Refugee resettlement is a major issue in several Minnesota races

Three Republicans have said they will work to stop or at least curtail further resettlement to the state if elected.

From Twin Cities Pioneer Press:

Some Republican candidates want to suspend refugee resettlement in Minnesota. Can they do that?

 

Minnesota has welcomed thousands of refugees since the federal resettlement process was set in 1980. So why does a trio of key Republicans up for election want to stop the program now?

Well, it depends on whom you ask.

Jim Newberger, Jeff Johnson and Jim Hagedorn (Courtesy photos)
Jim Newberger, Jeff Johnson, Jim Hagedorn

Jeff Johnson, Jim Newberger and Jim Hagedorn have each said they will ask the federal government to pause refugee resettlement in Minnesota if elected Tuesday. And they’ve each made it a key issue in their campaigns.

Johnson, who is running for governor, said he is concerned about how much it costs taxpayers, as well as high unemployment rates among Somali men.

Hagedorn, who is running for U.S. House in the 1st Congressional District, claims refugees are poorly vetted and pose a threat to national security.

Newberger, a candidate for U.S. Senate, alleges that some refugees don’t want to follow American law.

The Democrats running against them support the state’s openness to refugees, arguing that they strengthen local communities. Immigration experts and advocates say that Republicans’ opposition to the program is purely political and misses the benefits the newcomers provide.

The story goes on to tell us that all the Democrats running in the state have spoken out in favor of more refugees for the state claiming that the refugees have benefited the state by bringing cultural diversity and that the refugees fill cheap labor needs (of course that last is my phrase).

More here.

As for the question: Can they stop resettlement if elected?

I’m not going to wander in to the legal weeds on that. There is still a lawsuit pending in Tennessee on the issue of State’s Rights that holds some hope for relief.

Suffice it to say, if Minnesotans elect these outspoken Republicans, and they forcefully take their concern to the President and his US State Department, the flow could be diverted away from Minnesota for now (as long as Trump is in the White House).

Of course the open borders Leftists (and the federal resettlement agencies) will say that its the ‘unwelcoming’ attitude in the state that requires the slowdown in placement there.  (Code for calling you racists!).

I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no easy legal avenue that would allow Minnesotans to take a break from the contentiousness there now.

However, I know for sure if enough Minnesotans make enough political noise and elect candidates willing to speak as strongly as these three, you have a fighting chance of saving taxpayer dollars, staying safe, and maintaining some control of who is placed*** in your state by Washington and federal resettlement contractors.

In other words—there is no rest for the weary!

*** Of course, as Minnesota knows all too well, secondary migrants are moving in from other states to be with their own ethnic ‘community’ there and there is no way to stop that migration.

Pittsburgh Mayor Peduto refused to meet the President yesterday

Surely you know all about Democrat Mayor Bill Peduto shunning the President and his family when they went to Pittsburgh yesterday to pay their respects to those murdered in the synagogue attack last Saturday.  Here is one of many stories about the Mayor’s snub.

And, here is Peduto with Chris Matthews:

 

 

By the way, the Rabbi, who was leading services on Saturday when the attack happened, welcomed the President saying “he is my President.”

So, what does this have to do with RRW?

Let’s take a trip down memory lane!

Mayor Bill Peduto was one of 18 mayors who signed a 2015 letter to then President Obama telling the President that 10,000 Syrian refugees for America in the upcoming fiscal year was too few and they wanted Obama to ultimately admit 100,000.

The letter was organized by Cities for Action which says it is: “A coalition of city governments who stand in support of stronger cities through immigration action.”

As you know, President Trump is permitting very few Syrians to enter the US at the present time.

If you missed it in 2015, here are the 18 mayors pressing Obama for more Syrian refugees for their cities:

Ed Pawlowski, Mayor of Allentown, PA
Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Mayor of Baltimore, MD
Martin J. Walsh, Mayor of Boston, MA
James Diossa, Mayor of Central Falls, RI
Mark Kleinschmidt, Mayor of Chapel Hill, NC
Rahm Emanuel, Mayor of Chicago, IL
Edward Terry, Mayor of Clarkston, GA
Nan Whaley, Mayor of Dayton, OH
Domenick Stampone, Mayor of Haledon, NJ
Pedro E. Segarra, Mayor of Hartford, CT
Eric Garcetti, Mayor of Los Angeles, CA
Betsy Hodges, Mayor of Minneapolis, MN
Bill de Blasio, Mayor of New York City, NY
Jose Torres, Mayor of Paterson, NJ
William Peduto, Mayor of Pittsburgh, PA
Javier Gonzales, Mayor of Santa Fe, NM
Francis G. Slay, Mayor of St. Louis, MO
Stephanie A. Miner, Mayor of Syracuse, NY

