Our friend Leo Hohmann at World Net Daily tells us what he thinks of the Trump Administration’s weakness on the refugee issue.
From WND. Read it all, but here is the wrap-up:
Hohmann does not believe Trump is taking the refugee resettlement issue seriously enough. The veteran journalist warned in his book there is a historic demographic shift of Muslims out of the Middle East and Africa into Western Europe, Canada and the U.S. That shift is known as “civilization jihad,” and the resettlement of Muslim refugees in the West is one component of it.
“Stealth Invasion” is the ONLY full length book critical of US refugee policy.
“This is a situation where 1,500 foreign nationals are entering our country now every week,” Hohmann cautioned. “In many cases, when they come from chaotic, broken nations like Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, we have no idea who these people are and are simply accepting whatever story they give us about their so-called persecution.Yet, we allow Christians who are legitimately under a genocide in Iraq and Syria to languish there unprotected.
“Something must change, and soon, or there will be no more hint of Christianity in the Middle East, which is where the faith took root 2,000 years ago. Trump the candidate seemed to understand these troubling trends, but Trump the president seems confused, misdirected and ill-advised.”
Hohmann wishes Trump would fight the establishment on the refugee issue the same way he fought it on the climate change issue.
“I’d like to see the president approach the refugee issue with the same wisdom, energy and courage with which he approached the Paris climate-change deal,” the writer stated. “It took a lot of guts to defy the globalists and pull out of that bad deal, so we know President Trump has it in him to take on these entrenched, anti-American interests.”
It is truly insane. You really must unload on the White House and on your members of Congress and Senators to stop this awful “deal” with Australia.
If you are new to RRW, see my post here last week and be sure to read Nayla Rush’s (CIS) detailed accounting of the insanity,here.
From Today Online:
SYDNEY – The United States will tell dozens of refugees held in an Australian-run offshore detention center whether they will be offered resettlement in America within six weeks, two detainees told Reuters on Friday.
The deadline marks the first concrete timetable for a U.S.-Australia refugee swap arrangement that sparked tensions between the strong allies after President Donald Trump described it as “a dumb deal” for America.
So whose brilliant idea was this? According to Nayla Rush at CIS, it was Anne Richard, Obama’s Asst. Sec. of State for PRM who said this: Richard told reporters she was approached by the Australian embassy in Washington, D.C.: “When the Australians first came to us my motivation was let’s do this, let’s make this happen, we have got to get these individuals to a better place.”
U.S. officials representing Homeland Security this week returned to Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island, home to one of two Australian-administered detention centers in the Pacific, to conduct medical examinations on 70 men.
Extreme vetting involved six hours of questioning (oh boy, that is rough)! Any chance they used lie detector tests?
The men last month completed “extreme vetting” interviews that lasted up to six hours, with in-depth questions on associates, family, friends and any interactions with the Islamic State militant group.
After completing the medical tests, refugees were told to expect a decision on their resettlement applications within six weeks, two of the Manus Island detainees told Reuters.
[….]
It is not clear how many of the 70 men vetted will be accepted for resettlement in the United States. The refugees include men from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Myanmar. [These from Myanmar, aka Burma, are likely Rohingya Muslims.—ed]
[….]
In exchange, Australia has pledged to take Central American refugees from a center in Costa Rica, where the United States has taken in a larger number of people in recent years. [A ‘deal’ implies that both sides get something. Again, why are any mostly economic migrants who got to Costa Rica our problem?—ed]
The swap is designed, in part, to help Australia close one of its offshore centers that is expensive to run and has been widely criticized by the United Nations and others over treatment of detainees.
[….]
Australia’s hardline immigration policy requires asylum seekers intercepted at sea trying to reach Australia to be sent for processing to camps at Manus and on the South Pacific island of Nauru. They are told they will never be settled in Australia.
So Australia has a hardline immigration policy and we bail them out??? And, to add insult to injury, you won’t be told if any of Australia’s illegal aliens (they are not refugees!) will be placed in your towns!
Illegal aliens (or legitimate refugees) who get to Australia are Australia’s problem, not ours! Imagine a scenario where some Africans came across our southern border, asked for asylum (although there is no way of screening them) and we asked Australia to take them. Would that ever happen? No! And, remember this! Australia needs us more than we need them! Continue here.
President Trump’s first instinct to call this a “dumb deal” was right, the only thing dumber is to know that and go ahead with it anyway!
For my complete Australia archive, go here where this becomes post #204. Photo:Anne Richard was the Asst. Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) for Obama. She came to that job from the International Rescue Committee (I wrote about them yesterday, here). She represents the classic revolving door since she worked earlier in her career at the DOS, then went to the private contractor job, and then back to dole out refugees and your money to her contractor comrades. Click herefor my archive on Richard.
The Deep State is running PRM! (probably with the help of the Obama shadow government, including Richard, in DC).
One of Trump’s great failings is that he has put no one loyal to him in a leadership role in PRM, so they are outmaneuvering him on refugees!
Hey Malcolm, these mostly Muslim boat people are not our problem!
Check out the news here at Australia’s Nine News.
So here’s my idea!
Donald Trump could get the last laugh by cancelling the “dumb deal” Obama agreed to that would bring up to 1,250 of Australia’s unwanted so-called ‘refugees’, presently held in offshore detention facilities, to (your!) American towns.
Bringing them here would save Turnbull’s political neck, while American taxpayers foot the bill and risk our lives! Some deal!
See my post yesterdayabout the deal! (A deal implies both sides get something!).
Looking for something you can do?
Contact the White House and tell them to scrap the “dumb deal” with Australia! Click here.
Then tell your Congressman too!
Electing Donald Trump has apparently changed nothing in the way local refugee resettlement agencies contracted by the federal government treat taxpayers—the very people paying their salaries!
I’m beginning to get calls from some of you working in your communities telling me that you are (again!) being barred from “stakeholder” meetings.
For new readers “stakeholder” meetings occur in resettlement towns and cities usually quarterly and it is where the contractor gets together with impacted agencies and departments in your town—like the school system people, health officials, criminal justice officials, and sometimes non-profit group members who are supportive of more refugees for the town. Not usually admitted are concerned members of the taxpaying public who might want a smaller number brought to their neighborhoods.
(At this time of year they often talk about how many refugees your town can take in the coming fiscal year.) State Department bureaucrat Larry Bartlett told then Senator Jeff Sessions that there is “consultation” in towns targeted for resettlement. What he didn’t say is that anyone in opposition was not welcome to the meeting!
I had to laugh during testimony to the Senate in 2015 when Lawrence Bartlett, with a straight face, told Senator Jeff Sessions that refugee planning for towns was done in full and open planning meetings called “stakeholder” meetings and implied the consultation was open to all citizens of the towns. (Come to think of it, maybe he doesn’t know that his contractors are turning people away!)
This is what I saidin October 2015 (reporting on Sessions’ hearing) about “consultation” and stakeholder meetings:
Consultation is a joke!
Near the end of the hearing, Senator Sessions asked about whether there was consultation with the communities that would be receiving the refugees, and Lawrence Bartlett (US State Department) said with a straight face that there are quarterly consultations with stakeholders and elected officials.
He did not mention that the taxpaying public is prohibited from attending! He did not mention that if elected officials are hostile, they aren’t invited. He did not mention that in many communities there is no quarterly meeting. He did not mention that the meeting usually only involves ‘stakeholders’ that are friendlies. Go here to a post we wrote in May about the efforts by citizens in St. Cloud, MN to get into a ‘quarterly consultation’ (while ‘leaders of the Somali ‘community’ had been invited), but were told initially that they were not permitted to attend. (After a public outcry, a few representatives of the concerned public did eventually gain entry to a sanitized meeting.)
Readers are always asking me what they can do. You can do this!
Go here and find a contractor operating near you (even one within a hundred miles).
Call them and ask when the next ‘stakeholder’ meeting is scheduled and tell them you want to come. If they say no, call your member of Congressand complain. I know you think they are useless, but you must hound them!
While you have the contractor (they call themselves ‘affiliates’) on the phone ask for the 2017 R & P ABSTRACT. They may pretend they don’t know what you are talking about, but be polite and persistent.
Even if we should be seeing the documents before they go to Washington, they are not going to give you the FY18 one they are working on at this minute, but there is no reason for them to withhold the 2017 version. Tell them you want all of the pages including any letters of support attached.
The best one I ever saw is this one from Reno, Nevada. BTW, they tout Tesla as one of the global companies looking for laborers.
For FY18, they will claim it is a planning document not yet submitted to the US State Department. The ABSTRACT is the document in which they justify how many refugees your town could get starting on October 1, 2017 and you should have every right to know what they are asking for.
I’ve talked about those documents here at RRW until I’m blue in the face. Use my search function for the words R & P Abstracts.
The Trump team did not need an Executive Order for this—for creating more transparency and involvement in the local planning process!
Sure hope he is working on this because it would only require some regulatory tweeks, not an EO!
When the Trump team came in to office and crafted those now stalled Executive Orders, they said this (below) in the first order. I see no reason why this effort should be stalled and I sure hope that they are working on it behind the scenes. They can accomplish this goal with some simple regulatory tweeks!
However, from what I’m hearing about the process on-going in communities, nothing is changing. Secrecy is still the watchword as much now as it was under Obama.
Here is what the early Trump EO said about a larger role for targeted states and communities:
“It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.”
If anything the Dept. of State has become more secretive. I could be wrong, but I don’t believe they held an annual scoping meeting that normally happened in May (for all the years I’ve been writing this blog) where they at least pretended to get public input about the program.
This news was all over my alerts yesterday morning (one version of the story at Business Insider):
Study finds refugees actually pay the US government thousands more than they get from it
The glowing (and deceptive) report was clearly released now as a run-up to World Refugee Day next Tuesday and has probably been widely distributed on Capitol Hill by the legion of lobbyists for the refugee industry.
My reaction was that the conclusions fly in the face of all common sense. And, LOL!, I wondered right away whether they included the costs to the criminal justice system. Imagine how much those life prison terms of some refugee murderers and terrorists cost the American taxpayer! Esar Met, a Burmese refugee raped and murdered a little girl in his apartment complex shortly after arriving in the US (he had surely not paid in any taxes yet!) and is doing life in prison. Someone with some economic training and the interest should figure out what it costs taxpayers for these expensive trials and life sentences. One of my many posts on Met is here: https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2014/01/14/utah-medical-examiner-little-girl-suffered-excruciating-pain-before-dying-from-tear-to-heart/
So, I wondered if there was a rebuttal and sure enough there is!
If you see the deceptive news published in your newspaper, you must respond with a ‘letter to the editor’ using key points of Jason Richwine’s rebuttal. You can’t let their propaganda go unanswered.
The Center for Immigration Studiesresponded here this morning (emphasis is mine):
Refugees do not pay their own way
A working paper released this week by Notre Dame economists William Evans and Daniel Fitzgerald makes the head-scratching claim that refugees, despite below-average incomes and high rates of welfare use, pay $21,000 more in taxes than they receive in benefits during their first 20 years in the United States. Immigration-boosting wonks such as Matt Yglesias and Dylan Matthews immediately trumpeted the findings, and the Washington Post and FiveThirtyEight added favorable write-ups.
They should have been more skeptical. The claim that refugees contribute more in taxes than they receive in benefits is simply implausible.
[….]
So how does the Evans-Fitzgerald paper come to such an implausible result? First, the authors count all (or nearly all) taxes paid by refugees but reduce the services they receive to six social programs — cash welfare, SSI, Social Security, food stamps, Medicare, and Medicaid. All other costs that governments might incur from immigration — housing, infrastructure, education, law enforcement, and so on — do not count.
Second, they fail to adjust for the underreporting of those social programs…
[….]
Third, the paper excludes refugees’ minor children. When refugees cannot afford to provide food, housing, or medical care to their children, taxpayers foot the bill. Most of those costs are omitted.
Fourth, the authors restrict the refugee age range to 18-65, cutting off the analysis just before the age where most people stop working and begin participating in the nation’s costly retirement programs.
By the way, we bring in a significant number of refugees to the US over the age of 65 who immediately draw on SSI. More here.
Don’t miss CIS’s previous detailed study of the cost of refugees to taxpayers, here. Middle Easterners are especially expensive!
This is posted in my ‘What you can do’ category (created because new readers are asking). If you see the deceptive report mentioned in your local newspaper do not let it go unanswered!Send a letterto your member of Congress too and tell him or her (in advance) to watch for the propaganda (Big Lie!) campaign about refugees supposedly adding to the US economy. (The cheap labor supply might add to the bottomline at Tyson Foods, but not to the overall economy!).
