Iraqi man runs down daughter in Arizona, an honor killing attempt?

Update October 30th:  Father arrested in Atlanta, here.

Update October 29th:   Arizona Republic editorial says Muslims must speak out against honor killings.

Sure looks like it!     I wonder if these people are among the hundreds of Iraqis being resettled in Arizona—only their resettlement agency knows for sure!

From Yourwestvalley.com:

Peoria police are searching for a man they say ran down his 20-year-old daughter in a parking lot for becoming “too ‘westernized’ and … not living according to their traditional Iraq values.”

Noor Faleh Almaleki of Surprise was taken to a local hospital with life-threatening injuries, police said. Another woman, Amal Edan Khalaf, 43, of Surprise also was struck and is in the hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

[….]

Detectives from the Peoria Police Violent Crimes Unit, after talking with family and friends, learned Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, of Glendale was the driver, and that he is the father of Noor Faleh Almaleki. Those interviewed also told police he was with her as she had become too “westernized” and had made threats toward her.

Again, makes my point that many Muslims have no plans to assimilate in America.

Rochester, MN: Refugees see first snow

The timing of this story is perfect in light of Mr. Ralph Parker’s comment about why we don’t tell the good stories about refugees.  I had this article in my queue two days ago, but a reader sent it this morning and that reminded me to post it.   We have often joked on these pages about how the mainstream media writes a template story I have often called ‘refugees see first snow’ stories.   This one is literally one of those stories.

This is the general outline: refugees arrive in some frigid city from some southern clime; they are trying to adjust; there are many column inches devoted to telling about their horrible former lives, but then they see their first snow and they marvel at it.  Then everything is going to be just wonderful in America thanks to the good people in the resettlement business.

From the Twin Cities Daily Planet, a column by Doug McGill, begins:

Since Feras Alkaisi, his wife Sulaf, and their two young children moved here four months ago, they’ve experienced a lot of firsts – backyard barbecues, a casino (Treasure Island), carnival rides (at the Mall of America), watching football on TV, and last week, falling snow.

“I saw snow once before but it was on the ground and just a little bit,” Feras recalls. “I never saw snow falling through the air until last week.” He paused for a moment to take in the new memory, then a question occurred.

“Is it often cold in Minnesota ?”

Incidentally, there is mention in this article that the family was originally told they were going to Boston, but were, at the last minute, switched to Rochester, MN.  That’s because Boston is overloaded with refugees and the IRC resettlement office was closed there.

Back to my story, Rochester, MN is a “welcoming” city and many more refugees will be coming soon:

The 16 new Iraqi families in Rochester comprise 77 people, with another 100 or so Iraqi refugees planning to resettle in Rochester in the coming year, according to Catholic Charities, the local non-profit that handles refugee resettlement. Some 32,655 Iraqis have resettled in the U.S. in the past two years.

After many column inches devoted to telling the former tragic lives of the family comes this wrap-up:

Sipping Sulaf’s strong black coffee, his two children tucked into bed by 8 p.m., Feras relaxes on his living room sofa. He asks me to be sure that in this story he can publicly thank the local Catholic Charities office for resettling his family.

“They’ve done so much for us,” he says.

He smiles broadly as Sulaf brings out glasses of 7-Up to follow our coffee. But a weariness creeps into his voice as he tells his story of escape from war.

This is the sort of mushy reporting that requires the balancing that RRW provides!

Hints that everything is not peachy in Rochester.

This is an article from the same paper a week ago that says to me everyone is not so “welcoming” in Rochester.   The local Catholic Charities director deals with tough questions at a Kiwanis meeting by falling back to the usual guilt-trip the audience strategy.

When Mary Alessio gave a speech at the Kiwanis Club in Rochester last summer, she was shaken when she looked out at her audience and saw dozens of men who looked exactly like her father – row upon row of her father, one father per seat.

“My father’s a tough critic,” Alessio recalls, “and here I was giving a talk to a whole room filled with him.”

To make matters worse for her, Alessio was speaking that day about a topic she knew her father would ask some very demanding questions about – the resettlement of refugees from the world’s most troubled war zones to here in Rochester, Minnesota.

Alessio knows a lot about the subject because she is Director of Refugee Resettlement in Rochester for Catholic Charities, the not-for-profit agency that has resettled thousands of refugees from Somalia, Sudan, Cambodia, Laos, Iraq and other countries gutted by violence, war and famine over the years to this town.

Sure enough, when the Q & A started, one of her fathers out in the audience immediately raised his hand and fired away.

“We have enough problems taking care of people right here in the United States,” he demanded. “Why don’t we focus on solving that instead of taking in all these new people for a short time and then just dropping them?”

There’s no surefire answer to that question, as Alessio has discovered over the past five years, first as a case worker and then leading the agency in its basic daily work of guiding new refugee arrivals through a jam-packed 90-to-180 day resettlement process.

How does she answer—with the standard “welcoming/you should feel guilty for asking” response.

But the larger answer to why Rochester is home to so many refugees is Rochester itself. Because of its success at absorbing them, more have been attracted to come.*

[….]

At her Kiwanis speech, Alessio didn’t hesitate when answering her tough first question.

“We have to remember what our country was founded on,” she said. “We began as a home to immigrants. We were founded on the idea of welcoming the stranger. That’s what makes this country great.”

* Attracted to come?  The refugees don’t pick where they go anyway, it’s Catholic Charities calling the shots—not the refugees, not the city government, not the citizens of the neighborhoods where refugees are resettled,  not even the State Department (until a problem develops).

You can be sure I’ll be keeping an eye out for more news about refugees in Rochester!

