Is there a plan to resettle Somali refugees in St. Maries, Idaho? How does one find out?

08/06/2015 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Yesterday a reader sent this:

Last night I was told that Somali Refugees are going to be placed in St. Maries, Idaho sometime in September, the person who told me swore it was from a very reliable federal government connected source. I haven’t yet confirm this but would like to get the word out that refugees are NOW coming to North Idaho.

I don’t know if it’s true or not, but decided to use the information to make several key points.
One of the first questions people ask me in interviews or when speaking somewhere is this question: How do I find out if my town is targeted for resettlement?
The answer is you won’t find out until someone leaks the information. The program is wrapped in secrecy by the federal government and its contractors (aka Volags).
Those leaking the information may be employees of the local health department or the local school board which as “stakeholders” may get a little heads-up (we are talking weeks or a couple of months, certainly not a year).
Elected officials who may be seen as “welcoming” might also have a little warning. And, sometimes the leakers are affiliated with some of the left-leaning churches in town where church leaders are too excited by what they see as their good fortune to stay quiet.
By law the contractors and their handlers at the state level (Jannus Inc. in Idaho) are required to “consult” with the community, but that really only means they consult with those they see as friendlies.

If you are wondering about your town, start asking around!

Also, one indicator about whether your town could be targeted is if some large industry is nearby, or planning to move to the area. Look especially for meat packing plants. And, in Twin Falls, Idaho the Chobani yogurt plant most likely was looking for refugee laborers. The ‘non-profit’ contractors work closely with local industries to supply big businesses with cheap immigrant workers.
You might want to ask people involved with the local Chamber of Commerce if they know of any plans! The Chamber at the national level is outright in support of Open Borders and amnesty.

Why might there be some truth to this rumor? Why might a town like St. Maries be a target?

The proximity of a town to an already existing resettlement site is one good indicator. The State Dept. informed me once that a 100-mile radius to an existing resettlement office would make the site fair game. St. Maries is not near the main resettlement hubs in Idaho—Boise and Twin Falls which have received the bulk of the 6,000 plus refugees that Idaho has received since the beginning of Obama’s term in office.***
However, St. Maries is about 50 miles from the World Relief office in Spokane, Washington! Contractors are getting desperate to find new and fresh territory as some existing sites are experiencing ‘resistance.’ Twin Falls is an important ‘Pocket of Resistance’ now so it would be no surprise for Idaho to “welcome” refugees further north.
If World Relief in Spokane is involved in placing refugees in Idaho soon, then they know right now that it could happen because they are in the process of preparing their R & P Abstract for the feds as the new fiscal year is fast approaching on October 1. It should be legally required that those Abstracts be available to the public in advance of new resettlements!
Go here to the list of existing resettlement contractors and see if one is located near you.

I would like to appeal to all of you to send me any rumors you might hear about refugees being resettled in a town near you.

I’ll post the information, even if we have no firm information to go on. We have a category I haven’t used much here, called ‘Rumors’ and what you hear will be cataloged there. We would rather run down the rumors than to completely miss getting the news out about a prospective new resettlement site. Once a site is up and running they are hard to stop especially as the contractor will begin bringing in the relatives and if you object you will be chastised for wanting to interfere with family reunification.
This post is also archived in our new ‘Pockets of Resistance’ category for all of you wishing to learn more about what is happening around the country.
*** Idaho has received 6,158 refugees since January 2009 when Obama took office (data here). The majority of those went to Boise and Twin Falls. Although they received many more smaller numbers of certain ethnic groups the largest numbers came from Bhutan (1,159), Burma (1,223), Iraq (1,101), DR Congo (753), Somalia (625), Afghanistan (203), Sudan (194), Iran (157), and Uzbekistan (77). Idaho has also gotten several of the first group of Syrians (23).
One of those Uzbeks is on trial on terrorism charges, here. By the way, look at this, were they expecting trouble surrounding the trial?

Are Boston terrorists refugees? (updated!) (update! Politico says yes)

04/19/2013 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Update April 20th: It is time for a moratorium on Muslim immigration. Media twisting the truth, here.

Update #12: Radio talk show host Howie Carr was on O’Reilly tonight and pretty clearly described the benefits refugees receive from the US taxpayer.

He wondered why the citizens of Massachusetts didn’t get a say about whether they wanted Chechens resettled there—good question! O’Reilly lamented and repeated again at the end of the show that the “US was very generous to this family” and this is the repayment we got.

Update #11: Two good posts at VDARE discuss the issue of asylum for the terror family. Asylum and refugee status are two sides of the same coin.

In the case of asylum, they get in with a visa or come illegally across our borders and ask for asylum. With the refugee program we pick them up abroad and fly them here. Both programs are part of the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980. Federale (at VDARE) notes that the supposed persecution refugees and asylum seekers claim is often a lie because so often we see supposedly fearful “refugees” going “home” sometimes just to visit. Here is Sailer with a report that conflicts with our Update #10, where he quotes an official saying they were asylees. The important point is that we gave these Jihadists an opportunity for a good life, but the Islamic imperative trumps our goodies.

Update #10: A commenter tells us that it’s a chain migration refugee case (sometimes called family reunification) usually done through resettlement contractors like Catholic Charities. Will look for a link:

Not a rumor, sister of father on Canadian TV said she did refugee paperwork for mom and dad in 2002, they got it. Then under refugee family reconcilement, got 2 sons, the jihadists, and two daughters into US.

Update #9: You can tell the US State Department how you feel about certain refugee admissions for FY2014, click here for instructions.

Update #8: Daniel Greenfield at Frontpage: we have a few lessons to learn!

There are numerous lessons to take away from the Marathon Massacre, but one of these is that it’s time to rethink our immigration policy, especially when it comes to refugees.

By the way, it has a name (learn about it)—al Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration.

Update #7: Is this why Mom and Dad went back to Russia? Mom arrested for shoplifting here at Vlad Tepes.

Update #6: Senator Grassley at today’s immigration hearing in US Senate says when we find out how these killers got into the US it will expose the weakness in our immigration system—yes indeed!

Grassley:

Given the events of this week, it’s important for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system,” Mr. Grassley said in his opening statement. “While we don’t yet know the immigration status of people who have terrorized the communities in Massachusetts, when we find out it will help shed light on the weaknesses of our system.”

And don’t forget these are not the first terrorists to get into the US through the refugee program, remember the Iraqi refugee terrorists in Kentucky.

Update #5: Charming Dad in Russia says, ‘kill my kid and all hell will break loose!’ (Jihad Watch). So why did we take his kids as refugees ten years ago, why was Dad left behind?

(Update: I am now hearing that the whole family did come as refugees but the Dad and maybe the mother went back home—this after we paid some resettlement agency a lot of money to get them settled in Massachusetts!)

Update #4: So how do twenty-something “refugees” get Mercedes? (Russian mob?) From the Daily Caller:

“Tamerlan stops to answer a phone call while walking from his Mercedes to the Wai Kru Mixed Martial Arts center, where he practices boxing.”

Update #3: World Net Daily has more details on refugee terrorist brothers.

Update #2: Yes, it appears the brothers came to the US under the auspices of the US State Department’s Refugee Resettlement Program. Here is Politico quoting an uncle:

Tsarni (Uncle) said he did not know that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been killed. When he was informed by a reporter, he said the older Tsarnaev “absolutely deserved” it and that he’s “not sympathizing.” But he added that the two suspects got their start in America “as refugees.”

For new readers: Each year the Refugee Resettlement Program admits on average lately around 70,000 refugees a year, many from Muslim countries and territories. Our Russian resettlement has been huge.

Some reports indicate that at least the older brother may have come to the US in 2000. So I checked the annual reports and we admitted 555,916 from the Soviet Union (or former Soviet Union) from 1975-2000. In the year 2000 we brought in 14,576 from the former Soviet Union in that year alone. In 2001, it was 14,869. And in 2002, 9,978 Russians or those from former Soviet Union countries were given permanent residency status. How many Chechens—only the US State Department can say for sure.

*Also for new readers and researchers, here are the major federal refugee resettlement contractors. One of these agencies knows who these guys are. For Boston resettlement, I would put my money on the International Rescue Committee or the International Institute of New England (a subcontractor of USCRI). Update: Also check with Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services.

Update! Blogger Timothy Burke at Deadspin is reporting that the older (now dead) brother is a refugee:

Authorities are now confirming the two suspects sought in Monday’s Boston Marathon bombing are two Russian-born Chechen brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev. Tamerlan, the older brother, is dead. Here’s what we know about him.

It’s not much, and most of it’s derived from a photo gallery. We know Tamerlan Tsarnaev was 26 and a competitive boxer for a club named Team Lowell, who won the Rocky Marciano Trophy for being New England Golden Gloves heavyweight champion in 2010. He did this while taking time off from school at Bunker Hill Community College, where he studied in hopes of being an engineer. He’s been boxing in the U.S. since at least 2004, and his uncle told WBZ in Boston that he arrived in the United States in 2000 under refugee status.

This is a rumor! Please don’t run off saying they are!

From the editor: It is not a rumor any more! I’ve confused some readers. This was the first post I wrote this a.m. but minutes later I began the updates above. Most recent updates are at the top of this post (so read from bottom up for the correct order!)

However, we have been admitting “persecuted” Russians for years and according to reports these two are legal permanent residents (not student visa holders).

If you see any reference to the Chechens as asylees or refugees PLEASE let me know! Ann@vigilantfreedom.com

Again, this is ~~a rumor!~~!!! NOT a rumor!

Rumors abound as Tyson Foods continues to send mixed messages

01/02/2011 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

The Times-Gazette in Shelbyville, TN has a new story today laying out the time line of the developing story we first posted here before Christmas about an alleged terror threat at the Tyson Foods meatpacking plant, the same plant we have been writing about for years!

T-G Reporter Brian Mosely asks about the mixed messages coming out of company with a suggestion that maybe bloggers (!) wouldn’t be speculating about what exactly happened if Tyson’s spokesmen would come out with the whole truth. Mosely gives us a time line of who said what and when, then concludes:

If the alleged graffiti did not include the reported threatening words, what exactly was written that would require the involvement of federal authorities? And which federal agency is now looking into this matter?

But if the graffiti was harmless and not threatening, why not release the contents of the message to the public?

Doing so would go a long way in stifling the rumor mill and putting worried residents at ease.

Had Tyson Foods given a full explanation of what allegedly occurred in the facility, we seriously doubt that Nashville’s NBC affiliate would have wasted valuable holiday air time on a story based on a second-hand rumor about what someone supposedly wrote on a bathroom wall.

Instead, the lack of disclosure over what appears to be a minor case of vandalism has only incited more speculation and rumor over what goes on inside the plant.

Read it all.

Yes, indeed! Time for the whole story!

Rumor: The federal government supplements some refugee salaries

08/12/2010 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

A reader sent me this e-mail yesterday, and I don’t know the answer. Maybe one of you do.

[Recently] I got a call from someone who had a small business some years back. He told me a refugee approached him for a job at that time and said he (the refugee) could work for $4.00 an hour as the federal govt would kick in the rest up to the minumum wage.

This is something I have heard for years – and it seems Tyson worked something with Clinton, but I never heard specifics on it other than claims such as the one above.

If you know if this is true or not, please let us know. Either comment directly to this post or e-mail me privately at the address in the right hand column.

Episcopal Migration Ministries lobbies for more money, forget meaningful reform

04/18/2010 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Episcopal Migration Ministries held its annual conference in Washington, DC recently so that they could lobby Congress for more money for the refugee program. They call it “reforming” the program but I have doubts we will see any meaningful reform anytime soon—it’s all about the funding stupid.

Before I proceed with more of this recent news about the lobbying campaign, I remind readers that critics of the financially struggling Episcopal Church USA claim the church is staying afloat with the money it receives for refugee resettlement. See a post here, in March, that is the second post we’ve written on the subject. I don’t know if its true, but it warrants looking into. The first reform we should be demanding is that the volags (supposedly voluntary agencies) undergo regular rigorous financial audits. Readers are probably surprised to learn that there are no financial audits required at this time.

From Episcopal News Service:

The U.S. Department of State works with and funds 11 volunteer agencies — five of them faith-based, including EMM — and the State of Iowa Bureau of Refugee Services to resettle refugees in the United States. Each year, Congress and the president determine the number of refugees permitted to resettle in the U.S.; for 2010 they set the ceiling at 95,000.

What? Where did we pick up an extra 15,000 refugees for FY2010? The Presidential Determination letter for 2010 put the ceiling at 80,000 (the highest number since before 9/11)! And, by the way, the State of Iowa has dropped out of the refugee program and a Kurdish volag has stepped in to bring refugees to your town (see links in this post).

Throughout the four-day conference, EMM offered training for its frontline staff, including job development in today’s economy and church co-sponsorship, and in areas specific to its partners, the Department of State and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration Eric P. Schwartz gave the conference’s keynote address April 14 and praised EMM and its affiliates for their work.

“Your ministries and your network are important partners in refugee protection,” he said. “In the last fiscal year you resettled some 5,000 refugees through 31 affiliates in 21 states, which is a marked increase from previous years, and you are managing your network responsibly through opening offices in new locations, all during a very difficult economic period,” he said.

Schwartz also talked about the doubling of the reception and placement grant — $900 to $1,800 — passed by Congress for 2010. But, as important as the funding increase is in addressing refugees’ immediate needs — a roof, a clean bed and basic assistance — more still needs to be done for refugees. To that end, Schwartz said, it’s important for the State Department and resettlement partners to “stay the course.”

“The White House is leading a comprehensive effort to review the resettlement program and we will remain deeply engaged in this enterprise,” he said. “We will be working closely with the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services to secure additional job training, education, cash and medical assistance in the months that follow reception and placement.”

The White House reform is a joke!

There isn’t any real reform coming from the White House whose main mission is to make it easier for more refugees and asylees to get into the US (more voters!) and to redistribute wealth. They don’t care about the biggest problem they have—too many refugees (immigrants) causing stress for communities and potentially social unrest (remember crisis brings change!) like the extreme kind in Los Angeles yesterday (here too) and resettlement agencies running amok mostly because they are overloaded and unmonitored and simply demanding more money, more money, more money!

Cities have reached their capacity to absorb more needy people and the powers that be have no way of knowing what that capacity is. Rumors are circulating that some locations have told Schwartz’s shop in the State Department to stop sending refugees. We know for sure that Fredericksburg, VA is one of those and San Antonio, TX and Boise, ID officials were expressing the same concern just in the last few weeks. How many more are there?

So how do the powers in Washington assess a community’s capacity to take in more refugees—they don’t, and they don’t have a clue how to go about it. I do!

Reform suggestions from me

Regular readers know that this is a reform proposal I’ve been harping on for years. We need social and economic impact studies done for each city or town that is, or is proposed to be, a resettlement city. This federal study would be patterned after the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) required by the National Environmental Policy Act which requires that when a major federal action is proposed for a location a public hearing is held and all pertinent information is reported to the public. A finding is made as to whether the impact on the community is significant. In the case of the EIS a determination might be made to not proceed with the project.

I envision a similar study for resettlement cities. Economic factors such as job availability, housing, medical care, schools etc. would be incorporated in the study. Public input would be obtained. Contrary to the present view that resettlement should be done in secrecy so that citizens won’t be able to object, a full public debate on how many refugees will be brought to a community and from where they might originate will cause less social unrest then the sneaky strategy employed today.

I repeat: if the State Department and the volags cannot sell the program to the community with all the facts on the table then maybe it’s not a good fit for the community!

The strategy employed obviously since the inception of the Refugee Act of 1980—keep pouring refugees into certain cities until people scream—stinks! It’s not good for the refugees and it’s not good for social cohesion.

If at the conclusion of the initial Social and Economic Impact study it was determined how many refugees a city (town, county) could manage, only that number would be resettled. After a given period of time —three years, five years(?)— a new study would be ordered that would determine whether the city had the capacity to continue at that level or be increased or decreased based on changing economic and social conditions.

And, of course, I continue to suggest we remove all the middlemen volags from the program—-it should be run through the State Department and each State’s refugee agency. All the churches and other caring groups could provide true charity by giving their own time and private resources to the refugees. They just would no longer handle the taxpayers’ money.