Then why don’t you!
It has got to stop! There is no reason that we are admitting thousands of Somalis to the US every month when their country is safe enough for newly elected Minnesota legislator, Ilhan Omar, to go HOME for a visit!
I’ve just been telling readers in my two previous posts (here and here) that we have admitted over 100,000 Somalis to the US since Black Hawk Down (over the last two plus decades) and they are coming in now at the highest rate ever!
Why aren’t they going to Somalia to rebuild their own country?
Somalia welcomed newly elected American legislator Ilhan Omar home to Mogadishu on Tuesday, where she met with President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud.
The Somali American left as a child and lived for years in the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya before moving to the United States in 1997. She is the first Somali-American woman to become a lawmaker in the U.S., where she will serve as a Minnesota state representative.
Omar lives in the city of Minneapolis, which is home to the greatest concentration of Somali immigrants in the United States. Minneapolis-St. Paul also has a large Oromo population, among significant communities coming from Ethiopia, Kenya and other nations. Omar, serving as Director of Policy Initiatives at Women Organizing Women, has a long history of public service and other achievements within the community.
She praised Somalia for its embrace of women in leadership roles during her meeting, specifically noting the 30 percent benchmark for female members in the country’s new parliament.
“Women can lead Somalia,” Omar told Radio Dalsan. “Somalia is moving ahead.”
I am so angry.
In my nearly ten years of writing RRW, I don’t think I have been so angry as I am at this moment. Obama and his Department of State are committing treason in my view with this huge flood of Somali fake refugees they are ‘welcoming’ to the US just as they walk out the door!
Voice of America has a wrap-up article for the FY16 UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program (saves us looking up the numbers). What tickled me was the US Conference of Catholic Bishops head lobbyist referring to refugees as their “clients.” We’ve been telling you that this is a business—big business—a several $ billion a year business. Voice of America:
WASHINGTON —The United States narrowly missed its refugee cap for the fiscal year, closing out 12 months of political turbulence over admissions policies just five people short of the administration’s target of 85,000.
State Department data as of midnight October 1, the start of the 2017 fiscal year and the reset point for the government’s financial calendar, is the closest the refugee program has come to meeting the presidentially established limit in 24 years. [You knew they would bring them in here fast and not thoroughly vetted because Obama had to speed up his seeding plan—ed]
Among the largest groups of refugees this year were more than 12,500 Syrians, following a self-declared goal by the administration last September to admit at least 10,000 people fleeing civil war and Islamic State violence there.
Refugee and resettlement officials told VOA last week that travel for some refugees who were scheduled to arrive by the end of September was postponed because the limit had been met. A State Department spokesperson did not confirm how many refugees were affected, but said that those who were delayed would be included in the coming fiscal year, which begins October 1. [See our post of a week ago about the “ceiling” each year—ed]
Our additional “clients” will be arriving shortly says USCCB honcho!
“We understand that some clients may be held back these days and booked immediately in October. Thus, we expect no effect on clients,” said Bill Canny, who heads migration and refugee services for one of the country’s longest-serving resettlement agencies, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
More resettlement cities have been chosen….
The article also says that the largest category for FY17 (for the first time) will be the Near East and South Asia category. We will be taking 40,000 of those. (Near East and South Asia includes: Afghanistan, Bhutan/Nepal, Iran, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Syria.)
Anne Richard, Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration, reported to VOA on the growing number of cities that will ‘welcome’ refugees! We knew that!***
Richard also said the number of cities where refugees are resettled in the U.S. is “likely to grow” in the coming months. Programs are already in place in roughly 350 cities in nearly every state.
The refugee industry’s lobbying arm weighed in with this:
Naomi Steinberg, director of Refugee Council USA, an advocacy group for 22 NGOs that work in refugee resettlement, said that what stood out for her after what she called “a difficult year of nasty political rhetoric” is that the U.S. continued a “proud tradition” of welcoming those fleeing persecution.
“We know that as loud as those anti-refugee voices are, that they are still in the minority,” said Steinberg.
