Update May 5th, Phillipos wants to be released tomorrow—good boy (dumb maybe) but son of a refugee so therefore he is good, right?
It’s all over the news today (you don’t need me to tell you!) about the three friends of Dzhokar Tsarnaev and how they have been arrested for trying to hide evidence. We have been told repeatedly by the media that their involvement was AFTER the bombing, but we really don’t know that yet.
Here is a profileof the Ethiopian young man who first spotted his friend Dzhokar on the video footage released by the FBI in the days following the terrorist attack.
We don’t know if the 19-year-old was himself a refugee from Ethiopia, but his mother very likely was since she “works with refugees” now.
If he is a Muslim, as the other two arrested today are, we haven’t been told that yet (that I know of). A reliable source tells me that we resettle mostly Ethiopian Christians and only about 20% Muslims. BTW, the US State Department keeps all the stats on the religions of refugees they admit to the US, they just won’t give you that information.
Robel Phillipos, charged with lying to authorities investigating the Boston Marathon bombings, was the first friend to recognize Dzhokar Tsarnaev’s photo on TV news and alert the two other university students accused of aiding the suspect, according to the FBI affidavit released Wednesday.
Phillipos, Tsarnaev and Dias Kadyrbayev and Azamat Tazhayakov attended the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. Phillipos, 19, of Cambridge, was studying marketing, but the university said Wednesday he is not currently enrolled.
With Tsarnaev, he was a 2011 graduate of the prestigious Cambridge Rindge and Latin School, the city schools’ superintendent’s office said.
Phillipos, a U.S. citizen, lives with his mother, who is from Ethiopia and works with refugees, WHDH-TV reported. Their Cambridge apartment is next to the gas station where the Tsarnaev brothers carjacked a vehicle before getting into the shootout with police in which 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed.
Does anyone other than me find it ironic that all of this is happening in the very heart of Liberal, politically-correct America, Cambridge, Mass?
Of all of the cities in the U.S. one would think that Boston (Kennedy country!) would be immune from Muslim terrorist attacks because the people there are so “welcoming” to immigrants. Why would those same immigrants, given so much in Massachusetts, lie and kill people?
If you are interested (or some enterprising reporter is interested in investigating further), here is a list of all the “welcoming” refugee and immigrant groups serving “new Americans” in the Boston area (and largely funded by you—the taxpayer).
For new readers: We have written a bunch over the years on Ethiopian refugees, type ‘Ethiopian’ into our search function for more. I just did that, and what a coincidence this post heads the list—Virginia Imam stirring up Ethiopian Muslims with Jihad Talk.
O’Reilly: Why are we supporting questionable foreign folks?
(LOL! He doesn’t know the half of it!)
I’m an ‘occasional’ fan of O’Reilly, and happened to catch part of his show last night when he used Alan Colmes as a punching bag about the Boston Bomber family’s reported $100,000 dip into the pockets of American taxpayers.
If O’Reilly continues to investigate the refugee/asylum system, I will be his number one fan!
Bill O’Reilly kicked off his show tonight expressing outrage with the mother of Boston bombing suspects the Tsarnaev brothers for accusing the United States of a conspiracy to frame and kill her children, when her family has been taking more than $100,000 in welfare benefits for years. O’Reilly and Monica Crowley expressed outrage at the lack of welfare oversight, and when Alan Colmes challenged their claims, O’Reilly told Colmes to “shut up.”
O’Reilly called the mother “disgraceful” for her comments, and asked exactly why “we the people [are] supporting questionable foreign folks.”He wanted to know why President Obama and Governor Deval Patrick aren’t expressing outrage with the fact that the Tsarnaevs were getting welfare assistance, decrying the lack of outrage as “business as usual” for an immigration policy and a welfare system that turns a blind eye in situations like these.
Why did we let them in and how persecuted could they have been if they were, and are, traveling back and forth?
Funny that the Mediaitereport just focused on the welfare use, but to me O’Reilly’s outrage about their “vacations” to the land of persecution struck a cord.
Readers, we have seen it over and over again. We give refuge to people who claim persecution and then we see them go ‘home’ for visits and to do business. We have written at RRW about Bosnians going ‘home’ because they still own property, Mesketian Turks have houses to sell back ‘home’ and we can only speculate that they too must go back to Russia for occasional business, but the most outrageous are the Somalis. (Muslims all!)
We are resettling Somalis by the hundreds each month RIGHT NOW, yet many we have fed, housed, clothed and educated go back for various reasons—primarily “business” or to visit the family. Who can afford a plane ticket to Africa? But, we can’t forget that dozens of ‘youths’ went back to learn the fine art of Jihad, here in 2008!
BTW, the family reunification program for Somalis recently re-opened after being closed for years because of widespread fraud—those getting in as ‘family’ were found (through random DNA testing) not to be related at all. The State Department admitted that tens of thousands of Somalis are in the US illegally!
The Gang of Eight billwill make it easier for so-called asylum seekers and refugees to be admitted to the USbecause it makes whole groups of people eligible while under the present system they are still supposed to prove they personally fear persecution!
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!
Besides being “crazy,” did US immigration officials know that he was a “political activist” in Russia?
Mom’s mugshot when she was busted for shoplifting at Lord & Taylor last year.
There is so much news flying around now about the Boston bomber brothers Tsarnaev that it’s hard to sort through it and pick out what’s important and what isn’t. But this little nugget in the Huffington Post (hat tip: Jeff) is something I want to share here because it goes to the question of how much screening did this family have before being given asylum in the US?
The mainstream media and Muslim apologists are going to make the case that the brothers unpredictably just went off the deep end, but as more information comes out about this family the bigger issue is what sort of people are we letting into the US in the first place?
A woman who went on many occasions to the Tsarnaev apartment for a facial treatment relates this account of what the mother (Zubeidat Tsarnaeva) said happened in Russia before they came to America. Incidentally, Zubeidat had reportedly been fired from her spa job and was doing facials at home—LOL! you know this had to be in violation of health laws in Massachusetts!
In my last year of college I was getting a facial from her, and asking her about why she had originally come to the United States with her family about eight or 10 years previously. She told me that she and her husband had been lawyers and political activists in Russia. They had fled the country after “something that her husband did.” Her daughter had recently been divorced at this time, and her daughter’s ex-husband had taken their child to Russia, refusing to return him. Finally the child was returned. When my mom asked Zubeidat how they had gotten the child back, she told her that ‘her [Zubeidat’s] husband was crazy’ and everyone knew it. When he threatened the daughter’s ex-husband’s family, they returned the child.
I guess everyone (but US immigration officials) knew he was crazy. We are still waiting for more details on how this bunch received asylum. Were they resettled by a refugee resettlement contractor? Or, did they arrive here and ask for asylum and go before an immigration judge? There will be records that are surely being unearthed. If you find out the details before me—-please send the info. my way.
And, here is what else I want to know: If they were so persecuted back in Russia, then why did the parents return to Russia?
One more thing! The Gang of Eight amnesty bill introduced in the Senate last week has a refugee section we will be telling you more about—it makes it easier for morerefugees to get into the US, less screening and elimination of the requirement that you have to prove you were personally persecuted—great huh!
BostonMarathon bombing archive of our previous posts is here.
Send a message to the US State Department
The next hearing on how many (and which refugees) to bring to America in FY2014 is in May. Go here to see how you can send in testimony. You do not have to be an expert on the program and testimony can be short (civil please)!
O’Reilly: Why are we supporting questionable foreign folks?
