Tag: Muslim charity myth

The truth is that Gulf Arab States do not resettle refugees (even Muslim ones)! US expected to take them PERMANENTLY

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

One of the top posts for the month so far was this one: Why should the US and Europe take Syrian refugees while the Gulf Arab States take ZERO?
And, since stories like those at Breitbart flew around the world, the Gulf Arab states have had to defend the charges by claiming they do ‘welcome’ Syrians to live in their wealthy countries—-as guest workers!

Refugees become permanent citizens, guest workers do not!

Readers, it is really important that you understand what is happening when the UN High Commissioner for Refugees puts demands on Western countries throughout Europe, Australia, Canada and New Zealand—it is telling us that we must PERMANENTLY resettle the ‘refugees’ with no expectation that they will ever go home even if the civil war in Syria ended next month!
The refugees we take in eventually become naturalized (voting!) citizens.  Not so for those Muslim guest workers going to Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Middle East.
I think many Americans, who haven’t followed this complex issue, do not understand this concept.  Most assume that the ‘refugees’ will go home someday!  Paul Nachman, writing at VDARE, addressed this issue here last week.
This is a really good explanation from Deborah Amos at National Public Radio:

As the numbers mount, with Europe overwhelmed, the blame game has begun. Why don’t the richest Gulf Arab states — the diplomatic and financial sponsors of Syria’s rebel groups — resettle these desperate refugees?

RandaSlim_hiRes
Randa Slim, associated with the Rockefeller Bros. Fund AND The New America Foundation, two of those huge advocacy groups promoting more refugee resettlement to America says of the Gulf States: They can’t afford to bring in the Syrians because they “will bring their fight with them.” And, she says, they “can’t afford to do this.” But we can? See Slim’s bio here: http://www.mei.edu/profile/randa-slim

Even Gulf Arab citizens are raising the question: #ShameOnArabRulers is trending on Middle Eastern Twitter accounts.

[….]

Gulf officials are on the defensive and have been forced to address the issue publicly.

[….]

The Saudi Foreign Ministry challenged the charges by issuing official numbers that are impossible to verify independently, saying “the Kingdom has received around 2.5 million Syrians since the beginning of the conflict.”

[….]

While it’s true that the Gulf States have allowed thousands of Syrians to come on work visas, many Syrians say they face severe restrictions in these countries. Some have decided they would rather risk the difficult road to Europe.

“I will live here for five years, ten years, and then what?” says Dahlia, a Syrian who fled her home in Aleppo and joined relatives in the Gulf city-state of Dubai. “You never belong, you never feel you are safe, your residency can be canceled at any time and then what? Go where?”

Citizenship is not an option, even for workers who stay for decades.

[….]

The fact is that Gulf countries don’t accept refugees for resettlement because none of their governments officially recognize the legal concept. Even in Jordan, Syrians fleeing the civil war are called “guests,” the expectation being that they won’t stay.

Arab governments refused to sign the 1951 international convention on refugee rights, says Nadim Shehadi, head of the Fares Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. “The convention gives a mandate to UNHCR to do permanent settlement in the host countries or resettlement in third-party states,” says Shehadi.

This was unacceptable to Arab governments 60 years ago — and still is today.

So much for Muslim charity toward fellow Muslims.  So, tell me again why the US must take mostly Muslim Syrians?
There is much more at NPR, continue reading here.
Go here to see who has signed on to the 1951 convention and who hasn’t.

Muslim countries treat Palestinians like c***

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Where have we heard this before, oh yeh, here at RRW.   As Israel is beaten over the head continually for its supposed poor treatment of Palestinians, neighboring Muslim countries don’t want them either, but the mainstream media rarely mentions that little-known fact.

So, I was surprised to see it mentioned at the Washington Post albeit only in an opinion piece, but none-the-less uttered in print.

This reminds me of the outrageous UN report a few years ago where the UN High Commissioner for Refugees says that the world’s tradition of protecting refugees and asylum seekers comes not from a Christian charity heritage but from Islamic Shariah Law.   I can’t resist repeating what that Socialist Antonio Guterres said in 2009 (here):

New York, 23 June (AKI) – The 1,400-year-old Islamic custom of welcoming people fleeing persecution has had more influence on modern international refugee law than any other traditional source, according to a new study sponsored by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

High Commissioner Antonio Guterres said that more than any other historical source, Islamic law and tradition underpin the modern-day legal framework on which UNHCR bases its global activities on behalf of the tens of millions of people forced from their homes around the world.

This includes the right of everyone to seek asylum as well as prohibitions against sending those needing protection back into danger, Guterres said in the foreword to “The Right to Asylum between Islamic Sharia and International Refugee Law: A Comparative Study.”

In the study, Professor Abu Al-Wafa, Dean of the Law Faculty at Cairo University, describes how Islamic law and tradition respects refugees, including non-Muslims; forbids forcing them to change their beliefs; avoids compromising their rights; seeks to reunite families; and guarantees the protection of their lives and property.

I went on in my post in 2009  (UN High Commissioner for Refugees lies) to list all of the MUSLIM countries that were treating refugees like crap (and in virtually all cases the refugees are Muslims themselves!).  So the only surprising thing about this opinion piece in the Washington Post is that this topic is mentioned in the Washington Post.

Here is the piece by Olga Khazan:

The news media have reported frequently on Israel’s settlement building in the West Bank and its blockade of the Gaza Strip, but the experience of Palestinians in surrounding Arab countries is less well-known.

[….]

The news media have reported frequently on Israel’s settlement building in the West Bank and its blockade of the Gaza Strip, but the experience of Palestinians in surrounding Arab countries is less well-known.

Khazan goes on to report about the poor treatment of Palestinians in Lebanon, Egypt and Iraq.   Read it, it further confirms what we have written here for years that the concept of Muslim charity is a myth!  Type ‘UN Muslim Charity’ into our search function for many posts on the subject.

LOL!  I remember discussing the issue of Muslim refugees coming to my county with my Congressman back in 2007.  (That’s about when I figured RRW needed to be written).   He was shocked to learn that the Virginia Council of Churches was doing such a thing in Maryland, dropping off impoverished Muslims, and he wondered aloud—‘Why isn’t wealthy Saudi Arabia taking these poor Muslims in?‘   Why indeed?  The truth is, that the rich Muslim country—Saudi Arabia—doesn’t TAKE ANY REFUGEES!  Also, back in 2007 we reported that Saudi Arabia was building a state-of-the-art border fence, here.   Surprise!  They want to keep Saudi Arabia for their own kind!  None of those Somali, Palestinian or Rohingya riff-raff for them!