Please get your testimony off to Senator Sessions todayor at the latest tomorrow! Let Sessions know that Ms. Steinberg is blowing smoke!
***These are the new towns/cities we have learned about so far (we have heard that there are 47 new ones!). The selection process is mostly done quietly and out of public view.
Asheville, NC
Rutland, VT
Reno, NV
Ithaca, NY
Missoula, MT
Aberdeen, SD
Charleston, WV
Fayetteville, AR
Blacksburg, VA
Pittsfield, MA
Northhampton, MA
Flint, Michigan
Bloomington, IN
…..and that $2.2 billion is only for the Office of Refugee Resettlement (HHS) portion of the costs! It does not include the US State Department funding or the cost of security screening. Nor does it cover the cost of most welfare, subsidized housing, medical care and most of the cost of educating the children. They aren’t saying yet how many Syrians Obama will be requesting.
While I was on my 30 day ‘listening tour’ that took me to 13 mid-western and western states, the Obama Administration held a press conference call about the stepped-up Syrian Muslim refugee flow in to the US. Thanks to Christine for sending the transcript which I decided to post below in full.
Just so you know, all of the officials on the call are Obama appointees. Remember them! These are the people who are changing the demographics and the character of your home towns. Anne Richardand Robert Careyboth revolved in to their government perches from a refugee resettlement contracting agency (the International Rescue Committee). Shin Inouye is a former Washington, DC spokesman for the ACLU. And, for my friends in Montgomery County, MD, León Rodríguezwas once your county attorney.
These Obama appointees are all hard core open (NO!) borders advocates, and if Hillary is elected they will likely be able to stay on and continue their work of changing America by changing the people!
And, if you are wondering, Obama has one more shot in September to make a determination about how many refugees will be admitted to the US in the next fiscal year.
We know what Obama is going to do, but what will Paul Ryan do?
It will be up to Speaker Paul Ryan and the REPUBLICANS to decide if the numbers Obama is requesting will be acceptable because it is Congress that will fund (or not fund!) the President’s final request!
This (below) is from a press conference call on August 5th. Those of you doing research around the country on what is happening where you live will find this useful.
BTW, I am struck by how little the reporters know about the program and so they largely wasted their questions. See phone numbers at the end for the public affairs office of each government agency responsible for the refugee program. If you are reporting via alternative media about what is happening where you live, try calling those numbers! Call and ask questions even if you already know the answers!
Coordinator:
Welcome and thank you for standing by. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode until the Question and Answer session of today’s conference. At that time you may press Star 1 on your phone to ask a question.
I would like to inform all parties that today’s conference is being recorded. If you have any objections you may disconnect at this time. I would now like to turn the conference over to Shin Inouye, USCIS. Thank you, you may begin.
Shin Inouye:
Thank you (Sheila) and thank you all for joining us today to discuss the current state of Syrian refugees security screening and admissions. As a reminder this call is on the record and without embargo. On the call we have Assistant Secretary of State, The Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration, Anne C. Richard, US Citizenship and Immigration Services or USCIS Director Leon Rodriguez, and Health and Human Services Director of Refugee Resettlement, Robert “(Bob)” Carey.
We’ll have our speakers offer remarks about their agency’s respective roles in the refugee process and then open up the call to your questions. Let me first turn it over to Assistant Secretary Richard.
Anne Richard:
Thanks, this is Anne speaking. The United States has been a global leader in the resettlement of refugees. That’s why last year the President made a renewed commitment to help in some of the most vulnerable refugees in the world, pledging to increase the number of refugees we will accept from around the world to 85,000 from 70,000 per year over the last three years. As part of this commitment we also pledged to welcome at least 10,000 refugees fleeing the terrible conflict in Syria.
To that end early in the fiscal year we began working to adjust the capacity of our refugee admissions program, to bring many more refugees to the United States. To welcome more refugees from Syria we worked with the Department of Homeland Security, with our intelligence community and with other relevant agencies to upgrade our capacities to conduct security screening. DHS increased the number of the DHS offices available to interview applicants so that more security screening interviews could take place for more applicants, resulting in more refugees approved for travel.
In Jordan, for example, between February and April of this year we worked with DHS to surge additional staff to Jordan where DHS offices conducted interviews for about 12,000 UNHCR referred refugee applicants. In Beirut, Lebanon we restarted interviews of refugees in February. These had stopped for a year because of space limitations in the embassy compound. In Turkey we added staff to the resettlement support center in Istanbul that covers refugee processing in Turkey and Lebanon and DHS sent additional officers to conduct interviews.
In Iraq we began processing refugee resettlement cases in Erbil in December 2015. Thanks to these efforts and through the coordinated efforts of the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, we can now say that we have 8,000 Syrian refugees so far this year and that we are very confident that we will welcome at least 10,000 refugees from Syria by the end of this fiscal year. Monthly totals have climbed from low numbers of refugees admitted in the first half of the year to higher numbers recently.
In May, June and July the impact of our investments in and the enhancements to the process began to be realized. Our expectation from the beginning was that the rate of Syrian refugee admissions would increase over time as referrals from UNHCR — the Human Refugee Agency — UNHCR increased as we added to the capacity to process more cases referred to us and as DHS sent more DHS officers to the field to conduct the necessary rigorous and exhaustive security screening.
Briefly and in closing we want to reiterate that this is just one line of multiple lines of effort that the US government is undertaking to help the victims of terrible conflicts and crisis around the world. I want to remind you all that President Obama will convene the leader’s summit on refugees on the margins of the 71st session of the UN General Assembly in September. This summit is about encouraging all countries to take action and do more now.
Wealthy governments are asked to make new and significant contributions relating to humanitarian financing and refugee resettlement or admissions – other forms of admission to their country. Countries that host refugees are asked to make new commitments related to refugee self-reliance and inclusion, with a specific focus on letting refugees work and allowing refugee children to go to school. The purpose of the summit is to recruit other countries to join with us and make a real difference in the world’s contributions towards helping refugees.
At this point I’d like to turn to my colleague, the head of USCIS, Leon Rodriguez.
Leon Rodriguez:
Thank you Anne and thank you for your presentation. I too am gratified with the success that we’ve had in refugee admissions, particularly with respect to Syrian admissions. The process that we have applied to reach those admission levels is the same process that we have applied for many years – actually with a few enhancements that have further strengthened that process.
There are basically two critical components to the process and adjudicating, whether an individual is admitted to the United States as a refugee after that individual has been referred to us by the United Nations high commissioner and refugees and by the State Department. The first is to determine – this is what our officers do to determine whether that individual actually qualifies as a refugee – whether they meet the legal definition.
The legal definition that we use is derived from the United Nation’s convention on refugees, and that definition is used by all of the signatory countries to the convention, although in many cases each country interprets the conventions slightly differently. The second aspect and probably particularly critical for this discussion is we determined if — notwithstanding the fact that the individual meets the legal definition of refugee — if there is still some basis to deny that individual admission to the United States.
That can occur in one of two ways. In some cases we have – we exercise our discretion. For example if we have concerns about that individual’s credibility. In other cases we may have evidence that that individual falls under a specific category of inadmissibility. For example, if there is evidence that they are a known or suspected terrorist. To do that we used a number of tools. From my perspective the most critical of those tools is the refugee officer – is our highly trained, highly experienced staff that we deployed throughout the world to screen refugees.
Before they get there they have been extensively trained both in the legal tenants surrounding refugee law — the grounds inadmissibility that I discussed before — but also very critically in fraud detection and prevention, security protocols, interviewing techniques, credibility analysis.
They’ve also been briefed in country conditions and in regional conditions and again that briefing is often extensive, and the depth of that briefing grows as we spend more time in a particular refugee environment, be that the Syrian environment, the Iraqi environment, the Somalian environment, or as the case may be, the central American environment. The interviews that are conducted by those officers are frequently extensive – pro-credibility issues and pro-particular basis of inadmissibility.
In the specific cases of Syrians there are additional steps that are also taken. All of those cases or the majority of those cases, rather, are subject to something we call Syrian enhanced review, which provides us specific in-depth support both from our Refugee Affairs division and our Fraud Detection and National Security directorate to provide enhanced view of those cases before the interviews even occur overseas. This is intelligence-driven support – for example it yields specific lines of questioning that our officers are prepared to ask.
It also includes social media review of certain Syrian refugee applicants. Additionally and during the course of the interview an officer identifies areas of national security concern about a candidate, and that case moves into what we call the controlled application review and resolution process – essentially a hold process where further investigation and inquiry into that case occurs.
At the same time we have a number of law enforcement and intelligence resources that our officers utilize in order to determine whether there is any derogatory — and that’s a critical term — derogatory information about that individual. Those sources can come from State Department databases, databases of customs and border protection, the Department of Defense, but most critically from both the United States law enforcement and intelligence communities, including the FBI as well as a number of intelligence community partners as well.
One particularly important aspect there is a process that we call the intra-agency check which involves queries of a series of intelligence community holdings. That occurs not only prior to the interview of the individual but actually occurs on the recurrent basis during the entire process of that individual’s adjudication, and in many cases actually beyond the period of that individual’s admissions. So that if new derogatory information arises about that individual we are able to act on that derogatory individual – derogatory information at any time that that information may arise.
We have on an ongoing basis the implementing improvements to these processes – much of that is law enforcement sensitive or intelligence community protected. But those improvements have been occurring on an ongoing basis. I believe that this information is very critical because it really rebuts what is a widely held view that in fact we do not have resources against which to vet these individuals.
In fact literally hundreds of individuals from different countries, including hundreds of individuals from Syria, have had their admissions to the United States denied because of information that was found in these databases. Additionally, a number of other individuals have been denied admissions or have been placed on hold because we have determined – we have accessed that there are credibility concerns that have arisen during the interview process.
And that process is the same one that we conducted a year ago, two years ago and last week, and we will continue as we move through the process of screening refugees to apply those methodologies. Thank you.
Shin Inouye:
Thank you Director Rodriguez. Next we’ll hear from Director Carey.
Robert Carey:
Okay thank you. (Bob) Carey here. We could go to the work of your Office of Refugee Resettlement, under the Refugee Act of 1980 Congress created within the Department of Health and Human Service and the Office of Refugee Resettlement, and we are charged with providing refugees with resettlement assistance. This assistance includes employment training and placement, English language instruction, cash assistance and additional social services, all of which are designed to assist refugees in integrating into their new communities and to promote early self-sufficiency.
ORR carries out this work through an extensive public-private partnership network and funding to state governments and non-profit organizations across the US. In fiscal year 2016 ORR expects to serve upwards of 200,000 humanitarian migrants. So these humanitarian migrants include refugees, but also asylees, keeping Asian entrance on unaccompanied refugee minors, victims of torture and unaccompanied children.
Our work includes collaborations at the federal and state level with resettlement agencies, resettled refugees themselves and members of the communities that welcomed them. A central goal of the program is to ensure that states and municipalities have the best information available to help them prepare for incoming refugees. To this end each state has a state refugee coordinator, and often a state refugee health coordinator who oversees services and refugee benefits provisioned to eligible individuals in the given state.
The President’s fiscal year 2017 budget requests include $2.2 billion for ORR programs and that represents the cost of maintaining services for additional refugees and other entrance and unaccompanied children primarily from Central America. The President’s budget request would support a total of 213,000 humanitarian arrivals including 100,000 refugees in 2017. Once a refugee arrives in the US they are eligible to access the same benefits as American citizens who are here legally including temporary aide to newly families, Medicaid, SSI, and SNAP.
When refugees do not meet eligibility requirements for these programs ORR provides time-limited refugee cash assistance and refugee medical assistance. Social services and targeted assistance funds are allocated to states based on a formula tied to the prior two years of refugee arrivals, and that accounts for refugees and other entrance movements to other states after their initial resettlement on their path to legal permanent residence and citizenship.
ORR also supports additional programs to refugees and integrating which include migrant enterprise development assistance for ethnic community organizations, agricultural partnerships and services for survivors of torture. Another critical service we provide is school impact program funding which provides approximately $15 million for activities that assists children in adjusting to school after the trauma of war flight and all too often interrupted education.
As an alternative to access and cash assistance refugees may also enroll in what is known as the Matching Grant program – that’s Intensive Case Management program conducted by private non-profit organizations which assists refugees in finding employment and in economic self-sufficiency – self-sufficiency within four to six months after their arrival in the US and which is funded with a combination of private and government funds. And at the end of the program last year 82% were self-sufficient at the end of 180 days. [This is a joke, refugees can still be receiving most forms of welfare, such as food stamps and housing help and still be labeled “self-sufficient.”—-ed]
In summary, the Office of Refugee Resettlement stands committed to welcoming integrating newcomers into the fabric of our society. We believe this goal benefits not only refugees and their families, but strengthens communities and our nation as a whole and refugee resettlement is a reflection of our core value of who we are as a country, providing protection to individuals fleeing persecution on the basis of their race, religion, political opinions or membership in a social group. So thank you.
Shin Inouye:
Thank you Director Carey and thank you to all of our speakers. Operator if we can go ahead and open it up or if you could provide the instructions for how folks can ask questions.
Coordinator:
Thank you. We will now begin the Question and Answer session. If you would like to ask a question please press Star 1 to unmute your phone and record your name clearly. If you need to withdraw your question press Star 2. Again to ask a question please press Star 1.
Our first question comes from Julia Edwards with Reuters – your line is open.
Julia Edwards:
Hi, thank you. I was wondering if you could quantify how many refugees or how refugees were not considered after the additional screening procedures that were put in place by Congress at the end of last year? Or was there anyone who was ruled out as a result of this additional screening measures being put in place?
Leon Rodriguez:
I think that the screening measures were never actually voted into effect that you’re discussing, so when I talk about screening measures they’re basically the ones that we apply as our part of our ordinary process – that is joined between USCIS, State Department, the law enforcement intelligence community partners. And again what I would say is based on that screening – just speaking to the Syrian case, you know, hundreds – I wouldn’t be able to put a specific number on it now but hundreds have been denied.
There are even larger numbers of individuals who go on hold because concerns have been raised or – and also individuals who are denied on a credibility basis because our officers determined that there are concerns about the accounts that they’re given when we interview them.
Coordinator:
Our next question comes from Julie Davis with the New York Times. Your line is open.
Julie Davis:
Hi there. Well I was hoping you could be more specific about how many of the Syrian applicants had been denied because of the information that was found on the databases or put on hold because of credibility concerns. It sounds like you don’t have those numbers now. Would that be something you could get to us after the call potentially?
Leon Rodriguez:
Yes we can see if we can get you those numbers. Again what I will share are those numbers are large. When we’re talking still about, you know, we’re talking about 8,000 who have been cleared for admission this year we’re still talking about a substantial number who have either been denied or held because of these types of concerns.
Julie Davis:
Okay and also I’m wondering whether you can say, based on the up-ticks that you described, just in May, June, July – I assume August, you’re expecting will be the same if not larger in terms of refuge – Syrian refugees resettled. Do you expect that to continue rising into fiscal 2017, and do you have any estimate at all of how many Syrian refugees you may be looking at welcoming as a result of this surge in the next, you know, after the fiscal year ends?
Leon Rodriguez:
Actually I’m going to share a little bit more of an answer to your first question and I think I’m going to defer to my State Department colleagues. So our approval rates are 80%, denial rate is 7%, and the balance is hold – that kind of reflects the overall universe. So, you know, I can’t give you specific numbers that reflects about our clip of approvals denials and holds.
Julie Davis:
Got it.
Leon Rodriguez:
And Anne I’m wondering if you want to – I don’t know if you’re in a position to talk about next year or not…
Anne Richard:
Well just to say the current pace of arrivals will continue through the end of this fiscal year so we may exceed 10,000 and for next year we will continue to welcome large numbers of Syrians, but it’s too soon to have a target figure established.
Coordinator:
Thank you. And our next question comes from Jared Goyette with PRI. Your line is open.
Jared Goyette:
Hi I was just wondering if you could provide any detail to the I-130 program and if that’s had any impact in terms of the numbers of, you know, the number of Syrian refugees coming in – that’s of course the family petition? Thank you.
Anne Richard:
No we don’t have numbers for you for this call but we can follow-up on that after the call.
Jared Goyette:
Okay thanks.
Coordinator:
The next question comes from Nick Ballasy with PJ Media News your line is open.
Nicholas Ballasy:
Thanks for taking the question. My first – the first part of my question is among the applications for refugee status that have been denied, you said some of them were denied – was it because of national security or terrorism issues? And then the second part of my question is as you know, if you’re applying for legal status by marrying a US citizen or in a different category, you have to prove you have the financial support and you’re not a public charge and you also have to pay thousands of dollars in fees for those applications.
Why are refugees treated differently than people seeking legal status in the United States through the legal immigration process?
Leon Rodriguez:
Sure, this is Leon Rodriguez and I’ll invite my colleagues to chime in as well. You know, the fact is that refugees are refugees because they’re often coming out of war-torn countries or countries devastated in some other way. Frequently individuals have been living away from their countries without any means of securing a livelihood, or in many cases when we’re talking about Syrians, of having their children educated. So more typically individuals do not have the economic wherewithal. It’s also – frankly it’s a statutory decision that was made. We do not have authority to charge any kind of fee for refugees – it’s not a legal authority that we have.
Nicholas Ballasy:
And then the issue of the denied applications, was the reason for any of those denials national security or…
Leon Rodriguez:
Yes.
Nicholas Ballasy:
…(test) and concerns?
Leon Rodriguez:
Yes.
Shin Inouye:
All right (Sheila) if you could move to the next question please?
Coordinator:
Absolutely and as a reminder if you would like to ask a question you can press Star 1 on your phone and record your name when prompted. Our next question comes from Lauren Ashburn with EWTN. Your line is open.
Lauren Ashburn:
Thank you very much and thank you for taking my call. The percentage of those Syrian refugees who have been let into the country – what percent are Muslims? Do you have that breakdown?
Anne Richard:
Yes, most are Muslims over 99% are Muslims. [At least she is being honest! But, the reporter wasted her question because that information is readily available elsewhere.—ed]
Lauren Ashburn:
And then what percent are of religious (execution) are fleeing (because they) say religious persecution?
Anne Richard:
I don’t have that breakdown for you.
Lauren Ashburn:
Okay and then you mentioned, Secretary Carey – you mentioned that 82% are self-sufficient at the end of 180 days and I was wondering how long do the rest of them stay on benefits? How long do you extend the benefits?
Robert Carey:
The benefits access depends on the category. There are some individuals for whom, you know, refugee cash assistance can be extended for up to eight months for certain individuals, and then others may be eligible for mainstream benefits if they fit the qualifications.
Lauren Ashburn:
Okay, thanks.
Coordinator:
Our next question comes from (Esa Gomez) with ABC News. Your line is open.
(Esa Gomez):
I was wondering out of the 8,000 of the admitted refugees how many of them were children?
Anne Richard:
I should – we should have that number for you. Seventy eight percent were women and children and the number of children we’ll have to get you but let’s see – nearly – let’s see, 4,576 were under 18 – just a little under half female and roughly half male of the children. [Does this really give us any comfort when we know it is the Somali “children” who grew up in America that have been the most radicalized of the Muslim migrants?—ed]
(Esa Gomez):
Is that of the children or women and children?
Anne Richard:
So the first number I gave you the 78% were women and children. And then the second that’s 78% out of 8,000. And then the number of children is – or under 18 year olds is 4,576 and they’re roughly half and half men and – girls and boys rather.
