Refugee Resettlement Watch

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 5,918 other followers

  • Reaching me by mail

    You can reach me by e-mail here:

    refugeewatcher@gmail.com

    (But my inbox is so overloaded most of the time, it is hard to keep up.)

    Or, since some of you have asked, I have a post office box and you can reach me there by snail mail!

    Ann Corcoran
    P.O. Box 55
    Fairplay, MD 21733

  • Social

  • Refugee Info Resource

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 8,112,813 hits

Archive for June 28th, 2017

Virginia: Iraqi refugee to plead guilty today to lying on refugee application

Posted by Ann Corcoran on June 28, 2017

She failed to disclose a family relationship to an Iraqi terrorist.  Ho hum! There was no American fatally affected.

I’m joking because in a story I read within the last day, but can’t remember where, a pro-more-refugees advocate qualified his comment about no refugees committing terror attacks to say—no US refugee committed a fatal terror attack on US soil.  That isn’t true, and, the main reason there aren’t more is that the cases have been foiled!

This is the story we reported in March.

(Dear Supreme Court, family members lie!)

We learn that the Iraqi female liar will admit guilt today.

From AP at the Lincoln Journal Star (hat tip: Joanne). BTW, I searched and searched for any photos of the perps, but found none.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — A Virginia woman living in the U.S. as an Iraqi refugee for the last decade is scheduled to plead guilty Wednesday to federal charges after being charged with hiding her ties to the kidnapper of a U.S. contractor. [Translation—she lied on her refugee application and in her screening interviews!—ed]

Enas (eh-NAHS’) Ibrahim of Vienna was charged in March on allegations of visa fraud.

Prosecutors say Ibrahim, her husband and her husband’s brother all came to the U.S. and settled in the suburbs of the nation’s capital after receiving refugee status.

But prosecutors say the two men are brothers of Majid Al Mashhandani, who admitted participating in the 2004 kidnapping of U.S. contractor Roy Hallums.

Fraud, fraud and more fraud!

In addition to leaving out any reference to the Islamic terrorist brother because people told them in Iraq (who told them, a refugee contractor!) that they would be rejected from the refugee program if they revealed the terrorist brother, they FABRICATED PERSECUTION STORIES FOR THEMSELVES.

See the DOJ press release from March with all of the details of their lies.

How many more Iraqis lied to get in as refugees and to gain citizenship?

Checking Wrapsnet just now, I see that since the US opened the floodgates for Iraqis we have admitted 140,576 with no end in sight!

Virginia is number seven in the top ten receiving states with 4,536.

Alaska got 49 and Hawaii got a whopping four!

 

Posted in Crimes, diversity's dark side, Iraqi refugees, Muslim refugees, Refugee Resettlement Program, Refugee statistics, Where to find information, Who is going where | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

And so it begins—the battle of the bona fides

Posted by Ann Corcoran on June 28, 2017

“Anyone who has an existing relationship with a nonprofit, frankly tens of thousands of refugees, should be seen as having bona fide ties.”

Becca Heller

 

The US Supreme Court has taken it upon itself to re-write Refugee law by creating a new requirement (even if it is just for a few months) that refugees may enter the country ABOVE TRUMP’S CEILING OF 50,000 ADMISSIONS by September 30th if they can show a “bona fide relationship” to someone already here or to an “entity” in the US.

In Washington, DC, the scrambling to define those words—“bona fide relationship”—is underway!

The Refugee Act of 1980 has no provisions for going over the President’s CEILING except in an emergency and in such a case, the President (wishing to increase the ceiling) must “consult” with Congress.

The Supremes have thus gone beyond their Constitutional role and are crafting a new requirement that effectively nullifies Trump’s 50,000 admissions ceiling and strips the President and Congress of their authority under the Refugee Act of 1980.

Before I give you the  NY Times on the battle of the bona fides, you might want to read Andy McCarthy here (not much of a victory) on the decision as he raises an important point about giving powerful legal rights to some random immigrant who just happened to get here earlier who can now, with a demand to bring in the family members, have a legal right to supersede the President’s power to keep us safe.

International Refugee Assistance Project is one of the original litigants.

Here is the NY Times (other news outlets are signalling as well in which direction the refugee industry is going on this) which begins with the usual get-your-minds-right sob story with a couple of refugee ‘stars’ of the article telling their sad tale.

Skipping to the important part ……

About four out of 10 refugees who come to the United States have no family ties in the country, according to independent estimates. In some cities known for taking in refugees — like Boise, Idaho; New Haven; and Fayetteville, Ark. — those with no family ties are a majority.

On Monday, the Supreme Court threw into question whether such refugees, who are among the most vulnerable people seeking a haven after fleeing persecution or conflict, will be approved for resettlement in the United States.

In agreeing to hear two cases on President Trump’s travel ban, the court introduced a new phrase to the fraught discussion of refugees and Muslim immigrants: “bona fide relationship.”

Those who can show a “bona fide relationship” with a “person or entity” in the United States will not be affected by Mr. Trump’s 120-day halt to refugee admissions or his 90-day ban on travel from six majority-Muslim countries, according to the court’s order. Those refugees or travelers must be admitted, at least for now.

However, those who have no family, business or other ties can be prohibited, the court said.
The justices gave some examples of a bona fide relationship: visiting relatives in the United States, attending a university or taking a job offer.

Here we go! No family ties? So, they are setting the stage for demanding that anyone already connected, even tangentially, to a US refugee resettlement contractor*** should be admitted in addition to the relatives!

On a conference call Monday, lawyers who have fought the Trump administration argued that other refugees and travelers should also be allowed in because, like Mr. Dagoum, they often have ties to a nonprofit organization that has been helping them even before they land in the United States.

“Anyone who has an existing relationship with a nonprofit, frankly tens of thousands of refugees,” should be seen as having bona fide ties, said Becca Heller, director of the International Refugee Assistance Project.

Representatives of some resettlement agencies said they were awaiting guidance from the State Department. Heather Nauert, a State Department spokeswoman, said on Tuesday that the department would consult with the Justice Department on how to define “bona fide relationship,” a process she expected to take two more days. Meanwhile, anyone already approved for travel to the United States by July 6 would be allowed in, she said.

Continue reading here.

Just checking the numbers at Wrapsnet and see that as of this morning we are at 48,920 refugees admitted this fiscal year (began Oct. 1, 2016). We are thus 1,080 away from Trump’s 50,000 CEILING—a ceiling now rendered meaningless by the Supreme Court with this assertion.

With this below from the Court’s opinion, Trump (and America!) loses big time (where are you Congress?):

 

 

My previous posts on the Supreme Court debacle are here and here.

*** These are the nine major US resettlement contractors and working under them (using your tax dollars) are hundreds of local subcontractors.

Posted in Changing the way we live, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, The Opposition, Trump | Tagged: , | 5 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: