At the State Department hearing this past Wednesday in Washington, representatives from contractors US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Church World Service and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society all praised the US State Department for the expeditious arrival (so far) of refugees in FY2013.
So, just now as I checked the Palestinianarrivals at WRAPS, I see that, for only being a little over half way into the fiscal year, we have brought a larger number of refugees than usually arrive by this time. So far, as of April 30th, we have brought in 39,778 refugees. We could easily hit 80,000 at that rate which would be higher than previous years.
Waad Ramadan Alwan. His fingerprints were on an IED in Iraq, but he got into the US as a refugee!
Here are the top 5 nationalities of refugees resettled so far:
Iraqis: 11,066 (The State Dept. knows how many of these are Muslims and how many are Christians! See Muslim share of immigrant population growing, here)
Burmese: 9,336
Bhutanese (really Nepal): 5,067
Somalis: 4,387 (This number is so high because they re-opened family reunification for Somalis. It had been closed beginning in 2008 due to high levels of fraud detected. At this rate, 2013 will come close to the highest Bush years.)
Cubans: 2,199 (could Florida’s wealthy Cubans be pushing Senator Marco Rubio?)
Hurry! Someone tell Senator Rand Paul! Just now as I searched for a photo of one of Bowling Green, Kentucky’s Iraqi refugee terrorists, I came across a storyonly a few weeks old where Paul is asking, why the heck are we bringing so many Iraqis? Maybe Senator Paul doesn’t know that S.744 (The Gang of Eight plus Grover bill) will make it easier and provide more money for refugees and asylum seekers to get into the US! He could do something about that!—strip all refugee/asylum provisions from the bill and hold separate hearings on the program!
If you are a new reader here, scroll back through the previous few days for stories on Somali, Chechen, and Uzbek refugee terrorists in the US (and Palestinian immigrant terrorists too!).
In a must-read letter to the US State Department a 25-year veteran of the International Rescue Committee (one of the largest of the top nine federal contractors) calls for a moratorium on refugee resettlement until the ORR (Office of Refugee Resettlement) and the volags (contractors) get their act together.
Boston on our minds. The IRC closed its Boston office in 2009. But, several other refugee contractors are still doing business there.
Consider this long-time Boston resident’s comments about fraud and lax security screening in the light of two posts we have written in the last two days, here and here. It all rings true.
Editor: This is one more, but, by far the most damning, of the testimony we have been publishing in advance of this Wednesday’s hearing at the US State Department. All other testimonies we have received arearchived here.
(Emphasis below is mine)
Ms. Anne Richard
Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration
US State Department
Washington, DC. 20520
April 27, 2013
Re: Federal Register Public Notice 8241 Comment Request
Dear Ms Richard:
I worked for the IRC in several capacities from 1980 until 2004 (caseworker, deputy director of the Boston office). In 2004, amid increasing budget constraints, I volunteered for a lay off. At the time, my heart was still into the work I loved and I continued to volunteer for two additional years, spending 3 days a week working on the family reunification program, in which I was considered an “expert.”
Early on, I grew familiar with the fraud that was rampant throughout the program, from the refugees themselves (sometimes forgivable), the overseas OPE’s (not forgivable) and on up to the UN (most unforgivable). Most of my colleagues were also aware of it, and while they often joked about it, almost no one did anything to change or challenge it.
In our work, it was all about “getting the numbers,” often at the expense of legitimate screening for “real“ refugees.
To be honest, I never turned a blind eye to obvious fraud, but had been instructed to give all refugee applicants “the benefit of the doubt.” Yet there were many applications about which I had serious reservations. Some of them were classically laughable ( “I don’t remember my mother’s name… let me make a phone call..”). There were more than a few applicants that I rejected (or referred to another Volag that might not have had the same concerns).
Being directly “in the field,” it’s often difficult to objectively see outside the perimeters of our day to day work.
My major concern was helping people re-unite with close and legitimate family members whose relationship I believed to exist in fact. I can’t tell you how many times, after resettlement that those relationships were revealed to be fraudulent. Sometimes the reasons were understandable from a human kindness point of view ( claiming an orphaned niece as a sister), but often those “relationships” were simple financial transactions.
In my long years at the IRC, I assisted many ethnic groups. I can say without reservation that the Somalis were among the most duplicitous.There was a time when I suggested that they swear on the Quran before signing the affidavit of relationship. Most of the time they would flee and not return. That practice was discontinued, being deemed politically incorrect.
All of us in the field know just how weak the “security screening” was. It’s mostly a very poor and ineffective system of simple name checks from countries that for the most part keep no records.
I personally had some concerns about some Iraqi refugees admitted in the mid 90’s.
One of them went on to become implicated in the Oklahoma City bombings. Being a volag worker, I was very protective of him but, having spent hours with him in the emergency room of a mental hospital. I still have not been able to say to myself that he was not involved.
It is time for a moratorium on refugee resettlement until ORR and the volags get their act together.
Refugee resettlement affects every community it touches, from Lewiston ME, Minneapolis MN, to Kansas City KS.
The Volags hide behind their time frame responsibility fences. While I agree that they do not have funding to do much beyond initial basic placement, this is hardly adequate for a successful program, when most refugees end up being on long term public assistance.
The present program is really a “resettle and dump on the community” thing. This is not fair to the communities, the refugees or the volags.
ORR has yet to release long overdue federally mandated reports that show welfare dependency rates or employment figures. Some people say that ORR may have something to hide. I tend to agree.
Refugees are not assimilating for the most part. (some argue that refugees should not “assimilate” but “integrate” but , to me, it‘s all the same, since the majority do neither.). The State Dept continues to fund MAA’s (ethnic based organizations) which only keep immigrant and refugee communities separate and ghettoized.
As someone who spent most of my adult lifetime working in this field, I ask for a serious second look at the current program.
After 9/11, I was, as always, very vocal in defense of refugees and the US refugee program , convinced that no one admitted under the program could possibly be or become a terrorist. Regrettably, my mind has changed.
I now believe that we need a moratorium on continued resettlement until such time as ORR can get its house in order and present a restructured program that can provide safe haven for those truly in need and at the same time guarantee that this currently flawed program does not admit persons unworthy of our kind-heartedness or who are unwilling to become a positive part of our national fabric.
I do think the US should continue to receive some refugees, but it needs to be a much smaller and very carefully monitored program. The current one is a huge mess and a danger to our security and a detriment to our economy and society.
Respectfully,
Michael Sirois
No need for me to say anything further, except maybe to remind readers that S.744 (the Gang of Eight bill in the Senate) provides more funding for resettlement contractors and makes it easier for a greater number and variety of refugees/asylum seekers to gain admission to the US.
About the photo caption: We wrote about the closure of the IRC Boston office here in 2009. Visit it!
Here is an amendment to S.744 that is probably sending the refugee industry into conniption-fits. They don’t want any more security screening that slows the flow of third-worlders into the US. If it fails to pass it will send yet another signal that S.744 will endanger our security.
Graham, Kirk, McCain and Rubio yukking it up in Libya (we did good!) one year before the murder of Americans at Benghazi. Photo perhaps unrelated to this post, but it’s here because it infuriates me! Photo credit: AP
And, you have to laugh because, should it pass, half the countries we are importing refugees from now would have to be on the list—Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Russia, former Soviet Union countries, even Burma (Rohingya Muslims).
Be sure to see ourprevious post here about Graham’s other amendment that is clearly in response to the Boston Marathon bomber brothers’ faux asylum claim.
Go here to see the list of all the amendments (hat tip: John). The list now has a notation about which have passed/failed or been withdrawn.
Here is Graham’s amendment #3:
Purpose: To require additional security screening for certain aliens.
Additional Security Screening
The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall establish and maintain a list of countries or regions that, in the Secretary’s opinion based upon information related to national security, represents a threat, or contains groups or organizations that represent a threat, to the national security of the United States.
Upon determining that any alien or alien dependent spouse or child is or was a citizen or long-term resident of any such country or region, the Secretary shall conduct an additional security screening to ensure that the alien or alien dependent spouse or child is not a member of or otherwise affiliated with any terrorist or similar group or otherwise presents a threat to the national security of the United States.
The changing face of Norway—Asylum child waiting in line. Photo : Julien Harneis
Norway’s Refugee Dilemma!
Holy cow! It’s not just stunning that many towns are saying NO!, it is stunning that they are even given a choice in Norway of whether they want any refugees at all! Even with our Constitutional tradition of “States Rights,” American cities and states are not given an opportunity to say to the US State Department—sorry we can’t afford more refugees!
Aftenposten writes that only 64 of the 368 municipalities agreed to accept as many refugees as the government wants. 27 municipalities simply reject, while 204 municipalities receive less than the government has requested. 73 municipalities have not even responded to the request of Integration and Diversity Directorate, IMDI.
Later in the article we learn this about who is going to Norway—mostly Muslim young men.
The refugee and asylum seeker definitions are similar to the ones used by the US.
There are two main groups of refugees who come to Norway. The first group consists of asylum seekers who come to Norway on their own initiative, and the second group consists of resettlement refugees. Resettlement refugees are refugees who cannot return to their home country and cannot be granted residence in the country in which they are staying. Resettlement refugees’ cases are processed by and, they are recognised by, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) before they arrive in Norway.The Norwegian parliament, the Storting, stipulates a quota for the number of resettlement refugees Norway accepts each year. In 2010, Norway accepted 1,300 resettlement refugees. Most of the 2010 quota was reserved for Eritrean, Afghan, Palestinian, Burmese and Iranian refugees. Minimum 55 per cent were to be women and girls, while 15 per cent of the places were for vulnerable female refugees.
Also, there are asylum seekers who come to Norway on their own initiative and apply for protection from the Norwegian authorities. In the end of September, the Directorate of Immigration (UDI) had received 7,299 asylum applications. Many of these applicants come from countries badly affected by war or previous conflicts. The biggest groups of asylum seekers come from Eritrea, Somalia and Afghanistan. Not everyone who applies for asylum in Norway is entitled to protection or a residence permit.
[….]
A total of 163 500 persons with a refugee background were living in Norway on 1 January 2012. These persons accounted for 3.3 per cent of the Norwegian population, and 30 per cent of all immigrants in Norway. The two largest groups were persons with a refugee background from Iraq and Somalia.
[….]
Male refugees were overrepresented, with around 10 200 more men than women as at 1 January 2012.
Michelle Malkin is on a roll. Yesterday, she reminded us again of Grover Norquist’s connection to Islamists, like the now imprisoned Alamoudi. My title above is hers.
I wonder if Norquist sends Alamoudi gift packages to his prison cell?
Someone please tell Senator Marco Rubio that his buddy Norquist is an open borders pusher because he is also an Islamistwhich some on the right have been pointing out for going on ten years. But, this is one more case where the mainstream media is doing a great disservice to its viewers and readers by never mentioning the controversy.
Human Rights First, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, LaRaza—Norquist is all yours now!
By the way, Norquist even has a connection to refugee resettlement. As early as 2007, we reported on Norquist pushing for Iraqi refugees to be admitted to the US, here. See our entire Norquist archive here, and a more extensive archive on Norquist here at my other blog. (Just in case some real investigative reporter for a mainstream outlet is interested in helping America.)
For years, I’ve warned about the GOP’s Grover Norquist problem. Just last week, he was front and center at the Gang of 8′s amnesty press conference — despite longtime concerns expressed on this blog and by national security advocates and activists about his dangerous Islamist alliances and progressive proclivities.
Now we learn that Norquist’s convicted terrorist pal and former funder, Abdurahman Alamoudi, was the first president of the radical mosque attended by the Boston bomber brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev…
[….]
Alamoudi, as I’ve documented repeatedly here, provided seed money to Norquist’s Muslim outreach effort during the Bush years.
Malkin flashes back to 2003:
Norquist’s lobbying firm is registered as a lobbyist for Alamoudi. Alamoudi provided seed money for Norquist’s Islamic Institute, which shares space with Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform group. The institute is run by Alamoudi deputy and former AMC government relations director Khaled Saffuri. Saffuri and Norquist have worked closely with Bush senior adviser Karl Rove to give radical Muslim activists access to the White House.
Read it all, there is much more and lots of links!
Hey guys, where are you? We have had some great work done in the last few days by Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin.
Actually the guys are out there too—hereis Andy McCarthy on the jizya. This is a great time to educate Americans about Islamic supremacism.
OOPS! One more thing! To my knowledge Grover has never apologized for his association with Alamoudi.
