Editor: This is crossposted from ‘Frauds and Crooks’ this morning because I want this post archived here at the new RRW as well.
Michelle Malkin: Sixty Reasons Why the US Refugee Program is a Danger to Us!
Malkin’s timing is excellent because as I write this the Trump Administration is wrestling with an important legal requirement. In the coming weeks they must decide how many refugees (if any!) will be admitted to the US in FY2020 which begins in 21 days!
Every year since the Refugee Act of 1980 was signed into law by Jimmy Carter, the President determines how many UN-selected refugees will be welcomed to a town near you. Needless to say the refugee industry is in high gear putting pressure on the White House to get the numbers as high as they can (they are demanding 90,000) because the refugee contractors financial survival depends on high numbers!
Therefore, the timing of the release of Michelle Malkin’s new book couldn’t be better.
Here, at Breitbart, she pulls no punches and tells us about it and directs your attention to 60 reasons (60 Islamists we welcomed to become ‘new Americans’ while they came to do us harm.)
By the way, Trump can legally set the refugee ceiling for FY2020 at Zero!
Exclusive — Michelle Malkin: 60 Terrifying Reasons Trump Is Right to Reduce Refugees
Here are three facts that the most hysterical voices attacking the Trump administration’s proposal to radically reduce or freeze refugee admissions don’t want you to know:
1) They make billions of dollars off the federal refugee resettlement racket;
2) They are protected by the Open Borders Inc. media, which routinely whitewashes the gobsmacking financial self-interest of the “Let Them All In” leeches; and
3) They are never held accountable when untold numbers of the world’s most wretchedly violent and aggrieved refugees come here to sabotage the American Dream.
While left-wing religious groups, tax-exempt non-profits tied or allied to George Soros, and the amnesty-shilling Catholic Church scream “No hate, no fear, everyone is welcome here!” at the top of their lungs, American neighborhoods are being overrun by dangerous foreign criminals and jihad plotters.
David Miliband, president and CEO of International Rescue Committee, attacked the White House plan to slash refugee numbers from an Obama-era high of 100,000 to less than the current historic low of 30,000 as “inhumane.”
Is it because cutting the numbers would cut in to Miliband’s first-class travel and business lunch tabs? Malkin Truth-O-Meter: mostly likely true!
What Miliband neglects to mention in his diatribe against President Trump that his organization is one of 9 behemoth government contractors that works with the hostile United Nations and encrusted State Department social justice warriors to import thousands of new refugees every year with little input from the communities in which they are dumped. Miliband earns nearly a million-dollar salary*** and by one estimate, IRC has raked in nearly $900 million in refugee resettlement profits over the last decade. When you cut through the Statue of Liberty smokescreen of the open borders “charities,” the math is clear:
Reduced refugees means reduced cash flow.
Zero refugees means zero cash flow.
Why should taxpayers continue to see their hard-earned money siphoned away to feed the Trump Resistance Machine and Democrat Party’s Permanent Ruling Majority Project?
There are even more compelling reasons to throttle the refugee flow. According to the logic-twisting, ICE-doxxing cheerleaders at the New York Times, refugee reductions are the real threat to our nation because if we don’t keep importing hordes of Muslim translators from Iraq or Afghanistan, it would “undermine” our national security.
***And see mypost here at RRWa few days ago about the push to admit more Iraqi and Afghan translators. You will see the proof of Miliband’s obscene salary!
By the way, I am seeing a huge campaign by the contractors and their media lackeys to pressure the President at this very moment to agree to admit tens of thousands of UN-selected refugees to be your new neighbors.
We have admitted almost 240,000 refugees including interpreters and others who supposedly helped us in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2006 and some former military leaders say it isn’t enough and are pushing for more ‘new American’ Muslims for your neighborhoods.
It sure ticks me off!
Recently one of the nine federally-funded refugee contractors—the International Rescue Committee—crowed that former military leaders had sent a letter to the White House telling the Prez that it was imperative to bring in tens of thousands of additional refugees to help them—the military—around the world.
One of the signers of the letter to Trump is Ret. Gen. Wesley Clark who openly supported the Presidency of Barack Obama.
You cansee the letter here. For anyone who knows even a little about the refugee industry you will immediately recognize the language in the letter as boilerplate refugee industry lingo.
You might also notice that the military brass is mixing apples and oranges when discussing refugee admissions.
There are two major flows for legal ‘refugee’ admissions.
As CEO of the International Rescue Committee, the wealthiest of nine federal refugee contractors, Miliband crowed about the military support for more refugee admissions. Does he want to be sure to preserve his partially-federally funded salary of over $900,000 per YEAR?***
One is the original program set up by the Refugee Act of 1980 that is at present admitting around 30,000 refugees from places like the DR Congo, Burma, the Ukraine and some other African countries. Our military isn’t actively engaged in those places. That is the program approaching a critical decision point in the coming days and weeks.
Then there is the newer Special Immigrant Visa Program that admits the supposed military helpers from Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems that those are the primary places of concern to top brass who have made promises of a ticket to America in exchange for their help.
The numbers of Afghan and Iraqi SIVs are separate from the Refugee Act of 1980refugees.
[An aside: I argue that if you bring every last Iraqi and Afghan supporter of America to live in the US, what have you left in those countries—only those that hate us!]
Before I even get to the news—An important meeting is scheduled at the White House on Tuesday to discuss setting the cap for refugee admissions in FY2020—ponder these numbers.
Since October 1, 2006, we admitted 10,917 regular refugees from Afghanistan and 58,371 Special Immigrant Visas through August 26, 2019 for a total of 69,288.
During that same time period we admitted 143,082 Iraqi refugees and 18,508 SIVs from Iraq for a total of 161,590.
Total interpreters for the two hotbed Islamic countries was 76,879!
Really! That many were doing translation services for us? Or did anyone who took out the trash qualify to become your new neighbor?
Isn’t that enough? And, how many of the military brass who are shilling for the refugee contractors (like moneybags Miliband) are inviting Afghans and Iraqis to their homes, or to their neighborhoods?
Sorry this is getting long, but here is the story you need to read. From the New York Times(hat tip: Joanne):
Trump Administration Considers a Drastic Cut in Refugees Allowed to Enter U.S.
WASHINGTON — The White House is considering a plan that would effectively bar refugees from most parts of the world from resettling in the United States by cutting back the decades-old program that admits tens of thousands of people each year who are fleeing war, persecution and famine, according to current and former administration officials.
There is much discussion in the NYT article about Trump aide Stephen Miller and his dastardly deeds (like placing loyal Trump supporters at the State Department) to slow the refugee flow into America.
In meetings over the past several weeks, one top administration official has proposed zeroing out the program altogether, while leaving the president with the ability to admit refugees in an emergency.
Another option that top officials are weighing would cut refugee admissions by half or more, to 10,000 to 15,000 people, but reserve most of those spots for refugees from a few handpicked countries or groups with special status, such as Iraqis and Afghans who work alongside American troops, diplomats and intelligence operatives abroad.
Both options would all but end the United States’ status as a leader in accepting refugees from around the world.
The issue is expected to come to a head on Tuesday, when the White House plans to convene a high-level meeting in the Situation Room to discuss at what number Mr. Trump should set the annual, presidentially determined ceiling on refugee admissions for the coming year.
[….]
Advocates of the nearly 40-year-old refugee program inside and outside the administration fear that approach would effectively starve the program, making it impossible to resettle even those narrow populations. The advocacy groups say the fate of the program increasingly hinges on an unlikely figure: Mark T. Esper, the secretary of defense.
Barely two months into his job as Pentagon chief, Mr. Esper, a former lobbyist and defense contracting executive, is the newest voice at the table in the annual debate over how many refugees to admit. But while Mr. Esper’s predecessor, Jim Mattis, had taken up the refugee cause with an almost missionary zeal, repeatedly declining to embrace large cuts because of the potential effect he said they would have on American military interests around the world, Mr. Esper’s position on the issue is unknown.
The senior military leadership at the Defense Department has been urgently pressing Mr. Esper to follow his predecessor’s example and be an advocate for the refugee program, according to people familiar with the conversations in the Pentagon.
[….]
A senior Defense Department official said that Mr. Esper had not decided what his recommendation would be for the refugee program this year. As a result, an intense effort is underway by a powerful group of retired generals and humanitarian aid groups to persuade Mr. Esper to pick up where Mr. Mattis left off.
