Posts

After Iran occupies Syria, it will destroy Europe and North America

There is a long term plan at work here aimed at destroying the West and it can work.

Iran and Russia plan to destroy Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada by means of a new wave of millions of Syrian Sunnis fleeing to the West to escape the Shiite takeover of Syria.

In my weekly column two months ago, I claimed that Iran is the real victor in the Syrian civil war. Using the war against ISIS as a smokescreen, it is taking over large swathes of Syrian territory, mainly in the scarcely populated middle and eastern parts of the country. In the more fertile and densely populated west of Syria, there are Iraqi, Afghan, and Iranian Shiite militias augmenting Lebanese Hezbollah fighters who were given carte blanche to do whatever Hassan Nasrallah decides to do there.

Assad’s strength continues to increase as ISIS and the other rebel forces lose ground. The brutality of Russian involvement and the cruelty of Shiite militias overcame the anti-Assad forces, the turning point occurring when in 2015, Turkey’ s Erdogan was forced by Russia to cease his aid to the rebels and ISIS. Today, although Erdogan is an unwilling ally of Russia, Alawite Assad still sees him, justifiably, as an Islamist enemy.

The Kurds of northeast Syria, treated as below third class citizens until 2011, will never agree to live under Arab mercy once again and it is reasonable to assume that should Syria remain an undivided country under Assad’s rule, the Kurds will preserve relative autonomy in their region – or fight the regime for their rights.

That is certainly a problem, but the main issue facing a united Syria is going to be the drastic demographic changes the country is going to face.

First of all, about half of Syria’s citizens – close to 10 million – are refugees, half located in Syria and the other half in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, other Arab countries, Europe, North and South America, Australia and even Israel. Syrian refugees who reached points outside the Arab world will in all probability stay put, benefiting from the secure and orderly lives they can now lead. On the other hand, the 3.5 million now in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey are awaiting the end of hostilities in order to return to their homes.

Those expectations may be dashed, however, because Syrian reality is totally changed, and large parts of its cities are in ruins after six and a half years of a cruel and bloody war. Countless bombs dropped from planes and helicopters, artillery and tank barrages, mines and explosives planted by both sides have made much of urban Syria, where most of the fighting took place, unsafe to live in. In Homs, Aleppo, Adlib, Hamat and many other cities, entire neighborhoods will have to be razed and their infrastructure rebuilt from scratch.

Decades and billions of dollars are needed to rebuild the country and I, for one, do not see the world’s nations standing on line to donate the necessary funds. Refugees will not agree to switch their tents in Jordan for ruined buildings lacking basic infrastructure in a desolate and destroyed Syria.

The other reason the refugees will not return is their justified fear of the new lords of the land – the Shiites. Iran has been moving Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan to Syria for a long time in a clear attempt to change the demographic makeup of the country from the Sunni majority it had before the civil war broke out in 2011. The issue could not be more clear because it is no secret that the pre-civil war Sunni majority considered the Alawite rulers heretic idol worshippers who had no right to live in Syria, much less rule over it.

The Alawites know well that the Sunnis rebelled against them twice: The first time was from 1976 to 1982, a rebellion that took the lives of 50,000 citizens. The second time, slowly drawing to an end, has cost the lives of half a million men, women, children and aged citizens of Syria. The Alawites intend to prevent a third rebellion and the best way to do that is to change the majority of the population to Shiites instead of Sunnis. They will not allow the Sunni refugees to return to their homes, leaving them eternal refugees whose lands have been taken over by the enemy. Iran, meanwhile, will populate Syria with Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan.

This ethnic cleansing is the Ayatollah’s dream come true, the dream that sees a Shiite crescent drawn from Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea. This will cover the eastern Arab world from the north, while the war in Yemen is being fought in order to create a parallel southern crescent, entrapping Saudi Arabia and Jordan between the two. With the help of Allah, both those countries and Israel, the Small Satan, will soon fall into the hands of the Shiites, while Europe and America do nothing because who cares when Muslims fight other Muslims?

The Shiite majority in Syria will play along with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, their natural allies, and it is possible that some form of federation might be created between the two in order to push the Lebanese Christians out of the picture, “persuading” them to flee to other countries, leaving Lebanon to its “rightful” Shiite masters. This explains Nasrallah’s eager willingness to fight on Syrian soil as well as the opposition of those against Nasrallah to his involvement there.

The new demographic situation in Syria will convince the Sunni refugees that they have no place to which to return. They will try their best to be allowed to leave Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey for any country, preferably North America and Europe, willing to allow them entry. I predict a process that is the exact opposite of the one the world expects to take place when “peace” breaks out in Syria: Instead of refugees returning to their birthplace, expect the mass flight of Sunni refugees from the region, and expect a heightened incidence of Islamist terror in the countries that allow them in.

The reasons are obvious:

1. Former ISIS and rebel forces will infiltrate along with the refugees, because they, too, are Sunni. They are filled with fury and hatred for the Western countries who were part of the coalition that fought ISIS or stood by without aiding the rebels. Some of them will continue their Jihad on European and North American soil. Expect shootings, explosives and ramming attacks against citizens of these countries.

2. Some of the refugees will not find work and live on the economic and social fringes of society, in poverty-stricken Islamist neighborhoods which have already existed for years in many European cities, and where the local police fear to tread. Poverty and life on the fringe of society will turn some of the Muslim young people into easy prey for terrorist organization recruiters who arouse the desire for Jihad by describing the accepting host countries as decadent societies infected with permissiveness, prostitution, alcohol, drugs, materialism and corruption. They present the countries that allowed the immigrants entry as having done so to take advantage of them as industrial slaves, garage hands, cashiers and other degrading occupations, while the privileged citizens are lawyers, accountant, businessmen and homeowners w ho take advantage of the migrants in humiliating ways. It is only a matter of time until young Muslims, especially those who were taught that “everyone is equal” in Western schools, enlist in terrorist organizations.

3. Countries which allow in refugees will suffer a higher crime rate as a result, including violence in public places, sexual attacks and harassment, housebreaking, car theft, substance abuse, unreported work to avoid paying taxes and illegal construction. This will all occur at the same time these countries expend a larger part of their budgets on social services for the refugees, from child allowances to unemployment, health and old age benefits. At this point in time, the percentage of second and third generation immigrants populating the prisons in Western Europe is significantly larger than their percentage in the general population.

4. Increased economic, social and security problems in Europe and North America as a result of the rise in the number of migrants will lead to a rise in the strength of the right and the extreme right. This will in turn lead to more social tensions in the West. Members of Parliament whose only wish is to be re-elected will adapt their parliamentary activity – especially the laws they promote – to the expectations of the rapidly Islamizing constituencies, sacrificing their own people’s interests on the altar of their political careers. Many Europeans, aware of their elected leaders’ betrayal, will despair and leave those socially and economically deteriorating countries. This will increase the rate at which Europe turns into an Islamic region.

And that is how the agreements Iran and Russia will soon coerce Syria into accepting are going to start a chain reaction increasing the number of refugees and pulling Europe down to a point of no return, without the world understanding what is going on. The Atlantic Ocean is not wide enough to protect North America from this debacle crossing the sea.

This is how the Iranian Ayatollahs intend to destroy the heretic, permissive, drunk and materialistic West. More of the unfortunate Syrian millions will find themselves exiled to the heretic countries hated by the Ayatollahs, and Iran will operate from Syrian soil to vanquish Europe and America.

Written in Hebrew for Arutz Sheva, translated by Rochel Sylvetsky, Senior Consultant and op-ed editor of Arutz Sheva English site.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is a of Iran’s national flags are seen on a square in Tehran February 10, 2012, a day before the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl/File Photo.

A Middle East Grand Bargain Must Create Kurdistan by Sherkoh Abbas and Robert Sklaroff

President Trump’s itinerary during his first overseas trip revealed both his goal and its attendant strategy—although it remains officially unstated—as he tries to fashion a durable end to the Syrian civil war and the birth of a restructured region.

In the process of touching-base with the nerve-centers of each of the three major Middle East religions, he attempted to eliminate the Islamic State without empowering Iran.

Conspiratorial Liberals yelp when he recruits Russia, and acolytes of the Obama Administration condemn his having maneuvered around Tehran.

But he must defang the ayatollahs, lest they ally with North Korean missile-rattlers and threaten World War III.

This is why he keeps an armada in the Gulf, while maintaining a beefed-up presence in the Sea of Japan and encouraging Beijing to block Pyongyang from nuke-testing, for he must stretch the depleted military in theaters a half-globe apart until it has been rebuilt.

And that’s why he has embedded Americans with Kurdish forces attacking Raqqa, for it is impossible to be a “player” without having placed pieces onto the board.Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, the U.S. national security adviser, was triggered to inform Turkey on May 1st  that the Kurds were to receive heavy machine guns, mortars, anti-tank weapons, and armored cars after the Turks had lethally-bombed Kurdish forces in northeast Syria the prior Tuesday. That reflected autocrat Erdo?an having again  “distracted”  world attention from targeting the primary target, the Islamic State.

Accommodating this major reconfiguration of regional forces, President Vladimir Putin said that Russia saw no need to arm the Syrian Kurds, but said Moscow would maintain working contacts with them.

Secretary of Defense James “Jim” Mattis had decided to arm the Kurds directly rather than via any regional country, finally reversing Obama’s following-from-behind intransigent passivity.

He is implementing key aphorisms derived from his storied career defending America.

Indeed, Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) recognized arming the Kurds constitutes “an immense milestone.”

In the process, Mattis has recognized The Road to Defeating the Islamic State Runs through Kurdistan, an essay—illustrated by a settlement-map—that succinctly details the historic, military, economic, religious and political implications of this overdue stance.

Visiting Trump in this charged atmosphere, Erdo?an chose the wrong time to be bellicose against Israel and America.  His post-referendum dictatorial effort to promote Jihad was again manifest through two decrees; one that expelled more than 4,000 civil servants and another that banned television dating programs.

That these actions were  not being well-received. That was reflected in the fact that the latter two hyperlinks [al-Monitor and Aljazeera] are from Arab websites, suggesting welcome-recognition of a tilt toward inter-alia the Sunni Gulf states, plus Qatar, the locale of a major American military presence over NATO-aligned Ankara ,which is increasingly aligning with Iran against the potential for Kurds to achieve independence.

That  would serve as the culmination of battle-plans we have proposed for almost a decade.  In 2008, we identified  Kurds as  an “invisible people”  and   advocated confronting the major source of global terrorism,The Road to Iran Runs through Kurdistan – and Starts in Syria. In 2015, we showed why the United States cannot evade this trouble-spot,[The Pathway to Defeating ISIS Runs Though Kurdistan – And Starts in America. In 2013, we  concluded The Kurds can lead a reconstituted  Syria, at peace with all of her neighbors.  In 2014, we suggested NATO Must Help the Kurds Now.

That is  why Kurds are seeking recognition of their enormous military sacrifice and their unique political feat, noting their carefully-constructed federal system in Rojava;  the area of Northern Syria comprised of four self-governing cantons.

Resolving vague territorial claims would yield a regional Diaspora in Turkey, Iran, and Russia, although Stalin purged much of the USSR-population a half-century ago.

Recognizing that Russia has unilaterally created safe-zones, and buzzed American jets near Alaska and Crimea, it will remain vital to coordinate militaries functioning in close-quarters, to ensure spheres of influence do not inadvertently trigger  conflict.

If America retracts support for anti-Islamist Kurds, Erdo?an will be free to promote his brand of Muslim Brotherhood ideology; the dangerous ramifications of which have been explored [Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future].

NATO can reassure Turkey that creation of an independent Kurdistan south of its border, joining with the federated section of northern Iraq, will remove inordinate fears that secession-agitation will persist on its eastern reaches.

Turkey needs to accept this type of endpoint, for its military killed six members of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in air strikes in northern Iraq .

What really irks Erdo?an is that “U.S. arming Syrian Kurds shattered Turkey’s Ottoman Empire ambitions. ” Both  America and Turkey will face a de-facto proxy-war unless Erdogan heeds the more conciliatory tone struck by his Prime Minister.

The schism between the United States and Turkey was illustrated during their press  event.  These leaders deemed different entities as “terroristic”.  Trump cited PKK; whereas Erdo?an cited YPG/PYD .

This perhaps explains the anguish expressed by Turkish security guards, when they beatprotesters—primarily Kurds and Armenian outside t their D.C. embassy .

We suggest the following blueprint should be followed to prompt Moscow to help oust Iran from Syria . It would allow the Kurdish-plurality in northwestern Syria to extend its governance to the Mediterranean Sea, blocking Turkey from expansionist temptations.

The multi-front war against Islamists is recognized by Western leaders such as US Senator Ted Cruz (R, Texas) and globally Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—to have supplanted the Cold War paradigm of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

Perhaps the ultimate method to illustrate the wisdom of this approach is to discount an oppositional paradigm, such as the false claim that American involvement in Syria would merely be a manifestation of Western Imperialism in Rojava.

Instead, America should  implement Point 12  of Woodrow Wilson’s 14-Point Plan that advocated establishing Kurdistan more than a century ago.

At  long last, America Must Recognize Kurdistan  by serving as midwife for a new country [assuming this is the electoral outcome of the originally scheduled September 25 plebiscite sponsored by the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq. That  would assist in finally defeating  the Islamic State.  This would offer immediate and long-term geo-political  dividends.

ABOUT SHERKOH ABBAS

Sherkoh Abbas is President of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria.

ABOUT ROBERT SKLAROFF

Robert Sklaroff is a physician-activist and supporter of Kurdish self-determination.

This article constitutes the policy of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria, conveyed to America and to the world, representing the Kurds of Syria.

RELATED ARTICLE: Netanyahu, the First World Leader to Endorse Independent Kurdistan, Hits Back at Erdogan for Supporting Hamas

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

First time in history the Presidential refugee ceiling has been exceeded thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court

And, you can thank the Supreme Court for unconstitutionally legislating in its decision late last month. Refugees arriving after today are the responsibility of nine unelected justices.

I showed you here over the weekend that no ceiling has been exceeded in the over 35 year history of the program.

My worry is that what SCOTUS has done has been to literally obliterate the responsibility for refugees the law gives to the President and to Congress by defining a new standard for admittance—to those with “bona fide” relationships—ceiling be damned!

Even if one argues it is temporary, it is still an outrage!  How dare the Supreme Court say that those in a newly coined category—those prospective ‘refugees’ with bona fide relationships—are not a security threat to us!  That is the President’s job! Did the justices even read the Refugee Act of 1980?

But, how do you challenge the Supreme Court?  And, are the contractors secretly cheering because they have longed for the day when the CEILING would become meaningless.

To top it off, there is another legal challenge before the rogue Hawaii judge that might further gum up the works (see Breitbart’s Michael Leahy on that potential legal quagmire, here).

Chaos and confusion reign, just as Clarence Thomas (with Alito and Gorsuch) predicted.

And, this was completely unnecessary because the Trump Administration could have simply lowered the ceiling when they came in to office without any Executive Order.  The most they had to do was notify Congress!

As of yesterday afternoon, we have admitted 50,086 refugees to the US in this fiscal year.

Here is where the 50,086 were placed.

Alaska got 55 and Hawaii got 3.

Here are the top ten ‘welcoming’ states.  LOL! Hawaii is near the bottom as always with 3 whole refugees!

So much for Texas removing itself from the USRAP!

All of my posts on the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision are archived here.

There are many stories in the media today about the ceiling having been exceeded, if there is anything useful (other than the same old babble), I’ll update this post.

What you can say, when they say ______

I’m asked all the time: What can I do?  What can I do?

This is an excellent example of the kind of thing you can do.  This is a list of talking points thoughtfully prepared by Brenda Arthur of the Charleston, WV Act for America chapter.  As a citizen activist, she put some serious time into preparing this point/counterpoint and made it available for all of you!

PROPONENTS OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT WILL SAY :

1. Your town is losing population. Bringing refugees will revitalize your city.

  • Truth: Saying that Importing third world poverty into our city or state revitalizes it just defies logic and commonsense.
  • The educational level of many refugees is low. They will only qualify for minimum or low wage jobs. Therefore, they will continue to qualify for some form of government assistance such as Medicaid and/or Food Stamps aka SNAP.
  • Big Business uses refugees for cheap labor thereby depressing wages for Americans with low education levels.
  • The cost of educating a refugee child is apprx $10,000+ per year not to mention the additional cost of English language assistance/interpreters and additional tutoring due to a lack of previous education.
  • Refugees often send some of their money out of the country to family left behind. Those remittances that leave the country are dollars unavailable to the local economy. This is never factored in.
  • As the refugee population grows more languages will be required to be provided by the school system. This erodes the quality of the schools and reduces teaching time for American kids whose parents are paying the bill.
  • In towns where the refugee population has grown, parents are finding 17-20 year-olds in class with their children.
  • Some school districts across the country have as many as 81 languages for which they must provide ESL teachers and interpreters.

2. Another selling point by the proponents is that “It is our moral obligation. That’s who we are as a country.”

  • Our tax dollars were never meant to be someone else’s charity .
  • We should aid refugees where they are. For every one brought here we can help 12 people there. The administration of mercy belongs to each of us individually—-not to the government.
  • Our first moral obligation is to our own people.

Arthur created this refugee crimes poster to use as a visual aid when she speaks to groups in West Virginia. You can do this too!

3. OVER 800,000 REFUGEES (since 9/11) HAVE BEEN ADMITTED TO THE U.S. AND NO TERRORIST PROBLEMS:

  • Proponents will present the picture that everything is “sweetness and light.” Not true. Many problems are occurring with refugee populations in towns all across America: Gangs, increased drug trafficking, sex slave trade, domestic violence, crime, drug resistant strains of TB, female genital mutilation, and more.
  • Cultural differences are often great and cannot be bridged. Some refugee cultures believe that “honor killing” and rape of non-Muslim women is acceptable.
  • In addition, there have been terrorist acts committed by refugees as well as many crimes. Taxpayers pay for expensive trials, and for those who are sentenced we must bear the cost of imprisonment for many years.

4. NO STATE MONEY IS INVOLVED.

  • Yet another selling point of the proponents is that THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED. IT’S ALL FEDERAL MONEY. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, FEDERAL MONEY IS OUR MONEY.  SECONDLY, LET’S DISCUSS THE STATE COSTS: MEDICAID , STATE EMPLOYEES, EDUCATION, INTERPRETERS, AND LIKELY CASH WELFARE PAYMENTS.
  • DON’T TELL ME OR ANYONE ELSE THERE IS NO STATE MONEY INVOLVED WITH THIS PROGRAM. It’s a matter of how much.

TO RECAP:

  • Medicaid–Unreimbursed cost to the state
  • TANF–Cash Welfare payments –Unreimbursed costs to the state
  • Interpreters–Provided to students and other refugees as needed
  • Education–Cost for educating children K-12
  • State Employees’ salaries and benefits who work w/refugees

5. The vetting is very, very rigorous.

  • Former FBI Director, James Comey, Obama’s Special Envoy to the Middle East to fight ISIS, General John Allen, Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, Mike McCaul, Chairman of Homeland Security in the Congress , and now we know from the leaked Wikileaks documents that even Hillary Clinton herself said at a private meeting in 2013 that the refugees cannot possibly be vetted.
  • Further, Leon Rodriguez, former Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, reluctantly told former Senator Jeff Sessions’ Senate Committee in September 2016 that some of the refugees get in based solely on their testimony alone.
  • Fraud is rampant in the refugee program. Many refugees come from failed states. They have no documentation. We are supposed to believe the lie that everyone is who they say they are.
  • ISIS has sworn to infiltrate the refugee population. They already have.

6. The refugees become self-sufficient within 5 years.

  • The fact is that the Office Of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) defines self-sufficiency in a way that is contrary to the common understanding of the word. A household is considered self-sufficient if it is not receiving “a cash assistance grant”. But other welfare programs do not count under the ORR definition. Thus, ORR considers and reports them as self-sufficient even if they are receiving other forms of government assistance such as: Food Stamps (SNAP), Housing subsidies, or Medicaid .
  • Don’t be fooled. Make them define their terms.

7. Refugees pay taxes.

  • Consider that the average educational level of a Middle Eastern refugee is 10.5 years. That is not even a high school diploma. This means that the likelihood of them earning more than $9-$12 /hour is pretty unlikely. Having a low wage job is most likely. Further, even if they work and pay taxes the fact that the earnings level is low will often make them eligible for continuing government subsidies. There are other points to consider:
  • Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is available to people whose income is low. Many, if not most, refugees would likely qualify for this.
  • Child Tax Credit up to $1000 per child would apply based on income guidelines. This credit is IN ADDITION to deductions for dependent children.
  • Once the Tax Credits are applied it is possible that they are getting back all or most of the taxes that were paid and potentially more than they paid.

So, there we have it for those of you looking for something to do.  Use Arthur’s points for letters to the editor, arguing with ‘friends’ on Facebook, or when corresponding with your elected officials.

This post is filed in two categories here at RRW:  ‘Comments worth noting’ (here) and in my new category ‘What you can do’ (here).

And, for all of you interested in Arthur’s home state of West Virginia, go here for my archive on the state.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Crooks, thieves and fraudsters: You will never be told their immigration status

Human Rights Watch badgers Japan to take refugees

First 50 Syrian families head home to ‘safe zone’ in Syria….

….And, it has nothing to do with any Trump Administration plans. Other actors have stepped in to begin to make it happen and as the story tells us, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees had no comment.

Before critics jump in, it should be none of our business if these families want to put their lives in the hands of Hezbollah, it is not our role (or the UN’s!) to play the papa and tell them where to live and what to do with their lives (which is a large part of the psychology that drives refugee resettlement—the ‘we know what’s good for you’ mentality!).

From Lebanon’s Daily Star (hat tip: Joanne)

BEIRUT: Dozens of refugee families returned to Aasal al-Ward in southern Syria after leaving the Lebanese border town of Arsal over the weekend as part of a deal brokered by Hezbollah and Syrian rebel factions.

Photo accompanying Daily Star story.

The Lebanese Army said in a statement that 30 civilian vehicles carrying an estimated 50 families departed from the northern Lebanese town in the early hours of Saturday and a military escort accompanied them until the last military checkpoint.

According to the Army statement, the move was undertaken in response to a “keen interest of the families” to return to their homeland. Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV circulated a video Sunday depicting the Syrian families celebrating their return to their hometown.

Local media estimated that 50 families chose to leave Lebanon for Syria Saturday. A total of 500 families are expected to relocate following negotiations earlier this year to establish small safe zones for civilians in the Qalamoun region, brokered by Hezbollah.

A security source in the town of Arsal told The Daily Star Saturday that the return of dozens of displaced families was the result of behind-the-scenes negotiations between Hezbollah and the Syrian regime on one hand, and armed factions present in the area on the other.

[….]

The United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, had no comment when contacted Sunday evening.

There is more, but you may have to subscribe to get it.

Truth be told, most ‘refugees’ just want to go home and that should be our number one goal—to get them there—not move them around the world like pieces on a chessboard.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Buffalo, NY refugee contractors jumping for joy as refugee arrivals pick up

“My hometown (Utica) is gone”

Two cases of refugees beating family members: no one told me it was against the law in the west

Airbnb partners with refugee contracting agency to put-up refugees worldwide

Idaho refugee sexual assault case: boys get probation

After initial disappointment, Ohio resettlement agency getting excited for higher refugee influx

How has Delaware dodged the refugee bullet for decades? Answer: Joe Biden

There is a short news item at Delaware Public Media about how a Jewish refugee agency in Delaware is waiting for seven families (likely Muslim families based on their country of origin) they hope they will soon be settling in Delaware—the First State.  So I thought I might revisit a topic I haven’t discussed for a long time and that is the origin of the Refugee Act of 1980.

Senators Biden and Kennedy are responsible for the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program. See list below of other Senators deeply involved in 1979.

But, first here is a portion of the short piece at Delaware Public Media:

The state of Hawaii’s stay on Trump’s second travel ban suspends the FY17 cap for refugees – currently set at 50,000.

That opens the door for refugee families from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and the Eastern African country of Eritrea in line to come to the First State, but none of them have travel plans in place yet.

Jewish Family Services of Delaware Refugee Resettlement Coordinator Sarah Green says that currently, the families are stuck in Jordan and Ethiopia.

“It’s hard to know what’s happening,” Green said. “We just have to wait and see. We get a very limited view of what’s happening over there.”

She says her agency is taking the approach that these families could arrive any day – and working to ensure they’ll be comfortable when they reach Delaware.

[….]

There’s reason to expect they could arrive soon. According to the U.S. State Department, 900 flights for refugees to the U.S. are being scheduled every week.

As of this morning, 831 new refugees arrived in the US in the past week (5/5-5/12) according to Wrapsnet. And, that puts us at 44,072 this fiscal year.

At this rate the Trump Administration will hit 50,000 in about 7 – 8 weeks. Will they stop at 50,000 which should happen around the first week of July? That is the question!

Delaware, in some ways, is more interesting to me than some of the other very low refugee admission states (LOL! including Hawaii).  See chart below.

And that is because then Senator Joe Biden was one of the chief sponsors of the Senate-generated Refugee Act of 1979 (S.643) which became the Refugee Act of 1980 when Jimmy Carter signed it in to law the following year.  You can learn more about it here.  Pay special attention to the part about how states were NOT to be burdened with welfare costs of refugees.

Here are the co-sponsors of S.643 another of Senator Ted Kennedy’s swamp-America-with-immigrants bills:

So how is it that Delaware is in the bottom ten locations for refugee seeding when then Senator and now former Vice President Joe Biden is that state’s most prominent political figure?  Did he welcome refugees to America in 1979, but keep them from swamping Delaware with diversity for decades?

Wrapsnet data only goes back to FY2003, but that gives us enough years to see a pattern. (For researchers more diligent than I am, you can go back through all the previous annual reports and put the data together from the very beginning, but I expect the pattern is similar in the early years.)

So from FY03 through today (in FY17) we admitted 886,324 refugees to America (not including asylum seekers) and Delaware got a whopping 139 of them!

In the years Joe Biden was Vice President, Delaware got only 50 refugees.

Here are the last ten locations for refugee placement from FY03 to the present. What the heck is “Unknown State?” Does that mean 68 refugees were placed secretly somewhere? Yikes!

If Delaware Public Media really wanted to do some important work, reporters there should try to find out exactly why and how Delaware dodged a bullet for so many years when their claim to fame, Veep Joe Biden, sponsored the original law and then apparently kept diversity-seeding from the state! (It is not because of the state’s small size since Rhode Island got thousands more than Delaware).

For new readers, this post is filed in mywhere to find information’ category and in ‘Refugee statistics.’

FBI translator marries Islamic State terrorist

“‘It’s a stunning embarrassment for the FBI, no doubt about it,’ said John Kirby, a former State Department official. He said he suspects Greene’s entry into Syria required the approval of top ISIS leaders. Most outsiders trying to get into an ISIS region in Syria risk ‘getting their heads cut off,’ said Kirby, now a CNN commentator on national security matters. ‘So for her to be able to get in as an American, as a woman, as an FBI employee, and to be able to take up residence with a known ISIS leader, that all had to be coordinated.’”

And then the FBI protected her: “It also raises questions about whether Greene received favorable treatment from Justice Department prosecutors who charged her with a relatively minor offense, then asked a judge to give her a reduced sentence in exchange for her cooperation.”

Imagine what she could have told the Islamic State leaders that they might have found useful. If ever a swamp was in need of draining, it’s the FBI.

“The FBI translator who went rogue and married an ISIS terrorist,” by Scott Glover, CNN, May 1, 2017:

An FBI translator with a top-secret security clearance traveled to Syria in 2014 and married a key ISIS operative she had been assigned to investigate, CNN has learned.

The rogue employee, Daniela Greene, lied to the FBI about where she was going and warned her new husband he was under investigation, according to federal court records.

Greene’s saga, which has never been publicized, exposes an embarrassing breach of national security at the FBI—an agency that has made its mission rooting out ISIS sympathizers across the country.

It also raises questions about whether Greene received favorable treatment from Justice Department prosecutors who charged her with a relatively minor offense, then asked a judge to give her a reduced sentence in exchange for her cooperation, the details of which remain shrouded in court-ordered secrecy.

The man Greene married was no ordinary terrorist.

He was Denis Cuspert, a German rapper turned ISIS pitchman, whose growing influence as an online recruiter for violent jihadists had put him on the radar of counter-terrorism authorities on two continents.

In Germany, Cuspert went by the rap name Deso Dogg. In Syria, he was known as Abu Talha al-Almani. He praised Osama bin Laden in a song, threatened former President Barack Obama with a throat-cutting gesture and appeared in propaganda videos, including one in which he was holding a freshly severed human head.

Within weeks of marrying Cuspert, Greene, 38, seemed to realize she had made a terrible mistake. She fled back to the US, where she was immediately arrested and agreed to cooperate with authorities. She pleaded guilty to making false statements involving international terrorism and was sentenced to two years in federal prison. She was released last summer.

The FBI, in a statement to CNN, said as a result of Greene’s case it “took several steps in a variety of areas to identify and reduce security vulnerabilities. The FBI continues to strengthen protective measures in carrying out its vital work.”

The FBI did not identify what steps were taken and declined further comment.

“It’s a stunning embarrassment for the FBI, no doubt about it,” said John Kirby, a former State Department official. He said he suspects Greene’s entry into Syria required the approval of top ISIS leaders.

Most outsiders trying to get into an ISIS region in Syria risk “getting their heads cut off,” said Kirby, now a CNN commentator on national security matters. “So for her to be able to get in as an American, as a woman, as an FBI employee, and to be able to take up residence with a known ISIS leader, that all had to be coordinated.”

In court papers filed in US District Court in Washington D.C., prosecutors characterized Greene’s conduct as “egregious,” deserving of “severe punishment.”

Assistant US Attorney Thomas Gillice said Greene had “violated the public trust, the trust of the officials who granted her security clearance, and the trust of those with whom she worked and, in doing so, endangered our nation’s security.”

Even though Greene’s “conduct skirted a line dangerously close to other more serious charges,” the prosecutor argued she should receive a lighter sentence because of her cooperation.

Greene’s two-year sentence was less than punishments given other defendants charged with terrorism-related crimes.

Even failed attempts to travel to Syria and join ISIS have earned defendants much stiffer prison sentences. Americans convicted in dozens of recent ISIS prosecutions received an average sentence of 13 1/2 years in prison, according to an analysis in April by the Center on National Security at Fordham University.

A Justice Department official, however, said Greene’s sentence was “in line” with similar cases, but declined to cite examples….

Fluent in German, Greene went to work for the FBI as a contract linguist in 2011. It was a job that, following a grueling application and vetting process, came with a top-secret national security clearance.

Greene was assigned to the bureau’s Detroit office in January 2014 when she was put to work “in an investigative capacity” on the case of a German terrorist referred to in court records only as “Individual A.”

CNN identified “Individual A” as Cuspert using court documents, newspaper articles about his music career and transformation to jihadist, government bulletins, videos and other sources. His identity was ultimately confirmed by a source familiar with the investigation.

From Gangsta Rapper to Jihadist

Before Cuspert became a front man for jihadists, he was known as Deso Dogg in Germany. Tattoos on each hand spell out the image he cultivated in the mold of American gangsta rappers.

“STR8” was inked on one hand, “THUG” on the other.

One CD cover featured Cuspert with a menacing glare, holding a gun to his own head. His image was backed up by a real life rap sheet with a string of arrests. He had a lean, muscular physique and trained in various martial arts.

Cuspert never achieved star status in the music world, but he did enjoy some success: In 2006, he opened for popular US rapper DMX.

A near-death experience in a car accident prompted Cuspert to turn to religion, according to numerous press accounts. In 2010, he quit the rap world and converted to Islam. He traded his hard driving gangsta-style lyrics for Islamic devotional songs called Nasheeds, including one that praised bin Laden.

Cuspert gained some notoriety as an extremist in 2011 after he posted on Facebook a fake video purportedly showing US soldiers raping a Muslim woman. The video motivated a man to carry out a terrorist attack on the Frankfurt airport, killing two US airmen and wounding two others, according to The New York Times.

In 2012, Cuspert fled Germany, reportedly spending time in Egypt and Libya. The following year, he arrived in Syria, where he would emerge as “ISIS’s Celebrity Cheerleader,” according to a report from the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), a group that monitors various topics in the region, including violent extremism.

As part of the FBI’s investigation into “Individual A,” Greene identified several online accounts and phone numbers used by the terrorist, according to the court file.

Among them were two Skype accounts. She maintained “sole access” to a third Skype account, the records state.

It was in April 2014, during Greene’s work on the investigation, that Cuspert appeared in a video declaring his allegiance to ISIS and its leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi.

He called ISIS “the state that no one can stop,” adding, “we will continue to build it until it reaches Washington… Obama!” He then made a throat-cutting gesture with his finger, according to the MEMRI report.

On June 11, 2014, Greene filled out a Report of Foreign Travel form — a document FBI employees and contractors with national security clearances are required to complete when traveling abroad.

Greene, who was still married to her American husband at the time, characterized her travel on the form as “Vacation/Personal,” court records show.

“Want to see my family,” she wrote. Specifically, Greene said, she was going to see her parents in Munich, Germany.

She boarded an international flight on June 23, 2014. But her destination wasn’t Germany. She flew instead on a one-way ticket to Istanbul, Turkey, where she had reservations at the Erguvan Hotel. From there she traveled to the city of Gaziantep, about 20 miles from the Syrian border.

She contacted “Individual A,” the documents state, and with the assistance of a third party arranged by him, crossed the border into Syria. Once there, according to the court records, she married him.

Shortly after, Greene sent emails from inside Syria to an unidentified person in the US showing she was having second thoughts and suggesting she knew she was breaking the law.

“I was weak and didn’t know how to handle anything anymore,” she wrote on July 8. “I really made a mess of things this time.”

In another email the following day she wrote: “I am gone and I can’t come back. I wouldn’t even know how to make it through, if I tried to come back. I am in a very harsh environment and I don’t know how long I will last here, but it doesn’t matter, it’s all a little too late…”

On July 22, 2014, she again wrote to the unidentified recipient: “Not sure if they told you that I will probably go to prison for a long time if I come back, but that is life. I wish I could turn back time some days.”

While Greene was expressing regrets, Cuspert was actively fighting ISIS’s battles.

A video from July 2014 “showed glimpses of him in the bloody aftermath of the ISIS takeover of the Al-Sha’er gas fields in Homs,” according to the MEMRI report on Cuspert. In a field covered with dead bodies, Cuspert “is seen for several seconds beating a corpse with a sandal,” the report said.

Back in the US

It is unclear from the court file precisely when or how authorities learned of Greene’s actions, but on Aug. 1, 2014, five weeks after she left for Syria, federal authorities secretly issued a warrant for her arrest.

“At that time,” prosecutors would later write, “the defendant was at large in Syria or Turkey in the company of the leader of a terrorist group.”

After about a month in Syria, Greene somehow was able to leave the war-torn country and returned to the United States. She was arrested on Aug. 8, 2014….

RELATED ARTICLES:

University of Iowa: Muslim student charged with making terrorist threat

UK: Three more Muslim women arrested in terror raid

Islamic State seeks to impose religious rules in Egypt’s North Sinai

Syrian Christian Forces Ask President Trump for Help by Ryan Mauro

A Syriac Christian militia in Syria that is fighting the Islamic State (ISIS) and Al-Qaeda and also opposes the Assad regime is asking President Trump for direct military assistance and to be treated as equals with the U.S.-backed Arab forces preparing to take Raqqa, the “capitol” of ISIS.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) is a Christian component of the 50,000-strong Syrian Democratic Forces, an alliance of Kurds, Sunni Arabs, Turkmen and Christians backed by the United States and formed in October 2015. The U.S. military describes the alliance as its “best partnered forces” in Syria. The special operators helping the forces to fight ISIS say they have “absolute confidence” in them as the forces, including 1,000 women, prepare to attack Raqqa.

The MFS’ request for President Trump’s help reads in part:

 “There is no single reason to exclude us from the same support in equipment as is given to the Arabs. The fact that we suffered under genocides emphasizes the need for delivery of military equipment. If we are weak, we are a target of the extremist forces that the SDF is fighting against. 

“We will be part of any operation against Raqqa, regardless our current level of military equipment. We cannot imagine that the U.S. would deliberately want us to be poorer equipped than our Arab partners when we go into that big battle. 

“We thank the U.S. for the air support given in crucial battles and the support to the SDF. We also hope that this is an opportunity to work together for the long-term security and freedom of our people and all the peoples of the region.”

The MFS statement says that the U.S. military assistance favors the Turkmen and Arab components of the SDF over the Christians and Kurds. It also disputed Turkey’s claim that the Kurdish component is part of the PKK terrorist group.

The MFS has a presence in the Christian areas of northeastern Hasakah Province, a multi-ethnic province with Kurds and Arabs. The province has great potential for U.S. strategy, as it has been suggested as a candidate for a “safe zone” for refugees, most prominently by Dr. Ben Carson when he was running for the GOP presidential nomination. About half of Syria’s oil production is based in Hasakah Province.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) launched by the Syriac Union Party in January 2013 and is estimated to be about 2,000-strong and includes a Christian female unit named the Beth Nahrin Women Protection Forces. The organization includes Christians identifying as Assyrians, Syriacs and Chaldeans.

