South Carolina state Senator makes some of the most important statements of entire refugee debate

Most of you are probably aware that a bill is working its way through the South Carolina legislature that would put responsibility on those agencies which resettle refugees for acts of a criminal nature that might be perpetrated by refugees they place in the state.

kevin-bryant
SC Senator Kevin Bryant exposes ‘church’ refugee resettlement agencies as federal contractors with no special religious freedom protections for the agency itself. “My role in the government is to protect South Carolinians.”

Mother Jones (of course) takes a whack at the “anti-refugee” bill, but in the course of reporting on it, they inadvertently allow a State Senator to scoff at one of the most important arguments ‘religious’ resettlement contractors use to promote their role (as middlemen) in the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program—that they do it out of religious conviction and not as paid federal contractors.
To set the stage, here are some of the opening paragraphs, emphasis is mine (hat tip: Joanne):

A South Carolina bill that would create a registry of refugees and would hold their sponsors liable for any crimes they commit has sparked a debate over religious liberty in South Carolina.

The bill, which would require all recently resettled refugees to register with local law enforcement, would also hold each refugee’s sponsors liable if he or she commits a violent crime or an act of terrorism. “We are protecting South Carolina citizens’ safety,” State Senator Kevin Bryant, one of the bill’s lead sponsors, told members of the local press. “And if we have to do something that would de-incentivize the sponsoring of refugees, well, we’ve got to choose our own citizens over those that are not citizens of this country.”

The contracting agencies say the bill violates their religious freedom:

Some religious groups have denounced the bill as a violation of their First Amendment freedoms because it infringes their belief in caring for those in need. “We’re a Christian organization,” says Ted Goins, the president of Lutheran Services Carolinas, one of the state’s two main sponsors of refugee resettlement. “We get our marching orders from a Biblical perspective [as if there is no government cash involved!—ed]. It says we’re to love our neighbors as ourselves. Refugees are our neighbors.”  [A bit of irony here as several “Lutheran” agencies around the country have dropped the word Lutheran from their names, see Michigan earlier this month.—ed]

[….]

As the anti-refugee bill makes its way through the legislature, more religious leaders have publicly condemned it. A coalition of bishops from four different denominations sent a joint letter to Gov. Haley and lawmakers criticizing it.

Blah, blah, blah from the coalition of bishops, then see what Senator Bryant said.  But first know that the US State Department strictly forbids any of its contractors (Catholics, Protestants, Evangelicals, Jews and Lutherans) from proselytizing!  Go here to see what duties the contractors must perform in order to be paid for their work (or have their contract yanked).  This is just one small portion of the State Department rules:

The Department of State has cooperative agreements with nine domestic resettlement agencies to resettle refugees. While some of the agencies have religious affiliations, they are not allowed to proselytize. The standard cooperative agreement between the Department of State and each of the domestic resettlement agencies specifies the services that the agency must provide to each refugee.  [This is effectively a contract since the federal government follows up with audits to assure compliance.—ed]

Continue reading to learn what else is required of them.  They might use the phrase “cooperative agreement,” but there is no doubt this is a contract for services.
Now, this is what Senator Bryant says:

“As a Christian, I would never put myself in a contract that prohibited me from sharing the Gospel,” Sen. Bryant says in an interview. The Republican from Anderson County says that because the bill holds resettlement groups, not individuals, liable, it does not infringe on religious liberty. He says because resettlement groups sign a contract with the federal government in which they agree not to proselytize to refugees—more or less promising to act in a nondenominational capacity—they have given up all claims to religious liberty.

Bryant separates church and state and it’s about time the ‘religious’ resettlement contractors who are paid millions of your tax dollars every year to resettle refugees (payment by the head) did the same!  (I repeat for the umpteenth time—where is the ACLU?)

Bryant, a born-again Christian, says he has been able to separate his faith from his work on this bill. He says he would rather donate to organizations who help refugees in the Middle East and North Africa. “My role in the government is to protect South Carolinians. My role as a Christian is to personally support different ministries that reach out to refugees,” he says. “I think we need to separate the commands of Christ from the role of government.”

Read the whole Mother Jones article by clicking here.
Confusion works against the taxpayer!
I believe that much of the reason the Refugee Admissions Program has escaped scrutiny for over 30 years is the confusion that was created when the federal government hired ‘church’ groups to be federal refugee contractors.  Most people who hear about the program for the first time are shocked to learn that ‘Christian’ (and one Jewish group) are being PAID taxpayer dollars to do their supposed charitable work.

German PEGIDA leader to face trial for "hate speech" on Facebook

Invasion of Europe news….
As we have previously reported Facebook boy wonder, Mark Zuckerberg joined forces with the German government a few weeks ago in an agreement to police Facebook more thoroughly for anyone disparaging the immigrant hordes arriving in Germany at Mama Merkel’s invitation.

merkel and zuckerberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-26/merkel-confronts-facebook-s-zuckerberg-over-policing-hate-posts

Seems they caught a big fish in Lutz Bachmann the leader of PEGIDA.

Maybe it’s time to quit Facebook?

Before I get to the news, I want to say that I am thinking that all of you (me included) should begin weaning ourselves from Facebook where we are making boy wonder richer and ever more powerful.
Did you happen to catch the story at USA Today on April 13th?
It is entitled “Zuckerberg steps into political fray” and explains his stepped-up role in the US Presidential race.  Zuckerberg is a leader of the world-wide No Borders movement.  He is a globalist who believes in free trade and the free movement of (cheap) labor around the world, and he has his very own personal ten year plan for how the world should be run.
Here is the news on Mark-the-megalomaniac’s catch from Malta Today:

Lutz Bachmann is accused of inciting racial hatred after he made a series of Facebook posts where he called refugees “cattle” and “trash”.  [I wonder, if he had called his political and business leaders, who want cheap labor, swine or “trash,” would he suffer the same fate?—ed]

The 43-year-old’s trial in Dresden will be held amid tight security.

Pegida’s rallies have attracted thousands of supporters in Germany, with the movement even spreading to numerous countries since launching in 2014.

The group’s demonstrations were in the spotlight this January in Cologne after the Cologne Police Department received a barrage of reports of sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve.

[….]

The court says Mr Bachmann “disrupted public order” through his comments, which constituted an “attack on the dignity” of refugees.

If found guilty, he could face between three months and five years in prison.

Of course, Germany doesn’t have the same free speech protections that we have, but nevertheless, can’t someone figure out a site like Facebook where free speech can reign supreme.
For our complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive, click here.

So much for the Pope's power of persuasion

Invasion of Europe news…..

I wasn’t planning to write about the Pope’s propaganda stunt in Greece late last week where he visited the island of Lesbos and picked 12 lucky Syrian Muslims to take back to Rome with him, but there is one little bit I want you to see in this report from The Guardian.

Pope Yazidi
If he wasn’t going to help Christians, the Pope could have sent an extremely important message if he had taken 12 of the persecuted minority—Yazidis!—back to Rome. Photos: http://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2016/apr/16/pope-francis-europe-visits-lesbos-in-pictures

One of the major themes throughout the last nearly nine years that I’ve written this blog has been the criticism toward phony Christian/Jewish charity that depends on stealing from taxpayers in order to help the downtrodden all the while claiming credit for being charitable.
I don’t consider that charity—taking Caesar’s money and transferring it from one group of people to another isn’t charity!  But, it has become such an established practice no one seems to think about it anymore.
So, see this toward the end of The Guardian story (which by the way does not tell us if the Pope’s 12 Syrian Muslims will live completely on the Vatican’s dime and not the Italian government—something I doubt we will ever learn because the answer is probably that the Italian taxpayer will be footing their bill for years to come).

Get this! the Pope has been unable to persuade European Catholic Dioceses to take in refugee families!

Is it because they are primarily Muslim ‘refugees,’ or because the churches have become so conditioned to the concept that ‘Christian’ charitable money comes from the taxpayer that they no longer want to pony-up out of their own private funds?  A little of both? Who knows?

The three families, who had initially set their sights on reaching Germany or another European country, were expected to seek asylum in Italy.

Their arrival brings to about 20 the number of refugees living in the Vatican, which has fewer than 1,000 inhabitants. A similar intake across Europe would see 6 million people given asylum on the continent of 300 million. [Does the Vatican give them special Muslim prayer rooms, etc.—ed]

Last year, the pope appealed to every Catholic diocese in Europe to take in a refugee family, an appeal that fell on deaf ears across most parts of the continent.

The number of migrants arriving in Greece has fallen drastically since Turkey agreed to take back all those landing on the Greek islands in return for billions in EU cash and other concessions.

And, by the way, never forget that it is Turkey that originally allowed the launch of hundreds of thousands of Middle Easterners and Africans from their shores to invade Europe. Most of the Syrian Muslims were safe in Turkey.
For all of our posts on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ click here.   And, don’t forget, it was this Pope who first welcomed the invaders to Europe when he blessed the migrants on Lampedusa in 2013.

Heads-up Aberdeen, South Dakota! New resettlement site being proposed

Update: State Department admits today that the Syrian Sunni surge to America is on, and readers that is why you will see many more stories like this one from South Dakota—they need to find places to put them!
People ask me all the time, how will I know if my town is next?  The only way you will know is by picking up little tidbits of information like this from South Dakota Public Radio.  Hat tip: Joanne

Mike mayor
Aberdeen Mayor Mike Levsen: ““We need workers, and we certainly would be glad to have more friends and neighbors and more children in our schools and more cultures that we can learn from.” [And you get to pay for it all while big business gets cheap labor!]
There is no organized advanced planning for the secretive UN/US State Department resettlement sites.
There is no proper notice to communities. There will be no input from you, the taxpayer paying for all of this.  The process is one big free-for-all with federal contractors, like the Lutherans here, scrambling (especially now!) to find ‘welcoming’ communities with government subsidized housing as the Obama refugee surge has moved into high gear.
[Please see my previous post on the 100-mile radius, because as they move them out from the bulls-eye, they create ever-expanding target ranges for resettlement.—ed]
And, as you read and listen to the public radio story, I want you to think about this!
As infuriating as it is, it is one thing to sign the new refugees up for their “services” (aka welfare, food stamps, education, medical care), but now we see an expanding need to follow previously resettled refugees around the country as they move on their own to make sure they have a federal contractor to hold their hands to get their “services” wherever they move!

Do they ever stop being ‘clients’ of federal contractors?

And, notice that when “integration” is discussed (not ASSIMILATION) that integration seems to be linked somehow to their “services”— to their welfare?  What! no integration without a connection to the taxpayer teat?
From South Dakota Public Radio:

South Dakota could eventually have another direct resettlement site for refugees. A refugee is someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence. Currently any refugees who migrate to South Dakota arrive in Sioux Falls or Huron. A number of them choose to secondarily migrate to Aberdeen, and officials are considering making that city a direct resettlement site.

Tim Jurgens
Tim Jurgens, State Refugee Coordinator. SD is a Wilson-Fish state (see what that means below).

Tim Jurgens is the State Refugee Coordinator. He directs the Center for New Americans with Lutheran Social Services. Jurgens says he and others are trying to figure out the number of refugee eligible individuals that currently live in Aberdeen, to see if there’s a need to make it a direct resettlement site.

“Currently if they secondarily migrate into Aberdeen, so they arrive somewhere else, and they secondarily choose to move, it creates a bit of an issue,” Jurgens says. “Because when folks secondarily migrate, you don’t necessarily have all of the information you want or need for effective integration. Secondly, the funding is not necessarily going to be there immediately to assist the community. And then third, it’s just that you don’t know what services they’ve already achieved or already had, so you have to really restart that process for appropriate integration from a delayed time frame. So those would be the advantages to being a direct resettlement site.”

In summary, they can have a much faster delivery system of your money to refugees if they have an office in your town!

By the way, the Lutheran Social Services office in Huron is within 100 miles of Aberdeen, so there is no reason to set up a satellite office!
There is much, much, more to get you angry, continue reading here.
Some in North Dakota get it!  Come on South Dakota! Your governor could stop this in a heart beat!
As a Wilson-Fish state (see TN close to filing a States’ rights lawsuit) there is no role for elected representatives of the people in South Dakota, decisions are made about who is resettled there by Lutheran Social Services and the Obama Administration.

Just now as I had a look at other news here at RRW about South Dakota I was reminded of the 2014 Iraqi refugee sex trafficking case, here.

And, don’t miss this, there is some sort of funny business between BIG Meat (cheap immigrant labor)/the city and a federal immigrant visa program in Aberdeen already.
 

Interview with Anne Richard (Asst. Sec. of State) is revealing!

We learn that Irish immigrants at one time were as dangerous for America as Islamic terrorists and that refugee kids are cute!
Anne Richard cspan
I just want to give you two quotes from the woman who is at the top of the food chain when it comes to bringing third worlders to your towns.
Anne Richard is the Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration. She is one of several government employees involved with refugee resettlement who move in and out of government as employees first of federal contractors. (She was previously a VP at the International Rescue Committee.)
This is an interview with NPR where she knows her emotion-driven audience:
First, while responding to questions about terrorists getting in to the US as Syrian refugees, she equates the situation now with when the Irish came to America in large numbers (an aside: always remember that when the great waves of Irish came, they could not access welfare!).
Here she suggests that fear of them at the time is on the same level as our fear of ISIS today.

RICHARD: No, I think we’re trying to put together the best program possible. What I worry about the political discussion is it endangers this American tradition. And we have seen in the past that, you know, the Irish were too dangerous to bring in because they were going to be drunkards and hotheaded and backward.

And, further along in the interview, she demonstrates that she is driven by emotion (or at least trained to use that appeal)!
To me, to us, this is about being clear-eyed about the economic and social welfare of our communities.  This is about public policy decision-making.  This is about the costs to our economy. This is about whether there are unemployed Americans seeking work.
This is not about whether immigrants are nice people or their kids are cute!  
One of their favorite tricks (watch for it in your community) when you question the wisdom of inviting large numbers of impoverished people to your town, is that they want to drag out the poor refugees/immigrants as pawns to parade them before you in order to pull on your heart strings.
Here is Richard’s revealing comment to NPR:

RICHARD: Well, I meet a lot of refugees. And I find that when people meet refugees, they get it. They get the fact that these are families and that these are people who are really struggling and that they are resilient because they’ve already survived getting out of their countries. And so I think that Americans need to see more of the faces of refugees like I have. When you meet the individuals, the families, they have kids that are cute. They have grandparents who are wise. They have parents who are caring and want to help everybody.

I am sure all of those things are true, but they still don’t stack up to a clear-eyed economic analysis about whether mass migration of very needy people is good for American wise grandparents, caring parents, and cute children!
One more thought (I’m laughing when I think of it!):  Imagine the next time there is a refugee-promoting meeting in your town, and you bring out some impoverished senior citizens, some out of work vets, a few disabled Americans in need of subsidized housing and some poor/hungry American children to demonstrate your point.  Can you imagine the howls of outrage on the other side that we might play their same game!