Some posts on that campaign by the leftwing open-borders mayors, especially Pittsburgh’s Mayor Peduto, worth revisiting:

18 US Mayors tell Obama: We want MORE Syrian (Muslim) refugees!

Pittsburgh letter writer: Mayor is wrong to invite Syrian refugees to city

ACT for America launches citizen action campaign urging 18 mayors to re-think their demand for more Syrian refugees

Pittsburgh, PA Mayor Peduto: Bring us Syrian Muslims!

 

And, a few additional posts on Pittsburgh:

Pittsburgh: Jewish agency and Islamic Center working together to bring more Syrians to the city

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial: Are there holes in US refugee vetting process?

Pittsburgh: Refugees placed in dangerous housing complex….

Jewish refugee resettlement agency: Let’s bring Rohingya Muslims to Pittsburgh (to increase diversity!)

Pittsburgh at “tipping point” as refugee population mushrooms

Pittsburgh working hard to “welcome” refugees

More on refugee mental health issues from Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh: World Refugee Day brought out the diversity, but few Americans

Pittsburgh Catholic Bishop defends Catholic Charities and calls a meeting

And, there are more, but you get the idea!

Italy: Sale of Christian chapel to a Muslim group will be blocked

“Centuries of history risk disappearing if Islamisation, which up until now has been underestimated, gains the upper hand.”

(Matteo Salvini)

 

They are fighting hard in Italy to save Western Civilization.  We just hope it isn’t too late.

From Reuters:

ROME (Reuters) – Italy’s far-right League party intervened on Sunday to block efforts by a Muslim association to turn a former hospital chapel into a mosque.

The Muslim group last week made the highest offer for the chapel in the northern city of Bergamo at an auction organized by a local hospital, outbidding the Romanian Orthodox Church which had been using the building for its religious services.

map Bergamo

But the project proved short-lived, with League leaders in the wealthy Lombardy region, which includes Bergamo, announcing they would halt the sale by using a 2004 law that enables them to intervene and safeguard cultural sites.

“I would never put a Church on sale and I am amazed that the hospital management did not realize what a sensitive issue this is,” Lombardy President Attilio Fontana, a League politician, wrote on Twitter.

“However, we will exercise our right of first refusal (for the sale) and there will be no space for any appeal,” he added.

Salvini grim
Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini

His decision means the region must now buy the property.

League leader Matteo Salvini warned earlier this year that Italian culture and society risked being eradicated by Islam. “Centuries of history risk disappearing if Islamisation, which up until now has been underestimated, gains the upper hand,” he said in a statement.

More here.

There is a discussion in the Reuters story about the demographic change in Italy.

The story suggests that the Muslim population is still relatively small, but we know that the size doesn’t have to grow that much before demands for religious accommodation begin.

Mosques become a place around which Muslim communities build (even if there aren’t many practicing Muslims in the area when the mosque is first opened).

See my ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive here.

UN to Trump: You must let them in!

Here we go again!

The United Nations is demanding that we follow international law and let those fleeing violence in their Central American countries (not a criteria for granting asylum) into the US.  What happened with that supposed effort to tell Mexico to grant them asylum—that is what international law says!

The first safe country asylum seekers reach is where they must ask for asylum.

Clearly the UN is endorsing the concept of “asylum shopping” a term used around the world where migrants are on the hunt for their best deal.

But, you know all of that.

The caravan is an anti-Trump public relations stunt in the run-up to the midterm elections and it seems the whole world is in on it.

Here is Voice of America (with a photo of the starving mass of humanity!):

UN: Countries Must Allow People at Risk to Request Asylum

 

migrant caravan sleepers
If VOA was trying to get sympathy for the marchers, this photo is a poor choice!  Just saying!

 

GENEVA —
The U.N. refugee agency is urging Washington to allow people fleeing persecution and violence, including those who are traveling with the Central American caravan, to request asylum on U.S. territory.

