Category: The Opposition

Wanted: US Muslim families to “adopt” kids from camps

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Muslim kids of course.

Sheesh, and I thought the burgeoning ‘unaccompanied minors program’ of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (in the US Dept. of Health and Human Services) only took in kids who had come across our borders or had been abandoned by their parents when the family came across the border.  Now, we learn we are plucking ‘kids’ (16, 17, 18 year olds?) from camps elsewhere in the world, who supposedly have no parents/no family, and bringing them to the US.  And, you are paying for this!

Linda Hartke, CEO of Lutheran Immigration Services, will help facilitate the Muslim “adoptions.”

I recently mentioned the astronomical size of this program, here, in my report on the Lancaster meeting, and wondered about the huge number of kids I thought were coming across the borders.  Now we know they aren’t just ‘finding their way’ to the US on their own!  And, notice the word “orphan” isn’t being used.  This is what I learned in Lancaster:

In 2012, 14,700 kids arrived in the US without parents and in 2013 the number is expected to be 20,000.

Thanks to Creeping Sharia for tipping us off about this story at the Muslim Link:

It  has been nearly six months since the U.S. Government launched the Action Plan on Children in Adversity at the White House.  [here is a link to the Obama Administrations Action Plan—ed]

[….]

The Action Plan represents the first-ever whole-of-government strategic guidance for the U.S. Government’s international assistance for children.

[….]

The Joint Council on International Children’s Services, a Virginia-based NGO has been working for decades on the pillar of advocating for children in family care – especially for those around the globe who may be growing up on the streets or in orphanages or other institutions.

[….]

In the greater Washington DC area, government agencies identify refugee youth overseas (often living in camps outside of their country of origin) who are eligible for resettlement but who do not have a parent or a relative in the US. Due to their age (under 18), these children are placed into the Unaccompanied Refugee Minors program and receive refugee foster care services and benefits.   [Ahhhh!  What about a parent or relative right there in the camp?—ed]

One of these benefits is placement in a compatible home with matching ethnicity, language, and religion where possible.  The placing agencies are always seeking families to volunteer to help these teens by providing a home as they are receiving schooling (which may have been interrupted in their country of origin or while they were living in a camp) and be involved with their case-specific programs with an aim to helping them achieve eventual independence by their early 20s.

So we could see a youth  of 17 or 18 (who says he has no parent) plucked from a refugee camp for Syrians brought to the US to be “adopted” by an American Muslim family and then when he turns say 21, he just becomes one more alien on the path to US citizenship who will also be able to bring in his family who will surely be ‘discovered’ at about that time!

And, to top it off, the family who “adopts” the teen gets paid by you—the American taxpayer—to care for the child!  Some racket!  And, look who is here—LIRS and the USCCB (getting paid to make the arrangements)!

The two leading placement organizations, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, are especially keen to work with the Muslim community in our area since it is likely they could find matches for many of the children enrolled in the program. Specialized training in helping these children adjust to their new life and situation is a part of becoming involved as is a background check.  Financial support for participation is provided.   [Yippee!  They will get paid for their “charitable” work!—-ed]

I sure hope LIRS and the USCCB are doing some really good screening of American families—sure would hate to hear about a sexual abuse charge or a slavery charge (wasn’t it only a week or so ago a Saudi woman was charged with keeping aliens as slaves?)

Photo:  More on LIRS and Hartke’s Baltimore digs. See ‘Don’t break our rice bowls!‘

 Have a look at a recent Form 990 for Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, page 9. They had income in that year of $31,653,748 and, of that, you, the taxpayers of America, gave them $30,376,568.  Their CEO makes $204,186 in salary and benefits.  (Doing well, by doing good!  Hartke’s bio is here.)

Academic: We will have to find new territory to move whole populations of climate refugees….

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

….and to insist they have “collective governance” to maintain their cultures.

Professor Shuppert of Queens University Belfast. Maybe he could bring a few climate refugees to his home? Photo from his facebook page.

I can’t believe that anyone is spending time writing an academic paper like this one based on the phoney climate change (first called global warming!) science.  Professor Fabian Shuppert of Queens University Belfast is doing just that.

Haven’t people moved throughout time based on changes in climate and changing environmental factors?  Seems like one big fat excuse for the ‘great minds’ to re-order world governance to me.

His treatise reads like a Socialist wet dream!

You can read his entire 22-page draft, here,  but below are just a few snippets to pique your interest.

It is titled: Governing climate refugees: Self-determination, cultural integrity and finding new territory.  He is talking about moving whole Nations!

Introduction

Global climate change is going to lead to the displacement of millions of human beings.

[….]

The aim of this paper is to focus on a particularly drastic and challenging case of climate refugees, namely the forced migration of a complete nation, and to present a possible governance solution, which plays off both ethical and political considerations.

 The question I want to focus on is if the people of an entire nation have to relocate,where should they go and on the basis of which rights? In so doing, the paper hopes to offer a somewhat realistic picture of how the international community with its diverse array of political, economic and ethical viewpoints might react to the complex challenge of governing entire collectives of climate refugees.

[….]

The paper is divided into three sections. Section one sets out the preliminaries by explaining what kind of migrants the paper talks about and why the case of entire collectives needing a new place to live is a particularly interesting and challenging one,the solution to which might also help in devising appropriate governance in response to other cases of climate refugees. Section two takes a look at different rights all climate refugees might have, such as the right to (individual) free movement and the right to collective self-determination, arguing that future climate refugee governance should be based on collective rights, in conjunction with the protection of every refugee’s individual basic human rights.

Section three offers an account of a possible response to the problem set out in section one in light of the rights discussed in section two, while taking the issue of political interests into account. While the projected solution might not satisfy ideal ethical theory it hopefully offers a convincing account of a rights-based response in a non-ideal world.

So where do we move them?  Shuppert says there is lots of unused land, we must just convince the owners to “hand it over” to the refugees!

Finding territory in general is actually not such a big problem. While there is hardly any un-owned land, there certainly exists plenty of land on which nobody lives and which thus could theoretically be used as a new home for climate refugees. However, the task of finding uninhabited land which is good enough in order to sustain its new population, with the necessary features to satisfy the cultural life world condition is much more difficult. Moreover, and that seems to be possibly the largest obstacle, the current owner of the land would still have to agree to hand over the territory to the climate refugees.

Hey, good luck with that!  Come to think of it, there is a lot of unused land in Saudi Arabia!

For new readers, see our climate refugees category by clicking here.

Are asylum seekers illegal immigrants? Malta publication tries to regain control of the language

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment
LOL! I’m thinking they used the wrong photo to illustrate their point—this guy looks a little rough to be “vulnerable.” Don’t you think?

Frankly, I can’t tell if the Malta Independent has published a news article or an opinion piece with this title: Are asylum seekers illegal immigrants?

What alien entering a country such as Malta would enter with any other story than he/she was seeking asylum?  They are not stupid.  So, I say they are illegal aliens until proven otherwise.

There must be a lot of people who agree with me and thus the Open Borders word-police are trying to regain control of the language with this below.

From the Malta Independent:

 Asylum seekers who arrive in Malta by boat are neither engaging in illegal activity, nor are they immigrants. [Aliens then?—ed]

The UN Refugee Convention (to which Malta is a signatory) recognises that refugees have a right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, irrespective of how they arrive or whether they hold valid travel or identity documents.  

The Convention, to which Malta is legally bound, stipulates that what would usually be considered as illegal actions, such as entering a country without a visa, should not be treated as illegal if a person is seeking asylum.

This means that it is incorrect to refer to asylum seekers who arrive without authorisation as “illegal”, as they in fact have a right to enter the country to seek asylum.

In line with Malta’s obligations under the Convention, Malta permits unauthorised entry into the country for the purposes of seeking asylum. Asylum seekers do not break any Maltese laws simply by arriving on boats or without authorisation.   [Let’s see—five paragraphs say the very same thing in each one, do you dummies get the message now?—ed]

Such allowances are made because it is not always safe or practicable for asylum seekers to obtain travel documents or travel through authorised channels.

For new readers, here is our archive on Malta.  We follow the illegal alien issue there regularly because the US State Department has brought thousands of illegal alien men, like the one in the photo, to your towns and cities as “refugees” in a perversion of international refugee law.

Hey Mike, those darn Lutherans are busy lobbying again

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Editors note:  Mike is a reader (mikefromlongisland) who commented extensively, here, in the last few days about why and how the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (a 501(c)3 charitable organization) could be lobbying on bills before Congress.  (Imagine your local Tea Party doing such a thing with a 501(c)3 designation—but oops!  Tea Parties aren’t being granted any type of tax-deductible status).

Do all of you Lutherans out there agree with what is being done in the name of your faith?

These are hardcore open borders advocates pushing for more Afghans and Iraqis to be admitted to the US.   This disingenuous article in the Army Times quotes ADVOCATES (aka LOBBYISTS) for two federal refugee resettlement contractors lobbying hard for passage of S.744—Comprehensive Immigration Reform.  (Our archive on the legislative train wreck is here)

Nevermind that they will financially benefit greatly from passage of the Gang of Eight plus Grover bill should it become law.  Their beef this time is that Special Immigrant Visas will be in jeopardy if this bill isn’t passed pronto.

Meeting with Advocates for Immigrants
Pictured in the photo surrounding Congresswoman Roybal-Allard who is seated, from left to right: Brittney Nystrom (Director of Policy and Legal Affairs, National Immigration Forum), now a lobbyist for LIRS.

Remember, the Special Immigrant Visas law for those who “helped” America in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was inserted into a Defense Authorization bill in the dark of night.  Now, it is up for renewal and its extension was slipped into S. 744 (once again no hearings on it).

Maybe before you read the Lutherans view of the Special Immigrant Visa provision in S.744, check out a different view at World Net Daily by Aaron Klein.

Here then is the Army Times (reprinted from Medill News Service).  First they seek to scare readers that some poor translator is going to be beheaded in Iraq or Afghanistan if this program goes away (keep in mind they have had since 2008 to apply):

A law providing special visas to Iraqi and Afghan nationals in danger for helping the U.S. military suffered a blow when the House rejected the Senate’s immigration reform bill Wednesday.

Many of the refugees and their families face grave threats in their homelands as a result of their U.S. government affiliation, and thousands have been killed by their own countrymen, advocacy groups say.

In 2008, Congress passed legislation providing Iraqi and Afghan refugees who assisted the U.S. with special immigrant visas. This included contractors, translators and guides. The 5,000 visas allotted annually to Iraqis are set to expire at the end of September, while the 1,500 visas allotted annually to Afghans will expire in September 2014. The immigration bill would make the visas available until September 2018.

Only 50 special visas are allotted annually for Iraqi and Afghan translators. But in fiscal 2007 and 2008, an amendment to the 2006 National Defense Authorization Act allotted 500 visas for translators.

From fiscal year 2008 to March 2013, 11,647 visas have been allotted to Iraqi and Afghan refugees and 1,693 to translators, according to State Department data.

Director of Advocacy=lobbyist!

Those who benefit from the visas are in immediate danger, said Brittany Nystrom, director of advocacy at the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service.

With the immigration reform bill stalled, advocacy efforts have focused on pushing through the visa provision by other means, Nystrom said.

The provision has also been attached to the Senate and House’s National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2014.

Apparently, before taking the lobbying job for the Lutherans, Nystrom lobbied on immigration for the pro-open borders group —National Immigration Forum headed by Ali Noorani. (See photo from the Congresswoman’s website)  We told you about Grover Norquist’s special pal Ali Noorani here in February.

Lavinia Limon of USCRI (one of nine federal refugee contractors). Fox News Latino photo.

And, of course we would expect Ms. Limon to show up in this story.  Now head of a federal refugee contractor, she was Clinton’s director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (the revolving door!).  Here is one of many posts on the lobbying Limon.  And, here she says hire a refugee rather than an American!

The Army Times story continues:

The versions differ slightly in eligibility and the number of visas allotted, but the major difference in the authorization bill is that visas for Iraqis are only extended to 2014, said Lavina Limon, president and CEO of U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.

She said she hopes the version on the immigration reform bill will pass because there are fewer restrictions and the visas would be extended until 2018 rather than 2014 for Iraqis, although she said she is not optimistic.

While there is general agreement that the Iraqis and Afghans, who have provided invaluable support to the U.S., deserve retribution, the program needs a lot of work, she said.

We have no lobbyist in Washington!

Those of us who want to see reform of refugee resettlement, perhaps even a halt to this whole Refugee Resettlement Program have no one in Washington pressing our interests.  Some of the big immigration restriction groups touch on refugee issues from time to time, but really there is no one to counter the huge resources of the contractors who can hire lawyer/lobbyists like Nystrom.  Adding insult to injury—you are paying Nystrom’s salary!

See ‘Don’t break our rice bowls!‘

 Have a look at a recent Form 990 for Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, page 9. They had income in that year of $31,653,748 and, of that, you, the taxpayers of America, gave them $30,376,568.  Their CEO* makes $204,186 in salary and benefits.

96% of their funding comes from you.  No taxpayer funding=No LIRS!

UN closes refugee camp on Libya-Tunisia border, refugees refuse to leave

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

This is one of many enduring legacies Obama’s excellent adventure in Libya has left us.  Actually I should say Obama and his Humanitarian Vulcans—Clinton, Rice and Power—left us!   Tens of thousands of refugees were created when we helped oust Qaddafi.  Many were workers who had gone to Libya to work in the oilfields.  So much for Samantha Power’s “responsibility to protect!”

In truth, perhaps it was the Al-Qaeda rebels she and the girls were protecting.  Just think what a danger Samantha Power will be if confirmed as Obama’s UN Ambassador!

Samantha Power’s refugees at Choucha camp on the Libyan-Tunisian border at the heyday of US involvement in the Libyan conflict.  Photo: Renaud Philippe.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees was eager to close this camp, but the remaining refugees are demanding resettlement to third countries—that means the US, Canada, or Australia, because those three are really resettling the bulk of the world’s refugees

From the Saudi Gazette:

TRIPOLI — Some 650 refugees have refused to leave the Choucha refugee camp at the Tunisian-Libyan border, which officially closed Sunday.

The United Nations refugee agency UNHCR announced the closure of the camp in March but many refugees have stayed on, despite water and electricity supplies being cut off. A Chadian resident, Mussa Ibrahim, confirmed that the camp is still open and continuing to house around 650 residents.

“The camp may be closed theoretically,” he said: “UNHCR said they closed it for administrative reasons, but they did it for media hype.”

He also told the Libya Herald that basic services have been reduced over the last week. The water, he said, was stopped, forcing refugees to fetch water from neighboring areas in Ben Guerdane.

Ibrahim said that the camp’s residents, especially asylum seekers who have had their applications rejected, are waiting for a satisfactory solution.

The Tunisian government’s earlier decision to integrate remaining camp residents into Tunisian society, or return them to Libya, was rejected by some refugees, who asked UNHCR to reconsider their demand to be resettled in Western countries. These individuals are apparently mainly from sub-Saharan Africa, Palestine and Iraq. The Tunisian Ministry of Social Affairs, said Ibrahim, has started taking fingerprints from refugees, on a voluntary basis, in a move to grant some six-month residence permits. “This would also give us free movement in Tunisia,” Ibrahim explained, adding: “Until then, we cannot leave the camp.” However, his permit, which he needs to support his family, has not yet materialized.

By the way, we have been resettling refugees from the Libyan upheaval with the theory that we broke it, we fix it.  Now we are moving on to doing the same thing in Syria!  At my most cynical moments, I think the goal of all of  our involvements in the Middle East is the creation of more refugees.