Watch a video of the Christian females’ training camp in the Kurdish area of northern Syria. 

The MFS initially tried to ally with various Syrian rebel groups, such as those backed by Turkey who are fighting under the Free Syria Army banner, but their Islamist orientation prevented it from going anywhere. A MFS commander said, “Most have a mentality that they can’t accept diversity within Syria.”

In early 2014, MFS allied with the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Turkey considers to be a branch of the PKK Kurdish terrorist group. The U.S. position is that they are operationally separate, which MFS agrees with, even if they are ideologically unified. The YPG is the Kurdish component of the Syrian Democratic Forces.

The MFS is on the side of the secular-democratic Syrian opposition, even if it doesn’t directly engage Assad’s forces. It “started out as a staunchly anti-government militia, and its leaders insist that its views have not changed,” reports Middle East Eye.

The Syriac Military Council (MFS) and its Beth Nahrin Women Protection Forces (HSNB) condemn the Assad regime as a “murder machine.” When they launched, they declared support for “the Syrian people’s revolution in its desire to bring down the Ba’ath regime.”

The MFS commander in Hasakah says the Assad regime and ISIS should be viewed as part of the same enemy, accusing the ruling dictatorship of exploiting ISIS to stay in power.

“They [the Assad regime] are the ones that bring ISIS in…We want to launch attacks on ISIS, but the army of the regime does not allow us to. They have contracted different outside militias, some of which are sympathetic to ISIS, and allowed them to enter and loot homes,” he said.

With President Trump’s reversal on the Assad regime, U.S. policy is now aligned with the Syrian Christian forces that belong to the Syriac Military Council and oppose Assad, ISIS, Al-Qaeda and Islamist rebels.

As the MFS Christians prepare for the bloody battle in Raqqa, they are hoping that President Trump hears their voice. Let’s hope that their statement reaches him.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. To invite Ryan to speak please contact us.

RELATED ARTICLE: Fresno shooting rampage – 3 people killed, suspect yelled ‘Allahu Akbar,’ made posts against white people

Russian Reactions to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s Visit

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Moscow on April 11-12, 2017 came against the backdrop of a recent U.S. missile strike on a Syrian airbase that was followed by political tensions between Russia and the U.S.[1] At the G7 meeting in Italy just prior to his trip to Moscow, Tillerson had stated: “I think it’s also worth thinking about Russia has [sic] really aligned itself with the Assad regime, the Iranians, and Hizbullah. Is that a long-term alliance that serves Russia’s interest, or would Russia prefer to realign with the United States, with other Western countries and Middle East countries who are seeking to resolve the Syrian crisis? We want to relieve the suffering of the Syrian people. We want to create a future for Syria that is stable and secure. And so Russia can be a part of that future and play an important role, or Russia can maintain its alliance with this group, which we believe is not going to serve Russia’s interest longer-term. But only Russia can answer that question.”[2]

Commenting on Tillerson’s words, Russia Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “It’s useless to come to us with ultimatums, it’s just counterproductive.”[3] However, the meeting between Tillerson and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov changed Russia’s internal mood. Maxim Usim, columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, noted that Tillerson’s language was not confrontational and that this had enabled him to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin just before his departure from Moscow.

The following are reactions to U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson’s Moscow visit:

tillerson russia

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. (Source: State.gov)

Senator Kosachev: “The American Did Not Come With Absurd Proposals… None Of The Parties… Have A Desire To Further Exacerbate The Situation”

Russian Federation Council International Affairs Committee chairman Konstantin Kosachev wrote on his Facebook page: “The first impression is quite positive. No breakthrough occurred, and no one expected it. However, the two sides were able to avoid the temptation of the overstated expectations, and the modest results of the meeting are still positive.” Kosachev stressed that a meaningful result was the Russian and U.S. commitment to maintaining the dialogue by “institutionalizing it in the format of special representatives.”

He added: “The two sides now have a better understanding of the possible and impossible limits in the prospects for bilateral relations and in the interpretation of international problems. The Americans obviously did not come with some absurd proposals similar to exchanging (Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad) for G7 membership, Ukraine for Syria and so on, and also not only with moralizing and ultimatums.”

He stressed: “Otherwise, the meeting with (Russian President Vladimir Putin) would have not taken place, as wasting time on empty words is not his style.”

Kosachev also said that Russia “unambiguously confirmed its willingness to restore cooperation, provided that the two sides could do without the notorious American mentoring and arrogance. Anyway, none of the parties seems to have a desire to further exacerbate the situation, and everyone believes that it is not hopeless.”

(Tass.com, April 13, 2017)

(Source: Sputniknews.com, April 12, 2017)

Kommersant Columnist: Tillerson’s Moderate Language Enabled Meeting With Putin

Maxim Usim, a columnist for the Russian daily Kommersant, wrote that Tillerson’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was not confrontational, but rather business oriented. According to Usim, Tillerson avoided using harsh language regarding Russian policies, while Lavrov was reserved and diplomatic. The impression, wrote Usim, is that both sides want to minimize the damage to bilateral relations by “Trump’s Syrian escapade,” adding that the mere fact that Tillerson avoided “speaking in terms of sanctions and ultimatums” made the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin possible.

(Kommersant.ru, April 12, 2017)

Izvestia: “The First Attempt To Get Along May Be Considered Productive, Even If Not Fully Successful”

The Russian daily Izvestia summarized Tillerson’s the visit as follows: “The most important thing is that during this very short but very intense visit the sides succeeded in reaching an agreement regarding further steps to be taken in order to get rid of the bilateral crisis. At the same time, the visit’s message to the world was: The first attempt to ‘get along’ may be considered productive, even if not fully successful.”

(Izvestia.ru, April 13, 2017)

Duma International Affairs Committee Chairman: “There Was No Ultimatum”

Duma International Affairs Committee chairman Leonid Slutsky stated: “One of the visit’s results is the failed prognosis regarding some kinds of U.S. ultimatum. There was no ultimatum. On the contrary, the sides agreed on establishing a joint group in order to look into the most complicated questions of the Russia-U.S. agenda.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Tillerson: “We want to relieve the suffering of the Iraq… Ouch… Liby… Ouch… Syrian people.” The cartoon was published prior to Tillerson’s visit. (Ria.ru, April 11, 2017)

Senator Klintzevich: “It Is Now Obvious That Tillerson’s Visit Was Not A Waste Of Time”

Senator Franz Klintsevich, deputy chair of the Federation Council Defense and Security Committee, commented: “It is now obvious that Tillerson’s visit was not a waste of time. Reiterating the mutual commitment to fight international terror is the maximum which could have been achieved, given the recent negative developments. At the moment, it’s quite stupid to discuss who won and who lost as the result of the meeting, who saved face and who lost face… The sides opted for mutual compromise, but as a result they secured the chance to really cooperate against ISIS. That’s what is really important.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ivan Melnikov, Communist Party, Vice-speaker of Duma: “Given the unpredicted U.S. actions influencing the situation, we may judge only by the deeds rather than by the words and intentions. Mr. Tillerson leaves good impression, and speaks respectfully about Russia as a superpower – but what if the principles of the American imperialism remain in force?”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Ruling Party United Russia MP Sergey Zheleznyak: “The meeting demonstrated that despite the differences, our countries are interested in cooperation concerning various areas – solving burning international crises as well as renewing economic cooperation. We’ll see how Tillerson’s words in Moscow will coincide with the administration’s actions and then we’ll draw our conclusions.”

(Tass.com, April 12, 2017)

Senator Pushkov: The Meeting Was “The Start Of Dialogue”

Senator Alexey Pushkov tweeted: “Frontal confrontation has been cancelled. Russia and the U.S. proceed from the war of words towards exchanging opinions, controlling the differences and cautious dialogue.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

Pushkov also tweeted: “The summary of the negotiations in Moscow: Not yet a breakthrough, but the start of dialogue and an attempt to strengthen the mutual trust after serious tensions erupted.”

(Twitter.com/Alexey_Pushkov, April 12, 2017)

According to a Russian Defense Ministry source quoted in the Vedomosti newspaper, Moscow is ready for dialogue and does not consider a dangerous direct confrontation with the U.S. to be inevitable. Simultaneously, Moscow demonstrates its readiness to strengthen its military positions in Syria – this is the message delivered by the deployment of the frigate Admiral Grigorovich to the Mediterranean.

(Vedomosti.ru, April 13, 2017)

REFERENCES:

[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6866, Russia’s Reactions To The U.S. Missile Strike In Syria, April 10, 2017.

[2] State.gov, April 11, 2017.

[3] Ria.ru, April 12, 2017.

Will Syria’s Kurds join with Israel and the U.S.?

kurdnasLogoHiSherkoh Abbas , President of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria (KURDNAS), raised in  a recent Jns.com article the tantalizing prospect of a Kurdish- Israel- US Alliance to complete the work of destroying the Islamic State, “Are Syrian Kurds the missing ingredient in the West’s recipe to defeat Islamic State?” The thoughts expressed in this article reflect a recent conversation the author held with Sherkoh Abbas and Dr. Mordechai Nisan, author of  Minorities in the Middle East: A History of Struggle and Self-Expression.

The Kurds have earned political and military capital in both Iraq and Syria as the most effective boots on the ground combating the extremist Salafism of the Islamic State. This largest non Arab ethnic group in the Middle East has long been denied the promised statehood at the Versailles conference of 1919 that ended the First World War and the Lausanne Treaty of 1923 that established the modern Republic of Turkey.

Nevertheless, the Kurds have been resilient despite numerous tragic setbacks in their history over the past century. The establishment of a no fly zone in northern Iraq under US auspices led to the creation the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) and its much praised fighting force, the Peshmerga.

Further, it demonstrated the capabilities of the Kurds to govern themselves, overcoming internal differences and external geo- political threats from a hegemonic Iran and the Ba’athist regime of the late Saddam Hussein. Having vast energy resources helped to fuel the KRG’s development. KRG’s Peshmerga exemplary role in the current battle to retake Mosul from the Islamic State, in coordination with Iraqi national security and US forces, demonstrated its proficiency. Its humanity was demonstrated providing safe havens for Yazidis, Chaldean Christians and other ethnic non Muslim minorities that brought the KRG global recognition and respect.

On the surface the situation in Syrian Kurdistan, while complicated, has the potential for fostering the development of an autonomous Kurdish region extending across northern Syria from the KRG frontier to the Mediterranean, despite the objections of Erdogan’s Turkey.

We only have to look at recent actions by both Russia and the US. Russia and the YPG concluded an arrangement potentially protecting the Kurdish enclave of Afrin in Northwest Syria. Further, Russian meetings with Syrian Kurdish representatives in Moscow have evinced Kremlin interest in a federalized Syria in any agreement to end the seven year civil war with the Assad regime. After WWII, the Russians established a short-lived Kurdish Republic in Mahabad, Iran.  US Army Brig. General (ret.) Ernie Audino in our December 2015 New English Review interview, “No War Against ISIS Without the Kurds”, noted that history:

The well-educated and well-respected Qazi Muhammad was elected to serve as president of the Mahabad Republic, history’s first and only sovereign, Kurdish state. Knowing he needed a capable army to protect the state he requested help from the great Kurdish nationalist, Mustafa Barzani, who showed up with 5,000 of his peshmerga. During this period, a son was born to Barzani who named him, Masud. That son is now Masud Barzani, the current President of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in northern Iraq.

The U.S. has acted as an umpire between Turkish forces of President Erdogan and Islamist Sunni opposition militia from entering Manbij, liberated by the YPG on the west bank of the Euphrates River.

Moreover, the US sent a message to Ankara that it was backing the YPG led Syrian Democratic Force in the battle to retake the Islamic State administrative capital of Raqqa. The Pentagon has dispatched a US Marine artillery unit. It also alerted a reinforced brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division for possible deployment in Syria.

On the political side of the Syrian Kurdish conundrum there is the daunting task of unifying the tribes, political parties, and the Kurdish National Council.

As Sherkoh Abbas of KURDNAS has pointed out that will require the delinking of the YPG/PYD leadership from outreach and involvement with the PKK, the Assad regime, Iran’s Qods Force, and its proxy, the Iraqi Hashd Shiite Popular Mobilization Force militia. There are indications that the YPG/PYD might consider doing this if there were US, Russian and potentially, Israeli auspices.

Israeli PM Netanyahu, a year and a half ago, issued a statement supporting the establishment of an independent Kurdish state in the region; welcomed by the Kurdish communities.

The benefits would include having a reliable ally in a post Assad Syria with both political and military capacities and a secure source of oil to meet the Jewish nation’s growing domestic and regional demand.

Israel has to take an important step to achieve these desirable results. It has to reach out to both the Syrian Kurds and the Trump Administration to recognize the significant Kurdish role in the final destruction of the Islamic State threatening the security of Israel’s northern Golan frontier.

If that succeeds then both the US and Israel would have an important stable alliance with the largest non Arab ethnic polity in the troubled Middle East.  With the defeat of the Islamic State, that would turn attention to reining in the threat posed by a hegemonic Iran. With the possibility of a triple entente composed of both Iraqi and Syrian Kurdistans, Israel and the US, it raises the future prospect of fostering regime change in Tehran giving rise to the aspirations for autonomy of minorities in Iran- the Kurds, Azeri, Ahwaz and Baluch.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Since President Trump took office over 2,400 refugees from travel-ban countries entered U.S.

Pew Research has done a handy little summary of where we stand with refugees admitted this fiscal year, but most importantly they made a useful graph of how many entered from travel-restricted countries since the first week of December, through Trump’s inauguration and up to last Friday.

There is nothing we haven’t already been talking about as we reported also from Wrapsnet over recent weeks and months, but they put it in a neat little package for your review on the eve of the 120-day moratorium on refugee resettlement.

Pew Research Center:

A total of 2,466 refugees from six countries under new travel restrictions – Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen – have resettled in the United States since Donald Trump became president, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. State Department data. The number of refugees from the six travel-restricted countries represents 32% of all refugees who have entered the U.S. since Trump took office.

Pew continues….

Including refugees from countries with no travel restrictions, a total of 7,594 refugees have entered the U.S. during Trump’s first seven weeks in office (Jan. 21 to March 10). Of these refugees, 3,410 are Muslims (45%) and 3,292 are Christians (43%), with other religions or the religiously unaffiliated accounting for the rest.

So far in fiscal 2017 (which began Oct. 1, 2016), refugees who hold citizenship from the six restricted countries have accounted for more than a third (34%) of 37,716 refugee admissions.

More here.

President Trump has set the ceiling for the entire 2017 fiscal year at 50,000, a number we explained here is not that low!

This post is filed in our Trump Watch! category as well as ‘refugee statistics’ and ‘where to find information.’

EndNote: It is amusing to me to see research/articles like this because for years and years (I started writing RRW in 2007) no one paid any attention to the numbers, religions and ethnicities of refugees entering the US. It is nice to see so many news outlets educating the public!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Flow chart for refugee admissions shows where Trump team could downsize program with funding cuts

California judge seeks to prevent immigration arrests inside state courts

Horowitz: Where is Congress? Why are they not helping Trump on immigration?

Middle East experts: Kurdish safe zones could thwart Iranian threat to Israel

One report: Trump Department of State to cut funding to UN by 50%

Why Democrats are conspiring with the Russians to discredit President Trump

The Democrats keep yelling “the Russians are coming, the Russians are coming.” Why?

There have been many theories about the sudden interest on any and all connections between President Trump and his cabinet with the Russians by Democrats. Among these are: the Russians hacked the election, the Russians stole the election from Hillary Clinton, any contact with any Russian official or surrogate is grounds for dismissal or even impeachment.

Perhaps we should look back at what the Obama administration did to appease, if not become a surrogate for, Russia:

  1. Obama abandoned the missile defense system in Europe shelving deployment of U.S. missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic, citing new intelligence that the missile threat from Iran was minimal. Victory: Russia and Iran.
  2. Obama called for a “reset” of Russian/U.S. relations. On 6 March 2009 in Geneva, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a red button with the English word “reset” and the Roman alphabet transliteration of the Russian Cyrillic alphabet word перегрузка (“peregruzka”.) Victory: Russia and Iran.
  3. Obama tells Russian President Dmitry Medvedev more flexibility after the 2012 election. Obama stated that Vladimir Putin should give him more “space” and that “[a]fter my election I have more flexibility.” Victory: Russia, Iran, Syria
  4. Obama’s “red line” in Syria if Assad used chemical weapons. Red line policy ignored when Assad uses chemical weapons a second time. Victory: Russia and Syria.
  5. Finally, Obama’s deal with Iran on development of nuclear weapons. Victory: Iran, Russia and ISIS.

Democrats consider Obama’s Iran deal his signature foreign policy success. Here are Obama’s remarks on the Iran deal:

Obama’s foreign policy has emboldened Russia as the key force in the Middle East and at the same time given Iran the cover it needs to continue its nuclear program. Iran is now the hegemonic power in the Middle East, with the help of Russia, and is training and exporting radical Islamists to do its bidding globally.

As former Defense Secretary William S. Cohen said July 28, 2009, after the latest of six trips to the Gulf in the last 18 months, that “what I hear is, there is greater fear of Iran than there is animus toward Israel.” He added, “So that is almost a predominant sentiment that I’ve noticed throughout most, if not all, of the Gulf states” (Washington Times, July 29, 2009).

pelosi schumer putinThis is the reason that Democrats have tried to tie President Trump’s hands when it comes to Russia.

For if President Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson are successful in engaging Russia in the fight against ISIS and if President Trump can decouple Russia from Iran then the Obama foreign policy legacy will be gone. The Iran deal will be no more. Iran will be de-fanged and will not be the threat that it currently is to its Gulf state neighbors such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Israel.

Democrats working with the Russians are doing everything they can to put President Trump into a box when it comes to negotiating with Russia. That is good for Russia, Iran and Syria’s Assad.

Democrats want America to be weak in its foreign policy and weak even before President Trump meets with Russian President Putin.

The Democrats, along with Republican Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are hurting President Trump’s foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East and with Russia. That is the goal.

That is why the Democrats, and perhaps the “Axis of Evil” Republican Senators McCain, Graham and Rubio, are in effect conspiring with the Russians.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mark Levin to GOP: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump

Hold Iran accountable for terrorism: Sen. Cruz and Rep. McCaul

RELATED PHOTOGRAPHS:

pelosi with russian president medvedev

schumer putin 3

‘The Golan is ours’ — Israel Sovereignty and American National Security

A momentous joint press conference was held at the White House with President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu on February 15, 2017. For the first time in recent memory, a U.S. President was not demanding that Israel relinquish sovereign territory that had been granted under international law. That meant that the Jewish nation was entitled to negotiate secure borders in the land west of the river.

Things appear to be changing in the Middle East among the Sunni Arab monarchies, Emirates and states recognizing that America’s democratic ally is the proverbial strong horse opposing the hegemonic aspirations of the Shia Islamic Republic of Iran. An Iran that in consort with its proxy Hezbollah is actively engaging in creating a Shia crescent from the Persian Gulf via Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean Coast of Lebanon. Moreover, Iran has control of two world maritime choke points in the oil trades; the Straits of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab (at the mouth of the Red Sea).

Golani Tree - Golani Brigade symbol May Golani.png

The Golani tree symbol of the IDF Golani Brigade of the Northern command.

For Israel there is evidence that Iran’s IRGC Qods force and its proxy Hezbollah are ranging across the vital Golan Heights frontier. That is reflected in clashes that resulted in the deaths of IRGC Generals and a Hezbollah commander, son of the terrorist mastermind Imad Mughniyah.   A frontier that is also witnessing the expansion of ISIS militia on the southern portion of the Golan frontier.

The Golan is strategic to Israel’s national security reflected in its annexation by Israel’s parliament the Knesset in 1981. Yet, there have been efforts at the UN suggesting that Israel’s sovereign claim to the Golan is questioned. That despite it being included in the original Palestine Mandate granted to Great Britain at the Sam Remo conference in 1920. After two climatic wars fought in 1967 and in 1973, Israel is not about to give up its sovereign claim to the Golan.Further, Israel’s ears on the Middle East can be found on the summit of Mount Hermon at the base of the frontier monitoring digital communications.  IDF Golani units are deployed on the heights of this important bastion.  The UNDOF force in the demilitarized has been routed during the six plus years of the Syrian civil war. Israel has provided humanitarian aid and medical assistance to Syrian civilians and casualties of opposition militias often treating them in field hospitals and in emergency cases sending them to hospitals in central Israel.  The Syrian frontier on the Golan divides the Druze community, the Israeli branch of which are loyal citizens and yet understand the predicament of their cousins across the frontier.

There has been talk of establishment of so-called safe zones in southern Syria at the apex where Israel, Jordan and Israel meet.  At issue is what international forces would staff it. Given the record of the UN peacekeepers it is dubious that it could effectively defend the suggested safe zones. Israel’s experience in the Lebanon wars indicates that it is not about to take on the responsibility of a security zone in Syria. The one in Lebanon ended disastrously in the pell mell withdrawal from the Southern security zone   in 2000.

That apex at the conjunction of the three counties frontiers is now the target of the Islamic State. A recent Jewish Press report confirms the activity of Islamic State Salafist militia overrunning the apex area of Southern Syria, Jordan and Israel threatening the Golan frontier. It reports that the ISIS militia is lead by a Palestinian Salafist. While the IDF Chief of Staff Eizenkot would like the UNDOF to block further movement by the ISIS, their track record has been abysmal. Thus his assessment is that the IDF on the northern frontier could see intense fighting occur this spring.

Jonathan Schanzer and Marc Dubowitz crystallized in a Wall Street Journal article, “Golan,” stressing the vital importance of Israel’s sovereignty.  They noted:

Benjamin Netanyahu has achieved his primary objective of resetting ties with the U.S. after eight years of tensions. True, the Israeli prime minister and Donald Trump still need to bridge the gap on issues such as Palestinian-Israeli diplomacy and West Bank settlements. But they seem to be on the same page on a broad range of regional matters.

That could lead to a breakthrough on an issue of strategic importance to Israel. According to reports of the two leaders’ meeting on Wednesday, Mr. Netanyahu asked for U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

The move makes sense for both sides. It would provide the Israeli government with a diplomatic win while helping the Trump administration signal to Russia and Iran that the U.S. is charting a new course in Syria.

[…]

By recognizing Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan, the Trump administration would signal to Russia that, while Washington may now coordinate with Moscow on activities such as fighting Islamic State, it doesn’t share Russia’s goals for Syria.

Moreover, it would show that the U.S. will take a tougher line on the provision of arms and intelligence to Iran and Hezbollah.

Recognition of Israel’s Golan claims would acknowledge that it needs these highlands to hold off a multitude of asymmetric and conventional military threats from Syria—and whatever comes after the war there. Israel continues to target Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah to prevent them from establishing a base of operations on the Syrian Golan.

Recognizing Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan would also soften the Palestinians’ core demand for a state within the 1967 borders. If an international border can be revised along the Syrian border, the Palestinians will have a harder time presenting the 1949 armistice line along the West Bank as inviolable.

Against this background we reached out to someone who knows the strategic importance of what Messrs. Schanzer and Dubowitz have espoused, Ambassador Yoram Ettinger former Israeli emissary in Washington involved with Congressional liaison.

Mike Bates overlooking Kotel and Dome of the Rock Mosque on Temple Mount 3-2014.jpg

Mike Bates

Mike Bates:  Good afternoon welcome back to Your Turn, this is Mike Bates. We continue with our conversation, our Middle East round table discussion. With me in studio is Jerry Gordon,  Senior Editor of the New English Review and his blog the Iconoclast.

JBG headshot 1-26-14 SMALL.jpg

Jerry Gordon

Jerry Gordon: Glad to be back.

Bates: And joining us by telephone from Israel is Yoram Ettinger, former Israeli Congressional Liaison.

Yoram Ettinger: Thank you very much.

yoram-ettinger-picture

Former Ambassador Yoram Ettinger

Bates: Ambassador Ettinger, from your perspective as a former Israeli Emissary involved with Congressional relations, how significant was the outcome of the joint press conference at the White House on January 15th?

Ettinger: I would say that the outcome of the meeting between the leaders of the US and Israel is very significant.  It signals reconnection of the US administration with Middle Eastern reality after eight years – and more years – of assuming that the Palestinian issue is the core cause of regional turbulence and the crown jewel of Arab policymaking. Now there is an Administration that realizes, with all due respect, the Palestinian issue is not the primary or secondary, not even tertiary issue when it comes to Middle East priorities. The current administration seems to focus on the major threats to the US as well as to Western democracies and the regional and global stability. These are: Iran’s megalomaniacal aspirations and its  aim to become a major nuclear power. Second is Islamic terrorism  and third, the need to minimize the clear and present danger to every  pro- American Arab regime in the middle east, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Bahrain and Oman.

On all of those issues – Iran, Islamic terrorism, and the need to stabilize the pro- American Arab regimes – Israel plays a very unique role. The question is, are you going to sacrifice the very essential cooperation between US and Israel on the altar of the Palestinian issue? It seems to me that President Trump and his advisors may or may not go along entirely with Israel’s view of the Palestinian issue.  They are not going to sacrifice dire American national security interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue, which is not, is not, a core cause as far as Arab policymaking is concerned.

Bates: Ambassador Ettinger, I realize Israel is a democratic country, and like every democratic country, the people are not unified in their view of the world any more so in Israel as it is in the United States. But I’m curious. If you can generalize, what is the sense of the Israeli people to President Trump versus what we had for the previous eight years, President Obama?

Ettinger: Certainly Israel is highly diversified as far as ideology, as far as world view, even as far as Judaism is concerned.  However, one should note that a major factor in Israel is a sense of patriotism. We see that on the occasion of wars, on the occasion of conflicts with Arab countries, and recently on the issue of the Palestinians.  We see coalitions of all the big groups in Israel.  In fact, something which is not common in the US. The  majority of our special operation forces are very Dovish, and I emphasize very, very Dovish in their world view, and the majority of Israel’s combat pilots are also very Dovish.

And, their worldview has nothing to do with the fact that they are first to be called to serve during wartime, and they serve superbly.

When it comes to President Trump, the perception in Israel is that he is supportive of Israel. The public has accorded him at this point very significant support, unlike the case of the eight years with President Obama – when many Israelis sympathized with him as far as personality is concerned, maybe as it was reflected by television, newspapers, radio – but most Israelis were aware that as far as President Obama was concerned, Israel was not exactly one of his top positive priorities. When it comes to President Trump, the sense is that he does regard the Jewish State as a cardinal, positive element on his agenda.

Gordon: Ambassador, what is the danger of having a Palestinian state adjacent to the Jewish nation of Israel?

Ettinger: When it comes to Israel, the clear and present lethal threat is highlighted at this time of global instability, violence, and intolerance, tenuous agreements, tenuous regimes and policies. With a Palestinian state, Israel would be once again constrained to an eight-to-fifteen mile sliver along the Mediterranean, over-towered and dominated by the mountain ridges of the West Bank of Judea and Samaria. This is not exactly a prescription for long life expectancy. It’s a prescription for suicide, I believe.

But the key point is not what it means for Israel. For your American listeners, the issue is what would the impact be on America’s national security. And Americans should know when it comes to a Palestinian State, based on its track record, we are talking about a definite erosion of America’s authority in the Middle East and definite injury to very important American national security interests. For instance, there is the American-supported Hashemite monarchy in Jordan. A Palestinian State on the one hand and Hashemite regime in Jordan east of the Jordan River constitute an oxymoron.

Top Jordanian military officers made it very clear to their colleagues in Israel that the top priority of the Hashemites  is to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. Now the issue is not merely one more, or one less pro- American Arab regime.  A change in regime in Jordan would cause tectonic ripple effects, which would not be limited only to Jordan, but a definite spill- over southward to Saudi Arabia and from Saudi Arabia to the rest of the pro- American  Arab Gulf states.

This means that a Palestinian state could trigger ripple effects all the way into the Persian Gulf area, playing into the hands of Iran, also possibly into the hands of Russia and China and certainly adversely effecting America’s interest. It could create an Iranian block from Iran through Iraq, Jordan, all the way to fifteen miles from the Mediterranean. That  would mean loss of pro- American control of two critical waterways, the Bab el Mandab and Hormuz Straits in the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf, two of the most critical waterways for oil tankers, which would have an impact on the  global economy and  American economies.

You might also find a guarantee of naval rights, landing rights for the Russian, possibly Iranian, maybe Chinese, naval and air force, in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean, which once again would undermine vital American interests.

All this is based on the track record of Palestinians, which includes the waves of terrorism in the 1920s, 30s, 40s; collaboration with the Nazis during the Second World War; collaboration with the USSR after the war; collaboration with Ayatollah Khomeini after the demise of the Shah of Iran; and very close ties with Russia, North Korea, China, Cuba, and Venezuela.

Bates: Ambassador  Ettinger there was a recent  The Wall Street Journal op-ed by Jonathan Schanzer and Mark Dubowitz of the Washington DC based Foundation for Defense of Democracies drew attention to the possibility of Israel asserting sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Why did Israel annex the Golan Heights in 1981 and what geo-political and national security significance does it have given the threats on the frontier from Iran’s proxy Hezbollah and Syrian Islamic opposition  and ISIS?

 Ettinger: First of all, the Golan Heights is not foreign terrain for the Jewish state. The Golan Heights is part of the Jewish homeland going back some 3,500 years .  As far as contemporary strategy is concerned, there are only two options when it comes Golan: will it be part of Israel, controlled by Israel; or will it be a platform for rogue organizations, rogue regimes. There is no other option, although again in the wishful la-la land of some western policymakers, one could transform it into an international, neutral area.  Certainly when you look at the Middle East there is no such thing as a neutral element or neutral space.

As far as the impact of the Golan Heights, once again on the region as a whole and on Israel. One can go back to 1970 when Syria was a major military Arab power, Syria invaded Jordan. With the US bogged down in Southeast Asia, there was no way it could stretch military hand and help the pro- American late King Hussain. They called Israel. Israel mobilized its troops and the following day – without firing a single shot, only through the posture of deterrence of the presence of Israel – the Syrian military withdrew back to Syria. That was possible because Israel controlled the Golan Heights in 1970, which meant we were at the point where we could reach Damascus and basically take over Syria.

Should Israel be off the Golan Heights, and once again there is violence which threatens pro-American Arab regime in Jordan, without the Golan (and certainly there would already be a Palestinian state), Israel would be in no position, have no power to exert any posture of deterrence to assist the US, assist pro-American Arab regimes. We are talking today about the proliferation of Islamic terrorist organizations, many of which operate in Syria, which means with proximity to the Golan Heights and should Israel get off Golan Heights, the only question would be: which rogue regime, which rogue organization, will then control the Golan Heights.

Bates: There is no question that the Golan Heights are critical to the security of Israel. I made a day trip through Golan Heights when I was in Tiberius a few years ago. It’s beautiful, sparsely populated area.  It is of  massive strategic importance. Why doesn’t the United States recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel’s sovereign territory and is there any chance that will change under a Trump presidency?

Ettinger: It’s true that Golan Heights is critical for Israel’s national security, but it’s also true that it is  very important for America’s own national security, America’s own posture of deterrence in the Middle East.  Israel on the Golan Heights, Israel on the mountain ridges of Judea Samaria extends the strategic hand of the USA. With Israel off the Golan Heights and certainly off the mountain ridges of the West Bank, Israel is going to be transformed from a national security asset to a national security liability and a burden on the US. And the US is facing, in my mind, intensifying, and not reduced, threats due to the current trends in the Middle East and throughout the world. The US cannot rely on Europe which has lost its will power gradually – and is also losing its muscle. Israel is the only element in the Middle East upon which the US can rely. It is probably the most effective force anywhere in the world upon which the US can rely on.

Bates: No, question about it Ambassador.

Gordon: Ambassador, what is behind Israel’s emergence as a world leader in high tech global investments and its impact on the country’s economy?

 Ettinger: Out of necessity, due to the attempt to strangle Israel territorially, militarily, economically; due to various attempts to boycott and sanction Israel; and due to real lack of natural resources, Israel had to rely on its brain power. We have managed not only to survive but we have managed to develop – I would say next to the US – a major global, high tech technological country, both commercially and militarily. Today, in Israel, we have 250 research and development centers operated by global high tech giants, most of them American, some European. These are the centers that develop for Intel and Microsoft, and Apple and Google, and other giants, the latest innovative technologies. Israel contributes to research and development in America, to the competitiveness of American industries in the global competition, and to America’s foundation of employment.

Bates: It is a huge benefit, Ambassador. We have been speaking with Jerry  Gordon of the New English Review and its blog the Iconoclast and  with Ambassador Yoram Ettinger.  You can find Ambassador Ettinger online at www.theettingerreport.com.

Thanks so much for joining us this afternoon on 1330amWEBY

Listen to the broadcast, here.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Breitbart: Refugees cost taxpayers BILLIONS each year

While bringing refugees to the US from certain parts of the world poses a security risk for America, often forgotten is the huge cost to US taxpayers (federal, state and local) of placing them in communities already loaded with poor people, a practice the mayor of Springfield, Mass. recently pointed out.

domenic-sarno

Democrat Domemic Sarno, Mayor Springfield, Massachusetts.

And, before the refugee industry starts shouting about the fact that some refugees ultimately pay taxes, in reality very few even reach the income threshhold to pay taxes and many who make small amounts of income can actually file to get money back from the government through earned income tax credits while not ever having paid in anything.

The Democrat mayor of Springfield, Mass recently said that the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program concentrates “poverty on top of poverty!

Here is Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart in an article entitled: ‘Refugees Will Cost Taxpayers an Estimated $4.1 Billion in FY 2017’ says:

American taxpayers will spend more than $4.1 billion in the 2017 budget to support the 519,018 refugees who have been resettled by the federal government in the United States since October 2009, according to a cost estimate by Breitbart News.

To put that very large number in context, $4.1 billion can buy 10,677 new homes for $384,000 each, which is the average price of a new home sold in the United States in December 2016. Or it could buy 170,124 new autos for $24,100 each, which is the manufacturer’s suggested retail price for a 2017 Chevrolet Malibu.

Even if the Trump administration were to entirely shut down the flow of refugees into the United States in FY 2018 and beyond, the refugees who have already arrived in the country will cost at least another $3.5 billion in 2018, and about $2 billion to $3 billion annually thereafter until FY 2022 and beyond.

Here is one of several useful charts prepared by Leahy. This summarizes the COST PER REFUGEE:

screenshot-323

For more fun with numbers, continue reading here.

Where is Congress?

Donald Trump can cut the numbers arriving in the US while he is in office and can tinker with the regulations, but unless Congress grows a spine and reforms this out-of-control federal program, in 4 or 8 years we will go back to a wide open spigot! There is a limit to what can be done with a phone and a pen as Obama learned the hard way.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

How Illegal Immigration Hurts Black Americans, According to Civil Rights Commissioner

Obama’s Organizing for Action Partners with Soros-Linked ‘Indivisible’ to Disrupt Trump’s Agenda

Malta takes ‘refugees’ from Greece and Italy and passes others on to U.S.

Government demographic studies all wrong on Somali numbers in U.S.

Will new EO slow the Syrian migration to the US?

Nebraska Republican Governor supports security screening, BUT wants refugee admissions to resume ASAP

WSJ explains (sort of) what that March 3rd date means for slowing U.S. refugee admissions

Majority of Americans support Trump immigration ‘ban’ from terror hotspots

You are not alone!

Check it out!  Vox (the website that featured my work recently, here) reports that the majority of Americans support President Trump’s Executive Order to keep us safe from immigrants coming from certain parts of the world—keep us safe from terrorists trying to enter the country.

But, if the pollsters throw in mumbo-jumbo about “refugees” and phrases like “in keeping with US’s founding principles” they get more respondents to oppose the order.   The key message that resonates is one that uses the word “terrorism.”

Read it here.  Very interesting as Vox sends a message to its mostly Leftwing and Open Borders readers on how to use certain language to make their case.

I haven’t seen anything like this on mainstream cable media have you?

immigration poll supports trump ban

POLLS ON TRUMP EOS

Don’t waver Donald!

CNN and other Left-leaning news sites will show us non-stop clips of protesters opposing this EO making us all believe that we are in the minority, but never reveal that average Americans agree with Donald Trump on this! It is, as Trump says, “common sense!”

Sick of it? You can join like-minded Americans at upcoming rallies.  Go here (Spirit of America Rallies) and see if one is scheduled near you!

RELATED VIDEO: Pamela Geller on Trump’s “gorgeous” executive order is NOT a “Muslim ban.”

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Does Donald Trump know he can cap refugee program now?

The Trump Effect

Bloomberg: Trump’s refugee ceiling of 50,000 could hurt BIG MEAT

The Ninth Circuit Ignores Precedent and Threatens National Security – Wall Street Journal

Trump White House Says All Legal Options Still Being Considered, Ninth Circuit Court Judge Calls For En Banc Hearing

Krauthammer: 9th Circuit Ruling ‘A Disgraceful Conclusion’ – VIDEO

Hundreds Of Syrian, Iraqi Refugees Admitted To U.S. Since Trump Order Halted

Why the 9th Circuit Order Was Wrong, and What Trump Should Do About It

BREAKING: New Poll Shows SURPRISING Numbers For Trump….Liberals DUMBFOUNDED [VIDEO]