Geert Wilders is right, Europe is being invaded and it looks like the average Dutchman is going to stand and fight. The latest riot is over the Dutch government’s decision to give housing to refugees before Dutch citizens. Here Wilders warns the Dutch Parliament about the Hijra—the Islamic migration to Europe.
Hundreds of thousands of self-proclaimed refugees from the Middle East (many of them are actually gold diggers who are coming to Europa in order to live off the government’s dime) have arrived in Europe in recent months. This mass exodus out of especially Syria has been partially fueled by German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s promise that her country would take in all the refugees it had to take in.
The only problem? She got more than she bargained for. Much more. And the same goes for the rest of Europe.
In fact, so many “refugees” have made their way to the Old Continent that West European governments are having a hard time dealing with them. In the Netherlands alone, refugee centers are overwhelmed. As a result, the Dutch government has now announced that many refugees with a residence permit will be moved into normal homes. This means that these newly arrived immigrants will live in houses originally meant for Dutch citizens. The latter may have been waiting on waiting lists for years, but to no avail; refugees are given priority.
Read it all, it is quite extraordinary!
And, btw, refugees in America are gobbling up government subsidized housing at a rapid rate leaving low income Americans and the disabled on long waiting lists for help.
For all of our posts on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ go here.
The federal fiscal year ended on September 30th. We are now beginning FY 2016 (Obama says we will admit 10,000 Syrians who cannot be thoroughly screened according to the FBI). That is UNHCR Antonio Guterres on the left. He chooses our refugees and Anne Richard, Asst. Secretary of State for PRM does what he says!
Because the UNHCR is choosing our Syrian refugees from its camps dominated by Sunni Muslims, you can expect the numbers (the percentage) of Muslim refugees to continue just about as they have been this past fiscal year.
I’m sorry if this news is repetitive for our regular readers, but I want the mainstream media to stop being so lazy (or duplicitous) when reporting on the Syrians who have come so far.
I repeat, these numbers will not change going forward unless we get the UN out of the business of picking refugees for us!
This data is directly from the US State Department’s Refugee Processing Center. I thought if I did the research maybe reporters wouldn’t be so lazy in reporting it!
In fiscal year 2015 we admitted 1,682 Syrians through the Refugee Admissions Program. Religious affiliation is as follows:
Atheist (2)
Bahai (2)
Christian (29)
Moslem (53)
Moslem Shiite (10)
Moslem Suni (1,537)
No Religion (1)
Orthodox (1)
Other Religion (5)
Zorastrian (6)
That makes it 97% Muslim!
When you see politicians like Senators Mikulski, Cardin, Graham, Blumenthal and others we have mentioned this past week advocating for more Syrians, remember they are advocating for more MUSLIM Syrians to be admitted and placed in your towns, not truly persecuted Christians!
Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, is also a contender for the Republican nomination for President. He joins Far Left Senator Patrick Leahy in his efforts to get the Syrians in here faster.
Every time I see Graham, a proud member of the Gang of Eight on amnesty two years ago, I wonder whether Graham influences Rep. Trey Gowdy. Does Gowdy share Graham’s position on immigration? Does Graham keep a tight rein on Gowdy? Did either of them hear what the FBI said this week? https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2015/10/10/fbi-director-confirms-again-that-they-cant-thoroughly-screen-syrians-entering-the-us/ How closely does Graham monitor the activities of South Carolina Rep. Gowdy who has been dragging his feet on holding any hearing on the Refugee Admissions Program in the subcommittee (which he chairs!) responsible for Refugee Program oversight?
(A hearing was scheduled and postponed in the full House Judiciary Committee last week, but Gowdy, as subcommittee chairman, has been silent, and as such a disappointment, on the Syrian refugee question. If anyone has seen Gowdy raise concerns about bringing Syrians to America and his state, please send a news report my way and I will stand corrected.)
And, Mr. Gowdy, how about a hearing on the Babin billthat has 22 co-sponsors as of this writing? Gowdy is not one of them!
I digress, here is the news about Lindsey Graham and his pal Leahy.
From The Hill (hat tip: Joanne). Emphasis is mine:
A bipartisan pair of senators — including one presidential candidate — is pushing forward with an emergency spending bill to help strengthen the administration’s ability to combat the Syrian refugee crisis.
Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have rolled out legislation that would provide an extra $1 billion in emergency funding, mandating that the White House tell Congress within 45 days how it will use the money.
[….]
Dozens of Senate Democrats backed a letter from Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) [Hey, does Chris Murphy do the bidding of CAIR-CT too?—ed] earlier this week calling for an emergency spending bill. That letter was sent to Leahy and Graham, as well as Sens. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) and Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), the top two members on the Appropriations Committee. [Mikulski here—ed]
But FBI Director James Comey said Thursday that there are “gaps” in the screening process for bringing Syrians into the United States.
“There is risk associated of bringing anybody in from the outside, but specifically from a conflict zone like that,” he told members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Graham, who is running for president, quickly came out in support of accepting more Syrian refugees after a photo of a drowned Syrian child went viral and sparked international outrage earlier this year. [He fell for the propaganda photo!—ed]
His position pits him against not only many of his Republican colleagues, but also other 2016 presidential contenders. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who is also running for president, said earlier this week that President Obama’s plan to accept additional Syrian refugees was “nothing short of crazy.”
The Graham-Leahy bill also requires that Secretary of State John Kerry describe what security vetting refugees would have to undergo before being accepted into the country. [We already know they can’t screen the Syrians!—ed]
How many times have you heard Lindsey Graham say on TV that “if we don’t do something over there, the terrorists will be here!” So how can he so blithely, in the face of testimony by the FBI director, still advocate getting more Syrians here faster?
Update: 97% of the Syrians we admitted to the US in FY2015 are Muslims chosen by the UN, here.
This time it is not a lower level official from the FBI, but the Director himself who testified to Congress two days ago that they cannot guarantee Islamic terrorists won’t get into the US in the Syrian flow that is about to start in earnest as we speak (FY 2016 began October 1). FBI Director Comey: No data means we can’t crosscheck all the refugees entering the US.
And, for those who doubt me, there is further confirmation in this news account at The Hillthat the UNITED NATIONS is choosing the Syrians for us! And, because the UNHCR is choosing them, we are already getting a vast majority of Syrian Muslimsand not Christians!
Federal officials say “gaps” remain in their ability to screen Syrian refugees headed into the country, even as their ability to check incoming migrants has improved.
During a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on Thursday, FBI Director James Comey sounded a cautious note that is likely to be picked up by critics of the White House’s plan to welcome more refugees into the U.S.
“My concern there is there are certain gaps … in the data available to us,” Comey said.
“There is risk associated of bringing anybody in from the outside, but specifically from a conflict zone like that,” he added.
“There is no such thing as a no-risk enterprise and there are deficits that we face.”
In particular, the lack of solid on-the-ground intelligence assets in Syria has clouded the U.S.’s ability to crosscheck the backgrounds of every refugee hoping to come to the U.S., Comey and other national security officials told the Senate panel.
[….]
Obama administration officials have insisted that the vetting will be thorough, despite concerns about the lack of intelligence.
Any refugees headed to American shores would first be recommended by the United Nations, the Obama administration has said, and then meticulously screened by various U.S. agencies. [They have not been able to say how they could possibly be “meticulously” screened—ed].
Fox News reporter, Melissa Jacobs, posted a very useful piece earlier this week entitled, ‘Obama’s refugee resettlement plan could stir battle with states.‘
Here is a bit that interested me (be sure to read the whole thing because she mentions several states and local communities resisting the resettlement of more refugees. See if your city or state gets a mention!).
The Obama administration’s pledge to absorb thousands more Syrian and other refugees could run headlong into resistance from state and local officials worried about whether their communities can handle the influx.
[….]
“It’s a fiscal issue,” said Peter Steele, a spokesman for Maine Gov. Paul LePage. “You can only pay for what you can afford, and those funds should be going to the most needy citizens in our state.”
Center for Immigration Studies Fellow, Don Barnett: Time for refugee program to come out of the shadows. https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2014/03/24/wyoming-op-ed-time-for-the-refugee-program-to-come-out-of-the-shadows/
[….]
…. pushback from the states could pose practical challenges.
According to a 1980 law, states can opt out of the program and need to be consulted in the process. However, Don Barnett, a fellow with the Center for Immigration Studies, describes refugee resettlement as a “secretive” and lucrative business for “non-profits” who operate with little coordination with state and local communities.
“In every encounter I’ve had with resettlement representatives, they will say if the locality doesn’t want it, we won’t resettle them — but this hasn’t been tested,” Barnett said.
Concern about the funding burden falling on local governments is hardly new.
The 1981 Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy noted, “Many state and local officials are concerned that the costs of resettlement assistance will continue beyond the period of federal reimbursement and that the burden of providing services will then fall upon their governments.”
“There is a complete cost shift to the states,” Barnett said.
Indeed, federal funding, extended for 36 months at the beginning of the program, dropped to the current eight-month period by 1991. The Heritage Foundation estimates the total lifetime cost of government benefits at $6.5 billion per 10,000 refugees.
See Julia Hahn at Breitbart, here, for more on the Heritage Foundation study.
