Already 80,000 have left camps in Kenya and are returning to Somalia. So would someone tell the US State Department that they can stop the pipeline to America now!
NAIROBI, Kenya, Jun 6 – Kenya and Somalia have signed an agreement for the voluntary repatriation of about half a million Somali refugees living in Kenya.
The First Secretary at the Embassy of Somalia in Nairobi, Ali Mohammed Sheikh, said that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees would facilitate the homecoming of thousands who had fled war and hunger in their country.
He however asked for international solidarity saying it was an enormous task. “This is a procedure and you know before taking people back to their place there are other humanitarian factors to consider,” he expressed. “The enormous task requires international solidarity and burden sharing.”
Sheikh revealed that the latest count at the Dadaab refugee camp – the world’s largest – showed a reduction of 80,000 refugees who had gone back to Somalia.
For new readers: We have resettled more than 100,000 Somali refugees to cities large and small in the US over the last 25 years. See one of the most widely read posts here at RRW. Large numbers went to Minneapolis, and now they are spreading out throughout the state. In three years since 9/11 ( Bush years 2004, 2005, 2006) the number of Somalis arriving topped 10,000 per year. Those refugees then began bringing in the family (chain migration!) until 2008 when shock of shocks! the State Department discovered that as many as 30,000 Somalis had lied about their kinship and weren’t related at all. The State Department then closed the “family reunification” program for Somalis. It has recently been re-opened for new and legit family members, but they have no intention of finding and deporting the liars.
Since 5,000 Somalis have arrived in this fiscal year already, that means (number wise) we are well on our way to rival the Bush years mentioned above.
Ahhhh! Whole villages in Ethiopia are sweating, Korean Pop Stars groupies are worried and so is the Soros-funded Center for American Progress that the Gang of Eight plus Grover Senate immigration bill (S.744) would abolish the “popular” program to bring more diversity to your American towns via a lottery.
Rep Donald M. Payne, Jr. from Newark, NJ: Not enough poor Africans are getting to my district! (he didn’t say that, I did!)
Note to readers: These are not refugees we are writing about, they are 55,000 lucky lottery winners each year from countries where we don’t get enough immigrants. This is not a joke! I am not kidding!
Go hereto see where your town’s diversity winners are coming from.
If you aren’t a regular reader of Korean Pop Entertainment news you would have no idea about the stressed-out Ethiopians or the New Jersey Congressman who says we aren’t letting enough Africans into the US.
The green card lottery, a method through which at least 8 million foreigners wish to obtain their legal permanent residency, has been confirmed not to be cancelled for 2013 and 2014.
Although the odds of winning the green card lottery are not great, foreign hopefuls still have a chance of winning their legal status with a green card.
Just a few weeks ago, there was much speculation that the green card lottery would be taken away this year and that it was likely to be quietly cut. However, the US Embassy Press Secretary confirmed on Thursday that the green card application program will continue as usual for this year and next year.
According to the Armenpress on Thursday, US Embassy Press Secretary Taguhi Jahukyan said, “The Diversity Visa Program is continuing as usual for fiscal year 2013 and fiscal year 2014.”
While Congress has been discussing changes to immigration policy through new immigration bills, President Obama has not yet signed any immigration bill into law.
As the legislative process for changes in immigration policy is ongoing, no comment has been made on whether the green card lottery will continue onto 2015.
Just last year, at least 8 million foreigners submitted a green card application through the green card lottery. Only 55,000 green card applications were able to obtain a green card for themselves, their spouses, and their children.
The green card lottery is extremely popular, and foreigners would be very disappointed if the lottery program had been removed.
One green card lottery winner from Ethiopia said, “In my country, whole cities wait to hear the results of this lottery. I can’t believe they would take it away.”
The Diversity Visa Lottery Program, which issues winners a U.S. green card, started in 1995. Since then, thousands of foreigners have been granted immigrant visas and green cards.
One New Jersey House Representative, Donald Payne Jr. supported the continuance of the green card lottery program saying, “Diversity visas are one of the few ways people from Africa and the Caribbean can come to this country.” [I guess the Congressman doesn’t know about refugee resettlement and asylum—ed]
You know it’s a bad program if the Center for American Progress (read all about CAP here) wants desperately to save it!
Hereis what they say in an introduction to an informative “Infographic” (AN END TO DIVERSITY?—Ahhhhhh!):
The immigration reform bill currently being debated in the U.S. Senate, however, would eliminate the diversity-visa program and grant those who are eligible a small number of points in the new merit-based green-card allocations—explained in the infographic below. Without this visa category, immigration from certain low-sending regions would diminish further and would undermine the goal of welcoming immigrants from diverse backgrounds. The infographic below portrays the current distribution of diversity visas and highlights the disproportionate effect that the elimination of this category would have on migration from Africa.
Tell Rep. Payne that there are 100,000 plus Africans arriving in the US each year according to this useful graphic from CAP. Eliminating the Diversity Visa could knock that number down by 20,000, but they will surely be picked up through whatever changes are made to immigration by the Gang (unfortunately, you can count on that):
….saying they are “a threat to the long-term viability of the Jewish state.” Yes, they are! I don’t know why people don’t get this point. Mass migration will eventually bring down a country. It will happen more quickly in small countries like Israel or some European countries and more slowly in the US, but it will happen.
Here is my big question—-what is the third country to which these tens of thousands will be sent?
***Update June 8th*** Here is a reportthat says they will be deported to an African country.
We have already seen the erosion of the concept of legitimate refugee protection as in the case of Malta* where the US State Department took off Malta’s hands thousands of illegal (economic) migrants from Africa, transformed them into refugees and sent them to America.
I sure hope Obama didn’t make some deal when he visited Israel and that America is the third country they have in mind!
Israel’s new border fence. That isn’t an illegal alien, just a worker making repairs. Photo: Reuters
Israel plans to expel thousands of African refugees to an unidentified third country, according to a court document obtained Monday, in an initiative that has provoked concerns from human rights groups.
The program is an effort to confront one of Israel’s more persistent problems: What to do with some 60,000 African migrants – the majority from Eritrea and Sudan – who have illegally crossed the border into Israel from Egypt over the past eight years.
During a Supreme Court hearing on Sunday that questioned the legality of detaining asylum-seekers who entered Israel secretly, a government attorney said an agreement to resettle “infiltrators from Eritrea” had been reached with an unidentified third country, according to Reuters.
“There is an arrangement with one country, which will be an end-destination and not a transit point,” the lawyer said, according to a transcript provided by the Justice Ministry on Monday.
There are an estimated 35,000 Eritreans currently living illegally in Israel, but deporting them to their homeland, a state accused of torture last year by the UN human rights chief, is difficult under international law.
Resettling the migrants in another country could also raise legal issues. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees says resettlement can only be considered once refugee status has been granted – which Israel has not done – although exceptions can be made.
Under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, states are obligated not to send refugees to countries where they would face physical or political danger. It is unclear whether that requires the convention’s signatories, of which Israel is one, to monitor the refugees indefinitely after they are deported.
Making sure this won’t happen again, Israel builds a border fence!
While the fate of the migrants remains uncertain, Israel has taken rather dramatic steps to stem the influx in illegal immigration. Over the past year, Israel has constructed a barrier along its border with Egypt that has dramatically reduced the number of illegal arrivals. Israel is also incarcerating individuals who attempt to cross into the country while authorities determine whether they are eligible for refugee status.
He is right!
Israel’s plan to deport many of the estimated 60,000 migrants began in earnest in July of last year, when Netanyahu said the African migrants “are seen by many Israelis as a law and order issue and even a threat to the long-term viability of the Jewish state.”
So, what is the third country (one acceptable to the UN)?
For more on the problems Israel is having with illegal migrants, visit our category entitled‘Israel and refugees.’
* For the Malta policy started under the Bush State Department, go here for dozens of posts on the topic.
MINNEAPOLIS — The political awakening of Minnesota’s Somali community poses a conundrum for the DFL party. While Somali-Americans overwhelmingly vote Democratic, many appear to disagree with the party when it comes to gay rights.
That tension was on display Sunday, as the party considered a dispute between a Somali city council candidate and the openly gay incumbent he’s running against.
At the meeting, the party’s Constitution, Bylaws and Rules Committee upheld the party’s endorsement of Abdi Warsame, who’s running for a seat on the Minneapolis City Council.
That seat is currently held by Robert Lilligren, who’s been on the council nearly a dozen years. But Lilligren lost the DFL endorsement this year to Warsame after hundreds of Somali-Americans turned out at precinct caucuses in April, and came back to the party’s convention, giving Warsame overwhelming support. [We told you about the convention here.—-ed]
[….]
All 13 City Council wards in Minneapolis were redrawn last year as part of the post-census redistricting, and Lilligren’s ward changed substantially.Somali activists, led by Warsame, lobbied to have the borders moved so that as many East African voters as possible could be concentrated there.
Asylum-seekers of different nationalities queue during a rain storm outside the refugee office in Cape Town. The long queues have led to violent clashes between refugees and the police. photo: AP
They are having uprisings against refugees and asylum seekers (again!) in the country touted by the likes of Michelle Obama and US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a model country for equality and justice.
I’ve been meaning to write about the latest wave of violence for the last few days, but those refugee terrorist stories in the US and the UK have been distracting me.
As you read this latest information on a nearly three-year-old study (why report it now?) on xenophobia in the land of Mandela, remember whatever this country does going forward cannot be blamed on racist white people. The country is run by the black African National Congress. That is why every story uses the “xenophobia” charge. “Racism” doesn’t work when both the persecutors and the persecuted are the same race!
Johannesburg – The attitudes of South Africans to migrants may be softening, but research shows that one third of people canvassed still believe refugees should live in camps on the borders, and more than half say they still don’t want want refugees anywhere in the country.
More than a third of people canvassed also still associate migrants with crime, a quarter say they are ready to join forces to stop migrants operating a business in South Africa, and 41 percent are all for mandatory HIV testing of refugees.
While the researchers involved in the 2010 Southern African Migration Programme suggest that growing contact between migrants and South Africans may be having a positive effect on the attitudes of South Africans, they warn of an “unyielding cohort” willing to use violence to address the perceived migrant “threat”.
The article goes on to attempt to convince readers that conditions are improving and people are “softening” toward migrants who want what the South African constitution promises every person, which is everything—peace, security, a home, a job, an education (blah! blah! blah!). Then this:
But the study warned of an “unyielding cohort”, and said that unless there was a concerted effort to change attitudes, “migrants and refugees will continue to be soft targets of xenophobic discrimination in South Africa”.
The latest research showed that a quarter of respondents were ready to jointly prevent migrants from neighbouring countries from operating a business, and a similar number were also willing to prevent migrants from moving into their neighbourhoods. [Interesting to think about—do poor and middle class black South Africans have a greater desire for self-preservation then Americans, or Brits or Aussies?—ed]
Also, just less than half (41 percent) of black and white respondents believed migrants were carriers of disease. The same number also wanted mandatory HIV testing of refugees, and 18 percent said HIV treatment should not be afforded to refugees. [BTW, the US permits HIV positive and TB infected refugees to enter the US, and you (taxpayers) are paying for their treatment—ed]
“Globally, South Africa is still the country most opposed to immigration, where nearly 80 percent of citizens either support prohibition on the entry of migrants, or would like to place strict limits on it,” the study said. A quarter of South Africans wanted migrants deported regardless of their skills status, and 63 percent wanted electrified fences on borders.
More than 60 percent of respondents of all races also believed migrants took jobs away from locals.
We have dozens of posts on the “Rainbow Nation” going back several years. Read all about the post-apartheid immigration problems in South Africa (and the hypocrisy), here. This S.A. mess is a prime example of the political Left’s intellectual dishonesty—the inability or unwillingness to recognize the powerful human forces behind ethnic nationalism.
And, one more thing, if you think this doesn’t affect you, it does! The US (Australia too) is now taking refugees from South Africa and they aren’t the white asylum-seekers.