U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to prevent a caravan of thousands of immigrants from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador from entering the United States. The Pentagon has announced plans to send hundreds of troops to the border in what is described as a support role.

The U.N. refugee agency will not weigh in on whether it is legal for a country to close its borders to refugees and asylum seekers. But it says international law clearly states any person whose life may be in danger has the right to seek asylum and benefit from international protection.

What you see happening with gobbledygook in that previous paragraph is a strategy to make you think that every person on the move anywhere is a legitimate refugee.  We aren’t there yet, but the UN is driving public opinion in that direction.

There has to be a reason for “danger,” generalized danger is not a reason for granting asylum.  To be granted asylum a person must prove that he or she would be persecuted for race, religion, political views if returned to one’s home country.  Running from gang violence or poor job prospects does not make someone a refugee!

Andrej Mahecic
UN spokesman Andrej Mahecic says there are security risks for the migrants as they travel through Mexico.  Well gee, is that our problem? The UN can simply and easily get them back to their homes. (If they were really that concerned.)

“Our position globally is that the individuals who are fleeing persecution and violence need to be given access to territory and protection including refugee status and determination procedure. And, if the people who are fleeing persecution and violence enter Mexico, they need to be provided access to the Mexican asylum system and those entering the United States need to be provided access to the American asylum system,” he said.

But to get to the US they must pass through Mexico!

So that (above) tells me that any migrant caravan marchers who didn’t ask for asylum in Mexico when they crossed in to that country are admitting they aren’t asylum seekers after all.

Hence when they reach the US border they will all be illegal aliens and we can keep them out!

Mahecic keeps trying to send his message:

He said it is urgent to stabilize the situation, to provide proper reception and to improve basic conditions for people on the move. In regard to people seeking asylum, he says their international protection needs must be properly assessed before any decision is taken on their return or deportation.

More here.

Remember that Mahecic and his bosses are trying to drive public opinion world wide to their view that migration is a human right.  If they succeed then obviously that spells the end of the concept of national sovereignty.

Trump’s America First! message is completely antithetical to the UN’s objective, thus their on-going effort to destroy him.

Don’t you just feel like telling the UN to shut up! Of course, using only non-violent means by cutting off their funds entirely!

Trump has a plan to stop the migrant caravan, will announce Tuesday

I have to say: this is the newest news I’m seeing.  Since the whole issue is in flux (and perhaps more so after the shooting at the synagogue in Pittsburgh where we heard the shooter may have been angry over the caravan as well as HIAS’s role in it), things could change any minute.

Screenshot (1502)
Ready or not, here we come! Photo: Time magazine   http://time.com/5435748/border-patrol-wont-shoot-caravan-kirstjen-nielsen/

 

But, here is what Neil Munro reported at Breitbart yesterday:

WashPo: Trump Will Announce Anti-Caravan Plan on Tuesday

 

President Donald Trump will announce Tuesday how he will use his extraordinary powers over legal immigration to block the caravan and other asylum-seeking economic migrants, according to the Washington Post.

“A draft of the proposal reviewed by The Washington Post says the president can use his authority under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to declare certain migrants ineligible for asylum for national security reasons,” the Post reported.

The little-used powers are in Section 212(f) of U.S. law, at 8 U.S. Code § 1182:

Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

But pro-migration advocates say that 212(f) clause cannot stop illegal migrants from jumping over the border wall into the United States and then use U.S. and international law to apply for asylum.

These advocates say migrants — even those with invalid cases — are protected by the constitution’s Fith Amendment once they get onto U.S. territory. The clause — “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” — allows migrants to get court hearings, despite Presidential opposition, the advocates say.

However, U.S. law does not require that asylum applicants be allowed to stay in the United States while their legal claims are considered by the courts, countered Christopher Hajec, the litigation director for the Immigration Law Reform Institute.

President Trump has the legal authority to deport classes of migrants to an outside location where they can safely live until their appeals are heard, he said. Migrants would be allowed to appeal for asylum in court cases conducted via video, he told Breitbart News. “Some might get asylum,” he added.

Much more here.

Remember readers that asylum is the other side of the refugee coin.  The only difference is the means of getting here.

If we fly them they are called refugees, if they get here on their own steam they must apply for asylum (refugee status).  Then, if the migrant is granted asylum, he/she gets the benefits that refugees we transport here receive.