A reminder to all! Even if the number of refugees drops to nearly zero (it won’t!), the program will still be in place for a future President to simply put it on steroids to make up for what they will call the “lost Trump years.”
There must be a complete overhaul of the program while Trump is in the White House!
*** I hadn’t checked British national David Miliband’s salary for awhile so imagine my shock to see this from the most recent Form 990 for the IRC.
The IRC received over $500 MILLION from the US Treasury (from you!) in this one year!
Look at these salaries!
You shouldcontact the White Houseover this weekend and on Monday and tell the President what you think he should do!
“I feel hurt by the fact that a specific demographic at Wellstone has been taken away from us.”
(Aimee Fearing, former Wellstone principal)
When I read this storyat Minnesota Public Radio I couldn’t help but think about buggy whips. You know the expression about how as times change, so too do industries when the demand for certain commodities disappears.
But, the big difference is that with government programs, those benefiting certain people personally (with jobs etc.), instead of dying a natural death, taxpayer dollars are found to keep the government equivalent of the buggy whip industry alive.
At one time Wellstone High School, a special school for immigrants, was 65% Somali, today it is 30%, and those benefiting from the refugee industry generally in Minnesota are crying the blues.
As refugee admissions hit record low, one Minneapolis school fights to adapt
[Big opening section featuring a Somali success story to appeal to readers’ emotions before launching into the difficulties ahead for a special school for special people.]
For nearly two decades now, Wellstone has served as a training ground for hundreds of young refugee and immigrant students, many of whom grew up to be economists, health professionals and engineers — even as its population has fluctuated with each stroke of a presidential pen that expanded or reduced refugee admissions to the United States.
In recent years, though, not many people like Mah are entering the country because of the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration and the sharp reduction in refugee admissions. As a result, Wellstone is bracing for one of the lowest student enrollment years in its history.
But it’s not just Wellstone that’s witnessing the ripple effect of the dwindling number of refugees entering the country. Refugee-serving agencies in Minnesota have also seen a dramatic decline in the number of refugees coming to their doorsteps for resettlement services.
Here it is—they must keep the infrastructure alive—another way of saying that they must keep the taxpayer dollars flowing their way!
Former Principal Aimee Fearing
To keep the infrastructure alive, Wellstone and service agencies are finding new ways to adapt to the changing refugee-services landscape — by shifting resources and tapping into new demographics.
Donald Trump is to blame….
After he took office in 2017, the president followed through with many of his promises. For example, he barred people from certain predominantly Muslim nations, including Somalia, from entering the U.S. and reduced refugee admissions to the lowest level since the program was created in 1980.
Those restrictions have affected the refugee stream to Minnesota, which for years has been one of the top states for refugee resettlement. More than 3,000 primary refugees arrived in Minnesota in 2016, but only 1,000 came in 2017, and 660 last year, according to figures from the Minnesota Department of Human Services.
The dramatic reduction in refugee admissions will be felt this school year at Wellstone, where the student population has dropped from 400 four years ago to 180 now, according to school counselor Ali Kofiro.
[….]
Though the students at the school have come from all over the world, including East Africa, Southeast Asia, Central America and Mexico, Somalis typically were the majority. In 2015 and 2016, for instance, 65 percent of the students were Somalis. Today, that number is less than 30 percent.
“I feel hurt by the fact that a specific demographic at Wellstone has been taken away from us,” said Aimee Fearing, former Wellstone principal who now serves as the executive director of K-12 academic programming at Minneapolis Public Schools.
For Deqa Muhidin, an ESL teacher at Wellstone, the shrinking number of refugee arrivals hangs as a question mark over the future of the school. “Our school’s future will definitely be up in the air,” said Muhidin. “And my role will definitely be up in the air.”
[….]
The reduction in refugee admissions is also affecting nonprofit organizations and resettlement agencies that often rely on serving refugees to get funding.
Continue reading here. It is a long article, but useful especially for Minnesotans as it goes on to discuss the refugee contractors operating in the state and how they are adjusting (or not!) to the loss of much federal funding.
Endnote: One wonders about assimilation if the immigrant kids are kept separate and treated as special people in their own special school.
I woke up this morning with my head spinning about the results nationwide, and couldn’t at first figure out where to dive in to tell you what I think about the midterm election results.
