He says it has nothing to do with the fact that under the Donald Trump Administration the number of refugees being admitted to the US has plummeted.(I checked yesterday and in the first 2 weeks of January only around 200 came in.)
For new readers, the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration is normally a political appointment used by a new President to set a tone in the Department of State reflecting his (or her) political view on the controversial issue.
The job is a political appointment that requires Senate approval (both of Obama’s picks were approved).
However, here is the rub: Donald Trump has put no one forward for this position thus leaving it in the hands of State Department career professionals.
Perhaps he has a strategy behind that—-one less battle with Senate Dems, and Rs like Flake and Graham, and maybe it is easier to shrink the program without a leading figurehead. I don’t know the answer.
Anyway here is the latest news at a pro-more-refugees website.
LOL! My first thought when I saw this was: okay where is Hans and his reporter pal at Reuters?
From Refugees Deeply:
The top U.S. diplomat dealing with refugees has resigned his post. Simon Henshaw became the third senior official dealing with refugees to depart or be reassigned in recent weeks.
The acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) said it was a routine professional departure.
“It very honestly had to do with the fact that I’d felt I’d spent enough time,” Henshaw told Reuters. “I’m used to moving on every two or three years.”
The 33-year public service veteran said his move was not a protest at the Trump administration’s refugee policies, which have seen cuts to financial support and resettlement numbers as well as travel bans.
Henshaw, who has been with PRM since 2013, will hand over to Carol O’Connell, the deputy assistant secretary of state for African affairs. On January 9 Lawrence Bartlett, previously the head of the refugee admissions office at the State Department, was reassigned to the office handling Freedom of Information Act requests.
Since taking office, President Donald Trump has suspended the entire refugee program for four months, slashed resettlement places and funding for refugee programs and withdrawn the U.S. from the negotiations for a global compact on migration.
Earlier in January, Barbara Strack, chief of the Refugee Affairs Division at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, under the Department of Homeland Security, said she would retire this month.
The White House is also preparing to slash funding to the U.N. agency supporting Palestinian refugees (UNRWA). [Yippee!—ed]
I bet the head honchos of the nine US State Department refugee contractors are running as fast as they can to meet O’Connell (if they haven’t done so already). If past is prologue, she will be their information pipeline (and advocate, they hope).
Here are the nine that are largely funded (involuntarily) by you, the taxpayer:
In his argument posted atThe Guardian, he says more legal pathways are needed because they (from the third world) are coming illegally (whether we like it or not). Sounds like blackmail to me!
He also confirms my oft-repeated contention that it is the desire by industries for labor that we should be satisfying in the new borderless (dream) world.
Aspiring migrants, denied legal pathways to travel, inevitably fall back on irregular methods. This not only puts them in vulnerable positions, but also undermines governments’ authority. The best way to end the stigma of illegality and abuse around migrants is, in fact, for governments to put in place more legal pathways for migration, removing the incentives for individuals to break the rules, while better meeting the needs of their labour markets for foreign labour.
Thanks to reader Deb for sending me Jihad Watch’s take on his screedhere. See discussion there about hijrah and the OIC.
Then check out Breitbart’s report :
United Nations Secretary General António Guterres has unveiled his plan to promote global mass migration in the left-liberal Guardian newspaper.
Guterres, a former Socialist Party prime minister in his native Portugal, took over the top job at the UN on January 1st, having previously served as the institution’s High Commissioner for Refugees.
His article, titled ‘Migration can benefit the world. This is how we at the UN plan to help’, makes the bold claim that mass migration “powers economic growth, reduces inequalities and connects diverse societies”, in order to promote the Global Compact for Migration.
“This will be the first overarching international agreement of its kind,” he boasted — but claimed it would not “place any binding obligations on states”, but rather serve as “an unprecedented opportunity for leaders to counter the pernicious myths surrounding migrants”.
He [Guterres] made the contentious claim that migrants “take jobs” that local workers “cannot” fill, and asserted that this is a positive thing. He also attempted to spin the fact that migrants send huge sums of money straight out of their host countries and back to their countries of origin as a kind of supplement to foreign aid.
Breitbart continues here.
Pay attention to this last issue above about remittances. It is huge!
I remember when the Temporary Protected Status for Salvadorans was up for renewal under George W. Bush. It was quickly renewed with his administration saying that the money the Salvadorans sent OUT OF THE US ECONOMY was propping up El Salvador (so we needed to continue doing that).
Guterres at RRW:
We followed Antonio Guterres here at RRW for a decade since he was previously the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (before moving up to top dog position at the UN).
Go here for my Guterres archive.
Just a reminder that in June of 2009, as UNHCR, he said it was sharia law that underpins international refugee law and United Nations refugee activities. See 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.
Take that Christians and Jews! You thought Biblical Judeo-Christian charity predated Islam, silly you.
As we have learned repeatedly, Temporary Protected Status, a LEGAL immigration program, is not temporary.
You’ve been hearing the wailing about Salvadorans, who have had 17 years here in America to get over a natural disaster back home nearly 2 decades ago (having to leave the US by 2019) well wait till you hear the clamor for the Syrians who were first granted ‘temporary’ protection by Obama in 2012.
The more I think about this whole program, which allows nationals of designated countries who were present in the US (illegally?) on the date of the designation to stay and work for 18 months until their home country is back on its feet and then is extended every 18 months for YEARS, the more I think the whole program should be trashed right along with that insane Diversity Visa Lottery.
With TPS, every 18 months there is a hue and cry from advocates for the people working, getting drivers licenses, having babies and probably voting (with their drivers licenses) to allow them to stay for another 18 months. (And, by the way, sending billions out of the US economy and ‘home’ to their third world country as remittances.)
Every 18 months for the ten countries that have TPSnow we hear the same cries from the Dems—you can’t make them leave, they have families, houses, businesses etc.
You need to understand that it is a BFD that President Trump has said TPS for Salvadorans will end.
Now comes the next anti-Trump media campaign on behalf of 7,000 Syrians who got TPS during the Obama Administration.
I wrote about it at the time and you should know that these six Democrat Senators petitioned Obama for the Syrian designation:
Again, remember that this program does not let supposed ‘refugees’ in to the country it was only designed to allow a temporary stay in the US for those ALREADY IN HERE for another reason to stay for a little while. Wikipedia has a good description, here.
El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. By November 2017, about 300,000 foreign nationals were recipients of protection under temporary protected status. Some have been in the United States since the 1990s. People with temporary protected status are able to obtain work authorization every 18 months since the designation was made, in some cases for many years.
Here comes the Huffington Postwith the next installment of ‘Trump is a meany!’ This time it is the Syrian TPS designation that has them worked up!
Remember readers these are not REFUGEES! If they have a claim for asylum and prove they would be persecuted if returned to their home country, surely they have made those applications.
With humanitarian relief, known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS), set to expire for nearly 7,000 Syrians at the end of this month, many fear the Trump administration’s looming decision. [The USCIS website says they have until March 31st, so I’m guessing the announcement is made 2 months in advance.—ed]
The countries selected for TPS are few and far between, with only ten currently designated. And the Trump administration appears to be eliminating TPS protection for each designated country one at a time: Nicaragua, Sudan, Haiti, and now the latest upset of El Salvador, which was designated 17 years ago and tragically affects at least 200,000 people. In light of the Trump administration’s unrelenting attacks against dreamers, refugees, immigrants, and other vulnerable populations, Syrians in the U.S. are bracing themselves for the worst.
In order to extend the program, the Department of Homeland Security must merely decide whether the catastrophic country conditions in Syria, that warranted the TPS designation in 2012, continue to be met. Although the answer appears not only obvious, but indisputable, Washington is mulling this over. If the administration decides that Syrians no longer require protection and terminates TPS on January 31, 2018, such a devastating decision can only be grounded in political theatre, and not the reality of the country’s conditions.
Blah, blah, blah… now this!
(And, again, if Syrians can prove they would be killed if returned to Syria, then they need to apply for asylum. The immigration attorney writing this piece knows that!)
While the Trump administration may stand to gain political points with its right wing supporters for being “tough on immigration,” many Syrians, who consider their return to Syria a death sentence, will pay the price. The President continues to leverage his platform of xenophobia and superiority against those less fortunate — nations he, reportedly, disgracefully refers to as “shithole” countries. This cannot be the guiding force of this country’s immigration policies. By ending TPS for Syrians, the administration would not only be turning its back on a most vulnerable population, but it would be abandoning the humanitarian principles and values that led to the creation of TPS.
More here if you feel like reading it!
I repeat: It is time to dump this whole program because like so many other LEGAL immigration programs it has been corrupted by the Open Borders Left!
