If Trump only knew Utica, NY story, says resettlement agency employee, he wouldn't be so misguided

11/19/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

But what is the real Utica story?

Easily one of my greatest concerns about the whole resettlement process in the United States, is how can there be such widely divergent views on whether refugees have brought a “robust” economy and multicultural nirvana to a community, or not!

town-that-loves-refugees — Read the 2005 UN propaganda report used to entice (embarrass) other cities into ‘welcoming’ refugees. http://www.unhcr.org/publications/refugeemag/426f4c772/refugees-magazine-issue-138-town-loves-refugees.html

Is there no real investigative journalist willing to go to Utica, spend a little time, talk to everyone involved and report an accurate story about what has happened in the ‘Town that Loves Refugees’ (according to a 2005 United Nations propaganda campaign).
This is one more in those warm and fuzzy stories about how everything is copacetic in Utica. Of course the election of Donald Trump is the news hook for a reporter to once again tell the ‘good’ news about rebuilding cities with refugees.
Take a side trip now to Politico’s county by county breakdown and see that Trump actually won most of New York state including Oneida County (Utica) by a large margin. Presumably Trump’s views on refugees and immigration are in line with the largest numbers of voters in most of the state. Surely if the ‘good’ news on Utica was true after 11 years of beating that drum, the citizens there should all be on the side of more refugees. They apparently are not!
Back to Utica and yet another account of how refugees have supposedly brought boom times to the struggling city.
From the Gloucester Times:

UTICA — More than anywhere else in New York, this city in the Mohawk Valley has embraced people fleeing strife-torn countries.

[….]

But, now, Donald Trump’s election as president is stoking fear among refugees and their advocates, given his anti-immigrant rhetoric and focus on curtailing immigration.

A wall proposed for the Mexican border was a rhetorical fixture of Trump’s campaign, and he’s called refugees a “Trojan horse” whose ranks are infiltrated by “terrorists.”

“It is concerning to us,” said Shelly Callahan, director of the Mohawk Valley Resource Center for Refugees, which coordinates the resettlement of newcomers here. [Mohawk Valley Resource Center is a subcontractor of primary federal resettlement contractor Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service—ed]

[….]

Over the past three decades, Utica has rolled out the welcome mat to an estimated 16,000 refugees.

Here we go again with Chobani Yogurt changing America to supply its labor needs (with the help of a fake ‘charity’):

In Utica, foreign-born people and their children account for about a quarter of the city’s population of 62,000, earning it the United Nations’ distinction as “the town that loves refugees.”

Refugees represent a new pool of immigrant labor, which Callahan said has been a major asset for regional businesses looking to expand or simply trying to fill jobs shunned by workers already living here.

In some cases, businesses that hire refugees are targeted.

One upstate employer that has taken on some refugees living in Utica, the Chobani yogurt plant in Chenango County, has been sharply criticized in recent weeks by a right-wing, pro-Trump website, Breitbart, for hiring Muslim immigrants.

Those reports have unleashed racist rants against Chobani and its founder, Turkish immigrant Hamdi Ulukaya.

[….]

assemblyman-anthony-brindisi — Democrat Assemblyman Anthony Brinidisi: we have “robust” small business growth. But would someone please do a real unbiased economic and social impact study about Utica. LOL! I should do a post just on their favorite words, robust is near the top of the list. Everything from business start-ups to security screening is robust!

In the last decades of the 20th century, Utica shed more than 20,000 jobs with the closings of two nearby General Electric plants, Griffiss Air Force Base in nearby Rome and a Lockheed Martin plant.

Its population of 100,410 people in 1910 had shriveled to 60,000 by 2010.

“Without them, we would have a city with less population, less cultural diversity and not as robust in terms of small business growth as it has been over the past couple of decades,” Brindisi said in an interview.

More here.
I have all sorts of questions and suspect that some economic growth (if it does exist) may well be that federal welfare dollars (remember when Nancy Pelosi famously said food stamps boost the economy!) are flowing to Utica with the refugees which is not real growth but just a redistribution of wealth from one group of taxpayers elsewhere to supply social services for the refugee flood to Utica.

And, here is why I’m posting this story:

There is not one bit of anything negative in here about what changes have been brought to Utica that are not welcome. Reporter Joe Mahoney must not know how to google! (And, this is why local newspapers are going belly-up! The NYT too!)
Where is the mention of how the school system there had to sue the state for more money to manage all the kids in the school system?