Over time, I’ll have more to say about what it all means, but I do know this—there will be no legislative reform of the US Refugee Admissions Program in the next two years.
Now that the House is controlled by the Dems, that means that each committee will revert to Democrat control. And, they will never open for review the Refugee Act of 1980.
Minnesota not-so-nice power duo: Keith Ellison with US Senator Amy Klobuchar (will she run for Prez in 2020?)
Any further reform of the refugee program will have to come from the White House and if I were a betting person, I would bet that they have done about all they will do before 2020 which is to keep the numbers low.
Enough of that, I could be wrong.
As for my friends in Minnesota, don’t get angry at me for asking, but was outgoing governor Dayton right when he famously said in 2015, if you don’t like immigrants find another state?
Here is just one of many stories this morning from Minnesota with Keith Ellison, the state’s new Attorney General saying—-if you mess with Minnesota we will fight back. Which sounds like a veiled threat to silence speech.
Keith Ellison Defeats Doug Wardlow Completing DFL Sweep of Statewide Offices
An emotional Keith Ellison took the stage at St. Paul’s Crowne Plaza hotel late Tuesday night to deliver his victory speech after defeating Republican Doug Wardlow in the race for Minnesota’s Attorney General Office.
The race has been a constant source of controversy on both sides of the aisle, though Republicans were hopeful that Ellison’s past affiliations as well as a domestic-abuse allegation made against him by an ex-girlfriend would keep him from winning the state’s top law-enforcement job.
Polls frequently showed a tight race with large numbers of undecided voters, but Ellison managed to squeak out a victory over Warldow, winning 49 percent of the vote compared to Wardlow’s 44 percent.
Ellison began his victory speech by praising the Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party as one based on the “values of love, respect, transparency, and accountability.”
[….]
“We don’t care who it is—if anybody is messing with somebody in Minnesota, your Minnesota attorney general is going to stand up for them and fight back,” he concluded. “Tonight is a good night. Every statewide elected official is a Democrat in Minnesota.”
Muslims Hope To ‘Wake Up’ At The Ballot Box This Year
On a recent Saturday afternoon in an office in St. Paul, Minn., a flurry of calls went out to Native American and Latinos voters reminding them to vote Nov. 6. And there was a new group added to the list: Muslims.
Until last year, ISAIAH, a multi-racial coalition of faith communities in Minnesota, was mostly made up of churches. Now, 24 mosques have joined the voter turnout effort. The group is focused on getting communities of color to vote this year in reaction to what it describes as politics of fear and a rise of white nationalism.
Pals! Imam Asad Zaman (left) with Rep. Keith Ellison. Will Ellison be Minnesota’s next Attorney General after today?
With Muslims and immigrants used as boogeymen in political rhetoric, Imam Asad Zaman, executive director of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, said, getting his community to the ballot box is vital. Zaman is leading the local Muslim effort to get out the vote and has been a leader on political engagement in the community for more than 15 years.
And there are more Muslims now running for office, hoping to be part of a “blue wave.” In Minnesota, nine Muslims are on the ballot for state, federal and local offices.
“Many candidates running for office are using Islamophobia as a means to get to political power. That is absolutely un-American,” Zaman said. “The community is under assault. Fortunately, most of us are beginning to wake up.”
The community is under assault. Fortunately, most of us are beginning to wake up.
(Imam Asad Zaman)
He points out that in Minnesota there are 50,000 registered Muslim voters. Though Muslims make up a small voting bloc — they’re about one percent of the nation’s population — those votes can matter in close elections. Many feel a renewed sense of urgency to choose leaders that will represent them.
[….]
About two-thirds of Muslim voters identify as Democrats according to the Pew Research Center and about 13 percent as Republican.
Muslim populations growing in key battleground states
“What’s interesting is that they are clustered in key areas including battleground states such as Virginia, Florida, Michigan, Ohio and especially in urban areas,” Alzayat says. “So, for example you have about 120,000 registered Muslim voters in the state of Michigan. You have about 120,000 registered in Florida. You have about 100,000 registered in Virginia and those numbers really matter because in close elections … just a few votes can make a difference let alone tens of thousands, if not 100,000.”
Here are three facts that the most hysterical voices attacking the Trump administration’s proposal to radically reduce or freeze refugee admissions don’t want you to know:
