Tag Archive for: Hijrah

Reversing the Muslim Tide

/in , , , , , , /by

In the days following the horrific slaughter of innocent men, women, and children by radical Islamists in Paris, small groups of Syrian refugees have been  detained in unlikely ports of entry throughout the western hemisphere.  Eleven Syrian refugees, traveling with fake passports, were detained in Paraguay; 5 Syrians, traveling with stolen Greek passports, were arrested in Honduras; 3 Syrian men, traveling with fake Greek passports, were arrested on the Caribbean Island of St. Maarten after traveling through Brazil, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti; and 8 Syrians were arrested after making it as far as the INS border checkpoint at Laredo, Texas,

Is it my imagination, or is there a pattern developing here?  Is it pure coincidence that so many Syrians were detained in unlikely western hemisphere locations while trying to enter the U.S. illegally?  Could it be that they were acting under orders from ISIS to make their way into the U.S. for purposes of committing acts of terrorism?  And if these four insurgencies were detected, how many others went undetected?

In the meantime, Barack Obama’s plan to import more than 100,000 Islamic refugees per year has drawn strong opposition across the country.  While Republican presidential candidates argue that the 10,000 Syrian refugees now destined for resettlement should be barred from entering the U.S. until a fail-safe vetting formula can be developed, Democrats argue that U.S. immigration officials should simply trust the refugees to answer truthfully when asked whether or not they represent an existential threat to the American people.

In light of a great many vicious terror attacks, both here and abroad, the American people are understandable frightened and are unwilling to accept additional large numbers of Muslims into our country.  Unfortunately, members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, fail to recognize that the question of whether or not to admit additional Muslims has already been decided in the negative.  What I have suggested in recent columns is that, if the intent of the current law is unclear, the Congress should rewrite sections of the Communist Control Act of 1954, a statute that has not been overturned by the courts and is still in force, to read as follows:

 SEC. 1. PURPOSE.  The Congress hereby finds and declares that certain organizations exist within our borders which, although purporting to be political or religious in nature, are in fact instrumentalities of foreign political or religious entities or ideologies whose purpose it is to overthrow the Government of the United States by any available means, including force and violence.  Such organizations operate as authoritarian dictatorships within our borders, demanding for themselves the rights and privileges generally accorded to all political parties and religious denominations, but denying to all others the liberties guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.                                                                                  

SEC. 2. PROSCRIBED ORGANIZATIONS.  Any political or religious organization as described herein, or any successors or affiliates of such organizations, regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose it is to overthrow the government of the United States, or to force the political or religious conversion of its people by force or violence, or threats thereof, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or its political subdivisions; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities heretofore granted to said religious or political organizations, or any subsidiary or affiliate organizations, by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are hereby rescinded.

This amendment to the Communist Control Act of 1954 would serve to reinforce provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Public Law 414, which effectually bars any and all Muslims from either entering or residing in the United States.  That law, otherwise known as the McCarran-Walter Act, is still on the books.  And while it has not been enforced by recent administrations, Democrat or Republican, it is sufficient to protect the American people from attacks such as those carried out on September 11, 2001, and subsequent atrocities.

Chapter 2, Section 212, of the McCarran-Walter Act contains numerous provisions which bar  Muslims from legally entering or residing in the United States.  For example, Islam permits Islamic men to marry up to four wives.  And although fewer than 2% of Muslim men have multiple wives, the practice of polygamy is permitted under Islamic law.  Section 212(11) of the McCarran-Walter Act prohibits all aliens who are polygamists, or who practice polygamy, or who  advocate the practice of polygamy, from entering or residing in the United States.

Section 212(19) of the Act bars entry to any alien who seeks to procure, or has sought to procure, or has procured a visa or other documentation, or seeks to enter the United States by fraud, or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact.

Section 212(27) of the Act bars all aliens “who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows, or has reason to believe, seek to enter the United States solely, principally, or incidentally, to engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States.”

Section 212(28) of the Act denies access to all aliens who are anarchists, or who have at any time been  members of or affiliated with, any organization that advocates or teaches the overthrow of the government of the United States by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.

In addition, the McCarran-Walter Act contains provisions for a reporting system whereby all aliens are required to report their current address to the INS each year.  It also establishes a central index of aliens in the U.S. for use by security and enforcement agencies… much as Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson have suggested.

Section 212 of the Act makes irrelevant any current debate or legislative proposal that would restrict or delay the entry of large numbers of Middle Eastern refugees.  Section 212 concludes by saying, “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

In other words, under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Muslims are prohibited from obtaining visas to enter or immigrate to the United States, and it gives Obama the authority to do exactly what the American people want him to do… i.e. suspend any further immigration of Muslim refugees to the United States.

Muslim immigration is prohibited under McCarran-Walter because the Koran and Sharia Law require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution.  All those who subscribe to the Koran as their guiding principle, by definition, subscribe to Islam and its form of government.  Most liberals and Democrats insist that Muslims cannot be prohibited from entering the U.S. because Islam, as a religion, is a protected class under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.  However, Islam is not merely another religious denomination.  Islam is a complete social, political, economic, legal, judicial, and military system with a religious component.  As such, it is totally incompatible with principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution.  Islam does not, and cannot, merit 1st Amendment protections.

When the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was sent to President Harry Truman for his signature, he vetoed the bill.  However, his veto was overridden by a vote of 278 to 113 in the House and 57 to 26 in the Senate.  Speaking in support of a veto override, Senator Pat McCarran (D-NV), a principal author of the Act, said what any Republican of today might say.  He said, “I believe that this nation is the last hope of Western civilization, and if this oasis of the world shall be overrun, perverted, contaminated, or destroyed, then the last flickering light of humanity will be extinguished.  I take no issue with those who would praise the contributions which have been made to our society by people of many races, of varied creeds and colors.  However, we have in the United States today hard-core, indigestible blocs which have not become integrated into the American way of life, but which, on the contrary, are its deadly enemies.”

He concluded by saying, “Today, as never before, untold millions are storming our gates for admission and those gates are cracking under the strain.  The solution to the problems of Europe and Asia will not come through a transplanting of those problems en masse to the United States.  I do not intend to become prophetic, but if the enemies of this legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces, or in amending it beyond recognition, they will have contributed more to promote this nation’s downfall than any other group since we achieved our independence as a nation.”

How prophetic!  The enemies of America have been highly successful in “riddling our system to pieces,” and never before has the “last flickering light of humanity” been in greater danger of being extinguished than it is today.  What is needed is not a temporary halt to immigration by the “hard-core, indigestible blocs” that now threaten us, but a reversal of the immigration that has taken place since the McCarran-Walter Act became law in 1953.  So long as radical Islamists insist upon achieving world domination through acts of unspeakable violence, and so long as so-called “moderate” Muslims merely look on as bystanders, peace-loving peoples must insist that Muslims settle their age-old differences in total isolation, in their own barren lands.

If and when a new immigration bill comes before Congress for a veto override, Republicans would be well advised to resurrect the wise counsel of their 1953 colleague, Pat McCarran.

CNN Fails to ‘Vet’ Radical Muslim Guest

/in , , , , /by

Over at PJ Media today I discuss CNN “journalist” Christiane Amanpour’s manifest bias and hypocrisy:

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour believes “we can all afford to be human” regarding the Syrian refugees. Recently, she condemned the U.S. and other countries for not letting them enter the homeland, despite FBI Director James Comey’s testimony explaining that vetting this population is literally impossible.

Apparently, “discerning” does not qualify as a human trait to Amanpour. Because soon after she offered her ill-considered, slanderous logic equating “responsible” with “heartless,” she employed this advice in her own decision-making — and she was taken.

Amanpour demonstrated exactly how Islamic radicals have learned to take advantage of those bearing her viewpoint.

Last Thursday, Amanpour invited Dalil Boubakeur, chairman of the Grand Mosque of Paris, to a sit-down interview. During the interview, Boubakeur strongly denounced the Islamic State (ISIS) and called for military action against it. He then declared that the barbarous terror group behind the Paris attacks had nothing to do with Islam:

Our religion is not one of violence, of jihadism, of terrorism, of women who kill. In what page of Qur’an is that written that a woman must take bombs inside her body to explode and kill other people? In what part of Qur’an is that said? In what page of Qur’an is it said that we shall kill innocent people? Young people?

Boubakeur then lamented that “little by little,” the Islamic State had won over the young Muslims of Europe. He declared that it was a “great error … not only of Muslims, but of the world to accept this.”

Then, Boubakeur called on Muslims in France to assimilate:

[It is] very important [for] French Muslim people to express their French nationality, their French taste, their French values, their French [rejection] of what is the danger for them, France, and for our religion also.

Had Amanpour recognized vetting as rational behavior — and understood her own viewpoint as reckless and irresponsible — then she would have known that Boubakeur’s insistence on “assimilation” could be nothing but a preposterous, exploitative lie considering his past behavior.

Homeland security expert Patrick Poole reported on Boubakeur’s rejection of Islamic “assimilation” with Western values in PJ Media last January. Boubakeur certainly does not oppose ISIS’s — or, in general, Islam’s — embrace of violence when he isn’t on Amanpour’s set:

[I]n 2006 at the height of the Danish Cartoon crisis, Boubakeur had published an article denouncing the cartoons and concluded by issuing a warning to all those — including Charlie Hebdo — who would publish caricatures of Mohammed, saying: “He who sows the whirlwind shall reap the whirlwind.”

Stop drawing Muhammad, and start abiding by Sharia blasphemy laws … or else.

Boubakeur, rather than being the assimilation-supporting, violence-spurning moderate Amanpour wanted him to be, is guilty of fanning the violence that resulted in deadly riots across the globe and ended in the horrific slaughter at Charlie Hebdo’s offices.

Boubakeur’s interview answers were no doubt music to the ears of Amanpour, as they matched the narrative she pushed in her September op-ed published by CNN wherein she castigated the U.S. for not taking more Syrian refugees. In the op-ed, Amanpour described the following as “heartwarming”:

… ordinary citizens, the responsible media, and generous governments all opening their arms to welcome a modern, yet biblical tide of humanity, fleeing war and persecution to safety here in Europe.

She scolded the U.S. and Canada:

… countries with big hearts, deep pockets and a habit of projecting their humanitarian values [are] unwilling to actually help end the war that would stop this exodus.

The U.S., she lamented:

… has only accepted fewer than 1,500 Syrian asylum seekers over the course of the war.

Amanpour did not address in her piece the real reason why many in the U.S. and elsewhere are reluctant to take in large numbers of these refugees: the prospect of Islamic jihadis being among them.

The Islamic State boasted last February that they would soon inundate Europe with 500,000 refugees. The Lebanese education minister recently warned that there were 20,000 active jihadis among the Syrian refugees in camps in his country. An Islamic State operative boasted in September, shortly after the migrant influx into Europe began, that among the flood of refugees, 4,000 terrorists had already entered Europe.

None of that information made it into Amanpour’s piece. She likely is confident that Obama administration officials will be able to “vet” the refugees they admit into the U.S., as they have repeatedly promised to do….

She must understand now that to heed her call, to bring in those refugees in large numbers, might make her temporarily feel good about how tolerant and multicultural she is, but will be cold comfort to the rest of us when the bombs start exploding.

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Tunisia: Islamic jihadists murder at least 12 with bomb on bus full of presidential guards

Roman Catholic bishop Robert Barron advocates strategy of submission to the Islamic State

Radical Muslim Properly Defined

/in , , , , /by

Going back as far as 11 Sep 2001, I have been listening to media heads, politicians, and self proclaimed counter-terrorism experts worldwide explain to the masses what a Radical Muslim is and how they became radicalized. I have listened, analyzed, and self educated myself for over 2 decades on the issue of the terms radical and radicalized.

During my hundreds of visits to mosque in America, listening to Islamic scholars, Muslim worshipers and from studying the material provided to Muslims in a mosque I have for the best part of 2 decades that the terms radical and radicalized have been falsely defined by people who should know and who for decades have been leading innocent people astray of the true definitions.

I will not use several pages to discuss issues that do not relate to the terms radical and radicalized. The simpler written is the best for all to understand. If our media, politicians, and counter-terrorism professionals are providing false information about these two very important terms, do we expect liberals to provide accurate definitions?

Okay, follow me with my basic definitions of radical and radicalized. If at the end you still do not fully understand then please contact me at davegaubatz@gmail.com and I will help clarify.

1. Radical Muslim: This term in describing a Muslim who kills innocent people, rapes and kills young girls, advocates the hatred of Israel and the Jewish people, straps on suicide vests and kill innocent people, carry out shootings and explosive attacks on people at civil and innocent events, advocates killing Christians worldwide, desires in their hearts an Islamic caliphate worldwide and have the law of the land be controlled by Sharia law, and who believes 100% that their Prophet Mohammed was a perfect human and a man to be put upon a pedestal as an example of good to all, are not Radical Muslims.

The people and their actions, beliefs, and followers of Mohammed 100% in their daily lives are not radical, they are just Muslims. These people are not being misguided by the true form of Islam, they know the actions and objectives they follow and advocate is exactly what the Quran teaches and what Prophet Mohammed advocated for them his entire life and beyond. These people are the perfect examples of a Muslim carrying out each and every aspect of Sharia law and never questioning the teachings of the Quran and Mohammed. These people have studied Islam for many years and are closer to Mohammed than any other people on earth. Some become ‘Pure Muslims’ at an early age and for some it takes longer. Few people will reach the utopia of Islam. possibly as low as 1 in a 1000 achieve this goal, but when they do they are the light of Islam and their numbers will be in the millions. They will flourish across all lands to form an Islamic caliphate under Sharia law.

2. A Useful Analogy: When a young boy dreams of becoming a professional major league baseball player, he knows it will take years of study and practice to elevate himself to the highest level of baseball. He will start in little league, make it to the junior high and high school levels and most people who love baseball and desire to make it to the major leagues seldom make it past high school. They have lost their love of the game and no longer want to spend their free time practicing the finer arts of baseball at a higher level.

There are a few who continue after high school and make it to a minor league program of baseball. Many linger here for years and do not have the desire, talent or willingness to make it to the highest level of baseball (Major League Baseball). You must answer a question now. Are the boys who after many years of self sacrifice and study who make it to the Major League Radical baseball players or are they boys and men who fully understand all aspects of baseball and can now play and teach others? These professional players know in their hearts and minds what real baseball is and they understand the rules and regulations by heart and are at a utopia place in their lives.

In order for the world to understand and defeat Islamic based terrorism we must come to terms with the facts that Islam, the Quran, Prophet Mohammed and Sharia law is not an ideology of peace and caring for humanity, but rather an ideology of hate and violence as the rules and regulations laid out by Mohammed were meant to be. Mohammed did not desire for Muslims and Islam to be associated with love, but instead advocated for the worldwide dominance of Islam and violence was to be used to achieve this goal.

Hopefully by now we are beginning to understand just because a person comes to a point in his or her life that they now understand completely and have a desire as Mohammed did to spread Islam through violence does not mean they are being radical. They are the ‘Pure Muslims’ of the world who have accepted the clear and apparent aspects of the evils of Islam and Mohammed and are willing to give their lives in order to spread evil across the world. Essentially Islam is a form of following Satan. Readers must get it out of their minds that Islam has anything to do with peace and that Mohammed was a peaceful man. Islam is aligned with Nazism and the leader of Nazis known as Hitler.

3. A Radicalized Muslim: Day after day we are forced to listen to the media, politicians, and counter-terrorism professionals describe to us how a person goes through various steps to become ‘radicalized’. I consider their misunderstanding of Islam and Muslims to be a far greater national security threat than all Islamic based terrorists combined. These people who should have a better understanding of Islam are misleading the world when they say a person who just bombed innocent people for instance in Paris became radicalized. These Muslims did not become radicalized. They became ‘Pure Muslims’ because they have studied harder than their peers to understand and carry out the objectives of their Prophet Mohammed.

If my analysis of what a radical Muslim is or how the term radicalized is misleading, who are the millions of people who relate to Islam, but never make it to the Utopia level of fully understanding Islam and becoming ‘Pure Muslims’? These people are the apostates of Islam. They do not fully accept Islam, Sharia law, or the total teachings and understand of Prophet Mohammed. These are people that ‘Pure Muslims’ are killing in large numbers around the world.

Mosques are the little league fields, high school fields, minor league fields and for some the path to the major leagues. The objectives of all Imams teaching at mosques is to get their followers to become ‘Pure Muslims’ by accepting the real truths of Islam and what Prophet Mohammed desired. Mosques are the breeding grounds for the practicing of pure evil by pure Muslims.

‘Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America’

/in , , , , , , /by

Republican presidential candidates respond to the ridiculous Democratic National Committee ad you can see here. Huckabee’s comment is most apposite, and is true not just of the DNC, but of the Obama Administration and the mainstream media — as well as much of the Republican establishment.

“EXCLUSIVE: Republicans Slam DNC Ad Attacking Them for Using Term ‘Radical Islam,’” by Patrick Howley, Breitbart, November 21, 2015:

WASHINGTON -Republicans are slamming the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) new attack ad criticizing the GOP for using the term “radical Islam.”

After radical Islamists carried out deadly terrorist attacks in Paris, the DNC released an ad hitting Republicans from George W. Bush to Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for even using the word “Islam” while talking about terrorism.

The GOP is outraged.

“Democrats seem determined to defend Islam more than America,” Gov. Mike Huckabee told Breitbart News. “No one in the GOP blames all Muslims but no one in the DNC blames any Muslims, even the ones who shout Allah Akbar just before cutting off the head of a person who professes being a Christian.”

“You can’t defeat the enemy if you are unwilling to even call it by name,” Jeb Bush campaign spokesman Tim Miller told Breitbart News.

“The Democrat ad is a poignant reminder of why the world has become less safe under an Obama administration: denial and political correctness have become the default strategies. That’s not how you lead, that’s not how you win and that’s not how we are going to keep America free and safe,” said Ben Carson spokesman Doug Watts….

RELATED ARTICLE: Sharia UK: London police dive into canal to rescue Qur’ans

The Muslim Parasite and the Western Host

/in , , , , , /by

There has been much discussion about the coordinated Muslim migration from Syria to Europe and the United States. This migration has been called by some a parasitic one, as Muslims become welfare recipients of the host nation while they maintain their sacred duty to remain devout followers of Mohammed.

History shows how the followers of Mohammed cannot by Muslim law (shariah) integrate or assimilate into the host nation’s culture. Rather they feed off the host country until the time when they have sufficient political, financial, social and military power to overthrow the host country and replace it with Islam.

Europe is witnessing a revolution against the Muslim “invasion.”

Columnist Robert Heller in an email titled “Why Christian refugees should be given priority to emigrate to the U.S.” writes:

Christians are earmarked for genocide by the Islamic State. Many have already been beheaded or otherwise slaughtered. When President Obama said there should not be a religious test he omitted the fact that people marked for genocide and extinction should by all human instincts be saved from certain death. These people marked for death happen to be Christian.

If the Islamic State decided all people with blue eyes or black skin should be marked for genocide would President Obama say we don’t recognize their plight over Muslims who wish to emigrate because living in a war torn country is dangerous or difficult.

The issue is not whether a person is Christian; it is that this particular group of people are subject to rape, torture and death above all others. Obama’s effort to make this a Christian or Muslim religious issue is beyond comprehension.

Former Israeli Ambassador Yoram Ettinger, in his column “Second Thought: A U.S.-Israel Initiative”, writes:

Europe has ignored the significant impact on contemporary Islamic geo-strategy by crucial milestones in the life of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, such as the 7th century Hijrah (Islam-driven emigration). Muhammad emigrated/fled from Mecca to Yathrib (Medina) – along with his loyalists – not to be integrated and blend into Medina’s social, economic or political environment, but to advance and spread Islam through conversion, subversion and terrorism, if necessary.  Asserting himself over his hosts and rivals in Medina, Muhammad gathered a critical mass of military might to conquer Mecca and launch Islam’s drive to dominate the world.

In 1966, this Hijrah precedent was applied by Mahmoud Abbas, Arafat and the entire Fatah leadership which emigrated/fled from Syria to Jordan, incited the Palestinian population of Jordan, but failed in their attempt to topple the hosting Hashemite regime. In 1976, they failed in their attempt to topple the regime in Beirut, which had hosted them since they emigrated/fled from Jordan in 1970. In 1990, they collaborated with Saddam Hussein’s invasion and plunder of Kuwait, stabbing the back of the Sabah family, which had hosted them, their relatives and PLO associates since they emigrated/fled from Egypt in the mid-1950s.

On Friday morning, November 13, 2015, a few hours before Islamic terrorists launched their offensive against France, French Muslim children studied – and French Muslim adults heard in French mosques – that according to the Quran, humanity must submit to the prophet Muhammad, and the “infidel” must accept Sharia’ laws; “Holy War” (Jihad) must be conducted on behalf of Islam, and the participation in the Jihad rewards one with the benefits of paradise; the abode of the “believers” (Dar al-Islam) must be expanded into the abode of the “infidels” (Dar al-Harb), who are doomed to the sword; prohibiting “believers” to submit themselves to the rule of the “infidel,” except as a temporary tactic; agreements with “infidels” are provisional, as a prelude to subordinating the “infidel;” emigration of the “believers” must serve the historical, supremacist goal of Islam; and shielding the “believers” from “infidels” may require the Quran-sanctioned Taqiyyah – double talk and deception-based statements and agreements to be ignored, contradicted and abrogated once conditions are ripe.

Selwyn Duke in his column “Islamic influx: Why a Religious Test for Immigrants is Moral and Wise” writes:

People believe in things.

Some of those things are good and true, others are bad and false. And if what people believe is bad and false — whatever water-muddying label it wears — there’s every reason not to vote for them. There also may be good reason not to befriend or hire them, depending on the degree and nature of the badness. There may be reason to keep them out of your home.

And there certainly may be reason to keep them out of your national home.

It should be noted that when Charles Martel saved Europe from a Muslim invasion in 732 A.D. and when the responses to Islamic aggression known as the Crusades were launched in 1095, people understood the above well. In fact, the earliest known uses of the terms “religious” and “secular” were, respectively, 1200 and 1300; even so, they didn’t have their current meanings. “Secular” as in “in reference to humanism and the exclusion of belief in God from matters of ethics and morality,” only dates from 1850.

Thus, during Christendom’s formative years, adolescence and rise to dominance, people did in fact view the world more clearly in the most important sense: they understood that there was simply the true and untrue. Maybe now we can understand why Pope Benedict XVI identified the 13th or 14th century as the West’s high water mark.

Read more.

The ultimate question is: Whom do you trust?

Recent events in Paris and Mali must be viewed in a historical perspective. Islam and the followers of Mohammed have a sacred duty to conquer the non-believers. Remember the Middle East was once a Judeo/Christian paradise of prosperity, trade and peace.

It fundamentally began to change when Mohammed migrated (hijrah) from Mecca to Medina. Thus ends today’s lesson.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Does Global Warming Only Turn Muslims Into Terrorists?

More Syrians Stopped at the Border

Barack Obama Blocked 75% of Strikes on ISIS

Al-Qaeda claims Mali slaughter: “All praise is due to Allah”

VIDEO: Muslim migration or Islamic invasion?

/in , , , , , /by

Jihad Watch‘s Robert Spencer addresses contentious Muslim migration issues of today. He believes that this is a Hijrah, a jihadist invasion of the West, not a migration as the media likes to interpret it.

The Encyclopedia Britannica defines Hijrah as:

Hijrah, also spelled Hejira or Hijra (“Flight” or “Emigration”), Latin Hegira, the Prophet Muhammad’s migration (622 ce) from Mecca to Medina in order to escape persecution. The date represents the starting point of the Muslim era.

There are Muslim Jihadis both in Europe and on the way to America.

Map Of Radical Mosques in the U.S. According to the Clarion Project

These mosques or their leading clerics have radicalized attendees to become terrorists, supported terrorist organizations, made radical Islamist remarks or hosted others that have, or are financially backed by radical individuals or organizations.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Donald Trump Sets Off a Furor With Call to Register Muslims in the U.S.

President Obama rejects Intelligence reports on known Islamic terrorists

Muslim Migrants Are Killing Christian Migrants

Barack Obama Blocked 75% of Strikes on the Islamic State

EDITORS NOTE: This video is courtesy of DemoCast.tv.

White House: Secret meeting with George Batah, who wants 65,000 Syrians admitted to U.S.

/in , , , , , /by

I told you about this White House petition here, and I know that the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants and possibly the International Rescue Committee (two federal resettlement contractors) were initially involved, or I wouldn’t have mentioned USCRI (their affiliation with the petition must have been removed) in my original post.

George Batah

George Batah (right) invited to White House but prohibited from saying who he met with.

However, now we are told that it was one Syrian immigrant guy from Chicago, one stalwart young activist, who single-handedly came up with the idea and succeeded in getting over 100,000 signatures.

Of course all of those open borders activists who signed the petition have been identified by the White House as potential future allies for the Democrat party.

And, as a secondary benefit, the resettlement contractors and others pushing for more (mostly Muslim) Syrians to enter the US get a news hook (and more media pressure for Obama to raise the number of refugees to be admitted).

Here is the Huffington Post reporting on young George Batah:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has responded to a petition calling on the U.S. to resettle tens of thousands of Syrian refugees within its borders, inviting the man who started the petition to the White House for a meeting.

George Batah, 23, came from Syria in 2013 and now lives in Chicago. He said he started the petition in late August because he felt the United States has a moral obligation to continue being “the leader in refugee resettlement.”   [What is young George’s immigration status? It doesn’t say he is a refugee.—ed]

His petition asked the White House to accept at least 65,000 Syrian refugees by 2016. The administration did not commit to that number in its response Thursday, instead reiterating that it intends to bring at least 10,000.

[….]

Batah told The Huffington Post Thursday that while he was pleased to see the administration’s response, he intends to keep pushing officials to take more refugees.

“Ten thousand by 2016 is very meaningful, because 10,000 people’s lives would be saved,” Batah said. “But at the same time, I feel that a country like the U.S., with its resources, can contribute more in terms of the number.” 

[How many readers here are infuriated that young George (here since 2013 with immigration status unknown) “feels” that you can spend more of your hard-earned tax dollars on Syrians running from THEIR civil war?—ed]

Why the secrecy?

After Batah started his petition, administration officials invited him to the White House for a meeting in mid-September. He met with staff members from the National Security Council and other departments, but said he wasn’t allowed to disclose exactly who was there.

“When we met, they clearly cared about the issue and wanted to help address the crisis overall,” Batah said. “I’m not in politics, it’s not my strength, but I felt they genuinely care about it.”

Now young George (“not in politics”) wants to start more petitions to get U.S. mayors to ask for more Syrian refugees for your towns and cities.

Readers, beware of signing any petitions at Change.org!

Batah said he is continuing his activism on the issue, recently working with Change.org to encourage people to start petitions calling on their mayors to welcome more refugees.

Grrrr!

Don’t forget to help ACT pound those 18 mayors who have been demanding Obama admit 100,000 Syrians, here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Iraqi interpreters given refugee status, not pure as the driven snow

Muslim Refugee Resettlement: A Very Syrious Matter

/in , , , , , , /by

The Jewish Community Federations of North America have come together to provide humanitarian aid for Syrian refugees. The organizations, paid contractors who are identified in the Jewish Coalition for Disaster Relief, are too numerous to mention here, but include AIPAC, AJC, B’nai B’rith Int’l, HIAS, ORT America, and National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW), who are furthering the cause of population redistribution.

Refugees, unlike migrants, are defined as those who flee their homes because of persecution. President Obama authorized the State Department to admit 85,000 refugees fleeing humanitarian crises worldwide in 2016. Just as these Islamists have invaded Europe, so our multiculturalists are funding their invasion into America, and despite Saudi Arabia’s air-conditioned tents that are erected and ready to accommodate three million for their annual pilgrimage to Medina, no “Syrians” are welcomed within the Islamic world. By definition, not only are these Syrians not refugees, but the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has confessed that they have no screening process for “Syrian refugees.”

ISIS/IS promised a “sea of chaos” to flood the West with 500,000 refugees – not merely to create a humanitarian crisis and strain our resources, but to also include jihadists to force Islamic conversion and establish Sharia as the law of the land. Islamic countries claim to have declined the Syrians because of terror risks, and the Jewish Federations have turned a blind eye. Historian Serge Trifkovic wrote:

“The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history.”

And who are these Syrians? The Federation’s announcement contained a particularly deceptive photo of a wide-eyed, blonde toddler complete with Teddy bear, but the refugees are primarily able-bodied young men, weaned on anti-Semitism and hatred of the West and democracy, who are seen stomping on or burning our flags, brandishing rifles, hurling fire bombs, and wielding swords for decapitation. These are Islamists who have waged wars against Jews and Christians, and brought their savagery to Europe, complete with their methods of intimidation – riots and rapes of children and women. The rape count was more than 5,000 in 2008 and more than 6,000 in 2009; Muslims account for 50 to 75 percent of all rapes of women in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, and these are the men who are designated to receive Federation funding.

The BBC’s website of 200 images is also dishonest in its refugee presentation – providing a 53% focus on children, 36 percent men, and 10 percent women, whereas the United Nations Refugee Agency revealed that 75 percent of “refugees” were young men.

Interestingly, the largest Muslim charity, with its link to terror financing and settling refugees from terror-torn Syria, has an operating budget of $240 million in over 30 countries. The charity is part of a network calling for the settlement of thousands of Syrian refugees into “rich countries.” Indeed, this is Barack Obama’s 2008 promise to fundamentally transform America, and the Islamic State’s threat to flood the West. Jusuf Al Qaradawi of the Muslim Brotherhood declared their mission “to free the occupied lands of the laws and the tyranny of disbelievers. It is undoubtedly a case of jihad for the sake of Allah.” Are we to believe that the Federations (and the BBC) are unwittingly complicit as they aid and abet those who would bring their misery to the West?

Crain’s Cleveland Business reported that David Fleshler, chair of the board of directors of Global Cleveland, seeks to invite 100,000 foreigners to Ohio. Is it possible he is unaware that Ohio is one of eleven states that already have more people on welfare than are employed, and that the Qur’an prohibits Muslims from assimilating into kaffir lands? He alleges that immigrants will integrate and be employable, while Darrell Hamm, director of the non-profit The Refugee Response, claims to assist refugees with their adjustment.

Judicial Watch’s Corruption Chronicles states:

“Conveniently omitted are the devastating impacts of illegal immigration like the billions of dollars American taxpayers spend annually on their education, healthcare and incarceration,” as Germany is now experiencing. They bring with them greater demands for intolerance and accommodations, destruction of the existing cultures, rioting and violent crime, as they perform the Qur’anic edicts to establish jurisdiction in lands of the infidel.

Judicial Watch’s recent report shows that 1,519 foreigners with terrorist ties were granted special exemptions and residency or asylum through a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) program, to which President Obama appointed Fatima Noor to the post of assistant director for US Citizenship and Immigration. Where prior to 2014, they would have been banned from entry, these 1,519 are currently in the US with the same rights and benefits afforded legal residents.  At a time when restrictions were being eased during an asylum fraud of February, 2014, the administration unilaterally altered the Immigration and Nationality Act while also announcing our projected acceptance of refugees to 100,000 yearly by 2017. NumbersUSA reported that a new Pew study found that immigration will account for 88 percent of US population growth over the next 50 years.

The Frankfurter Allgemenie and international statistics show that these foreigners are not “refugees,” but “migrants” who are not under threat of war or persecution. The migration is their hijrah, a 1400-year-old strategy of Islamic expansionism, which, coupled with military conquest, will subvert and subdue the host and begin the complete transformation of that country. These are migrant warriors.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban wisely warned that the wave of mostly Muslim refugees coming to Europe threatens to undermine the continent’s Christian roots. “They represent a profoundly different culture.” All too obvious is the dearth of Christian and Jewish refugees who truly need asylum from the jihadists.

Meanwhile, the International Rescue Committee (IRC), headed by former British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, and Labour politician, praises the intake of Muslims into Germany (as the Germans march and rebel against Islamization), Iceland and Sweden, and demands that Obama admit 65,000 mostly Muslim Syrians to the US. Miliband, who is affiliated with George Soros, Hillary and Bill Clinton, and Samantha Power, reminds us that more than 11 million Syrians have been made homeless by conflict and Syria is host to 33,000 asylum seekers and refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. Miliband will not admit that Arab states refuse their brethren, but he is sure to remind us that no matter how many we take in, the number will be “unacceptable.”

The very lucrative refugee resettlement progams are used by those who hate non-Muslim countries and wish to replace their laws with Sharia. Breitbart News reveals that the U.S. already admits more than a quarter of a million Muslim migrants each year. Obama wants to add 10,000 Syrian migrants to that number. The Jewish Federations, Catholic Charities, World Council of Churches, and other “altruist” counterparts are conspiring against democracy, unintentionally or deliberately, to destroy Western civilization.

To support them is to hasten some very Syrious and irreparable consequences.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Sanctuary Cities on the Rise, Releasing More Than 9,000 Criminals in U.S. Illegally

Iraqi interpreters given refugee status, not pure as the driven snow

RELATED VIDEO: German police injured in yet another muslim riot in refugee center

John Kerry: U.S. to accept 85,000 Muslim refugees in 2016, 100,000 in 2017

/in , , , , , /by

What could possibly go wrong? Last February the Islamic State said it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. But they couldn’t actually be doing it now, could they? Inconceivable! And the Lebanese Education Minister recently said that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. But they couldn’t be heading to Europe, could they? Inconceivable! The 80% of migrants who claim to be fleeing the war in Syria but aren’t from Syria at all couldn’t have hijrah or jihad on their minds, could they? Inconceivable!

“US to Accept 85,000 Refugees in 2016, 100,000 in 2017, Kerry Says,” by Ken Dilanian, Associated Press, September 20, 2015:

Trying to address the Syrian refugee crisis, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced Sunday that the United States would significantly increase the number of worldwide refugees it takes in over the next two years, though not by nearly the amount many activists and former officials have urged.

The U.S. will accept 85,000 refugees from around the world next year, up from 70,000, and that total would rise to 100,000 in 2017, Kerry said at news conference with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier after the two discussed the mass migration of Syrians fleeing their civil war.

Many, though not all, of the additional refugees would be Syrian, American officials have said. Others would come from strife-torn areas of Africa. The White House had previously announced it intended to take in 10,000 additional Syrian refugees over the next year.

Asked why the U.S. couldn’t take more, Kerry cited post-Sept. 11 screening requirements and a lack of money made available by Congress. “We’re doing what we know we can manage immediately,” he said.

The migrants would be referred by the U.N. refugee agency, screened by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and resettled around the U.S.

“This step is in keeping with America’s best tradition as a land of second chances and a beacon of hope,” Kerry said. Kerry also met with some refugee families on the wooded, lakeside resort-style campus of the foreign ministry’s education center outside Berlin.

Congressional approval is not required for the expansion of resettlement slots, though Congress would have to appropriate money to pay for the additional effort. Some Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns that Islamic State militants could seek to slip into Europe or the U.S. posing as migrants….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Compassion As A Weapon: Politicizing The Syrian Refugee Crisis

Carson says Muslim shouldn’t be President; Hamas-linked CAIR demands he withdraw

Eiffel Tower closed to visitors after terror suspect with “large rucksack” climbs it

Senator Jeff Sessions: 90% of Middle Eastern refugees get some form of welfare

/in , , , , , , /by

Yesterday we told you about the Center for Immigration Studies analysis of data indicating that legal immigrants (which include refugees) are using our social safety net at a higher rate than native born Americans, now we learn that Middle Eastern refugees are using welfare assistance at an even higher level than other legal immigrants.

Sessions and Trump at Alabama rally August 21

Senator Jeff Sessions with 2016 Presidential hopeful Donald Trump at August 21st rally in Alabama.

From Breitbart (presumably these numbers include all Middle Eastern refugees no matter which religion they practice) Hat tip: Joanne.

The numbers are much more shocking than those we had previously obtained!

More than 90 percent of recent refugees from Middle Eastern nations are on food stamps and nearly 70 percent receive cash assistance, according to government data.

According to Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) data highlighted by the immigration subcommittee staff of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest — in FY 2013, 91.4 percent of Middle Eastern refugees (accepted to the U.S. between 2008-2013) received food stamps, 73.1 percent were on Medicaid or Refugee Medical Assistance and 68.3 percent were on cash welfare.

Middle Eastern refugees used a number of other assistance programs at slightly lower rates. For example, 36.7 percent received Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), 32.1 percent received Supplemental Security Income (SSI), 19.7 percent lived in public housing, 17.3 percent were on General Assistance (GA), and 10.9 percent received Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA).

The high welfare rates among Middle Eastern refugees comes as the Obama administration considers increasing the number of refugees — who are immediately eligible for public benefits — to the U.S., particularly Syrian refugees.

ORR defines refugees and asylees from the “Middle East” as being from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and Yemen.   [Hah! And these figures don’t include the Somali welfare usage numbers!—ed]

More here….

Shortly after a meeting with Sessions on Capitol Hill, saying we need to take care of our own problems, Trump expressed reservations about plans to resettle Syrian refugees in the US.

Addendum: Senator Jeff Sessions was the leader of the opposition to the Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill and here in 2013 called out “meatpackers” as among the big industry lobbyists pushing for a greater supply of cheap immigrant labor.  Long time readers here know the large role the meatpackers are playing in changing small town America by encouraging the resettlement of refugees.

RELATED ARTICLE: If you want to save Syrian Christians, do not take refugees from UN camps!

Welfare benefits causing Muslim migration to Europe and U.S.

/in , , , , , , /by
pa779-cover1

Click on the image for a printable copy of the policy analysis.

The CATO Institute’s Michael D. Tanner and Charles Hughes in their comprehensive policy analysis titled “The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: Europe” report:

If welfare benefits become too generous, they can create a significant incentive that encourages recipients to remain “on the dole” rather than to seek employment. Benefits in European Union (EU) countries vary widely, but in many of them, benefits are high relative to what an individual could expect to earn from a low-wage or entry-level job. For example, for a single parent with two children in 2013—

  • Welfare benefits in nine EU countries exceeded €15,000 ($18,200) per year. In six countries, benefits exceeded €20,000 ($24,300). Denmark offers the most generous benefit package, valued at €31,709 ($38,558).
  • In nine countries, welfare benefits exceeded the minimum wage in that country.
  • Benefits in 11 countries exceeded half of the net income for someone earning the average wage in that country, and in 6 countries it exceeded 60 percent of the net average wage income.
  • In Austria, Croatia, and Denmark, the effective marginal tax rate for someone leaving welfare for work was nearly 100 percent, meaning that a person would gain virtually no additional income from working. In another 16 countries, individuals would face an effective marginal tax rate in excess of 50 percent.
  • Benefits in the United States fit comfortably into the mainstream of welfare states. Excluding Medicaid, the United States would rank 10th among the EU nations analyzed, more generous than France and slightly less generous than Sweden. Thirty-five states offer a package more generous than the mean benefit package offered in the European countries analyzed.

Many European countries have recognized the problem and have begun to reform their welfare systems to create a better transition from welfare to work. In fact, the United States is falling behind some European countries with regard to welfare reform.

Countries that are serious about reducing welfare dependency and rewarding work should consider strengthening work requirements, establishing time limits for participation, and tightening eligibility. Perhaps more important, countries should examine the level of benefits available and the effective marginal tax rates their welfare systems create, with an eye toward reducing disincentives and encouraging work.

Read the full policy analysis buy clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Center for Immigration Studies: Welfare Use High for Both Legal and Illegal Immigrants

Thanks to Federal Assistance, Low-Income Americans Live in Luxury Apartments in Chicago

Judicial Watch: FEC Must Investigate Democratic National Committee for Employing Illegal Alien to Craft 2016 Political Message

Influx of Illegal Alien Minors Energizes Violent U.S. Street Gang MS-13

Wealthy Gulf Arab States close borders to Muslim Refugees for fear of Terrorism

/in , , , /by

Invasion of Europe news continued…

gulf-states-640x438-640x480

While you are looking at the above map courtesy of Breitbart, consider that Turkey is allowing ‘refugees’ to pass through and launch boats into the Aegean Sea so that thousands of the migrants can reach Greece. Why isn’t anyone criticizing Turkey? Or, turning the boats back to Turkey?

Breitbart has more news on a topic that obviously interests you.  Our post from last week, Why should US/Europe take Syrian refugees while Gulf Arab states take ZERO?, was visited by over 6,000 readers in a couple of days.  So what do the Gulf States know that we don’t, maybe that the “refugee” stream is composed of 75% men of fighting age!

demographics of muslim refugees

UN High Commissioner for Refugees chart on refugees from the Middle East. Ages not shown.

Here is Breitbart:

Five of the wealthiest Muslim countries have taken no Syrian refugees in at all, arguing that doing so would open them up to the risk of terrorism. Although the oil rich countries have handed over aid money, Britain has donated more than Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar combined.

No time today to linger, read it all here!

Our ‘Invasion’ archive is here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Comment from a Brit: We are headed for a disaster of epic proportions

Did facebook take down “horror story” at Italy/Austria border?

UNHCR data confirms it: 75% of the so-called refugees arriving in Europe are MEN

“Just wait”: Islamic State says it has smuggled 1000s of Muslim jihadis into Europe

Dead toddler’s father wanted to go to Europe to get new teeth!

Illinois: The leading state for Syrian Muslim refugee resettlement

/in , , , , , /by

This is a longish article at the Chicago Tribune that anyone concerned with Illinois should have a look at.  Any ‘pockets of resistance’ in Illinois?

Bill_Frelick_print_0

Bill Frelick of Human Rights Watch.

But, this whining bit (below) jumped out at me and I want to bring it to your attention.

The article implies that Syrian Muslims are not getting into the US in the refugee stream, but that just isn’t true. In 2015, 97% of the Syrians arriving in the U.S. through the State Department’s Refugee Admissions Program are Muslims (the vast majority are Sunnis) coming from UN camps.

We know this from the US State Department’s own Refugee Processing Center data base (if you don’t believe me, see for yourself) where the State Department tracks nationality and religion!

Last week we reported, here in that same post, that Illinois had the 4th highest number of Syrians resettled so far.

Here is a snip below from the Chicago Tribune story. Is Frelick ignorant or purposefully being deceptive and why don’t reporters at these big papers try to find out the truth—that we are bringing mostly Muslim Syrians and NOT the Christians.

Incidentally, we wouldn’t have such a difficult time screening Christians, would we?

But Syrian Muslims figure low on the list of asylum-seekers designated as being of “special humanitarian concern” when U.S. politicians consider applicants from among the world’s 60 million refugees because of fears that would-be terrorists from Islamic State, also known as ISIS, occupying much of northeastern Syria, might slip in among those trying to escape the violence, said Bill Frelick, director of the refugee rights program at Human Rights Watch.

And, what the hell does he mean when he says ‘when US politicians consider applicants.’  What politicians?  Does he mean Obama because it is the Administration that actually considers applicants.  Sad to say, Congress doesn’t have much of a role in the final decisions (LOL! assuming Congress would have the guts to stop anything anyway).

They talk big—like Rep Michael McCaul, here, but he really doesn’t have much authority to stop Obama short of legislation that could stall the whole process.

We will be watching to see if there is any action by McCaul or other House leaders responsible for refugees—Reps Goodlatte and Gowdy—in the coming weeks.