American Conservative Union, CPAC, and why they didn’t defend free speech

I know this is getting away somewhat from the subject of refugees, but it’s not entirely so because we questioned way back in December of 2007 why the American Conservative Union’s, David Keene, was so intent on promoting the Kennedy bill which ultimately opened the door for more Iraqis to enter the US.   It didn’t strike us as a particularly conservative position in light of the tanking economy and our national security concerns.

And, we are interested because of our interest in Geert Wilders’ right to speak on issues considered by some to be politically incorrect as Judy just mentioned in her post earlier this morning.

We attended the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last February (here) to hear Wilders speak, but the speech really wasn’t at the CPAC meeting, it was just in the same hotel.  Now, all these many months later, Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch gives us more details on what actually happened at last year’s CPAC meeting.

I won’t go into what just happened this past weekend at the Western CPAC meeting, you can follow the links in Mr. Spencer’s post for that, but here is how Spencer describes how it came about last year that “conservative” organizers shut out Geert Wilders.

What does this have to do with jihad? Everything. The Ziegler video, with its depiction of Keene’s egregious behavior, gives a good opportunity to spotlight the failure of the conservative mainstream to deal with the jihad issue. David Keene is not only the head of the ACU, but also of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which I criticized at Newsweek last February for its Grover Norquist-mandated refusal to deal with the jihad or Islamic supremacism in any meaningful or effective way.

At the time I was interviewed by Newsweek, Pamela Geller was working tirelessly behind the scenes to secure a speaking slot for Geert Wilders at CPAC, but CPAC was dragging its feet. With that in mind, I told Newsweek that people were afraid to deal with this issue, and added at Jihad Watch that “Keene’s, or someone’s, priorities are seriously out of order. Wilders should be front and center at CPAC, and the defense of free speech its central theme.”

I didn’t know it at the time, but after I was interviewed by Newsweek and before their article appeared, Keene decided to honor Wilders at CPAC and give him an award. But when the Newsweek piece hit, with quotes from me as well as David Horowitz saying, “How is it possible that a conservative conference does not have a single panel on the threat from radical Islam?,” Keene was furious. He was so furious that he canceled the award for Wilders and refused to let him speak at all, saying he wasn’t going to look as if he was being pushed around by Robert Spencer. Suddenly a few remarks in Newsweek by David Horowitz and me were controlling David Keene’s world. Principles? Free speech? Jihad and Islamization? Pah. For Keene, it was just a schoolyard fight, and he was behaving like a schoolyard bully — as he does here with Ziegler.

Spencer also reminds us of the connection Keene’s pal, Grover Norquist, has to the Islamist movement in the US.    Follow Spencer’s links or search RRW for ‘Grover Norquist.’

With friends like these, who needs enemies.

Iraqi numbers don’t add up; how many are coming in FY2010?

Update:  Be sure to read the comments to this post because readers apparently ‘in the know’ have reported what the number is expected to be.

Over the last few days there have been a flurry of stories, apparently generated by the UN, saying that there have been 80,000 plus referrals of Iraqi refugees by UNHCR for resettlement to the West.  These reports indicate we (the US) have taken roughly 30,000 of those.  From AP:

GENEVA — More than 30,000 Iraqis have moved to the United States under a resettlement program that began in 2007 while much smaller numbers have gone to other countries, the U.N. refugee agency said Friday.

The big United States intake, which began with the program in 2007, came after Washington had been heavily criticized for taking in too few Iraqi refugees.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has recommended to the participating countries the names of 82,500 Iraqis who should be moved, but so far only 33,117 have been able go to their new homelands, said spokesman Andrej Mahecic.

Rounding off the numbers, that leaves about 50,000 in the pipeline and if it’s true that the US is taking 75% of the Iraqis who have applied, that means we would take 37,500 of those in the pipeline. Right?

However, in the Obama Administrations Report to Congress the ceiling for the whole region which includes Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Nepal (Bhutanese) is 35,000 (p. 49).  In order for us to meet our 5-year obligation to take 60,000 Bhutanese at least 12,000 of the 35,000 would be from Nepal. 

So, how many Iraqis is Obama promising to bring this year?   The UN seems to be suggesting they expect us to take around 37,500 (2500 more than our whole regional ceiling).  Does anyone know?

No jobs for refugees!

Meanwhile, Iraqis already resettled in the US are not finding work.  According to the study from Georgetown University Law School (p. 20) as few as 20% of Iraqi refugees are finding employment and are getting increasingly frustrated and angry.

Just adds more evidence to my contention that creating chaos in a recession with angry immigrants is intentional and is driving this completely illogical policy.  See ‘Bring us your poor and angry’ here.

Britain deports Iraqi asylum seekers

Update October 18th:   More details on this story at the New York Times, here.

Update October 17th:  This is very confusing.  It seems that when the plane landed in Baghdad some of the returned asylum seekers got off the plane and others were told they must return to Great Britain, here.

Just as we in the US are getting ready to resettle possibly tens of thousands of additional Iraqi refugees (more on that in the morning), Britain joins Denmark now in loading them up and sending them back because violence is down.

From Al Jazeera:

Britain has forcibly sent 39 Iraqi asylum seekers back to Baghdad, a refugee group has said.

The International Federation of Iraqi Refugees (Ifir) has raised concern over the welfare of the asylum seekers once they arrive in Iraq, which has seen a continuation of deadly suicide bombings in recent months.

The Ifir said 39 people had been deported on a specially chartered Air Italy flight that left London’s Stansted airport early on Thursday.

The group said people on the flight were told it was going to Baghdad, making it the first deportation flight into south or central Iraq from the UK.

And, these 39 are not the first.

According to Britain’s interior ministry, 632 people were deported to northern Iraq between 2005 and 2008.