Refugee Resettlement Watch

eBay founder’s publication ‘The Intercept’ having hissy fit over refugee resettlement backlash

Posted by Ann Corcoran on October 17, 2015

The reporter (Lee Fang) for ‘The Intercept’ singles out a wealthy California man as its target in his piece in which he is literally freaking-out over all of us.  The implication here is that without this one man, there would be no backlash against the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program.

Ebay founder

Pierre Morad Omidyar is the billionaire founder of eBay (an Iranian) and ‘The Intercept’ is his creation. Don’t you just love it when Leftwing wealthy funders of political causes have hissy fits when they find there are big money people on the right. OT! He is wearing a Nature Conservancy hat here—the TNC operates very similarly to the wealthy refugee resettlement contractors as it too harms unsuspecting citizens in small town America (I know from vast past experience!). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Omidyar

I love to read stories like this one because it means you are having a huge impact!

By the way, he (Fang) is using Alinsky Rule 13 (we discussed Rule 13 here in 2009). Alinsky taught his followers in ‘Rules for Radicals’ to target individuals because they hurt more quickly than institutions.

It won’t work because the movement to hold back the tide of third world migration to America is much much larger than this one California man.

And, what Fang and eBay founder Omidyar don’t want their readers to know is that there are thousands of citizens working on this issue who are paid by no one and fueled only by a desire to save America—economically and culturally!  If Mr. Shillman went away today, it wouldn’t matter because we are fed by passion and patriotism, not cash.

The Intercept:

Strident calls to reject Syrian refugees fueled by wealthy California donor

While humanitarian groups and religious charities across the country are urging the U.S. to open its arms to refugees fleeing the bloody conflicts in Syria and Iraq, a number of bloggers and political pundits are beating the drums of intolerance, using conspiracy theories and anti-Muslim rhetoric to mobilize the American public against accepting migrants escaping war.

Several of the leading voices in this effort are sponsored by Robert Shillman, a wealthy donor to conservative causes who lives in Rancho Santa Fe, a suburb of San Diego.

Shillman, who did not respond to a request for comment, is the founder and chairman of Cognex Corp., a company that produces manufacturing technology.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at FrontPage Magazine, has argued that the only “genuine refugees” are “Christian and non-Muslim” and that the U.S. should not accept any Muslims from the conflict in Syria because those fleeing the region “are not victims, they are perpetrators.”

This is what makes me laugh: the reporter would like his readers to think that Shillman had something to do with Spartanburg and St. Cloud.  I bet the majority of those demanding answers in those cities have never even heard of Shillman.

Shillman Journalism Fellow articles about the dangers of accepting Syrian refugees have gone viral over the last two months, with versions reposted on conservative blogs and news hubs. Fear of Syrian migrants has fueled anger in small towns that fear they will become hosts for Islamic terrorists. Residents in cities such as Spartanburg, South Carolina, and St. Cloud, Minnesota, have organized opposition to the possibility of refugee resettlement efforts.

Asked earlier this year by Reuters about his support for David Horowitz and Pamella Geller, two well-known anti-Muslim activists, Shillman explained that he is not anti-Muslim, but rather simply more outspoken than most business leaders. “Most CEOs are hired guns and their future depends on what their boards think of them. I don’t give a fuck,” he said.

Best antidote to Rule 13—Rule 5!  Laugh at them!

There is lots of amusing stuff in here, continue reading.

9 Responses to “eBay founder’s publication ‘The Intercept’ having hissy fit over refugee resettlement backlash”

  1. Bhutan is a country with enough land and resources to sustain its population for another century without problems. However when the fourth king chose to depopulate the country by evicting almost 15% of us just to get rid of the people who protested against the regime’s human rights abuses, the world watched and India kept mum. That is why we are here. We had not option but get resettled.
    If powerful countries had forced Bhutan – a tiny country with hardly any say in global platform – to take all the refugees back, we Bhutanese-Nepali would not be target of ridicule of some sections of the society in various adopted lands. However, if research is carried out, we are not economically dependent on the state as a whole though a part of the population needs support having had to suffer more than 20 years as refugees with meager handouts.
    Take another 10 years and we will not be far behind the Indians as an ethnic group doing well and adding tax money to the national coffers.

    Like

    • Ann Corcoran said

      My contention from the beginning is that the US could have used its economic might to solve your problems right there rather than to scatter your people to the four winds. Of course it is too late now. One of the major drivers of refugee resettlement to the US is the large industries here always in need of cheap labor and I believe that is why over 80,000 of you have been brought here. It’s just that those big industries and their “church” supporters can hide behind a patina of humanitarianism that they continue to get away with it. But, I wish you well and hope you are right that you will be productive American citizens.

      Like

  2. I’ve been fighting the islamic world war since 1982, and I have never once received one single penny for my effort. jaw dropping how these idiots fling this garbage while defending George Soros as some kind of great philanthropist! I’m fighting not for money or power. I’m fighting for the future of Western Civilization, for our Children, for our Country. You see, that’s one very big difference between “them” and “us”…. WE are fighting out of passion for our country, our families, our Freedom & Liberty and our property. THEY are fighting because someone is telling them to fight. Most of them have no idea for what they’re fighting. No idea, or handicapped by the lies they’ve been gobbling down in the “schools” and media. We’re fighting with passion. They’re not. BIG difference.

    Like

  3. […] RELATED ARTICLE: Iranian Bay founder having hissy fit over refugee resettlement backlash […]

    Like

  4. stanely21 said

    I think it would be smarter to draw and distinction between Islam and Islamism. Then they can’t use accusations of “bigotry” as a weapon. In other words Pam Geller herself knows Muslim people who she likes and respects. They adhere to a version of Islam that is not political. ISLAMISM is political by definition. By that standard, she is an Anti-Islamist Activist.

    Like

    • sturandot13 said

      Sorry. There IS NO “version” of izlam that is NOT political. People can do as they please and believe as they please; however, there is only ONE “version” of izlam.

      Like

  5. futuret said

    http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/10/16/town-of-4000-finds-out-it-will-receive-3000-migrants-if-you-dont-like-hosting-refugees-in-your-town-you-can-leave-the-country/

    Like

  6. Brittius said

    Reblogged this on Brittius.

    Like

  7. Raging River Of Desperate Humanity Flooding Into Western Countries
    By Frosty Wooldridge

    “Most Western elites continue urging the wealthy West not to stem the migrant tide [that adds 80 million net gain annually to the planet], but to absorb our global brothers and sisters until their horrid ordeal has been endured and shared by all—ten billion humans packed onto an ecologically devastated planet.” Dr. Otis Graham, Unguarded Gates

    In the past month, the full impact of Graham’s prescient words stands on the jugular artery of Europe and soon to be Canada and America if more citizens fail to speak up.

    Even without civil war, the Syrian refugee invasion of Europe signals a more ominous and deadly trend for first world countries who stabilized their populations in the past 50 years. All of Africa, Indonesia, India, China, Mexico, South America—maintain exploding population growth that drove world population from 3.5 billion to 7.3 billion—and headed for 10.1 billion within 35 years. India adds 14 to 16 million annually and China still adds 8 million, net gain. It’s not pretty on multiple levels. I know because I witnessed it in my world travels.

    Along the way, the United Nations projects at least 50 million refugees to follow the Syrian refugees in the next two decades.

    That raging river of humanity flooding into Europe, Canada and America can’t stop, won’t stop, but in fact, grows by 80 million net gain annually. Those facts cannot be refuted.

    Therefore, at what point do Europe, Canada, Australia and America block the raging flood? When do people demand that refugees choose responsible fecundity rates? How many can be absorbed before Europe, Canada, Australia and America collapse under the human population time bomb?

    It’s WAY past time for world leaders, especially religious leaders to address the “population time-bomb” already exploding across the planet. It’s way past time to advocate for two even one child per woman worldwide via birth control.

    If the human race expects to survive the 21st century, every citizen in every country needs to stand up, speak up and start screaming for an international discussion on human birth control and viable civilizations. It’s a matter of life and death for all creatures living on this planet.

    Frosty Wooldridge, 6 continent world bicycle traveler

    Liked by 2 people

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: