~Any attempts to name-call, or otherwise make personal attacks, should be promptly shut down by the moderator.
Those are just suggestions off the top of my head, but the point is that no one should come away from the meeting shortchanged in any way. I feel sure that both Mr. Bartlett and Mr. Tota do not want to be associated with charges that they participated in a meeting that was somehow less than fair and open. And, to all involved—be sure to invite your US Representatives and Senators as well as Idaho legislatorsto this very important opportunity to get answers about how the US State Department and the Office of Refugee Resettlement run the program in Idaho (along with a resettlement agency) and how they can assure you that refugees will not financially strap the community or risk its security.
By the way, Idaho legislators should be especially interested because at this time Idaho is a Wilson-Fish statewhich means the Mr. Bartlett, Mr. Tota and the primary contractor—the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (with another non-profit, Jannus Inc.,which I forgot earlier)—call all the shots for Idaho and elected officials have virtually no say about who comes, how many and what state social services are used for refugees. Click herefor everything we have ever written on Twin Falls. Go here for more on Lawrence Bartlett, and herefor Ken Tota.
There are people who are standing up to the powerful Leftwing (aka Progressive) activists who have been working for decades to burrow their way into American churches. One such person is Kelly Monroe Kuhlberg, founder of the Veritas Forum and author of Finding God at Harvard. (Kuhlberg also is a colleague and friend of this author.)
Jim Wallis, the far-left founder of Sojourner Magazine and beneficiary of George Soros donations who has built a career out of subverting constitutional liberty in America by quoting the Bible out of context, is at it again.
In his latest effort in transparent left-wing propaganda, Wallis extends his love for open borders from the huge populations of Middle East and Africa to the United States to all of Europe.
But several evangelical leaders are calling Wallis out for his distortions of the Bible that promote a left-wing “pseudo-Christian” theocracy.
“It is curious to me that these refugees are almost entirely Islamic even though Christians are the ones in most mortal danger by Islamists,” Kelly Monroe Kullberg, founder of the Veritas Forum and author of Finding God at Harvard, tells Breitbart News. “The ‘refugees’ are not mostly sweet children, but adult Muslim males who are unscreened,” she said, adding Islamizing America [and Europe] is cultural injustice and suicide, not stewardship, beauty and progress.”
The full article can be found at Breitbart. Continue readinghere. It is jam-packed with information about the Progressive network Wallis helps lead.
Don’t forget, the Pope will also be carrying the Progressive’s messagewhen he arrives in the US next week. Make sure your Catholic friends know that so far he has made no distinction between the persecuted Christians arriving in Europe and the Muslim hordes.
Not to get too deep in the weeds, but long ago the Cultural Marxists knew that if their progressive agenda was to succeed in Christian America they would need to destroy the church and family first. For now, the best way that I can see to smoke them out is to ask every ‘religious’ Jew or Christian, who promotes the resettlement of massive numbers of migrants to Europe or the US, if they are saving the Christians first and how many have they saved so far. I could be wrong, but I expect the progressives will not want to be forced into a public declaration about rescuing Christians before Muslims.
Breitbarthas news yesterday that the Mexican government might be planning to ‘welcome’ Syrians to Mexico. And, then they could do what Trump says they do—send us their problem people!
Prominent Mexican officials are calling on their president to open the doors for 10,000 Syrian refugees, though thousands of Mexicans per year are fleeing their cartel-controlled nation and its violence and seeking asylum in the United States. The move comes on the heels of Mexico accepting 30 Syrian students. Other nations south of the porous U.S.-Mexico border have already opened their doors for people fleeing the Middle East.
Considering the Mexican government’s inability to govern its own territory and the willingness of Mexican officials to accept cash bribes, one could question whether their screening process would exclude potentially dangerous individuals. Even in the case of an individual being identified having a connection to a terrorist organization, a wealthy benefactor or ally of the individual could simply pay off a decision-maker and get the individual through.