But, she has also left the state for her own safety!
What the hell is going on with the police in Minneapolis?
Leo Hohmann has the latest at his new website, click here. See my earlier post on the attack here.
Below are a few snips from Hohmann’s detailed (update) report:
The tragic story of what happened to Morgan Evenson two weeks before Christmas is starting to gain traction in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Evenson gave the police a very detailed description of her attacker!
Ignored by the city’s largest newspaper, the Star Tribune, a second local TV station picked up the story Tuesday about the brutal attack by a Somali migrant that left the 26-year-old woman in a hospital bed with 14 stab wounds and a lacerated kidney.
It’s been nearly three weeks since a man described as a Somali immigrant attacked Evenson while she was walking home from work in uptown Minneapolis, slashing and stabbing her relentlessly while trying to drag her off of a public street.
She did not know the man and has no idea why he attacked her.
[….]
The fact that a Somali migrant targeted a young white woman while walking alone, and that he remains on the loose, has women watching their backs.
Several women told Fox 9 KMSP they are afraid to walk alone on the streets of this popular shopping district that they previously thought was safe.
And now the victim herself is speaking out, revealing new information about her attacker that cast doubt upon the official police narrative about what happened that night.
[….]
After being released from the hospital Evenson immediately moved out of state and said she fears for the safety of her friends still living in uptown Minneapolis….
Go here and see what she says about the attack and her attacker and what she wants to do!
And, see Hohmann’s discussion about the Minneapolis police department that seems to be controlled by the local Imams, putting their sensitivities before the safety of the non-immigrant community that still lives in Minneapolis. For those reading RRW for the first time, go here (one of my all time top posts) and see who is responsible for Minneapolis becoming the Somali capital of America. Hint: Initially it was three of the refugee contractors listed below. But, last I looked, 5 or 6 of them have set up shop in “welcoming” Minnesota.
But, get this, Pew Research says that the number isn’t growing due to conversions to Islam because for every convert to the ‘religion’ an equal number are leaving Islam!
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) disagrees with Pew as you will see below.
First Pew admitsthey have no reliable census data:
Recent political debates over Muslim immigration and related issues have prompted many people to ask how many Muslims actually live in the United States. But coming up with an answer is not easy, in part because the U.S. Census Bureau does not ask questions about religion, meaning there is no official government count of the U.S. Muslim population.
Still, based on our own survey and demographic research, as well as outside sources, Pew Research Center estimates that there were about 3.45 million Muslims of all ages living in the U.S. in 2017, and that Muslims made up about 1.1% of the total U.S. population.
Muslims in the U.S. are not as numerous as the number of Americans who identify as Jewish by religion, according to our estimate. At the same time, our projections suggest that the U.S. Muslim population will grow much faster than the country’s Jewish population. By 2040, Muslims will replace Jews as the nation’s second-largest religious group after Christians. And by 2050, the U.S. Muslim population is projected to reach 8.1 million, or 2.1% of the nation’s total population — nearly twice the share of today.
[….]
…. the Muslim population has continued to grow at a rate of roughly 100,000 per year, driven both by higher fertility rates among Muslim Americans as well as the continued migration of Muslims to the U.S.
Pew says that the Muslim population won’t reach 8.1 million until 2050, but CAIR says we are there already. And, they are working on their own count!
Muslim advocacy groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations routinely cite a span of 6 million to 8 million people in describing the size of Islam in America.
That would be between 2 percent and 3 percent of the U.S. population and make Muslims greater in number than Mormons or Jews.
That claim stands in sharp contrast to the results of a survey last year by the Pew Research Center, which found the population was 2.35 million, or 0.6 percent of the U.S. population, based on phone surveys. [Unclear what is meant by “last year” since it was in 2007 that Pew ‘guessed’ it was 2.35.—ed]
Notice that at both Pew Research and at CAIR they are interested in pinpointing when the Muslim population will surpass Jewish (and other) religious groups.
Time for a baby race! Nothing drives a Leftwinger crazier than my next admonition: Some of you better step up your game and have more babies!
I think Pew breaks down Muslim population numbers by state, go to the story, here, and see if there are links for other data.
I’m sure readers get sick of hearing me talk about the per head payment the US State Department pays the so-called VOLAGs (aka resettlement agencies, aka contractors)*** to place refugees into your towns and cities, but it is important because that is why you hear the contractors wailing now about the Trump Administration’s refugee slowdown. Why is the “welcome” the responsibility of the beleaguered US taxpayer?
Of course these agencies are on the Leftwing of the political spectrum and want to see diversity (and Democrat voters) planted in your towns. They have bought into the UN’s borderless world agenda, and some (maybe more than we know) work directly with global corporations to supply refugee labor, but because they can’t survive without government funding, they are hysterical now.
Thanks to collegue Jim, here is a documentfrom ten years ago, produced by Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service(the one experiencing financial accounting questions) claiming that the $850 per head payment they received at the time (half went to the refugees and half was for overhead) was not sufficient and they wanted a per head raise to $1,500.
Public-Private partnership, my foot!
They actually made the claim repeatedly in their report that the PUBLIC-PRIVATE partnership was too heavily skewed in the direction of private funding responsibility and that the feds weren’t putting up their share.
That claim led me to a Form 990 for 2009 (I couldn’t find 2008) to see if they were indeed putting in more money than the feds. The answer is NO!
In fact only 3% of their revenue from gifts, grants and loan collection fees was private funding. The remainder was GOVERNMENT funding of some sort.
Here is a screenshot of that portion of their Form 990 for 2009: Obviously government grants are taxpayer dollars as is the loan service fees.
That fact, that 97% of LIRS income that year was supplied by the US taxpayer, completely nullifies the argument they make in their 2008 18-page analysis: The Real Cost of Welcome where they say they are supplying the greater amount in the public-private partnership.
The purpose of the study was to ‘encourage’ an even larger share of the burden for the taxpayer. In 2008 they complained that $850 per refugee was inadequate and that they were putting in an unfair share of the public-private arrangement.
I thought you might like to see what ‘services’ they provide for refugees (that you pay for). Remember that they only take care of the refugees they place for 90 days.
Much of this could be done with volunteer help and donations. Isn’t this after all supposed to be a charitable humanitarian endeavor?
When did it happen that religious good works were to be paid for by the government?
You can readily see why a refugee designation is the most desirable LEGAL immigration category one could want. American taxpayers give out a lot of goodies, plus the refugees get caseworkers to hold their hands through the welfare bureaucracy!
Conclusion: We want $1,500 per head!
I can report that they got their wish and more! The present rate (climbed steadily over the Obama years) is now $2,125!
$1,125 is to be spent on the refugee and the contractor pockets $1000 for ‘administrative’ expenses. (And the contractor decides how to spend the refugee’s share!).
And, let me be clear, this (State Department payment) is not the only money the contractors receive from the US Treasury, they receive literally millions more through other agencies and grants/contracts particularly from the Office of Refugee Resettlement in HHS.
***These are the nine federal contractors who pass money through to hundreds of subcontractors operating around the country.
Broken record alert!
It is my contention that the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program will never be reformed until these Leftwing community organizers are removed from the federal dole. You get the list twice today (earlier post here)!
We reported here on January 1 that the Trump refugee numbers, at the present rate of arrival, would come in at half of the CEILING of 45,000 set for FY18.
By the way, George Bush had two years that saw refugee admissions in the 20,000 range.
Trump will set a record if he comes in below George W. Bush’s two lowest yearsof 27,070 (2002) and 28,117 (2003).
(Yesterday, Michael Leahy atBreitbartposted a more detailed look at the numbers so far.) Hans Van de Weerd of the two hats (IRC and RCUSA) is the go-to-guy for media comments these days. As you know RCUSA is the lobbying arm of the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program. My question: is Hans still a Dutch citizen? Bio here: http://www.phocuswrightconference.com/Whos-Coming/Speakers/2016/Hans-Van-de-Weerd Here Reuters reportson the retirement of Barbara Strack (hat tip: Joanne):
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – One of the top U.S. government officials working on refugee issues announced her impending retirement on Tuesday, and refugee advocates expressed concern about the fate of the country’s resettlement program which faces mounting pressure from the Trump administration.
Barbara Strack, a career official and chief of the Refugee Affairs Division at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, did not specify when she will leave her post, but USCIS spokesman R. Carter Langston said it would be in January.
[….]
“It’s something I’ve been planning towards for a long time, and it’s not driven by policy considerations,” Strack said. “I will deeply miss the colleagues and friendships that I‘m leaving behind, and the important mission of refugee resettlement. It’s been a privilege to be part of this community for the last 12 years, working to make the U.S. refugee resettlement program robust and secure.”
Advocates expressed concern at the timing of Strack’s retirement, saying it could further hamper U.S. refugee admissions. It was unclear immediately who would replace her.
[….]
The Refugee Affairs Division, which Strack oversees, includes dozens of officers charged with interviewing refugees abroad for resettlement in the United States.
[….]
Advocates for resettlement and some U.S. officials have expressed alarm at what they see as a slowdown in trips abroad known as circuit rides, in which USCIS officers interview refugees.
“The number of circuit rides has gone down drastically with currently only a few planned,” said Hans Van de Weerd, chair of Refugee Council USA***, a coalition of non-governmental groups working on refugee issues. “Many more will need to be scheduled soon to resettle 45,000 refugees and we don’t have any information about whether they will.”
More from Reuters here.
*** See myrecent post on RCUSAthe lobbying shop for the nine federal contractors which receive the vast majority of their funding from the US taxpayer. With the reduction in paying clients (aka refugees) entering the US, their budgets are taking huge hits. Go hereand see IRC salaries, spokesman Hans does not make the top tier.
I just wish for once ‘journalists’ at Amos’s level would explain to her listeners some of the real facts about how the US Refugee Admissions Program operates, but maybe NPR listeners are only interested in horror stories about the President with headlines meant to alarm them in to action.
(More on that below)
But see how journalism professor Amos beginsher report (hat tip: Margaret) with Donald Trump declaring that Obama’s Australia deal was dumb. It was, and it is! Deborah Amos, advocate for the existing UN/US Refugee Admissions Program, opinion writer at NPR and Journalism visiting lecturer at Princeton University. https://journalism.princeton.edu/people/deborah-amos/
Last year began with an angry phone call about refugees, famously leaked later. The newly inaugurated Donald Trump exploded when Australia’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, asked him to honor a U.S. pledge to resettle some 1,200 refugees from Australia’s offshore detention centers.
“This is a stupid deal,” Trump fumed to an astonished Turnbull. “This shows me to be a dope.”
A day earlier, the president had signed an executive order temporarily halting the entire U.S. refugee resettlement program and slashed the number of expected arrivals President Obama had set.
Trump complained that by honoring the deal with Australia he was “going to get killed” politically and abruptly hung up the phone.
It was the harbinger of policies set in motion to unravel the U.S. refugee resettlement program, an issue that defined Trump’s election campaign and has shaped much of his first year in office.
What the heck!
She then goes on and never reports that the President is going along with the deal (doesn’t she read RRW?).
But, you see, admitting that the President caved-in to pressure and is now going to admit up to 1,200 migrants that Australia doesn’t want, who have been in Australian-controlled detention for as long as four years, doesn’t fit the opinion piece she crafted and thus wouldn’t help stir up Leftwing anger.
She then quotes former Middle East ambassador Ryan Crocker (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama), bemoaning the (financial!) losses the federal refugee contractors*** will experience going forward:
“This is strategic, that’s why it’s different from previous anti-immigrant mindsets. It is a conscious effort to deconstruct the system,” Crocker says. He points to dramatic budget cuts for the nine private, voluntary agencies that for decades have contracted with the State Department to resettle and integrate the refugee population in communities across the U.S.
“The damage has already been done. These agencies run on the slimmest of margins. The layoffs are already doing structural damage. It’s going to take a long time to rebuild,” he says.
At this point, a real journalist would explain just a bit about the “voluntary agencies” (Ha! Ha!) which are almost completely funded by the US taxpayer, and, as such, are quasi-government organizations.
It would only take a paragraph or two to explain their financial structure based on federal payments on a refugee per head basis (hey! maybe even throw in a few numbers about CEO salaries). She might explain how they operate in secrecy in hopes that the locals won’t catch on to plans for their communities (Rutland, VT for example!).
She might say they are community organizers holding anti-Trump rallies like the recent one in Washington with CAIR, or that they hired the Podesta Group (for $100,000) to lobby for them.
She could point out that they could have been raising private charitable dollars to tide them over (and help refugees!) through slow refugee admission times. Or, maybe she could report on refugees left in the lurch by the contractors, some wishing to return to camps in Africa. You get my drift!
Then she quotes me wanting to be sure her listeners know what an extremist I am (well ok!). But, in many ways I’m more of an investigative journalist than she is!
“Donald Trump missed a fabulous opportunity to suspend the entire refugee admissions program,” activist Ann Corcoran complained to Breitbart News. Corcoran runs the Refugee Resettlement Watch website that regularly claims the resettlement program is corrupt and a health and security risk for communities that accept the newcomers. [Have I ever used the word corrupt?—ed]
Laughing my head off! This is my complete statement quoted at Breitbart:
“Donald Trump missed a fabulous opportunity to suspend the entire refugee admissions program, at least on a temporary basis, until we get back on our feet in Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico,” Ann Corcoran, who runs the Refugee Resettlement Watch website, tells Breitbart News.
And, Amos is training young journalists at Princeton!
Yes, the President has great power under the Refugee Act of 1980 and he could have suspended it outright. His team obviously decided to “smother” it by cutting the numbers and consequently cutting the funding (your tax dollars) that feed the refugee contractors***. Immigration lawyer Becca Heller in Glamour magazine: “The fight against Trump….” https://www.glamour.com/story/becca-heller-irap-vs-trump-supreme-court
Here she gives Becca Hellerwith the International Refugee Assistance Project in New York a lot of column inches to say what we said yesterdaythat Congress will need to step in to make permanent changes to the law.
“We are in a pitched battle for the continued existence of the U.S. refugee resettlement program,” says Heller. “The numbers are going to be low for the next few years and it’s our job to keep them as high as we can.”
[….]
Heller says there are limits to the president’s powers to end the refugee resettlement program outright. Congress established the program’s framework and would need to vote to eliminate it.
“I think [the refugee program is] under attack but I don’t think it’s over. For one thing, it’s the law,” says Heller, pointing to the 1980 Refugee Act that sets out the provisions for the admission of refugees “of special humanitarian concern,” and the 1965 immigration law that emphasizes family reunification [aka chain migration—ed].
“The president may be able to temporarily prevent refugees from coming in,” Heller says. “It’s not going to successfully dismantle the program without Congress.”
Frelick says there is nothing in the law (Refugee Act of 1980) that says the US resettle a single refugee
Ms. Amos earlier in her piece, designed to paint the President in the worst light, while the refugee industry is pure as the driven snow, quoted a spokesperson for Human Rights First. But, she could have just as well quoted Bill Frelick of Human Rights Watch who said this in November 2016 and I reported here. Take that Ms. Heller!
See what refugee advocate and longtime expert Bill Frelick (Human Rights Watch) said in November after Trump was elected and the refugee industry went in to shell-shock:
“In the U.S., there’s not a quota that has to be filled. The U.S. has a budgeted amount of money to do refugee resettlement, but there’s no requirement that the U.S. resettle a single refugee, and there’s no legal obligation to do it.”
I suspect he wasn’t too popular with his peers/media after that statement. I rarely see him quoted now.
More promotion of the existing/flawed refugee program and criticism of the President from Ms. Amos here.
***These are the “voluntary agencies” responsible for all refugee resettlement in the US. I rarely use the phrase voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) because it makes me laugh. When one thinks of voluntary agencies, one thinks of non-governmental organizations working hard to raise private money and using volunteer workers to carry out their humanitarian good works, not agencies funded with MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars(involuntarily taken from you) and CEOs making $200,000, $300,000 and $600,000 annual salaries!
