Senate Budget Committee ranking member Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is putting a call out to the American people: He needs help to kill President Barack Obama’s plans to grant executive amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
Sessions wants Americans to melt Congress’ phone lines, demanding their members make a precondition of any border crisis bill that Obama’s executive order amnesty via the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and any future plans be stopped.
“The American people have begged and pleaded for years for our laws to be enforced,” Sessions said in his statement. “We have people in our own country living in violence, fear and poverty every single day. They have demanded an immigration policy that puts their jobs, wages and communities first. Every citizen should pick up the phone and ask of their congressional representative: where do you stand?”
And, then please listen to Mark Levin’s interviewwith Senator Jeff Sessions about the “crisis,” but especially listen to the Senator say it would be disastrous to change the definition of “refugee.”
See our previous post on Obama’s proposed expansion of the refugee resettlement program where I said this:
For me, this news, spells the end for the United States of America as we know it, and may well be the single most destructive act of all by a President who threatened/promised to “fundamentally change America.”
The US Capitol Switchboard number is this: (202) 224-3121, but you are all smart enough to find your individual Member or US Senators directly. If the Capitol phone lines are swamped, call their district offices. You, grassroots American citizens, defeated them with your calls in the 2007 amnesty battle, but now the stakes are much, much higher.
Ask your elected officials where they stand—with Obama, or with you!
Message to Congress: Tell Obama NO executive amnesty! Close the border, send the illegals home, and no vacation until you do!
Update July 25th: Jonathon Moseley, writing at American Thinker has a good piece laying out why (legally) they are not “refugees.” Hat tip: Cathy.
Unbelievable! In order to ‘solve the border crisis’ the Obama Administration is considering redefining the decades old international standards of who is, and who isn’t a refugee.
Here is the definition of a refugee as updated in 1967 (from the original 1951 UN Convention):
“A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it..”[8]
Although they say the plan would only be “tested” in Central America, what we understand they are proposing would mean that every person, ultimately anywhere in the world, (fearing crime in their home country) could run to their local US Embassy and apply for refugee status. Note that “crime” or even fear of “violence” from gangs is not in the definition!
A couple of major principles they want to destroy are 1) that refugees (and asylum seekers) must have left the country of their “persecution” otherwise they are simply “internally displaced people” (not legal refugees). And, 2) as we just mentioned, that trying to escape crime or poverty is not presently grounds for claiming refugee status. However it is something that the ANTI-BORDERS CROWD HAS BEEN PROMOTING FOR YEARS!
The more they can muddy the definition of “refugee” the more people they can shoe-horn into America.
Before I give you the dreadful news that Drudge is featuring this evening, please also see Mark Krikorian here on another important point. Legitimate asylum seekers (being persecuted for race, religion or political views) are supposed to ask for asylum in the first safe country they reach after escaping the place of their persecution. So, in fact, if these “children” were legitimately fearful they were supposed to have asked for protection in Mexico.
For me, this news, spells the end for the United States of America as we know it, and may well be the single most destructive act of all by a President who threatened/promised to “fundamentally change America.”
Tonight we have Karl Rove focusing on the shiny object—Obama’s fundraisers—while Obama quietly plots the destruction of America’s sovereignty and economy.
Hoping to stem the recent surge of migrants at the Southwest border, the Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.
If approved, the plan would direct the government to screen thousands of children and youths in Honduras to see if they can enter the United States as refugees or on emergency humanitarian grounds.It would be the first American refugee effort in a nation reachable by land to the United States, the White House said, putting the violence in Honduras on the level of humanitarian emergencies in Haiti and Vietnam, where such programs have been conducted in the past amid war and major crises.
Critics of the plan were quick to pounce, saying it appeared to redefine the legal definition of a refugee and would only increase the flow of migration to the United States.
[….]
Administration officials confirmed that they are considering the idea, although they stressed that no decision has been made to move forward. They said the idea is one of many being discussed by officials at the White House and the Departments of State, Homeland Security, Justice, and Health and Human Services.
[….]
Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports tighter controls on immigration, said that the proposal would increase, not stem, the flood of migrants from Central America trying to get into the United States.
“It’s clearly a bad idea,” Mr. Krikorian said. “Orders of magnitude more people will apply for refugee status if they can just do it from their home countries.”
He added that the proposal would allow people to claim to be refugees from their countries with “nothing more than a bus ride to the consulate. We’re talking about, down the road, an enormous additional flow of people from those countries.”
You can bet the refugee contractors are jumping for joy! But they shouldn’t be because the inevitable angry backlash against tens of thousands, potentially hundreds of thousands, of phony “refugees” flooding into America needing their “services” will be something no one wants to see. And, those of you who truly care for real refugees should be weeping at this news.
Meanwhile, just as I was writing this, Republican Rep. Paul Ryan was on TV talking about his new program to combat poverty (poverty! he hasn’t seen anything yet), and Karl Rove was yammering about Obama’s fundraisers while Obama is busy bringing America to its knees.
Heck! Obama can apparently fly around the US on Air Force One and destroy the country at the same time!
Baltimore Archbishop William Lori isn’t smiling now!
Sorry for my choice of words in the title, but there didn’t seem to be anything more fitting then “screw,” which is what Obama (government generally) does to those whose hands are deep into the federal treasury.
Judy just now sent me the Bishops whining and moaning press release about King Obama’s latest declaration on gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination in agencies of the federal government (which includes federal contractors!).
And, by the way, since this is an Executive Order there is no opportunity to go to Congress for relief.
[I thought I was done with the Bishops for today when I finished my previous posta short time ago.]
Do you think they and their Catholic flock will ever get it? Once your hands are into Caesar’s money, Caesar owns you! Jesus knew, why don’t they?
From the USCCB(where mixed in with a lot of indignation about “religious freedom” they demonstrate their abject fear of losing their taxpayer funding):
WASHINGTON–The bishop-Chairmen of two USCCB Committees responded with great concern to President Obama’s July 21 executive order to prohibit federal government contractors from what the Administration deems “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” discrimination and to forbid “gender identity” discrimination in the employment of federal employees. The problems the bishops identify in the order relate both to the flaws in its core prohibitions, and to its lack of religious freedom protection.
[….]
Today’s executive order is unprecedented and extreme and should be opposed.
In the name of forbidding discrimination, this order implements discrimination. With the stroke of a pen, it lends the economic power of the federal government to a deeply flawed understanding of human sexuality, to which faithful Catholics and many other people of faith will not assent. As a result, the order will exclude federal contractors precisely on the basis of their religious beliefs.
[….]
As a result, even contractors [big ones like us!—ed] that disregard sexual inclination in employment face the possibility of exclusion from federal contracting if their employment policies or practices reflect religious or moral objections to extramarital sexual conduct.
Read it all, but don’t cry for them, I’m not! Core beliefs or money? Core beliefs or money? Which will it be?
Kevin Dinnin (lower left), CEO of probably the largest federal contractor resettling the Central American teens to your towns at the Dallas meeting with Obama and Perry.
Update July 21st: Judy points us to Clarice Feldman at the American Thinker picking up the story about “faith-based” contractors making out like bandits on the backs of taxpayers. What a relief to know that more and more Americans are getting the message.
Readers, please read this incredibly thorough post by ‘sundance’ at The Last Refuge about Obama’s meeting in Dallas with “faith-based” groups. Especially learn more about Kevin Dinnin (we told you about himhere and here), CEO of Baptist Children and Family Services. Hat tip: Judy. LOL! I think we are on the same track (see my post just a few minutes ago, here).
And, then be sure to see NumbersUSA’s fantastic interactive map on where “the children” are being sent. If you learn of a new grant and new destination for the ‘unaccompanied minors’ be sure to tell Numbers!
See all of our posts, extending back several years, on the ‘unaccompanied minors’ invasion of America and the resettlement contractors getting their piece of the pie. I admit that when I heard the Office of Refugee Resettlement representative talking about the coming “children’s” migration in June 2013 at a meeting in Pennsylvania, here, I had no idea it was going to be this big (but I think they knew!).
Also, I think the US Conference of Catholic Bishops may have fueled the fire (that was already smoldering) when they visited Central America in 2013, here. Other than on issues of marriage and abortion, the Bishops are as far Left as Obama!
The Dutch government is resisting pressure from the United Nations to accept more than 250 refugees from the civil war in Syria.
Opposition parties have also criticised the stance of deputy justice minister Fred Teeven, who said victims of the conflict should be accommodated in neighbouring countries. The Netherlands is spending €76.5 million on support in the region.
Other European countries are taking in a far greater share of the estimated three million Syrian refugees. Germany is accommodating 10,000, while Sweden is housing 1,200 and Norway 1,000. Both countries have much smaller populations than the Netherlands.
On Friday the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) urged European nations to “accept far more Syrians”, while ChristenUnie MP Joel Voordewind said the government was being too slow in finding shelter for the refugees who have been accepted.
“There are 150 refugees waiting in Lebanon because there is no accommodation for them in the Netherlands,” he said. “The allocation of housing for these people has begun far too late.”
Every time I see a story like this, I search for any blast from the UN or the worldwide humanitarian industrial complex at the US for taking only a tiny fraction of the the 2,000 Syrians that the Obama Administration was suggesting might be our quota for the year.
Something is fishy here. The contractors want the US to take up to 15,000 Syriansthis fiscal year (which ends on Sept. 30th) and yet there is almost complete silence on that at the moment. Maybe they know that with all the invasion news, bringing tens of thousands of Syrians to the US at this particular time would push American citizens over the edge. Or, somehow they are pulling it off in secrecy!
