I’m sorry to keep repeating myself, but this whole refugee controversy has devolved in to a discussion about two issues—the number of refugees we admit and security screening.
What happened to the idea that communities would be informed about refugees arriving in their neighborhoods? What happened to any discussion about the enormous costs of resettling refugees with little education who will be dependent on welfare most likely for life even as they take jobs from low-skilled Americans? What happened to any discussion about massive cultural disruption in some locations? What happened to any discussion about the fact that health screening of refugees seems virtually non-existent with cases of TB and HIV Aids stressing local health departments?
In short, what happened to any discussion about dumping or reforming the whole UN/US Refugee Admissions Program? Or, getting rid of the contractor middlemen***?
Are we simply going to battle over numbers?
Sure sounds like it!
I’m told I should be heartened by the news that someone in the White House (Stephen Miller) will be the point man on refugees, but really, can we expect Anthony Scaramucci to peg him as a f****** racist tomorrow? (If Scaramucci is crazy enough to say something about Miller like that, Trump can forget about his base!).
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The White House Domestic Policy Council (DPC) is taking the lead on a decision about how many refugees to admit to the United States next year, two current and three former officials said, a move that may empower those who wish to reduce immigration. [Who are Reuters sources—the leakers in Tillerson’s State Department and its hangers-on?—ed]
The council, which reports to U.S. President Donald Trump’s senior adviser for policy Stephen Miller, an architect of Trump’s initial travel ban, is adopting a role traditionally handled by National Security Council and State Department officials.
The shift may strengthen the hand of officials who, like Trump himself, wish to cut the number of refugees resettled in the United States, against foreign policy experts who view the issue through an international humanitarian lens and say taking them in is vital to getting others to keep their borders open.
The bureaucratic maneuver appears to be part of a wider Washington fight over steps that the Trump administration has taken to limit immigration to the United States.
Continue reading, there is lots more.
Again, if we see simply a slight reduction in the number of refugees to be admitted in FY18 (Trump will announce in September), and no effort to tell Congress to reform the monstrosity—Ted Kennedy’s Refugee Act of 1980—Trump will have (hugely) let us down.
***Federal contractors/middlemen/propagandists/lobbyists/community organizers paid by you to place refugees in your towns and cities. Under the nine major contractors are hundreds of subcontractors. Every week representatives of the nine meet with DOS officials and literally divvy up the refugee dossiers deciding where in 49 states (WY takes zero!) they will be (without your knowledge) placed.
The contractors income is largely dependent on taxpayer dollars based on the number of refugees admitted to the US. Those Aussie rejects (I told you about here yesterday) come with a dollar value to the contractor and they have no obligation to tell community leaders/police who they are placing in US towns and cities.
The only way for real reform of how the US admits refugees is to remove the contractors/propagandists/community organizers from the process.
- Church World Service (CWS)
- Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC) (secular)
- Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM)
- Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
- International Rescue Committee (IRC) (secular)
- US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) (secular)
- Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS)
- United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
- World Relief Corporation (WR)