The Chicago Tribune goes on to tell us more of what Frelick said:

“If there is even a whiff of a security concern, no consular officer or security officer (from the multitude of U.S. agencies vetting applicants) wants to be the one that has his name on the bottom of a form where someone turns out to have done something horrible,” Frelick said of the asylum-seekers from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other Muslim countries in conflict. “There is every incentive to say no and very few incentives to say yes. This stigma of terrorism, the fear of a needle in the haystack, tends to hold the whole haystack back.”

That is all fine and dandy, but always remember that history tells us that the Jihadist tendency is more likely to rear its ugly head in the next generation as we have seen innumerable times with the Somalis.  The parents aren’t the Jihadists, it is the youths that we helped raise with our tax dollars who are radicalized in neighborhood mosques who have turned to Islamic terrorism.  It might be 10-15 years before we see the Syrian refugee kids make their move.  Why gamble?  Save the Christians first.

Continue reading here and listen to a Syrian Muslim doctor whine.

One final funny note (NOT)!  The family which serves as the star of the story (there is always a heartwarming refugee story) has a three-year-old name ‘Osama.’   I think if someone named their kid ‘Hitler’ it would send a message wouldn’t it?  Same goes for Osama!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Martin O’Malley on the bandwagon: U.S. should take 65,000 Syrians in 2016

Rush Limbaugh on European refugee crisis and Syrians to the U.S.

Presbyterian pastor: Send 60,000 Muslim Syrians to St. Louis! We love Arabs

/in , , , , /by

I’m sorry I can’t seem to break away from this topic today—65,000! mostly Muslim Syrians (or more) may be on the way to the US—and all sorts are piling on the bandwagon in support of this insanity!  We just told you about Martin O’Malley and now here is a Presbyterian pastor from St. Louis explaining how the city is ruled by an Arab-American dynasty and so it is the perfect place to send 60,000 Syrians now!

gjohnson

Pastor Greg Johnson we are told lives alone with his two pet cats (Leela the Toyger and Sox). Surely he could take at least two or three Syrian families into his home.

I wondered if he was mistakenly thinking that the US State Department is saving Syrian Christians when they aren’t.  But, you will see it is the Muslims he is welcoming to town!

From Pastor Greg Johnson at Nextstl:

Send them to St. Louis.

We can take at least 60,000.

Our mayor, Francis G. Slay, is an Arab American. His grandfather Joseph R. Slay was born in Ottoman Greater Syria, in an area now part of Lebanon…..  [Based on wikipedia information, Slay is a Christian Syrian.  I wonder does he really want 60,000 Syrian Sunni Muslims in St. Louis—ed]

[….]

That’s an Arab American dynasty ruling St. Louis.

We were doing diversity before the coasts decided it was cool.

And we have a history of welcoming Moslems, too. Twenty years ago, tiny little St. Louis City — the core of a much larger metro area — took in around 60,000 Bosnian refugees. Like the Syrians, they were fleeing civil war and sectarian violence. Like the Syrians, most were Moslems. Like the Syrians, many could speak no English. Like the Syrians, they were an entrepreneurial people, hard working, often educated. Like the Syrians, they wanted a new start. With support from amazing institutions like the International Institute,*** 60,000 Bosnians made their way to St. Louis.

And we love them.

You’ve probably seen all the hoopla about Icelanders saying they will take 16,000 Syrians into their homes.  I do hope to see that happen and I sure hope the Icelandic government calls their bluff and demands that all the volunteers pay for the entire resettlement—the refugees’ food, clothing, medical, schooling etc.—without dipping into taxpayer funded programs.  I expect to see St. Louis Pastor Greg Johnson do the same.

***We have written about the International Institute and Bosnians, here.  It is a subcontractor of USCRI (Lavinia Limon) and it wants to make St. Louis the fastest growing immigrant community in America by 2020.

RELATED ARTICLES:

If your town is taking HUD housing dollars, diversity, in the form of third world refugees, is on the way

Three articles at WND on migrant crisis in Europe and spillover to the US; is it time to demand a moratorium?

Migrant crisis isn’t just Europe’s problem

LA Times story: U.S. not doing enough for refugees, but look what creeps in at the end (a warning!)

16 Photos of the Refugees Stranded in Hungary Amid Migrant Crisis

National Welcoming Week part of PR campaign to soften public up for 65,000 Syrians

NY Times notices Senate “jihadi caucus” promoting large scale Syrian resettlement

RELATED VIDEO:

Lutherans call for 200,000 refugees to be admitted to U.S. in 2016 including 100,000 Syrians

/in , , , , , /by

A reader has just alerted us to yet another federal refugee contractor, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS), one-upping the other two contractors we have reported on, here and here both demanding that Obama admit 65,000 Syrians in FY2016.  We thought those were outrageous demands!

Linda-Hartke-square-headshot-for-blog1-290x300

Linda Hartke, CEO of LIRS.

But get this…..

LIRS wants 100,000 Syrians!  Either they are completely insane or they know Obama is on the edge and needs a little push! Maybe if they say 100,000, Obama will settle for 65,000!

Linda Hartke, CEO of LIRS, sent out the urgent e-mail to their members. LIRS is approximately 97% funded with your tax dollars!

Here is what our reader says was in his e-mail alert:

“Refugees fleeing Syria need you.

I am asking you to join us with three simple actions that can make a real difference:

Act – In response to this global refugee crisis, the largest since World War II, you can urge the President and Congress to increase the annual refugee admissions goal, or “Presidential Determination” from the 2015 number of 70,000 to 200,000 for 2016 and prioritize receiving 100,000 Syrian refugees in this number.

Click here to send to urge President Obama and Congress to increase the number of refugees resettled this year and to prioritize Syrians.

We’ve been telling you about the importance of the timing on all this right now with the “Presidential Determination” due to be sent to Congress for “consultation” within a couple of weeks.  The escalating migrant crisis in Europe isn’t helping either.

This will be a great test for the Republicans running Congress—will they once again rubber stamp what Obama wants?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Migrant crisis isn’t just Europe’s problem

LA Times story: U.S. not doing enough for refugees, but look what creeps in at the end (a warning!)

16 Photos of the Refugees Stranded in Hungary Amid Migrant Crisis

National Welcoming Week part of PR campaign to soften public up for 65,000 Syrians

NY Times notices Senate “jihadi caucus” promoting large scale Syrian resettlement

RELATED VIDEO: