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 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.”
Pittsburgh’s Jewish refugee resettlement agency, HIAS vow to continue work after threats, Squirrel Hill shooting
The story paints a picture of a ‘non-profit‘ group that is all about welcoming the poor and downtrodden to America, but never mentions the fact that it is more than 50% funded by US and state taxpayers many of whom do not share its open-borders views and would prefer their tax dollars be spent on America’s needy people.
HIAS received $186 million from taxpayers in the last ten years, here. Its CEO is paid over $300,000 annually.
And, like virtually all mainstream media stories about the horrific attack on innocents, The Post-Gazette, mentions not one word about that fact that HIAS is paid to do its ‘good works’ by the US government.
It is fine and dandy if HIAS wants to hold anti-Trump political rallies, sue the President and organize for the Tuesday midterms, but doing those things while accepting millions of taxpayer dollars every year strikes most people as fundamentally unfair!
This is from an anti-Trump protest in January of this year put on by Church World Service, HIAS and CAIR https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2018/01/28/church-world-service-and-hias-join-cair-to-protest-at-white-house/
Here is a bit from the deficient Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story:
The Jewish refugee resettlement agency in Pittsburgh remains defiant in its work despite the connection Saturday’s mass shooting at a Squirrel Hill synagogue shared with its mission.
[….]
“These [sites] are echo chambers where people just get angrier and angrier and angrier about falsehoods,” said Mark Hetfield, CEO and president of HIAS — formerly the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society. “I mean, what harm was this congregation doing by welcoming refugees in a religious service?”
Charity Navigator reports that in 2016, HIAS was 58.5% funded by government grants mostly to resettle refugees. https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3820
Mr. Hetfield said that he’s aware of several “hate sites and hate sites masquerading as issue-oriented sites” that have attacked the work of HIAS and JFCS.
“But they’ve just been words so far, but as we see now, words lead to action.”
Mr. Hetfield said HIAS has in the past had a designated person monitor social media for threats but the organization will be “totally changing” its strategy.
“I mean we did not know about this murderer on Gab, we were not following Gab.We do not follow these hate-filled fora, but we need to,” he said. “And then we need to figure out what do we do when we see things. We see things every day against us.”
That is an example of how out of touch with most Americans these open borders leftwing groups are, they didn’t know about Gab? This is a prime example of why the Dems were so shocked at the 2016 election of Donald Trump.
Mr. Hetfield said the physical security strategy has changed as well since Saturday. Armed guards now surround HIAS offices in New York City and Silver Spring, Md. He likened the change to how he felt after 9/11.
JFCS has begun closely monitoring social media and re-evaluating security since the attack happened; it had also not known about Mr. Bowers prior to Saturday.
See if you can find one word about how HIAS is a US State Department contractor that is paid by the head to place refugees in towns and cities of their choosing (behind closed doors in conjunction with the US State Department).
If HIAS, the US State Department, and the mainstream media were transparent and honest about how refugee resettlement is carried out in America, citizen taxpayers wouldn’t get so frustrated.
So, why aren’t they more transparent?
I have a guess, but I would like to hear what they say for a change!
Endnote: I did see an AP story sometime in the last week that did mention (briefly!) that HIAS receives taxpayer dollars, but couldn’t find it again.
That UN Global Compact for Migration could crumble as more countries signal they won’t sign the document in Morocco in December.
We told you about it here recently. President Trump took us out at the very beginning and then Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban also said no way.
Sounds warm and fuzzy, so what is the problem? Those who have studied the draft say it would make migration a human right. In other words everyone would have a right to move wherever they wish. There would be no more legal migration process.
From the liberal Irish Times(so they don’t clearly mention the real crux of the problem):
Poles and Czechs follow Austria and Hungary in rejecting UN migration pact
Anti-immigration leaders in central Europe follow US lead in opposing global framework
Poland and the Czech Republic are set to join Hungary and Austria in pulling out of a United Nations pact on migration, as populist central European governments attack the deal before it is even signed.
Arbour: But we just want to control migration chaos via the United Nations!
The Global Compact For Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration was agreed in July by all UN members except the United States, and sets out norms for protecting and integrating people who migrate and ways to help them return home.
The pact is non-binding and recognises each state’s right to its own migration policy, but a growing number of anti-immigration leaders in central Europe are now rejecting it ahead of next month’s signing ceremony in Morocco.
“It is very likely that, like Austria, the Czech Republic and the United States, we will not be part of the UN global compact,” Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki said on Friday.
“We believe that here our regulations, our sovereign rules on border protection and migration control are our absolute priority.”
A day earlier, Czech prime minister Andrej Babis declared that he also opposed the pact.
“It’s not clearly interpreted and it could be abused. The United States has pulled out, Hungary too, now Austria, and Poland is debating it as well,” he said.
“I don’t like the fact that it blurs the distinction between legal and illegal migration. . . I will propose to partners in the government that we should do the same as Austria and Hungary,” he added ahead of cabinet talks on the pact next week.
I would like to know exactly what was left out of Babis’s statement in that previous quote!
