Category: Australia

Obama's damn Australia 'refugee' swap deal must be killed!

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I thought this thing was dead until I happened across this story at the Financial Review by Dougal Robinson from Melbourne, Australia.
The nerve of Aussie’s suggesting that if the US reneged on the deal, this might strain relations with Australia.

turnbull-trump
Is Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull blackmailing Donald Trump into taking 1000 of Australia’s detained FAILED asylum seekers, or is a “research fellow” running his mouth at the Financial Review?

See our previous posts on the insane deal, here (posts dated 2016 and 2017).
Remember when you read this that we are talking about illegal aliens who attempted to get to Australia, but that country refused to admit them to their mainland and they are in detention elsewhere.

The Australians did not want these mostly Muslim illegal aliens!  They were not granted asylum in Australia! So why are they our problem?

This has got to stop! There should be no DEALS involving refugees where our US State Department wants something from another country, but those getting shafted and suffering the consequences are local communities that must put up with unwanted aliens moving to their towns!
Here is what the Financial Review said three days ago.  Damn it! These are NOT REFUGEES, they failed Australia’s asylum process!  (Emphasis below is mine, you can tell I’m outraged when I write in red!)

Australian diplomats in Washington face an unenviable assignment: to convince the incoming Trump administration that more than 1000 refugees on Manus Island and Nauru should be resettled in the United States. While the Australian government wants the planned refugee resettlement to occur, circumstances will force it to consider the importance of this issue relative to many other topics needing discussion with the new administration.

The refugee resettlement deal, announced by the Turnbull government and Obama administration after November’s presidential election, faces growing opposition among members of Mr Trump’s party. Three congressional Republicans have already stated their opposition to the deal. If more Republicans express similarly critical views in coming days and weeks, it will become increasingly difficult for Mr Trump to carry out an Obama-era agreement that seems at odds with his comments on refugees and Muslim immigration. [Note that Obama’s State Dept. made the deal AFTER the election!—ed]

brian-babin-in-chair
Author Dougal Robinson calls Rep. Brian Babin a “hard-right” Congressman and says he (a “junior member of Congress”) surely does not have Trump’s ear. Babin called the deal “madness” just last week.

Brian Babin, a hard-right Texas congressman and member of the House Freedom Caucus, said he was “confident President-elect Trump will do everything in his power to put an immediate stop” to a refugee deal he described as “madness”. It is improbable that Babin, a junior member of Congress first elected in 2014, was foreshadowing the internal thinking of incoming Trump administration officials who are invariably focused on other priorities.

Of more concern are the other outspoken opponents of the deal: Senator Chuck Grassley and Representative Bob Goodlatte, influential Republicans who have spent several decades in Congress….

[….]

Australia will in all likelihood be asked to do much more than foot the bill for vetting and resettling the refugees in the United States, and accepting US-controlled refugees from Central America into Australia as currently planned will do little to assuage the new administration. A new commitment could be needed on one of Trump’s priorities, such as increased Australian engagement in the fight against ISIS. In these circumstances, the Trump administration could sell the resettlement as a pre-done agreement and point to an enhanced Australian alliance commitment. Security concerns could be alleviated by references to comprehensive vetting by Homeland Security officials and Australia’s strict standards on border control. [So Australia wouldn’t help fight ISIS unless we take 1,000 mostly Muslims that Australia doesn’t want!—ed]

Confirming that Trump can do what he wants with refugee admissions, this sounds like a threat from the Financial Review (or whoever they are writing this for!):

A final scenario is that this becomes a totemic issue due to Trump’s focus on immigration and ISIS. If several more Republicans in Congress, especially the senior and influential types, speak out against the deal then its fate may be sealed. As President, Trump can unilaterally scrap the deal without congressional approval. (Professor Niels Frenzen, an immigration expert at the University of Southern California school of law, notes that overseas refugee admissions are “pretty much subject to the unfettered discretion of the President”.) Such a rejection would be humiliating and problematic for Australia, a loyal US ally, and dominate evolving discussions of the alliance.

Sounds like blackmail to me!
More here.
Once again, Obama is leaving Trump with a foreign relations problem wholly of Obama’s making!

Rep. Brian Babin says Donald Trump will stop that insane refugee deal with Australia

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

babin-victory-photo
Rep. Brian Babin called the Australia deal, where we would take ‘refugees’ who failed in their asylum claims to Australia, and place them instead into your American towns, “madness.”

If you don’t know what deal I’m talking about, click here.
From The Sydney Morning Herald (hat tip: Richard at Blue Ridge Forum):

Donald Trump “will do everything in his power” to halt the refugee deal between Australia and the US, according to a hardline Texan congressman who is confident no resettlements will ever take place from Manus Island or Nauru.

More than two months after the agreement between outgoing President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was announced, slow progress on applications and lengthy security vetting by the US Department of Homeland Security is raising fear among those held in the Australian offshore immigration detention centres, ahead of Mr Trump’s inauguration on January 20.

More here.
By the way, it was this news that sent me to the ‘Processing Country’ maps that I wrote about earlier to see if we processed anyone in from Australia lately. I didn’t see any.

Iranian wants refugee status in Australia because he is an alcoholic

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

This is definitely a new angle.
Since, according to law, one must prove that one will be persecuted if returned home, this man is telling an Australian court that he could be persecuted, even executed, because he can’t kick the habit. And, has asked for refugee status in Australia.
One of my first thoughts was, so why would Australia even want to keep a drunk Muslim?

bermondsey-square-hotel
Sharia creep in the UK, the Muslim owner of this hotel reportedly has banned alcohol and pork. http://shoebat.com/2014/11/16/hotel-adopts-sharia-law-bans-sale-alcohol-pork/

We might be getting a few chuckles from this news, but everyone should be thinking about what Sharia law means as it creeps out of the Middle East/Africa and in to the West.
From the UK Daily Mail (hat tip: Joanne):

An ‘alcoholic’ Iranian man could be granted refugee status in Australia over fears he will be executed for drinking booze if he goes home.

The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, told the Federal Circuit Court that he had already committed two alcohol-related offences in Iran – where drinking is illegal for Muslims under Sharia law.

He argued that he would struggle to kick his habit if he is deported, despite knowing he could be put to death by the Iranian authorities if he is caught drinking alcohol again.

The man told the court that he had twice been in trouble in Iran for alcohol-related offences, in 2009 and 2012, The Australian reported.

More here.
In case you missed it, an Islamic terror attack was foiled in Melbourne in the days before Christmas, see here.
For more on Australia, see our Australia category by clicking here.

Fox News' Bill O'Reilly calls for one year moratorium on refugee resettlement

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I happened to catch his talking points memo last night.
bill-oreilly
However, he didn’t have the story exactly accurate on Australia.  He praised that country for its tough stance on illegal migrants as if it’s always been that way. But for those interested in digging in to the facts there, see our category on Australia (184 posts going back 8 years) and see that their hardline stance is relatively recent and that the country foolishly admitted, for years, large numbers of Muslim migrants that are now pretty aggressive.
O’Reilly also mentioned the strange deal that the Obama Administration is advancing where we would take off Australia’s hands hundreds (at least) of Australia’s rejected asylum seekers (our coverage here) presently housed in off-shore detention facilities.
However, here is the part we liked best in O’Reilly’s statement.  Thanks to Media Matters for tracking this type of story more closely than some on our side do.
 
screenshot-77
 
You can see 3 + minutes of the statement by O’Reilly by clicking here.  (I see they left out the Australia portion.) You may not like some of O’Reilly’s prescriptions for dealing with our illegal aliens living in the US.

Cut the crap! Australia 'refugee' deal is about the Australian public not wanting any more Muslim migrants

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

….while Obama is willing to take all he can get!
Look at this New York Times story on the supposed deal the Obama Administration has made with Australia to take its rejected asylum seekers off their hands! And, look at the UN twisting like a pretzel as it tries to explain why this insane deal is even being considered.
What it all boils down to is this: the Australian public (the voters) are sick and tired of all the Muslim boat people trying to break into Australia (so they have been parked offshore), but Australian political leaders, by agreeing to take Central American (phony refugees) in Costa Rica, are banking on being able to sell the public on most likely Catholics (or Christians of some sort) rather than the Muslims whose asylum cases were rejected!
This is basically a swap of illegal aliens! Don’t believe the UN that this is a “one-off!”  Check out Malta, the European island nation that sends the US its overflow African illegal alien boat people, a travesty we have been writing about for years.

The Muslim boat people held in detention in Australian offshore facilities have had their asylum claims rejected.  So neither those on Nauru or those in Costa Rica are legitimate (by definition) refugees! 

For background, before you read on, see Grassley and Goodlatte blast Obama, here.  There is a list of the nationalities of the failed asylum seekers, most come from Muslim countries.

New York Times (hat tip: heymister24):

SYDNEY, Australia — For years, the United Nations’ refugee agency told Australia that its policy of banishing asylum seekers to remote Pacific island detention centers was illegal.

samantha-power
This is Obama’s Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. This “deal” sounds like something she wholeheartedly approved. What will Nikki Haley do about it (or other similar deals, this is not a one-off) when she gets to the UN? Will she say No! We don’t know, but one thing we can be sure of, Haley will likely dress more professionally than Power!

Now, the agency is working with Australia in what both sides call an unusual, not-to-be-replicated agreement to send some of those refugees across the world, to be resettled in the United States.

The deal, announced by Australia last week, is aimed at shutting down two offshore detention facilities — one on the island nation of Nauru and the other on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea — where hundreds of people are housed in what rights groups describe as deplorable conditions. The United States has agreed to take some of them; how many, and how quickly, remains unclear.

[….]

In an interview this week, Volker Turk, an assistant high commissioner with the United Nations’ refugee agency, said his staff would help with the screening and resettlement of refugees but only as a “one-off” to allay their suffering. “We think there is an urgent imperative to find a humanitarian way out of this otherwise very, very, complex conundrum,” he said by telephone from Canberra, the Australian capital.

What the heck is the “complex conundrum?” 

Either they are legitimate refugees that Australia should admit to the mainland or they are illegal aliens who should be returned to where they came from.
THEY ARE NOT AMERICA’S PROBLEM EITHER WAY!
NYT continues:

“We do not in any way want to give the impression that we would continue supporting such types of mechanisms,” Mr. Turk said, referring to Australia’s offshore detention policy. “We, all of us, are very clear that this is a one-off, good offices, exceptional humanitarian type of involvement because we do not believe that the future of handling this lies in sending people to Manus Island and Nauru.”

[….]

Making the deal even more unusual, Australia has agreed to take in an unspecified number of Central American refugees who fled gang violence in their homelands.  [Fleeing gang violence is not a criteria for being designated a refugee!—ed]  The United Nations says there are an estimated 2,400 such people from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras who have been screened and recognized as refugees [Who “recognized” them?—ed]. The United States has long been reluctant to let them apply for asylum on its territory and only recently agreed to let the United Nations vet them at a processing center in Costa Rica.

I REPEAT, WHY ARE THE CENTRAL AMERICANS WHO FLED TO COSTA RICA OUR PROBLEM?
Legitimate asylum seekers are supposed to ask for asylum in the first safe country they get to, they are not supposed to be ‘asylum shopping’ for better deals! By doing this ‘one-time’ (ha! ha!) deal we set the precedent for many more to come!

Continue reading here.
If you want to learn more about Samantha Power, we have a lot, click here.