And, I can’t emphasize enough that Donald Trump has opened the window for change on how we admit immigrants to America. We must strike now because once he is out of office there will be no one with the guts to do what must be done. And the Dems know it!
Many American Jewish groups are angry with the Israeli government because it is now taking steps to remove tens of thousands of economic migrants who entered Israel from Africa before it had built its great border wall.
If US private activist groups want to pressure Israel that is their business, however, when one of those groups is paid millions annually from the US Treasury it becomes our business what they do. Of course it is the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) I’m talking about.
Why are we paying them a dime to take care of the refugees they resettle in the US while they muck around in world affairs?
Where is Congress? Cut them off!
And, let me be clear at the outset (before I get broad brush anti-Jewish comments). HIAS is first and foremost driven by its Leftwing view of the world (a borderless world). Just as there are Catholics (Lutherans, Evangelicals etc) on the political Left and on the political Right, so too are there Jews on both ends of the political spectrum.
HIAS is NOT working here on behalf of Israel!(I hear all the time from readers who say that HIAS is working forIsrael!)
Israel is in the same situation the US is in with thousands upon thousands of mostly economic migrants (not refugees) who got in to the country illegally and if permitted to stay would drastically change the country, for the worse. Anyone in their right mind knows that borders cannot be completely erased if a country wants to survive.
The difference is that since Israel is smaller it will die faster than we will if they do nothing about people like these:
Israel is said to be planning to begin deportations in the spring and the International Left (including HIAS) is haranguing the Netanyahu government in hopes of stopping it.
Here is TheJerusalem Post to explain what they are doing.
(That is one of the mean tactics the mean Leftwing learned from Saul Alinsky to go after those who will hurt first—some poor pilot just doing his job.)
Amid growing reports that the government is planning to deport tens of thousands of migrants from Sudan and Eritrea to Rwanda in March, an online campaign has been launched to beseech Israeli pilots not to fly asylum-seekers to what many activists deem a death sentence.
The campaign, initiated this week by the NGO Zizim Community Action, calls on the public to send letters to the Israel Aviation Association and the Israel Pilots Association, which includes all the pilots in the country, to refuse to fly migrants to any dangerous African country.
According to the NGO’s CEO, Raluca Gena, the online campaign is the first step toward a series of activities against what they, and many other human rights organizations and Jewish communities around the world, are calling an immoral deportation.
Presently, approximately 35,000 Eritrean and Sudanese asylum-seekers live in Israel. Among their 13,764 asylum applications submitted since 2013, only 11 have been approved by the Interior Ministry as of July 2017 – 10 Eritreans and one Sudanese.
Outside of Israel, prominent leaders of the North American Jewish community sent a public letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday urging Israel not to imprison or deport tens of thousands of Sudanese and Eritrean asylum-seekers.
Rather, the leaders – who sent an initial letter regarding the controversial issue to Netanyahu in November – urged him to allow North American Jews to help resolve the matter.***
Signatories include Mark Hetfield, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), the global Jewish nonprofit that protects refugees; Rabbi Jill Jacobs, executive director of T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights; Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism; Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street; and Nancy Kaufman, CEO of the National Council of Jewish Women. [This is a who’s who of American Leftwing Jewish groups.—ed]
“The government of Israel recently announced its plans to imprison or potentially deport tens of thousands of Sudanese and Eritrean asylum-seekers unless they leave voluntarily before April,” the letter states.
“The ultimatum follows a mounting campaign of escalation on the part of the Israeli government to pressure the roughly 38,000 African asylum-seekers remaining in Israel to self-deport. While Israeli authorities contend that the population in question – most of whom entered Israel between 2007 and 2012 – are economic migrants, HIAS and other rights groups argue that they are asylum-seekers and refugees deserving of protection.”
Israel does (or did) have a program where economic migrants who self-deported received a financial payments, but I don’t know if it is still in use.
***You should know that HIAS has been working with the US State Department to bring some of those so-called ‘refugees’ to the US directly from Israel. The numbers are small so far (9 this fiscal year), but if you think this story isn’t about you, it is!
They aren’t planning to bring more of them to the US and other western countries, are they?
It is something we have advocated here as well. Believe me, it is cheaper than incarceration and deportation and way cheaper than migrants of all stripes living (for years!) off the generosity of the US taxpayer for food, shelter, education and medical care.
Here is the story from NPR (hat tip: Joanne):
158,000. That’s roughly how many refugees are stuck in limbo in Europe right now.
Many of them got to Europe in late 2015, when the refugee crisis reached its peak, and have been waiting since then to see if they’ll be formally accepted into the European Union.
To cut down on the wait time and economic impact of this massive influx, some countries and nonprofits in Europe have embraced a new idea — pay refugees to go back to the countries they left in the first place.
Mahmoud Abdelwahab is one of the people who has been waiting. He’s 25, and originally from Mosul, Iraq. In early 2016, he quit his job as a cook and came to Europe, ending up in Vienna.
….the Austrian courts have been overwhelmed by applications. When the migrant crisis reached its peak back in 2015, the number of people wanting to stay in Austria tripled.
Instead of waiting longer, Mahmoud late last year made a tough decision. He decided to leave Austria and go back to Iraq.
“He saw other Iraqi people receiving the negative decision that they have to go back,” Epaid says. “And that’s why he decided for himself to back, before he got a negative.”
That decision — to voluntarily leave the country — is exactly what the Austrian government wants refugees to do.
Last spring, Austria announced that it would give 1,000 euros (roughly $1,219 USD) to the first 1,000 refugees who signed up to leave on their own.
The program was successful, and the government extended the offer to more refugees. It’s an incentive that’s gaining traction across Europe.
He’s taking the buyout, he says, to go home and use the money to buy a car and become a cab driver.
And, LOL!, if I could run the immigration program (in any country) I would hire Mahmoud for a huge sum of money and have him filmed saying that in public service announcements to be shown all over the Middle East and Africa!
And, for my readers who just want to see them arrested and taken in chains to an airport, I don’t want to hear from you so don’t bother commenting. (Of course there would have to be all sorts rules put in place, like they can’t come back next week. I know that!)
Heck, if we could pay the supposedly educated DACA kids (the Dreamers!) to go back to their countries of origin they might actually (if they have been educated by the US) help their people and their homelands improve themselves, and the world would be a better place.
Come on President Trump, give it a try. Offer to pay them to return to where they came from, with maybe a little starter money, and see how many will sign up. Call the program Dreams from my Father’s Homeland!
There would be a little humorous side benefit for us as we watched the Dems scream bloody murder about wasting taxpayer dollars….
(I’m shutting up! I’m getting carried away!).
Click hereto see all my posts on the ‘Invasion of Europe.’
That is the question that the Twin Cities Pioneer Pressseeks to answer in a longish article published yesterday.
(Was it ever really out, or were Minnesotans kept in the dark and never asked?)
Employing a technique we have become accustomed to seeing, reporter Bob Shaw uses a family as his ‘poster family’ that seems to be the kind of people America can absorb—hardworking, speak English, grateful—so as to get your sympathy juices flowing. But otherwise, I think it is was a pretty balanced and generally factual piece.
It’s long and chock-full of information. Here are some snips that interested me and I wanted to comment on (emphasis is mine):
Minnesota has the highest number of refugees per capita nationwide, according to the U.S. Census and refugee-support agencies. With 2 percent of the nation’s population, Minnesota has 13 percent of its refugees.
The cutback in the refugee inflow has shaken Minnesota’s network of sponsoring agencies. [I don’t believe we are told in this article that the “sponsoring agencies” are handsomely paid for their ‘charitable works.’—-ed]
They say the more refugees, the better. They argue that refugees boost the economy, diversify our state and eventually pay back the costs of their resettlement.
Yet, refugees cost an estimated $107,000 each in food aid, medical expenses and other services, according to one researcher. Communities have no control over the in-flow of refugees, yet they must share the cost of supporting them. And, according to Kim Crockett, vice president of the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative think tank based in Golden Valley.
I’ve been giving this above a lot of thought lately and have concluded that the refugee industry made a huge blunder years ago in its treatment of local citizens. Of course the refugee advocates and contractors*** thought they could go on forever keeping information secret from the local people and now once the locals see that they have been kept in the dark and are reacting, the only thing left for the industry is to pull out the “racist” label, thus making locals even angrier.
Pioneer Presscontinues with more on that Notre Dame study which doesn’t seem to me supports the idea that more refugees are good for Minnesota. Twenty years! It is going to take twenty years for taxpayers to be repaid for their generosity!
Refugees are free to apply for taxpayer-funded government aid, like any other residents. Nonprofit groups often help them apply.
A 2017 Notre Dame study on the economic outlook of refugees said that after 20 years, refugees are more likely than native-born residents to be receiving welfare and food-support payments — and they are also more likely to be employed.
What does that tell you? Employed at what? Obviously work (like meatpacking in MN!) that doesn’t pay enough to allow them to get off of welfare!
Crockett thinks that initial outlay is too high as well and points out that although this is a federal program, the feds have dumped huge costs on the taxpayers of Minnesota:
The refugee resettlement program is a federal effort, but the federal government “does not compensate Minnesota, or the local school districts, cities or counties, who may find themselves coping with large concentrations of refugees,” Crockett says. So when many refugees end up enrolled in Medicaid or assistance programs such as those for housing or transportation or language study, Minnesotans absorb the extra costs.
This next bit is always said in understanding tones—refugees want to live with their own kind of people, near their own cultural and ethnic kindred spirits and relatives.
But, here is what I want to know—-why is that same understanding not given to people with European roots? Why are we told we aren’t permitted to seek out our kind of people, but it is so acceptable for say Somalis (and other refugee groups) to develop enclaves?
The state doesn’t keep track of refugees who arrive in the U.S. and then move to Minnesota. But the federal government does.
Minnesota accepted 4,523 refugees in the two-year period ending Sept. 30, 2015, according to the federal Office of Refugee Settlement. But at the same time, a second wave arrived — 3,864 refugees who moved from other states to Minnesota.
Minnesota’s secondary migration was larger than all other states combined. Second-place Iowa had 442 refugees moving from other states. [The story doesn’t tell you that most of the secondary migrants are Somalis and a few other African ethnic groups.—ed]
“Minnesota has been a magnet,” said Bob Oehrig, director of Arrive Ministries in Richfield, an agency that handles refugees. He said Minnesota has what refugees want — jobs, good social welfare programs, and plenty of people from their home country [Somalia!—-ed].
There is much more here for you to chew on!
***These (below) are the nine major federal contractors making decisions about who comes to your towns and cities. They are paid by the head to place refugees and are now in budgetary panic-mode as the Trump Administration slows the flow to America.
At some point in the last three decades they made a strategic (fatal?) error when they chose to act in secrecy and treat local communities and citizens with disdain and vilification instead of trying to be honest and understanding of concerns people have for their security, their culture and their wallets. As a result the backlash against them is real and growing!
It is bad, but I’m not sure it is the worst threat to free speech. In fact, if you aren’t a Twitter user you might not know what all the fuss is about.
If anyone asked me, I would say the worst threat is the kind of silencing that people like South Dakota’s Taneeza Islamuse when they bully venues to shut down speaking events she and her ilk disapprove of by frightening owners/managers in to cancelling events. And, often frighten speakers in to silence.
That kind of intimidation is mean and personal and causes people to fear for their safety.
In America we have a right to speak and we have a right to gather!
That said, let’s talk more about the stunning revelations this week from James O’Keefe who got the dirt on Twitter and shadow-banning—a less personal, but nonetheless serious threat to free speech.
And, it isn’t just about Twitter! Shadow-banning can be used in all sorts of situations where social media is taking the pulse of citizens’ views, as we mentioned when we talked about shadow-banning possibly being used by the Heritage Foundation, here.
Breitbart (Twitter Censorship!) has a good explanation here, but simply put this is how it works:
You post a comment, or tweet something, and you can see on your computer screen that the comment posted and you think your remark is being seen by the world, but no one else sees it but you!
As Breitbart says, the very best, most skillful, shadow-banning is when you are never the wiser about the fact that you are speaking to an audience of one!
Here is CNS News on Brent Bozell’s comments on O’Keefe’s latest :
Twitter’s practice of “shadow banning” conservative posts, exposed Thursday in a new James O’Keefe undercover video, constitutes “the most sinister threat to free speech in history,” Media Research President Brent Bozell warns in a statement reacting to the news.
The Project Veritasvideo, featuring current and former Twitter employees describing the social media giant’s shadow banning censorship tactics, prompted the previously-skeptical Bozell to issue a warning to all Americans:
“I have been a critic of some of James O’Keefe’s work in the past, so I have the credentials to say the following: What O’Keefe has produced is not just extraordinary but it demands national attention.
“The radical left is out to censor the voices of all with whom they disagree. O’Keefe has proven it. Every American needs to watch this — if, of course, Twitter will allow it.”
I’ve been shadow-banned by Twitter on a couple of occasions (maybe more times than I know before I caught on!), so now I am wise to them!
Without getting too deep in to the weeds and techie details, here is what I have found and what I do.
After each tweet that I consider important, I check the feed for my tweets and the analytics which is where each tweet is recorded and statistics are gathered. If it is missing there, I quickly go to the tweet on my screen (before it is lost in hundreds of new incoming tweets) and get a screenshot.
Then I do this as I did yesterday when I tweeted about the President’s supposed commentson certain countries.
I bring attention to the fact that Twitter shadow-banned me and I put a screenshot of the original tweet into a new tweet. Like this…
If you are on Twitter, follow me (@RefugeeWatcher). I tweet a lot of information that I have no time to write about in a post here at RRW. And, you can see what I’m tweeting in the right hand side bar when you visit my blog directly.
Nuts! Just nuts! 200,000 is an astronomical number and add to that the promise of 1,000 a month family reunification (chain migration) by late summer. And, that is considered a compromise!
More Invasion of Europe news….
From Channel New Asia:
BERLIN: Germany will limit the number of asylum seeker arrivals to around 200,000 annually under a draft coalition agreement sealed Friday (Jan 12) in marathon talks between the country’s two biggest parties.
“We determine that the number of new arrivals … should not exceed the range of 180,000 to 220,000 per year,” according to a copy of the document agreed by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives and the Social Democrats obtained by AFP.
On the thorny issue of family reunions for asylum seekers granted temporary refuge, the preliminary accord says current restrictions should be loosened.
The agreement calls for parliament to pass a law by the end of July allowing 1,000 family members per month to come to Germany.
A little more here.
See my Germany archive by clicking here.
Meanwhile in Japan, efforts are underwayto further tighten asylum policy. Japan takes virtually no one! (And, has had no Islamic terror attacks. Coincidence?)
And, you can tell bythis article at HuffPo that paints him as an “authoritarian” that they are very very afraid of him and his growing “nationalist” power in Eastern Europe. They also see him exporting his views (about especially Muslim migration) to other European countries like Italy, Austria and (gasp!) even Germany.
One of Hungarian Prime Minister Orban’s greatest strengths is his willingness to speak (as Trump did yesterday) straightforwardly. Muslim refugees are invaders.
I’m still waiting for President Trump to invite Orban to the White House. If he wants to push the Left (and CNN) over the cliff (into a mental breakdown) now, that would do it.
Here is the Huffington Post on Orban (the truth-teller):
In a January 8th interview with Germany’s Bild newspaper, Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orban, said “we don’t see these people as Muslim refugees. We see them as invaders.” Multi-culturalism, he said, is an illusion. Muslim culture, he continued, is so different from Europe’s that parallel societies are being created.
Orban’s anti-migrant campaign is resonating beyond central Europe into Austria, Italy and even Germany. Earlier this month he was welcomed at a conference of Bavaria’s Christian Socialists, whose leader Horst Seehofer is critical of chancellor Angela Merkel’s immigration policies. In 2015 over 1 million mostly Muslim refugees were resettled in Germany. About 150,000 of those refugees transited Hungary. Few wanted to stay in Hungary.
Orban has made common cause with neighboring Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic where public opinion opposes refugee resettlement.Hungary and Poland are being targeted by the European Union Commission for refusing a quota of 10,000 refugees under a burden sharing measure agreed to three years ago. The case is before the European Court of Justice. Since the 2015 migration crisis Poland has accepted no refugees while Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Austria have each taken fewer than twenty.
The Fidesz Party that Orban founded holds a two-thirds majority in parliament and is favored to win new elections set for April 8th. Orban has ruled Hungary with an increasingly authoritarian hand since 2010.
HuffPo writer Barry Wood throws everything at Orban he can think of that would paint the man as a monster (eg. “flame-thrower” with close ties to Russia), and then goes on to say this below, as if we would all be shocked, that Orban doesn’t like that nice old man—George Soros (I bet HuffPo gets a bit of moola from Budapest-born, György Schwartz).
During a visit to Budapest in November I was startled to see posters bearing the image of billionaire Hungarian-born investor and philanthropist George Soros all over the city.Paid for by Fidesz, these ubiquitous posters tell Hungarians not to let Soros have the last laugh. Soros is the favorite target of Orban, representing everything he opposes—multiculturalism, diversity, globalization, and tolerance. Soros is accused of wanting to Muslimize Europe. Some Jewish groups see the campaign as anti-Semitic, others do not.
Come on Donald! Give us some more fun! Welcome Viktor Orban to the White House and give him a lavish State Dinner! (Stick it to Soros too! You know he hates you!)
Looking for something to do? Write to the White Houseand tell the Prez you want to see Orban invited to the White House (and have him bring his lovely family)!
Go herefor my complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive.
With all the hullabaloo since yesterday about the President’s question about why we needed to import so many people from certain s***hole countries, I’m thinking that the great fear the PC crowd (pulling out the smelling salts) has is that when the President speaks straightforwardly (on anything), it gives permission for masses of Americans to do the same. Speaking freely about critical issues facing our country could be the death of the hard Left and they know it.
I’m expecting that half of America was laughing in the privacy of their homes when they heard the President voice something that they themselves dare not say.
I didn’t look around for what might be the best discussion about what exactly happened, but this one at the American Spectatorby Scott McKay seems on point and brings up the Somali issue something we know a good bit about.
Here are a few snips (emphasis is mine):
Thursday saw a media firestorm erupt over a Washington Post report that amid a White House meeting with several members of Congress working on a compromise having to do with the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, President Trump asked why America should have to take in so many immigrants from “s***hole countries” rather than people from places like Norway.
The Post article isn’t exactly the finest example of American journalism, identifying as its source no one actually in the room to confirm what Trump supposedly said but instead naming two anonymous people who were “briefed on the meeting.”
Those anonymous second-hand sources claimed that the offending statement came amid a discussion over a proposal to eliminate the diversity visa lottery program and use the 50,000 visas per year tied up in it to offer protection to “vulnerable populations” living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status.Trump became irritated at this, according to the Post, and asked about Haitians, and when the conversation turned to Africa Trump supposedly said, “Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?”and suggested that maybe instead America should be taking in more people from Norway — whose prime minister visited the White House the day before.
The Post reported that the Senators attempting to come to a DACA solution, most prominently Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin (whose track record indicates a lack of reliability where it comes to good faith in negotiations) and South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham (no more need be said) were upset over, upon arriving at the meeting, being joined by immigration hard-liners Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia), among others. Durbin and Graham thought they’d have the president more or less to themselves. And when the meeting devolved into disagreement, with Trump showing no interest in a DACA deal, it’s pretty obvious someone on one or both of their staffs rushed to the Post to offer up a juicy second-hand Trump quote which might or might not have been reported in proper context.
Author McKay then goes through a list of dysfunctional countries whose nationals are here in large numbers, including from Somalia:
How about Somalia? Who’s up for more mass immigration from Somalia? Is there any argument Somalia is a s***hole, or do we need a national screening of Black Hawk Down to remind us what that country is like? If you’d like a more recent depiction of what Somalia has to offer the world we could all watch Captain Phillips, the 2013 Tom Hanks vehicle about the true story of the Maersk Alabama, set upon by one of the multitudinous hordes of pirates — yes, actual pirates — sloughing off from Somali shores in search of fat from international commerce.
Somalia is such a s***hole that its stench infects nearby countries like Kenya — viz., the Westgate Shopping Mall attack in Nairobi in 2013 — and Uganda, where Al-Shabaab, Somalia’s home-grown jihadist terror group, set off a series of bombs in the capital of Kampala to slaughter 76 people as they watched the 2010 World Cup soccer final.
What has America derived from mass immigration from Somalia? Machete attacks on street corners in Columbus and mall stabbings in suburban Minneapolis. And if you like, you can ask the current and former residents of Lewiston, Maine, what a boon Somali immigration has been to that town. [Seemachete attackin Shelburne, VT in the last week.—ed]
The open-borders crowd doesn’t want to talk about that, though, and it wants to call you racist if you’re opposed to a deluge of immigrants from the worst places on earth.That’s why Trump’s “s***holes” objection is big news rather than the fact there are so-called political leaders who can’t agree to reorient our immigration policy toward taking people who can successfully assimilate here.
Between the two, the crude man who tells the truth and looks out for his own citizens is preferable to the genteel man who sells us out for cheap labor or ballot-box fuel for a political machine. If Trump is the former, so be it.