In the last 24 hours over 50 readers of RRW clicked on my suggestion to go to Amazon and get the little book that explains what is happening and why Muslim immigrants are flooding western countries—it’s not that they are looking primarily for a better life (a job, a house, a car) it’s because their “faith” instructs them to change the world according to Mohammad’s instruction.
Go here, get the book and read it! (note I have no deal with Amazon or the authors!).
Modern Day Trojan Horse: Al-Hijra, The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam?[Paperback]
Sam Solomon (Author), E Al Maqdisi (Author)
I’m wondering if Muslim leaders throughout the US were furious with the Boston Bomber Brothers because the plan is to take us over through our political process and every time someone like Tamarlan Tsarnaev goes off the reservation (because he can’t wait for the long-term plan) and kills innocent people, it sets their agenda back again. (Although as authors Solomon and Maqdisi tell us there is a terrorism/violence component to Mohammed’s original design).
Michelle Malkin is on a roll. Yesterday, she reminded us again of Grover Norquist’s connection to Islamists, like the now imprisoned Alamoudi. My title above is hers.
I wonder if Norquist sends Alamoudi gift packages to his prison cell?
Someone please tell Senator Marco Rubio that his buddy Norquist is an open borders pusher because he is also an Islamistwhich some on the right have been pointing out for going on ten years. But, this is one more case where the mainstream media is doing a great disservice to its viewers and readers by never mentioning the controversy.
Human Rights First, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, LaRaza—Norquist is all yours now!
By the way, Norquist even has a connection to refugee resettlement. As early as 2007, we reported on Norquist pushing for Iraqi refugees to be admitted to the US, here. See our entire Norquist archive here, and a more extensive archive on Norquist here at my other blog. (Just in case some real investigative reporter for a mainstream outlet is interested in helping America.)
For years, I’ve warned about the GOP’s Grover Norquist problem. Just last week, he was front and center at the Gang of 8′s amnesty press conference — despite longtime concerns expressed on this blog and by national security advocates and activists about his dangerous Islamist alliances and progressive proclivities.
Now we learn that Norquist’s convicted terrorist pal and former funder, Abdurahman Alamoudi, was the first president of the radical mosque attended by the Boston bomber brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev…
[….]
Alamoudi, as I’ve documented repeatedly here, provided seed money to Norquist’s Muslim outreach effort during the Bush years.
Malkin flashes back to 2003:
Norquist’s lobbying firm is registered as a lobbyist for Alamoudi. Alamoudi provided seed money for Norquist’s Islamic Institute, which shares space with Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform group. The institute is run by Alamoudi deputy and former AMC government relations director Khaled Saffuri. Saffuri and Norquist have worked closely with Bush senior adviser Karl Rove to give radical Muslim activists access to the White House.
Read it all, there is much more and lots of links!
Hey guys, where are you? We have had some great work done in the last few days by Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin.
Actually the guys are out there too—hereis Andy McCarthy on the jizya. This is a great time to educate Americans about Islamic supremacism.
OOPS! One more thing! To my knowledge Grover has never apologized for his association with Alamoudi.
Update April 29th: Readers to this post made yesterday our best day ever at RRW, here. And, reader Joseline, alerted us to the White House petition to halt Muslim immigration. I signed it and wrote about it here.
I was blown away when I saw this! And, my first thought was how sorry I am that Lawrence Auster didn’t live another month to see someone with clout and a big megaphone echo his calls for a halt to Muslim immigration to America. He was often critical of some in the ‘anti-jihad’ movement who wouldn’t go that far, demonstrating that even they had been infected with the disease of political correctness.
Laura Ingraham (not PC)
Here is one report on what Ingraham said on Monday. From The Raw Story:
Right-wing radio host Laura Ingraham announced on her program Monday that she’s long believed the United States should shut down all immigration from central Asia and any nation with a majority Muslim population.
Going even further, Ingraham said she’s not sure why the U.S. allows people from central Asia either, particularly ethnic Chechnens, two of whom have been identified as the Boston bombing suspects.
“I would submit that people shouldn’t be coming here as tourists from Chechnya after 9/11,” Ingraham said. “Dagistan, Checnya, Kergystan, uh-uh. As George Bush would say, ‘None of them stans.’”
Ann Coulter, not known for her political correctness either, called for jailing Mrs. Tsarnaev for wearing a hijab and wondered out loud on Hannityif Tamerlan had required her to get a clitorectomy. You go girls!
Seriously, female genital mutilation is on the rise in America as we reported, here, last month suggesting there isn’t much assimilation going on in the Muslim “community.”
Update: Ann Coulter says LEGAL immigration is a problem, here.
That is the title of a post early this morning by Steve Sailor writing at VDARE. Read it! Seems the Boston Herald got the scoop by hounding the Welfare Department until they coughed it up.
No surprise to regular readers here who know about all the ‘bennies’ refugees and those granted asylum are eligible for!
There is a lesson in here for gullible American girls—Muslim men like to see their women out working—don’t convert and don’t marry them (it is actually part of the civilization jihad, but that is a story for another day).
For all of our previous posts on the Brothers Tsarnaev, go here.
Update: Blogger Federale has more information on the asylum claim here. Wonder how the aunt fits into all this, looks like the WHOLE family came at some point!
Has anyone figured this out yet? I assumed by now some crackerjack investigative reporter would have unearthed their immigration paperwork—maybe they have. If you see it, let me know!
We have been told innumerable times since Friday that they are “refugees” or received “political asylum.” Those are slightly different terms of art. I’ve got farm chores to do, so no time to explain the slight difference now.
Maret Tsarnaev, aunt of alleged Boston bombers says she is studying law. But, did she say she did the paperwork to get her brother and family into US? How?
A commenter tells us that it’s a chain migration refugee case (sometimes called family reunification) usually done through resettlement contractors like Catholic Charities. Will look for a link:
Not a rumor, sister of father on Canadian TV said she did refugee paperwork for mom and dad in 2002, they got it. Then under refugee family reconcilement, got 2 sons, the jihadists, and two daughters into US.
However, I got thinking today about the I-130 and the I-730 visa application process. Surely some real investigative reporters are looking through the records for those Visas!
But how could an adult apply for refugee status for her extended family? (They are not her spouse or children). It doesn’t make any sense unless she lied somehow. Although once Mom, Dad and little Dzhokhar got in then they surely used one of these to get the remainder of the kids in.
A year ago next month I reported on how those two Visa programs have a serious potential for fraud, and here is what a kind reader sent to explain the two programs. Visas for family reunification explained:
A few days ago I reportedon Somalis in Minneapolis who are angry that the US State Department/Homeland Security are making it harder for them to bring their “families” to the US. I explained that the P-3 program had been suspended in 2008 when it was learned that tens of thousands of Africans (mostly from Somalia) had gotten into the US fraudulently—they lied about their family relationship. The program is still partially closed. And, now the I-130 visa process has added some hurdles which has ticked-off the would-be migrants (and their lawyers) even further.
Since these visa application processes are all ‘greek’ to those of us on the outside, I appealed for help in understanding the I-130 visa and the I-730 visa as it relates to “refugees.” A kind reader with experience has sent us the following explanation (emphasis mine). This will be filed in our ‘where to find information’category for your future reference.
I-130’s
This is the name used for a form to apply for the legal immigration of certain relatives of certain types of US legal residents. It is not a part of the US refugee resettlement program. It’s an application for a permanent visa based on family relationship criteria.
Any US citizen can petition for parents, spouse , minor children, single adult children over 21, married children , and siblings. (spouses and minor children of beneficiaries are included on the visa)
Depending on the relationship to the petitioner,there are various waiting times based on the number of pending applications.
Parents, spouses and unmarried minor children are eligible for “immediate” visas and it’s just a matter of the actual processing time (although it’s usually several months to a year). Older children have a much longer waiting period and for siblings, the wait hovers around 10 years .
Legal permanent residents (green card holders) can only petition for spouses, unmarried minor children. Those are not “immediate” visas, but are subject to another waiting list but is usually 3-4 years),
Visas are initially adjudicated by the visa center here in the US simply based on documentation presented with the application, and then (provided they are initially approved) , once they become “current” , sent overseas to the nearest embassy/consulate for final decision, based on a face to face interview and documentation.
The US petitioner is also required to file an “affidavit of support” (showing financial ability to support the applicant (s)) which precludes the applicants from accessing any public benefits upon entering the US. (this is a whole other issue, since actual enforcement of those affidavits varies greatly from state to state and many legal visa recipients do access public benefits).
At one time, in the P-3 program, US relatives who were US citizens were barred from utilizing the P-3 process and required to file I-130’s. Refugee advocates successfully lobbied to have this rule changed, thus US citizens could file P-3 applications. While no longer required to, they could still also simultaneously file I-130’s as a back up in case the applicants failed to meet refugee criteria (one does not preclude the other). In my experience, most US relatives chose not to file the I-130s and , instead, rely solely on the P-3 process which, as you know, confers refugee status and eligibility for all available public benefits and puts no onus of financial responsibility on the US anchor relative.
I-730’s
This is where the lines can get a bit blurry.
This is a US visa called “following to join.” There are 2 categories:
Visa 93 (US relative was admitted as a refugee)
Visa 92 (US relative was granted political asylum in the US)
Applicants are limited to spouses and unmarried minor children (not parents, siblings, married or over 21 kids).
Relationships must have existed prior to granting of US petitioner’s status (some tricky parts here!). Application must be filed within 2 years of granted status.
Visas 92/93 can be filed simultaneously with P-3 applications.
Those applications are initially approved by US immigration processing centers (there are only a couple who do these) and sent to the local embassy/consulate for final adjudication. The applicants are under no requirement to provide any proof of refugee claims themselves, but only proof of relationship to the petitioner. If the visa is granted, they are admitted to the US under “derivative refugee/asylee” status.Affidavits of support are not required, and they are eligible for public benefits subject to the petitioner’s income (again,… my experience showed a large amount of easily-conducted fraud).
Of course I find it amusing beyond belief that the “persecuted refugees” (Mom and Dad) decided to go home to their persecutors a year or so ago and left the boys behind going to school and living off the US taxpayer in some form or another.
I’ll bet you a buck we will find immigration fraud in the case of the Brothers Tsarnaev—assuming some enterprising reporter does the digging and gets the news out!
In the last 24 hours over 50 readers of RRW clicked on my suggestion to go to Amazon and get the little book that explains what is happening and why Muslim immigrants are flooding western countries—it’s not that they are looking primarily for a better life (a job, a house, a car) it’s because their “faith” instructs them to change the world according to Mohammad’s instruction.