Think about Utica, NY before you jump on the “welcoming refugees” bandwagon

Utica (the town that loves refugees) is suing the state of NY for their refugee-generated school funding crisis

How about the story from last summer where the feds gave grants to the Utica area for summer jobs for special teenagers (refugees):

Utica: Give refugees summer jobs or pay for it later

Then, how about:

Utica NY: Latest concern is refugees driving drunk

Utica, NY: Burmese Karen refugee murdered

Large numbers of refugees bring food stamp scammers to town:

More Muslim food stamp scammers arrested, Utica, NY this time

From elsewhere in New York state:

Syracuse, NY refugee story confirms imported immigrant poverty does not revitalize cities

In refugee-saturated Buffalo, NY, violence leaves Burmese refugee paralyzed

New York boosts school budget $1.1 billion to cope with refugee overload

Buffalo, NY: Christians and Jews declining in number, Muslim population increasing

Syracuse: Catholic Church becomes mosque update

Heads up Poughkeepsie, New York: ‘Christian’ charity to bring you Syrian Muslims likely before January 2017

You know what! Go back and look again at how red New York state is, here. Someone in New York should be writing a blog about the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program and pulling all this together!

Report: Charleston, WV pro-Syrian Muslim resettlement rally held

11/17/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

“I don’t think they should be brought here, period!”

(citizen activist Brenda Arthur)

As I told you a few days ago a Charleston ‘Interfaith’ group was planning a rally to push for the resettlement of Syrian refugees to the state capitol. And, as I mentioned then, I am struck by the fact that the rally for refugees was so specific about Syrians when we bring refugees from all over the world (and resettlement contracting agencies don’t get to pick only those ethnic groups they prefer).
Why are they so concerned about Syrians? Why is the Charleston, West Virginia group so discriminatory against other ethnic groups?

And here are my bigger questions: Where is Alex? Where is Shelley? Where is Joe?

manchin — Come on Joe! Even if the Republicans are too squishy to speak up, surely you get it!

Considering that the controversy about the resettlement of Syrian refugees in American towns is one of the major issues that pushed Donald Trump over the finish line last week, shouldn’t we expect elected officials like Rep. Alex Mooney (R) in whose district this rally occurred and US Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R) and Joe Manchin (D) to have the guts to say where they stand on the issue!

Are they for or against this plan from Washington?

One story about the rally is here. There was a counter-rally, so no one can say any longer that there is no opposition to the plan to expand the resettlement of Syrian Muslims (99% of all Syrians entering the US are Muslims) in to West Virginia.
See some of the opposition’s arguments reported at the Charleston Gazette-Mail:

During last year’s rally supporting Syrian refugees, Brenda Arthur stood across the street in protest. She learned of the rally only hours before it was scheduled to begin. She was then one of only two people protesting against it.

This time, she brought a few friends. To them, the reasons to not bring refugees seem endless.

“We had the June flooding disaster, we’ve lost jobs, there have been cuts in school funding and then there’s the drug epidemic,” Arthur said. “We’ve got all of these major problems to deal with. How does it even make sense to bring people here from halfway around the world that are going to need every form of government assistance?”

Arthur, 65, gathered with about a dozen other people in protest of the rally. Their main complaints about settling refugees in Charleston is the fear that they might be sent by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and that tax money would be used to resettle them.

But even if it didn’t cost taxpayers anything to bring refugees to West Virginia, and even if officials could be completely sure that the refugees weren’t sent by ISIS, Arthur still doesn’t want them here.

“I don’t think they should be brought here, period. We should take care of them in their homeland,” Arthur said. “A lot of these people, you know, they’ve been in their tribal land for thousands of years, and now they’re uprooted, brought to a new culture — in many cases a culture that has nothing to do with them. Our values are antithetical to a lot of things that they believe.”

See our complete archive on the West Virginia controversy by clicking here.

Hudson,Wisconsin Catholic Church asked to resettle five Syrian families in departure from normal resettlement process

11/17/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

First, this proposal to a specific Catholic Church to effectively become a resettlement agency in a town with no resettlement office tells me that the refugee industry is getting desperate.

Frankly, as Congress has not appropriated enough money for Obama’s large refugee numbers for FY17 (already underway) because it has not acted on the budget for the upcoming year, contractors like the US Conference of Catholic Bishops are looking for ways to pawn off some of their responsibilities on, in this case, an individual church.
Members of St. Patrick’s Catholic Church are apparently in the process of deciding if they will take responsibility for five (most likely Muslim since 99% of the Syrians entering the US now are Muslims) families. (I saw this story almost a week ago, so maybe they have already decided.)

st-patrick-hudson — US Conference of Catholic Bishops attempting to get the most bang for their federal bucks by not opening an office while turning over responsibility for Syrian families to a specific church.

This is a huge undertaking. I watched as a church near where I live in 2007 took on the responsibility for one family and it was an enormous chore that didn’t end well. My local story is a long story, but members of St. Patricks must be prepared for many duties not the least of which is shuttling refugees in their own cars to myriad appointments (doctors, schools, social service departments) and often to jobs for months (one of the first things volunteers ultimately become weary of!).
And, one of the other things that volunteers tire of is the lack of appreciation some ethnic groups of refugees show for volunteers. I can’t say that will happen here, but the fun and excitement of taking care of Africans and Middle Easterners wears thin when the refugees act entitled.
One more thing before I get to the story: Hudson, Wisconsin is on the border of Minnesota. Normally a federal contractor has an office within a hundred miles of where it places the refugees, but the three offices maintained by the Bishops in Wisconsin (Greenbay, Sheboygan, and Milwaukee) are all hundreds of miles away. However, the USCCB office in St. Paul, Minnesota is only 18 miles from Hudson so I assume that out-of-state office will be sending the federal money to St. Patrick’s. My first thought is that the USCCB is now making decisions from over the border in Minnesota for what happens in another state.
Here is the news from the Hudson Star-Observer:

Rev. John Gerritts and St. Patrick’s Church received a call from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for the parish to assist with the resettlement of five Syrian refugee families from a camp in Turkey to Hudson. The church has not yet made a decision.

The conference is one of several organizations that helps with the federal government’s refugee resettlement program. Through the program, the U.S. will admit 85,000 refugees this year [reporter has it wrong, that was FY16, the number for FY17 is 110,000—ed] , according to the U.S. State Department.

These five refugee families have been vetted by the government and approved for resettlement in the United States, a process that can take between 18 and 24 months, Gerritts explained.

hudson-map — Hudson is right across the state line from a huge resettlement area (mostly Somali refugee resettlement) in Minnesota.

“It’s quite thorough and lengthy,” Gerritts said. “They are fully approved to move here. This is working through the government.”

Hudson was selected as the families’ new home because they indicated they had a relative in Hudson during the vetting process. [One relative and five families are coming? Sounds fishy—ed]

Whether or not these five refugee families come to Hudson is not up to the church, as they have already been approved by the federal government. Instead St. Patrick’s is being asked to be a resource to spearhead the resettlement.

[….]

Usually, after a location for resettlement is determined, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops will reach out to an agency in the area that specializes in resettlement. The Hudson community does not have an agency like this, so instead St. Patrick’s has been asked to assist. St. Patrick’s is one of the first parishes in the country who have been asked to take on this role.

[….]

St. Patrick’s would not bear any of the financial cost for these services. The church would be responsible for disbursing the government funding provided for refugee resettlement.

For the full story, go here.
LOL! Parishioners at St. Patrick’s better get that in writing and the town of Hudson’s elected officials are presumably being briefed because there will be many costs to local taxpayers!
For new readers in Wisconsin, see our ‘Ten things your town needs to know’ by clicking here. It is not just one Catholic parish that will be impacted by the decision, but the whole town! If you don’t like what is happening be sure to let Speaker Paul Ryan hear from you!

Ignoring the governor, New Jersey refugee contractors vow to place them as fast as Obama admits them!

11/15/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

In my previous post I said I had two stories today (so far) about reactions from within the refugee resettlement industry about the future of the program in a Trump administration. The second story comes from NJ.com which begins with the usual heart string-tugging story that has to be the first lesson of Journalism 101 classes at our colleges and universities. However this story has a little smell to it! (Emphasis below is mine)

chrischristie — Governor Chris Christie withdrew New Jersey from the Refugee Admissions Program, but it is meaningless if he doesn’t follow-up with a state’s rights lawsuit. Contractors admit at NJ.com that Syrians can’t be properly screened!

The woman, a Syrian refugee recently resettled in Middlesex County, had one question the morning after the election of Donald Trump:

“What does this mean for my sons?”

What kind of visa allowed the Syrian couple admission to the US, and it is certainly a red flag that their TEENAGE BOYS were not admitted!
Also, since the pair have not yet been approved for asylum, they are NOT REFUGEES (not until their asylum applications have been approved are they eligible for all the goodies refugees receive from taxpayers!).
NJ.com continues:

Her concern was recounted by the Rev. Seth Kaper-Dale, whose New Brunswick congregation has sponsored the resettlement of several refugee families. The woman and her husband had come to the United States on visas, and are seeking asylum***, but her teenage boys were denied visas and are waiting in a third country.

“I told her it doesn’t mean anything for her boys,” Kaper-Dale said. “I do not expect Donald Trump will be nearly as aggressive with his actions as he was with his mouth.” [Rather optimistic isn’t it?—ed]

Admitting it again! Trump does not need Congress to cut off the flow!

Trump campaigned on a promise to stop the flow of refugees from the Middle East, vowing to hit the pause button on the current administration’s acceptance of refugees from the brutal civil war in Syria. Since the refugee resettlement program is administered by the U.S. State Department, a president does not need congressional approval to make the change.