(Esa Gomez):
Oh okay, thank you.
Coordinator:
And again as a reminder you can press Star 1 on your phone and record your name if you have a question. One moment please for any additional questions. We are showing no further questions at this time. (Unintelligible)…
Shin Inouye:
(Unintelligible) (a couple). All right, well thank you (Sheila). Thank you all for joining us. As a reminder this call is on the record and without embargo. If you have any additional questions here are the phone numbers for the respective public affairs offices for the participants on the call. The State Department is at 202-647-2492. Once again The State Department is 202-647-2492. USCIS is at 202-272-1200. Once again USCIS is at 202-272-1200. And HHS is at 202-401-9215. Once again HHS is at 202-401-9215. Thank you very much.
Coordinator:
That does conclude today’s conference. Thank you for participating. You may disconnect at this time.
This post is filed in our ‘where to find information’ category, here.
We learn that Irish immigrants at one time were as dangerous for America as Islamic terrorists and that refugee kids are cute!
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!
These people have got to go! Imagine this: Obama Secretary of State John Kerry is confirming what we all know: Europe is in very serious trouble as over a million migrants have flooded in over the last year because ‘leaders’ such as Germany’s Angela Merkel have welcomed them with open arms.
Obama is doing the same to America!
We have thousands upon thousands of Unaccompanied Alien Children walking in to our country (or riding trains) and claiming asylum, refugee numbers have been increased (from countries that hate us!) and foreign workers are invited in by the hundreds of thousands to take Americans’ jobs, even Cubans (from a country supposedly now free!) are swarming in to the US from everywhere.
And, Kerry says the very same things (sans Cubans) pose an existential threat for Europe! What about us?
Here is The Blaze yesterday:
Though just months ago President Barack Obama excoriated and mocked Republicans who oppose offering Syrian refugees resettlement in the U.S., Secretary of State John Kerry on Saturday characterized the flood of refugees entering Europe as a “threat” of “near existential” proportions to the continent.
“The United States of America understands the near existential nature of this threat to the politics and fabric of life in Europe,” Kerry told the Munich Security Conference Saturday, according to the the State Department’s transcript of his remarks.
The top U.S. diplomat said that half of those trying to get into Europe aren’t even Syrian and that there’s “a whole industry” designed to move them over borders, echoing arguments made by those who want a more stringent vetting process before allowing migrants claiming to be Syrian refugees into the U.S.
“As we know, 50 percent of the people now knocking on the door of Europe — with a whole industry that’s been created to try to help move them and some very perverse politics in certain places that turns the dial up and down for political purposes — half of them now come from places other than Syria. Think about that — Pakistan, Bangladesh***, Afghanistan,” Kerry said. [We have admitted tens of thousands from those same countries to the US over the years—ed]
The secretary of state said that the “staggering humanitarian crisis” is posing “unprecedented challenges” and affecting “the social fabric of Europe.”
Yet, Kerry is so dense he doesn’t get-it that we see what is happening to Europe and DO NOT want it here!
We want our social fabric left alone!
Continue reading. *** People ask me all the time, what can I do to fight this—the invasion of America.
Not for the first time, I am going to beg someone to begin a blog or website about theDiversity Visa Lottery (Green Card Lottery). If you think refugee resettlement is outrageous you haven’t seen anything yet! Every year we admit 50,000 new permanent residents to the US (through a lottery!) for the sole purpose of increasing our diversity!
I’ve highlighted Bangladesh, which is now ineligible for the program because in a previous five year period over 50,000 Bangladeshis entered the US! Bangladesh is a safe Muslim country. These people are not refugees! And, for goodness sake, if anyone you know (or a political candidate or elected official) says, “I am fine with legal immigration, just not illegal immigration,” then hit them upside the head! (figuratively).
These people have got to go!
If you are in one of the early primary states where the 2016 Presidential candidates are everywhere in your state, you MUST be hitting them on refugees and on immigration generally everywhere you find them! Tell them we don’t want to be Europe!