And, just as we predicted! Obama may be trying to front-end the resettlement of his 110,000 refugee plan for FY2017. However, contractors beware because if you get out ahead of your federal funding, you may actually have to find private money later in the year (or go belly-up!).

The New Jersey-based agencies that have federal contracts to help refugees find housing and jobs all vow to continue to welcome people who have come to New Jersey from at least 18 countries. [Progress when mainstream media mentions that the ‘religious’ groups have federal contracts!—ed]

If anything, some expect the pace of resettlement may pick up as the Obama administration tries to bring over as many families as possible before Trump takes office in January, one volunteer said.

[….]

Concerned about the impact the Trump election might have on the organization’s refugee resettlement program, Bertrand made inquiries a few days after the election and said he was told refugees would continue to arrive until the change of administration takes place in Washington.

“And after that, they have no idea what will happen,” he said.

Gov. Christie’s withdrawal of the state from the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program only means a non-profit federal contractor like Church World Service in this story will call the shots for NJ (maybe it already has become a Wilson-Fish state). If he was serious he would file a lawsuit as Tennessee is doing here.

Although Gov. Chris Christie came out against the state accepting any Syrian refugees – saying he would be opposed to accepting even orphans under the age of five – states cannot ban refugees from resettlement in their borders.

Will wonders never cease! Here they actually admit what we have been saying all along about screening Syrians!

Agencies that help with refugee settlement say the people arriving today have been in the vetting pipeline for years. But they concede that the chaotic conditions that triggered a mass exodus from Syria in 2015 makes it very difficult for refugees to prove anything about their backgrounds, as employers, relatives and even records are now scattered, unavailable, or destroyed.

Continue reading here.
***As I warned in my earlier post this morning, watch out for more extensive use of the asylum process if the refugee resettlement program is curtailed.
Go here for more on New Jersey.

Trump transition needs to weigh-in on Obama's Australian 'refugee' deal

11/14/2016 ~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

What is to be gained by admitting over 1,000 rejected Australian asylum seekers—-mostly Muslims?

Why are they our problem?

We have been writing about this stunning revelation for a couple of days, but it looks like it is going forward as Obama sends officials to the island of Nauru to start processing Australia’s rejected asylum seekers.
Update thanks to a reader: ‘Refugees’ from Nauru wouldn’t arrive until after January 20th. I don’t see this as necessarily a good piece of news because as I read it, the processing will proceed which puts Trump in an even worse position and that is denying entry to ‘refugees’ that the Obama Admin. has screened and given promises to. See the story here, what do you think?
See our previous posts here and here.

bannon-trump-priebus — Can they do anything to stop the DEAL? Remember the so-called ‘refugees’ failed Australia’s asylum application process.

Another news story from AP gives us more details.
Apparently we asked Australia to take some illegal migrants that were parked in Costa Rica. WTH! Why are those migrants in Costa Rica our problem? I will bet a million bucks these aren’t even legitimate refugees but economic migrants:

Turnbull announced at Obama’s Leaders’ Summit on Refugees in September that Australia would participate in the U.S.-led program to resettle Central American refugees from a camp in Costa Rica.

It makes me wonder if Australia is trying to save itself from too many Muslims so is willing to take the Central Americans instead.
This deal smells and is emblematic of an issue I haven’t written about since 2015 when I last posted my Ten Reasons for a Moratorium on Refugee Resettlement, see that post by clicking here.

I was making the point that there is ample evidence that the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program is being used for extracurricular activities of the State Department, not (as advertised!) to help poor downtrodden people who are pawns in these deals.
Why did we admit thousands of Meskhetian Turks to America when Russia didn’t want the Sunni Muslims in their midst (those who came to my county had to sell homes in Russia when they resettled here)? They could hardly be ‘refugees.’
Why did we airlift Uzbek Muslim extremists to America in the Bush Administration and call them ‘refugees?’
What national interest was involved in helping the UN close camps in Nepal to move nearly 100,000 Bhutanese (Nepali!) people here over the last 9 years (many did not want to come here)? I suspect we were sucking up to the UN.

Now, what is to be gained by admitting over 1,000 rejected Australian asylum seekers—-mostly Muslims. Why are they our problem?

Here is what I said in my Ten Reasons for a Moratorium….
This is number 7. Only legitimate refugees should even be considered. Moving people around the world for other reasons should be specifically prohibited.

Congress needs to specifically disallow the use of the refugee program for other purposes of the US Government,especially using certain refugee populations to address unrelated foreign policy objectives—Uzbeks, Kosovars, Meshketians and Bhutanese (Nepalese) people come to mind.

I don’t know if Trump and his team have any power to halt this DEAL before the 20th of January, but I sure hope he tries!